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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
China and Taiwan: Love and longing across the strait - BBC News
|
2024-04-03
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Beijing has made its position clear on Taiwan, but what do the country's citizens want?
|
China
|
Shanshan and her Taiwanese boyfriend have found themselves caught up in strained relations of their governments (file image)
Shanshan had never met anyone from Taiwan before January last year.
The 24-year-old, from Changsha City in central China, had also not really paid much attention to news about the self-governing island, which her country believes is Chinese territory and has promised to take one day.
But then she fell in love - she met her Taiwanese boyfriend playing online video games. They started chatting for hours, long talks during which she discovered he was "gentle and sensitive".
But even as Shanshan and her partner Guodong share sweet messages across the Taiwan Strait - preparing to meet her parents during the Chinese New Year festival - their governments are trading a ramped-up war of words in the run-up to Taiwan's presidential elections on Saturday.
China's President Xi Jinping has cast the decision at Taiwan's ballot box as a choice between war and peace. Under his leadership, Beijing has taken an ever sharper, firmer and often more aggressive tone towards the democratically-governed island, warning the world that it alone will decide how and when unification will happen.
However, despite regular military activities in the Taiwan Strait, President Xi has also repeatedly offered "peaceful reunification", while Beijing's Taiwan Affairs Office maintains that "both sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family".
But those most likely to listen to this message are its own people - not those living across the strait.
Taiwan sits just 68 nautical miles away from China's Pingtan island - just visible through binoculars
Shanshan and Guodong have very different views on the future of Taiwan.
"My boyfriend just wants to maintain the status quo and doesn't want independence or unification. But I support our country's position and hope for unification one day. We only discuss, we don't argue. The key is that we can't change these things, so we hope for positive developments," she says.
Their differing views have not affected their relationship. And yet, the issue has created very real barriers for the couple.
China banned "individual tourists" from visiting Taiwan in 2019. That means Shanshan cannot visit her partner's home or his parents, and she wonders if that will ever change.
But things are not much easier for Guodong when he arrives in China.
Shanshan has discovered that she and her boyfriend may share the same language, and her government says they are the same people, but he faces the same hurdles as many foreigners hoping to settle in mainland China.
The administration and paperwork involved for either one of them to stay with the other for any length of time is substantial. Paying for most things involves the need to generate a QR code on pre-registered Chinese phones, with Chinese apps linked to Chinese bank accounts - none of which he has.
"For example, when he comes to visit, buying tickets, booking hotels, and making payments are challenging, and even going to tourist sites, taking taxis, or going to the bank, he faces difficulties," Shanshan explains.
"After being together, I realised that there are many cross-strait couples facing restrictions and difficulties in meeting each other, and the marriage process is complicated and tedious."
China's relationship with Taiwan is therefore critical for this couple. Closer ties could make it easier for them to move between countries. For them, politics across the strait is tangible.
For others in China, Taiwan is part of a vision - the government's view of the future. State media highlights the ties between the two as a shining beacon of brotherhood and shared cultural heritage.
Chinese tourists flock to this spot, embracing Beijing's vow to unify with Taiwan
On a rocky outcrop of Pingtan island in Fujian province, the closest part of the Chinese mainland to Taiwan, tourists pay to stand on a platform and peer through binoculars at an outline of Taiwan 68 nautical miles (126km) away.
Many have travelled thousands of miles to get here. They brave the biting January winds and struggle to brace themselves against the gales as they stare out to sea over the rising white horses. Sea fog and cloud obscure any view of Taiwan, but still, they line up to take photographs at a strategically placed stone arch, using their arms to make love heart signs above their heads.
For some, this is a poignant moment.
Cui Xiuwen has come from northwest China's Shaanxi province in the hope of just a glimpse of Taiwan.
"My biggest wish after visiting here is that I hope the island of Taiwan can return to our motherland soon," the 61-year-old tells us excitedly.
"The urge and feeling became stronger while I've been here. In the past I didn't feel this so keenly. Our compatriots are watching each other across the water and we cannot unite."
She hugs our team warmly as she talks about her fear of conflict.
"We see and hear much talk about Taiwan and the mainland on TV. That's why I want to come here quickly and look at it. I hope Taiwan will be reclaimed in a peaceful way. I don't want war. The casualties will be huge. We want peace."
One young couple - dressed head to toe in Christian Dior - pose for their social media feeds in sunglasses while gazing wistfully out to sea.
They stand in stark contrast to some of those who live and work on this island, who admit to rarely thinking about their neighbour, just a few hours away by boat.
But Chinese citizens struggling to earn a living along the same coast rarely think about their neighbours
Dozens of local workers gather in groups on the concrete walls of the small port on the island to sort abalone shells for harvesting. Huddling together out of the wind, wrapped up in fleece headscarves and fishing overalls, they barely look up as they speak to us. They need to keep working to earn money - that is their main concern.
"I don't feel a connection. I have no friends or relatives there," says one woman as she uses her knife to scrape through the baskets to release the shellfish.
"I don't care whether it's reunified or not. We ordinary people don't care. This is up to the officials. We have no wish or hope. We just want enough to eat, we want a better life. We don't care about other things."
Read more about the Taiwan election:
There are around 40 million people living in Fujian province. Many Taiwanese are thought to be descendants of Fujian immigrants, and Beijing often uses these ties as an argument for closer economic and social integration. It wants Fujian province to be the model for "peaceful unification with the motherland".
It's part of what analysts call a "carrot and stick" approach to Taiwan.
Or more recently - a display of warships and wooing.
China has named its new aircraft carrier after Fujian. It unveiled new images of its first domestically designed warship on state television just last week - part of President Xi's goal of making the People's Liberation Army a "world class military".
But alongside these flashy displays of military power, there is some evidence that Beijing is attempting to entice more Taiwanese people to the mainland.
The Chinese government has unveiled a detailed plan this week to try to bring more Taiwanese investors to Fujian and to encourage Taiwan residents to study, work and live in the south-eastern province.
One block of flats in Fuzhou, the BBC found, was even going as far as to offer incredibly cheap rent to Taiwanese people. "Welcome home" said the sign on the front door, but when we spoke to a real estate agent they said that any such rental agreement needed permission from various government departments.
China also plans to build a high-speed railway across the strait "at an early date".
The simple fact is the two need each other, economically. China is Taiwan's biggest trading partner, and exports to China have enabled its economy to enjoy strong growth.
Beijing is keen to encourage Taiwanese people to live and work in China
In an alleyway in Fuzhou, the main city in Fujian province, Li Haoyu from Taiwan tosses noodles into the sizzling wok as customers on mopeds wait for their dinner. He came to China seven years ago for a job at a funeral home. His path from there is a little vague, he's not even sure how old he is.
He hasn't been back for five years, but has to return soon as his travel permit to China will soon expire.
Taiwanese noodles have a simpler flavour, he says as his swirls the hot pan over the fire.
World headlines about war and business worries across the Taiwan Strait do not worry him. He is only concerned with the flow of customers in his street.
But he knows the relationship between his past and current homes are not good.
"I think the feelings are good between the people. But I don't know how the two governments feel about each other," he says as he carefully loads the noodles into a bowl.
"I hope ties can be normalized. I hope the two sides can be like two brothers, like a family," he adds.
The ties between Taiwan and China after this election could also have an impact on Shanshan's blossoming relationship.
Beijing has already warned that any attempt to push for Taiwan's formal independence will mean conflict - although many doubt Beijing will want a war on its doorstep as it battles an economic downturn.
All Shanshan can do is "hope for a better cross-strait relationship".
Luckily, their own relationship is going well, she adds.
"Despite the distance, we can be together. Both of us hope for a future together. We can accept these difficulties, and even if it's challenging, we will support and help each other."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-67931901
|
news_world-asia-china-67931901
|
|
Yousaf 'not surprised' JK Rowling posts are not criminal - BBC News
|
2024-04-03
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The Harry Potter author challenged Scotland's new hate crime law by describing several transgender women as men.
|
Scotland politics
|
The first minister said there was a high threshold for criminality in the new law
Humza Yousaf said he was "not surprised" police had assessed JK Rowling's online posts challenging the new hate crime law to be non-criminal.
The Harry Potter author described several transgender women as men, including convicted prisoners, trans activists and other public figures.
The legislation creates a crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to protected characteristics.
But Police Scotland said no action would be taken against Ms Rowling.
The first minister said the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 "protects the most vulnerable and marginalised in our in society" while also safeguarding "freedom of expression and freedom of speech".
Mr Yousaf told BBC Scotland News: "Those new offences that have been created by the act have a very high threshold for criminality.
"The behaviour has to be threatening or abusive and intends to stir up hatred.
"So it doesn't deal with people just being offended or upset or insulted."
He said Ms Rowling's posts on X were a "perfect example of that".
The first minister added: "Anybody who read the act will not have been surprised at all that there's no arrests made.
"JK Rowling's tweets may well be offensive, upsetting and insulting to trans people.
"But it doesn't mean that they meet a threshold of criminality of being threatening or abusive and intending to stir up hatred."
Mr Yousaf said it was up to Police Scotland to decide how to deal with hate incidents.
BBC understands the national force has received more than 3,000 hate crime reports since the new law was introduced on Monday.
A large number were about a 2020 speech by Mr Yousaf - then justice secretary - highlighting white people in prominent public roles.
However Mr Yousaf told BBC Scotland that the majority of "vexatious" complaints made about him "come from the far right."
"I'm not going to let them stop me from continuing to speak out about racism or talk about that fact that we need more diversity in public life," he said.
"That was the point I was making in the speech that's been referenced."
In relation to both Ms Rowling and the first minister's speech, a police spokesperson said: "The circumstances have been assessed and will not be recorded as a non-crime hate incident."
Last month Tory MSP Murdo Fraser threatened legal action against Police Scotland after the force logged a social media comment he made as a "hate incident".
And on Wednesday he criticised the force's response to the complaints against Ms Rowling and Mr Yousaf.
He said: "This decision means Police Scotland have not only breached their own policy on recording non-crime hate incidents, but now appear to be making it up as they go along."
Officers later concluded no crime had been committed by Mr Fraser.
TV journalist India Willoughby was among those named in Ms Rowling's social media comments.
She said Police Scotland had "bottled it" and she was "disappointed" that no action was being taken against Ms Rowling.
Ms Willoughby said it was "distressing to find myself in a list containing rapists and predators".
She told BBC Radio Scotland's Drivetime programme: "The hate crime bill says if you're in one those groups and something causes you fear or upset then it's a potential hate crime. I just don't see how this doesn't qualify.
"I get the impression that Police Scotland are actually scared because it's JK Rowling.
"Obviously she has a lot of clout, it would probably be an expensive case."
The broadcaster also criticised the SNP and said it had been left looking "really weak".
India Willoughby was disappointed that JK Rowling's comments were considered non-criminal
Ms Willoughby said she had experienced "deliberation provocation and deliberate targeting" through abusive social media messages since Ms Rowling published her comments on the new hate crime legislation.
"Let's remove the word 'trans' and consider any other minority like black or Jewish people," she said.
"If somebody out there was campaigning against another group and made a list which contained rapists and sex offenders and, in amongst them, included four innocent people from that group and deliberately misgendered them, I think that constitutes incitement. Why else would you be linking them?
"By putting four innocent trans people in a list of trans people which includes predators and rapists, she is trying to imply that trans people are dangerous and that has been the gist of her argument all along."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Explained: Why has Scotland’s new hate crime law proved controversial?
Following Ms Rowling's comments, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said people should not be criminalised for stating simple facts on biology".
Mr Sunak would not be drawn on whether he supported her approach, but he added: "We should not be criminalising people saying common sense things about biological sex, clearly that isn't right.
"We have a proud tradition of free speech."
The Hate Crime Act creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.
The maximum penalty is a prison sentence of seven years.
A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, "that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive," with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the protected characteristics.
Stirring up hatred based on race, colour, nationality or ethnicity was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986 but, in an attempt to streamline the criminal law in Scotland, that too is now part of the Hate Crime Act.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68725547
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68725547
|
|
French pupil dies after being beaten near school - BBC News
|
2024-04-05
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The 15-year-old boy was attacked by several youths and suffered a cardiac arrest, say police.
|
Europe
|
The boy was attacked near the school where he was a pupil
There are renewed concerns over levels of violence in French schools after two young teenagers were the victims of attacks, one of them fatal.
A 15-year-old boy named as Shamseddin died in hospital on Friday.
The news came a day after he was beaten by a group of youths near his school in Viry-Chatillon, in the southern Paris suburbs.
"This extreme violence is becoming commonplace," said the town mayor, Jean-Marie Vilain.
Mr Vilain told French media the boy was walking home after a music class at about 16:30 local time on Thursday when he was set upon by a group of youths.
According to witnesses, he was punched and kicked by the attackers, who were wearing balaclavas.
He was taken to the Necker hospital, a top paediatric hospital in Paris, but doctors were unable to save his life.
One 17-year-old teenager has been arrested by French police in the Viry-Chatillon murder case, the local prosecutor announced later. Police are still looking for other assailants.
On Tuesday, in another incident in the southern city of Montpellier, a 14-year-old girl named as Samara was placed in an artificial coma after she was beaten by a group shortly after leaving school.
Three adolescents - a girl and two boys of roughly the same age as Samara - have been arrested and admitted taking part in the attack, police said. Samara has since regained consciousness.
The girl's mother told French media that Samara had been bullied by another girl at the school because she refused to follow Islamic dress codes.
"Samara puts on a bit of make-up. And this other girl wears the headscarf. All the time, she kept calling her an unbeliever," she said on French television on Wednesday.
"My daughter dresses like a European. Every day there were insults. It was physically and psychologically unbearable."
However, the prosecutor's office in its initial report on the attack made no mention of a religious connection, saying the background was an argument over photographs shared on Snapchat.
And speaking Thursday evening on another French television channel, Samara's mother read out a statement accusing the far-right of trying to use the attack to their own advantage.
"My daughter is a practising pious Muslim. She fasts during Ramadan and prays five times a day. Please do not use us to sully the name of our religion," she said.
The attacks have further heightened concerns about violence in schools, against a background of gangs, cyber-bullying and pressure to conform to Islamic rules.
Last week, the headteacher of a school in Paris resigned saying he feared for his life after receiving death threats for telling a girl to remove her head covering in accordance with French law.
In the same week, several schools had to shut because of hoax bomb threats made by people claiming to be Islamic radicals.
In recent years, two teachers have been murdered by Islamist radicals.
Samuel Paty was decapitated on the street in a Paris suburb in 2020, while Dominique Bernard was killed at his school in Arras in October last year.
Earlier on Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron said schools needed to be "shielded" from "uninhibited violence among our teenagers and sometimes among increasingly younger ones".
Reacting to the two attacks, Marine Le Pen of the hard-right National Rally said: "When will the government finally sit up and take the full measure of the savagery which is gnawing at our society?"
Jean-Marie Vilain, the mayor of Viry-Chatillon, was in tears as he spoke to journalists of the death of Shamseddin, who - he said - left a mother and a younger sister with their lives in ruins.
"We have to teach our children that there is good and there is bad. And when you do something bad, you get punished. And maybe we need to learn again how to punish," he said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68744255
|
news_world-europe-68744255
|
|
Gaza evacuation warnings from IDF contain many errors, BBC finds - BBC News
|
2024-04-05
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Experts say these errors could violate Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.
|
Middle East
|
Two men and two boys on a street in Gaza look at a leaflet containing an IDF evacuation warning
Evacuation warnings issued by Israel to people in Gaza ahead of attacks have contained a host of significant errors, BBC analysis has revealed.
Warnings contained contradictory information and sometimes misnamed districts. This made them confusing to Gazans seeking safety.
Experts say such mistakes could violate Israel's international law obligations.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has rejected any assertion the warnings were confusing or contradictory.
In a statement, it said the alerts analysed by the BBC were only one element of its "extensive efforts to encourage the evacuation [of] civilians out of harm's way".
International humanitarian law requires attacking forces to give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit.
Israel says its warning system is designed to help civilians flee danger as it continues its war against Hamas. The system divides a map of Gaza into hundreds of numbered blocks.
Israel has produced an interactive online map of the blocks that geo-locates users, showing their live location and which block number they are in.
This IDF post from late January shows a social media post on X with a link through via QR code to the master block map.
But people we spoke to have described struggling to get online to access the system, as well as finding the block system difficult to understand, notwithstanding the errors.
The BBC analysed the IDF's Arabic language social media channels on Facebook, X and Telegram, where we found hundreds of posts containing warnings. The same warnings were often posted repeatedly.
We also searched for leafleted warnings which had been photographed and shared online. The IDF says it has dropped 16 million such leaflets over Gaza.
We have focused our analysis on warnings issued since 1 December, which is when the IDF launched its block system as a way of providing more precise instructions than previously, after coming under international pressure.
We grouped all of the IDF's posts and leaflets that we found after this date into 26 separate warnings. The vast majority made reference to the master block system.
The IDF told the BBC it also warned of impending attacks through pre-recorded phone messages and live phone calls. Due to damage to Gaza's phone network we have not been able to compile data on these phone calls.
And our analysis of leaflets was limited to those we could find photographed and shared online.
The 26 separate warnings we found contained specific information from the IDF that people could use to escape areas of danger. But 17 of them also contained errors and inconsistencies.
In addition, one warning listed neighbourhoods as being in one district when they were actually in another. Another mixed up the block numbers of two neighbourhoods. And in a third, some blocks listed in the text were on the opposite side of Gaza to those highlighted on the accompanying map.
When we put these errors to the IDF, it did not respond to the issues we raised with the maps specifically but said the text of posts had been sufficiently clear. It also said that when arrows were used to direct people to safety, "it is obvious that the arrows point to a general direction" and reiterated that the key information had been provided in the text.
These inaccuracies and errors may violate Israel's obligation under international law to provide "effective advanced warnings", says Janina Dill, co-director of the Oxford Institute of Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict.
If the majority of warnings contain errors or are unclear to the point that civilians can't understand them then, she says, "these warnings do not fulfil the proper function they have under international humanitarian law".
This, adds Kubo Macak professor of international law at the University of Exeter, undermines their function to give "civilians the chance to protect themselves".
In December, Saleh, a tech entrepreneur from Gaza City, was sheltering with his children and his in-laws in Nuseirat in central Gaza - where, he says, there was no electricity or phone signal and long periods of internet outage.
He saw people killed and others fleeing from a nearby school as it was being shelled, but says he had not received any IDF evacuation details.
Eventually, he found someone with a Sim card that allowed him to access data networks in Egypt and Israel and came across an evacuation warning on an Israeli government Facebook page.
"There was an evacuation order for several residential blocks - [but] we didn't know which block we lived in. This led to a big argument," Salah says.
Salah could only access the internet intermittently, but he messaged his wife Amani, who has been in the UK since just before the war. She was able to go online and access the IDF's master block map and pinpoint where her husband was. But then, looking back at the specific evacuation warning on Facebook, the couple realised the numbered block where Salah was staying was shown cut in two - adding to the family's confusion.
Eventually, Salah decided to leave with the children. But some of his family stayed put - until fighting escalated further.
When the BBC analysed the Facebook evacuation warning Salah had been trying to decipher, we found further points of confusion.
In text, the post urged people to leave blocks 2220, 2221, 2222, 2223, 2224 and 2225 - all blocks that appear in the IDF's online master map.
But in the accompanying map, the six numbered blocks had been lumped into one, and mislabelled as block 2220.
Despite these inconsistencies, Israel presented its block warning system at the International Court of Justice in January as part of its defence against allegations by South Africa that it is committing genocide.
Israel's lawyers argued that it was doing its utmost to protect civilians and had "developed a detailed map so that specific areas can be temporarily evacuated, instead of evacuating entire areas".
They presented one social media warning in court as evidence - but the BBC has found two errors in it.
Block 55 and 99 were listed in the text of the post from 13 December but they were not shaded on the map.
The IDF told the BBC that when a block number is explicitly mentioned in text, the warning is sufficiently clear.
Israel's lawyers also claimed that the IDF, via its Arabic Twitter account, was providing information on the location of shelters close to areas being evacuated. But in all of the posts and leaflets we analysed we did not see any warning providing names or exact locations of shelters.
BBC analysis has also found the IDF's block system overall was used inconsistently. Nine of the 26 warnings listed a mix of block numbers and neighbourhood names. Another nine didn't mention block numbers at all. Despite linking through to the online master map, they instead listed neighbourhoods by name - which often sprawled over many numbered blocks.
The BBC could not find a way to determine the exact blocks of these neighbourhoods.
The Abdu family, which includes 32 people, also fled Gaza City to central Gaza early in the war. Then, in December, they received a warning leaflet dropped from a plane.
Messages on the family Whatsapp group, which the BBC has seen, chart their confusion as they argued for two days over what the leaflet meant.
It contained a list of neighbourhoods to evacuate, but the family couldn't locate most of these places.
The warning asked people to leave "Al-Bureij Camp and the neighbourhoods of Badr, the North Coast, al-Nuzha, al-Zahra, al-Buraq, al-Rawda, and al-Safa in the areas south of Wadi Gaza."
We located an al-Zahra and a Badr close by, but they are north of the Wadi Gaza riverbed. We could not find the neighbourhoods of al-Rawda or al-Nuzha in the "areas south of Wadi Gaza".
The Abdu family struggled to decide what to do. Should they stay and risk getting caught up in a fierce ground battle - or leave, and abandon the only shelter they might find?
Some followed the warning to go to "shelters in Deir al-Balah". But when they arrived they felt unsafe and decided to return. If they were going to die they would die together, they told us.
Satellite data on destruction in Gaza - analysed by Jamon Van Den Hoek at Oregon State University and Corey Scher of City University New York Graduate Center - shows that the area of Deir al-Balah that the family fled to came under more intense attack during this period than the area that they had left.
The IDF told us it had cross-checked "data regarding civilian presence and movement that followed these warnings" and that many people did receive and follow them.
It said that warnings had "saved countless civilian lives in the Gaza Strip".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68687749
|
news_world-middle-east-68687749
|
|
French pupil dies after being beaten near school - BBC News
|
2024-04-06
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The 15-year-old boy was attacked by several youths and suffered a cardiac arrest, say police.
|
Europe
|
The boy was attacked near the school where he was a pupil
There are renewed concerns over levels of violence in French schools after two young teenagers were the victims of attacks, one of them fatal.
A 15-year-old boy named as Shamseddin died in hospital on Friday.
The news came a day after he was beaten by a group of youths near his school in Viry-Chatillon, in the southern Paris suburbs.
"This extreme violence is becoming commonplace," said the town mayor, Jean-Marie Vilain.
Mr Vilain told French media the boy was walking home after a music class at about 16:30 local time on Thursday when he was set upon by a group of youths.
According to witnesses, he was punched and kicked by the attackers, who were wearing balaclavas.
He was taken to the Necker hospital, a top paediatric hospital in Paris, but doctors were unable to save his life.
One 17-year-old teenager has been arrested by French police in the Viry-Chatillon murder case, the local prosecutor announced later. Police are still looking for other assailants.
On Tuesday, in another incident in the southern city of Montpellier, a 14-year-old girl named as Samara was placed in an artificial coma after she was beaten by a group shortly after leaving school.
Three adolescents - a girl and two boys of roughly the same age as Samara - have been arrested and admitted taking part in the attack, police said. Samara has since regained consciousness.
The girl's mother told French media that Samara had been bullied by another girl at the school because she refused to follow Islamic dress codes.
"Samara puts on a bit of make-up. And this other girl wears the headscarf. All the time, she kept calling her an unbeliever," she said on French television on Wednesday.
"My daughter dresses like a European. Every day there were insults. It was physically and psychologically unbearable."
However, the prosecutor's office in its initial report on the attack made no mention of a religious connection, saying the background was an argument over photographs shared on Snapchat.
And speaking Thursday evening on another French television channel, Samara's mother read out a statement accusing the far-right of trying to use the attack to their own advantage.
"My daughter is a practising pious Muslim. She fasts during Ramadan and prays five times a day. Please do not use us to sully the name of our religion," she said.
The attacks have further heightened concerns about violence in schools, against a background of gangs, cyber-bullying and pressure to conform to Islamic rules.
Last week, the headteacher of a school in Paris resigned saying he feared for his life after receiving death threats for telling a girl to remove her head covering in accordance with French law.
In the same week, several schools had to shut because of hoax bomb threats made by people claiming to be Islamic radicals.
In recent years, two teachers have been murdered by Islamist radicals.
Samuel Paty was decapitated on the street in a Paris suburb in 2020, while Dominique Bernard was killed at his school in Arras in October last year.
Earlier on Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron said schools needed to be "shielded" from "uninhibited violence among our teenagers and sometimes among increasingly younger ones".
Reacting to the two attacks, Marine Le Pen of the hard-right National Rally said: "When will the government finally sit up and take the full measure of the savagery which is gnawing at our society?"
Jean-Marie Vilain, the mayor of Viry-Chatillon, was in tears as he spoke to journalists of the death of Shamseddin, who - he said - left a mother and a younger sister with their lives in ruins.
"We have to teach our children that there is good and there is bad. And when you do something bad, you get punished. And maybe we need to learn again how to punish," he said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68744255
|
news_world-europe-68744255
|
|
Gaza evacuation warnings from IDF contain many errors, BBC finds - BBC News
|
2024-04-06
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Experts say these errors could violate Israel's obligations under international humanitarian law.
|
Middle East
|
Two men and two boys on a street in Gaza look at a leaflet containing an IDF evacuation warning
Evacuation warnings issued by Israel to people in Gaza ahead of attacks have contained a host of significant errors, BBC analysis has revealed.
Warnings contained contradictory information and sometimes misnamed districts. This made them confusing to Gazans seeking safety.
Experts say such mistakes could violate Israel's international law obligations.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has rejected any assertion the warnings were confusing or contradictory.
In a statement, it said the alerts analysed by the BBC were only one element of its "extensive efforts to encourage the evacuation [of] civilians out of harm's way".
International humanitarian law requires attacking forces to give effective advance warning of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit.
Israel says its warning system is designed to help civilians flee danger as it continues its war against Hamas. The system divides a map of Gaza into hundreds of numbered blocks.
Israel has produced an interactive online map of the blocks that geo-locates users, showing their live location and which block number they are in.
This IDF post from late January shows a social media post on X with a link through via QR code to the master block map.
But people we spoke to have described struggling to get online to access the system, as well as finding the block system difficult to understand, notwithstanding the errors.
The BBC analysed the IDF's Arabic language social media channels on Facebook, X and Telegram, where we found hundreds of posts containing warnings. The same warnings were often posted repeatedly.
We also searched for leafleted warnings which had been photographed and shared online. The IDF says it has dropped 16 million such leaflets over Gaza.
We have focused our analysis on warnings issued since 1 December, which is when the IDF launched its block system as a way of providing more precise instructions than previously, after coming under international pressure.
We grouped all of the IDF's posts and leaflets that we found after this date into 26 separate warnings. The vast majority made reference to the master block system.
The IDF told the BBC it also warned of impending attacks through pre-recorded phone messages and live phone calls. Due to damage to Gaza's phone network we have not been able to compile data on these phone calls.
And our analysis of leaflets was limited to those we could find photographed and shared online.
The 26 separate warnings we found contained specific information from the IDF that people could use to escape areas of danger. But 17 of them also contained errors and inconsistencies.
In addition, one warning listed neighbourhoods as being in one district when they were actually in another. Another mixed up the block numbers of two neighbourhoods. And in a third, some blocks listed in the text were on the opposite side of Gaza to those highlighted on the accompanying map.
When we put these errors to the IDF, it did not respond to the issues we raised with the maps specifically but said the text of posts had been sufficiently clear. It also said that when arrows were used to direct people to safety, "it is obvious that the arrows point to a general direction" and reiterated that the key information had been provided in the text.
These inaccuracies and errors may violate Israel's obligation under international law to provide "effective advanced warnings", says Janina Dill, co-director of the Oxford Institute of Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict.
If the majority of warnings contain errors or are unclear to the point that civilians can't understand them then, she says, "these warnings do not fulfil the proper function they have under international humanitarian law".
This, adds Kubo Macak professor of international law at the University of Exeter, undermines their function to give "civilians the chance to protect themselves".
In December, Saleh, a tech entrepreneur from Gaza City, was sheltering with his children and his in-laws in Nuseirat in central Gaza - where, he says, there was no electricity or phone signal and long periods of internet outage.
He saw people killed and others fleeing from a nearby school as it was being shelled, but says he had not received any IDF evacuation details.
Eventually, he found someone with a Sim card that allowed him to access data networks in Egypt and Israel and came across an evacuation warning on an Israeli government Facebook page.
"There was an evacuation order for several residential blocks - [but] we didn't know which block we lived in. This led to a big argument," Salah says.
Salah could only access the internet intermittently, but he messaged his wife Amani, who has been in the UK since just before the war. She was able to go online and access the IDF's master block map and pinpoint where her husband was. But then, looking back at the specific evacuation warning on Facebook, the couple realised the numbered block where Salah was staying was shown cut in two - adding to the family's confusion.
Eventually, Salah decided to leave with the children. But some of his family stayed put - until fighting escalated further.
When the BBC analysed the Facebook evacuation warning Salah had been trying to decipher, we found further points of confusion.
In text, the post urged people to leave blocks 2220, 2221, 2222, 2223, 2224 and 2225 - all blocks that appear in the IDF's online master map.
But in the accompanying map, the six numbered blocks had been lumped into one, and mislabelled as block 2220.
Despite these inconsistencies, Israel presented its block warning system at the International Court of Justice in January as part of its defence against allegations by South Africa that it is committing genocide.
Israel's lawyers argued that it was doing its utmost to protect civilians and had "developed a detailed map so that specific areas can be temporarily evacuated, instead of evacuating entire areas".
They presented one social media warning in court as evidence - but the BBC has found two errors in it.
Block 55 and 99 were listed in the text of the post from 13 December but they were not shaded on the map.
The IDF told the BBC that when a block number is explicitly mentioned in text, the warning is sufficiently clear.
Israel's lawyers also claimed that the IDF, via its Arabic Twitter account, was providing information on the location of shelters close to areas being evacuated. But in all of the posts and leaflets we analysed we did not see any warning providing names or exact locations of shelters.
BBC analysis has also found the IDF's block system overall was used inconsistently. Nine of the 26 warnings listed a mix of block numbers and neighbourhood names. Another nine didn't mention block numbers at all. Despite linking through to the online master map, they instead listed neighbourhoods by name - which often sprawled over many numbered blocks.
The BBC could not find a way to determine the exact blocks of these neighbourhoods.
The Abdu family, which includes 32 people, also fled Gaza City to central Gaza early in the war. Then, in December, they received a warning leaflet dropped from a plane.
Messages on the family Whatsapp group, which the BBC has seen, chart their confusion as they argued for two days over what the leaflet meant.
It contained a list of neighbourhoods to evacuate, but the family couldn't locate most of these places.
The warning asked people to leave "Al-Bureij Camp and the neighbourhoods of Badr, the North Coast, al-Nuzha, al-Zahra, al-Buraq, al-Rawda, and al-Safa in the areas south of Wadi Gaza."
We located an al-Zahra and a Badr close by, but they are north of the Wadi Gaza riverbed. We could not find the neighbourhoods of al-Rawda or al-Nuzha in the "areas south of Wadi Gaza".
The Abdu family struggled to decide what to do. Should they stay and risk getting caught up in a fierce ground battle - or leave, and abandon the only shelter they might find?
Some followed the warning to go to "shelters in Deir al-Balah". But when they arrived they felt unsafe and decided to return. If they were going to die they would die together, they told us.
Satellite data on destruction in Gaza - analysed by Jamon Van Den Hoek at Oregon State University and Corey Scher of City University New York Graduate Center - shows that the area of Deir al-Balah that the family fled to came under more intense attack during this period than the area that they had left.
The IDF told us it had cross-checked "data regarding civilian presence and movement that followed these warnings" and that many people did receive and follow them.
It said that warnings had "saved countless civilian lives in the Gaza Strip".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68687749
|
news_world-middle-east-68687749
|
|
Garth Crooks' Team of the Week: Pickford, De Bruyne, Gabriel, Morris, Rice - BBC Sport
|
2024-04-07
|
None
|
Which players impressed our football pundit Garth Crooks enough to make his latest Team of the Week?
| null |
After every Premier League weekend, BBC football pundit Garth Crooks gathers his thoughts and gives you his Team of the Week.
Here are this week's choices and, as ever, Garth also discusses the game's big talking points in the Crooks of the Matter.
• None Follow your Premier League club and get news, analysis and fan views sent direct to you
Jordan Pickford (Everton): The Premier League is entering into a period of games where if you are a player, or football fan for that matter, incapable of holding your nerve then I suggest you stay at home for the next few weeks. What the pressure must be like for a goalkeeper, when the slightest mistake could be costly especially at this stage in the season, is almost unimaginable. However, it must help when you've faced the threat of relegation before and Pickford seems very comfortable in such circumstances. His performance in a midweek draw at Newcastle was outstanding and he then kept a clean sheet in a very nervy encounter - a 1-0 win at home to Burnley on Saturday.
Gabriel (Arsenal): How Arsenal defend in their next seven Premier League fixtures will determine whether they will be crowned champions or not. That is why their entire back five celebrated as if they had scored a goal when Gabriel blocked a shot in the dying minutes of a match that had already been won against Brighton. To concede at that stage in the 3-0 victory would have been a no more than a mere consolation for the home side.
Nonetheless, Arsenal's fifth consecutive clean sheet away from home signifies something far more meaningful. It suggests they know they are on a roll and the momentum they have created could see them through to the last day of the season. Gabriel and William Saliba have been magnificent in this regard and they have created a formidable centre-back partnership. Arsenal have a tricky run-in, but none more so than their trip to the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium on 28 April.
Micky van de Ven (Tottenham): What a strike - the goalkeeper never moved. We know he has pace and we know he has the composure but I never knew Van de Ven could strike a ball like he did in the 3-1 win against Nottingham Forest. It was about as good as a two-touch finish you will see. It was also a very important goal for Spurs whose inconsistency is their only threat to a top-four place.
The goal settled Tottenham down sufficiently to put a potentially troublesome Forest side to bed. Spurs go back into the top four with a mouth-watering tie against Arsenal looming in three weeks' time. Both clubs need maximum points for very different reasons but defeat for either club could ruin their most cherished ambitions this season.
William Saliba (Arsenal): Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta had every right to talk about the maturity of his team's performance and the spirit within their ranks in his post-match interview, having dealt with Brighton so successfully.
Saliba was the first player to run to Gabriel after the Brazilian defender made an excellent late block, which was exactly the spirit Arteta was referring to. What is also conspicuous is the way Arsenal are stirring the emotions of their away supporters. The Gunners have some difficult journeys to make between now and the end of the season in order to lift the title and their players will need their passion and support. So celebrating their victories so vividly and openly is building even greater momentum, with everyone looking forward to the next away fixture. It's a clever strategy and one that may in the end prove pivotal to their title challenge.
Declan Rice (Arsenal): Arsenal were taking no chances against Brighton, bringing four players back into their starting line-up after their midweek victory over Luton. Martin Odegaard was the star of the show against the Hatters in the absence of Rice, who made what seemed to be no more than a cameo appearance in the latter stages.
However, the game against Brighton posed a completely different challenge for the Gunners and one they rose to quite brilliantly. Rice was once again at the heart of a very professional performance. The former West Ham captain is as effective in attack as he is in defence, which is probably why Arsenal were prepared to pay £105m for the player in the first place.
Bruno Guimaraes (Newcastle): He's been a revelation for the team since he arrived at St James' Park. The fans love him and his team can't do without him. Guimaraes scored Newcastle's winner against Fulham on his 100th appearance for the club. Manager Eddie Howe's impromptu pep talk during the first half, where he pulled his players together and gave them what appeared to be a rocket, seemed to do the trick.
This has been a difficult season for the Magpies and they navigated the first part of it very well. However, if Newcastle are going to compete with the best teams, they will need a bigger squad and with Financial Fair Play rules hovering over everyone's head it's going to be very difficult to assemble the squad their owners can clearly afford.
Kobbie Mainoo (Manchester United): The way Liverpool started against Manchester United they could have been 3-0 up after 40 minutes. Their missed chances spelt danger for the visitors and so it turned out. One mistake by the young Jarell Quansah and United were level. Liverpool's counter-attacks were their biggest asset, but the fact that Virgil van Dijk is the only defender they can really count on in a crisis is really starting to affect their title chances.
Meanwhile, the longer the game went on the more Jurgen Klopp looked rattled. By the time Mainoo had put away the most glorious finish United were 2-1 up and Liverpool were the ones on the rack and Klopp looked like he was ready to explode on the touchline.
The good news for United is midfielder Mainoo is getting better with every game. The bad news for Liverpool is dropping two points at Old Trafford in the 2-2 draw has done Arsenal and Manchester City a monumental favour. The title is now well and truly up for grabs.
Kevin de Bruyne (Manchester City): There can't be many teams that can leave their star man out of their following fixture having scored a hat-trick, but Manchester City can. Despite his midweek treble against Aston Villa, Phil Foden sat on the bench and looked quite comfortable leaving matters to De Bruyne et al at Crystal Palace.
The equaliser from the Belgium international against Palace was so good it had manager Pep Guardiola blowing kisses to his player in sheer admiration. What then took place from de Bruyne was just pure class. He set up Erling Haaland to add further debate as to the whether the striker is just a goalscorer or not - and then proceeded to help himself to a second goal against Crystal Palace in a 4-2 romp away from home and his 100th since joining the club. This result was massive for City as it leaves them still within striking distance of Liverpool and Arsenal, and Foden fresh to face Real Madrid on Tuesday night in their Champions League quarter-final. Now that's how you manage your resources.
Carlton Morris (Luton): Finally, Luton close out a game. I said at the start of the season Morris can't score all their goals but he's made a very healthy contribution with nine. The Hatters don't have enough scoring power to stay in the league - a point I raised at the start of their campaign, but my goodness they've had a go. The finish by Morris against Bournemouth which provided Luton with a 2-1 win and three very valuable points demonstrated just how capable the striker is in front of goal.
However, even with Nottingham Forest's four-point deduction by the Premier League, which has given Luton a lifeline, they remain in the bottom three and still have a mountain to climb to survive the season. To stand any chance of staying up they must win at least three of their remaining six games.
Dominic Calvert-Lewin (Everton): When did goalkeepers start becoming footballers? When Manchester City boss Guardiola decided to revolutionise football, that's when. Burnley are paying the price for such boldness and Calvert-Lewin the grateful recipient of Clarets keeper Arijanet Muric's benevolence. Everton desperately needed this 1-0 victory and more besides if they are to stay in the division. It was also Calvert-Lewin who rescued a point away at Newcastle in midweek, showing nerves of steel to convert a late penalty.
Burnley, meanwhile, are almost certainly down and while it might appear honourable for a manager to hold on to his football beliefs it can also prove costly. Vincent Kompany and his team have certainly paid the price.
Ollie Watkins (Aston Villa): Aston Villa took a battering at Manchester City in midweek but survived sufficiently to face Brentford a few days later and earn a draw. Either side could have won this game as both teams went toe-to-toe, both desperate for the win at Villa Park.
This has not been a great week for Villa but not a bad week for Watkins whose two goals in a 3-3 encounter against the Bees keep his team in touch with the top four. Brentford, on the other hand, are for the first time in this division finding it very tough to pick up points. Nevertheless they have enough quality to survive in the Premier League.
Referee Andy Madley deserves great credit for his handling of the Brentford v Brighton fixture where Lewis Dunk wasn't penalised in a shirt-pulling encounter with Bees forward Yoane Wissa.
It's not often referees get a round of applause for a decision but both sets of fans appreciated the understanding. Here was a referee that adjudicated from instinct and not the rule book. Meanwhile, Brighton striker Danny Welbeck is playing out of his skin.
Morgan Gibbs-White (Nottingham Forest). The turn to get away from Joao Palhinha and the final pass for Callum Hudson-Odoi to score against Fulham in midweek was superb. Gibbs-White was producing touches of magic all over the park against Fulham, who were well and truly beaten on the night. Gibbs-White also deserved his goal to crown a superb performance.
Cole Palmer (Chelsea): Six goals in four league games says all you need to know about a player's form.
The Crooks of the Matter
It was difficult to ignore the argument surrounding Erling Haaland last week about the contribution he makes to the team outside the box. The suggestion was that if he's not scoring goals then his hold-up play and general contribution to the team are just not good enough.
I was always taken by Gerd Muller, Bayern Munich's record goalscorer and a World Cup winner with West Germany, and a lack of work-rate. It was clear his manager's instructions were to concentrate on what he was good at. The same was true of Brazil's Romario, who was practically a passenger on all things outside the box.
The great Italian striker Paolo Rossi was virtually anonymous until you set him free on a through-ball. All those soccer greats had one thing in common - they were the best at what they did and all won World Cups.
English football has always demanded work-rate as an essential part of its make-up and if you are a striker and not scoring goals most weeks then work must be the default position.
It was Sir Alf Ramsey who said he "distrusted a genius who didn't possess a sweat on his brow". He was referring to Tottenham's Jimmy Greaves, who he left out of England's 1966 World Cup final triumph in favour of West Ham's Geoff Hurst. He was proved right of course with Hurst's match-winning hat-trick.
However, scoring goals has always been the most difficult job to achieve on a football pitch. It's only those who can't do it who tend to resent those who can, especially when they are having a bad time in front of goal.
• None Our coverage of your Premier League club is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68756167
|
rt_football_68756167
|
|
Cloghan Point: Lack of action over oil terminal plan 'shocking' - BBC News
|
2024-04-07
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mid and East Antrim Borough Council has already voted to approve plans, despite letters of objection.
|
Northern Ireland
|
The site is on the shores of Belfast Lough
A campaign group has said it is "shocking" that the infrastructure minister has not intervened over plans to expand a Belfast Lough oil terminal.
A spokesperson for the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) said minister John O'Dowd "gave the matter careful consideration".
The Cloghan Point terminal is located outside Whitehead in County Antrim.
It is currently used to store part of the Republic of Ireland's strategic reserve of diesel and gas oil.
However, it is to be developed into a facility for importing oil to be stored on the site before being distributed across Northern Ireland and further afield.
A planning application was submitted to Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, and in September 2023 the council's planning committee voted to approve the expansion despite hundreds of letters of objection.
A spokesperson for the Department for Infrastructure said the minister "gave the matter careful consideration"
It has faced opposition from local residents concerned over a big increase in the site's use as well as climate change issues.
In some cases, planning decisions that are deemed to have a regional impact can be "called in" by the Department for Infrastructure.
But the DfI spokesperson said that Mr O'Dowd had considered the plans "in line with all of his statutory obligations".
They added that he "has now written to Mid and East Antrim Council to inform them that the application will not be referred to the department for determination".
As the minister has decided not to intervene, Mid and East Antrim Borough Council have said they will now officially issue the planning permission.
Hilary McCollum from the Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal group said the terminal expansion will have implications beyond one council area
Hilary McCollum from the Stop Whitehead Oil Terminal group said she "just doesn't understand" how an argument can be made that the expansion of Cloghan Point will not have a regional impact.
"We all know we are in a climate crisis, we know we need to reduce fossil fuel use. And yet we are going to have another new oil terminal that's able to bring in oil from bigger tankers.
"That suggests to me an increase in oil imports into Northern Ireland.
"If you are increasing the amount of fossil fuels being brought in, how is that going to impact on Northern Ireland's strategy to reach net zero by 2050?"
The site was built in the late 1970s to serve Ballylumford and Kilroot Power stations
Ms McCollum said that "sometimes things go wrong".
"If there's an oil spill at Cloghan Point, or if there's, worst case, an explosion at Cloghan Point, that is not just going to affect the Mid and East Antrim area, that would affect the whole of Belfast Lough, it would affect north Down," she said.
The terminal was constructed more than 40 years ago and originally used to facilitate distribution of heavy fuel oil to Kilroot Power Station and Ballylumford Power Station in Islandmagee.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68730973
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-68730973
|
|
Ministers 'caught by surprise' over hate crime row - Freeman - BBC News
|
2024-04-07
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Former health secretary Jeane Freeman also believes misogyny should have been included in the new law.
|
Scotland politics
|
Former SNP MSP Jeane Freeman was Scottish health secretary from 2018 to 2021
Former health secretary Jeane Freeman says SNP ministers have been "caught by surprise" by the row over Scotland's new hate crime law.
She also said misogyny should have been included in the legislation, which creates a crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to protected characteristics.
Police Scotland received thousands of complaints after its launch last week.
The force has confirmed a number of complaints were made during Sunday's Old Firm match at Ibrox.
It is expected to publish full figures this week.
Ms Freeman, who was health secretary from 2018 to 2021, told BBC Scotland's The Sunday Show her reaction to the new law was one of "frustration at the level of misinformation".
She said: "My impression is that the furore and genuine concerns over the last week has caught the Scottish government by surprise."
Ms Freeman said ministers should have planned for the law coming in "at this particular point in the electoral cycle".
She said "if you leave loopholes in it and don't set out what it does and doesn't do" it would be used by political opponents.
Ms Freeman said she understood why some women's groups agreed misogyny should not be included following a 2022 report by a review group chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy KC.
But she added: "My own view is that was a loophole that you left in the legislation, left wide open to be exploited.
"So I have two sets of conflicting frustration. One about how this has been handled, prepared for and presented, and the other being how it has been mishandled and misinformed in a lot of the presentation and comment."
Last week First Minister Humza Yousaf said the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 protected the "most vulnerable and marginalised" while safeguarding freedom of expression and speech.
The act creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.
The maximum penalty is a prison sentence of seven years.
A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, "that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive," with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the protected characteristics.
Stirring up hatred based on race, colour, nationality or ethnicity was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986 but, in an attempt to streamline the criminal law in Scotland, that too is now part of the Hate Crime Act.
On Sunday, Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie condemned the "deplorable levels of misinformation" surrounding the act.
The Glasgow MSP also revealed he was contacted by Police Scotland officers on Saturday over "vexatious complaints" that had been made in his name.
He told The Sunday Show: "I genuinely would appeal to those who are creating this misinformation and creating this wave of confusion and hostility, think about the real-world consequences of your actions.
"This is emboldening not the online keyboard warriors, not the people who get to write angry columns in newspapers, it is emboldening the worst elements of our society who genuinely do pose a threat of outright abuse and violence."
Lord McConnell said action was needed before the summer
And, writing in the Sunday Mail newspaper, former first minister Lord McConnell branded it "unworkable".
Lord McConnell, who was Scottish Labour leader and first minister from 2001 to 2007, said the act "inflamed" trans misgendering rows.
He also compared it to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act, which was repealed in 2018.
Lord McConnell warned Police Scotland officers would be dealing with many "simply spurious" complaints at a time when the force's budget was under pressure.
He added: "The arguments between feminist and transgender campaigners - excluding crimes against women from the Act has inflamed the situation with many women feeling their concerns are ignored.
"This is exactly what good legislation should seek to avoid. Good political leadership should try to win the argument, build a consensus not sow division."
Police Scotland confirmed it is investigating a number of complaints of hate-related crimes which are alleged to have taken place during Sunday's Rangers - Celtic match.
The Old Firm game resulted in a 3-3 draw.
The force said no arrests were made at Ibrox Stadium but a small number of reports relating to hate crimes are being assessed.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68756055
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68756055
|
|
Garth Crooks' Team of the Week: Pickford, De Bruyne, Gabriel, Morris, Rice - BBC Sport
|
2024-04-08
|
None
|
Which players impressed our football pundit Garth Crooks enough to make his latest Team of the Week?
| null |
After every Premier League weekend, BBC football pundit Garth Crooks gathers his thoughts and gives you his Team of the Week.
Here are this week's choices and, as ever, Garth also discusses the game's big talking points in the Crooks of the Matter.
• None Follow your Premier League club and get news, analysis and fan views sent direct to you
Jordan Pickford (Everton): The Premier League is entering into a period of games where if you are a player, or football fan for that matter, incapable of holding your nerve then I suggest you stay at home for the next few weeks. What the pressure must be like for a goalkeeper, when the slightest mistake could be costly especially at this stage in the season, is almost unimaginable. However, it must help when you've faced the threat of relegation before and Pickford seems very comfortable in such circumstances. His performance in a midweek draw at Newcastle was outstanding and he then kept a clean sheet in a very nervy encounter - a 1-0 win at home to Burnley on Saturday.
Gabriel (Arsenal): How Arsenal defend in their next seven Premier League fixtures will determine whether they will be crowned champions or not. That is why their entire back five celebrated as if they had scored a goal when Gabriel blocked a shot in the dying minutes of a match that had already been won against Brighton. To concede at that stage in the 3-0 victory would have been a no more than a mere consolation for the home side.
Nonetheless, Arsenal's fifth consecutive clean sheet away from home signifies something far more meaningful. It suggests they know they are on a roll and the momentum they have created could see them through to the last day of the season. Gabriel and William Saliba have been magnificent in this regard and they have created a formidable centre-back partnership. Arsenal have a tricky run-in, but none more so than their trip to the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium on 28 April.
Micky van de Ven (Tottenham): What a strike - the goalkeeper never moved. We know he has pace and we know he has the composure but I never knew Van de Ven could strike a ball like he did in the 3-1 win against Nottingham Forest. It was about as good as a two-touch finish you will see. It was also a very important goal for Spurs whose inconsistency is their only threat to a top-four place.
The goal settled Tottenham down sufficiently to put a potentially troublesome Forest side to bed. Spurs go back into the top four with a mouth-watering tie against Arsenal looming in three weeks' time. Both clubs need maximum points for very different reasons but defeat for either club could ruin their most cherished ambitions this season.
William Saliba (Arsenal): Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta had every right to talk about the maturity of his team's performance and the spirit within their ranks in his post-match interview, having dealt with Brighton so successfully.
Saliba was the first player to run to Gabriel after the Brazilian defender made an excellent late block, which was exactly the spirit Arteta was referring to. What is also conspicuous is the way Arsenal are stirring the emotions of their away supporters. The Gunners have some difficult journeys to make between now and the end of the season in order to lift the title and their players will need their passion and support. So celebrating their victories so vividly and openly is building even greater momentum, with everyone looking forward to the next away fixture. It's a clever strategy and one that may in the end prove pivotal to their title challenge.
Declan Rice (Arsenal): Arsenal were taking no chances against Brighton, bringing four players back into their starting line-up after their midweek victory over Luton. Martin Odegaard was the star of the show against the Hatters in the absence of Rice, who made what seemed to be no more than a cameo appearance in the latter stages.
However, the game against Brighton posed a completely different challenge for the Gunners and one they rose to quite brilliantly. Rice was once again at the heart of a very professional performance. The former West Ham captain is as effective in attack as he is in defence, which is probably why Arsenal were prepared to pay £105m for the player in the first place.
Bruno Guimaraes (Newcastle): He's been a revelation for the team since he arrived at St James' Park. The fans love him and his team can't do without him. Guimaraes scored Newcastle's winner against Fulham on his 100th appearance for the club. Manager Eddie Howe's impromptu pep talk during the first half, where he pulled his players together and gave them what appeared to be a rocket, seemed to do the trick.
This has been a difficult season for the Magpies and they navigated the first part of it very well. However, if Newcastle are going to compete with the best teams, they will need a bigger squad and with Financial Fair Play rules hovering over everyone's head it's going to be very difficult to assemble the squad their owners can clearly afford.
Kobbie Mainoo (Manchester United): The way Liverpool started against Manchester United they could have been 3-0 up after 40 minutes. Their missed chances spelt danger for the visitors and so it turned out. One mistake by the young Jarell Quansah and United were level. Liverpool's counter-attacks were their biggest asset, but the fact that Virgil van Dijk is the only defender they can really count on in a crisis is really starting to affect their title chances.
Meanwhile, the longer the game went on the more Jurgen Klopp looked rattled. By the time Mainoo had put away the most glorious finish United were 2-1 up and Liverpool were the ones on the rack and Klopp looked like he was ready to explode on the touchline.
The good news for United is midfielder Mainoo is getting better with every game. The bad news for Liverpool is dropping two points at Old Trafford in the 2-2 draw has done Arsenal and Manchester City a monumental favour. The title is now well and truly up for grabs.
Kevin de Bruyne (Manchester City): There can't be many teams that can leave their star man out of their following fixture having scored a hat-trick, but Manchester City can. Despite his midweek treble against Aston Villa, Phil Foden sat on the bench and looked quite comfortable leaving matters to De Bruyne et al at Crystal Palace.
The equaliser from the Belgium international against Palace was so good it had manager Pep Guardiola blowing kisses to his player in sheer admiration. What then took place from de Bruyne was just pure class. He set up Erling Haaland to add further debate as to the whether the striker is just a goalscorer or not - and then proceeded to help himself to a second goal against Crystal Palace in a 4-2 romp away from home and his 100th since joining the club. This result was massive for City as it leaves them still within striking distance of Liverpool and Arsenal, and Foden fresh to face Real Madrid on Tuesday night in their Champions League quarter-final. Now that's how you manage your resources.
Carlton Morris (Luton): Finally, Luton close out a game. I said at the start of the season Morris can't score all their goals but he's made a very healthy contribution with nine. The Hatters don't have enough scoring power to stay in the league - a point I raised at the start of their campaign, but my goodness they've had a go. The finish by Morris against Bournemouth which provided Luton with a 2-1 win and three very valuable points demonstrated just how capable the striker is in front of goal.
However, even with Nottingham Forest's four-point deduction by the Premier League, which has given Luton a lifeline, they remain in the bottom three and still have a mountain to climb to survive the season. To stand any chance of staying up they must win at least three of their remaining six games.
Dominic Calvert-Lewin (Everton): When did goalkeepers start becoming footballers? When Manchester City boss Guardiola decided to revolutionise football, that's when. Burnley are paying the price for such boldness and Calvert-Lewin the grateful recipient of Clarets keeper Arijanet Muric's benevolence. Everton desperately needed this 1-0 victory and more besides if they are to stay in the division. It was also Calvert-Lewin who rescued a point away at Newcastle in midweek, showing nerves of steel to convert a late penalty.
Burnley, meanwhile, are almost certainly down and while it might appear honourable for a manager to hold on to his football beliefs it can also prove costly. Vincent Kompany and his team have certainly paid the price.
Ollie Watkins (Aston Villa): Aston Villa took a battering at Manchester City in midweek but survived sufficiently to face Brentford a few days later and earn a draw. Either side could have won this game as both teams went toe-to-toe, both desperate for the win at Villa Park.
This has not been a great week for Villa but not a bad week for Watkins whose two goals in a 3-3 encounter against the Bees keep his team in touch with the top four. Brentford, on the other hand, are for the first time in this division finding it very tough to pick up points. Nevertheless they have enough quality to survive in the Premier League.
Referee Andy Madley deserves great credit for his handling of the Brentford v Brighton fixture where Lewis Dunk wasn't penalised in a shirt-pulling encounter with Bees forward Yoane Wissa.
It's not often referees get a round of applause for a decision but both sets of fans appreciated the understanding. Here was a referee that adjudicated from instinct and not the rule book. Meanwhile, Brighton striker Danny Welbeck is playing out of his skin.
Morgan Gibbs-White (Nottingham Forest). The turn to get away from Joao Palhinha and the final pass for Callum Hudson-Odoi to score against Fulham in midweek was superb. Gibbs-White was producing touches of magic all over the park against Fulham, who were well and truly beaten on the night. Gibbs-White also deserved his goal to crown a superb performance.
Cole Palmer (Chelsea): Six goals in four league games says all you need to know about a player's form.
The Crooks of the Matter
It was difficult to ignore the argument surrounding Erling Haaland last week about the contribution he makes to the team outside the box. The suggestion was that if he's not scoring goals then his hold-up play and general contribution to the team are just not good enough.
I was always taken by Gerd Muller, Bayern Munich's record goalscorer and a World Cup winner with West Germany, and a lack of work-rate. It was clear his manager's instructions were to concentrate on what he was good at. The same was true of Brazil's Romario, who was practically a passenger on all things outside the box.
The great Italian striker Paolo Rossi was virtually anonymous until you set him free on a through-ball. All those soccer greats had one thing in common - they were the best at what they did and all won World Cups.
English football has always demanded work-rate as an essential part of its make-up and if you are a striker and not scoring goals most weeks then work must be the default position.
It was Sir Alf Ramsey who said he "distrusted a genius who didn't possess a sweat on his brow". He was referring to Tottenham's Jimmy Greaves, who he left out of England's 1966 World Cup final triumph in favour of West Ham's Geoff Hurst. He was proved right of course with Hurst's match-winning hat-trick.
However, scoring goals has always been the most difficult job to achieve on a football pitch. It's only those who can't do it who tend to resent those who can, especially when they are having a bad time in front of goal.
• None Our coverage of your Premier League club is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68756167
|
rt_football_68756167
|
|
Everton deducted two points for second breach of Premier League financial rules - BBC Sport
|
2024-04-08
|
None
|
Everton are deducted two points for a second breach of Premier League financial rules.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Everton
Everton have been deducted two points for a second breach of Premier League financial rules.
Profit and sustainability rules (PSR) permit clubs to lose £105m over three years and an independent commission found Everton breached that by £16.6m for the three-year period to 2022-23.
They drop one place to 16th and are now two points above the relegation zone.
The Toffees had a 10-point deduction reduced to six on appeal in February for the three-year period to 2021-22.
Everton say the club will appeal against the decision.
The Merseyside club could yet face a further points deduction in relation to interest costs associated with the building of the club's new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock, though that issue is unlikely to be resolved before the end of the season.
In its written reasons the independent commission said the Premier League's starting point for any sanction was a five-point deduction but conceded two should be taken off because of the overlap in the years that were assessed in Everton's two cases.
The commission decided that any breach of PSR justifies a three-point deduction, with an additional two points because Everton's breach of £16.6m - 15.8% above the £105m threshold - is deemed significant.
However, the commission accepted Everton's arguments for mitigation in relation to the fact the club has:
• None Already been deducted points this season
• None Suffered a loss of revenue because of the suspension of a sponsorship deal with Russian company USM
The commission concluded that the fact Everton have already been punished this season "for losses in years which overlap with the years at issue in these proceedings" merits a two-point reduction in punishment, with a further point for the loss of sponsorship revenue and early admission of guilt.
It also said that the club and league remain in dispute over costs related to the new stadium - with the Premier League saying these costs should count as PSR losses, while Everton argue they should be excluded and have capitalised them on their latest audited accounts.
The same independent commission will meet to decide the issue at a later date and, if it agrees with the Premier League, could issue further punishment.
However, the commission said this issue cannot be dealt with using the expediated PSR process introduced this season so is unlikely to be resolved before the end of the campaign.
An Everton statement read: "While the club's position has been that no further sanction was appropriate, the club is pleased to see that the commission has given credit to the majority of the issues raised by the club, including the concept of double punishment, the significant mitigating circumstances facing the club due to the war in Ukraine, and the high level of co-operation and early admission of the club's breach."
The Toffees added that the club is "extremely concerned" at the "inconsistency" of the punishments, with four different commissions issuing four different points deductions this season.
The Premier League said the independent commission "reaffirmed the principle that any breach of the PSRs is significant and justifies, indeed requires, a sporting sanction".
Nottingham Forest are the other Premier League club to have been charged with PSR breaches this season and were docked four points in March, although they have lodged an appeal.
Championship club Leicester have also been charged by the Premier League for allegedly breaking spending rules during their last three seasons in the top flight.
There is no guarantee that Everton's appeal will be heard before the final games of the Premier League season on 19 May when Everton travel to Arsenal.
The 2023-24 season technically remains 'live' until the annual general meeting in June when relegated clubs transfer their certificates and 24 May has been selected as a 'backstop date' for the appeals process to be concluded.
• None Fight for Premier League survival - who will go down?
This second deduction comes at a time of significant uncertainty at Everton.
The club released their accounts covering the 2022-23 season on 31 March, reporting financial losses of £89.1m.
In September, owner Farhad Moshiri agreed to sell his 94% stake in the club to American investment fund 777 Partners. The takeover is going through the regulatory processes and the club is still waiting for that to be approved by the Premier League.
Everton are also in the process of building a new stadium on the banks of the River Mersey at Bramley-Moore Dock, which is due to open in 2024.
Giving evidence to the independent commission, Kevin Thelwell, Everton's director of football, said the club was already changing and moving away from its previous business model towards a more sustainable recruitment strategy, but added that "it's a big old ship to turn round".
What are the financial rules?
The PSRs are aimed at promoting financial stability within the Premier League.
They were introduced in 2015-16 although the demand to protect clubs from overspending can be traced back to Portsmouth, who in 2010 became the first - and so far only - Premier League club to go into administration after failing to find a buyer who would pay off spiralling debts of about £60m.
Current rules limit the losses clubs are allowed to make, although the figure can be inflated by external owner-driven funding.
However, the rules are due to be switched so, like Uefa, spending is linked to turnover.
Opponents of the rules argue they prevent significant investment from wealthy backers and, by definition, maintain the status quo of the biggest clubs remaining the richest and most successful.
24 March 2023: Premier League refers Everton to independent commission over alleged breach of financial fair play rules for the three-year accounting period ending with the 2021-22 season.
17 November 2023: Everton receive an immediate 10-point deduction after being found to have breached the Premier League's financial rules.
15 January: Everton and Nottingham Forest are charged for breaches of the league's profit and sustainability rules. The hearing has to be concluded within 12 weeks of this date, which is 8 April.
26 February: Everton's first penalty for breaching Premier League financial rules is reduced from 10 points to six after an appeal.
25 March: Hearing for Everton's second charge, relating to three-year accounting period ending in 2022-23, takes place this week.
8 April: Everton receive second points deduction of two points.
19 May: The final day of the Premier League season, when Everton visit Arsenal (16:00 BST).
24 May: The latest possible date for an appeal hearing to be concluded.
• None Our coverage of Everton is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
• None Everything Everton - go straight to all the best content
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68723109
|
rt_football_68723109
|
|
Foreign Office: Former diplomats lead call to replace 'elitist' department - BBC News
|
2024-04-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
A new Department for International Affairs with modernised premises and a broader remit is proposed.
|
UK
|
The main Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office building in London houses a statue of British imperialist Robert Clive, who engineered British rule in India
The Foreign Office should be abolished and replaced by a new Department for International Affairs with "fewer colonial era pictures on the wall", a group of former senior diplomats and officials has said.
They have written a pamphlet proposing radical reform of UK foreign policy.
They say the Foreign Office is elitist, "rooted in the past" and "struggling to deliver a clear mandate".
In response, the department said it had clearly defined priorities.
The group of former officials say the new department should have a broader remit that promotes Britain's prosperity and security by better coordinating strategy on trade and aid, development and climate change - as well as traditional foreign policy.
The authors say this would be better able to deliver on Britain's long-term international objectives.
Parliament should give the new department "core objectives and mandates" that "endure beyond the tenure of individual ministers" to avoid repeated short term policy change, the authors say.
And they argue there should be a new commitment by the government to spend 1% of national income on the department's international priorities - just as 2% of national wealth is currently committed to defence.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office was built to impress foreign visitors at the height of the British empire
The authors include former cabinet secretary Lord Sedwill, former director general at the Foreign Office Moazzam Malik, and Tom Fletcher, former ambassador and foreign affairs adviser to Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron.
The pamphlet - The World in 2040: Renewing the UK's Approach to International Affairs - reflects the conclusions of a two-day conference involving former ministers, national security advisers and senior civil servants held in Oxford.
The authors are scathing of the Foreign Office, known officially as the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). They say it is "struggling to deliver a clear mandate, prioritisation and resource allocation".
It "all too often operates like a giant private office for the foreign secretary of the day, responding to the minister's immediate concerns and ever-changing in tray", they say. The merger between the FCDO and the Department for International Development "struggled to deliver", they add.
They say "the very name of the Foreign, Commonwealth (formerly 'Colonial') and Development Office is anchored in the past".
"A new Department for International Affairs (or Global Affairs) would signal a potentially quite different role. The physical surroundings on King Charles Street also hint at the Foreign Office's identity: somewhat elitist and rooted in the past," reads the pamphlet.
"Modernising premises - perhaps with fewer colonial era pictures on the walls - might help create a more open working culture and send a clear signal about Britain's future."
The Foreign Office is responsible for protecting and promoting British interests worldwide
The Foreign Office - based in King Charles Street in Whitehall - was built in the 1860s in a grand classical Victorian style to impress foreign visitors at the height of the British empire.
Many paintings there tell the story of Britain's imperial past, including one - next to the foreign secretary's office - in which Africa is portrayed by a black boy holding up a basket of fruit.
The essential argument of the authors is that Britain needs to have a clearer sense of its "purpose, history, interests and assets as an off-shore, mid-sized power".
It "will not be able to rely on just its traditional alliances with the US and Europe" but should instead form "pragmatic" new partnerships with other "middle powers" elsewhere in the world, they say.
Britain's security and prosperity, they argue, will in future be more closely tied to its economic and social relationships with regional powers, especially in Asia.
In making those new partnerships, the UK should be willing to "share rights" with emerging countries in reformed multilateral institutions, say the former diplomats.
It should accept new allies even if their "interests and values may be less closely aligned" to Britain's. The UK should "be more of a team-player, showing humility and respect" rather than trying to project an image of "greatness" to the world "that today seems anachronistic", they add.
The pamphlet says: "Regaining a sense of confidence requires a greater self-awareness of our position as an 'off-shore' nation.
"As a mid-sized power outside the European Union, there is potentially much to learn from countries like Norway, Canada, Switzerland and Japan who are able to use their size and independence to leverage significant influence on the world stage."
To do all that, they argue, requires a new international affairs department that steers "long-term strategy and policy" with much of the actual implementation carried out by more semi-autonomous agencies.
Downing Street said the prime minister did not agree the Foreign Office was "elitist", nor that colonial-era paintings should be removed.
"We've previously talked about being proud of the UK's history and looking forward, the Foreign Office is at the forefront of efforts to promote UK interests at home and abroad," the prime minister's official spokesman said.
A FCDO spokesperson said: "We are maximising the benefits of merging diplomacy and development in the FCDO to better deal with global challenges, as seen in our responses to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and in the Middle East.
"We are committed to having an even greater impact and influence on the world stage - which is why we recently completed a review across the department to ensure we are effectively directing our funds, streamlining all our international policy work, and building our capability for the future."
• None UK aid department to be merged with Foreign Office
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68756259
|
news_uk-68756259
|
|
Swansea: Case dropped after press photographer arrested on story - BBC News
|
2024-04-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
A freelance photographer was "singled out" by a police officer for having a camera, a court hears.
|
Wales
|
Freelance photographer Dimitris Legakis was arrested while reporting from the scene of a murder in Swansea
Prosecutors have dropped what a judge called a "disturbing" case against a press photographer who was arrested while covering a breaking news story.
Dimitris Legakis was detained with "considerable force" at scene of a murder on Sketty Lane, Swansea and held in custody for 15 hours.
Swansea Crown Court heard "there was no evidential basis" to charge him.
Judge Geraint Walters said it seems a police officer "took offence" to him taking pictures.
Mr Legakis, a freelance photographer who runs the Athena Picture Agency in Swansea, was covering a car fire on 22 September, 2023, when an argument broke out.
Police arrived at the scene and arrested Mr Legakis on a public order allegation, later charging him with assaulting an emergency worker, obstructing or resisting a police officer, and with a public order offence of using threatening or abusive words or behaviour.
The car fire had been set by murderer David Clarke, who beat his 77-year-old wife Helen with a hammer before dousing her in petrol and setting her alight.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the public order allegation and Mr Legakis pleaded not guilty to the assault charge.
The trial was due to start on Tuesday but at a hearing on Monday prosecution barrister Alycia Carpanini said no evidence would be offered in the case.
She told the court it was not in the public interest to pursue the obstruction allegation.
Asked by Judge Walters why the decision to offer no evidence had been taken on the eve of the trial, the barrister said the original statement taken from the police officer did not "coincide" with what he later said in his victim personal statement.
The alleged assault was also not captured on bodycam footage, she added.
The judge said having read the papers in the case it seemed to him "the high point of the prosecution case" was that somebody employed as a photographer was taking pictures and a police officer "took offence" to it.
He said prosecutors came to recognise that from the start, "there was no evidential basis" to charge Mr Legakis.
Judge Walters called the case "disturbing", saying it "raised serious questions" and that something had "very seriously gone wrong".
He recorded a formal not guilty verdict on the charge of assaulting an emergency worker.
Mr Legakis's barrister, James Hartson, told the court his client was a well-known professional photographer who believed he was singled out by the police because he was carrying a camera.
He told the court his defence case statement raised "legitimate questions about the freedom of the press".
Mr Harston told the court the assault charge was "suggested" to the arresting officer by his sergeant, to which the officer first said "it's not worth it" but "in a heartbeat" changed his mind.
After deciding it would offer no evidence in the case, the court heard the CPS wrote to the judge to suggest the matter could be dealt with "administratively", in other words in private.
South Wales Police has been asked to comment.
Mr Legakis reported being assaulted by four people during the altercation on Sketty Lane.
Six months later, in March, the force's professional standards unit wrote to him to confirm the allegations had not been investigated, and the issue would be raised with a chief inspector in Swansea.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68763717
|
news_uk-wales-68763717
|
|
Ministers 'caught by surprise' over hate crime row - Freeman - BBC News
|
2024-04-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Former health secretary Jeane Freeman also believes misogyny should have been included in the new law.
|
Scotland politics
|
Former SNP MSP Jeane Freeman was Scottish health secretary from 2018 to 2021
Former health secretary Jeane Freeman says SNP ministers have been "caught by surprise" by the row over Scotland's new hate crime law.
She also said misogyny should have been included in the legislation, which creates a crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to protected characteristics.
Police Scotland received thousands of complaints after its launch last week.
The force has confirmed a number of complaints were made during Sunday's Old Firm match at Ibrox.
It is expected to publish full figures this week.
Ms Freeman, who was health secretary from 2018 to 2021, told BBC Scotland's The Sunday Show her reaction to the new law was one of "frustration at the level of misinformation".
She said: "My impression is that the furore and genuine concerns over the last week has caught the Scottish government by surprise."
Ms Freeman said ministers should have planned for the law coming in "at this particular point in the electoral cycle".
She said "if you leave loopholes in it and don't set out what it does and doesn't do" it would be used by political opponents.
Ms Freeman said she understood why some women's groups agreed misogyny should not be included following a 2022 report by a review group chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy KC.
But she added: "My own view is that was a loophole that you left in the legislation, left wide open to be exploited.
"So I have two sets of conflicting frustration. One about how this has been handled, prepared for and presented, and the other being how it has been mishandled and misinformed in a lot of the presentation and comment."
Last week First Minister Humza Yousaf said the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 protected the "most vulnerable and marginalised" while safeguarding freedom of expression and speech.
The act creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.
The maximum penalty is a prison sentence of seven years.
A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, "that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive," with the intention of stirring up hatred based on the protected characteristics.
Stirring up hatred based on race, colour, nationality or ethnicity was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986 but, in an attempt to streamline the criminal law in Scotland, that too is now part of the Hate Crime Act.
On Sunday, Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie condemned the "deplorable levels of misinformation" surrounding the act.
The Glasgow MSP also revealed he was contacted by Police Scotland officers on Saturday over "vexatious complaints" that had been made in his name.
He told The Sunday Show: "I genuinely would appeal to those who are creating this misinformation and creating this wave of confusion and hostility, think about the real-world consequences of your actions.
"This is emboldening not the online keyboard warriors, not the people who get to write angry columns in newspapers, it is emboldening the worst elements of our society who genuinely do pose a threat of outright abuse and violence."
Lord McConnell said action was needed before the summer
And, writing in the Sunday Mail newspaper, former first minister Lord McConnell branded it "unworkable".
Lord McConnell, who was Scottish Labour leader and first minister from 2001 to 2007, said the act "inflamed" trans misgendering rows.
He also compared it to the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act, which was repealed in 2018.
Lord McConnell warned Police Scotland officers would be dealing with many "simply spurious" complaints at a time when the force's budget was under pressure.
He added: "The arguments between feminist and transgender campaigners - excluding crimes against women from the Act has inflamed the situation with many women feeling their concerns are ignored.
"This is exactly what good legislation should seek to avoid. Good political leadership should try to win the argument, build a consensus not sow division."
Police Scotland confirmed it is investigating a number of complaints of hate-related crimes which are alleged to have taken place during Sunday's Rangers - Celtic match.
The Old Firm game resulted in a 3-3 draw.
The force said no arrests were made at Ibrox Stadium but a small number of reports relating to hate crimes are being assessed.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68756055
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68756055
|
|
Masters champion Jon Rahm on Augusta title defence and LIV moving to 72 holes - BBC Sport
|
2024-04-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSport/
|
Masters champion Jon Rahm's move to LIV could prove a "tipping point" in the battle for the future of the men's professional game, writes Iain Carter.
|
Golf
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Jon Rahm says his switch to LIV golf could prove to be a "tipping point" for the sport
Coverage: Live radio and text commentary on BBC Sounds and BBC Sport website of each round. Full details
Masters champion Jon Rahm has called for the LIV Golf League to move to 72 holes and believes his lucrative switch to the breakaway tour could prove a "tipping point" in the ongoing battle for the future of men's professional golf. The 29-year-old Spaniard is looking forward to his Augusta title defence this week having finished joint fourth at last week's LIV event in Miami, although he led his Legion XIII quartet to victory in the team event. For the first time this year, all of the world's best players will be at the same venue when the Masters tees off on Thursday. The opening major of the 2024 calendar begins with the men's game still split as the PGA Tour explores a possible relationship with LIV's Saudi Arabian backers. Before his move, Rahm was critical of LIV's abbreviated 54-hole duration and despite signing a contract reportedly worth £450m he believes his new employers should consider moving to the traditional 72-hole format. The LIV calendar currently has 14 54-hole tournaments with a shotgun start and no cut, and players compete for both individual and team honours at each event. Speaking to BBC Sport, Rahm said: "If there ever was a way where LIV could go to 72 holes I think it would help all of this argument a lot. "The closer I think we can get LIV Golf to some other things the better. I think it would be for some kind of unification to feed into a world tour or something like that. "I don't know if I'm alone in this, but I definitely wouldn't mind going back to 72 holes."
Rahm remains an influential global star having added the Masters to his 2021 US Open title which was won at Torrey Pines in California. He had been a staunch LIV critic but shook the golfing establishment with his move at the end of last year. He agrees with the notion that if LIV could lure him to their ranks, they are capable of securing the services of pretty much any leading player and have now proven themselves to be a significant part of the modern golf scene. "That's a well thought out argument," he told me. "I could be the start of a tipping point in that sense. "I understood the weight that [my] decision could have and the impact it could have. I understood that perfectly and that's why it wasn't an easy decision. "The balance of golf could be disturbed a little bit. Luckily in my career, especially last year, I accomplished a lot and I got to be one of the bigger names in golf. "There are few active players that could have had a bigger impact than myself in that sense. Not to be patting myself on the back too much, but I understood the position I was in." Rahm points to the 6 June 2023 announcement of a "framework agreement" between the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) and the PGA and DP World Tours as a pivotal moment for him. He, like all the leading players on both tours, was blindsided by the move and at the time spoke of a sense of "betrayal" by the tour's hierarchy. "I was not happy," he admitted. "At the US Open trying to deal with something like that wasn't perfect timing. What we need to reflect on is the second that framework agreement was worked on, everything changed. "And that's where the beginning of all this change happened. If it wasn't me (making the move) it would have been someone else at some point. "If the PGA Tour is now open to working with the PIF or LIV or maybe coming together in some kind of way then that opened the door for me to do the same thing." Behind the scenes this week the politicking will continue in the confines of the Augusta National clubhouse. Rumours are already circulating that PIF governor Yasir Al-Rumayyan could be in attendance at the Masters. But Rahm will put golf's future to one side to concentrate on defending his crown. Remembering 12 months ago he smiles at the way that he initially embarked on securing his first Green Jacket. He began with a double bogey after four-putting the opening green. "I'm very happy to talk about it now," he laughed. "It was very unusual. I hit a perfect tee shot, eight-iron to the centre of the green - so far according to plan - and then hit that first putt a little too hard and then misread the next two. "I think the part that gets lost here is, obviously I'm not happy about doubling the first hole. But if you are going to make a mistake like that it might as well be early enough that you have plenty of time to rectify. "Every single one of those putts felt good."
As Masters tradition dictates, 2023 champion Jon Rahm was helped into his Green Jacket by previous winner Scottie Scheffler
He bounced back with a birdie at the second and was able to satisfy what he regards as a key benchmark for the opening stretch through the cathedral pines of the famed Alister Mackenzie layout. "I believe if you are on the seventh fairway at even par you are doing good. At Augusta National the first six holes can be really challenging. "There are a lot of mistakes that can happen, a lot of bogeys that can happen so that was my challenge and actually I was on the seventh fairway at even par, made birdie on seven and I felt like there was no difference whatsoever." Last year's tournament was blighted by the weather and Rahm was required to play 30 holes on the final day before emerging triumphant and joining fellow Spaniards Seve Ballesteros, Jose Maria Olazabal and Sergio Garcia in winning the Masters. "We played a lot of golf on the weekend," Rahm recalled. "The last one somewhat like that I believe was 2005. Tiger [Woods] was telling me he played 54 holes on the weekend because of weather delays." He believes his form has been better in the month leading up to the tournament than it was a year ago when he posted three early PGA Tour wins. He dismisses the notion that LIV lacks the intensity of competition provided by his former circuit. "I see everybody's scepticism," Rahm said. "I get it. I've been there, I voiced it to more people than most people would probably speak to. "It was one of the things that was holding me back from possibly joining LIV Golf. But now, having been here, once you start the tournament I really sometimes have forgotten that I've only played 54 holes." And he is convinced that he will get an added boost from now being qualified to use the ultra exclusive champions locker room. "Going back and knowing that you're a champion and that you have an idea of how to get things done and the confidence that you know you can get it done again is always an added bonus," he said. "It'll be a little different being defending champion but I should have a little bit extra motivation too." He is looking forward to hosting a Basque themed champions dinner, featuring small local snacks called pintxos, on the Tuesday evening. Tradition (there are so many at the Masters) dictates he will pick up the tab, but readily and happily acknowledges he can well afford it. Indeed, he is ready to revel in all that comes with being a winner of golf's most glamorous tournament. "It is quite incredible isn't it?" he smiled. "Being able to go in that locker room and be surrounded by those players. It's a very exclusive club; very, very exclusive and very special. "I'm hoping that I'm someone who can come back as defending champion and give it a good run and hopefully win it." He would be the first to successfully defend since Woods 22 years ago. Given the seismic impact of his transition to the LIV tour, the implications of such a success would be significant. You can listen to the entire interview with Jon Rahm in BBC Radio 5 Live's 'Masters preview' programme from 21:00 BST on Monday, 8 April on BBC Sounds.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/68755247
|
rt_golf_68755247
|
|
Foreign Office: Former diplomats lead call to replace 'elitist' department - BBC News
|
2024-04-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
A new Department for International Affairs with modernised premises and a broader remit is proposed.
|
UK
|
The main Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office building in London houses a statue of British imperialist Robert Clive, who engineered British rule in India
The Foreign Office should be abolished and replaced by a new Department for International Affairs with "fewer colonial era pictures on the wall", a group of former senior diplomats and officials has said.
They have written a pamphlet proposing radical reform of UK foreign policy.
They say the Foreign Office is elitist, "rooted in the past" and "struggling to deliver a clear mandate".
In response, the department said it had clearly defined priorities.
The group of former officials say the new department should have a broader remit that promotes Britain's prosperity and security by better coordinating strategy on trade and aid, development and climate change - as well as traditional foreign policy.
The authors say this would be better able to deliver on Britain's long-term international objectives.
Parliament should give the new department "core objectives and mandates" that "endure beyond the tenure of individual ministers" to avoid repeated short term policy change, the authors say.
And they argue there should be a new commitment by the government to spend 1% of national income on the department's international priorities - just as 2% of national wealth is currently committed to defence.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office was built to impress foreign visitors at the height of the British empire
The authors include former cabinet secretary Lord Sedwill, former director general at the Foreign Office Moazzam Malik, and Tom Fletcher, former ambassador and foreign affairs adviser to Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron.
The pamphlet - The World in 2040: Renewing the UK's Approach to International Affairs - reflects the conclusions of a two-day conference involving former ministers, national security advisers and senior civil servants held in Oxford.
The authors are scathing of the Foreign Office, known officially as the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). They say it is "struggling to deliver a clear mandate, prioritisation and resource allocation".
It "all too often operates like a giant private office for the foreign secretary of the day, responding to the minister's immediate concerns and ever-changing in tray", they say. The merger between the FCDO and the Department for International Development "struggled to deliver", they add.
They say "the very name of the Foreign, Commonwealth (formerly 'Colonial') and Development Office is anchored in the past".
"A new Department for International Affairs (or Global Affairs) would signal a potentially quite different role. The physical surroundings on King Charles Street also hint at the Foreign Office's identity: somewhat elitist and rooted in the past," reads the pamphlet.
"Modernising premises - perhaps with fewer colonial era pictures on the walls - might help create a more open working culture and send a clear signal about Britain's future."
The Foreign Office is responsible for protecting and promoting British interests worldwide
The Foreign Office - based in King Charles Street in Whitehall - was built in the 1860s in a grand classical Victorian style to impress foreign visitors at the height of the British empire.
Many paintings there tell the story of Britain's imperial past, including one - next to the foreign secretary's office - in which Africa is portrayed by a black boy holding up a basket of fruit.
The essential argument of the authors is that Britain needs to have a clearer sense of its "purpose, history, interests and assets as an off-shore, mid-sized power".
It "will not be able to rely on just its traditional alliances with the US and Europe" but should instead form "pragmatic" new partnerships with other "middle powers" elsewhere in the world, they say.
Britain's security and prosperity, they argue, will in future be more closely tied to its economic and social relationships with regional powers, especially in Asia.
In making those new partnerships, the UK should be willing to "share rights" with emerging countries in reformed multilateral institutions, say the former diplomats.
It should accept new allies even if their "interests and values may be less closely aligned" to Britain's. The UK should "be more of a team-player, showing humility and respect" rather than trying to project an image of "greatness" to the world "that today seems anachronistic", they add.
The pamphlet says: "Regaining a sense of confidence requires a greater self-awareness of our position as an 'off-shore' nation.
"As a mid-sized power outside the European Union, there is potentially much to learn from countries like Norway, Canada, Switzerland and Japan who are able to use their size and independence to leverage significant influence on the world stage."
To do all that, they argue, requires a new international affairs department that steers "long-term strategy and policy" with much of the actual implementation carried out by more semi-autonomous agencies.
Downing Street said the prime minister did not agree the Foreign Office was "elitist", nor that colonial-era paintings should be removed.
"We've previously talked about being proud of the UK's history and looking forward, the Foreign Office is at the forefront of efforts to promote UK interests at home and abroad," the prime minister's official spokesman said.
A FCDO spokesperson said: "We are maximising the benefits of merging diplomacy and development in the FCDO to better deal with global challenges, as seen in our responses to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and in the Middle East.
"We are committed to having an even greater impact and influence on the world stage - which is why we recently completed a review across the department to ensure we are effectively directing our funds, streamlining all our international policy work, and building our capability for the future."
• None UK aid department to be merged with Foreign Office
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68756259
|
news_uk-68756259
|
|
Mona: Court rules women’s-only exhibit must allow male visitors - BBC News
|
2024-04-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The Australian exhibit denied men entry in a bid to highlight misogyny. A man sued for access and won.
|
Australia
|
The Ladies Lounge exhibit was introduced to Mona at the end of 2020
An Australian museum has been ordered to allow men into a women's-only exhibit, following a high-stakes court case over the matter.
The Ladies Lounge at Tasmania's Museum of Old and New Art (Mona) sought to highlight historic misogyny by banning male visitors.
After being denied entry, one filed a gender discrimination lawsuit, which he won on Tuesday.
"We are deeply disappointed by this decision," a Mona representative said.
The velvet-clad lounge - which contains some of the museum's most-acclaimed works, from Picasso to Sidney Nolan - has been open since 2020.
It was designed to take the concept of an old Australian pub - a space which largely excluded women until 1965 - and turn it on its head, offering champagne and five-star service to female attendees, while refusing men at the door.
Jason Lau, a New South Wales resident who visited Mona in April of last year, was one such male.
Representing himself throughout the case, he argued that the museum had violated the state's anti-discrimination act by failing to provide "a fair provision of goods and services in line with the law" to him and other ticket holders who didn't identify as female.
The museum had responded by claiming the rejection Mr Lau had felt was part of the artwork, and that the law in Tasmania allowed for discrimination if it was "designed to promote equal opportunity" for a group of people who had been historically disadvantaged.
In his ruling, Richard Grueber dismissed the argument - finding that it was "not apparent" how preventing men from experiencing the famous artworks held within the Ladies Lounge achieved that goal.
Throughout the case, the museum's supporters, including artist Kirsha Kaechele - who created the work - had used the courtroom as a space for performance art, wearing matching navy suits and engaging in synchronised movements.
Mr Grueber said that while the behaviour of the women hadn't disrupted the hearing, it was "inappropriate, discourteous and disrespectful, and at worst contumelious and contemptuous".
His decision to allow "persons who do not identify as ladies" to access the exhibit will come into effect in 28 days.
In a statement, Ms Kaechele said she was "deeply saddened" by the ruling, and would be taking time to "absorb the situation, seek council and compose myself". She added that she was grateful for public support through what has been "one of the most difficult periods of my life".
Ms Kaechele previously told the BBC the case had felt like her artwork was coming to life and signalled she would fight it all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
But she also noted that having the Ladies Lounge shut down could help drive home its intended message.
"If you were just looking at it from an aesthetic standpoint, being forced to close would be pretty powerful."
A spokesperson for Mona said the museum would consider its options, but in court it had previously said the artwork would be untenable if the ruling was not in their favour.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68770187
|
news_world-australia-68770187
|
|
Arizona Supreme Court reinstates near-total abortion ban from 1864 - BBC News
|
2024-04-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Arizona's top court ruled that a strict 160-year-old ban on abortion may be enforced.
|
US & Canada
|
The decision may shutter all abortion clinics in Arizona
The Arizona Supreme court has ruled that the state can enforce a 160-year-old near-total abortion ban.
The 1864 law - which precedes Arizona becoming a state - makes abortion punishable by two to five years in prison, except when the mother's life is at risk.
The ruling could shutter all clinics in the state, and affect both women's healthcare and the coming election.
Arizona voters may be able to undo the ruling in a November referendum.
The decision follows months of legal wrangling about whether the pre-statehood law could be enforced after years of dormancy. Many argued it had been effectively nullified by decades of state legislation, including a 2022 law that allows abortions until 15 weeks of pregnancy.
Arizona's top court agreed to review the case in August 2023 after a right-wing legal advocacy group, Alliance Defending Freedom, appealed against a lower court ruling that said the more recent law should stand.
In a 4-2 ruling on Tuesday, the state supreme court overturned that decision. It said the 1864 law was "now enforceable" because there were no federal or state protections for the procedure.
The Alliance Defending Freedom joined anti-abortion activists in celebrating the decision, saying the "significant" ruling would "protect the lives of countless, innocent unborn children".
Arizona's Supreme Court delayed enforcement of the law for 14 days, and the justices sent the case back to a lower court to hear further arguments.
But it remains unclear how the law will be enforced.
Governor Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, issued an executive order last year that placed the matter of enforcing abortion law in the hands of state attorney general Kris Mayes - a fellow Democrat who has promised that Arizonans will not be prosecuted for getting or performing an abortion.
Ms Mayes reiterated that promise on Tuesday, calling the law "draconian".
"Today's decision to reimpose a law from when Arizona wasn't a state, the Civil War was raging, and women couldn't even vote will go down in history as a stain on our state," she said, criticism that was soon echoed by the White House and other leading Democrats.
Some Arizona Republicans also expressed concerns about the ruling.
Kari Lake, a close ally of Donald Trump and a Republican candidate for the state's seat in the US Senate, said she opposed the decision.
She called on Governor Hobbs and the state legislature to find a "common sense solution".
Ruben Gallego, Ms Lake's Democratic opponent, noted Ms Lake had previously supported the ban, pointing to a 2022 interview where she called the 1864 law "great".
"Today's ruling is devastating for Arizona women and their families," Mr Gallego added.
The owner of one abortion clinic in Phoenix said the state was "stepping back in time". Gabrielle Goodwick, of Camelback Family Planning, told the BBC that the move would affect "marginalised populations" the most.
Abortion access is supported by the majority of American voters
Abortion access - which is broadly supported among the American public - has helped Democrats overperform in local and state elections since the US Supreme Court overturned a landmark legal decision that protected reproductive rights nationwide.
The issue is now expected to influence election results again in November, with Democrats hoping the issue gives them a boost in battleground states like Arizona.
Tuesday's ruling will certainly raise the stakes for a state ballot initiative that aims to protect abortion rights until 24 weeks of pregnancy.
Activists in the state say they have already met the signature threshold required to put the question to voters this autumn.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, the head of anti-abortion group Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America, indicated she would work to defeat the referendum, and hailed an "enormous victory" following the state supreme court's decision.
In the almost two years since Roe was overturned, activists who support widening abortion access have won all seven ballot initiatives related to the issue, even in Republican-controlled states.
Last week, Florida's Supreme Court gave the green light to another abortion referendum. If approved, Florida voters would overturn the state's six-week ban and enshrine broad abortion access in the state's constitution.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68774959
|
news_world-us-canada-68774959
|
|
Trump trial: Publisher says he suppressed negative news - BBC News
|
2024-05-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified on Tuesday about his relationship with Trump.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Our reporter at court explains the big moments from a difficult day for Trump’s team
The underbelly of New York City's tabloid media industry was laid bare in a Manhattan courtroom on Tuesday. A famous publisher outlined a secret plan he had with Donald Trump and his personal lawyer Michael Cohen, calling it an "agreement among friends". Prosecutors questioned former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker for nearly three hours. He testified that the three worked to suppress negative stories about the candidate during his 2016 campaign. "'This could be a very big story, so I believe that it should be removed from the market'," Mr Pecker said he would advise the former president about killing certain articles. Mr Pecker's testimony could prove critical for prosecutors as they seek to prove that Mr Trump tried to influence the election by quelling a story of an alleged affair. Mr Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records. Prosecutors allege he tried to cover up a $130,000 (£104,500) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels before he won the race for the White House back in 2016. Continuing his testimony from Monday as the trial's first witness, Mr Pecker said he met Mr Trump in the late 1980s and eventually became good friends with the former president.
The two had a mutually "beneficial" relationship, in which Mr Trump would share exclusive information with him, such as news about the contestants on his reality TV show, The Apprentice. This helped boost viewership for the show and the National Enquirer, Mr Pecker said. Shortly after Mr Trump launched his first presidential bid, Mr Pecker said he met with Cohen and Mr Trump in August 2015. There, Mr Pecker said he agreed to suppress negative articles about the former president and promote positive stories about him, a plan Mr Pecker argued should be kept "as quiet as possible". The tabloid publisher said he also agreed to notify Mr Trump about stories concerning his romantic affairs, as he was "an eligible bachelor" who "dated the most beautiful women", according to Mr Pecker. Mr Pecker detailed two stories that the three men worked to kill. One was from Dino Sajudin, a former Trump Tower doorman, who Mr Pecker said tried to sell an article in 2015 about an unsubstantiated rumour that Mr Trump once fathered a child out of wedlock. After investigating, Mr Pecker said, he found the claim to be "1,000% untrue".
But he agreed with Cohen to pay Mr Sajudin $30,000 for perpetual rights to the story, because it would have been "very embarrassing for the campaign" if it got out, Mr Pecker said. Just before the end of the day in court, prosecutors also delved into a hush-money agreement made to Playboy model Karen McDougal. She claims she and Mr Trump had a long-term affair, though Mr Trump denies this. Mr Pecker said he advised the former president to buy Ms McDougal's story, but Mr Trump was unsure. "'Anytime you do anything like this, it always gets out'," Mr Pecker claimed Mr Trump told him. His company eventually purchased the story for $150,000. Though prosecutors did not bring charges over either of these payments, the testimony from Tuesday could help paint a picture of the context leading up to Ms Daniels' payment. Putting the tabloid publisher up on the stand first in the trial was a smart move, according to former Brooklyn prosecutor Julie Rendelman. "He provides the backdrop for how the whole 'catch and kill' scheme came to be, the players involved, and the timing as it related to Trump's campaign," she said. Mr Pecker's testimony came after the second day of the hush-money trial got off to a rocky start for the former president's legal team.
The day began with a hearing on whether comments Mr Trump made about those involved in the case violated a gag order. Sparks quickly flew between his lead lawyer, Todd Blanche, and Justice Juan Merchan. After prosecutors alleged 10 of his social media posts violated the order, Mr Blanche argued his client had a right to address "political attacks". Judge Merchan was not buying it. "You're losing all credibility with the court," he told Mr Blanche, after trying to get him to hurry up his arguments. Trump is accused by the prosecution of routinely breaking a restriction imposed by the judge that prevents him from publicly attacking witnesses, prosecutors and relatives of court staff. "He knows about the order, he knows what he's not allowed to do, but he does it anyway," prosecutor Christopher Conroy told the court. At stake for Mr Trump is a $10,000 fine and a warning that future violations of the order could lead to his imprisonment. The judge said he would reserve making a ruling about the violations for now. But former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani said the judge's reproach was a worrying sign for Mr Trump's team. "They can't control their client, but when the judge tells a lawyer they are losing all their credibility, that's bad," Mr Rahmani said. In the break that followed the hearing, Mr Trump took to his social media site Truth Social to criticise Judge Merchan and claim that he was being unfairly blocked from defending himself against attacks.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68880206
|
news_world-us-canada-68880206
|
|
Trump trial: Prosecution say hush money was 'pure election fraud' - BBC News
|
2024-05-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
But the defence says the former president committed no crimes and calls star witness an admitted liar.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Is Trump part of a 'conspiracy' or 'cloaked in innocence'?
The prosecution in Donald Trump's hush-money trial accused the former president of a criminal conspiracy and cover-up to hide a sex scandal ahead of the 2016 presidential election. "It was election fraud, pure and simple," a lawyer told the jury during opening statements on Monday at the historic trial in New York. Setting out the case for the defence, Mr Trump's lawyer said his client had committed no crimes and that it was not illegal to try to influence an election. "He is cloaked in innocence," he added. Mr Trump is accused of trying to cover up a $130,000 (£104,500) payment to porn star Stormy Daniels before he won the race for the White House back in 2016. He has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records and also denies having an alleged sexual encounter with Ms Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford. At the start of the second week of the criminal trial in Manhattan - the first ever of a former US president - each side set out the case they will present to the jury. The first witness, tabloid publisher David Pecker, also took the stand briefly and will continue his testimony on Tuesday. Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the court that Michael Cohen, Mr Trump's former lawyer and confidant, worked with the Trump Organization's chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, to "cook the books" at Mr Trump's direction. Prosecutors alleged that the scheme to disguise how Cohen was reimbursed for the payment to Ms Daniels involved falsifying three forms of records - invoices, ledger entries and cheques. Mr Trump said in his business records that those payments were "for legal services pursuant to a retainer agreement" with Mr Cohen, Mr Colangelo told the jury. "Those were lies," the prosecutor said.
Critically for this case, he said that Mr Trump was motivated to provide the payoff so voters did not learn of the alleged encounter with Ms Daniels. Prosecutors said that this cover-up should be considered election interference, which constituted a second crime. That elevated the charge of falsifying business records from a lower-level misdemeanour into a more serious felony. They claimed the infamous Access Hollywood tape, which surfaced weeks before the 2016 election and showed Mr Trump bragging about being able to have sex with anyone because he is famous, had panicked his campaign. "The defendant and his campaign staff were deeply concerned that it would irreparably damage his standing with female voters in particular," Mr Colangelo told the court. But when Ms Daniels came forward a day later alleging a sexual encounter with Mr Trump, it compounded the problem created by the tape, Mr Colangelo alleged.
The public disclosure "would have been devastating to his campaign, so at Trump's direction Cohen negotiated a deal", Mr Colangelo told the jurors. The prosecution alleges Mr Pecker - the former boss at American Media Inc, which owns the National Enquirer - and Mr Cohen discussed how to keep it quiet. The defence's rebuttal was fairly simple in comparison. Mr Blanche appeared intent on casting prosecutors' star witness - Cohen - as an untrustworthy former employee with an axe to grind against the former president. "He's a convicted felon and a convicted perjurer - he's an admitted liar," Mr Blanche said of Cohen. He also zeroed in on Ms Daniels, who he said had earned "hundreds of thousands" of dollars with her claims. The defence lawyer told the jury to discount her as a witness. He went on to dismiss the examples of allegedly false records as "34 pieces of paper" that did not involve his client. As for the case prosecutors made for election interference, Mr Blanche denied that his client had done anything illegal even if he had attempted to sway voters. "There's nothing wrong with trying to influence an election," Mr Blanche said. "It's called democracy." The trial is expected to last about another six weeks, but legal experts say opening statements are particularly important as an opportunity to shape jurors' views on the case. "You need to start out strong in a case like this," former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told the BBC. Mr Rahmani noted that the prosecution's efforts to elevate this to an election interference case may be tough with a jury that includes two lawyers. "It's clear the records were false business records, but to take that next step to prove they were in furtherance of, or to cover up, a campaign finance contribution, is a more difficult legal argument and they're going to need to do a lot more than that in my opinion. "This is going to come down to Michael Cohen," he concluded, and whether his testimony backs up what he has said in the past and whether he has documents to prove it.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68877610
|
news_world-us-canada-68877610
|
|
Failed asylum seeker given £3,000 to go to Rwanda - BBC News
|
2024-05-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The asylum seeker went to the east Africa country under a scheme separate to the forced returns scheme.
|
UK Politics
|
The failed asylum seeker is likely to have flown to Kigali, the Rwandan capital
A first failed asylum seeker has gone to Rwanda under a voluntary removals programme, it is understood. Under the scheme, announced last month, migrants whose claims are rejected are offered up to £3,000 to move to the east African country. It is separate to the forced returns scheme the government announced two years ago. That scheme, which has been beset by delays, is due to begin by mid-July. The Sun, which first reported the story, external, said the unnamed man was flown out of the UK on Monday on a commercial flight. Officials would not be drawn on any details, other than to say the asylum seeker had exhausted all rights to be in the UK. The Rwandan government confirmed that a failed asylum seeker arrived on Tuesday on a flight from London. Labour said the move showed ministers were "desperate" to get a flight off to Rwanda before Thursday's local elections in England.
The scheme announced in March is understood to be a variation of an existing voluntary returns scheme for failed asylum seekers. The scheme will also be opened up to other people with no right to remain in the UK, and foreign criminals. The Home Office says payments under the current scheme "can pay for" temporary accommodation in the destination country, or education costs, or the cost of setting up a business. Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch suggested the fact someone had volunteered to go to Rwanda undermined the argument that it was not a safe country. In response to criticism of the £3,000 paid for relocation, she told Sky News there was no "cost-free option" for border control. According to official statistics, 19,253 people with no right to remain in the UK were voluntarily removed from the UK last year. Of these, 3,319 received a "reintegration package" or flights paid by the Home Office. Jacqueline McKenzie, partner and head of immigration at Leigh Day solicitors, said she was aware from contacts that many people had recently been offered this package to go to Rwanda, including some very vulnerable individuals. "I am surprised, given the amount of calls that have been made, that more people haven't gone, if it's a good idea," she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper called news of the voluntary return a "pre-election gimmick," adding taxpayers were "forking out £3,000 for a volunteer to board a plane". "The Tories are so desperate to get any flight off to Rwanda before the local elections that they have now just paid someone to go," she added. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said the individual went to Rwanda under "an old scheme", which "won't stop the boats". "They've had to pay someone £3,000. There's a suspicion out there that this is about an election - it's not about seriously stopping the boats," he said, in a reference to the local elections taking place in England on Thursday. "Liberal Democrats believe this scheme is extremely expensive and won't actually work," he added. It comes after the Home Office confirmed Rwanda had agreed to accept an initial cohort of 5,700 asylum seekers under the separate forced returns scheme. The scheme - which the government argues will deter future migrants from crossing the English Channel in small boats - has been dogged by legal delays. However, it is finally set to begin in the summer, after legislation to override a Supreme Court ruling entered into force earlier this month. The Home Office has said 2,143 asylum seekers can immediately be located for detention in the run-up to their flights, as they are reporting to the department. It has denied losing track of the remaining 3,557, who are subject to a range of different monitoring requirements. Downing Street insisted on Tuesday it remained confident of their whereabouts, after the figures became public as part of a policy document. However, a government source admitted it was possible some could abscond before they were detained.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68932830
|
news_uk-politics-68932830
|
|
Javier Milei: Argentines wait for 'crazy' president's shock therapy to work - BBC News
|
2024-05-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The new president's radical measures to overhaul the economy are loved by some, loathed by others.
|
Latin America & Caribbean
|
Javier Milei wielded a chainsaw at one of his campaign rallies to symbolise his plans to slash public spending
There is one thing that unites those who love and loathe Argentina's new president - they both describe him as "crazy". "Most people call him that. I think it's good," says 21-year-old Axel Uhrig of Javier Milei, who won the presidential election with 56% of the vote in November. Axel is part of Pibes Libertarios (libertarian lads) - a self-described "militant" group whose battleground is social media. They stick posters around Buenos Aires at night with QR codes linking to videos in support of President Milei's policies. The new president is trying to get a package of reforms approved to shrink the state, but is struggling to get it through Congress, where he does not have a majority. Mr Milei may have won the election, but the Pibes Libertarios still feel they are fighting a battle for his sweeping reforms to privatise companies and cut regulations to be made into law.
The Pibes Libertarios support the president's radical reforms and libertarian ideology
After a series of Argentine governments introduced widespread nationalisation, welfare benefits, subsidised prices, and powerful labour laws and unions, Axel feels Mr Milei gave those on the right an "identity" - a libertarian identity. He is keen to stress this is different from "liberals" in the West who are "progressive" and instead captures those who support "freedom from the state". Axel is glad that the president was "crazy enough" to defy the status quo with a different approach to the economy. He adds he "saw no future in this place" before Mr Milei was elected and says his two best friends left Argentina seeking a better life in the US and Spain - a trend that is widely commented on here.
Mr Milei's radically different approach to the economy is why a lot of people voted for him in a country where for many steep inflation feels like the norm. President Milei blames the country's skyrocketing inflation on years of high government spending, high debt, and money-printing to service it. He argues "shock" measures are needed to tackle it.
The government argues inflation will get worse before it gets better
He has already slashed the value of the currency, public spending and subsidies for transport, fuel and energy. These measures have in turn driven up prices. New figures published this week showed annual inflation in Argentina had hit more than 250%, making it the highest rate in the world.
The monthly figure jumped to 25.5% in December after he came to power, though has since fallen to 20.6%. Mr Milei told the television station La Nación + the figure was "horrifying" but "you have to look at where we were."
Many Argentines relish what they perceive as his honesty, saying they are willing to put up with more pain if it improves the economy in the long term. Adriana Ignaszewski, 33, runs a discount grocery store in the poorer suburb of El Jagüel. She says in the past "no-one gave us an answer" to inflation, but "today we have someone who tells it how it is."
Adriana Ignaszewski is updating prices in her grocery store every day
Argentines will wait as long as they need to, she adds. "If it is the last thing we have to go through, let's go through it." Adriana likes the president's focus on getting inflation down to help with the cost of living, instead of support from the government, because price rises affect her business and customers every day. But down the road her sister Silvia, 40, has relied on state support and fears she cannot afford to wait. She lives with their mother and three of her five children in a house comprised of a few small rooms where "the refrigerator is literally empty". Silvia sews crates of hair accessories to sell at a market and says her sales have dropped by more than 50%. "People can't buy food, fewer will be able to buy a hair accessory," she says.
Silvia says sales of the hair accessories she sews have dropped because of rising prices
She stresses that fruit and meat are luxuries and says she cannot even afford to buy basic items like milk, rice or bread. She believes the current price spikes Mr Milei's plans have caused will lead to people going without anything. "The policies they are carrying out will kill the people, the workers," she says. Even some of those struggling, though, agree with Mr Milei's recent argument to the World Economic Forum in Davos that "the state is not the solution, the state is the problem itself." They don't want support from the government, they think it is the cause of people's woes. Cristina, a pensioner who sells old clothes for extra money at the barter market with Silvia, says she cannot afford her rent and living costs on her pension and blames former governments for making people accustomed to receive state support. "They got used to the benefits. Many prefer to steal or be at home and collect benefits without working. The government cannot be there for everything." Lorena Giorgio, chief economist at the economic analysis centre, Equilibria, says Mr Milei has done good work in explaining to people why changes are needed.
Economist Lorena Giorgio thinks many Argentines are waiting to see if things improve
But, Ms Giorgio adds, "The problem is that Milei told them that the political sector and the richest were the ones who were going to pay. She predicts people may be willing to wait while things get tougher for six or seven months. But she argues that if inflation remains high, and salaries and pensions do not keep up, there could be "social problems" by Christmas. In the past, economic crises here have led to riots, protests and even the toppling of presidents.
Riot police guard the Argentine Congress during protests in Buenos Aires in January
With people like Silvia, the woman selling hair accessories, wondering how long they can wait, I asked Mr Milei's spokesman, Manuel Adorni, when people would be able to judge whether the president's measures were working. He would not commit to a timeframe but said that in a "short period" the government would begin to "show results in this fight against inflation". Argentina for many years "swept the garbage under the carpet," he added, "and we have decided to remove the garbage and always tell the truth." President Milei's popularity in part stems from the intense anger, especially from the young, about the country's economic crisis, and what they perceive as his honesty about that. He has hinged his reputation on curing that by cutting the state, though he is already blaming opposition politicians - whom he calls la casta, the caste - for not letting him cut as much as he wants to.
Prices in Argentina rose by more than 200% last year
His public support is likely to be defined by how quickly he can show results, when state support is being reduced and some already feel at their limit. At a supermarket where the price of meat has gone up 30% in two months, a woman, Anabela Acuña, break down in tears when asked how life is for her right now. "It's very, very difficult. I have three jobs and I can't make ends meet," she says. "Many people are on the street. That breaks my heart. "All very crazy, very crazy."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-68287245
|
news_world-latin-america-68287245
|
|
Gaza war: Netanyahu vows to defeat Hamas in Rafah despite US arms threat - BBC News
|
2024-05-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Israeli leader says his country will "stand alone" and "fight with fingernails" if shipments are halted.
|
Middle East
|
Netanyahu was defiant in the face of US threats to cut off weapons
Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed Israel can "stand alone", after the US warned arms shipments could be stopped if he orders a full-scale invasion of Rafah in Gaza. Thousands of people have already fled the southern city after the Israeli military began what it called a "limited" operation on Monday. US President Joe Biden has repeatedly warned against the operation, saying that it would cross a "red line". But Mr Netanyahu dismissed the US warning, saying Israel would fight on. "If we need to ... we will stand alone. I have said that if necessary we will fight with our fingernails," the prime minister said. Mr Netanyahu also invoked the war of 1948 - where the newly formed State of Israel was attacked by a coalition of Arab states - to dismiss the US warnings. "In the War of Independence 76 years ago, we were the few against the many," he said. "We did not have weapons. There was an arms embargo on Israel, but with great strength of spirit, heroism and unity among us - we were victorious." Despite Mr Netanyahu's comments, his government has come under pressure after the US suspended the delivery of 1,800 2,000lb (907kg) bombs and 1,700 500lb bombs over fears that they could cause civilian deaths in Rafah. Mr Biden went further still in an interview with CNN on Wednesday, saying that if the attack went ahead he would further suspend supplies of artillery shells and other weapons. Yoav Gallant, Mr Netanyahu's defence minister, dismissed the US warnings, saying Israel's "enemies as well as ... best of friends" should understand that his country "cannot be subdued". "We will stand strong, we will achieve our goals," he added. The comments came hours after the UN said more than 80,000 people had fled Rafah since Monday amid constant bombardment and as Israeli tanks massed close to built-up areas. The UN also warned that food and fuel were running out for the more than one million still sheltering in the city, because it was not receiving aid through nearby crossings. Israeli troops took control and closed the Rafah crossing with Egypt at the start of their operation, while the UN said it was too dangerous for its staff and lorries to reach the reopened Kerem Shalom crossing with Israel. Israeli forces said they were conducting "targeted raids" against Hamas elements remaining in the city. However, the Israeli government has refused to rule out a full scale invasion, leading to Mr Biden's warning he would not supply it with the munitions to do so.
White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Mr Biden did not believe "smashing into Rafah" would advance Israel's objective of defeating Hamas. "An enduring defeat of Hamas certainly remains the Israeli goal, and we share that goal with them," Mr Kirby said. "The argument that somehow we're walking away from Israel, or we're not willing to help them defeat Hamas just doesn't comport with the facts," he said.
Israeli tanks and other armoured vehicles gathered near the Gaza border fence on Thursday
Palestinian media said two people were killed on Thursday afternoon in an Israeli air strike in the al-Jneineh neighbourhood of Rafah - one of the eastern areas which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ordered residents to evacuate before beginning its ground operation began on Monday night. Another three people were reportedly killed in an air strike in the nearby Brazil area, which is not in the evacuation zone but is next to the Egyptian border. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) - which are proscribed as terrorist organisations by Israel, the US and other countries - said they were targeting Israeli forces on the eastern outskirts with mortar bombs and anti-tank missiles. Hamas also said it had blown up a booby-trapped tunnel east of Rafah underneath three Israeli military vehicles. The IDF said three of its soldiers were moderately wounded as a result of the explosion. Overnight, at least five people were reportedly killed when a family's home in the western Tal al-Sultan neighbourhood was hit in an Israeli strike. They included three children, one of them a one-year-old infant, medics said.
Meanwhile hopes of a peace deal - which seemed close earlier in the week before Israel said it did not past muster - appeared to be fading. Both Israeli and Hamas delegations left indirect talks in Cairo on Thursday. After seven months of war in Gaza, Israel insists victory is impossible without taking the city of Rafah and eliminating the last remaining Hamas battalions. Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas in response to the group's attack on southern Israel on 7 October, during which about 1,200 people were killed and 252 others were taken hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 34,900 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. Israel says 128 hostages are unaccounted for, 36 of whom are presumed dead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68980826
|
news_world-middle-east-68980826
|
|
What could go wrong for Keir Starmer? A lot actually, Laura Kuenssberg writes - BBC News
|
2024-05-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Labour's leadership is bouncing - but there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
Keir Starmer's success was sketched across the map of England at the local elections last week. The Labour leadership is bouncing from nabbing another of the Tories' MPs, Natalie Elphicke - and polling since the council results puts him further ahead than ever. What could possibly go wrong for him? A lot, actually. The general election is still months away and there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and the shiny black door of No 10.
First, conversations across the Labour Party suggest the danger of taking victory for granted - being complacent - is the number one risk. A shadow minister warns: "People sometimes act as if it's already happened… not realising the scale of effort required to do that." A source tells me holiday was cancelled at Labour HQ in December, until July, with all staff expected to be on standby for a general election. There's no taking it easy now: a similar edict is in place from September to December.
"We have to keep our discipline and keep on our message," says another insider. That discipline is important in avoiding the kind of public sparring between colleagues that was all too common in the bruising Corbyn era, and which the public doesn't like. It's important in avoiding stray comments that would give opponents ammo to attack - just look at how the Conservatives played with Labour's wavering over its now retired vow to spend £28bn a year on the economy going green. But it's also important because if a Labour victory is hammered into people's expectations, that could affect how the election campaign is fought. "If everyone thinks we are getting a thumping great majority, you end up with the campaign being a referendum on Labour," one source says. Instead, "we want it to be about the threat of five more years of the Tories".
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
Another senior figure tells me: "What you hear is that people think they are voting Labour because they don't want the Tories - rather than enthusiastically voting for us." The party would love there to be more excitement about them. But some insiders want the focus to stay on the Conservatives, who are struggling, and a choice between the two big parties. With that in mind, Labour was only too happy for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to claim that the local election results suggested the country was on course for a hung parliament. They were pleased for the public to be reminded that a Labour victory is not a foregone conclusion.
Second, while the Tories have been stuck in the doldrums in the polls for months, Labour cannot predict or control much of what happens before the election. On 6 October last year, the world didn't know what was about to happen in Israel. The shocking events of 7 October and the intense conflict since then has unsettled many in the Labour Party. The local elections confirmed the leadership's attitude to war in Gaza affected votes in some areas, and unhappiness over foreign policy feels something of a proxy for general grumpiness on the left. There is just no telling what other events could provoke further disagreement, or what unexpected events could shift the polls. The better economic news of the last few days also helps the Conservatives to make their planned argument - that the country has turned a corner, and that Labour would put that at risk. And of course the Conservatives are looking for any Labour vulnerabilities to push.
• None On this week's show are the Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron and Labour MP Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow paymaster general
• None The actor Dominic West also joins the show to talk about his new West End show
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 BST on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Tory sources point to Labour's position on immigration, cancelling the government's Rwanda plan. They'll likely put pressure on Labour over the enhanced relationship it wants with the EU. Then there's Labour's plan for extra rights in the workplace, what Conservatives have dubbed "French-style union laws" - another pressure point. There is no question that Keir Starmer's Labour Party is a very different beast to Jeremy Corbyn's tribe as they went into the last general election. But how able are they to shrug off Conservative attacks? "We can rattle them quite easily," a Conservative source suggests, pointing to pressure they believe led to Labour ditching its £28bn commitment. A Labour figure says Starmer's team needs to avoid "being distracted by the madness". Sometimes, "they know it's a trap, but they feel they have no option but walk into it anyway". Politics is about how able you are to defend yourself, as well as how sharply you can attack.
To win, it helps if you look like a winner - but overstretch yourself, and it could all go wrong. Not every eager young staffer in Labour these days was born when, in 1992, Neil Kinnock's Sheffield rally showed him prematurely triumphant, with all the crashing disappointment that followed. But the memory is present in plenty of Labour minds (Kinnock, incidentally, warned on BBC Radio 4's The Week in Westminster that voters are not fully convinced by Starmer and his party). Even Starmer's most loyal lieutenants acknowledge privately that he is unlikely to be a politician with razzle and dazzle. But he has changed since he became leader of a battered party in 2020. One Starmer ally says he is "definitely showing that confidence - and he's earned it - he has gone through some really, really difficult stuff for the party, he's grafted it and worked it up". As the party's reaction to the second defection in as many weeks suggested, there is a fine line to walk between breeding success and too much swagger. Some of his MPs' reactions to this week's defection of Natalie Elphicke - not just a Conservative, but from the Conservative right - highlighted that risk.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Defecting MP Natalie Elphicke : Tories under Sunak have broken many election promises
Sure, they want to appeal to what Starmer repeatedly described as "all reasonable people". But for some of his own gang, Elphicke does not fall into that category. One senior figure told me: "With the over excitement of the scale of a win there might be a strategic error of going for the stretch of the Tories we can pull over, rather than protecting what we already have."
Yes, to pull off a victory Labour has to appeal to voters who wouldn't have dreamt of backing them in 2019 - and in huge numbers. But it also has to keep its existing base on board, to make sure they campaign and turn out. What Labour bosses never forget - even if some of its more excitable supporters do - is that to win a majority, the party has to win a swing bigger than Tony Blair did in 1997, when he redrew the electoral map. To have a majority of even one MP, Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner and the rest of his team have to do better - far better - than Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, John Prescott, Jack Straw, David Blunkett and the rest. In 2019 it felt implausible that they would be anywhere within reach. Now, the party is increasingly taking decisions and marking positions as those it would defend in government. It is spending huge amounts of time preparing to govern, not just campaign. Yet as both Starmer and Sunak are only too happy to remind you, voters face a different choice in a general election than what they say to a pollster, or when they pick a local councillor. It is still "if" not "when" the Labour leader becomes prime minister - and there is plenty of danger ahead.
What questions would you like to ask Lord Cameron or Jonathan Ashworth this Sunday? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68995187
|
news_uk-politics-68995187
|
|
Chris Mason: Sunak, Starmer and their small boats row - BBC News
|
2024-05-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The issue of people crossing the Channel is so contested, even the terminology of the topic is disputed.
|
UK Politics
|
As of 21 April, 6,265 people had crossed the English Channel in small boats since the start of 2024
There is a single word at the heart of the political row between the prime minister and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer when it comes to unauthorised immigration. The issue of people in small boats crossing the English Channel is so contested, even the terminology of the topic is disputed. There are asylum seekers, who have applied for refugee status and are waiting for a decision. There are refugees. There is illegal immigration. Overlapping descriptions and labels, many of which provoke fury and anger. And so to that word - amnesty. Both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir are seeking to weaponize it, to make what they see as a negative point about their opponent. The Labour leader accused Mr Sunak of a "Travelodge amnesty" - people who have arrived in small boats and are, in UK law, illegal immigrants. They are stuck in limbo in UK hotels at significant expense to the taxpayer. Incidentally, Sir Keir did this while projecting a confidence I've not seen before in him. Not just his manner on stage, but his willingness to praise a Conservative idea - the Small Boats Operational Command - strictly up to a point, which he claims he would build on. And praise a Conservative cabinet minister, Justice Secretary Alex Chalk. It amounted, in the round, I thought, to a man with the air of an heir. A man - after those local election results and the second defection to his party from the Conservatives in a fortnight - who might just feel closer to the prospect of becoming prime minister than ever before.
Sir Keir's label of a claimed Conservative "Travelodge amnesty" is an attempt to push back at the Tory description of Labour's plan to allow people who have arrived on small boats to apply for asylum. Yes, you guessed it, the Conservatives describe that as an amnesty too. Both leaders clearly see a political value in projecting an aggression on this topic and portraying their opponent as weak, even soft. The big picture here, acknowledged by them both and illustrated in this example, is this is deeply complex and there is no off the shelf panacea on offer. What do you do about the huge backlogs of people? How do you create deterrents to crossing the Channel? Are deterrents even possible? What does fairness and justice look like, to people contemplating a crossing, others seeking a legal route to the UK, and the British taxpayer? Are international legal frameworks, domestic laws, or agreements with other countries up to scale of the challenge? Returning more people not granted asylum to their country of origin is key. BBC Verify has been looking at how this might apply to recent small boat arrivals. Vietnamese people - 1,266 in total - and Afghans - 1,216 people - make up the top two nationalities arriving in the UK this way so far this year. The next most common nationalities to have arrived this way between 1 January and 21 April 2024 were Iranians, Syrians and Eritreans. Of these five countries, the government only has a returns agreement with Vietnam, so ministers in this government or any future one would have to negotiate agreements with the other four if the asylum seekers' claims were rejected. Plus none of them currently feature on the government's list of where people can be safely returned, which poses a further potential challenge. It is for Mr Sunak, Sir Keir and others to win arguments and gain trust on this most difficult, emotional, diplomatic and political of issues - and to grapple for solutions. As partial, long winded and expensive as they may prove to be.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68994326
|
news_uk-politics-68994326
|
|
Gaza war: Netanyahu vows to defeat Hamas in Rafah despite US arms threat - BBC News
|
2024-05-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Israeli leader says his country will "stand alone" and "fight with fingernails" if shipments are halted.
|
Middle East
|
Netanyahu was defiant in the face of US threats to cut off weapons
Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed Israel can "stand alone", after the US warned arms shipments could be stopped if he orders a full-scale invasion of Rafah in Gaza. Thousands of people have already fled the southern city after the Israeli military began what it called a "limited" operation on Monday. US President Joe Biden has repeatedly warned against the operation, saying that it would cross a "red line". But Mr Netanyahu dismissed the US warning, saying Israel would fight on. "If we need to ... we will stand alone. I have said that if necessary we will fight with our fingernails," the prime minister said. Mr Netanyahu also invoked the war of 1948 - where the newly formed State of Israel was attacked by a coalition of Arab states - to dismiss the US warnings. "In the War of Independence 76 years ago, we were the few against the many," he said. "We did not have weapons. There was an arms embargo on Israel, but with great strength of spirit, heroism and unity among us - we were victorious." Despite Mr Netanyahu's comments, his government has come under pressure after the US suspended the delivery of 1,800 2,000lb (907kg) bombs and 1,700 500lb bombs over fears that they could cause civilian deaths in Rafah. Mr Biden went further still in an interview with CNN on Wednesday, saying that if the attack went ahead he would further suspend supplies of artillery shells and other weapons. Yoav Gallant, Mr Netanyahu's defence minister, dismissed the US warnings, saying Israel's "enemies as well as ... best of friends" should understand that his country "cannot be subdued". "We will stand strong, we will achieve our goals," he added. The comments came hours after the UN said more than 80,000 people had fled Rafah since Monday amid constant bombardment and as Israeli tanks massed close to built-up areas. The UN also warned that food and fuel were running out for the more than one million still sheltering in the city, because it was not receiving aid through nearby crossings. Israeli troops took control and closed the Rafah crossing with Egypt at the start of their operation, while the UN said it was too dangerous for its staff and lorries to reach the reopened Kerem Shalom crossing with Israel. Israeli forces said they were conducting "targeted raids" against Hamas elements remaining in the city. However, the Israeli government has refused to rule out a full scale invasion, leading to Mr Biden's warning he would not supply it with the munitions to do so.
White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Mr Biden did not believe "smashing into Rafah" would advance Israel's objective of defeating Hamas. "An enduring defeat of Hamas certainly remains the Israeli goal, and we share that goal with them," Mr Kirby said. "The argument that somehow we're walking away from Israel, or we're not willing to help them defeat Hamas just doesn't comport with the facts," he said.
Israeli tanks and other armoured vehicles gathered near the Gaza border fence on Thursday
Palestinian media said two people were killed on Thursday afternoon in an Israeli air strike in the al-Jneineh neighbourhood of Rafah - one of the eastern areas which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ordered residents to evacuate before beginning its ground operation began on Monday night. Another three people were reportedly killed in an air strike in the nearby Brazil area, which is not in the evacuation zone but is next to the Egyptian border. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) - which are proscribed as terrorist organisations by Israel, the US and other countries - said they were targeting Israeli forces on the eastern outskirts with mortar bombs and anti-tank missiles. Hamas also said it had blown up a booby-trapped tunnel east of Rafah underneath three Israeli military vehicles. The IDF said three of its soldiers were moderately wounded as a result of the explosion. Overnight, at least five people were reportedly killed when a family's home in the western Tal al-Sultan neighbourhood was hit in an Israeli strike. They included three children, one of them a one-year-old infant, medics said.
Meanwhile hopes of a peace deal - which seemed close earlier in the week before Israel said it did not past muster - appeared to be fading. Both Israeli and Hamas delegations left indirect talks in Cairo on Thursday. After seven months of war in Gaza, Israel insists victory is impossible without taking the city of Rafah and eliminating the last remaining Hamas battalions. Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas in response to the group's attack on southern Israel on 7 October, during which about 1,200 people were killed and 252 others were taken hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 34,900 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. Israel says 128 hostages are unaccounted for, 36 of whom are presumed dead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68980826
|
news_world-middle-east-68980826
|
|
What could go wrong for Keir Starmer? A lot actually, Laura Kuenssberg writes - BBC News
|
2024-05-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Labour's leadership is bouncing - but there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
Keir Starmer's success was sketched across the map of England at the local elections last week. The Labour leadership is bouncing from nabbing another of the Tories' MPs, Natalie Elphicke - and polling since the council results puts him further ahead than ever. What could possibly go wrong for him? A lot, actually. The general election is still months away and there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and the shiny black door of No 10.
First, conversations across the Labour Party suggest the danger of taking victory for granted - being complacent - is the number one risk. A shadow minister warns: "People sometimes act as if it's already happened… not realising the scale of effort required to do that." A source tells me holiday was cancelled at Labour HQ in December, until July, with all staff expected to be on standby for a general election. There's no taking it easy now: a similar edict is in place from September to December.
"We have to keep our discipline and keep on our message," says another insider. That discipline is important in avoiding the kind of public sparring between colleagues that was all too common in the bruising Corbyn era, and which the public doesn't like. It's important in avoiding stray comments that would give opponents ammo to attack - just look at how the Conservatives played with Labour's wavering over its now retired vow to spend £28bn a year on the economy going green. But it's also important because if a Labour victory is hammered into people's expectations, that could affect how the election campaign is fought. "If everyone thinks we are getting a thumping great majority, you end up with the campaign being a referendum on Labour," one source says. Instead, "we want it to be about the threat of five more years of the Tories".
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
Another senior figure tells me: "What you hear is that people think they are voting Labour because they don't want the Tories - rather than enthusiastically voting for us." The party would love there to be more excitement about them. But some insiders want the focus to stay on the Conservatives, who are struggling, and a choice between the two big parties. With that in mind, Labour was only too happy for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to claim that the local election results suggested the country was on course for a hung parliament. They were pleased for the public to be reminded that a Labour victory is not a foregone conclusion.
Second, while the Tories have been stuck in the doldrums in the polls for months, Labour cannot predict or control much of what happens before the election. On 6 October last year, the world didn't know what was about to happen in Israel. The shocking events of 7 October and the intense conflict since then has unsettled many in the Labour Party. The local elections confirmed the leadership's attitude to war in Gaza affected votes in some areas, and unhappiness over foreign policy feels something of a proxy for general grumpiness on the left. There is just no telling what other events could provoke further disagreement, or what unexpected events could shift the polls. The better economic news of the last few days also helps the Conservatives to make their planned argument - that the country has turned a corner, and that Labour would put that at risk. And of course the Conservatives are looking for any Labour vulnerabilities to push.
• None On this week's show are the Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron and Labour MP Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow paymaster general
• None The actor Dominic West also joins the show to talk about his new West End show
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 BST on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Tory sources point to Labour's position on immigration, cancelling the government's Rwanda plan. They'll likely put pressure on Labour over the enhanced relationship it wants with the EU. Then there's Labour's plan for extra rights in the workplace, what Conservatives have dubbed "French-style union laws" - another pressure point. There is no question that Keir Starmer's Labour Party is a very different beast to Jeremy Corbyn's tribe as they went into the last general election. But how able are they to shrug off Conservative attacks? "We can rattle them quite easily," a Conservative source suggests, pointing to pressure they believe led to Labour ditching its £28bn commitment. A Labour figure says Starmer's team needs to avoid "being distracted by the madness". Sometimes, "they know it's a trap, but they feel they have no option but walk into it anyway". Politics is about how able you are to defend yourself, as well as how sharply you can attack.
To win, it helps if you look like a winner - but overstretch yourself, and it could all go wrong. Not every eager young staffer in Labour these days was born when, in 1992, Neil Kinnock's Sheffield rally showed him prematurely triumphant, with all the crashing disappointment that followed. But the memory is present in plenty of Labour minds (Kinnock, incidentally, warned on BBC Radio 4's The Week in Westminster that voters are not fully convinced by Starmer and his party). Even Starmer's most loyal lieutenants acknowledge privately that he is unlikely to be a politician with razzle and dazzle. But he has changed since he became leader of a battered party in 2020. One Starmer ally says he is "definitely showing that confidence - and he's earned it - he has gone through some really, really difficult stuff for the party, he's grafted it and worked it up". As the party's reaction to the second defection in as many weeks suggested, there is a fine line to walk between breeding success and too much swagger. Some of his MPs' reactions to this week's defection of Natalie Elphicke - not just a Conservative, but from the Conservative right - highlighted that risk.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Defecting MP Natalie Elphicke : Tories under Sunak have broken many election promises
Sure, they want to appeal to what Starmer repeatedly described as "all reasonable people". But for some of his own gang, Elphicke does not fall into that category. One senior figure told me: "With the over excitement of the scale of a win there might be a strategic error of going for the stretch of the Tories we can pull over, rather than protecting what we already have."
Yes, to pull off a victory Labour has to appeal to voters who wouldn't have dreamt of backing them in 2019 - and in huge numbers. But it also has to keep its existing base on board, to make sure they campaign and turn out. What Labour bosses never forget - even if some of its more excitable supporters do - is that to win a majority, the party has to win a swing bigger than Tony Blair did in 1997, when he redrew the electoral map. To have a majority of even one MP, Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner and the rest of his team have to do better - far better - than Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, John Prescott, Jack Straw, David Blunkett and the rest. In 2019 it felt implausible that they would be anywhere within reach. Now, the party is increasingly taking decisions and marking positions as those it would defend in government. It is spending huge amounts of time preparing to govern, not just campaign. Yet as both Starmer and Sunak are only too happy to remind you, voters face a different choice in a general election than what they say to a pollster, or when they pick a local councillor. It is still "if" not "when" the Labour leader becomes prime minister - and there is plenty of danger ahead.
What questions would you like to ask Lord Cameron or Jonathan Ashworth this Sunday? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68995187
|
news_uk-politics-68995187
|
|
Gaza war: Netanyahu vows to defeat Hamas in Rafah despite US arms threat - BBC News
|
2024-05-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Israeli leader says his country will "stand alone" and "fight with fingernails" if shipments are halted.
|
Middle East
|
Netanyahu was defiant in the face of US threats to cut off weapons
Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed Israel can "stand alone", after the US warned arms shipments could be stopped if he orders a full-scale invasion of Rafah in Gaza. Thousands of people have already fled the southern city after the Israeli military began what it called a "limited" operation on Monday. US President Joe Biden has repeatedly warned against the operation, saying that it would cross a "red line". But Mr Netanyahu dismissed the US warning, saying Israel would fight on. "If we need to ... we will stand alone. I have said that if necessary we will fight with our fingernails," the prime minister said. Mr Netanyahu also invoked the war of 1948 - where the newly formed State of Israel was attacked by a coalition of Arab states - to dismiss the US warnings. "In the War of Independence 76 years ago, we were the few against the many," he said. "We did not have weapons. There was an arms embargo on Israel, but with great strength of spirit, heroism and unity among us - we were victorious." Despite Mr Netanyahu's comments, his government has come under pressure after the US suspended the delivery of 1,800 2,000lb (907kg) bombs and 1,700 500lb bombs over fears that they could cause civilian deaths in Rafah. Mr Biden went further still in an interview with CNN on Wednesday, saying that if the attack went ahead he would further suspend supplies of artillery shells and other weapons. Yoav Gallant, Mr Netanyahu's defence minister, dismissed the US warnings, saying Israel's "enemies as well as ... best of friends" should understand that his country "cannot be subdued". "We will stand strong, we will achieve our goals," he added. The comments came hours after the UN said more than 80,000 people had fled Rafah since Monday amid constant bombardment and as Israeli tanks massed close to built-up areas. The UN also warned that food and fuel were running out for the more than one million still sheltering in the city, because it was not receiving aid through nearby crossings. Israeli troops took control and closed the Rafah crossing with Egypt at the start of their operation, while the UN said it was too dangerous for its staff and lorries to reach the reopened Kerem Shalom crossing with Israel. Israeli forces said they were conducting "targeted raids" against Hamas elements remaining in the city. However, the Israeli government has refused to rule out a full scale invasion, leading to Mr Biden's warning he would not supply it with the munitions to do so.
White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Mr Biden did not believe "smashing into Rafah" would advance Israel's objective of defeating Hamas. "An enduring defeat of Hamas certainly remains the Israeli goal, and we share that goal with them," Mr Kirby said. "The argument that somehow we're walking away from Israel, or we're not willing to help them defeat Hamas just doesn't comport with the facts," he said.
Israeli tanks and other armoured vehicles gathered near the Gaza border fence on Thursday
Palestinian media said two people were killed on Thursday afternoon in an Israeli air strike in the al-Jneineh neighbourhood of Rafah - one of the eastern areas which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ordered residents to evacuate before beginning its ground operation began on Monday night. Another three people were reportedly killed in an air strike in the nearby Brazil area, which is not in the evacuation zone but is next to the Egyptian border. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) - which are proscribed as terrorist organisations by Israel, the US and other countries - said they were targeting Israeli forces on the eastern outskirts with mortar bombs and anti-tank missiles. Hamas also said it had blown up a booby-trapped tunnel east of Rafah underneath three Israeli military vehicles. The IDF said three of its soldiers were moderately wounded as a result of the explosion. Overnight, at least five people were reportedly killed when a family's home in the western Tal al-Sultan neighbourhood was hit in an Israeli strike. They included three children, one of them a one-year-old infant, medics said.
Meanwhile hopes of a peace deal - which seemed close earlier in the week before Israel said it did not past muster - appeared to be fading. Both Israeli and Hamas delegations left indirect talks in Cairo on Thursday. After seven months of war in Gaza, Israel insists victory is impossible without taking the city of Rafah and eliminating the last remaining Hamas battalions. Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas in response to the group's attack on southern Israel on 7 October, during which about 1,200 people were killed and 252 others were taken hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 34,900 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. Israel says 128 hostages are unaccounted for, 36 of whom are presumed dead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68980826
|
news_world-middle-east-68980826
|
|
What could go wrong for Keir Starmer? A lot actually, Laura Kuenssberg writes - BBC News
|
2024-05-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Labour's leadership is bouncing - but there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and No 10.
|
UK Politics
|
Keir Starmer's success was sketched across the map of England at the local elections last week. The Labour leadership is bouncing from nabbing another of the Tories' MPs, Natalie Elphicke - and polling since the council results puts him further ahead than ever. What could possibly go wrong for him? A lot, actually. The general election is still months away and there are plenty of potential pitfalls between Starmer and the shiny black door of No 10.
First, conversations across the Labour Party suggest the danger of taking victory for granted - being complacent - is the number one risk. A shadow minister warns: "People sometimes act as if it's already happened… not realising the scale of effort required to do that." A source tells me holiday was cancelled at Labour HQ in December, until July, with all staff expected to be on standby for a general election. There's no taking it easy now: a similar edict is in place from September to December.
"We have to keep our discipline and keep on our message," says another insider. That discipline is important in avoiding the kind of public sparring between colleagues that was all too common in the bruising Corbyn era, and which the public doesn't like. It's important in avoiding stray comments that would give opponents ammo to attack - just look at how the Conservatives played with Labour's wavering over its now retired vow to spend £28bn a year on the economy going green. But it's also important because if a Labour victory is hammered into people's expectations, that could affect how the election campaign is fought. "If everyone thinks we are getting a thumping great majority, you end up with the campaign being a referendum on Labour," one source says. Instead, "we want it to be about the threat of five more years of the Tories".
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
Another senior figure tells me: "What you hear is that people think they are voting Labour because they don't want the Tories - rather than enthusiastically voting for us." The party would love there to be more excitement about them. But some insiders want the focus to stay on the Conservatives, who are struggling, and a choice between the two big parties. With that in mind, Labour was only too happy for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to claim that the local election results suggested the country was on course for a hung parliament. They were pleased for the public to be reminded that a Labour victory is not a foregone conclusion.
Second, while the Tories have been stuck in the doldrums in the polls for months, Labour cannot predict or control much of what happens before the election. On 6 October last year, the world didn't know what was about to happen in Israel. The shocking events of 7 October and the intense conflict since then has unsettled many in the Labour Party. The local elections confirmed the leadership's attitude to war in Gaza affected votes in some areas, and unhappiness over foreign policy feels something of a proxy for general grumpiness on the left. There is just no telling what other events could provoke further disagreement, or what unexpected events could shift the polls. The better economic news of the last few days also helps the Conservatives to make their planned argument - that the country has turned a corner, and that Labour would put that at risk. And of course the Conservatives are looking for any Labour vulnerabilities to push.
• None On this week's show are the Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron and Labour MP Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow paymaster general
• None The actor Dominic West also joins the show to talk about his new West End show
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 BST on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Tory sources point to Labour's position on immigration, cancelling the government's Rwanda plan. They'll likely put pressure on Labour over the enhanced relationship it wants with the EU. Then there's Labour's plan for extra rights in the workplace, what Conservatives have dubbed "French-style union laws" - another pressure point. There is no question that Keir Starmer's Labour Party is a very different beast to Jeremy Corbyn's tribe as they went into the last general election. But how able are they to shrug off Conservative attacks? "We can rattle them quite easily," a Conservative source suggests, pointing to pressure they believe led to Labour ditching its £28bn commitment. A Labour figure says Starmer's team needs to avoid "being distracted by the madness". Sometimes, "they know it's a trap, but they feel they have no option but walk into it anyway". Politics is about how able you are to defend yourself, as well as how sharply you can attack.
To win, it helps if you look like a winner - but overstretch yourself, and it could all go wrong. Not every eager young staffer in Labour these days was born when, in 1992, Neil Kinnock's Sheffield rally showed him prematurely triumphant, with all the crashing disappointment that followed. But the memory is present in plenty of Labour minds (Kinnock, incidentally, warned on BBC Radio 4's The Week in Westminster that voters are not fully convinced by Starmer and his party). Even Starmer's most loyal lieutenants acknowledge privately that he is unlikely to be a politician with razzle and dazzle. But he has changed since he became leader of a battered party in 2020. One Starmer ally says he is "definitely showing that confidence - and he's earned it - he has gone through some really, really difficult stuff for the party, he's grafted it and worked it up". As the party's reaction to the second defection in as many weeks suggested, there is a fine line to walk between breeding success and too much swagger. Some of his MPs' reactions to this week's defection of Natalie Elphicke - not just a Conservative, but from the Conservative right - highlighted that risk.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Defecting MP Natalie Elphicke : Tories under Sunak have broken many election promises
Sure, they want to appeal to what Starmer repeatedly described as "all reasonable people". But for some of his own gang, Elphicke does not fall into that category. One senior figure told me: "With the over excitement of the scale of a win there might be a strategic error of going for the stretch of the Tories we can pull over, rather than protecting what we already have."
Yes, to pull off a victory Labour has to appeal to voters who wouldn't have dreamt of backing them in 2019 - and in huge numbers. But it also has to keep its existing base on board, to make sure they campaign and turn out. What Labour bosses never forget - even if some of its more excitable supporters do - is that to win a majority, the party has to win a swing bigger than Tony Blair did in 1997, when he redrew the electoral map. To have a majority of even one MP, Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner and the rest of his team have to do better - far better - than Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, John Prescott, Jack Straw, David Blunkett and the rest. In 2019 it felt implausible that they would be anywhere within reach. Now, the party is increasingly taking decisions and marking positions as those it would defend in government. It is spending huge amounts of time preparing to govern, not just campaign. Yet as both Starmer and Sunak are only too happy to remind you, voters face a different choice in a general election than what they say to a pollster, or when they pick a local councillor. It is still "if" not "when" the Labour leader becomes prime minister - and there is plenty of danger ahead.
What questions would you like to ask Lord Cameron or Jonathan Ashworth this Sunday? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68995187
|
news_uk-politics-68995187
|
|
Chris Mason: Sunak, Starmer and their small boats row - BBC News
|
2024-05-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The issue of people crossing the Channel is so contested, even the terminology of the topic is disputed.
|
UK Politics
|
As of 21 April, 6,265 people had crossed the English Channel in small boats since the start of 2024
There is a single word at the heart of the political row between the prime minister and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer when it comes to unauthorised immigration. The issue of people in small boats crossing the English Channel is so contested, even the terminology of the topic is disputed. There are asylum seekers, who have applied for refugee status and are waiting for a decision. There are refugees. There is illegal immigration. Overlapping descriptions and labels, many of which provoke fury and anger. And so to that word - amnesty. Both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir are seeking to weaponize it, to make what they see as a negative point about their opponent. The Labour leader accused Mr Sunak of a "Travelodge amnesty" - people who have arrived in small boats and are, in UK law, illegal immigrants. They are stuck in limbo in UK hotels at significant expense to the taxpayer. Incidentally, Sir Keir did this while projecting a confidence I've not seen before in him. Not just his manner on stage, but his willingness to praise a Conservative idea - the Small Boats Operational Command - strictly up to a point, which he claims he would build on. And praise a Conservative cabinet minister, Justice Secretary Alex Chalk. It amounted, in the round, I thought, to a man with the air of an heir. A man - after those local election results and the second defection to his party from the Conservatives in a fortnight - who might just feel closer to the prospect of becoming prime minister than ever before.
Sir Keir's label of a claimed Conservative "Travelodge amnesty" is an attempt to push back at the Tory description of Labour's plan to allow people who have arrived on small boats to apply for asylum. Yes, you guessed it, the Conservatives describe that as an amnesty too. Both leaders clearly see a political value in projecting an aggression on this topic and portraying their opponent as weak, even soft. The big picture here, acknowledged by them both and illustrated in this example, is this is deeply complex and there is no off the shelf panacea on offer. What do you do about the huge backlogs of people? How do you create deterrents to crossing the Channel? Are deterrents even possible? What does fairness and justice look like, to people contemplating a crossing, others seeking a legal route to the UK, and the British taxpayer? Are international legal frameworks, domestic laws, or agreements with other countries up to scale of the challenge? Returning more people not granted asylum to their country of origin is key. BBC Verify has been looking at how this might apply to recent small boat arrivals. Vietnamese people - 1,266 in total - and Afghans - 1,216 people - make up the top two nationalities arriving in the UK this way so far this year. The next most common nationalities to have arrived this way between 1 January and 21 April 2024 were Iranians, Syrians and Eritreans. Of these five countries, the government only has a returns agreement with Vietnam, so ministers in this government or any future one would have to negotiate agreements with the other four if the asylum seekers' claims were rejected. Plus none of them currently feature on the government's list of where people can be safely returned, which poses a further potential challenge. It is for Mr Sunak, Sir Keir and others to win arguments and gain trust on this most difficult, emotional, diplomatic and political of issues - and to grapple for solutions. As partial, long winded and expensive as they may prove to be.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68994326
|
news_uk-politics-68994326
|
|
Trump's lawyer attacks Michael Cohen in hush-money trial - BBC News
|
2024-05-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The defence team questioned the credibility of Trump's former lawyer, who said he lied for the ex-President.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: The BBC's Nada Tawfik walks through the defence's strategy in Michael Cohen's cross-examination
Donald Trump's legal team sought on Tuesday to dismantle the credibility of the star witness in the ex-president's criminal trial, Michael Cohen. Mr Trump showed no reaction as his lawyer, during cross-examination, cast Cohen as a man with a personal vendetta against his former boss. Throughout the legal showdown weeks in the making, Cohen remained calm. He also said he hoped Mr Trump would be found guilty of fraud in the hush-money case. Cohen was on the stand for a second day of blockbuster testimony. He was called by prosecutors to testify about making a $130,000 (£104,300) hush-money payment to adult-film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, to prevent her from telling a story about an alleged sexual encounter with Mr Trump. Donald Trump now faces 34 counts of business fraud for allegedly disguising reimbursements for the payment to Cohen as legal expenses. The former president pleaded not guilty to the charges and denies having sex with Ms Daniels. At one point, his lawyer Todd Blanche asked bluntly if Cohen wanted to see Mr Trump convicted in the case. After being pressed, Cohen responded: "Sure." Over the course of two hours, Mr Blanche tried to undermine Cohen, who was imprisoned after pleading guilty to tax evasion, fraud and campaign finance violations. He brought up his guilty plea for lying to congress, and sought to portray Cohen as being motivated by hate and fame. He also sought to show that Cohen seeks to profit from the legal woes of a man he blasts daily in public. The lawyer dredged up Cohen's prolific social media posts, podcasts, and media appearances attacking Donald Trump, often in unprintable language.
BBC News reporters are in the Manhattan courtroom covering the historic first criminal trial of a former US president. You'll find their updates and analysis on the BBC news website and app, and across TV, radio and podcasts.
At the start of the cross-examination, Mr Blanche asked about a comment Cohen made about him on social media. Is it true, Mr Blanche asked, that Cohen had called him a "crying little [expletive]". Cohen quickly replied: "Sounds like something I would say." Justice Juan Merchan swiftly struck the answer from the official record, but the exchange set the tone for the afternoon. Mr Blanche later displayed some of Cohen's podcast merchandise, including a t-shirt that showed Mr Trump in an orange jumpsuit, handcuffed. But by the close of Tuesday's session, the lawyer had not cross-examined Cohen on the most damaging testimony he had given prosecutors: that he had kept Mr Trump informed at every stage of the payment to Ms Daniels, and that the former president had approved the allegedly fraudulent reimbursement plan. Despite previous witnesses testifying to Cohen's belligerent nature, Cohen remained composed under cross-examination. Jeffrey Levine, an attorney who represents Cohen, said in a statement that "my understanding is Mr Cohen came across credibly." His testimony will continue when court is back in session on Thursday.
Prosecutors took a risk calling Cohen, given his online posts and criminal record. But as the man who actually carried out the hush-money payment to Ms Daniels, his testimony was crucial for the New York district attorney's case. Prosecutors also hope he will help prove another part of their case - that allegedly covering up the payment was election interference. In a pivotal moment, prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Cohen why he made the payment. "To ensure that the story would not come out, would not affect Mr Trump's chances of becoming president of the United States," he told the court. Ms Hoffinger asked on whose behalf he committed that crime.
Although Cohen said he didn't regret working for Donald Trump or his organisation, he said he had "violated my moral compass" in order to do Mr Trump's bidding. The FBI raided Cohen's apartment in April 2018. He spoke to then-President Trump, who told him "stay tough, you're going to be OK." "I felt reassured because I had the president of the United States protecting me," Cohen testified. But it was the last direct conversation between the two men. Cohen - who once said he would "take a bullet" for Mr Trump - testified that, after speaking to his family about being targeted by a federal investigation, he decided not to continue lying on behalf of his most famous client. After court wrapped up on Tuesday, Mr Trump told reporters that his team had "a very good day" and criticised a gag order limiting what he can say publicly about the judge's family and others involved in the case. A number of Mr Trump's Republican allies and possible running mates for November's election have attended the trial this week. House Speaker Mike Johnson, currently the top Republican in the US government and in line to succeed the president after the vice-president, was present on Tuesday and spoke to reporters outside. Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum and Representative Byron Donalds of Florida also attended the trial.
Prosecutors indicated during arguments on Tuesday that Michael Cohen would be the last witness they call. Donald Trump has indicated that he wants to take the witness stand to testify in his own defence - but whether he actually does so remains to be seen.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-69012587
|
news_world-us-canada-69012587
|
|
Valdo Calocane: Triple killer's sentence review date set - BBC News
|
2024-05-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Calocane was sentenced to a hospital order after admitting manslaughter by diminished responsibility.
|
Nottingham
|
Valdo Calocane admitted manslaughter and was sentenced to a hospital order
A date has been set for the sentence review of Nottingham attacks killer Valdo Calocane. Emma Webber, mother of victim Barnaby Webber, said the victims' families were told on Friday that a hearing had been set for 8 May. The review of Calocane's indefinite hospital order will be heard at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. Mr Webber and Grace O'Malley-Kumar, both 19, and 65-year-old Ian Coates were fatally stabbed on 13 June 2023. Calocane was sentenced to detention in a high-security hospital after admitting manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. During his sentencing, a judge told Calocane that he would be detained in a high-security hospital "very probably for the rest of your life".
Ian Coates, Barnaby Webber and Grace O'Malley-Kumar died at the scene of the attacks
He was found to be suffering from paranoid schizophrenia at the time of the attacks, which the judge said, in his view, "significantly contributed" to him carrying them out. Speaking outside Nottingham Crown Court following the killer's sentencing on 25 January, the victims' families voiced their anger at the outcome.
Mrs Webber said "true justice" had not been served and that the families had been "let down". Attorney General Victoria Prentis said in February she would refer the sentence to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration after concluding it was "unduly lenient". Three Court of Appeal judges will hear arguments from the senior treasury counsel representing the attorney general and Calocane's barrister.
Follow BBC East Midlands on Facebook, external, on X, external, or on Instagram, external. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk, external or via WhatsApp, external on 0808 100 2210.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-68860493
|
news_uk-england-nottinghamshire-68860493
|
|
Trump's lawyer attacks Michael Cohen in hush-money trial - BBC News
|
2024-05-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The defence team questioned the credibility of Trump's former lawyer, who said he lied for the ex-President.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: The BBC's Nada Tawfik walks through the defence's strategy in Michael Cohen's cross-examination
Donald Trump's legal team sought on Tuesday to dismantle the credibility of the star witness in the ex-president's criminal trial, Michael Cohen. Mr Trump showed no reaction as his lawyer, during cross-examination, cast Cohen as a man with a personal vendetta against his former boss. Throughout the legal showdown weeks in the making, Cohen remained calm. He also said he hoped Mr Trump would be found guilty of fraud in the hush-money case. Cohen was on the stand for a second day of blockbuster testimony. He was called by prosecutors to testify about making a $130,000 (£104,300) hush-money payment to adult-film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, to prevent her from telling a story about an alleged sexual encounter with Mr Trump. Donald Trump now faces 34 counts of business fraud for allegedly disguising reimbursements for the payment to Cohen as legal expenses. The former president pleaded not guilty to the charges and denies having sex with Ms Daniels. At one point, his lawyer Todd Blanche asked bluntly if Cohen wanted to see Mr Trump convicted in the case. After being pressed, Cohen responded: "Sure." Over the course of two hours, Mr Blanche tried to undermine Cohen, who was imprisoned after pleading guilty to tax evasion, fraud and campaign finance violations. He brought up his guilty plea for lying to congress, and sought to portray Cohen as being motivated by hate and fame. He also sought to show that Cohen seeks to profit from the legal woes of a man he blasts daily in public. The lawyer dredged up Cohen's prolific social media posts, podcasts, and media appearances attacking Donald Trump, often in unprintable language.
BBC News reporters are in the Manhattan courtroom covering the historic first criminal trial of a former US president. You'll find their updates and analysis on the BBC news website and app, and across TV, radio and podcasts.
At the start of the cross-examination, Mr Blanche asked about a comment Cohen made about him on social media. Is it true, Mr Blanche asked, that Cohen had called him a "crying little [expletive]". Cohen quickly replied: "Sounds like something I would say." Justice Juan Merchan swiftly struck the answer from the official record, but the exchange set the tone for the afternoon. Mr Blanche later displayed some of Cohen's podcast merchandise, including a t-shirt that showed Mr Trump in an orange jumpsuit, handcuffed. But by the close of Tuesday's session, the lawyer had not cross-examined Cohen on the most damaging testimony he had given prosecutors: that he had kept Mr Trump informed at every stage of the payment to Ms Daniels, and that the former president had approved the allegedly fraudulent reimbursement plan. Despite previous witnesses testifying to Cohen's belligerent nature, Cohen remained composed under cross-examination. Jeffrey Levine, an attorney who represents Cohen, said in a statement that "my understanding is Mr Cohen came across credibly." His testimony will continue when court is back in session on Thursday.
Prosecutors took a risk calling Cohen, given his online posts and criminal record. But as the man who actually carried out the hush-money payment to Ms Daniels, his testimony was crucial for the New York district attorney's case. Prosecutors also hope he will help prove another part of their case - that allegedly covering up the payment was election interference. In a pivotal moment, prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Cohen why he made the payment. "To ensure that the story would not come out, would not affect Mr Trump's chances of becoming president of the United States," he told the court. Ms Hoffinger asked on whose behalf he committed that crime.
Although Cohen said he didn't regret working for Donald Trump or his organisation, he said he had "violated my moral compass" in order to do Mr Trump's bidding. The FBI raided Cohen's apartment in April 2018. He spoke to then-President Trump, who told him "stay tough, you're going to be OK." "I felt reassured because I had the president of the United States protecting me," Cohen testified. But it was the last direct conversation between the two men. Cohen - who once said he would "take a bullet" for Mr Trump - testified that, after speaking to his family about being targeted by a federal investigation, he decided not to continue lying on behalf of his most famous client. After court wrapped up on Tuesday, Mr Trump told reporters that his team had "a very good day" and criticised a gag order limiting what he can say publicly about the judge's family and others involved in the case. A number of Mr Trump's Republican allies and possible running mates for November's election have attended the trial this week. House Speaker Mike Johnson, currently the top Republican in the US government and in line to succeed the president after the vice-president, was present on Tuesday and spoke to reporters outside. Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum and Representative Byron Donalds of Florida also attended the trial.
Prosecutors indicated during arguments on Tuesday that Michael Cohen would be the last witness they call. Donald Trump has indicated that he wants to take the witness stand to testify in his own defence - but whether he actually does so remains to be seen.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-69012587
|
news_world-us-canada-69012587
|
|
Slovak PM Robert Fico 'fighting for his life' following surgery - minister - BBC News
|
2024-05-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Robert Fico was shot as he left a meeting in Handlova, central Slovakia - a suspect has been arrested.
|
Europe
|
There is so much we still don’t know.
But what is absolutely clear is how this attack - in broad daylight - has sent shockwaves across Slovakia, Europe and far beyond.
We live in a time of growing political polarisation where social media is being weaponised in all too many places.
And it’s now tragically clear that Slovakia was not just deeply polarised, but dangerously so.
Immediate reactions from many capitals have expressed concern for the prime minister’s health but have also described it as a shocking attack against democracy.
Prime Minister Fico is well known in Slovakia and across Europe - a veteran politician whose career spans three decades and the political spectrum. His populist party began on the left and has moved increasingly to the right. His positions have become more strident; anti-EU, against sending aid to Ukraine, against LGBTQ rights.
The shooting came on the day parliament began discussing his government’s proposal to abolish Slovakia’s public broadcaster and replace it with an institution opponents fear will suppress criticism towards him and his allies within the populist-nationalist coalition.
Political arguments are part of democracy - not assassination attempts.
Slovakia’s crisis has sent a chill down the political spine.
This ends our live coverage for now. For further updates click here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-69016687
|
news_live_world-europe-69016687
|
|
PMQs: Rishi Sunak challenged over early release of dangerous criminals - BBC News
|
2024-05-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The prime minister insists no-one deemed a threat to public safety is eligible for early release.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rishi Sunak is asked to "guarantee" that none of the prisoners released early are considered high risk
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has been challenged over the early release of dangerous criminals under a scheme aimed at easing overcrowding in jails. During PMQs, Sir Keir Starmer asked for a guarantee that no criminals considered high risk were freed early. The PM insisted no-one deemed a threat to public safety would be eligible. But the Labour leader pointed to an example of one inmate who posed a danger to children, who had his release date brought forward. The case was revealed in a report on HMP Lewes by the prisons watchdog, external, which was published on Tuesday. The individual had a history of stalking and domestic abuse but was released without a full risk assessment.
The original scheme, introduced last October, allowed "low-level offenders" to be freed from prisons in England and Wales up to 18 days early under strict supervision. This was increased to up to 60 days in March and will be further extended to up to 70 days from 23 May. The government has said no-one convicted of a sexual, terrorist or serious violent offence would be eligible for early release. The prison population has ballooned in recent decades as a result of tougher sentences and court backlogs. Sir Keir said the government had not provided "basic details" about the scheme, including how many prisoners were being released early, where they were and what crimes they had committed. He called for domestic abusers to be exempt from the scheme. In response, Mr Sunak said: "There are strict eligibility criteria in place, with exclusions based on public safety and no-one will be put on the scheme if they were deemed a threat to public safety." The PM said prison governors also had "an absolute lock" over who was put on the scheme. He added that those released were subject to strict conditions and supervision, which he said was in contrast to under the last Labour government. Later, Downing Street denied the government was attempting to pass the buck onto prison governors in managing the move. A Labour spokesman said the party would want to end the early release policy "as soon as possible" if it wins power, but added "we are under no illusion about the scale of the challenge we will face when it comes to the prison capacity crisis that we will inherit". Mr Sunak will be especially eager to maintain the Conservative Party's reputation for being tough on crime in an election year. Under repeated questioning from Sir Keir on the issue he hit back by arguing that the Conservatives believe more than Labour that prison prevents crime. That attack line shows precisely why Mr Sunak is also now vulnerable if Labour can establish the argument in voters' minds that prisoners are being released early who should not be on the streets. In a piece of potentially awkward timing, one of the main pieces of legislation the government still hopes to complete before the general election is a Sentencing Bill, external. The proposed law is partly intended to address the capacity problems by suspending almost all prison sentences of less than a year and expanding home detention. But some prisons campaigners say this is insufficient to deal with the problems in the system, and in other ways the bill is designed to put people in prison longer - with those who commit the most violent murders imprisoned for life, and those sentenced for rape and some other sexual offences required to serve their whole sentence in prison, whereas currently they can in some circumstances be released on licence after two-thirds of the sentence. Downing Street said the government was pressing ahead with the Sentencing Bill, adding: "In order to ensure that we can put the worst offenders away for longer we must make sure that there are sufficient spaces to lock up the most dangerous criminals."
Chief inspector of prisons Charlie Taylor has raised "serious concerns" about the early release scheme. His report highlighted one individual who had been freed early was recalled to custody before the watchdog's inspection of the prison had ended. According to the findings, the inmate had a "significant" drug problem and a record of self-harm as well as experiencing suicidal thoughts, but was freed despite "appeals for the decision to be reversed and staff having serious concerns for his and the public's safety". Meanwhile, some court appearances in England will be delayed in another emergency measure to deal with prison overcrowding. Under Operation Early Dawn, the Ministry of Justice says that it now needs to control the flow of cases reaching this first day in court because of the pressure on cells. In practice, this means some defendants who would expect to be sent from court to a remand prison cell will be told the start of their case is being delayed. That will mean police will have to release some of them on bail with a date to later attend court.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69015911
|
news_uk-politics-69015911
|
|
Trump's lawyer attacks Michael Cohen in hush-money trial - BBC News
|
2024-05-17
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The defence team questioned the credibility of Trump's former lawyer, who said he lied for the ex-President.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: The BBC's Nada Tawfik walks through the defence's strategy in Michael Cohen's cross-examination
Donald Trump's legal team sought on Tuesday to dismantle the credibility of the star witness in the ex-president's criminal trial, Michael Cohen. Mr Trump showed no reaction as his lawyer, during cross-examination, cast Cohen as a man with a personal vendetta against his former boss. Throughout the legal showdown weeks in the making, Cohen remained calm. He also said he hoped Mr Trump would be found guilty of fraud in the hush-money case. Cohen was on the stand for a second day of blockbuster testimony. He was called by prosecutors to testify about making a $130,000 (£104,300) hush-money payment to adult-film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, to prevent her from telling a story about an alleged sexual encounter with Mr Trump. Donald Trump now faces 34 counts of business fraud for allegedly disguising reimbursements for the payment to Cohen as legal expenses. The former president pleaded not guilty to the charges and denies having sex with Ms Daniels. At one point, his lawyer Todd Blanche asked bluntly if Cohen wanted to see Mr Trump convicted in the case. After being pressed, Cohen responded: "Sure." Over the course of two hours, Mr Blanche tried to undermine Cohen, who was imprisoned after pleading guilty to tax evasion, fraud and campaign finance violations. He brought up his guilty plea for lying to congress, and sought to portray Cohen as being motivated by hate and fame. He also sought to show that Cohen seeks to profit from the legal woes of a man he blasts daily in public. The lawyer dredged up Cohen's prolific social media posts, podcasts, and media appearances attacking Donald Trump, often in unprintable language.
BBC News reporters are in the Manhattan courtroom covering the historic first criminal trial of a former US president. You'll find their updates and analysis on the BBC news website and app, and across TV, radio and podcasts.
At the start of the cross-examination, Mr Blanche asked about a comment Cohen made about him on social media. Is it true, Mr Blanche asked, that Cohen had called him a "crying little [expletive]". Cohen quickly replied: "Sounds like something I would say." Justice Juan Merchan swiftly struck the answer from the official record, but the exchange set the tone for the afternoon. Mr Blanche later displayed some of Cohen's podcast merchandise, including a t-shirt that showed Mr Trump in an orange jumpsuit, handcuffed. But by the close of Tuesday's session, the lawyer had not cross-examined Cohen on the most damaging testimony he had given prosecutors: that he had kept Mr Trump informed at every stage of the payment to Ms Daniels, and that the former president had approved the allegedly fraudulent reimbursement plan. Despite previous witnesses testifying to Cohen's belligerent nature, Cohen remained composed under cross-examination. Jeffrey Levine, an attorney who represents Cohen, said in a statement that "my understanding is Mr Cohen came across credibly." His testimony will continue when court is back in session on Thursday.
Prosecutors took a risk calling Cohen, given his online posts and criminal record. But as the man who actually carried out the hush-money payment to Ms Daniels, his testimony was crucial for the New York district attorney's case. Prosecutors also hope he will help prove another part of their case - that allegedly covering up the payment was election interference. In a pivotal moment, prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Cohen why he made the payment. "To ensure that the story would not come out, would not affect Mr Trump's chances of becoming president of the United States," he told the court. Ms Hoffinger asked on whose behalf he committed that crime.
Although Cohen said he didn't regret working for Donald Trump or his organisation, he said he had "violated my moral compass" in order to do Mr Trump's bidding. The FBI raided Cohen's apartment in April 2018. He spoke to then-President Trump, who told him "stay tough, you're going to be OK." "I felt reassured because I had the president of the United States protecting me," Cohen testified. But it was the last direct conversation between the two men. Cohen - who once said he would "take a bullet" for Mr Trump - testified that, after speaking to his family about being targeted by a federal investigation, he decided not to continue lying on behalf of his most famous client. After court wrapped up on Tuesday, Mr Trump told reporters that his team had "a very good day" and criticised a gag order limiting what he can say publicly about the judge's family and others involved in the case. A number of Mr Trump's Republican allies and possible running mates for November's election have attended the trial this week. House Speaker Mike Johnson, currently the top Republican in the US government and in line to succeed the president after the vice-president, was present on Tuesday and spoke to reporters outside. Former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum and Representative Byron Donalds of Florida also attended the trial.
Prosecutors indicated during arguments on Tuesday that Michael Cohen would be the last witness they call. Donald Trump has indicated that he wants to take the witness stand to testify in his own defence - but whether he actually does so remains to be seen.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-69012587
|
news_world-us-canada-69012587
|
|
Did prosecutors make a strong case in Trump's hush-money trial? - BBC News
|
2024-05-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
As the prosecution rests, legal experts assess the evidence so far and the chances of a conviction.
|
US & Canada
|
Michael Cohen is questioned by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger on 13 May in Manhattan while Donald trump looks on
After four weeks of testimony in a New York courtroom, the prosecution has rested its case in the hush-money trial against former president Donald Trump. Lawyers from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office called on a cast of blockbuster witnesses and produced dozens of surreptitiously recorded conversations and documents to help corroborate their case. They allege Mr Trump directed a $130,000 payment to an adult-film star in 2016 to avoid a sex scandal he feared would derail his presidential campaign - and that he then authorised an illegal reimbursement scheme to cover it up. Mr Trump denies 34 counts of falsifying business records. His lawyers are now presenting his defence.
Legal experts say the prosecution did an efficient job. But even with solid evidence and testimony, they acknowledge that a conviction in the complex felony case is far from guaranteed. "The pieces are all there. But is it there beyond a reasonable doubt?" said former Brooklyn prosecutor Julie Rendelman. "I don't know." "It only takes one juror," she added.
Though Mr Trump's case centres on a reimbursement he made to Michael Cohen, his former fixer, prosecutors spent the first weeks of the trial walking the court through what led up to the $130,000 (£102,000) hush-money payment Cohen made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels. They started with David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer. He described a series of meetings in Trump Tower where he, Cohen and Mr Trump hatched a plan to suppress negative stories about Mr Trump - including alleged sexual encounters - as he ran for president. His testimony proved influential, said former Manhattan prosecutor Lance Fletcher. "He doesn't have a reputation that's been blown apart by this. And he came into it really seeming to be Trump's friend," Mr Fletcher said. "So I think he comes off as almost an impartial witness." From there, prosecutors called a host of others, including former Trump aide Hope Hicks and Daniels' former attorney Keith Davidson, to corroborate the story.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
"They sort of connected a fascinating novel … about how all of these characters interacted," said Columbia Law School professor John Coffee. "And that was wise." They also interspersed evidence such as meeting logs, recordings and receipts of hush-money payments made to a Trump Tower doorman and Playboy model Karen McDougal to bolster witnesses' stories.
Prosecutors used weeks of storytelling and evidence to build up to the most highly anticipated witnesses, including Ms Daniels.
While prosecutors pledged to tread lightly when quizzing her about the alleged sexual encounter at a hotel suite in Nevada in 2006, she still proved at times an uncontrollable witness, Judge Juan Merchan told the court. Mr Trump has denied having sex with her. Her explicit testimony led to several unsuccessful mistrial motions from Mr Trump's legal team and may have opened the door for an appeal, some legal experts said. But others said that context helped prosecutors show why Mr Trump would be desperate to pay for her silence in order to protect his campaign. "She got into some salacious details, which I thought went too far," said Ms Rendelman. "But at the same time, the argument for the prosecution is the more salacious it is, the more Trump would want it to be shut down."
BBC News reporters are in the Manhattan courtroom covering the historic first criminal trial of a former US president. You'll find their updates and analysis on the BBC news website and app, and across TV, radio and podcasts.
Ultimately, Ms Daniels could only testify to what led up to the hush-money payment. For the behind-the-scenes reimbursement, they had to rely on a problematic witness: a convicted felon who recently has made a living off attacking Mr Trump.
Members of the public held their breath earlier this week as Mr Trump's former fixer-turned foe, Cohen, was called to the stand. Many anticipated the same character who authored fiery social media posts attacking Mr Trump, for whom he once pledged to take a bullet. But the man speaking in a blue suit and tie took them by surprise. Cohen appeared composed as he detailed his decades with Mr Trump. "He is measured. He is reflective," said Diane Kiesel, a former New York Supreme Court Justice and Manhattan prosecutor. "He has not let any bias or animus for Mr Trump show through." Cohen told the court of his initial admiration, working as Mr Trump's personal attorney for 10 years. He acknowledged the lows as well, including lying on Mr Trump's behalf, leading to regrets.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: The BBC's Nada Tawfik dissects the brutal questioning of Cohen
His composure boosted the prosecutors' case, and his testimony was bolstered by a weak cross-examination from Mr Trump's legal team on day one, experts said. Mr Trump's attorney, Todd Blanche, appeared disorganised at first, stumbling sometimes in his questioning, experts told the BBC. But he appeared to make strides on the second day, Thursday, casting doubt on details of Cohen's testimony, including an October 2016 phone call Cohen made to Mr Trump's bodyguard in which he claimed to have to talked to Mr Trump about details of the hush-money payment. It was a reminder of what experts said was one of prosecutors' largest problems: Cohen's credibility. The defence hammered home the point that Cohen is a convicted criminal, who spent time in prison after being convicted on several charges including lying to Congress. Cohen was able to testify to a key part of prosecutors' case - Mr Trump's direct knowledge of the hush-money payment reimbursement scheme. Cohen said former Trump Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg - currently serving a perjury sentence at Rikers Island prison - decided to classify reimbursements from Mr Trump's account as legal expenses. Cohen testified that he heard Weisselberg get the OK from Mr Trump himself. As Cohen spoke, prosecutors also displayed the dozens of cheques, ledgers and invoices at the heart of the 34-count indictment. But Cohen's story may not sway all jurors. "You are relying on a witness who in many respects … comes with a larger load of baggage than others," Ms Rendelman said. "It makes it a bit more difficult to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt."
Other challenges remain for the prosecution. In a relatively novel approach, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office elevated falsifying business records charges to a felony by claiming Mr Trump did so with the goal of concealing another crime. To prove their case, prosecutors must show intent - that Mr Trump illegally classified records for the purpose of aiding his campaign.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Trump's hush-money case asks, did he 'cook the books'?
Several witnesses seemed to corroborate this. "He wasn't thinking at all about [his wife] Melania," Cohen told the court. "This was all about the campaign." But prosecutors must make this connection clear to the jury. "Essentially they have to connect these payments to a motive that links them to a campaign," said Ms Kiesel. "This requires a summation of a lifetime, because you really have to connect these dots." Mr Fletcher said prosecutors succeeded in doing so, with witnesses arguing the hush-money payment and reimbursement was not made to protect Mr Trump's family. "This was all about the election," Mr Fletcher said. "If I was going to bet, I would bet on a conviction. But I don't think it's a slam dunk." In the end, the verdict could come down to jury selection, experts said. The 12 members and six alternates were picked from hundreds who expressed a range of political views and familiarity with Mr Trump and this case. Jury members are often unpredictable, Ms Kiesel said. "It only takes one person to decide that the people have not met their burden," she said. "The people have 12 [jurors] to convince."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-69030047
|
news_world-us-canada-69030047
|
|
Four presenters lose part of legal challenge against BBC - BBC News
|
2024-05-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Their equal pay claims won't go to a tribunal, but claims including sex and age discrimination will.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Left-right: Annita McVeigh, Martine Croxall, Karin Giannone and Kasia Madera arriving for the employment tribunal
Four female presenters have lost a bid to take legal action against the BBC on grounds of equal pay, a judge ruled. However, their separate claims including sex and age discrimination will go to a full employment tribunal. The BBC has rejected their complaints and successfully argued the women had no grounds to bring an equal pay claim. Martine Croxall, Annita McVeigh, Karin Giannone and Kasia Madera said they "remain committed to seeking equal pay". A BBC spokesperson said: "We are pleased with the result and that the tribunal has accepted our position. We will not be commenting further at this stage." The four newsreaders have been attending a two-day preliminary hearing in central London, which concluded on Thursday. A three-week tribunal to hear their claims against the broadcaster will now be held in March 2025. Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera were given the go-ahead to have their cases heard jointly at that hearing, which the BBC had opposed.
The BBC insists its application process was "rigorous and fair"
All four presenters alleged they have not been paid equally compared with an equivalent male presenter since February 2020. "The BBC grinds you down on pay," Croxall told the hearing on Wednesday. On Thursday, the judge ruled that the claim relating to equal pay could not go ahead, because Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera had previously agreed equal pay settlements with the corporation. The judge's ruling means equal pay will not be included at next year's tribunal. The group, who are aged 48-55, have all been familiar faces on the BBC's TV channels. They separately claim they lost their roles on the BBC News Channel following a "rigged" recruitment exercise. The BBC insists its application process was "rigorous and fair". In court documents, it said: "It is denied that [the BBC] has subjected [the presenters] to age or sex discrimination, harassment or victimisation, or has breached the sex equality clause." In a joint statement, Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera said: "We are pleased the tribunal has agreed our four discrimination claims should be heard together, claims the BBC's lawyers tried to split, which would have necessitated eight hearings at great additional expense to the licence fee payer. "We remain committed to seeking equal pay despite the BBC's lawyers relying on a novel argument to prevent our claims progressing. "We await the judge's written ruling, to which we will give further consideration."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68944554
|
news_entertainment-arts-68944554
|
|
Deliveroo rider Jenniffer Rocha who bit off thumb seen working after conviction - BBC News
|
2024-05-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Jenniffer Rocha is filmed delivering food despite being convicted for biting off a customer's thumb.
|
Hampshire & Isle of Wight
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Jenniffer Rocha was filmed picking up a delivery despite her conviction for biting off a customer's thumb
A delivery rider who bit off a customer's thumb continued working for Deliveroo, even after the account she was using at the time was suspended. Jenniffer Rocha, 35, from Aldershot, Hampshire, previously pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm after an argument over a pizza in December 2022. Following her court appearance, Deliveroo cancelled her account. But BBC News filmed Rocha in April still delivering food, again apparently using a Deliveroo rider account. A second account that Rocha was accessing has also been suspended, Deliveroo said. She is due to be sentenced on Friday. The big three delivery apps - Deliveroo, Just Eat and Uber Eats - announced this week they would tighten up their systems, external to check the identities of what are called "substitute" riders. Warning: This story contains a graphic image and details that some readers may find upsetting
Rocha severed Stephen Jenkinson's thumb just above the knuckle
Stephen Jenkinson, 36, had ordered a pizza from the Deliveroo app on 14 December 2022. After Rocha arrived at the wrong location, Mr Jenkinson walked down the street to meet her - but forgot to pick up his phone. This caused an argument, as he had needed to give Rocha a delivery code from his mobile in order to collect the food. Mr Jenkinson said he was then attacked. He said he raised his hand to Rocha's motorcycle helmet and she bit his thumb with "force". When she eventually let go, Mr Jenkinson lifted up his arm and "sprayed her with blood", as his thumb had been severed just above the knuckle. Deliveroo previously described the original incident as "awful".
Mr Jenkinson said he was unable to return to his work as a plumber because of the injury
Rocha pleaded guilty to one count of grievous bodily harm at Winchester Crown Court on 19 March. But weeks later, BBC News tracked down Rocha in Aldershot and twice observed her riding her moped and picking up food for delivery. On the second occasion, on 18 April, she was filmed going to a takeaway, collecting a bag of food, putting it into the box on her bike and riding off. When asked, the takeaway manager confirmed Rocha was delivering using a Deliveroo account. A Deliveroo spokesperson said the company was committed to preventing misuse of its platform. They said: "We immediately cancelled the account that was being used at the time of this terrible incident and subsequently terminated an alternative account. "We have strengthened our processes and recently introduced a new registration process and identity verification technology for substitute riders."
Mr Jenkinson said Rocha took his thumb "clean off" with the power of a "chainsaw"
On Tuesday, the Home Office announced Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat would be tightening up their identity checks. Ministers had been concerned the current system allowed illegal working. All riders are self employed and can lend their account to anyone they want - a so-called substitute. The main account holder has in the past been responsible for checking that person is over 18, has no serious convictions and is legally allowed to work. BBC News revealed last year how it led to illegal workers and even children working for Deliveroo, with a black market of accounts for sale or rent online. The Home Office criticised the companies for failing to tackle illegal working and organised a series of meetings with them. Deliveroo rolled out its new system last month, saying it was the first major platform to carry out "direct right to work checks". The company said the new scheme included "a registration process and identity verification technology".
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-68928464
|
news_uk-england-hampshire-68928464
|
|
Deliveroo rider bites off Aldershot customer's thumb - BBC News
|
2024-05-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Jenniffer Rocha, who was delivering a pizza, attacked the customer near his home in Aldershot.
|
Hampshire & Isle of Wight
|
Jenniffer Rocha was delivering a pizza when she severed Stephen Jenkinson's thumb
A food delivery driver who bit off a customer's thumb has pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm. Jenniffer Rocha, 35, attacked the customer in December 2022 near his home in Aldershot in Hampshire. She was not employed by Deliveroo, but had been working as a "substitute" rider using someone else's account. The judge at Winchester Crown Court described it as a "serious offence", which could result in a prison sentence. Deliveroo said it was an "awful incident", adding it had ended the rider's account. Rocha is due to be sentenced on 3 May. Warning: This story contains a graphic image and details that some readers may find upsetting
A plumber by trade, Mr Jenkinson is unable to work because of his injury
Stephen Jenkinson, 36, had ordered a pizza from the food delivery app on 14 December 2022. But Rocha arrived at the wrong location, down the street from Mr Jenkinson's house. When he went to get his food, he forgot his phone and a brief argument ensued about the delivery code number he needed to provide. Mr Jenkinson said he was then attacked. He raised his hand to Rocha's motorcycle helmet and she bit his thumb. "All I remember, I was shaking her helmet trying to get her off," he told the BBC. She eventually let go, at which point Mr Jenkinson lifted up his arm and "sprayed her with blood". Mr Jenkinson's thumb was severed just above the knuckle. "The force with which she must have been biting, she'd clean taken it off," he said, adding it was as if he had "gone through a chainsaw".
Mr Jenkinson's thumb is severed just above the knuckle
He said the case raised questions about Deliveroo's responsibility for scrutinising its delivery drivers. It comes as new figures released to BBC News indicate that, across the UK, three vehicles used for food delivery are seized every week by police because they are uninsured for business use. Deliveroo, like many food delivery apps, does not employ any drivers or riders directly. They are classed as independent contractors and can appoint "substitutes" to deliver on their behalf. It is the responsibility of the main account holder to check that the substitute is legally allowed to work. Rocha was in the UK legally and had the right to work here. Deliveroo said its riders were covered by the company's own free insurance. But because Rocha was working as a substitute for another driver, Deliveroo cannot be held legally responsible. Solicitors representing Mr Jenkinson said her insurance policy did not cover injury caused by a criminal act. "At the moment, I'm getting nothing from Deliveroo," said Mr Jenkinson.
A plumber by training, Mr Jenkinson said he had been unable to work since the attack. After months of reconstructive surgery, part of his big toe was grafted onto the stump of his missing thumb. He has had to relearn basic tasks such as doing up buttons or tying shoelaces - and said he still had no sensation in it. "Financially, I'm ruined. I'm unemployed. I'm in a massive amount of debt and I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel," he said. His relationship with his girlfriend, the mother of their newborn daughter, also broke down following the incident. "I have to live with this for the rest of my life," Mr Jenkinson said. "I want to use this story to help others, to say 'this has to change'," he added. Mr Jenkinson's lawyer, Alex Barley from Slater Heelis, said: "Companies operating in the gig economy should be held to account for the actions of the people they rely on for their significant profits. "The practice of substitution should be stopped and the companies should be required to carry out necessary checks on all people working for them". In a statement Deliveroo said its riders were self employed - a fact which had been "confirmed by UK courts on multiple occasions". "Substitution is and always has been a common feature of self employment - it is not specific to Deliveroo, nor our sector," it added.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68558464
|
news_uk-68558464
|
|
Chris Mason: Why did Sunak decide to call summer election? - BBC News
|
2024-05-22
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
An election has been called by Rishi Sunak sooner than many commentators and politicians had expected.
|
UK Politics
|
The general election is on - it will soon be over to you. Power will soon drain from Westminster, and drain from those who currently hold it. Politicians, and their future - but far more importantly the country's direction - will lie in your hands. The prime minister announced the date outside Number 10, with the rain pouring down and music blasting from just outside the Downing Street gates. The song? An old hit from the 1990s, D:Ream's Things Can Only Get Better which you might remember from Tony Blair's era. For weeks there had been a growing expectation the election would be held in the autumn, giving the prime minister at least two years in office and giving the economic outlook a greater opportunity to improve.
A very senior government figure told me just days ago "there is no reason to be getting excited" when I was part of a conversation about a summer election. I spent more than an hour in conversation with another very senior Conservative just yesterday where the whole thing was framed around a very long campaign that might still be rumbling when the pumpkins were out and the sparklers were sparkling. But not everybody is in the loop on something like this. Decisions can be on a knife edge - and there have been those pushing Rishi Sunak to go sooner, Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden among them. Those making that argument felt that things might not improve much and that the perceived desire of the electorate to be given a say soon might risk making any Conservative defeat worse if the appointment with voters was pushed back.
In other words, do it now or it could get worse. The prime minister can also point to at least some of his objectives being fulfilled, or seemingly en route to being fulfilled. Today's inflation number can be chalked up as a success. Of course it's not purely down to the actions of the government. But governments get blamed when it's sky high, so it's reasonable to expect they will attempt to siphon off some credit when it falls - and it has. The wider economic picture appears a little brighter too. Then there is the plan to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda. It hasn't happened yet but it would appear flights could be imminent, perhaps even during the election campaign, although the claim that it will act as a deterrent will not be tested before polling day. And so the campaign begins. The Conservatives will say over and over again: be careful what you wish for. Labour and others will say over and over again it is time for change. The outcome will be quite something, whatever happens. Either the opinion polls are broadly right and the party of government will change, or they are wrong and it will be one of the biggest upsets in recent years.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69050402
|
news_uk-politics-69050402
|
|
Chris Mason: Why did Sunak decide to call summer election? - BBC News
|
2024-05-23
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
An election has been called by Rishi Sunak sooner than many commentators and politicians had expected.
|
UK Politics
|
The general election is on - it will soon be over to you. Power will soon drain from Westminster, and drain from those who currently hold it. Politicians, and their future - but far more importantly the country's direction - will lie in your hands. The prime minister announced the date outside Number 10, with the rain pouring down and music blasting from just outside the Downing Street gates. The song? An old hit from the 1990s, D:Ream's Things Can Only Get Better which you might remember from Tony Blair's era. For weeks there had been a growing expectation the election would be held in the autumn, giving the prime minister at least two years in office and giving the economic outlook a greater opportunity to improve.
A very senior government figure told me just days ago "there is no reason to be getting excited" when I was part of a conversation about a summer election. I spent more than an hour in conversation with another very senior Conservative just yesterday where the whole thing was framed around a very long campaign that might still be rumbling when the pumpkins were out and the sparklers were sparkling. But not everybody is in the loop on something like this. Decisions can be on a knife edge - and there have been those pushing Rishi Sunak to go sooner, Deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden among them. Those making that argument felt that things might not improve much and that the perceived desire of the electorate to be given a say soon might risk making any Conservative defeat worse if the appointment with voters was pushed back.
In other words, do it now or it could get worse. The prime minister can also point to at least some of his objectives being fulfilled, or seemingly en route to being fulfilled. Today's inflation number can be chalked up as a success. Of course it's not purely down to the actions of the government. But governments get blamed when it's sky high, so it's reasonable to expect they will attempt to siphon off some credit when it falls - and it has. The wider economic picture appears a little brighter too. Then there is the plan to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda. It hasn't happened yet but it would appear flights could be imminent, perhaps even during the election campaign, although the claim that it will act as a deterrent will not be tested before polling day. And so the campaign begins. The Conservatives will say over and over again: be careful what you wish for. Labour and others will say over and over again it is time for change. The outcome will be quite something, whatever happens. Either the opinion polls are broadly right and the party of government will change, or they are wrong and it will be one of the biggest upsets in recent years.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69050402
|
news_uk-politics-69050402
|
|
UN's top court orders Israel to halt military operations in Rafah - BBC News
|
2024-05-24
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The ICJ also says the Rafah border crossing with Egypt must be opened for the entry of humanitarian aid "at scale".
|
World
|
This was the outcome Israel sought to avoid: a demand to halt a military operation the government regards as essential for the defeat of Hamas, the return of hostages and the security of Gaza’s border with Egypt.
But there is no immediate indication that Israel will change course. Its tanks are pushing closer to the centre of Rafah and just as the ICJ ruling was being read out, a series of air strikes sent a huge black cloud billowing over Rafah.
Some of Benjamin Netanyahu’s hardline colleagues have reacted with rage, accusing the court of antisemitism and siding with Hamas.
But for Netanyahu’s critics, this is one more sign of Israel’s growing international isolation.
The country says it’s gone to great lengths to ensure that civilians are out of harm’s way, before sending troops into Rafah.
And it says it’s making sure that food and other vital supplies reach Gaza.
There are elements of truth to both of these arguments. More than 800,000 civilians have moved away from Rafah.
And while it’s true that very little aid has entered the southern Gaza Strip since the Rafah offensive began almost three weeks ago, Israel has allowed hundreds of trucks of commercial goods to enter, meaning that in parts of the territory, food is available (if not necessarily affordable).
Despite repeated warnings of famine, especially in the north, mass starvation has yet to manifest itself. If anything, the situation in the north may have improved somewhat, thanks to the opening of additional crossing points.
But the court seemed unimpressed. A fresh wave of mass displacement, it argued, represented a significant new threat to the lives and wellbeing of the Palestinian population, which demanded fresh action.
South Africa argued that Rafah represented “the last line of defence” for the Gaza Strip. For Rafah to suffer the same fate as the territory's other cities, it said, could lead to further irreparable damage to the entire Palestinian population.
This is what the court is trying to stop. Israel says that is not the purpose of its operation in the south and looks set to press on.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-69055989
|
news_live_world-69055989
|
|
Laura Kuenssberg: Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer have more in common than you might think - BBC News
|
2024-05-25
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
They may start the election in very different political positions but the PM and the Labour leader are similar characters.
|
UK Politics
|
Has it been a shaky start to Rishi Sunak's general election campaign? "Damn right!", to use the man himself's phrase, except he was talking about whether he would win. I'd say, "Damn right!" to that too. But both men know there is an awful long way to go before a single vote is cast. They have other things in common too. Both leaders inspire unusual loyalty among their teams. They are often praised by those who work with them as being warmer than they appear on camera: staffers describe them as decent family men, who take their jobs incredibly seriously and work incredibly hard. They come from different generations. Sir Keir Starmer is 61, and voted in a general election for the first time in 1983, the year Margaret Thatcher won a second term. Rishi Sunak was only three years old then. He cast his first ballot in 2001, when Tony Blair won another term. But neither party leader is a political "lifer". They became MPs in the same year - 2015 - after successful careers in other fields.
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
The Labour leader's first job was clearing stones from fields on a farm, before studying law and reaching the top of that profession. The Tory leader helped his mum in her pharmacy, but his first paid job was a waiter in a restaurant, before university and then a highflying career in finance.
Unlike many of their predecessors, these party leaders do not come from political families and have not been steeped from an early age in political intrigue and campaigning. You won't find either of them spinning yarns about drunken shenanigans at long ago party conferences, or carrying grudges about things that happened decades ago in student election campaigns. They both like to think things through, take time over decisions and test the arguments rather than being ruled by flashes of instinct. Having got to the top of their parties, they have both been prepared to be ruthless, and compromise to achieve the power they want. But neither man is entirely comfortable with the showbiz side of modern politics and the intrusion into their personal lives that comes with the territory. They both genuinely appear to enjoy talking to members of the public - but the morning TV sofa, or the glossy magazine shoot, is not something either of them would choose. They will be on the road for the next month in what is always a gruelling test of endurance for party leaders (although Mr Sunak has raised eyebrows by taking a less frantic day on Saturday, with only a couple of events in his constituency in Yorkshire).
• None On this week's show are Home Secretary James Cleverly and Labour's shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 GMT on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Both leaders start their days at the crack of dawn. Mr Starmer is on the phone to his top team at 06:15, who have already been planning the day. The first call of campaign managers at Tory HQ is at 05:30. Mr Sunak keeps going on tea, with the bag left in to make it industrial strength, and munches on cake - lemon drizzle the favourite. Starmer chooses coffee then maybe a tea later as the day goes on. No sweet tooth and hardly any snacks for him, it seems, just an occasional bag of crisps.
Starmer headed to Gillingham on the first day of campaigning
For all their similarities, the two leaders are in totally different political positions. Rishi Sunak has been behind and his battered party in the doldrums for months. A cabinet minister tells me "everyone accepts it is pretty unlikely we are going to win the election - it would be a heroic outcome if we can deprive them of an overall majority". The flip side is that every poll, every pundit, at the moment, expects that Keir Starmer will be prime minister. Sunak starts in a pretty grim position - although in one sense it is easier to be the underdog. For Keir Starmer, the fear is a deadly complacency that could set in. His team is insistent that they must keep fighting for the broadest possible level of support - relax or slip up, and their huge hypothetical lead could fall away. The first act of the 40-day election drama has been totally different for each of them too. Rishi Sunak has managed to chuck away his first mover advantage. The Downing Street speech in the torrential rain, a photo gaffe picturing him under an exit sign, a planned photocall where the Titanic was built, asking Welsh voters if they were looking forward to a football tournament they aren't in.
Sunak's photo ops have not gone smoothly
These mistakes are not his fault. But they are campaign mistakes nonetheless, giving the impression in these vital early stages that it's all a bit of a mess. What is also damaging are the departures of more and more Conservative MPs, including Michael Gove, who had been a prominent personal backer of Mr Sunak himself. It's impossible not to see the sheer numbers of Tory MPs departing as a reflection of the party's prospects. There are whispers already about unhappiness in campaign HQ in its grand building tucked in behind Parliament Square, concern about a lack of experience in Mr Sunak's team, and suggestions that some of the senior staffers are distracted by trying to find their own seats instead of focusing on the job they are there to do. At Labour HQ on the other side of the Thames, it is a story of "so far, so good". They didn't know the election was coming on that particular day, yet their plan was conceived months back, just in case. They had even done what looked like an election launch before it had been called, with Keir Starmer's speech last week on the "first steps" he would take in government. There have not yet been gaffes, dramas or campaign disasters, although it's a long six weeks and they are highly likely to come. The test of a good campaign is what happens when things go wrong.
The Labour and Conservative manifestos are not due for another fortnight or so - but expect the Conservatives to soon start releasing plans and policies that are designed to grab your attention. In contrast, the Labour manifesto is likely only to bottom out what they have already said. The Tories are behind, so hope to be rewarded if they take some risks. Labour is ahead, so it's safety first, even if it means criticism from their left wing that they are not being ambitious enough and from the Conservatives that there are too many blanks in their programme. One final thing that unites the two leaders vying to be prime minister is an awareness that in the last few years British voters have proven themselves to be incredibly volatile.
There aren't just millions of voters who haven't yet made up their minds. There are millions of voters who have made a decision already, but who might change it by the time of polling day. I have seen scenarios which suggest the Conservatives could be facing an historic wipeout. At this early stage in the game, neither side is expecting Rishi Sunak to be able to stay in Number 10. But sources in both camps say the range of outcomes is still wide within that - from a hung Parliament, to a thumping Labour win.
The start of David Cameron's campaign in 2015 was shaky, he even admitted he wouldn't run for a third term, and forgot which football team he supported. A couple of weeks later he won a majority that looked like it had been out of reach. The beginning of Theresa May's campaign 2017 gave the impression she was cruising to glory. But her early promises of "strong and stable" government crashed to disappointment by the end. What had looked like a scrappy grassroots campaign from Jeremy Corbyn looked authentic and powerful to many voters by the end and ran the Tories closer than Labour had dared to hope at the start. Mistakes on both sides are bound to come, and there will be unexpected events to disrupt their best-laid plans. There are rumblings among the unions about Labour's plans for workers' rights falling short. More big Conservative names could exit. And the smaller parties are capable of changing the outcome too. Can either Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer be sure of the outcome?
What questions do you have about the general election? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69061699
|
news_uk-politics-69061699
|
|
Laura Kuenssberg: Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer have more in common than you might think - BBC News
|
2024-05-26
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
They may start the election in very different political positions but the PM and the Labour leader are similar characters.
|
UK Politics
|
Has it been a shaky start to Rishi Sunak's general election campaign? "Damn right!", to use the man himself's phrase, except he was talking about whether he would win. I'd say, "Damn right!" to that too. But both men know there is an awful long way to go before a single vote is cast. They have other things in common too. Both leaders inspire unusual loyalty among their teams. They are often praised by those who work with them as being warmer than they appear on camera: staffers describe them as decent family men, who take their jobs incredibly seriously and work incredibly hard. They come from different generations. Sir Keir Starmer is 61, and voted in a general election for the first time in 1983, the year Margaret Thatcher won a second term. Rishi Sunak was only three years old then. He cast his first ballot in 2001, when Tony Blair won another term. But neither party leader is a political "lifer". They became MPs in the same year - 2015 - after successful careers in other fields.
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
The Labour leader's first job was clearing stones from fields on a farm, before studying law and reaching the top of that profession. The Tory leader helped his mum in her pharmacy, but his first paid job was a waiter in a restaurant, before university and then a highflying career in finance.
Unlike many of their predecessors, these party leaders do not come from political families and have not been steeped from an early age in political intrigue and campaigning. You won't find either of them spinning yarns about drunken shenanigans at long ago party conferences, or carrying grudges about things that happened decades ago in student election campaigns. They both like to think things through, take time over decisions and test the arguments rather than being ruled by flashes of instinct. Having got to the top of their parties, they have both been prepared to be ruthless, and compromise to achieve the power they want. But neither man is entirely comfortable with the showbiz side of modern politics and the intrusion into their personal lives that comes with the territory. They both genuinely appear to enjoy talking to members of the public - but the morning TV sofa, or the glossy magazine shoot, is not something either of them would choose. They will be on the road for the next month in what is always a gruelling test of endurance for party leaders (although Mr Sunak has raised eyebrows by taking a less frantic day on Saturday, with only a couple of events in his constituency in Yorkshire).
• None On this week's show are Home Secretary James Cleverly and Labour's shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 GMT on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Both leaders start their days at the crack of dawn. Mr Starmer is on the phone to his top team at 06:15, who have already been planning the day. The first call of campaign managers at Tory HQ is at 05:30. Mr Sunak keeps going on tea, with the bag left in to make it industrial strength, and munches on cake - lemon drizzle the favourite. Starmer chooses coffee then maybe a tea later as the day goes on. No sweet tooth and hardly any snacks for him, it seems, just an occasional bag of crisps.
Starmer headed to Gillingham on the first day of campaigning
For all their similarities, the two leaders are in totally different political positions. Rishi Sunak has been behind and his battered party in the doldrums for months. A cabinet minister tells me "everyone accepts it is pretty unlikely we are going to win the election - it would be a heroic outcome if we can deprive them of an overall majority". The flip side is that every poll, every pundit, at the moment, expects that Keir Starmer will be prime minister. Sunak starts in a pretty grim position - although in one sense it is easier to be the underdog. For Keir Starmer, the fear is a deadly complacency that could set in. His team is insistent that they must keep fighting for the broadest possible level of support - relax or slip up, and their huge hypothetical lead could fall away. The first act of the 40-day election drama has been totally different for each of them too. Rishi Sunak has managed to chuck away his first mover advantage. The Downing Street speech in the torrential rain, a photo gaffe picturing him under an exit sign, a planned photocall where the Titanic was built, asking Welsh voters if they were looking forward to a football tournament they aren't in.
Sunak's photo ops have not gone smoothly
These mistakes are not his fault. But they are campaign mistakes nonetheless, giving the impression in these vital early stages that it's all a bit of a mess. What is also damaging are the departures of more and more Conservative MPs, including Michael Gove, who had been a prominent personal backer of Mr Sunak himself. It's impossible not to see the sheer numbers of Tory MPs departing as a reflection of the party's prospects. There are whispers already about unhappiness in campaign HQ in its grand building tucked in behind Parliament Square, concern about a lack of experience in Mr Sunak's team, and suggestions that some of the senior staffers are distracted by trying to find their own seats instead of focusing on the job they are there to do. At Labour HQ on the other side of the Thames, it is a story of "so far, so good". They didn't know the election was coming on that particular day, yet their plan was conceived months back, just in case. They had even done what looked like an election launch before it had been called, with Keir Starmer's speech last week on the "first steps" he would take in government. There have not yet been gaffes, dramas or campaign disasters, although it's a long six weeks and they are highly likely to come. The test of a good campaign is what happens when things go wrong.
The Labour and Conservative manifestos are not due for another fortnight or so - but expect the Conservatives to soon start releasing plans and policies that are designed to grab your attention. In contrast, the Labour manifesto is likely only to bottom out what they have already said. The Tories are behind, so hope to be rewarded if they take some risks. Labour is ahead, so it's safety first, even if it means criticism from their left wing that they are not being ambitious enough and from the Conservatives that there are too many blanks in their programme. One final thing that unites the two leaders vying to be prime minister is an awareness that in the last few years British voters have proven themselves to be incredibly volatile.
There aren't just millions of voters who haven't yet made up their minds. There are millions of voters who have made a decision already, but who might change it by the time of polling day. I have seen scenarios which suggest the Conservatives could be facing an historic wipeout. At this early stage in the game, neither side is expecting Rishi Sunak to be able to stay in Number 10. But sources in both camps say the range of outcomes is still wide within that - from a hung Parliament, to a thumping Labour win.
The start of David Cameron's campaign in 2015 was shaky, he even admitted he wouldn't run for a third term, and forgot which football team he supported. A couple of weeks later he won a majority that looked like it had been out of reach. The beginning of Theresa May's campaign 2017 gave the impression she was cruising to glory. But her early promises of "strong and stable" government crashed to disappointment by the end. What had looked like a scrappy grassroots campaign from Jeremy Corbyn looked authentic and powerful to many voters by the end and ran the Tories closer than Labour had dared to hope at the start. Mistakes on both sides are bound to come, and there will be unexpected events to disrupt their best-laid plans. There are rumblings among the unions about Labour's plans for workers' rights falling short. More big Conservative names could exit. And the smaller parties are capable of changing the outcome too. Can either Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer be sure of the outcome?
What questions do you have about the general election? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69061699
|
news_uk-politics-69061699
|
|
Laura Kuenssberg: Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer have more in common than you might think - BBC News
|
2024-05-27
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
They may start the election in very different political positions but the PM and the Labour leader are similar characters.
|
UK Politics
|
Has it been a shaky start to Rishi Sunak's general election campaign? "Damn right!", to use the man himself's phrase, except he was talking about whether he would win. I'd say, "Damn right!" to that too. But both men know there is an awful long way to go before a single vote is cast. They have other things in common too. Both leaders inspire unusual loyalty among their teams. They are often praised by those who work with them as being warmer than they appear on camera: staffers describe them as decent family men, who take their jobs incredibly seriously and work incredibly hard. They come from different generations. Sir Keir Starmer is 61, and voted in a general election for the first time in 1983, the year Margaret Thatcher won a second term. Rishi Sunak was only three years old then. He cast his first ballot in 2001, when Tony Blair won another term. But neither party leader is a political "lifer". They became MPs in the same year - 2015 - after successful careers in other fields.
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
The Labour leader's first job was clearing stones from fields on a farm, before studying law and reaching the top of that profession. The Tory leader helped his mum in her pharmacy, but his first paid job was a waiter in a restaurant, before university and then a highflying career in finance.
Unlike many of their predecessors, these party leaders do not come from political families and have not been steeped from an early age in political intrigue and campaigning. You won't find either of them spinning yarns about drunken shenanigans at long ago party conferences, or carrying grudges about things that happened decades ago in student election campaigns. They both like to think things through, take time over decisions and test the arguments rather than being ruled by flashes of instinct. Having got to the top of their parties, they have both been prepared to be ruthless, and compromise to achieve the power they want. But neither man is entirely comfortable with the showbiz side of modern politics and the intrusion into their personal lives that comes with the territory. They both genuinely appear to enjoy talking to members of the public - but the morning TV sofa, or the glossy magazine shoot, is not something either of them would choose. They will be on the road for the next month in what is always a gruelling test of endurance for party leaders (although Mr Sunak has raised eyebrows by taking a less frantic day on Saturday, with only a couple of events in his constituency in Yorkshire).
• None On this week's show are Home Secretary James Cleverly and Labour's shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves
• None Watch live on BBC One and iPlayer from 09:00 GMT on Sunday
• None Follow latest updates in text and video on the BBC News website from 08:30
• None Viewers can send questions or comments to @bbclaurak on x, external or instagram, external and email kuenssberg@bbc.co.uk
Both leaders start their days at the crack of dawn. Mr Starmer is on the phone to his top team at 06:15, who have already been planning the day. The first call of campaign managers at Tory HQ is at 05:30. Mr Sunak keeps going on tea, with the bag left in to make it industrial strength, and munches on cake - lemon drizzle the favourite. Starmer chooses coffee then maybe a tea later as the day goes on. No sweet tooth and hardly any snacks for him, it seems, just an occasional bag of crisps.
Starmer headed to Gillingham on the first day of campaigning
For all their similarities, the two leaders are in totally different political positions. Rishi Sunak has been behind and his battered party in the doldrums for months. A cabinet minister tells me "everyone accepts it is pretty unlikely we are going to win the election - it would be a heroic outcome if we can deprive them of an overall majority". The flip side is that every poll, every pundit, at the moment, expects that Keir Starmer will be prime minister. Sunak starts in a pretty grim position - although in one sense it is easier to be the underdog. For Keir Starmer, the fear is a deadly complacency that could set in. His team is insistent that they must keep fighting for the broadest possible level of support - relax or slip up, and their huge hypothetical lead could fall away. The first act of the 40-day election drama has been totally different for each of them too. Rishi Sunak has managed to chuck away his first mover advantage. The Downing Street speech in the torrential rain, a photo gaffe picturing him under an exit sign, a planned photocall where the Titanic was built, asking Welsh voters if they were looking forward to a football tournament they aren't in.
Sunak's photo ops have not gone smoothly
These mistakes are not his fault. But they are campaign mistakes nonetheless, giving the impression in these vital early stages that it's all a bit of a mess. What is also damaging are the departures of more and more Conservative MPs, including Michael Gove, who had been a prominent personal backer of Mr Sunak himself. It's impossible not to see the sheer numbers of Tory MPs departing as a reflection of the party's prospects. There are whispers already about unhappiness in campaign HQ in its grand building tucked in behind Parliament Square, concern about a lack of experience in Mr Sunak's team, and suggestions that some of the senior staffers are distracted by trying to find their own seats instead of focusing on the job they are there to do. At Labour HQ on the other side of the Thames, it is a story of "so far, so good". They didn't know the election was coming on that particular day, yet their plan was conceived months back, just in case. They had even done what looked like an election launch before it had been called, with Keir Starmer's speech last week on the "first steps" he would take in government. There have not yet been gaffes, dramas or campaign disasters, although it's a long six weeks and they are highly likely to come. The test of a good campaign is what happens when things go wrong.
The Labour and Conservative manifestos are not due for another fortnight or so - but expect the Conservatives to soon start releasing plans and policies that are designed to grab your attention. In contrast, the Labour manifesto is likely only to bottom out what they have already said. The Tories are behind, so hope to be rewarded if they take some risks. Labour is ahead, so it's safety first, even if it means criticism from their left wing that they are not being ambitious enough and from the Conservatives that there are too many blanks in their programme. One final thing that unites the two leaders vying to be prime minister is an awareness that in the last few years British voters have proven themselves to be incredibly volatile.
There aren't just millions of voters who haven't yet made up their minds. There are millions of voters who have made a decision already, but who might change it by the time of polling day. I have seen scenarios which suggest the Conservatives could be facing an historic wipeout. At this early stage in the game, neither side is expecting Rishi Sunak to be able to stay in Number 10. But sources in both camps say the range of outcomes is still wide within that - from a hung Parliament, to a thumping Labour win.
The start of David Cameron's campaign in 2015 was shaky, he even admitted he wouldn't run for a third term, and forgot which football team he supported. A couple of weeks later he won a majority that looked like it had been out of reach. The beginning of Theresa May's campaign 2017 gave the impression she was cruising to glory. But her early promises of "strong and stable" government crashed to disappointment by the end. What had looked like a scrappy grassroots campaign from Jeremy Corbyn looked authentic and powerful to many voters by the end and ran the Tories closer than Labour had dared to hope at the start. Mistakes on both sides are bound to come, and there will be unexpected events to disrupt their best-laid plans. There are rumblings among the unions about Labour's plans for workers' rights falling short. More big Conservative names could exit. And the smaller parties are capable of changing the outcome too. Can either Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer be sure of the outcome?
What questions do you have about the general election? In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy. Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk, external. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69061699
|
news_uk-politics-69061699
|
|
Four presenters lose part of legal challenge against BBC - BBC News
|
2024-05-03
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Their equal pay claims won't go to a tribunal, but claims including sex and age discrimination will.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Left-right: Annita McVeigh, Martine Croxall, Karin Giannone and Kasia Madera arriving for the employment tribunal
Four female presenters have lost a bid to take legal action against the BBC on grounds of equal pay, a judge ruled. However, their separate claims including sex and age discrimination will go to a full employment tribunal. The BBC has rejected their complaints and successfully argued the women had no grounds to bring an equal pay claim. Martine Croxall, Annita McVeigh, Karin Giannone and Kasia Madera said they "remain committed to seeking equal pay". A BBC spokesperson said: "We are pleased with the result and that the tribunal has accepted our position. We will not be commenting further at this stage." The four newsreaders have been attending a two-day preliminary hearing in central London, which concluded on Thursday. A three-week tribunal to hear their claims against the broadcaster will now be held in March 2025. Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera were given the go-ahead to have their cases heard jointly at that hearing, which the BBC had opposed.
The BBC insists its application process was "rigorous and fair"
All four presenters alleged they have not been paid equally compared with an equivalent male presenter since February 2020. "The BBC grinds you down on pay," Croxall told the hearing on Wednesday. On Thursday, the judge ruled that the claim relating to equal pay could not go ahead, because Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera had previously agreed equal pay settlements with the corporation. The judge's ruling means equal pay will not be included at next year's tribunal. The group, who are aged 48-55, have all been familiar faces on the BBC's TV channels. They separately claim they lost their roles on the BBC News Channel following a "rigged" recruitment exercise. The BBC insists its application process was "rigorous and fair". In court documents, it said: "It is denied that [the BBC] has subjected [the presenters] to age or sex discrimination, harassment or victimisation, or has breached the sex equality clause." In a joint statement, Croxall, McVeigh, Giannone and Madera said: "We are pleased the tribunal has agreed our four discrimination claims should be heard together, claims the BBC's lawyers tried to split, which would have necessitated eight hearings at great additional expense to the licence fee payer. "We remain committed to seeking equal pay despite the BBC's lawyers relying on a novel argument to prevent our claims progressing. "We await the judge's written ruling, to which we will give further consideration."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68944554
|
news_entertainment-arts-68944554
|
|
Why France is finding vegan croissants hard to stomach - BBC News
|
2024-05-05
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The idea of butter-free patisseries appeals to some but horrifies dairy farmers and traditionalists.
|
Europe
|
These croissants are for sale in a dairy-free bakery in Paris
There it sits, in all its flaky glory, with a crust the colour of autumn leaves, and two plump claws almost begging to be torn off and devoured. Light as air and as French as the guillotine. But this particular pastry - among dozens crowding a display shelf in an unremarkable looking boulangerie in central Paris - is no ordinary offering. Far from it. For this is a butter-free croissant, a crisp swerve away from more than a century of devout culinary tradition and a nod towards larger forces seeking to reshape French food and agriculture. "I'm changing the world," grinned Rodolphe Landemaine, between mouthfuls of a lovingly laminated, butter-free, pain au chocolat. Landemaine, a baker, now owns five busy boulangeries in Paris, with more on the way in other French cities, all serving entirely dairy-free products to a mostly local clientele. Not that he advertises the absence of butter, or eggs, or cows' milk, in his shops. Indeed, the word "vegan" never crosses his lips. "It's not an easy word for French people to get used to. It's very difficult for them to give up on butter and eggs," he acknowledged, explaining that the idea of veganism is considered too "militant" for many. Instead, Landemaine, a vegan with an interest in animal welfare and climate change, has adopted a stealthier approach, hoping customers will fall in love with his croissants, madeleines, quiches, sandwiches, flans and pains au raisins before they realise, too late, that butter has been replaced with a secret blend of plant-based products.
Baker Rodolphe Landemaine is a vegan and exploring dairy-free alternatives to traditional ingredients
And if he can persuade conservative French taste buds to tolerate croissants "sans beurre" then perhaps, the argument goes, anything is possible. As if on cue, a young boy walked past us, clutching the remains of a flaky claw, which he loudly declared to be délicieux. "It tastes lighter," said a musician named Anne, 42, nibbling the end of her croissant. "It's really good. I don't think I would recognise the difference," said Marta, a visitor from Poland, of her pain au chocolat. She's not a vegan but noted that she often got a scathing look from French waiters if she ordered oat milk with her coffee. "I see the judgement in their eyes because it's just not part of their culture," she added. For a country grappling with all sorts of new influences, such as challenges to its long-standing policy of state secularism, or le wokisme of imported "Anglo-Saxon" culture wars, a few unusual pastries can hardly be considered a major threat. And yet the issue brushes some raw nerves here, from French people's deep but evolving relationship with the terroir or land, to the escalating farmers' protests across Europe, to the upheavals brought on by climate change commitments, to France's almost religious devotion to certain culinary customs. And all this in the shadow of June's European Parliament elections, which look likely to usher in big gains for far-right parties in France and beyond. "Not for me, no way," said Thierry Loussakoueno, with mild indignation, appalled by the very idea of a butter-free croissant.
Thierry Loussakoueno was among the judges at a recent croissant competition
Loussakoueno was busy, one recent morning, judging a traditional croissant competition in a wood-panelled conference room close to the River Seine in central Paris. The event, one among dozens, was organised by the Paris office of the French Union of Bakers and Pastry Makers and sponsored by a group of dairy farmers from south-west France. The French food industry has a collective reputation for being highly organised, conservative, and quick to self-defend. "I don't understand these vegan pastries. I can understand people who don't eat meat for whatever reason, and I respect this completely. But dairy products and butter are just too important in the taste of food and not using them is just too bad and a pity," said Loussakoueno, a Parisian civil servant. Other judges and competitors, sniffing and prodding a succession of crescent-shaped creations, spoke of the need to protect French farmers. "It's difficult for me to even talk about making a croissant without butter. There's a whole family who are behind this - lots of people involved in the process," said Olivier Boudot, a cookery teacher.
The milk from this farm near Amiens is sold to a butter factory
An hour's drive northwest of Paris, near Amiens, in a large barn surrounded by gentle green hills, a muscular, 700kg Holstein cow manoeuvred herself into an automated milking enclosure, watched by her owner, Sophie Lenaerts. "Amazing machines," said Lenaerts, as a mechanical arm swung four suction cups beneath the cow, who was casually relieved of a dozen litres of milk, destined for a nearby butter factory.
Lenaerts, 57, has more pressing concerns than the perceived threat of vegan croissants sold to metropolitan consumers. And yet the issue rankles. Like many small farmers in France and beyond, she has spent much of the past few months angrily organising protests against a European Union-wide agricultural system which she feels is destroying her industry. She's planning another trip to Brussels this month to help block roads near the European Union's headquarters. Sitting later in her snug farm kitchen, Lenaerts railed against imports of cheaper, sub-standard foreign food goods, against the huge mark-ups that distributors and middlemen impose on her produce, and against the sense that farmers are too often left as scapegoats for all climate-related issues. "I have grandchildren. I want the best planet for everyone. But it's always the farmer that gets the blame," she said. Vegan croissants were, for her, merely an indicator of the broader "industrial madness" that involves shipping unusual foods around the globe in order for "certain food companies" to make a profit. A combination of cynicism and virtue-signalling.
Lenaerts suggests everyone make a small effort to eat well
Lenaerts looked through a rain-speckled window towards her fields. Ninety-eight percent of her cows' food is produced on the farm. Almost all the food her family eats is bought from her neighbours, just a cycle-ride away. Surely, she explained, this is the way to tackle climate change, and a host of other challenges. Instead, this "virtuous circle" is already on the brink of extinction. "The fear of losing French agriculture is the fear of losing our heritage, our land. It's the farmers that maintain our landscape and make France a country for tourism. When no farmers are left, when no cows are left, it will be much worse. But I think we're at a turning point in terms of awareness," Lenaerts continued, pointing to strong public support for the recent farmers' protests. "If everyone makes a small effort to eat well, to pay attention to what they're buying, things should go in the right direction." There are some encouraging signs of that.
The team at Datil, which has been awarded a Michelin star
Off a narrow street in the fashionable Marais district of Paris, six women stood, in solemn concentration, in a gleaming restaurant kitchen, carving up the morning's delivery of plump asparagus spears, salad heads, kumquats, and radishes. Gliding between them, the owner and chef, Manon Fleury, was still basking in the delight of being awarded a first Michelin star for her restaurant, Datil, in March. Fleury, once a junior fencing champion, has received a lot of attention in France for her energetic attempts to challenge a male-dominated restaurant industry, but her cooking - with a focus on "mostly vegan, poetic" recipes - is also seeking to nudge French food culture in a new direction. Hers is by no means the only restaurant of its kind in Paris, but visitors - including the millions soon to descend on the city for the Olympic Games in July - may notice the extent to which meat and dairy-loving France lags far behind London, for example, in offering even the barest nod towards vegetarian options. "The French tradition is quite heavy," Fleury admitted. She acknowledged the cost involved in trying to break away from larger suppliers and sticking to a smaller network of trusted organic farmers. "There is more and more interest in this kind of cuisine, but it has to be in harmony and balance," Fleury said, trying to sound both reassuring and radical at the same time. "Sometimes you have to be radical to change the world," she said.
Manon Fleury focuses on vegan food in her restaurant in Paris
"Yes, kind of. But with a lot of kindness." Back at the bakery, perhaps 15 minutes by bicycle from Fleury's restaurant, the morning rush of customers was slowing down. One last, lonely, croissant sat waiting behind glass. Landemaine, the owner, said his business was growing fast, with new outlets opening soon in Bordeaux, Lyon and Rennes, with strong interest from the UK, Dubai and elsewhere. But perhaps more significant was the notice that he said other French food companies were taking in his success. "They sense the market is changing. One reason (for their interest) is that butter has been so expensive for several years," he said. Still, Landemaine acknowledged that the road ahead remained steep. "It's changing. But not so quickly," he said, as one of his bakers emerged from the basement kitchen, carrying a tray laden with dark, light-as-air, butter-free, chocolate tarts.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68944117
|
news_world-europe-68944117
|
|
Rachel Reeves: Government gaslighting people over state of economy - BBC News
|
2024-05-06
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The shadow chancellor's speech comes ahead of figures likely to show the UK has emerged from recession.
|
Business
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The government is "gaslighting" Britain over the state of the economy and its plans are "deluded", shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has said. Key economic figures this week are likely to show the UK emerging from recession, while the Bank of England could take steps towards interest rate cuts. The economy is likely to be a key battleground in the upcoming general election. The Tories said Labour had "no plan". Giving a speech in the City of London, Ms Reeves said that suggestions the feel-good factor is returning are "completely out of touch with the realities on the ground". On Friday, however, the first official data on gross domestic product in the three months to March is likely to show that the economy grew, marking the official end to a shallow recession last year.
The Bank of England could take further steps towards interest rate cuts on Thursday too, ahead of a likely sharp fall in inflation - which measures how prices rise over time - later in the month. While Ms Reeves acknowledged "these things could happen this month", the opposition's intervention is designed to pre-empt the government's argument about the cost-of-living crisis being over and the coming general election being about "protecting the recovery". "The Conservatives are gaslighting the British public," she said. "Gaslighting" is psychologically manipulating a person into questioning his or her perception of reality. At the beginning of 2023, Rishi Sunak set out the Conservatives' priorities, including halving inflation, growing the economy, and reducing government debt. The government has met the first pledge, and never set out what it meant by growing the economy. Debt remains at levels last seen during the early 1960s. Just days after a difficult set of local and mayoral elections for the Conservatives, Ms Reeves announced that Labour hopes to fight the general election "on the economy", saying that voters could choose "five more years of chaos with the Conservatives" or "stability with a changed Labour Party". In response, chairman of the Conservative Party, Richard Holden MP, said: "The personnel may change but the Labour Party hasn't." He said that the Labour Party has "no plan" and would take the British public "back to square one" with higher taxes and higher unemployment rates. Despite abandoning its long-standing plan to borrow and spend £28bn of public money on new, green industries, Mr Reeves restated Labour's commitment to a new vision for a green economy, reflecting thinking in the US and Europe. In February Labour rowed back on plans to spend £28bn a year on environmental projects if it wins the upcoming general election. Responding to a question from the BBC on Tuesday, Ms Reeves said that getting to clean energy by 2030 and creating green jobs can be done "through other means", including the creation of GB Energy, the National Wealth Fund, and planning reforms. Ms Reeves said that investment in low-carbon industries was being held back by the UK planning system. Last month, her National Wealth Fund "taskforce", including former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, and the chief executives of Barclays and Aviva, met to discuss how to raise £22bn in private sector investment in next generation technologies. It is expected to report back before the summer.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68965212
|
news_business-68965212
|
|
Rachel Reeves: Government gaslighting people over state of economy - BBC News
|
2024-05-07
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The shadow chancellor's speech comes ahead of figures likely to show the UK has emerged from recession.
|
Business
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The government is "gaslighting" Britain over the state of the economy and its plans are "deluded", shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has said. Key economic figures this week are likely to show the UK emerging from recession, while the Bank of England could take steps towards interest rate cuts. The economy is likely to be a key battleground in the upcoming general election. The Tories said Labour had "no plan". Giving a speech in the City of London, Ms Reeves said that suggestions the feel-good factor is returning are "completely out of touch with the realities on the ground". On Friday, however, the first official data on gross domestic product in the three months to March is likely to show that the economy grew, marking the official end to a shallow recession last year.
The Bank of England could take further steps towards interest rate cuts on Thursday too, ahead of a likely sharp fall in inflation - which measures how prices rise over time - later in the month. While Ms Reeves acknowledged "these things could happen this month", the opposition's intervention is designed to pre-empt the government's argument about the cost-of-living crisis being over and the coming general election being about "protecting the recovery". "The Conservatives are gaslighting the British public," she said. "Gaslighting" is psychologically manipulating a person into questioning his or her perception of reality. At the beginning of 2023, Rishi Sunak set out the Conservatives' priorities, including halving inflation, growing the economy, and reducing government debt. The government has met the first pledge, and never set out what it meant by growing the economy. Debt remains at levels last seen during the early 1960s. Just days after a difficult set of local and mayoral elections for the Conservatives, Ms Reeves announced that Labour hopes to fight the general election "on the economy", saying that voters could choose "five more years of chaos with the Conservatives" or "stability with a changed Labour Party". In response, chairman of the Conservative Party, Richard Holden MP, said: "The personnel may change but the Labour Party hasn't." He said that the Labour Party has "no plan" and would take the British public "back to square one" with higher taxes and higher unemployment rates. Despite abandoning its long-standing plan to borrow and spend £28bn of public money on new, green industries, Mr Reeves restated Labour's commitment to a new vision for a green economy, reflecting thinking in the US and Europe. In February Labour rowed back on plans to spend £28bn a year on environmental projects if it wins the upcoming general election. Responding to a question from the BBC on Tuesday, Ms Reeves said that getting to clean energy by 2030 and creating green jobs can be done "through other means", including the creation of GB Energy, the National Wealth Fund, and planning reforms. Ms Reeves said that investment in low-carbon industries was being held back by the UK planning system. Last month, her National Wealth Fund "taskforce", including former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, and the chief executives of Barclays and Aviva, met to discuss how to raise £22bn in private sector investment in next generation technologies. It is expected to report back before the summer.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68965212
|
news_business-68965212
|
|
Trump New York hush-money trial is far from a slam dunk - BBC News
|
2024-05-07
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Experts are split over the strength of NY prosecutor Alvin Bragg's case, which relies on a novel legal strategy.
|
US & Canada
|
An adult film star. Alleged secret payments. A turncoat lawyer. And a candidate for president of the United States. Donald Trump's very first criminal trial - and the first of a former US president - involves charges of white-collar crime, but it features some of the most eye-catching details in any of the four criminal cases against him. The case revolves around a $130,000 (£104,000) hush-money payment from Mr Trump's lawyer to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with Trump in 2006. But that payment was not actually illegal. Instead, the blockbuster case bringing 34 felony charges is based on allegations the former president falsified business records to cover up the payment - made just before the 2016 election - to avoid an embarrassing sex scandal which he denies. The trial, which began in New York on 15 April, has legal experts divided on the strength of the case. Some debate whether Manhattan's District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, should have even brought the case and whether it is strong enough.
Ambrosio Rodriguez, a former prosecutor who says he is no fan of the former president, believes the case legitimises Mr Trump's ongoing argument that he is being prosecuted unfairly because of who he is. Mr Rodriguez argues that the case relies on old allegations, noting that federal prosecutors had investigated and declined to bring charges. "This is a waste of time and a bad idea, and not good for the country," he told the BBC. "This seems just a political need and want to get Trump no matter what the costs are." Others disagree. Nick Akerman, who worked on the Watergate prosecution, says it's a serious case.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Our New York correspondent sets out what's at stake in Trump's unprecedented trial?
"This is about an effort to defraud the American voters in 2016 to keep them from learning material information that would have affected their vote," he told the BBC, referring to Mr Trump's alleged efforts to hide payments reimbursing his then lawyer, Michael Cohen.
The case also has come under scrutiny because it's seemingly built on an untested legal theory. Mr Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. New York prosecutors say Mr Cohen paid off Ms Daniels, and accuse Mr Trump of trying to disguise the money he paid him back as legal fees. Ordinarily, falsifying business records is considered a misdemeanour - or low-level offence - in New York. But when it is done to conceal a crime, it can be elevated to a more serious felony charge. It is not unusual for the Manhattan District Attorney's Office to do that, but Mr Bragg's approach is a particularly novel one.
He says Trump Organization records were falsified to conceal or aid criminal activity. But even though the trial begins on Monday, he has not specified the exact crime allegedly hidden. He has however given clues. In court filings and interviews, Mr Bragg has said Mr Trump violated both state and federal election laws, and state tax laws. "The District Attorney's office is not precluded from presenting to the jury a variety of alternative theories on sort of why the records were falsified," says Shane T. Stansbury, a former assistant United States Attorney in New York's southern district. But he adds that it is unclear if a state prosecutor can invoke a federal election crime, as it appears Mr Bragg intends to do. "We could have appellate courts and even the US Supreme Court weighing in on some of the federal questions that are part of this theory, so I think we're a long way from having resolution on this case," he says. A former prosecutor in the New York federal office, Mark Pomerantz, said federal prosecutors went back and forth on charging Mr Trump so often that the investigation was nicknamed "the zombie case". But due to the seriousness of charging a former president, some legal experts say that Mr Bragg had to bring the strongest possible case against Mr Trump, which is why he went for felony charges. "Given who the defendant is in this case," said Anna Cominsky, a professor at the New York Law School, "Just a misdemeanour may not rise to the level of criminality that perhaps one would expect someone in Trump's position to be charged with."
One of the biggest wildcards in this case is the prosecution's star witness: Michael Cohen. Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to federal campaign violations as part of the alleged cover-up, which he said was directed by Mr Trump. Since his release, he has become one of Mr Trump's harshest critics, consistently attacking him in the press and on his podcast. He has also admitted in the past to lying to Congress under oath. That history makes him a "compromised witness," said Mr Stansbury. But as the man at the centre of the alleged scheme, he is almost guaranteed to testify against his former boss. "His credibility is a huge issue for the prosecution, and definitely something the defence is going to attack," said Ms Cominsky. Mr Bragg will try to bolster Mr Cohen's testimony by presenting proof of the payments to the jury.
The former president is sticking with a strategy that amounts to attack-and-delay. He frequently calls the case a "hoax" and a "witch-hunt." He has slammed Judge Merchan and District Attorney Bragg and attacked their family members on social media - to the extent that a partial gag order has now been imposed that prevents him from attacking court staff and their families.
Mr Trump speaks to the press after a 25 March hearing in his New York criminal case
His lawyers have tried to argue that the payments were made to keep the embarrassing information from Mr Trump's family, rather than to hide anything from voters. Mr Akerman believes that argument, if used by the former president's lawyers in court, would fall flat with the 12-person jury ultimately deciding Mr Trump's fate. "First of all, all of this was done right before the election, it had nothing to do with his family," he told the BBC. Should a jury vote to convict him, Mr Trump would enter the final stretch before November's presidential election as a convicted felon. But his legal team only needs to persuade one juror that he is not guilty of the crimes alleged for him to walk free. "To me, the only defence that they have is to try and pick a jury and try and identify somebody who might actually hang the jury," Mr Akerman said. "Try and find someone who is a little bit eccentric, somebody who might be more sympathetic to Donald Trump."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68737723
|
news_world-us-canada-68737723
|
|
Keir Starmer faces Labour anger after Natalie Elphicke's defection - BBC News
|
2024-05-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Natalie Elphicke has previously attacked Labour over policies including migration and taxes.
|
UK Politics
|
Sir Keir Starmer's decision to admit Tory MP Natalie Elphicke into Labour has been met with bewilderment by some of his MPs. The Dover MP's surprise defection from the Conservatives has prompted reaction ranging from delight to anger by her new colleagues. Canterbury MP Rosie Duffield said Labour MPs were "baffled" by her "really peculiar" move to swap sides. But a senior party figure hailed her switch as "one hell of a coup". And Sir Keir has said he is "delighted" with her defection, telling reporters it showed his party was "the party of the national interest". Several sources suggested Labour's whips, responsible for party discipline, were worried about accepting her, but Labour deny this.
It is the second defection to Labour for Rishi Sunak in less than two weeks, after Dr Dan Poulter also quit the Tories last month. Normally, when an MP switches parties, their new colleagues are almost all delighted. However, this latest defection, announced minutes before Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, has left some Labour MPs feeling upset, let down, and shocked. In a blistering statement, Ms Elphicke said the Tories had become a "byword for incompetence and division". What Ms Duffield is willing to say publicly in reaction to the defection, many many more are saying privately. Although Ms Elphicke has made arguments in areas such as housing that are in tune with her new colleagues she has previously attacked Labour policy in a number of areas. She has criticised the party for "grabbing more in taxes" and not being "serious" about stopping small boat crossings, a big issue in her Dover seat. As well as her political stance, many Labour MPs are deeply uncomfortable with remarks she made about her then-husband Charlie Elphicke, whom she replaced as Dover MP in 2019. In an interview with the Sun after his conviction in 2020 for sexual assault, she was reported to have said being "attractive" and "attracted to women" had made him an "easy target".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
She has not commented on those previous remarks since defecting on Wednesday. Labour said "all those issues have been dealt with previously both in Parliament and in public". Speaking to BBC Radio Sheffield on Wednesday, Labour MP Sarah Champion said "some of the things Mrs Elphicke had said defending her ex-husband from the sexual abuse allegations" did not "sit well with me at all". She also said she would find it "challenging" to have former Tory MPs in the party "when it's so close to a general election". "I think their policies and their belief systems are so far from mine but we are where we are I guess," she added. She added the fact that Ms Elphicke, like Dan Poulter, are both planning to quit Parliament at the election created a "bit of a mess" because Labour already has candidates in both their seats.
Conservative MPs have also expressed surprise at Ms Elphicke's defection, with Transport Minister Huw Merriman branding her "shameless" and an "opportunist". "I'm just disappointed for politics that she's done what she's done," he added.
Speaking to BBC South East, fellow Kent MP Ms Duffield said Labour backbenchers were "really confused" by the defection. "I think it's a really peculiar decision and I think most Labour backbenchers and probably lots of Tories are really quite baffled by it, actually," she added. She added she didn't "believe for a second that she has suddenly transformed into a Labour MP". And fellow Labour backbencher Mick Whitley called her move "outrageous," adding Ms Elphicke did not share the "values of the Labour movement". Mish Rahman, a member of Labour's ruling National Executive Committee, said that he does not welcome Ms Elphicke's defection, saying the party is getting "grubbier". Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World Tonight, Mr Rahman said that Ms Elphicke has "never occupied the centre ground in her time as an MP". He described the Conservative Party as a "sinking ship" and said Ms Elphicke is "swimming in the ocean" trying to "escape" it. He said the Labour Party should be in the business of changing the country, "not saving the careers of Tory politicians who the British public are rejecting because of the damage they've done to the country". "She's not fit to be a Labour party member, let alone an MP," he added. John McDonnell, who was shadow chancellor under former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, said he was "surprised and shocked" by her move. "I'm a great believer in the powers of conversion, but I think even this one would have strained the generosity of spirit of John the Baptist, quite honestly," he told LBC. However, Sir Keir will hope to keep the focus on the big picture - and argue Tory defections can personify his wider project of tempting former Conservative voters to switch to Labour. "That's what matters," says a senior Labour figure. "In the end we have recruited the Conservative MP for Dover for goodness' sake. In the middle of row about small boat crossings. That's one hell of a coup."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68980700
|
news_uk-politics-68980700
|
|
The inside story of Tory MP's Natalie Elphicke's defection to Labour - BBC News
|
2024-05-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Keir Starmer's allies believe the Dover MP can help win Tory voters but some on the left are uneasy.
|
UK Politics
|
Before Tory MP Christian Wakeford swapped sides to Labour at the peak of the Partygate scandal in 2022, it had been 27 years since an MP had defected directly from the governing party to the main party of opposition. Less than two weeks ago, Dan Poulter made the same journey as Mr Wakeford. And today - to bafflement and shock from MPs of all parties - Natalie Elphicke sits as a Labour MP. Indeed, it took a while for MPs to work out what Sir Keir Starmer was talking about at Prime Minister's Questions when he welcomed Mrs Elphicke to his side; few had noticed her sit down behind the Labour leader. She walked in accompanied by John Healey, the shadow defence secretary - who is understood to have been instrumental to wooing her across, due to a working relationship they forged due to a shared interest in housing. Mrs Elphicke worked in the housing sector before she became an MP in 2019, while Mr Healey was the housing minister in Gordon Brown's government and shadowed the brief for Labour from 2015 to 2020.
Sir Keir and his team are jubilant. They believe there could be few clearer messages for voters motivated by the small boats issue than the MP for Dover - where many of the crossings arrive - declaring that she trusts the Labour leader over Rishi Sunak on the issue. Remember this is one of the prime minister's five priorities: an issue at the heart of his attempts to reverse his political predicament.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
More broadly, Sir Keir's allies believe that the defection will help him make a direct argument to 'big C' Conservatives that if an MP as 'small c' conservative as Mrs Elphicke is moving to Labour, so they should too. On the flipside, that is exactly what is worrying some Labour MPs, who worry that a broad church that can include Mrs Elphicke is simply too broad. Multiple sources claimed that party whips, who are responsible for enforcing discipline, expressed concerns about admitting Mrs Elphicke to the party, though Labour denied this. It is worth remembering, too, that some Labour MPs are still angry that Diane Abbott, first elected as a Labour MP in 1987, has not had the Labour whip restored since April last year, when she was suspended over allegations of antisemitism.
The two previous Conservative defectors were widely welcomed by Labour MPs: Mr Wakeford was disillusioned with Boris Johnson at a moment when his character was at the heart of the political debate; Labour MPs liked that Mr Poulter defected specifically on the issue of the NHS. Mrs Elphicke's cause of immigration and asylum policy sits less easily with many Labour MPs - though it is worth noting that she also cited housing, where her views are much more in tune with the Labour mainstream. It hasn't helped settle some Labour MPs' nerves that so many Conservative MPs have been noisily declaring that they are much less right-wing than Mrs Elphicke. The truth about Ms Elphicke's position on the ideological spectrum is perhaps a little more nuanced. She was staunchly pro-Brexit, and a member of the Eurosceptic European Research Group of Conservative MPs. Yet while she has repeatedly castigated Labour over its approach to small boats, she has long argued that diplomacy with France will be more effective than the government's Rwanda scheme - putting her fairly close to Labour, which opposes the policy.
In 2022, she proposed that all private rents be frozen to help renters with the cost of living, and the next year was part of a cross-party project to build houses for homeless people. In February she praised Nye Bevan, one of the heroes of the post-war Labour government, in the House of Commons. Some of the anxieties among Labour MPs are not just about Mrs Elphicke's beliefs, but about her messy arrival in politics. She has only been an MP since 2019, replacing her then-husband, Charlie Elphicke, after he was charged with sexual assault. He was later convicted and imprisoned, at which point she announced that their marriage was ending. Despite the private rumblings of dissatisfaction from some quarters of the Labour Party, it is noteworthy that few have so far gone public to express their concerns. That is a sign of a disciplined Labour Party, with even some of the MPs most sceptical about Sir Keir's leadership determined not to make victory at the general election harder by sounding off. But that does not mean they will forget this episode. One Labour figure warned that Sir Keir was "storing up bad will" for the government that most people - including Natalie Elphicke - now assume he will lead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68979548
|
news_uk-politics-68979548
|
|
Trump's classified documents trial in Florida indefinitely postponed - BBC News
|
2024-05-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The former US president's federal trial in Florida is now unlikely to begin before the 2024 election.
|
US & Canada
|
The Florida trial is now unlikely to begin - let alone be resolved - before the November election
A judge has indefinitely postponed Donald Trump's federal trial in Florida over his alleged mishandling of classified documents while in office. US District Judge Aileen Cannon said that setting a trial date before resolving significant questions over trial evidence would be "imprudent". Her court order on Tuesday cancelled the 20 May 2024 start date she had previously set for the proceedings. The trial is now unlikely to begin before the 5 November US election. Mr Trump's lawyers have proposed that the trial be held after his presidential rematch with Joe Biden, his successor in the White House. Prosecutors meanwhile have pushed for it to take place this year. But the 20 May date set by Judge Cannon appeared less and less likely to hold amid slow-moving deliberations over multiple pre-trial issues. The former president is accused of keeping top-secret documents in his possession after leaving office, rather than returning them to the National Archives as prescribed by law.
Government prosecutors have also alleged that he then obstructed efforts to take back the documents, including by plotting to erase security video at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Mr Trump has denied any wrongdoing and has pleaded not guilty to the 40 felony counts against him, which range from conspiracy to obstruct justice to making false statements. Also charged alongside him are his personal aide Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, a property manager at Mar-a-Lago. Both men have also pleaded not guilty.
Trump is charged alongside his aide Walt Nauta (right) and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos de Oliveira
Defence lawyers and prosecutors have repeatedly tussled in court over what classified evidence can be presented at trial, prompting a series of delays. Some legal commentators have also suggested that Judge Cannon, who has often sided with Mr Trump's arguments, is deliberately slow-walking the case on behalf of the man who appointed her to the court. In her Tuesday filing, the judge scheduled additional hearings over pending concerns, including one in late July, and declined to set a new date for the trial to begin. Finalising a trial date at this juncture, she wrote, "would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court's duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court". "The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court," she added. Carl Tobias, a law expert at the University of Richmond, said that Judge Cannon had failed to act to limit the "delay tactics" of Mr Trump's team. "Some complications and delays may have been inevitable... but the judge's failure to take control and move the case, or to request help is surprising," he said. Mr Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, is facing dozens of charges across three other criminal cases and is currently on trial in New York. But he is also awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on his claims of presidential immunity, a decision he has argued could influence all the criminal cases against him.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68972255
|
news_world-us-canada-68972255
|
|
Sunak facing Starmer at PMQs as Tory MP defects to Labour - BBC News
|
2024-05-08
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Ex-Conservative MP Natalie Elphicke says "under Rishi Sunak, the Conservatives have become a byword for incompetence and division".
|
UK Politics
|
For some Labour MPs, this is not a straightforward win
Sir Keir Starmer is jubilant at Natalie Elphicke’s shock defection. It enables him to make a direct argument to "big C" Conservatives that if an MP as "small c" conservative as Elphicke is moving to Labour, so they should too. That’s exactly what is worrying some Labour MPs in private. The two previous defections direct from the Conservatives — Christian Wakeford and Dan Poulter — were widely welcomed: Wakeford was disillusioned with Boris Johnson; Labour MPs liked that Poulter defected specifically on the issue of the NHS. Elphicke’s cause of immigration and asylum policy sits less easily with many Labour MPs — though it is worth noting that she also cited housing, where her views are much more in tune with the Labour mainstream. Labour MPs are also asking questions about the circumstances in which Elphicke first got her seat in 2019. She replaced her then-husband, Charlie Elphicke, after he was charged with sexual assault. He was later convicted and imprisoned, at which point she announced that their marriage was ending.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68975761
|
news_live_uk-politics-68975761
|
|
Rafah: UN says 80,000 have fled Gaza city as Israeli strikes intensify - BBC News
|
2024-05-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Israeli tanks reportedly mass close to built-up areas of the south Gaza city amid constant shelling.
|
Middle East
|
The Israeli military ordered an estimated 100,000 residents of eastern Rafah to evacuate on Monday
More than 80,000 people have fled the southern Gaza city of Rafah since Monday, the UN says, as Israeli tanks reportedly mass close to built-up areas amid constant bombardment. Palestinian armed groups said they were targeting Israeli troops to the east. Israel's military has said its ground forces are conducting "targeted activity" in eastern Rafah. The UN also warned that food and fuel were running out because it was not receiving aid through nearby crossings. Israeli troops took control and closed the Rafah crossing with Egypt at the start of their operation, while the UN said it was too dangerous for its staff and lorries to reach the reopened Kerem Shalom crossing with Israel. It came as Israel's prime minister rejected a threat by the US president to stop supplying some weapons if it launched a major assault on "population centres" in Rafah. Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel could "stand alone" if necessary. After seven months of war in Gaza, Israel has insisted victory is impossible without taking the city and eliminating the last remaining Hamas battalions. But with more than a million displaced Palestinians sheltering there, the UN and Western powers have warned that an all-out assault could lead to mass civilian casualties and a humanitarian catastrophe.
Residents and aid workers in Rafah said the sound of artillery and air strikes was constant on Thursday. Louise Wateridge, a spokeswoman for the UN aid agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), told the BBC in the afternoon that she was at a health facility in the west and could "hear and feel the bombardment coming closer". "The building is shaking on a frequent basis. There is this constant buzzing of drones," she said. "The fear and nervousness that people [in Rafah] have had, has now become terror." Palestinian media said two people were killed on Thursday afternoon in an Israeli air strike in the al-Jneineh neighbourhood - one of the eastern areas which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ordered residents to evacuate before beginning its ground operation began on Monday night. Another three people were reportedly killed in an air strike in the nearby Brazil neighbourhood, which is not in the evacuation zone but is next to the Egyptian border. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) - which are proscribed as terrorist organisations by Israel, the US and other countries - said they were targeting Israeli forces on the eastern outskirts with mortars and anti-tank missiles. Hamas also said it had blown up a booby-trapped tunnel east of Rafah underneath three Israeli military vehicles. The IDF said three of its soldiers were moderately wounded as a result of the explosion. Overnight, at least five people were reportedly killed when a family's home in the western Tal al-Sultan neighbourhood was hit in an Israeli strike. They included three children, one of them a one-year-old infant, medics said. The IDF said on Wednesday evening that soldiers had been carrying out "targeted operations on the terrorist infrastructure surrounding the Gazan side of the Rafah crossing and conducted operational raids on suspicious buildings in the area", and that about 30 "terrorists" had been eliminated. It also said Israeli aircraft had struck targets in support of the troops.
The director of the Kuwaiti Specialist Hospital in central Rafah - one of only two hospitals still partially functioning in the city - told BBC Arabic on Thursday that it was facing a surge in casualties, including many "unusual injuries caused by unusual weapons". But Dr Jamal al-Hamas said it did not have the diagnostic capabilities to treat them properly, adding: "Even the X-ray machine is disabled due to Israeli shelling and there are no spare parts for it." Dr Hams said the situation had been made worse by the closure of the al-Najjar hospital in the city's east on Wednesday due to an evacuation order and nearby fighting. The IDF has told displaced people to head towards an "expanded humanitarian area" stretching from nearby al-Mawasi to the city of Khan Younis and central town of Deir al-Balah. It said they would find field hospitals, tents and additional aid supplies. But Palestinians and UN officials said it was made up of neighbourhoods that were overcrowded and lacking in essential services or left in ruins by recent fighting. Unrwa's deputy director in Gaza, Scott Anderson, told the BBC that the agency had seen a "significant movement of population, with over 80,000 people now displaced" as the fighting moved "further westward to the centre of Rafah itself". "Perhaps most worrying, because [the] Rafah and Kerem Shalom entry points are closed, we are beginning to run out of fuel that enables us to provide the response to the people who are being displaced, as well as the other people in Gaza," he added. The World Health Organization also warned that hospitals in southern Gaza - including those outside Rafah - only had a three days of fuel left. On Wednesday, the Israeli military announced it had reopened the Kerem Shalom crossing, a key aid entry point that had been closed for four days because of a Hamas rocket fire. It released a video showing aid lorries entering the crossing on Thursday, but the UN said the fighting made it impossible for it to pick up the supplies. "The challenge is one of security. The combat operations are very focused in the south-east part of Rafah. There is a very large IDF presence. There seems to be a very large militant presence as well," Mr Anderson said. "We're concerned about our ability to move staff and trucks safely in and out of the crossing to bring in humanitarian aid." In response, the IDF said it took "all operationally feasible measures to mitigate harm to civilians, including aid convoys and workers. The IDF has never, and will never, deliberately target aid convoys and workers." It added: "The IDF makes extensive efforts to enable the safe delivery of humanitarian aid, and has been working closely with various aid groups to co-ordinate and realise their vital efforts to provide food and humanitarian aid."
Israeli tanks and other armoured vehicles gathered near the Gaza border fence on Thursday
Meanwhile, Israelis reacted with alarm and anger after US President Joe Biden said he had warned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would cut off further weapons supplies in the event of a full-scale assault on Rafah. "I've made it clear to Bibi and the war cabinet, they're not going to get our support if in fact they go into these population centres," he told CNN on Wednesday. Last week, the Biden administration paused one arms shipment that included a batch of 2,000 pound bombs - one of the most destructive munitions in Israel's arsenal - over concerns about what was about to happen in Rafah. On Thursday, Israel's far-right National Security Minister condemned the remarks, posting on social media that "Hamas loves Biden". Later, Mr Netanyahu released a video in which he reminded Israelis that their country survived an arms embargo and emerged victorious in the 1948-49 Arab-Israeli War that followed its declaration of independence. "Today we are much stronger," he said. "If we need to stand alone, we will stand alone. I have said that if necessary - we will fight with our fingernails." The IDF's chief spokesman also said it had the munitions required for operations in Rafah and other planned operations. White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Mr Biden did not believe "smashing into Rafah" would advance Israel's objective of defeating Hamas. "The argument that somehow we're walking away from Israel, or we're not willing to help them defeat Hamas just doesn't comport with the facts," he told reporters. Indirect talks in Cairo on a ceasefire and hostage release deal also appeared to once again grind to a halt on Thursday, with both the Israeli and Hamas delegations leaving. A senior Hamas official, Ezzat al-Rishq, said Israel's operation in Rafah and seizure of the Rafah crossing there "aim to obstruct the efforts of the mediators". Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas in response to the group's cross-border attack on southern Israel on 7 October, during which about 1,200 people were killed and 252 others were taken hostage. More than 34,900 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. A deal agreed in November saw Hamas release 105 hostages in return for a week-long ceasefire and some 240 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. Israel says 128 hostages are unaccounted for, 36 of whom are presumed dead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68983436
|
news_world-middle-east-68983436
|
|
Keir Starmer faces Labour anger after Natalie Elphicke's defection - BBC News
|
2024-05-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Natalie Elphicke has previously attacked Labour over policies including migration and taxes.
|
UK Politics
|
Sir Keir Starmer's decision to admit Tory MP Natalie Elphicke into Labour has been met with bewilderment by some of his MPs. The Dover MP's surprise defection from the Conservatives has prompted reaction ranging from delight to anger by her new colleagues. Canterbury MP Rosie Duffield said Labour MPs were "baffled" by her "really peculiar" move to swap sides. But a senior party figure hailed her switch as "one hell of a coup". And Sir Keir has said he is "delighted" with her defection, telling reporters it showed his party was "the party of the national interest". Several sources suggested Labour's whips, responsible for party discipline, were worried about accepting her, but Labour deny this.
It is the second defection to Labour for Rishi Sunak in less than two weeks, after Dr Dan Poulter also quit the Tories last month. Normally, when an MP switches parties, their new colleagues are almost all delighted. However, this latest defection, announced minutes before Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, has left some Labour MPs feeling upset, let down, and shocked. In a blistering statement, Ms Elphicke said the Tories had become a "byword for incompetence and division". What Ms Duffield is willing to say publicly in reaction to the defection, many many more are saying privately. Although Ms Elphicke has made arguments in areas such as housing that are in tune with her new colleagues she has previously attacked Labour policy in a number of areas. She has criticised the party for "grabbing more in taxes" and not being "serious" about stopping small boat crossings, a big issue in her Dover seat. As well as her political stance, many Labour MPs are deeply uncomfortable with remarks she made about her then-husband Charlie Elphicke, whom she replaced as Dover MP in 2019. In an interview with the Sun after his conviction in 2020 for sexual assault, she was reported to have said being "attractive" and "attracted to women" had made him an "easy target".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
She has not commented on those previous remarks since defecting on Wednesday. Labour said "all those issues have been dealt with previously both in Parliament and in public". Speaking to BBC Radio Sheffield on Wednesday, Labour MP Sarah Champion said "some of the things Mrs Elphicke had said defending her ex-husband from the sexual abuse allegations" did not "sit well with me at all". She also said she would find it "challenging" to have former Tory MPs in the party "when it's so close to a general election". "I think their policies and their belief systems are so far from mine but we are where we are I guess," she added. She added the fact that Ms Elphicke, like Dan Poulter, are both planning to quit Parliament at the election created a "bit of a mess" because Labour already has candidates in both their seats.
Conservative MPs have also expressed surprise at Ms Elphicke's defection, with Transport Minister Huw Merriman branding her "shameless" and an "opportunist". "I'm just disappointed for politics that she's done what she's done," he added.
Speaking to BBC South East, fellow Kent MP Ms Duffield said Labour backbenchers were "really confused" by the defection. "I think it's a really peculiar decision and I think most Labour backbenchers and probably lots of Tories are really quite baffled by it, actually," she added. She added she didn't "believe for a second that she has suddenly transformed into a Labour MP". And fellow Labour backbencher Mick Whitley called her move "outrageous," adding Ms Elphicke did not share the "values of the Labour movement". Mish Rahman, a member of Labour's ruling National Executive Committee, said that he does not welcome Ms Elphicke's defection, saying the party is getting "grubbier". Speaking to BBC Radio 4's The World Tonight, Mr Rahman said that Ms Elphicke has "never occupied the centre ground in her time as an MP". He described the Conservative Party as a "sinking ship" and said Ms Elphicke is "swimming in the ocean" trying to "escape" it. He said the Labour Party should be in the business of changing the country, "not saving the careers of Tory politicians who the British public are rejecting because of the damage they've done to the country". "She's not fit to be a Labour party member, let alone an MP," he added. John McDonnell, who was shadow chancellor under former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, said he was "surprised and shocked" by her move. "I'm a great believer in the powers of conversion, but I think even this one would have strained the generosity of spirit of John the Baptist, quite honestly," he told LBC. However, Sir Keir will hope to keep the focus on the big picture - and argue Tory defections can personify his wider project of tempting former Conservative voters to switch to Labour. "That's what matters," says a senior Labour figure. "In the end we have recruited the Conservative MP for Dover for goodness' sake. In the middle of row about small boat crossings. That's one hell of a coup."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68980700
|
news_uk-politics-68980700
|
|
The inside story of Tory MP's Natalie Elphicke's defection to Labour - BBC News
|
2024-05-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Keir Starmer's allies believe the Dover MP can help win Tory voters but some on the left are uneasy.
|
UK Politics
|
Before Tory MP Christian Wakeford swapped sides to Labour at the peak of the Partygate scandal in 2022, it had been 27 years since an MP had defected directly from the governing party to the main party of opposition. Less than two weeks ago, Dan Poulter made the same journey as Mr Wakeford. And today - to bafflement and shock from MPs of all parties - Natalie Elphicke sits as a Labour MP. Indeed, it took a while for MPs to work out what Sir Keir Starmer was talking about at Prime Minister's Questions when he welcomed Mrs Elphicke to his side; few had noticed her sit down behind the Labour leader. She walked in accompanied by John Healey, the shadow defence secretary - who is understood to have been instrumental to wooing her across, due to a working relationship they forged due to a shared interest in housing. Mrs Elphicke worked in the housing sector before she became an MP in 2019, while Mr Healey was the housing minister in Gordon Brown's government and shadowed the brief for Labour from 2015 to 2020.
Sir Keir and his team are jubilant. They believe there could be few clearer messages for voters motivated by the small boats issue than the MP for Dover - where many of the crossings arrive - declaring that she trusts the Labour leader over Rishi Sunak on the issue. Remember this is one of the prime minister's five priorities: an issue at the heart of his attempts to reverse his political predicament.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
More broadly, Sir Keir's allies believe that the defection will help him make a direct argument to 'big C' Conservatives that if an MP as 'small c' conservative as Mrs Elphicke is moving to Labour, so they should too. On the flipside, that is exactly what is worrying some Labour MPs, who worry that a broad church that can include Mrs Elphicke is simply too broad. Multiple sources claimed that party whips, who are responsible for enforcing discipline, expressed concerns about admitting Mrs Elphicke to the party, though Labour denied this. It is worth remembering, too, that some Labour MPs are still angry that Diane Abbott, first elected as a Labour MP in 1987, has not had the Labour whip restored since April last year, when she was suspended over allegations of antisemitism.
The two previous Conservative defectors were widely welcomed by Labour MPs: Mr Wakeford was disillusioned with Boris Johnson at a moment when his character was at the heart of the political debate; Labour MPs liked that Mr Poulter defected specifically on the issue of the NHS. Mrs Elphicke's cause of immigration and asylum policy sits less easily with many Labour MPs - though it is worth noting that she also cited housing, where her views are much more in tune with the Labour mainstream. It hasn't helped settle some Labour MPs' nerves that so many Conservative MPs have been noisily declaring that they are much less right-wing than Mrs Elphicke. The truth about Ms Elphicke's position on the ideological spectrum is perhaps a little more nuanced. She was staunchly pro-Brexit, and a member of the Eurosceptic European Research Group of Conservative MPs. Yet while she has repeatedly castigated Labour over its approach to small boats, she has long argued that diplomacy with France will be more effective than the government's Rwanda scheme - putting her fairly close to Labour, which opposes the policy.
In 2022, she proposed that all private rents be frozen to help renters with the cost of living, and the next year was part of a cross-party project to build houses for homeless people. In February she praised Nye Bevan, one of the heroes of the post-war Labour government, in the House of Commons. Some of the anxieties among Labour MPs are not just about Mrs Elphicke's beliefs, but about her messy arrival in politics. She has only been an MP since 2019, replacing her then-husband, Charlie Elphicke, after he was charged with sexual assault. He was later convicted and imprisoned, at which point she announced that their marriage was ending. Despite the private rumblings of dissatisfaction from some quarters of the Labour Party, it is noteworthy that few have so far gone public to express their concerns. That is a sign of a disciplined Labour Party, with even some of the MPs most sceptical about Sir Keir's leadership determined not to make victory at the general election harder by sounding off. But that does not mean they will forget this episode. One Labour figure warned that Sir Keir was "storing up bad will" for the government that most people - including Natalie Elphicke - now assume he will lead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68979548
|
news_uk-politics-68979548
|
|
Gaza war: Netanyahu vows to defeat Hamas in Rafah despite US arms threat - BBC News
|
2024-05-09
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Israeli leader says his country will "stand alone" and "fight with fingernails" if shipments are halted.
|
Middle East
|
Netanyahu was defiant in the face of US threats to cut off weapons
Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed Israel can "stand alone", after the US warned arms shipments could be stopped if he orders a full-scale invasion of Rafah in Gaza. Thousands of people have already fled the southern city after the Israeli military began what it called a "limited" operation on Monday. US President Joe Biden has repeatedly warned against the operation, saying that it would cross a "red line". But Mr Netanyahu dismissed the US warning, saying Israel would fight on. "If we need to ... we will stand alone. I have said that if necessary we will fight with our fingernails," the prime minister said. Mr Netanyahu also invoked the war of 1948 - where the newly formed State of Israel was attacked by a coalition of Arab states - to dismiss the US warnings. "In the War of Independence 76 years ago, we were the few against the many," he said. "We did not have weapons. There was an arms embargo on Israel, but with great strength of spirit, heroism and unity among us - we were victorious." Despite Mr Netanyahu's comments, his government has come under pressure after the US suspended the delivery of 1,800 2,000lb (907kg) bombs and 1,700 500lb bombs over fears that they could cause civilian deaths in Rafah. Mr Biden went further still in an interview with CNN on Wednesday, saying that if the attack went ahead he would further suspend supplies of artillery shells and other weapons. Yoav Gallant, Mr Netanyahu's defence minister, dismissed the US warnings, saying Israel's "enemies as well as ... best of friends" should understand that his country "cannot be subdued". "We will stand strong, we will achieve our goals," he added. The comments came hours after the UN said more than 80,000 people had fled Rafah since Monday amid constant bombardment and as Israeli tanks massed close to built-up areas. The UN also warned that food and fuel were running out for the more than one million still sheltering in the city, because it was not receiving aid through nearby crossings. Israeli troops took control and closed the Rafah crossing with Egypt at the start of their operation, while the UN said it was too dangerous for its staff and lorries to reach the reopened Kerem Shalom crossing with Israel. Israeli forces said they were conducting "targeted raids" against Hamas elements remaining in the city. However, the Israeli government has refused to rule out a full scale invasion, leading to Mr Biden's warning he would not supply it with the munitions to do so.
White House national security spokesman John Kirby said Mr Biden did not believe "smashing into Rafah" would advance Israel's objective of defeating Hamas. "An enduring defeat of Hamas certainly remains the Israeli goal, and we share that goal with them," Mr Kirby said. "The argument that somehow we're walking away from Israel, or we're not willing to help them defeat Hamas just doesn't comport with the facts," he said.
Israeli tanks and other armoured vehicles gathered near the Gaza border fence on Thursday
Palestinian media said two people were killed on Thursday afternoon in an Israeli air strike in the al-Jneineh neighbourhood of Rafah - one of the eastern areas which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ordered residents to evacuate before beginning its ground operation began on Monday night. Another three people were reportedly killed in an air strike in the nearby Brazil area, which is not in the evacuation zone but is next to the Egyptian border. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) - which are proscribed as terrorist organisations by Israel, the US and other countries - said they were targeting Israeli forces on the eastern outskirts with mortar bombs and anti-tank missiles. Hamas also said it had blown up a booby-trapped tunnel east of Rafah underneath three Israeli military vehicles. The IDF said three of its soldiers were moderately wounded as a result of the explosion. Overnight, at least five people were reportedly killed when a family's home in the western Tal al-Sultan neighbourhood was hit in an Israeli strike. They included three children, one of them a one-year-old infant, medics said.
Meanwhile hopes of a peace deal - which seemed close earlier in the week before Israel said it did not past muster - appeared to be fading. Both Israeli and Hamas delegations left indirect talks in Cairo on Thursday. After seven months of war in Gaza, Israel insists victory is impossible without taking the city of Rafah and eliminating the last remaining Hamas battalions. Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza to destroy Hamas in response to the group's attack on southern Israel on 7 October, during which about 1,200 people were killed and 252 others were taken hostage, according to Israeli authorities. More than 34,900 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory's Hamas-run health ministry. Israel says 128 hostages are unaccounted for, 36 of whom are presumed dead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68980826
|
news_world-middle-east-68980826
|
|
Labour's battle between right and left causes Starmer to stumble - BBC News
|
2024-06-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The furore over Diane Abbott has exposed long-running divisions in the Labour Party
|
BBC InDepth
|
These arguments are happening in public at deafening volume because we are in a general election campaign, when Labour wants to be seen above all else as a sensible, credible force, and when many of the public will be taking a proper look at Keir Starmer for the first time.
The worst possible time to indulge in a big, fat – and avoidable – row. The plight of Diane Abbott could have been decided many months ago. The indecision looks like “the boys have treated her shabbily” says one party source.
A member of the shadow cabinet tells me only a few voters so far have brought the subject up on the doorstep, although they warn, “you have to be careful how this looks."
One focus group conducted by the polling group More in Common on Thursday night reported the issue was raised unprompted by members of the public thinking about who to choose.
One voter switching from Conservative to Labour said: “I worry if I was going to change from one party to another, would I trust somebody that's basically stabbing their own party member in the back?”
The group of voters it might concern the most, identified as the “progressive activist” by More In Common, makes up about 12% of the voting public, the most left-wing portion.
Two thirds of them, by their calculation, chose Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, in 2019. That figure has already slid to a 60%, with evidence of many shifting across to the Greens.
The local election results already demonstrated there’s been a cost from Labour’s position on Gaza, in terms of lost seats, and there’s been disappointment among some environmental activists at the party shifting on its plans, although Keir Starmer would deny their ambitions have been watered down.
The relief for Labour is that most of the voters who the so-called “purge” might upset live in big cities and student towns where they already rack up chunky majorities.
So perhaps discontent over candidate selection will not make much of a difference on polling day. There is an argument too, still made by the most enthusiastic advocates of Starmer’s efforts to distance himself from Jeremy Corbyn, that having a massive public barney with one of Mr Corbyn’s friends is evidence of how much the party has moved on.
But this argument may be too clever by half, in the context of a campaign where every vote matters.
“Never buy into the idea that it’s a masterplan,” says another Labour source, “no one ever wants any public messiness - it doesn’t help”.
And, as one senior Labour MP suggested to me, the risk is the public will not come away with the impression that Starmer is different to Corbyn, they will just see a big, nasty row. Not ideal when Keir Starmer wants also to attack the Tories for fighting amongst themselves.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7220exjzvno
|
news_articles_c7220exjzvn
|
|
Growth takes the spotlight in election campaign - BBC News
|
2024-06-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Parties are looking to shift ground – and the key issue is economic growth.
|
Scotland
|
Growth takes the spotlight in election campaign
Change is afoot for the economy, whatever the result of the general election on 4 July. While the battle for Westminster votes and seats takes place, the ground is also being prepared for the next Scottish Parliament election in less than two years. Parties are looking to shift ground – and the key issue is economic growth. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has taken his message about a state-owned energy company to Scotland, where the headquarters would be based. Aberdeen thinks it is the leading candidate to be the location. There have been SNP plans for an energy supplier before, using the buying power of the state to challenge the dominant private sector providers of gas and power. The Labour proposals are not going there. They seem to be more upstream, where the power is generated. GB Energy will take stakes in renewable energy projects.
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, told the Prosper economic forum in Edinburgh on Thursday that the party would provide reassurance to private investors that government can be a reliable partner because “it has skin in the game”. In recent years, the energy industry has not seen the Tories, Labour or the SNP as reliable partners because of inconsistent approaches to tax for offshore energy, licensing for further drilling or the consents it needs for renewable developments. Labour is now the main concern for the oil and gas industry. Mr Sarwar sent clear signals at the Prosper event that Labour will “not turn off the taps.” “Oil and gas will play a role in the energy mix for decades to come,” he said. However, industry figures in the north east of Scotland are waiting to hear from Sir Keir Starmer and environment spokesman Ed Miliband how the party’s position at Westminster can be squared with that of Anas Sarwar. Labour strategy at Westminster is to refuse new drilling licences by offshore operators, while recognising those granted up until this election. Conservative ministers have been accelerating that process in recent months. Labour’s position has met with criticism from the industry and in the north-east of Scotland, which has many jobs dependent on the sector. But the Westminster leadership has chosen a hard line against further drilling to show its commitment to action on climate change, boost its green credentials against a challenge from Green Party candidates and to emphasise the economic opportunity of renewable power.
Mr Sarwar’s speech to the Prosper forum, which consisted of private, public and third sector organisations, also set out some big changes for Labour’s pitch at the Holyrood election in 2026. These days, profit is good. Labour is “unashamedly pro-growth and pro-business”. That includes re-thinking plans for rent controls to ensure they do not discourage investment in housing. Mr Sarwar said increased income tax on higher earners in Scotland put the country “at a competitive disadvantage”. He backed reform of business rates, which the retail sector in particular has been crying out for. He also addressed problems with the planning system, which lacks staff to deal with a heavy workload, including the looming cascade of renewable energy applications. In the forum’s discussion of the huge opportunity from renewable energy, the problems with slow and inconsistent planning kept arising. This was not just for industrial sites but for housing all those people whose new jobs are being promised. Labour now plans a national organisation to handle planning applications, with centres of excellence on different types of application, drawing together 32 different council offices. That may look like centralisation, but it sounds like local councillors would still retain the main role in planning decisions, once the officials have done the necessary work. Incidentally, planners are being less pressured by applications for solar panels on industrial buildings, offices and the roofs of homes. As of last week, the rules have been significantly relaxed in Scotland.
The deputy first minister also spoke at the Prosper event
Also speaking to the Prosper event was the SNP’s Kate Forbes, three weeks into her job as deputy first minister and economy secretary in the Scottish government. It was a reminder that governing goes on in devolved administrations, and that the John Swinney/Kate Forbes leadership team has change in mind, even during an election campaign. Some changes may be included in the election manifesto and other shifts in direction are being postponed until after the Westminster ballot due to civil service rules on campaign impartiality. Ms Forbes was also keen to highlight her credentials as a friend of business, dropping heavy hints of change in the pipeline for coming weeks. She is seeking to revise plans for housing regulation, acknowledging the harm done to private sector investment by the current rent control plans. With income tax diverging from Westminster, the SNP minister said there would be a further statement shortly which was intended to reduce uncertainty about tax rates, while repeating her view that income tax cannot increase continually.
The Highland MSP also said ministers had been “too glib” about what they call “just transition” from oil and gas to renewable energy, when there is a risk that running down fossil fuels too fast would “cut [the industry] off at its knees”. The Scottish government’s draft energy plan, under previous SNP leadership, said there should be a presumption against further drilling licences, but there is pressure within the SNP to change that and to be more supportive of the sector. The power to issue licences, however, lies with the Westminster government. The SNP position is not decisive, but the signal matters politically. This raft of measures not only seeks to shift perceptions of the SNP, but requires the party itself to adapt to new leadership priorities. In recent years, Conservatives have switched from Boris Johnson’s enthusiasm for renewable power and the winding down of oil and gas to Rishi Sunak’s enthusiastic embrace of more drilling and more production. Tories agree with the industry’s argument that the demand and need for oil and gas is not going away as fast as some wish it to do, and that Britain would be wise to produce its own fossil fuels rather than rely on imports.
Addressing the choices and dilemmas in energy and economy policy will have to become clearer in the Liberal Democrat manifesto. For now, the party wants a “proper, one-off windfall tax” on oil producers and traders, and it wants to see more effort put into investing in the energy transition to renewable power. Asked about the Rosebank field to the west of Shetland, which has become a test of political support or opposition to the oil and gas sector, the Westminster leader, Sir Ed Davey, told BBC Scotland he is against.
Linking all of this is the drive for more economic growth, which is also a theme of Conservative and Liberal Democrat campaigns. Sluggish growth since the financial crash of 2008 has meant stagnating real spending power across Britain. It also means aspirations for public services are far outstripping the money available. Acknowledging the fiscal squeeze, Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are tied to similar, self-imposed rules on fiscal restraints. The only way to promise anything substantial and new is either to cut some spending programmes or to incentivise and stimulate the private sector to get to work on investment. If that grows output from the economy, then more profit, more jobs, higher earnings and more spending are captured in the tax net to deliver more revenue for ministers to spend. Conservatives have policies intended to boost growth, while Rishi Sunak has signalled that the party will redirect resources to achieve his promises. These include national service funded by a raid on levelling up funds, and more English apprenticeships through squeezing out lower-standard English university courses. Labour has been wooing business energetically. That is a recognition that it is going to have to be a closer relationship than ever if the economy is to grow. Without it, there’s little extra money to deliver on electoral pledges.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn441866y42o
|
news_articles_cn441866y42
|
|
Donald Trump: Nothing will change White House fight, lawyer tells BBC - BBC News
|
2024-06-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Donald Trump's lawyer Alina Habba tells the BBC he would run for president even if he was in jail.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Donald Trump's lawyer Alina Habba says he would run for president even if he was in jail
One of Donald Trump's lawyers has told the BBC "nothing will change" his fight for the White House - despite being convicted following an historic trial in New York. Jurors found Mr Trump guilty on Thursday of falsifying business records to conceal hush money payments made to former porn star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election campaign. Mr Trump became the first US president to be convicted of a crime, but he has said the trial was rigged and the prosecution was politically orchestrated. Alina Habba has told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg the former president is a "victim of political, selective prosecution". Following the seven-week trial at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, Mr Trump was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records. Mr Trump will be sentenced on 11 July. However, he confirmed he will be appealing against his criminal convictions. Ms Habba, 40, appeared alongside Mr Trump during the trial and said even if jailed, Mr Trump will still stand in the US presidential election in November.
Donald Trump's attorney Alina Habba (L) appeared alongside the former US president after he was convicted
"We have seen some corruption in this country that frankly has never seen before in our judicial system," Ms Habba told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg. "It is very real, it is not posturing by any means, it is 100% a problem that this country is going to have to handle and get a grapple on in November. "He is running for president, nothing will change there. "The people that need him in this country, because frankly it's more important than anything anybody else thinks. "Our people are speaking loudly, they're donating, they're small donors, and they are standing up because they are afraid, because we cannot have this happen to us."
On Thursday Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to payments made to Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential campaign
In remarks at Trump Tower in New York on Friday, Mr Trump spoke for more than 30 minutes and angrily attacked his political opponents, the jury and the judge in his case. He called Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over his trial, a "tyrant" and claimed that he "literally crucified" witnesses. In response, President Joe Biden's campaign described Mr Trump as unhinged and thirsting for revenge. "That's how the American system of justice works," Mr Biden said, adding it was "reckless" and "irresponsible" for anyone to suggest the trial was rigged. Mr Trump's unprecedented conviction has entrenched bitter divisions in the US, in the run-up to November's vote.
Prosecutors successfully laid out a case Mr Trump was afraid Ms Daniels would fatally harm his 2016 presidential campaign by going public with an alleged sexual encounter, prompting him to pay her - then illegally hide the transaction. Ms Daniels herself gave evidence. In another development since the convictions, her lawyer told ABC News Ms Daniels wore a bulletproof vest when she went to the New York courthouse. Clark Brewster said: "It's so vicious and threatening and so I think from the standpoint of just the fear of what somebody might do," he said of the atmosphere for Ms Daniels. In exclusive comments to the Daily Mirror, external, Ms Daniels said Mr Trump should be jailed or used as "the volunteer punching bag at a women's shelter". She told the paper: "It’s not over for me. It’s never going to be over for me. "Trump may be guilty, but I still have to live with the legacy.”
Trump's team may use Stormy Daniels' testimony as grounds for appeal
Mr Blade added that despite the trial ending and bringing some relief, the stress was far from over. "It brings another weight upon her shoulders of what happens next," Mr Blade said.
Also on Saturday, the Trump campaign sent out a text message to supporters – one of more than a dozen sent since the verdict – which read in part: “They want me behind bars. They want me DEAD.” Some of his most fervent supporters, such as former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson, have alleged without evidence there is a secret plot to assassinate Mr Trump. Others have made a less conspiratorial argument – pointing out the maximum penalty Mr Trump faces, four years for each of 34 felony counts, would effectively mean he would spend the rest of his life in prison. Mr Trump alluded to this in his most recent fundraising message, saying his enemies are “attempting to JAIL me for life as an innocent man”. However, legal experts agree Mr Trump will not receive anywhere near the maximum, and will be sentenced to a much shorter jail sentence, if he is given any prison time at all.
The full interview with Alina Habba will be played on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on BBC One and BBC iPlayer at 09:00 BST on Sunday 2 June.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crggwzl6vq1o
|
news_articles_crggwzl6vq1
|
|
Trump trial: Trump family scarce as guilty verdict was read - BBC News
|
2024-06-01
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mr Trump's second son was the only relation in the courtroom. His wife and eldest daughter have largely remained silent.
| null |
After parade of support, one Trump family member was at verdict
Throughout his historic seven-week criminal trial, several of Donald Trump’s family members accompanied him to court in a show of strength and support. But in the end, there was just one: Eric. The day the jury reached a verdict, Mr Trump’s second son was the only relation in the courtroom, absorbing the 34 declarations of “guilty” from a seat directly behind his father. As court adjourned for the last time, Eric Trump stood. The family patriarch grasped his son's chest, before walking out as a convicted felon. The younger Trump trailed behind him. The first two rows behind the defence table were closely scrutinised throughout the trial. They were occupied at various points by Donald Trump Jr, the former president’s eldest son; Lara Trump, his daughter in law and co-chair of the Republican National Committee; and on the day of closing arguments, Tiffany Trump, his youngest daughter who rarely engages in politics. Eric Trump, an executive vice president at the Trump Organization, attended the trial more than any other family member.
• None Hush-money trial was Trump's to lose. Here’s why he did Outside of court, Donald Trump Jr frequently was his father’s megaphone to media, echoing claims of a politically motivated prosecution, and on social media – including a TikTok filmed with his father on the first day of deliberations.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. BBC reporter in court describes what Trump did after guilty verdict
“This case was rigged from the start,” the eldest Trump child declared on X after the verdict. But the absences were more notable. The two highest-profile women in Trump’s life did not attend a single day. Wife Melania Trump, and his daughter, Ivanka Trump, never appeared at 100 Centre Street. And they have remained all but invisible in the verdict’s aftermath. The former first lady of the United States also did not put out a statement after a New York jury found that Trump had broken the law by covering up a payment to an adult film star who claims that she and Trump had sex in 2006. The sexual encounter that Stormy Daniels described in explicit detail in the courtroom allegedly occurred just four months after Melania Trump had given birth to their son, Barron. The payment was aimed at preventing her from going public just before the 2016 election with the story. During Ms Daniels' testimony, she discussed the sexual encounter she claimed to have with Trump in his hotel room in Lake Tahoe in Nevada while both were attending a golf tournament there. Ms Daniels said on the stand that Trump's mention of his wife during their meeting was "very brief". "He said, 'Don't worry about it, we actually don't even sleep in the same room,'" she told the court. She also testified that during their hotel meeting, they discussed her childhood and her adult-film work, and Trump showed her pictures of his wife. Ms Daniels said she responded that his wife was ''beautiful''. Former Trump aide Hope Hicks also took the stand to be grilled about a Wall Street Journal story alleging affairs with multiple women, including Playboy model Karen McDougal and Ms Daniels. She said Trump worried about the story. "He was concerned how it would be viewed by his wife and he wanted me to make sure that the newspapers weren't delivered to their residence that morning," she testified. Toward the end of April, Trump during his usual pre-court comments mentioned Melania Trump. CBS reported that he wished her a happy birthday and said he was heading to Florida that evening to be with her.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. 'I did my job': Manhattan District Attorney speaks after Donald Trump verdict
CNN reported that Trump's wife and their son were in New York when the verdict came down. Ivanka Trump, who had followed her father to Washington to serve as a top White House aide, has conspicuously withdrawn from political life after her father’s presidency ended with an attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
• None What the guilty verdict means for the election
• None What Trump's most devoted supporters think of the verdict She has made only the briefest appearances in his legal dramas. Her lawyers successfully fought to have her severed from her father’s civil business fraud trial last year, which ensnared her brothers. When she appeared as a witness, it was for one day of soft-spoken testimony, before she returned to her Florida home. After her father was convicted on Thursday, Ms Trump posted a photo of him holding her as an infant, with the caption, “I love you dad.” She used the Instagram platform’s Story feature, and so the post was only available for a fleeting 24 hours before disappearing forever.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c199vrln1z2o
|
news_articles_c199vrln1z2
|
|
Bowen: Netanyahu walks political tightrope as US seeks Gaza deal - BBC News
|
2024-06-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Secretary of State Blinken's Middle East mission collides with Israeli politics, Jeremy Bowen says.
|
World
|
Antony Blinken is visiting the Middle East to seek backing for a new Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal
If diplomats have groundhog days, when they are condemned to reliving the same 24 hours, perhaps Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, felt a certain weariness as his jet approached the Middle East on his latest trip. It is his eighth diplomatic tour of the region in the eight months since the Hamas attacks on Israel on 7 October last year. The politics of trying to negotiate an end to the war in Gaza and an exchange of Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners were already complicated. They are more tangled than ever now that the Israeli opposition leader Benny Gantz has resigned from the war cabinet of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, along with his political ally Gadi Eisenkot. Both men are retired generals who led the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) as chiefs of staff.
Benny Gantz's resignation from Israel's war cabinet presents another challenge for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Without Benny Gantz, the Americans have lost their favourite contact in the cabinet. Now he’s back in opposition, Mr Gantz wants new elections - he is the pollsters’ favourite to be the next prime minister - but Mr Netanyahu is safe as long as he can preserve the coalition that gives him 64 votes in the 120-member Israeli parliament. That depends on keeping the support of the leaders of two ultranationalist factions. They are Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister, and Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister. That is the point at which Secretary of State Blinken’s mission collides with Israeli politics. President Joe Biden believes that the time has come to end the war in Gaza. Mr Blinken’s job is to try to make that happen. But Messrs Ben-Gvir and Smotrich have threatened to bring down the Netanyahu government if he agrees to any ceasefire until they are satisfied that Hamas has been eliminated. They are extreme Jewish nationalists, who want the war to continue until no trace of Hamas remains. They believe that Gaza, like all the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan, is Jewish land that should be settled by Jews. Palestinians, they argue, could be encouraged to leave Gaza "voluntarily".
The war in Gaza is still raging after eight months
Antony Blinken is in the Middle East to try to stop the latest ceasefire plan from going the way of all the others. Three ceasefire resolutions in the UN Security Council were vetoed by the US, but now Joe Biden is ready for a deal. On 31 May, the president made a speech urging Hamas to accept what he said was a new Israeli proposal to end the war in Gaza. It was a three-part deal - which has now been backed by a UN resolution - starting with a six-week ceasefire, a "surge" of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and the exchange of some Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners. The deal would progress to the release of all the hostages, a permanent “cessation of hostilities” and ultimately the huge job of rebuilding Gaza. Israelis should no longer fear Hamas, he said, because it was no longer able to repeat 7 October. President Biden and his advisers knew there was trouble ahead. Hamas insists it will only agree to a ceasefire that guarantees an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war. The destruction and civilian death inflicted by Israel in Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza during the raid to free four hostages last week can only have strengthened that resolve. The Hamas-run health authorities in Gaza say that 274 Palestinians were killed during the raid. The IDF says the number was less than 100. Mr Biden also recognised that some powerful forces in Israel would object. "I've urged the leadership in Israel to stand behind this deal," he said in the speech. "Regardless of whatever pressure comes."
Benjamin Netanyahu is now more reliant on ultranationalist factions in his governing coalition
The pressure came quickly, from Messrs Ben Gvir and Smotrich. They are senior government ministers, viscerally opposed to the deal that Joe Biden presented. It made no difference to them that the deal was approved by the war cabinet, as they are not members. As expected, they threatened to topple the Netanyahu coalition if he agreed to the deal. Neither Hamas nor Israel have publicly committed to the deal that President Biden laid out. He accepted that the language of parts of it needed to be finalised. The ambiguity in parts of the proposal might in other conflicts, between other belligerents, allow room for diplomatic manoeuvre. But that would require a shared realisation that the time had come to make a deal, that more war would not bring any benefit. There is no sign that the Hamas leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, is at that point. He seems determined to stick the course he has followed since 7 October. Some reports out of Gaza said that Palestinians in the ruins of Nuseirat camp were swearing at Hamas as well as Israel for disregarding their lives. The BBC cannot confirm that, as like other international news organisations it is not allowed by Israel and Egypt to enter Gaza, except under rare and highly supervised trips with the Israeli military.
Almog Meir Jan was one of four Israeli hostages who were rescued by Israeli forces in an operation in central Gaza on Saturday
It seems clear though, that vast numbers of Palestinian dead have strengthened, not weakened the resilience of Hamas. For them, survival of their group and its leaders equals victory. They will focus on the fact that the killing of more than 37,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians – according to the health ministry in Gaza – have brought Israel into deep disrepute. It faces a case alleging genocide at the International Court of Justice, and applications at the International Criminal Court for arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. On the Israeli side, Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost two members of the war cabinet, Messrs Gantz and Eisenkot, who wanted a pause in the war to allow negotiations to free hostages. He is more exposed, without the political insulation they provided, to the hardliners, Messrs Ben-Gvir and Smotrich.
Gaza's health ministry said more than 270 Palestinians were killed during the Israeli hostage rescue operation
Perhaps Antony Blinken will urge him to call their bluff, to make the deal and satisfy millions of Israelis who want the hostages back before more of them are killed. Mr Netanyahu might then have no choice other than to risk his government by gambling on an election. Defeat will bring forward commissions of enquiry that will examine whether he bears responsibility for the political, intelligence and military failures that allowed Hamas to break into Israel eight months ago. Or Benjamin Netanyahu might default to the techniques of procrastination and propaganda that he has perfected over all his years as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. If in doubt, play for time, and push arguments harder than ever. On 24 July, he will return to one of his favourite pulpits, when he addresses a joint session of the US Congress in Washington DC. Something better, for him, might emerge.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511vl9yjwwo
|
news_articles_c511vl9yj
|
|
Jury begins deliberating in historic Hunter Biden case - BBC News
|
2024-06-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The fate of the US president's son now lies in the hands of 12 jurors in Delaware.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Hunter Biden on criminal trial: ‘I think it went well’
Jurors in the Hunter Biden gun case have begun deliberating, and must now decide the fate of the US president's son. The 54-year-old is accused of lying about his drug use on a federal form while buying a weapon in 2018, and of illegally possessing a firearm while he was allegedly a drug user. For days, prosecutors presented evidence to suggest that Mr Biden was in the throes of addiction when he purchased the gun in Delaware. His defence team say he was in recovery and therefore not a drug user at the time. Mr Biden, who did not testify, denies the three related charges. If convicted, he could face up 25 years in prison. The BBC briefly questioned Mr Biden in downtown Wilmington after the jury began deliberations on Monday. "I think [today] went well," Mr Biden said. "We'll see though. We have to wait for the jury to come back." In a lengthy closing argument, prosecutor Leo Wise said "no-one is above the law" and the case is "no more important, or less important, because of who the defendant is". "The central issue in this case is whether he was an addict, and knew that he was," Mr Wise added. To make the government's case, Mr Wise pored over witness testimony from Mr Biden's former partners and his own memoir to try to show he was an active drug user around the time he bought the gun. The evidence, Mr Wise said, was "personal. It was ugly, and it was overwhelming". Mr Biden's defence team argue he was in recovery at the time, so was truthful when he indicated on the paperwork that he was not a drug user.
• None The struggles and scandals of Hunter Biden
His lawyer, Abbe Lowell, repeatedly pointed out to jurors that none of the text messages or witness testimony presented in court referenced "actual drug use" at the time of the purchase, arguing that the prosecution's case rests on "suspicion" and "conjecture". Mr Lowell accused prosecutors of using evidence of drug use over many years. As an example, Mr Lowell pointed out that testimony from Mr Biden's ex-girlfriend, Zoe Kestan, revealed “no pipes, no scales, no drugs, not even alcohol" at the time in question. Mr Biden's family members sat in the row behind him in Delaware's federal court, including First Lady Jill Biden - his step-mother and the president's wife - Ashley Biden, his half-sister, as well as the James and Valerie Biden, the president's siblings. Several visibly bristled when the prosecution said Mr Biden had "four years of active addiction", shaking their heads. Mr Biden, for his part, spent long periods staring intently at jurors as the closing arguments went on, occasionally taking notes and conferring with his legal team. During a break, his wife Melissa Cohen Biden embraced him and patted him on the shoulders, whispering into his ear. The start of proceedings on Monday focused on a legal technicality. Mr Biden's lawyers wanted the 12 jurors to be told during jury instructions that he had filled out the form "in good faith". The prosecution disagreed. The discrepancy is linked to the question of whether Mr Biden "knowingly" lied on the form. Last week, prosecutors played excerpts from an audiobook of Mr Biden's memoir, in which he talks about being addicted to crack cocaine for four years, a period that overlapped with his gun purchase. The court also heard from Mr Biden's ex-romantic partners, including Hallie Biden. Hallie - Mr Biden's brother's widow - testified that she found "remnants" of crack cocaine in Mr Biden's car, along with the gun. However, during cross-examination, Ms Biden confirmed she had not seen him using drugs around the time of his gun purchase. Throughout the trial, the defence has attempted to cast doubt on the memories of the prosecution’s witnesses.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cldd97ql25do
|
news_articles_cldd97ql25d
|
|
Bowen: Netanyahu walks political tightrope as US seeks Gaza deal - BBC News
|
2024-06-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Secretary of State Blinken's Middle East mission collides with Israeli politics, Jeremy Bowen says.
|
World
|
Antony Blinken is visiting the Middle East to seek backing for a new Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal
If diplomats have groundhog days, when they are condemned to reliving the same 24 hours, perhaps Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, felt a certain weariness as his jet approached the Middle East on his latest trip. It is his eighth diplomatic tour of the region in the eight months since the Hamas attacks on Israel on 7 October last year. The politics of trying to negotiate an end to the war in Gaza and an exchange of Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners were already complicated. They are more tangled than ever now that the Israeli opposition leader Benny Gantz has resigned from the war cabinet of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, along with his political ally Gadi Eisenkot. Both men are retired generals who led the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) as chiefs of staff.
Benny Gantz's resignation from Israel's war cabinet presents another challenge for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Without Benny Gantz, the Americans have lost their favourite contact in the cabinet. Now he’s back in opposition, Mr Gantz wants new elections - he is the pollsters’ favourite to be the next prime minister - but Mr Netanyahu is safe as long as he can preserve the coalition that gives him 64 votes in the 120-member Israeli parliament. That depends on keeping the support of the leaders of two ultranationalist factions. They are Itamar Ben-Gvir, the national security minister, and Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister. That is the point at which Secretary of State Blinken’s mission collides with Israeli politics. President Joe Biden believes that the time has come to end the war in Gaza. Mr Blinken’s job is to try to make that happen. But Messrs Ben-Gvir and Smotrich have threatened to bring down the Netanyahu government if he agrees to any ceasefire until they are satisfied that Hamas has been eliminated. They are extreme Jewish nationalists, who want the war to continue until no trace of Hamas remains. They believe that Gaza, like all the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan, is Jewish land that should be settled by Jews. Palestinians, they argue, could be encouraged to leave Gaza "voluntarily".
The war in Gaza is still raging after eight months
Antony Blinken is in the Middle East to try to stop the latest ceasefire plan from going the way of all the others. Three ceasefire resolutions in the UN Security Council were vetoed by the US, but now Joe Biden is ready for a deal. On 31 May, the president made a speech urging Hamas to accept what he said was a new Israeli proposal to end the war in Gaza. It was a three-part deal - which has now been backed by a UN resolution - starting with a six-week ceasefire, a "surge" of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and the exchange of some Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners. The deal would progress to the release of all the hostages, a permanent “cessation of hostilities” and ultimately the huge job of rebuilding Gaza. Israelis should no longer fear Hamas, he said, because it was no longer able to repeat 7 October. President Biden and his advisers knew there was trouble ahead. Hamas insists it will only agree to a ceasefire that guarantees an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the war. The destruction and civilian death inflicted by Israel in Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza during the raid to free four hostages last week can only have strengthened that resolve. The Hamas-run health authorities in Gaza say that 274 Palestinians were killed during the raid. The IDF says the number was less than 100. Mr Biden also recognised that some powerful forces in Israel would object. "I've urged the leadership in Israel to stand behind this deal," he said in the speech. "Regardless of whatever pressure comes."
Benjamin Netanyahu is now more reliant on ultranationalist factions in his governing coalition
The pressure came quickly, from Messrs Ben Gvir and Smotrich. They are senior government ministers, viscerally opposed to the deal that Joe Biden presented. It made no difference to them that the deal was approved by the war cabinet, as they are not members. As expected, they threatened to topple the Netanyahu coalition if he agreed to the deal. Neither Hamas nor Israel have publicly committed to the deal that President Biden laid out. He accepted that the language of parts of it needed to be finalised. The ambiguity in parts of the proposal might in other conflicts, between other belligerents, allow room for diplomatic manoeuvre. But that would require a shared realisation that the time had come to make a deal, that more war would not bring any benefit. There is no sign that the Hamas leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, is at that point. He seems determined to stick the course he has followed since 7 October. Some reports out of Gaza said that Palestinians in the ruins of Nuseirat camp were swearing at Hamas as well as Israel for disregarding their lives. The BBC cannot confirm that, as like other international news organisations it is not allowed by Israel and Egypt to enter Gaza, except under rare and highly supervised trips with the Israeli military.
Almog Meir Jan was one of four Israeli hostages who were rescued by Israeli forces in an operation in central Gaza on Saturday
It seems clear though, that vast numbers of Palestinian dead have strengthened, not weakened the resilience of Hamas. For them, survival of their group and its leaders equals victory. They will focus on the fact that the killing of more than 37,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians – according to the health ministry in Gaza – have brought Israel into deep disrepute. It faces a case alleging genocide at the International Court of Justice, and applications at the International Criminal Court for arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s Defence Minister Yoav Gallant. On the Israeli side, Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost two members of the war cabinet, Messrs Gantz and Eisenkot, who wanted a pause in the war to allow negotiations to free hostages. He is more exposed, without the political insulation they provided, to the hardliners, Messrs Ben-Gvir and Smotrich.
Gaza's health ministry said more than 270 Palestinians were killed during the Israeli hostage rescue operation
Perhaps Antony Blinken will urge him to call their bluff, to make the deal and satisfy millions of Israelis who want the hostages back before more of them are killed. Mr Netanyahu might then have no choice other than to risk his government by gambling on an election. Defeat will bring forward commissions of enquiry that will examine whether he bears responsibility for the political, intelligence and military failures that allowed Hamas to break into Israel eight months ago. Or Benjamin Netanyahu might default to the techniques of procrastination and propaganda that he has perfected over all his years as Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. If in doubt, play for time, and push arguments harder than ever. On 24 July, he will return to one of his favourite pulpits, when he addresses a joint session of the US Congress in Washington DC. Something better, for him, might emerge.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511vl9yjwwo
|
news_articles_c511vl9yj
|
|
Jury begins deliberating in historic Hunter Biden case - BBC News
|
2024-06-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The fate of the US president's son now lies in the hands of 12 jurors in Delaware.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Hunter Biden on criminal trial: ‘I think it went well’
Jurors in the Hunter Biden gun case have begun deliberating, and must now decide the fate of the US president's son. The 54-year-old is accused of lying about his drug use on a federal form while buying a weapon in 2018, and of illegally possessing a firearm while he was allegedly a drug user. For days, prosecutors presented evidence to suggest that Mr Biden was in the throes of addiction when he purchased the gun in Delaware. His defence team say he was in recovery and therefore not a drug user at the time. Mr Biden, who did not testify, denies the three related charges. If convicted, he could face up 25 years in prison. The BBC briefly questioned Mr Biden in downtown Wilmington after the jury began deliberations on Monday. "I think [today] went well," Mr Biden said. "We'll see though. We have to wait for the jury to come back." In a lengthy closing argument, prosecutor Leo Wise said "no-one is above the law" and the case is "no more important, or less important, because of who the defendant is". "The central issue in this case is whether he was an addict, and knew that he was," Mr Wise added. To make the government's case, Mr Wise pored over witness testimony from Mr Biden's former partners and his own memoir to try to show he was an active drug user around the time he bought the gun. The evidence, Mr Wise said, was "personal. It was ugly, and it was overwhelming". Mr Biden's defence team argue he was in recovery at the time, so was truthful when he indicated on the paperwork that he was not a drug user.
• None The struggles and scandals of Hunter Biden
His lawyer, Abbe Lowell, repeatedly pointed out to jurors that none of the text messages or witness testimony presented in court referenced "actual drug use" at the time of the purchase, arguing that the prosecution's case rests on "suspicion" and "conjecture". Mr Lowell accused prosecutors of using evidence of drug use over many years. As an example, Mr Lowell pointed out that testimony from Mr Biden's ex-girlfriend, Zoe Kestan, revealed “no pipes, no scales, no drugs, not even alcohol" at the time in question. Mr Biden's family members sat in the row behind him in Delaware's federal court, including First Lady Jill Biden - his step-mother and the president's wife - Ashley Biden, his half-sister, as well as the James and Valerie Biden, the president's siblings. Several visibly bristled when the prosecution said Mr Biden had "four years of active addiction", shaking their heads. Mr Biden, for his part, spent long periods staring intently at jurors as the closing arguments went on, occasionally taking notes and conferring with his legal team. During a break, his wife Melissa Cohen Biden embraced him and patted him on the shoulders, whispering into his ear. The start of proceedings on Monday focused on a legal technicality. Mr Biden's lawyers wanted the 12 jurors to be told during jury instructions that he had filled out the form "in good faith". The prosecution disagreed. The discrepancy is linked to the question of whether Mr Biden "knowingly" lied on the form. Last week, prosecutors played excerpts from an audiobook of Mr Biden's memoir, in which he talks about being addicted to crack cocaine for four years, a period that overlapped with his gun purchase. The court also heard from Mr Biden's ex-romantic partners, including Hallie Biden. Hallie - Mr Biden's brother's widow - testified that she found "remnants" of crack cocaine in Mr Biden's car, along with the gun. However, during cross-examination, Ms Biden confirmed she had not seen him using drugs around the time of his gun purchase. Throughout the trial, the defence has attempted to cast doubt on the memories of the prosecution’s witnesses.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cldd97ql25do
|
news_articles_cldd97ql25d
|
|
What Hunter Biden's conviction means for President Joe Biden - BBC News
|
2024-06-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The guilty verdict is unlikely to change voters' minds, but it will be a personal blow for the US president.
|
US & Canada
|
Hunter Biden’s conviction for lying about his drug use on a handgun licence application will be a devastating personal blow for his father, Joe Biden. The US president doubles as the patriarch of a tight-knit family that has seen its share of personal tragedy and trauma. Now his surviving son has been found guilty of three federal crimes that carry a potentially lengthy prison term. But Hunter's verdict is unlikely to change how Americans vote in November's election. His father's name will be on the ballot, not his. There's no evidence connecting the president to his son's offences. And there has been scant polling evidence that the public is following this trial closely.
After the verdict was announced, the president released a statement hinting at the dual obligations demanding his attention. “I am the president, but I am also a dad,” he said. He added that he continued to support his son and was proud of the man he is today.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. BBC reporter describes Hunter Biden's reaction in court as verdict is read
At the start of the trial, Joe Biden said he wouldn’t comment on the proceedings, but his son’s courtroom drama has followed him for weeks, as he conducted his official duties and campaigned for re-election. Hunter's yet-to-be determined punishment may be similarly distracting as the president prepares later this month for a pivotal presidential debate. "This will, of course, be a personal distraction for the president, as it would be for any father," says Michael LaRosa, who served as press secretary for First Lady Jill Biden during the first two years of the Biden presidency. "It's not a distraction from his duties as president, but I'm sure it will take an emotional toll on the family." While in France for D-Day commemorations last week, President Biden said that he would not consider using his authority to pardon his son. And he added that he would accept the jury’s verdict – a contrast from Donald Trump’s rejection of his own conviction as rigged and corrupt. The former president’s response to the Hunter Biden verdict was also markedly different. In a statement released by the campaign, Trump said the trial was “nothing more than a distraction” from what he asserted were more serious crimes committed by the Biden family. That was a sentiment echoed by many other Republicans. Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina said the verdict was just “the veil of fairness”. Others noted that the trial only went ahead because a federal judge last year rejected what critics saw as a "sweetheart" plea deal.
Trump’s trial became a partisan brawl from start to finish, with Republican officials lining up behind the former president to condemn the proceedings. Hunter’s conviction had a different feel, marking the culmination of a dark period for a Biden family that has known more than its share of turmoil. Hunter Biden spiralled into drug use around the time that his brother, Beau, died from brain cancer. His battles with addiction and the toll it exacted on his family relationships were presented in painful detail during the trial through excerpts from Hunter’s memoir, his text messages and emails, photographs and testimony from those close to him. All the while, friends and members of Hunter Biden’s family – including First Lady Jill Biden and his wife, Melissa Cohen Biden – sat behind him, watched and sometimes hugged him or held his hand during breaks in the trial. His half-sister Ashley cried during the defence attorney’s closing arguments. “Jill and I will always be there for Hunter and the rest of our family with our love and support,” President Biden’s post-verdict statement concluded. “Nothing will ever change that.” The prosecuting attorney during his closing argument said the evidence presented was ugly and personal. He also said that it was overwhelming and it was necessary to show that when Hunter Biden filled out the federal background check application for a handgun, he knowingly lied when he certified that he was not using drugs. In the end, a unanimous jury agreed. This guilty verdict means the president’s son - the only surviving child from his first wife, who was killed along with his infant daughter in a car accident half a century ago – may face years in prison.
Hunter Biden now awaits sentencing for his conviction, but even after the judge decides his punishment his legal travails will not be over. He is also facing a September trial on charges of failing to pay $1.4m in federal income taxes. That trial, coming less than two months before the election, may not contain the raw emotion on display in the Delaware courtroom, but it could prove more politically damaging for the president. Hunter’s foreign business dealings and his financial ties to the president have been a source of continued scrutiny by Mr Biden’s Republican critics. Drug addiction and the consequences of it have touched many American lives. Allegations of financial impropriety and tax fraud, however, may generate less sympathy from the voting public.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clwwz7rlgrgo
|
news_articles_clwwz7rlgrg
|
|
General election 2024: Is the Conservative manifesto a game-changer? - BBC News
|
2024-06-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
This is a manifesto in Rishi Sunak’s image - can it turn the tide of the election?
|
Politics
|
Manifestos provide, in theory at least, the spine of an incoming government’s mission. The promises within them, if not entirely sacrosanct, are at least meant to be possessed of a greater sanctity than other more disposable political pledges. And they set a tone, a framework and dividing lines with political opponents too. Whisper it, but I quite like to collect them. I have old ones from years gone by on my bookshelves at home. They are political history preserved in glossy paper, and a constant reference point, for at least five years, for victorious and losing parties alike.
The 2024 Conservative manifesto, external is a 76-page tome which has the desire and the instinct for tax cuts as its controlling thought. But hang on: cuts in national insurance and stamp duty get the thumbs-up, but there is no equivalent on income tax or inheritance tax. The argument goes that as sought after as these might be by many, they are less of a priority than the other two. And there is a pattern here, as you can see when you look at the Tory promise on borders and security. Rishi Sunak renews his commitment to the Conservative plan to send some of those arriving over the Channel on small boats to Rwanda. But look what is not promised: the one thing some reckon would make it more likely this scheme and others like it would work — withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Instead, there is a rather fudgey formulation in the manifesto, on page 36. It reads: "If we are forced to choose between our security and the jurisdiction of a foreign court, including the ECHR, we will always choose our security."
In short this is a manifesto in Rishi Sunak’s image. Not surprising really, you might say, he is the Conservative leader and fair point — but let me flesh out what I mean. It feels like a document that encapsulates what you might call Sunakian Conservatism. His allies would say the fundamentals of that are deliverable, pragmatic, thought-through ideas, not flashy for their own sake but sensible. His critics within the party are already saying they are insufficiently bold, grabby or game-changey - when a game-changer is so desperately needed, if even possible. "Doubt any of this will make a blind bit of difference," one senior Tory texts me. Before adding, "Should have gone for a tax cut that would have some cut through. These won’t. ECHR language is completely pointless. It is unreformable and we should be leaving." A final thought: there is an undercurrent to public utterances and social media adverts from the Conservatives now, to match their private musings. It is an undercurrent which acknowledges the possibility, even the likelihood of defeat. That is not to say for a moment they are giving up - we are three weeks into this campaign with the three most important weeks still to come. But a framing is emerging from the Tories which acknowledges maximising Conservative support may be about minimising a Labour victory, not preventing it.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw00k66jd3ro
|
news_articles_cw00k66jd3r
|
|
Why Grant Shapps is warning about a Labour 'super-majority' - BBC News
|
2024-06-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
This feels like a real inflection point in the campaign, the BBC's Henry Zeffman explains.
|
Politics
|
Why Grant Shapps is warning about a Labour 'supermajority'
There are only two men who realistically can enter Downing Street on the morning after the general election: Rishi Sunak or Sir Keir Starmer. Listen to the Conservatives’ messaging today, though, and you could be forgiven for thinking that there is only one possibility - Labour victory. At least that’s what is being signalled by Grant Shapps, the defence secretary. In an interview with Times Radio this morning Mr Shapps made the obligatory vow to “fight for every single seat in this country”. And yes, he stressed that “the polls have been wrong before” and that “no-one’s cast a vote”. But beyond those caveats, Mr Shapps focused on warning not only of the possibility of a Labour victory, but of a large one. “You want to make sure that in this next government, whoever forms it, there’s a proper system of accountability,” he said. “You don’t want to have somebody receive a supermajority. And in this case, of course, the concern would be that if Keir Starmer were to go into No 10… and that power was in some way unchecked, it would be very bad news for people in this country”. Pressed on whether he was effectively conceding defeat with more than three weeks to go until polling day, Mr Shapps said: “I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say the country doesn’t function well when you get majorities the size of [Sir Tony] Blair’s or even bigger. And we would say there are a lot of very good, hardworking MPs who can hold the government of the day to account. And we’d say those are Conservative MPs.” Just reflect on those last two sentences. Mr Shapps is not arguing, there, that people should vote Conservative in order to implement tax cuts, or reduce immigration, or any of the other offers at the centre of the Conservative manifesto. He is arguing that people should vote Conservative in order to hold a Labour government to account. This feels like a real inflection point in the campaign. Privately, many Conservative candidates are fairly open about their belief that victory is implausible and that their party should instead hope to limit the scale of a Labour victory. But it’s of a different order of magnitude to see one of the Conservatives’ most experienced politicians make an argument in that direction openly. (Note, too, that Grant Shapps’s constituency is very much under threat on current polling).
This poses clear strategic challenges to the Labour Party, though. Labour campaign chiefs have been drumming a ‘no complacency’ message into their troops. They will fear that this sort of language from the Conservatives might make some of their marginal voters feel that a Labour victory is assured and therefore they do not need to turn out to vote - or even that they can risk a protest vote for one of the smaller parties. Sir Keir Starmer has denied it’s a foregone conclusion that Labour will win a majority. Sir Keir said no vote had been cast yet, he couldn’t be complacent, and said he needed a “mandate” to change the country. He added that he’s told people that “if you want change, you have to vote for it". So what is Shapps trying to achieve here? Well, firstly it pays to remember that he is one of the Conservatives’ most experienced politicians - he knew what he was saying and he will have meant to say it. It appears he is trying to use the possibility of a large Labour victory to ensure that a large Labour victory does not happen. For some, this will be reminiscent of the 2017 general election where - albeit generally at a local level rather than national – some Labour candidates told voters they could back them safe in the knowledge that Theresa May would win big and Jeremy Corbyn had no chance of becoming prime minister. Theresa May did win, but she lost her majority – some Labour candidates believed that argument made the difference for them. This is a reminder, too, that in our saturated political-media environment, polls are no longer mere measures of public opinion - they can shape voter behaviour too. Plenty of people are displeased by that development. But it’s a reality.
Sign up for our Election Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments in the general election campaign. It’ll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv221jple3jo
|
news_articles_cv221jple3j
|
|
What Hunter Biden's conviction means for President Joe Biden - BBC News
|
2024-06-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The guilty verdict is unlikely to change voters' minds, but it will be a personal blow for the US president.
|
US & Canada
|
Hunter Biden’s conviction for lying about his drug use on a handgun licence application will be a devastating personal blow for his father, Joe Biden. The US president doubles as the patriarch of a tight-knit family that has seen its share of personal tragedy and trauma. Now his surviving son has been found guilty of three federal crimes that carry a potentially lengthy prison term. But Hunter's verdict is unlikely to change how Americans vote in November's election. His father's name will be on the ballot, not his. There's no evidence connecting the president to his son's offences. And there has been scant polling evidence that the public is following this trial closely.
After the verdict was announced, the president released a statement hinting at the dual obligations demanding his attention. “I am the president, but I am also a dad,” he said. He added that he continued to support his son and was proud of the man he is today.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. BBC reporter describes Hunter Biden's reaction in court as verdict is read
At the start of the trial, Joe Biden said he wouldn’t comment on the proceedings, but his son’s courtroom drama has followed him for weeks, as he conducted his official duties and campaigned for re-election. Hunter's yet-to-be determined punishment may be similarly distracting as the president prepares later this month for a pivotal presidential debate. "This will, of course, be a personal distraction for the president, as it would be for any father," says Michael LaRosa, who served as press secretary for First Lady Jill Biden during the first two years of the Biden presidency. "It's not a distraction from his duties as president, but I'm sure it will take an emotional toll on the family." While in France for D-Day commemorations last week, President Biden said that he would not consider using his authority to pardon his son. And he added that he would accept the jury’s verdict – a contrast from Donald Trump’s rejection of his own conviction as rigged and corrupt. The former president’s response to the Hunter Biden verdict was also markedly different. In a statement released by the campaign, Trump said the trial was “nothing more than a distraction” from what he asserted were more serious crimes committed by the Biden family. That was a sentiment echoed by many other Republicans. Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina said the verdict was just “the veil of fairness”. Others noted that the trial only went ahead because a federal judge last year rejected what critics saw as a "sweetheart" plea deal.
Trump’s trial became a partisan brawl from start to finish, with Republican officials lining up behind the former president to condemn the proceedings. Hunter’s conviction had a different feel, marking the culmination of a dark period for a Biden family that has known more than its share of turmoil. Hunter Biden spiralled into drug use around the time that his brother, Beau, died from brain cancer. His battles with addiction and the toll it exacted on his family relationships were presented in painful detail during the trial through excerpts from Hunter’s memoir, his text messages and emails, photographs and testimony from those close to him. All the while, friends and members of Hunter Biden’s family – including First Lady Jill Biden and his wife, Melissa Cohen Biden – sat behind him, watched and sometimes hugged him or held his hand during breaks in the trial. His half-sister Ashley cried during the defence attorney’s closing arguments. “Jill and I will always be there for Hunter and the rest of our family with our love and support,” President Biden’s post-verdict statement concluded. “Nothing will ever change that.” The prosecuting attorney during his closing argument said the evidence presented was ugly and personal. He also said that it was overwhelming and it was necessary to show that when Hunter Biden filled out the federal background check application for a handgun, he knowingly lied when he certified that he was not using drugs. In the end, a unanimous jury agreed. This guilty verdict means the president’s son - the only surviving child from his first wife, who was killed along with his infant daughter in a car accident half a century ago – may face years in prison.
Hunter Biden now awaits sentencing for his conviction, but even after the judge decides his punishment his legal travails will not be over. He is also facing a September trial on charges of failing to pay $1.4m in federal income taxes. That trial, coming less than two months before the election, may not contain the raw emotion on display in the Delaware courtroom, but it could prove more politically damaging for the president. Hunter’s foreign business dealings and his financial ties to the president have been a source of continued scrutiny by Mr Biden’s Republican critics. Drug addiction and the consequences of it have touched many American lives. Allegations of financial impropriety and tax fraud, however, may generate less sympathy from the voting public.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clwwz7rlgrgo
|
news_articles_clwwz7rlgrg
|
|
Mifepristone: Supreme Court rejects limits on abortion pill - BBC News
|
2024-06-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mifepristone is used in medication abortion, the most common method of ending pregnancies in the US.
|
US & Canada
|
Demonstrators surrounded the Supreme Court in March as the justices heard arguments in the case
The US Supreme Court has unanimously rejected an effort to restrict access to the abortion pill mifepristone. The decision, which came two years after the court rescinded the nationwide guarantee to an abortion, was welcomed by pro-choice activists. The justices decided the plaintiffs, a group of anti-abortion doctors and activists, did not have a legal right to sue. But they left the door open to other attempts to limit the availability of the drug.
Mifepristone is one of two drugs used in a medication abortion, now the most common method of terminating pregnancies in the US. The plaintiffs, known as the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, had argued that approval for the drug from US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should be withdrawn. But during arguments on the case in March, several of the court's nine justices sounded sceptical that any of the plaintiffs had suffered harm from the availability of mifepristone - which is necessary to have the legal standing to sue. "The plaintiffs have sincere legal, moral, ideological objections to elective abortion and to FDA's relaxed regulation," wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh for the court, "but they failed to demonstrate" any actual injury. "A plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue," he also wrote. The top court overturned Roe v Wade, effectively rescinding a federal right to abortion, in June 2022. Since then, 21 states have moved to restrict abortion earlier in pregnancy than the standard it had set. Seventeen of those have barred the procedure at six weeks or earlier. Thursday's ruling has no bearing on these laws - medication abortion remains illegal in states that prohibit abortion. But abortion pills have acted as an effective workaround to the bans, with thousands of pills flowing into restrictive states through the mail. Pro-choice activists were encouraged that access to abortion pills had been preserved, but warned the Supreme Court's decision was a qualified victory. At least three states - Missouri, Kansas and Idaho - have also opposed the FDA's approval of the drug in court. The Supreme Court's decision on Thursday does not rule out these future challenges. "This ruling is not a ‘win’ for abortion, it just maintains the status quo," said Nancy Northup, president of the pro-choice Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. "The attacks on abortion pills will not stop here - the anti-abortion movement sees how critical abortion pills are in this post-Roe world." In a statement, President Joe Biden echoed those comments, saying the ruling "does not change the fact that the fight for reproductive freedom continues". "The stakes could not be higher for women across America," he said. Anti-abortion groups criticised the decision. But these groups, too, indicated the fight would continue. "It is a sad day for all who value women’s health and unborn children’s lives," said Katie Daniel, state policy director for Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America. "But the fight to stop dangerous mail-order abortion drugs is not over." Abortion is expected to be a leading issue at the ballot box this autumn. Since Roe v Wade was overturned, it has posed a problem for some Republicans, caught between a base that opposes the abortion, and a general electorate that broadly supports access to the procedure, external.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Texas abortion law: 'I waited for my daughter to die so I wouldn't die'
In recent months, Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has called for compromise from his party members, suggesting strict bans were politically costly. On Thursday morning, speaking to House Republicans, Trump seemed to advocate for exceptions to anti-abortion laws, saying "like Ronald Reagan, you have to have three choices: life of the mother, rape and incest". He added: "But you have to follow your own heart." The two-drug regimen was approved for use up to 10 weeks of pregnancy by the FDA in 2000. A patient is first given mifepristone to induce an abortion and then misoprostol to empty the uterus. Since 2016, the FDA has eased access to the drug and allowed doctors to hold virtual appointments with patients and for prescriptions to be sent by mail. Those more recent approvals were at question in this case. Nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the US now are medication abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports access to the procedure. More than a million pregnancies were terminated in the US last year, the highest number in over a decade, says the institute. Throughout two decades of use, the FDA, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists (ACOG) and other mainstream medical organisations have maintained that both mifepristone and misoprostol are safe for women to use. US studies say medication abortion is about 95% effective in ending pregnancy and requires further medical follow-up less than 1% of the time.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2qq1wqw3w2o
|
news_articles_c2qq1wqw3w2
|
|
Why Grant Shapps is warning about a Labour 'super-majority' - BBC News
|
2024-06-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
This feels like a real inflection point in the campaign, the BBC's Henry Zeffman explains.
|
Politics
|
Why Grant Shapps is warning about a Labour 'supermajority'
There are only two men who realistically can enter Downing Street on the morning after the general election: Rishi Sunak or Sir Keir Starmer. Listen to the Conservatives’ messaging today, though, and you could be forgiven for thinking that there is only one possibility - Labour victory. At least that’s what is being signalled by Grant Shapps, the defence secretary. In an interview with Times Radio this morning Mr Shapps made the obligatory vow to “fight for every single seat in this country”. And yes, he stressed that “the polls have been wrong before” and that “no-one’s cast a vote”. But beyond those caveats, Mr Shapps focused on warning not only of the possibility of a Labour victory, but of a large one. “You want to make sure that in this next government, whoever forms it, there’s a proper system of accountability,” he said. “You don’t want to have somebody receive a supermajority. And in this case, of course, the concern would be that if Keir Starmer were to go into No 10… and that power was in some way unchecked, it would be very bad news for people in this country”. Pressed on whether he was effectively conceding defeat with more than three weeks to go until polling day, Mr Shapps said: “I think it’s perfectly legitimate to say the country doesn’t function well when you get majorities the size of [Sir Tony] Blair’s or even bigger. And we would say there are a lot of very good, hardworking MPs who can hold the government of the day to account. And we’d say those are Conservative MPs.” Just reflect on those last two sentences. Mr Shapps is not arguing, there, that people should vote Conservative in order to implement tax cuts, or reduce immigration, or any of the other offers at the centre of the Conservative manifesto. He is arguing that people should vote Conservative in order to hold a Labour government to account. This feels like a real inflection point in the campaign. Privately, many Conservative candidates are fairly open about their belief that victory is implausible and that their party should instead hope to limit the scale of a Labour victory. But it’s of a different order of magnitude to see one of the Conservatives’ most experienced politicians make an argument in that direction openly. (Note, too, that Grant Shapps’s constituency is very much under threat on current polling).
This poses clear strategic challenges to the Labour Party, though. Labour campaign chiefs have been drumming a ‘no complacency’ message into their troops. They will fear that this sort of language from the Conservatives might make some of their marginal voters feel that a Labour victory is assured and therefore they do not need to turn out to vote - or even that they can risk a protest vote for one of the smaller parties. Sir Keir Starmer has denied it’s a foregone conclusion that Labour will win a majority. Sir Keir said no vote had been cast yet, he couldn’t be complacent, and said he needed a “mandate” to change the country. He added that he’s told people that “if you want change, you have to vote for it". So what is Shapps trying to achieve here? Well, firstly it pays to remember that he is one of the Conservatives’ most experienced politicians - he knew what he was saying and he will have meant to say it. It appears he is trying to use the possibility of a large Labour victory to ensure that a large Labour victory does not happen. For some, this will be reminiscent of the 2017 general election where - albeit generally at a local level rather than national – some Labour candidates told voters they could back them safe in the knowledge that Theresa May would win big and Jeremy Corbyn had no chance of becoming prime minister. Theresa May did win, but she lost her majority – some Labour candidates believed that argument made the difference for them. This is a reminder, too, that in our saturated political-media environment, polls are no longer mere measures of public opinion - they can shape voter behaviour too. Plenty of people are displeased by that development. But it’s a reality.
Sign up for our Election Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments in the general election campaign. It’ll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv221jple3jo
|
news_articles_cv221jple3j
|
|
Mifepristone: Supreme Court rejects limits on abortion pill - BBC News
|
2024-06-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mifepristone is used in medication abortion, the most common method of ending pregnancies in the US.
|
US & Canada
|
Demonstrators surrounded the Supreme Court in March as the justices heard arguments in the case
The US Supreme Court has unanimously rejected an effort to restrict access to the abortion pill mifepristone. The decision, which came two years after the court rescinded the nationwide guarantee to an abortion, was welcomed by pro-choice activists. The justices decided the plaintiffs, a group of anti-abortion doctors and activists, did not have a legal right to sue. But they left the door open to other attempts to limit the availability of the drug.
Mifepristone is one of two drugs used in a medication abortion, now the most common method of terminating pregnancies in the US. The plaintiffs, known as the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, had argued that approval for the drug from US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should be withdrawn. But during arguments on the case in March, several of the court's nine justices sounded sceptical that any of the plaintiffs had suffered harm from the availability of mifepristone - which is necessary to have the legal standing to sue. "The plaintiffs have sincere legal, moral, ideological objections to elective abortion and to FDA's relaxed regulation," wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh for the court, "but they failed to demonstrate" any actual injury. "A plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue," he also wrote. The top court overturned Roe v Wade, effectively rescinding a federal right to abortion, in June 2022. Since then, 21 states have moved to restrict abortion earlier in pregnancy than the standard it had set. Seventeen of those have barred the procedure at six weeks or earlier. Thursday's ruling has no bearing on these laws - medication abortion remains illegal in states that prohibit abortion. But abortion pills have acted as an effective workaround to the bans, with thousands of pills flowing into restrictive states through the mail. Pro-choice activists were encouraged that access to abortion pills had been preserved, but warned the Supreme Court's decision was a qualified victory. At least three states - Missouri, Kansas and Idaho - have also opposed the FDA's approval of the drug in court. The Supreme Court's decision on Thursday does not rule out these future challenges. "This ruling is not a ‘win’ for abortion, it just maintains the status quo," said Nancy Northup, president of the pro-choice Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. "The attacks on abortion pills will not stop here - the anti-abortion movement sees how critical abortion pills are in this post-Roe world." In a statement, President Joe Biden echoed those comments, saying the ruling "does not change the fact that the fight for reproductive freedom continues". "The stakes could not be higher for women across America," he said. Anti-abortion groups criticised the decision. But these groups, too, indicated the fight would continue. "It is a sad day for all who value women’s health and unborn children’s lives," said Katie Daniel, state policy director for Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America. "But the fight to stop dangerous mail-order abortion drugs is not over." Abortion is expected to be a leading issue at the ballot box this autumn. Since Roe v Wade was overturned, it has posed a problem for some Republicans, caught between a base that opposes the abortion, and a general electorate that broadly supports access to the procedure, external.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Texas abortion law: 'I waited for my daughter to die so I wouldn't die'
In recent months, Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has called for compromise from his party members, suggesting strict bans were politically costly. On Thursday morning, speaking to House Republicans, Trump seemed to advocate for exceptions to anti-abortion laws, saying "like Ronald Reagan, you have to have three choices: life of the mother, rape and incest". He added: "But you have to follow your own heart." The two-drug regimen was approved for use up to 10 weeks of pregnancy by the FDA in 2000. A patient is first given mifepristone to induce an abortion and then misoprostol to empty the uterus. Since 2016, the FDA has eased access to the drug and allowed doctors to hold virtual appointments with patients and for prescriptions to be sent by mail. Those more recent approvals were at question in this case. Nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the US now are medication abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which supports access to the procedure. More than a million pregnancies were terminated in the US last year, the highest number in over a decade, says the institute. Throughout two decades of use, the FDA, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynaecologists (ACOG) and other mainstream medical organisations have maintained that both mifepristone and misoprostol are safe for women to use. US studies say medication abortion is about 95% effective in ending pregnancy and requires further medical follow-up less than 1% of the time.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2qq1wqw3w2o
|
news_articles_c2qq1wqw3w2
|
|
What next for Sunak and Starmer as poll race enters second half? - BBC News
|
2024-06-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Chris Mason and Henry Zeffman find Sunak supporters downbeat and Starmer's team buoyant as polls fail to narrow.
|
Politics
|
As campaign passes halfway, mood in Tory and Labour camps could not be more different
The moods of the two main parties’ general election campaigns do not tell us what will happen on 4 July. But as we pass the halfway stage in the long slog to polling day, they do give us a strong flavour of how candidates, strategists and officials think this election is going for them. And right now, the moods of the Conservative and Labour campaigns could not be more different. Even the most fatalistic Labourites, for so long determined to avoid complacency, are beginning to admit that they believe government is within their grasp. Even the most loyal Sunakites, convinced for so long that during an election campaign voters would see the qualities that they see in their prime minister, are beginning to concede that the long-predicted narrowing of the gap between the two parties simply isn’t happening - at least not yet. “Utterly dire” was the stark response from one prominent Conservative to the campaign so far, “there’s no clear messaging or strategy.” They decried “the Kool-Aiders” working for Rishi Sunak who, they said, were not realistic about his strengths and weaknesses before thrusting him to the centre of what has so far been a presidential-style campaign.
Some Conservative candidates argue that the election result will be closer than many expect. But privately few even half-heartedly mount an argument that the overall outcome is up for grabs anymore. One candidate said that the prevailing pessimism in the party had sparked a vicious cycle. “People just stop campaigning,” they said. “A lot of colleagues haven’t really worked their seats before. When morale is down you can’t really do anything.” At the grassroots level, they said: “It’s quite a low-motivation, low-energy campaign. Volunteers are down, lots of Tory MPs who think they are going to lose their seats aren’t really bothering. And that makes it quite difficult inside the campaign to know what’s really going on.” Some Conservatives insist, though, the true picture of national support is nowhere near as dire as some models projecting a near-wipeout would suggest. “The Labour vote is softer than people think,” one source said. “In parts of England the solid Labour vote - people who say they’re definitely voting Labour - is no different to 2019. "What is different is there’s many, many, many more undecideds who were Conservatives. The problem is how do you get those people to come out when apathy is pretty high?”
The new message piloted by Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, warning of the consequences of a vast Labour majority, may have been targeted at finding ways to give those persistent undecideds a reason to vote Conservative. It was arguably the biggest moment of this third week of the campaign and a strategy from a campaign that feels like it has run out of better ideas. Nigel Farage’s decision to become leader of Reform UK and run for a seat himself was one of the biggest moments of the campaign so far. On Thursday evening, minutes before ITV's latest election debate started, a YouGov poll appeared, external putting Reform UK one percentage point ahead of the Conservatives for the first time. Not surprisingly, Mr Farage seized on this with glee, telling the ITV audience: “We are now the opposition to Labour." “This is the inflexion point. The only wasted vote now is a Conservative vote,” he added in an online video. It is only one poll, and 1% is within the margin of error. Let’s see what others suggest in the coming days. But psychologically it is the last thing the Conservatives need.
Nigel Farage makes the most of Reform's poll bounce
In Labour, meanwhile, there is a tangible buoyancy. Campaign insiders say that the first three weeks have gone smoothly, but insist that this is not the product of springing into action after Mr Sunak’s sudden decision to go to the polls. “Things are going well because of how carefully crafted things have been for a long time,” one campaign source said. “That’s a step change in standards, in professionalism. It’s the cultural change that Keir has brought. Everything is done properly.” The Labour campaign has not been without its wobbles. The saga over whether Diane Abbott would be a Labour candidate disrupted the party’s news "grid" and there was frustration at the top of the party at Sir Keir Starmer’s failure to immediately rebut Mr Sunak’s tax attack in the first televised debate last week. “In some ways that was good for us because it reminded people that not everything will go to plan,” a senior official said. To some on the left of the Labour Party - as signified by a protester early on in Sir Keir’s speech at the manifesto launch - the absence of radical new policies in the manifesto risks depressing turnout among leftwingers. Sir Keir embraced that critique in his speech, saying the stability in his programme was evidence of the stability he would bring to government. That’s why Labour chose to launch their manifesto at the same venue in Manchester where Sir Keir unveiled his “five missions” for government in February 2023, with messaging substantially the same as today’s.
The Euros will take attention away from the election
So what next for the Labour campaign? The party is proud of its so-called "ground war" – the pavement pounding, door knocking and leafleting that goes on away from the cameras. Privately, the party reckons its operation and data gathering is far superior to the Conservatives’. As for the "air war" – what you will see in media coverage – it will be the same kinds of events and certainly the same message. But Sir Keir’s visits will be taking place over the coming days in constituencies with larger Conservative majorities than those he has visited so far, the BBC understands - a clear display of confidence. Activists, too, are being encouraged to focus their energies on more and more ambitious target seats. One curious twist coming in the next few weeks, not lost on senior Labour people, is the start of the Euros, the football tournament. This will command attention and passion, disrupt television schedules and distract people at just the point the election campaign reaches its crescendo. How to campaign, in an inevitably partisan manner, as people, particularly in England and Scotland come together to watch the football, poses a challenge. Some at the top of the Labour Party are beginning to think, if a little furtively, of the aftermath of 4 July, too. Senior staff still do not know for sure what jobs they would have in Downing Street if Labour win but Sue Gray, Sir Keir’s chief of staff, has spent most of the campaign at party headquarters preparing detailed plans for government. Some shadow ministers have taken time off the campaign trail to hold "access talks" with civil servants in Whitehall. There are logistical questions about a Labour government, too. For example: would they let MPs take their traditional six-week summer recess? While plans are not yet developed on this, the answer appears to be a resounding no. “We can’t pass up the opportunity to hit the ground running,” one Labour source said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nn8k23zlqo
|
news_articles_c4nn8k23zlq
|
|
Will The Sun newspaper endorse Keir Starmer's Labour Party? - BBC News
|
2024-06-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The paper has backed the Conservatives since 2010 but in 2024 that may change.
|
BBC InDepth
|
Had the paper’s portrayal of the Labour leader (including the eve-of-poll headline "If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain turn out the lights") swung it for the Tories? Did the Sun really have that much influence?
Rupert Murdoch, the Sun's owner, later said that headline had been "tasteless and wrong". He told the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press that, "We don't have that sort of power."
Some muttered that he would say that, wouldn't he, but even in 1992, some polls in the last week of the campaign had already pointed to a swing away from Labour. The Sun had simply spotted which way the wind was blowing, the argument went.
The Sun doesn't make its daily print readership public now but it’s believed to be around 600,000. It says it reaches nearly seven million people every day through a combination of digital and print.
The paper told us: "Sun readers are always at the heart of British elections and so naturally leaders of all parties are always eager to hear their views on the issues that matter to them and their families.”
It also says that the "live grilling" its readers will be able to give both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir before the election is unique to traditional print titles. Its Never Mind The Ballots: Election Showdown will be hosted by Harry Cole and broadcast on the paper’s website, YouTube and social channels.
Given that, perhaps it isn't that surprising that the question of who the Sun newspaper supports in an election is still viewed as totemic and prompts coverage far wider than is perhaps justified.
If the Sun does back Sir Keir, Ms Perrior says that endorsement is not worth what it once was but is "still worth having".
"He’s trying to say 'we are not the Labour Party that you worry about with your taxes or with your healthcare or with your national security’ and therefore an endorsement from the Sun really rubber stamps that, and says to the public or to their readers, that they believe that he can be trusted and he can be given the keys to Number 10.
"But, of course, the Sun also has YouTube channels that are broadcasting lots of videos. So it's not just the Sun in terms of the newspaper. They have different outlets now that they are continually pushing those political messages."
In 1997, when the paper backed Mr Blair, Mr Higgins told the BBC that he and the senior team had initially resisted when Rupert Murdoch dropped his “absolute bombshell”.
"Mr Murdoch said in no uncertain words that he detected a wind of change in the country and that we were going to switch horses."
Mr Higgins says the Sun always wants to be on the side of its readers but also “on the side of winners”.
Mr Campbell agrees. "They backed us because they knew we were going to win. That may be about to happen again and that, more than anything, is what will drive their judgement."
He doesn’t think Sir Keir needs to worry too much about the papers. "The right-wing papers will be worrying that their readers will think they are totally out of touch if they argue the Tories deserve another term. Let them sweat! And meanwhile speak to the country as a whole," he says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw88x6ww1p8o
|
news_articles_cw88x6ww1p8
|
|
What next for Sunak and Starmer as poll race enters second half? - BBC News
|
2024-06-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Chris Mason and Henry Zeffman find Sunak supporters downbeat and Starmer's team buoyant as polls fail to narrow.
|
Politics
|
As campaign passes halfway, mood in Tory and Labour camps could not be more different
The moods of the two main parties’ general election campaigns do not tell us what will happen on 4 July. But as we pass the halfway stage in the long slog to polling day, they do give us a strong flavour of how candidates, strategists and officials think this election is going for them. And right now, the moods of the Conservative and Labour campaigns could not be more different. Even the most fatalistic Labourites, for so long determined to avoid complacency, are beginning to admit that they believe government is within their grasp. Even the most loyal Sunakites, convinced for so long that during an election campaign voters would see the qualities that they see in their prime minister, are beginning to concede that the long-predicted narrowing of the gap between the two parties simply isn’t happening - at least not yet. “Utterly dire” was the stark response from one prominent Conservative to the campaign so far, “there’s no clear messaging or strategy.” They decried “the Kool-Aiders” working for Rishi Sunak who, they said, were not realistic about his strengths and weaknesses before thrusting him to the centre of what has so far been a presidential-style campaign.
Some Conservative candidates argue that the election result will be closer than many expect. But privately few even half-heartedly mount an argument that the overall outcome is up for grabs anymore. One candidate said that the prevailing pessimism in the party had sparked a vicious cycle. “People just stop campaigning,” they said. “A lot of colleagues haven’t really worked their seats before. When morale is down you can’t really do anything.” At the grassroots level, they said: “It’s quite a low-motivation, low-energy campaign. Volunteers are down, lots of Tory MPs who think they are going to lose their seats aren’t really bothering. And that makes it quite difficult inside the campaign to know what’s really going on.” Some Conservatives insist, though, the true picture of national support is nowhere near as dire as some models projecting a near-wipeout would suggest. “The Labour vote is softer than people think,” one source said. “In parts of England the solid Labour vote - people who say they’re definitely voting Labour - is no different to 2019. "What is different is there’s many, many, many more undecideds who were Conservatives. The problem is how do you get those people to come out when apathy is pretty high?”
The new message piloted by Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, warning of the consequences of a vast Labour majority, may have been targeted at finding ways to give those persistent undecideds a reason to vote Conservative. It was arguably the biggest moment of this third week of the campaign and a strategy from a campaign that feels like it has run out of better ideas. Nigel Farage’s decision to become leader of Reform UK and run for a seat himself was one of the biggest moments of the campaign so far. On Thursday evening, minutes before ITV's latest election debate started, a YouGov poll appeared, external putting Reform UK one percentage point ahead of the Conservatives for the first time. Not surprisingly, Mr Farage seized on this with glee, telling the ITV audience: “We are now the opposition to Labour." “This is the inflexion point. The only wasted vote now is a Conservative vote,” he added in an online video. It is only one poll, and 1% is within the margin of error. Let’s see what others suggest in the coming days. But psychologically it is the last thing the Conservatives need.
Nigel Farage makes the most of Reform's poll bounce
In Labour, meanwhile, there is a tangible buoyancy. Campaign insiders say that the first three weeks have gone smoothly, but insist that this is not the product of springing into action after Mr Sunak’s sudden decision to go to the polls. “Things are going well because of how carefully crafted things have been for a long time,” one campaign source said. “That’s a step change in standards, in professionalism. It’s the cultural change that Keir has brought. Everything is done properly.” The Labour campaign has not been without its wobbles. The saga over whether Diane Abbott would be a Labour candidate disrupted the party’s news "grid" and there was frustration at the top of the party at Sir Keir Starmer’s failure to immediately rebut Mr Sunak’s tax attack in the first televised debate last week. “In some ways that was good for us because it reminded people that not everything will go to plan,” a senior official said. To some on the left of the Labour Party - as signified by a protester early on in Sir Keir’s speech at the manifesto launch - the absence of radical new policies in the manifesto risks depressing turnout among leftwingers. Sir Keir embraced that critique in his speech, saying the stability in his programme was evidence of the stability he would bring to government. That’s why Labour chose to launch their manifesto at the same venue in Manchester where Sir Keir unveiled his “five missions” for government in February 2023, with messaging substantially the same as today’s.
The Euros will take attention away from the election
So what next for the Labour campaign? The party is proud of its so-called "ground war" – the pavement pounding, door knocking and leafleting that goes on away from the cameras. Privately, the party reckons its operation and data gathering is far superior to the Conservatives’. As for the "air war" – what you will see in media coverage – it will be the same kinds of events and certainly the same message. But Sir Keir’s visits will be taking place over the coming days in constituencies with larger Conservative majorities than those he has visited so far, the BBC understands - a clear display of confidence. Activists, too, are being encouraged to focus their energies on more and more ambitious target seats. One curious twist coming in the next few weeks, not lost on senior Labour people, is the start of the Euros, the football tournament. This will command attention and passion, disrupt television schedules and distract people at just the point the election campaign reaches its crescendo. How to campaign, in an inevitably partisan manner, as people, particularly in England and Scotland come together to watch the football, poses a challenge. Some at the top of the Labour Party are beginning to think, if a little furtively, of the aftermath of 4 July, too. Senior staff still do not know for sure what jobs they would have in Downing Street if Labour win but Sue Gray, Sir Keir’s chief of staff, has spent most of the campaign at party headquarters preparing detailed plans for government. Some shadow ministers have taken time off the campaign trail to hold "access talks" with civil servants in Whitehall. There are logistical questions about a Labour government, too. For example: would they let MPs take their traditional six-week summer recess? While plans are not yet developed on this, the answer appears to be a resounding no. “We can’t pass up the opportunity to hit the ground running,” one Labour source said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nn8k23zlqo
|
news_articles_c4nn8k23zlq
|
|
Euro 2024: England and Gareth Southgate must deliver in tournament - BBC Sport
|
2024-06-16
|
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSport/
|
It is time for England and manager Gareth Southgate to deliver when their Euro 2024 campaign begins on Sunday, writes Phil McNulty.
|
England Men
|
'It's time for Southgate & England to deliver'
Watch England's game with Serbia live on BBC One, BBC iPlayer and the BBC Sport website and app
England's Euro 2024 campaign starts in what was once known as the "City of Thousand Fires”, with manager Gareth Southgate knowing his fourth major tournament in charge cannot be a slow burner. Gelsenkirchen earned its label in the era when it was built on coal mining, and it is here in Germany's industrial heartland that both England and Southgate get to work on their latest quest to banish the accusations that they fall short when it matters. And as England begin the quest to justify their tag as pre-tournament favourites against Serbia at the Arena AufSchalke (20:00 BST kick-off), the mood around the camp is one of composure and cautious optimism, as reflected in the words and demeanour of Southgate and captain Harry Kane at their pre-match news conference. Southgate is well aware of the significance of a fast start, especially as Germany and Spain have made significant early mission statements with outstanding performances in victories against Scotland and Croatia. He said: "In terms of our standing, we have already seen how Germany and Spain have played. There are some exceptional teams here. We have to be exceptional to progress through the group and our main focus is our first game. It is obvious how important that is." The England fans making their way to Gelsenkirchen are doing so with high expectations fuelled by the world-class reliability of Kane and the emergence of Jude Bellingham, the new golden boy and a Champions League winner with Real Madrid. There is also the brilliance and exuberance of the younger attacking brigade such as Arsenal's Bukayo Saka, Chelsea forward Cole Palmer, Phil Foden from Manchester City and Newcastle United wide man Anthony Gordon. And if England were in any danger of forgetting or downplaying their lofty pre-tournament status, Serbia coach Dragan Stojkovic was in the mood to remind them - constantly - when he faced the media.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Southgate speaks on eve of England's Euro 2024 campaign
Stojkovic looked to be playing psychological games by repeatedly claiming England were favourites for Euro 2024, adding: "My players can hardly wait for the match to start. We are going to be ready for the great challenge called England." Kane was comfortable with the weight of expectation accompanying England out here in Germany, with anything less than triumph in Berlin on 14 July likely to be viewed as a major disappointment. "I think every tournament possesses different expectations," said the Bayern Munich striker. "We have earned the right to be classed among the favourites. Looking at ourselves both individually and as a team, we have done lots of things well at previous tournaments but ultimately we are here to win." England's recent performances have been mixed - including a desperately poor loss to Iceland at Wembley in their final friendly before travelling to Germany - but the excitement surrounding the attacking talent in this squad is arguably greater than at any time under Southgate. He enters his fourth and potentially final major tournament as England manager with varying schools of thought still providing the narrative to his time in charge. One argument is that Southgate deserves huge credit for changing the temperature around the England team after inheriting a post-Sam Allardyce shambles from the Football Association in November 2016, putting together the best managerial sequence since Sir Alf Ramsey. He is sometimes viewed as a manager who does not get the credit he deserves for his rehabilitation of the national team or his tournament record. The other point of view paints him as a conservative nearly man presiding over missed opportunities in the World Cup semi-final against Croatia in Moscow six years ago, and the Euro 2020 final against Italy at Wembley, games lost after his side took an early lead before losing direction and, ultimately, both matches. Some would say the truth resides somewhere between the two. No-one can deny the progress but the failure to get over the line will linger until England actually cross it.
Jude Bellingham, 20, is already at his third major tournament with the senior England side
Southgate smiled as he addressed that question, saying: "I've been in the job eight years. I understand the landscape. Everybody who has been in this job has experienced the same thing. I just try to prepare the team in the best manner possible." In the next month, he and his players can answer the questions in the most emphatic manner possible by winning the tournament. If this does not happen then long-standing criticisms will be aimed at them and, as even suggested by Southgate himself, the manager may well leave. Asked about the possibility of this being his last tournament as England manager, he smiled again and added: "I don't want to put pressure on the other coaches here but it could be the last tournament for all of them as well. This is the world we live in. "I'm probably more relaxed about it because I have had previous experience of three before this one. I know the issues we have to deal with and the pathway we have to navigate. I'm very fortunate to have great players and a great staff and I'm really looking forward to the start of this tournament." The time for talking then stopped and Southgate and Kane strode away with the sort of purpose they hope England will bring to the Euro 2024 stage in Gelsenkirchen on Sunday night.
Southgate and Kane have worked together as manager and captain for four major tournaments now
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cw992w1pq17o
|
rt_football_articles_cw992w1pq17
|
|
Will The Sun newspaper endorse Keir Starmer's Labour Party? - BBC News
|
2024-06-16
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The paper has backed the Conservatives since 2010 but in 2024 that may change.
|
BBC InDepth
|
Had the paper’s portrayal of the Labour leader (including the eve-of-poll headline "If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain turn out the lights") swung it for the Tories? Did the Sun really have that much influence?
Rupert Murdoch, the Sun's owner, later said that headline had been "tasteless and wrong". He told the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press that, "We don't have that sort of power."
Some muttered that he would say that, wouldn't he, but even in 1992, some polls in the last week of the campaign had already pointed to a swing away from Labour. The Sun had simply spotted which way the wind was blowing, the argument went.
The Sun doesn't make its daily print readership public now but it’s believed to be around 600,000. It says it reaches nearly seven million people every day through a combination of digital and print.
The paper told us: "Sun readers are always at the heart of British elections and so naturally leaders of all parties are always eager to hear their views on the issues that matter to them and their families.”
It also says that the "live grilling" its readers will be able to give both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir before the election is unique to traditional print titles. Its Never Mind The Ballots: Election Showdown will be hosted by Harry Cole and broadcast on the paper’s website, YouTube and social channels.
Given that, perhaps it isn't that surprising that the question of who the Sun newspaper supports in an election is still viewed as totemic and prompts coverage far wider than is perhaps justified.
If the Sun does back Sir Keir, Ms Perrior says that endorsement is not worth what it once was but is "still worth having".
"He’s trying to say 'we are not the Labour Party that you worry about with your taxes or with your healthcare or with your national security’ and therefore an endorsement from the Sun really rubber stamps that, and says to the public or to their readers, that they believe that he can be trusted and he can be given the keys to Number 10.
"But, of course, the Sun also has YouTube channels that are broadcasting lots of videos. So it's not just the Sun in terms of the newspaper. They have different outlets now that they are continually pushing those political messages."
In 1997, when the paper backed Mr Blair, Mr Higgins told the BBC that he and the senior team had initially resisted when Rupert Murdoch dropped his “absolute bombshell”.
"Mr Murdoch said in no uncertain words that he detected a wind of change in the country and that we were going to switch horses."
Mr Higgins says the Sun always wants to be on the side of its readers but also “on the side of winners”.
Mr Campbell agrees. "They backed us because they knew we were going to win. That may be about to happen again and that, more than anything, is what will drive their judgement."
He doesn’t think Sir Keir needs to worry too much about the papers. "The right-wing papers will be worrying that their readers will think they are totally out of touch if they argue the Tories deserve another term. Let them sweat! And meanwhile speak to the country as a whole," he says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw88x6ww1p8o
|
news_articles_cw88x6ww1p8
|
|
What next for Sunak and Starmer as poll race enters second half? - BBC News
|
2024-06-16
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Chris Mason and Henry Zeffman find Sunak supporters downbeat and Starmer's team buoyant as polls fail to narrow.
|
Politics
|
As campaign passes halfway, mood in Tory and Labour camps could not be more different
The moods of the two main parties’ general election campaigns do not tell us what will happen on 4 July. But as we pass the halfway stage in the long slog to polling day, they do give us a strong flavour of how candidates, strategists and officials think this election is going for them. And right now, the moods of the Conservative and Labour campaigns could not be more different. Even the most fatalistic Labourites, for so long determined to avoid complacency, are beginning to admit that they believe government is within their grasp. Even the most loyal Sunakites, convinced for so long that during an election campaign voters would see the qualities that they see in their prime minister, are beginning to concede that the long-predicted narrowing of the gap between the two parties simply isn’t happening - at least not yet. “Utterly dire” was the stark response from one prominent Conservative to the campaign so far, “there’s no clear messaging or strategy.” They decried “the Kool-Aiders” working for Rishi Sunak who, they said, were not realistic about his strengths and weaknesses before thrusting him to the centre of what has so far been a presidential-style campaign.
Some Conservative candidates argue that the election result will be closer than many expect. But privately few even half-heartedly mount an argument that the overall outcome is up for grabs anymore. One candidate said that the prevailing pessimism in the party had sparked a vicious cycle. “People just stop campaigning,” they said. “A lot of colleagues haven’t really worked their seats before. When morale is down you can’t really do anything.” At the grassroots level, they said: “It’s quite a low-motivation, low-energy campaign. Volunteers are down, lots of Tory MPs who think they are going to lose their seats aren’t really bothering. And that makes it quite difficult inside the campaign to know what’s really going on.” Some Conservatives insist, though, the true picture of national support is nowhere near as dire as some models projecting a near-wipeout would suggest. “The Labour vote is softer than people think,” one source said. “In parts of England the solid Labour vote - people who say they’re definitely voting Labour - is no different to 2019. "What is different is there’s many, many, many more undecideds who were Conservatives. The problem is how do you get those people to come out when apathy is pretty high?”
The new message piloted by Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, warning of the consequences of a vast Labour majority, may have been targeted at finding ways to give those persistent undecideds a reason to vote Conservative. It was arguably the biggest moment of this third week of the campaign and a strategy from a campaign that feels like it has run out of better ideas. Nigel Farage’s decision to become leader of Reform UK and run for a seat himself was one of the biggest moments of the campaign so far. On Thursday evening, minutes before ITV's latest election debate started, a YouGov poll appeared, external putting Reform UK one percentage point ahead of the Conservatives for the first time. Not surprisingly, Mr Farage seized on this with glee, telling the ITV audience: “We are now the opposition to Labour." “This is the inflexion point. The only wasted vote now is a Conservative vote,” he added in an online video. It is only one poll, and 1% is within the margin of error. Let’s see what others suggest in the coming days. But psychologically it is the last thing the Conservatives need.
Nigel Farage makes the most of Reform's poll bounce
In Labour, meanwhile, there is a tangible buoyancy. Campaign insiders say that the first three weeks have gone smoothly, but insist that this is not the product of springing into action after Mr Sunak’s sudden decision to go to the polls. “Things are going well because of how carefully crafted things have been for a long time,” one campaign source said. “That’s a step change in standards, in professionalism. It’s the cultural change that Keir has brought. Everything is done properly.” The Labour campaign has not been without its wobbles. The saga over whether Diane Abbott would be a Labour candidate disrupted the party’s news "grid" and there was frustration at the top of the party at Sir Keir Starmer’s failure to immediately rebut Mr Sunak’s tax attack in the first televised debate last week. “In some ways that was good for us because it reminded people that not everything will go to plan,” a senior official said. To some on the left of the Labour Party - as signified by a protester early on in Sir Keir’s speech at the manifesto launch - the absence of radical new policies in the manifesto risks depressing turnout among leftwingers. Sir Keir embraced that critique in his speech, saying the stability in his programme was evidence of the stability he would bring to government. That’s why Labour chose to launch their manifesto at the same venue in Manchester where Sir Keir unveiled his “five missions” for government in February 2023, with messaging substantially the same as today’s.
The Euros will take attention away from the election
So what next for the Labour campaign? The party is proud of its so-called "ground war" – the pavement pounding, door knocking and leafleting that goes on away from the cameras. Privately, the party reckons its operation and data gathering is far superior to the Conservatives’. As for the "air war" – what you will see in media coverage – it will be the same kinds of events and certainly the same message. But Sir Keir’s visits will be taking place over the coming days in constituencies with larger Conservative majorities than those he has visited so far, the BBC understands - a clear display of confidence. Activists, too, are being encouraged to focus their energies on more and more ambitious target seats. One curious twist coming in the next few weeks, not lost on senior Labour people, is the start of the Euros, the football tournament. This will command attention and passion, disrupt television schedules and distract people at just the point the election campaign reaches its crescendo. How to campaign, in an inevitably partisan manner, as people, particularly in England and Scotland come together to watch the football, poses a challenge. Some at the top of the Labour Party are beginning to think, if a little furtively, of the aftermath of 4 July, too. Senior staff still do not know for sure what jobs they would have in Downing Street if Labour win but Sue Gray, Sir Keir’s chief of staff, has spent most of the campaign at party headquarters preparing detailed plans for government. Some shadow ministers have taken time off the campaign trail to hold "access talks" with civil servants in Whitehall. There are logistical questions about a Labour government, too. For example: would they let MPs take their traditional six-week summer recess? While plans are not yet developed on this, the answer appears to be a resounding no. “We can’t pass up the opportunity to hit the ground running,” one Labour source said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nn8k23zlqo
|
news_articles_c4nn8k23zlq
|
|
Will The Sun newspaper endorse Keir Starmer's Labour Party? - BBC News
|
2024-06-17
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The paper has backed the Conservatives since 2010 but in 2024 that may change.
|
BBC InDepth
|
Had the paper’s portrayal of the Labour leader (including the eve-of-poll headline "If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain turn out the lights") swung it for the Tories? Did the Sun really have that much influence?
Rupert Murdoch, the Sun's owner, later said that headline had been "tasteless and wrong". He told the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press that, "We don't have that sort of power."
Some muttered that he would say that, wouldn't he, but even in 1992, some polls in the last week of the campaign had already pointed to a swing away from Labour. The Sun had simply spotted which way the wind was blowing, the argument went.
The Sun doesn't make its daily print readership public now but it’s believed to be around 600,000. It says it reaches nearly seven million people every day through a combination of digital and print.
The paper told us: "Sun readers are always at the heart of British elections and so naturally leaders of all parties are always eager to hear their views on the issues that matter to them and their families.”
It also says that the "live grilling" its readers will be able to give both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir before the election is unique to traditional print titles. Its Never Mind The Ballots: Election Showdown will be hosted by Harry Cole and broadcast on the paper’s website, YouTube and social channels.
Given that, perhaps it isn't that surprising that the question of who the Sun newspaper supports in an election is still viewed as totemic and prompts coverage far wider than is perhaps justified.
If the Sun does back Sir Keir, Ms Perrior says that endorsement is not worth what it once was but is "still worth having".
"He’s trying to say 'we are not the Labour Party that you worry about with your taxes or with your healthcare or with your national security’ and therefore an endorsement from the Sun really rubber stamps that, and says to the public or to their readers, that they believe that he can be trusted and he can be given the keys to Number 10.
"But, of course, the Sun also has YouTube channels that are broadcasting lots of videos. So it's not just the Sun in terms of the newspaper. They have different outlets now that they are continually pushing those political messages."
In 1997, when the paper backed Mr Blair, Mr Higgins told the BBC that he and the senior team had initially resisted when Rupert Murdoch dropped his “absolute bombshell”.
"Mr Murdoch said in no uncertain words that he detected a wind of change in the country and that we were going to switch horses."
Mr Higgins says the Sun always wants to be on the side of its readers but also “on the side of winners”.
Mr Campbell agrees. "They backed us because they knew we were going to win. That may be about to happen again and that, more than anything, is what will drive their judgement."
He doesn’t think Sir Keir needs to worry too much about the papers. "The right-wing papers will be worrying that their readers will think they are totally out of touch if they argue the Tories deserve another term. Let them sweat! And meanwhile speak to the country as a whole," he says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw88x6ww1p8o
|
news_articles_cw88x6ww1p8
|
|
Will The Sun newspaper endorse Keir Starmer's Labour Party? - BBC News
|
2024-06-18
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The paper has backed the Conservatives since 2010 but in 2024 that may change.
|
BBC InDepth
|
Had the paper’s portrayal of the Labour leader (including the eve-of-poll headline "If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain turn out the lights") swung it for the Tories? Did the Sun really have that much influence?
Rupert Murdoch, the Sun's owner, later said that headline had been "tasteless and wrong". He told the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press that, "We don't have that sort of power."
Some muttered that he would say that, wouldn't he, but even in 1992, some polls in the last week of the campaign had already pointed to a swing away from Labour. The Sun had simply spotted which way the wind was blowing, the argument went.
The Sun doesn't make its daily print readership public now but it’s believed to be around 600,000. It says it reaches nearly seven million people every day through a combination of digital and print.
The paper told us: "Sun readers are always at the heart of British elections and so naturally leaders of all parties are always eager to hear their views on the issues that matter to them and their families.”
It also says that the "live grilling" its readers will be able to give both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir before the election is unique to traditional print titles. Its Never Mind The Ballots: Election Showdown will be hosted by Harry Cole and broadcast on the paper’s website, YouTube and social channels.
Given that, perhaps it isn't that surprising that the question of who the Sun newspaper supports in an election is still viewed as totemic and prompts coverage far wider than is perhaps justified.
If the Sun does back Sir Keir, Ms Perrior says that endorsement is not worth what it once was but is "still worth having".
"He’s trying to say 'we are not the Labour Party that you worry about with your taxes or with your healthcare or with your national security’ and therefore an endorsement from the Sun really rubber stamps that, and says to the public or to their readers, that they believe that he can be trusted and he can be given the keys to Number 10.
"But, of course, the Sun also has YouTube channels that are broadcasting lots of videos. So it's not just the Sun in terms of the newspaper. They have different outlets now that they are continually pushing those political messages."
In 1997, when the paper backed Mr Blair, Mr Higgins told the BBC that he and the senior team had initially resisted when Rupert Murdoch dropped his “absolute bombshell”.
"Mr Murdoch said in no uncertain words that he detected a wind of change in the country and that we were going to switch horses."
Mr Higgins says the Sun always wants to be on the side of its readers but also “on the side of winners”.
Mr Campbell agrees. "They backed us because they knew we were going to win. That may be about to happen again and that, more than anything, is what will drive their judgement."
He doesn’t think Sir Keir needs to worry too much about the papers. "The right-wing papers will be worrying that their readers will think they are totally out of touch if they argue the Tories deserve another term. Let them sweat! And meanwhile speak to the country as a whole," he says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw88x6ww1p8o
|
news_articles_cw88x6ww1p8
|
|
Carol Morgan: Husband found guilty of conspiring to murder wife - BBC News
|
2024-06-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Carol Morgan was found dead in the shop she ran with her husband more than 40 years ago.
|
Beds, Herts & Bucks
|
Husband guilty of conspiring to murder wife in 1981
A new witness in 2018 said Allen Morgan wanted to find a hitman to kill his wife
A husband accused of hiring a hitman to murder his former wife in 1981 has been found guilty. Carol Morgan, 36, was killed in a shop she ran with her husband Allen Morgan in Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire. His current wife and then lover Margaret Morgan, 75, was found not guilty of the same charge by a jury at Luton Crown Court.
Carol Morgan was killed in what police originally thought was a burglary gone wrong
Morgan, 73, found his wife's body in the storeroom when he returned from taking her two children, then aged 14 and 12, to a cinema in Luton. Prosecutors said the cinema trip gave Morgan a "cast-iron" alibi while a paid hitman murdered Carol and robbed the store. At the time detectives believed Carol had been the victim of a burglary that had gone wrong, but a cold case investigation in 2018 uncovered a new witness who said Morgan wanted to find a hitman to kill his wife. Jane Bunting, 60, told the jury she met Morgan in the Dolphin pub in Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, a few months before the murder. Ms Bunting, who was 17 at the time, said she was "appalled" and "horrified" when Morgan asked if her ex-boyfriend knew anyone who could kill. She said: “He'd say, 'I hate Carol', 'I don't want to be married to her', 'I wish she'd die', 'wouldn't an accident be nice?'."
Carol and Allen Morgan had been married since March 1977
A killer, who has never been caught, used an axe or machete to attack Carol before escaping with £435 in cash and 1,400 cigarettes. The Morgans had spiralling debts in 1981 and Carol had made a will leaving everything to her husband. The shop also had a life insurance policy linked to it, the court heard. Prosecutor Pavlos Panayi KC said: “The killer had some inside information before entering premises. "The obvious conclusion was that the killer was told by Allen Morgan where he would find the cash, which may well have constituted part payment for the murder.”
The jury heard that about a year before his wife's death Morgan had begun an affair with Margaret Spooner, whom he later married. Dean Morgan, Carol’s son, told the jury it was a “real shock” in 2019 when the police told him that his step-parents had been arrested on suspicion of being involved in the murder. He said he flew home from a holiday. The 57-year-old said he last spoke to his stepfather in 2023, when he was charged. “He told me it was all a mix up and I told him I had no idea about what happened. “The argument became heated and he put the phone down on me. We have not spoken since.”
Det Supt Carl Foster, who led the cold case investigation, said: “Carol was killed in a frenzied and sustained attack, suffering horrific injuries which cruelly cut short her life." He said the case had to rely on "good old-fashioned detective work" including retracing evidence and revisiting witnesses. He said a "change in people's allegiances" over the past four decades had been key to the case. “Carol was effectively erased from all memory, including those of her own two children, who have grown up without their mother, being raised by the man responsible for her death,” he added. He said the force remained committed to finding out who murdered Carol. Morgan has been remanded in custody and will be sentenced on 31 July.
As Allen Morgan’s guilty verdict was announced, he lifted his head to the ceiling and looked up. When the words "not guilty" were read out in relation to Margaret Morgan, she shook her head. As Mrs Morgan left the courtroom, she did not look back at her husband once. When Morgan was told he would be remanded in custody until his sentencing – rather than on bail as he has been during the trial - he appeared annoyed. An officer from Bedfordshire Police said it was a display of the arrogance he had shown throughout the two-month trial.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz77x3e8eeyo
|
news_articles_cz77x3e8eey
|
|
BBC Verify: Do Tory plans to save £12bn in welfare payments add up? - BBC News
|
2024-06-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The Conservatives say they can save £12bn from the welfare budget but Labour argue there are no extra savings to be had.
| null |
Do Tory plans to save £12bn in welfare payments add up?
• None The Conservatives say they can save £12bn from the welfare budget if they win the election - but Labour argues there are no extra savings to be had and there is a black hole in the Tory plans
• None While it appears some of the measures - and their associated costings - have previously been announced, the Conservatives are indicating much of the £12bn savings could come from changes to disability benefits which have not been fully laid out
• None But doing so will be challenging given research suggests the health of the UK's working age population is getting worse and the number of people claiming PIP is growing each month
The Conservatives are promising to make more cuts to National Insurance if they win the election. Part of the plan to pay for it is a significant reduction in welfare spending. The Tories say they will save £12bn a year from the welfare budget within five years - but Labour say their proposals will save nothing at all. The argument centres on what proposed savings have already been accounted for by the government's official forecaster - the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR). Its job is to work out what the government's plans will cost and how much they will save. It then publishes its figures at the Budget and Autumn Statement. Labour argue the Conservatives have already announced their plans, which means any potential savings have already been accounted for and will not save more money. The reality is both sides are exaggerating. Some of the welfare measures in the Tory manifesto do seem to have been previously announced in the autumn of 2023 including:
• None Investment in mental health treatments to help people back to work And these measures were factored into the OBR's spending calculations at the time of the Autumn Statement - or to use the jargon, the baseline. The measures were projected to increase employment over the next parliament. However, Mr Sunak is correct that not all of the welfare measures in the manifesto were previously announced or scored by the OBR including:
• None Accelerating the roll out of Universal Credit So the next question - can the Conservatives find enough new reforms to save £12bn a year? The Institute for Fiscal Studies says one potentially significant saving that has not been factored into the numbers already is the Tories' pledge to “reform disability benefits”. Disability benefit payments are projected to rise sharply over the coming parliament - from £39bn in 2023-24 to £58bn in 2028-29. Around £14bn of the £19bn increase is due to rising Personal Independence Payment (PIP) payouts. These are paid to people aged over 16 who have a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and face difficulty doing everyday tasks. Recipients can be in work.
If the Conservative pledge to “reform disability benefits” could stop this projected rise in PIP payouts then they would achieve around £12bn in welfare savings. But the manifesto does not give details of what changes it will bring in beyond pledging a “more objective” assessment of an individual's needs and implying some level of restriction on PIP claims from people with mental health problems. However, Tom Waters of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank warns that cutting the disability bill, external will be “far easier said than done”. He notes that the number of people getting disability benefit awards each month has doubled since the pandemic - up from 20,000 a month to 40,000. Research also suggests the health of working age people in the UK is getting worse, with the Health Foundation think tank saying this is a trend which “is not going away”, external. It is worth looking at the political context too. At the 2015 general election the Conservative manifesto promised to cut a further £12bn from the annual welfare budget – the same amount being pledged now. It was after the election that then-Chancellor George Osborne said he had found where to make cuts, including reducing the benefits cap for families and making the BBC fund TV licences for the over-75s. While some significant savings were found ministers were forced into a rethink after a political backlash over some of the measures. The Office for Budget Responsibility later concluded £4bn from the £12bn a year had not been found, external.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c97785q63n5o
|
news_articles_c97785q63n5
|
|
UK Amazon workers to be balloted on union recognition - BBC News
|
2024-06-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Workers are set to vote on whether GMB should be recognised at the online retailer's Coventry site.
|
Coventry & Warwickshire
|
Workers at Amazon in Coventry will be balloted over union recognition
A ballot process that could see Amazon recognise a trade union in the UK for the first time is to begin. GMB union officials were due to enter the trading giant's Coventry fulfilment site for the first time on Wednesday, where they were set to hold meetings with the 3,000 workers to try to win their vote. Workers will ultimately vote on whether they want a union to represent them with GMB needing 40% of them to vote in their favour. Amazon said employees have always had the choice of joining a union and that it placed “enormous” value on engagement with its employees.
If the union succeeds, it would mean the company will have to negotiate with the union on terms, pay and conditions for workers at the site. Amazon will also ask staff to attend meetings to hear the company's counter argument. Ballot papers will be sent out on 3 July with workplace voting starting on 8 July, lasting for six days. GMB said the result of the ballot would be announced on 15 July. The process will be overseen by the Government's Central Arbitration Committee.
Amanda Gearing, GMB senior organiser, said it was a historic moment. “They [Amazon] are a multi-billion-pound global company investing huge energy to resist efforts by working class people in Coventry to fight for a better life." Workers had stood up to be counted and demanded the chance to vote for union recognition, she said. GMB first began its campaign for recognition 18 months ago and has been involved in a lengthy dispute with Amazon, which has seen more than 30 days of strike action.
A spokesperson for Amazon said: “Our employees have the choice of whether or not to join a union. They always have. “Across Amazon we place enormous value on having daily conversations and engagement with our employees. It’s a strong part of our work culture. We value that direct relationship and so do our employees.” It said minimum starting pay has gone up to £12.30 and £13 per hour depending on location. "We also work hard to provide great benefits, a positive work environment and excellent career opportunities," it added.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11j9p9g0po
|
news_articles_cd11j9p9g0
|
|
Labour's battle between right and left causes Starmer to stumble - BBC News
|
2024-06-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The furore over Diane Abbott has exposed long-running divisions in the Labour Party
|
BBC InDepth
|
These arguments are happening in public at deafening volume because we are in a general election campaign, when Labour wants to be seen above all else as a sensible, credible force, and when many of the public will be taking a proper look at Keir Starmer for the first time.
The worst possible time to indulge in a big, fat – and avoidable – row. The plight of Diane Abbott could have been decided many months ago. The indecision looks like “the boys have treated her shabbily” says one party source.
A member of the shadow cabinet tells me only a few voters so far have brought the subject up on the doorstep, although they warn, “you have to be careful how this looks."
One focus group conducted by the polling group More in Common on Thursday night reported the issue was raised unprompted by members of the public thinking about who to choose.
One voter switching from Conservative to Labour said: “I worry if I was going to change from one party to another, would I trust somebody that's basically stabbing their own party member in the back?”
The group of voters it might concern the most, identified as the “progressive activist” by More In Common, makes up about 12% of the voting public, the most left-wing portion.
Two thirds of them, by their calculation, chose Labour, under Jeremy Corbyn, in 2019. That figure has already slid to a 60%, with evidence of many shifting across to the Greens.
The local election results already demonstrated there’s been a cost from Labour’s position on Gaza, in terms of lost seats, and there’s been disappointment among some environmental activists at the party shifting on its plans, although Keir Starmer would deny their ambitions have been watered down.
The relief for Labour is that most of the voters who the so-called “purge” might upset live in big cities and student towns where they already rack up chunky majorities.
So perhaps discontent over candidate selection will not make much of a difference on polling day. There is an argument too, still made by the most enthusiastic advocates of Starmer’s efforts to distance himself from Jeremy Corbyn, that having a massive public barney with one of Mr Corbyn’s friends is evidence of how much the party has moved on.
But this argument may be too clever by half, in the context of a campaign where every vote matters.
“Never buy into the idea that it’s a masterplan,” says another Labour source, “no one ever wants any public messiness - it doesn’t help”.
And, as one senior Labour MP suggested to me, the risk is the public will not come away with the impression that Starmer is different to Corbyn, they will just see a big, nasty row. Not ideal when Keir Starmer wants also to attack the Tories for fighting amongst themselves.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7220exjzvno
|
news_articles_c7220exjzvn
|
|
Donald Trump: Nothing will change White House fight, lawyer tells BBC - BBC News
|
2024-06-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Donald Trump's lawyer Alina Habba tells the BBC he would run for president even if he was in jail.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Donald Trump's lawyer Alina Habba says he would run for president even if he was in jail
One of Donald Trump's lawyers has told the BBC "nothing will change" his fight for the White House - despite being convicted following an historic trial in New York. Jurors found Mr Trump guilty on Thursday of falsifying business records to conceal hush money payments made to former porn star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election campaign. Mr Trump became the first US president to be convicted of a crime, but he has said the trial was rigged and the prosecution was politically orchestrated. Alina Habba has told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg the former president is a "victim of political, selective prosecution". Following the seven-week trial at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, Mr Trump was found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records. Mr Trump will be sentenced on 11 July. However, he confirmed he will be appealing against his criminal convictions. Ms Habba, 40, appeared alongside Mr Trump during the trial and said even if jailed, Mr Trump will still stand in the US presidential election in November.
Donald Trump's attorney Alina Habba (L) appeared alongside the former US president after he was convicted
"We have seen some corruption in this country that frankly has never seen before in our judicial system," Ms Habba told Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg. "It is very real, it is not posturing by any means, it is 100% a problem that this country is going to have to handle and get a grapple on in November. "He is running for president, nothing will change there. "The people that need him in this country, because frankly it's more important than anything anybody else thinks. "Our people are speaking loudly, they're donating, they're small donors, and they are standing up because they are afraid, because we cannot have this happen to us."
On Thursday Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to payments made to Stormy Daniels during his 2016 presidential campaign
In remarks at Trump Tower in New York on Friday, Mr Trump spoke for more than 30 minutes and angrily attacked his political opponents, the jury and the judge in his case. He called Judge Juan Merchan, who presided over his trial, a "tyrant" and claimed that he "literally crucified" witnesses. In response, President Joe Biden's campaign described Mr Trump as unhinged and thirsting for revenge. "That's how the American system of justice works," Mr Biden said, adding it was "reckless" and "irresponsible" for anyone to suggest the trial was rigged. Mr Trump's unprecedented conviction has entrenched bitter divisions in the US, in the run-up to November's vote.
Prosecutors successfully laid out a case Mr Trump was afraid Ms Daniels would fatally harm his 2016 presidential campaign by going public with an alleged sexual encounter, prompting him to pay her - then illegally hide the transaction. Ms Daniels herself gave evidence. In another development since the convictions, her lawyer told ABC News Ms Daniels wore a bulletproof vest when she went to the New York courthouse. Clark Brewster said: "It's so vicious and threatening and so I think from the standpoint of just the fear of what somebody might do," he said of the atmosphere for Ms Daniels. In exclusive comments to the Daily Mirror, external, Ms Daniels said Mr Trump should be jailed or used as "the volunteer punching bag at a women's shelter". She told the paper: "It’s not over for me. It’s never going to be over for me. "Trump may be guilty, but I still have to live with the legacy.”
Trump's team may use Stormy Daniels' testimony as grounds for appeal
Mr Blade added that despite the trial ending and bringing some relief, the stress was far from over. "It brings another weight upon her shoulders of what happens next," Mr Blade said.
Also on Saturday, the Trump campaign sent out a text message to supporters – one of more than a dozen sent since the verdict – which read in part: “They want me behind bars. They want me DEAD.” Some of his most fervent supporters, such as former Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson, have alleged without evidence there is a secret plot to assassinate Mr Trump. Others have made a less conspiratorial argument – pointing out the maximum penalty Mr Trump faces, four years for each of 34 felony counts, would effectively mean he would spend the rest of his life in prison. Mr Trump alluded to this in his most recent fundraising message, saying his enemies are “attempting to JAIL me for life as an innocent man”. However, legal experts agree Mr Trump will not receive anywhere near the maximum, and will be sentenced to a much shorter jail sentence, if he is given any prison time at all.
The full interview with Alina Habba will be played on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg on BBC One and BBC iPlayer at 09:00 BST on Sunday 2 June.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crggwzl6vq1o
|
news_articles_crggwzl6vq1
|
|
Carol Morgan: Husband found guilty of conspiring to murder wife - BBC News
|
2024-06-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Carol Morgan was found dead in the shop she ran with her husband more than 40 years ago.
|
Beds, Herts & Bucks
|
Husband guilty of conspiring to murder wife in 1981
A new witness in 2018 said Allen Morgan wanted to find a hitman to kill his wife
A husband accused of hiring a hitman to murder his former wife in 1981 has been found guilty. Carol Morgan, 36, was killed in a shop she ran with her husband Allen Morgan in Leighton Buzzard, Bedfordshire. His current wife and then lover Margaret Morgan, 75, was found not guilty of the same charge by a jury at Luton Crown Court.
Carol Morgan was killed in what police originally thought was a burglary gone wrong
Morgan, 73, found his wife's body in the storeroom when he returned from taking her two children, then aged 14 and 12, to a cinema in Luton. Prosecutors said the cinema trip gave Morgan a "cast-iron" alibi while a paid hitman murdered Carol and robbed the store. At the time detectives believed Carol had been the victim of a burglary that had gone wrong, but a cold case investigation in 2018 uncovered a new witness who said Morgan wanted to find a hitman to kill his wife. Jane Bunting, 60, told the jury she met Morgan in the Dolphin pub in Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, a few months before the murder. Ms Bunting, who was 17 at the time, said she was "appalled" and "horrified" when Morgan asked if her ex-boyfriend knew anyone who could kill. She said: “He'd say, 'I hate Carol', 'I don't want to be married to her', 'I wish she'd die', 'wouldn't an accident be nice?'."
Carol and Allen Morgan had been married since March 1977
A killer, who has never been caught, used an axe or machete to attack Carol before escaping with £435 in cash and 1,400 cigarettes. The Morgans had spiralling debts in 1981 and Carol had made a will leaving everything to her husband. The shop also had a life insurance policy linked to it, the court heard. Prosecutor Pavlos Panayi KC said: “The killer had some inside information before entering premises. "The obvious conclusion was that the killer was told by Allen Morgan where he would find the cash, which may well have constituted part payment for the murder.”
The jury heard that about a year before his wife's death Morgan had begun an affair with Margaret Spooner, whom he later married. Dean Morgan, Carol’s son, told the jury it was a “real shock” in 2019 when the police told him that his step-parents had been arrested on suspicion of being involved in the murder. He said he flew home from a holiday. The 57-year-old said he last spoke to his stepfather in 2023, when he was charged. “He told me it was all a mix up and I told him I had no idea about what happened. “The argument became heated and he put the phone down on me. We have not spoken since.”
Det Supt Carl Foster, who led the cold case investigation, said: “Carol was killed in a frenzied and sustained attack, suffering horrific injuries which cruelly cut short her life." He said the case had to rely on "good old-fashioned detective work" including retracing evidence and revisiting witnesses. He said a "change in people's allegiances" over the past four decades had been key to the case. “Carol was effectively erased from all memory, including those of her own two children, who have grown up without their mother, being raised by the man responsible for her death,” he added. He said the force remained committed to finding out who murdered Carol. Morgan has been remanded in custody and will be sentenced on 31 July.
As Allen Morgan’s guilty verdict was announced, he lifted his head to the ceiling and looked up. When the words "not guilty" were read out in relation to Margaret Morgan, she shook her head. As Mrs Morgan left the courtroom, she did not look back at her husband once. When Morgan was told he would be remanded in custody until his sentencing – rather than on bail as he has been during the trial - he appeared annoyed. An officer from Bedfordshire Police said it was a display of the arrogance he had shown throughout the two-month trial.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz77x3e8eeyo
|
news_articles_cz77x3e8eey
|
|
Will The Sun newspaper endorse Keir Starmer's Labour Party? - BBC News
|
2024-06-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The paper has backed the Conservatives since 2010 but in 2024 that may change.
|
BBC InDepth
|
Had the paper’s portrayal of the Labour leader (including the eve-of-poll headline "If Kinnock wins today will the last person to leave Britain turn out the lights") swung it for the Tories? Did the Sun really have that much influence?
Rupert Murdoch, the Sun's owner, later said that headline had been "tasteless and wrong". He told the Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press that, "We don't have that sort of power."
Some muttered that he would say that, wouldn't he, but even in 1992, some polls in the last week of the campaign had already pointed to a swing away from Labour. The Sun had simply spotted which way the wind was blowing, the argument went.
The Sun doesn't make its daily print readership public now but it’s believed to be around 600,000. It says it reaches nearly seven million people every day through a combination of digital and print.
The paper told us: "Sun readers are always at the heart of British elections and so naturally leaders of all parties are always eager to hear their views on the issues that matter to them and their families.”
It also says that the "live grilling" its readers will be able to give both Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir before the election is unique to traditional print titles. Its Never Mind The Ballots: Election Showdown will be hosted by Harry Cole and broadcast on the paper’s website, YouTube and social channels.
Given that, perhaps it isn't that surprising that the question of who the Sun newspaper supports in an election is still viewed as totemic and prompts coverage far wider than is perhaps justified.
If the Sun does back Sir Keir, Ms Perrior says that endorsement is not worth what it once was but is "still worth having".
"He’s trying to say 'we are not the Labour Party that you worry about with your taxes or with your healthcare or with your national security’ and therefore an endorsement from the Sun really rubber stamps that, and says to the public or to their readers, that they believe that he can be trusted and he can be given the keys to Number 10.
"But, of course, the Sun also has YouTube channels that are broadcasting lots of videos. So it's not just the Sun in terms of the newspaper. They have different outlets now that they are continually pushing those political messages."
In 1997, when the paper backed Mr Blair, Mr Higgins told the BBC that he and the senior team had initially resisted when Rupert Murdoch dropped his “absolute bombshell”.
"Mr Murdoch said in no uncertain words that he detected a wind of change in the country and that we were going to switch horses."
Mr Higgins says the Sun always wants to be on the side of its readers but also “on the side of winners”.
Mr Campbell agrees. "They backed us because they knew we were going to win. That may be about to happen again and that, more than anything, is what will drive their judgement."
He doesn’t think Sir Keir needs to worry too much about the papers. "The right-wing papers will be worrying that their readers will think they are totally out of touch if they argue the Tories deserve another term. Let them sweat! And meanwhile speak to the country as a whole," he says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw88x6ww1p8o
|
news_articles_cw88x6ww1p8
|
|
Travis Scott arrested in Miami over intoxication and trespassing - BBC News
|
2024-06-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The rapper is detained under his real name, Jacques Bermon Webster, according to custody records.
|
Newsbeat
|
Travis Scott was detained under his real name, Jacques Bermon Webster
Travis Scott has been arrested in Miami on suspicion of disorderly intoxication and trespassing over an argument on a boat. The American rapper was detained by police at Miami Beach Marina at around 01:45 local time on Thursday, according to official records. An arrest report from Miami Beach Police Department seen by BBC Newsbeat says officers were called to reports of people fighting on a yacht. The 33-year-old was detained under his real name, Jacques Bermon Webster, according to the Miami-Dade County Corrections Department's website.
Police were called to reports of a disturbance on a yacht and saw Travis Scott shouting at people on the vessel. Officers say they spoke to the rapper and could "sense a strong smell of alcohol" on his breath. According to the report they told him to leave the dock, which he did, but he "walked backwards, yelling obscenities to the occupants of the vessel". Scott then left the area, but was seen by officers five minutes later returning and attempting to head back to the yacht, according to the report. When challenged he "disregarded officers' commands" and became "erratic", shouting and disturbing local residents, according to police. Following his arrest, the report says the defendant later admitted that he had been drinking alcohol, stating: "It's Miami." "Mr Scott was briefly detained due to a misunderstanding," his legal representative Bradford Cohen said in a statement on Thursday. "There was absolutely no physical altercation involved, and we thank the authorities for working with us towards a swift and amicable resolution."
Travis Scott is a 10-time Grammy Award nominee and one of the biggest hip-hop acts in the world. He was previously in a relationship with Kylie Jenner and the pair have two children together. His European tour is due to start in the Netherlands on 28 June, with a show scheduled in London and at the Co-op Live venue in Manchester on 13 July. In 2021, 10 fans died in a crowd surge at Scott's Astroworld festival in Houston, Texas. He did not face criminal charges over their deaths but remains involved in civil cases alleging that organisers were at fault. Last year he scored his first UK number one album with Utopia, which was released a week after a planned show in front of Egypt's pyramids was cancelled.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cldd457vk3ro
|
news_articles_cldd457vk3r
|
|
Euro 2024: Should England start Phil Foden against Denmark? - BBC Sport
|
2024-06-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSport/
|
Chief football writer Phil McNulty looks at how Gareth Southgate can get Phil Foden's brilliance at club level to translate into England's Euro 2024 campaign.
|
European Championship
|
Will Southgate stick or twist with Foden?
Phil Foden created one chance against Serbia on Sunday
Gareth Southgate's England squad selection for Euro 2024 received widespread approval for being bold and courageous - and yet he is still revisiting a debate stretching back two decades. It is a conversation that returns to the era when England's then-manager Sven-Goran Eriksson failed to cash in what looked like a golden ticket stamped with the names of Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Paul Scholes. Eriksson's star-struck approach led him to pack his team with England's best individuals rather than shape a fully-functioning balanced side, a forced and flawed strategy that left the so-called 'Golden Generation' unfulfilled at international level while sweeping up major prizes regularly with their clubs. It ended with a disillusioned Scholes, wasted on the left flank at Euro 2004 in Portugal, calling time early on his international career, a world-class operator with Manchester United marginalised by England. And now there are hints of old arguments being raked over once more as England continue their Euro 2024 campaign against Denmark in Frankfurt on Thursday. Southgate is not at the Eriksson stage yet - indeed he may never reach it - but he will be aware of the growing volume of the discussion around Manchester City's Phil Foden, England's young superstar Jude Bellingham and the make-up of his midfield elsewhere. All the indications backstage in Frankfurt suggested Southgate will keep faith with Foden in the mainly left flank role he filled against Serbia, with Liverpool's Trent Alexander-Arnold alongside Declan Rice in the centre. It has not silenced the argument and the noise increased after Foden - the Footballer of the Year with 27 league goals as Manchester City secured a fourth successive title - cut a peripheral figure in England's opening Euro 2024 win against Serbia in Gelsenkirchen, while Bellingham was the dominant personality in all aspects, scoring the decisive goal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Southgate was playing his cards close to his chest when asked about his team selection for England's second group game against the Danes. Will he stick or twist? Will Southgate retain belief that Foden's brilliance at club level will naturally translate into Euro 2024, or does he go for a smoother fit on the left flank? Would a change to Foden's role be an early admission of defeat? He also staked a lot on choosing Alexander-Arnold in midfield with Arsenal's Rice, but that may yet be a horses for courses pick depending on the style and standard of opposition. Southgate has a track record of not changing teams early in major tournaments so the smart money is on him retaining an unchanged side - but if and when he does, there will be firm focus on Foden and Alexander-Arnold to further back up the manager's faith, or there may be changes ahead. England's manager would be courageous to change it. He will also be showing the courage of his convictions to keep it as it was. It is the balancing act of an England manager. Southgate certainly gave a glowing reference to trusted old lieutenant Kieran Trippier, whose role at left-back on the side that failed to function against Serbia was highlighted alongside Foden's display in front of him. "Ask anyone who plays in front of Kieran," said Southgate. "They will tell you the way he communicates and talks them through the game is an enormous help."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Pundits discuss what changes England might make for their game with Denmark
How Southgate solves the Foden conundrum will fundamentally shape England's campaign in Germany. It may leave him with the hardest choice of all as Euro 2024 moves on: whether to keep faith with Foden or look elsewhere within his squad. Bellingham's role as the focal point and driving force of England's team has resulted in Foden being pushed into a wider role. When he moved into more central areas, he still failed to have any impact in the 1-0 victory against the Serbs. Southgate will not be making any adjustments to the role of Bellingham, who received lavish praise from Denmark coach Kasper Hjulmand. "You see how good he is at 20. I think he will be very, very good when he is 23," Hjulmand said. "You see the way he carries himself, how he plays, and you are looking at a great player." Foden is convinced he can make it work with Bellingham and improve as Euro 2024 progresses. Now he must hope his manager feels the same, with Newcastle United's impressive Anthony Gordon pushing his claims and looking a more natural fit with his pace and smooth, direct approach down the left. For Foden to make his case more compelling, he has to impose himself on proceedings in a manner he has done all too rarely for England - and do it against Denmark on Thursday.
Foden had 64 touches but only one in the Serbia penalty area, creating one chance
Ian Wright and Cesc Fabregas both believe the initiative lies with Foden. "Do you want it enough to make a difference and hold the ball for your team? Do you want to make things happen? Do you enjoy getting the ball under pressure?" said Fabregas. "You need to take this responsibility to grow. I think players like Foden, they need to step up." Foden hardly seems the type to be intimidated or shrink in the the presence of a colleague, but there is no doubt the player seen at Manchester City has not presented himself too often for England. Time is short at major tournaments. Margins for error can be very small. Denmark did not entirely convince with constant denials that they still feel a major sense of injustice about the manner of their defeat by England in the Euro 2020 semi-final at Wembley - when Harry Kane scoring the deciding goal in a 2-1 win from a rebound following a highly contentious penalty awarded for a challenge on Raheem Sterling. Under their excellent coach Hjulmand, they present stubborn and dangerous opposition - making it even more important Southgate gets the key choices right.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Phil Foden: How do England get the best out of him?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cprr8gdjn85o
|
rt_football_articles_cprr8gdjn85
|
|
Scottish Greens manifesto: Key policies analysed - BBC News
|
2024-06-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The Scottish Greens promise to "turbo charge" Scotland's journey to net zero.
|
Scotland Politics
|
The Scottish Greens have launched their 2024 election manifesto, in which they promise to "turbo charge" Scotland's journey to net zero with a call to invest £28bn a year in tackling climate change. The document, external sets out the party's plans if it was to form a government. Here are some of their key policies, analysed by BBC Scotland correspondents.
It's probably no surprise that the Scottish Greens go the furthest of all the main parties when it comes to their position on oil and gas exploration. Not only do they want the next UK government to end new licences, they also want to see recently issued ones revoked. That would be a costly business because companies will have already invested millions as licence holders and so will demand compensation, probably through the courts. The manifesto quotes the International Energy Agency which says new fossil fuel production must end now if global climate change targets are to be met. They also want to see an end to all subsidies and tax breaks for the fossil fuels sector which would overturn very long standing agreements on how the expensive job of decommissioning the North Sea will be paid for. The industry has contributed billions to the economy since the start of the oil boom in the 1960s and the understanding was that they'd receive these tax breaks in return for the clean up. The party wants to see Scotland at the heart of a clean energy revolution but says expensive new nuclear power must be ruled out of the mix.
The Scottish Greens are long-time backers of independence – and their manifesto includes the call for the powers to hold constitutional referendums to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Their argument mirrors that of the SNP, namely that it should be up to Scots to decide when to have another vote. So far, calls for a second referendum have been denied, and Labour has been clear it doesn’t support one. With backing for independence hovering around 50%, the Greens say they recognise there’s more work to do to persuade voters of their case. And in the meantime, the party wants more devolution, including full control over taxation, and greater borrowing powers for the Scottish government. The Greens say those powers would provide the opportunity to demonstrate how things can be done differently. They also want to remove the UK government’s veto over Holyrood legislation, after the mechanism was used by the Scottish Secretary to prevent a new system of gender recognition being enacted in Scotland. The Scottish Greens were big supporters of that policy – and moves to block it have fuelled their argument that Holyrood has been treated with contempt.
The Scottish Greens don't pretend that they would be able to influence health policy in Scotland through the results of this UK general election. But they say their overarching goal of Scottish independence offers a route to "powers to protect our right to care from the NHS". They say that in an independent Scotland, the Greens would ensure a written constitution could offer the legal right to free healthcare, including hospital treatment, mental health services, dentistry and eyecare. But past experience of legal guarantees to healthcare in Scotland have not proved enough to make it a reality. Since 2011, the Scottish government's treatment time guarantee has set out a legal obligation for health boards to provide inpatient and day case treatment for patients within 12 weeks of diagnosis. But in the latest quarterly statistics, only 56.7% of those patients had actually been seen within this timeframe. The Scottish Greens might argue that in an independent nation, the government would have more levers of control to make this a possibility. But putting something down in writing does not instantly provide the funding and the staff to make it happen overnight.
For the first time, Scottish Greens can set out what they've done in government as well as what they would like Westminster to do next. It gives their manifesto a sharper edge, or perhaps it just reads that way after having seen Scottish Green ministers at work. This is no longer the politics of wishful thinking. The party's programme for Westminster, however, remains that of a pressure group seeking opposition seats inside the Commons, with plans that don't have to add up. They would, however, combine to bring radical change, and unabashedly so. This plants the party firmly on the left of politics, in case there was any doubt, with nationalisation of buses to broadband to Loganair's island air services. There's intervention in the economy, to cap food prices while inflation rides high, to introduce a universal basic income, a scrappage scheme for boillers and cars while reinstating dates for ending their sale, and lowering the Bank of England lending rate for green investments. This puts Scottish Greens close to trade unions on ideas for stronger worker rights, parental and compassionate leave, and a four-day week with no loss of pay. On tax, the target is wealth, with a tax on those with assets worth more than £3.4m, ranging from 1% up to 10% per year, bringing in an estimated £70bn. As with the SNP, it's proposed that UK income tax should match Scotland’s higher rates and more thresholds. At least one Green proposal is likely to be considered by the next Westminster government, even if bigger parties won't admit it now: a system for charging drivers per mile for use of the road, to replace fuel duty revenue as petrol and diesel is extinguished.
The Scottish Greens argue drugs possession should be decriminalised by the UK government and/or that the policy be devolved to Holyrood, so Scottish ministers have the power to change the law themselves. The Greens say a change in drugs laws would ease the introduction of safe consumption rooms and drug checking services. These checking services already operate in countries including Canada and allow individuals to submit drug samples for analysis and get individual feedback. The aim is to reduce the harm of street drugs which have increasingly unknown strengths, but in the UK the services require licences issued by the Home Office. The Greens suggest the current legal framework acts as a barrier. Drugs policy is currently reserved to Westminster. Health is devolved though and some would argue there are improvements in healthcare which the Scottish government could make within its existing powers.
The Scottish Greens – like the SNP – want to devolve broadcasting to the Scottish parliament. But they would go further, establishing a Scottish media authority and legislation which would monitor social media as well as mainstream output. That monitoring would extend to hate speech, with the potential to ban advertising which “promotes hate speech or undermines democracy.” They support the continuation of the licence fee in funding the BBC, but believe it needs to be reviewed in a fast-changing media landscape. They want to see the expansion of the Local Democracy Reporting scheme, which is operated by the BBC, to support local newspapers and give more space to community voices. They’d also like to introduce a levy on paid streaming services - with incentives for those who invest in content production in Scotland. They also want to ensure that nationally important events like football and the Eurovision Song Contest are available on free to air services.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cevv9dkwekeo
|
news_articles_cevv9dkweke
|
|
TikTok confirms it offered US government a 'kill switch' - BBC News
|
2024-06-21
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The platform made the disclosure as part of its legal challenge against a law forcing its sale in the US.
|
Technology
|
TikTok says it offered the US government the power to shut the platform down in an attempt to address lawmakers' data protection and national security concerns. It disclosed the "kill switch" offer, which it made in 2022, as it began its legal fight against legislation that will ban the app in America unless Chinese parent company ByteDance sells it. The law has been introduced because of concerns TikTok might share US user data with the Chinese government - claims it and ByteDance have always denied. TikTok and ByteDance are urging the courts to strike the legislation down. "This law is a radical departure from this country’s tradition of championing an open Internet, and sets a dangerous precedent allowing the political branches to target a disfavored speech platform and force it to sell or be shut down," they argued in their legal submission.
They also claimed the US government refused to engage in any serious settlement talks after 2022, and pointed to the "kill switch" offer as evidence of the lengths they had been prepared to go. TikTok says the mechanism would have allowed the government the "explicit authority to suspend the platform in the United States at the US government's sole discretion" if it did not follow certain rules. A draft "National Security Agreement", proposed by TikTok in August 2022, would have seen the company having to follow rules such as properly funding its data protection units and making sure that ByteDance did not have access to US users' data. The "kill switch" could have been triggered by the government if it broke this agreement, it claimed. In a letter - first reported by the Washington Post, external - addressed to the US Department of Justice, TikTok's lawyer alleges that the government "ceased any substantive negotiations" after the proposal of the new rules. The letter, dated 1 April 2024, says the US government ignored requests to meet for further negotiations. It also alleges the government did not respond to TikTok's invitation to "visit and inspect its Dedicated Transparency Center in Maryland".
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia will hold oral arguments on lawsuits filed by TikTok and ByteDance, along with TikTok users, in September. Legislation signed in April by President Joe Biden gives ByteDance until January next year to divest TikTok's US assets or face a ban. It was born of concerns that data belonging to the platform's 170 million US users could be passed on to the Chinese government. TikTok denies that it shares foreign users' data with China and called the legislation an "unconstitutional ban" and affront to the US right to free speech. It insists that US data does not leave the country, and is overseen by American company Oracle, in a deal which is called Project Texas. However, a Wall Street Journal investigation, external in January 2024 found that some data was still being shared between TikTok in the US and ByteDance in China.
In May, a US government official told the Washington Post that "the solution proposed by the parties at the time would be insufficient to address the serious national security risks presented." They added: "While we have consistently engaged with the company about our concerns and potential solutions, it became clear that divestment from its foreign ownership was and remains necessary."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwz7l02j0o
|
news_articles_cxwwz7l02j0
|
|
No guns for domestic abuse suspects, Supreme Court rules - BBC News
|
2024-06-21
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The court showed there are limits to the right to bear arms as it upheld a gun ban for those under restraining orders.
|
US & Canada
|
No guns for domestic abuse suspects, top US court rules
Actress Julianne Moore speaks outside the court during November arguments
People placed under restraining orders for suspected domestic violence do not have a right to own guns, the Supreme Court has ruled. The 8-1 decision upholds a 30-year-old law that bars those with restraining orders for domestic abuse from owning firearms. A lower court had struck down that federal statute as not "consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation". Friday's ruling marks a rare victory for firearms restrictions in the top court.
Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion, with all but one of his colleagues in agreement. The policy of disarming alleged domestic abusers is in line with "what common sense suggests", he wrote. "When an individual poses a clear threat of physical violence to another, the threatening individual may be disarmed," he said. Justice Clarence Thomas, arguably the most conservative member of the court, was the lone dissenter. He wrote that "today's decision puts at risk the Second Amendment rights of many more". At the centre of the case decided on Friday was Zackey Rahimi, a Texas man with a history of armed violence against girlfriends and shootings in public places. In 2020, his then-girlfriend was granted a restraining order by a court after he dragged her into his car, causing her to hit her head on the dashboard during an argument near his Arlington, Texas, home. He also shot at a bystander who witnessed the assault. Despite a court order suspending his handgun licence and barring him from possessing any firearms, he kept his weapons and was involved in five shootings in public later that year. A small-time drug dealer, according to court filings, Rahimi is currently serving a six-year sentence in a Texas federal prison after pleading guilty to violating the court order.
He is also currently awaiting state charges related to his shooting spree. The US Constitution's Second Amendment guarantees the right "to keep and bear arms". In 2022, the US Supreme Court significantly expanded gun rights when it decided the Second Amendment protects a broad right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defence. It also created a new test for gun laws, specifying they must be rooted in "historical tradition". Justice Thomas delivered that opinion. After that decision, Rahimi filed an appeal against his conviction, arguing it did not pass the Supreme Court's new test. In a handwritten letter from jail last year, he also vowed to "stay away from all firearms and weapons” once he is released. During a November hearing, Rahimi's lawyer, James Matthew Wright, said he could find no historical precedent for people being disarmed, save those convicted of a felony - which does not include the subjects of restraining orders. But the US government argued that "dangerous" individuals, such as loyalists to Britain in the American Revolutionary War era, had been disarmed in the past. The government's lawyer also said women living in a home with an armed domestic abuser were five times more likely to be murdered. The number of women killed in Texas by an armed partner has nearly doubled over the past 10 years, according to the Texas Council on Family Violence, a non-profit.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
In his opinion on Friday, Justice Roberts wrote: "Since the founding, our Nation's firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms." "When a restraining order contains a finding that an individual poses a credible threat to the physical safety of an intimate partner, that individual may - consistent with the Second Amendment - be banned from possessing firearms." He added that "some courts have misunderstood the methodology of our recent Second Amendment cases". The 2022 precedent was "not meant to suggest a law trapped in amber", he said. Five separate justices wrote concurring opinions, with two liberals - Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson - suggesting that blame for confusion "may lie with us" rather than other courts. Writing in dissent, Justice Thomas argued there was "not a single historical" justification for the majority's ruling.
Many Second Amendment advocates were disappointed by the ruling, but several said it was narrow in scope. Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, wrote in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that the decision allowed authorities "to disarm persons subject to restraining orders, but only while the order in effect". "It did not decide whether the government can prohibit broad classes of people from possessing arms permanently, and it rejected the government’s argument that 'irresponsible' people could be prohibited from possessing arms," he said. Brady, the nation's oldest gun control group, hailed the decision as "an important victory for gun violence and domestic violence prevention". "Lately, the Court has gotten a lot wrong and has upheld extreme rulings," its chief legal officer, Douglas Letter, said in a statement. "Yet even this Court understands how reasonable this law is and agrees that proven approaches preventing gun violence are completely constitutional."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy77g704ldzo
|
news_articles_cy77g704ldz
|
|
Why are devolved issues dominating a UK election? - BBC News
|
2024-06-21
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The vote is a UK general election, and thus will not directly affect how some services are delivered here.
|
Scotland Politics
|
The vote on July 4 is a UK general election, and thus will not directly affect how the Scottish government delivers services north of the border. But those services and policies which are devolved to the Scottish Parliament are still playing a huge role in the campaign. Why aren't Scottish politicians more concerned about sticking to reserved, rather than devolved, areas?
The advent of the Scottish Parliament in 1999 created two different sets of powers for politicians - those devolved for MSPs to work with, and those which remain reserved to Westminster and its MPs. Devolved matters include important policy areas like health, education, housing, justice and policing, economic development and the environment. Reserved matters meanwhile include defence and national security, foreign affairs, immigration, trade and currency. Over the years, extra powers have also been devolved to Holyrood - including the management of certain welfare benefits and some tax-raising powers including a Scottish rate of income tax. This patchwork of who is in charge of what can be difficult to follow - and no more so than during an election campaign, when politicians are looking to craft straightforward messages which "cut through" to voters. When the big UK-wide campaigns are talking about the state of the health services, it can be difficult to block that out in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. And Scots are obviously going to have their views of the candidates shaped by their experience of the NHS - despite the fact it's managed entirely from Holyrood. Voters simply aren't going to base their views solely on a prospective MP's position on foreign affairs, if that party is also talking about health and education too.
Unless this is a cross-border service, its likely Douglas Ross is on a devolved train
It also feels like the politicians themselves don't particularly care. The SNP has made its record in government a prominent campaign issue. Candidates and ministers alike love to point to things they have delivered, like the Scottish Child Payment and free bus travel for under-22s. Equally the Holyrood opposition parties have put criticism of the SNP's record front and centre of their pitches. The Conservatives spent the first half the campaign talking about Michael Matheson's iPad data bill - a Holyrood disciplinary issue. Labour, keen to take seats from the SNP, never misses a chance to paint the government in Edinburgh as being as allegedly chaotic as the one in London. The Lib Dems meanwhile frequently major on improving access to NHS dentists and GPs. There is an element of pragmatism to this. If waiting times and access to treatment are coming up on the doorsteps, canvassers are not going to chide voters that actually they can vote on that in 2026. They're going to find policies and arguments to suit whatever people are most interested in.
Anas Sarwar's visit to a dairy farm would fall into the devolved area of agriculture
And in fairness there are ways in which the reserved policies being discussed at this election will ultimately overlap with devolved ones. Take health. If the next UK government were to increase health spending, that would have a knock-on effect on the Holyrood budget. Spending in devolved areas triggers what are known as "Barnett consequentials" - the devolved administrations get a share of the funding, but can spend it on whatever they please. In practice, consequentials resulting from health spending down south are almost always passed on to health services in Scotland, because ministers in Edinburgh don't want to look as if they're less dedicated to the NHS. There are also the usual claims and counter-claims about privatisation and who is going to "save the NHS". So that gives candidates in Scotland a reasonable excuse to talk about health in this campaign, even though it's devolved. It's also worth reflecting that just became issues are reserved, they do not operate in an entirely independent atmosphere. There may be a devolved rate of income tax, but key measures like the tax-free allowance and National Insurance Contributions are reserved, meaning the systems are quite closely interlinked. The same goes for welfare - many benefits have been devolved, but some like Universal Credit are still run from Westminster. Some of the current proposals to reform welfare at a UK level could thus put pressure on the system run from Edinburgh.
Like the rest of the health services, dentistry is devolved
Another quirk of devolution that impacts on this contest is what known as the pre-election period, or "purdah". Essentially the business of government can and must continue during the campaign. John Swinney is still the first minister, and his cabinet keep going with the day job - and civil servants support them in delivering existing commitments. But they cannot use the machinery of government for anything which might give them an advantage in the election. There essentially has to be a firewall between government business and party campaigning. For example when John Swinney took a train trip to mark the reopening of the Levenmouth railway line, he then had to shift to a separate party event as SNP leader rather than first minister before he could engage in any electioneering. This isn't just about politicians being clear about when they're acting as a partisan party member or as a cabinet secretary pursuing government work. It also applies to the use of the civil service, and government announcements during the campaign. Because Mr Swinney was freshly in the door as first minister at the point the election was called, he had a whole host of announcements planned about how he would run the government. But most of them have had to be shelved, as outlined by the head of the civil service, external in Scotland. The medium-term financial strategy - which might have included future tax plans - had to be paused, along with its accompanying fiscal forecasts. So have the planned energy strategy, just transition plan and oil and gas policy publications, all expected this summer.
The work that goes on at Holyrood isn't meant to interfere in a Westminster poll
That has created difficulties for the SNP when the campaigns focus in on things like the North Sea oil and gas industry. The government hasn't yet published its formal strategy for the sector, and now they're not allowed to until after the election. But SNP politicians are asked about it constantly. They have had to stick to their interim position of stressing the importance of a "climate compatibility checkpoint", which is much more nuanced and much harder to fit on a leaflet than the binary positions of the Conservatives (who are in favour of new licences for exploration) and Labour (who wouldn't grant any). The party's manifesto ultimately plumped for an "in-between" position of assessing bids on a case by case basis. But this is necessarily a policy formulated by party officials, rather than civil servants with reams of data and expertise to hand. And Mr Swinney is still routinely pursued to explain exactly what it means. The Conservatives have run into similar problems around their tax claims, with the civil service distancing itself from Rishi Sunak's attack line about the cost of a Labour government. So it absolutely is helpful to have an understanding of what is devolved and what is reserved during this campaign, and where figures are coming from impartial government officials or partisan party campaigners. But in the debates and doorstep encounters of the next few weeks, the lines are likely to remain pretty blurry.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrr1z51y0jo
|
news_articles_cjrr1z51y0j
|
|
Swinney: Parliament stamps not used for campaign - BBC News
|
2024-06-23
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The first minister responds to fresh claims about SNP parliamentary resources being used for campaigning.
|
Scotland Politics
|
Swinney: Parliament stamps not used for campaign
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. John Swinney insists parliament stamps were not used for campaign
First Minister John Swinney has said he is "confident" that no public money has been used on the SNP's election campaign. The party is under investigation by Scottish Parliament officials following a complaint that stamps bought on parliamentary expenses were passed to UK election candidates for campaigning activities. Speaking on the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday, Mr Swinney said he had been "assured that no parliamentary stamps that have been provided by Parliament have been used to support election purposes." His comments came after the Sunday Mail reported Mr Swinney's office manager telling an SNP staff WhatsApp group chat that "stamp fairy is very useful when it comes to campaigns". The BBC reported on Thursday that an anonymous complaint was submitted to Holyrood's presiding officer Alison Johnstone. The Scottish Parliament said it was investigating the matter to establish whether there had been any misuse of parliamentary resources. A screenshot from a WhatsApp group made up of staff who work for SNP MSPs included a discussion about whether or not the stamps can be traced back to the purchaser. MSPs are allowed to spend up to £5,500 a year on postage and stationery as part of parliamentary resources provided by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB). The parliament’s rules state that they “must be used only for parliamentary duties and must not be used for any other purpose, including party political purposes”.
Speaking on Sunday, Mr Swinney described the message referring to the "stamp fairy" as "humorous remarks made in a WhatsApp channel". He added: "I've obviously discussed this with my staff and I've been assured that no parliamentary stamps that have been provided by Parliament have been used to support election purposes." He later added he was "confident" there had not been any use of public money to prop up the SNP's campaign. "What's important is the reassurance that I've had that parliamentary stamps have not been used for election purposes," he said. "We've obviously been engaging in a fundraising campaign to support the election campaign. "It's been supported by the many members that we have around the country," he said. The Scottish Conservatives said the SNP has "serious questions" to answer.
Mr Swinney was also asked about his party's manifesto commitment to opening negotiations on a second referendum with the next UK government in the event of his party winning a majority of Scottish seats in next month's election. He was asked how he could keep that promise when both the Conservatives and Labour have said they would not enter into discussions on independence. Mr Swinney said: "I think this is really in the hands of the people of Scotland, to be honest, and it's a deeply democratic question. "In 2021, the people of Scotland elected a parliament that was committed to holding an independence referendum and which supported independence. "And essentially the United Kingdom government has not enabled that view, that expression of an opinion of the people of Scotland to be put into democratic effect. "So what I am saying in this election is that if people in Scotland want us to progress on the arguments about independence, if they want Scotland to be an independent country, then they've got to support the Scottish National Party as the only means of ensuring that can come about". Mr Swinney declined to say whether a failure to win a majority of Scottish seats in the general election would see him accept that the will of the Scottish people was not to have another independence referendum. "I'm not going to pre-judge the outcome of the election," he said. Mr Swinney said the result of the 2021 Scottish election gave Holyrood the mandate for a referendum and Westminster should "remove the obstacles" to that.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ck55kg2882go
|
news_articles_ck55kg2882g
|
|
Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU - BBC News
|
2024-06-24
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
It is the first time a company has been found to be in breach of the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
|
Technology
|
Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU
European Union regulators have accused Apple of being in breach of new laws designed to rein in big tech companies. The European Commission, which regulates competition in the EU, said Apple's App Store squeezes out rival marketplaces, marking the first time it has found a company in breach of the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The firm faces a potential fine of up to 10% of its global revenue if it fails to comply with the rules. Apple said it is "confident our plan complies with the law".
The tech giant has been given the opportunity to review the investigation's preliminary findings, and it can avoid a monster fine if it comes back with a proposal which is satisfactory to the EU. The European Commission says that developers should be able to freely tell customers when there are cheaper app stores available beyond the one run by Apple. The firm charges developers an average of 30% commission on its App Store. Previously, it was told to allow alternatives in the EU in March. "We have reason to believe that the App Store rules not allowing app developers to communicate freely with their own users is in breach of the DMA," said EU Commissioner Thierry Breton. The Commission also alleges that Apple's fees "go beyond what is strictly necessary".
In response, Apple said it has made changes in the past few months to ensure it complies with the DMA. "We estimate more than 99% of developers would pay the same or less in fees to Apple under the new business terms we created," it said in a statement. "All developers doing business in the EU on the App Store have the opportunity to utilize the capabilities that we have introduced, including the ability to direct app users to the web to complete purchases at a very competitive rate." Another of Apple's main arguments is that users benefit from strong security measures by sticking to the official App Store. In response, the Commission says it will happily discuss security issues.
Separately, the European Commission has opened another investigation into Apple regarding new contractual terms for developers. This focuses on three main areas:
• None A fee of €0.50 (£0.42) which Apple charges developers for every app downloaded outside of Apple's App Store
• None The number of steps which Apple puts in place for users who want to download apps from alternative stores
• None Whether Apple's eligibility criteria for alternative app store developers breaches the DMA Apple says it changed its eligibility criteria in March, external to make it easier for developers to set up app stores. It also says it removed the €0.50 fee for apps which make no money - such as those designed by students - in May, external.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5111qxl2nro
|
news_articles_c5111qxl2nr
|
|
Swinney: Parliament stamps not used for campaign - BBC News
|
2024-06-24
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The first minister responds to fresh claims about SNP parliamentary resources being used for campaigning.
|
Scotland Politics
|
Swinney: Parliament stamps not used for campaign
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. John Swinney insists parliament stamps were not used for campaign
First Minister John Swinney has said he is "confident" that no public money has been used on the SNP's election campaign. The party is under investigation by Scottish Parliament officials following a complaint that stamps bought on parliamentary expenses were passed to UK election candidates for campaigning activities. Speaking on the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday, Mr Swinney said he had been "assured that no parliamentary stamps that have been provided by Parliament have been used to support election purposes." His comments came after the Sunday Mail reported Mr Swinney's office manager telling an SNP staff WhatsApp group chat that "stamp fairy is very useful when it comes to campaigns". The BBC reported on Thursday that an anonymous complaint was submitted to Holyrood's presiding officer Alison Johnstone. The Scottish Parliament said it was investigating the matter to establish whether there had been any misuse of parliamentary resources. A screenshot from a WhatsApp group made up of staff who work for SNP MSPs included a discussion about whether or not the stamps can be traced back to the purchaser. MSPs are allowed to spend up to £5,500 a year on postage and stationery as part of parliamentary resources provided by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB). The parliament’s rules state that they “must be used only for parliamentary duties and must not be used for any other purpose, including party political purposes”.
Speaking on Sunday, Mr Swinney described the message referring to the "stamp fairy" as "humorous remarks made in a WhatsApp channel". He added: "I've obviously discussed this with my staff and I've been assured that no parliamentary stamps that have been provided by Parliament have been used to support election purposes." He later added he was "confident" there had not been any use of public money to prop up the SNP's campaign. "What's important is the reassurance that I've had that parliamentary stamps have not been used for election purposes," he said. "We've obviously been engaging in a fundraising campaign to support the election campaign. "It's been supported by the many members that we have around the country," he said. The Scottish Conservatives said the SNP has "serious questions" to answer.
Mr Swinney was also asked about his party's manifesto commitment to opening negotiations on a second referendum with the next UK government in the event of his party winning a majority of Scottish seats in next month's election. He was asked how he could keep that promise when both the Conservatives and Labour have said they would not enter into discussions on independence. Mr Swinney said: "I think this is really in the hands of the people of Scotland, to be honest, and it's a deeply democratic question. "In 2021, the people of Scotland elected a parliament that was committed to holding an independence referendum and which supported independence. "And essentially the United Kingdom government has not enabled that view, that expression of an opinion of the people of Scotland to be put into democratic effect. "So what I am saying in this election is that if people in Scotland want us to progress on the arguments about independence, if they want Scotland to be an independent country, then they've got to support the Scottish National Party as the only means of ensuring that can come about". Mr Swinney declined to say whether a failure to win a majority of Scottish seats in the general election would see him accept that the will of the Scottish people was not to have another independence referendum. "I'm not going to pre-judge the outcome of the election," he said. Mr Swinney said the result of the 2021 Scottish election gave Holyrood the mandate for a referendum and Westminster should "remove the obstacles" to that.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ck55kg2882go
|
news_articles_ck55kg2882g
|
|
Manchester Airport passengers still without luggage after power cut - BBC News
|
2024-06-24
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
A power cut caused cancellations of departures and arrivals at Manchester Airport.
|
Manchester
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Some passengers whose travel plans were thrown into chaos by a power cut at Manchester Airport face further delays as airlines rearrange grounded flights while others have been left without luggage and their final destinations. Airport bosses said all its system were "running as normal" again, but urged passengers to check the status of their flights before travelling. It said airlines would be in touch with travellers whose flights had been cancelled on Sunday. The airport said it was "likely to be slightly busier than usual" throughout Monday due to passengers hit by cancellations.
Large queues formed as flights were cancelled at Manchester Airport
However some outgoing passengers have reported arriving at their destinations only to be told their bags had not been loaded onto the flight. Lloyd Cooke, from Stoke-on-Trent, had booked the 07:15 BST Jet2 flight from Manchester to Alicante on Sunday for a five-night stay with his daughter, Holly Cooke. The 62-year-old charity chief executive told the BBC that as the baggage carousel at check-in was not functioning, they were told to leave their luggage to one side and checked in as usual. The flight left after a 90 minute delay with all the passengers onboard unaware their bags had been left behind, Mr Cooke claimed. Mr Cooke said: "We had no awareness there was anything negative going to impact us. "The first we knew there was a major problem was when we were told, before we got off the plane, that some of the bags had not made it. "Everyone was thinking that sounded like most had made it but there were some left behind, so you're hoping yours has made it."
Charity chief executive Lloyd Cooke said he felt Jet2 had been "disingenuous" by not telling passengers they would be flying without their baggage.
However, Mr Cooke said after making their way through passport control in Spain passengers were greeted by about 10 Jet2 reps - who confirmed the no luggage was coming. "I think if they had said to people you have two options, fly without baggage or cancel and make other arrangements quite a few would have," he said. "We're quite resilient but you have got families or people have medication or all sorts of important things they can't do without. I feel like it was a bit disingenuous." Mr Cooke said the airline had said the baggage was likely to arrive on Tuesday, but he added: "I am not holding my breath." A spokesperson for Jet2 said it apologised and that the process of sending left-behind luggage had "already started".
Chaotic scenes greeted passengers waiting to collect their luggage on Sunday
Passengers waiting for news after disembarking a flight from Rhodes in the early hours of Sunday
Similar problems faced passengers arriving at Manchester from other airports. Ryan Jones and his fiancé Haf Griffiths were returning from an "amazing" 10-night stay in Rhodes and landed in Manchester at about 02:15 BST. However, Mr Jones, from Deeside in North Wales, said they were kept onboard the Tui flight for about 30 minutes and told there had been a power outage. "They finally let us off the plane and moved us quickly into Terminal 2 where it all came to a standstill for about two hours," he said. "Nobody knew what was happening, there were children crying their eyes out as nobody had had any sleep, nobody could tell us anything, there were just announcements saying there had been a power outage."
Ryan Jones and his fiancé Haf Griffiths said their holiday to Rhodes had been "tarnished" by their experience
Mr Jones said "everything started moving" at about 04:00, and passengers were put on buses into Terminal 1 where they went through passport control. He said: "We thought 'we're through, it will be absolutely fine now, everything is sorted'. "But when we got to baggage collection there were thousands of people standing and lying around." Mr Jones said there was no sign of any baggage arriving, and they waited until 07:00 with "nobody telling us anything". "There were people opening the flaps where the baggage comes onto the carousel to talk to the baggage handlers. They didn't have a clue what was going on, there were arguments galore", he said. Mr Jones said staff began directing passengers to fill out an online form to arrange for bags to be sent to their homes, and he and Ms Griffiths left about 07:45. He said: "We had an amazing time but this has tarnished it to be honest." The Tui airline apologised to its customers affected by the power cut. A statement added: "Unfortunately, some customers had to travel home yesterday without their bags due to the inoperable baggage system at Manchester Airport. "We would like to reassure customers that we will reunite them with their belonging as soon as possible. We appreciate our customers patience at this time."
According to Manchester's live departure board, there were several delays of an hour or more, including a 07:30 BST flight to Ibiza set to depart at 08:30. A flight to Bourgas in Bulgaria, due to depart at 06:05, was delayed until 09:41. Travel expert Simon Calder told BBC 5Live that Sunday's events could have a "serious" impact on aviation by "knocking confidence". He said: "There will be some people who take one look at this, look at the stress and the anxiety and the upset, and the not knowing what's going on, and say 'well I'm not going to do that'. "That will affect an airport's business, possibly more widely airports' businesses." Mr Calder said the industry was "competitive", with Manchester risking losing out to alternative airports. He added: "If people are chatting in the pub and say 'well I used Liverpool John Lennon Airport and it was fine, nice and uncrowded, seems to work OK', then you might get a cohort of people actually moving away from Manchester Airport to another airport."
Passengers whose flights were cancelled described the situation as "chaos"
The airport said it said it had deployed extra staff to help process the backlog, and said passengers should generally arrive two hours before their flights for short-haul and three hours for long-haul. From the early hours of Sunday, outbound flights were grounded and scheduled arrivals were diverted to other UK airports. By lunchtime, 66 outbound flights (25% of all departures) and 50 inbound journeys (18% of all arrivals) had been cancelled, according to aviation analytics company Cirium. At about 19:30 BST, airport bosses said flights had resumed and vowed to hold an investigation into what happened. Passengers whose flights were cancelled described the situation at the airport as "chaos", and photos shared on social media showed large queues and stalled baggage carousels piled high with luggage. Kelvin Knaver, from St Helens, had been due to fly to Amsterdam with EasyJet. He told BBC North West Tonight: "It has been a mess. There’s such a backlog that it’s going to take forever to clear." EasyJet saw the largest number of cancellations. It said the delays were "out of its control" and that it was "doing everything possible to minimise the impact of the disruption". One Singapore Airlines flight from Houston in Texas was diverted to London Heathrow while another which departed from Singapore had to land at London Gatwick. An Etihad Airways flight from Abu Dhabi had to touch down in Birmingham Airport instead. Chris Woodroofe, the managing director of the Manchester Airport, said he was sorry for the delays and that staff were "making sure the impact [did] not carry on" into the coming days. The disruption was caused by a "fault" with a cable at the airport, which sent a surge of power across the electrical network, he said.
Have you been affected by the disruption at Manchester Airport?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nnn0vn0k0o
|
news_articles_c4nnn0vn0k0
|
|
Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU - BBC News
|
2024-06-25
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
It is the first time a company has been found to be in breach of the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
|
Technology
|
Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU
European Union regulators have accused Apple of being in breach of new laws designed to rein in big tech companies. The European Commission, which regulates competition in the EU, said Apple's App Store squeezes out rival marketplaces, marking the first time it has found a company in breach of the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The firm faces a potential fine of up to 10% of its global revenue if it fails to comply with the rules. Apple said it is "confident our plan complies with the law".
The tech giant has been given the opportunity to review the investigation's preliminary findings, and it can avoid a monster fine if it comes back with a proposal which is satisfactory to the EU. The European Commission says that developers should be able to freely tell customers when there are cheaper app stores available beyond the one run by Apple. The firm charges developers an average of 30% commission on its App Store. Previously, it was told to allow alternatives in the EU in March. "We have reason to believe that the App Store rules not allowing app developers to communicate freely with their own users is in breach of the DMA," said EU Commissioner Thierry Breton. The Commission also alleges that Apple's fees "go beyond what is strictly necessary".
In response, Apple said it has made changes in the past few months to ensure it complies with the DMA. "We estimate more than 99% of developers would pay the same or less in fees to Apple under the new business terms we created," it said in a statement. "All developers doing business in the EU on the App Store have the opportunity to utilize the capabilities that we have introduced, including the ability to direct app users to the web to complete purchases at a very competitive rate." Another of Apple's main arguments is that users benefit from strong security measures by sticking to the official App Store. In response, the Commission says it will happily discuss security issues.
Separately, the European Commission has opened another investigation into Apple regarding new contractual terms for developers. This focuses on three main areas:
• None A fee of €0.50 (£0.42) which Apple charges developers for every app downloaded outside of Apple's App Store
• None The number of steps which Apple puts in place for users who want to download apps from alternative stores
• None Whether Apple's eligibility criteria for alternative app store developers breaches the DMA Apple says it changed its eligibility criteria in March, external to make it easier for developers to set up app stores. It also says it removed the €0.50 fee for apps which make no money - such as those designed by students - in May, external.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5111qxl2nro
|
news_articles_c5111qxl2nr
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.