title
stringlengths 28
112
| published_date
stringlengths 10
10
| authors
stringclasses 6
values | description
stringlengths 0
239
| section
stringclasses 95
values | content
stringlengths 178
42.3k
| link
stringlengths 34
77
| top_image
stringlengths 53
143
| news_id
stringlengths 13
55
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shell's Jackdaw gas field given go-ahead by regulators - BBC News
|
2022-06-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Shell says the field east of Aberdeen has the potential to produce 6.5% of Britain's gas output.
|
Scotland business
|
Development of a major North Sea gas field has been approved by regulators.
The Jackdaw field, east of Aberdeen, has the potential to produce 6.5% of Britain's gas output.
The regulatory approval comes as the UK government seeks to boost domestic energy output following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Shell's proposals were initially rejected on environmental grounds in October.
"We're turbocharging renewables and nuclear, but we are also realistic about our energy needs now," he said on Twitter.
"Let's source more of the gas we need from British waters to protect energy security."
Under the new plan, Shell plans to start production from the field in the second half of 2025.
The oil and gas company said the approval came "at a time when UK energy security is critically required."
Shell said it expected to spend £500m in the UK to develop the new facility.
It said the Jackdaw field should be able to provide gas to 1.4m British homes, and its carbon emissions should eventually be captured for storage, if a large project in Peterhead secures funding.
But environmental campaigners have condemned the move.
The activist group Greenpeace said it believed the approval could be unlawful and it was considering legal action.
"Approving Jackdaw is a desperate and destructive decision from Johnson's government, and proves there is no long-term plan," said Ami McCarthy, a political campaigner for Greenpeace.
The approval comes as Britain struggles with soaring energy prices in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the 24 February.
Energy independence was a major theme of the UK energy strategy announced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson in early April.
The main focus was investing in renewable and nuclear power but it also promised new licences for gas projects in the North Sea arguing that producing gas in UK waters has a lower carbon footprint than doing so abroad.
It is understood that Shell has changed the way it processes natural gas before it brings it onshore.
The plan had been to vent excess gas at an offshore hub to reduce the corrosive CO2 content in the pipes.
The UK was one of 100 countries that pledged to cut methane gas emissions by 30% over the next 10 years.
Under the new plan Shell will bring a higher percentage of gas ashore.
It was the Cambo oil field, west of Shetland, that got the attention as world leaders gathered in Glasgow seven months ago to show their commitment to tackling climate change.
Cambo was the test of how serious the UK government really was. As minority partner in the development, Shell pulled out. It was expensive, in deep water, and the politics of it made it a riskier investment.
It had other projects to consider first. Jackdaw, a gas field close to existing infrastructure, was what Shell describes as a "vanilla" project - relatively, very straight forward.
Permission to install a tie-back (subsea link) to a nearby platform had been refused last year, on the grounds that production would raise emissions unacceptably.
Shell appealed. It wants to capture those emissions at the carbon capture and storage plant it is helping to plan for St Fergus in Aberdeenshire (but which the UK government put on the back burner). And it plans also to re-power its offshore platforms with renewable electricity rather than burning gas.
Along with the sudden rise in concern about energy security that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine, those arguments appear to have won over the UK government and its regulator.
The fight doesn't stop here. The industry saw Jackdaw as a test of whether the UK government is serious about energy security: but for environmental campaigners, it's a test of whether the UK government is serious about climate change.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61666693
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-business-61666693
|
|
Amber Heard: It's easy to forget I'm a human being - BBC News
|
2022-06-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Heard found herself in a tense exchange with Johnny Depp's attorney as the trial nears its end.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 26 May
Amber Heard says she felt humiliated and had faced hundreds of daily death threats after testifying at Johnny Depp's trial against her.
Speaking on the final day of the trial before closing statements, the actress said: "Perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being."
Mr Depp, 58, is suing Ms Heard, 36, over an article she wrote in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
He has repeatedly denied her claims.
Over more than a month of testimony, jurors have been presented with starkly different versions of incidents that took place throughout the couple's troubled two years together.
Both actors accuse the other of being the aggressor in the relationship and have called witnesses to testify on their behalf. A number of the witnesses called by Mr Depp's team have directly contradicted Ms Heard's claims.
"I know how many people will come out and say whatever for him," Ms Heard said in court on Thursday. "That's his power. That's why I wrote the op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomenon."
Ms Heard's testimony on Wednesday also led to a tense exchange with Camille Vasquez - Mr Depp's now viral lawyer - over an image of spilled wine. It is one of several pictures Ms Heard has presented, allegedly from a huge fight the couple had in 2016 which ended with Mr Depp assaulting her.
At one point, Ms Heard turned to jurors and claimed the photos had been redacted or edited by Mr Depp's lawyers to benefit her ex-husband's case.
"I'd appreciate if you wouldn't be making arguments to the jury," Ms Vasquez said sternly. "I didn't ask you about anything."
Throughout her testimony, Ms Heard repeatedly denied accusations she was lying or misled jurors during the trial.
Her testimony, she added, had led to "hundreds" of death threats on a daily basis and forced her to "relive the trauma" of her marriage.
"This is horrible... this is humiliating for any human being to go through and perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being," she said. "As I stand here today, I can't have a career. I can't even have people associate with me because of the threats and the attacks that they will have to endure."
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for a 2018 comment article she wrote in the Washington Post in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
While he wasn't named, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61599667
|
news_world-us-canada-61599667
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
Boris Johnson: The letterati and Conservative gloom - BBC News
|
2022-06-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
After a long weekend of pomp and pageantry, the focus now turns to the prime minister's future.
|
UK Politics
|
"I begin to wonder if the Tory party has a death wish." So says a senior supporter of Boris Johnson.
"Either we get rid of him or the electorate will get rid of us," says a Conservative MP who wants him out.
After four days of bunting, union flags, Paddington Bear and Jason Donovan, yes - that is the sound of the clunk and clatter of politics returning.
Resuming again, a festival of guesswork to rival any fete or pageant, all focused on the prime minister's future.
I am struck by a couple of things:
Firstly, speaking to Mr Johnson's greatest supporters, his biggest critics, and those somewhere in between, there is a collective gloom within the Conservative Party. A feeling they are in a spot it will be hard to get out of in one piece.
And secondly, very few within the Conservative parliamentary party would be remotely surprised if a vote of confidence happens this week.
But that doesn't mean one definitely will.
A quick reminder of the rules: for the prime minister to face a vote of confidence, 15% of Tory MPs have to ask for one. They do that by writing to Sir Graham Brady, who chairs what's called the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs.
Admirable, that is, unless you're a journalist trying to find out how many letters he has been sent, and how close that total is to 54, the number needed to trigger a vote.
"It's entirely opaque," says a veteran of a past internal skirmish.
Everyone is guessing amid an orgy of speculation.
And if 54 is reached, a majority of Conservative MPs would have to say they no longer had confidence in Boris Johnson to remove him. That is 180 Tory MPs saying so.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Boos and cheers for the PM as he arrived at St Paul's with wife Carrie
The grumblers have been dubbed the "letterati" by one minister I talk to, and most seem to think there isn't a huge amount of coordination between those trying to oust Mr Johnson.
That said, some who are loyal to him point a finger at supporters of Remain in the Brexit referendum and some of the 2019 intake who they accuse of going wobbly at the first sign of trouble.
The bad news, for the prime minister, is his critics don't come from a particular wing or rank of the party - they are scattered throughout it.
On the upside for Mr Johnson, as a supporter of his puts it to me, this means "there isn't a plan, a strategy or a candidate".
In other words, they agree on wanting Boris Johnson out, but they don't agree on much else.
So are things different from back in January, when you may remember we went through this whole rigmarole and it fizzled out?
That, of course, is possible again, but one observer inside the parliamentary party reckons things have changed since then.
MPs are being invited to drinks dos by donors, there is a frisson, a momentum that isn't going away as the party contemplates life after Mr Johnson.
Let's explore the gloom I'm hearing from Conservative MPs. Two long-standing figures, of polar opposite views on Boris Johnson, both mentioned 1997 to me.
As bleak a year in the modern history of the Conservative Party anyone could cite, when Tony Blair swept to power with a landslide victory for Labour.
"We are getting to the point where if these people don't stop, the public will say we hear this noise and infighting, you're a noisy cabal of narcissists and they'll stop listening," says one figure deeply irritated by those trying to remove the prime minister.
"We are getting dangerously close to that place in the public mind."
Another, keen to evict Mr Johnson from Downing Street, draws the same comparison with the mid to late 90s: the gut feeling of an impression being left with the electorate that it will be impossible to shift.
But that impression for them is around the prime minister's character, which can only change, they argue, by changing prime minister.
And if a vote of confidence doesn't happen this week, then what?
Well, there are two by-elections later this month - one in Tiverton and Honiton in Devon, the other in Wakefield in West Yorkshire - which could prove crucial.
Plenty of Tory MPs fear they will lose both, the former to the Liberal Democrats, the latter to Labour.
And then another blast of the jitters will strike.
Boris Johnson was in the royal box for the Party at the Palace on Saturday night
And, in the meantime, the speculation will rumble on.
Those hoping to shore up Mr Johnson feel they have two arguments they can deploy with the undecided: Who's next? And, he'll win anyway.
In other words, there's no obvious successor and a leadership race will be nightmare for the party.
Plus, more importantly they argue, if there's a vote of confidence, Boris Johnson will probably win.
Even among his critics, most acknowledge this is likely.
But votes of confidence are never good news for a party leader.
And very few Conservatives are confident there won't be one any time soon.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61700334
|
news_uk-politics-61700334
|
|
Arizona police placed on leave after watching man drown - BBC News
|
2022-06-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Three Arizona officers watched a man who was begging for help drown in a reservoir.
|
US & Canada
|
Police body cam footage shows the officers interacting with Sean Bickings before he gets into Tempe Town Lake
Three police officers in Arizona have been placed on leave after they failed to rescue a homeless man from drowning.
Newly released bodycam footage and transcripts show the man, Sean Bickings, 34, getting into Tempe Town Lake last month and warning police he was "going to drown".
But none of the officers on the scene intervened to save him, with one heard saying: "I'm not jumping in after you."
Mr Bickings soon slipped underwater and was later declared dead.
Describing him as "an unsheltered Tempe community member", city authorities called his death a "tragedy".
The incident took place after 05:00 local time (12:00 GMT) on 28 May, when officers responded to a call about an alleged fight between the man and his partner in the city centre.
According to the city's statement, the couple "cooperated fully and denied that any physical argument had taken place".
However, police footage showed that while officers were checking the couple's names for outstanding arrest warrants, Mr Bickings climbed over a metal fence dividing the boardwalk from the lake and entered the water.
He told the officers he was going "for a swim", waded in and swam towards a bridge even after they informed him swimming was not allowed in the lake.
The 12-minute bodycam video ends around this time, with a message at the end saying it has been cut short "due to the sensitive nature of the remaining portion of the recording".
The city instead provided a transcript of the remainder of the exchange, in which Mr Bickings repeatedly said he was on the verge of drowning and needed to be saved.
The transcript also showed officers tried to calm down Mr Bickings' companion as she grew increasingly distraught, telling her they were getting a boat.
At one point, she shouted: "He's drowning right in front of you and you won't help."
The three officers involved in the incident have not been named.
They are on "non-disciplinary paid administrative leave" as their response is examined by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the police department of neighbouring Scottsdale.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61712871
|
news_world-us-canada-61712871
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
US Supreme Court: The woman who helped to end Roe v Wade - BBC News
|
2022-06-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lynn Fitch said she hoped to empower women by striking down the law.
|
US & Canada
|
Lynn Fitch may be the lawyer to end Roe v Wade
Millions of women in the US will lose the legal right to abortion, after the Supreme Court overturned a 50-year-old ruling that legalised it nationwide. Before the court's ruling was made public, BBC News looked at the woman whose case brought about the historic decision.
In September 2021, Mississippi's chief legal officer sat down for an interview with Pro-Life Weekly, a Catholic television programme featuring anti-abortion activists.
Lynn Fitch looked how she almost always does during public appearances: dyed-blonde hair blow-dried straight and neat, tasteful jewellery and a monochrome suit, this time in powder blue.
The attorney general was there to celebrate. The United States Supreme Court had just announced the date it would hear her state's challenge to Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that has, for the nearly 50 years since, served as a nationwide guarantee to abortion access.
The case, Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, centres on a Mississippi law that would ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, even in cases of rape or incest. Under Ms Fitch's direction, the state asked the Supreme Court to uphold the law and slash the landmark Roe v Wade decision in the process. A ruling is expected this month. A leaked draft suggests it is likely that Mississippi's ban will be upheld, paving the way for other states to also outlaw abortion.
Ms Fitch - who declined to be interviewed - had argued that overturning Roe v Wade would be "game-changing", "uplifting" women by eliminating what she described as a false choice between family and career.
"Fifty years ago, for professional women, they wanted you to make a choice. Now you don't have to," she said on Pro-Life Weekly. "You have the option in life to really achieve your dreams, your goals, and you can have those beautiful children as well."
If she wins the case, and Roe v Wade falls, some 40 million women may lose access to abortion, pro-choice advocates warn. It could also make Ms Fitch, a single working parent of three, a Republican superstar and poster-child for her own argument: modern women don't need abortion to have it all.
Ms Fitch is facing off against Jackson Women's Health Organisation - the last remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi
Abortion was not always an animating theme of Ms Fitch's political career. When she first took public office, as Mississippi state treasurer in 2011, she pushed for legislation that would guarantee men and women were paid equally.
Her convictions were shaped in many ways by her upbringing, and her experiences as a single mother, says Hayes Dent, a long-time friend and colleague, who ran her first political campaign.
When Mr Dent first met Ms Fitch, she had just been named executive director of the Mississippi State Personnel Board, a state agency, by then-governor Haley Barbour. Mr Dent was immediately impressed.
"Having been around every major political figure in Mississippi for 40 years, I could just tell: she's going to run," Mr Dent said. "And when she pulls that trigger, she's going to be successful."
It wasn't for another couple of years that she did, launching a campaign for state treasurer.
When he launched her first political campaign, for state treasurer in 2011, "she was an underdog," said Austin Barbour, a national GOP strategist and the nephew of former Governor Barbour.
Mr Dent, who had kept tabs on Ms Fitch, reached out to her in the middle of that 2011 cycle and asked to come on board her campaign.
"I said 'Look, I think you can win this race,'" he recalled.
She accepted. The two would drive the length of the state in a day, making a handful of different stops and placing fundraiser calls in the hours between.
"Her attitude was 'what is the task at hand,'" Mr Dent said. "It'd be like 'Look, we've gotta go to the tobacco spitting festival.' And she'd do great! She wouldn't spit tobacco, but she was great."
The only reason Ms Fitch would turn down a campaign event was her kids, cutting out early to make a school basketball game or parent-teacher conference.
She was a natural campaigner, but fundraising lagged. Mr Dent drove to northern Mississippi to ask her father for a personal donation.
Attorney General Fitch may become a hero on the political right
Bill Fitch still lived in Holly Springs, the small, rural town near the state's northern edge where Ms Fitch spent most of her childhood.
Her father had inherited land on the historic Galena Plantation and used the sprawling 8,000-acre property to restore the family farm, turning it into a premier quail hunting destination. The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and Mississippi governors Barbour and Phil Bryant, became frequent guests.
Visitors of Fitch Farms could elect to stay in the former home of Confederate general and first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, Nathan Bedford Forrest, which Mr Fitch had bought and transported onto the property.
Ms Fitch has told local media of "special" childhood memories at her father's farm, riding horses and hunting quail.
As a teenager, she was the "prototypical popular girl", Mr Dent said. "Leader, cheerleader, athletic, the whole nine yards," he said.
She went to the University of Mississippi, joined a sorority and graduated with a degree in business administration and later in law.
When Mr Dent drove to her father's farm to make his pitch for a campaign donation, he said it painly: "I told him if I left there with a big cheque, she was going to win".
She won, and then won again four years later, securing a second term as state treasurer.
In this office, she targeted state debt, expanded access to financial education in the state, and advocated for equal pay laws (Mississippi remains the only state that does not ensure equal pay for equal work between men and women).
And she developed her knack for connecting to voters, leaning on both her Holly Springs upbringing and an apparent ease in the public eye.
In interviews and campaign videos, Ms Fitch looks preternaturally poised. She makes easy eye contact, her speech slow and relaxed, often thanking God and her family for the opportunity to serve her state.
"Rural roots matter to voters in this state," said Mr Barbour, the Republican strategist. "And she's very likeable, she just is."
Ms Fitch also helped bolster her conservative credentials with her support for then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, leading Mississippi's Women for Trump coalition in 2016. When Mr Trump was in Jackson for a campaign rally, she sat in the front row.
Two years later, Ms Fitch announced she would make a bid for Mississippi Attorney General - an office that had never been held by a woman.
But she wasn't the underdog this time, gliding to victory in November 2019 with nearly 60% of the vote on a promise to uphold "conservative values and principles".
Ms Fitch, pictured in white to the right of Mr Trump, led Mississippi's Women for Trump coalition in 2016
As a devoted Republican in a solidly Republican state, where Ms Fitch stood on abortion was taken as given, even if she didn't run on it.
Across the country, about 60% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to data from the Pew Research Centre. But among Mississippi Republicans, nearly 70% believe abortion should illegal in all or most cases.
"You don't run in Mississippi, you don't run in rural conservative states and not want to see Roe v Wade overturned," said Mr Barbour, the Republican strategist. "It's just ingrained".
The abortion ban before the Supreme Court was passed by Mississippi's state legislature in 2018, two years before Ms Fitch took office as Attorney General. The law, which bans abortions outright after 15 weeks, was immediately challenged in court on behalf of Jackson Women's Health Organization, Mississippi's last remaining abortion clinic.
A federal district court struck down the ban, saying it was unconstitutional. In 2019, an appeals court upheld this decision.
But in June 2020, five months into the job, Attorney General Fitch petitioned the US Supreme Court to review the 15-week ban. The court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, accepted and heard the case in December of last year.
Now, she's known nationally as the lawyer expected to topple Roe v Wade.
At times, Ms Fitch has said her state is merely making an argument for the rule of law: asking the Supreme Court to turn over abortion policymaking to the states. But more often, she says the case is about women's empowerment.
Roe v Wade, she has said, made women believe they had to pick: family or career, not both.
"The court in Roe pitted women against our children, and woman against woman," she wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.
The choice is misleading and paternalistic, argued Ms Fitch. It's a position seemingly drawn from her own life: a single mother who has ascended to the highest levels of state office, while remaining devoted to her children and grandchildren.
"Being a single mom has sort of dominated her thought process, and her life experience," Mr Dent said. "I think that's one of the reasons she feels so strongly about this".
In a world without Roe v Wade, Ms Fitch said during a television interview last year, "babies will be saved" and mothers "get a chance to really redirect their lives. They have all these new and different opportunities that they didn't have 50 years ago".
Ms Fitch has said women will be empowered by abortion bans
Pro-choice activists have accused Ms Fitch of using feminist language to cover over an inherently anti-feminist policy.
Her arguments lean "heavily into false claims that they are 'empowering women'", said Dina Montemarano, research director for NARAL Pro-Choice America. This tactic, Ms Montemarano said, is often used by anti-abortion activists to assert control over women's bodies and violate their fundamental freedoms.
In an opening brief submitted to the Supreme Court, Ms Fitch wrote of "sweeping policy advancements [which] now promote women's full pursuit of both career and family".
But in a counter-argument submitted to the Supreme Court, 154 economists warned that this optimism was "premature and false".
"Mississippi's celebration of parental leave policies is particularly bizarre, as the United States is one of only two countries without a national paid maternity leave policy," the economists wrote.
Mississippi, specifically, has no state laws mandating paid family leave. It is the poorest state in the nation and has the highest rates of both infant mortality and child poverty.
But if Roe is indeed thrown out, Ms Fitch will return to Mississippi a conservative hero.
"I'm 99% sure she will run for attorney general again," Mr Dent said. "And based on how the last three years have gone, it's hard for me to imagine she'll have any Republican opposition this time".
There are also early rumblings that she may one day run for governor. She has not yet commented on this speculation.
If she wins, Ms Fitch would be the first female governor in Mississippi's history.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61789443
|
news_world-us-canada-61789443
|
|
Roe v Wade: Why this is a seismic day in America - BBC News
|
2022-06-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The divide in America has become even deeper after this Supreme Court ruling, writes Sarah Smith.
|
US & Canada
|
The abortion debate has divided America - and is unlikely to be settled by this Supreme Court decision
The Supreme Court just lobbed a constitutional hand grenade into the raging culture wars in the US, igniting a fresh battle in this decades-long fight over abortion.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court found that there was no constitutional right to abortion, turning the decision of whether to allow abortions or not up to the states. Millions of women are now expected to lose access.
While this legal ruling will change the law, it will not settle the arguments over abortion. It will inflame them.
Jubilant anti-abortion campaigners have achieved something that seemed practically impossible only a few years ago. They believe thousands of babies' lives will now be saved.
Pro-choice advocates are left utterly dismayed as they think women's rights have just been set back 50 years. Back to a time when women died as a result of illegal back-street abortions.
Recent polls suggest around two-thirds of Americans did not want to see the constitutional right to abortion removed.
In such contentious times, even the lofty Supreme Court itself becomes a leading character in the narrative, not just an adjudicator. Before this ruling came out, a man with a gun and knife was arrested outside the home of one of the more conservative justices, saying he was upset by a leak of the draft ruling. Supreme Court justices now have to have security protection. That's how incendiary this issue is.
This decision was based on their interpretation of constitutional law, but it's also deeply political. When the court overturns a previous ruling it inevitably looks to critics to be more political than constitutional.
The court has a 6-3 conservative super majority, thanks to the three justices appointed by Donald Trump. He made a specific campaign promise to appoint judges who would overturn Roe v Wade - and those appointments will probably be his most lasting legacy.
Donald Trump at the March for Life in 2019
The seismic political impact of the Supreme Court's ruling will be felt across all 50 states, but the immediate practical impact of much more restrictive laws is likely to happen in half of them.
One of those states is Oklahoma, which last month passed the most restrictive abortion legislation in America - a total ban from the point of conception with few exceptions.
When I met state representative Wendi Stearman in Tulsa, she told me it is her honour and privilege to have authored the bill. She says she will be helping 4,000 unborn children every year "to have a chance at life".
When I asked her if she believed the legislation will stop abortions happening in Oklahoma she said no - but that it will make them more difficult to obtain.
She argues that in all but a tiny minority of cases women can choose not to become pregnant before conception and that "most women just use abortion as a form of contraception".
That's an argument vehemently refuted by Andrea Gallego,, who runs an abortion clinic in Tulsa. She says the decision to have an abortion is often the hardest decision any woman will ever make.
A few weeks ago her clinic was treating around 40 pregnant patients every day. When I visited, the waiting rooms and treatment facilities were completely empty. Only a few staff remain - answering calls and giving out information about clinics in other states.
"Patients have been begging for help," she says. "It's devastating. These laws don't prevent abortion. They just add extra burdens to patients."
What is already happening in Oklahoma will now be replicated in other states.
Now that Roe v Wade is overturned, 26 states could further restrict abortion access, including 13 states that have passed so-called trigger laws, which would introduce bans immediately upon the court's decision. Less than a third of those states would include exceptions for rape of incest, according to the legislation they have already passed, or are trying to pass.
Democratic-controlled states like California and New York will cast themselves as abortion sanctuaries, welcoming women from places where the procedure has been outlawed. There are 20 states in all where abortion will remain a protected right. About 26.5 million women of childbearing age live in those states.
As abortion clinics close down in states that have outlawed the practice many more are expected to open near state borders in places where it is still allowed. Those who don't have the time or money to travel may resort to other means - such as ordering abortion-inducing pills online - even if it is illegal.
There were somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000 abortions in the US in 2019. According to the Center for Disease Control, about one in six pregnancies end in abortion, and over 90% occur in the first trimester. Over half of women who get abortions are already mothers, and for most, it is their first abortion.
The court's decision could not be more timely, as Americans are set to vote for their representatives in Congress later this year.
Facing a thrashing in November's elections, the Democrats hope the abortion issue will galvanise pro-choice women to come out and vote for them. But they have already failed in their attempt to get Congress to introduce legislation to grant a federal right to abortion, which would have stopped individual states from banning the procedure.
Even if Democrats keep control of the House and Senate, they won't be able to overturn this court ruling.
On the other side, there are plenty of Republicans who would like to legislate for a federal abortion ban that would outlaw abortion across all states. That may be the coming battle if Republicans take control of Congress after the next election.
Further fights may be had over how this ruling affects certain types of contraception or IVF treatment. And some have questioned whether similar legal arguments can be used to undermine same-sex marriage.
America today feels like one country that contains two very separate nations, inhabited by two tribes that have completely different values, beliefs and goals. Now, they have just moved farther apart.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61929438
|
news_world-us-canada-61929438
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: Campaigners' challenge to be heard on Monday - BBC News
|
2022-06-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
They are taking the case to the Court of Appeal after a judge ruled the first flight could go ahead.
|
UK
|
A group of people, thought to be asylum seekers, arriving at Dover (file image)
Campaigners against the government's policy to send migrants to Rwanda say they will now take their fight to the Court of Appeal on Monday.
It comes after the High Court said the first flight to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda could go ahead.
About 31 people have been told they could be on that flight on Tuesday, with more planes to go later this year.
The Prince of Wales has been caught up in the row after two papers reported he had called the policy "appalling".
The prince is travelling to the east African country later this month to represent the Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting being held in the capital, Kigali.
Clarence House, which represents the prince, reiterated that he remains "politically neutral" and said that it would not comment on "supposed anonymous private conversations".
Under the government policy, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
The government hopes the scheme will discourage asylum seekers from crossing the English Channel, with more than 10,000 people making the dangerous sea journey so far this year.
But campaigners who brought the High Court case said they were deeply concerned for the welfare of people set to be "forcibly deported". They had wanted to block the first flight from leaving, as well as individual people being placed on it.
Speaking at the High Court on Friday, Mr Justice Swift said there was a "material public interest" in Home Secretary Priti Patel being able to carry out her policies. He said he did not consider there was any evidence asylum seekers would be ill treated.
But he said there would be a full judicial review, where the High Court will hear a challenge to the policy as a whole, before the end of July.
The first claim had been brought by lawyers on behalf of some asylum seekers, alongside the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) which represents more than 80% of Border Force staff, as well as groups Care4Calais and Detention Action.
Ms Patel has praised the judgement, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson calling it "welcome news".
One asylum seeker - an Iranian ex-police commander who has been held at a detention centre since arriving in the UK in May - has said he fears being killed by Iranian agents in Rwanda.
The former commander, who is not being named in order to protect his identity, was sentenced by an Iranian military court to almost five years in jail in Iran and a demotion for refusing to shoot protesters during anti-government demonstrations in 2019.
When he was out on bail pending his appeal, the former commander escaped to Turkey, where in November 2021 he gave testimony via Skype to a UK-based rights groups' tribunal investigating alleged Iranian atrocities during the protests
He says he lived in hiding in Turkey before arriving in the UK in May. Although his face was covered when he gave evidence, he says Iran's security forces managed to identify him and persecuted his family.
"Why Rwanda? I'd rather be sent to Iran," he said. "At least, I know the consequences. I can't live with uncertainty and in fear any more."
He has been told he will be deported on Tuesday.
Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the PCS union - which has called for urgent fresh talks with Ms Patel - said those being removed to Rwanda faced the risk of being sent back to the countries they had been fleeing, and where they faced persecution.
James Wilson, deputy director of campaign group Detention Action, said it was disappointed, but added there were "some positives" from the case - noting that six of the eight original claimants had their removal orders withdrawn by the Home Office in advance of the judgement.
Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said the charity was "deeply concerned for the welfare of people who may be forcibly deported to Rwanda, a fate that could profoundly harm their mental health and future".
But Conservative MP Kevin Hollinrake said while the policy is not ideal, it is the only viable solution.
He told BBC Radio 4: "I don't think anybody is particularly comfortable with the situation where we are shipping asylum seekers off to a far distant land - but, nevertheless, we have got to do something that acts as a disincentive for people to make money out of other people's perilous journeys.
"In the absence of any other workable policy I don't see any other option other than to support this one.
The government's policy will see people given accommodation and support in Rwanda while their asylum application is being considered by the country. If they are successful, they can stay there with up to five years' access to education and support.
Those who fail in their asylum bids in Rwanda will be offered the chance to apply for visas under other immigration routes if they wish to remain in the country, but could still face deportation.
Mr Justice Swift said part of the case to block the initial flights focused on the argument that Ms Patel's "decision to treat Rwanda as a safe country is either irrational or based on insufficient investigation".
He said this argument, along with other parts of the case, would be heard with evidence at the full judicial review, to be held across two days before the end of July.
A judicial review sees a judge looking at how a decision, or action, has been made by a public body. It does not consider whether the decision itself is correct or not.
Up to 130 people so far have been notified they could be flown to Rwanda at some point in the future. It emerged during the High Court hearing on Friday that removal directions for three people set to be on the first flight had been dropped by the Home Office, with two more having them cancelled.
Mr Justice Swift denied an injunction to the remaining two claimants trying to avoid being removed.
Conservative MP Peter Bone, former chairman of the all-party group against human trafficking, said he believes the scheme will work.
"These people smugglers - they're just out to make money. They don't want to get caught and they don't want to do anything difficult," he told BBC Radio 4.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61769300
|
news_uk-61769300
|
|
Don't go to Ukraine, military boss tells Britons - BBC News
|
2022-06-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The head of the UK's armed forces also rejects Ukraine's call for a no-fly zone, saying it will not help.
|
UK
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: We have a direct line to Moscow, says UK chief of defence staff Adm Sir Tony Radakin
Britons should not head to Ukraine to fight and should instead help however they can from the UK, the head of the armed forces has said.
Speaking to the BBC, Adm Sir Tony Radakin rejected Ukraine's call for a no-fly zone saying it would not help tactically and might escalate fighting.
He urged the West to have confidence that they were doing the "right thing".
The invasion was not going well, Russia was becoming less powerful and it cannot continue, he said.
On Britons wanting to join the fight, Adm Radakin said that the "sound of gunfire" was not "something you want to rush to", and urged people to support Ukraine in sensible ways from the UK.
Asked whether Foreign Secretary Liz Truss had been right to say she would support any Briton who wanted to fight, he said: "We can all understand that sentiment, and that sentiment needs to be channelled into support for Ukraine."
Senior UK military officers are genuinely worried that some British troops - regulars or reservists - might try to join the battle in Ukraine and, in doing so, risk handing Russia a propaganda victory.
Last week the Chief of Defence People, Lt Gen James Swift, sent out a message to the chain of command stressing that UK military personnel were "not authorised" to travel there.
He said that if there was any suspicion that troops were trying to make their way to Ukraine then it should be reported immediately to the Service Police.
The message warned that if serving British military personnel went to fight in Ukraine then they were putting not only their lives in danger but they also risked giving "the mistaken perception" to Russia that Britain had sent in troops to engage in hostilities.
Adm Sir Tony Radakin has now underlined that message, saying it would be "unlawful and unhelpful".
At present the MoD does not believe there are any examples of full-time British military personnel going absent to fight in Ukraine. But it's harder for them to keep tabs on reservists who often also have another career.
In his interview with the BBC's Sunday Morning show, the defence chief painted a picture of Russian forces suffering from heavy losses and low morale, with kit failings and a massive military convoy stalled outside the capital, Kyiv.
The Kremlin has lost more troops in a week than the UK did in 20 years in Afghanistan, he said, and some "lead elements of Russian forces" have been decimated.
He described stories of soldiers whose morale had been so knocked they had abandoned the convoy destined for Kyiv to camp in the forest.
Ukrainian servicemen near Kyiv - a huge convoy of Russian troops has stopped its advance outside the capital
On Saturday, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky delivered a fiery speech saying the West's reluctance to implement a no-fly zone over Ukraine had given Russia "a green light" to continue bombarding towns and villages.
But Adm Radakin insisted such an intervention would not help.
"The advice that we, as senior military professionals are giving our politicians, is to avoid doing things that are tactically ineffective and definitely to avoid doing things that tactically might lead to miscalculation or escalation."
He said most of the shelling and destruction was coming from artillery, not Russian aircraft, and to police a no-fly zone could mean taking out Russian defence systems and shooting down Russian aircraft - leading to an escalation, he added.
Speaking later on the same programme, UK deputy prime minister Dominic Raab said he understood Ukraine's cri de coeur but insisted the West had been clear all along that it would not engage in direct military confrontation.
That would give succour to Russian President Vladimir Putin's argument that he was in conflict with the West, he said.
Mr Putin said on Saturday that any such move to implement a no-fly zone would be seen "as participation in an armed conflict by that country".
The West has to maintain calmness and responsibility and not react rashly to the latest "bizarre or ridiculous comment" from Mr Putin, he said.
"We are prepared, we are professional armed forces, we will approach this conflict with that level of professionalism and responsibility that you would expect.
"We will also be incredibly confident in our ability to face down President Putin," he added.
He gave an insight into relations with his counterpart, Gen Valery Gerasimov, head of Russian armed forces, explaining the Ministry of Defence has a direct line to Moscow's operational headquarters.
It is tested every day, he said, and he has used the line to tell Gen Gerasimov they need to speak. "I'm waiting for him to come back to me," he added.
Adm Radakin was also asked whether the West would know beforehand whether Mr Putin would use nuclear weapons.
He said he did not want to go into detail but there had been a "remarkable" level of intelligence in the months leading up to the invasion.
"There are some more discreet elements in terms of warning signs if this was going to start to chart a path towards nuclear escalation," he said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60637185
|
news_uk-60637185
|
|
As it happened: January 6: Capitol riot hearing praises Pence for averting 'catastrophe' - BBC News
|
2022-06-16
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A congressional committee said Trump tried to pressure his vice-president to overturn election results.
|
US & Canada
|
There is absolutely NO way the vice-president could reject the result of the presidential election. That may not seem like news.
Most people listening to this testimony will be thinking "no [expletive], Sherlock"
Only a tiny handful of people around Donald Trump thought it was even remotely possible that Mike Pence could declare Trump the winner or send the results back to individual states. And we already know that those people were known by some as "Team Crazy".
It may seem hardly necessary to lay out all the legal, historical and constitutional arguments over why it is not possible for one person to overturn an election result.
So why are we listening to all this evidence about what legal advisers discussed and the pressure Trump piled on Pence to get him to change his mind?
It is part of the wider case the committee plan to make against Donald Trump.
They want to demonstrate not just that Trump inspired the violent attack on the Capitol on 6 Jan 2021, but that it was part of a wider, deliberate conspiracy to illegally overturn the election result. No less than an attempted coup.
The committee will return to this narrative when they draw together all the strands of their inquiry and put together what will amount to the case for the prosecution of Donald Trump.
The select committee can't try or convict Trump. They can't even bring criminal charges against him. But the attorney general can, and he has said he is watching these hearings closely. It's obvious that members of the committee think there is a case to answer.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-61819616
|
news_live_world-us-canada-61819616
|
|
Four Tet wins royalty battle over streaming music - BBC News
|
2022-06-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The dance act took his former record label to court - the verdict could set a new precedent.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Four Tet's best songs include Butterflies, Two Thousand and Seventeen, and Lush
Pioneering electronic artist Four Tet has reached a settlement in the legal battle against his former record label.
The musician, whose real name is Kieran Hebden, sued Domino Records last year over the royalties he gets paid when his music is downloaded or streamed.
He argued that the 13.5% royalty rate he was being offered was unfair, and demanded a 50% split with the label.
In a settlement, Domino agreed to the honour the 50% rate and reimbursed the musician for historic underpayments.
It was quite a reversal for the indie label, which originally responded to the case by removing several Four Tet albums from streaming services (they were later reinstated).
"It has been a difficult and stressful experience to work my way through this court case and I'm so glad we got this positive result," wrote Hebden in a statement announcing the settlement.
"Hopefully I've opened up a constructive dialogue and maybe prompted others to push for a fairer deal on historical contracts, written at a time when the music industry operated entirely differently."
The result could set a legal precedent for contract disputes in the music business; where royalty rates have been subject to heavy scrutiny since last year's inquiry into the streaming market by MPs on the Culture Select Committee.
However, Four Tet's legal challenge was ultimately decided out of court, so any future disputes would not be able to cite a legal judgement.
"Neither the courts, nor the settlement terms, have made any determination as to how streaming should be categorised or streaming income split," said Domino Records in a statement, adding it was "pleased" that Hebden had chosen to settle the case on "financial terms first offered to him in November 2021".
This YouTube post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on YouTube The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. Skip youtube video by Four Tet This article contains content provided by Google YouTube. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Google’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. End of youtube video by Four Tet
The dispute concerned the recording contract Hebden signed with Domino in 2001, which resulted in four albums: Pause (2001), Rounds (2003), Everything Ecstatic (2005) and There Is Love In You (2010).
The deal was signed before the advent of downloads of streams - and his dispute hinged on whether those methods of accessing his music could be defined as a "sale" or a "licence" under the terms of his contract.
The difference is far from academic because most artists receive 50% of the royalties for a licence but a much lower figure, typically between 12% and 22%, for a sale.
Historically, the difference was due to the way music was distributed: selling music in the era of CDs, vinyl and cassettes incurred huge costs in manufacturing and distribution, which meant labels needed to cover their overheads. But when music is licensed to movies, television or advertisements, artists generally get a bigger payday, on the understanding that a third party is bearing the relevant costs.
After the advent of iTunes and Spotify, labels often argued that downloads and streams should be counted as sales.
This prompted a flurry of lawsuits, especially in the US. Most famously, the producers who discovered Eminem won a case against Universal Records that forced the label to pay the higher "licensing" rate when his songs were downloaded.
Four Tet's case in the UK essentially made the same argument.
Domino had argued that digital downloads, including streams, were considered a new technology format and Hebden was only entitled to the 13.5% royalty rate (although they have paid him as much as 18% on a discretionary basis).
The case quickly became complicated, with Hebden adding a claim for breach of contract after Domino withdrew his music from streaming services; and Domino saying they may to take the case to the High Court, which Hebden could not afford.
However, in a statement posted on social media today, Hebden said he had been offered the 50% rate he had sought in a settlement, the details of which were made public.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Four Tet This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. End of twitter post by Four Tet
"Domino have now agreed to treat streaming and download income as licensing income and will apply the 50% rate to streaming and download income going forward, and have reimbursed Kieran for the underpayment over recent years," said his lawyer, Aneesh Patel, in a statement.
"I really hope that my own course of action encourages anyone who might feel intimidated by challenging a record label with substantial means," added Hebden.
"Unlike Domino, I didn't work with a big law firm and luckily the case took place in the IPEC [Intellectual Property and Enterprise court] where legal costs are capped, so I was able to stand my ground."
Hebden shared images of the settlement, which showed that he would receive £56,921.08 in respect of all historical streaming and download income, dated back to July 2017, in addition to interest calculated at a rate of 5% per year.
In a statement to the BBC, Domino added: "Kieran's claim arose from differing interpretations of specific clauses in a contract entered into by Kieran and Domino in 2001 in the pre-streaming era, and the application of those clauses to streaming income.
"Since 2021 Kieran has added to and pursued his claim despite numerous attempts by Domino to settle the matter.
"The case now having been settled, we are glad to be able to dedicate our full attention to resourcing and supporting our artists and we wish Kieran continued success in his career."
Follow us on Facebook, or on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61871547
|
news_entertainment-arts-61871547
|
|
Archie Battersbee's family can appeal life-support ruling - BBC News
|
2022-06-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Archie's family lost a High Court battle last week when a judge ruled his life support should end.
|
Essex
|
Hollie Dance and her family have won the right to have Archie's case heard at the Court of Appeal
The parents of a 12-year-old boy have been given the right to appeal against the decision to allow his life-support treatment to end.
Last week, a High Court judge ruled that Archie Battersbee was "brain-stem dead" and treatment could stop.
However, following another hearing, the same judge, Mrs Justice Arbuthnot, granted Archie's parents permission to take the case to the Court of Appeal.
His family were "delighted" at the decision, a spokeswoman said.
Archie was found unconscious at his home in Southend, Essex, on 7 April.
The court had previously heard that he suffered brain damage during an incident which his mother believed may have been related to an online challenge.
Doctors treating him at the Royal London Hospital told the High Court it was "highly likely" he was "brain-stem dead" and asked for his life-support to end.
Mrs Justice Arbuthnot ruled in favour of the hospital and against Archie's mother and father, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee.
But in a High Court hearing questioning that decision, she said an argument by the family's legal team that the standard of proof in relation to "declaration of death" should have been higher was a "compelling" reason for the case to be heard by appeal judges.
The Barts Health NHS Trust, which runs the Royal London, said it would not make any changes to Archie's care while his parents sought further legal hearings.
A High Court judge ruled last week that Archie Battersbee was dead
During Monday's hearing, the family's barrister Edward Devereux QC outlined nine grounds of appeal.
Mr Devereux said for a decision of such "gravity", the judge should have been satisfied "beyond reasonable doubt" and not made a decision about Archie's treatment ending on "the balance of probabilities".
He also argued that the court had failed to accommodate the religious views of Archie and his family.
Mrs Justice Abuthnot dismissed eight of the appeal grounds but said appeal judges should consider the standard of proof issue.
She said Court of Appeal judges had never considered that issue in relation to "declaration of death" cases, adding there was a "compelling" reason for them to hear it.
Speaking after the hearing, a spokeswoman for Archie's family, Ella Carter, said: "We were all really convinced that we weren't going to get permission to appeal.
"So we're more than happy at the decision - we're delighted."
Hollie Dance said she believed her son was "still in there" and would continue to fight
Following the initial High Court ruling, Archie's mother said she was "devastated".
She told BBC Breakfast that she slept by his hospital bed each night and spoke to him every day.
Ms Dance said: "He's in there, physically, for whatever reason, whether it's locked-in syndrome, whether he's paralysed... I don't know, but I feel he's in there," she said.
The High Court previously heard evidence that Ms Dance said Archie had squeezed her hand.
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-61869995
|
news_uk-england-essex-61869995
|
|
Depp-Heard trial: Why Johnny Depp lost in the UK but won in the US - BBC News
|
2022-06-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Experts say key factors included having a jury trial and his lawyers using a specific legal tactic.
|
US & Canada
|
In 2020, Hollywood actor Johnny Depp lost a UK libel lawsuit against the Sun newspaper. But on Wednesday, he won a similar lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard in a US courtroom.
At the start of his recent trial, many legal experts suggested that Mr Depp had a weaker chance of winning than he did in the UK, because the US has very strong free speech protections.
The fact that the jury found that Ms Heard was guilty of defamation with an article in which she claimed she was a victim of domestic abuse means they didn't believe her testimony.
Mark Stephens, an international media lawyer, told the BBC that it's "very rare" that essentially the same case is tried on two sides of the pond and gets different results.
He believes the main factor that influenced Mr Depp's victory in America was the fact that his US trial was before a jury while his UK trial, over an article in the British tabloid that called him a "wife-beater", was before a judge only.
"Amber Heard has comprehensively lost in the court of public opinion, and in front of the jury," he said.
In both the UK and the US trial, Mr Depp's lawyers argued that Ms Heard was lying - to make their case, they attacked her character and claimed that she was in fact the abusive partner.
This is a common defence tactic in sexual assault and domestic violence trials called "deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender" or "Darvo", said Mr Stephens.
The strategy turns the tables on the alleged victim, shifting the conversation away from "did the accused commit abuse" to "is the alleged victim believable".
"They deny that they did anything, they deny they're the real perpetrator, and they attack the credibility of the individual calling out the abuse, and then reverse the roles of the victim and the offender," Mr Stephens said.
In the UK trial, Mr Stephens said the judge recognised that strategy, and dismissed a lot of the evidence that did not directly address whether Mr Depp committed assault or not.
"Lawyers and judges tend not to fall for it, but it's very, very effective against juries," he said. Men are more likely to believe Darvo arguments, but female jurors are also susceptible.
"People have a paradigm in their mind of how a victim of abuse might be like and how they might behave, and of course we all know that's often false."
Hadley Freeman, a Guardian journalist who covered both cases, told the BBC that another major difference was the fact that the American trial was televised, turning the court case into "almost a sports game".
Each twist and turn of the trial was watched by millions of people - many of whom turned to social media to express support for Mr Depp.
On TikTok, the hashtag #justiceforjohnnydepp got about 19 billion views. The jury was instructed not to read about the case online, but they were not sequestered and they were allowed to keep their phones.
Ms Freeman also thinks that vitriol that the general public lobbed against Ms Heard was a "a bit of #MeToo backlash".
"'Believe women' seems a very long time ago when it comes to Amber Heard," she said.
Reputation: Depp v Heard. Watch key moments from the trial on iPlayer (UK-only).
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61673676
|
news_world-us-canada-61673676
|
|
Shell's Jackdaw gas field given go-ahead by regulators - BBC News
|
2022-06-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Shell says the field east of Aberdeen has the potential to produce 6.5% of Britain's gas output.
|
Scotland business
|
Development of a major North Sea gas field has been approved by regulators.
The Jackdaw field, east of Aberdeen, has the potential to produce 6.5% of Britain's gas output.
The regulatory approval comes as the UK government seeks to boost domestic energy output following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Shell's proposals were initially rejected on environmental grounds in October.
"We're turbocharging renewables and nuclear, but we are also realistic about our energy needs now," he said on Twitter.
"Let's source more of the gas we need from British waters to protect energy security."
Under the new plan, Shell plans to start production from the field in the second half of 2025.
The oil and gas company said the approval came "at a time when UK energy security is critically required."
Shell said it expected to spend £500m in the UK to develop the new facility.
It said the Jackdaw field should be able to provide gas to 1.4m British homes, and its carbon emissions should eventually be captured for storage, if a large project in Peterhead secures funding.
But environmental campaigners have condemned the move.
The activist group Greenpeace said it believed the approval could be unlawful and it was considering legal action.
"Approving Jackdaw is a desperate and destructive decision from Johnson's government, and proves there is no long-term plan," said Ami McCarthy, a political campaigner for Greenpeace.
The approval comes as Britain struggles with soaring energy prices in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on the 24 February.
Energy independence was a major theme of the UK energy strategy announced by Prime Minister Boris Johnson in early April.
The main focus was investing in renewable and nuclear power but it also promised new licences for gas projects in the North Sea arguing that producing gas in UK waters has a lower carbon footprint than doing so abroad.
It is understood that Shell has changed the way it processes natural gas before it brings it onshore.
The plan had been to vent excess gas at an offshore hub to reduce the corrosive CO2 content in the pipes.
The UK was one of 100 countries that pledged to cut methane gas emissions by 30% over the next 10 years.
Under the new plan Shell will bring a higher percentage of gas ashore.
It was the Cambo oil field, west of Shetland, that got the attention as world leaders gathered in Glasgow seven months ago to show their commitment to tackling climate change.
Cambo was the test of how serious the UK government really was. As minority partner in the development, Shell pulled out. It was expensive, in deep water, and the politics of it made it a riskier investment.
It had other projects to consider first. Jackdaw, a gas field close to existing infrastructure, was what Shell describes as a "vanilla" project - relatively, very straight forward.
Permission to install a tie-back (subsea link) to a nearby platform had been refused last year, on the grounds that production would raise emissions unacceptably.
Shell appealed. It wants to capture those emissions at the carbon capture and storage plant it is helping to plan for St Fergus in Aberdeenshire (but which the UK government put on the back burner). And it plans also to re-power its offshore platforms with renewable electricity rather than burning gas.
Along with the sudden rise in concern about energy security that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine, those arguments appear to have won over the UK government and its regulator.
The fight doesn't stop here. The industry saw Jackdaw as a test of whether the UK government is serious about energy security: but for environmental campaigners, it's a test of whether the UK government is serious about climate change.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-61666693
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-business-61666693
|
|
Amber Heard: It's easy to forget I'm a human being - BBC News
|
2022-06-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Heard found herself in a tense exchange with Johnny Depp's attorney as the trial nears its end.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 26 May
Amber Heard says she felt humiliated and had faced hundreds of daily death threats after testifying at Johnny Depp's trial against her.
Speaking on the final day of the trial before closing statements, the actress said: "Perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being."
Mr Depp, 58, is suing Ms Heard, 36, over an article she wrote in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
He has repeatedly denied her claims.
Over more than a month of testimony, jurors have been presented with starkly different versions of incidents that took place throughout the couple's troubled two years together.
Both actors accuse the other of being the aggressor in the relationship and have called witnesses to testify on their behalf. A number of the witnesses called by Mr Depp's team have directly contradicted Ms Heard's claims.
"I know how many people will come out and say whatever for him," Ms Heard said in court on Thursday. "That's his power. That's why I wrote the op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomenon."
Ms Heard's testimony on Wednesday also led to a tense exchange with Camille Vasquez - Mr Depp's now viral lawyer - over an image of spilled wine. It is one of several pictures Ms Heard has presented, allegedly from a huge fight the couple had in 2016 which ended with Mr Depp assaulting her.
At one point, Ms Heard turned to jurors and claimed the photos had been redacted or edited by Mr Depp's lawyers to benefit her ex-husband's case.
"I'd appreciate if you wouldn't be making arguments to the jury," Ms Vasquez said sternly. "I didn't ask you about anything."
Throughout her testimony, Ms Heard repeatedly denied accusations she was lying or misled jurors during the trial.
Her testimony, she added, had led to "hundreds" of death threats on a daily basis and forced her to "relive the trauma" of her marriage.
"This is horrible... this is humiliating for any human being to go through and perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being," she said. "As I stand here today, I can't have a career. I can't even have people associate with me because of the threats and the attacks that they will have to endure."
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for a 2018 comment article she wrote in the Washington Post in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
While he wasn't named, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61599667
|
news_world-us-canada-61599667
|
|
Chris Mason: Conservative leadership TV debate turns colleagues into opponents - BBC News
|
2022-07-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The exchanges between five remaining Tory leadership hopefuls were a chance for renewal and combat.
|
UK Politics
|
From left, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Kemi Badenoch, Tom Tugendhat and Penny Mordaunt cross words in the ITV debate
You had to keep reminding yourself these were five people who are actually in the same party.
And the two of them taking the greatest lumps out of each other sat around the same cabinet table a fortnight ago.
Changing leaders between elections can offer a party a chance to renew in office.
It also offers plentiful opportunity for it to rip itself to shreds in public.
There are nerves in Conservative circles that Sunday evening's debate was rather more the latter than the former.
So after a weekend of two and a half hours of primetime television debate and acres of newsprint, where do we find ourselves as we enter the second week of the Conservative leadership contest?
TV debates serve up real jeopardy, particularly for those with the most to lose.
On Friday's debate on Channel 4, the two outsiders, in terms of their support among Conservative MPs so far at least, seemed to relish it, perhaps pleasantly surprised they had made it so far.
Kemi Badenoch and Tom Tugendhat were probably the least known to most viewers, and with little to lose.
Whereas the big three, in terms of votes so far, Rishi Sunak, Penny Mordaunt and Liz Truss, feared going backwards; denting their solid starts.
Things felt different in the ITV debate.
Without the punctuation marks of a live audience in the studio, with its questions and applause, and with the addition of some nifty ideas such as each candidate being able to put a question to just one other, the exchanges felt sharper, more spiky.
The candidates addressed each other rather than the audience in the studio, and often archly.
Team Truss are candid: "Liz was better tonight than on Friday" one aide told me.
"She is the clear heavyweight on the economy to rival Rishi. That was a battle of the grown ups between Liz and Rishi, with Liz the 'change' candidate on the economy," a source added.
They want to portray a Sunak premiership - economically at least - as more of the same as what's gone before, without the scruffy blonde hair.
Yet again Mr Sunak was the focus of most, if not all of the barbs coming from his opponents.
Or, we should remind ourselves, colleagues.
I'm told his question to Liz Truss, "what do you regret most, being a Lib Dem or being a Remainer?" was meant to be light hearted.
It didn't sound anything of the sort. More like a laser guided zap at her true Conservative credentials.
Penny Mordaunt arrived on ITV's stage having weathered an onslaught in the newspapers, much of it focused on the rights of trans people.
Her campaign is hopeful it is counterproductive, and convinced most Conservative Party members hate it, because it involves Conservatives attacking Conservatives.
The thing is, that only matters if she reaches the final two, what matters now is the extent to which it matters among Conservative MPs.
Those Tory MPs who are most keen to avoid Rishi Sunak as the next Prime Minister will then have to decide which alternative is both most palatable to them, and most likely to beat Mr Sunak among the party grassroots.
Tom Tugendhat's team, closest to the trapdoor of elimination in the last round, say they have picked up how uncomfortable plenty of Conservatives are at what is described as 'blue on blue' scrapping between Tories in public.
They hope Mr Tugendhat having never been a cabinet minister gave him some distance from the arguments, particularly between Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.
And Team Badenoch are quick to point to the latest survey for the ConservativeHome website which suggests Kemi Badenoch would beat all the other candidates in a head-to-head contest with the party membership.
"It puts quite a lot of pressure on MPs," as one of her aides puts it.
There is another hustings, in front of Conservative MPs on Monday, followed by another vote, Round three, at teatime.
We'll know the result at 20:00 BST, and five candidates will become four.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62202108
|
news_uk-politics-62202108
|
|
Capitol riots: 'Wild' Trump tweet incited attack, says inquiry - BBC News
|
2022-07-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Mr Trump sent a rallying call to supporters after "the craziest meeting" of his presidency, the inquiry hears.
|
US & Canada
|
A Trump tweet mobilised far-right extremists to converge on Washington DC on the day of last year's Capitol riot, a congressional inquiry has heard.
He posted the tweet after "the craziest meeting of the Trump presidency", said a lawmaker on the panel.
The then-president forged ahead with a rallying call to supporters even though aides repeatedly told him he had fairly lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.
The committee accuses Mr Trump of an attempted coup to remain in power.
Supporters of Donald Trump violently stormed Congress on 6 January 2021 as lawmakers met to certify Mr Biden's victory.
Hours before the hearing, Mr Trump, a Republican, dismissed the Democratic-led House of Representatives panel on his Truth Social social media platform as "Political Hacks and Thugs" perpetrating a "HOAX".
The select committee has been conducting a nearly year-long investigation into the attack on the Capitol. Tuesday's hearing, the seventh since June, focused on a tweet Mr Trump sent in the early hours of 19 December 2020, and a stormy six-hour meeting at the White House that preceded the post.
Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat on the committee, said the meeting had been described as "unhinged" and "not normal".
Mr Trump had already been told by White House aides and figures within his own campaign team that he should concede to Mr Biden, a Democrat.
However, on 18 December he welcomed to the White House some informal advisers who had been urging him to pursue his unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud.
The group - which included his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and his ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn - had suggested Mr Trump order the military to seize state voting machines.
The meeting was intercepted by aides, as well as then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
"I don't think any of these people were providing the president good advice," Mr Cipollone said in recorded testimony to the select committee.
What followed was hours of argument, during which Mr Cipollone said he was attacked "verbally", but kept "pushing back", asking the group: "Where is the evidence?" They did not offer any proof, he and other aides told the committee.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Former aide testifies: Trump said ’take me to the Capitol’
The meeting ended after midnight with the idea of seizing ballot boxes rejected. Mr Trump's tweet - sent at 01:42 local time - told supporters: "Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election. Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild."
The post, Mr Raskin argued, "electrified and galvanised his supporters", who believed Mr Trump's claims that the election had been stolen from him.
The panel says the tweet was the siren call to extremist groups such as the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys to turn up. Two members of the groups are awaiting trial on rare seditious conspiracy charges related to the Capitol riot.
An anonymous Twitter employee told the committee they saw a rise in violent rhetoric online following the tweet. Mr Raskin said some of the responses turned "openly homicidal".
Committee members are trying to draw a direct line between the social media post and the violence on 6 January. The panel is seeking to build a case that Mr Trump's efforts to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election constitute illegal conduct.
Tuesday's hearing was also told of a claim that Mr Trump attempted to contact someone who was talking to the congressional inquiry, raising the possibility of witness tampering.
Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the committee, said they had notified the justice department.
The Wyoming congresswoman said the person Mr Trump had tried to contact did not answer his call and instead alerted a lawyer.
Another witness who testified on Tuesday was Ohio man Stephen Ayres, who has pleaded guilty to participating in the attack on the Capitol.
Ayres stunned people in the hearing room when he approached two of the police officers who were injured in the melee and shook their hands. More than 140 officers were hurt in the riot.
Stephen Ayres shakes the hand of Capitol police officer Harry Dunn after testifying
One of the policemen, Harry Dunn, described the exchange to the BBC's Tara McKelvey, who attended the hearing.
"He apologised," Mr Dunn said, shaking his head. "I'm trying to process."
Mr Trump - who has hinted he may run for the White House again in 2024 - has described the hearings as an attempt to distract Americans from the "disaster" of Democratic governance amid rampant inflation.
A New York Times opinion poll this week found just 33% of voters approve of President Biden, lower than Mr Trump's popularity in the aftermath of the Capitol riot, according to Gallup.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62140410
|
news_world-us-canada-62140410
|
|
UK government asks Supreme Court to dismiss indyref2 case - BBC News
|
2022-07-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Its submission to the Supreme Court questions whether judges should hear the Scottish government's case.
|
Scotland politics
|
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the UK
The UK government has urged judges to dismiss the Scottish government's request for a ruling on whether it has the power to hold indyref2.
The Scottish government has asked the Supreme Court to examine whether a referendum could be staged without formal consent from Westminster.
The UK government has now questioned whether the court should agree to hear the case.
And it said it was clear that Holyrood does not have the necessary powers.
The case was referred to the Supreme Court last month by Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain - the Scottish government's top law officer.
It followed First Minister Nicola Sturgeon setting out her route map to securing another referendum on independence, which she wants to hold on 19 October 2023.
The first minister said she hoped the Supreme Court would "deliver clarity and legal certainty in a timely manner" over whether she could hold a referendum even if the UK government continues to refuse to give permission.
If the court rules that Holyrood does not have the power, she said the next general election would become a "de facto referendum" with the SNP standing on a single issue of independence.
It later emerged that the Lord Advocate was not prepared to sign off on the Scottish government's independence referendum bill without a ruling from the Supreme Court.
She said she currently "does not have the necessary degree of confidence" that the Scottish Parliament would have the power to hold indyref2.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Nicola Sturgeon has proposed 19 October 2023 as the date for a referendum
In its initial response to the Supreme Court, the UK government said its "clear view" was that a bill legislating for a referendum on independence would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, arguing that issues relating to the constitution are reserved to Westminster.
It also said the referendum legislation has not been passed by MSPs - and has not yet even been introduced to the Scottish Parliament - so it would be "premature" for judges to rule on it.
And it confirmed that its top legal advisor in Scotland - the Advocate General - would take part in the case.
A UK government spokesman said it had been clear that "now is not the time to be discussing another independence referendum, when people across Scotland want both their governments to be working together on the issues that matter to them and their families".
He added: "However, following the Lord Advocate's referral of the Scottish government's draft Scottish Independence Referendum Bill, the UK government has today lodged its initial response with the Supreme Court.
"The papers confirm that the Advocate General for Scotland will become a formal party to the case, and ask the court to consider whether it should accept the Lord Advocate's referral."
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United Kingdom, with its judges - who are known as justices - having the final say on the biggest legal issues. They are the ultimate check and balance on the UK's laws and constitution.
Handling of the case is currently with the president of the court, Lord Reed - a Scottish former Court of Session judge. He will decide the timescales on which the case will be heard, and whether any preliminary issues need to be dealt with first.
If the Scottish government wins the case, Ms Sturgeon said the bill would be introduced at Holyrood and passed swiftly to allow a vote to happen in October 2023.
A spokesman for the first minister said her government "fully intends to offer the Scottish people the choice of independence".
He added: "The UK government's repeated attempts to block democracy - which now seem to extend to an unwillingness to even make a substantive argument before the Supreme Court - serve only to demonstrate how little confidence it has in its case for the union."
It underlines how far apart the Scottish and UK governments are on this issue that they are even having an argument over whether or not there should be an argument.
In many ways this is not a surprise. The UK government had a deadline to respond to the court, and was unlikely to stand aside and not contest the case.
They were always likely to try to have the case dismissed too. The approach in court is generally to throw the kitchen sink, to pitch in every argument which could have a chance of success.
There is an interesting insight into the UK government's case here, though.
Their hope is that if the court decides not to hear the case until a bill has been passed, the issue could be killed off entirely by leaving the Lord Advocate in a Catch-22.
She doesn't want to sign off the bill to be tabled until there's been a ruling, but judges might yet refuse to rule until a bill has been passed.
That position could yet change, of course, given she says settling this question is a matter of "exceptional public importance".
And the Scottish government is sure to fight back, both in the courts and in its political pronouncements.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62138075
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62138075
|
|
Jail for woman who claimed Darren Russell murder was accident - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Stephanie Bowie will serve at least 16 years for stabbing Darren Russell outside a restaurant in Erskine.
|
Glasgow & West Scotland
|
A woman who fatally wounded a man but claimed she did not mean to kill him has been jailed for at least 16 years.
Stephanie Bowie stabbed 21-year-old Darren Russell twice in the chest outside a restaurant in Erskine, Renfrewshire, on New Year's Day 2021.
She denied murder, saying she "accidentally" wounded the victim when she brought out the knife to scare him.
Jurors found her guilty of murder after a trial at the High Court in Glasgow..
Jailing her for life at the High Court in Stirling, the judge said she would serve a minimum of 16 years before she was eligible to apply for parole.
Lord Weir said she had she had committed a "deplorable act of lethal violence".
The trial, last month, heard that Bowie, 29, had stormed to the scene after her brother Mark had been in a minor row with Mr Russell.
The two men - and others - had earlier been in the grounds of nearby Barsail Primary School where they got into an argument.
Bowie took a taxi from Paisley to Erskine after learning of the row, having grabbed a knife before getting into the cab.
She turned up at the school and immediately threatened to kill Mr Russell.
The victim's best friend Craig Smith said they all eventually ended up on a path near the Grill in the Park Bar and Restaurant in Erskine.
Mr Smith, 23, said: "I did not know why she was going for my friend.
"I was trying to get Mark to calm down his sister. Me and Mark had a kind of discussion...as I turned, he (Mr Russell) just fell to the deck and she has come skipping past, all happy."
As the Bowies ran off, Mr Smith helped his friend back to the home he shared with his parents nearby, but he later died.
Stephanie Bowie admitted she had killed Mr Russell but claimed she had not meant it, despite the blows being deep into the victim's body.
She claimed while Mr Russell was standing over her, she "panicked" and brought out the knife hidden up her sleeve.
Bowie said she got rid of the knife and her blood-stained jacket. She also altered her hairstyle to try to avoid being caught.
A jury found her guilty of murder, possession of a bladed article and an attempt to defeat the ends of justice.
After the verdict, the court was told Bowie had a number of previous convictions including for threatening behaviour and breaching bail.
The senior investigating officer in the case, Ch Insp Christopher Nisbet, said Bowie was now facing the consequences of her actions.
"I hope this sentence sends a clear message that violence and the carrying of weapons is completely unacceptable," he said.
He added: "We hope that this conviction brings at least a degree of closure for his relatives and friends.
"We know it has a devastating and significant impact on individuals, families and communities.
"We will continue to work closely with partners and remain determined to bring perpetrators to justice."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62082961
|
news_uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62082961
|
|
Boris Johnson resigns: It is painful to leave Downing Street, says PM - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson says he fought hard to remain in No 10 after colleagues revolted against his leadership.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Johnson: "It's painful not to be able to see through so many ideas and projects myself."
Boris Johnson has said it is "painful not to be able to see through so many projects and ideas" as he announced his resignation as Tory party leader.
The PM was met with cheers from family and staff as he made his resignation speech outside No 10.
He said he had tried to persuade colleagues it would be "eccentric" to change leader and blamed the "herd instinct" in Westminster for his exit.
He added he intended to stay in office until his successor is chosen.
A timetable for a leadership contest would be announced next week, he said. The winner of that contest will become the next UK prime minister.
However, Mr Johnson is facing calls to leave No 10 immediately - including from former Conservative prime minister Sir John Major.
In a letter to party bosses, Sir John said the leadership contest should be speeded up, or if not deputy PM Dominic Raab should take over as caretaker PM.
Mr Johnson's departure followed a mass revolt by ministers over his leadership, sparked by the dramatic resignation of Chancellor Rishi Sunak and Health Secretary Sajid Javid on Tuesday.
He resisted calls to quit - including from newly-appointed Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi - for 48 hours, until it became clear that he had lost the confidence of his party and could not continue.
Speaking outside Downing Street, he said he had secured an "incredible mandate" in the 2019 general election, winning "the biggest Conservative majority since 1987".
"The reason I have fought so hard in the last few days to continue to deliver that mandate in person, was not just because I wanted to do so, because I felt it was my job, my duty, my obligation to you to do what we promised in 2019."
"I regret not to have been successful in those arguments," he said, but acknowledged that the will of his party was "clear".
"In politics, no one is remotely indispensable," he said adding: "I want you to know how sad I am to be giving up the best job in the world, but them's the breaks."
He said he was proud of his achievements in office, citing taking the UK out of the EU, the government's response to Covid and rolling out the vaccine programme.
He also said he had led "the West in standing up to Putin's aggression in Ukraine".
Addressing the Ukrainian people, he said: "We in the UK will continue to back your fight for freedom for as long as it takes."
President Volodymyr Zelensky praised Mr Johnson for "realising the threat of RF [Russian Federation] monster and always being at the forefront of supporting [Ukraine]."
Carrie Johnson and Nadine Dorries were in Downing Street to watch the PM's speech
Mr Johnson thanked his wife Carrie and their children as well as the staff of Downing Street and "you, the British people, for the immense privilege you have given me".
"I know even if things can sometimes seem dark now our future together is golden," he added.
He promised that he and his cabinet would to serve the country's interest until a new leader is chosen. He has filled vacant posts in his cabinet, which will meet later.
He still faces a challenge, however, in replacing the raft of more junior ministers across several departments who quit to force his exit.
Mr Johnson came to power in July 2019, and six months later won a massive majority in a general election.
However, he has been dogged by controversy in recent months, including a fine for breaking his own lockdown laws and his handling of sexual misconduct allegations against former Deputy Chief Whip Chris Pincher.
The PM's speech was brief. But his departure from office won't necessarily be swift.
He wanted history to know his resignation was the fault of colleagues and not himself. The "herd", as he called it, had moved quickly, despite winning the biggest majority at the 2019 general election since 1987 and attracting new voters to his party.
The subtext is that the coalition of voters - including former Labour supporters - he assembled in 2019 may break up without him to keep it together.
He referenced the bad press he received recently, but didn't spend long on any of the mistakes he may have made in office and which provoked mass resignations and a vote of no confidence.
He simply acknowledged he hadn't persuaded colleagues that he should remain in office.
He will stay on until a new leader is elected, but it is the backbench 1922 committee that will decide the timetable and some MPs want it expedited so he is not still in office until the autumn.
With new cabinet ministers in place, he does not seem in a hurry to leave. He will want a legacy that isn't obscured by the chaotic past few days.
The Conservative Party will now hold a leadership contest to find a replacement for the departing leader.
So far Attorney General Suella Braverman is the only Tory MP to declare she will stand, and Steve Baker has said he is "seriously" considering running.
They are expected to be joined by more candidates in the coming days - although deputy PM Dominic Raab has ruled himself out.
Some Conservative MPs also have expressed concern Mr Johnson would stay in office until the autumn, with one saying he had lost "the trust and authority required to continue".
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said Mr Johnson should step down immediately and warned that if he did not Labour would hold a vote of no confidence in the government in Parliament.
If the government lost the confidence vote, it could lead to a general election, however, in order to pass, a large number of Conservative MPs would have to support the Labour motion.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62076257
|
news_uk-politics-62076257
|
|
Prince Harry faced tensions with royal officials as security downgraded, court hears - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Duke of Sussex says officials were involved in decisions about his security that were unfair.
|
UK
|
Prince Harry and Meghan attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service on a rare UK visit
The Duke of Sussex faced "significant tensions" with a top aide to the Queen involved in downgrading his security, a court has been told.
Challenging the decision, Prince Harry's lawyer said he had not been aware Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, played a role.
The decision was "materially prejudiced" as key information was withheld, Shaeed Fatima QC said.
The duke lost full protection after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
Without a guarantee of police protection, Prince Harry believes it is too dangerous to bring his family from the US to visit the UK - which his lawyer has previously said "is and always will be his home".
The duke's legal team argued the decision about his security by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was invalid because of "procedural unfairness".
They questioned whether it was "appropriate" for Sir Edward or other members of the Royal Household to sit on the committee, when Prince Harry had been told it was "independent".
Representing the duke, Ms Fatima said: "He didn't know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all."
Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, had a tense relationship with Prince Harry, lawyers said
She said Prince Harry should have been able to make direct representations to Ravec to ensure his arguments were properly communicated to the committee and been given an opportunity to respond to points being made by others, including members of the Royal Household.
Ms Fatima said his offer to pay for his own police protection "was not conveyed to Ravec" and so the decision was "materially prejudiced".
This court action is still at an early stage. Mr Justice Swift is being asked to decide whether Prince Harry has an arguable case going forward. That decision won't come for another few weeks.
However - the written and oral submissions heard in Court three this morning are headline-making because of the detail and most notably what were described as "significant tensions" between Prince Harry and the Queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.
No specifics were read out in court - sensitive information was kept out of the public hearing. But it does point to the breakdown in relations between the Sussexes and the Royal Household prior to their move abroad.
Whatever Mr Justice Swift decides, there may be further legal action as counsel for the Duke of Sussex has indicated a second judicial review claim has been started into whether he should be allowed to fund the security himself rather than having taxpayers pay for it.
An offer Prince Harry's counsel say was made - including in an email to Sir Edward Young in 2020 - but which was not passed on to Ravec.
Lawyers for the Home Office say Ravec was entitled to make the decision it did - to provide police protection to Prince Harry and Meghan on a case-by-case basis when they visit the UK.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that personal tensions between Prince Harry and Royal Household officials are "irrelevant" to his change in status when he stepped back from royal duties.
He said there was "no basis" to conclude that the duke making representations to the committee would have led to a different outcome.
Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.
He and Meghan have only rarely visited since their move to California. On one visit in July 2021, the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.
The Sussexes also stopped in the UK in April, meeting the Queen on the way to the Invictus Games, and attended the thanksgiving service during the Platinum Jubilee last month.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62044951
|
news_uk-62044951
|
|
Resignation speech: 'No-one is indispensable' - Boris Johnson's statement in full - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson says he's immensely proud of his government's achievements as he resigns outside No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Boris Johnson stepped out of No 10 to the sound of applause from some political supporters, Downing St colleagues and his wife. Here is his resignation speech in full:
"It is clearly now the will of the parliamentary Conservative Party that there should be a new leader of that party and therefore a new prime minister.
"And I've agreed with Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of our backbench MPs, that the process of choosing that new leader should begin now and the timetable will be announced next week.
"And I've today appointed a Cabinet to serve, as I will, until a new leader is in place.
"So I want to say to the millions of people who voted for us in 2019, many of them voting Conservative for the first time, thank you for that incredible mandate, the biggest Conservative majority since 1987, the biggest share of the vote since 1979.
"And the reason I have fought so hard in the last few days to continue to deliver that mandate in person was not just because I wanted to do so, but because I felt it was my job, my duty, my obligation to you to continue to do what we promised in 2019.
"And of course, I'm immensely proud of the achievements of this government, from getting Brexit done to settling our relations with the Continent for over half a century, reclaiming the power for this country to make its own laws in Parliament, getting us all through the pandemic, delivering the fastest vaccine rollout in Europe, the fastest exit from lockdown, and in the last few months, leading the West in standing up to Putin's aggression in Ukraine.
"And let me say now, to the people of Ukraine, that I know that we in the UK will continue to back your fight for freedom for as long as it takes.
"And at the same time in this country, we've been pushing forward a vast programme of investment in infrastructure and skills and technology - the biggest for a century. Because if I have one insight into human beings, it is that genius and talent and enthusiasm and imagination are evenly distributed throughout the population.
"But opportunity is not, and that's why we must keep levelling up, keep unleashing the potential of every part of the United Kingdom. And if we can do that, in this country, we will be the most prosperous in Europe.
"And in the last few days, I tried to persuade my colleagues that it would be eccentric to change governments when we're delivering so much and when we have such a vast mandate and when we're actually only a handful of points behind in the polls, even in mid-term, after quite a few months of pretty relentless sledging and when the economic scene is so difficult domestically and internationally.
"And I regret not to have been successful in those arguments and of course it's painful not to be able to see through so many ideas and projects myself.
"But as we've seen at Westminster, the herd instinct is powerful and when the herd moves, it moves.
Boris Johnson made his speech in front of the cameras...
"And my friends in politics, no-one is remotely indispensable and our brilliant and Darwinian system will produce another leader, equally committed to taking this country forward through tough times.
"Not just helping families to get through it, but changing and improving the way we do things, cutting burdens on businesses and families and yes, cutting taxes, because that is the way to generate the growth and the income we need to pay for great public services.
"And to that new leader, I say whoever he or she may be, I say I will give you as much support as I can. And to you, the British public.
"I know that there will be many people who are relieved and perhaps quite a few who will also be disappointed. And I want you to know how sad I am to be giving up the best job in the world.
...and his wife, baby daughter and other supporters in the crowd
"I want to thank Carrie and our children, and all the members of my family who have had to put up with so much for so long.
"I want to thank the peerless British civil service for all the help and support that you have given our police, our emergency services and, of course, our fantastic NHS, who at (a) critical moment, helped to extend my own period in office, as well as our armed services and our agencies that are so admired around the world.
"And our indefatigable Conservative Party members and supporters whose selfless campaigning makes our democracy possible. I want to thank the wonderful staff here at Chequers - here at Number 10, and of course at Chequers. And our fantastic prop force detectives, the one group by the way, who never leak.
"Above all, I want to thank you, the British public, for the immense privilege that you have given me and I want you to know that from now on until the new prime minister is in place, your interests will be served and the government of the country will be carried on.
"Being prime minister is an education in itself. I have travelled to every part of the United Kingdom and, in addition to the beauty of our natural world, I have found so many people possessed of such boundless British originality and so willing to tackle old problems in new ways that I know that even if things can sometimes seem dark now, our future together is golden.
"Thank you all very much. Thank you."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62081380
|
news_uk-politics-62081380
|
|
Rapper Nipsey Hussle's killer convicted of murder - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hussle, born Ermias Asghedom, was shot outside his LA clothing store in 2019 after a brief argument.
|
US & Canada
|
Hussle was praised for his humanitarian charity work after his death
The man who shot and killed Los Angeles rapper Nipsey Hussle minutes after a brief argument in 2019 has been found guilty of murdering the rising artist.
Eric Holder, 32, was convicted by a jury in California on Wednesday after six hours of deliberations.
Hussle, born Ermias Asghedom, was shot outside his LA clothing store. The 33-year-old had reportedly known the killer for several years.
Following his death, tributes were paid from across the music industry.
Holder was also found guilty of two counts of attempted manslaughter as two other men were shot in the incident. He could get life in prison when he is sentenced in September.
He belonged to the same street gang as Hussle and had previously admitted to killing him. Witnesses say he left the scene after a ten minute argument, in which Hussle warned him of rumours that he was co-operating with police, and returned with two handguns.
His defence team argued that he attacked him in the "heat of passion" but the jury agreed that the attack was premeditated.
Eric Holder could get life in prison when he is sentenced in September
At the 2019 BET Awards, Hussle was posthumously given the Best Male Hip Hop Artist and Humanitarian Awards.
Over 20,000 people attended a celebration of his life, with former US President Barack Obama praising him for leaving "a legacy worth of celebration".
Hussle, a former gang member in Los Angeles, had become a community organiser and used the money he made from music to fund improvements to his neighbourhood.
After his death he was praised as a "West Coast hero" by members of the city council, who unanimously voted to re-name an intersection "Nipsey Hussle Square" in his south LA neighbourhood.
Bryannita Nicholson, a woman who was in a casual relationship with Holder and unwittingly drove him to and from the murder scene, testified in court during the trial that she saw Holder load a gun before the shooting.
She said that they spotted the rapper on the street outside his Marathon clothing store while they were picking up a food order. Holder rushed over and she said she heard him loudly tell the rapper: "Did you say I snitched?".
Ms Nicholson added that she posed for a photo with Hussle while Holder went to collect the food. The witness, who came forward to police leading to Holder's arrest, said that she saw Holder eat some food before he left her car to kill Hussle.
Last week, Holder was attacked in jail by "multiple individuals" his public defender told CBS News, the BBC's partner in the US. He was reportedly cut with a razor, and taken to hospital where he had a wound to his head closed with staples.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62072376
|
news_world-us-canada-62072376
|
|
Boris Johnson resignation: New leader will shift political landscape - BBC News
|
2022-07-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the Boris Johnson era ends, it's a safe bet the next Tory leader will be a very different character.
|
UK Politics
|
Boris Johnson will be remembered as a convention-smashing, rule-bending, first name recognition prime minister.
A man whose character strengths, in the eyes of many Conservative MPs, were also his weaknesses.
Great at campaigning, poor at governing, many backbenchers found themselves reflecting.
Standing at the lectern in Downing Street, Boris Johnson was forced to articulate that his imagined future had been crushed.
The boy who dreamed of being "world king" ejected.
A primary colours prime minister provoking colourful reactions to the near end: protesters just beyond the Downing Street gates screaming "liar", some of his most loyal MPs comparing his defenestration to the downfall of Lady Thatcher.
Boris Johnson is now, he insists, a prime minister emasculated, fulfilling a duty rather than a bucket list of ambitions.
His supporters are pointing to convention that departing prime ministers loiter until their replacement rolls up, rather than instantly skedaddle to make way for a caretaker PM.
As a spectator to this noise from Westminster, you might ponder: why them and what next?
Why them, that tiny collection of MPs, deciding who should govern and lead, so relatively soon after a big election win?
Well, in a parliamentary democracy, for better or worse - as opposed to those countries with a presidency - our party leaders, and so our prime ministers, are chosen by their parties, (and affiliated trade unions in the case of the Labour Party) not the rest of us.
It means the thinnest sliver of the country will get to decide who replaces Boris Johnson. The electorate will have the chance to endorse or reject the chosen one, but only at the next election.
It may not surprise you to discover that Westminster is a postcode which doesn't suffer a deficit of ambition.
The wannabes will fight a popularity contest among Tory MPs in the next few weeks, and two of them should be left at the end of that process, Conservative Party members will have the final say.
Over the course of the summer, somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 people will be charged with selecting the next head of our government on our behalf.
It is a safe bet the next prime minister will be a very different character to Boris Johnson. Given the manner and motivations behind his toppling, being seen to ooze integrity and revere truth are qualities all the candidates will aspire to illustrate.
But beyond that, there will be an intriguing debate about what it means to a Conservative in 2022.
A Conservative in post-Brexit Britain, where neither main party at Westminster contests the fundamentals of the UK's departure from the EU, but where our relations with our nearest neighbours have not normalised since.
When a new leader assumes office, the political landscape will instantly shift.
Yes, they will have novelty and freshness, at least for a bit. But no electoral mandate to call their own.
And the opposition parties will confront a new opponent.
As the Boris Johnson era concludes, so too will there be new turf upon which the arguments of tomorrow will play out.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62088774
|
news_uk-politics-62088774
|
|
David Trimble: Reaction to the death of former first minister - BBC News
|
2022-07-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lord Trimble died after a short illness at the age of 77.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Lord Trimble, former first minister of Northern Ireland and Ulster Unionist Party leader, has died at the age of 77
Politicians and others have been paying tribute to the former Nobel Peace prize winner for his role in the Good Friday Agreement and beyond.
Tonight's news will cause deep sadness throughout Northern Ireland and much further afield.
David Trimble was a man of courage and vision. He chose to grasp the opportunity for peace when it presented itself and sought to end the decades of violence that blighted his beloved Northern Ireland.
He will forever be associated with the leadership he demonstrated in the negotiations that led up to the 1998 Belfast Agreement.
The bravery and courage he demonstrated whilst battling his recent illness was typical of the qualities he showed in his political career, at Stormont and at Westminster.
He will be remembered as a first minister, as a Peer of the Realm and as a Nobel Prize Winner. He will also be remembered as a great unionist.
David Trimble's life has left an indelible mark on our shared island's story.
Over the course of his political career, but particularly in difficult years of the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, he demonstrated immense courage and took political risks that sustained the life of our fledgling peace process.
He doesn't often enough get credit for it, but without David Trimble's fortitude, there would simply have been no agreement.
The image of David and Seamus Mallon walking through Poyntzpass together in 1998 to comfort the families of Damien Trainor and Philip Allen is an enduring icon of the peace process that inspired a whole generation of people who wanted, and needed, to believe that our shared future could be different from our divided past.
It is my enduring memory of his commitment to reconciliation.
My thoughts and prayers are with Daphne, Richard, Victoria, Nicholas and Sarah at this difficult time. I hope they are comforted by the immense legacy that David left to the people of Northern Ireland.
*The SDLP has announced it will postpone its assembly recall motion scheduled for Tuesday.
What I found in dealing with David Trimble, including when I served as deputy first minister alongside him in office, was the term doable counted a lot with him.
He would tell you things were out because they weren't doable, and then the calculus would change and he would decide things were doable and even though it was going to be risky and difficult, if it was doable, he was going to go for it.
Unless he as the leader of the main unionist parties was going to go for the [Good Friday] Agreement, even though it entailed risks for him, even though it had real challenges, unless he was going to go for the agreement, one, there wouldn't have been an agreement, and two, it certainly wouldn't have got endorsement at the referendum.
My sympathies to Daphne who I know very well and the children and to his friends.
He was courageous. I had many a row, many arguments and in more recent years we had good laughs about those debates.
As a good negotiator when he made a deal, when he settled something, he stuck by it.
He stuck by it subsequently and he paid a price, he lost his seat in Upper Bann, he got a lot of criticism from his wider unionist family.
He was a good guy and he stood firmly by what he believed in and I had a long chat with him just a few weeks ago in Queen's [University] and he knew what was coming.
He was brave in that, as he was in everything else.
"David Trimble, in his support of the peace process, showed politics at its very best. When some within his own ranks were opposed to the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, he supported it.
When we needed his willingness to go the extra mile for peace, he travelled that mile. When there was the prospect of collapse of the process without strong leadership, he provided that leadership.
"His contribution to Northern Ireland and to the United Kingdom was immense, unforgettable and frankly irreplaceable.
"Whatever disagreements we had - and there were quite a few - I never had anything other than profound respect for David as a person and as a Leader.
"My deepest condolences to Daphne and his family.
"We have lost today someone who will be mourned by friends and foes alike."
I am deeply saddened to learn of the death of Lord Trimble earlier today.
He was a giant of British and international politics and will be long remembered for his intellect, personal bravery and fierce determination to change politics for the better.
A winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and a leading architect of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement, he championed democracy over violence, and played a huge role in setting Northern Ireland on the path to peace.
My thoughts are with David's wife Daphne and their children at this difficult time. They should know that David's legacy and achievements will never be forgotten by the people of the United Kingdom.
As President of Ireland, I wish to express my deep sadness at hearing the news of the passing of David Trimble, former First Minister of Northern Ireland and former Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party.
Sabina joins me in expressing our profound sympathy to Mrs Daphne Trimble and to all of David's family, friends and colleagues.
Lord Trimble will be remembered for a life of public service, and of course for his most significant contribution to the work for peace on our island.
The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize, together with John Hume, following the signing of the Good Friday Agreement almost 25 years ago, was part of the recognition by so many of their work for peace.
David Trimble's dedication and courage, often during the most challenging times, has earned him a distinguished and deserved place in our history books.
His work leaves a true legacy on the necessity and value of peace on our shared island for future generations.
I wish to express my deepest condolences to the family, colleagues and friends of David Trimble.
He played a key role as leader of the UUP, and his was a long and distinguished career in unionist politics and in the politics of Northern Ireland.
All of us in politics at the time witnessed his crucial and courageous role in the negotiations leading to the Good Friday Agreement and his leadership in building support in his party and his community for the agreement.
Fittingly, his contribution was recognised internationally and most notably by the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to himself and John Hume "for their joint efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland".
As the first, first Minister of Northern Ireland, he began the arduous work of bedding down the executive and delivering for the people of Northern Ireland.
In his speech accepting the Nobel Prize, Trimble spoke about the "politicians of the possible", a phrase which I think sums up the David Trimble we all knew, and it speaks to his achievements over many decades, often in challenging circumstances.
The work of reconciliation begun in the Good Friday Agreement continues, and as new generations pick up the mantle of this work, it is fitting that we pay tribute to Lord Trimble for his central contribution in setting us on the path to peace and reconciliation.
David faced huge challenges when he led the Ulster Unionist Party in the Good Friday Agreement negotiations and persuaded his party to sign on for it.
It is to his credit that he supported that agreement. I thank him for that.
In the years immediately following the agreement, I met David many times.
Our conversations were not always easy, but we made progress. We used to meet quite often on our own and I got to know him quite well.
While we held fundamentally different political opinions on the way forward nonetheless I believe he was committed to making the peace process work.
David's contribution to the Good Friday Agreement and to the quarter century of relative peace that followed cannot be underestimated.
I want to extend my sincerest condolences to Daphne Trimble, their daughters Victoria and Sarah, their sons Richard and Nicholas and to the entire family circle.
It is with genuine regret that I have learned of the passing of Former First Minister David Trimble.
I wish to offer my sincere condolences to his wife Daphne, their four children and the wider family circle who will feel his loss deeply.
His very significant contribution to the peace process and his courage in helping achieve the Good Friday Agreement leaves a legacy a quarter century on for which he and his family should be rightly proud.
I am deeply saddened to learn of David's passing and my thoughts are foremost with Daphne and their children at this painful time of loss.
He made a huge contribution to Northern Ireland, and to political life in the United Kingdom.
Throughout some of the most difficult years of the Troubles, David was a committed and passionate advocate for the Union, at a time when doing so placed a considerable threat to his safety.
Whilst our political paths parted within the Ulster Unionist Party, there can be no doubting his bravery and determination in leadership at that time.
He was a committed and passionate unionist who always wanted the best for Northern Ireland.
Right until recent days David continued to use his political skill and intellect, most recently in support of the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union and in opposition to the Northern Ireland Protocol.
As a Nobel laureate, his words carried significant weight and he helped raise awareness of the threat the protocol posed to Northern Ireland, particularly amongst the wider UK audience.
He leaves a huge and lasting legacy to Northern Ireland. He can undoubtedly be said to have shaped history in our country.
My thoughts are with the friends and family of Lord Trimble
My sympathies are also with his former colleagues in the UUP.
Lord Trimble's greatest legacy to his political career is the Good Friday Agreement and the risks he took to both help achieve it, and ensuring the resulting assembly remained during its unsteady early days.
It was at times an unenviable role.
I am greatly saddened to learn of the passing of Lord David Trimble and wish to express to Lady Trimble and the family sincere condolences.
Though politically we fundamentally disagreed over the Belfast Agreement, latterly as joint applicants in the Judicial Review challenge to the Protocol we shared a common determination to rid Northern Ireland of this iniquitous assault on our constitutional position.
David had a very clear and correct view of the dangers and unacceptability of the Protocol.
I have known David and Daphne Trimble since my university days when David was one of my lecturers and Daphne was a fellow student in my law year.
As a couple throughout their married life, Daphne gave exemplary support to David and in his declining health was a tower of strength to him. So, in losing David, Daphne has suffered a great loss and Northern Ireland has lost a foremost thinker within unionism.
The loss of David Trimble will be felt deeply throughout Northern Ireland.
My heart goes out to his family and friends.
He will be remembered for his unshaking defence of peace, and his leadership in helping deliver the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement.
David Trimble was a towering figure of Northern Ireland and British politics as one of the key authors of the Good Friday Agreement, the first First Minister and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.
My thoughts are with Lady Trimble and their family.
Deeply saddened to hear of the death of former Northern Ireland First Minister David Trimble.
David was a great figure, instrumental in delivering the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement and the optimistic Northern Ireland of today.
My thoughts are with his family at this time.
He [Trimble] was a giant of Unionism and he helped bring peace to Northern Ireland as an architect of the Good Friday Agreement, and he was a deserved winner of the Nobel Peace prize.
I'm sure everyone's thoughts will be with his family tonight.
David Trimble took enormous personal and political risks for peace. He put the future of Northern Ireland before his party's interests and sought to make Northern Ireland a warmer house for all who lived there.
He was not always right, but he worked to take violence out of politics to strengthen the centre ground. For that, he and John Hume jointly won the Nobel Prize. Rest in peace.
Deeply saddened at the death of Lord Trimble. Working together in the Talks, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the House of Lords, I saw him face testing times and profound challenges with great courage and integrity.
Present and future generations owe him more than they know.
The Hume Foundation is deeply saddened at the passing of Lord David Trimble.
David Trimble demonstrated genuine and courageous leadership during the negotiations that led to the Good Friday Agreement 24 years ago.
Our sincere sympathies to all his family.
Remembering David Trimble's wife and family in prayer. Whilst a strong representative of his party, he had courage to lead, and to persuade others to take historic steps forward for peace and reconciliation.
For this we owe him a sincere debt of gratitude.
David Trimble showed leadership at a time when Northern Ireland so badly needed it.
All politicians from all traditions should be inspired by his courage.
My thoughts tonight are with his family, his wife Daphne, his UUP colleagues and unionist community.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-62295988
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-62295988
|
|
Obituary: David Trimble, Northern Ireland's first first minister - BBC News
|
2022-07-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Nobel Peace Prize winner was known as the Harry Houdini of Northern Ireland politics.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Lord Trimble's decision to back the Good Friday Agreement was a defining moment in his political career.
The then Ulster Unionist leader earned a place on the world stage, mixing with presidents and prime ministers.
He and the then Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) leader, John Hume, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.
He was Northern Ireland's inaugural first minister in an assembly that took years of bitter arguments to form.
And he weathered so many challenges to his leadership and policy that commentators called him the Harry Houdini of Northern Ireland politics.
Trimble and Hume were "two men who are making history", U2's Bono said in 1998
William David Trimble was born on 15 October 1944 in Bangor, County Down.
A law lecturer at Queen's University in Belfast by profession, he entered politics through the hard-line Vanguard Party in the early 1970s.
As such, he opposed the Sunningdale Agreement that had tried to broker a power-sharing agreement and create a new Northern Ireland Executive.
He played an important strategic role in the loyalist strike that brought down the executive less than six months after the agreement was signed.
Ironically, the Sunningdale proposals were not far removed from those he would himself campaign for 20 years later.
Trimble played a major role in loyalist protests against the Sunningdale Agreement
He was elected as Vanguard member for Belfast South in the short-lived Northern Ireland Constitutional Convention in 1975.
But Vanguard fell apart over proposals to form closer links with the nationalist SDLP and Trimble joined the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP).
He held a number of positions within the UUP and finally entered Westminster as an MP after a by-election in Upper Bann in 1990.
His strong unionist credentials were bolstered when he led a controversial Orange parade down the nationalist Garvaghy Road in Portadown, County Armagh.
The march, from Drumcree Parish Church, was the scene of clashes between nationalist residents and the Orange Order in past years, and in 1995, for the first time the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) moved to prevent the march from taking place.
Paisley and Trimble wrangled in the political arena but joined forces in support of the Orange Order at Drumcree
After a stand-off that lasted two days, police allowed the march to go ahead as long as the Orangemen walked in silence, without the normal band music.
Trimble, wearing his Orange sash, marched alongside the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Ian Paisley in front of hundreds of Orangemen.
At the end of the road, the two men held their linked hands in the air in what was interpreted by the local community as a gesture of triumph.
Trimble later protested that he had only held Paisley's hand to prevent the other man from hogging the limelight.
His hard-line stand at the parade helped him in the race to become Ulster Unionist leader, when he defeated the frontrunner John Taylor.
More than 70% of voters in Northern Ireland supported the Good Friday Agreement
There were some who feared that his swaggering approach spelled the end for the peace process.
But three years later, he and Seamus Mallon of the SDLP were appointed first and deputy first ministers in a new Northern Ireland Assembly.
He became the first unionist leader since the 1920s to negotiate with Sinn Féin and pushed ahead with talks in spite of the opposition of half his parliamentary party.
Trimble and Hume were rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize for their work
In October of the same year, Trimble and Hume were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
The citation said: "As the leader of the traditionally predominant party in Northern Ireland, David Trimble showed great political courage when, at a critical stage of the process, he advocated solutions which led to the peace agreement."
There were stumbling blocks - Trimble often found himself locking horns with republicans over the IRA's failure to decommission its weapons.
He resigned as first minister and the Northern Ireland Executive lurched from suspension to suspension.
His critics said he had gone back to his hard-line roots, but he denied that.
Along with Seamus Mallon (second right), Trimble rubbed shoulders with political heavyweights as he led the Northern Ireland Executive
Thanks to decommissioning, he continued to share power with Sinn Féin, even if that put him out of step with close colleagues.
His party was deeply divided and he was under pressure.
In 2001, an angry crowd greeted him and his wife Daphne in Banbridge, County Down, after the general election - he held on to his seat but by a much-reduced majority.
The Democratic Unionists treated the election as a second referendum on the Good Friday Agreement, fiercely attacking the UUP and winning five seats - just one fewer than their unionist rivals.
The IRA agreed to put some weapons beyond use in October 2001, and Trimble agreed to return to government, but his critics were not happy.
Trimble saw off a leadership challenge from Jeffrey Donaldson, who later joined the DUP
In September 2002, he and Jeffrey Donaldson came up with a compromise plan, giving the IRA a four-month deadline to give up violence for good.
But just a few days later, there was news of an alleged IRA spy ring inside Stormont and the assembly collapsed again.
There were rows within the UUP and half of its Westminster MPs resigned the whip.
But Trimble still managed to defeat Donaldson in a leadership challenge in September 2003.
The DUP's David Simpson took Trimble's Westminster seat in the 2005 general election
The November 2003 election saw the once-powerful UUP fall into third place behind the DUP, to which Donaldson and two other MLAs had defected.
The general election of 2005 marked the end of Trimble's political career.
The UUP was reduced to holding just a single seat at Westminster, where once it had held 10.
Among the casualties was Trimble himself, who decided to stand down as UUP leader.
He later told the BBC that he had made a mistake in not standing down in 2003, but said there had been no-one coming forward to take on the leadership.
Trimble - pictured with his wife Daphne - was a Conservative peer in his later years
He was made Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the original name of Lisburn, his adopted home town, and joined the ranks of Conservative Party peers.
There was speculation that he might have been offered a Cabinet post if the Conservatives had won the 2010 election outright.
But the forming of a coalition with the Liberal Democrats meant he was not included in the government ranks.
Instead, he turned his attention to the Middle East, becoming a strong advocate for Israel and a fierce critic of Hezbollah, the militant group based in Lebanon.
In recent years, he was also vocal in his opposition to the Northern Ireland Protocol - part of the 2019 Brexit deal that keeps Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods, preventing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.
Lord Trimble argued that it put the Good Friday Agreement at risk.
David Trimble was married twice. His first marriage ended in divorce, and in 1978 he married Daphne Orr. The couple met when he was one of her lecturers while she was studying law at Queen's University, Belfast.
Daphne Trimble stood unsuccessfully as an Ulster Conservatives and Unionists - New Force candidate for Lagan Valley in the 2010 General Election.
Boating was one of the family's favourite pursuits. In later years, they owned a narrow boat that they used to explore the English canal system.
The Trimbles had four children - Richard, Vicky, Nicholas and Sarah.
In 2019, speaking during a House of Lords debate on same-sex marriage, Lord Trimble revealed that his daughter, Vicky, had married her girlfriend.
"I cannot change that, and I cannot now go around saying that I am opposed to it because I acquiesced to it. There we are," he said.
His daughter said she was "a little surprised" by his wording but that how he deals with her and her wife speaks louder than his words.
David and Daphne Trimble with a portrait by Colin Davidson unveiled at Queen's University
Nicholas Trimble has followed his parents into politics. In June 2020, he was elected mayor of Lisburn and Castlereagh.
In 2017, Lord Trimble wrote to the former deputy minister, Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness shortly before he died, telling him how much he appreciated his efforts to make devolution in Northern Ireland work.
"You reached out to the unionist community in a way some of them were reluctant to reach out to you," he wrote.
"I and my colleagues believed that you were indispensable."
In June, a portrait of Lord Trimble by artist Colin Davidson was unveiled at Queen's University.
At the ceremony, former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, called him a "passionate and determined peacemaker" and there were video messages from former US President Bill Clinton, former Prime Minister Tony Blair and Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
David Trimble will be remembered as a street politician who won the Nobel Peace Prize; an academic who walked on an international political stage; and a man who brought the Ulster Unionists into a historic agreement for Northern Ireland.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25825573
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-25825573
|
|
Archie Battersbee: Parents lose appeal over life support - BBC News
|
2022-07-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The 12-year-old has been in hospital since being found unconscious at home in April.
|
Essex
|
Parents Hollie Dance (pictured) and Paul Battersbee lost two High Court hearings to get continued life support treatment for their son Archie
The parents of a 12-year-old boy have lost an appeal against a decision to allow life support treatment to end.
Archie Battersbee was found unconscious at home in Southend, Essex, on 7 April and the Royal London Hospital believe he is brain dead.
Appeal judges supported a High Court ruling that ending his life support was lawful and in his best interests.
A 48-hour delay to ending treatment has been ordered so the family can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
In a statement, his mother Hollie Dance, said: "As long as Archie is alive, I will never give up on him; he is too good to give up on.
"We should not have to endlessly battle the hospital in the courts for what we believe is right for Archie.
"Top judges have told us, however, that this is the law. If this so, the law must change."
She added the family was considering taking the case to the European court in Strasbourg, France.
Archie has not regained consciousness since he was found by his mother Ms Dance, who believes he had been taking part in an online challenge.
Paul Battersbee (pictured at an earlier court hearing) was taken ill before today's Court of Appeal ruling
Court of Appeal judges in London were asked to postpone their ruling as Archie's father, Paul Battersbee, had been taken ill outside court, but they refused.
It is thought Mr Battersbee may have suffered a heart attack or stroke prior to the hearing.
However, judges said it was in Archie's best interests to give a judgement today.
Ms Dance said she thought judges had been "insensitive" in deciding not to adjourn.
She also wanted appeal judges to adjourn their ruling on the basis that she had "video evidence" that indicated that Archie, who is attached to a ventilator, had twice tried to breathe for himself on Friday and Saturday.
"The hospital seem to cherry pick what they want to put over to the court. Again we've heard today that Archie's losing weight. He put on 0.4 kilos yesterday. How is that losing weight?" said Ms Dance.
The family's legal team indicated they would make a separate application to Mr Justice Hayden, who made the latest High Court judgement, on that point.
Barts Health NHS Trust, which runs the hospital in Whitechapel in east London, had taken the case to the courts to get a ruling on what was in the best interests of Archie, who the courts have heard had catastrophic brain injuries.
Judges in two separate High Court hearings had previously ruled against his parents, who wanted treatment to continue while his heart was still beating.
Sir Andrew McFarlane, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Peter Jackson have now refused to overturn the last High Court judgement by Mr Justice Hayden.
Sir Andrew said medical staff had seen "no signs of life" in Archie and his "every bodily function is now maintained by artificial means".
He said the case had received widespread media coverage - including a photograph of Archie.
"Archie is no longer the boy in the photograph," said Sir Andrew.
In June, a first High Court judge agreed with doctors that Archie Battersbee was "brain-stem dead"
Mr Justice Hayden delivered his ruling after reviewing evidence in the Family Division of the High Court in London.
He described what had happened to Archie as a "tragedy of immeasurable dimensions", but said medical evidence was "compelling and unanimous" and painted a "bleak" picture.
Archie's parents, who are separated, had argued he made errors and had been appealing for a third hearing at the High Court with a different judge.
Barrister Edward Devereux QC, leading the legal team for Archie's parents, had told appeal judges that Mr Justice Hayden had not given "real or proper weight" to Archie's previously expressed wishes and religious beliefs.
He also appealed on the grounds that Archie's family's wishes were also not given "real or proper weight", that Mr Justice Hayden had failed to carry out a "comprehensive evaluation" of the benefits and burdens of continuing life support treatment, and had that he had been wrong to conclude that treatment was burdensome and futile.
Archie's parents have been supported by a campaign organisation called the Christian Legal Centre.
All arguments were dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-62292655
|
news_uk-england-essex-62292655
|
|
Tory leadership: Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss in fiercest clash yet over tax - BBC News
|
2022-07-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The economy dominated as Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss took part in their first head-to-head TV debate.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss tore into each other over their rival visions for the future of the UK economy, in their first head-to-head TV debate.
The two contenders to be the next PM did not hold back from "blue-on-blue" attacks in the hour-long BBC special.
Mr Sunak told Ms Truss her tax cut plan would "tip millions of people into misery" and cost the Conservatives the next election.
Ms Truss said tax rises brought in by him would lead to a recession.
The foreign secretary and former chancellor, who until three weeks ago were in the same cabinet, talked over each other at times and shot angry glances across the stage at Stoke-on-Trent's Victoria Hall.
It led to complaints afterwards by Ms Truss's supporters that the ex-chancellor was being too aggressive and was "mansplaining" - something fiercely denied by the Sunak camp.
The pair were on better terms by the end of the debate, with Ms Truss saying she would "love" to have Mr Sunak on her team if she becomes PM. The ex-chancellor praised her stance on Russia.
But the row over tax dominated the early exchanges.
Ms Truss wants to scrap the rise to National Insurance, a planned rise in corporation tax and would temporarily scrap green levies on energy bills to be paid for through borrowing.
Mr Sunak says he would not cut taxes until inflation was under control.
Mr Sunak - who quit as chancellor earlier this month - said the coronavirus pandemic had created a large bill and that putting it on the "country's credit card" would "pass the tab to our children and grandchildren".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Ms Truss insisted that under her plans the UK would start paying down the debt in three year's time - and paying it back straight away as Mr Sunak wanted to do would push the UK into a recession.
Mr Sunak suggested her plans would lead to higher interest rates, but the foreign secretary dismiss this as "scaremongering" and "project fear" - an echo of the criticism aimed at the Remain campaign during Brexit referendum.
Mr Sunak took this opportunity to point out that, unlike him, Ms Truss campaigned against Brexit.
"Maybe I learnt from that," she replied. She later said the Brexit referendum was when she had learnt not to trust Treasury forecasts on the economy.
Other key moments in the debate included:
Mr Sunak's resignation as chancellor helped trigger the downfall of Mr Johnson.
He praised Mr Johnson's handling of Brexit and the pandemic but said he had quit as a matter of principle over the PM's "conduct" and the fact that they had "very different views about the direction of travel on the economy".
Ms Truss acknowledged the prime minister had made mistakes but said they were not "sufficient" enough for the Conservative Party to have "rejected him".
Neither said they would accept Mr Johnson in their cabinet.
Chief secretary to the Treasury and Truss-backer Simon Clarke told BBC Breakfast that polling after the debate showed the majority of Conservative voters thought his candidate had won the evening - and it had reaffirmed his view that she was the right candidate to lead the country.
He refused to criticise Mr Sunak for interrupting, but said viewers would have to make up their own minds about his debating style. He added he thought Ms Truss had been "cool, controlled" and had made compelling arguments.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer told BBC Breakfast the debate showed a Conservative Party which had "lost the plot and lost its purpose".
He said Mr Sunak was acting like he had "just come down from the moon" and discovered the economy was in a bad way when he had been in charge of it until three weeks ago, while Ms Truss was playing "fantasy economics" without explaining how she would pay for tax cuts.
"We do need change in the UK but the change we need is not a change at the top of the Conservative Party, it is more fundamental than that. We need a fresh start for Britain. We need a Labour government," he said.
For all the talk of wanting the "blue-on-blue" attacks to subside - this debate showed they haven't gone away.
Liz Truss's campaign accused Rishi Sunak of not letting her get a word in edgeways, and Rishi Sunak continued to slam Liz Truss's tax cut plans for not being economically sound.
Sources close to Sunak said he had "won the argument" on the economy, with his argument that her tax cuts would further fuel inflation and push up interest rates and people's mortgages.
Behind the scenes, Truss's camp feel positive too - claiming that while she stayed calm Sunak was "flustered".
Debates about their backgrounds haven't gone away either. Both are keen to distance themselves from any suggestion they had certain privileges.
Truss pointed to her comprehensive school education but distanced herself slightly, though, from the outright attacks on Sunak's clothing and education from some of her supporters.
But the key battleground - and the biggest dividing line between the two - is still tax.
What questions do you have about the Tory Leadership debate? Please get in touch by emailing: haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62299111
|
news_uk-politics-62299111
|
|
EU launches fresh legal action over Northern Ireland border rules - BBC News
|
2022-07-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The fresh claims come amid a worsening diplomatic row over the Northern Ireland Protocol.
|
UK Politics
|
The EU has launched fresh legal action against the UK over its enforcement of post-Brexit trading rules in Northern Ireland.
It has accused the UK of failing to apply customs and tax rules it agreed as part of its 2019 exit agreement.
The arrangements have led to a bitter diplomatic row - with the UK now arguing they disrupt trade too much.
The UK government said the latest claims were "disappointing" and legal action was "in nobody's interest".
The latest legal claims come in addition to a separate challenge to the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, which would allow the UK to scrap some of the border arrangements without the EU's say-so.
The bill passed its final stages in the House of Commons earlier this week, but faces a potentially rough ride in the Lords later this year.
The EU, opposition parties and some Tory MPs argue the bill goes against the deal the UK signed and breaches international law.
The border arrangements, known as the Northern Ireland Protocol, were designed to avoid checks at the UK's border with the Republic of Ireland.
However, they have become highly unpopular among unionists in Northern Ireland, with the UK government now arguing they are too disruptive.
The European Commission has now launched four additional legal actions over the protocol, with the UK given an initial two months to reply to the complaints.
They relate to an alleged failure to provide the EU with data about exports from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, and implement agreed EU customs, VAT and alcohol excise rules.
They come in addition to previous claims by the commission, alleging the UK had failed to properly share trade data and set up border inspection posts.
In a statement, the commission said its latest actions were required to "secure compliance" with the border arrangements that the UK had agreed to.
It added that in a "spirit of constructive cooperation," it had held off from the legal actions for over a year whilst talks with the UK over changing the protocol were ongoing.
But it added that UK's "unwillingness to engage in meaningful discussion since last February", as well as the bill to scrap parts of the protocol, "go directly against this spirit".
A UK government spokesperson said: "It is disappointing that the EU has chosen to bring forward further legal action, particularly on goods leaving Northern Ireland for Great Britain which self-evidently present no risk to the EU single market.
"A legal dispute is in nobody's interest and will not fix the problems facing the people and businesses of Northern Ireland. The EU is left no worse off as a result of the proposals we have made in the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill.
"We will review the EU's arguments and respond in due course."
There are a few reasons why the European Commission has decided to launch these four further claims now.
Talks on how to fix problems with the protocol have stalled; UK legislation to override parts of the treaty has cleared the Commons; and Liz Truss, who introduced that bill, is - polls suggest - the current favourite to move into Downing Street.
In other words, why hold back when a negotiated solution, for now, looks very unlikely.
"If the UK takes steps towards adopting the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill, the EU isn't going to sit back and do nothing," one diplomat told me.
EU officials also want to push the UK, by whatever means it can, to take another look at its own proposals to fixing the protocol.
But it is the passage of the bill, rather than the legal action, that remains the more immediate and key thing to watch.
Sources here tell me that if it becomes law, and the UK does start unilaterally changing parts of the treaty, then Brussels could turn to trade sanctions.
It will be one for the new prime minister's in-tray this autumn.
The legal steps could eventually lead to the UK being fined under a dispute process overseen by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), the EU's top court.
However, the dispute process can take months to complete - and cases at the ECJ can take years to be heard.
What do to about relations with the EU over Northern Ireland is one of the big incoming challenges for the next Tory leader and UK prime minister, who will take office in early September.
Liz Truss, who as foreign secretary was responsible for introducing the protocol bill, has blamed EU "intransigence" for the current stand-off.
Her rival for the top job, former chancellor Rishi Sunak, has said the protocol poses challenges to the "the stability of the situation" in Northern Ireland.
In late 2021, it was reported he had urged Boris Johnson and his former chief Brexit negotiator Lord Frost not to "blow up " talks with the EU about the protocol. At the time the Treasury declined to comment.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62265810
|
news_uk-politics-62265810
|
|
The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change - BBC News
|
2022-07-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.
|
Science & Environment
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was cooked up to spread doubt and persuade the public that climate change was not a problem. The little-known meeting - between some of America's biggest industrial players and a PR genius - forged a devastatingly successful strategy that endured for years, and the consequences of which are all around us.
On an early autumn day in 1992, E Bruce Harrison, a man widely acknowledged as the father of environmental PR, stood up in a room full of business leaders and delivered a pitch like no other.
At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change.
Don Rheem and Terry Yosie, two of Harrison's team present that day, are sharing their stories for the first time.
"Everybody wanted to get the Global Climate Coalition account," says Rheem, "and there I was, smack in the middle of it."
The GCC had been conceived only three years earlier, as a forum for members to exchange information and lobby policy makers against action to limit fossil fuel emissions.
Though scientists were making rapid progress in understanding climate change, and it was growing in salience as a political issue, in its first years the Coalition saw little cause for alarm. President George HW Bush was a former oilman, and as a senior lobbyist told the BBC in 1990, his message on climate was the GCC's message.
There would be no mandatory fossil fuel reductions.
But all that changed in 1992. In June, the international community created a framework for climate action, and November's presidential election brought committed environmentalist Al Gore into the White House as vice-president. It was clear the new administration would try to regulate fossil fuels.
The Coalition recognised that it needed strategic communications help and put out a bid for a public relations contractor.
E Bruce Harrison was known as the “Dean of green PR”
Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt.
He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers. Harrison had built a firm that was considered one of the very best.
Media historian Melissa Aronczyk, who interviewed Harrison before he died in 2021, says he was a strategic linchpin for his clients, ensuring everyone was on the same page.
"He was a master at what he did," she says.
Drawing on thousands of newly discovered documents, this three-part film charts how the oil industry mounted a campaign to sow doubt about the science of climate change, the consequences of which we are living through today.
Before the pitch, Harrison had assembled a team of both seasoned PR professionals and almost total novices. Among them was Don Rheem, who had no industry credentials. He had studied ecology before becoming an environmental journalist. A chance meeting with Harrison, who must have seen the strategic value of adding Rheem's environmental and media connections to the team, led to a job offer on the GCC pitch.
"I thought, 'Wow, this is an opportunity to get a front row seat at probably one of the most pressing science policy and public policy issues that we were facing.'
"It just felt enormously important," Rheem says.
Terry Yosie - who had recently been recruited from the American Petroleum Institute, becoming a senior vice-president at the firm - remembers that Harrison began the pitch by reminding his audience that he was instrumental in fighting the auto reforms. He had done so, in part, by reframing the issue.
The same tactics would now help beat climate regulation. They would persuade people that the scientific facts weren't settled, and that alongside the environment, policy makers needed to consider how action on climate change would - in the GCC's view - negatively affect American jobs, trade and prices.
The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists.
An extract from a GCC business card for reporters, shared by former journalist Nicky Sundt
"A lot of reporters were assigned to write stories," Rheem says, "and they were struggling with the complexity of the issue. So I would write backgrounders so reporters could read them and get up to speed."
Uncertainty ran through the full gamut of the GCC's publications, a creative array of letters, glossy brochures, and monthly newsletters.
Rheem and the team were prolific - within a year, Harrison's firm claimed to have secured more than 500 specific mentions in the media.
An extract from a 1994/5 GCC booklet made by E Bruce Harrison's team, from the collection of Nicky Sundt
In August 1993, Harrison took stock of progress in another meeting with the GCC.
"The rising awareness of the scientific uncertainty has caused some in Congress to pause on advocating new initiatives," declared an updated internal strategy pitch, shared with the BBC by Terry Yosie.
"Activists sounding the alarm over 'global warming' have publicly conceded that they lost ground in the communications arena over the past year."
Now, Harrison counselled, they needed to expand the external voices making their case.
"Scientists, economists, academics and other noted experts carry greater credibility with the media and general public than industry representatives."
Harrison was "a master at what he did," says historian Melissa Aronczyk, who shared this undated advert with the BBC
While most climate scientists agreed that human-caused climate change was a real issue that would require action, a small group argued there was no cause for alarm. The plan was to pay these sceptics to give speeches or write op-eds - about $1,500 (£1,250) per article - and to arrange media tours so they could appear on local TV and radio stations.
"My role was to identify the voices that were not in the mainstream and to give those voices a stage," Rheem says. "There was a lot we didn't know at the time. And part of my role was to highlight what we didn't know."
He says the media was hungry for these perspectives.
"Journalists were actually actively looking for the contrarians. It was really feeding an appetite that was already there."
If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it
Many of these sceptics or deniers have rejected the idea that funding from the GCC and other industry groups had any impact on their views. But the scientists and environmentalists tasked with repudiating them - arguing the reality of climate change - encountered a well-organised and effective campaign they found hard to match.
"The Global Climate Coalition is seeding doubt everywhere, fogging the air… And environmentalists really don't know what's hitting them," environmental campaigner John Passacantando remembers.
"What the geniuses of the PR firms who work for these big fossil fuel companies know is that truth has nothing to do with who wins the argument. If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it."
Harrison's company paid experts to argue that mainstream climate scientists were overstating the problem
In a document dating from around 1995, shared with the BBC by Melissa Aronczyk, Harrison wrote that the "GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming."
The groundwork had been laid for the industry's biggest campaign to date - opposing international efforts to negotiate emissions reductions at Kyoto, in Japan, in December 1997. By then, a consensus had emerged among scientists that human-caused warming was now detectable. But the US public was still showing signs of doubt. As many as 44% of respondents to a Gallup poll believed scientists were divided. Public antipathy made it harder for politicians to fight for action, and America never implemented the agreement reached in Kyoto. It was a major victory for the industry coalition.
"I think E Bruce Harrison was proud of the work he did. He knew how central he had been to moving the needle on how companies intervened in the conversation about global warming," says Aronczyk.
I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime
The same year as the Kyoto negotiation, Harrison sold his firm. Rheem decided that public relations wasn't the right career, while Yosie had long since moved on to other environmental projects for the firm. Meanwhile, the GCC began to disintegrate, as some members grew uncomfortable with its hard line. But the tactics, the playbook, and the message of doubt were now embedded and would outlive their creators. Three decades on, the consequences are all around us.
"I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime," says former US Vice-President Al Gore of the big oil companies' efforts to block action.
"I think it is, in many ways, the most serious crime of the post-World War Two era, anywhere in the world. The consequences of what they've done are just almost unimaginable."
Don Rheem is now a workplace and leadership consultant
"Would I do anything differently? It's a hard question to answer," reflects Don Rheem, who says he was "way down the totem pole" of the GCC's operation. "There's some sadness that not much has happened."
He maintains that climate science was too uncertain in the 1990s to warrant "drastic actions", and that developing countries - particularly China and Russia - have ultimately been responsible for the decades of climate inaction, rather than American industry.
"I think it's really easy to create a conspiracy theory about really pernicious intent of industry to completely halt any progress," Rheem says. "Personally, I didn't see that.
"I was very young. I was very curious... Knowing what I know today, would I have done some things differently then?
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62225696
|
news_science-environment-62225696
|
|
Supreme Court date for indyref2 case set for 11 October - BBC News
|
2022-07-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
UK Supreme Court judges will consider whether Holyrood can legally hold a second Scottish vote.
|
Scotland politics
|
A key court case that could allow the Scottish Parliament to legislate for another independence referendum will hear arguments in October, the Supreme Court has said.
The Scottish government wants judges to settle whether MSPs could legislate for a vote without Westminster's backing.
But UK law officers argue this is premature, and want the case thrown out without a ruling either way.
The hearing will take place in London on 11 and 12 October.
The panel for the case will be announced at the end of September.
Judges have said they want to hear the full arguments from both sides before coming to a decision.
The two parties have until 9 August to make written submissions.
Scotland's first minister Nicola Sturgeon wants to hold a vote on 19 October 2023, and is pushing for an agreement with the UK government to allow this.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Nicola Sturgeon has proposed 19 October 2023 as the date for a referendum
UK ministers are opposed to this, so Ms Sturgeon wants the Supreme Court to rule on whether Holyrood has the power to hold a vote without Westminster's support.
UK government law officers claim this move was premature and that the usual route should be for MSPs to pass a bill before the court scrutinises it.
The court has asked both sides to provide substantive arguments at the same time as considering that point, asking for full written submissions to be made in the coming weeks.
Judges refused a motion from the Advocate General for Scotland - the UK government's top Scottish law officer - asking for these submissions to be limited solely to the question of whether the court should rule on the case.
The Supreme Court said it was "in the interests of justice and the efficient disposal of the proceedings that the court should hear argument on both issues at a single hearing".
Scottish government constitution secretary, Angus Robertson, said confirmation of the October date was "welcome news.".
He added: "The Lord Advocate's written case has been filed with the Supreme Court and will be published in due course."
The UK government also welcomed the hearing date.
A spokesperson said: "We are preparing our written case on the preliminary points we have noted, as well as the substantive issue, and will submit in accordance with the timetable set by the court.
"On the question of legislative competence, the UK government's clear view remains that a bill legislating for a referendum on independence would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament."
Holyrood and Westminster are both now in recess, and politicians would do well to enjoy their summer break with a frantic autumn in the offing.
A new prime minister will be installed in September - then in October the Supreme Court will consider the issue of indyref2.
Both of these developments are crucial to whether Nicola Sturgeon can deliver the vote she has targeted in October 2023.
The new prime minister will surely sit down with her at some point, but both of the remaining candidates have already made their opposition to a referendum clear.
That moves the first minister on to Plan B - a court ruling. She will hope judges back Holyrood's right to legislate for a vote, although she knows this might be a tall order.
If they rule against this, then Ms Sturgeon will spread her hands and ask what routes are left open to her - looking to put pressure on UK ministers to come back to the table.
So these autumn dates represent some progress towards clearing up the questions over indyref2 - even if they might not ultimately break the stalemate.
• None BBC iPlayer - Independence- Why Scotland Could Vote Again
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62250988
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62250988
|
|
Joshua Schulte: Former CIA hacker convicted of 'brazen' data leak - BBC News
|
2022-07-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Prosecutors said Joshua Schulte leaked advanced hacking tools to WikiLeaks in a "devastating" move.
|
US & Canada
|
A former CIA hacker has been found guilty of leaking a trove of classified hacking tools to Wikileaks.
Joshua Schulte was convicted of sending the CIA's "Vault 7" cyber-warfare tools to the whistle-blowing platform. He had denied the allegations.
The 2017 leak of some 8,761 documents revealed how intelligence officers hacked smartphones overseas and turned them into listening devices.
Prosecutors said the leak was one of the most "brazen" in US history.
Damian Williams, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said Mr Schulte's actions had "a devastating effect on our intelligence community by providing critical intelligence to those who wish to do us harm".
Mr Schulte, who represented himself at the trial in Manhattan federal court, now faces decades in prison. He also faces a separate trial on charges of possessing images and videos of child abuse, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
After joining the CIA in 2010, Mr Schulte soon achieved the organisation's highest security clearance. He went on to work at the agency's headquarters in Langley, Virginia, designing a suite of programmes used to hack computers, iPhones and Android phones and even smart TVs.
Prosecutors alleged in 2016 that he transmitted the stolen information to Wikileaks and then lied to FBI agents about his role in the leak.
They added that he was seemingly motivated by anger over a workplace dispute in which his employer ignored his complaints. The software engineer had been struggling to meet deadlines and Assistant US Attorney Michael Lockard said one of his projects was so far behind schedule that he had earned the nickname "Drifting Deadline".
The prosecutors said he wanted to punish those he perceived to have wronged him and said in "carrying out that revenge, he caused enormous damage to this country's national security".
But Mr Schulte said the government had no evidence that he was motivated by revenge and called the argument "pure fantasy". In his closing argument, he claimed that "hundreds of people had access" to the leaked files and that "hundreds of people could have stolen it".
"The government's case is riddled with reasonable doubt," he added.
Prosecutors had urged jurors to consider evidence of an attempted cover-up, including a list of chores Mr Schulte made that contained an entry reading: "Delete suspicious emails."
They added that after his arrest, Mr Schulte attempted to transmit more information. He smuggled a phone into jail where he attempted to send a reporter information about CIA cyber groups and drafted tweets that included information about CIA cyber tools under the name Jason Bourne, a fictional intelligence operative.
Mr Schulte has been held behind bars since 2018.
His original case was declared a mistrial after jurors were deadlocked on some of the most serious charges.
The conviction comes as Wikileaks founder Julian Assange faces extradition to the US over documents leaked in 2010 and 2011, which officials say broke the law and endangered lives.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62158799
|
news_world-us-canada-62158799
|
|
Brexit: No case for UK returning to EU, Labour leader Starmer says - BBC News
|
2022-07-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Labour's leader says "we cannot afford to look back" as he sets out his plan to "make Brexit work".
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Keir Starmer: We're not trading on divisions
The UK "will not go back into the EU" under a Labour government, Sir Keir Starmer has said, in a speech attacking the government's record on Brexit.
The Labour leader vowed to "move on arguments of the past" and seek to "make Brexit work".
He said the UK was "stuck" and needed a plan to get its "economy growing again".
And he recommitted to keeping the UK out of the EU single market, customs union and free movement rules.
Speaking to the BBC's political editor Chris Mason before the speech, Sir Keir said: "We want to go forward, not backwards. And therefore this is not about rejoining the EU.
"It's very clear that what we can't do is reopen all those arguments, all those divisions that caused so much anguish over past years."
He said the economy was stagnant under the Conservative government and its Brexit deal was "holding us back".
Labour's plan, he said, would focus on "unblocking" the government's Brexit deal by removing barriers to trade with the EU and taking steps to resolve border issues in Northern Ireland.
The Labour leader's address marked an attempt to regain control over an issue that has been a dividing line between the party's MPs, members, and some of its voters.
Sir Keir - who as Jeremy Corbyn's shadow Brexit secretary said the party should advocate staying in the EU in any second referendum - has largely avoided talking about Brexit during his time as leader.
Before Monday, he had not made a set-piece speech on the issue since the UK cut legal ties with the EU, and mentioned it just five times in a 11,500 word essay ahead of Labour's annual conference last year.
With official forecasters continuing to say Brexit has damaged the UK's economy, he has faced pressure within Labour - including from London mayor Sadiq Khan - to push for Britain to rejoin the bloc's single market.
On Monday Mr Khan told the BBC he disagreed with the party's position on Brexit and said the "country's future is best served being members of the single market".
Others in the party have expressed similar sentiments, including shadow minister Anna McMorrin, who recently told a private meeting she hoped the UK could return to the EU single market under a Labour government.
But in a speech at pro-EU think tank the Centre for European Reform, Sir Keir rejected that approach, arguing it would be a "recipe for more division".
He added: "There are some who say, 'We don't need to make Brexit work. We need to reverse it'.
"I couldn't disagree more, because you cannot move forward or grow the country or deliver change or win back the trust of those who have lost faith in politics if you're constantly focused on the arguments of the past."
What Sir Keir Starmer is doing today, in black and white, is making peace with Brexit.
He will say explicitly that a Labour government would not return to the single market, customs union or freedom of movement.
He has said these things before - but saying them all together is quite something.
Unlike the Conservatives, Labour MPs and party members were not split down the middle on Brexit. The vast majority of them absolutely hated the idea.
So today, the Labour leader is saying that argument is closed and he is turning a political leaf.
He will hope by doing that, criticism can't come back the other way accusing his party of secretly wanting to take the UK back in.
He will also hope it creates space to criticise the Tories' Brexit deal, not least on the Northern Ireland issue.
Sir Keir also repeated his promise not to re-establish the EU's free movement rules in the UK, arguing instead he would seek new flexibilities for short work trips and touring musicians.
The Labour leader said new trade barriers with Europe have created a "fatberg of red tape" for business to follow.
He likened the economic effect of Brexit to the "wet wipe island" blocking the river Thames in London, adding: "It is hampering the flow of British business — we will break that barrier down."
As part of a plan to "make Brexit work", the Labour leader promised to:
He also promised a new approach to post-Brexit border arrangements for Northern Ireland, which have proved highly unpopular among unionists.
The government argues the provisions, which it signed up to as part of the 2019 withdrawal deal, are causing economic disruption and must be changed.
After failing to secure the changes it wants during talks with the EU, it recently tabled legislation enabling it to go back on parts of the deal it doesn't like.
Border checks on goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland are opposed by many unionists
In his speech, Sir Keir accused minsters of "lashing out" and pledged to continue talks over the arrangements, known as the Northern Ireland protocol.
"The solutions are there, the desire is there. What is lacking is trust," he said. "Labour will change that. We will be the honest broker our countries need."
He also attacked the government's approach to regulating the economy outside the EU, accusing them of cutting rules and then "gawping at the power of the market".
"The government have missed Brexit opportunities time and time again. It beggars belief that during a cost of living crisis that they still haven't cut VAT on energy bills," he added.
"Labour will be sharper than this. We will use our flexibility outside of the EU to ensure British regulation is adapted to suit British needs."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62034754
|
news_uk-politics-62034754
|
|
David Trimble: Reaction to the death of former first minister - BBC News
|
2022-07-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lord Trimble died after a short illness at the age of 77.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Lord Trimble, former first minister of Northern Ireland and Ulster Unionist Party leader, has died at the age of 77
Politicians and others have been paying tribute to the former Nobel Peace prize winner for his role in the Good Friday Agreement and beyond.
Tonight's news will cause deep sadness throughout Northern Ireland and much further afield.
David Trimble was a man of courage and vision. He chose to grasp the opportunity for peace when it presented itself and sought to end the decades of violence that blighted his beloved Northern Ireland.
He will forever be associated with the leadership he demonstrated in the negotiations that led up to the 1998 Belfast Agreement.
The bravery and courage he demonstrated whilst battling his recent illness was typical of the qualities he showed in his political career, at Stormont and at Westminster.
He will be remembered as a first minister, as a Peer of the Realm and as a Nobel Prize Winner. He will also be remembered as a great unionist.
David Trimble's life has left an indelible mark on our shared island's story.
Over the course of his political career, but particularly in difficult years of the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, he demonstrated immense courage and took political risks that sustained the life of our fledgling peace process.
He doesn't often enough get credit for it, but without David Trimble's fortitude, there would simply have been no agreement.
The image of David and Seamus Mallon walking through Poyntzpass together in 1998 to comfort the families of Damien Trainor and Philip Allen is an enduring icon of the peace process that inspired a whole generation of people who wanted, and needed, to believe that our shared future could be different from our divided past.
It is my enduring memory of his commitment to reconciliation.
My thoughts and prayers are with Daphne, Richard, Victoria, Nicholas and Sarah at this difficult time. I hope they are comforted by the immense legacy that David left to the people of Northern Ireland.
*The SDLP has announced it will postpone its assembly recall motion scheduled for Tuesday.
What I found in dealing with David Trimble, including when I served as deputy first minister alongside him in office, was the term doable counted a lot with him.
He would tell you things were out because they weren't doable, and then the calculus would change and he would decide things were doable and even though it was going to be risky and difficult, if it was doable, he was going to go for it.
Unless he as the leader of the main unionist parties was going to go for the [Good Friday] Agreement, even though it entailed risks for him, even though it had real challenges, unless he was going to go for the agreement, one, there wouldn't have been an agreement, and two, it certainly wouldn't have got endorsement at the referendum.
My sympathies to Daphne who I know very well and the children and to his friends.
He was courageous. I had many a row, many arguments and in more recent years we had good laughs about those debates.
As a good negotiator when he made a deal, when he settled something, he stuck by it.
He stuck by it subsequently and he paid a price, he lost his seat in Upper Bann, he got a lot of criticism from his wider unionist family.
He was a good guy and he stood firmly by what he believed in and I had a long chat with him just a few weeks ago in Queen's [University] and he knew what was coming.
He was brave in that, as he was in everything else.
"David Trimble, in his support of the peace process, showed politics at its very best. When some within his own ranks were opposed to the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, he supported it.
When we needed his willingness to go the extra mile for peace, he travelled that mile. When there was the prospect of collapse of the process without strong leadership, he provided that leadership.
"His contribution to Northern Ireland and to the United Kingdom was immense, unforgettable and frankly irreplaceable.
"Whatever disagreements we had - and there were quite a few - I never had anything other than profound respect for David as a person and as a Leader.
"My deepest condolences to Daphne and his family.
"We have lost today someone who will be mourned by friends and foes alike."
I am deeply saddened to learn of the death of Lord Trimble earlier today.
He was a giant of British and international politics and will be long remembered for his intellect, personal bravery and fierce determination to change politics for the better.
A winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and a leading architect of the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement, he championed democracy over violence, and played a huge role in setting Northern Ireland on the path to peace.
My thoughts are with David's wife Daphne and their children at this difficult time. They should know that David's legacy and achievements will never be forgotten by the people of the United Kingdom.
As President of Ireland, I wish to express my deep sadness at hearing the news of the passing of David Trimble, former First Minister of Northern Ireland and former Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party.
Sabina joins me in expressing our profound sympathy to Mrs Daphne Trimble and to all of David's family, friends and colleagues.
Lord Trimble will be remembered for a life of public service, and of course for his most significant contribution to the work for peace on our island.
The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize, together with John Hume, following the signing of the Good Friday Agreement almost 25 years ago, was part of the recognition by so many of their work for peace.
David Trimble's dedication and courage, often during the most challenging times, has earned him a distinguished and deserved place in our history books.
His work leaves a true legacy on the necessity and value of peace on our shared island for future generations.
I wish to express my deepest condolences to the family, colleagues and friends of David Trimble.
He played a key role as leader of the UUP, and his was a long and distinguished career in unionist politics and in the politics of Northern Ireland.
All of us in politics at the time witnessed his crucial and courageous role in the negotiations leading to the Good Friday Agreement and his leadership in building support in his party and his community for the agreement.
Fittingly, his contribution was recognised internationally and most notably by the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to himself and John Hume "for their joint efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland".
As the first, first Minister of Northern Ireland, he began the arduous work of bedding down the executive and delivering for the people of Northern Ireland.
In his speech accepting the Nobel Prize, Trimble spoke about the "politicians of the possible", a phrase which I think sums up the David Trimble we all knew, and it speaks to his achievements over many decades, often in challenging circumstances.
The work of reconciliation begun in the Good Friday Agreement continues, and as new generations pick up the mantle of this work, it is fitting that we pay tribute to Lord Trimble for his central contribution in setting us on the path to peace and reconciliation.
David faced huge challenges when he led the Ulster Unionist Party in the Good Friday Agreement negotiations and persuaded his party to sign on for it.
It is to his credit that he supported that agreement. I thank him for that.
In the years immediately following the agreement, I met David many times.
Our conversations were not always easy, but we made progress. We used to meet quite often on our own and I got to know him quite well.
While we held fundamentally different political opinions on the way forward nonetheless I believe he was committed to making the peace process work.
David's contribution to the Good Friday Agreement and to the quarter century of relative peace that followed cannot be underestimated.
I want to extend my sincerest condolences to Daphne Trimble, their daughters Victoria and Sarah, their sons Richard and Nicholas and to the entire family circle.
It is with genuine regret that I have learned of the passing of Former First Minister David Trimble.
I wish to offer my sincere condolences to his wife Daphne, their four children and the wider family circle who will feel his loss deeply.
His very significant contribution to the peace process and his courage in helping achieve the Good Friday Agreement leaves a legacy a quarter century on for which he and his family should be rightly proud.
I am deeply saddened to learn of David's passing and my thoughts are foremost with Daphne and their children at this painful time of loss.
He made a huge contribution to Northern Ireland, and to political life in the United Kingdom.
Throughout some of the most difficult years of the Troubles, David was a committed and passionate advocate for the Union, at a time when doing so placed a considerable threat to his safety.
Whilst our political paths parted within the Ulster Unionist Party, there can be no doubting his bravery and determination in leadership at that time.
He was a committed and passionate unionist who always wanted the best for Northern Ireland.
Right until recent days David continued to use his political skill and intellect, most recently in support of the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union and in opposition to the Northern Ireland Protocol.
As a Nobel laureate, his words carried significant weight and he helped raise awareness of the threat the protocol posed to Northern Ireland, particularly amongst the wider UK audience.
He leaves a huge and lasting legacy to Northern Ireland. He can undoubtedly be said to have shaped history in our country.
My thoughts are with the friends and family of Lord Trimble
My sympathies are also with his former colleagues in the UUP.
Lord Trimble's greatest legacy to his political career is the Good Friday Agreement and the risks he took to both help achieve it, and ensuring the resulting assembly remained during its unsteady early days.
It was at times an unenviable role.
I am greatly saddened to learn of the passing of Lord David Trimble and wish to express to Lady Trimble and the family sincere condolences.
Though politically we fundamentally disagreed over the Belfast Agreement, latterly as joint applicants in the Judicial Review challenge to the Protocol we shared a common determination to rid Northern Ireland of this iniquitous assault on our constitutional position.
David had a very clear and correct view of the dangers and unacceptability of the Protocol.
I have known David and Daphne Trimble since my university days when David was one of my lecturers and Daphne was a fellow student in my law year.
As a couple throughout their married life, Daphne gave exemplary support to David and in his declining health was a tower of strength to him. So, in losing David, Daphne has suffered a great loss and Northern Ireland has lost a foremost thinker within unionism.
The loss of David Trimble will be felt deeply throughout Northern Ireland.
My heart goes out to his family and friends.
He will be remembered for his unshaking defence of peace, and his leadership in helping deliver the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement.
David Trimble was a towering figure of Northern Ireland and British politics as one of the key authors of the Good Friday Agreement, the first First Minister and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.
My thoughts are with Lady Trimble and their family.
Deeply saddened to hear of the death of former Northern Ireland First Minister David Trimble.
David was a great figure, instrumental in delivering the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement and the optimistic Northern Ireland of today.
My thoughts are with his family at this time.
He [Trimble] was a giant of Unionism and he helped bring peace to Northern Ireland as an architect of the Good Friday Agreement, and he was a deserved winner of the Nobel Peace prize.
I'm sure everyone's thoughts will be with his family tonight.
David Trimble took enormous personal and political risks for peace. He put the future of Northern Ireland before his party's interests and sought to make Northern Ireland a warmer house for all who lived there.
He was not always right, but he worked to take violence out of politics to strengthen the centre ground. For that, he and John Hume jointly won the Nobel Prize. Rest in peace.
Deeply saddened at the death of Lord Trimble. Working together in the Talks, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the House of Lords, I saw him face testing times and profound challenges with great courage and integrity.
Present and future generations owe him more than they know.
The Hume Foundation is deeply saddened at the passing of Lord David Trimble.
David Trimble demonstrated genuine and courageous leadership during the negotiations that led to the Good Friday Agreement 24 years ago.
Our sincere sympathies to all his family.
Remembering David Trimble's wife and family in prayer. Whilst a strong representative of his party, he had courage to lead, and to persuade others to take historic steps forward for peace and reconciliation.
For this we owe him a sincere debt of gratitude.
David Trimble showed leadership at a time when Northern Ireland so badly needed it.
All politicians from all traditions should be inspired by his courage.
My thoughts tonight are with his family, his wife Daphne, his UUP colleagues and unionist community.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-62295988
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-62295988
|
|
Obituary: David Trimble, Northern Ireland's first first minister - BBC News
|
2022-07-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Nobel Peace Prize winner was known as the Harry Houdini of Northern Ireland politics.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Lord Trimble's decision to back the Good Friday Agreement was a defining moment in his political career.
The then Ulster Unionist leader earned a place on the world stage, mixing with presidents and prime ministers.
He and the then Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) leader, John Hume, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.
He was Northern Ireland's inaugural first minister in an assembly that took years of bitter arguments to form.
And he weathered so many challenges to his leadership and policy that commentators called him the Harry Houdini of Northern Ireland politics.
Trimble and Hume were "two men who are making history", U2's Bono said in 1998
William David Trimble was born on 15 October 1944 in Bangor, County Down.
A law lecturer at Queen's University in Belfast by profession, he entered politics through the hard-line Vanguard Party in the early 1970s.
As such, he opposed the Sunningdale Agreement that had tried to broker a power-sharing agreement and create a new Northern Ireland Executive.
He played an important strategic role in the loyalist strike that brought down the executive less than six months after the agreement was signed.
Ironically, the Sunningdale proposals were not far removed from those he would himself campaign for 20 years later.
Trimble played a major role in loyalist protests against the Sunningdale Agreement
He was elected as Vanguard member for Belfast South in the short-lived Northern Ireland Constitutional Convention in 1975.
But Vanguard fell apart over proposals to form closer links with the nationalist SDLP and Trimble joined the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP).
He held a number of positions within the UUP and finally entered Westminster as an MP after a by-election in Upper Bann in 1990.
His strong unionist credentials were bolstered when he led a controversial Orange parade down the nationalist Garvaghy Road in Portadown, County Armagh.
The march, from Drumcree Parish Church, was the scene of clashes between nationalist residents and the Orange Order in past years, and in 1995, for the first time the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) moved to prevent the march from taking place.
Paisley and Trimble wrangled in the political arena but joined forces in support of the Orange Order at Drumcree
After a stand-off that lasted two days, police allowed the march to go ahead as long as the Orangemen walked in silence, without the normal band music.
Trimble, wearing his Orange sash, marched alongside the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Ian Paisley in front of hundreds of Orangemen.
At the end of the road, the two men held their linked hands in the air in what was interpreted by the local community as a gesture of triumph.
Trimble later protested that he had only held Paisley's hand to prevent the other man from hogging the limelight.
His hard-line stand at the parade helped him in the race to become Ulster Unionist leader, when he defeated the frontrunner John Taylor.
More than 70% of voters in Northern Ireland supported the Good Friday Agreement
There were some who feared that his swaggering approach spelled the end for the peace process.
But three years later, he and Seamus Mallon of the SDLP were appointed first and deputy first ministers in a new Northern Ireland Assembly.
He became the first unionist leader since the 1920s to negotiate with Sinn Féin and pushed ahead with talks in spite of the opposition of half his parliamentary party.
Trimble and Hume were rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize for their work
In October of the same year, Trimble and Hume were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
The citation said: "As the leader of the traditionally predominant party in Northern Ireland, David Trimble showed great political courage when, at a critical stage of the process, he advocated solutions which led to the peace agreement."
There were stumbling blocks - Trimble often found himself locking horns with republicans over the IRA's failure to decommission its weapons.
He resigned as first minister and the Northern Ireland Executive lurched from suspension to suspension.
His critics said he had gone back to his hard-line roots, but he denied that.
Along with Seamus Mallon (second right), Trimble rubbed shoulders with political heavyweights as he led the Northern Ireland Executive
Thanks to decommissioning, he continued to share power with Sinn Féin, even if that put him out of step with close colleagues.
His party was deeply divided and he was under pressure.
In 2001, an angry crowd greeted him and his wife Daphne in Banbridge, County Down, after the general election - he held on to his seat but by a much-reduced majority.
The Democratic Unionists treated the election as a second referendum on the Good Friday Agreement, fiercely attacking the UUP and winning five seats - just one fewer than their unionist rivals.
The IRA agreed to put some weapons beyond use in October 2001, and Trimble agreed to return to government, but his critics were not happy.
Trimble saw off a leadership challenge from Jeffrey Donaldson, who later joined the DUP
In September 2002, he and Jeffrey Donaldson came up with a compromise plan, giving the IRA a four-month deadline to give up violence for good.
But just a few days later, there was news of an alleged IRA spy ring inside Stormont and the assembly collapsed again.
There were rows within the UUP and half of its Westminster MPs resigned the whip.
But Trimble still managed to defeat Donaldson in a leadership challenge in September 2003.
The DUP's David Simpson took Trimble's Westminster seat in the 2005 general election
The November 2003 election saw the once-powerful UUP fall into third place behind the DUP, to which Donaldson and two other MLAs had defected.
The general election of 2005 marked the end of Trimble's political career.
The UUP was reduced to holding just a single seat at Westminster, where once it had held 10.
Among the casualties was Trimble himself, who decided to stand down as UUP leader.
He later told the BBC that he had made a mistake in not standing down in 2003, but said there had been no-one coming forward to take on the leadership.
Trimble - pictured with his wife Daphne - was a Conservative peer in his later years
He was made Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the original name of Lisburn, his adopted home town, and joined the ranks of Conservative Party peers.
There was speculation that he might have been offered a Cabinet post if the Conservatives had won the 2010 election outright.
But the forming of a coalition with the Liberal Democrats meant he was not included in the government ranks.
Instead, he turned his attention to the Middle East, becoming a strong advocate for Israel and a fierce critic of Hezbollah, the militant group based in Lebanon.
In recent years, he was also vocal in his opposition to the Northern Ireland Protocol - part of the 2019 Brexit deal that keeps Northern Ireland in the EU's single market for goods, preventing a hard border with the Republic of Ireland.
Lord Trimble argued that it put the Good Friday Agreement at risk.
David Trimble was married twice. His first marriage ended in divorce, and in 1978 he married Daphne Orr. The couple met when he was one of her lecturers while she was studying law at Queen's University, Belfast.
Daphne Trimble stood unsuccessfully as an Ulster Conservatives and Unionists - New Force candidate for Lagan Valley in the 2010 General Election.
Boating was one of the family's favourite pursuits. In later years, they owned a narrow boat that they used to explore the English canal system.
The Trimbles had four children - Richard, Vicky, Nicholas and Sarah.
In 2019, speaking during a House of Lords debate on same-sex marriage, Lord Trimble revealed that his daughter, Vicky, had married her girlfriend.
"I cannot change that, and I cannot now go around saying that I am opposed to it because I acquiesced to it. There we are," he said.
His daughter said she was "a little surprised" by his wording but that how he deals with her and her wife speaks louder than his words.
David and Daphne Trimble with a portrait by Colin Davidson unveiled at Queen's University
Nicholas Trimble has followed his parents into politics. In June 2020, he was elected mayor of Lisburn and Castlereagh.
In 2017, Lord Trimble wrote to the former deputy minister, Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness shortly before he died, telling him how much he appreciated his efforts to make devolution in Northern Ireland work.
"You reached out to the unionist community in a way some of them were reluctant to reach out to you," he wrote.
"I and my colleagues believed that you were indispensable."
In June, a portrait of Lord Trimble by artist Colin Davidson was unveiled at Queen's University.
At the ceremony, former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, called him a "passionate and determined peacemaker" and there were video messages from former US President Bill Clinton, former Prime Minister Tony Blair and Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
David Trimble will be remembered as a street politician who won the Nobel Peace Prize; an academic who walked on an international political stage; and a man who brought the Ulster Unionists into a historic agreement for Northern Ireland.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-25825573
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-25825573
|
|
Tory leadership: Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss in fiercest clash yet over tax - BBC News
|
2022-07-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The economy dominated as Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss took part in their first head-to-head TV debate.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss tore into each other over their rival visions for the future of the UK economy, in their first head-to-head TV debate.
The two contenders to be the next PM did not hold back from "blue-on-blue" attacks in the hour-long BBC special.
Mr Sunak told Ms Truss her tax cut plan would "tip millions of people into misery" and cost the Conservatives the next election.
Ms Truss said tax rises brought in by him would lead to a recession.
The foreign secretary and former chancellor, who until three weeks ago were in the same cabinet, talked over each other at times and shot angry glances across the stage at Stoke-on-Trent's Victoria Hall.
It led to complaints afterwards by Ms Truss's supporters that the ex-chancellor was being too aggressive and was "mansplaining" - something fiercely denied by the Sunak camp.
The pair were on better terms by the end of the debate, with Ms Truss saying she would "love" to have Mr Sunak on her team if she becomes PM. The ex-chancellor praised her stance on Russia.
But the row over tax dominated the early exchanges.
Ms Truss wants to scrap the rise to National Insurance, a planned rise in corporation tax and would temporarily scrap green levies on energy bills to be paid for through borrowing.
Mr Sunak says he would not cut taxes until inflation was under control.
Mr Sunak - who quit as chancellor earlier this month - said the coronavirus pandemic had created a large bill and that putting it on the "country's credit card" would "pass the tab to our children and grandchildren".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Ms Truss insisted that under her plans the UK would start paying down the debt in three year's time - and paying it back straight away as Mr Sunak wanted to do would push the UK into a recession.
Mr Sunak suggested her plans would lead to higher interest rates, but the foreign secretary dismiss this as "scaremongering" and "project fear" - an echo of the criticism aimed at the Remain campaign during Brexit referendum.
Mr Sunak took this opportunity to point out that, unlike him, Ms Truss campaigned against Brexit.
"Maybe I learnt from that," she replied. She later said the Brexit referendum was when she had learnt not to trust Treasury forecasts on the economy.
Other key moments in the debate included:
Mr Sunak's resignation as chancellor helped trigger the downfall of Mr Johnson.
He praised Mr Johnson's handling of Brexit and the pandemic but said he had quit as a matter of principle over the PM's "conduct" and the fact that they had "very different views about the direction of travel on the economy".
Ms Truss acknowledged the prime minister had made mistakes but said they were not "sufficient" enough for the Conservative Party to have "rejected him".
Neither said they would accept Mr Johnson in their cabinet.
Chief secretary to the Treasury and Truss-backer Simon Clarke told BBC Breakfast that polling after the debate showed the majority of Conservative voters thought his candidate had won the evening - and it had reaffirmed his view that she was the right candidate to lead the country.
He refused to criticise Mr Sunak for interrupting, but said viewers would have to make up their own minds about his debating style. He added he thought Ms Truss had been "cool, controlled" and had made compelling arguments.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer told BBC Breakfast the debate showed a Conservative Party which had "lost the plot and lost its purpose".
He said Mr Sunak was acting like he had "just come down from the moon" and discovered the economy was in a bad way when he had been in charge of it until three weeks ago, while Ms Truss was playing "fantasy economics" without explaining how she would pay for tax cuts.
"We do need change in the UK but the change we need is not a change at the top of the Conservative Party, it is more fundamental than that. We need a fresh start for Britain. We need a Labour government," he said.
For all the talk of wanting the "blue-on-blue" attacks to subside - this debate showed they haven't gone away.
Liz Truss's campaign accused Rishi Sunak of not letting her get a word in edgeways, and Rishi Sunak continued to slam Liz Truss's tax cut plans for not being economically sound.
Sources close to Sunak said he had "won the argument" on the economy, with his argument that her tax cuts would further fuel inflation and push up interest rates and people's mortgages.
Behind the scenes, Truss's camp feel positive too - claiming that while she stayed calm Sunak was "flustered".
Debates about their backgrounds haven't gone away either. Both are keen to distance themselves from any suggestion they had certain privileges.
Truss pointed to her comprehensive school education but distanced herself slightly, though, from the outright attacks on Sunak's clothing and education from some of her supporters.
But the key battleground - and the biggest dividing line between the two - is still tax.
What questions do you have about the Tory Leadership debate? Please get in touch by emailing: haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62299111
|
news_uk-politics-62299111
|
|
Archie Battersbee: Parents lose appeal over life support - BBC News
|
2022-07-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The 12-year-old has been in hospital since being found unconscious at home in April.
|
Essex
|
Parents Hollie Dance (pictured) and Paul Battersbee lost two High Court hearings to get continued life support treatment for their son Archie
The parents of a 12-year-old boy have lost an appeal against a decision to allow life support treatment to end.
Archie Battersbee was found unconscious at home in Southend, Essex, on 7 April and the Royal London Hospital believe he is brain dead.
Appeal judges supported a High Court ruling that ending his life support was lawful and in his best interests.
A 48-hour delay to ending treatment has been ordered so the family can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
In a statement, his mother Hollie Dance, said: "As long as Archie is alive, I will never give up on him; he is too good to give up on.
"We should not have to endlessly battle the hospital in the courts for what we believe is right for Archie.
"Top judges have told us, however, that this is the law. If this so, the law must change."
She added the family was considering taking the case to the European court in Strasbourg, France.
Archie has not regained consciousness since he was found by his mother Ms Dance, who believes he had been taking part in an online challenge.
Paul Battersbee (pictured at an earlier court hearing) was taken ill before today's Court of Appeal ruling
Court of Appeal judges in London were asked to postpone their ruling as Archie's father, Paul Battersbee, had been taken ill outside court, but they refused.
It is thought Mr Battersbee may have suffered a heart attack or stroke prior to the hearing.
However, judges said it was in Archie's best interests to give a judgement today.
Ms Dance said she thought judges had been "insensitive" in deciding not to adjourn.
She also wanted appeal judges to adjourn their ruling on the basis that she had "video evidence" that indicated that Archie, who is attached to a ventilator, had twice tried to breathe for himself on Friday and Saturday.
"The hospital seem to cherry pick what they want to put over to the court. Again we've heard today that Archie's losing weight. He put on 0.4 kilos yesterday. How is that losing weight?" said Ms Dance.
The family's legal team indicated they would make a separate application to Mr Justice Hayden, who made the latest High Court judgement, on that point.
Barts Health NHS Trust, which runs the hospital in Whitechapel in east London, had taken the case to the courts to get a ruling on what was in the best interests of Archie, who the courts have heard had catastrophic brain injuries.
Judges in two separate High Court hearings had previously ruled against his parents, who wanted treatment to continue while his heart was still beating.
Sir Andrew McFarlane, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Peter Jackson have now refused to overturn the last High Court judgement by Mr Justice Hayden.
Sir Andrew said medical staff had seen "no signs of life" in Archie and his "every bodily function is now maintained by artificial means".
He said the case had received widespread media coverage - including a photograph of Archie.
"Archie is no longer the boy in the photograph," said Sir Andrew.
In June, a first High Court judge agreed with doctors that Archie Battersbee was "brain-stem dead"
Mr Justice Hayden delivered his ruling after reviewing evidence in the Family Division of the High Court in London.
He described what had happened to Archie as a "tragedy of immeasurable dimensions", but said medical evidence was "compelling and unanimous" and painted a "bleak" picture.
Archie's parents, who are separated, had argued he made errors and had been appealing for a third hearing at the High Court with a different judge.
Barrister Edward Devereux QC, leading the legal team for Archie's parents, had told appeal judges that Mr Justice Hayden had not given "real or proper weight" to Archie's previously expressed wishes and religious beliefs.
He also appealed on the grounds that Archie's family's wishes were also not given "real or proper weight", that Mr Justice Hayden had failed to carry out a "comprehensive evaluation" of the benefits and burdens of continuing life support treatment, and had that he had been wrong to conclude that treatment was burdensome and futile.
Archie's parents have been supported by a campaign organisation called the Christian Legal Centre.
All arguments were dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-62292655
|
news_uk-england-essex-62292655
|
|
Chris Mason: Conservative leadership TV debate turns colleagues into opponents - BBC News
|
2022-07-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The exchanges between five remaining Tory leadership hopefuls were a chance for renewal and combat.
|
UK Politics
|
From left, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Kemi Badenoch, Tom Tugendhat and Penny Mordaunt cross words in the ITV debate
You had to keep reminding yourself these were five people who are actually in the same party.
And the two of them taking the greatest lumps out of each other sat around the same cabinet table a fortnight ago.
Changing leaders between elections can offer a party a chance to renew in office.
It also offers plentiful opportunity for it to rip itself to shreds in public.
There are nerves in Conservative circles that Sunday evening's debate was rather more the latter than the former.
So after a weekend of two and a half hours of primetime television debate and acres of newsprint, where do we find ourselves as we enter the second week of the Conservative leadership contest?
TV debates serve up real jeopardy, particularly for those with the most to lose.
On Friday's debate on Channel 4, the two outsiders, in terms of their support among Conservative MPs so far at least, seemed to relish it, perhaps pleasantly surprised they had made it so far.
Kemi Badenoch and Tom Tugendhat were probably the least known to most viewers, and with little to lose.
Whereas the big three, in terms of votes so far, Rishi Sunak, Penny Mordaunt and Liz Truss, feared going backwards; denting their solid starts.
Things felt different in the ITV debate.
Without the punctuation marks of a live audience in the studio, with its questions and applause, and with the addition of some nifty ideas such as each candidate being able to put a question to just one other, the exchanges felt sharper, more spiky.
The candidates addressed each other rather than the audience in the studio, and often archly.
Team Truss are candid: "Liz was better tonight than on Friday" one aide told me.
"She is the clear heavyweight on the economy to rival Rishi. That was a battle of the grown ups between Liz and Rishi, with Liz the 'change' candidate on the economy," a source added.
They want to portray a Sunak premiership - economically at least - as more of the same as what's gone before, without the scruffy blonde hair.
Yet again Mr Sunak was the focus of most, if not all of the barbs coming from his opponents.
Or, we should remind ourselves, colleagues.
I'm told his question to Liz Truss, "what do you regret most, being a Lib Dem or being a Remainer?" was meant to be light hearted.
It didn't sound anything of the sort. More like a laser guided zap at her true Conservative credentials.
Penny Mordaunt arrived on ITV's stage having weathered an onslaught in the newspapers, much of it focused on the rights of trans people.
Her campaign is hopeful it is counterproductive, and convinced most Conservative Party members hate it, because it involves Conservatives attacking Conservatives.
The thing is, that only matters if she reaches the final two, what matters now is the extent to which it matters among Conservative MPs.
Those Tory MPs who are most keen to avoid Rishi Sunak as the next Prime Minister will then have to decide which alternative is both most palatable to them, and most likely to beat Mr Sunak among the party grassroots.
Tom Tugendhat's team, closest to the trapdoor of elimination in the last round, say they have picked up how uncomfortable plenty of Conservatives are at what is described as 'blue on blue' scrapping between Tories in public.
They hope Mr Tugendhat having never been a cabinet minister gave him some distance from the arguments, particularly between Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.
And Team Badenoch are quick to point to the latest survey for the ConservativeHome website which suggests Kemi Badenoch would beat all the other candidates in a head-to-head contest with the party membership.
"It puts quite a lot of pressure on MPs," as one of her aides puts it.
There is another hustings, in front of Conservative MPs on Monday, followed by another vote, Round three, at teatime.
We'll know the result at 20:00 BST, and five candidates will become four.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62202108
|
news_uk-politics-62202108
|
|
Rishi Sunak tops Tory leadership poll, as Tom Tugendhat out of race - BBC News
|
2022-07-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Penny Mordaunt holds on to second spot in the leadership contest, with Liz Truss still in third place.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Sir Graham Brady reads out the result of third round of voting by Tory MPs in the leadership contest
Former Chancellor Rishi Sunak has topped the third MPs' vote for the next Tory leader and prime minister, with backbencher Tom Tugendhat eliminated.
Trade Minister Penny Mordaunt took second place, while Foreign Secretary Liz Truss was third and ex-Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch was fourth.
The four remaining candidates go to another round of voting on Tuesday.
The field will be cut to two on Wednesday, with Conservative Party members then having the final say.
The placings were the same as in the second round of voting last Thursday, but Mr Sunak picked up 14 more votes, Ms Badenoch nine and Ms Truss seven.
Ms Mordaunt's support dropped by one vote, as did Mr Tugendhat's.
In a statement, Mr Tugendhat said: "I want to thank my team, colleagues and, most of all, the British people for their support.
"I have been overwhelmed by the response we have received across the country. People are ready for a clean start and our party must deliver on it and put trust back into politics."
A source within Ms Truss's campaign told the BBC: "We've narrowed the gap to Penny pretty considerably. Story is Penny going backwards. All to play for!"
But Ms Mordaunt said: "My vote is steady and I'm grateful to my colleagues for all their support and thrilled to be in second place once more."
A prominent Sunak supporter said: "That's a cracking result - Rishi gaining most [votes]."
And a Badenoch campaign source said: "Kemi is pleased to have taken it to the next vote. She has momentum over both Mordaunt and Truss. It's all to play for and Kemi is in it to win."
The Tory leadership contest has become increasingly bitter and personal in tone, as those left in it fight for the final two places.
Mr Tugendhat earlier rejected calls to stand aside and throw his support behind another candidate, as did Ms Badenoch.
But most of the rancour has been between Mr Sunak, Ms Mordaunt and Ms Truss, who clashed in an ITV-hosted debate on Sunday over their economic policies.
A Sky News debate scheduled for Tuesday was cancelled after Mr Sunak and Ms Truss declined to take part, and amid concern among senior Tories that angry arguments in public could damage the party.
The new Tory leader and prime minister is due to be announced on 5 September.
In seven weeks' time, we will have a new prime minister.
For centuries in this country, with a few exceptions, we have collectively been in the habit of getting white men to run the place.
We now know for certain that that isn't going to happen this time around.
We are now down to the final quartet: former Chancellor Rishi Sunak, Trade Minister Penny Mordaunt, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and former Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch.
Separately, the government won a vote of confidence in itself in the House of Commons.
It could have led to a general election, had ministers been defeated.
But this would have required dozens of Conservative MPs to side with Labour and other opposition parties.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Boris Johnson says he has "no idea" why the Labour leader “insisted” in holding a confidence motion in the government
Opening the debate, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he was still in charge of "one of the most dynamic governments of modern times".
He told MPs: "He [Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer] wants [a confidence vote] and since they want one, it's his constitutional prerogative, we will comply and we will win."
He also told the Commons: "Some people will say as I leave office that this is the end of Brexit, and the Leader of the Opposition and the deep state will prevail in its plot to haul us back into alignment with the EU as a prelude to our eventual return, and we on this side of the House will prove them wrong, won't we?" Tory MPs cheered in response.
Sir Keir responded to the PM's speech, saying: "Unlike his predecessors, this prime minister has not been forced out over policy disagreements.
"And despite the delusions he has fostered in his bunker, he has not been felled by the stampede of an eccentric herd. Instead, he has been forced out in disgrace."
The government won by 349 votes to 238, a majority of 111.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62212846
|
news_uk-politics-62212846
|
|
Jail for woman who claimed Darren Russell murder was accident - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Stephanie Bowie will serve at least 16 years for stabbing Darren Russell outside a restaurant in Erskine.
|
Glasgow & West Scotland
|
A woman who fatally wounded a man but claimed she did not mean to kill him has been jailed for at least 16 years.
Stephanie Bowie stabbed 21-year-old Darren Russell twice in the chest outside a restaurant in Erskine, Renfrewshire, on New Year's Day 2021.
She denied murder, saying she "accidentally" wounded the victim when she brought out the knife to scare him.
Jurors found her guilty of murder after a trial at the High Court in Glasgow..
Jailing her for life at the High Court in Stirling, the judge said she would serve a minimum of 16 years before she was eligible to apply for parole.
Lord Weir said she had she had committed a "deplorable act of lethal violence".
The trial, last month, heard that Bowie, 29, had stormed to the scene after her brother Mark had been in a minor row with Mr Russell.
The two men - and others - had earlier been in the grounds of nearby Barsail Primary School where they got into an argument.
Bowie took a taxi from Paisley to Erskine after learning of the row, having grabbed a knife before getting into the cab.
She turned up at the school and immediately threatened to kill Mr Russell.
The victim's best friend Craig Smith said they all eventually ended up on a path near the Grill in the Park Bar and Restaurant in Erskine.
Mr Smith, 23, said: "I did not know why she was going for my friend.
"I was trying to get Mark to calm down his sister. Me and Mark had a kind of discussion...as I turned, he (Mr Russell) just fell to the deck and she has come skipping past, all happy."
As the Bowies ran off, Mr Smith helped his friend back to the home he shared with his parents nearby, but he later died.
Stephanie Bowie admitted she had killed Mr Russell but claimed she had not meant it, despite the blows being deep into the victim's body.
She claimed while Mr Russell was standing over her, she "panicked" and brought out the knife hidden up her sleeve.
Bowie said she got rid of the knife and her blood-stained jacket. She also altered her hairstyle to try to avoid being caught.
A jury found her guilty of murder, possession of a bladed article and an attempt to defeat the ends of justice.
After the verdict, the court was told Bowie had a number of previous convictions including for threatening behaviour and breaching bail.
The senior investigating officer in the case, Ch Insp Christopher Nisbet, said Bowie was now facing the consequences of her actions.
"I hope this sentence sends a clear message that violence and the carrying of weapons is completely unacceptable," he said.
He added: "We hope that this conviction brings at least a degree of closure for his relatives and friends.
"We know it has a devastating and significant impact on individuals, families and communities.
"We will continue to work closely with partners and remain determined to bring perpetrators to justice."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62082961
|
news_uk-scotland-glasgow-west-62082961
|
|
Ghislaine Maxwell appeals against sex trafficking conviction - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ghislaine Maxwell formally filed her appeal nine days after her conviction for child sex trafficking.
|
US & Canada
|
Ghislaine Maxwell has appealed against her child sex trafficking conviction and the 20-year prison term she was handed by a US judge last month.
Maxwell, 60, was convicted in December of recruiting and trafficking four teenage girls for abuse by her then-boyfriend Jeffrey Epstein.
Epstein took his own life in a New York jail cell in 2019 while awaiting his own trial.
Maxwell's appeal process was expected and will likely last several months.
During her trial, her lawyers argued that she was being scapegoated for Epstein's crimes, calling her friendship with the financier the "biggest mistake of her life".
Judge Alison J Nathan rejected attempts to throw out the case, including after Maxwell's lawyers argued that one juror had failed to inform the court that he had been abused as a child.
She also rejected arguments that Maxwell had not been allowed to prepare adequately for her trial, and that prosecutors had waited too long to bring their case against her.
Pronouncing the sentence in June, Judge Nathan said Maxwell's conduct had been "heinous and predatory" and that she "played a pivotal role" in Epstein's abuse.
As well as jail time, the judge imposed a fine of $750,000 (£610,000).
Her lawyer had asked for a sentence of no more than five years.
It remains unclear on what grounds Maxwell plans to appeal. Her lawyers were not required to give a reason in Thursday's legal filing.
Addressing her victims in the Manhattan courthouse in June, Maxwell said she empathised with them, adding that she hoped her prison sentence would allow the victims "peace and finality".
Maxwell has been in custody since her arrest in July 2020, held mostly at Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center.
The case against the British former socialite has been one of the highest-profile since the emergence of the #MeToo movement, which encouraged women to speak out about sexual abuse.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: 'We still want answers from Maxwell'
The crimes of Epstein, who mixed with some of the world's most famous people, were first reported in the media in 2005 and he served prison time in Florida in 2008-09 on a state charge of procuring a minor for prostitution.
Following numerous lawsuits, he was arrested again in 2019 in a federal case in New York.
At least eight women wrote letters to Maxwell's judge during her trial describing how they had suffered.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62088862
|
news_world-us-canada-62088862
|
|
Prince Harry faced tensions with royal officials as security downgraded, court hears - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Duke of Sussex says officials were involved in decisions about his security that were unfair.
|
UK
|
Prince Harry and Meghan attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service on a rare UK visit
The Duke of Sussex faced "significant tensions" with a top aide to the Queen involved in downgrading his security, a court has been told.
Challenging the decision, Prince Harry's lawyer said he had not been aware Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, played a role.
The decision was "materially prejudiced" as key information was withheld, Shaeed Fatima QC said.
The duke lost full protection after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
Without a guarantee of police protection, Prince Harry believes it is too dangerous to bring his family from the US to visit the UK - which his lawyer has previously said "is and always will be his home".
The duke's legal team argued the decision about his security by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was invalid because of "procedural unfairness".
They questioned whether it was "appropriate" for Sir Edward or other members of the Royal Household to sit on the committee, when Prince Harry had been told it was "independent".
Representing the duke, Ms Fatima said: "He didn't know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all."
Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, had a tense relationship with Prince Harry, lawyers said
She said Prince Harry should have been able to make direct representations to Ravec to ensure his arguments were properly communicated to the committee and been given an opportunity to respond to points being made by others, including members of the Royal Household.
Ms Fatima said his offer to pay for his own police protection "was not conveyed to Ravec" and so the decision was "materially prejudiced".
This court action is still at an early stage. Mr Justice Swift is being asked to decide whether Prince Harry has an arguable case going forward. That decision won't come for another few weeks.
However - the written and oral submissions heard in Court three this morning are headline-making because of the detail and most notably what were described as "significant tensions" between Prince Harry and the Queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.
No specifics were read out in court - sensitive information was kept out of the public hearing. But it does point to the breakdown in relations between the Sussexes and the Royal Household prior to their move abroad.
Whatever Mr Justice Swift decides, there may be further legal action as counsel for the Duke of Sussex has indicated a second judicial review claim has been started into whether he should be allowed to fund the security himself rather than having taxpayers pay for it.
An offer Prince Harry's counsel say was made - including in an email to Sir Edward Young in 2020 - but which was not passed on to Ravec.
Lawyers for the Home Office say Ravec was entitled to make the decision it did - to provide police protection to Prince Harry and Meghan on a case-by-case basis when they visit the UK.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that personal tensions between Prince Harry and Royal Household officials are "irrelevant" to his change in status when he stepped back from royal duties.
He said there was "no basis" to conclude that the duke making representations to the committee would have led to a different outcome.
Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.
He and Meghan have only rarely visited since their move to California. On one visit in July 2021, the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.
The Sussexes also stopped in the UK in April, meeting the Queen on the way to the Invictus Games, and attended the thanksgiving service during the Platinum Jubilee last month.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62044951
|
news_uk-62044951
|
|
Resignation speech: 'No-one is indispensable' - Boris Johnson's statement in full - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson says he's immensely proud of his government's achievements as he resigns outside No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Boris Johnson stepped out of No 10 to the sound of applause from some political supporters, Downing St colleagues and his wife. Here is his resignation speech in full:
"It is clearly now the will of the parliamentary Conservative Party that there should be a new leader of that party and therefore a new prime minister.
"And I've agreed with Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of our backbench MPs, that the process of choosing that new leader should begin now and the timetable will be announced next week.
"And I've today appointed a Cabinet to serve, as I will, until a new leader is in place.
"So I want to say to the millions of people who voted for us in 2019, many of them voting Conservative for the first time, thank you for that incredible mandate, the biggest Conservative majority since 1987, the biggest share of the vote since 1979.
"And the reason I have fought so hard in the last few days to continue to deliver that mandate in person was not just because I wanted to do so, but because I felt it was my job, my duty, my obligation to you to continue to do what we promised in 2019.
"And of course, I'm immensely proud of the achievements of this government, from getting Brexit done to settling our relations with the Continent for over half a century, reclaiming the power for this country to make its own laws in Parliament, getting us all through the pandemic, delivering the fastest vaccine rollout in Europe, the fastest exit from lockdown, and in the last few months, leading the West in standing up to Putin's aggression in Ukraine.
"And let me say now, to the people of Ukraine, that I know that we in the UK will continue to back your fight for freedom for as long as it takes.
"And at the same time in this country, we've been pushing forward a vast programme of investment in infrastructure and skills and technology - the biggest for a century. Because if I have one insight into human beings, it is that genius and talent and enthusiasm and imagination are evenly distributed throughout the population.
"But opportunity is not, and that's why we must keep levelling up, keep unleashing the potential of every part of the United Kingdom. And if we can do that, in this country, we will be the most prosperous in Europe.
"And in the last few days, I tried to persuade my colleagues that it would be eccentric to change governments when we're delivering so much and when we have such a vast mandate and when we're actually only a handful of points behind in the polls, even in mid-term, after quite a few months of pretty relentless sledging and when the economic scene is so difficult domestically and internationally.
"And I regret not to have been successful in those arguments and of course it's painful not to be able to see through so many ideas and projects myself.
"But as we've seen at Westminster, the herd instinct is powerful and when the herd moves, it moves.
Boris Johnson made his speech in front of the cameras...
"And my friends in politics, no-one is remotely indispensable and our brilliant and Darwinian system will produce another leader, equally committed to taking this country forward through tough times.
"Not just helping families to get through it, but changing and improving the way we do things, cutting burdens on businesses and families and yes, cutting taxes, because that is the way to generate the growth and the income we need to pay for great public services.
"And to that new leader, I say whoever he or she may be, I say I will give you as much support as I can. And to you, the British public.
"I know that there will be many people who are relieved and perhaps quite a few who will also be disappointed. And I want you to know how sad I am to be giving up the best job in the world.
...and his wife, baby daughter and other supporters in the crowd
"I want to thank Carrie and our children, and all the members of my family who have had to put up with so much for so long.
"I want to thank the peerless British civil service for all the help and support that you have given our police, our emergency services and, of course, our fantastic NHS, who at (a) critical moment, helped to extend my own period in office, as well as our armed services and our agencies that are so admired around the world.
"And our indefatigable Conservative Party members and supporters whose selfless campaigning makes our democracy possible. I want to thank the wonderful staff here at Chequers - here at Number 10, and of course at Chequers. And our fantastic prop force detectives, the one group by the way, who never leak.
"Above all, I want to thank you, the British public, for the immense privilege that you have given me and I want you to know that from now on until the new prime minister is in place, your interests will be served and the government of the country will be carried on.
"Being prime minister is an education in itself. I have travelled to every part of the United Kingdom and, in addition to the beauty of our natural world, I have found so many people possessed of such boundless British originality and so willing to tackle old problems in new ways that I know that even if things can sometimes seem dark now, our future together is golden.
"Thank you all very much. Thank you."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62081380
|
news_uk-politics-62081380
|
|
Sir Keir Starmer cleared by police over Durham lockdown beers - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Labour leader says he would have quit if he had been fined as a "matter of principle".
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and deputy Angela Rayner have been cleared by Durham police of breaking lockdown rules.
It follows an inquiry into an event at a Labour MP's office in April 2021.
In a statement, the police said there was "no case to answer" citing an exemption to lockdown rules for "reasonably necessary work".
Sir Keir said he would have quit his role if he had been fined as "matter of principle", adding "integrity matters".
"It shouldn't be controversial to say that those who make the law can't break the law," he told a press conference.
He said that in the coming days he would set out how a Labour government would "reboot our economy, re-energise our communities, revitalise our public services, and give Britain the fresh start it needs".
He added that he wouldn't "get everything right" and would make mistakes but promised "What you will always get from me is someone who believes honour and integrity matters."
In a statement, Ms Rayner, who had also promised to quit if fined, said: "The contrast with the behaviour of this disgraced prime minister couldn't be clearer."
At the Durham gathering on 30 April, which was in the run-up to the Hartlepool by-election, people drank beer and ate curry in the constituency office of City of Durham MP Mary Foy.
Social distancing rules - including a ban on indoor mixing between households - were in place at the time.
However, Labour had argued the food was consumed between work events, meaning the gathering was within the rules.
This decision matters because it tells you who will lead the Labour Party into the next general election.
Until today, that was far from certain - a colossal pause button pressed on Sir Keir's future; his political fate in the hands of detectives in County Durham.
He'd decided in May that a fine would equal resignation for him; consistent with his demand that it should have meant the same for Boris Johnson.
He can and will now return to his argument that not all politicians are the same; that integrity matters.
He'll argue that contrast is now more stark than ever in comparison with Mr Johnson.
But while he is mighty relieved today, this is also the week that his biggest political challenge, becoming prime minister, arguably became a bit harder.
For having defined himself in opposition to Boris Johnson, he now faces the moving target of a range of possible opponents.
They'll have - for a while at least - the shine of novelty, albeit without their own mandate.
But they may not present him with quite the same scope for critique as he's had in recent months with the prime minister.
Durham Constabulary launched an investigation into the event in May after receiving "significant new information".
Following the investigation, the police have now said they would not be issuing any fines and no further action will be taken.
"There is no case to answer for a contravention of the regulations, due to the application of an exception, namely reasonably necessary work," the police said.
They have also said they would not name those present at the gathering.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Footage shows Sir Keir Starmer drinking beer with colleagues in Durham on 30 April 2021
Ms Foy said she was "delighted" by the outcome of the inquiry.
But added that it was "unfortunate that the desire of some Conservative politicians has led to so much of Durham police's time being focused on a matter that was already investigated, especially when their resources are already under significant pressure".
Earlier in the year Boris Johnson, his wife Carrie and his then-Chancellor Rishi Sunak were fined for attending a birthday party during lockdown in June 2020.
Following their fines, North West Durham Conservative MP Richard Holden wrote to Durham's chief constable asking her to look again at the claims against Sir Keir, taking into account the Met Police's decision.
Responding to the police's decision, Conservative MP Michael Fabricant said: "I don't think Keir Starmer has done himself any favours today - I'm sorry if this is unjust, but it will reinforce the view of many that it was an establishment stitch-up."
He said he had heard from members of the public who felt the Labour leader had "in effect blackmailed Durham police by saying he would quit if he was fined".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62095955
|
news_uk-politics-62095955
|
|
Theranos exec Sunny Balwani convicted of fraud - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
He and fraudster Elizabeth Holmes ran the Silicon Valley company as a couple before its implosion.
|
US & Canada
|
Balwani's company was once worth $9bn (£7.5bn), but was based on blood testing technology that did not work
Silicon Valley executive Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani has been found guilty of deceiving investors as part of a plot with ex-girlfriend Elizabeth Holmes.
He falsely and repeatedly claimed that their company, Theranos, had a device that could detect hundreds of diseases with a few drops of blood.
Holmes was found guilty at a separate trial in January where she accused Balwani of abuse - which he denies.
Both Holmes, 38, and Balwani, 57, will be sentenced by a judge in the autumn.
Holmes is facing around 20 years in prison and is currently free on bail. Balwani also faces up to 20 years in prison as well as millions of dollars in restitution payments to his victims.
Theranos was once worth $9bn (£7.5bn), but was based on blood testing technology that did not work.
The verdict was read on the fifth day of jury deliberations at a courthouse in San Jose, California, in the heart of Silicon Valley. Balwani was found guilty of all 12 charges against him.
During closing arguments on 21 June, prosecutors showed text messages sent by Balwani to Holmes.
"I am responsible for everything at Theranos," he wrote in 2015. "All have been my decisions too."
Assistant US Attorney Jeffrey Schenk called the message an admission of guilt. "He's acknowledging his role in the fraud," he said.
Holmes was the company's founder and leader. But Balwani ran the everyday operations of the company.
He had no medical training to speak of, and some thought that might be enough to convince a jury that he simply did not understand that Theranos' technology didn't work.
His lawyers also argued that he invested his own money in the company - why do that if he thought the technology was dud?
But this set of verdicts makes him just as culpable, in some respects more culpable, for the Theronos scandal than Holmes.
Holmes was convicted of four charges of fraud, Balwani of 12 counts. He was also convicted of defrauding patients, something Holmes avoided.
It means that Balwani will now go down in history as front and centre in the Theranos saga.
Here in Silicon Valley, execs at start-ups and tech companies will be looking on.
They'll note that an executive was convicted of wider charges of fraud than the founder and chief executive.
It sets an important legal warning to managers - it's not always the boss that shoulders the greatest burden of responsibility.
The verdict also partly vindicates Elizabeth Holmes' legal team, who placed her on the witness stand to be cross-examined. A risky move that may have paid off.
Theranos was once the darling of biotech and Silicon Valley.
Holmes was able to raise more than $900m from investors, including billionaires like media magnate Rupert Murdoch and tech mogul Larry Ellison.
The firm promised it would revolutionise the healthcare industry with a test that could detect conditions such as cancer and diabetes with only a few drops of blood.
But these claims began to unravel in 2015 after a Wall Street Journal investigation reported that its core blood-testing technology did not work.
The three-month case against Balwani bore large similarities to the government's prosecutions of Holmes.
Lawyers for Balwani argued that he was also duped by Holmes, after he joined the company and became chief financial officer in 2010.
Before breaking up as the company fell apart in 2016, the couple went to great lengths to ensure that investors and employees were unaware of their romantic relationship.
His lawyers pointed out that after investing $15m of his own money into Theranos, he never cashed out his stock options despite his investment rising to some $500m.
Unlike Holmes, Balwani did not take the stand to testify in his defence.
Holmes reportedly first met Balwani during a college trip to Beijing when she was 18.
He was a 37-year-old South Asian immigrant who had made millions selling his software company before the dot-com bubble burst. Around the same time he met Holmes, he divorced his wife, a Japanese artist. Their relationship became a romantic one around the time that Holmes was starting Theranos.
While Holmes was the face of the company, he was the businessman serving as the president and chief operating officer.
"Ms Holmes and Mr Balwani were partners in virtually everything," prosecutor Robert Leach said earlier in the trial.
"The defendant and Holmes knew the rosy falsehoods that they were telling investors were contrary to the reality within Theranos."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61902378
|
news_world-us-canada-61902378
|
|
Boris Johnson resignation: New leader will shift political landscape - BBC News
|
2022-07-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the Boris Johnson era ends, it's a safe bet the next Tory leader will be a very different character.
|
UK Politics
|
Boris Johnson will be remembered as a convention-smashing, rule-bending, first name recognition prime minister.
A man whose character strengths, in the eyes of many Conservative MPs, were also his weaknesses.
Great at campaigning, poor at governing, many backbenchers found themselves reflecting.
Standing at the lectern in Downing Street, Boris Johnson was forced to articulate that his imagined future had been crushed.
The boy who dreamed of being "world king" ejected.
A primary colours prime minister provoking colourful reactions to the near end: protesters just beyond the Downing Street gates screaming "liar", some of his most loyal MPs comparing his defenestration to the downfall of Lady Thatcher.
Boris Johnson is now, he insists, a prime minister emasculated, fulfilling a duty rather than a bucket list of ambitions.
His supporters are pointing to convention that departing prime ministers loiter until their replacement rolls up, rather than instantly skedaddle to make way for a caretaker PM.
As a spectator to this noise from Westminster, you might ponder: why them and what next?
Why them, that tiny collection of MPs, deciding who should govern and lead, so relatively soon after a big election win?
Well, in a parliamentary democracy, for better or worse - as opposed to those countries with a presidency - our party leaders, and so our prime ministers, are chosen by their parties, (and affiliated trade unions in the case of the Labour Party) not the rest of us.
It means the thinnest sliver of the country will get to decide who replaces Boris Johnson. The electorate will have the chance to endorse or reject the chosen one, but only at the next election.
It may not surprise you to discover that Westminster is a postcode which doesn't suffer a deficit of ambition.
The wannabes will fight a popularity contest among Tory MPs in the next few weeks, and two of them should be left at the end of that process, Conservative Party members will have the final say.
Over the course of the summer, somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 people will be charged with selecting the next head of our government on our behalf.
It is a safe bet the next prime minister will be a very different character to Boris Johnson. Given the manner and motivations behind his toppling, being seen to ooze integrity and revere truth are qualities all the candidates will aspire to illustrate.
But beyond that, there will be an intriguing debate about what it means to a Conservative in 2022.
A Conservative in post-Brexit Britain, where neither main party at Westminster contests the fundamentals of the UK's departure from the EU, but where our relations with our nearest neighbours have not normalised since.
When a new leader assumes office, the political landscape will instantly shift.
Yes, they will have novelty and freshness, at least for a bit. But no electoral mandate to call their own.
And the opposition parties will confront a new opponent.
As the Boris Johnson era concludes, so too will there be new turf upon which the arguments of tomorrow will play out.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62088774
|
news_uk-politics-62088774
|
|
Brexit: No case for UK returning to EU, Labour leader Starmer says - BBC News
|
2022-07-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Labour's leader says "we cannot afford to look back" as he sets out his plan to "make Brexit work".
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Keir Starmer: We're not trading on divisions
The UK "will not go back into the EU" under a Labour government, Sir Keir Starmer has said, in a speech attacking the government's record on Brexit.
The Labour leader vowed to "move on arguments of the past" and seek to "make Brexit work".
He said the UK was "stuck" and needed a plan to get its "economy growing again".
And he recommitted to keeping the UK out of the EU single market, customs union and free movement rules.
Speaking to the BBC's political editor Chris Mason before the speech, Sir Keir said: "We want to go forward, not backwards. And therefore this is not about rejoining the EU.
"It's very clear that what we can't do is reopen all those arguments, all those divisions that caused so much anguish over past years."
He said the economy was stagnant under the Conservative government and its Brexit deal was "holding us back".
Labour's plan, he said, would focus on "unblocking" the government's Brexit deal by removing barriers to trade with the EU and taking steps to resolve border issues in Northern Ireland.
The Labour leader's address marked an attempt to regain control over an issue that has been a dividing line between the party's MPs, members, and some of its voters.
Sir Keir - who as Jeremy Corbyn's shadow Brexit secretary said the party should advocate staying in the EU in any second referendum - has largely avoided talking about Brexit during his time as leader.
Before Monday, he had not made a set-piece speech on the issue since the UK cut legal ties with the EU, and mentioned it just five times in a 11,500 word essay ahead of Labour's annual conference last year.
With official forecasters continuing to say Brexit has damaged the UK's economy, he has faced pressure within Labour - including from London mayor Sadiq Khan - to push for Britain to rejoin the bloc's single market.
On Monday Mr Khan told the BBC he disagreed with the party's position on Brexit and said the "country's future is best served being members of the single market".
Others in the party have expressed similar sentiments, including shadow minister Anna McMorrin, who recently told a private meeting she hoped the UK could return to the EU single market under a Labour government.
But in a speech at pro-EU think tank the Centre for European Reform, Sir Keir rejected that approach, arguing it would be a "recipe for more division".
He added: "There are some who say, 'We don't need to make Brexit work. We need to reverse it'.
"I couldn't disagree more, because you cannot move forward or grow the country or deliver change or win back the trust of those who have lost faith in politics if you're constantly focused on the arguments of the past."
What Sir Keir Starmer is doing today, in black and white, is making peace with Brexit.
He will say explicitly that a Labour government would not return to the single market, customs union or freedom of movement.
He has said these things before - but saying them all together is quite something.
Unlike the Conservatives, Labour MPs and party members were not split down the middle on Brexit. The vast majority of them absolutely hated the idea.
So today, the Labour leader is saying that argument is closed and he is turning a political leaf.
He will hope by doing that, criticism can't come back the other way accusing his party of secretly wanting to take the UK back in.
He will also hope it creates space to criticise the Tories' Brexit deal, not least on the Northern Ireland issue.
Sir Keir also repeated his promise not to re-establish the EU's free movement rules in the UK, arguing instead he would seek new flexibilities for short work trips and touring musicians.
The Labour leader said new trade barriers with Europe have created a "fatberg of red tape" for business to follow.
He likened the economic effect of Brexit to the "wet wipe island" blocking the river Thames in London, adding: "It is hampering the flow of British business — we will break that barrier down."
As part of a plan to "make Brexit work", the Labour leader promised to:
He also promised a new approach to post-Brexit border arrangements for Northern Ireland, which have proved highly unpopular among unionists.
The government argues the provisions, which it signed up to as part of the 2019 withdrawal deal, are causing economic disruption and must be changed.
After failing to secure the changes it wants during talks with the EU, it recently tabled legislation enabling it to go back on parts of the deal it doesn't like.
Border checks on goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland are opposed by many unionists
In his speech, Sir Keir accused minsters of "lashing out" and pledged to continue talks over the arrangements, known as the Northern Ireland protocol.
"The solutions are there, the desire is there. What is lacking is trust," he said. "Labour will change that. We will be the honest broker our countries need."
He also attacked the government's approach to regulating the economy outside the EU, accusing them of cutting rules and then "gawping at the power of the market".
"The government have missed Brexit opportunities time and time again. It beggars belief that during a cost of living crisis that they still haven't cut VAT on energy bills," he added.
"Labour will be sharper than this. We will use our flexibility outside of the EU to ensure British regulation is adapted to suit British needs."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62034754
|
news_uk-politics-62034754
|
|
Lord Advocate would not sign off indyref2 bill without ruling - BBC News
|
2022-07-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Court papers reveal Dorothy Bain did not have enough confidence about the legality of the referendum bill.
|
Scotland politics
|
The Scottish government's top lawyer was not prepared to sign off on an independence referendum bill, court papers have revealed.
Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain has asked the Supreme Court to rule on whether Holyrood has the power to legislate for a vote without UK government consent.
She said she currently "does not have the necessary degree of confidence" that it does.
Nicola Sturgeon has said she wants to hold a referendum on 19 October 2023.
The Lord Advocate is still expected to argue the Scottish government's case at the Supreme Court, and she said there was an issue of "exceptional public importance" for judges to resolve.
Ms Sturgeon still hopes to win the agreement of UK ministers for a fresh referendum, but had asked the Lord Advocate to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for a ruling on whether one could go ahead without the backing of Westminster.
She told MSPs that this would "accelerate to the point when we have legal clarity and legal fact".
However, papers lodged with the court suggest that the Lord Advocate would not have backed ministers in tabling a referendum bill while the question of whether Holyrood has the powers to do so remained unresolved.
All bills must be accompanied by a statement underlining that they are within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, which must be cleared by the Lord Advocate.
The reference to the Supreme Court said that in the case of a referendum bill, "the Lord Advocate does not have the necessary degree of confidence" to do this.
Instead, it said that Ms Bain "considers there is a genuine issue of law that is unresolved", and this is of "exceptional public importance to the people of Scotland".
Nicola Sturgeon has set out her strategy to pursue a fresh referendum on independence - including a court case
She also said that the matter was directly relevant to a key manifesto pledge which she said had been endorsed by the Scottish public, with the SNP and Greens holding a majority of the seats at Holyrood.
Ms Bain wrote: "The Scottish government, the Scottish Parliament and the people of Scotland and the wider United Kingdom ought to have clarity on the scope of the relevant reservations on this issue of fundamental constitutional importance.
"Being questions of law, only this court can provide that clarity and unless the issue is judicially resolved there will remain uncertainty and scope for argument about the powers of the Scottish Parliament. That is not in the best interests of the people of Scotland or of the United Kingdom."
Ms Bain will submit a written note of argument to the court, while the UK government will be asked to respond. The Welsh and Northern Irish administrations have also been notified.
Handling of the case is currently with the president of the court, Lord Reed - a Scottish former Court of Session judge. He will decide the timescales on which the case will be heard, and whether any preliminary issues need to be dealt with first.
If the Scottish government wins the case, Ms Sturgeon said the bill would be introduced at Holyrood and passed swiftly to allow a vote to happen in October 2023.
However if judges rule against this, the first minister said the SNP would treat the next UK general election as a "de facto referendum" and seek to use the result to trigger independence negotiations.
It was the centrepiece of Nicola Sturgeon's big referendum announcement - the Supreme Court would be asked to settle once and for all the long-standing question of Holyrood's powers.
The tactic of having the Lord Advocate push the matter to the courts immediately was an innovative one which caught Holyrood's opposition parties and indeed the UK government on the hop.
However, it appears the first minister actually had little choice. Her previous strategy was to pass the bill, then defend it in court against an inevitable challenge, but these papers show that the Lord Advocate would not have signed off on the key first step in that plan.
It may make little difference in the grand scheme of things. We are still going to court, and the Lord Advocate is still arguing the case for MSPs having the power to legislate for indyref2.
But this illustrates the narrow room for manoeuvre the first minister has on this issue - and the potential difficulty of winning over the judges of the Supreme Court.
Opposition MSPs had pressed for Ms Bain to give a statement to parliament following Ms Sturgeon's announcement, but this did not happen before Holyrood's summer recess.
The UK government remains opposed to a referendum with Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab saying on Tuesday that the position has not changed.
He told MPs: "We do not think that now is the right time for a second referendum, given all the pressures and challenges and given the outcome of the first.
"I think what the people of Scotland want to see is both their governments - in Edinburgh and in Westminster - working closely together."
Scottish Conservative constitution spokesman Donald Cameron claimed that the papers that had been sent to the Supreme Court showed that the SNP was "playing political games by going to court in order to stir up grievance."
He added: "Now we know why the Scottish government, shamefully, failed to allow the Lord Advocate to appear before Parliament last week, ahead of the summer recess - because Scotland's top law officer is not confident that the First Minister's plan to hold a divisive and unwanted referendum has any legal basis."
Scottish Labour MSP Sarah Boyack said: "It is clear from the document that the Lord Advocate does not have confidence that what the SNP is proposing is legal.
"With the country in the midst of a cost of living crisis, it is deeply disappointing to see Nicola Sturgeon return to the politics of the past."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62051703
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62051703
|
|
Ava White: Boy who killed girl, 12, in Snapchat row gets life - BBC News
|
2022-07-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ava White was stabbed to death in Liverpool after a row over being filmed for social media.
|
Liverpool
|
A 15-year-old boy who stabbed a schoolgirl to death after a row over a Snapchat video has been sentenced for her murder.
Ava White, 12, was killed in Liverpool city centre after a Christmas lights switch-on event in November 2021.
The boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, claimed he accidentally stabbed her in self-defence but was found guilty after a trial.
He was sentenced to life with a minimum of 13 years at Liverpool Crown Court.
The trial heard Ava and her friends became involved in an argument with the teenager and three of his friends after the boys recorded Snapchat videos of her group.
Ava's friends said the boy, who was 14 at the time, "grinned" after stabbing her in the neck with a flick-knife before fleeing the scene.
She was taken to Alder Hey Children's Hospital with critical injuries and died a short time later.
Ava White was described as a "kind hearted little girl" by her mother
The boy then dumped the knife and took off his coat, which was later found in a wheelie bin, as he began covering up his actions.
CCTV later showed him and his friends in a shop where the boy took a selfie and bought butter, which he said was for crumpets.
He then went to a friend's home and when his mother contacted him to tell him police wanted to speak to him he told her he was playing a computer game.
The boy was arrested at about 22:30 GMT, just two hours after the fatal stabbing.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The boy is seen running away in CCTV footage released by police
The court heard he denied being in the city centre at all before going on to blame another boy for the stabbing.
He later said he heard one of Ava's group threaten to stab his friend if he did not delete a video of Ava and claimed he had wanted only to "frighten her away" and had not meant to stab her.
The girl's mother broke down in court at the sentencing as she described her grief.
Leanne White said: "My beloved Ava dies all over again every morning I wake up.
"The moment Ava died is now yesterday, tomorrow and forever. It is the past, the present and the future.
"It is not just one horrific moment in time that happened last whenever. It is not just the moment, the hour or second.
"Our lives became permanently divided into before and after."
Ava had dreamed of travelling the world as an air hostess, her mum says
She described her daughter as a "kind hearted little girl" and said "precious memories are all I have left".
Her mother added: "She will never fulfil her dream of becoming an air hostess and travelling the world."
A statement from Ava's father Robert Martin was also read to the court.
He said: "Ava was the reason I got out of bed, my reason for living. When Ava was taken away it destroyed everything I stood for and worked towards."
The court heard the boy, who has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and attended a special school, had previously been subject to a community resolution notice after hitting a PCSO last July.
Mrs Justice Yip said he had also been arrested in May last year for assault on two women and by August it was suspected he was being exploited by known criminals.
Nick Johnson QC, defending, said the defendant was carrying the knife because he had previously been a victim of crime.
The court heard his father had been violent towards his mother and was jailed in 2015.
Balloons were released at the start a vigil in memory of Ava
The boy admitted possessing the knife but denied murder and an alternative charge of manslaughter.
Mrs Justice Yip said: he had shown a lack of remorse which had "understandably caused Ava's family further distress".
Sentencing him, she said: "There is only one reason why Ava is dead and that is because you chose to carry a knife and you chose to get it out and use it.
"You enjoyed carrying a knife. You were showing it off to your friends earlier that evening. It was a nasty weapon and you should not have had it."
Det Supt Sue Coombs described the case as "extremely shocking" and said she hoped the sentence would be a deterrent to young people carrying knives.
Ava's sister Mia White told in a statement read to the court how she wants to give talks about the impact of knife crime.
The 18-year-old said: "Hopefully if I can change at least one child's mind about using a knife I will have accomplished something special."
Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-62119537
|
news_uk-england-merseyside-62119537
|
|
Tax cut beauty contest could turn ugly - BBC News
|
2022-07-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Many candidates vying to become Tory party leader are eyeing tax cuts, but can they balance the books?
|
Business
|
As the list of Tory party leadership candidates grows ever longer, there is one issue that has become the key battleground of this race - tax.
So far, many have signalled they will cut taxes.
But one wonders whether while drawing up their campaign pledges, the hopefuls had chance to look at a report by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the government's independent forecaster.
Last week, it warned that the UK was facing a number of long-term borrowing challenges.
In 50 years' time, says the OBR, the UK will be grappling with an ageing society and a shrinking workforce, while trying at the same time to reach net zero.
The OBR's warnings might seem too far in the future for a population battling with soaring living costs right now.
But a tax cut would also seem difficult to square with a 2019 Conservative manifesto pledge, which committed the party to balancing the current budget by the middle of the decade.
That's balancing day-to-day spending with tax revenue and also getting debt falling as a share of the total economy or gross domestic product (GDP).
So far, government policies, including a rise in National Insurance contributions, have raised the tax burden significantly, by 3% of GDP. That has funded public spending increases of 2% of GDP, which has left about £30bn of what is known as headroom.
Most of the candidates seem to be using all of that up in one form or another. And then some.
We await more detailed accounts of their plans.
Watch Boris Johnson Quits: What Next & More Questions on iPlayer.
But the really big point is that the £30bn doesn't exist any more. As OBR chairman Richard Hughes told me last week: "We've got to remember the risks of the outlook for growing.
"You've got risks around energy prices, which are all already rising above the levels that we've seen in our last forecast. You've got risks to interest rates, which are also rising above levels we saw in the March forecasts".
Put most simply, there is a tangible risk of recession, or at least stagnation, arising from the rising cost of living.
May's economic growth figures, which are due on Wednesday, are likely to show that the economy is on course to shrink in this quarter.
Cabinet ministers vying for Number 10 are now openly embracing forecasts showing the UK has the worst outlook for growth next year among advanced economies. These were the same forecasts that were played down last year but are now being marshalled as an argument for a stimulus.
So if the tax burden is to be reined in, perhaps these candidates will borrow more and yet again abandon the fiscal rules and 2019 manifesto promises. Or some of the promised post-pandemic increase in the size of the state - from social care funding to reducing NHS waiting lists, to "levelling up" funding - will have to be rolled back.
As Mr Hughes put it to me about those advocating tax cuts now: "It may also require them to revisit some of their spending priorities if they want to meet those fiscal objectives, which they've set for themselves in the manifesto".
There is obviously a wider political canvas here. This leadership contest is to impress at first Conservative MPs and then the party's membership. In theory that would suggest an appeal to low tax, small state thinking. But that is not always the same thing as the fiscal conservatism of balanced budgets. And how coherent all that is, with the appeal to former Labour areas won at the last election for example, is another interesting question.
Then the bigger questions about even more significant changes, such as the effective loss of £30bn a year in petrol taxes, and funding an ageing society with a shrinking workforce, loom even larger from the pages of the OBR document.
• None Hunt wants 'smart tax cuts that grow the economy'
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62117277
|
news_business-62117277
|
|
Tory leadership: TV debates can catapult or crush reputations - BBC News
|
2022-07-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Scrutiny of the Tory leadership rivals is about to crank up and the next vote seems a long way off.
|
UK Politics
|
These daily doses in democracy are dizzying.
Because while, each time, the electorate in the leadership contest - Conservative MPs - stays the same, the ballot paper changes.
So as a Tory MP supporting a particular candidate, that support has a sell by date - the point at which the person you have backed gets knocked out.
And dozens of Conservative MPs are considering their Plan B, or C, with each passing round.
There isn't another round until Monday. And before then there are TV debates, with their capacity to catapult or crush the reputation of the participants.
They take place at 19:00 BST on Channel 4 on Friday, then at 19:00 on ITV on Sunday and at 20:00 on Sky News on Tuesday.
The frontrunners have everything to lose. The outsiders everything to gain. So who knows what might happen?
But, with the colossal caveat inserted that some zinger of a thing might happen that revolutionises everything, let's explore the state of play right now.
With two rounds now done, the top three have stayed the same each time: Rishi Sunak, Penny Mordaunt, Liz Truss.
The working assumption of the various campaigns is Mr Sunak is likely to snaffle one of the two golden tickets to the final run off decided by Conservative Party members. That is assuming the debates do not inflict a mortal political wound.
So what about the contest for the other spot?
As I wrote previously, Team Truss think the "natural ceiling" of her parliamentary support is higher than Penny Mordaunt's, despite being beaten by her twice.
Now we have some evidence there might be something in their claim.
The Attorney General for England and Wales, Suella Braverman, knocked out in the second round, has told me she will now support Liz Truss. It's thought most of her supporters will follow suit.
One who definitely will is the formidable campaigner Steve Baker. And now, writing in the Daily Telegraph, the former Brexit minister Lord Frost has signed up to Team Truss too.
As a peer, Lord Frost doesn't have a vote in the parliamentary stages of this race, but he does have a suggestion. He argues it is time to unite the right of the party around Liz Truss, and that Kemi Badenoch should give up.
Just because he's suggested this doesn't mean it'll happen. In fact Team Badenoch say it won't and she's in it to win it. One source suggested he should have waited to see the debates on telly and then he might have reached a different conclusion on who to back.
Former Brexit minister Lord Frost has signed up to Team Truss
But barring a transformational shift in support in the coming days, it seems unlikely Mrs Badenoch will make the final two and so it's reasonable to ponder where her supporters will move to if she is eliminated.
And while labels like "anti-woke" being attached by some to Kemi Badenoch and Penny Mordaunt being called "woke" by others are crude and simplistic, there is no doubt the two of them are some distance apart on issues of identity politics.
So how many supporters of Kemi Badenoch could perhaps switch to Penny Mordaunt? Maybe not a vast number.
And while there is still the question of where Team Tugendhat, another likely casualty of the early rounds next week, shift their loyalties to, you can begin to assemble an argument that points to Liz Truss being able to dislodge Penny Mordaunt from making the final two.
But, but, but: Penny Mordaunt has surprised many already and may do so yet again; her team have the effervescence and confidence that their candidate has a freshness, breadth and capacity to communicate none of her rivals have.
TV debates can be unpredictable. The scrutiny of all the candidates is about to crank up several notches; what might the Sunday newspapers be able to reveal?
And so round three on Monday seems a long, long way off.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62173665
|
news_uk-politics-62173665
|
|
The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change - BBC News
|
2022-07-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.
|
Science & Environment
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was cooked up to spread doubt and persuade the public that climate change was not a problem. The little-known meeting - between some of America's biggest industrial players and a PR genius - forged a devastatingly successful strategy that endured for years, and the consequences of which are all around us.
On an early autumn day in 1992, E Bruce Harrison, a man widely acknowledged as the father of environmental PR, stood up in a room full of business leaders and delivered a pitch like no other.
At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change.
Don Rheem and Terry Yosie, two of Harrison's team present that day, are sharing their stories for the first time.
"Everybody wanted to get the Global Climate Coalition account," says Rheem, "and there I was, smack in the middle of it."
The GCC had been conceived only three years earlier, as a forum for members to exchange information and lobby policy makers against action to limit fossil fuel emissions.
Though scientists were making rapid progress in understanding climate change, and it was growing in salience as a political issue, in its first years the Coalition saw little cause for alarm. President George HW Bush was a former oilman, and as a senior lobbyist told the BBC in 1990, his message on climate was the GCC's message.
There would be no mandatory fossil fuel reductions.
But all that changed in 1992. In June, the international community created a framework for climate action, and November's presidential election brought committed environmentalist Al Gore into the White House as vice-president. It was clear the new administration would try to regulate fossil fuels.
The Coalition recognised that it needed strategic communications help and put out a bid for a public relations contractor.
E Bruce Harrison was known as the “Dean of green PR”
Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt.
He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers. Harrison had built a firm that was considered one of the very best.
Media historian Melissa Aronczyk, who interviewed Harrison before he died in 2021, says he was a strategic linchpin for his clients, ensuring everyone was on the same page.
"He was a master at what he did," she says.
Drawing on thousands of newly discovered documents, this three-part film charts how the oil industry mounted a campaign to sow doubt about the science of climate change, the consequences of which we are living through today.
Before the pitch, Harrison had assembled a team of both seasoned PR professionals and almost total novices. Among them was Don Rheem, who had no industry credentials. He had studied ecology before becoming an environmental journalist. A chance meeting with Harrison, who must have seen the strategic value of adding Rheem's environmental and media connections to the team, led to a job offer on the GCC pitch.
"I thought, 'Wow, this is an opportunity to get a front row seat at probably one of the most pressing science policy and public policy issues that we were facing.'
"It just felt enormously important," Rheem says.
Terry Yosie - who had recently been recruited from the American Petroleum Institute, becoming a senior vice-president at the firm - remembers that Harrison began the pitch by reminding his audience that he was instrumental in fighting the auto reforms. He had done so, in part, by reframing the issue.
The same tactics would now help beat climate regulation. They would persuade people that the scientific facts weren't settled, and that alongside the environment, policy makers needed to consider how action on climate change would - in the GCC's view - negatively affect American jobs, trade and prices.
The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists.
An extract from a GCC business card for reporters, shared by former journalist Nicky Sundt
"A lot of reporters were assigned to write stories," Rheem says, "and they were struggling with the complexity of the issue. So I would write backgrounders so reporters could read them and get up to speed."
Uncertainty ran through the full gamut of the GCC's publications, a creative array of letters, glossy brochures, and monthly newsletters.
Rheem and the team were prolific - within a year, Harrison's firm claimed to have secured more than 500 specific mentions in the media.
An extract from a 1994/5 GCC booklet made by E Bruce Harrison's team, from the collection of Nicky Sundt
In August 1993, Harrison took stock of progress in another meeting with the GCC.
"The rising awareness of the scientific uncertainty has caused some in Congress to pause on advocating new initiatives," declared an updated internal strategy pitch, shared with the BBC by Terry Yosie.
"Activists sounding the alarm over 'global warming' have publicly conceded that they lost ground in the communications arena over the past year."
Now, Harrison counselled, they needed to expand the external voices making their case.
"Scientists, economists, academics and other noted experts carry greater credibility with the media and general public than industry representatives."
Harrison was "a master at what he did," says historian Melissa Aronczyk, who shared this undated advert with the BBC
While most climate scientists agreed that human-caused climate change was a real issue that would require action, a small group argued there was no cause for alarm. The plan was to pay these sceptics to give speeches or write op-eds - about $1,500 (£1,250) per article - and to arrange media tours so they could appear on local TV and radio stations.
"My role was to identify the voices that were not in the mainstream and to give those voices a stage," Rheem says. "There was a lot we didn't know at the time. And part of my role was to highlight what we didn't know."
He says the media was hungry for these perspectives.
"Journalists were actually actively looking for the contrarians. It was really feeding an appetite that was already there."
If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it
Many of these sceptics or deniers have rejected the idea that funding from the GCC and other industry groups had any impact on their views. But the scientists and environmentalists tasked with repudiating them - arguing the reality of climate change - encountered a well-organised and effective campaign they found hard to match.
"The Global Climate Coalition is seeding doubt everywhere, fogging the air… And environmentalists really don't know what's hitting them," environmental campaigner John Passacantando remembers.
"What the geniuses of the PR firms who work for these big fossil fuel companies know is that truth has nothing to do with who wins the argument. If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it."
Harrison's company paid experts to argue that mainstream climate scientists were overstating the problem
In a document dating from around 1995, shared with the BBC by Melissa Aronczyk, Harrison wrote that the "GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming."
The groundwork had been laid for the industry's biggest campaign to date - opposing international efforts to negotiate emissions reductions at Kyoto, in Japan, in December 1997. By then, a consensus had emerged among scientists that human-caused warming was now detectable. But the US public was still showing signs of doubt. As many as 44% of respondents to a Gallup poll believed scientists were divided. Public antipathy made it harder for politicians to fight for action, and America never implemented the agreement reached in Kyoto. It was a major victory for the industry coalition.
"I think E Bruce Harrison was proud of the work he did. He knew how central he had been to moving the needle on how companies intervened in the conversation about global warming," says Aronczyk.
I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime
The same year as the Kyoto negotiation, Harrison sold his firm. Rheem decided that public relations wasn't the right career, while Yosie had long since moved on to other environmental projects for the firm. Meanwhile, the GCC began to disintegrate, as some members grew uncomfortable with its hard line. But the tactics, the playbook, and the message of doubt were now embedded and would outlive their creators. Three decades on, the consequences are all around us.
"I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime," says former US Vice-President Al Gore of the big oil companies' efforts to block action.
"I think it is, in many ways, the most serious crime of the post-World War Two era, anywhere in the world. The consequences of what they've done are just almost unimaginable."
Don Rheem is now a workplace and leadership consultant
"Would I do anything differently? It's a hard question to answer," reflects Don Rheem, who says he was "way down the totem pole" of the GCC's operation. "There's some sadness that not much has happened."
He maintains that climate science was too uncertain in the 1990s to warrant "drastic actions", and that developing countries - particularly China and Russia - have ultimately been responsible for the decades of climate inaction, rather than American industry.
"I think it's really easy to create a conspiracy theory about really pernicious intent of industry to completely halt any progress," Rheem says. "Personally, I didn't see that.
"I was very young. I was very curious... Knowing what I know today, would I have done some things differently then?
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62225696
|
news_science-environment-62225696
|
|
Resignation speech: 'No-one is indispensable' - Boris Johnson's statement in full - BBC News
|
2022-07-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson says he's immensely proud of his government's achievements as he resigns outside No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Boris Johnson stepped out of No 10 to the sound of applause from some political supporters, Downing St colleagues and his wife. Here is his resignation speech in full:
"It is clearly now the will of the parliamentary Conservative Party that there should be a new leader of that party and therefore a new prime minister.
"And I've agreed with Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of our backbench MPs, that the process of choosing that new leader should begin now and the timetable will be announced next week.
"And I've today appointed a Cabinet to serve, as I will, until a new leader is in place.
"So I want to say to the millions of people who voted for us in 2019, many of them voting Conservative for the first time, thank you for that incredible mandate, the biggest Conservative majority since 1987, the biggest share of the vote since 1979.
"And the reason I have fought so hard in the last few days to continue to deliver that mandate in person was not just because I wanted to do so, but because I felt it was my job, my duty, my obligation to you to continue to do what we promised in 2019.
"And of course, I'm immensely proud of the achievements of this government, from getting Brexit done to settling our relations with the Continent for over half a century, reclaiming the power for this country to make its own laws in Parliament, getting us all through the pandemic, delivering the fastest vaccine rollout in Europe, the fastest exit from lockdown, and in the last few months, leading the West in standing up to Putin's aggression in Ukraine.
"And let me say now, to the people of Ukraine, that I know that we in the UK will continue to back your fight for freedom for as long as it takes.
"And at the same time in this country, we've been pushing forward a vast programme of investment in infrastructure and skills and technology - the biggest for a century. Because if I have one insight into human beings, it is that genius and talent and enthusiasm and imagination are evenly distributed throughout the population.
"But opportunity is not, and that's why we must keep levelling up, keep unleashing the potential of every part of the United Kingdom. And if we can do that, in this country, we will be the most prosperous in Europe.
"And in the last few days, I tried to persuade my colleagues that it would be eccentric to change governments when we're delivering so much and when we have such a vast mandate and when we're actually only a handful of points behind in the polls, even in mid-term, after quite a few months of pretty relentless sledging and when the economic scene is so difficult domestically and internationally.
"And I regret not to have been successful in those arguments and of course it's painful not to be able to see through so many ideas and projects myself.
"But as we've seen at Westminster, the herd instinct is powerful and when the herd moves, it moves.
Boris Johnson made his speech in front of the cameras...
"And my friends in politics, no-one is remotely indispensable and our brilliant and Darwinian system will produce another leader, equally committed to taking this country forward through tough times.
"Not just helping families to get through it, but changing and improving the way we do things, cutting burdens on businesses and families and yes, cutting taxes, because that is the way to generate the growth and the income we need to pay for great public services.
"And to that new leader, I say whoever he or she may be, I say I will give you as much support as I can. And to you, the British public.
"I know that there will be many people who are relieved and perhaps quite a few who will also be disappointed. And I want you to know how sad I am to be giving up the best job in the world.
...and his wife, baby daughter and other supporters in the crowd
"I want to thank Carrie and our children, and all the members of my family who have had to put up with so much for so long.
"I want to thank the peerless British civil service for all the help and support that you have given our police, our emergency services and, of course, our fantastic NHS, who at (a) critical moment, helped to extend my own period in office, as well as our armed services and our agencies that are so admired around the world.
"And our indefatigable Conservative Party members and supporters whose selfless campaigning makes our democracy possible. I want to thank the wonderful staff here at Chequers - here at Number 10, and of course at Chequers. And our fantastic prop force detectives, the one group by the way, who never leak.
"Above all, I want to thank you, the British public, for the immense privilege that you have given me and I want you to know that from now on until the new prime minister is in place, your interests will be served and the government of the country will be carried on.
"Being prime minister is an education in itself. I have travelled to every part of the United Kingdom and, in addition to the beauty of our natural world, I have found so many people possessed of such boundless British originality and so willing to tackle old problems in new ways that I know that even if things can sometimes seem dark now, our future together is golden.
"Thank you all very much. Thank you."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62081380
|
news_uk-politics-62081380
|
|
Sir Keir Starmer cleared by police over Durham lockdown beers - BBC News
|
2022-07-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Labour leader says he would have quit if he had been fined as a "matter of principle".
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and deputy Angela Rayner have been cleared by Durham police of breaking lockdown rules.
It follows an inquiry into an event at a Labour MP's office in April 2021.
In a statement, the police said there was "no case to answer" citing an exemption to lockdown rules for "reasonably necessary work".
Sir Keir said he would have quit his role if he had been fined as "matter of principle", adding "integrity matters".
"It shouldn't be controversial to say that those who make the law can't break the law," he told a press conference.
He said that in the coming days he would set out how a Labour government would "reboot our economy, re-energise our communities, revitalise our public services, and give Britain the fresh start it needs".
He added that he wouldn't "get everything right" and would make mistakes but promised "What you will always get from me is someone who believes honour and integrity matters."
In a statement, Ms Rayner, who had also promised to quit if fined, said: "The contrast with the behaviour of this disgraced prime minister couldn't be clearer."
At the Durham gathering on 30 April, which was in the run-up to the Hartlepool by-election, people drank beer and ate curry in the constituency office of City of Durham MP Mary Foy.
Social distancing rules - including a ban on indoor mixing between households - were in place at the time.
However, Labour had argued the food was consumed between work events, meaning the gathering was within the rules.
This decision matters because it tells you who will lead the Labour Party into the next general election.
Until today, that was far from certain - a colossal pause button pressed on Sir Keir's future; his political fate in the hands of detectives in County Durham.
He'd decided in May that a fine would equal resignation for him; consistent with his demand that it should have meant the same for Boris Johnson.
He can and will now return to his argument that not all politicians are the same; that integrity matters.
He'll argue that contrast is now more stark than ever in comparison with Mr Johnson.
But while he is mighty relieved today, this is also the week that his biggest political challenge, becoming prime minister, arguably became a bit harder.
For having defined himself in opposition to Boris Johnson, he now faces the moving target of a range of possible opponents.
They'll have - for a while at least - the shine of novelty, albeit without their own mandate.
But they may not present him with quite the same scope for critique as he's had in recent months with the prime minister.
Durham Constabulary launched an investigation into the event in May after receiving "significant new information".
Following the investigation, the police have now said they would not be issuing any fines and no further action will be taken.
"There is no case to answer for a contravention of the regulations, due to the application of an exception, namely reasonably necessary work," the police said.
They have also said they would not name those present at the gathering.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Footage shows Sir Keir Starmer drinking beer with colleagues in Durham on 30 April 2021
Ms Foy said she was "delighted" by the outcome of the inquiry.
But added that it was "unfortunate that the desire of some Conservative politicians has led to so much of Durham police's time being focused on a matter that was already investigated, especially when their resources are already under significant pressure".
Earlier in the year Boris Johnson, his wife Carrie and his then-Chancellor Rishi Sunak were fined for attending a birthday party during lockdown in June 2020.
Following their fines, North West Durham Conservative MP Richard Holden wrote to Durham's chief constable asking her to look again at the claims against Sir Keir, taking into account the Met Police's decision.
Responding to the police's decision, Conservative MP Michael Fabricant said: "I don't think Keir Starmer has done himself any favours today - I'm sorry if this is unjust, but it will reinforce the view of many that it was an establishment stitch-up."
He said he had heard from members of the public who felt the Labour leader had "in effect blackmailed Durham police by saying he would quit if he was fined".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62095955
|
news_uk-politics-62095955
|
|
Love Island: Women's Aid talks to ITV over 'controlling behaviour' - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Women's Aid is in talks with ITV bosses about the way male islanders are treating women on the show.
|
Newsbeat
|
The guys look shocked but they must've known Luca was going to get his fair share of pies
A domestic abuse charity has spoken to ITV about "misogynistic and controlling behaviour" on Love Island.
Women's Aid said it was forced to act after being tagged in so many social posts about the show by viewers.
It has also criticised producers for missing out "an understanding of controlling behaviour in relationships" in its inclusion training for contestants.
ITV said it was "always looking at how we expand and evolve on this training".
This year's Love Island has seen a big backlash from viewers over the way the male islanders are treating the women.
It is rare to reach the end of each night's show without seeing one of the boys as a top trend, and not for the right reasons.
Women's Aid communications chief Teresa Parker said the charity was "being tagged into a stream of Twitter posts, with viewers highlighting the misogyny and controlling behaviour being shown on screen".
Over the last few days Luca has accused his partner Gemma of "flirting" with Casa Amor "bombshell" Billy, despite her insisting she wasn't interested in him in Sunday's movie night episode.
Luca's family released a statement on his Instagram in response to criticism, saying "when he watches it back, he will be embarrassed and deeply apologetic".
The girls also used the pie challenge to show Dami what they thought of his behaviour
His pal Dami has also been slammed for shouting at Summer and calling her "fake" after he shared a three-way kiss with her and another "bombshell" in Casa Amor.
Even early favourite Davide - who kissed two girls during Casa Amor - has come under fire for constantly calling Ekin-Su a "liar" during their regular arguments.
Women's Aid said all of the above had led it to seek out ITV bosses to talk about the concerns it had about the show.
The charity said producers had shared information on their inclusion training - coaching given to all islanders around appropriate behaviours and sensitive topics including disability and race.
"But what appears to be missing is specific information on abusive relationships and an understanding of controlling behaviour in relationships," Teresa Parker said.
"It is vital that producers know when to intervene and challenge unacceptable behaviour."
They might've been all smiles here but Luca was criticised for his "Tasha who?" comments on movie night
Teresa said Women's Aid had offered to help and were "in conversation with ITV and the Love Island producers about what we can do moving forward to help address this".
"ITV can play an important role here, by dealing with something that is clearly an ongoing issue for the show, and at Women's Aid we want to help where we can," she said.
Another domestic abuse charity, Refuge, has also tweeted that "the misogyny and casual sexism witnessed on this series... is extremely concerning".
"The double standards, gaslighting and coercive control being displayed by the men in the villa is hugely problematic," it added.
Former contestant Jacques was criticised for the way he treated his partner Paige before he quit the villa.
He has since come out and said he was left broken by the show but claimed producers pressed him to carry on.
In response to Women's Aid's comments, an ITV spokesman said: "We cannot stress highly enough how seriously we treat the emotional well-being of all of our islanders.
"Welfare is always our greatest concern, and we have dedicated welfare producers and psychological support on hand at all times, who monitor and regularly speak to all of the islanders in private and off-camera.
"Ahead of this series, contributors on the show were offered video training and guidance covering inclusive language around disability, sexuality, race and ethnicity, behaviours and microaggressions.
"We are always looking at how we expand and evolve on this training to ensure that all of our islanders feel they are part of a safe and inclusive environment."
Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 weekdays - or listen back here.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-62219716
|
news_newsbeat-62219716
|
|
UK pay falls at fastest rate on record as inflation hits - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Basic pay falls at fastest rate since records began in 2001 when rising prices are taken into account.
|
Business
|
Regular pay is falling at the fastest rate since 2001 when taking into account rising prices, official figures show.
Between March and May, pay excluding bonuses was down 2.8% from a year earlier when adjusted for inflation - the fastest drop since records began.
Household budgets are being hit by soaring food, fuel and energy costs, with inflation at a 40-year high.
Pay growth was much higher for the private sector than the public sector.
For March to May, average total pay for the private sector was 7.2% higher than the same period last year, before taking account of inflation, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). For the public sector the figure was 1.5%.
Pay including bonuses was down 0.9% when adjusted for inflation.
It comes as the government is due to unveil this year's pay deal for 2.5 million public sector workers, including teachers, nurses, doctors, police officers and members of the armed forces.
Unions are calling for wages to reflect the cost of living - but ministers have signalled the pay deal will not match price rises, warning this would push inflation even higher.
Inflation - the rate at which prices rise - hit 9.1% in May, the highest level in 40 years, and is expected to climb further by the autumn.
James Reed, chairman of Reed, one of the UK's largest recruitment businesses, said the UK was seeing "a two-speed workforce", with big pay offers being made to people with certain skills.
"So you might be seeing 25% plus pay offer increases to get people to move jobs. But then we're seeing other parts of the economy where pay hasn't moved much at all and that is concerning because more and more people will end up living in in-work poverty," he told the BBC's Today programme.
Virgin Money is the latest company to offer a one-off payment to help employees cope with the rising cost of living, with all staff on a salary of £50,000 or less to get a £1,000 lump sum in August.
Max Poynton says his doughnut firm is finding it difficult to recruit new staff
With job vacancies at near record highs, many sectors are struggling to recruit.
Max Poynton, operations director at Project D, a doughnut firm in Derby, said it was particularly hard to find experienced people.
"I think a lot of people after the pandemic have gone and retrained, upskilled themselves and the same pool of people that was there before maybe isn't there anymore."
He knows staff are struggling, with some ride-sharing on their way into work to save money. Some have asked directly for a pay rise but with the business facing increased costs on everything from electricity to diesel to flour and icing, he says it is simply not an option.
"I'd love to be able to say yes but at the moment it's tough to offer any sort of pay rises, especially with the uncertainty of not knowing how much our costs are going to increase over the next six months."
Dan Bond is feeling the impact of rising prices
Dan Bond, who works in the doughnut factory, said his last pay rise was in April when the minimum wage went up. Since then Dan, who drives to work, has seen a huge rise in the cost of filling up his tank.
However, he is unsure whether he would ask his employer for a pay rise.
"I know they're also experiencing hard times," he said. "So do I put that pressure on as well?"
Business groups, including the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) and Make UK, which represents manufacturers, said companies were struggling with higher wage demands from staff and that salary increases were beginning to hold back growth and investment.
Jane Gratton, from the BCC, told the Commons Business Committee small businesses were losing candidates to other employers offering higher pay and were worried about how they could compete with bigger firms.
But Frances O'Grady, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, told the committee workers were facing a "pay crisis" and the argument that the country was in a "pay inflation spiral" was "nonsense".
The jobs market is still hot, with unemployment down and vacancies up near records. However, the ONS says it doesn't see evidence of the dreaded "wage-price" spiral that would entrench the current high rates of inflation.
Indeed the flip side of that is the biggest real squeeze on pay since these records were first collected two decades ago, and probably for significantly before that too.
Pay settlements are not "inflationary" as they are not exceeding inflation. Though there is some evidence in certain sectors and local settings, with worker shortages, of unionised workplaces securing double digit pay rises.
Other workplaces in construction and manufacturing see employers paying retention bonuses and cost of living lump sums. On average, while not inflationary, these settlements are high in cash terms.
It is notable too that from March to May, average total pay including bonuses was up 7.2% in the private sector compared to the previous year, but up just 1.5% in the public sector.
Little wonder that those in the public sector say that some of the visible chaos seen in social care and the health system reflects low-paid public sector workers jumping ship to better paid jobs at the likes of supermarkets and Amazon.
This reduction in the social care workforce is crippling the sector enough to cause queues of ambulances unable to offload patients into hospitals unable to discharge their patients.
Much of this boils down to a singular factor, not even discussed in the current contest to run the country - significant shortages of labour.
Job vacancies continued to increase between April and June - up 6,900 compared to the previous quarter - although the rate is slowing.
The accommodation and food service sectors saw the biggest rise but this was offset by falls in other industries, including wholesale and retail trade and motor vehicle repairs.
ONS head of labour market and household statistics, David Freeman, said demand for labour was "clearly still very high", with unemployment falling again and another record low for redundancies.
For March to May, the unemployment rate was estimated at 3.8%, a fall of 0.1 percentage points compared to the previous three-month period.
Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi said the figures "underline how strong our jobs market continues to be".
But he added: "I am acutely aware that rising prices are affecting how far people's hard-earned income goes, so we are providing help for households through cash grants and tax cuts."
However, Labour's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Pat McFadden, said the Conservatives had "failed to grow the economy, which has left people more exposed to inflation and the cost-of-living crisis".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62218706
|
news_business-62218706
|
|
Rishi Sunak tops Tory leadership poll, as Tom Tugendhat out of race - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Penny Mordaunt holds on to second spot in the leadership contest, with Liz Truss still in third place.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Sir Graham Brady reads out the result of third round of voting by Tory MPs in the leadership contest
Former Chancellor Rishi Sunak has topped the third MPs' vote for the next Tory leader and prime minister, with backbencher Tom Tugendhat eliminated.
Trade Minister Penny Mordaunt took second place, while Foreign Secretary Liz Truss was third and ex-Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch was fourth.
The four remaining candidates go to another round of voting on Tuesday.
The field will be cut to two on Wednesday, with Conservative Party members then having the final say.
The placings were the same as in the second round of voting last Thursday, but Mr Sunak picked up 14 more votes, Ms Badenoch nine and Ms Truss seven.
Ms Mordaunt's support dropped by one vote, as did Mr Tugendhat's.
In a statement, Mr Tugendhat said: "I want to thank my team, colleagues and, most of all, the British people for their support.
"I have been overwhelmed by the response we have received across the country. People are ready for a clean start and our party must deliver on it and put trust back into politics."
A source within Ms Truss's campaign told the BBC: "We've narrowed the gap to Penny pretty considerably. Story is Penny going backwards. All to play for!"
But Ms Mordaunt said: "My vote is steady and I'm grateful to my colleagues for all their support and thrilled to be in second place once more."
A prominent Sunak supporter said: "That's a cracking result - Rishi gaining most [votes]."
And a Badenoch campaign source said: "Kemi is pleased to have taken it to the next vote. She has momentum over both Mordaunt and Truss. It's all to play for and Kemi is in it to win."
The Tory leadership contest has become increasingly bitter and personal in tone, as those left in it fight for the final two places.
Mr Tugendhat earlier rejected calls to stand aside and throw his support behind another candidate, as did Ms Badenoch.
But most of the rancour has been between Mr Sunak, Ms Mordaunt and Ms Truss, who clashed in an ITV-hosted debate on Sunday over their economic policies.
A Sky News debate scheduled for Tuesday was cancelled after Mr Sunak and Ms Truss declined to take part, and amid concern among senior Tories that angry arguments in public could damage the party.
The new Tory leader and prime minister is due to be announced on 5 September.
In seven weeks' time, we will have a new prime minister.
For centuries in this country, with a few exceptions, we have collectively been in the habit of getting white men to run the place.
We now know for certain that that isn't going to happen this time around.
We are now down to the final quartet: former Chancellor Rishi Sunak, Trade Minister Penny Mordaunt, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and former Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch.
Separately, the government won a vote of confidence in itself in the House of Commons.
It could have led to a general election, had ministers been defeated.
But this would have required dozens of Conservative MPs to side with Labour and other opposition parties.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Boris Johnson says he has "no idea" why the Labour leader “insisted” in holding a confidence motion in the government
Opening the debate, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he was still in charge of "one of the most dynamic governments of modern times".
He told MPs: "He [Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer] wants [a confidence vote] and since they want one, it's his constitutional prerogative, we will comply and we will win."
He also told the Commons: "Some people will say as I leave office that this is the end of Brexit, and the Leader of the Opposition and the deep state will prevail in its plot to haul us back into alignment with the EU as a prelude to our eventual return, and we on this side of the House will prove them wrong, won't we?" Tory MPs cheered in response.
Sir Keir responded to the PM's speech, saying: "Unlike his predecessors, this prime minister has not been forced out over policy disagreements.
"And despite the delusions he has fostered in his bunker, he has not been felled by the stampede of an eccentric herd. Instead, he has been forced out in disgrace."
The government won by 349 votes to 238, a majority of 111.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62212846
|
news_uk-politics-62212846
|
|
Cost of living: Will this mean more home grown fruit and veg? - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Rising prices for fruit and vegetables could mean more farm jobs and more people growing their own.
|
Wales
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Mike Harvey grows enough veg on his allotment to feed his family all year round
The rising cost of food is strengthening arguments for Wales to grow more of its own vegetables.
Higher energy prices and the war in Ukraine have caused the price of frozen vegetables to skyrocket - a trend one economist said would continue.
Wales uses only a fraction of its land to grow vegetables and the amount has halved since 1998.
But higher prices could make vegetables more viable for farmers and force some people to grow their own.
"I love growing food for me and for other people," said farmer Katherine Langton.
"I never realised as a kid that you could do farming as a job. As soon as I realised that this was kind of a viable option for someone, I thought 'hang on, this is what I should do'."
Along with her partner David Langton, the 27-year-old started a business in 2020, renting a two-acre field in Crickhowell, Powys, and growing fruit, vegetables and flowers.
They supply weekly boxes of vegetables and fruit to 60 families, sell in the town's market and donate any unsold veg to a nearby food bank.
Katherine and David Langton grow vegetable for about 60 families
Katherine and David did not grow up in farming families, so "watched a lot of YouTube videos" to get to grips.
They live near their crops in a caravan and have plans to expand in the future. There is enough work for them to employ extra workers, for about 40 hours a week.
Their story runs counter to the trend in Wales in recent decades.
The rising cost of living could see more people growing their own vegetables, like these potatoes at an allotment in Blaenau Gwent
Official figures indicated since 1998 the amount of agricultural land used to grow vegetables and salad halved, from 587 hectares to 298 hectares last year.
The number of regular and casual farmer workers also fell, from 16,610 to 12,448.
Dr Huw Dixon, of Cardiff University, said food prices would continue to go up because of the energy that goes into production, from fuel in a farmer's tractor to the electricity in processing plants.
The invasion of Ukraine, a major food exporter, is pushing prices even higher, he added.
"Also there is climate change... droughts in France, which is one of the biggest grain producers, and floods in India which exports a lot of wheat," he said.
"Harvests across the world are being affected."
Prof Dixon said farmers needed help to produce more fruit and vegetables and everyone should be trying to grow their own food.
Katherine Langton says she never considered growing vegetables as a job when she was younger
The allotment in Brynmawr, Blaenau Gwent, was created during World War One to help families feed themselves.
A century later it is again full of a huge variety of vegetables and feeding families trying to make ends meet.
Mike Harvey says growing your own vegetables is not hard
Mike Harvey one of the allotment owners, said: "It is not difficult, you take a pack of carrot seed, 200 in the pack. I had two packets, that's 400 carrots, potentially."
Mike and his allotment neighbour Dai Lewis grow potatoes, onions, beans, carrots, and tomatoes and produce enough to see them through most of the year with enough leftover to give plenty away.
"Fresh stuff tastes better than what you get in the supermarkets because what you grow in a container out the back garden has not been sprayed," he added.
Dai Lewis digging up fresh spuds at his allotment in Brynmawr
You do not even need a garden, Mr Harvey said, explaining how you can grow vegetables on a patio or in a yard using an old dustbin or even, like him, an old bathtub.
Growing a row of stick beans and spuds in the garden was a central part of rural and valleys life a generation ago.
But some large farmers said they would struggle to make money growing vegetables.
"We would have to do 20 acres to make it worthwhile," said Tom Rees, 33, who farms with his father, uncle, brother and cousin at Pendoylan, Vale of Glamorgan.
They raise cows and sheep on a 950-acre farm, large by Welsh standards, growing barley and maize to feed their livestock.
Farmer Tom Rees says right now he is better off raising livestock
"We would need a huge level of investment to grow the vegetable crops and store them in temperature-controlled storage," Mr Rees said.
"We'd be better off doing what we are doing."
He explained they would have to hire extra workers for a twenty-acre vegetable operation.
"Getting hold of labour is hard enough in the UK since Brexit," Mr Rees said.
"I'm better putting my knowledge into growing beef."
The Welsh government recently published the support it proposes to give farmers in the future.
Growing vegetables and fruit will get some support, but it is too early to know how many farmers will take up the challenge or whether the demands of the wider food industry make that too much of a problem for them.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62206677
|
news_uk-wales-62206677
|
|
Anti-Semitism used as factional weapon within Labour, says report - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
An internal inquiry finds the party's left and right both used anti-Semitism as a "factional weapon".
|
UK Politics
|
Labour's left and right wings both treated the issue of anti-Semitism as a "factional weapon" when Jeremy Corbyn was leader, a report says.
Martin Forde QC's inquiry finds general "toxicity" existed between Mr Corbyn's office and staff at party HQ.
And he says the opposing groups used the issue of anti-Semitism as a weapon during their arguments, rather than confront the issue.
Complaints procedures have improved since but more work is needed, he adds.
Mr Forde's inquiry began in April 2020 after an 860-page dossier - dated March 2020 - was leaked.
It contained private WhatsApp messages and claimed some Labour workers had not wanted Mr Corbyn, on the party's left, to win the 2017 general election and had hindered efforts to tackle anti-Semitism.
The dossier found "no evidence" of anti-Semitism being handled differently from other complaints and blamed "factional opposition" towards Mr Corbyn.
But Mr Forde's report says factionalism was "endemic" within Labour and the issue of anti-Semitism was weaponised by both sides, not just the party's right.
"The evidence clearly demonstrated that a vociferous faction in the party sees any issues regarding anti-Semitism as exaggerated by the right to embarrass the left," it says.
"It was of course also true that some opponents of Jeremy Corbyn saw the issue of anti-Semitism as a means of attacking him.
"Thus, rather than confront the paramount need to deal with the profoundly serious issue of anti-Semitism in the party, both factions treated it as a factional weapon."
The report also says Labour's disciplinary process was "not fit for purpose" and "potentially prone to factional interference".
However, it adds that "many aspects of the party's recent reforms of disciplinary procedures" are a positive, and changes have been "generally steps in the right direction", although further work is needed.
The report also criticises a "culture of intellectual smugness which exists at the extremes of the political spectrum" of Labour opinion.
Responding to the findings, a Labour spokesperson said: "The Forde report details a party that was out of control.
"Keir Starmer is now in control and has made real progress in ridding the party of the destructive factionalism and unacceptable culture that did so much damage previously and contributed to our [general election] defeat in 2019."
Jeremy Corbyn said the Forde report raised questions about Labour's future direction
But, in a statement, Mr Corbyn said that many in Labour had found it "hard to come to terms" with his "overwhelming" election as leader in 2015.
"In any party there are groups and factions, but the resistance we were faced with went far beyond that," he added.
Mr Corbyn also said the Forde report showed Labour needed to "decide what it is for".
"Are we a democratic socialist party, run by members and affiliated unions, that aims for a fundamental transfer of wealth and power from the few to the many?" he asked. "Or are we something else?"
Hilary Schan, co-chair of the Momentum Group, which supports Mr Corbyn, said the report showed that "right-wing Labour staff members worked to undermine the party's general election chances and its own complaints system, including on anti-Semitism".
"Disgracefully, while tens of thousands of Labour members were pounding the streets to kick the Tories out in favour of a socialist Labour government, these right-wing factional operators were wreaking havoc on the party from within," she added.
In October 2020, a report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission's found Labour to have been responsible for "unlawful" acts of harassment and discrimination during Mr Corbyn's four-and a-half years as party leader.
Its investigation identified serious failings in leadership and an inadequate process of handling anti-Semitism complaints.
Mr Corbyn said the scale of anti-Semitism within Labour had been "dramatically overstated" by his opponents and that he had always been "determined to eliminate all forms of racism".
He was suspended from the party and was readmitted a month later.
But Mr Corbyn was not readmitted to Labour's parliamentary party and continues to sit in the House of Commons as an independent MP.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62226042
|
news_uk-politics-62226042
|
|
Tobias Ellwood suspended as Tory MP after missing confidence vote - BBC News
|
2022-07-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Tobias Ellwood says he is sorry to lose the party whip, but argues he was away on a foreign trip.
|
UK Politics
|
Tobias Ellwood has been stripped of the party whip, meaning he will no longer sit as a Tory MP
A senior Tory MP has been suspended from the parliamentary party after he missed a vote of confidence in Boris Johnson's government.
Tobias Ellwood has had the whip removed and will not be able to vote in the Conservative leadership election.
Mr Ellwood said he was "sorry" to lose the whip but argued he was unable to return from a meeting in Moldova.
The government won the vote and the prime minister is due to continue in his role until a successor is elected.
Mr Ellwood, a former minister who chairs the Commons Defence Committee, said he had a meeting with the president of Moldova on Monday and had been "unable to secure return travel due to unprecedented disruption both here and in the UK".
"I am very sorry to lose the whip but will now continue my meetings in Ukraine promoting the prime minister's efforts here and specifically seeking to secure the reopening of Odessa port - so vital grain exports can recommence," Mr Ellwood said in a statement.
Russia invaded Ukraine in February and its forces have blockaded some Black Sea ports, including the key grain-exporting city of Odesa.
Mr Ellwood tweeted a picture of himself sitting in a meeting with the governor of Odesa Oblast, Ukrainian colonel Maksym Marchenko.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Tobias Ellwood MP This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
Meanwhile, the UK government survived a vote of confidence in itself on Monday, winning by 349 votes to 238, a majority of 111.
Other Tory MPs did not vote on Monday's confidence motion, but only Mr Ellwood has had the party whip removed.
The Tory Whips Office said other MPs who could not make the vote were "paired appropriately".
Pairing is an arrangement between two MPs of opposing parties to not vote on a particular issue. This enables an MP to be absent without affecting the result of the vote as they effectively cancel each other out.
Mr Ellwood's suspension prevented him for voting in the fourth leadership ballot of Tory MPs, who whittled down the candidates to three on Tuesday.
He is supporting trade minister Penny Mordaunt, who is currently in second place ahead of Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, who is being backed by allies of Mr Johnson.
Ms Mordaunt's team have dismissed the whips' argument, with one backer telling BBC Newsnight's Nick Watt "why didn't they do that for Tobias? He was visiting Moldova".
Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, an ally of Mr Johnson, said suggestions that the prime minister was trying to remove a vote for Ms Mordaunt by stripping the whip from Mr Ellwood were "wholly untrue".
"Every single MP of every party is under no illusion regarding the price to be paid in not voting during a Gov confidence motion," Ms Dorries wrote in a tweet. "It's a very clearly defined and historic red line.
"Tobias could have voted like everyone else."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Boris Johnson says he has "no idea" why the Labour leader “insisted” in holding a confidence motion in the government
In an unusual move, the government called the vote after it rejected a Labour motion that made reference to the prime minister.
The vote could have triggered a general election had the government lost, although that would have required dozens of Conservative MPs to side with Labour and other opposition parties.
It means Mr Johnson will carry on as prime minister until a new Tory leader is elected and replaces him in September this year.
Ahead of the vote, Mr Johnson defended his government and his track record, speaking at length about about Brexit, support for Ukraine and his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62221445
|
news_uk-politics-62221445
|
|
Rapper Nipsey Hussle's killer convicted of murder - BBC News
|
2022-07-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hussle, born Ermias Asghedom, was shot outside his LA clothing store in 2019 after a brief argument.
|
US & Canada
|
Hussle was praised for his humanitarian charity work after his death
The man who shot and killed Los Angeles rapper Nipsey Hussle minutes after a brief argument in 2019 has been found guilty of murdering the rising artist.
Eric Holder, 32, was convicted by a jury in California on Wednesday after six hours of deliberations.
Hussle, born Ermias Asghedom, was shot outside his LA clothing store. The 33-year-old had reportedly known the killer for several years.
Following his death, tributes were paid from across the music industry.
Holder was also found guilty of two counts of attempted manslaughter as two other men were shot in the incident. He could get life in prison when he is sentenced in September.
He belonged to the same street gang as Hussle and had previously admitted to killing him. Witnesses say he left the scene after a ten minute argument, in which Hussle warned him of rumours that he was co-operating with police, and returned with two handguns.
His defence team argued that he attacked him in the "heat of passion" but the jury agreed that the attack was premeditated.
Eric Holder could get life in prison when he is sentenced in September
At the 2019 BET Awards, Hussle was posthumously given the Best Male Hip Hop Artist and Humanitarian Awards.
Over 20,000 people attended a celebration of his life, with former US President Barack Obama praising him for leaving "a legacy worth of celebration".
Hussle, a former gang member in Los Angeles, had become a community organiser and used the money he made from music to fund improvements to his neighbourhood.
After his death he was praised as a "West Coast hero" by members of the city council, who unanimously voted to re-name an intersection "Nipsey Hussle Square" in his south LA neighbourhood.
Bryannita Nicholson, a woman who was in a casual relationship with Holder and unwittingly drove him to and from the murder scene, testified in court during the trial that she saw Holder load a gun before the shooting.
She said that they spotted the rapper on the street outside his Marathon clothing store while they were picking up a food order. Holder rushed over and she said she heard him loudly tell the rapper: "Did you say I snitched?".
Ms Nicholson added that she posed for a photo with Hussle while Holder went to collect the food. The witness, who came forward to police leading to Holder's arrest, said that she saw Holder eat some food before he left her car to kill Hussle.
Last week, Holder was attacked in jail by "multiple individuals" his public defender told CBS News, the BBC's partner in the US. He was reportedly cut with a razor, and taken to hospital where he had a wound to his head closed with staples.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62072376
|
news_world-us-canada-62072376
|
|
Roe v Wade: Mississippi judge refuses to block abortion ban - BBC News
|
2022-07-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
It is part of an escalation in activity in US courts as states seek to impose abortion restrictions.
|
US & Canada
|
America's top court overturned the constitutional right to abortion last month, paving the way for states to enact their own bans
A judge in Mississippi has rejected a request from the state's only abortion clinic to temporarily block a ban on almost all abortions.
It means that - providing there are no further legal developments - the ban will take effect on Thursday with the clinic closing the day before.
The ban can come into force because the Supreme Court overturned the landmark Roe v Wade ruling last month.
The 1973 decision guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion.
The decision to overturn it was met with scenes of protest and joy around the country, as both pro-choice and anti-abortion supporters reacted to a development that will transform abortion rights in America for years to come.
Millions of women will lose access to abortion as conservative states such as Mississippi seek to pass their own laws to ban the procedure.
The Mississippi "trigger law" was passed in 2007 and was contingent on the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade. Some 13 states had laws of this kind in place and have already severely curtailed or blocked abortion access in the weeks since.
Lawyers for the Mississippi clinic - the Jackson Women's Health Organization - had argued that the right to privacy under the state's constitution included a right to abortion.
But Judge Debbra Halford rejected the argument at a hearing on Tuesday. "The plain wording of the Mississippi Constitution does not mention abortion," she wrote in her decision.
Rob McDuff, an attorney for the clinic, told the Associated Press that they were considering whether to appeal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Inside a US abortion clinic in its final days
The lawsuit in the southern state was part of an escalation in activity in courts nationwide following the Supreme Court's decision. States are seeking to pass their own abortion laws, but several of these have been tied up in legal challenges.
In Florida, a ban on abortions past 15 weeks came into effect on Tuesday after a court order blocking its enforcement was put on hold.
And in Louisiana, the state's attorney general asked the state's top court to allow a ban on almost all abortions to be enforced after it was held up in the lower courts.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62059114
|
news_world-us-canada-62059114
|
|
The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change - BBC News
|
2022-07-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was hatched to persuade people that climate change was not a problem.
|
Science & Environment
|
Thirty years ago, a bold plan was cooked up to spread doubt and persuade the public that climate change was not a problem. The little-known meeting - between some of America's biggest industrial players and a PR genius - forged a devastatingly successful strategy that endured for years, and the consequences of which are all around us.
On an early autumn day in 1992, E Bruce Harrison, a man widely acknowledged as the father of environmental PR, stood up in a room full of business leaders and delivered a pitch like no other.
At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change.
Don Rheem and Terry Yosie, two of Harrison's team present that day, are sharing their stories for the first time.
"Everybody wanted to get the Global Climate Coalition account," says Rheem, "and there I was, smack in the middle of it."
The GCC had been conceived only three years earlier, as a forum for members to exchange information and lobby policy makers against action to limit fossil fuel emissions.
Though scientists were making rapid progress in understanding climate change, and it was growing in salience as a political issue, in its first years the Coalition saw little cause for alarm. President George HW Bush was a former oilman, and as a senior lobbyist told the BBC in 1990, his message on climate was the GCC's message.
There would be no mandatory fossil fuel reductions.
But all that changed in 1992. In June, the international community created a framework for climate action, and November's presidential election brought committed environmentalist Al Gore into the White House as vice-president. It was clear the new administration would try to regulate fossil fuels.
The Coalition recognised that it needed strategic communications help and put out a bid for a public relations contractor.
E Bruce Harrison was known as the “Dean of green PR”
Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt.
He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers. Harrison had built a firm that was considered one of the very best.
Media historian Melissa Aronczyk, who interviewed Harrison before he died in 2021, says he was a strategic linchpin for his clients, ensuring everyone was on the same page.
"He was a master at what he did," she says.
Drawing on thousands of newly discovered documents, this three-part film charts how the oil industry mounted a campaign to sow doubt about the science of climate change, the consequences of which we are living through today.
Before the pitch, Harrison had assembled a team of both seasoned PR professionals and almost total novices. Among them was Don Rheem, who had no industry credentials. He had studied ecology before becoming an environmental journalist. A chance meeting with Harrison, who must have seen the strategic value of adding Rheem's environmental and media connections to the team, led to a job offer on the GCC pitch.
"I thought, 'Wow, this is an opportunity to get a front row seat at probably one of the most pressing science policy and public policy issues that we were facing.'
"It just felt enormously important," Rheem says.
Terry Yosie - who had recently been recruited from the American Petroleum Institute, becoming a senior vice-president at the firm - remembers that Harrison began the pitch by reminding his audience that he was instrumental in fighting the auto reforms. He had done so, in part, by reframing the issue.
The same tactics would now help beat climate regulation. They would persuade people that the scientific facts weren't settled, and that alongside the environment, policy makers needed to consider how action on climate change would - in the GCC's view - negatively affect American jobs, trade and prices.
The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists.
An extract from a GCC business card for reporters, shared by former journalist Nicky Sundt
"A lot of reporters were assigned to write stories," Rheem says, "and they were struggling with the complexity of the issue. So I would write backgrounders so reporters could read them and get up to speed."
Uncertainty ran through the full gamut of the GCC's publications, a creative array of letters, glossy brochures, and monthly newsletters.
Rheem and the team were prolific - within a year, Harrison's firm claimed to have secured more than 500 specific mentions in the media.
An extract from a 1994/5 GCC booklet made by E Bruce Harrison's team, from the collection of Nicky Sundt
In August 1993, Harrison took stock of progress in another meeting with the GCC.
"The rising awareness of the scientific uncertainty has caused some in Congress to pause on advocating new initiatives," declared an updated internal strategy pitch, shared with the BBC by Terry Yosie.
"Activists sounding the alarm over 'global warming' have publicly conceded that they lost ground in the communications arena over the past year."
Now, Harrison counselled, they needed to expand the external voices making their case.
"Scientists, economists, academics and other noted experts carry greater credibility with the media and general public than industry representatives."
Harrison was "a master at what he did," says historian Melissa Aronczyk, who shared this undated advert with the BBC
While most climate scientists agreed that human-caused climate change was a real issue that would require action, a small group argued there was no cause for alarm. The plan was to pay these sceptics to give speeches or write op-eds - about $1,500 (£1,250) per article - and to arrange media tours so they could appear on local TV and radio stations.
"My role was to identify the voices that were not in the mainstream and to give those voices a stage," Rheem says. "There was a lot we didn't know at the time. And part of my role was to highlight what we didn't know."
He says the media was hungry for these perspectives.
"Journalists were actually actively looking for the contrarians. It was really feeding an appetite that was already there."
If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it
Many of these sceptics or deniers have rejected the idea that funding from the GCC and other industry groups had any impact on their views. But the scientists and environmentalists tasked with repudiating them - arguing the reality of climate change - encountered a well-organised and effective campaign they found hard to match.
"The Global Climate Coalition is seeding doubt everywhere, fogging the air… And environmentalists really don't know what's hitting them," environmental campaigner John Passacantando remembers.
"What the geniuses of the PR firms who work for these big fossil fuel companies know is that truth has nothing to do with who wins the argument. If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it."
Harrison's company paid experts to argue that mainstream climate scientists were overstating the problem
In a document dating from around 1995, shared with the BBC by Melissa Aronczyk, Harrison wrote that the "GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming."
The groundwork had been laid for the industry's biggest campaign to date - opposing international efforts to negotiate emissions reductions at Kyoto, in Japan, in December 1997. By then, a consensus had emerged among scientists that human-caused warming was now detectable. But the US public was still showing signs of doubt. As many as 44% of respondents to a Gallup poll believed scientists were divided. Public antipathy made it harder for politicians to fight for action, and America never implemented the agreement reached in Kyoto. It was a major victory for the industry coalition.
"I think E Bruce Harrison was proud of the work he did. He knew how central he had been to moving the needle on how companies intervened in the conversation about global warming," says Aronczyk.
I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime
The same year as the Kyoto negotiation, Harrison sold his firm. Rheem decided that public relations wasn't the right career, while Yosie had long since moved on to other environmental projects for the firm. Meanwhile, the GCC began to disintegrate, as some members grew uncomfortable with its hard line. But the tactics, the playbook, and the message of doubt were now embedded and would outlive their creators. Three decades on, the consequences are all around us.
"I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime," says former US Vice-President Al Gore of the big oil companies' efforts to block action.
"I think it is, in many ways, the most serious crime of the post-World War Two era, anywhere in the world. The consequences of what they've done are just almost unimaginable."
Don Rheem is now a workplace and leadership consultant
"Would I do anything differently? It's a hard question to answer," reflects Don Rheem, who says he was "way down the totem pole" of the GCC's operation. "There's some sadness that not much has happened."
He maintains that climate science was too uncertain in the 1990s to warrant "drastic actions", and that developing countries - particularly China and Russia - have ultimately been responsible for the decades of climate inaction, rather than American industry.
"I think it's really easy to create a conspiracy theory about really pernicious intent of industry to completely halt any progress," Rheem says. "Personally, I didn't see that.
"I was very young. I was very curious... Knowing what I know today, would I have done some things differently then?
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-62225696
|
news_science-environment-62225696
|
|
Ava White: Boy who killed girl, 12, in Snapchat row gets life - BBC News
|
2022-07-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ava White was stabbed to death in Liverpool after a row over being filmed for social media.
|
Liverpool
|
A 15-year-old boy who stabbed a schoolgirl to death after a row over a Snapchat video has been sentenced for her murder.
Ava White, 12, was killed in Liverpool city centre after a Christmas lights switch-on event in November 2021.
The boy, who cannot be named for legal reasons, claimed he accidentally stabbed her in self-defence but was found guilty after a trial.
He was sentenced to life with a minimum of 13 years at Liverpool Crown Court.
The trial heard Ava and her friends became involved in an argument with the teenager and three of his friends after the boys recorded Snapchat videos of her group.
Ava's friends said the boy, who was 14 at the time, "grinned" after stabbing her in the neck with a flick-knife before fleeing the scene.
She was taken to Alder Hey Children's Hospital with critical injuries and died a short time later.
Ava White was described as a "kind hearted little girl" by her mother
The boy then dumped the knife and took off his coat, which was later found in a wheelie bin, as he began covering up his actions.
CCTV later showed him and his friends in a shop where the boy took a selfie and bought butter, which he said was for crumpets.
He then went to a friend's home and when his mother contacted him to tell him police wanted to speak to him he told her he was playing a computer game.
The boy was arrested at about 22:30 GMT, just two hours after the fatal stabbing.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The boy is seen running away in CCTV footage released by police
The court heard he denied being in the city centre at all before going on to blame another boy for the stabbing.
He later said he heard one of Ava's group threaten to stab his friend if he did not delete a video of Ava and claimed he had wanted only to "frighten her away" and had not meant to stab her.
The girl's mother broke down in court at the sentencing as she described her grief.
Leanne White said: "My beloved Ava dies all over again every morning I wake up.
"The moment Ava died is now yesterday, tomorrow and forever. It is the past, the present and the future.
"It is not just one horrific moment in time that happened last whenever. It is not just the moment, the hour or second.
"Our lives became permanently divided into before and after."
Ava had dreamed of travelling the world as an air hostess, her mum says
She described her daughter as a "kind hearted little girl" and said "precious memories are all I have left".
Her mother added: "She will never fulfil her dream of becoming an air hostess and travelling the world."
A statement from Ava's father Robert Martin was also read to the court.
He said: "Ava was the reason I got out of bed, my reason for living. When Ava was taken away it destroyed everything I stood for and worked towards."
The court heard the boy, who has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and attended a special school, had previously been subject to a community resolution notice after hitting a PCSO last July.
Mrs Justice Yip said he had also been arrested in May last year for assault on two women and by August it was suspected he was being exploited by known criminals.
Nick Johnson QC, defending, said the defendant was carrying the knife because he had previously been a victim of crime.
The court heard his father had been violent towards his mother and was jailed in 2015.
Balloons were released at the start a vigil in memory of Ava
The boy admitted possessing the knife but denied murder and an alternative charge of manslaughter.
Mrs Justice Yip said: he had shown a lack of remorse which had "understandably caused Ava's family further distress".
Sentencing him, she said: "There is only one reason why Ava is dead and that is because you chose to carry a knife and you chose to get it out and use it.
"You enjoyed carrying a knife. You were showing it off to your friends earlier that evening. It was a nasty weapon and you should not have had it."
Det Supt Sue Coombs described the case as "extremely shocking" and said she hoped the sentence would be a deterrent to young people carrying knives.
Ava's sister Mia White told in a statement read to the court how she wants to give talks about the impact of knife crime.
The 18-year-old said: "Hopefully if I can change at least one child's mind about using a knife I will have accomplished something special."
Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-62119537
|
news_uk-england-merseyside-62119537
|
|
Capitol riots: 'Wild' Trump tweet incited attack, says inquiry - BBC News
|
2022-07-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Mr Trump sent a rallying call to supporters after "the craziest meeting" of his presidency, the inquiry hears.
|
US & Canada
|
A Trump tweet mobilised far-right extremists to converge on Washington DC on the day of last year's Capitol riot, a congressional inquiry has heard.
He posted the tweet after "the craziest meeting of the Trump presidency", said a lawmaker on the panel.
The then-president forged ahead with a rallying call to supporters even though aides repeatedly told him he had fairly lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.
The committee accuses Mr Trump of an attempted coup to remain in power.
Supporters of Donald Trump violently stormed Congress on 6 January 2021 as lawmakers met to certify Mr Biden's victory.
Hours before the hearing, Mr Trump, a Republican, dismissed the Democratic-led House of Representatives panel on his Truth Social social media platform as "Political Hacks and Thugs" perpetrating a "HOAX".
The select committee has been conducting a nearly year-long investigation into the attack on the Capitol. Tuesday's hearing, the seventh since June, focused on a tweet Mr Trump sent in the early hours of 19 December 2020, and a stormy six-hour meeting at the White House that preceded the post.
Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat on the committee, said the meeting had been described as "unhinged" and "not normal".
Mr Trump had already been told by White House aides and figures within his own campaign team that he should concede to Mr Biden, a Democrat.
However, on 18 December he welcomed to the White House some informal advisers who had been urging him to pursue his unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud.
The group - which included his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and his ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn - had suggested Mr Trump order the military to seize state voting machines.
The meeting was intercepted by aides, as well as then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
"I don't think any of these people were providing the president good advice," Mr Cipollone said in recorded testimony to the select committee.
What followed was hours of argument, during which Mr Cipollone said he was attacked "verbally", but kept "pushing back", asking the group: "Where is the evidence?" They did not offer any proof, he and other aides told the committee.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Former aide testifies: Trump said ’take me to the Capitol’
The meeting ended after midnight with the idea of seizing ballot boxes rejected. Mr Trump's tweet - sent at 01:42 local time - told supporters: "Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election. Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild."
The post, Mr Raskin argued, "electrified and galvanised his supporters", who believed Mr Trump's claims that the election had been stolen from him.
The panel says the tweet was the siren call to extremist groups such as the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys to turn up. Two members of the groups are awaiting trial on rare seditious conspiracy charges related to the Capitol riot.
An anonymous Twitter employee told the committee they saw a rise in violent rhetoric online following the tweet. Mr Raskin said some of the responses turned "openly homicidal".
Committee members are trying to draw a direct line between the social media post and the violence on 6 January. The panel is seeking to build a case that Mr Trump's efforts to overturn his defeat in the 2020 election constitute illegal conduct.
Tuesday's hearing was also told of a claim that Mr Trump attempted to contact someone who was talking to the congressional inquiry, raising the possibility of witness tampering.
Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the committee, said they had notified the justice department.
The Wyoming congresswoman said the person Mr Trump had tried to contact did not answer his call and instead alerted a lawyer.
Another witness who testified on Tuesday was Ohio man Stephen Ayres, who has pleaded guilty to participating in the attack on the Capitol.
Ayres stunned people in the hearing room when he approached two of the police officers who were injured in the melee and shook their hands. More than 140 officers were hurt in the riot.
Stephen Ayres shakes the hand of Capitol police officer Harry Dunn after testifying
One of the policemen, Harry Dunn, described the exchange to the BBC's Tara McKelvey, who attended the hearing.
"He apologised," Mr Dunn said, shaking his head. "I'm trying to process."
Mr Trump - who has hinted he may run for the White House again in 2024 - has described the hearings as an attempt to distract Americans from the "disaster" of Democratic governance amid rampant inflation.
A New York Times opinion poll this week found just 33% of voters approve of President Biden, lower than Mr Trump's popularity in the aftermath of the Capitol riot, according to Gallup.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62140410
|
news_world-us-canada-62140410
|
|
Deadline to secure backers looms for Tory leader hopefuls - BBC News
|
2022-07-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Candidates vying to replace Boris Johnson have just hours to secure support from at least 20 MPs.
|
UK Politics
|
Candidates vying to be the leader of the Conservative Party - and the next prime minister - have until 18:00 BST to get the support of at least 20 MPs.
The deadline comes after the party increased the number of nominations required to make it on to the first-round ballot to speed up the process.
Ten MPs are putting themselves forward to replace Boris Johnson.
Three - Rishi Sunak, Penny Mordaunt, and Tom Tugendhat - have so far passed the necessary threshold.
Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi also told the BBC he had the support of 20 MPs.
But Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has withdrawn from the contest, pledging to back Mr Sunak, who resigned as chancellor last week.
Voting will get under way on Wednesday, with candidates needing 30 backers to make it into the second round.
The field will be whittled down to two finalists before the end of next week in successive rounds of voting by Tory MPs.
With candidates scrambling around for MPs' backing, Mr Sunak, former Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch and Mr Tugendhat, chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, have launched their official campaigns.
A winner will be picked in a postal ballot of around 160,000 Conservative Party members over summer, with the result due to be announced on 5 September.
On BBC Breakfast, Mr Zahawi was asked if he regretted his close association with Boris Johnson. He praised the prime minister for the coronavirus vaccine rollout and delivering Brexit, before saying he would bring the Conservative Party together and "heal those wounds".
The contest so far has been dominated by the issue of taxation, with nearly all of the candidates pledging cuts to personal or business taxes, or both.
On Monday the 1922 backbench committee, which organises leadership contests, increased the number of nominations needed to stand.
Vice-chair of the committee, Nusrat Ghani, told Radio 4's Today this was a "tweak" to the rules, adding: "I don't think it is a great task if you are trying to run for leader of the Conservative Party that you have the support of at least 20 colleagues."
Tuesday 12 July - nominations to get on the ballot open, closing at 18:00 BST
Wednesday 13 July - first round of voting among Tory MPs
Thursday 14 July - likely date for second round of voting
Monday 18 July - likely date for third round of voting, if required
Mr Sunak and Mr Tugendhat are launching their official campaigns on Tuesday.
The candidates for the party leadership are:
Mr Johnson will not be endorsing any of the candidates, having told the media: "I wouldn't want to damage anyone's chances with my support."
Rishi Sunak is the man to beat among Tory MPs.
After pledges of tax cuts from his rivals yesterday, the Mr Sunak will make an argument for what he sees as economic realism.
Yes, tax cuts. But only after inflation is under control and the economy is growing.
Expect him to argue he is prepared to make difficult decisions and act responsibly.
Liz Truss meanwhile is pitching herself to MPs as the best person to stop Mr Sunak.
She is expected to get some big cabinet backers today in Jacob Rees Mogg and Nadine Dorries.
But unsurprisingly, she isn't the only person making the argument she is best placed to take on Mr Sunak.
A number of candidates will spend the next few hours trying to shore up supporters.
Most believe they will meet the 20 threshold to get onto tomorrow's ballot. We'll find out for sure later.
Meanwhile, Labour will table a confidence motion in the government, sources say.
The party promised to bring the House of Commons vote if the Conservatives did not remove Mr Johnson from office immediately.
It could be held as early as Wednesday, but it is unlikely many Conservatives would back it.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer for their tax pledges, accusing them of entering an "arms race of fantasy economics".
He also accused them of "hypocrisy" for having backed tax hikes that have been introduced during Mr Johnson's time in office.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62130122
|
news_uk-politics-62130122
|
|
6 January hearing: 'Unhinged' White House meeting in spotlight - BBC News
|
2022-07-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Trump allies pushed baseless election claims in Oval Office, the congressional hearing is told.
|
US & Canada
|
It’s been a central argument of the 6 January committee that Donald Trump knowingly set the stage for the violence when he told his supporters to march to the Capitol and that his silence as it unfolded help the situation to spiral out of control.
In Tuesday’s hearing, the committee presented evidence on both counts. Committee member Stephanie Murphy explained that Trump ad-libbed key lines in his 6 January speech at a rally near the White House. He added specific condemnations of Vice-President Mike Pence and told his supporters to be strong, to fight like hell and to march to the Capitol. That last part was not in his scripted speech, but the committee showed text indicating rally-goers, including militants, knew he was going to say that days in advance.
Trump’s speech, Democratic Representative Stephanie Murphy said, was “built on a foundation of lies”.
“He lied to his supporters that the election was stolen,” the congresswoman from Florida continued. “He stoked their anger. He called for them to fight for him. He directed them to the US Capitol. He told them he would join them. And his supporters believed him and many headed towards the Capitol. As a result, people died, people were injured, many of his supporters’ lives will never be the same.”
One of those supporters was a man named Stephen Ayers, who testified to the committee that he entered the Capitol because Trump told him to and only exited because Trump, after hours of violence, told his supporters to leave.
If he had spoken out earlier, he said, “maybe we wouldn’t be in this bad of a situation”.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-62140198
|
news_live_world-us-canada-62140198
|
|
UK government asks Supreme Court to dismiss indyref2 case - BBC News
|
2022-07-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Its submission to the Supreme Court questions whether judges should hear the Scottish government's case.
|
Scotland politics
|
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the UK
The UK government has urged judges to dismiss the Scottish government's request for a ruling on whether it has the power to hold indyref2.
The Scottish government has asked the Supreme Court to examine whether a referendum could be staged without formal consent from Westminster.
The UK government has now questioned whether the court should agree to hear the case.
And it said it was clear that Holyrood does not have the necessary powers.
The case was referred to the Supreme Court last month by Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain - the Scottish government's top law officer.
It followed First Minister Nicola Sturgeon setting out her route map to securing another referendum on independence, which she wants to hold on 19 October 2023.
The first minister said she hoped the Supreme Court would "deliver clarity and legal certainty in a timely manner" over whether she could hold a referendum even if the UK government continues to refuse to give permission.
If the court rules that Holyrood does not have the power, she said the next general election would become a "de facto referendum" with the SNP standing on a single issue of independence.
It later emerged that the Lord Advocate was not prepared to sign off on the Scottish government's independence referendum bill without a ruling from the Supreme Court.
She said she currently "does not have the necessary degree of confidence" that the Scottish Parliament would have the power to hold indyref2.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Nicola Sturgeon has proposed 19 October 2023 as the date for a referendum
In its initial response to the Supreme Court, the UK government said its "clear view" was that a bill legislating for a referendum on independence would be outside the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament, arguing that issues relating to the constitution are reserved to Westminster.
It also said the referendum legislation has not been passed by MSPs - and has not yet even been introduced to the Scottish Parliament - so it would be "premature" for judges to rule on it.
And it confirmed that its top legal advisor in Scotland - the Advocate General - would take part in the case.
A UK government spokesman said it had been clear that "now is not the time to be discussing another independence referendum, when people across Scotland want both their governments to be working together on the issues that matter to them and their families".
He added: "However, following the Lord Advocate's referral of the Scottish government's draft Scottish Independence Referendum Bill, the UK government has today lodged its initial response with the Supreme Court.
"The papers confirm that the Advocate General for Scotland will become a formal party to the case, and ask the court to consider whether it should accept the Lord Advocate's referral."
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United Kingdom, with its judges - who are known as justices - having the final say on the biggest legal issues. They are the ultimate check and balance on the UK's laws and constitution.
Handling of the case is currently with the president of the court, Lord Reed - a Scottish former Court of Session judge. He will decide the timescales on which the case will be heard, and whether any preliminary issues need to be dealt with first.
If the Scottish government wins the case, Ms Sturgeon said the bill would be introduced at Holyrood and passed swiftly to allow a vote to happen in October 2023.
A spokesman for the first minister said her government "fully intends to offer the Scottish people the choice of independence".
He added: "The UK government's repeated attempts to block democracy - which now seem to extend to an unwillingness to even make a substantive argument before the Supreme Court - serve only to demonstrate how little confidence it has in its case for the union."
It underlines how far apart the Scottish and UK governments are on this issue that they are even having an argument over whether or not there should be an argument.
In many ways this is not a surprise. The UK government had a deadline to respond to the court, and was unlikely to stand aside and not contest the case.
They were always likely to try to have the case dismissed too. The approach in court is generally to throw the kitchen sink, to pitch in every argument which could have a chance of success.
There is an interesting insight into the UK government's case here, though.
Their hope is that if the court decides not to hear the case until a bill has been passed, the issue could be killed off entirely by leaving the Lord Advocate in a Catch-22.
She doesn't want to sign off the bill to be tabled until there's been a ruling, but judges might yet refuse to rule until a bill has been passed.
That position could yet change, of course, given she says settling this question is a matter of "exceptional public importance".
And the Scottish government is sure to fight back, both in the courts and in its political pronouncements.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62138075
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62138075
|
|
Baglan Energy Park: £6m to connect energy park with no power - BBC News
|
2022-07-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Welsh ministers accused their UK counterparts of failing to help after spending the cash.
|
Wales
|
Connecting businesses on an energy park to a new power supply after the power station they used went under has cost more than £6m of public money.
Firms connected to Baglan Power Station, Neath Port Talbot, which went into liquidation, also spent millions.
Economy minister Vaughan Gething has now accused the UK government of failing to intervene to protect the industrial estate's energy supply.
The UK government said Cardiff Bay was responsible for "contingency planning".
About 1,200 people working at 36 businesses faced losing their electricity supply, as well as five sewage pumping stations and several street lights.
Under original plans, power at the site was due to be switched off in January, but was kept on pending the result of the court case.
The liquidation was handled by the insolvency service - a UK government agency.
Mr Gething said: "I have chosen to spend about six million of public money to protect the communities here and to protect the jobs.
"We have also had to fight a very, very frustrating legal action with the UK government department that wanted to stop us from taking that action. It has been a deeply frustrating time."
Economy minister Vaughan Gething has accused the UK government of not being prepared to help
But a UK government spokesman said contingency planning had "always been the responsibility" of the Welsh government.
"The UK government is continuing to support the Welsh government in delivering its responsibility to ensure those impacted on the Baglan Energy Park get the help they need," they added.
The insolvency service told customers of Baglan Power Station that their electricity supply would be disconnected in January, months ahead of the completion of work to install a new electricity network.
The Welsh government launched legal proceedings to attempt to delay the deadline.
Judges forced a delay while the arguments were considered and the work on a new connection has been completed before legal proceedings concluded.
The Welsh government spent about £4m on the new network connecting the site to the National Grid, with other costs incurred during attempts to resolve the issue.
At one point ministers considered buying or renting the power station to maintain the electricity supply, but were told that would take too long.
Italian-owned paper manufacturer Sofidel was the largest employer that relied on the power station - it has a workforce of more than 300 people and used about 94% of the electricity it generated.
Giuseppe Munari says Sofidel spent several million pounds on backup generators
Sofidel joined the Welsh government's legal action after having to hire generators as a precaution.
"To have a backup system with a generator farm cost us several million pounds, even if it never generated a single kilowatt of power," said director Giuseppe Munari.
"The plan was to get an alternative supply. Unfortunately this takes time. I was told that normally in this country it takes two or three years."
Sofidel has paid for a new electricity substation connected to the National Grid while Western Power Distribution has provided new wire connections up to the premises of each site on the industrial estate.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62221842
|
news_uk-wales-62221842
|
|
US Capitol riot: Steve Bannon felt above the law, prosecutors say - BBC News
|
2022-07-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the ex-Trump strategist's trial begins, prosecutors say he rebuffed a "mandatory" legal summons.
|
US & Canada
|
Former Trump strategist Steve Bannon felt "above the law" by defying a legal summons to testify about last year's riot at the US Capitol, prosecutors said at the start of his trial.
Mr Bannon, a key player in Donald Trump's 2016 election win, faces two counts of contempt of Congress.
He is accused of ignoring the "mandatory" summons to testify to a congressional panel investigating the riot.
Mr Bannon, 68, says he is innocent.
If convicted, he could face up to two years in prison.
Mr Bannon served as campaign chief to Mr Trump in 2016 and became the White House's chief strategist until he was ousted seven months later in the aftermath of a violent far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017. But he has remained in touch with Mr Trump and his top allies.
Following the 6 January 2021 riot, the former Trump adviser did not comply with a summons, known as a subpoena, to testify - as well as submit relevant documents - about his efforts to challenge the outcome of the November 2020 presidential election and organise the protests that culminated in the storming of Congress.
During opening arguments at his trial, federal prosecutor Amanda Vaughn said the subpoena was not "a request" or "an invitation".
"It was mandatory," she said. "The defendant decided he was above the law."
A member of the defence team, Evan Corcoran, told the jury Mr Bannon was "innocent of the charges".
In his own opening statement, Mr Corcoran said negotiations over subpoenas are a "process" and that Mr Bannon - whom he described as a "political thinker" - had done nothing wrong.
Outside court, Mr Bannon angrily accused the House of Representatives committee of staging a "show trial".
He argued that the congressional inquiry was being driven by the "total and complete illegitimacy" of Mr Biden, and he repeated false claims that Mr Trump won the election.
Prosecutors in the case believe that Mr Bannon may be able to shed light on the events that led to the 6 January riot.
The committee has been particularly interested in Mr Bannon's communications with Mr Trump ahead of the incident, as well as the "war room" meetings held at a nearby hotel with other key figures, allegedly, as part of a last-ditch attempt to thwart certification of President Joe Biden's win.
After first being subpoenaed in September, Mr Bannon vowed to go "medieval" and become a "misdemeanour from hell" for the Biden administration.
He also argued that his contacts with Mr Trump were covered by executive privilege, a legal principle that holds communications between presidents and their advisers to be protected from disclosure in order to allow for candid advice.
The judge, however, had previously ruled that Mr Bannon could not claim he didn't comply with the subpoena as a result of executive privilege.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62230848
|
news_world-us-canada-62230848
|
|
Wimbledon: Emma Raducanu & Leicester City fuel Katie Boulter before Harmony Tan match - BBC Sport
|
2022-07-02
|
[]
|
Katie Boulter is taking inspiration from Leicester's 2015/16 Premier League title victory and Emma Raducanu's 2021 US Open win to fuel her Wimbledon run.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Tennis
Katie Boulter is taking inspiration from Leicester's 2016 Premier League title victory and Emma Raducanu's 2021 US Open win to fuel her Wimbledon run.
The 25-year-old takes on France's Harmony Tan, who knocked out seven-time singles champion Serena Williams, at 11:00 BST for a place in the last 16.
"I hope I can take a leaf out of their book," said Boulter of Leicester before Saturday's match.
"They were something else. Maybe I can hopefully create that this year."
Leicester defied 5,000-1 pre-season odds to clinch the title ahead of the top-flight's established powerhouses, while Raducanu, ranked 150 in the world at the time, became the the first player to come through qualifying and clinch a Grand Slam title in an astonishing run at Flushing Meadows last year.
Raducanu was knocked out of this year's Wimbledon on Wednesday, overpowered by Caroline Garcia of France. But Boulter says her Davis Cup team-mate's run in New York has made her reimagine what is possible.
"She came out, she surprised everyone, and she played some fearless tennis," said Boulter, ranked 118 in the world.
"That's what's so impressive. I hope I can go out there and do the same thing. I'd love to do what she's done. You never know, one day it might happen."
• None Injury lows to Wimbledon highs - who is Katie Boulter?
• None No Grand Slams but Isner aces the records
Liam Broady is another Briton aiming to join compatriot Heather Watson in the fourth round. The 28-year-old from Stockport defeated 12th seed Diego Schwartzman in five sets and, like Boulter, is competing in the third round of a Grand Slam event for the first time.
However, Broady admits that he would understand if, for once, he didn't get his compatriot's support, given he is playing Boulter's boyfriend, Australian 19th seed Alex De Minaur.
"I won't judge her if she sits in 'Demon's' box. She kind of has to, doesn't she?," Broady said.
"I know his game pretty well. He's a fantastic player. He's very good on the grass.
"But I fancy myself against anybody, to be honest."
Top seed Iga Swiatek could extend her winning streak to 38 matches, a total unmatched since German legend Steffi Graf won 66 in a row in 1989-90, if she beats Alize Cornet to make the fourth round.
The Polish 21-year-old's last defeat came in Dubai back in February. She has dropped only six sets in her streak since.
A two-time French Open champion and an Australian Open semi-finalist earlier this year, Swiatek would equal her best run at Wimbledon by beating French world number 37 Cornet on Court One. But she admitted she is still getting to grips with grass.
"I guess you can see that I'm not playing maybe as efficiently as on other surfaces," she said.
"I would play well on grass if I would have kind of more time to just play on this surface. Every year it [the grass court season] is only like four weeks, so I feel it's not enough to learn properly."
In one of the most eagerly anticipated matches of the day, Australian Nick Kyrgios will take on fourth seed Stefanos Tsitsipas.
Kyrgios is ranked 35 places lower the Greek Tsitsipas, but, since memorably knocking out world number one Rafael Nadal on his debut Wimbledon campaign as a teenager, has always carried considerable threat on grass.
He also frequently comes with controversy. Kyrgios was fined $10,000 (£8,200) for his behaviour in his first-round win where he spat at a spectator and called a line judge a "snitch".
Tsitsipas has seen Kyrgios' antics up close. At the grass-court warm-up event in Halle in June, Kyrgios smashed up his racquet and got into an argument with the umpire over his alleged time-wasting during their match.
"I feel like everyone here knows who Nick is,' Tsitsipas said.
"We have had many great matches against each other. I respect him for his game and the way he fights … when he wants to."
Kyrgios has won three of the pair's four previous meetings.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/62016496
|
rt_tennis_62016496
|
|
Tyson Fury makes emotional knife plea over cousin's death - BBC News
|
2022-08-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
"This needs to stop," the boxer says, as two are arrested over Rico Burton's stabbing in Altrincham.
|
Manchester
|
Rico Burton died in hospital after he was stabbed in Greater Manchester
Boxer Tyson Fury has called on the government to introduce stronger punishments for knife crime after his cousin was killed in a stabbing.
The heavyweight champion said on social media "RIP Rico Burton", who was "stabbed in the neck" overnight.
Fury compared knife crime to a "pandemic", adding, "you don't know how bad it is until it's one of your own".
Two men have been arrested in connection with the incident, in which a 17-year-old also suffered serious injuries.
Supt Ben Ewart said one of the men, aged 21, was arrested at the scene and the other, aged 20, was arrested later. Both remain in police custody.
In an impassioned plea on social media earlier, Mr Fury wrote: "This is becoming ridiculous - idiots carry knives. This needs to stop."
The boxer demanded the government "bring back higher sentencing for knife crime".
He ended the post in tribute to his cousin: "Life is very precious and it can be taken away very quick. Enjoy every moment.
"RIP Rico Burton - may the lord God grant you a good place in heaven, see you soon."
Tyson Fury said his cousin Rico Burton died after a stabbing
Supt Ewart, of Greater Manchester Police, said the emergency services had received multiple calls at about 03:00 BST on Sunday.
Arriving at the scene in a courtyard area, paramedics found the 17-year-old and Mr Burton with stab wounds and receiving first aid from members of the public.
He said both victims were taken to Manchester Royal Infirmary where Mr Burton later died.
"This is without doubt a senseless attack and both victims should have returned home this morning after enjoying a night out with friends," Supt Ewart said.
He added: "Goose Green is a popular nightspot and would have been busy at the time and I appeal for anyone who was there overnight on Saturday or anyone with information about this incident - including phone photograph footage or videos - to come forward, in particular any friends of any of the victims or suspects who may have been out with them that night who have not yet come forward.
Asked what police had been told about a possible argument, Supt Ewart said it was a "very live" investigation and that was "obviously a factor we're looking into".
Knife crimes rose by 10% to 49,027 offences in England and Wales during the year to March 2022, according to records.
Public concern about stabbings and firmer guidance for judges since 2015 have led to longer sentences, although offenders under 18 are still more likely to be cautioned than jailed.
A statue made of weapons confiscated by police - known as the Knife Angel - has been recently touring the country
Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-62624382
|
news_uk-england-lancashire-62624382
|
|
Alex Jones concedes Sandy Hook school shooting was '100% real' - BBC News
|
2022-08-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Parents of a child who was killed are seeking millions in a defamation trial against the radio host.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch as Alex Jones is told his text messages were sent to opposing lawyers by mistake
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has testified that the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting was "100% real" and that it was wrong to call it a hoax.
The parents of a child killed in the shooting are seeking at least $150m (£123m) in a defamation trial brought against the prominent radio host.
They say they have endured harassment and emotional distress because of Mr Jones's comments about the attack.
The trial will determine how much money he owes for defaming the couple.
Mr Jones is the only person testifying in his defence during the proceedings in Texas. He has portrayed the case as an attack on his free speech rights under the First Amendment.
On Wednesday, the Infowars host said he now understood that it was irresponsible of him to claim the shooting was false and that no children were killed.
"Especially since I've met the parents. It's 100% real," he said. "They [the media] won't let me take it back."
In a dramatic moment in court, it was also revealed that Mr Jones's text messages had been sent by mistake to a lawyer representing the parents.
Mark Bankston, a lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, whose six-year-old son Jesse died in the shooting, revealed that he had been sent an "entire digital copy" of Mr Jones's cell phone spanning a period of two years.
Mr Bankston added that when he told the opposing legal team about the mishap, they "did not take any steps to identify it as privileged or protected in any way".
The revelation emerged after Mr Bankston provided Mr Jones with a copy of texts from his device that referenced Sandy Hook. Mr Jones had previously said under oath that there were no such messages.
"You did get my text messages?" Mr Jones asked. "You said you didn't. Nice trick."
"You know what perjury is, right?" Mr Bankston said."I just want to make sure before we go further."
Mr Jones then insisted he had not tried to hide any messages. "If I was mistaken, I was mistaken," he said, adding that he was not a "tech guy".
Twenty children and six adults were shot dead at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut in 2012.
In the years following the incident, Mr Jones repeatedly claimed that the shooting was a ploy to push gun control measures and claimed without evidence that it had been staged by actors and the media.
In his testimony, he also complained that he was being "typecast" as "someone that runs around talking about Sandy Hook, makes money off Sandy Hook, is obsessed by Sandy Hook".
Closing arguments in the case are expected to begin later on Wednesday before jurors begin deliberating a verdict.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62415376
|
news_world-us-canada-62415376
|
|
Beyoncé removes Kelis sample and ableist slur on Renaissance - BBC News
|
2022-08-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The star updates her 5-day-old album to remove a Kelis reference and an offensive lyric on Heated.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Beyoncé updated the songs shortly after acknowledging complaints from disability advocates
Beyoncé has updated her latest album, Renaissance, in response to criticism from fans and the pop star Kelis.
The song Heated has received a lyrical update, removing a slur that is often used to demean people with spastic cerebral palsy.
In place of the so-called "s-word", Beyoncé now sings "blast".
Meanwhile, a reference to Kelis's hit Milkshake has also disappeared from the album, after the singer complained she had not given permission for its use.
The "la la la" hook from Milkshake was originally used in the background of Beyoncé's song Energy. Those vocals have now been erased from the mix.
A drum sample - based either on Milkshake or an earlier Kelis track called Get Along With You - remains integral to the song.
The updates happened on streaming services including Spotify, Tidal and Apple overnight on Tuesday, just five days after Renaissance was released.
In a brief glitch, Tidal replaced Energy with a version that only featured the isolated vocals of Beyoncé singing "la la la", with the rest of the track remaining silent.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by PAPITOˣ⁴ This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
At the time of writing, the original versions remain on YouTube.
It is also too late to change the vinyl and CD editions of the album - although future pressings may contain the revisions.
Beyoncé came under fire from disability advocates over the weekend for including an ableist slur on Heated, which was co-written by Drake.
It came just a few weeks after another US pop star, Lizzo, apologised for using the same derogatory term in her song GRRRLS.
Both Lizzo and Beyoncé said they were unaware of the connotations of the word - whose links to cerebral palsy are less well-known in the US.
In a statement on Monday, Beyoncé's publicist said: "The word, not used intentionally in a harmful manner, will be replaced in the lyrics".
The Kelis story is less clear-cut.
Kelis was angry that Beyoncé hadn't sought permission to reference her song Milkshake
The singer took to social media last week, accusing Beyoncé of "theft" after learning her anthem Milkshake had been interpolated on the song Energy (interpolation is when one song references another, without directly sampling it).
Kelis said she had not been informed in advance, and that her mind was "blown" by the "level of disrespect".
"It's not hard. She can contact me, right?" Kelis said on Instagram. "It's common decency."
However, Beyoncé would not have had to seek Kelis's permission to reference Milkshake, as the singer is not a credited writer on the song and does not own the copyright.
Instead, permission would have been sought from writer/producers Pharrell Williams and Chad Hugo - and Kelis's disagreement is largely with them.
She has previously accused the duo, professionally known as the Neptunes, of "lying and tricking" her into a bad deal, which gave them the rights to her music at the start of her career.
"I was told we were going to split the whole thing 33/33/33, which we didn't do," she told the Guardian in 2020. "Their argument is, 'Well, you signed it.'
"I'm like, 'Yeah, I signed what I was told, and I was too young and too stupid to double-check it.'"
This YouTube post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on YouTube The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. Skip youtube video by BeyoncéVEVO This article contains content provided by Google YouTube. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Google’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts.
In an Instagram video about Beyoncé's song, she confirmed that Pharrell, in particular, was the source of her frustration.
"Publishing was stolen, people were swindled out of rights. It happens all the time, especially back then. So it's not about me being mad about Beyoncé.
"Pharrell knows better," she added. "This is a direct hit at me [and] he does this stuff all the time. It's very petty [and] the reason I'm annoyed is because I know it was on purpose."
Beyoncé appears to have sided with the singer, by removing the reference to Milkshake - although Pharrell and Chad Hugo still receive a writing credit, presumably for the brief sample of Get Along With You.
Meanwhile, Monica Lewinsky has tweeted a request for Beyoncé to consider adjusting a lyric in her 2013 song Partition, which references her affair with President Clinton.
Linking to a news story about the lyric change on Heated, Lewinsky wrote: "Uhmm, while we're at it... #Partition".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Monica Lewinsky (she/her) This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
Asked if she had ever mentioned the song to Beyoncé's team, Lewinsky replied: "No, I haven't. I did mention it in the first Vanity Fair article I wrote in 2014, which was the first public thing I'd done in 10 years. But you make an interesting point."
It is not unusual for musicians to update albums after release in the streaming era.
Kanye West, a former Beyoncé collaborator, has turned it into an artform. In 2016, on the day he released his seventh album The Life Of Pablo, he tweeted: "Im'a fix Wolves" - referring to one of the album's key songs.
A month later, the original version of the track was replaced, featuring new vocals from Australian pop star Sia. Frank Ocean's contribution to the song was then separated out, and given it's own track on the album, simply known as Frank's Track.
Follow us on Facebook, or on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-62405039
|
news_entertainment-arts-62405039
|
|
Ryan Giggs an unfaithful 'love cheat' in relationships, court hears - BBC News
|
2022-08-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ryan Giggs says he has never been faithful - but denies ever physically assaulting a woman.
|
Wales
|
Ryan Giggs said he had not done any of the things he is accused of "in the manner described"
Ryan Giggs has told a court he has never been faithful in his relationships.
Giving evidence in his defence, Mr Giggs was asked if his reputation for "infidelity" or being a "love cheat" was justified, to which he said he was "a flirt by nature".
Mr Giggs, 48, is accused of controlling behaviour, as well as assaulting Kate Greville, 38, and her younger sister Emma, 26, in November 2020.
When questioned by his defence barrister, Chris Daw QC, if he lied to partners including Ms Greville about being unfaithful he said: " Yes, more than once".
But when asked if he had ever physically assaulted a woman, he said "no", adding that he had never set out to control or coerce a woman.
Mr Daw asked: "Did you ever set out to make Kate Greville a slave to your demands, as she claims?"
Mr Giggs said he met his now ex-wife around at a barbecue when he was 18 and the pair started a relationship when he was in his late 20s.
He told the court they moved to Worsley, Greater Manchester, and had two children with whom he has "a very good" relationship with today.
Ryan Giggs says he and Kate Greville's relationship progressed after they were both unhappy in their marriages
He said he was not faithful to Ms Greville and never told her about his previous infidelities.
"I wasn't honest with her, no," he told Mr Daw.
"The first time I met Kate I was immediately attracted to her, I thought she was attractive, I thought she was intelligent, I thought she was funny."
He went on to say how the pair started flirting and that he thought she "looked hot" after swapping pictures of each from their travels.
The pair had sex for the first time the night before a planned London photo-shoot for Cafe Football, which they had kept secret.
Mr Daw asked: "What was the balance of interest in that?"
Giggs replied: "It was equal. We went back to the hotel room. We had sex and stayed the night."
From that point, he said, the two talked about how unhappy they both were in their marriages.
He said Ms Greville left her husband "no longer than six months" after their first sexual contact.
Mr Giggs said he continued to stay at his family home with his wife Stacey and their two children as the affair carried on.
Ryan Giggs' football career ended with him as the most decorated player in the Premier League era, with 34 trophies
That relationship with his current wife at the time came to an end after a press article related him to Ms Greville in 2016, he said.
"She (Stacey) questioned me about it. I denied it."
Shortly after in the summer of 2016 he said Ms Greville was planning to move to Abu Dhabi for a work opportunity - he "didn't want her to go" but the pair agreed to "make it work".
Mr Daw asked about an incident at the Westin Hotel in Dubai in 2017, when Kate Greville alleges Mr Giggs dragged her naked body across the floor of his hotel room before throwing her belongings into a corridor.
Mr Giggs said the pair had been "delighted" to have a chance to see each other again but things took a turn for the worse after he started replying to a message from his daughter in a club.
"I could just feel Kate sort of looking over and sort of wondering who I was messaging. I just got a bit irritated because she was making it quite obvious she was peering over my shoulder. I just said: 'I'm messaging Libby'."
He said after he "stormed off" to his hotel room, Ms Greville followed him and they got into an argument.
Denying there was any "physical element" to this, he said he started packing her suitcase and told her he did not want her to stay with him.
"Kate was trying to stop me from putting clothes and various other stuff into the suitcase.
"I didn't manage to shut it but I was ushering her towards the front door with the suitcase."
He said they were "half outside" in the corridor and half in the hotel room before Ms Greville managed to get the suitcase back and get back into the room.
Mr Giggs said he then told Kate Greville to sleep on the sofa, but after they calmed down they had sex and spent the night together in the same bed.
"We had sex that we would have quite often which could get quite rough, but not anything weird, but just rough."
Mr Daw said: "Was that sort of sexual activity something the two of you engaged in regularly?"
Giggs replied: "Yes," adding he and Ms Greville were both the instigator after not seeing eachother for a long period of time.
He told the court there was no issue between the two of them the next day and that the incident in the relationship "wasn't unusual but I wouldn't say it was regular".
Earlier, in a statement read to Manchester Crown Court, Ryan Giggs said his ex-girlfriend Kate Greville had attacked him on 1 November 2020.
He said this incident resulted in injuries she said she sustained when he headbutted her.
The jury heard he asked both sisters to leave his house but they refused.
"I had no option but to demand my phone to ring the police. I went to the utility room to get hers [Kate Greville's].
"At this point she gave me my phone and, rather foolishly, I decided to keep hers.
"I should not have done this but [I] was emotional, angry and upset."
The ex-Wales and Manchester United star said he planned to call the police but Kate Greville grabbed his hand and a scuffle developed with her sister Emma, who was "standing in close proximity".
He stated: "I accept during this scuffle my head clashed with hers [Kate]. I am not sure if it was the face or head but I am sure it was not deliberate."
Emma Greville previously told the court Mr Giggs grabbed her sister by the shoulders and headbutted her, before turning to her and saying: "I'll headbutt you next."
He is charged with controlling and coercive behaviour against Kate Greville between August 2017 and November 2020.
He is also charged with assaulting Kate Greville, causing her actual bodily harm, and charged with the common assault of Emma Greville on 1 November 2020.
Ryan Giggs has denied being controlling or coercive with his ex-girlfriend
In a prepared defence statement given to police and read in court by prosecutor Peter Wright QC, Mr Giggs said: "I will not accept that my behaviour towards my former partner has been in any way controlling or coercive, nor that I have done any of the incidents in the manner described."
He told police there were occasions Ms Greville tried to "control our relationship," including one incident when she was jealous of his "contact with other females".
He also said he did not recall threatening to release intimate photos or videos of the couple.
His statement said even if a threat had been made "in jest or in drink," it would be "preposterous" for Ms Greville to believe it would be carried out.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62554229
|
news_uk-wales-62554229
|
|
Liz Truss accused of branding British workers lazy in leaked audio - BBC News
|
2022-08-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Tory leadership hopeful is accused by critics of branding workers lazy in leaked audio.
|
UK Politics
|
Liz Truss said the UK needs "more productivity" to boost economic growth
Conservative leadership candidate Liz Truss said British workers needed "more graft" in leaked comments.
In the recording, published by the Guardian, Ms Truss suggested Britons lacked the "skill and application" of foreign nationals.
Labour said her comments were "offensive" and "effectively brand British workers as lazy".
The foreign secretary did not deny making the comments and said productivity needed to improve.
"I don't know what you're quoting there," Ms Truss said under questioning at a Tory leadership event on Tuesday evening.
"But the point that I've always made is what we need in this country is more productivity across the country and we need more economic growth."
The leak emerged ahead of a hustings event in Perth where Ms Truss and her leadership rival former Chancellor Rishi Sunak were grilled by Scottish Conservative members.
The party's roughly 200,000-strong membership are voting for their next leader, who will succeed Boris Johnson as prime minister in September.
The Guardian report said Ms Truss made the comments in the audio when she was chief secretary to the Treasury, a role she held between 2017 and 2019.
The report did not reveal the source of the audio recording, parts of which were redacted.
In the two-minute clip, Ms Truss said British workers' "mindset and attitude" were partly to blame for them producing less per hour than their foreign counterparts, suggesting they needed "more graft".
Ms Truss said in the recording: "Essentially it's partly a mindset and attitude thing I think. Yeah, its working culture basically. If you go to China it's quite different, I can assure you...
"There's a fundamental issue of British working culture. Essentially if we're going to be a richer country and a more prosperous country, that needs to change.
"But I don't think people are that keen to change that."
Speaking on difference in productivity in the UK, she said: "If you look at productivity, it's very, very different in London from the rest of the country."
A Truss campaign source said the comments were "half a decade old" and lacked "context", while acknowledging the UK does "need to boost productivity".
"As prime minister, Liz will deliver an economy that is high wage, high growth and low tax," the source said.
The Office for National Statistics says every country has seen slower growth in output per worker since 2009 when compared with the pre-financial crisis period.
OECD figures show that in 2019, the UK came fourth highest in the rankings of GDP per hour worked among G7 countries.
Ms Truss, who has consistently led Mr Sunak in polls, has put her tax-cutting plan for boosting economic growth at the centre of her pitch to Conservative members.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Liz Truss quizzed on 'no handouts' cost of living policy
The remarks by Ms Truss echo controversial arguments made in a 2012 book she co-authored, "Britannia Unchained", in which British workers were described as among the "worst idlers in the world".
Asked about it at a leadership debate last month, Ms Truss distanced herself from the contentious assessment, claiming co-author and Sunak supporter Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab, had written it.
Mr Raab has subsequently said the authors of the book, which also included several other senior Conservative ministers, had agreed "collective responsibility" over its contents.
Labour's shadow work and pensions secretary Jonathan Ashworth said the "Britannia Unchained fiasco" seemed to be "the blueprint" for Ms Truss's prospective government.
"Workers across the country are working all hours to keep a roof over their heads, put food on the table and provide for their families," he said.
"Liz Truss should be helping working people to cope with this cost of living crises, as Labour this week outlined we would do, not peddling this offensive nonsense."
Liberal Democrat business spokesperson Sarah Olney called on the foreign secretary to apologise for her "shameful" comments, adding: "Truss's mask has slipped".
"How can Truss expect to win the support of the British public with views like this?," she added.
The BBC approached Mr Sunak's team for comment on the matter but received no response.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62571016
|
news_uk-politics-62571016
|
|
Trump search warrant: FBI took top secret files from Mar-a-Lago - BBC News
|
2022-08-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former president says the cache, including information about the "President of France", was declassified.
|
US & Canada
|
Donald Trump has said he welcomes the warrant being made public
The FBI seized top secret files in a search of former US President Donald Trump's estate in Florida this week, documents show.
Agents removed 11 sets of documents, including some marked "TS/SCI", a designation for material that could cause "exceptionally grave" damage to US national security.
Mr Trump denied any wrongdoing and said the items were declassified.
It was the first time an ex-president's home was searched in a criminal probe.
The list of items was made public on Friday afternoon after a judge unsealed a seven-page document that included the warrant authorising the search of Mr Trump's Palm Beach residence, Mar-a-Lago.
It said more than 20 boxes of items were taken on Monday, including a binder of photos, a handwritten note, unspecified information about the "President of France" and a clemency letter written on behalf of long-time Trump ally Roger Stone.
As well as four sets of top secret files, the cache includes three sets of "secret documents" and three sets of "confidential" material.
The warrant indicates that FBI agents were looking into potential violations of the Espionage Act, which makes it illegal to keep or transmit potentially dangerous national security information.
The removal of classified documents or materials is prohibited by law. Mr Trump increased the penalties for the crime while in office and it is now punishable by up to five years in prison.
The warrant notes that the locations searched at Mar-a-Lago include an area called the "45 office" and storage rooms, but not private guest suites not being used by Mr Trump and his staff.
The justice department had asked a court to make it public on Thursday, a move considered rare amid an ongoing investigation.
It was approved by a judge on 5 August, three days before it was carried out on Monday, 8 August.
On Friday night, Mr Trump's office issued a statement maintaining that he had used his authority while president to declassify the documents.
"He had a standing order that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken into the residence were deemed to be declassified," the statement said.
"The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the President of the United States.
"The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat, with classification authority delegated by the president, needs to approve of declassification is absurd."
Legal experts have told US media it is unclear whether this argument would hold up in court. "Presidents can declassify information but they have to follow a procedure," Tom Dupree, a lawyer who previously worked in the justice department, told the BBC.
"They have to fill out forms. They have to give certain authorisations. They can't simply say these documents are declassified. They have to follow a process [and it is] not clear that was followed here."
A spokesman for Mr Trump, Taylor Budowich, said the administration of President Joe Biden "is in obvious damage control after their botched raid".
Mr Budowich accused the administration of "leaking lies and innuendos to try to explain away the weaponisation of government against their dominant political opponent".
Mr Trump's conservative allies have also condemned the raid as a political hit job as he considers another run for the presidency in 2024.
Law enforcement agencies around the country are reportedly monitoring online threats against government officials that have emerged in the wake of the FBI search.
US Attorney General Merrick Garland, who personally approved the warrant, defended federal agents on Thursday as "dedicated, patriotic public servants".
"I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked," he told reporters.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62527628
|
news_world-us-canada-62527628
|
|
Tyson Fury makes emotional knife plea over cousin's death - BBC News
|
2022-08-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
"This needs to stop," the boxer says, as two are arrested over Rico Burton's stabbing in Altrincham.
|
Manchester
|
Rico Burton died in hospital after he was stabbed in Greater Manchester
Boxer Tyson Fury has called on the government to introduce stronger punishments for knife crime after his cousin was killed in a stabbing.
The heavyweight champion said on social media "RIP Rico Burton", who was "stabbed in the neck" overnight.
Fury compared knife crime to a "pandemic", adding, "you don't know how bad it is until it's one of your own".
Two men have been arrested in connection with the incident, in which a 17-year-old also suffered serious injuries.
Supt Ben Ewart said one of the men, aged 21, was arrested at the scene and the other, aged 20, was arrested later. Both remain in police custody.
In an impassioned plea on social media earlier, Mr Fury wrote: "This is becoming ridiculous - idiots carry knives. This needs to stop."
The boxer demanded the government "bring back higher sentencing for knife crime".
He ended the post in tribute to his cousin: "Life is very precious and it can be taken away very quick. Enjoy every moment.
"RIP Rico Burton - may the lord God grant you a good place in heaven, see you soon."
Tyson Fury said his cousin Rico Burton died after a stabbing
Supt Ewart, of Greater Manchester Police, said the emergency services had received multiple calls at about 03:00 BST on Sunday.
Arriving at the scene in a courtyard area, paramedics found the 17-year-old and Mr Burton with stab wounds and receiving first aid from members of the public.
He said both victims were taken to Manchester Royal Infirmary where Mr Burton later died.
"This is without doubt a senseless attack and both victims should have returned home this morning after enjoying a night out with friends," Supt Ewart said.
He added: "Goose Green is a popular nightspot and would have been busy at the time and I appeal for anyone who was there overnight on Saturday or anyone with information about this incident - including phone photograph footage or videos - to come forward, in particular any friends of any of the victims or suspects who may have been out with them that night who have not yet come forward.
Asked what police had been told about a possible argument, Supt Ewart said it was a "very live" investigation and that was "obviously a factor we're looking into".
Knife crimes rose by 10% to 49,027 offences in England and Wales during the year to March 2022, according to records.
Public concern about stabbings and firmer guidance for judges since 2015 have led to longer sentences, although offenders under 18 are still more likely to be cautioned than jailed.
A statue made of weapons confiscated by police - known as the Knife Angel - has been recently touring the country
Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-62624382
|
news_uk-england-lancashire-62624382
|
|
Elon Musk subpoenas Twitter founder Jack Dorsey ahead of court battle - BBC News
|
2022-08-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The billionaire hopes Jack Dorsey will help him end his deal to buy the social media site.
|
Business
|
Elon Musk has launched legal action to summon Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey to appear in court as part of his legal battle with the tech company.
Mr Musk is seeking to end his $44bn deal for Twitter after alleging the firm failed to provide enough information on fake account numbers.
But the social media site is suing Mr Musk to try to force him to buy it.
The case will be heard in Delaware, US, in October unless both parties decide to settle outside of court beforehand.
Twitter hopes that a judge will order Mr Musk - who is the world's richest man - to complete the takeover at the agreed price of $54.20 per share.
But as part of the trial preparations, lawyers for Mr Musk have called on his friend, the former boss of Twitter Mr Dorsey, in the hope that he will help support the Tesla boss's argument that the social media company hasn't been honest about the volume of fake accounts on its platform.
A subpoena legal writ or document summons a person to attend court or orders the submission of evidence, as records or documents, before a court.
In July, the billionaire said he planned to walk away from his deal to buy Twitter, which prompted the company to sue him.
Mr Musk accused the company of withholding information about fake accounts, but Twitter argued that these were excuses to cover buyer's remorse.
The site has issued its own subpoenas to people who had planned to invest in the deal with Mr Musk.
Jack Dorsey is the co-founder of Twitter
Mr Dorsey stepped down as chief executive of Twitter in November last year and tweeted in support of Mr Musk when he announced his bid to buy the company in April, saying: "Elon is the singular solution I trust. I trust his mission to extend the light of consciousness."
Last month, a US judge ruled that Twitter's lawsuit against Mr Musk should go to trial in October.
Earlier in August, Mr Musk sold another 7.92 million shares in Tesla, worth around $6.88bn (£5.7bn), stating that he needed the money in case he is forced to buy Twitter.
Mr Musk has countersued Twitter, claiming a third of visible Twitter accounts, assessed by his team, were fake. Using that figure the team estimated that a minimum of 10% of daily active users are bots.
But filings made by his legal team in his battle with Twitter have been questioned by leading bot researchers.
Twitter says it estimates that fewer than 5% of its daily active users are bot accounts.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62641029
|
news_business-62641029
|
|
UK government argues MSPs do not have power to set up indyref2 - BBC News
|
2022-08-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
UK ministers will argue in court that Holyrood cannot set up a referendum without Westminster backing.
|
Scotland politics
|
The Scottish Parliament "plainly" does not have the power to set up an independence referendum, UK government law officers have argued.
The Supreme Court is to look at whether MSPs can legislate for a vote without Westminster's backing in October.
The Scottish government has argued that any vote would be "advisory" and would not directly break up the union.
But UK law officers said there was "no secret" that Scottish ministers would want the vote to lead to independence.
Papers published on Wednesday said a referendum was "not designed to be an exercise in mere abstract opinion polling at considerable public expense", and it would clearly be used to push for "the secession of Scotland" from the UK.
Judges will hear arguments at the court in London on 11 and 12 October.
The SNP has also applied to intervene in the case to make additional arguments in favour of a referendum.
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wants to hold a vote on independence in October 2023, and has been pushing the UK government to agree to this.
However in the absence of a deal she also wants judges to rule on whether Holyrood has the power to set up a vote without Westminster support.
The case has been referred to the Supreme Court by Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain, the Scottish government's top law officer, in a bid to clarify whether MSPs can pass legislation paving the way for a poll.
Constitutional matters including the union are reserved to Westminster, but Ms Bain has argued that an "advisory" referendum would not necessarily cut across this.
The QC said that the vote would have "no prescribed legal consequences arising from its result", and that it would be for politicians to decide what to do afterwards.
Ms Sturgeon has argued this was also the case with the 2014 independence referendum and the 2016 vote on EU membership, which led to years of negotiations and bills being passed before Brexit actually happened.
The UK government meanwhile does not want judges to rule on the case at all, arguing that it would be premature to decide anything before a bill has been passed by MSPs.
Papers lodged on behalf of the Advocate General for Scotland - Lord Stewart of Dirleton, the UK government's top Scots law officer - argue that the court would not normally give "advisory opinions on abstract legal questions".
Legislative disputes between the Scottish and UK governments are heard in the Supreme Court in London
The submission also states that "the Scottish Parliament plainly does not have the competence to legislate for an advisory referendum on the independence of Scotland from the United Kingdom".
On the idea of a vote being "advisory", the submission said there was "no secret" about the Scottish government's intentions.
It added: "It cannot be credibly suggested that the outcome of the referendum will be 'advisory' in the sense of being treated as an academic interest only.
"A referendum is not, and is not designed to be, an exercise in mere abstract opinion polling at considerable public expense.
"Were the outcome to favour independence, it would be used - and no doubt used by the SNP as the central plank - to seek to build momentum towards achieving that end: the termination of the union and the secession of Scotland."
There are few surprises in the UK government submission - it is fairly straightforward, that Holyrood doesn't have the authority to set up a referendum.
It is however slightly awkward for this to be stated so baldly.
UK ministers have previously preferred to stress the breadth of devolved responsibilities, painting Holyrood as one of the world's most powerful devolved parliaments.
That allows them to put pressure back on the SNP over the running of services in Scotland, and avoids the impression of telling MSPs to get "back in your box".
It's also why they tend to say "not now" to a referendum, rather than a flat "no". But putting it into bare legal terms removes the softer edges of political messaging.
It all underlines that the outcome of this case will cause a political storm no matter the result.
Should the UK government's legal arguments win out in the Supreme Court, they will immediately become political arguments for Ms Sturgeon to use in the court of public opinion.
A very public demonstration of the limits of Holyrood's powers could be a cornerstone of her case for why it should have more.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62491289
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62491289
|
|
Rishi Sunak insists he's the Tory contender to fix problems facing UK - BBC News
|
2022-08-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The BBC's Nick Robinson reflects on the key takeaways from his interview with Rishi Sunak.
|
UK Politics
|
If you're facing an emergency who do you want to come to your aid?
Is it the clever guy who tells you you can trust him because, after all, he did a pretty good job in the last emergency?
The guy who says you have to get used to the idea that you can't have your hopes and dreams - not now at least?
Or do you pick the woman who insists that there's no need to be so gloomy? Who promises she can deliver the future you've craved for so long?
That, in a nutshell, is the choice Rishi Sunak is presenting to the Conservative members who get to choose our next prime minister.
It is also the reason that he has gone from being the favourite to - in his own words - the underdog.
In an interview for Our Next Prime Minister on BBC One at 19.00 BST he told me he'd rather lose the race to replace Boris Johnson than win it on false promises.
Mr Sunak has told the 160,000 or so Conservative members that will choose our next prime minister that the country faces not one, but a whole series of emergencies.
So, that is what I explored with him starting with the soaring price of energy.
Martin Lewis, the Money Saving Expert, has called on Mr Sunak to pledge to match the £15bn he pledged as chancellor to help people with their bills before they soared again.
Mr Lewis is going to be disappointed.
Mr Sunak says he will give more help to pensioners and to those on benefits. But he'll only spend "a few billions".
This means that millions of ordinary families will have to pay hundreds of pounds a year extra without additional help.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Mr Sunak said he wants to "restore trust in politics"
He was very keen to point out that his opponent Liz Truss - who has still not come up with a date on which she will be interviewed - has made promises of tax cuts that will do nothing for the old or the poor.
Instead, he says it will give people on big salaries like hers a big handout of over £1,000 whilst folk on low wages get just a few quid.
One reason, perhaps, for Mr Sunak's reluctance to promise to spend more and to spell out his plans in detail is because he'd then have to put a price on them and explain where the many billions required would come from.
He can't say borrowing because he's condemned his main rival, Ms Truss, for mortgaging the futures of our children and grandchildren with her promise to borrow more to pay for tax cuts.
He says the money will come from efficiency savings. But the figures he needs to find would dwarf the savings that he needs to raise £1bn to spend on arms for Ukraine.
When it comes to another emergency - the huge backlog in the NHS - Mr Sunak is not promising to spend more.
This is despite warnings from those running NHS services that inflation will mean that they may have to employ fewer employees, build fewer hospitals or carry out fewer operations
Two-thirds of Tory members in a recent poll said they thought the health device had enough money already.
He has identified the control of our borders as another emergency, and I asked him about that Brexit promise that Britain would take control of its borders.
I also asked him: Is the promise made repeatedly by the Conservatives to cut net migration - the difference between the number coming into the country and the number leaving it - now dead?
The figure, about 240,000, is now well over double that target.
Mr Sunak appears not to mind providing people come here legally if their skills are needed.
He cares much more about illegal crossings of the channel even though the numbers doing that are much much lower.
Perhaps Rishi Sunak's biggest problem is that he is not Boris Johnson.
Many in his party wish that the ballot paper gave them the option to keep Mr Johnson in Number 10.
I asked Mr Sunak whether Mr Johnson was unfit to stay in office. It's a question he's tried to avoid up until now speaking in code about the prime minister being "on the wrong side of an ethical issue".
He said that that was why he'd resigned from the cabinet and declining trust in the standards in public life did itself constitute another emergency.
So, is Mr Sunak like the plumber who comes to fix your broken boiler and tells you: "It's worse than you think, it'll cost you a lot more and things are really bad?" when all people want is someone who says "yes, I can fix it?"
Is he, in Boris Johnson's words, a gloomster and not a booster?
No, he insisted, when I put that to him, I'm the guy you can trust to put things right.
Even though he keeps being told he is going to lose, he looks like a man who still believes there's an argument worth having.
Nick Robinson sits down with Conservative leadership candidate Rishi Sunak to see where he stands on the issues that matter to you.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62496845
|
news_uk-politics-62496845
|
|
Dafydd Wigley: Welsh independence less likely if Scotland stays - BBC News
|
2022-08-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Former Plaid leader Dafydd Wigley says there would be a "greater focus" on a redesigned UK.
|
Wales politics
|
An independent Wales is "less likely" to come about if Scotland does not vote to leave the UK first, a former Plaid Cymru leader has said.
Lord Dafydd Wigley said if Scotland again voted "no" to independence, there would be a "greater focus" on a redesigned United Kingdom.
He was speaking to the BBC Walescast podcast in the first of a series of interviews with Welsh politicians.
The Scottish government wants to hold a second independence referendum in 2023.
But UK government ministers are opposed to the vote.
Lord Wigley served as MP for Caernarfon from 1974 up to 2001, and was the constituency's assembly member from the opening of the institution until 2003.
He led Plaid Cymru twice, in the early 1980s and from 1991 to 2000. He will retire soon from the House of Lords, where he has been a peer since 2011.
In a wide-ranging interview, Lord Wigley talks about his "difficult" time in Cardiff Bay, and how he witnessed the election of a new prime minister from Downing Street.
Lord Wigley served as MP for Caernarfon from 1974 until 2001
The former Plaid leader questioned where England and Wales would be left "as a unit" if Scotland became independent.
"Is that what we want," he asked, "to be a small pimple on the western side of England that doesn't count for anything?
"We get precious little voice now in the UK, we'll get even less when it is so dominated by the needs of England."
But he said if Scotland rejected independence a second time it was "less likely" that Wales would become independent.
"In realistic terms, if Scotland was to have a referendum and it went 'no', I think what we then have is a greater focus on a federalism or confederal argument."
Under a federal set-up, more powers could shift from London to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland but power would still ultimately reside in Westminster.
Lord Wigley prefers a confederal system, where authority would lie with the four individual countries of the UK, but "certain functions", like defence, are pooled together.
The current Welsh government, led by Labour's Mark Drakeford, supports the union and is opposed to Welsh independence.
Plaid Cymru, the third largest party in the Welsh parliament and now in a co-operation agreement with Mr Drakeford, campaigned to hold a vote at the last Senedd election.
Lord Wigley's Plaid Cymru campaigned for the then National Assembly to be established in the 1997 referendum, as did Welsh Labour at the time. The Yes side won, but just, with 50.3% of the vote.
A quarter of a century on and the slender victory for Welsh devolution is still emotive for the former Plaid leader.
As the results first came in, he said it was "as if you were going in half-time in a football match losing 10-0… I knew in my heart if we'd have lost that we'd have lost it for my lifetime".
But the fortunes of devolution supporters would change as the counting continued.
"A civil servant came down and said: 'The Secretary of State [for Wales Ron Davies] would like to have a word with you.'
"I went down a long corridor, I knocked on the door, and the door opened. Ron just came and flung his arms around me and said: 'We've won, Dafydd.'
"And that was a night, a moment of a night that I will never forget, never forget."
Fighting back tears, he adds: "It was a changing of our fortunes in a flick of a switch."
Lord Wigley, pictured with his wife Elinor, saw his party reach a high watermark at the 1999 Assembly election
The first election for the National Assembly - the institution now known as the Welsh Parliament - took place in 1999.
As the results and early gossip started coming in, Lord Wigley "went ashen white" because Plaid could well be the largest party and "the reality was we were not ready for that".
In the end, Plaid won 17 out of the 60 seats. It was a high watermark that the party is yet to beat.
"We got to a position where there was a danger of Plaid talking to its heartlands, and there is a need now, as always, to have an agenda that touches the nerve in each of those industrial seats and in Cardiff, and Swansea, and Newport, there's no reason on earth why we can't relate there," he reflected.
He recalls his brief time in the National Assembly from 1999 to 2003, while he was still an MP, as "difficult".
"I'd wrongly, I believe, made the decision to continue as MP for Caernarfon up until the next election in 2001.
"It's one of the worst decisions I've made in my life. I should've stood down immediately in Westminster."
Having then had a "heart operation in December 1999", Lord Wigley laughs as he explains he was then told "to avoid stressful positions".
Shortly afterwards, it was suggested by Plaid colleagues Ieuan Wyn Jones and Cynog Dafis that he should stand down as leader.
"I don't feel betrayed because I don't see other people's ambitions as anything you should try restricting," he said.
Despite dedicating his political life to the establishment of a Welsh Parliament, Lord Wigley has spent much more time in Westminster.
There are many highlights, from securing compensation payments to former slate quarry workers suffering from pneumoconiosis, to his campaigning work on disability politics following the death of two of his boys, Alun and Geraint, to a genetic illness.
He has also struck up some unexpected friendships, including with a former prime minister.
On the night John Major was chosen to enter 10 Downing Street, Lord Wigley was invited to his home for a family party
On the night John Major was chosen to enter 10 Downing Street, Dafydd Wigley was invited over for a "small family party".
Dafydd Wigley continues the story: "There about 40 or 50 people milling around.
"John Major then goes through next door to join Margaret Thatcher for a night cap and the party starts dying down.
"Anyway, Newsnight was coming on and they only had one television."
That television was in John and Norma Major's bedroom.
Lord Wigley added: "So, there was I and a couple of other family friends and Norma sitting on the prime minister-elect's bed watching coverage of him being elected as prime minister."
He eventually left, not wanting to overstay his welcome.
Lord Wigley is now preparing to leave Westminster once and for all. But after more than 50 years in frontline politics, he isn't quite done yet.
Watch the interview on Walescast on BBC One Wales at 22:40 on Wednesday, or on iPlayer after broadcast, or listen to it on BBC Sounds.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-62478472
|
news_uk-wales-politics-62478472
|
|
Tory leadership: I'd rather lose doing right thing, says Sunak - BBC News
|
2022-08-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former chancellor says he has a "moral responsibility" to help the poorest with energy bills.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rishi Sunak said he wants to "restore trust in politics"
Rishi Sunak has said he would rather lose the Tory leadership race than "win on a false promise".
In a BBC interview, the former chancellor said he would tell people what "they needed to hear" and stay "true" to his values.
He added the next prime minister had a "moral responsibility" to support poorer households with payments for energy bills.
And he said rival Liz Truss's plan for tax cuts would not help the most needy.
He told the BBC's Nick Robinson he would spend billions of pounds on further targeted payments to pensioners and those on low incomes.
The plan marks a contrast with Foreign Secretary Ms Truss, who argues tax cuts are a more Conservative way to help with rising living costs.
How to help households with rising energy bills has become a key dividing line in the contest to succeed Boris Johnson as next UK prime minister.
Nick Robinson sits down with Conservative leadership candidate Rishi Sunak to see where he stands on the issues that matter to you.
As the war on words over energy turned increasingly bitter on Wednesday, Ms Truss's team said Mr Sunak's "socialist tax and spend" proposals would tip the UK into recession.
The foreign secretary said helping people with tax cuts would be better for the economy and would be her "first port of call" if she becomes prime minister.
But in his BBC interview, Mr Sunak said her plan would not help "millions of people" who only pay low or no taxes, whilst his winter payments would ensure support for those "that most need our help".
Ms Truss has not ruled out extra payments this winter if she enters No 10 - and said earlier that she would do "all that I can to help struggling households".
Mr Sunak's campaign argued the comments showed she was considering direct payments, calling it a U-turn.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Mr Sunak said it was too early to put a precise figure on how much his extra payments would be worth, or what they would cost.
However, he suggested they would compensate for a projected £400 increase in bills compared to predictions earlier this year.
These extra payments would come on top of a £15bn package of payments he announced as chancellor in May.
Pushed on whether the extra payments would cost a "few billion" or more than £10bn, he replied: "It's much closer to former than the latter."
He said the "temporary" support would be made by increasing the scale of payments to pensioners and low-income households due in the autumn.
He said his plan to cut VAT on energy bills, announced earlier in the campaign, would ensure people of all incomes receive some help.
He has said public borrowing required to fund his plans can be minimised through "efficiencies" in government spending - although he has not set out detailed plans.
It comes after a forecast on Tuesday suggested bills for a typical household could hit £4,266 next year, higher than predictions made earlier this year.
"That's why I do feel a moral responsibility as PM to go further, and get extra help to people over the autumn and the winter," he added.
On Wednesday, Ms Truss said her plan for tax cuts would "turbocharge our economy, grow the size of the pie and increase prosperity for everyone".
A spokesperson for her campaign added: "people didn't vote for the Conservative Party to be subjected to old fashioned Gordon Brown-style politics of envy".
The BBC has also invited Liz Truss to a one-on-one interview with Nick Robinson and says it has been discussing timings with her team.
Both Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss believe they are on the right side of the moral argument over the cost of living crisis that is dominating this leadership election.
Liz Truss argues that putting up taxes is immoral - but Rishi Sunak told Nick Robinson the government had a "moral responsibility" to go further to help those who cannot afford to heat their homes.
He suggested bills could be £400 higher than anticipated when he was chancellor. How much further would he go? Anyone hoping for specific figures will have to wait but there were strong hints of targeted help for pensioners and those on the lowest incomes.
This interview may be seen and heard by millions but both candidates have tried, to varying degrees, to target their message at the 160,000 or so Conservative Party members who will choose our next prime minister.
Mr Sunak, the self-styled underdog in this contest, appeared to acknowledge that those members may prefer to hear Liz Truss's message on tax cuts.
He said he went into the contest prepared to tell people "what they needed to hear rather than what they needed to hear, not necessarily what they wanted to hear".
That doesn't mean he hasn't refined his own message during the campaign - he's promising to cut VAT on energy bills, a position he rejected in government - but he made clear he would rather lose (or win) on his own terms.
"Our Next Prime Minister: The Interviews" is available on BBC iPlayer now, and is on BBC One at 7pm
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62496858
|
news_uk-politics-62496858
|
|
Brittney Griner: Russian prosecutors seek nine-and-a-half year sentence - BBC News
|
2022-08-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The US basketball star pleaded guilty to drugs charges but denies deliberately breaking the law.
|
Europe
|
Russian prosecutors have asked a court to sentence the US basketball star Brittney Griner to almost 10 years in prison on drugs charges.
The Olympic gold medallist was detained in February at an airport near Moscow when cannabis oil vape cartridges were found in her luggage.
Cannabis is illegal in Russia for both medicinal and recreational use.
Ms Griner, 31, pleaded guilty to drug charges but has denied deliberately breaking the law.
A verdict is expected later on Thursday.
"I made an honest mistake, and I hope in your ruling it does not end my life," Ms Griner told the court shortly after both sides presented closing arguments.
"I did not conspire or plan to commit this crime," she added.
The trial has reached the top levels of US-Russia diplomacy, with reports suggesting a conviction in the case could pave the way for a dramatic prisoner swap involving the Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout.
Russian courts rarely acquit defendants, and analysts say a conviction is highly likely. The length of sentence is thought to be less certain.
"I ask the court to find Griner guilty and sentence her to nine years and six months in prison," prosecutor Nikolay Vlasenko said.
He also requested that the basketball star, who had played in Russia, be fined one million roubles (£13,700; $16,500), according to the AFP news agency.
In their closing argument, Ms Griner's lawyers called for a more lenient punishment and referenced her high profile in the sporting world.
"In sprinting there is Usain Bolt, in Formula 1 - Michael Schumacher, and in women's basketball there is Brittney Griner," her lawyer Maria Blagovolina, said.
Ms Blagovolina also argued that Ms Griner packed the cartridges by mistake and only used cannabis for medical purposes while in the US state of Arizona.
At an earlier court hearing, Ms Griner said officials had made her sign documents but "no-one explained any of it to me".
She also said she had received neither an explanation of her rights nor access to a lawyer in the initial hours of her detention, and that she had to use a translation app on her phone to communicate.
"I still don't understand to this day how [the vape cartridges] ended up in my bags," Ms Griner said.
"With them being accidentally in my bags, I take responsibility, but I did not intend to smuggle or plan to smuggle anything into Russia."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62424149
|
news_world-europe-62424149
|
|
Brittney Griner: US basketball star jailed for nine years on drug charges - BBC News
|
2022-08-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Brittney Griner, 31, is jailed on drug charges, a verdict President Joe Biden calls "unacceptable".
|
Europe
|
Brittney Griner (right) pleaded guilty to drug charges - but denied deliberately breaking the law
A Russian court has sentenced US basketball star Brittney Griner to nine years in prison on drug charges.
As Griner, 31, was being led out of the courtroom in handcuffs, she was heard saying: "I love my family."
The double Olympic winner has admitted possessing cannabis oil, but told the court she had made an "honest mistake".
The court near Moscow convicted her of smuggling and possessing narcotics. The prosecution had sought a nine-and-a-half year jail term.
Reading the verdict on Thursday, the presiding judge said she had taken into account the fact that the American had already spent a considerable time in detention.
Griner's defence lawyer Maria Blagovolina said her client was "very upset, very stressed".
"She can hardly talk. It's a difficult time for her. When we saw Brittney on Tuesday, we told her, 'See you on Thursday'. She said, 'See you on doomsday'. So it looks like she was right."
The defence team said they would appeal against the verdict.
Griner, who is considered one of the best players in the world, was detained in February at an airport near Moscow when vape cartridges containing cannabis oil were found in her luggage.
She had come to Russia to play club basketball during the US off-season.
Soon after, Russia invaded Ukraine and her case has become subject to high-profile diplomacy between the US and Russia.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: "Russia, and any country engaging in wrongful detention, represents a threat to the safety of everyone travelling, working, and living abroad."
It is unclear how long she will actually spend behind bars, as the US and Russia have been discussing a potential prisoner swap that could involve the basketball player.
Reports in US media suggest imprisoned Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout - known as the Merchant of Death - could be transferred by Washington to the Russian authorities as part of the deal.
Speaking after her sentencing, White House national security spokesman John Kirby urged Russia to accept the "serious proposal" offered by the US for Griner and fellow detained US citizen Paul Whelan.
"It's a serious proposal. We urge them to accept it. They should have accepted it weeks ago when we first made it," Mr Kirby said.
After the court heard closing arguments, Griner said: "I made an honest mistake, and I hope in your ruling it does not end my life."
"I did not conspire or plan to commit this crime," she added.
Griner also said she had received neither an explanation of her rights nor access to a lawyer in the initial hours of her detention, and that she had to use a translation app on her phone to communicate.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62427635
|
news_world-europe-62427635
|
|
Alex Jones must pay $4m in damages for Sandy Hook hoax claims - BBC News
|
2022-08-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The parents of a child killed in the shooting say they endured harassment because of the radio host's claims.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch as Alex Jones is told his text messages were sent to opposing lawyers by mistake
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has been ordered to pay $4.1m (£3.3m) in damages after falsely claiming the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting was a hoax.
The parents of a victim have sought at least $150m in the Texas defamation trial against the Infowars founder.
They said they endured harassment and emotional distress because of the right-wing host's misinformation.
Twenty children and six adults were shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.
The jury in the city of Austin decided compensatory damages on Thursday, and must still determine any punitive damages.
Jones - who was not in court when the outcome was announced - has repeatedly argued that the shooting was a hoax organised by the government in order to strip Americans of gun ownership rights, and that the parents of the dead children were "crisis actors".
He has already lost a series of defamation cases brought by parents of the victims by default after failing to produce documents and testimony.
But this is the first in which financial damages were agreed by a jury.
The case was brought by Scarlett Lewis and Neil Heslin, the separated parents of six-year-old Jesse Lewis, who died in the school shooting.
Ahead of Thursday's decision, a lawyer for the plaintiffs revealed that Jones' lawyer had inadvertently sent him two years of texts from his client's phone.
The attorney said a congressional panel investigating last year's US Capitol riot had already requested access to the messages. The committee has said Jones helped organise a rally that took place just before the riot.
Despite retracting his claims about Sandy Hook, Jones has continued to use his platform to attack jurors and the judge in this case.
Jesse Lewis, six, was killed at Sandy Hook
He also claimed he was bankrupt despite evidence that his companies were earning about $800,000 a day selling diet supplements, gun paraphernalia and survivalist equipment.
During the emotionally charged two-week trial, Jones portrayed the case as an attack on his free speech rights under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
"Speech is free, but lies you have to pay for," lawyers for the families countered in their opening arguments.
Testifying on Wednesday, Jones acknowledged the Sandy Hook attack was "100% real" and apologised for having "hurt these people's feelings".
But in her testimony, Mrs Lewis addressed Jones in court, saying: "Jesse was real… I'm a real mom."
She went on to say it is "incredible to me that we have to do this".
"That we have to implore you - not just implore you, punish you - to get you to stop lying," she continued, adding: "It is surreal what is going on in here."
Mr Heslin said that Jones' lies "tarnished the honour and legacy" of his son, adding that he had gone through nearly 10 years of "hell" since the attack.
According to lawyers for the parents, they were forced to hire private security for the trial out of concern that followers of Jones could seek to harm them.
The parents said Jones had made their lives "hell"
One forensic psychiatrist testified that the parents were suffering from "complex post-traumatic stress disorder" similar to what battlefield soldiers or victims of child abuse endure.
Lawyers for the parents accused Jones of trying to hide evidence, and argued that he had committed perjury when he denied sending messages related to the Sandy Hook attack.
Jones' Infowars parent company, Free Speech Systems LLC, declared bankruptcy last week. The outlet has been banned by YouTube, Spotify and Twitter for hate speech, but continues to operate.
Other wild conspiracies pushed by Jones include that the US government is creating floods and tornados as "weather weapons" and that chemicals in drinking water are making frogs homosexual.
Lawyer Mark Banston, who represented the parents in the case, told reporters outside court on Thursday that his clients were not disappointed with the sum awarded by the jury.
"We aren't done folks," the attorney was quoted as saying by the Associated Press news agency.
"We knew coming into this case it was necessary to shoot for the moon to get the jury to understand we were serious and passionate. After tomorrow, he's going to owe a lot more."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62427918
|
news_world-us-canada-62427918
|
|
Alex Jones concedes Sandy Hook school shooting was '100% real' - BBC News
|
2022-08-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Parents of a child who was killed are seeking millions in a defamation trial against the radio host.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch as Alex Jones is told his text messages were sent to opposing lawyers by mistake
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has testified that the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting was "100% real" and that it was wrong to call it a hoax.
The parents of a child killed in the shooting are seeking at least $150m (£123m) in a defamation trial brought against the prominent radio host.
They say they have endured harassment and emotional distress because of Mr Jones's comments about the attack.
The trial will determine how much money he owes for defaming the couple.
Mr Jones is the only person testifying in his defence during the proceedings in Texas. He has portrayed the case as an attack on his free speech rights under the First Amendment.
On Wednesday, the Infowars host said he now understood that it was irresponsible of him to claim the shooting was false and that no children were killed.
"Especially since I've met the parents. It's 100% real," he said. "They [the media] won't let me take it back."
In a dramatic moment in court, it was also revealed that Mr Jones's text messages had been sent by mistake to a lawyer representing the parents.
Mark Bankston, a lawyer for Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, whose six-year-old son Jesse died in the shooting, revealed that he had been sent an "entire digital copy" of Mr Jones's cell phone spanning a period of two years.
Mr Bankston added that when he told the opposing legal team about the mishap, they "did not take any steps to identify it as privileged or protected in any way".
The revelation emerged after Mr Bankston provided Mr Jones with a copy of texts from his device that referenced Sandy Hook. Mr Jones had previously said under oath that there were no such messages.
"You did get my text messages?" Mr Jones asked. "You said you didn't. Nice trick."
"You know what perjury is, right?" Mr Bankston said."I just want to make sure before we go further."
Mr Jones then insisted he had not tried to hide any messages. "If I was mistaken, I was mistaken," he said, adding that he was not a "tech guy".
Twenty children and six adults were shot dead at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut in 2012.
In the years following the incident, Mr Jones repeatedly claimed that the shooting was a ploy to push gun control measures and claimed without evidence that it had been staged by actors and the media.
In his testimony, he also complained that he was being "typecast" as "someone that runs around talking about Sandy Hook, makes money off Sandy Hook, is obsessed by Sandy Hook".
Closing arguments in the case are expected to begin later on Wednesday before jurors begin deliberating a verdict.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62415376
|
news_world-us-canada-62415376
|
|
Brittney Griner: US basketball star jailed for nine years on drug charges - BBC News
|
2022-08-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Brittney Griner, 31, is jailed on drug charges, a verdict President Joe Biden calls "unacceptable".
|
Europe
|
Brittney Griner (right) pleaded guilty to drug charges - but denied deliberately breaking the law
A Russian court has sentenced US basketball star Brittney Griner to nine years in prison on drug charges.
As Griner, 31, was being led out of the courtroom in handcuffs, she was heard saying: "I love my family."
The double Olympic winner has admitted possessing cannabis oil, but told the court she had made an "honest mistake".
The court near Moscow convicted her of smuggling and possessing narcotics. The prosecution had sought a nine-and-a-half year jail term.
Reading the verdict on Thursday, the presiding judge said she had taken into account the fact that the American had already spent a considerable time in detention.
Griner's defence lawyer Maria Blagovolina said her client was "very upset, very stressed".
"She can hardly talk. It's a difficult time for her. When we saw Brittney on Tuesday, we told her, 'See you on Thursday'. She said, 'See you on doomsday'. So it looks like she was right."
The defence team said they would appeal against the verdict.
Griner, who is considered one of the best players in the world, was detained in February at an airport near Moscow when vape cartridges containing cannabis oil were found in her luggage.
She had come to Russia to play club basketball during the US off-season.
Soon after, Russia invaded Ukraine and her case has become subject to high-profile diplomacy between the US and Russia.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: "Russia, and any country engaging in wrongful detention, represents a threat to the safety of everyone travelling, working, and living abroad."
It is unclear how long she will actually spend behind bars, as the US and Russia have been discussing a potential prisoner swap that could involve the basketball player.
Reports in US media suggest imprisoned Russian arms trafficker Viktor Bout - known as the Merchant of Death - could be transferred by Washington to the Russian authorities as part of the deal.
Speaking after her sentencing, White House national security spokesman John Kirby urged Russia to accept the "serious proposal" offered by the US for Griner and fellow detained US citizen Paul Whelan.
"It's a serious proposal. We urge them to accept it. They should have accepted it weeks ago when we first made it," Mr Kirby said.
After the court heard closing arguments, Griner said: "I made an honest mistake, and I hope in your ruling it does not end my life."
"I did not conspire or plan to commit this crime," she added.
Griner also said she had received neither an explanation of her rights nor access to a lawyer in the initial hours of her detention, and that she had to use a translation app on her phone to communicate.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62427635
|
news_world-europe-62427635
|
|
Alex Jones must pay $4m in damages for Sandy Hook hoax claims - BBC News
|
2022-08-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The parents of a child killed in the shooting say they endured harassment because of the radio host's claims.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch as Alex Jones is told his text messages were sent to opposing lawyers by mistake
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has been ordered to pay $4.1m (£3.3m) in damages after falsely claiming the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting was a hoax.
The parents of a victim have sought at least $150m in the Texas defamation trial against the Infowars founder.
They said they endured harassment and emotional distress because of the right-wing host's misinformation.
Twenty children and six adults were shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.
The jury in the city of Austin decided compensatory damages on Thursday, and must still determine any punitive damages.
Jones - who was not in court when the outcome was announced - has repeatedly argued that the shooting was a hoax organised by the government in order to strip Americans of gun ownership rights, and that the parents of the dead children were "crisis actors".
He has already lost a series of defamation cases brought by parents of the victims by default after failing to produce documents and testimony.
But this is the first in which financial damages were agreed by a jury.
The case was brought by Scarlett Lewis and Neil Heslin, the separated parents of six-year-old Jesse Lewis, who died in the school shooting.
Ahead of Thursday's decision, a lawyer for the plaintiffs revealed that Jones' lawyer had inadvertently sent him two years of texts from his client's phone.
The attorney said a congressional panel investigating last year's US Capitol riot had already requested access to the messages. The committee has said Jones helped organise a rally that took place just before the riot.
Despite retracting his claims about Sandy Hook, Jones has continued to use his platform to attack jurors and the judge in this case.
Jesse Lewis, six, was killed at Sandy Hook
He also claimed he was bankrupt despite evidence that his companies were earning about $800,000 a day selling diet supplements, gun paraphernalia and survivalist equipment.
During the emotionally charged two-week trial, Jones portrayed the case as an attack on his free speech rights under the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
"Speech is free, but lies you have to pay for," lawyers for the families countered in their opening arguments.
Testifying on Wednesday, Jones acknowledged the Sandy Hook attack was "100% real" and apologised for having "hurt these people's feelings".
But in her testimony, Mrs Lewis addressed Jones in court, saying: "Jesse was real… I'm a real mom."
She went on to say it is "incredible to me that we have to do this".
"That we have to implore you - not just implore you, punish you - to get you to stop lying," she continued, adding: "It is surreal what is going on in here."
Mr Heslin said that Jones' lies "tarnished the honour and legacy" of his son, adding that he had gone through nearly 10 years of "hell" since the attack.
According to lawyers for the parents, they were forced to hire private security for the trial out of concern that followers of Jones could seek to harm them.
The parents said Jones had made their lives "hell"
One forensic psychiatrist testified that the parents were suffering from "complex post-traumatic stress disorder" similar to what battlefield soldiers or victims of child abuse endure.
Lawyers for the parents accused Jones of trying to hide evidence, and argued that he had committed perjury when he denied sending messages related to the Sandy Hook attack.
Jones' Infowars parent company, Free Speech Systems LLC, declared bankruptcy last week. The outlet has been banned by YouTube, Spotify and Twitter for hate speech, but continues to operate.
Other wild conspiracies pushed by Jones include that the US government is creating floods and tornados as "weather weapons" and that chemicals in drinking water are making frogs homosexual.
Lawyer Mark Banston, who represented the parents in the case, told reporters outside court on Thursday that his clients were not disappointed with the sum awarded by the jury.
"We aren't done folks," the attorney was quoted as saying by the Associated Press news agency.
"We knew coming into this case it was necessary to shoot for the moon to get the jury to understand we were serious and passionate. After tomorrow, he's going to owe a lot more."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62427918
|
news_world-us-canada-62427918
|
|
UK government argues MSPs do not have power to set up indyref2 - BBC News
|
2022-08-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
UK ministers will argue in court that Holyrood cannot set up a referendum without Westminster backing.
|
Scotland politics
|
The Scottish Parliament "plainly" does not have the power to set up an independence referendum, UK government law officers have argued.
The Supreme Court is to look at whether MSPs can legislate for a vote without Westminster's backing in October.
The Scottish government has argued that any vote would be "advisory" and would not directly break up the union.
But UK law officers said there was "no secret" that Scottish ministers would want the vote to lead to independence.
Papers published on Wednesday said a referendum was "not designed to be an exercise in mere abstract opinion polling at considerable public expense", and it would clearly be used to push for "the secession of Scotland" from the UK.
Judges will hear arguments at the court in London on 11 and 12 October.
The SNP has also applied to intervene in the case to make additional arguments in favour of a referendum.
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wants to hold a vote on independence in October 2023, and has been pushing the UK government to agree to this.
However in the absence of a deal she also wants judges to rule on whether Holyrood has the power to set up a vote without Westminster support.
The case has been referred to the Supreme Court by Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain, the Scottish government's top law officer, in a bid to clarify whether MSPs can pass legislation paving the way for a poll.
Constitutional matters including the union are reserved to Westminster, but Ms Bain has argued that an "advisory" referendum would not necessarily cut across this.
The QC said that the vote would have "no prescribed legal consequences arising from its result", and that it would be for politicians to decide what to do afterwards.
Ms Sturgeon has argued this was also the case with the 2014 independence referendum and the 2016 vote on EU membership, which led to years of negotiations and bills being passed before Brexit actually happened.
The UK government meanwhile does not want judges to rule on the case at all, arguing that it would be premature to decide anything before a bill has been passed by MSPs.
Papers lodged on behalf of the Advocate General for Scotland - Lord Stewart of Dirleton, the UK government's top Scots law officer - argue that the court would not normally give "advisory opinions on abstract legal questions".
Legislative disputes between the Scottish and UK governments are heard in the Supreme Court in London
The submission also states that "the Scottish Parliament plainly does not have the competence to legislate for an advisory referendum on the independence of Scotland from the United Kingdom".
On the idea of a vote being "advisory", the submission said there was "no secret" about the Scottish government's intentions.
It added: "It cannot be credibly suggested that the outcome of the referendum will be 'advisory' in the sense of being treated as an academic interest only.
"A referendum is not, and is not designed to be, an exercise in mere abstract opinion polling at considerable public expense.
"Were the outcome to favour independence, it would be used - and no doubt used by the SNP as the central plank - to seek to build momentum towards achieving that end: the termination of the union and the secession of Scotland."
There are few surprises in the UK government submission - it is fairly straightforward, that Holyrood doesn't have the authority to set up a referendum.
It is however slightly awkward for this to be stated so baldly.
UK ministers have previously preferred to stress the breadth of devolved responsibilities, painting Holyrood as one of the world's most powerful devolved parliaments.
That allows them to put pressure back on the SNP over the running of services in Scotland, and avoids the impression of telling MSPs to get "back in your box".
It's also why they tend to say "not now" to a referendum, rather than a flat "no". But putting it into bare legal terms removes the softer edges of political messaging.
It all underlines that the outcome of this case will cause a political storm no matter the result.
Should the UK government's legal arguments win out in the Supreme Court, they will immediately become political arguments for Ms Sturgeon to use in the court of public opinion.
A very public demonstration of the limits of Holyrood's powers could be a cornerstone of her case for why it should have more.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62491289
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-62491289
|
|
Ryan Giggs: Covid lockdown was hell, ex tells court - BBC News
|
2022-08-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former Manchester United star is accused of using controlling and coercive behaviour
|
Wales
|
Ryan Giggs' trial is expected to last two weeks
Ryan Giggs' ex-girlfriend said living with him during the first Covid lockdown was "utter hell", a court has heard.
The former Manchester United star and Wales manager, 48, is accused of using controlling and coercive behaviour and assaulting Kate Greville.
Mr Giggs is charged with causing her actual bodily harm, and of the common assault of her younger sister, Emma Greville.
The pair moved in together after he asked her to live with him in Worsley, Greater Manchester.
Ms Greville said she did not choose to live elsewhere because she "wanted to stay with Ryan... because we had just started the relationship again".
The court heard that during lockdown the couple did online family quizzes, Zoom wine tastings and had Michelin-starred chefs bring in food.
But Ms Greville said there were arguments, including about a dishwasher.
"He was making me feel like I was stupid, the way I was loading it. I had to do it exactly the way he wanted to do it."
Chris Daw QC, defending Mr Giggs, said: "You suggest in your various accounts that lockdown was a period of living hell."
Ms Greville replied: "I felt like I was losing my mind. I was having panic attacks. It was a horrific time."
The court previously heard that Mr Giggs had "deliberately headbutted" his ex-girlfriend and his private life involved a "litany of abuse, both physical and psychological".
The former Manchester United star is accused of using controlling and coercive behaviour
The court heard on 16 November, 2020, four days before she was interviewed by police about her allegations, an article appeared in The Sun.
There was a photo of her walking her dog and the words, "Living hell: Ryan Giggs's ex spotted with a bruised lip in first outing since Wales manager's assault arrest".
Messages were read from 10 November between Ms Greville and a friend.
The friend said she was going to sell a picture of Ms Greville.
Ms Greville suggested they set up a photo and both get paid. Her friend was keen to do this.
"We could get £5K," said Ms Greville.
Mr Daw asked if she was selling stories to the press about the case.
"It was a picture," Ms Greville said.
It was suggested she would not have returned to Mr Giggs had he been a serial and violent abuser.
Ms Greville said: "He made me believe that he would not do it again and, stupidly, I went back. I am hugely ashamed of that but I did."
Mr Daw questioned Ms Greville about her claims Mr Giggs "effectively isolated you or affected your relationships with friends and family".
She said the way he made her feel meant she did not want to "interact with my friends as much and tell them what was going on". She did not "frequently spend time with my family", but her sister would regularly come to the house.
Mr Daw pointed out a number of photos of Ms Greville on holiday with friends in 2019 and 2020, saying it was a "naked lie" Mr Giggs did anything to stop her seeing them.
Ms Greville replied: "He was creating really difficult relationships with these people".
Ryan Giggs' football career ended with him as the most decorated player in the Premier League era, with 34 trophies
She also told the court she was made to feel that a violent attack on her by him in a London hotel room had been her fault.
Mr Daw read a series of text messages between them the day after she said he kicked her in the back out of bed, threw a laptop bag at her head and threw her naked out of a hotel room.
She agreed the messages were "good humoured" and referred jokingly to their hangovers following an event they had both attended in London the evening before.
Mr Daw said Mr Giggs' version of events was that the pair had been at a work function and Ms Greville accused him of flirting with a woman he had been paired with for a crazy golf competition.
She denied she tried to "wind him up" by flirting with another man at a club later on.
Mr Daw said that the next morning you said to him: "I was so drunk I don't remember much about that night."
Ms Greville told the court: "While we were at breakfast I went to touch my head and my head was hurting, I said: 'Did you throw a bag at me last night?' and he said: 'Yes, but you wound me up that much you made me do it'."
When Mr Daw said this was "all just lies," she replied: "No, absolutely not."
Ms Greville was asked about the discovery of messages on Mr Giggs' phone that showed he had been messaging other women in August 2020.
She was asked whether her decision to leave him was based on infidelity, and not coercion or violence.
Ryan Giggs watched as Kate Greville's police interview was played for the jury
She replied it was "incorrect" that she left Mr Giggs solely because he was a cheat. She said she left him because of that, combined with everything else.
The court heard that in October Ms Greville messaged a friend saying she needed a plan and was not walking away with nothing.
Asked what she meant, she told the court she needed a plan to get away in secret, so Mr Giggs could not find her and harass her.
Making reference to her walking away remark, she said she was talking about the dog.
When asked if her plan was to get pregnant by Mr Giggs, she said: "No, absolutely not."
Ms Greville denied she was planning to get pregnant by having her contraceptive coil removed without Mr Giggs' knowledge, and that she did not recall continuing to have unprotected sex with him.
She denied she lied "prolifically" to the police, with Mr Daw saying "you have twisted the truth very carefully to try to implicate him in crimes he did not commit".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62505497
|
news_uk-wales-62505497
|
|
Tory leadership: I'd rather lose doing right thing, says Sunak - BBC News
|
2022-08-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former chancellor says he has a "moral responsibility" to help the poorest with energy bills.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rishi Sunak said he wants to "restore trust in politics"
Rishi Sunak has said he would rather lose the Tory leadership race than "win on a false promise".
In a BBC interview, the former chancellor said he would tell people what "they needed to hear" and stay "true" to his values.
He added the next prime minister had a "moral responsibility" to support poorer households with payments for energy bills.
And he said rival Liz Truss's plan for tax cuts would not help the most needy.
He told the BBC's Nick Robinson he would spend billions of pounds on further targeted payments to pensioners and those on low incomes.
The plan marks a contrast with Foreign Secretary Ms Truss, who argues tax cuts are a more Conservative way to help with rising living costs.
How to help households with rising energy bills has become a key dividing line in the contest to succeed Boris Johnson as next UK prime minister.
Nick Robinson sits down with Conservative leadership candidate Rishi Sunak to see where he stands on the issues that matter to you.
As the war on words over energy turned increasingly bitter on Wednesday, Ms Truss's team said Mr Sunak's "socialist tax and spend" proposals would tip the UK into recession.
The foreign secretary said helping people with tax cuts would be better for the economy and would be her "first port of call" if she becomes prime minister.
But in his BBC interview, Mr Sunak said her plan would not help "millions of people" who only pay low or no taxes, whilst his winter payments would ensure support for those "that most need our help".
Ms Truss has not ruled out extra payments this winter if she enters No 10 - and said earlier that she would do "all that I can to help struggling households".
Mr Sunak's campaign argued the comments showed she was considering direct payments, calling it a U-turn.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Mr Sunak said it was too early to put a precise figure on how much his extra payments would be worth, or what they would cost.
However, he suggested they would compensate for a projected £400 increase in bills compared to predictions earlier this year.
These extra payments would come on top of a £15bn package of payments he announced as chancellor in May.
Pushed on whether the extra payments would cost a "few billion" or more than £10bn, he replied: "It's much closer to former than the latter."
He said the "temporary" support would be made by increasing the scale of payments to pensioners and low-income households due in the autumn.
He said his plan to cut VAT on energy bills, announced earlier in the campaign, would ensure people of all incomes receive some help.
He has said public borrowing required to fund his plans can be minimised through "efficiencies" in government spending - although he has not set out detailed plans.
It comes after a forecast on Tuesday suggested bills for a typical household could hit £4,266 next year, higher than predictions made earlier this year.
"That's why I do feel a moral responsibility as PM to go further, and get extra help to people over the autumn and the winter," he added.
On Wednesday, Ms Truss said her plan for tax cuts would "turbocharge our economy, grow the size of the pie and increase prosperity for everyone".
A spokesperson for her campaign added: "people didn't vote for the Conservative Party to be subjected to old fashioned Gordon Brown-style politics of envy".
The BBC has also invited Liz Truss to a one-on-one interview with Nick Robinson and says it has been discussing timings with her team.
Both Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss believe they are on the right side of the moral argument over the cost of living crisis that is dominating this leadership election.
Liz Truss argues that putting up taxes is immoral - but Rishi Sunak told Nick Robinson the government had a "moral responsibility" to go further to help those who cannot afford to heat their homes.
He suggested bills could be £400 higher than anticipated when he was chancellor. How much further would he go? Anyone hoping for specific figures will have to wait but there were strong hints of targeted help for pensioners and those on the lowest incomes.
This interview may be seen and heard by millions but both candidates have tried, to varying degrees, to target their message at the 160,000 or so Conservative Party members who will choose our next prime minister.
Mr Sunak, the self-styled underdog in this contest, appeared to acknowledge that those members may prefer to hear Liz Truss's message on tax cuts.
He said he went into the contest prepared to tell people "what they needed to hear rather than what they needed to hear, not necessarily what they wanted to hear".
That doesn't mean he hasn't refined his own message during the campaign - he's promising to cut VAT on energy bills, a position he rejected in government - but he made clear he would rather lose (or win) on his own terms.
"Our Next Prime Minister: The Interviews" is available on BBC iPlayer now, and is on BBC One at 7pm
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62496858
|
news_uk-politics-62496858
|
|
Euro 2022 final: Women's football will never be the same again - BBC Sport
|
2022-08-01
|
[]
|
After years of misery following England's football teams, the Lionesses finally gave the nation the trophy it craved.
| null |
Euro 2022 final: Women's football will never be the same again Last updated on .From the section Women's Euro 2022
Dutchwoman Sarina Wiegman led England to victory five years after doing the same for her home country England have been singing the lament about football coming home for an age - but after the barren years of misery, it finally came through the door into the welcoming arms of an exultant Wembley as the Lionesses were crowned European champions. The bare statistics state they beat old rivals and eight-time European champions Germany 2-1 after extra time. Sounds straightforward enough, except the wider context makes their triumph a seismic moment for women's football and the sport in general. It was 7.51pm in the evening Wembley sunshine when the outstanding captain, Leah Williamson, lifted that precious piece of silverware above her head and it all actually felt, looked and sounded real. England's magnificent Lionesses were Euro 2022 champions and had secured their place in history. England's women had won their first major trophy. An England senior football team had won its first major trophy in 56 years. On a day when 87,192 packed Wembley, an all-time Uefa tournament record, coach Sarina Wiegman and her players made themselves legends. England's women were centre stage. Winners. No-one can ever take this away from them. The years of disappointment were over. England's football had a success story - a winning story - to tell at last, and no-one deserved it more than a coach and squad that have quite simply changed the face of women's football in this country throughout a flawless, superbly managed Euro 2022 campaign over the past month. For those of us used to witnessing the years of hurt following England men's team, five European Championships and five World Cups in this particular case - a journey that has taken in Japan, Portugal, Germany, South Africa, Poland and Ukraine, Brazil, France, Russia and last summer's Euro 2020 - the misery was ended by the Lionesses on their own doorstep at Wembley. This was what watching an England team winning a trophy felt like and how the Lionesses deserved it, how they had the right to milk every second of Wembley's ecstasy, Wiegman's squad and support team taking a lap of honour, staring out at a sea of thousands of smiling, celebrating faces. 'Couldn't be further from last year's final' It was a little more than a year ago when the England men's team came closest to ending the curse, only to lose on penalties to Italy in the Euro 2020 final, another hard-luck story to follow on from losing the World Cup semi-final to Croatia in Moscow three years earlier. The occasion was one of abject misery and shame from first to last, a day defaced by disgraceful crowd behaviour, a lack of organisation and racial abuse of the England players who missed penalties in the shootout that left the crushing loss as simply another item on a thoroughly grim agenda. This day could not have been further away as an experience - joyful, peaceful, but still containing all the requisite jeopardy and tension that accompanies a major final. This was wonderfully civilised and friendly, but the atmosphere lost nothing for that. This still felt like a big occasion, but devoid of the slightest hint of toxicity. It could catch on. The game was not a classic when measured in quality but it was fiercely fought, at times brutal, and came up with the storyline England football fans have craved for so long. England found a way to prevail, as they have before in this tournament when times have been tough, and 31 July 2022 will now be marked down as the game-changer for women's football. The sky is the limit now with this team capturing the hearts and minds of a nation, surely ushering in a new era. Victory also brought more iconic moments to add to Alessia Russo's brilliant backheel in the semi-final against Sweden, with match-winner Chloe Kelly the central figure. Chloe Kelly's goal ensured the Lionesses ended their wait for a first major trophy England led though Ella Toone's superb lofted finish from Keira Walsh's perfect pass just after the hour, but the dangerous Germans, cruelly robbed of top scorer and talisman Alexandra Popp after she was injured in the warm-up, deservedly struck back when the dangerous Lina Magull clipped in the equaliser at the near post with 11 minutes left. Into extra time they went, and with the prospect of penalties looming - and we all know how painfully that usually ends for England - Kelly emerged from a scramble at a corner to bundle home the winner. What followed will be etched on the memory forever. It was England's Brandi Chastain moment. Chastain famously celebrated scoring the winning penalty for the United States in the 1999 World Cup by ripping off her shirt. Kelly followed suit as she raced around Wembley almost in disbelief. Her shirt-swirling jubilation will provide an image for the ages. Kelly had been introduced in one of those masterful changes Wiegman has implemented throughout Euro 2022, usually impeccably timed and having maximum impact. England were ten minutes from history, Wembley was knee-deep in chewed fingernails, but they survived with barely an anxious moment thanks to a masterpiece of game management that kept the ball in the corner and consequently Germany at arm's length. Wembley erupted when Ukrainian referee Kateryna Monzul sounded the final whistle, Kelly breaking off from her post-match interview by running away singing Sweet Caroline into the microphone. Lucy Bronze launched herself head first into layers of silver tickertape that exploded behind England as they lifted the trophy. The smiling figure of Wiegman, reserved and calculating in the technical area, joined in the celebrations with gusto after delivering what the Football Association hired her for after winning the trophy with the Netherlands in a home tournament five years ago. Wiegman was brought in to make England winners after losing three semi-finals. Job done. She has given off a cool air of calm and authority throughout. Wiegman stuck with the same team for six games, and for all the arguments about whether Alessia Russo should have started ahead of Ellen White, Wiegman can point towards a large silver trophy as her answer to that. As for England's Lionesses, this was the crowning glory of an unforgettable Euro 2022. Women's football - in the very best of ways - will never be the same again. In the words of Wiegman as she left the scene of England's triumph: "We changed society."
• None Why is football shirt collecting on the rise? Find out what's behind the popularity of these 'bits of polyester'
• None How do the Lionesses relax between matches? Pop in for a visit to England's Euro 2022 base camp
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62373333
|
rt_football_62373333
|
|
Trump search warrant: FBI took top secret files from Mar-a-Lago - BBC News
|
2022-08-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former president says the cache, including information about the "President of France", was declassified.
|
US & Canada
|
Donald Trump has said he welcomes the warrant being made public
The FBI seized top secret files in a search of former US President Donald Trump's estate in Florida this week, documents show.
Agents removed 11 sets of documents, including some marked "TS/SCI", a designation for material that could cause "exceptionally grave" damage to US national security.
Mr Trump denied any wrongdoing and said the items were declassified.
It was the first time an ex-president's home was searched in a criminal probe.
The list of items was made public on Friday afternoon after a judge unsealed a seven-page document that included the warrant authorising the search of Mr Trump's Palm Beach residence, Mar-a-Lago.
It said more than 20 boxes of items were taken on Monday, including a binder of photos, a handwritten note, unspecified information about the "President of France" and a clemency letter written on behalf of long-time Trump ally Roger Stone.
As well as four sets of top secret files, the cache includes three sets of "secret documents" and three sets of "confidential" material.
The warrant indicates that FBI agents were looking into potential violations of the Espionage Act, which makes it illegal to keep or transmit potentially dangerous national security information.
The removal of classified documents or materials is prohibited by law. Mr Trump increased the penalties for the crime while in office and it is now punishable by up to five years in prison.
The warrant notes that the locations searched at Mar-a-Lago include an area called the "45 office" and storage rooms, but not private guest suites not being used by Mr Trump and his staff.
The justice department had asked a court to make it public on Thursday, a move considered rare amid an ongoing investigation.
It was approved by a judge on 5 August, three days before it was carried out on Monday, 8 August.
On Friday night, Mr Trump's office issued a statement maintaining that he had used his authority while president to declassify the documents.
"He had a standing order that documents removed from the Oval Office and taken into the residence were deemed to be declassified," the statement said.
"The power to classify and declassify documents rests solely with the President of the United States.
"The idea that some paper-pushing bureaucrat, with classification authority delegated by the president, needs to approve of declassification is absurd."
Legal experts have told US media it is unclear whether this argument would hold up in court. "Presidents can declassify information but they have to follow a procedure," Tom Dupree, a lawyer who previously worked in the justice department, told the BBC.
"They have to fill out forms. They have to give certain authorisations. They can't simply say these documents are declassified. They have to follow a process [and it is] not clear that was followed here."
A spokesman for Mr Trump, Taylor Budowich, said the administration of President Joe Biden "is in obvious damage control after their botched raid".
Mr Budowich accused the administration of "leaking lies and innuendos to try to explain away the weaponisation of government against their dominant political opponent".
Mr Trump's conservative allies have also condemned the raid as a political hit job as he considers another run for the presidency in 2024.
Law enforcement agencies around the country are reportedly monitoring online threats against government officials that have emerged in the wake of the FBI search.
US Attorney General Merrick Garland, who personally approved the warrant, defended federal agents on Thursday as "dedicated, patriotic public servants".
"I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked," he told reporters.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62527628
|
news_world-us-canada-62527628
|
|
Tory leadership: Pay public sector workers in regions differently, says Truss - BBC News
|
2022-08-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
But Labour and some Tories say her plan would mean pay cuts for those living outside London.
|
UK Politics
|
Liz Truss has said she wants to save taxpayers' money by ending national pay deals for civil servants' pay.
The Tory leadership candidate wants to link civil servants' salaries to living standards where they work, meaning similar jobs could have different salaries depending on location.
Ms Truss says the scheme could be rolled out to other public sector areas, saving £8.8bn a year.
Labour called her plan "a fantasy recipe for levelling down".
The party's deputy leader Angela Rayner said it would reduce "the pay of Northerners, worsening the divide which already exists".
Some Conservative MPs in the south-west of England have also come out strongly against the proposals, with Steve Double, a Rishi Sunak ally, saying it would be "hugely damaging to public services in Cornwall".
And Ben Houchen - mayor of Tees Valley and another supporter of Mr Sunak - said: "There is simply no way you can do this without a massive pay cut for 5.5 million people including nurses, police officers and our armed forces outside London."
But minister and Truss backer Jacob Rees-Mogg said: "Anyone who currently works for the civil service will remain on their current terms but new people will be paid the market rate in the area in which they live - and that's quite rightly taking care of taxpayers' money."
He added that "if the government is the highest payer, it then crowds out private sector investment."
Ms Truss is competing with former Chancellor Mr Sunak to become the next Conservative leader, and prime minister.
The party's 160,000 or so members are voting on which of the two they want to replace Boris Johnson, and the winner will be announced on 5 September.
Ms Truss has also proposed scrapping jobs aimed at increasing inclusion and diversity in the public sector.
In addition to introducing regional pay, Ms Truss has said she would save £137m by banning union representatives from getting paid time off to focus on union work.
The foreign secretary also wants to reduce average civil service annual leave from 27 days to 25 and scrap Whitehall's diversity officers - something her team estimates could save £12m a year.
Along with the proposed reforms to public sector pay, she says the total savings to the taxpayer would be up to £11bn.
There are bits of tinkering here and there in Ms Truss's plans, like saving £12m a year from cutting civil service diversity officers.
But the only way these plans will save "billions" is if they not only pay civil servants less in poorer areas - but other public sector workers too.
Ms Truss says she'll only do this if it "works" when they introduce it for civil servants.
Economically, the argument is that it's harder for private companies to hire people where public pay is higher and harder to compete with.
But politically - it's very hard to see how she sells this.
To save billions, she's arguing you'd need a situation where nurses, police, teachers - for example - would be paid less in Sunderland than ones in Surrey.
Lots of policy has been pumped out in this campaign with headlines like 'Whitehall waste' to appeal to members.
But dig in to the detail, and there are loads of questions about how some of these would work in practice.
The foreign secretary has also been criticised for describing Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon as an "attention-seeker".
Scotland's deputy first minister John Swinney said he was "absolutely horrified" and described the comments as "obnoxious".
At a question session on Monday evening, Mr Sunak told party members he was the candidate for change.
He was introduced to the stage in Exeter by former International Trade Secretary Liam Fox who said Mr Sunak had the "character, courage, experience intellect and downright decency" to win over swing voters.
Ms Truss received her own campaign boost when she received the endorsement of trade minister Penny Mordaunt.
Ms Mordaunt - who was knocked out of the race after finishing third in the polling among MPs - described Ms Truss as the "hope candidate".
The FDA - the union for senior civil servants - said it was "astounding" Ms Truss was planning to move jobs out of London while at the same time cutting regional pay.
Alex Thomas of the Institute for Government think tank said the idea of regional pay "comes around every few years".
"The reason why chancellors and prime ministers have previously tended to abandon it is the benefits are pretty marginal - both in terms of the cost you can save and the benefits to the local economy."
But the Taxpayers' Alliance argues it would help boost economic growth in regions such as the north-east of England and the Midlands by reducing inflated labour costs and thereby encouraging the private sector to invest in these areas.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62390009
|
news_uk-politics-62390009
|
|
Kwasi Kwarteng considers scrapping bankers’ bonus cap to boost City - BBC News
|
2022-09-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The new chancellor believes removing a cap on bankers' bonuses could boost growth in the City.
|
Business
|
The Treasury is considering removing a cap on bankers' bonuses as part of a post-Brexit shake-up of City rules.
Sources said no final decisions had been made, but confirmed chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng considered it a way of making London a more attractive place for global banks to do business.
City bosses have long complained about the EU-wide bonus rules which cap bonuses at twice an employee's salary.
They say they lead to higher base pay that pushes up banks' fixed costs.
Those costs cannot be adjusted in line with the firm's financial performance, they add, making the UK less attractive than the US or Asia.
People close to Mr Kwarteng confirmed reports in the Financial Times that the new chancellor is considering the move.
Critics have argued that uncapped bonuses lead to the kind of excessive risk taking that spawned the financial crisis of 2008.
But others argue that other new rules that can hold senior managers personally and potentially criminally responsible for misconduct, plus the ability to claw back bonuses years after they are granted, achieve a sufficient disincentive.
Taking the lid off bankers' pay at a time when many households are facing hardship from the rising cost of living will undoubtedly provoke outrage in many quarters.
The proposal "sends a rather confused signal when people are being squeezed in terms of the cost of living, and the government is trying to encourage pay restraint in the public sector", Andrew Sentance, a former member of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee, told the BBC.
"To appear to allow bankers to have bigger bonuses at the same time, doesn't look very well timed. There may be some longer term arguments for pursing this policy but I think the timing would be very bad if they did it now."
Rachel Winter, from Killick & Co, told the BBC: "It's an absolutely terrible time for this headline when you've got inflation [at] a 40-year high, you've got so many people struggling with the cost of living, do we really want to be reading headlines about banker bonuses?
"Arguably the banks do pay a lot of tax, so I think the chancellor is looking at ways to boost the UK economy to get more banks to come to London, to stay in London and pay more tax."
Removing the cap is just one of a number of deregulation initiatives being considered.
The government is also keen to relax rules limiting the amount insurance and pension funds can invest in assets that are harder to sell at short notice - such as long-term infrastructure projects.
These rules are part of pan-European regulations collectively known as Solvency II.
But the Bank of England is concerned that relaxing the rules could expose pensioners' savings to greater long-term risk and that lowering the amount of ready cash firms are required to hold could see them pay out any money freed up to their shareholders rather than invest in projects favoured by the government.
Pitting the Treasury and the financial services industry against the Bank of England is seen as a key test of the Bank's independence and senior officials at the Bank have privately conceded the fight over Solvency II is a political one they could well lose.
Kwasi Kwarteng laid out his "unashamedly pro-growth plan" for the economy at a gathering of senior bankers two weeks ago.
He would argue that the instincts that persuade him to cut banking regulations are the same instincts that persuaded him to throw a £100bn-plus shield over businesses and households to prevent high energy prices causing a job-and-growth-killing recession.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62906854
|
news_business-62906854
|
|
Liz Truss defends plan to lift cap on bankers’ bonuses - BBC News
|
2022-09-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The prime minister tells the BBC lifting a cap on bonuses is part of a plan to increase growth.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Liz Truss: "I will always work to make sure we are helping those who are struggling."
Prime Minister Liz Truss has said she is prepared to take "difficult decisions" such as removing a cap on bankers' bonuses to boost the economy.
In an interview with the BBC, Ms Truss said that spurring economic growth may mean doing unpopular things.
Her government is considering removing a cap on bankers' bonuses as part of a post-Brexit shake-up of City rules.
Speaking in New York ahead of a meeting with President Joe Biden, the PM said she was about "delivering for people".
BBC Political Editor Chris Mason asked Ms Truss whether she was happy to see bankers getting bigger bonuses and for the rich to get richer.
"What I want to see is a growing economy," Ms Truss said.
"If that means taking difficult decisions which are going to help Britain become more competitive, help Britain become more attractive, help more investment flow into our country, yes, I'm absolutely prepared to make those decisions."
Labour's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Pat McFadden, said there was nothing difficult about lifting the cap on bankers' bonuses.
"This is a bizarre move that will do nothing to support growth, and comes straight from the tired Tory playbook on trickle-down economics which haven't worked for them over the last decade," the Labour MP said.
President Biden tweeted earlier that he was "sick and tired" of the theory that cutting taxes for business and the wealthy would see the benefits "trickle down" into the pockets of poorer workers.
Although apparently not intended as a swipe at Ms Truss, the comment underlines the political differences between the two leaders ahead of their meeting.
The prime minister's official spokesman said it was "ludicrous" to suggest President Biden was referring to Ms Truss in the tweet.
He said the world's democracies were "not prescriptive" in how they achieve economic growth.
Ms Truss has admitted a new trade deal with the United States is unlikely in the "short-to-medium term" and that no discussions are currently underway.
The UK government had previously promised a post-Brexit trade deal with the US by 2022.
There has been lots of talk of a new era in the last few weeks, for obvious reasons.
Now, with political argument returning, it is language the prime minister is embracing, about her premiership and the challenges she - we - face.
'We are entering a new era. It is a more insecure era,' she told me.
Insecure abroad, insecure at home. The core of her political strategy is turbo-charging economic growth — and, for now at least, being willing to embrace the unpopular.
"Difficult decisions" as she put it - such as allowing bankers to get bigger bonuses.
There are two big questions for her: will it work, and will people like it?
She doesn't have long to find out the answers, with a general election two-ish years away.
In her Chris Mason interview, Ms Truss said she wanted to forge closer ties with the UK's allies.
"It is a more insecure era. We face an increasingly aggressive Russia, an assertive China. We need to work more closely with our allies, and we also need to get the British economy growing so that we have that security for all of our citizens."
In a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in New York, Ms Truss agreed to enhance UK-France co-operation on energy to cut costs for households.
In Downing Street's account of the meeting, there was no mention of contentious issues that have strained Anglo-French relations since the UK left the European Union.
Neither the unauthorised migrant crossings of the English Channel, nor the post-Brexit trade arrangements for Northern Ireland were discussed, in a meeting described as "constructive" by Downing Street.
Mr Macron and Ms Truss were meeting face-to-face for the first time, weeks after the she questioned whether the French President was a friend or foe.
"I now believe in proof, in results," Mr Macron said. "There is a will to re-engage, to move on and to show that we are allies and friends in a complex world."
Speaking earlier, Ms Truss said "we are facing incredibly tough economic times" after Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the aftershocks of the Covid-19 pandemic "pushed up energy prices".
She said higher energy bills were "a price worth paying" for the UK's long-term security.
Typical household energy bills will rise to £2,500 a year from 1 October, in part due to reductions in Russian gas exports during the war in Ukraine.
Under Ms Truss's plans, energy bills will be frozen at that level for the next two years.
The scheme is likely to be paid for by increased government borrowing, but the full details will be announced on Friday as part of a mini-Budget.
On Wednesday, Ms Truss will use her speech to the United Nations General Assembly to rally support for Ukraine and highlight the threat from authoritarian states such as Russia and China.
The PM will argue that democratic nations should prioritise economic growth and security to win the new era of strategic competition.
Ms Truss will also reiterate her commitment to protecting the UK and its allies, including by increasing defence spending to 3% of GDP by 2030.
"Just as we are building a plan for growth at home, we are also developing a new blueprint for our engagement with the world," the PM is expected to say.
"We will build resilience and collective security - because they are vital for freedom and democracy."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62968072
|
news_uk-politics-62968072
|
|
Chris Mason: Noisy politics back after pause for mourning - BBC News
|
2022-09-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
After the solemnity and silence of the Queen's funeral, UK politics comes roaring back.
|
UK Politics
|
Prepare for the roaring return of politics.
Families, businesses and the country face grave threats: soaring prices, crippling fuel costs and the prospect of recession.
It is two-and-a-half months - 76 days - since Boris Johnson said he was resigning as prime minister, draining his already crippled government of its remaining authority.
And then, a little over 48 hours after Liz Truss became prime minister, the Queen died. What many described as a zombie government had been replaced by a Trappist one; politics understandably falling silent during the period of mourning.
But, with the funeral of Queen Elizabeth now over, the arguments resume - and the demands for action will be loud.
The prime minister is already on her first foreign trip in the job, at the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
While there, Ms Truss will meet plenty of world leaders, including US President Joe Biden, for a re-arranged one-on-one conversation that had originally been scheduled to happen in London.
No matter that it felt like the United Nations gathered in London for the funeral of the late Queen. This is the actual UN.
It will mean the returning political conversation will have a diplomatic air - in its opening few hours at least - rather than an intense domestic scrappiness.
But that will be back before you know it. This is a government that wants to give the impression that it is in a hurry, and it has catching up to do.
So there will be a blitz of announcements between now and the weekend.
We're told the new government's overriding mission is delivering economic growth. And, in the short term, there are two other priorities: help with energy bills and a plan for the NHS.
Expect a sense of continuity Johnson on some issues, such as support for Ukraine.
And expect a hawkish scepticism about China from Ms Truss when she addresses the UN.
The long journey from the warmth of David Cameron taking Chinese President Xi Jinping for a pint just seven years ago to the current downright frostiness continues.
On the economy, there is a markedly different approach. The strategy is economic growth, even if the hoped-for means of delivering it cause a row.
It is in that context that we should see the plan to lift the cap on bankers' bonuses, an idea which, in isolation, would appear to many to be politically crazy when so, so many people are struggling to pay for their groceries or fill up their car.
But expect to hear ministers argue it means the very best (read very best paid bankers in the world) will want to ply their lucrative, economy-expanding trade here again, and in so doing - or at least so the theory goes - pay lots of tax in the UK.
The call for growth means we'll also hear about fracking and the licensing of drilling for oil in the North Sea, with the added justification of increasing the UK's energy security in an uncertain world.
These ideas, alongside the tax cuts promised by Ms Truss in her leadership campaign, will be at the core of the mini Budget presented by the new Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng on Friday.
Long gone will be the mantra of balancing the books from the era of Mr Cameron and George Osborne.
Instead, we see the prospect of falling taxes, a vast rise in spending to help with energy bills and little expectation of spending cuts elsewhere.
And so key among the tools and techniques deployed in the hope of economic growth: borrowing. Big time.
Incidentally, central to the Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's diagnosis of Britain's contemporary problems is a fascinating overlap with his new opponent, Ms Truss - the sclerotic growth of the last decade.
But expect the suggested remedies and medicines from the two sides to differ considerably. And so the rows will be stark, the ideological dividing lines clear, and the stakes high.
What then of energy bills and the NHS?
The public row about bills may have paused when the Queen died. But the pain did not.
One reporter friend of mine once told me about news that "it is not old until it's told".
The government's plan to help with energy bills has been announced but it was rapidly overtaken by events at Balmoral, where the Queen died.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. WATCH: Liz Truss announces energy price guarantee for next two years
The precise nature and cost of the help hasn't been comprehensively explained, examined and scrutinised. In the coming days, that process will begin - and the plan to help businesses will be set out too.
The rather more sluggish help for companies compared to households is, those in government explain, because the energy market for businesses is much more complicated.
Despite Ms Truss's initial aversion to what she called "handouts", the scale of the crisis had the capacity to bankrupt people and firms - and so bankrupt her government before she began, making a big intervention inevitable.
And the intervention is big. It is considerably more expensive than the furlough scheme and, in reality, a blank cheque, for it is impossible to know what the overall cost will be given the fluctuating price of gas.
The argument inside government is that the alternative would have been more expensive, both in its social costs and on the exchequer.
And then there is the NHS. We can expect an announcement about plans for the winter from the new Health Secretary for England and Deputy Prime Minister Thérèse Coffey.
Waits to get an ambulance, waits to get a GP appointment, waits to get an operation are long, long and long for many.
That matters for millions and, politically, is potentially incredibly dangerous for ministers.
A tough winter for the NHS, the prospect of industrial action looming, added to what we are already seeing in the justice system, leaves some senior figures in the Labour Party pondering whether a critique of the government centred on examples of state failure - where the infrastructure of what ministers manage is simply not working - would hit home.
If examples of this really start to stack up, the political peril for the prime minister is obvious.
The best ministers can hope for is to keep the NHS out of the headlines. That would be a metric of success. But achieving it will, I suspect, be near impossible.
Ms Truss has inherited a party that has spent the summer scrapping with itself and where a chunk of her backbenchers are sceptical of both her and her economic strategy.
She inherits, too, a party that has been in government for 12 years.
Eternal youth is no easier to achieve in politics than it is in life, although Conservative MPs hope yet another facelift at the top, a new leader, may tempt the electorate to look at them afresh.
The opinion polls, for now at least, suggest the new prime minister has quite the challenge ahead.
Labour, the Scottish National Party and the Liberal Democrats each have their tails up and a general election is just two-ish years away.
From the silence and solemnity of the last 10 days, politics is now back and it's going to be noisy.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62959380
|
news_uk-politics-62959380
|
|
I hope King Charles will push for action on climate change, says John Kerry - BBC News
|
2022-09-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The US presidential envoy says the King can "leverage" the action needed to tackle global warming.
|
UK
|
John Kerry - seen here with the then-Prince of Wales in 2021 - says the King knows the climate issue "inside out"
President Biden's climate envoy has told the BBC he hopes King Charles will continue his work on global warming.
John Kerry told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg he would welcome the King's involvement because he "has the ability... to leverage the kind of action we need now on a global basis".
He said the monarch had "indicated" he wanted to maintain his passion for the environment "in the appropriate way".
And Mr Kerry said he hoped the King would visit the next UN climate summit.
Speaking from the US, the former Secretary of State told Laura Kuenssberg he had been invited to see the then-Prince of Wales in Scotland to discuss the climate crisis but the meeting was cancelled following the death of the Queen.
But Mr Kerry said he "very much" hopes the King will continue to push the arguments for radical action to tackle climate change "within the constitutional process".
"There's no question in my mind, that it is not a standard multilateral issue or bilateral issue, there is a threat to the entire planet, a threat to all of our nations and he understands it as well as anybody on the planet," he said.
"He's been consistent on this issue, beginning in his teenage years and carrying on in many different iterations and he's for real, believe me.
"He knows the issue inside out, backwards and forwards and he's been a leader."
Mr Kerry said the King had discussed wanting to be "relevant and try to be engaged" and that he hoped he would continue to be active on environmental issues.
"He is an enormously important convener and somebody who has the ability to be able to leverage the kind of action we need now on a global basis.
"This challenge is as significant as any threat we've ever faced," he told the BBC.
John Kerry represented the US at the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow last year
Mr Kerry was appointed President Joe Biden's special envoy for climate in January 2021 - the first time such a role has existed within the White House.
He has spoken in recent months about the impact of the war in Ukraine on efforts to limit global heating to 1.5C by 2030 - with countries facing the simultaneous challenges of sourcing alternatives to Russian gas supplies while also needing to cut their CO2 emissions.
Mr Kerry told Laura Kuenssberg the lesson from the conflict in Ukraine is that "you do not want to be a prisoner of your energy source" adding that Europe "wants to liberate itself" from its dependency on Russian gas.
He added it would be "terrific" if the King could come to the COP climate change summit in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el Sheikh in November - adding that he thought His Majesty would like to be able to attend.
Mr Kerry said that he thought next gathering would see a "raising of ambition" by countries which had been unable to sign up at the COP26 summit in Glasgow last year to steps to limit the planet's temperature increase to 1.5C.
"We can get there but it's going to take a gigantic effort moving forward," he said.
Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg is on BBC One from 09:00 BST on Sunday 18 September or you can catch it on BBC iPlayer
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62940512
|
news_uk-62940512
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.