Theresa May should act unilaterally and guarantee the status of three million EU nationals currently living in Britain, and not wait for reciprocal reassurance from Brussels, according to the parliamentary committee for exiting the EU.
A new report jointly authored by all members of the committee, which includes prominent Leave campaigner Michael Gove, says it would be ‘unconscionable’ to make EU nationals living in Britain wait up to two years for negotiations to find out on what basis they might be allowed to stay in the UK, or even be forced to leave.
Committee chairman Hilary Benn said they had been left under a “cloud of uncertainty” and did not want to be used as “bargaining chips” in the talks.
Source The Independent
German’s Social Democratic Party (SPD) has overtaken the conservative Christian-Democrat CDU for the first time in ten years in the DeutschlandTrend poll published by broadcaster ARD Friday.
The survey indicated the SPD, which picked former European Parliament President Martin Schulz as its candidate for chancellor in the September 24 vote, would win 32 percent of the vote if elections were held today, just ahead of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU on 31 percent.
Source: – POLITICO
Macron, a centrist candidate who is currently the favourite to become the country’s next leader, launched his full policy manifesto today.While his likely run-off opponent Marine Le Pen’s manifesto included no policies on LGBT rights other than scrapping same-sex marriage, Macron dedicated an entire section to LGBT issues.
In it he pledged to challenge homophobic in everyday life, and to tackle anti-LGBT discrimination in the workplace.
The candidate said he would scale up random checks of employers’ compliance with equality laws, while also “naming and shaming” those found to have discriminated.
Source: · PinkNews
Many a big crisis is a series of seemingly isolated events in different sectors at the same time. Sometimes they’re a flash in the pan, doing limited damage. But sometimes they arrive at the same historical moment as other events, merging into messy chaos. They are often the work of different actors, pulling in different directions. This makes blame hard to pin down. But we are about to have a crisis that is entirely different. The fiasco around the social grant payments is entirely the making of the people responsible and no one else’s. Should the worst happen, the results of the crisis and their impact on South Africa are too ghastly to contemplate. But the cooler analytical heads now also have to measure the political price the ruling party is going to pay because of the reckless actions by one Bathabile Dlamini. By STEPHEN GROOTES.
Source: Daily Maverick
“Racked” with anxieties about the post-Brexit world, the next generation of voters do not believe there is a single politician trustworthy enough to run the country, a landmark study of 16 to 18-year-olds has revealed.
According to the Edelman Trust Barometer, a long-running integrity and credibility survey, the majority of these teens feel helpless about their prospects – distrusting of the government and the British people to protect their future.
The group, labelled “Generation Angst”, narrowly missed out on voting in the EU Referendum. They believe they have been left a “poisoned legacy”, with more than a third (38%) claiming their standard of living will be worse than older generations.
The main findings of the survey show:
- Only 14% now feel confident about their future post-Brexit
- ‘None of the above’ ranked higher than all UK political leaders
- London Mayor Sadiq Khan most trusted to ‘do what is right’
- 6 in 10 are worried about the pace of change of social media
- Young people are more likely to consider experts believable
Source: The Huffington Post
As an outsider, I prefer not to comment too directly or too often on US internal politics, but Donald Trump’s plans to ramp up military spending and resume the nuclear arms race are not just domestic affairs – they concern us all.
This map, based on 2013 data from a global poll conducted by WIN/Gallup International and designed by reddit user Loulan, is disturbing. It shows that outside North America and the United Kingdom, by far the majority of countries polled saw the United States as the greatest threat to world peace.
The 2013 Gallup report is one of an annual series that polls mostly questions relating to happiness and optimism, but in that year included the question on threats to world peace. The press release for the global reports stated
The US was the overwhelming choice (24% of respondents) for the country that represents the greatest threat to peace in the world today. This was followed by Pakistan (8%), China (6%), North Korea, Israel and Iran (5%). Respondents in Russia (54%), China (49%) and Bosnia (49%) were the most fearful of the US as a threat.
It’s not surprising that Russia, China Bosnia, other Muslim nations and Latin American countries regarded the USA as the greatest threat. Note though, that that view is also shared (albeit to a lesser degree) by Germany, Sweden, Finland and Australia.
The data is admittedly now three years out of date. Since then, the USA and Iran have reached a degree of rapprochement, and Putin’s military adventures in the Ukraine and elsewhere may have switched American and British views of the greatest threat, from Iran to Russia. On the other hand, a belligerent Trump’s rise to the presidency will not have reduced concerns around the world about the American danger to global peace. If his plans to vastly increase military spending, resume the nuclear arms race, revoke the Iran treaty and challenge China in the South China Sea become reality, the rest of the world will have even more cause to be concerned. What the world need for greater peace, is more diplomacy, not more arms – yet Trump is planning to cut funding for his foreign service.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham has told reporters that Trump’s budget proposals are “dead in the water” and will never be approved by Congress.
We should all pray that he is right.
The primary focus of an important article at Harvard Business Review is of course, “business”. However, all business operates inside a social context. The context for this analysis, is globalisation. This has been of immense value to richer people in the developed world, and to Asian and other developing world middle classes. One group that has not benefited particularly, and by falling back in relative terms, is the working class in Western developed countries. (This is very clearly shown in the frequently cited “elephant graph”
Our global narrative of progress, the implicit case for embracing change in exchange for its fruits, is being increasingly called into question by economically marginalized groups and populist politicians across the globe. This narrative has rested on three propositions: that globalization is a major driver of growth and prosperity; that technological progress enriches our lives; and that shareholder returns reflect businesses’ contributions to societal progress.
Those who question the continued applicability of this narrative have a case. While globalization has increased aggregate prosperity and reduced inequality across nations, it has also created winners and losers within nations
Source: Harvard Business Review
This uneven distribution of benefits has consequences, for those who have been left behind – and for both business, and for political conditions. In the UK, and the USA, we have seen the result in the rise of Donald Trump, and the June vote against the EU. Elsewhere in Europe, there’s been a widely reported rise in support for populist parties.
This is sharply illustrated by what the HBR refers to as a “trust gap”. HBR includes a graph that shows the widening of this trust gap between 2012 and 2016. Note that although it is the USA that has seen the most dramatic impact of this in electoral politics, the widening is even greater in the UK and in France.
Research shows plans to increase threshold at which tax is paid will overwhelmingly benefit rich families in south-east England
A £1bn Conservative inheritance tax cut will exacerbate the north-south divide, an MP has warned, as figures lay bare the winners and losers of a flagship government policy.
People inheriting homes in constituencies in London and south-east England will gain the lion’s share of the benefits from the tax cut, according to research commissioned by the Labour MP Rachel Reeves.
Of the 100 constituencies that will benefit the most, 96 are in London or the south-east and are mostly held by Tories, with 31 in and around London held by Labour.
Source: The Guardian