Video EU ‘using Galileo as negotiating tactic’
Category: POLITICS
-
Foie gras imports could also be banned after Brexit, UK minister shows
Symbol copyright Getty Pictures Symbol caption Geese being raised for foie gras production in Bulgaria
A luxury French food made by power-feeding ducks or ducks may well be banned from being imported to the united kingdom after Brexit, a minister has hinted.
British farmers are banned from generating foie gras – which means fatty liver – on cruelty grounds.
But eating places and retail outlets are allowed to import the pate-like substance below EUROPEAN loose-marketplace rules.
Environment Minister George Eustice informed MPs that might change when Britain left the european, in March next year.
He was responding to a choice from Conservative Henry Smith, who instructed MPs foie gras was once “merciless to supply, unhealthy to devour and it’s pricey to purchase” and it used to be time to prohibit “this outdated practice”.
Symbol copyright Getty Images 98% of duck foie gras imports to the united kingdom come from France France produced about EIGHTY THREE% of the world’s duck foie gras and 25% of its goose foie gras, MPs had been told Manufacturing is banned in some ECU member states however it remains to be produced in Hungary, Bulgaria, Spain and Belgium India become the primary u . s . a . to prohibit foie gras imports in 2014 Many UNITED KINGDOM shops have banned the sale of foie gras, together with Selfridges, Harvey Nichols, Sainsbury’s and Waitrose – and each Houses of Parliament However it is still to be had to shop for online and is served in pubs and restaurants 
Image copyright PA French legislation states that foie gras “belongs to the safe cultural and gastronomical background of France”, Farming Minister George Eustice told MPs.
“While we’re a member of the european Union, as Mr Smith pointed out, we’re required to observe law which places regulations at the advent of measures that impair the movement of products within the european marketplace.”
But, he stated: “once we leave the ecu Union, we do certainly have a possibility to appear at restrictions on gross sales alongside the lines that Mr Smith talked about.”
Mr Eustice brought there have been no boundaries to an “moral ban” on imports underneath Global Trade Agency regulations, and some nations, comparable to India, had brought one in.
-
Len McCluskey’s coming for me, says Tom Watson
Labour’s Tom Watson says Unite industry union leader Len McCluskey is attempting “to take me out as deputy leader”.
He instructed the BBC’s Nick Robinson the union leader was “coming for me” – however he used to be not likely to be “bullied” out of his job.
He mentioned he desired to “deliver everybody back together” within the party.
Mr McCluskey has previously accused Mr Watson of behaving like a “low-finances remake of the Godfather” over claims of a difficult left plot to take over Labour.
His place of business declined to comment on Mr Watson’s latest claims.
Mr Watson, who was elected deputy chief of the party on the related time Mr Corbyn was leader in September 2015, is believed to have come stressed to denounce Labour MPs who had backed a vote of no trust in Mr Corbyn.
“I felt very tough there, because Unite funded my campaign, they did not nominate me, and that i assume he felt that I, in some way, used to be obligated to him personally.
“And my legal responsibility used to be to the Labour Celebration. You May seriously criticise me for taking the incorrect position, and that is the reason fair, however I Am not going to be bullied by way of Len McCluskey.
“I undoubtedly wasn’t going to be bullied by way of Rupert Murdoch, so I’m no doubt not going to be bullied by means of Len McCluskey. And i believe he discovered that very tough.”
The MP, who fought a long-running combat with Mr Murdoch’s newspaper crew over telephone hacking, stated he felt he used to be being persecuted via Mr McCluskey.
“Yes, he’s coming for me. They’re upping their delegates and all of that,” he said.
“what will be, shall be. He Is powerful sufficient, if he desires to take me out as deputy leader, he most likely could, but that is as much as him. I’m just going to get on and take a look at and bring everyone again in combination and do what i can as best possible i can.”
Listen: Nick Robinson’s Political Thinking podcast
There is no formal mechanism for eliminating the Labour Birthday Celebration deputy leader.
But Mr Watson is understood to be troubled that Unite is engaged in a takeover of the birthday celebration, with the appointment of Unite officials to key roles, equivalent to new normal secretary Jennie Formby and Mr McCluskey’s chief of body of workers, Andrew Murray, who has been seconded to the chief’s place of business.
Karie Murphy, who used to be Unite’s favoured candidate within the 2013 variety row sooner than the Falkirk through-election, is Mr Corbyn’s chief of body of workers, while Amy Jackson, a former Unite professional, is his political secretary.
Mr Watson has additionally clashed with Mr McCluskey over the union chief’s fortify for the professional-Corbyn power workforce Momentum and efforts by local party activists to de-make a selection a few Labour MPs.
Mr McCluskey has spoken of his disappointment on the death of his friendship with Mr Watson, however has additionally accused him of participating in “a dull and somewhat sinister coup” to get rid of Mr Corbyn.
In September closing 12 months, he called for a female deputy chief to be brought in to paintings along Mr Watson.
-
Brexit: MPs say PM must honour ‘assurances’ over Parliament’s position
Image copyright AFP
Politics is often concerning the big image, however occasionally it’s a pageant for pedants.
Believe me, in Westminster, there is a very very difference between the promise of extra serious chat about something with the likelihood of a transformation – and a promise in truth to do something different, particularly if it is made by means of the occupant of Number 10.
So just hours after the concession, (or non-concession) very, very darkish mutterings started from folks who were persuaded by what they concept used to be a promise.
Read Laura’s complete blog
What the Brexiteers are announcing
Eurosceptic MPs have criticised moves to give Parliament more energy as Brexit approaches, saying this would be used to “spoil” the uk’s EU departure.
Tory MP Andrew Bridgen, a number one Brexit backer, mentioned the concessions could “get back to haunt” the government if they amounted to a veto over the terms of the uk’s departure.
He instructed the BBC that rebels had been looking for a “wrecking movement”, pointing out: “It not just has the risk of stopping Brexit, it’s without a doubt going to make the negotiating place of the government considerably diminished.
“it is massively irresponsible, and that i can’t consider that those that are perpetrating this don’t know precisely what they’re doing. And, for me, it’s a betrayal of the British other folks.”
Tempers flare in Commons
The EU Withdrawal Bill is now back within the Space of Commons, with MPs debating the rest of the Lords amendments.
These include a requirement to seek club of the eu Economic Area – an association like Norway’s that would stay the united kingdom part of the european single marketplace. this is adverse by both the Conservative and Labour leaderships, despite the backing of some professional-EU MPs in both parties.
There could also be an modification requiring the government to report back to Parliament on steps taken to negotiate a customs union with the eu.
The executive has rejected this one too, and has proposed an alternative amendment referring to a new “customs arrangement” which used to be thought to have prevented the chance of a rise up on that subject.
Tempers flared in the Commons as MPs discussed immigration, with Speaker John Bercow interesting to members to “recognize” each and every other’s arguments.
Ms Soubry said she used to be “appalled” at a speech from Labour’s Caroline Flint and accused her of no longer appreciating the price of immigrants.
Ms Flint had argued for brand new immigration controls, pronouncing people wanted to have the option to “flip the tap on and stale after we make a selection”.
She stated she was no longer against all immigration but that her constituents sought after a “honest and managed system”.
Earlier some MPs claimed an amendment passed on Tuesday night time could have implications for the federal government’s most popular business choices after Brexit.
Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer highlighted the amendment, which devoted the federal government to avoiding any “physical infrastructure, including border posts, or assessments and controls” in Northern Ireland after Brexit.
He said this meant one among the government’s proposals for replacing the customs union – a generation-primarily based technique to minimise border delays – could be “illegal” if it comes to any border infrastructure exams.
Dominic Grieve agreed, pronouncing: “not just do we have to stay in a sort of customs arrangement amounting to a union, however we are also going to need to have a high degree of regulatory alignment because in a different way the existence that occurs alongside the border might be not possible because of different laws on each side.”
Labour’s whips’ administrative center stated it expected 8 votes to take place from 19:30BST.
-
The Tory psychodrama over Brexit invoice
Symbol copyright Getty Images
Ministers want you to ignore the Tory psychodrama, but frankly, that may be what it appears like we’re stuck in the center of.
that is an try at a elementary summary of what came about – from what i have been advised – after a barmy afternoon.
For this to make sense, here’s a reminder of what happened earlier within the week.
Ministers win key Brexit bill vote after concession PM ‘must honour assurances’ Tory rebels reject Might’s Brexit compromise
By Means Of approximately 1400 BST the haggling among Dominic Grieve and the solicitor general, representing the government, was once just about concluded to Grieve’s satisfaction.
The Remain-leaning possible rebels had a model of the promised compromise that stored Theresa May’s bacon earlier within the week. and so they were pleased with it.
Image copyright AFP Image caption Dominic Grieve has described the federal government’s compromise as “unacceptable” By 1600 BST, that was once no longer the case.
The Ones pushing for a transformation had been instructed the federal government wanted something else, to make the movement “unamendable”.
Omit the technicalities, that would principally imply the overall “significant” vote could, in impact, be a take-it-or-go away-it vote, a possible vote of no confidence within the top minister.
I’m instructed they made it crystal transparent they’d by no means accept it.
But then, “inexplicably”, that ended up within the final version that was revealed, ahead of they had noticed it.
Their suspicion: Brexiteers had positioned the kybosh on it all.
A senior Brexiteer informed me that they were not those who had put a spanner in the works. they are saying they only noticed it at the final minute, and weren’t thinking about haggling over the deal.
Image copyright AFP Image caption Bother ahead? Theresa Would Possibly may just face another showdown next week Others beg to differ despite the fact that, suggesting that they had been advised the issue was that “Jacob Rees-Mogg, had to see it” and it has been suggested that Brexit Secretary David Davis was once instrumental in converting the plan.
What does that all imply even though?
The hardcore Remainer rebels are apoplectic, feeling they have got been betrayed by means of the prime minister, who has damaged the promise she gave them to circumvent defeat.
And it units the scene for an additional showdown in Parliament next week when the prime minister might discover which facet of her celebration has the stronger unravel.
What happened today is probably going to have driven the two sides additional apart.
This complete process is meant to be in regards to the political divorce between the eu and the uk.
every now and then it is the negotiation among the 2 aspects of the Tory celebration which are more bitter than any of that would be.
-
Texas shooting renews debate about American school design
Just hours after the nation’s latest school shooting, the debate began anew: Are American schools built in a way that makes them easy targets? Are there too many windows, too many entrances and exits
Just hours after the nation’s latest school shooting, the debate began anew: Are American schools built in a way that makes them easy targets? Are there too many windows, too many entrances and exits and too few security features?
The questions expose yet another divide, with Second Amendment activists and some security experts calling for safer school designs and some gun-control advocates saying it’s a distracting side issue that avoids more meaningful action.
The debate began after the 1999 mass shooting at Columbine High School in Colorado and gained more attention in the aftermath of the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. On Friday, in the hours after a student shot and killed 10 people at a high school in Santa Fe, Texas, the state’s lieutenant governor suggested again that it was time to examine school layouts.
“There are too many entrances and too many exits to our over 8,000 campuses in Texas,” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said, explaining that those points can’t all be guarded.
Gun-rights activists, led by the National Rifle Association, have pushed for a “hardening” of schools, including training and arming educators and even keeping shrubbery and landscaping farther away from school buildings so there are fewer blocked viewpoints. Reducing the number of entrances is considered another way to prevent shooters from getting inside undetected.
According to a report last year in Education Week, a trade publication, the average age of an American school is 44 years with major renovations dating back more than a decade. Older buildings were designed without today’s worries of active shooters and terrorism.
They have lots of “nooks and crannies,” isolated areas that are difficult to supervise, as well as old hardware on classroom doors and main offices that aren’t located near the main entrance. Other problems include old public-address systems and no telephones in classrooms, said Kenneth Trump, president of the National School Safety and Security Services, a Cleveland-based consulting firm.
When it comes to designing schools, educational considerations create some natural tension with security needs. Studying in places with lots of light, for example, is thought to improve learning. That was the philosophy behind one school constructed just last year with floor-to-ceiling windows, Trump said. But those same windows could make students and staff easy targets for a gunman.
He agrees that a large number of entrances can make a school vulnerable. More doors bring a greater risk that someone will prop one open or that mechanical issues will prevent a door from being closed or locked. It’s also harder to monitor who is coming and going.
And even if a front entrance is fortified with security systems, there are usually other ways in, such as the cafeteria where food deliveries are made or the gym.
Still, Trump said, no amount of architectural planning or design will replace mental health treatment, emergency drills and training and the ability to identify potential school shooters ahead of time.
It’s simplistic to think that layouts and building features alone will make schools safer, he said, and politically expedient to tout only architectural design and construction.
Focusing solely on exits and entrances can create a host of other issues, cautioned Gregory Shaffer, a security consultant and retired FBI agent.
Having metal detectors at the entrance creates long lines, which means schools have to start earlier and hire more staff to screen students. “And if you have long lines going into the school, that makes it a target as well. That is a shooter’s ideal location,” he said.
For gun-control advocates, it’s galling to focus on structural issues. They see frequent school shootings as evidence of the nation’s unwillingness to take other steps to stop gun violence.
“I often find that the discussion of how to do it is really a smoke screen,” said David Chipman, formerly of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and now a senior policy adviser with the gun safety organization founded by former Rep. Gabby Giffords, who was gravely wounded in a shooting in 2012. “How to do it isn’t really the issue. It’s do we want to do it and are we willing to pay the money.”
After the 9/11 terror attacks, the United States took steps to secure government and public buildings – from airports to concert halls. It’s routine now to go through a metal detector before entering. Yet those same steps aren’t common in public schools, making them, he said, more dangerous than prisons.
“There are some places that we’ve decided as a nation that we will not allow violence to ever occur,” Chipman said. “But school is not one of them yet.”
-
President Trump demands DOJ give informant documents to Congress
President Donald Trump late Saturday demanded Justice Department give members of Congress the documents related to an FBI informant who had contacted campaign officials during the 2016 election.
President Donald Trump late Saturday demanded Justice Department give members of Congress the documents related to an FBI informant who had contacted campaign officials during the 2016 election.
“If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal,” Mr. Trump Tweeted. “Only the release or review of documents that the House Intelligence Committee (also, Senate Judiciary) is asking for can give the conclusive answers. Drain the Swamp!”
The tweet references allegations that have been circulating among Republicans and conservative media outlets that an FBI informant was planted into the campaign as part of the Russian collusion investigation.
It is also the latest Tweet from Trump calling upon Justice Department to give Congress documents related to the Russian probe.
Lawmakers had requested the documents related to the Russia investigation – which could include details about the FBI informant, – several months ago, but the Justice Department continues to stall. Earlier this month, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, Republican California, threatened to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt if the documents are turned over.
On Friday, multiple media outlets reported an FBI informant met with Trump campaign officials George Papadopoulos and Carter Page regarding their alleged Russia Times. The Washington Post reported the informant also met with Trump co-chairman Sam Clovis.
The New York Times said the informant was “an American academic who teaches in Britain,” but said it would not name the person to “preserve their safety.” In addition, CNN reported the informant has been an FBI and CIA source “for years.”
Justice Department and FBI officials have maintained that turning over the documents to Mr. Nunes would put the informant’s life in danger.
Mr. Trump said earlier this month that he could force the Justice Department to provide lawmakers with the documents
“A Rigged System – They don’t want to turn over Documents to Congress,” Trump tweeted. “What are they afraid of? Why so much redacting? Why such unequal “justice?” At some point, I will have no choice but to use the powers granted to the Presidency and get involved!”
Rudy Giuliani, who is serving as the president’s attorney, told CNN Friday morning that he didn’t know for sure if the FBI had embedded an informant in the Trump campaign.
“Here’s the issue that I really feel strongly about with this informant, if there is one. First of all, I don’t know for sure, nor does the President, if there really was. We’re told that,” the former New York City mayor told CNN’s Chris Cuomo on “New Day,” without providing details on the source for that information other than to hint some are “gone from the FBI.”
-
Cory Gardner pushes to give police officers new body armor
Sen. Cory Gardner introduced a new proposal to give every law enforcement officer body armor strong enough to absorb shots from a rifle.
Sen. Cory Gardner introduced a new proposal to give every law enforcement officer body armor strong enough to absorb shots from a rifle.
“Most have vests, but not the right kind,” Mr. Gardner, Colorado Republican, said on Fox News.
He said that a stronger type of body armor may have saved the fallen officer killed in his state in the past week. Four officers were ambushed after responding to an incident, leaving one policeman and wounding three others.
“This would equip our officers with type III body armor that’s good for rifles. Some of the things that could’ve protected the officers in Colorado,” Mr. Gardner said.
Most officers currently have a type of armor, but it’s not as strong as type III, or has been worn down. The senator acknowledged that the new protective gear would be more expensive, but said that he thinks it’s an expense worth making.
“This is going to be expensive there’s no doubt about it, but this country sent $1.7 billion to Iran. I think we can find $1 billion to back the blue,” he said.
-
Rudy Giuliani: Jeff Sessions could have prevented a special counsel investigation
Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani said Friday that Attorney General Jeff Sessions could have prevented a special counsel investigation, attributing that as the reason President Trump remains upset with him.
Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani said Friday that Attorney General Jeff Sessions could have prevented a special counsel investigation, attributing that as the reason President Trump remains upset with him.
“What Jeff Sessions has done to him is stick him with a special counsel because he didn’t step up and say, ‘I can make this decision.’ Stick him with a special counsel, that has now $20 million later, has come up with nothing,” Mr. Giuliani said on CNN.
He said there is no need for a special counsel investigation into collusion claims between the Trump campaign and Russia. Mr. Giuliani argued that Mr. Sessions’ recusal triggered the need for an outside counsel in the case and damaged the Justice Department’s ability to handle the investigation.
SEE ALSO: EXCLUSIVE: Mueller agrees to narrow scope of questions in bid to interview Trump
“Nobody else in the Justice Department is recused because Sessions is recused,” Mr. Giuliani said.
He also stood by his previous statements that Mr. Trump should not testify in the case saying special counsel Robert Mueller’s team will try to trap the president.
“Explain to me why they even need to interview the president if it isn’t to try and trap him into perjury,” Mr. Giuliani said.
The former New York City mayor has also said that he does not believe Mr. Mueller’s team will indict Mr. Trump.