Stories about
Jeremy Corbyn


Jeremy Bernard Corbyn (/ˈkɔːrbɪn/; born 26 May 1949) is a British politician who has been Leader of the Labour Party and Leader of the Opposition since 2015. He has been the Member of Parliament (MP) for Islington North since 1983.

Westmonster

Published  20 hours ago

Another Labour MP has resigned from the party. Will the last one out turn off the lights?

Dudley MP Ian Austin made the announcement this morning, telling his local paper the Express and Star: “The Labour Party has been my life, so this has been the hardest decision I have ever had to take, but I have to be honest and the truth is that I have become ashamed of the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn.”

BREAKING: Dudley North MP @IanAustinMP today confirmed he is quitting The Labour Party.

He has become the ninth MP to leave Jeremy Corbyn’s party this week. Read more exclusively in the @ExpressandStar and online https://t.co/0FBpjaCiAf pic.twitter.com/R7H2Ey0rG8

— Express & Star (@ExpressandStar) February 22, 2019

The MP isn’t pulling any punches: “I always tell them the truth and I could never ask local people to make Jeremy Corbyn Prime Minister.” A truly damning indictment.

When it comes to anti-Jewish sentiment within Labour, Austin said: “I am appalled at the offence and distress Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party have caused to Jewish people.

“It is terrible that a culture of extremism, anti-Semitism and intolerance is driving out good MPs and decent people who have committed their life to mainstream politics.

“The hard truth is that the party is tougher on the people complaining about anti-Semitism than it is on the anti-Semites.”

Austin, who won’t be joining the anti-Brexit ‘Independent Group’ of MPs, said of the Labour Party’s direction: “I think Jeremy Corbyn has completely changed what was a mainstream party into a completely different party with very different values.

“The hard left is now in charge of the party, they’re going to get rid of lots of decent mainstream MPs and I just can’t see how it can return to the mainstream party that won elections and changed the country for the better.”

Westmonster

Published  1 day ago

Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott and Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn have now both said that they think ISIS bride Shamima Begum should be allowed back into Britain. They are seemingly willing to gamble with the safety of the public, the majority of whom do not want jihadists allowed back into the country.

Abbot told the BBC that: “She should have been brought back to this country, should have been questioned, interrogated and if necessary, put on trial.”

She insisted that “it’s not legal to render somebody stateless like that”. 65% of Brits support breaking international law to render Begum stateless so that she cannot return to Britain.

"She should have been brought back to this country". Shadow Home Secretary, @HackneyAbbott disputes the UK’s decision to strip Shamima Begum of her British citizenship’ #bbcwato https://t.co/DSKO0nneEd pic.twitter.com/g4Fgb8wmOS

— The World at One (@BBCWorldatOne) February 21, 2019

Jeremy Corbyn had earlier argued that Shamima Begum “obviously has, in my view, a right to return to Britain”. Surely she gave up that right when she decided to betray this country to support a a sadistic death cult?

WATCH | @jeremycorbyn says jihadi bride Shamima Begum has "a right to return to Britain" and should receive "some support". What planet is this man living on?! She left to join a militant Islamist group that sponsors terror in the west. Keep her out!pic.twitter.com/mlk4xJ6Jjs

— Leave.EU (@LeaveEUOfficial) February 21, 2019

More than 400 so-called ‘returning jihadists’ have been allowed back into the UK and only around 10% have been prosecuted.

We have seen horrific attacks in Britain and across Europe from Islamic extremists. Why are weak politicians willing to put the British public at risk by allowing Islamic State supporters back into the country?

Help Westmonster stand up for strong borders and national security by supporting us with a donation.

The Independent

Published  2 days ago

A Labour MP who told Jeremy Corbyn to “sit down and shut up” as he spoke about the Iraq War in the House of Commons has been accused of “thuggish” behaviour.

Ian Austin heckled the Labour leader during his speech following the publication of the Chilcot report during which he apologised on behalf of the party for taking Britain to war.

Mr Corbyn called the war an “act of military aggression, launched on a false pretext” and said the subsequent “colonial-style occupation” led to the rise of Isis.

But Mr Austin told Mr Corbyn to “shut up” and shouted “you’re a disgrace” until the Speaker, John Bercow, intervened.

Gavin Newlands, the Scottish Nationalist MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire, tweeted it was a “typically pathetic and thuggish heckle” during what he called “Corbyn’s fantastic dissection of Blair’s lies and deceit”.

Former Channel 4 Economics Editor Paul Mason called Mr Austin a “warmonger” and noted he had opposed the setting up of an inquiry into the war.

Mr Austin actually voted against the inquiry the first time eight times the subject came before the Commons but eventually voted in favour of the Chilcot inquiry set up by then Prime Minister Gordon Brown in June 2009 along with the majority of Labour MPs, according to TheyWorkForYou. He was not an MP in 2003.

Columnist Owen Jones also waded into the argument calling Mr Austin an “astonishingly unpleasant person” and “a bully”.

He later asked his Twitter followers to stop sending abuse Mr Austin, saying his “calling out Ian Austin’s unpleasant behaviour isn’t an excuse for people to be abusive to him”.

Other Twitter users accused Mr Austin of being “rude”:

Mr Austin, a former key supporter of Mr Brown, has heavily criticised Mr Corbyn in the past.

In an article for The Times commenting on the furore, he said: “The Chilcot Report will never settle arguments about whether the war was right or wrong, but it should lay to rest allegations about bad faith, lies or deceit."

He said there was “no justification for saying evidence was ‘confected’” as he said Mr Corbyn had suggested in the Commons.

“To listen to Tony Blair’s critics, you would think that Iraq had been a peaceful haven of tranquillity before 2003. Nothing could be further from the truth," he continued.

“Of course we must learn the lessons of mistakes made after the invasion of Iraq, but we must also learn the lessons of not taking action too.”

He concluded: “Thirty years in protest movements and meetings where everyone agrees with him mean Jeremy has never had to think about complex problems and difficult solutions, which is why he is struggling to lead a mainstream political party, let alone persuade people to see him as their prime minister.

The Independent has sought to contact Mr Austin for comment.

We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.

At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.

Evening Standard

Published  3 days ago

John McDonnell today said Labour is “moving towards” a second referendum on Brexit that would give Britons the chance to stay in the European Union.

In an exclusive interview with the Evening Standard, the shadow chancellor also called on Labour to move “quicker and fiercer” against anti-Semitism, and expressed regret for “not enough action” in the past.

A ninth Labour MP quit the party today, citing disgust over the failure to crack down on anti-Semitism and intolerance” under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

Ian Austin, a former close aide to Gordon Brown, said the party was being “tougher on the people complaining about anti-Semitism than it is on the anti-Semites”.

With Labour reeling from a week of turmoil, Mr McDonnell held out olive branches on the two big issues that the defectors complained about: Brexit and anti-Semitism.

He gave his strongest indication yet that Labour is close to backing a second public vote and said he would campaign for Remain if one is held.

“On the people’s vote, we’ve kept it on the table and we’re moving towards that,” he said.

He said an amendment calling for a public vote which is being tabled for debate next week by Labour MPs Peter Kyle and Phil Wilson “could be a solution”.

The amendment, which was reportedly endorsed by shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer at a planning meeting this week, would offer Theresa May’s deal an easy ride in the Commons if she put it to a binding yes-no vote of the public.

Mr McDonnell revealed the two backbenchers had been asked to redraft the amendment. And he said that if the Prime Minister’s deal was rejected by the public, Britain would remain in the EU by default.

“If we were going on a people’s vote based on a deal that has gone through Parliament in some form, if that got voted down then you’d have status quo, and that would be Remain,” he said.

His words clashed with those of Unite union leader Len McCluskey who said on Wednesday Remain should not be on the ballot paper as it was “not the best option for our nation”.

Mr Corbyn was reported in the Guardian to be edging closer to backing a referendum, while The Times said Labour faced mass defections to The Independent Group of former Labour and Tory MPs if he refused.

Mr McDonnell said Remain should be an option in a referendum and said Labour was “moving into implementation stages around our conference decision, around the People’s Vote”.

Asked how would he vote, he said firmly: “I’ve said all along if there was another one I’d campaign for Remain and I’d vote for Remain.”

In the same interview, Mr McDonnell criticised his party for moving too slowly and softly against anti-Semitism. “We’ve got to be quicker, and we’ve got to be fiercer,” he said. “I think there’s been a lot of listening but not enough action. That’s the problem.”

Speaking of the criticisms made by eight Labour MPs who formed The Independent Group this week, Mr McDonnell agreed that clear-cut cases of anti-Semitism had not led to enough swift punishment.

His response contrasts starkly with hostility from Mr Corbyn’s office which accused the eight defectors of defending “austerity [and] corporate tax cuts”, while Mr McCluskey dismissed the anti-Semitism row as “contrived”.

Mail Online

Published  3 days ago

The Labour leader said that the teenager, who gave birth to a baby boy in a refugee camp on Sunday, had 'a right to return' after fleeing the country to support IS.

The Independent

Published  3 days ago

In front of around five hundred people, Jeremy Corbyn strode on to the stage to the sound of about six hands clapping “Thank you so much for that warm reception,” he said. The reception had not been

sputniknews

Published  4 days ago

If you repeat a lie enough times, people will think it’s true, the old saying goes. In 2003 the neocons repeated ad nauseam the claim that Iraq possessed WMDs. It wasn’t true, but was said with so much confidence that people felt scared of expressing scepticism.

The Independent

Published  4 days ago

Three Conservative MPs have announced they are resigning from their party to join ex-Labour members in the new Independent Group in the House of Commons.

Heidi Allen, Sarah Wollaston and Anna Soubry left Theresa May's Tories after being heavily critical of her approach to Brexit and the growing influence of eurosceptics in the party.

It means the Independent Group now has eleven members, more than the Liberal Democrats, including the eight MPs who have walked out of Jeremy Corbyn's party in recent days.

More follows…

We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.

At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.

The Independent

Published  4 days ago

The Labour Party has always been home to many different political traditions, all united with the common goal of getting a Labour government and social justice. I disagreed with some things New

The Independent

Published  4 days ago

There are few more meaningless Blairite phrases than “modern Britain”, and this cliche was unfortunately given another outing by formerly Labour MPs today as the Dinner Party Seven launched their breakaway independent group.

Yet it didn’t take long for them to look decidedly unmodern – about an hour and a half to be precise. No sooner had Angela Smith, one of the seven, sat down in a BBC studio than she burbled something about brown people having a “funny tinge”, thereby plunging the new group into its first race row (and then its first apology).

It was a timely reminder that this group hardly consisted of the creme-de-la-creme of politics. Unless what is left at the bottom of the barrel can be redefined as “creme”. Alas, the talent pool that came into government with Blair in 1997 has largely dried up, gone to the Lords or moved upstairs from there. Things have changed. Young talent is now very much of the Jeremy Corbyn tendency. Youth is on his side, as he quipped on Marr.

McDonnellomics – the word will catch on, trust me – may be embodied by two old silver-haired white men, but it stands for something more: diversity, reversing the gap between rich and poor, shifting the balance of power so that workers reap the benefits of their labour, and transforming public services to give everyone quality housing, jobs and income.

What remains of “the project” – as Peter Mandelson used to call it – are now largely old white men and women, bitter at the temerity of people to take control of the Labour movement, blinking in disbelief as the political landscape rumbles and moves around them.

Created with Sketch. Labour split: the MPs who are quitting the party

Show all 7 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. Labour split: the MPs who are quitting the party

Change is now driven by a more diverse, youthful and principled movement demanding answers to the big questions that face Britain. And they are scornful of Labour moderates who deploy focus-group-tested terms like “fairness” while delivering public-private partnerships that drain our schools and hospitals of funds today.

Blair and Brown made progress on gender representation but failed to make much headway on racial diversity in the Commons. After 1987, when Diane Abbott, the late Bernie Grant and two others were elected, we had to wait until 2010 for the first big jump in BME representation, largely due to a mass exodus of retiring MPs who didn’t fancy a period in opposition under somebody even slightly left-wing.

While the Labour government gave us the Stephen Lawrence inquiry and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, it subsequently rolled back gains claiming that the Macpherson recommendations had all been fulfilled despite evidence of increasingly unequal racial outcomes across the board, from police stop-and-searches, to rates of BME homelessness. The Blair and Brown years were better for race equality in some respects than Thatcher and Cameron but not by much that you could really feel.

This once-cool Cool Britannia generation, which largely marginalised the race issue is now embodied by the more diverse faces of Chuka Umunna and Luciana Berger. But behind this facade are the real moderates, like Mike Gapes and Angela Smith. Old has-beens – and never-weres – who went unnoticed during the glory years and who did little for race equality then, yet now claim to care passionately about racism on behalf of all "funny tinged" people.

Nobody is going to be fooled by this act. Jeremy Corbyn is the real anti-racist, he’s been there and got the T-shirt. A large collection, in fact, all in his garage. And it is the new Labour Party that is driving an agenda to genuinely tackle racial disadvantage. The class of ’97 have had their chance, and no assortment of austerity-supporting capitalists are going to stop it.

Lester Holloway is a Labour and Momentum member. He used to work for Operation Black Vote, the Runnymede Trust and was editor of New Nation and news editor at The Voice newspaper. He writes in a personal capacity

We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.

At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.

The Independent

Published  4 days ago

Jeremy Corbyn faces a historic Labour rupture after being warned that more MPs are ready to follow seven who dramatically quit his party on Monday. The leader publicly appealed for unity while his

Mail Online

Published  5 days ago

The 19-year-old, who left east London to marry an ISIS fighter in Syria, gave birth to a baby boy in a Syrian refugee camp yesterday. Today her family's lawyer Tasnime Akunjee appeared on TV.

Breitbart

Published  5 days ago

Rep. Ilhan Omar is an antisemite and hating Jews is a perfectly acceptable position in today’s Democratic Party.

Westmonster

Published  5 days ago

A group of seven MPs have resigned from Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party in a dramatic moment in British politics.

Latest stories direct in your inbox

Sign up for the free Red Alert email:

MP Luciana Berger says she has come to "sickening conclusion" that Labour is "institutionally anti-Semitic", as she joins six other MPs in quitting party

Latest: https://t.co/tCMja2t2Qm pic.twitter.com/NRjzy0zT9j

— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) February 18, 2019

Luciana Berger announced that they will now form a group of Independent MPs.

Berger said that she felt “embarrassed and ashamed” and called Labour “institutionally anti-Semitic”.

She said Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership had refused to tackle a culture of bullying and bigotry.

Chris Leslie said Labour had been hijacked by the “machine politics” of the far-left.

In a statement, the Independent Group said: “We believe that none of today’s political parties are fit to provide the leadership and direction needed by our country.”

Statement pic.twitter.com/nAr4YhO5h8

— Ross Kempsell (@rosskempsell) February 18, 2019

Others in attendance included Chuka Umunna, Angela Smith, Mike Gapes, Gavin Shuker and Ann Coffey.

Westmonster

Published  5 days ago

The group of anti-Brexit MPs who resigned from the Labour Party this morning include prominent campaigners against Brexit and for a second referendum, including Chuka Umunna and Chris Leslie.

Latest stories direct in your inbox

Sign up for the free Red Alert email:

Surely having resigned, they will now put their decision to the people? Unlike the 17.4 million who voted for Brexit, no one has endorsed their decision or given it any mandate.

A Labour source has been quoted as saying: “All these MPs stood under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership…Now they are standing for different policies and on a different platform, they should resign and put them to the test in a by-election. That is the right and democratic thing to do.”

Suddenly not so keen on democracy after all?

Sky News

Published  5 days ago

Latest updates as the PM writes to all Conservative MPs ahead of fresh Brexit talks with the EU.

Express.co.uk

Published  5 days ago

The Tory MP for Broxtowe and outspoken Remainer used to prominently display her pride at being a “life long One Nation Tory” on her Twitter bio. However, Ms Soubry has removed all reference to her party from the bio section of her profile, referring to herself simply as ‘MP for Broxtowe’. The title echoes stylising employed by the seven breakaway Labour MPs who announced this morning they were quitting their party and forming the Independent Group of MPs.

Ms Soubry’s old profile read: “MP for Broxtowe and life long One Nation Tory.”

The wording has now changed to: “Dunham on Trent, Clumber Park, Hartland Comp Worksop, Nottingham, MP for Broxtowe.”

It is not clear exactly when Ms Soubry changed her profile and she has not publicly commented on the new parliamentary faction.

However, as recently as yesterday she retweeted comments from Chuka Umunna.

Mr Umunna is one of Ms Soubry’s key People’s Vote allies and a leading figures behind the splinter group that broke away from Labour.

Political commentator and journalist Tom Harwood tweeted images of the changed profiles.

Mr Harwood said: “Soubs used to prominently feature the words 'One Nation Tory' in her Twitter bio. Now she doesn't.

“I really hope she doesn't defect to the new Labour group of MPs over one policy disagreement with the Government (and one she committed to deliver at that).

“It would be very sad.”

Former Labour leadership candidate Chuka Umunna announced his decision to leave the party at a hushed press conference in Westminster this morning.

The MP for Streatham spoke of the difficulty in deciding to leave Labour, blaming leader Jeremy Corbyn’s stance on Brexit and failure to address anti-Semitism in the party.

Mr Umunna invited other MPs from across the Commons who are disillusioned with their party’s leadership and Brexit position to join the breakaway Independent Group.

Mr Umunna said: “The established parties are not up to this change.

“They can’t be the change because they are the problem. They have failed to fulfil their duties with the competence the public deserves.

“It is time we dumped this country’s old fashioned politics. We invite you to join your parties and help us forge a new consensus.”

the Guardian

Published  6 days ago

Campaigners against Theresa May’s “my deal or no deal” Brexit strategy are planning to mobilise the public and politicians for a showdown over the UK’s future in Europe in the final six days before Britain is due to leave the EU, the Observer can reveal.

The plans will involve a huge march in London on Saturday, 23 March, aimed at demonstrating the scale of public anxiety about the two Brexit options May is offering, which will conclude with speeches outside the Palace of Westminster. Hundreds of thousands are expected to attend. Then on 25 and 26 March, MPs of all parties say they will be ready to rally behind a “lethal” amendment that will allow May’s deal to be passed, but only on condition that it is first ratified and approved by the British people in a referendum. Such a referendum would require article 50 to be delayed.

If the British people reject May’s deal in that second public vote, the UK would in all probability stay in the EU on its current terms.

MPs who backed Remain in the 2016 referendum – and who are appalled by May’s attempts to “run down the clock” in the hope of forcing parliament to vote for her hugely unpopular deal – believe that the two-pronged approach of involving the public and politicians has a good chance of averting a disastrous Brexit outcome, albeit at the 11th hour.

While some at Westminster believe the chances of securing a second referendum have faded, supporters of the latest plans say the Commons will be most likely to back another public vote at the moment when a nervous nation will be on the brink of the biggest decision in its postwar history, one that will affect the futures of millions of British people. The UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March.

On Saturday one of the strategists behind the planned amendment, the Labour MP Peter Kyle, said that the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, and the shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, were enthusiastic about the plan and looking at whether Labour could whip for his amendment.

“I know they are both warm to the idea,” Kyle said. “In the next few days they will be testing how wide support for this amendment is in the party.”

Another senior Labour MP involved in talks about what is being called parliament’s “final showdown” said: “By that stage, at one minute before midnight, Labour will have no option but to back the Kyle amendment as a route to a second referendum, as they will have run out of alternatives. There should also be enough Tories who will see the sense in allowing the public either to sign off on, or reject, May’s deal. This is clearly the best way to end this argument for good.”

The shadow Scotland minister, Paul Sweeney, threw his support behind the strategy at a meeting of Labour MPs last week on Thursday entitled “Love Socialism, Hate Brexit”. He said: “It’s not about a people’s vote. It is not about overturning any view.”

Florists: Fresh blooms could become preserve of the rich in no-deal Brexit

Read more

Sweeney added that, if May was so confident her deal was the best one available, she should be willing to test it against public opinion, in the same way that the Irish peace process was subject to ratification by the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic in 1998. “If Theresa May is not willing to compromise on her deal, then if she’s that confident in it she should approach it the same way as the Good Friday agreement, so there was a ratification … We give the people a final say.”

Most MPs believe the prime minister will try to leave a final crucial Commons vote on her deal until the last possible moment, probably early in the week after she returns from an EU summit in Brussels on 21 and 22 March. But that eventual “meaningful vote” – likely on 25 or 26 March – would be amendable, giving those MPs who believe the issue must be put back to the people their opportunity to strike.

Labour’s Yvette Cooper and Conservative Oliver Letwin plan to table an amendment in the next fortnight that would force May to apply to the EU to extend article 50 for an unspecified period beyond 29 March if the prime minister has not secured parliamentary backing for a deal by the middle of March. But supporters of another referendum say the final piece of the jigsaw will be to get MPs to support another public vote during the extension period.

This week May and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn – both facing splits within their own parties and possible resignations over Brexit – will hold talks with European leaders in an attempt to find a breakthrough. But hopes that the two leaders can agree on a cross-party way forward are fading, not least because of the prime minister’s refusal to accept Labour’s central demand for a UK-wide customs union and her opposition to taking the option of no deal off the table.

In October an estimated 700,000 people from all over the UK marched peacefully on parliament to demand a second referendum on Brexit. The event was the biggest outpouring of public opposition to government policy since the anti-Iraq-war protest in 2003.

The event on 23 March will be entitled “Put It to the People”, and the organisers say it will be for all those people who want to stop a disastrous Brexit, not just dyed-in-the-wool Remainers who have always been wedded to the idea of reversing the referendum decision.

BBC News

Published  6 days ago

The MPs - including Luciana Berger and Chuka Umunna - urge others join them, as Jeremy Corbyn says he is "disappointed" at the split.

The Sun

Published  6 days ago

BREXIT scaremongers were exposed as hoaxers last night after their warnings of No Deal chaos were finally demolished. EU chiefs have secretly agreed measures to ensure transport links with Britain …

Westmonster

Published  6 days ago

Anti-No Deal Conservative MP Nick Boles is clearly feeling the pressure as his local Association kicks off over his total opposition to a WTO Brexit, and he has accused pro-Brexit group Leave.EU of a cardinal sin: recruiting Leave voters into the Tory Party!

Westmonster has previously reported how local Tories in the Grantham and Stamford area were growing furious with the behaviour of Boles.

He has previously said: “If at any point between now and 29 March the government were to announce that No Deal Brexit had become its policy, I would immediately resign the Conservative whip and vote in any way necessary to stop it from happening.”

This led to local Tory Vice-Chairman, Councillor Adam Stokes, pointing out: “The constituency voted to Leave. He’s putting some blocks in the way by agreeing with the amendments. I’m extremely disappointed he’s taking this action.

“We are going to start the selection process. I am sure it’s going to be very tough for Nick to be reselected. My own personal view is I won’t vote for reselecting him.”

Councillor Robert Foulkes, Chairman of Stamford Welland Conservatives, said: “If I was the opposition, I would say ‘Can you trust the Tories?’ If they are going to renege on it (Brexit), what can be more fundamental?

“We need to make a show where we will not have Nick Boles and deselect him and re-establish the trust with the electorate.”

Boles has now claimed that the Tory Party is full of, shock horror, Brexiteers. He has told The Times: “There has been a systematic operation of infiltration of the Conservative Party by UKIP and UKIP sympathisers. I had 400 members until 12 months ago and I now have 500…hey have coalesced with those in my party who already had these views. Among the more right-wing and reactionary members there has never been a total acceptance of my brand of politics; they were quite grumpy about gay marriage.”

The Remainer MP claimed that others are being targeted as well: “What has happened to me and I think is in the process of happening to others like Dominic Grieve, Antoinette Sandbach, Anna Soubry, Mark Pawsey and George Freeman is a sudden influx of ex-UKIP members or ex-UKIP voters actively recruited by the organisations Leave.EU and Leave Means Leave.”

You would have thought most Tories would welcome new members and blood into the party to take the fight to Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party. 17.4 million Brexiteers voted Leave and now they expect the Conservative government to deliver. 64% of Tory members prefer No Deal to Theresa May’s deal – it is Nick Boles who now represents the fringe of his party.

If you want to help Westmonster fight for Brexit then please consider supporting the site with a donation. Thank you very much!

The Independent

Published  6 days ago

Of the many con tricks that have propelled Brexit from being the fantasy of a few to the reality for the many, the myth that it is a battle won for the people against the elite is right up there with

The Independent

Published  1 week ago

MPs have voted against including the European Charter of Fundamental Rights in UK law after Brexit. A Labour amendment, tabled in the name of Jeremy Corbyn, sought to retain the provisions in the

The Independent

Published  1 week ago

Jeremy Corbyn has been accused of betraying the party’s Brexit policy by the delegates who wrote it, as they demand he finally backs a Final Say referendum on Brexit. The delegates from around the

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 week ago

Sen. Bernie Sanders called anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), on the phone to offer his support after she voiced her anti-Semitic and anti-Israel comments. Sanders, who was born Jewish, reportedly said that "We will stand by our

Mail Online

Published  1 week ago

Tasnime Akunjee first appeared in the public eye when he represented the families of three girls who fled to join ISIS in Syria in 2015.

The Independent

Published  1 week ago

Campaigners for a fresh Brexit referendum will pour onto the streets for another huge demonstration next month, with the decision poised to “go down to the wire”. The Put It To The People march –

The Independent

Published  1 week ago

Theresa May has left the door open for the greater involvement of US corporations in British healthcare as she arrives in America to lay the groundwork for a future trade deal.

Ms May would only say that she was committed to a health service that is free at the point of delivery, but made no comment on whether the NHS would be off the table in any future talks.

Trade and the UK’s economic relationship with the US will be one of the key pillars of the Prime Minister’s visit to Philadelphia and Washington DC.

Asked whether health services might form a part of a potential deal, she said: “We're at the start of the process of talking about a trade deal. We're both very clear that we want a trade deal.

“It will be in the interests of the UK from my point of view, that's what I'm going to be taking in, into the trade discussions that take place in due course.

“Obviously he will have the interests of the US. I believe we can come to an agreement that is in the interests of both.”

Created with Sketch. The controversial orders Donald Trump has already issued

Show all 9 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. The controversial orders Donald Trump has already issued

Asked again whether the NHS would be off the table she said: “As regards the NHS, we're very clear as a Government that we're committed to an NHS that is free at the point of use.”

The statement left open the possibility of the greater involvement of US firms in healthcare, as long as people do not have to pay for the services they provide at the moment they are received.

A Number 10 spokesman said later: “The NHS will never be part of a trade deal and will always remain free at the point of delivery.”

Liberal Democrat Leader Tim Farron said: “The public were told Brexit would mean another £350m a week for the NHS, not that our health service would be opened up to US firms.

“Theresa May must immediately clarify that the NHS will not be up for sale in any future negotiations with Trump. Hollowing out our health service in the name of a trade deal with the US would be an utter betrayal of most of those who voted to leave the EU.”

One of the key factors that led to opposition to the TTIP trade deal between the US and EU was fear over whether it would open up the NHS to vast multi-national corporations who might put the profits ahead of patient care.

Ms May faced repeated questions in the Commons on Wednesday, with Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn urging her to rule out any deal that would give US giants a toehold in British healthcare.

The SNP also raised concerns that a deal could see UK supermarkets stocked with foods that do not meet current safety standards.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

Breitbart

Published  1 week ago

Jeremy Corbyn, the embattled leader of the opposition UK Labour Party, has been accused of accepting campaign funds from a group with links to the Hamas terrorist organisation.

Friends of Al-Aqsa are alleged to have given a cheque for £10,000 to Mr. Corbyn, an outspoken critic of Israel, when he was bidding to become Labour leader in 2015. A report in the Observer newspaper on Sunday made the claim, adding that the money came from the proceeds of a fundraising dinner held for Mr. Corbyn’s election.

A spokesman for the Labour leader said the amount had not been declared because the cheque was made out to the wrong person.

Any donation above £7,500 should be declared to the Electoral Commission.

According to the Observer, Friends of Al-Aqsa was founded by Ismail Patel in 1997 and has been caught up in a series of controversies since. In 2009 Patel told a rally: “Hamas is no terrorist organisation. The reason they hate Hamas is because they refuse to be subjugated, occupied by the Israeli state, and we salute Hamas for standing up to Israel.”

Patel was also a spokesman for the British Muslim Initiative, an organisation that the Daily Telegraph has claimed has links to Hamas.

Only one donation from the Friends of Al-Asqa’s fundraising dinner has been declared. Ibrahim Hamami, who the Telegraph has claimed is an opponent of the Oslo peace accords, and wrote in support of a wave of stabbings of Jews in Israel in 2015, gave £2,000 to Corbyn, the register of MPs’ interests shows.

Approached at the time by the Telegraph, he said: “I am not answering your questions. Get lost.”

The revelation comes as the Labour Party continues to battle allegations that it is profoundly anti-Semitic in nature and welcomes members who espouse anti-Jewish sentiments.

In May, Breitbart Jerusalem reported Britain’s most notorious radical Islamist preacher, Anjem Choudary, provided support for then-suspended Labour MP Naz Shah’s controversial Facebook post suggesting the relocation of Israel to the United States.

Choudary also defended the British Labour Party generally from charges of anti-Semitism, saying: “I think that the term anti-Semitism has been used as a tool to attack those who criticise Israel. And I think that’s become clear over the last few days.”

He was speaking in a joint interview with Breitbart News editor Aaron Klein on the talk radio programme, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.”

As Breitbart Jerusalem reported, Shah was eventually re-admitted to the party after agreeing that comments which saw her suspended were anti-Semitic. She apologised for online posts, including one suggesting Israel should be moved to the United States.

In April the Labour Party was forced to hold an internal inquiry into allegations of anti-Semitism within its rank and file membership. The move followed a turbulent week in which two prominent members were suspended over anti-Semitic comments.

BrexitCentral

Published  1 week ago

Written by

A few honourable MPs aside, the Labour Party has now dumped its manifesto commitment on Brexit to respect the referendum result. It is now calling for Britain to stay in the EU’s customs union forever – which would effectively mean being locked into the EU forever while having no say at all over how it works.

Say what you like about Theresa May’s negotiating skills, her task would anyway have been nigh on impossible given the continual attempts at sabotage from politicians and others in Britain.

One example: when May went to Brussels last week, she was told by Donald Tusk that Jeremy Corbyn’s proposals for a permanent customs union represented “a promising way out” of the current impasse on Brexit.

Another form of sabotage is the constant exhortations from the establishment calling for the EU to give no ground to the Government.

Brexit is in danger. A clean Brexit is still the default position, leaving on 29th March to trade on WTO terms. Yet despite the defeat in parliament on 29th January of every binding amendment to block or delay Brexit – including Labour’s permanent customs union – Theresa May’s so-called Withdrawal Agreement is still on the table.

Even though MPs voted against it on 24th January, May still wants MPs to vote again on it, once again using No Deal as a threat not as an opportunity.

Her current deal with the EU is not a Withdrawal Agreement – it is a Remainer Agreement, in every clause on every one of its 585 pages. It is No Brexit. It would bind us forever into a United States of Europe.

It is meant to be permanent, inescapable. The Attorney General told the Cabinet that there was no legal escape route from the backstop Protocol and that it would “endure indefinitely”.

Her deal would give the EU tariff-free access to our market and control of our trade policy, force us to fund the EU’s defence programme, give EU fishing vessels free access to our waters, give the EU control of our farms, and allow free movement of labour through clauses about “mobility”. In sum, it would bind us into the EU in perpetuity.

No surprise, then, that Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the European Commission, boasted that the EU got “almost everything” it wanted with the deal.

MPs rejected May’s deal – almost the only thing they can agree on – then voted to tell her to go yet again to Brussels with her faithful lieutenant Oliver Robbins, to beg the EU to drop the Irish backstop.

But the EU will not give up the huge advantages they gain under the backstop. As Robbins observed, renegotiating the backstop with the EU is “for the birds”.

We do not need to beg the EU to change its position – that would be fruitless, as all experience from Harold Macmillan 50 years ago to David Cameron has proven. We do not need to beg the EU for a new deal, as Boris Johnson has suggested. We do not need to pay the EU £39 billion for the privilege of leaving, nor even the £20 billion that Johnson proposed.

We can and should just declare our policies on trade, fishing, the Irish border, immigration and everything else. We do not need to ask the EU’s permission. We declare our independence and then, if we wish, we can negotiate with the EU.

BBC News

Published  1 week ago

The defeat by 45 votes has no legal force but No 10 had warned it would make the PM's EU talks more difficult.

Politicalite UK

Published  1 week ago

21K SharesShare21KTweetA WIGAN MP has been criticized after she claimed more than £1m in expenses despite failing to represent her own constituents in regards to Brexit. Lisa Nandy MP, a privileged Champagne Socialist and daughter of a millionaire cultural Marxist was University educated before taking an internship in an MP’s office, she has reportedly never […]

TruePublica

Published  1 week ago

International Trade Secretary Liam Fox was forced into an embarrassing admission - his plan to quickly normalize the U.K.’s WTO commitments had failed

Daily Wire

Published  1 week ago

SponsoredReport AdxReason: --Select please--

On Sunday, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), an open anti-Semite with a long history of anti-Semitic commentary, jumped back into the Jew-hating waters with a couple of tweets blaming Republican support for Israel on payments by those shekelmaster Hebrews. Here’s what she tweeted:

It's all about the Benjamins baby https://t.co/KatcXJnZLV

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) February 10, 2019

When called out for her anti-Semitism by Chelsea Clinton, she then suggested that the perception that her anti-Semitic comments were in fact anti-Semitic was merely a right-wing smear:

Chelsea - I would be happy to talk. We must call out smears from the GOP and their allies. And I believe we can do that without criticizing people for their faith.

I look forward to building an inclusive movement for justice with you. https://t.co/EGA9NQfBCi

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) February 11, 2019

Omar’s latest Jew-hatred isn’t the beginning of her story. In 2012 she tweeted:

In 2013 she chuckled over Hamas and Hezbollah and suggested that the American military was akin to Al Qaeda. She supports the anti-Semitic BDS movement. She said last month that Israel cannot be a democracy and a Jewish state. She’s not hiding the ball here.

Democratic Leadership made a statement suggesting that Omar’s “use of anti-semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about Israel’s supporters is deeply offensive. We condemn these remarks and we call upon Congresswoman Omar to immediately apologize for these hurtful comments.” While some Democrats issued statements denouncing Omar’s language, there has been no threat to remove her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Meanwhile, some members of the media played defense for Omar, suggesting she was only “raising questions,” or dumbing down her anti-Semitism into mere anti-Israel sentiment:

Suffice it to say that Rep. Steve King’s (R-IA) racist comments about white nationalism did not receive this sort of tepidly dismissive media coverage.

Anti-Semitism now thrives inside the Democratic Party. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) wrote a piece for Louis Farrakhan in 2006; she’s welcome in the party. Linda Sarsour continues to be an ally to the new Democratic Fresh Faces™ as well as more established names like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) (in November, Sarsour slammed “folks who masquerade as progressives but always choose their allegiance to Israel over their commitment to democracy and free speech”). Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) holds conference calls with vicious British anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn, to no serious blowback from the Democratic Party. Keith Ellison, now attorney general of Minnesota, was nearly made the head of the Democratic National Committee after engaging in blatant anti-Semitism for years.

How has the Democratic Party morphed into the party of anti-Semitism? By embracing the philosophy of intersectionality on the one hand, and by embracing the myth that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are completely separable on the other. The former provides the emotional impetus for nodding at Jew-hatred; the latter provides the intellectual framework for doing so.

The philosophy of intersectionality has othered Jews from the intersectional coalition. Because intersectionality is built on the premise that the prevailing Western system of thought has victimized various groups, and that those groups must band together in order to destroy that system, those who have thrived under the West must be excised from the intersectional agglomeration – being, as they are, representatives of the fact that Western thought is not, in fact, rooted in evil. The Jews are simply too financially, educationally, and politically successful to be seen as anything other than members of the power structure. Thus, slurs against them must be countenanced from more victimized groups. As I wrote back in November:

In areas where Jews are successful, then, anti-Semitism and intersectional theory often merge. Many Jews have white skin; many Jews are highly educated and wealthy; the state of Israel is disproportionately powerful. This means that in the intersectional hierarchy, Jews stand near the top when it comes to privilege. And this means that anti-Semitism is only objectionable when expressed by white supremacists – by members of a group even more privileged than the Jews. When anti-Semitism is expressed by others in the intersectional hierarchy, however, that’s not anti-Semitism at all: it’s just a normal form of intersectional thinking. Thus, Louis Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism or Linda Sarsour’s anti-Semitism or Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism isn’t anti-Semitism at all, but the rage of an intersectional underdog taking on a more powerful group. Hence the disproportionate focus of the intersectional thinkers on Israel, the supposed evidence of the hierarchical power of the Jews.

Intersectional theory posits identity groups as the chief factor in determining morality. That sort of thinking has never cut in favor of Jews. And it doesn’t now, either. Pretending that Jews are part of the intersectional hierarchy is simply siding with the intersectional alligator, hoping that it eats the Jews last.

Stacked on top of that emotionally resonant bigotry is an intellectual lie: that opposing the existence of the only Jewish state on planet earth is somehow separable from base Jew-hatred. That’s a tenuous logical framework to begin — calling for a boycott against that state on grounds you ignore from every other state somehow is obviously targeting Jews. In practice, that framework completely collapses. There’s a reason that Omar isn’t merely tweeting about Israeli influence, but about American Jews overall. There’s a reason that terrorist groups use BDS as a front for their activities. There’s a reason that conflict in Gaza is used as an excuse to terrorize synagogues in France.

Yet the new Left must buy into the anti-Israel-isn’t-anti-Jewish logic in order to justify an underlying bigotry against the Jews more broadly. And so Ilhan Omar won't suffer any consequences for her anti-Semitism. Neither will Tlaib. Better that the intersectional coalition be maintained at the expense of the Jews.

HuffPost UK

Published  1 week ago

Internal party polling and warnings from her chief whip and party chairman have forced her to 'think the unthinkable'

the Guardian

Published  1 week ago

Europe is sleepwalking into oblivion and its people need to wake up before it is too late. If they don’t, the European Union will go the way of the Soviet Union in 1991. Neither our leaders nor ordinary citizens seem to understand that we are experiencing a revolutionary moment, that the range of possibilities is very broad, and that the eventual outcome is thus highly uncertain.

Most of us assume the future will more or less resemble the present, but this is not necessarily so. In a long and eventful life, I have witnessed many periods of what I call radical disequilibrium. We are living in such a period today.

The next inflection point will be the elections for the European parliament, in May 2019. Unfortunately, anti-EU forces will enjoy a competitive advantage. There are several reasons for this, including the outdated party system in most European countries, the practical impossibility of treaty change and the lack of legal tools for disciplining member states that violate the principles on which the EU was founded. The EU can impose its laws on applicant countries but it lacks sufficient capacity to enforce member states’ compliance.

The antiquated party system hampers those who want to preserve the values on which the EU was founded, but it helps those who want to replace those values with something radically different. This is true in individual countries and even more so in trans-European alliances. The party system of individual states reflects the divisions that mattered in the 19th and 20th centuries, such as the conflict between capital and labour. But the cleavage that matters most today is between pro- and anti-European forces.

The many voters who remain pro-European have no party to vote for

The EU’s dominant country is Germany, whose dominant political alliance – between the Christian Democratic Union and the Bavaria-based Christian Social Union – has become unsustainable. The alliance worked as long as there was no significant party in Bavaria to the right of the CSU. That changed with the rise of the extremist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). In last September’s länder elections, the CSU’s result was its worst in more than six decades, and the AfD entered the Bavarian parliament for the first time.

The AfD’s rise removed the raison d’etre of the CDU-CSU alliance. But that alliance cannot be broken up without triggering new elections that neither Germany nor Europe can afford. And the ruling coalition cannot be robustly pro-European while facing the AfD threat.

The situation is far from hopeless. The German Greens have emerged as the only consistently pro-European party in the country, and they continue to rise in opinion polls, whereas the AfD seems to have reached its high point (except in the former East Germany). But now CDU/CSU voters are represented by a party whose commitment to European values is ambivalent.

In the United Kingdom too an antiquated party structure prevents the popular will from finding proper expression. Both Labour and the Conservatives are internally divided, but their leaders, Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May, respectively, are determined to deliver Brexit. The situation is so complicated that most Britons just want to get it over with, although it will be the defining event for the country for decades to come.

Collusion between Corbyn and May has aroused opposition in both parties, which in the case of Labour is bordering on rebellion. May has announced a programme to aid impoverished pro-Brexit Labour constituencies in the north of England. And Corbyn is accused of betraying the pledge he made at Labour’s last party conference to back a second Brexit referendum if he can’t trigger a general election.

The chances that May’s deal will again be rejected by MPs are growing by the day. That could set in motion a groundswell of support for a referendum – or, even better, for revoking Britain’s article 50 notification.

Italy finds itself in a similar predicament. The EU made a fatal mistake in 2017 by strictly enforcing the Dublin agreement, which unfairly burdens countries, such as Italy, where migrants first enter the EU. This drove its predominantly pro-European and pro-immigration electorate into the arms of the anti-European League party and Five Star Movement in last year’s election. The previously dominant Democratic party is in disarray. As a result, the many voters who remain pro-European have no party to vote for. There is, however, an attempt to organise a united pro-European list. A similar reordering of party systems is happening in France, Poland and Sweden.

How rising populism could shake up European elections

Read more

When it comes to trans-European alliances, the situation is even worse. National parties at least have some roots in the past, but these alliances are entirely dictated by party leaders’ self-interest. The European People’s party (EPP) alliance is the worst offender – almost entirely devoid of principles, as demonstrated by its willingness to embrace Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in order to preserve its majority and control the allocation of top EU jobs. Anti-European forces may look good in comparison: at least they have some principles, even if they are odious.

It is difficult to see how the pro-EU parties can emerge victorious from the May elections unless they put Europe’s interests ahead of their own. One can still make a case for preserving the EU in order radically to reinvent it. But that would require a change of heart within the EU. The current leadership is reminiscent of the politburo when the Soviet Union collapsed – continuing to issue edicts as if they were still relevant.

The first step to defending Europe from its enemies, both internal and external, is to recognise the magnitude of the threat they present. The second is to awaken the sleeping pro-European majority and mobilise it to defend the values on which the EU was founded. Otherwise, the dream of a united Europe could become a 21st-century nightmare.

• George Soros is the chairman of Soros Fund Management and of the Open Society Foundations

A version of this article has also appeared on Project Syndicate

The Sun

Published  1 week ago

THERESA May is preparing to resign as PM this summer so she can influence who succeeds her, Cabinet ministers now believe. Under the suspected plan, Mrs May would call time on her Premiership short…

BBC News

Published  1 week ago

The Labour leader had written to the prime minister, setting out his conditions to supporting a deal.

The Electronic Intifada

Published  1 week ago

Is the influence of the Israel lobby waning?

Westmonster

Published  1 week ago

The European Union’s Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier has once again showed how detached those in Brussels are from reality, refusing to substantially renegotiate on a UK deal whilst insisting that “something has to give on the British side”.

Ruling out any legally-binding changes, Barnier said yesterday that: “It’s clear from our side that we are not going to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement but we will continue our discussion in the coming days.”

He also directly interfered in British domestic politics by welcoming Jeremy Corbyn’s letter that calls for a permanent Customs Union. This is still the trap the EU are laying.

Ahead of Barclay meeting, Michel Barnier says he found the Corbyn letter (on customs union) “interesting in tone and in substance” … understand PM May will discuss. “Something needs to give on UK side…” pic.twitter.com/d9DLK1QhBG

— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) February 11, 2019

“I found Corbyn’s letter interesting in tone and in content,” Barnier said.

And he insisted that: “Something has to give on the British side.”

May should deliver an ultimatum and now prepare the country fully for leaving with No Deal. With widespread concern around Europe at the prospect of a No Deal, it is time for those in Brussels to get a reality check.

Sky News

Published  1 week ago

A no-deal Brexit would lead to "potentially devastating" consequences for the peace process in Northern Ireland, according to former prime minister Tony Blair.

In a wide-ranging interview with Sky News' Sophy Ridge, the ex-Labour Party leader warned of a hard border if the UK leaves the EU without agreements in place for what the future relationship will look like.

He dismissed Brexiteer claims that leaving with no deal would not be detrimental to Britain's economy.

Mr Blair told Sky News: "No one could responsibly propose this [a no-deal Brexit]. It would be economically very, very dangerous for Britain and for the peace process in Northern Ireland, it would potentially be devastating.

"We would have a hard border, a very hard border, no-deal Brexit means a really hard border between the north and south of Ireland, contrary to the Good Friday Agreement and it would cause an enormous fissure within the United Kingdom."

He accused politicians of behaving recklessly over the issue of the Northern Ireland peace process.

He said: "They've been playing fast and loose with it from the beginning.

"There's people who cheerfully say you can put the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland in a completely different relationship with Europe, in trading terms, and it makes no difference to the economy of Northern Ireland - I don't know on what basis they would possibly say that."

The former politician, who has called for a second referendum on Brexit, said the country needed to decide whether it wanted a soft or hard departure from the bloc.

"I've never thought you could get to another referendum going directly to it - you'll get to it when the people see what the true Brexit alternatives are and the truth is there are two," he said.

"You can have the soft Brexit, which is really what Jeremy Corbyn is suggesting, or you could have the hard Brexit that Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and other people want.

"And what I've really been saying all the way through this process is you've got to decide which of those Brexits you want before we leave - otherwise, we're going to leave without clarity."

He said leaving without clarity meant "no closure" for the country, leaving the argument to rage on long after the UK leaves the EU.

"By then you'll have left paid your money up front and you'll have given up your negotiating leverage," he said. "For the country to do that, as Theresa May wants to do - to leave without knowing what Brexit you get - this would be, in my view, an incredibly foolish thing for the country to do.

"It's got to know where we're heading before we leave."

He later turned to the issue of antisemitism in the Labour Party and admitted there were "parts of the left that do have a problem with antisemitism".

"You see this in their attitudes to the state of Israel," said Mr Blair. "You can make all sorts of criticisms about the state of Israel but with their continual focusing on Israel, all the time over a long period, you're left with the feeling that they're in a sense targeting it because it is a Jewish state."

He said Labour leadership had "not been robust enough on this".

"Can you imagine when I was leader of the Labour Party having a conversation with me about whether antisemitism was in the Labour Party or not?" he asked. "We wouldn't even have that conversation and there is, I'm afraid, a nascent alliance between what I would call bits of the sort of Islamist type of politics and the left.

"And you can see this not just here in the UK, you can see it across Europe and yes, it gives rise to antisemitism... it's not your traditional antisemitism of the right-wing nature but it's every bit as pernicious."

Mail Online

Published  2 weeks ago

Countdown star Rachel Riley and Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling’s agent are teaming up with advisers from Tony Blair’s Government to launch a breakaway Labour Party within weeks.

The plotters, led by Blair’s former Chief of Staff, Jonathan Powell, addressed about 50 ‘potential supporters of a new political movement’ to stop Jeremy Corbyn getting the keys to No 10, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

The secret meeting on Tuesday night was held in the Central London offices of Ms Rowling’s agent, Neil Blair, where Powell and former Blair speechwriter Philip Collins delivered plans for a new pro-European centrist party.

Oxford-educated Ms Riley, who is Jewish, revealed last month that her Channel 4 bosses ordered extra protection after she publicly criticised Corbyn and received threats from his hard- Left followers [File photo]

The proposed party does not yet have a leader but there was rapturous applause after one audience member called for Ms Rowling to take charge. She is a noted Labour supporter and donor – but also an outspoken critic of Corbyn.

Powell and Collins told guests over drinks and canapes that they aim to launch the party later this year, following Britain’s EU exit on March 29. They claimed their yet-to-be-named party could eventually win up to 100 seats.

The pair also raised the running sore of anti-Semitism in Labour, which was cited as a key reason behind the planned breakaway.

The proposed party does not yet have a leader but there was rapturous applause after one audience member called for Ms Rowling (above) to take charge. She is a noted Labour supporter and donor – but also an outspoken critic of Corbyn [File photo]

At the meeting were Ms Riley and former EastEnders star Tracy Ann Oberman, who have both been attacked by Labour supporters for criticising Corbyn’s handling of the anti-Semitism crisis.

Oxford-educated Ms Riley, who is Jewish, revealed last month that her Channel 4 bosses ordered extra protection after she publicly criticised Corbyn and received threats from his hard- Left followers.

After the rebels’ meeting, one source said: ‘There was a presentation which lasted for about 45 minutes and was followed by a Q&A. The organisers emphasised the need for a charismatic leader for the party to succeed. But they made it clear they are unsure who that is at the moment. One attendee suggested J. K. Rowling – which got a large round of applause.

‘They emphasised that a new centrist movement has the opportunity to attract people with a more nuanced approach to politics and life – and that is why they believe they can succeed where the SDP failed.’

At the meeting were Ms Riley and former EastEnders star Tracy Ann Oberman (above), who have both been attacked by Labour supporters for criticising Corbyn’s handling of the anti-Semitism crisis [File photo]

The Social Democratic Party was formed in 1981 by four senior Labour moderates and eventually merged with the Liberal Party.

The invitation to Tuesday’s meeting declared: ‘We are hosting a drinks reception at 7pm on Tuesday 5th February for potential supporters of a new political movement that Britain desperately needs. This is an initiative led by Jonathan Powell and Philip Collins. Britain is stuck. The promise that the next generation will be better off than their parents is broken. Inequality is tearing the country apart.

‘Housing is too expensive, earnings are static and the quality of work is too poor for too many. The world is changing fast and we’re retreating from it… the old parties cannot face the future because they have run out of answers, energy and leadership.

‘That is why Jonathan and Philip are building a new political movement to move Britain on to a better politics.’

Ms Rowling is a friend of former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown and donated £1 million to the party in 2008. However, she has used social media to mock Corbyn’s position on Brexit.

Westmonster

Published  2 weeks ago

If the establishment don't want Nigel Farage to return to the frontline, they need to deliver Brexit on 29th March as promised. In an absolute missile of

Fox News

Published  2 weeks ago

The Republican Party has a secret weapon for 2020. It’s especially effective because it’s stealthy: The Democrats seem oblivious to its power. And the GOP needn’t lift a finger for it to work. All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch 29-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez . . . exist.

AOC, as she’s better known, today exists largely in front of the cameras. In a few months she’s gone from an unknown New York bartender to the democratic socialist darling of the left and its media hordes. Her megaphone is so loud that she rivals Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the face of the Democratic Party.

Republicans don’t know whether to applaud or laugh. Most do both.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a freight train gaining speed by the day—and helping Republicans with every passing minute.

For them, what’s not to love? She’s set off a fratricidal war on the left, with her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, this week slamming the “radical conservatives” among the Democrats holding the party “hostage.” She’s made friends with Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s Labour Party, who has been accused of anti-Semitism. She’s called the American system of wealth creation “immoral” and believes government has a duty to provide “economic security” to people who are “unwilling to work.” As a representative of New York, she’s making California look sensible.

On Thursday Ms. Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her vaunted Green New Deal, complete with the details of how Democrats plan to reach climate nirvana in a mere 10 years. It came in the form of a resolution, sponsored in the Senate by Massachusetts’ Edward Markey, on which AOC is determined to force a full House vote. That means every Democrat in Washington will get to go on the record in favor of abolishing air travel, outlawing steaks, forcing all American homeowners to retrofit their houses, putting every miner, oil rigger, livestock rancher and gas-station attendant out of a job, and spending trillions and trillions more tax money. Oh, also for government-run health care, which is somehow a prerequisite for a clean economy.

Kimberley Strassel is a Fox News contributor and writes the Potomac Watch column for the Wall Street Journal where she is a member of the editorial board. Her latest book is "The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech" (Twelve, 2016). Follow her on Twitter @KimStrassel.

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

A majority of the country want Theresa May to delay Brexit, according to a new poll released ahead of a fresh Commons showdown over her exit strategy. With less than seven weeks until exit day, the

Zero Hedge

Published  2 weeks ago

Having been mocked by her own leadership (and much of social media) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) - the little socialist that could - faces the final condemnation tonight as The Wall Street Journal surveyed the Bronx Congresswoman's "Green New Deal" resolution... and was left in hysterics, with Kimberley Strassel tweeting:

"By the end of the Green New Deal resolution (and accompanying fact sheet) I was laughing so hard I nearly cried. If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is, they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful. "

Leaving the outspoken reporter with only one conclusion:

" The Republican Party has a secret weapon for 2020. It’s especially effective because it’s stealthy: The Democrats seem oblivious to its power. And the GOP needn’t lift a finger for it to work.

All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch 29-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez . . . exist."

we leave it to Strassel to destroy it line by line...

AOC, as she’s better known, today exists largely in front of the cameras. In a few months she’s gone from an unknown New York bartender to the democratic socialist darling of the left and its media hordes. Her megaphone is so loud that she rivals Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the face of the Democratic Party. Republicans don’t know whether to applaud or laugh. Most do both.

For them, what’s not to love? She’s set off a fratricidal war on the left, with her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, this week slamming the “radical conservatives” among the Democrats holding the party “hostage.” She’s made friends with Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s Labour Party, who has been accused of anti-Semitism. She’s called the American system of wealth creation “immoral” and believes government has a duty to provide “economic security” to people who are “unwilling to work.” As a representative of New York, she’s making California look sensible.

On Thursday Ms. Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her vaunted Green New Deal, complete with the details of how Democrats plan to reach climate nirvana in a mere 10 years. It came in the form of a resolution, sponsored in the Senate by Massachusetts’ Edward Markey, on which AOC is determined to force a full House vote. That means every Democrat in Washington will get to go on the record in favor of abolishing air travel, outlawing steaks, forcing all American homeowners to retrofit their houses, putting every miner, oil rigger, livestock rancher and gas-station attendant out of a job, and spending trillions and trillions more tax money. Oh, also for government-run health care, which is somehow a prerequisite for a clean economy.

It’s a GOP dream, especially because the media presented her plan with a straight face - as a legitimate proposal from a legitimate leader in the Democratic Party. Republicans are thrilled to treat it that way in the march to 2020, as their set-piece example of what Democrats would do to the economy and average Americans if given control. The Green New Deal encapsulates everything Americans fear from government, all in one bonkers resolution.

It is for starters, a massive plan for the government to take over and micromanage much the economy. Take the central plank, its diktat of producing 100% of U.S. electricity “through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources” by 2030. As Ron Bailey at Reason has noted, a 2015 plan from Stanford envisioning the goal called for the installation of 154,000 offshore wind turbines, 335,000 onshore wind turbines, 75 million residential photovoltaic (solar) systems, 2.75 million commercial solar systems, and 46,000 utility-scale solar facilities. AOC has been clear it will be government building all this, not the private sector.

And that might be the easy part. According to an accompanying fact sheet, the Green New Deal would also get rid of combustion engines, “build charging stations everywhere,” “upgrade or replace every building in U.S.,” do the same with all “infrastructure,” and crisscross the nation with “high-speed rail.”

Buried in the details, the Green New Deal also promises government control of the most fundamental aspects of private life. The fact sheet explains why the resolution doesn’t call for “banning fossil fuels” or for “zero” emissions across the entire economy—at least at first. It’s because “we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast” (emphasis mine).

This is an acknowledgment that planes don’t run on anything but fossil fuel. No jet fuel, no trips to see granny. It’s also an acknowledgment that livestock produce methane, which has led climate alarmists to engage in “meatless Mondays.” AOC may not prove able to eradicate “fully” every family Christmas or strip of bacon in a decade, but that’s the goal.

Finally, there is the one little problem of how to pay for all this 'free shit' - never you mind says AOC, that's what taxes-on-the-rich and a printing press are for...

...the resolution is Democratic math at its best. It leaves out a price tag, and is equally vague on what kind of taxes would be needed to cover the cost. But it would run to tens of trillions of dollars. The fact sheet asserts the cost shouldn’t worry anyone, since the Federal Reserve can just “extend credit” to these projects! And “new public banks can be created to extend credit,” too! And Americans will get lots of “shared prosperity” from their “investments.” À la Solyndra.

At least some Democrats seem to be aware of what a danger this is, which is why Ms. Pelosi threw some cold water on the Green New Deal this week. They should be scared. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a freight train gaining speed by the day—and helping Republicans with every passing minute.

Finally, it is worth noting that, on the day AOC unveiled her socialist utopian dream for Amerika - and the way she hopes to pay for it - the sovereign risk of the United States of America surged...

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

Theresa May is returning to Westminster facing ministerial resignations after she left talks with EU leaders over her Brexit deal empty-handed. With another vote in the Commons due next week, a

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

As the Brexit negotiations stagger on, a large swathe of Labour voters will be bitterly disappointed this week by the party leadership. In particular, younger voters who flocked to the party in 2017 in the expectation that the party would fight this Tory disaster will feel they have been sold down the river. Worse still, many think Labour is complicit.

Today, Richard Brooks, one of the co-founders of anti-Brexit youth group, For our Future’s Sake, spelt out how young Labour voters feel: “The Liberal Democrats went onto campuses and promised young people to not increase tuition fees. When they trebled them, only months later, young people and students mobilised – and in 2015 the Liberal Democrats were all but wiped out. The Labour Party now has the same existential threat before it. Does it enable a Tory Brexit, which will disproportionately harm young and working class people, or does Labour follow the wishes of hundreds of thousands of members like me, and support a People’s Vote.” He is absolutely right.

In a letter to Theresa May last night, Jeremy Corbyn said he would help facilitate Brexit and support her deal if May meets five key tests. One of Labour’s original tests, which demanded the exact same economic benefits outside the EU as we have within it, has been dropped. It was never realistic – at least he has realised this much. There was also the mantra that Labour would seek a “jobs first” Brexit. But Brexit, in the terms that the British people voted for originally, is impossible to deliver and there is no point pretending that anything short of keeping the current deal as an EU member is going to be good for the economy. In fact it will be the opposite, especially for jobs.

Whether May meets these five tests or not, they are not credible, nor do they take us any closer to a Final Say on the deal. Let’s go through them briefly.

“A permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union” with “a UK say on future EU trade deals” is the first demand. You cannot have a say on EU trade policy because EU treaties grant the EU sole competence over its common commercial policy. Seeking to participate in a customs union and expecting influence and a say on trade deals is not on the table – just ask Turkey which participates in the customs union but has no say over trade deals.

Created with Sketch. Brexit and travel: all you need to know

Show all 14 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. Brexit and travel: all you need to know

Second, Labour seeks “close alignment with the single market” which should be “underpinned by shared institutions and obligations”. This is a weakening of the Labour Party conference motion which talked about “full participation in the single market”, something which is only possible if you continue to participate in the single market through membership of the European Economic Area, which Keir Starmer, the Shadow Brexit Secretary, made very clear in the House of Commons last July that the Labour front bench was opposed to.

Third, the letter demands a “dynamic alignment on rights and protections so that UK standards keep pace with evolving standards across Europe as a minimum”. How on earth can you expect that from a Conservative prime minister when she, a member of cabinet for the last eight years, has sponsored the weakening of unfair dismissal protections, imposed employment tribunal fees which were ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court and overseen the watering down of the statutory remit of the Equality and Human Rights Commission?

Finally, the fourth and fifth points ask for clear commitments on participation in EU agencies and funding programmes, as well as unambiguous agreements on the details of future security arrangements. The truth is that everything in the political declaration is an aspiration – all of it is ambiguous, whether on security arrangements or otherwise, because it is not binding and subject to a future trading agreement being signed off in several years’ time. The prime minister is unlikely still to be in place when the future trading arrangement is finalised, and neither will the main EU leaders. Any promises involving these people, therefore, aren’t worth the paper they’re written on, as others will be in charge when the time comes.

In short, these tests are nonsense and Labour’s policy is all over the place.

Above all, the letter makes no mention of referring this back to the people. The spirit of Labour’s conference policy was that if we couldn’t get an election, Labour would commit to referring this issue back to the people.

The leader and those around him have made it is clear they have no interest in going there at all. He has also tacitly given a green light to those who not only won’t support a people’s vote but are also happy to thwart the House of Commons’ ability to stop the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal in 50 days. That is the harsh reality of what we have learned these last couple of weeks and the party won’t be forgiven by the next generation.

Chuka Umunna is Labour MP for Streatham

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

mirror

Published  2 weeks ago

Local party activists have tabled motions of no confidence in Ms Berger, complaining that she "criticises" Jeremy Corbyn

Westmonster

Published  2 weeks ago

Jeremy Corbyn’s personal approval ratings have gone through the floor. The bad news comes as he calls for a permanent EU Customs Union and ‘close alignment’ with the Single Market. That isn’t what 17.4 million voted for, Jezza.

An Ipsos Mori poll today finds that the Labour Leader has a -55 net satisfaction rating. That is astonishingly bad, with Theresa May on -25.

Just 17% of voters are now satisfied with Corbyn, and an incredible 72% of voters are dissatisfied with him. Only 44% of Labour voters are happy with him. Ouch.

This is a historically dire level of popularity and comes after Corbyn opportunistically sought to cause maximum disruption on Brexit rather than honouring the referendum result.

NEW @IpsosMORI: just 17% are now satisfied with Jeremy Corbyn – dangerously close to the 13% Michael Foot recorded in 1982 https://t.co/eL0RkQWuX5

— Simon Atkinson (@SimonMAtkinson) February 8, 2019

YouGov also recently found that his popularity has hit an all-time low. As they explain: “In most cases it wasn’t due to his position being too far towards Remain (just 3% thought this) or too far towards Leave (just 6% said this), but rather the fact that he doesn’t seem to have any position at all.”

Westmonster

Published  2 weeks ago

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has set out his new list of demands if the government want to secure his support for any deal with the European Union.

Latest stories direct in your inbox

Sign up for the free Red Alert email:

The wish list essentially keeps the UK deeply locked into Brussels. Instead of a radical agenda for change, Labour want to tie the UK into the EU indefinitely and kill off any prospect for a fully independent trade policy.

The demands include:

‘Permanent and comprehensive’ UK-wide Customs Union.

Close alignment with the Single Market.

‘Dynamic alignment’ on rights and protections.

Commitments to on future UK participation in EU agencies.

Agreements on future security arrangements including the European Arrest Warrant.

This comes after Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary, Sir Keir Starmer, refused to rule out ‘free movement of workers’ under a Corbyn government. Open borders by the back door.

Rather than seeing as a huge opportunity to become independent and self-governing, Labour are desperately trying to cling on to the EU whilst one of their Shadow Ministers has even called for a second referendum. What a shambles.

the Guardian

Published  2 weeks ago

Letter offers Labour’s support if PM makes five binding commitments – including joining a customs union

Political UK

Published  2 weeks ago

Voters have discovered how much Jeremy Corbyn and Diane Abbott have claimed in expenses.The British public can now easily see how much MPs are claiming in expenses and the figures are alarming, to s

BBC News

Published  2 weeks ago

The prime minister is returning to Brussels to press for legally binding changes to her Brexit deal.

the Guardian

Published  2 weeks ago

Union’s paper suggests failure to shift policy could be more damaging than Iraq war

gellerreport

Published  2 weeks ago

Business Insider

Published  2 weeks ago

"Bregret" is real and growing, YouGov research shows.

In poll after poll the UK public says Brexit was the "wrong" decision.

LONDON — For nearly three years it has been one of the strongest, most consistent trends in UK politics, according to one of the country's leading pollsters.

Ever since the public voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, voters have increasingly regretted the decision. The more they learn about the details, consequences, and repercussions of divorcing from the EU and placing barriers in front of our largest, closest and richest trading partner, the more they regret Brexit, according to YouGov.

The above chart from Pantheon Macroeconomics says it all. It shows a running average of each month's YouGov polls.

The margin of those who believe the decision was "wrong" is now eight to 10 percentage points — about the same margin as voted in favour of Leave back in 2016.

Pantheon analyst Samuel Tombs, who collates this data, thinks this will syncopate with the broadly pro-Remain majority inside the House of Commons to produce a "soft" Brexit that the UK closely bound to the EU.

Here are his predictions:

Pantheon Macroeconomics

Read more about Brexit:

Jeremy Corbyn, Tony Benn, and me: The man who invented left-wing Euroscepticism tells us why he thinks Corbyn really favours Brexit

The EU will happily punish delusional Britain for May's Brexit defeat

The UK has never been more against Brexit and the chance of a second referendum has never been greater

Our Brexit Insider Facebook group is the best place for up-to-date news and analysis about Britain's departure from the EU, direct from Business Insider's political reporters. Join here.

Daily Wire

Published  2 weeks ago

A trio of far-left Democrats are normalizing blatant anti-Semitism in the Democratic Party as leaders in the party idly stand by and refuse to condemn their actions and statements.

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

Former Conservative deputy prime minister Michael Heseltine has warned the electoral base is dying off at a rate of 2 per cent a year and has called for a new party leader.

Lord Heseltine, who worked with Margaret Thatcher and was deputy to John Major, said the party needs to work hard to “restore its electoral forturnes” and that Theresa May should step down after a “matter of months”.

The 84-year-old’s comments come weeks after the Tory party failed to achieve an overall majority in Parliament while Labour enjoyed a gain of more than 30 seats, defying the polls and commentators.

“One thing which is just worth having in mind, and you can't do anything about it, 2 per cent of the older part of the electorate die every year - they are 70 per cent Conservative,” Lord Heseltine told Sky News.

”Another 2 per cent come in at the young end of the electorate - they are about 70 per cent Labour. That's about 2 per cent change each year. There isn't that much time.“

Lord Heseltine said it would be “dangerous” for the Conservatives if Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn remained a “credible candidate” for prime minister.

Created with Sketch. UK Election Day 2017

Show all 38 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. UK Election Day 2017

The Brexit sceptic claimed that Ms May could “do the party a service by holding on a little” but should ultimately step down to make way for a new leader and a new party policy in a few months.

Ms May is facing increasing pressure to resign after a bungled initial Brexit meeting with EU counterparts and is being criticised for her efforts to strike a deal with the DUP, a socially conservative Northern Irish party. Repeated terrorist attacks at London Bridge and Finsbury Park have pushed back the Queen’s speech as well as talks with the DUP.

The prime minister has also been accused of “hiding” from the electorate during the campaign, on the scene of terrorist incidents and during the Grenfell Tower fire disaster.

Days before a fire swept through a tower block, killing at least 79 people, Ms May’s government had vowed that “austerity was over” and that the electorate wanted to be offered hope and better living standards after years of cuts to public services.

It signalled a major U-turn after almost a decade of austerity and Conservative government since the financial crisis of 2008.

Another turnaround was witnessed with the opposition.

On 8 June, seven weeks after Ms May changed her mind and called for the snap election, Labour gained 34 seats, including Tory strongholds such as Canterbury and Kensington.

It was a coup for Mr Corbyn, whose MPs had fled his shadow cabinet and vowed he would not become a leader just months before.

Mr Corbyn was given a standing ovation by his party colleagues when Parliament resumed.

The Jewish Chronicle

Published  2 weeks ago

More than 85 per cent of British Jews think Jeremy Corbyn is antisemitic, according to polling carried out for the JC. A similar percentage believe there are significant levels of antisemitism at all levels of the Labour Party.

The survey, undertaken by polling company Survation between August 12 and September 4, shows that 85.9 per cent of British Jews regard the Labour leader as antisemitic, while just 8.3 per cent believe he is not.

In a recent Survation poll among the general public, 39 per cent said Mr Corbyn was antisemitic.

Among British Jews, only 1.7 per cent believe Prime Minister Theresa May to be antisemitic, with 89.9 per cent saying she is not. Just 6.1 per cent say that Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable is antisemitic.

Survation also asked British Jews for their views on the main parties. Respondents were asked to rank Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and UKIP on a scale of 1-5, where 1 corresponds to the statement hat “there are very low levels of antisemitism among the political party’s members and elected representatives”, 4 to the belief that “there are high levels of antisemitism with the party’s members and elected representatives” and 5 to “very high” levels.

According to the survey, 85.6 per cent of British Jews rated Labour at either 4 or 5, suggesting they see antisemitism as having significantly infiltrated all levels of the party.

A similar survey of British Jews by Survation in 2017 found that 69 per cent believed there were “high” to “very high” levels of antisemitism in the Labour Party, meaning there has been a marked increase over the past year in the number of British Jews who believe there are “high” to “very high” levels of antisemitism in Labour.

In this latest survey, only 6.1 per cent ranked the Conservatives at 4 or 5 on the same scale, with 11.2 per cent ranking the Liberal Democrats in one of these two categories. Only UKIP came anywhere close to Labour’s rating, with 56.9 per cent of Jews ranking the party at four or five on the scale.

In a poll earlier this month among the general public, 43 per cent said there were “high” to “very high” levels of antisemitism within Labour.

The poll was conducted after the Labour leader was at the centre of further rows. In July, photos of Mr Corbyn surfaced from a 2014 event in Tunis, where he laid a wreath commemorating the terrorists behind the Munich massacre of the Israeli Olympic team in 1972. In August, a video emerged of him speaking at a 2013 event, during which he said of British “Zionists”.

“They clearly have two problems. One is they don’t want to study history, and secondly, having lived in this country for a very long time, probably all their lives, they don’t understand English irony either.”

Tablet Magazine

Published  2 weeks ago

On June 8, the United Kingdom will hold its general election. Today, the London Jewish Chronicle released its polling on the Jewish vote in the upcoming contest, and the numbers are stark. 77 percent of British Jews say they will vote for Theresa May’s Conservatives, with just 13 percent voting for the opposition Labour party. For comparison, the 2016 exit poll by the Council on American-Islamic Relations showed that Donald Trump received 13 percent of the Muslim vote.

What has driven British Jews to flee Labour like minorities who fled the Republican party under Trump? As in the United States, this exodus is significantly attributable to the party’s radical leader, in this case, Jeremy Corbyn. In fact, a whopping 54 percent of Jews surveyed said they would be more likely to vote for Labour if Corbyn were not in charge. Who then is Corbyn, and why are British Jews so repelled by him?

To begin with, Corbyn has a long history of unsavory associations with anti-Semites. Among other exploits, he has:

— Donated to the organization of Paul Eisen, a Holocaust denier, and appeared at his events. He later claimed he was unaware of Eisen’s unsavory views, despite 15 years of association.

— Defended vicar Stephen Sizer, who disseminated materials arguing the Mossad did 9/11, after he was banned from social media by the Church of England for posting anti-Semitic material.

— Praised preacher Raed Salah and invited him to parliament. Salah claims that Jews make their Passover matzoh with gentile blood, that Jews had foreknowledge of 9/11, and that homosexuality is “a great crime.” He has been banned from the U.K. for anti-Semitic incitement.

— Invited activist Dyab Abou Jahjah to parliament and spoke alongside him. Abou Jahjah had called the 9/11 attacks “sweet revenge,” said Europe made “the cult of the Holocaust and Jew-worshiping its alternative religion,” and called gays “Aids-spreading faggots.” He is now banned in the U.K.

— Campaigned for the release of Jawad Botmeh and Samar Alami, who were convicted in Britain in 1996 for bombing the Israeli Embassy in London and one of the country’s largest Jewish charities.

Taken together, this pattern of behavior suggests a blind spot for anti-Jewish prejudice at best, and incredibly poor judgment in allies and associates at the very least. After all, it is entirely possible to campaign against imperialism and other Western ills without legitimizing anti-Jewish bigots in the halls of parliament. (Suffice to say, if Donald Trump had engaged in such conduct, it would be national news and rightly so.)

If British Jews have taken note of Corbyn’s dalliances with anti-Semites, so have British anti-Semites, many of whom have flocked to Corbyn’s banner. Under his leadership, scores of party officials have had to be suspended or expelled for anti-Semitic hate, in most cases only after media coverage forced the party’s hand. Some of these Corbyn supporters have been captured claiming Israel was behind ISIS or 9/11 or the Sandy Hook Massacre, or asserting that Jewish bankers control Britain.

Most damning for Corbyn, however, has been the anti-Jewish bigotry expressed by his key associates and backers. One such supporter is Jackie Walker, a leader of Momentum, the far-left activist group that forms the backbone of Corbyn’s base. Walker is a committed Corbyn backer. She also claims that Jews were the “chief financiers” of the African slave trade, a classic anti-Semitic canard long debunked by historians; has criticized Britain’s Holocaust Memorial Day; and said she hasn’t “heard a definition of anti-Semitism that I can work with.” After her comment about the slave trade, she was suspended by the party, but by the end of the month, she was reinstated, even as she refused to apologize or retract her bigoted claim. Walker remained vice-chair of Momentum for months, until her remarks about anti-Semitism and Holocaust Memorial Day led her to be restricted to a less public role on the organization’s steering committee. If Corbyn has any problem with his support base being led by an anti-Semite, he has kept it to himself. He has not even criticized Walker’s slave trade slur. She remains a Labour party member in good standing.

Then there is former London mayor Ken Livingstone, whom Corbyn personally appointed to oversee a defense policy review. Livingstone had a long record of problematic entanglements with Jews, but this did not deter the Labour leader from selecting him. Predictably, Livingstone soon imploded in a blaze of anti-Semitic rhetoric and Holocaust revisionism, asserting on live TV that Hitler was a “Zionist,” that Zionist Jews collaborated with Hitler—gross distortions of the historical record—and that “a real anti-Semite doesn’t just hate the Jews in Israel.” Corbyn initially waffled on whether to suspend Livingstone from Labour, and was captured on video running away from a reporter asking him about it. Ultimately, Livingstone received a slap on the wrist from the party, which barred him from holding office for one year, but didn’t suspend or expel him from membership. This led 100 of Labour’s MPs to publicly denounce their own party for failing to combat anti-Semitism.

This conduct of Corbyn’s confidants and base, often with his tacit approval, has contributed to a toxic environment for Jewish politicians and journalists during his tenure. In one famous instance, Jewish Labour MP Ruth Smeeth was publicly accused of being part of a media conspiracy against Corbyn by a Momentum activist at a party event, while Corbyn stood by and said nothing. Smeeth walked out and later issued an emotional statement: “Until today I had made no public comment about Jeremy’s ability to lead our party, but the fact that he failed to intervene is final proof for me that he is unfit to lead, and that a Labour Party under his stewardship cannot be a safe space for British Jews.” The vitriol has extended to non-Jewish critics of Corbyn as well. After Labour’s Sadiq Khan, London’s first Muslim mayor, endorsed a challenger to Corbyn’s leadership, he was hit with anti-Semitic abuse on social media insinuating that he was under Jewish control. (Khan had previously criticized Corbyn for failing to adequately confront anti-Semitism in the party ranks.)

Journalists, and particularly Jewish ones, have similarly been targeted by Corbyn’s most zealous supporters, not unlike U.S. journalists who critically covered Donald Trump’s campaign. This anti-media direction comes from the top. Much like Trump, Corbyn has often had harsher words for those in the press who have covered racists in his base than he has had for the racists themselves. Thus, after leftist Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland, one of Britain’s most prominent Jewish journalists, criticized Corbyn’s associations with anti-Semitic individuals, Corbyn was caught on tape grousing, “The big negative today is Jonathan Freedland in the Guardian… Labour has a problem with anti-Semitism under Corbyn. Utterly disgusting subliminal nastiness, you know. He’s not a good guy at all. He seems kind of obsessed with me, you know?”

Just this week, Jewish journalist Emma Barnett was subject to a torrent of abuse on social media—anti-Semitic and otherwise—after she interviewed Corbyn about childcare on the BBC and he appeared unable to answer some of her questions. To his credit, Corbyn apologized for her treatment by his supporters. That he only publicly repudiated this conduct days before an impending election, however, does not inspire much confidence, though it is a testimony to how blatant the abuse has become that he was forced to do so.

— Jo Green (@jg_ccpress) May 30, 2017

Corbyn has thus left progressive Jews with a profoundly unpalatable choice, pinned between the party whose ideology they share and its disquieting leader and his most zealous supporters. One does not envy their decision.

Previous: ‘Not In My Name’: 100 Labour MPs Denounce Party For Failing to Confront Anti-SemitismJackie Walker Can’t Stop Saying Offensive Things About JewsJeremy Corbyn Slams Jewish Journalist for Writing About Anti-Semitism in Labour PartyLabour Officials Suspended After Claiming Jews Were Behind African Slave Trade, Israel Behind ISISLabour Party Suspends Three More Officials for Anti-Semitism

The Anti-Semitism Scandal Engulfing the Labour Party Was Entirely Predictable

Meet Jeremy Corbyn, the New Leader of Britain’s Labour Party

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

It’s difficult to know who got the least out of the “lovely” phone conversation between Jeremy Corbyn (69) and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (29).  True, as a kind of long-distance political

The Independent

Published  2 weeks ago

Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted he incorrectly claimed that Jeremy Cobyn voted against the Good Friday Agreement.

Asked on Channel 4 News whether it was worth sacrificing peace in Northern Ireland for Brexit, Mr Rees-Mogg replied: “I am unaware of any Brexiteer who is in favour of abandoning the Good Friday Agreement – it’s Jeremy Corbyn, incidentally, who voted against the Good Friday Agreement when it came to Parliament.”

But it was quickly pointed out that the Labour leader did vote for the deal in July 1998 telling the Commons at the time: “We look forward to peace, hope and reconciliation in Ireland in the future.”

Responding to the clarification, the Conservative MP for North East Somerset posted on his Twitter account: “Mea culpa, I was wrong to say that Mr Corbyn voted against the Good Friday Agreement. He did not.”

The agreement – involving London, Dublin and parties in Northern Ireland – had a major impact in reducing sectarian violence and is widely considered to have brought an end to the period of violence referred to as the Troubles.

Angela Rayner, the Shadow Education Secretary, added that she was sure the new “intrepid” fake news unit – announced by the Government last month – will “swing into action” and investigate the claim made by Mr Rees-Mogg.

A Labour source told The Independent: “Jacob Rees-Mogg is just the latest Tory MP to make a false claim about Jeremy in a desperate attempt to smear him. He should apologise.”

Another Conservative MP Ben Bradley last week was forced to make an apology to Mr Corbyn – alongside a substantial donation to a charity – after making false claims that the Labour leader had had links with communist-era spies.

Mr Bradley said his comments were “wholly untrue and false" and agreed to pay out an undisclosed sum to a homeless charity and a foodbank in his Mansfield constituency.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

Middle East Eye

Published  2 weeks ago

If Benjamin Netanyahu ever needs rest and recuperation from the travails of being Israel’s longest serving prime minister, if there is a shed in which he can hide from any one of the five police investigations threatening him, this place of relative comfort must surely be "the pit".

gellerreport

Published  2 weeks ago

The Nazis did the same thing. They, too, were the “victims” of the Jews. Corbyn, the leader of the UK’s Labour party, was discovered to be a member of not one, but two anti-Semitic Facebook groups. His Labour party has a long history of Jew-hatred. Corbyn has said that ISIS supporters should not be prosecuted for “expressing a political point of view.” A leading Corbyn activist caused outrage after claiming that Islamic terrorists are “freedom fighters.” If Jeremy Corbyn becomes the British Prime Minister, which could very well happen in the coming months, Britain will definitively be finished as a free society.

“UK Labor leader says Israel & Jews are the source of global terrorism, not Islam,” The Real News, January 2019 (thanks to Mark):

In an interview with an Iranian state television, the leader of the Labor Party in Britain said Israel is behind Islamic terror attacks and global terrorism in order to destabilize the Middle East. He defended ISIS and Islam and described Israel and the Jews as the main source of global terrorism.

Here’s what the media does not tell you about the leader of the British Labor Party:

Jeremy Corbyn met with Terrorists of Hamas and Hezbollah and even called them “friends”.

Hamas and Hezbollah are Islamic terrorist organizations, with an antisemitic ideology, an arsenal of missiles pointing at Israel, a history of terror attacks on Jewish targets in the West, and links to organised crime.

The leaders of this terrorist organizations repeatedly called for genocide of all Jews.

Please watch and share this video if you think Jeremy Corbyn should resign….

HuffPost UK

Published  2 weeks ago

OLI SCARFF via Getty Images

Jacob Rees-Mogg has said he would “flee the country” should the Conservative Party decide to abandon Brexit.

The backbench MP, who has drawn huge crowds at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, admitted that Jeremy Corbyn had stolen a march on the Tories since the election.

“Yes, momentum in all senses is with the Left,” he told a meeting hosted by the Policy Exchange think-tank on the fringes of the conference on Tuesday afternoon.

“What would I least like the message to be if there was an election held tomorrow?” he said.

“It would be that we are remaining in the European Union and ignoring the referendum. I would probably flee the country.”

Rees-Mogg, who spoke at one event that was so full one woman fainted due to the heat, said Tory members had been treated “appallingly” by party bosses.

The North Somerset MP said members were “ignored” despite doing “all the work” on the ground such as “delivering the leaflets, knocking on doors, going out in the rain”.

Speaking today, Rees-Mogg also slammed the “Kim Jong-un style” conference for appearing like an”American presidential convention” in which members were “just expected to turn up and cheer the great and good”.

Westmonster

Published  2 weeks ago

The Conservative Party have surged to a 7-point lead following a week in Parliament that saw Conservative MPs push for changes to an EU deal whilst the likes of Labour MP Yvette Cooper sought to stop a No Deal Brexit. The actions of hardline Remainers MPs this week hasn’t gone down well with the public.

Opinium tonight have the Tories on 41%, compared to 34% for Labour. 226 Labour MPs voted to delay Brexit if the government hadn’t negotiated a deal by late February which would have crippled the UK’s hand in negotiations, unable to walk away. Thankfully, they were unsuccessful.

Opinium/Observer latest political poll:

LAB: 34% (-6)

UKIP: 7% (-)

GRN: 4% (-)

30 Jan – 01 Feb

— Opinium (@OpiniumResearch) February 2, 2019

This is clearly the way forward for the Conservatives. If they deliver a clean Brexit on 29th March as promised, the British public will back them. Jeremy Corbyn’s shifting on the issue has come across appallingly and his support has just reached an all-time low.

SINKING: Jeremy Corbyn’s popularity falls to all-time low after pathetic shifting on Brexit.

The public want to Leave but Labour would rather play party politics. Disgraceful! https://t.co/CO3dicMukY

— Westmonster (@WestmonsterUK) February 2, 2019

Hopefully this is a wake-up call for the Tory Party on the way forward. They must hold the line and refuse to be bullied by Brussels.

The Sun

Published  3 weeks ago

THE Second Referendum campaigners don’t know they’re beaten. Parliament this week sent them a clear message — their hopes to overturn the biggest democratic mandate in our country’s history will co…

BBC News

Published  3 weeks ago

The Japanese carmaker has produced vehicles at Sunderland since 1986 and employs almost 7,000 people.

The Irish Times

Published  3 weeks ago

Illegal fund activity linked to Brexit being ignored in belief ‘the people have spoken’

Tablet Magazine

Published  3 weeks ago

The full Tablet series featuring Paul Berman’s original three-part essay on the state of the contemporary Left, along with responses to Berman from writers across the political spectrum, is collected here.

Paul Berman warns of a Western Left characterized by an irrational hatred of Israel, a reflexive blame-America posture, and a blind eye to Islamist fanaticism. In response to this perceived plague, he calls for a “preliminary charge” by progressives of conscience against “anti-Zionists and the Farrakhanites and any lingering Chavistas”, along with movements like BDS and individual leaders like Jeremy Corbyn.

I don’t accept Berman’s underlying presumptions, and hence see his warnings as misplaced. Let’s start with his most influential contemporary target. Berman approvingly cites the consensus of UK Jewish organizations that “a culture of classic anti-Semitism [has] taken root” inside Corbyn’s Labour Party. But is that factual? No one has been able to disprove the conclusion of Labour’s internal review, which found that cases of anti-Semitism within the party’s ranks represent “less than 0.1 percent” of Labour’s members.

But I am admittedly biased. I happen to admire Corbyn’s unapologetic opposition to neoliberal economics and advocacy for a more just, humane society. I also admire Corbyn for being, in the words of the Israeli writer Gideon Levy, “a staunch, consistent opponent of Israel’s occupation policy.” To Levy, opposing that occupation is not only Corbyn’s “right; as a true leftist it’s his duty.”

It is Corbyn’s consistent and principled fulfillment of that duty that I believe explains why he has been labeled an anti-Semite. His foes are following an old playbook: Defenders of the Israeli government have long cheapened the meaning of the term “anti-Semitism” and the memory of the Holocaust by deploying both as weapons to silence defenders of Palestinian rights. It is striking that Corbyn’s detractors, like Berman, see no irony in attacking him for appearing at an event with Hajo Meyer, an Auschwitz survivor. At the event, not Corbyn but Meyer himself criticized the exploitation of Nazi crimes to launder Israeli crimes, including the cruel besiegement of Gaza As the Jewish son of a father who in infancy survived the Nazi occupation of Budapest, I share Meyer’s objection to the weaponization of Jewish suffering.

Jewish voices like Meyer, and I, presumably subscribe to what Berman calls “the mania for eliminating the faraway Jewish state, or, at least, the mania for singling out the Jewish state for unique obloquy.” Both “manias” are worthy of reflection. It is true that a one-state solution has become increasingly popular in the Palestinian solidarity movement, and the Left more broadly. And it is true that a one-state outcome would mean that Israel could no longer define itself as the state of the Jewish people, but instead as a state of its citizens, of any religion—in others words, a democratic one.

On a moral level, I favor that outcome. How can I oppose democracy with equal rights for all? However, on a practical level, I do not insist on it. I see a democratic one-state as far less politically realistic than a plan with broad-based international support, i.e. a two-state solution. There are, of course, many on the progressive left who would take issue with that assessment, pointing not just to the principle of equality but to the Israel-created “facts on the ground” as prohibitive of a genuine two-state future. That disagreement is a valid and vital one. But to say that those who favor a single democratic state that treats all citizens equally are consumed by a “mania for eliminating” is as ludicrous as it would be if the charges had been levied against opponents of South African apartheid. Proposing to replace a noxious political regime with a more humane and equitable one is the opposite of a destructive impulse.

There is a further irony to this particular tack. It is now uncontroversial that Israel was founded on an eliminationist ethic of its own: the ethnic cleansing of Arab populations from land that would become the Jewish state. As the Israeli historian Benny Morris observes:

“[T]ransfer was inevitable and inbuilt in Zionism – because it sought to transform a land which was ‘Arab’ into a Jewish state and a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population.”

Zionism’s deliberate “major displacement of Arab population” could only be fully reversed with a democratic one-state solution in the whole of Israel-Palestine and the right of return for all Palestinian refugees. That may well be politically impractical. But how is acknowledging that history—and calling for equality and justice for the displaced Arab population—an act of “mania”?

The same holds for what Berman calls “the mania for singling out the Jewish state for unique obloquy.” Here again, I think the accusation applies in the other direction. Israel is in the 52nd year of the world’s longest ongoing military occupation. Despite the claims of historical revisionists, it has never made a single peace offer that even approaches minimal Palestinian rights or respect for international law. Meanwhile, its violent enforcement of that occupation is backed by the world’s largest superpower, both of its two main political parties, and the bulk of its media. If there is any “mania” operating here, it is the one that can somehow defend or run ideological interference for that occupation even as it routinely commits the most savage of crimes. Since March, Israel has gunned down unarmed civilian protesters in Gaza on a weekly basis. The Trump administration has offered its full support for Israel’s violence while even cutting the already meager U.S. aid given to Palestinian refugees. If Israel seems to be singled out for “unique obloquy,” then, it is not because of its Jewish character, but its unique impunity.

Not only is ascribing anti-Semitism to Israel’s critics misplaced, and cynical, it also obscures its presence much closer to home. One of Israel’s chief political allies is the U.S. Christian far right, whose affinity for current Jewish sovereignty in the Holy Land is premised on the future fulfillment of an anti-Semitic prophecy. Another ally is Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who enjoyed Benjamin Netanyahu’s support for his propaganda campaign against the billionaire Jewish financier George Soros. Human rights groups in Israel have recently called on the government to stop arming neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine, following a history, Haaretz observes, in which “Israel has armed anti-Semitic regimes.”

If combating anti-Semites is the goal, then defenders of Israel like Berman are well-positioned to do something about it: they could call on Israel to stop allying with them. But, that leftist defenders of Palestinian rights are instead the targets of Berman’s obloquy, should tell us something about his real commitments, and how seriously we should take his dire warnings.

Aaron Maté is a Brooklyn-based journalist and contributor to The Nation. He has previously hosted and produced for The Real News and Democracy Now! Follow him at @aaronjmate.

The Independent

Published  3 weeks ago

Whitehall officials have begun “serious work” on the UK staying in a permanent EU customs union as a route to rescuing the Brexit deal, despite Theresa May ruling out the move, The Independent can

The Independent

Published  3 weeks ago

Labour MPs will give Jeremy Corbyn a week to prove the leadership has got to grips with the antisemitism row that has dogged the party.

MPs are braced for a fresh clash over handling of anti-Jewish sentiment in Labour’s ranks amid warnings the party risks appearing “institutionally antisemitic” if the issue is not addressed.

The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) will debate a motion on Monday that would give the leadership seven days to set out how it is addressing the antisemitism allegations which engulfed the party last year.

The move comes amid anger over Labour’s handling of disciplinary cases, including the decision to reinstate ex-MP Jim Sheridan, now a councillor in Renfrewshire, in Scotland, who was suspended from the party last year for allegedly making antisemitic comments online.

Mr Sheridan apologised to the Jewish community but he said his accusers had overreacted.

Created with Sketch. Police separate clashing Brexit protesters outside Parliament

Show all 11 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. Police separate clashing Brexit protesters outside Parliament

The motion, tabled by Newcastle North MP Catherine McKinnell, said: “In the months that have followed the PLP is dismayed that there remains such a backlog of antisemitism cases that are still to be investigated and a decision reached – in particular the high-profile cases that it was promised would be concluded by July 2018.

“The PLP is very concerned by recent reports that a number of cases of alleged antisemitic activity from high-profile members have been dropped. The PLP calls on the party leadership to adequately tackle cases of antisemitism, as a failure to do so seriously risks antisemitism in the party appearing normalised and the party seeming to be institutionally antisemitic.”

Labour’s general secretary should deal with antisemitism by Christmas

Deputy leader Tom Watson suggested last year that Labour’s general secretary Jennie Formby should step down if the antisemitism row had not been dealt with by Christmas.

He said Ms Formby had “staked” her career on dealing within antisemitism in Labour, after taking over from Iain McNicol in April 2018.

A Labour MP told The Independent: “Obviously a commitment was made that this would be dealt with by the end of the year. Since then, it hasn’t been gripped with or dealt with. There are still lots of outstanding cases and there are people who are being cleared and reinstated, having been suspended, where they have been guilty of egregious racism.”

However a source said the NCC, Labour’s disciplinary committee, was the only body with the power to expel members. It is independent of the leadership, including Ms Formby.

A Labour spokesperson said: “Labour is committed to tackling antisemitism in all its forms wherever it arises, in our party and wider society. We have significantly sped up and strengthened our procedures for dealing with complaints about antisemitism.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

Daily Wire

Published  3 weeks ago

Report AdxReason: --Select please--

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) praised notorious anti-Semitic Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn on Sunday following an apparent phone conversation the two far-left politicians had.

"Great to speak to @AOC on the phone this evening and hear first hand how she’s challenging the status quo," Corbyn tweeted. "Let’s build a movement across borders to take on the billionaires, polluters and migrant baiters, and support a happier, freer and cleaner planet."

"It was an honor to share such a lovely and wide-reaching conversation with you, @jeremycorbyn!" Ocasio-Cortez responded. "Also honored to share a great hope in the peace, prosperity, + justice that everyday people can create when we uplift one another across class, race, + identity both at home & abroad."

Allegations of anti-Semitism against Corbyn started getting significant media attention following Corbyn's rise in 2015 from a leftist Member of Parliament to the leader of Britain’s Labour Party.

The New Yorker reported:

Corbyn has long campaigned for peace in the Middle East, and he has frequently criticized the actions of Israel. Over the years, he has attended protests and conferences alongside campaigners who have expressed anti-Semitic views. In mid-August, 2015, a month before Corbyn was elected Labour leader, Stephen Pollard, the editor of the Jewish Chronicle, which describes itself as the oldest continuously published Jewish newspaper in the world, wrote a front-page editorial challenging the candidate to explain some of these instances. “They were all things in the public domain. We weren’t revealing anything new,” Pollard told me the other day. “But nobody had really paid attention to Corbyn previously, because why would you?” Pollard wrote the editorial while on holiday in Devon. Headlined “The Key Questions He Must Answer,” it asked Corbyn about his connections to Deir Yassin Remembered, an anti-Israel group run by a Holocaust denier; his defense of an Anglican vicar who peddled anti-Semitic conspiracy theories; and his descriptions of Hamas and Hezbollah as “friends,” and of Sheikh Raed Salah, a Palestinian mayor accused of making the blood libel in 2007, as “an honored citizen.” “I just sat down in my cottage and wrote this leader,” Pollard said. “That set the course for the next couple of years, really.”

Allegations of anti-Semitism—committed by members, officials, and the leader himself—have been the running sore of Corbyn’s leftist takeover of the Labour Party ever since, and the sense of something gravely wrong has deepened with time.

The New Yorker's report notes that Britain's three major Jewish newspapers — The Jewish Chronicle, Jewish News, and Jewish Telegraph — each published a joint editorial slamming the Labour Party and Corbyn "because of the existential threat to Jewish life in this country that would be posed by a Jeremy Corbyn-led government."

The New Yorker continued:

Each of Corbyn’s attempts to respond to the issue has somehow managed to make things worse. In the spring of 2016, when I was reporting a Profile of the Labour leader for this magazine, Naz Shah, a member of Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet, was suspended from the Party for sharing Facebook posts that suggested that Israelis should be relocated to the U.S. (“Problem solved,” she wrote.) The following day, Ken Livingstone, a former mayor of London and long-term Corbyn ally, went on the radio to defend Shah and talked about Hitler instead: “He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.” Livingstone was suspended as well. In response, Corbyn ordered a two-month inquiry into anti-Semitism in the Labour Party by Shami Chakrabarti, a respected civil-rights lawyer.

Read the full report on Corbyn's anti-Semitism crisis here.

In August 2018, Corbyn "admitted attending a ceremony for the terrorists behind the Munich massacre," The Independent reported. "The Labour leader said he was “present” at a memorial event commemorating those responsible for the 1972 attack, despite his office previously insisting he was only at the event in question honoring Palestinians killed in an Israeli air strike."

In November 2018, "Scotland Yard has opened a criminal investigation into allegations of antisemitic hate crimes linked to Labour party members," The Guardian reported.

Express.co.uk

Published  3 weeks ago

THE BBC has faced backlash from Twitter users after “shamefully” broadcasting a speech by Belgian MEP Guy Verhofstadt but failing to show a “patriotic” speech by Brexiteer Nigel Farage who was also speaking in the European Parliament on Wednesday.

New York Post

Published  3 weeks ago

Modal Trigger

Jewish conservatives get asked this question more than any other: “Why are Jews liberals?” The question eventually got so tiresome that my father, himself a prominent Jewish conservative, wrote an entire book about tracing the history back to Biblical times. You can still buy it on Amazon. So I’m not going to answer it here.

What we know is this basic fact: In national elections, Jews vote for Democratic candidates by a margin of 3 to 1. That number has been fairly consistent through four elections now. It suggests Democrats should have no concerns about keeping Jews in their coalition for another generation.

And yet they do have such concerns. And they should.

This week, prominent Democrats announced a new group called Democratic Majority for Israel, led by the pollster Mark Mellman. He told The New York Times: “Most Democrats are strongly pro-Israel, and we want to keep it that way. There are a few discordant voices, but we want to make sure that what’s a very small problem doesn’t metastasize into a bigger problem.”

The “very small problem” Mellman has in mind is a trio of newly elected Democrats: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib and Minnesota’s Ilhan Omar. They seem to have very few foreign policy views aside from a caricature of Israel as an occupying colonial force that sits up at night thinking of new ways to torment Palestinians.

Such ideas haven’t arisen from nowhere. They are the full flowering of decades of leftist propaganda and fashionable campus blatherskite. From such repellent acorns mighty trees grow, as we have seen in Europe. Britain’s Labour party did little to head off the virulent Israel hatred in its ranks, and it is now headed by an out-and-out anti-Semite.

In Britain, once-overwhelming Jewish support for Labour has cratered. A poll before the 2017 election found that only 13 percent of Jews supported Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour because of its horrid record on anti-Semitism.

That is why Mellman and his fellow Democrats are smart to be doing this now, before the conflict actually begins to bite. The problem is “very small” at this moment, but the party’s trend line to the left suggests it will grow in force absent some major intervention or ideological change of heart.

Nor are the views of the new, leftist members of Congress completely alien to the kinds of Democrats who take official roles in the party. At the 2012 Democratic National Convention, delegates removed language supporting Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

When the Obama White House, fearful of losing campaign dollars, intervened to have the language restored, there was a vocal fight on the convention floor. It sounded very much like those who didn’t want the pro-Jerusalem language restored won a voice vote — and when the chair announced otherwise, the hall erupted in boos.

Bernie Sanders came very close to espousing anti-Zionist opinions openly in 2016, and he won 22 states. His path was softened by the hostile posture of President Barack Obama’s administration. Obama claimed to be a friend of Israel, but there was no country or government he criticized more over his eight years — and he concluded his term allowing a UN resolution hostile to the Jewish state to pass without an American veto.

The activist base’s growing antipathy to Israel is less worrisome to friends of the Jewish state than it would have been at any other time in the country’s history, because Israel finds itself in a surprisingly strong position internationally and at home. It has held the line against Palestinian terrorism, and it is working in concord with Arab and Muslim nations in a manner that would have seemed science-fictional at the turn of the century.

What should be concerning is the subject that goes unaddressed in Mellman’s fight: the potential mainstreaming of anti-Semitism in the Democratic Party as represented by the renewed public importance of Louis Farrakhan and the refusal of vanguard figures on the left, like the leaders of the Women’s March, to repudiate his noxious filth.

Here, too, Democrats need not worry today about this electorally or when it comes to votes and donations. Instinctively liberal, Jews are bound to be more alarmed by some of the white-nationalist encroachments into President Trump’s GOP. But the Corbyn example looms large and is arguably far more dangerous to the American Jewish future than anti-Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party is to Israel’s future.

The Independent

Published  3 weeks ago

Theresa May is considering a bid to win Labour MPs' support for her Brexit deal with a cash injection for areas that voted Leave at the 2016 referendum.

The proposal comes ahead of any second vote on the prime minister's deal and after Ms May secured parliamentary backing to seek alternatives to the Irish backstop.

A Downing Street source confirmed to The Independent the funds for Leave areas was a "possibility" but made clear it had not yet been agreed.

John Mann - the Labour MP for Bassetlaw - said: "Show us the money. A fund of sufficient size to transform our communities. Our areas voted Leave and it is time that we had the investment we need."

Mr Mann was one of 14 Labour MPs to vote against an amendment by his colleague Yvette Cooper on Tuesday which would have paved the way to delay Britain's exit from the EU by giving MPs the power to request an Article 50 extension.

Downing Street hope they can win the support of Labour MPs when Ms May returns to the Commons with a second "meaningful vote" on her deal next month as it is expected several Conservative MPs will still remain opposed to her plans.

In regards to the cash injection, a government source also told The Times: "There's a willingness to look again at coalfield communities and make good the promises that former Labour governments failed to deliver.

"It's about allowing Labour MPs representing Brexit communities to show that they have extracted something in return for their vote. And, frankly, it's not an unreasonable ask."

In a warning to colleagues tempted to support the prime minister's deal in the coming weeks, however, the Labour MP David Lammy said: "More fool them. Socialists my arse. Cowards and facilitators. History will be brutal."

It comes as Ms May prepares to spend the coming weeks attempting to renegotiate the withdrawal agreement and the Irish backstop, despite the EU repeatedly rejecting such demands from the UK government.

On Wednesday, Jeremy Corbyn held talks with Ms May on Wednesday in which he "set out the Labour case for a comprehensive customs union with the European Union".

But speaking to reporters in his parliamentary office after the meeting, he warned that he had suspicions about the government’s motives in holding the meetings with opposition parliamentarians.

The Labour leader said: “The whole process looks like it’s running down the clock by saying, well, it’s either the problems and the difficulties of no deal or support a deal that’s already been rejected by the House of Commons.

“I’m suspicious that there is a programme of running down the clock here.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

Daily Wire

Published  3 weeks ago

Report AdxReason: --Select please--

On Sunday, as the world marked International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Planned Parenthood, the single largest murderer of children in the womb in modern history, tweeted out its thoughts:

On #HolocaustMemorialDay, we remember the tremendous, immeasurable human cost of bigotry — and we reaffirm that there can be no place for antisemitism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, or *any* form of hatred in our communities, our politics, and our country.

— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) January 27, 2019

Planned Parenthood is responsible for the killing of some 300,000 American unborn children per year; those children are disproportionately minority and from poorer families.

But this is typical of the intersectional Left, which has subsumed anti-Semitism under the broader rubric of Leftist politics. The issue when it comes to the Holocaust isn’t the dehumanization and slaughter of innocents anymore – now it’s “bigotry” writ large, so that the Holocaust can be used as just another club against conservatives on a range of issues from immigration to biological sex. This is how the Women’s March can proclaim that it opposes bigotry even while its leaders call for anti-Semitic boycotts against Israel from the podium. For too many on the Left, getting into the specifics of the Holocaust makes it impossible for the Holocaust to be used as a political tool. Better to be vague about the Holocaust, to broaden it to a miasmatic evil, so that the Holocaust can be linked with whatever trendy cause Leftists wish to promote that day.

That’s how open anti-Semities like Britain’s Jeremy Corbyn can, with a straight face, tweet nonsense like this:

Corbyn has backed Hamas and Hezbollah, and is an ardent Israel-hater who has associated with blood libel purveyors and Holocaust deniers. Yet he apparently has no qualms about blathering about the Holocaust, even though he’d undoubtedly side with its modern-day advocates in the radical Islamist world.

The same holds true for Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), who tweeted:

Omar is a BDS supporter who has also expressed bewilderment that Jews might be upset at her past tweet about Israel "hypnotizing" the world. But she's happy to use the Holocaust as a club against supposed right-wing extremism, even as she promotes anti-Semitic terrorists.

Watering down the Holocaust so that it can be applied as a gloss on every favored cause of the day is the ultimate insult to Jews. Jews should reject such cynical manipulation from the very people who would gladly engage in atrocities against innocents if given the chance to do so.

Daily Intelligencer

Published  3 weeks ago

After the Covington debacle, it is clearer than ever: Liberal democracy is being dismantled before our eyes — by all of us.

BBC News

Published  4 weeks ago

The PM continues meetings over her deal as the chancellor promotes the UK to businesses in Davos.

HuffPost UK

Published  1 month ago

Yvette Cooper urged to change extension to end of June.

BrexitCentral

Published  1 month ago

I'm not going to sugar the pill today. Instead I intend to raise some questions upon which I do not think many Conservative parliamentarians have reflected sufficiently. Questions like:Why sho

Westmonster

Published  1 month ago

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has disgracefully moved towards a second referendum, something that will go down like a cold bucket of sick with working class Labour voters who backed Brexit and want to see the people’s vote of 2016 implemented.

The Labour Party have now tabled an amendment that would seek to block a No Deal Brexit and instead demand the right to vote on:

i) “Negotiating changes to the draft Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration so as to secure a permanent Customs Union with the EU, a strong relationship with the Single Market underpinned by shared institutions and obligations, and dynamic alignment on rights and standards, in order to command a majority in the House of Commons.

ii) “Legislating to hold a public vote on a deal or a proposition that has commanded the support of the majority of the House of Commons.”

Jeremy Corbyn has himself said: “It is time for Labour’s alternative plan to take centre stage, while keeping all options on the table, including the option of a public vote.”

Eloise Todd of the anti-Brexit, George Soros-funded ‘Best for Britain’, said: “Labour have put a second referendum on the table with this amendment and this is a massive step forward.” In reality it would represent a huge step back and total undermining of British democracy.

HuffPost reckon that Labour Shadow Ministers want any vote would include the option to Remain in the European Union. What an insult to 17.4 million who went out and voted for Brexit.

The other day a YouGov found only 8% of the public back a second referendum as the way forward, with leaving the EU now having a 10-point lead over remaining. Corbyn has sold out to his hardline Remainer colleagues.

Westmonster

Published  1 month ago

Labour MP Caroline Flint is the latest to reveal that she’s encountered a “hardening view in favour of No Deal” among Leavers in her constituency.

Speaking on the BBC’s Politics Live today, Flint said that Remain and Leave voters were now asking her “why aren’t we just getting on” with Brexit.

And she went on to say: “I have to say though amongst a number of Leave voters, and I don’t think this is just typical of Doncaster, there is a hardening view in favour of No Deal.”

. @CarolineFlintMP "I have to say though, amongst a number of Leave voters, and I don't think this is just typical to Doncaster, there is a hardening view in favour of no-deal." pic.twitter.com/hILttaXTcP

— BrexitCentral (@BrexitCentral) January 23, 2019

Whilst Jeremy Corbyn wants the government to rule out No Deal, Stoke MP Ruth Smeeth revealed yesterday that 75% of the voters that had written to her now favour No Deal and the Sunderland Echo found 70% of their readers in favour of a No Deal, despite Labour MPs in the city disgracefully calling for a second referendum.

The gap between Labour and Brexit Britain widens…

Mail Online

Published  1 month ago

The Work and Pensions Secretary is said to have argued that as many as 40 ministers want to vote for a rebel amendment designed to postpone Britain’s departure date and prevent no-deal.

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

Labour has said the Commons should be able to vote on whether to hold a second referendum in an amendment the party submitted on Monday night to Theresa May’s Brexit update.

It is the first time the party has asked MPs to formally consider a second poll, although the carefully worded compromise amendment did not commit the party’s leadership to backing a referendum if such a vote were to take place.

The wording called for May’s government to hold a vote on two options – its alternative Brexit plan and whether to legislate “to hold a public vote on a deal or a proposition” that is supported by a majority in the Commons.

The intervention came as the party’s leadership seeks to deal with divisions between Jeremy Corbyn and some of the leader’s closest allies who are sceptical about a second referendum and those who are more enthusiastic such as Brexit spokesman Sir Keir Starmer.

Sign up to our Brexit weekly briefing

Read more

The party’s alternative Brexit plan, which would be the subject of a separate vote if the amendment were carried, proposes that the UK remain in a post-Brexit customs union with the European Union and have a strong relationship with the single market. Citizens’ rights and consumer standards would be harmonised with the EU’s.

Corbyn said: “Our amendment will allow MPs to vote on options to end this Brexit deadlock and prevent the chaos of a no-deal. It is time for Labour’s alternative plan to take centre stage, while keeping all options on the table, including the option of a public vote.”

But second referendum campaigners were last night gearing up to criticise the alternative Brexit plan. The People’s Vote campaign said that it was one of a series of Brexit promises – like no-deal – that were being made with “little regard for what could actually be delivered”.

The cross-party group, supported by dozens of Labour MPs, posed five questions that it believes Corbyn’s Brexit model struggles to answer, escalating tensions between campaigners and the party’s leadership.

A 16-page evaluation placed Labour’s plan on a par with both the no-deal option supported by hard Brexit Tories and the Norway-plus customs union alternative, in that they were no better than pledges made by the leave campaign at the time of the EU referendum.

“All three alternative plans,” the analysis added “share many similarities with the arguments made for Brexit in 2016 when big promises were made with little regard for what could actually be delivered.”

It quoted an interview with Corbyn in which he said he would be opposed to any deal that would make the UK poorer, and then cited a report by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research that said “every form of Brexit will damage the UK economy”.

The analysis also asked whether the UK would “have any say over its trade policy” under Labour’s policy of remaining in a customs union with some decision-making power over future EU trade agreements.

The document, whose authors are not named, said “it is almost inconceivable that the EU would agree” – citing the EU’s Lisbon treaty – and that “being in a customs union without a say would be very damaging” because the UK would be force to liberalise markets to third countries on a non-reciprocal basis.

Tensions within Labour have been rising as MPs who support a second referendum want to pressurise Corbyn into supporting another Brexit vote, in line with the party’s policy to explore it as an option if it cannot secure an early election.

A total of 71 Labour MPs declared they supported a second referendum last week on the morning of the day the party lost a vote of no confidence in Theresa May’s government, meaning that an early election was unlikely.

The group is planning to take the argument further at a news conference on Tuesday, fronted by Labour MPs David Lammy and Bridget Phillipson with Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson and Caroline Lucas, the Green party leader in Westminster.

Labour backbencher and second referendum supporter David Lammy said the amendment represented “a big step forward” but added that the party’s alternative Brexit proposal “deserves to be properly scrutinised” now that Corbyn wanted it to be centre stage.

mirror

Published  1 month ago

He said the government had already "wasted" £1.9billion

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

Labour leader seeks to balance pressure from rival wings of his party before Theresa May reveals her plan B for Brexit

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Theresa May is considering an attempt to amend the Good Friday Agreement in a bid to break the Brexit deadlock and win support for a negotiated exit deal, it has been reported.

Ministers believe the move could avoid the UK having to commit to a backstop as part of the prime minister’s “plan B”, the Daily Telegraph reported on Sunday.

The EU has insisted on a backstop measure to ensure an open border remains between Northern Ireland and the Republic after the UK leaves the bloc. Ms May has been forced to find alternatives to her original Brexit deal after it was crushed in the Commons on Tuesday.

Under the PM’s plan, the Telegraph reports, London and Dublin would either agree a new set of principles or add words to “support or reference” the Good Friday Agreement in order to guarantee an open border.

The 1998 peace deal effectively brought an end to the Troubles after years of failed talks, and established a power-sharing structure to accommodate unionist and nationalist politicians.

Downing Street declined to comment on the report when approached by The Independent.

It follows separate reports that Ms May planned to pitch to the Irish government a bilateral treaty that would remove the need for the backstop so hated by many Conservative MPs; the arrangement would see the UK enter into a temporary customs union with the EU, and Northern Ireland agree to abide by European rules on goods until a subsequent deal was reached.

Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, admitted on Sunday that “we have to compromise on the backstop” and an “alternative mechanism” was needed.

On Monday the PM is due to update MPs on her revised Brexit plan. After her deal was defeated last week Ms May held cross party-talks aimed at resolving the impasse, but Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn denounced her offer as “not genuine” given her apparent unwillingness to budge from certain red lines.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

Theresa May is due to meet the cabinet as Labour calls for a vote on options including another referendum.

Evening Standard

Published  1 month ago

The Government’s broken promises on Brexit have finally come home to roost. It promised trade talks in parallel with the divorce talks. Instead Theresa May agreed to fork out £39 billion with no treaty in return. Michael Gove promised “the day after we vote to leave, we hold all the cards and we can choose the path we want”. But that hasn’t been the case. It promised high-tech customs solutions at the Irish border and new trade deals. And it promised a December vote on the deal, but broke that one too.

Like Nick Clegg promising not to raise tuition fees and then tripling them, the Prime Minister has learned that saying one thing but doing another comes at a cost — in this case more than a third of her own MPs voting against her flagship policy. Party leaders are rarely forgiven for putting short-term political interests above those of the country.

So what happens next? If Jeremy Corbyn’s attempt to trigger a general election isn’t successful , then next week we will have another Commons motion on the Government’s Plan B. That motion will be amendable. And with Parliament at an impasse, the case for a People’s Vote will be overwhelming.

All the attention will be on the pledge made at Labour Party conference in September: if a general election cannot be achieved and if the Government’s proposal is defeated then the outstanding option is for Labour to campaign for a People’s Vote.

Polling shows a majority in every Labour constituency for a new Brexit vote — 86 per cent of Labour members say they want a public vote. Most Labour MPs agree too. Asking the people what they think is an option that can’t be ducked any longer.

Most people — especially the two million young people who didn’t get a chance to vote in the referendum nearly three years ago — now expect Labour to deliver on this promise.

If Labour MPs are whipped to support a final say for the public, combined with the now growing number of Conservative MPs supporting a People’s Vote, a majority is achievable.

This is therefore one of those unusual moments when the future of the country is in the hands of the Leader of the Opposition. So will Jeremy Corbyn keep that Labour promise or break it? The hundreds of thousands who marched through London last year in support of a People’s Vote will feel cheated if Labour’s front bench back out of it.

If Jeremy Corbyn breaches the trust placed in him by those who want a People’s Vote, then he risks following the path of Nick Clegg nearly a decade ago. A broken promise on a People’s Vote could devastate Labour’s fortunes in the same way it did for Clegg after the tuition fees betrayal. It would be a monumental mistake. That’s why surely Labour’s leadership will now let the public decide.

Chris Leslie is Labour MP for Nottingham East

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

EU citizens will no longer have to pay £65 for the right to stay in the UK after Brexit, the PM announces.

The Sun

Published  1 month ago

BREXIT campaigners will mount a legal challenge if Theresa May tries to halt Britain’s departure from the EU. They will seek a High Court ruling on any decision to extend or revoke Article 50 – and…

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Diane Abbott has accused the BBC of bias against Jeremy Corbyn and his top team following her latest appearance on Question Time, and launched a stinging attack on presenter Fiona Bruce.

The shadow home secretary has claimed she was unfairly treated by Ms Bruce and the BBC during Thursday night’s debate, particularly during discussion of voting intention polls, and that audience members were “whipped up” against her.

On Friday she complained that the broadcaster had legitimised the “mistreatment, bias and abuse” she faces as a black woman in the public eye after social media users and other Labour figures suggested she had been hectored during the programme, and made the butt of jokes beforehand.

Now, writing exclusively for The Independent, Ms Abbott makes the further claim that Ms Bruce made “unpleasant remarks about me” prior to filming, and accuses the new face of Question Time of not knowing her brief.

The programme has become “a political version of the Jeremy Kyle show” following the departure of veteran presenter David Dimbleby, she suggests, and could put off young women from black and ethnic minority groups from entering politics.

She writes: “Over a long political career I have appeared on BBC Question Time innumerable times, but I have never had such a horrible experience as I had in Derby last week.

“Fiona Bruce, who has taken over from Dimbleby as presenter on Question Time, does not appear to be well briefed. She got the polling for Labour vs Tory wrong.

“She (or her researcher) appears to have got their figures from a Conservative central office handout. Above all, it seems she is not afraid to appear unfair as a presenter.

“I was interrupted more than double the number of times that Tory MP Rory Stewart was interrupted, even though he spoke more times than I and for a longer period overall.

“I’m also told that [Ms Bruce] made unpleasant remarks about me to the audience, before the programme was actually recorded.”

The Hackney MP wrote that she has “always been up for robust debate”, but made clear her distaste for the direction she believed Question Time was taking. She further accused the BBC of “treating Jeremy Corbyn and his ministers as if we are not legitimate political actors”.

She added: “There may be a market for a political version of the Jeremy Kyle show, but that is not exactly what the production company Mentorn was commissioned to make.”

During Thursday’s programme Ms Abbott was involved in a heated debate over whether Labour led the Conservatives in national opinion polls, with Ms Bruce and journalist Isabel Oakeshott both telling her she was wrong to say Labour was at “level pegging”.

Late on Saturday, the BBC tweeted a response. It said: “A YouGov poll published on the day of the programme suggested a lead for the Conservatives. Diane Abbott was also right that some other polls suggested Labour either as ahead or tied, and we should have made that clear.”

A BBC spokesperson added: ”We are sorry to hear Diane Abbott’s concerns over Thursday’s edition of Question Time and we have contacted her team to reassure them that reports circulating on social media are inaccurate and misleading.

“Diane is a regular and important contributor to the programme. As we said earlier, we firmly reject claims that any of the panel was treated unfairly either before or during the recording.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

mirror

Published  1 month ago

Diane Abbott’s Question Time row deepened last night after Labour made an official complaint to the BBC over her treatment.

The Shadow Home Secretary had accused Thursday’s show – chaired by new host Fiona Bruce – of legitimising racist abuse against her.

She was interrupted more than twice as often as Tory Justice Minister Rory Stewart on Thursday’s edition, which was heavily criticised by Labour politicians and Momentum campaigners.

Labour have complained that Ms Abbott was incorrectly challenged after claiming it was “neck and neck” with the Tories in the polls, it is understood.

Fiona Bruce and political pundit Isabel Oakeshott said Labour was behind in the polls – but in the last 10 at the time it has trailed the Tories in four, led in four and tied in two.

Last night the BBC tweeted: “We’ve reviewed what was said re polling. A YouGov poll published on the day suggested a lead for the Conservatives.

“Diane Abbott was also right that some other polls suggested Labour either ahead or tied and we should have made that clear.”

The complaint is also said to mention the level of interruption Ms Abbott faced – panellists or Ms Bruce stopped her 21 times in the hour-long programme.

Tory Rory Stewart was interrupted nine times and SNP’s Kirsty Blackman eight times.

Social media claims that a BBC team member made inappropriate comments to the audience about Ms Abbott and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn are also said to be part of the complaint.

Supporter Alison Martin, in the audience, tweeted: “Didn’t feel like a balanced audience, though Leavers were loud.

“Jeers against Diane Abbott were worse than heard on the broadcast; was some humour at Diane’s expense from BBC staff before recording.”

Audience member Jyoti Wilkinson, who works for Labour’s Derby West MP Chris Williamson, said Ms Bruce used innuendo to “instigate a roast”.

He said: “Comments along the lines of ‘Let her know what you really think’ and ‘Some may think she is in the shadow cabinet because of her very close relationships to Corbyn’ were made.

“This had the desired effect and the carefully selected audience guffawed in delight as they had been given license to air their bigoted views in public.”

Ms Abbott’s spokesman said: “A hostile environment was whipped up. A public broadcaster like the BBC should be a model of impartiality and equality.

“The media must stop legitimising mistreatment, bias and abuse against her as a black woman in public life.”

Last night the BBC said: “We’re sorry to hear Diane Abbott’s concerns and have contacted her team to reassure them social media reports are inaccurate and misleading.

“Diane Abbott is a regular and important contributor. We firmly reject claims any of the panel were treated unfairly before or during the recording.”

Fiona, 54 – seen dancing on stage at last year’s Isle of Wight Festival – insists she’ll still party despite her serious new role: “People have jobs, then let their hair down when they’re not working.”

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Labour has asked the BBC for unseen footage of last week's Question Time and demanded a correction during next week's episode as a row over the show’s treatment of Diane Abbott deepened. 

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

How much anti-Semitism must pile up in the Democratic Party before something can be done about it? And will the mainstream media hold them accountable?

mirror

Published  1 month ago

Labour faces a split with MPs prepared to join a new party unless Jeremy Corbyn backs a second Brexit referendum, a senior backbencher warned.

Former ministers David Lammy claimed there could be an SDP-style walkout if the party leader continued to resist demands to support another EU vote.

He told Sky News: “There are a small group in our party who are frustrated, who have so much grievance, the fear is they are going to go off and form another party, I personally reject that."

"But the danger is that, just like 1983, a new party built around a relationship with Europe keeps the Labour Party out of power for a generation."

The 'Gang of Four' Roy Jenkins, David own, Bill Rodgers and Shirley Williams left the Labour Party in 1981.

They went on to form the SDP and fought the 1983 election in an alliance with the Liberal Party.

It split the opposition vote giving Labour its worst electoral performance since 1918 and critics say it led to Labour being kept out for a generation.

But the split Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Burgon hit back, saying: “I don't think the party's going to split.”.

Earlier this week a Labour frontbencher told the Daily Mirror Labour MP and prominent Remainer Chuka Ummuna was seriously planning a move to create another party.

Labour's policy, as decided at their conference in September, is to push for a general election so they can take charge of the Brexit negotiations.

If that fails, one of many options is to back a second referendum.

But the leadership has been keen to insist that all options are equal.

This puts them at odds with a number of their MPs and the vast majority of the party's members - more than 70% of whom back a second vote.

Mail Online

Published  1 month ago

A YouGov survey found that Remain has stretched out a 12-point lead over Leave - at 56 per cent versus 44 per cent.

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

At least the Sun thrives on chaos. The savage parliamentary mauling of Britain’s withdrawal agreement with the European Union allowed Rupert Murdoch’s pet tabloid to unveil on Wednesday morning a front page of grandly gleeful malevolence. Under the headline Brextinct, it conjured a creepy chimera of Theresa May’s head pasted on to the body of a dodo. But the thing about such surreal pictures is that it is not easy to control their interpretation. From the outside, this one seemed to suggest much more than the immediately intended message that both May and her deal are politically dead. When, it prompted one to ask, did Brextinction really happen? Was this strange creature ever really alive or was it not always a grotesquely Photoshopped image of something else, a crisis of belonging that has attached itself to the wrong union? Do the events of this week point us, not towards the EU, but to the travails of a radically disunited kingdom?

Theresa May’s survival is just a Tory confidence trick | Gary Younge

Read more

The dodo, after all, may be proverbially dead but it has a vivid afterlife in that great trawl of the English unconscious, Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. It is the Dodo, when various characters have fallen into a pool of tears, who suggests how they might dry themselves – the Caucus-race. “There was no ‘One, two, three, and away’, but they began running when they liked, and left off when they liked, so that it was not easy to know when the race was over. However, when they had been running half an hour or so, and were quite dry again, the Dodo suddenly called out, ‘The race is over!’ and they all crowded round it, panting, and asking, ‘But who has won?’”

This seems, this week more than ever, a perfect description of the state to which British politics has been reduced – a lot of frantically anarchic running overseen by a defunct creature, the Brextinct dodo. And who has won? Carroll’s Dodo, of course, decrees: “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes.” Having emptied Alice’s pockets to provide rewards for everyone else, the Dodo solemnly presents her with the only thing that’s left: her own thimble. “We beg your acceptance of this elegant thimble.”

The Brexit game is patently not worth the thimble to be presented at the end of it. Yet in Theresa May’s humiliation on Tuesday, there were prizes for almost everybody else: a glimpse of opportunity for her rivals in cabinet; a revival of their sadomasochistic no-deal fantasies for the zealots; the hope of a second referendum for remainers; proof of the near-collapse of the Westminster order for nationalists; the hope of a general election for Jeremy Corbyn. But in truth nobody has won anything – it is a losing game all round.

For all of this is the afterlife of dead things. One of them is Brexit itself. When did Brextinction occur? On 24 June 2016. The project was driven by decades of camped-up mendacity about the tyranny of the EU, and sold in the referendum as a fantasy of national liberation. It simply could not survive contact with reality. It died the moment it became real. You cannot free yourself from imaginary oppression. Even if May were a political genius – and let us concede that she is not – Brexit was always going to come down to a choice between two evils: the heroic but catastrophic failure of crashing out; or the unheroic but less damaging failure of swapping first-class for second-class EU membership. These are the real afterlives of a departed reverie.

If the choice between shooting oneself in the head or in the foot is the answer to Britain’s long-term problems, surely the wrong question is being asked. It is becoming ever clearer that Brexit is not about its ostensible subject: Britain’s relationship with the EU. The very word Brexit contains a literally unspoken truth. It does not include or even allude to Europe. It is British exit that is the point, not what it is exiting from. The tautologous slogan Leave Means Leave is similarly (if unintentionally) honest: the meaning is in the leaving, not in what is being left or how.

Paradoxically, this drama of departure has really served only to displace a crisis of belonging. Brexit plays out a conflict between Them and Us, but it is surely obvious after this week that the problem is not with Them on the continent. It’s with the British Us, the unravelling of an imagined community. The visible collapse of the Westminster polity this week may be a result of Brexit, but Brexit itself is the result of the invisible subsidence of the political order over recent decades.

Play Video

It may seem strange to call this slow collapse invisible since so much of it is obvious: the deep uncertainties about the union after the Good Friday agreement of 1998 and the establishment of the Scottish parliament the following year; the consequent rise of English nationalism; the profound regional inequalities within England itself; the generational divergence of values and aspirations; the undermining of the welfare state and its promise of shared citizenship; the contempt for the poor and vulnerable expressed through austerity; the rise of a sensationally self-indulgent and clownish ruling class. But the collective effects of these interrelated developments do seem to have been barely visible within the political mainstream until David Cameron accidentally took the lid off by calling a referendum and asking people to endorse the status quo.

What we see with the lid off and the fog of fantasies at last beginning to dissipate is the truth that Brexit is much less about Britain’s relationship with the EU than it is about Britain’s relationship with itself. It is the projection outwards of an inner turmoil. An archaic political system had carried on even while its foundations in a collective sense of belonging were crumbling. Brexit in one way alone has done a real service: it has forced the old system to play out its death throes in public. The spectacle is ugly, but at least it shows that a fissiparous four-nation state cannot be governed without radical social and constitutional change.

Why are people cheering for no deal? Because they’re thinking about it the wrong way | Anand Menon

Read more

European leaders have continually expressed exasperation that the British have really been negotiating not with them, but with each other. But perhaps it is time to recognise that there is a useful truth in this: Brexit is really just the vehicle that has delivered a fraught state to a place where it can no longer pretend to be a settled and functioning democracy. Brexit’s work is done – everyone can now see that the Westminster dodo is dead. It is time to move on from the pretence that the problem with British democracy is the EU and to recognise that it is with itself. After Brextinction there must be a whole new political ecosystem. Drop the dead dodo, end the mad race for a meaningless prize, and start talking about who you want to be.

• Fintan O’Toole is a columnist at the Irish Times and author of Heroic Failure: Brexit and the Politics of Pain

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Over a long political career I have appeared on BBC Question Timeinnumerable times, but I have never had such a horrible experience as I had in Derby last week.

I am not a “snowflake” on these matters. Most of my appearances have been with David Dimbleby as chair. Dimbleby could never be mistaken for a socialist. He ruled the programme with an iron hand and was capable of some very sharp interventions indeed. But he had a huge depth of knowledge about politics and tried to treat each panellist fairly.

I also spent 12 years appearing alongside Andrew Neil on BBC This Week. He is not everybody’s favourite presenter. but he was supremely well briefed. You know when you sit down next to him on a Thursday evening that he had read every poll finding, every blog and every newspaper article about the issues of the day.

By contrast Fiona Bruce, who has taken over from Dimbleby as presenter on Question Time, does not appear to be well briefed. She got the polling for Labour vs Tory wrong. She (or her researcher) appears to have got their figures from a Conservative Central Office handout. Above all, it seems she is not afraid to appear unfair as a presenter.

I was interrupted more than twice the number of times that Tory MP Rory Stewart was interrupted, even though he spoke more times than I and for a longer period overall. I was not allowed to respond to a blatantly abusive remark from the audience. I’m also told that she made unpleasant remarks about me to the audience, before the programme was actually recorded, although the BBC has denied that “any of the panel was treated unfairly either before or during the recording”.

A number of people who were there have reported that the audience was wound up against me before I even stepped on stage. It would be wrong to blame Fiona Bruce for all this. Question Time has had a new editor for some time, and seems more interested in entertainment than politics. In particular her holy grail appears to be clips of red-faced men abusing politicians, which then go viral on Twitter. With David Dimbleby gone, she is now off the leash and we are faced with the spectacle that you saw in Derby.

The question is where does the BBC go from here. First of all it needs to stop treating Jeremy Corbyn and his shadow ministers as if we are not legitimate political actors and try giving us the respect that they automatically give to Tory ministers and Labour MPs on the right of the spectrum. In the current abusive political climate, TV production teams need to reflect before they wind up live audiences against particular politicians. It may result in “good television” but it can easily turn ugly.

As forQuestion Time itself, there may be a market for a political version of the Jeremy Kyle Show, but that is not exactly what the production company Mentorn was commissioned to make.

In all my life I have never asked for special treatment, only fair treatment. But many viewers and people in the audience for last week’s Question Timethought that the way I was spoken about before the programme, the way that I was treated during the programme and the chairing of the programme were decidedly unfair.

And who could blame any young Bame women with an interest in politics and a left-of-centre ideology seeing the way that I was treated on Question Time and deciding that politics is not for her?

I have always been up for robust debate. But Question Time in Derby went beyond that and I hope that the BBC reflects and learns the lessons.

Diane Abbott is shadow home secretary and MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

LifeZette

Published  1 month ago

'The Ingraham Angle' examined Ocasio-Cortez's popularity — and the Democratic Party's future

Westmonster

Published  1 month ago

Andrea Jenkyns is the Member of Parliament for Morley and Outwood.

The United Kingdom deserves better and it was right that Parliament voted down the Prime Minister’s deal this week. This was a bad deal and not one which the House of Commons could accept.

Following this defeat there have been continued calls by some Remain MPs to delay or worse reverse the result of the referendum. This is very distressing and I understand readers concerns that what they were promised is under threat by narrow-minded and undemocratic Remainers who want to keep us in the European Union against the British people’s wishes. This cannot be allowed to happen.

Politicians need to be building trust with the electorate, not tearing it down by ignoring the result of the referendum. I understand the frustration that many around the country are feeling. With 70 Labour MPs this week signing a letter demanding a second referendum, many of whom represent Leave-voting constituencies, I would be disillusioned if they represented the area I lived in and this should not be forgotten at the polling booth.

This is, unfortunately, becoming typical of the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn’s Brexit policy to keep us in the Single Market and the Customs Union would be a complete sell-out. Staying in these institutions will not allow us to obtain control over immigration and our halt our ability to sign new trade deals with the rest of the world.

Some MPs are now advocating that we delay Brexit by extending Article 50 as if this will somehow make resolve the deadlock in Parliament, however, nothing is going to change. We now need to get on with delivering Brexit not stalling it further and we should not be pushing democracy into the long grass with delay after delay. It is over 900 days since the referendum date and people need to see that what they vote for comes to pass in a timely manner. Any further delay will only cause further irritation and frustration to a country which has been more than patient waiting for Brexit to be delivered.

At the referendum there was no third option: the choice was either Leave or Remain. The referendum did not mention a half in, half out or worst of both worlds choice for our country’s future. The referendum question said nothing about giving the EU £39 billion of taxpayers’ money and getting nothing in return, the referendum question said nothing about a continued role for the European Court of Justice after 2019, and the referendum question said nothing about an Irish backstop and restricting our ability to sign new trade deals. The Prime Minister’s deal was a bad deal and Labour’s policy will mean Brussels having a say over our country’s future, this should never be allowed to happen again.

If a deal can’t be achieved that respects the result of the referendum then we need a clean Brexit and we need to move to WTO rules. Under WTO the result of the referendum will be delivered: we will be a sovereign and independent country once again and in control of our own destiny.

Every week I receive hundreds of messages from people who voted to leave telling me that they are dismayed with the state Westminster politics. And if I were looking in I can understand their anxieties. They have huge concerns that even after the referendum result and the triggering of Article 50 that their Brexit dream will never become a reality. I find this hugely upsetting personally.

My message to proud Brexiteers who feel this way is to hold your nerve and don’t give up on politicians or politics. There are dozens of dedicated MPs who are fighting tooth and nail and standing up for Brexit. I share your frustration, but please keep your resolve. The dream of a truly sovereign and independent United Kingdom is not lost. Brexit must be delivered. Leave must mean Leave and a brave band of Brexit MPs will continue to fight for our country, fight for democracy and will never accept a bad deal.

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

Diane Abbott has accused BBC Question Time of legitimising racist abuse after claims that the shadow home secretary was singled out before and during Thursday night’s episode of the political discussion programme.

The Labour politician claimed she had been unfairly mocked in the warm-up and had been interrupted more often than other panellists by Fiona Bruce, the programme’s new chair.

“We are appalled by the treatment of Diane Abbott on BBC’s Question Time,” a spokesperson for Abbott said. “It was clear that a hostile atmosphere was whipped up, propped up by reports of inappropriate and sexist commentary in the audience warm-up session.

“A public broadcaster like the BBC should be expected to be a model of impartiality and equality. The BBC cannot claim anything of the sort when analysis of the programme shows that the only black woman on the panel was jeered at and interrupted more times than any other panellist, including by the chair herself.

“The media must stop legitimising mistreatment, bias and abuse against Ms Abbott as a black woman in public life. The BBC should be ashamed that their programming is complicit in such behaviour.”

Audience members who attended the filming of Question Time in Derby claimed that the warm-up for the programme included innuendo about Abbott’s past relationship with Jeremy Corbyn and that the audience booed her name when it was announced.

The audience loudly applauded when she was asked about Corbyn’s refusal to engage in Brexit talks with Theresa May unless the prime minister ruled out a no-deal departure from the EU.

Abbott’s staff suggested the warm-up had “set the whole audience up to be quite negative” about the politician, while pointing at online viral videos suggesting Bruce had interrupted Abbott more than the other panellists.

Labour gains three-point lead as May’s Brexit plan hits buffers

Read more

A BBC spokesperson said the corporation had been in touch with Abbott’s team but suggested some of the claims about the show’s treatment of her which went viral on social media are false. “We are sorry to hear Diane Abbott’s concerns over last night’s edition of Question Time and we have contacted her team today to reassure them that reports circulating on social media are inaccurate and misleading. Diane is a regular and important contributor to the programme … we firmly reject claims that any of the panel was treated unfairly either before or during the recording.”

Question Time and other BBC current affairs programmes have become a lightning rod for claims of media bias against Labour, with the corporation repeatedly forced to defend aspects of its presentation of political topics.

The Momentum campaign group launched a petition demanding the BBC apologise after Bruce backed claims that Labour was behind in the opinion polls.

The Momentum petition referred to an exchange where panellist Isabel Oakeshott said that Labour were “way behind in the polls” and Abbott replied that “we are kind of level-pegging” before Bruce said that Labour were “definitely” behind. But recent polling has found the two parties roughly neck and neck.

This is scandalous 😠#bbcqt #DianeAbbott pic.twitter.com/gObm5Fugq2

Abbott has appeared on Question Time at least 29 times over several decades, according to her office. In a 2017 article for the Guardian, she described her experience as one of the UK’s first black MPs, highlighting the level of abuse she received on social media.

“I went into politics to create space for women and other groups who have historically been treated unfairly,” she wrote. “Once, the pushback was against the actual arguments for equality and social justice. Now the pushback is the politics of personal destruction. This is doubly effective for opponents of social progress. Not only does it tend to marginalise the female ‘offender’, but other women look at how those of us in the public space are treated and think twice about speaking up publicly, let alone getting involved in political activity.”

jonathan-cook

Published  1 month ago

Reporting, commentary and analysis on Israel-Palestine

thetimes

Published  1 month ago

The Labour Party is haemorrhaging members amid a growing backlash over Jeremy Corbyn’s stance on Brexit, according to party insiders.

At the height of Corbyn’s popularity following the general election in 2017, Labour was considered the “largest party in western Europe” with more than 500,000 members.

In recent months, however, it has lost up to 150,000 members, according to three sources within the party. It is estimated that up to 100,000 are not up to date with their subs and enrolment has slumped to around 385,000.

A Labour insider said the downswing had already cost around £6m. “The party is skint,” the source said. “There have already been some recriminations about the amount spent on last summer’s botched music festival Labour Live.

“Although there is…

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

A Tory MP who has put forward a plan to block a no-deal Brexit says ministers have told him they will quit, if they are ordered to vote against it.

His cross-party bill would force Theresa May to request an extension of Article 50 if she can't get a deal approved by MPs by the end of February.

Mr Boles told the BBC his bill had a "broad base" of support from different sides of the Brexit debate.

And he said he believed a number of ministers backed his plan.

PM meets party leaders to break Brexit deadlock

Brexit: A really simple guide

Corbyn tells May: Rule out no deal now

Theresa May has been meeting senior members of other parties to see if there is any room for a compromise after her EU withdrawal deal was overwhelmingly rejected by MPs this week. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has refused to attend talks until the prospect of a no-deal Brexit has been ruled out.

The prime minister will publish a new plan on Monday with a full debate and key vote scheduled for Tuesday, 29 January.

Mr Boles's EU Withdrawal (Number 2) Bill aims to put Parliament in control of the Brexit process, demanding an extension to the Article 50 process to allow negotiations to continue beyond the scheduled date of Brexit on March 29.

But Mr Boles withdrew proposals for the cross-party Commons Liaison Committee of senior backbenchers to draw up an alternative Brexit plan, after its chair Sarah Wollaston indicated that it would not accept the role.

'Rolling bandwagon'

However the Tory backbencher told Nick Robinson's Political Thinking podcast the bill would still go ahead and had sponsors from three different parties - the Conservatives, Labour and the Lib Dems.

"This bill is about creating the space for a compromise by ruling out a no-deal Brexit," he told the BBC.

To pass his new bill, Mr Boles will need to suspend the rules in Parliament so that he does not need government support to free up parliamentary time for it.

He could do this by amending the government's business motion which sets out the schedule ahead of the Commons debate on 29 January.

He told the Political Thinking podcast: "We have had indications that many ministers, including cabinet ministers are very, very keen to see it pass and are telling the prime minister that they will not vote against it.

"There is a bandwagon rolling, it's got a lot of momentum behind it and I very much hope that any MP who shares my view that a no-deal Brexit would be a disaster, will jump on board.

"I have been told directly by ministers, not in the cabinet, that they have said that they would resign if they are whipped to vote against it."

While he did not know if any cabinet ministers would quit, he said the transcript reported in the Daily Telegraph of a conversation in which Philip Hammond "made quite plain that he thought this was fantastic".

Evening Standard

Published  1 month ago

Support for staying in the European Union has jumped to its highest level since the 2016 referendum in the wake of the crushing Commons defeat for Theresa May’s deal.

A new YouGov poll reveals 56 per cent of voters would choose Remain if given the chance in a fresh referendum. Only 44 per cent said they would vote Leave. The 12-point lead for Remain is a big increase from eight points at the end of last year, and will be seen as evidence that voters are losing confidence in Brexit.

It is three times as big as the four-point margin that Leave secured in the 2016 referendum to commit Britain to quitting the EU. Support has also grown for a second referendum, found YouGov’s survey of 1,000 adults, which was commissioned by the People’s Vote campaign but conducted independently.

Some 47 per cent of the public back a new vote, or 56 per cent for and 44 against after excluding don’t knows.

The snap poll was conducted after Tuesday night’s record-breaking Commons vote against Mrs May’s withdrawal blueprint, which was crushed by 432 votes to 202.

Last night the Prime Minister managed to unite the Tories and her on-off Democratic Unionist Party allies to resist a Labour motion of no confidence by 325 votes to 306. Labour MP Chuka Umunna, a leading supporter of the People’s Vote campaign, urged party leader Jeremy Corbyn to read the results and back a referendum.

“This snap poll shows more than ever why the Government needs to change course and hand this decision on Brexit back to the people,” he said.

“The poll also underlines why the leadership of my party needs to listen to Labour’s own supporters, more than three-quarters of whom are demanding a People’s Vote. To ignore those calls now would be an historic mistake for which Labour would not be forgiven.”

Scottish Secretary David Mundell effectively ruled out holding a second referendum today, despite the Prime Minister offering talks with other parties aimed at finding a consensus.

“She’s not going down a route to stop Brexit,” he said, saying the talks were only designed to produce “an orderly Brexit” route. “Everything is up for discussion but what isn’t going to be an outcome is arrangements that seek to stop Brexit, which I believe the People’s Vote is designed to do.”

But the Scottish National Party’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford and Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable both used talks to push for a referendum.

Conservative supporters of a second EU referendum this morning launched a “Right to Vote” campaign in an attempt to push Mrs May into holding a re-run of the 2016 plebiscite.

Former minister Phillip Lee, who quit last year to campaign against Brexit, claimed Tory support for a fresh poll was “underestimated” and “growing fast”. “I know from private conversations at Parliament that backing among my colleagues for a referendum is there and is growing fast,” he said.More than 170 leading figures, including architect Lord Foster and Nobel Prize winner Sir Paul Nurse,have called for Mrs May and Mr Corbyn to back a second referendum.

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

Theresa May's government survives a no confidence vote by 325 to 306 - but has yet to get MPs to back a Brexit plan

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

The European Council president sends a cryptic tweet after Theresa May's Brexit deal was rejected.

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

PM Theresa May loses MPs’ vote on Brexit deal by 432 votes to 202 - the biggest government defeat in history

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

Jeremy Corbyn should seize the chance to alter the course of Britain’s future, says Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty

Dailystar.co.uk

Published  1 month ago

Hours before MPs vote for the first time on Theresa May’s Brexit deal, the former UKIP leader told Daily Star Online he believes she never wanted the UK to fully leave the Brussels bloc.

Mrs May is widely expected to lose the crunch vote by a huge margin, which could lead to a "no deal" Brexit or even a second referendum.

Some even expect her to stand down or be ousted as leader.

Mr Farage said: “This should be a day of celebration for Brexiteers but unfortunately the Prime Minister never wanted us to become an independent country, her deal costs us a fortune, ties us into EU rules indefinitely and is a total shocker.

“This failure of leadership has given the Remainers the opportunity to hijack the process.”

Mrs May’s deal would mean the UK pays Brussels around £40billion and, if the government fails to negotiate a trade deal in the two-year “transition period,” the so-called “Irish backstop” will be triggered.

The UK cannot leave the backstop without the EU’s permission, and Mr Farage and others claim the UK could become permanently tied to the bloc’s trade rules.

Speaking on his LBC radio show on Monday night, Farage added: “It seems to me that what [the Prime Minister] is saying to everybody and urging everybody, is that a bad deal is better that a ‘no deal’.

“If this Prime Minister believed in Brexit she would stick with what Article 50 says, and it says… if you cannot negotiate a withdrawal agreement, two years after the date of triggering [Article 50] you simply leave.”

Mr Farage, who now leads the group Leave Means Leave, pointed out that 494 MPs voted to trigger the Article 50 divorce process.

He joined a Leave Means Leave protest outside parliament this morning, urging people to back a "no deal" exit from the European Union on World Trade Organisation terms.

The former UKIP leader will also join former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, Labour Brexiteer Kate Hoey and Wetherspoons boss Tim Martin for a pro-Brexit rally opposite parliament on Thursday.

On Monday afternoon, Mrs May’s deal suffered its first official parliamentary defeat as peers in the House of Lords registering their opposition to it by 321 votes to 152 – a majority 169.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has threatened to hold a no-confidence vote in the Prime Minister if the deal fails tonight – which could see her forced from office – and says he wants a general election before Brexit.

He blasted on Twitter: “If Theresa May's botched deal is defeated today she'll only have herself to blame after two wasted years negotiating with her cabinet and her bickering backbenchers instead of the EU.

“We need an election to have the chance to vote for a government that can bring people together.”

Last night, Mrs May reportedly summoned her Cabinet for last-minute talks ahead of the showdown and attempted to persuade Brexiteers to back the deal and block any chance of a Labour government.

She also appealed to her Northern Irish allies, the Democratic Unionist Party, who are continuing to say they will vote the deal down due to the so-called “Irish backstop”.

Meanwhile Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the House of Commons, insisted May was still determined to keep fighting for her deal and believes it can pass.

“Her purpose is to leave the European Union in line with what people voted for. She could not be clearer about that,” she told BBC2’s Newsnight programme.

The New European

Published  1 month ago

Anti-Brexit and Pro-Brexit protesters fly flags outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Yui Mok/PA Wire

Polling by Hope Not Hate and Best for Britain has found that 60% of the public back a fresh referendum if MPs are unable to decide on Brexit.

For the first time, the polling - carried out in mid-December and early January - found a majority in favour of a second referendum in every part of Great Britain.

The analysis showed support for a second referendum is particularly high among Labour voters, with a majority in every seat held by Jeremy Corbyn’s party.

The findings come as the Labour leader is under pressure to commit his party to a second referendum if he is unable to secure a general election through a no-confidence motion in May’s government.

MORE: Pizza shop offers discount to those who have backed a People’s Vote

The research is based on “multi-level regression and post-stratification analysis” applied by market research company FocalData to two waves of YouGov polling involving a total of 6,785 voters.

Participants were asked whether, if Parliament cannot decide on the best way forward for Brexit, they would favour a public vote with three options - Remain, Leave with Mrs May’s deal or Leave with no deal.

A total of 60.2% favoured a second referendum, with strongest backing in Scotland (67.7%), London (67.6%), the North West (61.2%), Wales (60.3%), North East (59.8%) and Yorkshire & Humber (58.9%).

Highest levels of opposition were recorded in the South West (44.9%), East of England (44%), East Midlands (43.2%), South East (42.2%) and West Midlands (42.1%)

Support for a public vote was high among Labour supporters across all regions of the country, ranging from 75.1% in the North East to 82.2% in London.

MORE: Support our journalism by taking out a print subscription of The New European for just £13

Best for Britain boss Eloise Todd said: “A public vote is the option the people in the country want, and MPs must not ignore that.

“Politicians need to resist the temptation to cobble together a Westminster fudge - it’s those kinds of deals behind closed doors that people rejected in 2016. Instead they should listen to the country, understand that most people now want a say on their future, and let the people decide on Brexit.”

Hope Not Hate chief executive Nick Lowles added: “MPs have had over two years to sort out Brexit and it is becoming abundantly clear that there is not a majority for any one option.

“With Parliament deadlocked, the British public now clearly believe that they should make the final decision through a public vote.

“They overwhelmingly want to take back control and there is nothing more democratic than that.”

Labour MP Virendra Sharma, a supporter of the Best for Britain campaign for a second referendum, said: “Labour voters and members are clear. Brexit is against what we believe, our values and our principles.

“We, as a party cannot fight austerity and deliver better public services while we pay a sky-high Brexit bill. Labour must back a second Brexit vote. It’s the only way out of this impasse. We must let the people decide.”

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

UK Parliament vote on Theresa May's Brexit plan a make or break moment for the prime minister, exit movement

A vote on the British prime minister's divorce settlement for departing the E.U. is likely to be rejected; Benjamin Hall reports on the opposition to the deal and what happens next.

British Prime Minister Theresa May suffered a catastrophic defeat Tuesday as Parliament overwhelmingly rejected her Brexit deal with the European Union -- a defeat that places the future of Brexit in doubt and is likely to spark calls for May’s ouster via a general election.

May’s withdrawal agreement was voted down 432-202, the largest in the history of the House of Commons. May was expected to lose, but the extent to which she lost was significant and marks a devastating blow for her leadership and her ability to go back to Brussels and negotiate further concessions.

What happens next is unclear. Britain is scheduled to leave the bloc at the end of March, currently with no deal -- something that many MPs on both sides of Parliament, including May, have said would lead to significant disruption. Some MPs, particularly those who voted to remain in the E.U. in 2016, have called for Britain to delay its departure, or hold a second referendum.

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn is expected to call for a motion of no-confidence in the government as early as Wednesday. Should that pass, it could eventually lead to a snap general election if another government is not formed.

May is also likely to face significant pressure from her Conservative Party to step aside, particularly considering the margin of her defeat, which would normally lead to a prime minister’s resignation. But May, having survived a vote of no-confidence from her party in December, is protected from being ousted from her own party until December 2019.

This is a breaking news alert, check back for future updates.

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

Labour's leader sets out conditions for Brexit talks with the prime minister and threatens more no-confidence votes.

Consortiumnews

Published  1 month ago

Historian and U.K. analyst Mark Curtis checks out the Twitter accounts of journalists whose names have been associated with the Integrity Initiative, a British "counter disinformation" program. By Mark Curtis British Foreign Policy Declassified The U.K.-financed Integrity Initiative, mana

The Sun

Published  1 month ago

EU leaders are prepared to delay Brexit until July because Parliament can’t agree a deal, it has been claimed. The British government is expected to ask for an extension to Article 50 –…

TheyWorkForYou

Published  1 month ago

TheyWorkForYou

01/12 11:13 pm

TheyWorkForYou is a website which makes it easy to keep track of your local MP's activities.

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Former prime minister John Major has renewed calls for the government to suspend Brexit and give the public a Final Say referendum. Ahead of a critical Brexit vote on Tuesday, the Tory grandee said

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

A People's Vote event is held in Sheffield, as an anti-austerity rally takes place in central London.

Mail Online

Published  1 month ago

The pair spoke in Mr Bercow’s grace-and-favour Commons apartment the day before the Speaker allowed the former Attorney General to table an amendment, it can be revealed.

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

Theresa May pleads with MPs to back her deal agreed with the EU in Tuesday's crunch Commons vote.

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

Not leaving the EU could end centuries of "moderate" politics in the UK, the transport secretary says.

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Tony Blair has advised those going to the polls to consider voting for the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats in order to weaken the Prime Minister’s mandate for a hard Brexit.

The former Prime Minister said it was important to vote for candidates who had an “open mind” on the final deal and that people should not limit their votes to just Labour because the issue was “bigger than party allegiance”.

He also praised Theresa May, arguing: “She’s very sensible, she’s a very decent person, she’s very solid, I agree with a lot she says.”

Mr Blair has previously admitted that he “wouldn’t want to win on an old-fashioned leftist platform” like Jeremy Corbyn’s, “even if I thought it was the route to victory”.

Speaking on Sunday on the BBC’s The World This Weekend programme he said: “The absolutely central question at this general election is less who is the prime minister on 9 June, and more what is the nature of the mandate.

“Otherwise frankly this is a steamroller election – is it possible that we can return as many members of parliament as possible to parliament that are going to keep an open mind on this Brexit negotiation until we see the final terms.”

Asked whether this political approach could mean voting Liberal Democrat, Mr Blair replied: “What I’m advocating may mean that. It may mean voting Labour. It may mean, by the way, that they vote Tory, for candidates who are prepared to give this commitment.”

“This is something that’s bigger than party allegiance, in this particular election.”

The former Prime Minister said candidates should be asked whether they backed Brexit “at any cost” or whether they were prepared to say any final deal was not in the interests of the country.

Mr Blair’s advice comes despite Ms May suggesting that votes for the Conservatives are an indication of the country “coming together” behind her Brexit plan.

He said that he personally “will always vote Labour”.

The former PM’s comments provoked anger on social media, with some Labour members suggesting he be ejected from the party for backing rival candidates. Matt Zarb-Cousin, a former spokesperson for Jeremy Corbyn, said Mr Blair “should be kicked out of the party”.

Labour’s rulebook states that “a member of the party who joins and/or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a party member”.

One Labour source poured derision on Mr Blair’s comments, telling The Independent that “voting for the Lib Dems because you’re unhappy with Brexit is like voting for them because you don’t like tuition fees”.

Mr Blair also hinted at the possibility of a political return. He said: “I look at the British political scene at the moment and I actually almost feel motivated to go right back into it.”

A spokesperson for Jeremy Corbyn said: “On 9 June, we will either have a Labour government or a Tory one.

“If you want Brexit to be used to turn Britain into a low-wage tax haven, vote Tory. If you want a Britain for the many not the few after Brexit, vote Labour. The choice is clear.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

A cabinet minister has been accused of engaging in "gutter politics" after warning MPs that blocking Brexit could trigger a surge of far-right extremism. Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, said

The Sun

Published  1 month ago

YELLOW vest campaigner James Goddard has been arrested by police in central London on public order offences. The Met Police said in a statement: “We can confirm that a man in his 30s was arre…

thetimes

Published  1 month ago

The shadow Brexit secretary has warned Jeremy Corbyn that a second referendum may now be the only viable option to prevent a no-deal exit from the European Union.

The Times understands that Sir Keir Starmer has told the Labour leader that with less than three months to go before leaving the EU the party’s options are limited and it has an obligation not to allow the government to run down the clock on a no-deal Brexit.

In a speech today Mr Corbyn will insist that it is still possible for Labour to negotiate a better deal with Brussels and will restate his call for a general election.

Yesterday Sir Keir said for the first time that extending Article 50 “may well be inevitable” despite an…

Express.co.uk

Published  1 month ago

THOUSANDS of British Yellow Vest protesters will swarm on London today as French-inspired anti-establishment anger spills out onto the capital’s streets.

BrexitCentral

Published  1 month ago

Written by

As Canterbury does not have its own Conservative MP, I have been asked by local Conservative members, activists and supporters to set out their views, as expressed to me, in the hope that Conservative MPs will read this before voting on the draft Brexit deal.

As a marginal seat in the heart of Kent, the Canterbury constituency is on the political ‘frontline’ for both Brexit and the next general election. Conservatives here fear the deal proposed offers a bleak prospect for both party and country. They hope you will weigh an alternative.

The majority of our Conservative members, activists and supporters voted Leave in 2016. They were not motivated by bigotry. Our constituency welcomes 7 million tourists every year, we are proud to host 40,000 students from around the world and our local businesses trade globally. Conservatives have an optimistic and outward looking worldview. The vote for Brexit was born of a desire to enhance sovereignty, create opportunity and embrace the future.

Conservative supporters who called for Brexit voted in good faith. They deserve recognition that they knew what they voting for. In Kent, people know that disruption needs mitigation. We have seen steps proposed in Operation Brock applied many times before. We marked agreements like the Treaty of Canterbury (regarding the Channel Tunnel) that facilitated trade before the European Union and will continue to have force regardless of Brexit. And now, we see neighbours across the Channel, like Holland, introducing new laws for an amicable ‘no-deal’ outcome. Evidently, those neighbours believe that is a sensible option.

I am sure most constituency Chairs like me have received a huge number of messages from those who oppose the draft Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration. Our supporters fear it springs from the same well as last year’s general election campaign. Indeed, when voters are told that declining this deal means no deal or no Brexit, they tend to reply: “fine, either is better”.

Our activists and voters cannot be taken for granted. Many worry this deal betrays them. Given the dreaded spectre of Jeremy Corbyn’s narrow-minded hate and broad-brush prejudice, the biggest risk we all face is not leaving the EU without a deal. It is that if we let down our supporters on this issue, they will not help us fight another. On 15th January, please vote against this deal.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Today's excuse as to why Brexit mustn't happen is that a gaggle of protestors in yellow vests have been caught on film calling an MP a "Nazi".

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

David Miliband is the most popular choice as next Labour leader, among members of the public who knew who they would choose, a new poll shows.

A survey by BMG Research found that while more than a third of people did not know who to pick (36 per cent), of those who did, 10 per cent would opt for the elder Miliband brother to succeed Jeremy Corbyn.

Despite three years in office, the poll also found few of Mr Corbyn’s front bench have managed to break through to the wider public consciousness, with both Mr Miliband and Yvette Cooper scoring more highly than big hitters like John McDonnell, Sir Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Emily Thornberry.

Ms Cooper, the chair of the home affairs committee, was next with 6 per cent, followed by Sir Keir, the shadow Brexit secretary, and Chuka Umunna on 4 per cent, and shadow chancellor John McDonnell on 3 per cent.

Nearly a third (32 per cent) of people said they had never heard of any of these senior Labour figures.

When pollsters asked more than 1,500 people which of the Labour politicians they had heard of, 74 per cent of voters said Mr Miliband and half said Ms Cooper.

Mr McDonnell, a close ally of the Labour leader, had 45 per cent, while pro-EU campaigner Mr Umunna secured 39 per cent of votes and Ms Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, was on 34 per cent.

Rising stars in the shadow cabinet such as Rebecca Long-Bailey and Ms Rayner fared worse, with 10 per cent and 18 per cent respectively. Senior figures such as deputy leader Tom Watson and Sir Keir were only recognised by around a third of people.

Mr Miliband was foreign secretary during Gordon Brown’s premiership and was a candidate in the 2010 leadership election, losing out to his younger brother Ed.

Created with Sketch. Labour Party conference 2018: in pictures

Show all 24 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. Labour Party conference 2018: in pictures

After resigning as an MP, he moved to head up the International Rescue Committee (IRC) in New York, but there have been persistent rumours that he could return to frontline politics.

Speculation was fuelled by a series of public interventions over Brexit last year, including an article in December in which he branded Mr Corbyn’s policy as “confusion at best and a fantasy at worst”.

Source Note: BMG Research interviewed a representative sample of 1,514 GB adults online between 8th & 11th January. Data are weighted. BMG are members of the British Polling Council and abide by their rules.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

thetimes

Published  1 month ago

The party’s MPs can’t keep saying the only game in town is a ‘false choice’

Not before time, the end is in sight. The light at the end of the Brexit tunnel is actually light at last and not, as has seemed more likely until now, the light of an oncoming train. Week by week, the picture is clearing as, one by one, the range of options available to the United Kingdom are closed off. There will be no second referendum; there will be no revocation of article 50. That means just two choices are left: a withdrawal agreement or no deal at all.

Jeremy Corbyn is adamant that Brexit, of one sort or another, must happen. On this he and the prime minister agree, which is enough to ensure that remainers’ dreams that the whole process can be dismissed…

Subscribe now and get unlimited digital access on web and our smartphone and tablet apps, free for your first month.

Get one month’s free unlimited access

Unlock quality journalism on the topics that you decide matter most.

Start your trial

Get The International Pack for free for your first 30 days for unlimited Smartphone and Tablet access.

Start your free trial

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

A majority of voters believe the final say on Britain's impending exit from the EU should be determined by the public, according to the biggest Brexit poll held since the 2016 referendum. The YouGov

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

I have seldom seen a poll on a subject dividing the nation for which the lessons are so clear. The biggest survey yet conducted on Brexit shows that Remain would comfortably win a referendum held today – and that Labour would crash to a landslide election defeat if it helped Brexit go ahead.

YouGov questioned more than 25,000 people between 21 December and last Friday. It tested two referendum scenarios. If the choice is Remain versus the government’s withdrawal agreement, Remain leads by 26 points: 63% to 37%. If the choice is Remain versus leaving the EU without a deal, Remain wins by 16 points: 58% to 42%.

The difference is explained by the views of those who voted Leave in 2016. Many of them want a clean break with Brussels, but back away from an agreement that fails to redeem the promise in 2016 to “take back control”. Among all voters, only 22% support the government’s deal. Among Leave voters the figure is not much higher: 28%.

The larger point is that the nature of the choice has changed since 2016 – 52% voted Leave when it was a general aspiration with little apparent downside. Today support for Brexit is significantly lower when Leave is more clearly defined.

This pattern is familiar to referendums in different countries: many people support the broad idea of change, but back away when the details are laid out. They want “change”, but not “this change”.

That is clearly the case today: 80% of people who voted Leave two years ago still say they want Brexit to go ahead; but the figure falls to 69% if the choice is a “no deal” Brexit, and only 55% if the referendum offers the withdrawal agreement. The rest say they don’t know, or switch to Remain. (The respective loyalty rates on the other side – Remain voters in 2016 who would stick with Remain today – are significantly higher.)

In short, the electorate is increasingly polarised between a growing majority that wants the UK to stay in the EU and a much smaller, but still significant, segment of the electorate that wants a hard, “no deal” Brexit. There is little public appetite for compromise between these two positions.

This polarisation poses acute problems for Jeremy Corbyn as well as Theresa May. The Labour leader fears that if his party backs a public vote and then campaigns for a Remain victory he will alienate Leave voters in Labour’s heartlands.

YouGov’s figures suggest that, far from boosting Labour’s support, Corbyn’s approach could lead to electoral catastrophe.

The conventional voting intention question produces a six-point Conservative lead (40% to 34%). This is bad enough for an opposition that ought to be reaping electoral dividends at a time when the government is in crisis.

However, when voters are asked how they would vote if Labour failed to resist Brexit, the Conservatives open up a 17-point lead (43% to 26%). That would be an even worse result than in Margaret Thatcher’s landslide victory in 1983, when Labour slumped to 209 seats, its worst result since the 1930s.

The key reason for this is that, if Labour is seen to facilitate Brexit in any form, YouGov’s results indicate that the party would be deserted by millions of Remain voters – without gaining any extra support from Leave voters.

Thus Labour risks losing Remain seats where the party did well in 2017 – famously Kensington and Canterbury, but also a host of other constituencies in and around London, and others with a large student population – while failing to recoup any of the ground it lost in the party’s traditional heartlands.

In 2016 Labour voters divided two to one in favour of staying in the EU. Today Labour voters divide 83% to 17% if the choice is Remain versus the Withdrawal Agreement, and 80% to 20% in a Remain versus “no deal” contest. There are huge and obvious risks in being seen to thwart such huge majorities – either by resisting a referendum or, if one is held, failing to campaign against Brexit.

Peter Kellner is the former president of YouGov.

cyberguerrilla

Published  1 month ago

Greetings! We are Anonymous.We have warned the UK government that it must conduct an honest and transparent investigation into the activity of the Integrity Initiative and the Institute for Statec

Middle East Eye

Published  1 month ago

Only an extensive public movement of grassroots support will be able to bring about a UK foreign policy that genuinely promotes human rights

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

As the extent of anti-Brexit feeling among Labour members is revealed, the Lib Dems could get a boost if Cable stepped back sooner

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Labour members overwhelmingly back a fresh Brexit referendum, a new study has found, piling further pressure on Jeremy Corbyn to do the same.

As many as 72 per cent of card-carrying party loyalists want the Labour leader to throw his weight behind a Final Say public vote – and 88 per cent would back Remain if it takes place.

The researchers warned Mr Corbyn his own supporters would turn against him if he continued to oppose another referendum, as he did a few days before Christmas.

Around 16 per cent said they had considered quitting Labour because of its pro-Brexit stance – a proportion equivalent to around 88,000 members, according to the analysis.

“Our survey suggests Labour’s membership is overwhelmingly in favour of the UK remaining in the EU and badly wants a referendum to achieve that end,” said Professor Tim Bale, of Queen Mary University London.

“Labour’s grassroots clearly hate Brexit and, although many of them still love Corbyn, he might not be able to rely for much longer on their support for him trumping their opposition to leaving the EU.”

The Labour leader sparked anger 11 days ago, when he insisted Brexit will go ahead if Labour wins a snap general election triggered by the current crisis.

He vowed, as prime minister, to head to Brussels to try to renegotiate softer exit terms to Theresa May’s deal – while acknowledging departure day might have to be delayed beyond 29 March.

However, Labour activists are stepping up their campaign to force a change of direction, urging members to demand a referendum in the party’s manifesto if there is an election.

Some are calling for a special conference to decide Labour’s policy if, as seems certain, the prime minister’s deal is rejected by MPs in a fortnight’s time.

More than 2,500 signed a petition over Christmas arguing “the situation has changed radically” since Labour’s cautious policy was agreed at its annual conference in September.

Today’s survey, of 1,034 Labour members, was carried out by YouGov for the Economic and Social Research Council-funded Party Members Project, partly run by Professor Bale.

If there is another referendum – and a three-way question – 88 per cent of Labour members would back Remain, 3 per cent would support leaving with Ms May’s deal and 5 per cent would back leaving with no deal.

Some 89 per cent of Labour members – compared with 65 per cent of current Labour voters and only 45 per cent of all voters – believe leaving the EU without a deal would cause enduring economic damage.

While just 35 per cent of the electorate as a whole fear shortages of food and medicine supplies in a no-deal Brexit, that figure rises to 82 per cent of Labour members and 58 per cent of Labour voters.

In response to the research, a Labour spokesperson said: “As unanimously agreed at Labour party conference, if Theresa May’s botched Brexit deal is voted down in parliament then a general election should be called.

“In line with the policy agreed at conference, if the Conservatives block a general election then we will keep all options on the table, including the option of campaigning for a public vote.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

Labour members are significantly more opposed to Brexit than Jeremy Corbyn is, with 72% of them thinking their leader should fully support a second referendum, according to a study of attitudes in the party.

The polling, part of an ongoing wider academic study into attitudes in various parties, found that only 18% opposed Labour campaigning for a second referendum, while 88% would then opt for remain if such a vote was held.

Official Labour policy is that a second referendum could potentially be considered if there is not a general election. However, Corbyn is publicly lukewarm on the idea, and prompted dismay among some party activists last month by saying he expected Brexit to happen even if Labour won a snap election.

There is a path to a second referendum – and only Labour can win it | Tom Kibasi

Read more

Corbyn is facing intense pressure from some in the party to change course, with one pro-remain party group pushing for a motion that Labour would guarantee a referendum if there was a general election.

The study, part of the Party Members Project led by Prof Tim Bale of Queen Mary University of London, found that while Labour members still strongly supported their leader overall, they appear both distanced from his views on Brexit and, for some, sceptical about his motives on the subject.

The polling of 1,034 party members shortly before Christmas found that almost two-thirds believed Corbyn was doing very well or fairly well as leader, and 58% believe he could get a better Brexit deal than Theresa May as prime minister.

But asked why they felt Corbyn had not campaigned for a second referendum, 23% of those asked said it was because the Labour leader backed leaving the EU. Another 34% put the decision down to not wanting to alienate Labour voters.

If a new referendum was held, 88% of members would back remain, both in a two-way vote against either May’s plan or no deal, or in a three-way poll between all of them.

The findings “increase the pressure on Labour’s leader to get off the fence”, Bale said. “If Jeremy Corbyn genuinely believes, as he has repeatedly claimed, that the Labour party’s policy should reflect the wishes of its members rather than just its leaders, then he arguably has a funny way of showing it – at least when it comes to Brexit,” he said.

There was, he noted, some difference between the views of Labour voters and members. While a parallel poll of 1,675 voters found 73% of the party’s supporters believed the Brexit decision was a mistake, for members that rises to 89%.

Labour owes it to its supporters to become the party of remain | Zoe Williams

Read more

On the impact of a no-deal departure, 89% of members said this would harm the economy in the medium to long term, against 65% of current Labour voters and 45% of all voters.

Of the near-third of members who said they oppose Labour’s current Brexit policy, 56% said the issue could make them quit the party – a potential loss of 88,000 people.

Bale said Corbyn “does need to think carefully about whether his ambiguity on the issue is quite as cunningly clever as many commentators seem to believe”.

He added: “It is because, if Corbyn carries on like this, then Labour risks losing some of the members on whom it’s relying to give it the activist edge over the Conservatives at the next general election.”

A Labour spokesman said: “As unanimously agreed at Labour party conference, if Theresa May’s botched Brexit deal is voted down in parliament then a general election should be called. In line with the policy agreed at conference, if the Conservatives block a general election then we will keep all options on the table, including the option of campaigning for a public vote.”

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Just before parliament broke up for the Christmas recess the political bubble was gripped by talk of motions of no confidence. 

The Sun

Published  1 month ago

ONE in four people would vote for a far-right, anti-immigrant and anti-Islam party, a shock poll revealed yesterday. As Theresa May’s Chequers deal continues to anger Brexiteers, growing numb…

BBC News

Published  1 month ago

The reasons are often "outside of our control", writes the home secretary in newspaper article.

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

When reflecting on the last 12 months in British politics, I found myself casting my mind back to a simpler time. A time when David Cameron was forced to make a televised statement outside his house – while wearing a fleece – about smoking weed in high school. When calling a bigoted woman a “bigoted woman” was the biggest political scandal, and when eating a bacon sandwich in an odd manner ruined careers.

Now the innocence of the pre-Brexit era is long gone. Westminster’s largest parties have different leaders who, for the first time since 2013, have navigated a calendar year in politics without a referendum or a general election. What a relief… Or so we thought.

Depending on the news of the day and, of course, who you ask, Britain is either teetering towards a second referendum or a no-deal Brexit. The only indisputable truth is that, two years on from 2016’s EU referendum, people are more divided than ever. Westminster has somehow managed to become even more polarised than the electorate, which is quite an achievement. Though, rather then being inevitable, the bacterial divisiveness of our politics has been allowed to fester and multiply in a leadership vacuum.

This year we have seen both Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn lacking in political and moral authority. With Number 10 occupied by a Remainer pretending to be a Leaver, opposed at the dispatch box by a notorious Eurosceptic who “campaigned” for Remain, it’s difficult to trust either of them.

While balancing their personal beliefs with political realities, May and Corbyn have so far failed to reconcile party members’ and MPs’ demands with the wider electorate. Both have also been engulfed in scandals that would have been fatal to their careers just a few years ago.

Created with Sketch. UK news in pictures

Show all 50 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. UK news in pictures

Amber Rudd might have taken the blame, but May’s notoriously anti-immigrant fingerprints were all over the Windrush scandal. May’s “hostile environment” policies were responsible for black British citizens being illegally deported in a scandal which, both heartbreaking and maddening, is one of the most shameful in living memory.

When May wasn’t running through wheat fields or rolling out the red carpet for Donald Trump, she was hiring new ministers as her cabinet disappeared quicker thanPriti Patel on a “family holiday”. After creating the cabinet position of Brexit secretary, both appointees quit within months of each other over deals they were allegedly instrumental in negotiating – an appropriate summary of the prime minister’s year.

After becoming the first government in history to be found incontempt of parliament for failing to publish key Brexit legal advice,May postponed the vote on her EU withdrawal bill, knowing she would be defeated. As her own MPs turned on her, Mayrestored the Tory whip to two MPs facing serioussexual harassment accusations – the most damning moment of her premiership so far.

May’s slow implosion, after years of Tory infighting over Europe, wouldn’t be so disastrous if Her Majesty’s opposition weren’t in a similarly tangled mess. On Brexit, it is not yet clear whether Corbyn’s inability to follow or articulate Labour party policy is deliberate or accidental idiocy, but either way it is terrible for the country.

As for scandals, Corbyn never misses an opportunity to remind everyone how untrustworthy he is. His denial that he was “involved” in laying a wreath for terrorists was almost as disturbing as his cult-like followers’ inability to believephotographic evidence that suggested otherwise. Then there was his shockingly inadequate response to alleged antisemitism within the Labour party, which was followed by the emergence of a2013 clip which showed him making “jokes” that many perceived to be antisemitic. Even Labour MPs described the video as“sickening” and “inexcusable”.

According toYouGov polls tracking who the public think will make the best prime minister, Corbyn has been outperformed by “not sure” for the entirety of 2018. With an approval rating ofminus 19 per cent, it seems that retiring that ghastly tan suit might be the only positive he can take from this year.

Since the 2017 general election, the Conservatives and Labour have been neck-and-neck in the polls. Though, for most voters, the choice between them is a matter of deciding who is the lesser of two evils. If both May and Corbyn decided to stand down now, at the same time, I would estimate that about 80 per cent of the electorate would either breathe a great sigh or relief or react with jubilation. At perhaps the most pivotal moment in our nation’s modern history, having two leaders who are this widely disliked is an extremely worrying place for our democracy to be.

Brexit was seen by many as a revolt against “politics are usual”. Yet the new, post-referendum normal has turned out to be a never-ending tug-of-war of inadequacy, incompetence and deliberate deception. If Britain wants smarter politicians, we’re going to have to start being smarter voters. But with politics outside Scotland dominated by two parties with leaders who aren’t even competent enough to organise a televised debate, let alone negotiate Brexit, where else are voters to turn?

As a new year approaches, my mind drifts to Brazil, America and Italy, where we have already seen what can happen when voters feel like they’re out of options. Unless a seismic shift breaks the endlessly bleak deadlock that is May vs Corbyn, I fear things will get much worse before they get better.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Jeremy Corbyn today reiterates his pledge to eradicate rough sleeping within the first term of a Labour government, saying the recent death of a homeless man outside Parliament should act as a wake-up call.

His remarks come as a fresh analysis by Labour claims that 5,000 homeless people – including those on the streets, in hostels, and temporary accommodation – are suffering from mental health issues this festive period.

The alarming figure, Mr Corbyn said in an interview with The Independent, has increased since 2010 and was a “symptom of the crisis in mental health” in the country.

Using data available from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), Labour’s analysis claimed 5,470 homeless people will be suffering from mental illness over the Christmas period.

This is a figure that has increased by almost three quarters – 71 per cent – since 2010 when the Conservatives entered a coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

Asked whether he planned to eradicate rough sleeping in the first term of a Labour government, Mr Corbyn said: “Absolutely – I would want to be judged by our success in ending absolute poverty and homeless in this country.

“I have spent my whole life being a constituency MP and a councillor for highly-stressed inner urban areas. I would use every opportunity possible to end homelessness and destitution in our society.”

His remarks come after separate figures released in December also revealed nearly 600 homeless people died in 2017 in England and Wales, according to data collated by the Office for National Statistics (NAO).

And just last week Gyula Remes, 43, was found by British Transport Police collapsed yards away from one of the entrances to parliament. Although officers administered first aid, he died hours later in hospital.

Asked whether it should act as wake-up call to politicians, Mr Corbyn replied: “It should be – it’s not the first one, there was another last year.”

Speaking earlier this week James Brokenshire, the housing secretary, admitted that a rise in rough sleeping could be down to his party’s policies in an interview with Politico’s London Playbook.

The cabinet minister said the Conservatives have to “look and reflect on ourselves as to the increase”, adding: “Yes there are other factors that are relevant here, but we have to look at the policy – and I do think we need to look at changes to policy. I’ve already started, and others in government have done so too.”

Responding to Labour’s analysis, the minister for homelessness, Heather Wheeler, added: “We are committed to tackling all forms of homelessness and supporting people with mental illnesses.

“We are investing £1.2bn to tackle homelessness in all its forms and have asked NHS England to spend £30m over the next five years on health services for those rough sleeping.

“Councils have a duty to help people into temporary accommodation and we have introduced a new law to ensure they get faster access to this support.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Jeremy Corbyn has challenged Theresa May to cut short the Christmas recess and recall parliament early in the new year in order to bring forward a critical vote on the Brexit deal. In an interview

Voice of Europe

Published  1 month ago

There's a world outside your window and it’s a world of dread and fear. The only thing that is growing is the bitter rape of young vulnerable British girls, as you read those words this festive season, thank god it’s them, instead of you.

the Guardian

Published  1 month ago

The Labour party is united: the vast majority of its MPs, its members and its voters – from all classes – want Britain to stay in the European Union. They recognise that Brexit is a project by the right for the right.

For the EU stands for openness, peace, tolerance and the best of the Enlightenment traditions. It is the most successful institutional architecture forging international collaboration yet known. Britain has benefited immeasurably from its membership. It is the European answer to the 21st-century question of how to manage interdependencies between countries – economic, trading, security, financial, scientific – in a world where necessarily they must grow.

Those who believe in it as a force for good do not want to go down without a struggle – to wimp out because to have another democratic encounter with the issue is said to be anti-democratic, arousing dark warnings of impending civic unrest from those asked to vote again. A one-off, never to be revisited referendum, as in totalitarian states in the 1930s, has become an irreversible building block for a rightwing world, with the connivance of parts of the old left that hold the same conception of imagined, untrammelled national autonomy as the extreme right.

This brutal right, with its increasingly strident nationalist and racist overtones, is not going to go away after Brexit – it will raise the stakes still further, attempting to turn our beloved country into a venomous, intolerant cesspit. It has to be confronted sooner or later. Better sooner.

Yet Labour’s leadership refuses to speak for this powerful and growing conviction within its party – in the country, too, with opinion polls hardening in favour of EU membership. As the government amazingly puts the country on to a war footing to manage the fallout of an impending hard Brexit, Labour’s voice is weak and temporising. In his interview with the Guardian Jeremy Corbyn says that even if Labour won a snap general election, it would lead the country out of the EU but with a “better deal” built around a permanent customs union. Ongoing EU membership threatens a socialist programme, he argues, because of state-aid rules. If Theresa May recasts her deal in softer terms, he will back it, he says.

His stance is wrong at every level. First, he has just reduced his electoral base to the shrinking Leave vote so that Labour will not and cannot win a general election. Remain voters, now the majority, must find another home. Worse, he is threatening the cohesion of his party by opposing its majority view and the values that support it, just as Brexit is threatening the cohesion of the Conservative party.

All members of the Labour party must now examine their conscience: is this what they stand for and believe? The Corbyn deal, which can only be incrementally different from the May deal, will suffer from all the same deficiencies. We are to be associated with our continent as a satellite but not to share in its governance or play a part in shaping its destiny.

It betrays a 19th-century view of socialism. What industries are going to be built by direct government subventions? The world of the future is not state-supported steel and cement companies. Britain has the third largest AI industry and could become the global hub for blockchain – all done inside the EU. The task for 21st-century socialism is not to bankroll directly such vigorous businesses. It is to build the architecture to generate more of them, enfranchise workforces, protect the backs of ordinary men and women, put environmental sustainability at the heart of our economy and continually to upgrade the social contract. In this, the EU is our ally, not our foe.

The case must be put to the people again, framed by what we now know. It must be allied to a passionate case for reform. The desperate poverty and extraordinary inequalities that disfigure our country and that properly persuaded millions they could not vote for the status quo have to be addressed. Our economy has to be reshaped by an imaginative state; our society recast; our political institutions reformed.

On top, we need two reciprocal commitments from Europe. Freedom of movement is a core freedom, but host societies must have the capacity to regulate inflows of people, otherwise intolerable strains are created. The multiple derogations from freedom of movement used by other EU states must be codified into a new deal that permits Britain, and of course other members, sufficient control of our borders.

Second, the EU itself needs a democratic and accountability reboot. We are not recommitting to the same old EU – but one committed to change.

This case would best be made by Labour as the centre of a cross-party coalition: it has credibility as a fighter against poverty and abusive capitalism and an advocate for internationalism. But the case for tolerance and openness cannot be made from a tribal silo. I admire Tories such as Phillip Lee, Jo Johnson and Sam Gyimah who have resigned on this issue, and others such as Anna Soubry, Justine Greening, Sarah Wollaston, Ken Clarke and Dominic Grieve. I would be proud to stand and campaign alongside them – and also Nicola Sturgeon, Caroline Lucas and Vince Cable. Any differences are secondary to what unites us. What does our country stand for, what is its future and who are our allies? Not Putin, Xi and Trump.

Such a declaration will write me off with Corbyn, his gatekeepers Seumas Milne and Karie Murphy, and his cheerleader in the union movement, Len McCluskey. Anyone not 100% loyal to their world view and tribe within a tribe is beyond the pale. Even in normal times, it is a disabling way to think and act in a democracy. Today, it is dangerous. The Labour party has hit bottom – conniving in antisemitism and now in the rightwing coup that is Brexit. Its break-up is no longer inconceivable, nor is the emergence of a left-of-centre alternative. Britain deserves better than this.

• Will Hutton is an Observer columnist

For Our Future's Sake

Published  2 months ago

Young supporters will leave Labour in their millions if leadership backs Brexit

Labour’s young supporters would desert the party in droves, if they vote to back a compromise Brexit Deal. According to a YouGov poll of more than 5,000 people conducted last week, Labour’s support among 18 – 29 year olds is currently at 60 per cent. However, if Labour backed a form of Brexit, support for Jeremy Corbyn’s party amongst the young would be halved to just 33 per cent. They would be leapfrogged by the Liberal Democrats, who jump 29 points, from 10 per cent to 39 per cent.

Findings from the poll, commissioned by the People’s Vote campaign but conducted independently by YouGov, shows that among those who indicate a preference, 75 per cent of young voters – a core constituency for the Labour Party – back a People’s Vote. 79 per cent would vote to stay in the European Union in such a vote.

Young voters feel even more negatively about Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement than MPs – with them rejecting her deal by a margin of 3-to-1.

In a further blow for Jeremy Corbyn and Labour’s Brexit policy, just 17 per cent of young voters believe he would be able to deliver a better Brexit deal than what is on offer.

This polling was completed shortly before Jeremy Corbyn’s interview in the Guardian on 22nd December, in which he says that Labour would carry on with Brexit in the event of a snap General Election,

Responding, For our Future’s Sake co-founder and Labour Party member and activist, Richard Brooks says:

“Jeremy Corbyn is in danger of betraying and losing the support of millions of young people and students who very nearly propelled him to Downing Street last year, and who’s support he needs if he is to ever become Prime Minister.

Students and young people will not forget or forgive politicians who sell them down the river by backing a Brexit that limits our life opportunities and makes us poorer.”

Notes to editors

Polling information available at: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5v5qj2t7c8/PVResults_181214_Brexit_w.pdf

For more information, please contact Richard Brooks (FFS) on 07740858477 and richard.brooks@ffsakes.uk or Hugo Lucas (OFOC) on 07557 199901 and hugo@ofoc.co.uk —

the Guardian

Published  2 months ago

Opposition leader says he would go to Brussels to secure better deal if he was PM

HuffPost UK

Published  2 months ago

Research, commissioned by Hope Not Hate and Best For Britain, also showed 11% lead for Remain.

the Guardian

Published  2 months ago

With deadlock in Westminster over how to move forward with Brexit, what are the polls saying about people’s changing attitudes towards leaving the EU? The latest YouGov survey for the People’s Vote campaign contains three important messages.

1. Staying in the EU now holds a commanding lead over the government’s deal

Views of voters match those of MPs in rejecting Theresa May’s deal by almost two to one. And Conservative voters, like Conservative MPs, are divided, with half of them backing her deal and one in three opposed.

For most of this year, polls have shown remain ahead of leave, typically by four to six points. But in a referendum between staying in the EU and leaving on the terms that the government has negotiated, staying enjoys an 18-point lead: 59-41%.

Of the more than 17 million who voted leave in 2016, just 10 million people say they would vote for the government’s deal – 2 million would vote to stay, while 3 million are not sure or would not vote. In contrast, of the 16 million who voted remain in 2016, 13.5 million would still vote to stay in the EU. Only 1.4 million would vote for May’s deal, and 1 million are not sure or would not vote.

And pro-Europeans are significantly more enthusiastic than Brexiters. Counting only those who say they are certain to vote in a “no Brexit” v “May’s deal” referendum, staying in the EU currently leads by 63-37%. An 18-point lead among all voters therefore widens eight points, to 26%, among those certain to vote.

2. Millions of 2016’s leave voters have lost faith in Brexit’s ability to make life better

Few erstwhile leave voters now think Brexit will make life better. Three months ago, 43% of leave voters thought Brexit would make the economy stronger. Just 12% feared it would make the economy weaker. Today, only 24% of leave voters say “stronger”, while slightly more, 26%, say “weaker”. That’s a huge, 33-point drop for “stronger” in the net difference between the two views since the beginning of September. There have also been marked falls in leave voters’ optimism about people’s standard of living and the NHS. In all three cases, pro-Europeans’ views have changed little. They are just as pessimistic now as they were three months ago.

3. Labour could suffer badly if it ends up facilitating Brexit

Labour is seeking an early general election. YouGov asked people how they would vote if Labour, along with the Conservatives, supported going ahead with Brexit. Labour slumps to third place, with 22%, behind the Liberal Democrats, who would jump to 26%. Those who voted Labour last year and remain the year before say they are more likely to switch to the Liberal Democrats (49%) than stay with Labour (41%). The survey suggests no compensating boost among those who voted leave in the referendum. In fact, it would be the Conservatives who would benefit if both main parties backed Brexit. Their support among leave voters would rise from 62% to 69%. Labour support among leave voters would slip from 21% to 19%.

Moreover, most Labour leave voters who take sides back a people’s vote, by 56-44%. Again, the evidence suggests little downside to Labour backing a people’s vote. Indeed, among Labour supporters generally, such a vote is massively popular, with 77% in favour and just 23% against. A further challenge for Jeremy Corbyn is to persuade voters that he could get a better Brexit deal if he were prime minister. This claim is rejected by 68%-11% of voters generally, by 47%-30% of Labour voters, and – perhaps most ominously – by 52-23% of Labour leave voters.

A parallel question provides one fragment of relief for the prime minister, though a blow for the Brexit project generally. Just 18% of voters (and 20% of Conservatives) think a different leader could get a better Brexit deal – 60% of all voters (and 70% of Conservatives) disagree. All the signs are pointing to the public losing faith in Brexit fast. It’s clear we need a people’s vote.

• Peter Kellner is former president of YouGov. This article first appeared on infacts.org

HuffPost UK

Published  2 months ago

Labour has called the move "parliamentary tactics".

Evening Standard

Published  2 months ago

Voters back a second EU referendum in every area of the UK, new analysis of polling figures show.

The research, released 100 days before the scheduled date of Brexit, found that Britain would now vote to Remain by a margin of 56 per cent to 44 per cent.

The 12-point lead for Remain is higher than seen in any mainstream conventional poll since the 2016 EU referendum, which was won by Leave by 52 per cent to 48 per cent.

Analysis suggested that voters in the constituencies of Prime Minister Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson would all prefer to stay in the EU.

Best for Britain's research is based on modelling by data consultancy Focaldata using a method called Multilevel Regression and Post-stratification (MRP) on raw data from polling of more than 8,000 people between October 24 and November 6.

According to the campaign group, the analysis found majority support for what they term a People's Vote among supporters of every major party, residents of every region of the country and both men and women.

Respondents were asked whether they "support the British public having the final say on the Brexit deal".

The reported results omit those who said "don't know" or refused to answer, so that totals add up to 100 per cent.

Support for giving the public the final say was higher among women (69 per cent) than men (63 per cent) and stronger among younger voters (75 per cent for those aged 18-44) than older (69 per cent for 45-54 year-olds, 61 per cent for 55-64 year-olds and 51 per cent for those aged 65 and older).

In Mr Johnson's Uxbridge constituency, the analysis found 67 per cent backing a public vote, against 33 per cent opposing it. In Mrs May's Maidenhead seat the split was 63 per cent to 37 per cent in favour and in Mr Corbyn's Islington North 78 per cent to 22 per cent.

Some 77 per cent of Labour supporters said they wanted the public to be given the final say, against 52 per cent of Conservatives.

And support for a public vote was highest in London (72 per cent) and Scotland (71 per cent), followed by the North East, North West and Wales (67 per cent), Yorkshire and the Humber (66 per cent), and the South East and West Midlands (64 per cent), and lowest in the East Midlands, East of England and South West (63 per cent).

The research found a majority in favour of Remain in every age group except the over-64s, who backed Leave by 56 per cent to 44 per cent.

Younger voters were the biggest Remain backers, with 64 per cent of 18-24 year-olds, 66 per cent of the 25-34 group and 62 per cent of the 35-44s. Some 57 per cent of 45-54 year-olds and 52 per cent of 55-64 year-olds said they would vote Remain in a re-run poll.

Support for Remain was highest in Scotland (70 per cent) and London (68 per cent), followed by the North West and Wales (56 per cent), the South East (54 per cent), South West (53 per cent) and the North-East and Yorkshire and Humber (52 per cent).

The East Midlands backed Leave by 51 per cent to 49 per cent, while the East of England and West Midlands said they would vote for EU withdrawal by less than half a percentage point over 50 per cent of those expressing a preference.

Eloise Todd, chief executive of Best for Britain said: "This shows that with 100 days to go till Brexit a record amount of the public do not want to leave.

"This should be a wake-up call for politicians. With Westminster deadlocked, I believe we must throw it back to the people and give them the final say on Brexit."

- Best for Britain's figures are based on modelling by Focaldata on raw data from a Populus poll of 8,154 people taken between October 24 and November 6.

Reporting by PA.

BBC News

Published  2 months ago

With 101 days to Brexit, ministers meet to discuss preparations for the UK leaving without a deal.

dailyrecord

Published  2 months ago

An MP has taken aim at Foreign Office minister Alan Duncan over the Institute of Statecraft and demanded a probe into a Scottish-based black ops Twitter attack on Labour.

the Guardian

Published  2 months ago

Theresa May’s statement aims to stifle growing demands for second referendum

The Independent

Published  2 months ago

Theresa May bungled a meeting with EU leaders on Thursday night in a disastrous turn of events that resulted in them scrapping written commitments to help her pass her Brexit deal through parliament.  The prime minister shredded goodwill at a question and answer session with her 27 counterparts, who had arrived in Brussels promising to help her but were amazed when she turned up without any developed requests or ideas.

LabourList | Labour's biggest independent grassroots e-network

Published  2 months ago

Below is the full text of the composite motion on Brexit passed by Labour conference 2018. The key pledge is that Labour vows to “support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote” should it not be able to secure a general election.

Conference welcomes Jeremy Corbyn’s determined efforts to hold the Tories to account for their disastrous negotiations. Conference accepts that the public voted to leave the EU, but when people voted to ‘take back control’ they were not voting for fewer rights, economic chaos or to risk jobs. Conference notes the warning made by Jaguar Land Rover on 11.9.18, that without the right deal in place, tens of thousands of jobs there would be put at risk.

Conference notes that workers in industries across the economy in ports, food, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, energy, chemicals, in our public services and beyond are worried about the impact of a hard Brexit on livelihoods and communities.

Conference believes we need a relationship with the EU that guarantees full participation in the Single Market. The Brexit deal being pursued by Theresa May is a threat to jobs, freedom of movement, peace in Northern Ireland and the NHS. Tory Brexit means a future of dodgy trade deals and American-style deregulation, undermining our rights, freedoms and prosperity. This binds the hands of future Labour governments, making it much harder for us to deliver on our promises. Conference notes Labour has set six robust tests for the final Brexit deal. Conference believes Labour MPs must vote against any Tory deal failing to meet these tests in full.

Conference also believes a no-deal Brexit should be rejected as a viable option and calls upon Labour MPs to vigorously oppose any attempt by this Government to deliver a no-deal outcome. Conference notes that when trade unions have a mandate to negotiate a deal for their members, the final deal is accepted or rejected by the membership. Conference does not believe that such important negotiations should be left to government ministers who are more concerned with self-preservation and ideology than household bills and wages.

Stagnant wages, crumbling services and the housing crisis are being exacerbated by the government and employers making the rich richer at working people’s expense, and not immigration. Conference declares solidarity and common cause with all progressive and socialist forces confronting the rising tide of neo-fascism, xenophobia, nationalism and right wing populism in Europe.

Conference resolves to reaffirm the Labour Party’s commitment to the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 including no hard border in Ireland.

Conference believes that there is no satisfactory technological solution that is compliant with the Good Friday Agreement and resolves to oppose any Brexit deal that would see the restoration of a border on the island of Ireland in any form for goods, services or people.

Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.

If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.

This should be the first step in a Europe-wide struggle for levelling-up of living standards, rights and services and democratisation of European institutions Labour will form a radical government; taxing the rich to fund better public services, expanding common ownership, abolishing anti-union laws and engaging in massive public investment.

Value our free and unique service?

LabourList has more readers than ever before - but we need your support. Our dedicated coverage of Labour's policies and personalities, internal debates, selections and elections relies on donations from our readers.

If you can support LabourList’s unique and free service then please click here.

BBC News

Published  2 months ago

UK Prime Minister Theresa May will face a vote of no confidence in her leadership later on Wednesday

BBC News

Published  2 months ago

Theresa May will speak to Angela Merkel, Mark Rutte and Donald Tusk after delaying UK vote on the deal.

The Independent

Published  2 months ago

A Labour government would work to build a “socialist Europe” both inside and outside the EU institutions, Jeremy Corbyn has said. Speaking at a meeting of left-of-centre parties in Lisbon on Friday, the Labour leader promised to emulate the success of Portugal’s left-wing government, which has reversed austerity policies and seen positive economic results.

dailyrecord

Published  2 months ago

Explosive leaked documents passed to the Sunday Mail reveal the organisation’s Integrity Initiative is funded with £2million of Foreign Office cash and run by military intelligence specialists.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

Democrat New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez praised fellow Democrat, Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, on Tuesday for claiming Republicans’ support for Israel is bought by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

“Unlike this President, Rep. [Omar] demonstrated a capacity to acknowledge pain & apologize, use the opportunity to learn [about] history of antisemitism [sic],+grow from it while clarifying her stance,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. “I’m also inspired by Jewish leadership who brought her in, not push her out, to heal.”

Unlike this President, Rep. @IlhanMN demonstrated a capacity to acknowledge pain & apologize, use the opportunity to learn abt history of antisemitism,+grow from it while clarifying her stance.

I’m also inspired by Jewish leadership who brought her in, not push her out, to heal. https://t.co/ONRegDJK2S

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 12, 2019

Omar is facing massive backlash after she quote-tweeted a link to an article by Haaretz where House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy threatened punishment against Omar and Democratic Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib, America’s first two Muslim congresswomen; both Omar and Tlaib have been embroiled in allegations of anti-Semitism.

Omar first commented on the tweet, saying “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” and after she was pressed to clarify who she was referring to, she tweeted “AIPAC!” (RELATED: Ted Cruz Praises Nancy Pelosi For Condemning Omar’s Anti-Semitism)

The comments received swift condemnation from members of congress on both sides of the aisle, including from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership.

“Lots of people here proclaiming to be ‘woke’ trying to police communities on what they are/aren’t allowed to be upset by,” Ocasio-Cortez continued. “I’m proud [Omar] raised the issue of lobbyist [money] in politics & equally proud of her sensitivity to communities. Both are possible.”

While Omar has been in office less than two months, she’s been surrounded by a number of controversies involving anti-Semitism. The freshman congresswoman defended anti-Israeli statements, such as ones invoking Allah to expose Israel’s “evil doings,” and she has come out in favor of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to punish the nation-state of Israel by economically depriving the country for its alleged mistreatment of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

Omar was also on the record implying that Israel is not a democracy and gave an interview to a host that called Israel “Jewish ISIS.”

While Ocasio-Cortez claimed to have Sephardic Jewish ancestry, she has also made some eyebrow raising statements about Jews. The self-proclaimed radical compared a migrant caravan trying to enter the United States illegally to Jews fleeing the Holocaust.

She later compared the effects of Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal to the Holocaust, urging the United States to follow Germany’s example by paying reparations and acknowledge the suffering that occurred during Nazi occupation.

The New York congresswoman also received backlash after she expressed gratitude for her correspondence with Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of U.K.’s Labour Party. Corbyn has been plagued with accusations of anti-Semitism and has a long history of condemning Israel while applauding anti-Jewish terrorist organizations.

Ocasio-Cortez is part of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) that supports BDS. The Daily Wire uncovered a 2017 video of DSA voting in favor of BDS while chanting “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” a famous Hamas rallying cry.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

timesofisrael

Published  2 months ago

'It's time to wander again,' Mark Lewis tells fellow Jews facing rising anti-Semitism in Britain and across Europe

the Guardian

Published  2 months ago

Len McCluskey tells MPs he fears a ‘people’s vote’ could be seen as a betrayal, sources say

BBC News

Published  2 months ago

Tuesday's vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal will be delayed, two cabinet sources tell the BBC.

The Independent

Published  2 months ago

Prominent Labour MP and Brexiteer Kate Hoey has suffered a vote of no confidence from her local constituency members for “reneging” on general election commitments to oppose a hard Brexit. Party activists in her south London seat of Vauxhall, which voted overwhelmingly to Remain at the European Union referendum, passed the motion on Thursday evening for the party to remove the whip from Ms Hoey.

the Guardian

Published  2 months ago

The long read: The credibility of establishment figures has been demolished by technological change and political upheavals. But it’s too late to turn back the clock

mirror

Published  2 months ago

The veteran activist for the NHS and refugees told doctors in his final hours: "I am not ready to die because I have too much work to do"

Westmonster

Published  2 months ago

The British public are in favour of a televised Brexit debate that is being touted – but they firmly want someone on that debate who is representing the pro-No Deal stance many Brexiteers now take.

Sky News found that 66% of the public are in favour of such a debate, set to feature Theresa May vs. Jeremy Corbyn.

But interestingly nearly the same number, 63%, said that they wanted that debate to include a representative willing to put the case for a World Trade, No Deal Brexit as well.

By comparison there is far less support for someone in the debate putting the case for a second referendum, with 51% favouring that.

Jeremy Corbyn has said No Deal isn’t an option and Theresa May no longer talks about ‘No Deal is better than a bad deal’ meaning a head-to-head leaves a huge swathe of the electorate unrepresented in such a Brexit debate.

It should include a third panellist who rejects May and Corbyn’s bad deals, and wants the UK to go fully independent without being sucked into the EU’s orbit.

Sky News

Published  2 months ago

Follow live updates as Theresa May prepares to tell MPs "with absolute certainty" that "there is not a better deal available".

BBC News

Published  2 months ago

UK’s withdrawal agreement from European Union approved by EU leaders, chief Donald Tusk says.

The Independent

Published  2 months ago

Theresa May has been forced to make an 11th-hour deal over Gibraltar to head off a diplomatic row, clearing the way for a key summit to approve her Brexit blueprint. The prime minister was accused of caving in to Spain’s demands over the future of the British overseas territory, after Madrid threatened to veto the progress of the Brexit deal due to be agreed by the EU on Sunday.

BBC News

Published  3 months ago

Political declaration on relationship between UK and EU after Brexit "agreed in principle", European Council says

BBC News

Published  3 months ago

The former PM tells the BBC "moderates" may have lost the party to Jeremy Corbyn and the left.

Westmonster

Published  3 months ago

Jeremy Corbyn’s would-be Chancellor John McDonnell last night branded Sir Winston Churchill a “villain” when asked if the was a hero or not.

At a Politico event, the socialist made the outrageous claim, referencing Churchill’s approach to dealing with miners on strike.

His disrespect of Britain’s war time Leader sparked a furious backlash, with Piers Morgan tweeting: “Unbelievable. Labour hierarchy now denouncing the man who saved Britain from the Nazis as a ‘villain’. What an absolute disgrace.”

Boris Johnson, who has written a book on Churchill, pointed out that he had “saved this country and the whole of Europe from a barbaric fascist and racist tyranny and our debt to him is incalculable.

“If John McDonnell had the slightest knowledge of history he would be aware that Churchill also had an extraordinary record as a social reformer who cared deeply for working people and their lives.”

Whilst Sir Nicholas Soames, the grandson of Churchill and Conservative MP, told The Telegraph that: “Frankly it’s a very foolish and stupid thing to say, surely said to gain publicity.

“I think my grandfather’s reputation can withstand a publicity-seeking assault from a third-rate, Poundland Lenin. I don’t think it will shake the world.”

It is yet another reminder of the far-left views held by Corbyn’s leadership team who want to run this country. Appalling disrespect.

Westmonster

Published  3 months ago

The verdict is in on Jeremy Corbyn’s Brexit game-playing: his favourability rating has fallen to an all-time low, according to YouGov.

A ‘peak Corbyn’ level of approval after the 2017 General Election has now declined to a -45 net rating, his worst ever.

Among those who voted Labour at the last election, only 47% now have a favourable opinion of the socialist MP, with 44% having an unfavourable view. That’s pretty dire.

Having refused to take a firm position on Brexit and instead disgracefully sought to opportunistically chop and change on everything from a Customs Union to a second referendum, YouGov highlight how badly this lack of decisiveness has gone down.

When it comes to why he has lost popularity, they explain that: “In most cases it wasn’t due to his position being too far towards Remain (just 3% thought this) or too far towards Leave (just 6% said this), but rather the fact that he doesn’t seem to have any position at all.”

Brexit indecisiveness is seriously damaging Jeremy Corbyn. Our new favourability survey finds the Labour leader on an all-time low of -45 – lower even than it was prior to the 2017 general election campaign https://t.co/qWKgFo1vTr pic.twitter.com/I6OVtCyocn

— YouGov (@YouGov) January 31, 2019

YouGov’s Chris Curtis has also said: “We have seen two dramatic shifts in Jeremy Corbyn’s popularity – a huge rise around the 2017 election, followed by a steady fall ever since.

“When we asked people who had turned against him, Brexit was mentioned overwhelmingly as a reason. It was about his indecisiveness, playing politics with Brexit and refusing to meet Theresa May.

“Labour has had a policy of constructive ambiguity about Brexit because they did not want to alienate their voters on either side of the debate, but that has proved to be a fairly destructive policy.”

The pathetic lack of leadership and refusal to stand up for a proper Brexit has shown Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership to be pretty feeble indeed. They can’t be allowed anywhere near Downing Street.

Will you help Westmonster fight for Brexit?

BBC News

Published  3 months ago

Theresa May is to use a speech to business leaders to say it will deliver a fair immigration system.

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

Theresa May will seek to regain the initiative in the row over her Brexit plans by declaring that they stop EU citizens being able to “jump the queue” into Britain.

The prime minister will say that under the new system, people will be given the right to live in the UK based on skills instead of where they come from.

Ms May’s attempt to shift the debate onto immigration and away from technical issues around the Irish border marks an effort to fight back against Eurosceptic Tories trying to depose her.

Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn will also give a speech on Monday attacking the PM’s approach as “a botched, worst-of-all-worlds deal”.

On Sunday the prime minister sought to underline how it is future relations with the EU, and not the “withdrawal agreement” including the controversial Irish “backstop”, that will deliver the Brexit people voted for in 2016.

Building on that theme, she will say in a speech on Monday: “In the future, outside the EU, immigration will continue to make a positive contribution to our national life, but the difference will be this – once we have left the EU, we will be fully in control of who comes here.

“It will no longer be the case that EU nationals, regardless of the skills or experience they have to offer, can jump the queue ahead of engineers from Sydney or software developers from Delhi.

“Instead of a system based on where a person is from, we will have one that is built around the talents and skills a person has to offer.”

Downing Street believes immigration will be central in the fight to win support for the prime minister’s Brexit deal, ahead of a critical vote in parliament due in December.

It is widely accepted that the issue was at the very heart of many people’s reasons for backing the Leave campaign, but it has not yet featured in the debate about the merits of the actual Brexit deal struck by Ms May.

She will add during her speech at the CBI in London: “Not only will this deliver on the verdict of the referendum.

“It should lead to greater opportunity for young people in this country to access training and skilled employment.”

The prime minister will travel to Brussels this week to see European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, ahead of a summit to sign off both the withdrawal agreement and outline future framework on 27 November.

But Eurosceptics are continuing their push to oppose her plans, to rally support against them in the commons and to raise enough letters calling for her resignation to force a vote of no confidence in her.

It currently looks doubtful that Ms May’s plans have enough support from Conservative benches to be passed by the commons, but No 10 are now beginning a drive to turn Tory MPs who are as of yet unsure how they will vote.

In his speech to the CBI, Mr Corbyn will criticise the government for spending two years negotiating a deal that he argues will “leave the country in an indefinite halfway house without a real say over our future”.

He will say: “If the prime minister is unable to negotiate an agreement that can win a majority in parliament and work for the whole country, Labour’s alternative plan can and must take its place.”

The opposition leader said that his plan would prioritise a “new comprehensive and permanent customs union”, a guarantee for workers’ rights and protections for consumers and the environment, and a strong relationship with the single market.

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

Middle East Eye

Published  3 months ago

The UK government is ignoring a UN ruling that determined the Wikileaks founder was being held in ‘arbitrary detention’ at the Ecuadorian embassy

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

The party's Brexit secretary described the agreement approved by the cabinet last night as "a miserable failure of negotiation".

Ms May revealed that her cabinet had reached a collective decision to the draft Brexit deal that had been struck by negotiators this week.

Following the announcement Ms May held a lengthy meeting with DUP leader Arlene Foster, followed by a 20-minute meeting with Jeremy Corbyn.

"We said we would judge the deal once we had seen it. We have now read and analysed the 500 or so pages. It is a miserable failure of negotiation,” Mr Starmer said on Sky News.

“There is huge detail on issues like the backstop that the government says it does not intend to use and on the question on what you intend to use there is seven pages.

“… We will vote against this deal because it does not meet our tests. I don’t think anybody would sign up to a document without knowing where it was heading.”

More follows…

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

BBC News

Published  3 months ago

Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab has resigned saying he "cannot in good conscience support" draft Brexit agreement

the Guardian

Published  3 months ago

A company boss who has given nearly £1m to the Conservative party and long-serving MPs from across the Commons head the list of political figures who receive a knighthood in this year’s New Year honours list.

David Ord, who becomes a knight in the new year, is a co-owner of Bristol ports and a member of the Conservative party’s Leaders’ Group, who were granted exclusive access to cabinet ministers under David Cameron and George Osborne. He has given more than £930,000 to the party since 2013.

Ord, a major opponent of the Severn Barrage, was once embroiled in a donations row after it emerged in 2014 that Bristol North West MP Charlotte Leslie had failed to declare the port owner’s donations to her local party on time, despite making numerous parliamentary interventions about the project. She apologised and was cleared of wrongdoing by the parliamentary watchdog.

Jeremy Corbyn said the honours for Tory donors were an insult to those who had been rewarded for charitable work or achievements. “The Conservatives are making a mockery of our honours system,” the Labour leader’s spokesperson said. “Every crony appointment is an insult to the incredible people from right across Britain who are rewarded for the great contributions they make to our national life.”

Hillsborough campaigner Prof Phil Scraton turns down OBE

Read more

A Downing Street source defended the honours for Conservative donors, saying: “Being involved in political parties is generally considered to be an important part of civic society, and the alternative is having state funding for political parties, which is not where the consensus lies. When people dedicate their time and service to civil society it’s appropriate they can be honoured.”

Two veteran sitting MPs were knighted. Conservative MP Julian Brazier and Labour’s David Crausby, a former member the HS2 select committee, which sat for almost 100 days over eight months taking evidence from up to 40 petitioners a day.

Former Lib Dem minister Steve Webb, one of the architects of the coalition’s “triple-lock” pension guarantee and auto-enrolment in workplace pensions, has also been knighted.

Vera Baird, the former Labour MP who is now Northumbria police and crime commissioner, has been made a dame for services to women and equality. The former QC, who was solicitor general under Gordon Brown, was honoured for her role in the Equality Act 2010. Baird said she saw the honour as “giving the cause of equality a boost”.

Politicians receiving the highest honours included Liberal Democrat peer Shirley Williams, who has been made a companion of honour to mark more than 50 years in political life. Lady Williams, a former Labour education secretary under James Callaghan, was one of the so-called gang of four of influential Labour politicians who split to form the Social Democrat party, which later merged with the Liberal party to form the Lib Dems.

Other Tory donors receiving honours this year include associate party treasurer Dominic Johnson, who lent the Cameron family his west London townhouse rent-free when the former prime minister resigned and left No 10.

The register of MPs’ interests shows that the family stayed in the Chelsea property until the end of October before they moved back into their Notting Hill home, which had been rented out.

M&C Saatchi founding director Jeremy Sinclair, credited as the brains behind the famous Conservative campaign poster showing Tony Blair with “demon eyes”, also receives a CBE.

Key members of Conservative party headquarters have also been honoured, including director of campaigning Darren Mott, who received an OBE, with Alexandra Broadrick, chief of staff to the party chairman, and Louise Goodall, the deputy head of fundraising, receiving MBEs.

Whitehall staff also received dozens of awards, including 14 for Home Office officials who served under Theresa May when she led the department. However, some critics questioned the number of awards handed out to staff from HMRC, given the recent poor performance of the department.

Staff received the honours for their work on tackling tax non-compliance and tax avoidance, as well as for customer service. The department was recently criticised by the National Audit Office for pursuing only one successful criminal prosecution despite a new specialist unit identifying almost £2bn in tax evasion and avoidance by the super-rich.

The Lib Dem leader, Tim Farron, said the honours for HMRC investigators “dishonour the honours system” given the department’s poor performance on tax evasion and delays on consumer hotlines.

“HMRC have had the worst year; not only billions of pounds not collected from the biggest tax dodgers, but the average punter has been made to wait for hours on the phone on hold,” he said. “It’s a farce. I thought this was a joke, but it’s not.”

A government source said it had a “proud record of tackling tax evasion, one of the toughest in the developed world, and not only are these civil servants being rewarded for their work, the service itself is doing good work.”

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

The EU is prepared for Britain to cancel Brexit, the president of the European Council has said. Speaking in Brussels after a day of turmoil in Westminster, Donald Tusk said a “no-Brexit scenario” was still on the cards and that the EU would be ready for it.

Truthdig: Expert Reporting, Current News, Provocative Columnists

Published  3 months ago

Julian Assange’s sanctuary in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London has been transformed into a little shop of horrors. He has been largely cut off from communicating with the outside world for the last seven months. His Ecuadorian citizenship, granted to him as an asylum seeker, is in the process of being revoked. His health is failing. He is being denied medical care. His efforts for legal redress have been crippled by the gag rules, including Ecuadorian orders that he cannot make public his conditions inside the embassy in fighting revocation of his Ecuadorian citizenship.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has refused to intercede on behalf of Assange, an Australian citizen, even though the new government in Ecuador, led by Lenín Moreno—who calls Assange an “inherited problem” and an impediment to better relations with Washington—is making the WikiLeaks founder’s life in the embassy unbearable. Almost daily, the embassy is imposing harsher conditions for Assange, including making him pay his medical bills, imposing arcane rules about how he must care for his cat and demanding that he perform a variety of demeaning housekeeping chores.

The Ecuadorians, reluctant to expel Assange after granting him political asylum and granting him citizenship, intend to make his existence so unpleasant he will agree to leave the embassy to be arrested by the British and extradited to the United States. The former president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, whose government granted the publisher political asylum, describes Assange’s current living conditions as “torture.”

His mother, Christine Assange, said in a recent video appeal, “Despite Julian being a multi-award-winning journalist, much loved and respected for courageously exposing serious, high-level crimes and corruption in the public interest, he is right now alone, sick, in pain—silenced in solitary confinement, cut off from all contact and being tortured in the heart of London. The modern-day cage of political prisoners is no longer the Tower of London. It’s the Ecuadorian Embassy.”

“Here are the facts,” she went on. “Julian has been detained nearly eight years without charge. That’s right. Without charge. For the past six years, the U.K. government has refused his request for access to basic health needs, fresh air, exercise, sunshine for vitamin D and access to proper dental and medical care. As a result, his health has seriously deteriorated. His examining doctors warned his detention conditions are life-threatening. A slow and cruel assassination is taking place before our very eyes in the embassy in London.”

“In 2016, after an in-depth investigation, the United Nations ruled that Julian’s legal and human rights have been violated on multiple occasions,” she said. “He’d been illegally detained since 2010. And they ordered his immediate release, safe passage and compensation. The U.K. government refused to abide by the U.N.’s decision. The U.S. government has made Julian’s arrest a priority. They want to get around a U.S. journalist’s protection under the First Amendment by charging him with espionage. They will stop at nothing to do it.”

“As a result of the U.S. bearing down on Ecuador, his asylum is now under immediate threat,” she said. “The U.S. pressure on Ecuador’s new president resulted in Julian being placed in a strict and severe solitary confinement for the last seven months, deprived of any contact with his family and friends. Only his lawyers could see him. Two weeks ago, things became substantially worse. The former president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, who rightfully gave Julian political asylum from U.S. threats against his life and liberty, publicly warned when U.S. Vice President Mike Pence recently visited Ecuador a deal was done to hand Julian over to the U.S. He stated that because of the political costs of expelling Julian from their embassy was too high, the plan was to break him down mentally. A new, impossible, inhumane protocol was implemented at the embassy to torture him to such a point that he would break and be forced to leave.”

Assange was once feted and courted by some of the largest media organizations in the world, including The New York Times and The Guardian, for the information he possessed. But once his trove of material documenting U.S. war crimes, much of it provided by Chelsea Manning, was published by these media outlets he was pushed aside and demonized. A leaked Pentagon document prepared by the Cyber Counterintelligence Assessments Branch dated March 8, 2008, exposed a black propaganda campaign to discredit WikiLeaks and Assange. The document said the smear campaign should seek to destroy the “feeling of trust” that is WikiLeaks’ “center of gravity” and blacken Assange’s reputation. It largely has worked. Assange is especially vilified for publishing 70,000 hacked emails belonging to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and senior Democratic officials. The Democrats and former FBI Director James Comey say the emails were copied from the accounts of John Podesta, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, by Russian government hackers. Comey has said the messages were probably delivered to WikiLeaks by an intermediary. Assange has said the emails were not provided by “state actors.”

The Democratic Party—seeking to blame its election defeat on Russian “interference” rather than the grotesque income inequality, the betrayal of the working class, the loss of civil liberties, the deindustrialization and the corporate coup d’état that the party helped orchestrate—attacks Assange as a traitor, although he is not a U.S. citizen. Nor is he a spy. He is not bound by any law I am aware of to keep U.S. government secrets. He has not committed a crime. Now, stories in newspapers that once published material from WikiLeaks focus on his allegedly slovenly behavior—not evident during my visits with him—and how he is, in the words of The Guardian, “an unwelcome guest” in the embassy. The vital issue of the rights of a publisher and a free press is ignored in favor of snarky character assassination.

Assange was granted asylum in the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to answer questions about sexual offense allegations that were eventually dropped. Assange feared that once he was in Swedish custody he would be extradited to the United States. The British government has said that, although he is no longer wanted for questioning in Sweden, Assange will be arrested and jailed for breaching his bail conditions if he leaves the embassy.

WikiLeaks and Assange have done more to expose the dark machinations and crimes of the American Empire than any other news organization. Assange, in addition to exposing atrocities and crimes committed by the United States military in our endless wars and revealing the inner workings of the Clinton campaign, made public the hacking tools used by the CIA and the National Security Agency, their surveillance programs and their interference in foreign elections, including in the French elections. He disclosed the conspiracy against British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn by Labour members of Parliament. And WikiLeaks worked swiftly to save Edward Snowden, who exposed the wholesale surveillance of the American public by the government, from extradition to the United States by helping him flee from Hong Kong to Moscow. The Snowden leaks also revealed, ominously, that Assange was on a U.S. “manhunt target list.”

What is happening to Assange should terrify the press. And yet his plight is met with indifference and sneering contempt. Once he is pushed out of the embassy, he will be put on trial in the United States for what he published. This will set a new and dangerous legal precedent that the Trump administration and future administrations will employ against other publishers, including those who are part of the mob trying to lynch Assange. The silence about the treatment of Assange is not only a betrayal of him but a betrayal of the freedom of the press itself. We will pay dearly for this complicity.

Even if the Russians provided the Podesta emails to Assange, he should have published them. I would have. They exposed practices of the Clinton political machine that she and the Democratic leadership sought to hide. In the two decades I worked overseas as a foreign correspondent I was routinely leaked stolen documents by organizations and governments. My only concern was whether the documents were forged or genuine. If they were genuine, I published them. Those who leaked material to me included the rebels of the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN); the Salvadoran army, which once gave me blood-smeared FMLN documents found after an ambush; the Sandinista government of Nicaragua; the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad; the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Central Intelligence Agency; the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) rebel group; the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO); the French intelligence service, Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure, or DGSE; and the Serbian government of Slobodan Milosovic, who was later tried as a war criminal.

We learned from the emails published by WikiLeaks that the Clinton Foundation received millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two of the major funders of Islamic State. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton paid her donors back by approving $80 billion in weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, enabling the kingdom to carry out a devastating war in Yemen that has triggered a humanitarian crisis, including widespread food shortages and a cholera epidemic, and left close to 60,000 dead. We learned Clinton was paid $675,000 for speaking at Goldman Sachs, a sum so massive it can only be described as a bribe. We learned Clinton told the financial elites in her lucrative talks that she wanted “open trade and open borders” and believed Wall Street executives were best-positioned to manage the economy, a statement that directly contradicted her campaign promises. We learned the Clinton campaign worked to influence the Republican primaries to ensure that Donald Trump was the Republican nominee. We learned Clinton obtained advance information on primary-debate questions. We learned, because 1,700 of the 33,000 emails came from Hillary Clinton, she was the primary architect of the war in Libya. We learned she believed that the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi would burnish her credentials as a presidential candidate. The war she sought has left Libya in chaos, seen the rise to power of radical jihadists in what is now a failed state, triggered a massive exodus of migrants to Europe, seen Libyan weapon stockpiles seized by rogue militias and Islamic radicals throughout the region, and resulted in 40,000 dead. Should this information have remained hidden from the American public? You can argue yes, but you can’t then call yourself a journalist.

“They are setting my son up to give them an excuse to hand him over to the U.S., where he would face a show trial,” Christine Assange warned. “Over the past eight years, he has had no proper legal process. It has been unfair at every single turn with much perversion of justice. There is no reason to consider that this would change in the future. The U.S. WikiLeaks grand jury, producing the extradition warrant, was held in secret by four prosecutors but no defense and no judge. The U.K.-U.S. extradition treaty allows for the U.K. to extradite Julian to the U.S. without a proper basic case. Once in the U.S., the National Defense Authorization Act allows for indefinite detention without trial. Julian could very well be held in Guantanamo Bay and tortured, sentenced to 45 years in a maximum-security prison, or face the death penalty. My son is in critical danger because of a brutal, political persecution by the bullies in power whose crimes and corruption he had courageously exposed when he was editor in chief of WikiLeaks.”

Assange is on his own. Each day is more difficult for him. This is by design. It is up to us to protest. We are his last hope, and the last hope, I fear, for a free press.

“We need to make our protest against this brutality deafening,” his mother said. “I call on all you journalists to stand up now because he’s your colleague and you are next. I call on all you politicians who say you entered politics to serve the people to stand up now. I call on all you activists who support human rights, refugees, the environment, and are against war, to stand up now because WikiLeaks has served the causes that you spoke for and Julian is now suffering for it alongside of you. I call on all citizens who value freedom, democracy and a fair legal process to put aside your political differences and unite, stand up now. Most of us don’t have the courage of our whistleblowers or journalists like Julian Assange who publish them, so that we may be informed and warned about the abuses of power.”

Chris Hedges is a Truthdig columnist, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, a New York Times best-selling author, a professor in the college degree program offered to New Jersey state prisoners by Rutgers…

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

People ask: what next on Brexit? What is actually going to happen? What is the process by which things will come to a head in the House of Commons? 

BBC News

Published  3 months ago

The PM says efforts are going on "through the night", but the negotiations are "immensely difficult".

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

Jeremy Corbyn has pledged to end the “scourge” of rough sleeping among armed forces veterans as he calls on Theresa May to officially register the number of homeless ex-servicemen and women.

It comes as Mr Corbyn – alongside past and present leaders of other major political parties – prepares to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the end of the First World War at the Cenotaph in central London on Remembrance Sunday.

The Labour leader will mark the historic occasion by outlining his party’s “social contract” for veterans, including provisions for free education and treating mental health issues as “seriously as physical health issues”.

He will also call on ministers to use the government’s “long overdue” Veterans Strategy – due to be published later this month – to officially record the number of homeless veterans in the UK, including statistics on those who take their own lives.

While there are no official figures available, various charities offer vastly different estimates and many concentrate on London, which Labour says highlights the need for official measures.

The Royal British Legion charity suggests the proportion of homeless veterans among London’s homeless population is believed to be around six per cent – around 1,100.

Mr Corbyn said: “On Remembrance Sunday, we commemorate all those killed in war as we strive for a world of peace. We must also think of our veterans and the shocking lack of support far too many receive.

“Let today spur us into action, to give our veterans the security and support they deserve with a new social contract for veterans.

"The next Labour government will guarantee armed forces personnel the opportunity to have a home, to heal and to retrain when they complete their time in service.

“We will do the right thing by ending the scourge of rough sleeping and helping veterans embark on new careers.”

He added that the psychological effects of war “can be devastating” and that while many organisations offered support, “charity alone is not enough”.

Labour’s shadow defence secretary, Nia Griffith, added: “In spite of the best efforts of many of those working in the sector, too many veterans are still not getting the support they need.

“The government’s long overdue Veterans Strategy needs to be far-reaching and properly funded. It must strengthen the transition phases and implement proper joined-up thinking to ensure that no veteran who needs support falls through the net.”

The Independent has launched its #FinalSay campaign to demand that voters are given a voice on the final Brexit deal.

Sign our petition here

The Independent

Published  3 months ago

Jeremy Corbyn has rejected growing calls for a Final Say referendum, despite a backlash from his own MPs for saying Brexit cannot be stopped. The Labour leader faced strong criticism – including from a shadow minister – after an interview in which he insisted the process of EU withdrawal could not be halted.

The Sun

Published  3 months ago

A CONTROVERSIAL Labour MP and her convicted drug dealer son are living in social housing - despite the pair earning up to £130,000 a year.

Shadow development secretary Kate Osamor has faced intense criticism after it emerged that she promoted her son in his House of Commons job, regardless of his conviction for having £2,500 of Class A drugs with intent to supply at Bestival in Dorset last year.

Rex Features

Now the Sun on Sunday can reveal that Ms Osamor and her son Ishmael, 29, are living in social housing in Tottenham, north London - despite their earnings classing them ineligible by council guidelines.

Haringey Council documents from 2017 state that households earning in excess of £64,200 are not eligible to apply for a social housing property.

And it has been reported that 9,000 people are waiting for social housing in the borough - one of the poorest in Britain - and a further 3,000 are living in temporary accommodation due to the limited supply of properties.

Ms Osamor, a close ally of Jeremy Corbyn, is paid a salary of £77,379 plus expenses. Since being elected an MP in 2015 she has also benefitted from £13,000 of travel and accommodation on visits to countries including India and Nigeria.

PA:Press Association

Her son Ishmael is working for her as her chief of staff and is paid up to £43,835. And before he resigned from Haringey council last month he was entitled to claim at least £10,000 a year in allowances from the council.

Ishmael was previously a durector of two clothing companies and a second hand car sales business which was dissolved in September this year. He pleaded guilty to the drug charges on October 26, having brought ecstasy, cocaine, ketamine and cannabis to the music festival.

Ishmael was spared prison after his barrister persuaded prosecutors he was not planning to make a profit from his £2,500 haul of drugs.

Judge Stephen Climie said the 29-year-old was lucky to avoid a four-year prison term and sentenced him to 200 hours of unpaid work instead and to pay £400 prosecution costs.

Osamor pleaded guilty to four drugs charges after his barrister Mohsin Zaidi struck a deal with the Crown Prosecution Service at Bournemouth Crown Court.

The former Labour councillor was caught with 30g of ecstasy – a class A drug blamed for a string of deaths at music festivals – as well 7.5g of cocaine, 5.7g of ketamine and a trace of cannabis at Bestival in 2017.

Ms Osamor has denied wrongdoing in the row over her son.

Labour's Diane Abbott warns that Leave would win again in the event of a second referendum

GOT a story? Ring The Sun on 0207 782 4104 or WHATSAPP on 07423720250 or email exclusive@the-sun.co.uk.

Westmonster

Published  3 months ago

Polling firm YouGov have released a hefty chunk of data on what the public think of Britain’s politicians – and Boris Johnson is Britain’s most popular politician.

32% of Brits have a positive opinion of BoJo and Theresa May – but 46% have a negative opinion of May compared to a slightly lower 43% for Johnson.

Jeremy Corbyn is third, Ed Balls fourth, Sadiq Khan fifth and Nigel Farage sixth, according to their calculations.

In terms of other Conservative figures, Sir John Major, Lord Hague and Ruth Davidson are next in the pecking order in terms of popularity. In terms of net rating, Ruth Davidson comes top – but only 62% of people have even heard of her and a quarter of those who have are neutral.

Theresa May and Boris Johnson are the UK's most popular politicians (both liked by 32% of Brits), finds @chris__curtis. However, in net terms, the honour actually goes to Ruth Davidson, with a net popularity score of +7 (Boris is -11 and May -14) https://t.co/Txe6f1ZzSO pic.twitter.com/twYTM6qT2V

— YouGov (@YouGov) November 7, 2018

Interestingly, David Cameron and George Osborne both trail the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Davis. The public haven’t forgiven them for Project Fear.

AltNewsMedia

Published  6 months ago

Altnewsmedia has been investigating the Muslim Brotherhood and how it operates in the UK and elsewhere. It is often claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) operates on the basis of systematic obfuscation and deception. Many in the West can’t quite grasp that it is always exactly the same snake but with different heads. Altnewsmedia has been examining this specific story concerning the Finsbury Park mosque as it helps to explain a number of critical points about the MB.

Finsbury Park mosque used to be run by Abu Hamza (The Hate Preacher with one eye and a hook for a hand) and his henchmen.

Eventually, after years of preaching jihad (with zero pushback from the congregation), Abu Hamza and many of his henchmen were arrested. Abu Hamza is currently serving life in a US Supermax prison.

After that, the London establishment handed over control of the mosque to a bunch of friendly fellows wearing suits, named the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB).

However, the MAB is a subdivision of the Muslim Brotherhood, and it (MAB) is officially listed as a terrorist organisation in many Arab countries. Just to repeat that; Finsbury Park Mosque is controlled by an organisation banned as a terrorist organisation in several parts of the Muslim world.

Hamas is also a subdivision of the Muslim Brotherhood, albeit slightly diverged. Before the 1967 war, Gaza was part of Egypt. There was a local Muslim Brotherhood branch in Gaza. After Israel took control of Gaza in 1967, the Gaza Muslim Brotherhood branch simply rebadged itself as Hamas. Exactly the same people. Today, Hamas states that it is “following the path of the Muslim Brotherhood ” So Hamas is a part of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Once this is understood, can it simply be a coincidence that a trustee of the Finsbury Park mosque (run by MAB/MB) turns out to be a senior political Officer of Hamas (also MB)? Can any person who understands the modus operandi of MB believe that the fellow trustees of Finsbury Park mosque (all MB members) had no idea whatsoever that their esteemed colleague was also a member of Hamas?

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has found himself in the media spotlight in recent days for making the salute of an Islamist organisation which has been described by a Government inquiry as“counter to British values and democracy”. The Labour leader was pictured making the four-fingered Rabbi’ah sign, a symbol of the Muslim Brotherhood, during a visit to – where else? – Finsbury Park mosque! It is not remotely surprising that those running the Mosque give the Muslim Brotherhood signal. They are part of the Muslim Brotherhood.

These Muslim Brotherhood charities, mosque associations and human rights organisations operating in the West also serve the purpose of maintaining and developing their infrastructure in these countries The Finsbury Park Mosque trustee position was simply a cover for Sawalha. They all knew exactly what was happening. But it’s such an easy trick to fool the western media and establishment. Just imagine how they were chuckling after claiming they had no idea about Sawalha, and seeing that the trick worked, yet again

With Muslim Brotherhood organisations (e.g. Islamic Relief UK, Muslim Association of Britain, CAIR-USA), they are always set up by Muslim Brotherhood personnel (who were always at some previous MB organisation). Then the same MB people move to another country, are joined by some other MB people and set up a new MB org. And so the merry-go-round spins and spins. Loads of different groups (charities, student orgs, mosque associations, human rights, etc). All claiming to be independent, yet always set up by MB people

Given that the Muslim Brotherhood and its many surrogates here in the UK are diammetrically opposed to the values of our pluralist western democracies, the question must be posed as to why they are allowed to operate in our countries with impunity, if not downright approval?

BBC News

Published  6 months ago

Police are surrounding the vehicle after the incident in central London.

Middle East Eye

Published  6 months ago

Britain's Labour party is tearing itself apart over anti-Semitism charges disingenuously cooked up by political opponents

Breitbart

Published  6 months ago

This is it -- the moment we've been waiting for. The moment when the Brexit rebellion finally began.

the Guardian

Published  6 months ago

Study for the Observer reveals that most constituencies in Britain now have a majority of voters who want to stay in EU

The Sun

Published  6 months ago

THERESA May’s soft Brexit plan could cost the Tories 25 MPs and hand the keys to No 10 to Jeremy Corbyn, research shows. A polling expert claims a mini-recovery by Ukip would see as many as two doz…

Breitbart

Published  6 months ago

Actor Danny DeVito falsely claimed in an interview with The Daily Beast published on Saturday that the Trump administration is keeping illegal aliens in “concentration camps.”

“Oh, it’s horrible. They are prison camps,” he said when asked about the situation at the southern border, where illegal aliens are being held in shelters for processing. “It’s awful. They’re little concentration camps. I try to do my part, which is to support progressive candidates who are trying to change the government, and try to be as vocal as I can about it.”

DeVito went on to criticize the “clowns” within Democratic Party, but admitted that having previously supported Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential primary he is now excited about the prospects of the far-left New York congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“This guy [Trump] is a clown. The Democrats are clowns, too. I don’t put too much faith in the Democratic Party,” the Twins star said.

DeVito continued:

Well, I’m really excited about Ocasio-Cortez. That was great, man. It was very exciting to see that. The thing about it is, Crowley was in there for ten years, and she beat the machine—and we know that because of what happened with Bernie. So now we have Stacey Abrams, who could be the first African-American governor of Georgia. Not only young people but all people are starting to get hip to the fact that we have to take care of healthcare, education and the environment.

The 72-year-old actor, who has starred in major productions such as Matilda and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, has never made a secret of his political interests. In January 2016, he declared that Hollywood was run by a “bunch of racists” because of the lack of black nominees at the Oscars, before adding that “the entire country is a racist country.”

As well as his support for Bernie Sanders, DeVito has also endorsed the far-left British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. On Friday, The Daily Mail revealed that Corbyn laid a wreath for the Palestinian terrorists behind the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics as his party faces an internal dispute over deep-rooted allegations of anti-semitism.

Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at bkew@breitbart.com.

RT International

Published  6 months ago

After a Saudi-led attack in Yemen killed and injured dozens of children, the public is again questioning London's arms sales to Riyadh. Officials have kept silent, helped by the MSM which fails to question the UK's involvement.

kerfuffled

Published  6 months ago

The MSM QAnon Show

08/07 8:23 am

Welcome to the show. The Washington Post is leading the unhinged Media Establishment attack on the QAnon story. In just a few days over a dozen anti-QAnon articles have been published by the Washington Post alone, each getting more manic and deranged as the desperation becomes all the more obvious. And more will follow.

It’s hard to think of another ‘conspiracy’ that has attracted so much attention from the media, especially one that is apparently just a LARP.

Note the deliberately provocative language used – “deranged” “scary” “cult” “virus” “terrifying” “nasty” “despicable” “twisted” “byzantine” – and that’s just from one media outlet’s headlines and slugs.

For those that don’t know, the QAnon ‘conspiracy theory’ mainly consists of a series of anonymous posts, which use the socratic method of asking the reader questions, encouraging them to find their own answers. The main purpose being to enlighten people of the corruption which has gone on for many years in various establishments. The Media Establishment is no exception. Which leaves many not surprised at all by this frantic coverage.

It really is quite laughable that these question-based posts can be labelled terrifying and dangerous when all they have led people to do is be more aware of how global politics and media propaganda works. Terrifying, yes, for the establishments in question.

Almost every media outlet has jumped on the same narrative, exposing themselves further as being against people having a deeper understanding of how propaganda works.

All of these articles paint a dark and sinister slant towards QAnon, attempting to convince the reader that, (despite not actually knowing how big the movement is) it’s still a fringe cult of only a handful of people, shown here by The Guardian (click images for links) –

Of course journalists couldn’t then help but admit they were alarmed to see more than a very small number of people were packing out the Tampa rally, advertising Q.

The Tampa rally was the catalyst for the media to begin acknowledging QAnon and subsequentley publishing the backlash articles against Q and those who have been researching (the Anons). As the BBC rightly admits (see below) ignoring the QAnon story now would be deemed irresponsible, as the Q interest is huge, not just a small number of people.

BBC have also drawn attention to the fact that more people are now being exposed to QAnon, exactly why all the articles have such a sinister, negative slant. Media outlets do need to be careful – but they have already failed. Nevertheless they will continue to use herd mentality technique, playing on individuals’ psychology – creating a fear of being the Other. This fear of being ridiculed, laughed at, of being different from the herd is why such strong wording has been used in all the articles in the past week –

Haaretz decided to take the anti-Semitic slant, a popular technique which is also being used to slate UK opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn. Despite Haaretz’ accusatory headline, the same article admits that QAnon actually has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, other than at times referring to people suspected of corruption, who just happen to be Jewish:

By the way, this revelation which debunks the articles’ own theory is conveniently situated at the very end of the article. Seems like batshit to me.

The Advocate, a media outlet for the LGBT community uses a similar tactic, helpfully telling its readers that they should be worried and incorrectly claims that QAnon is homophobic, crazy, disturbing and dangerous (click images for links):

However the only proof The Advocate gives to back up these claims are a few random tweets. The Guardian also does its best to infer QAnon violence is on the cards and wants people to worry.

So not only do the Media Establishment want us to believe that QAnon is a –

– they are very clear to get across that this is also a dangerous, sinister, scary cult that people really need to be worried about.

It’s basic fear propaganda.

Why would they do this if there was nothing for them to fear?

Keep watching for the key words and themes to be used in the Media Establishment.

Enjoy The Show!

The Electronic Intifada

Published  6 months ago

Israeli government app falsely attributes "anti-Semitic" comments to Corbyn.

Socialist Worker (Britain)

Published  6 months ago

Ilan Pappe, a leading Israeli-born historian and anti-Zionist, on how to combat claims that opposing Israel is antisemitic

mirror

Published  6 months ago

Survey for the People’s Vote campaign found 50% believe the final decision on leaving the EU should be taken by the public

RT International

Published  6 months ago

BBC’s Newsnight will air a special on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange hosted by journalist John Sweeney, despite what the #FreeAssange campaign say are tweets in “clear breach” of the BBC objectivity standards by the journalist.

“John Sweeney put in charge of tomorrow's Julian Assange special despite (because of?) malicious tweets in clear breach of BBC code,” the #FreeAssange campaign tweeted.

BBC Newsnight's John Sweeney put in charge of tomorrow's Julian Assange special despite (because of?) malicious tweets in clear breach of BBC code: https://t.co/jlXcbmRCRk

— #FreeAssange! (tweets by campaign)⌛ (@JulianAssange) July 31, 2018

The campaign, which has more than 790,000 followers on Twitter published a list of tweets in which the BBC journalist repeatedly mocks and calls the Wikileaks founder a “Russian agent,” a “Kremlin asset” and Vladimir Putin’s most “useful idiot”. But, despite Sweeney’s personal feelings about Assange being on full display all over Twitter, he will still host the special on the whistleblower.

The #FreeAssange campaign has traded barbs with Sweeney on Twitter in recent days, calling the BBC employee a “UK state TV propagandist”. Sweeney responded to say that the campaign’s characterization of him was “twaddle”.

A great insight into Putin's most unaware useful idiot, Julian Assange. Comic on Russian democracy https://t.co/YkpjHIkBuH via @repubblicait

— John Sweeney (@johnsweeneyroar) December 28, 2016

Julian Assange is the Prisoner of Knightsbridge. It's a yet to be made film about a Russian agent holed up in London's fancy area @abbydees

— John Sweeney (@johnsweeneyroar) March 9, 2017

Assange has been living inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London for six years and fears extradition to the United States over millions of leaked documents and classified US military footage. Recent reports have suggested that due to his deteriorating health, Assange may be leaving the embassy soon.

The Courage Foundation, which fundraises for the legal defense of whistleblowers, said the conditions in which Assange is living with “no access to sunlight” are having a serious impact on his “physical and mental health”.

Sweeney has a history of making his personal feelings about various political figures clear. A look at his Twitter profile shows that he has also retweeted numerous comments highly critical of UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, and that he appears to have somewhat of a fixation with Russia.

Sweeney made headlines in 2014 for “doorstepping” Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow to ask him whether he “regrets the killings in Ukraine”. Putin stopped to answer the question through a translator.

An article in the UK’s Independent newspaper at the time said that Sweeney had “a reputation for sailing close to the wind”.

Assange’s mother, Christine Assange, tweeted that her son is “sick, in pain & suffering” and labelled BBC journalists involved with the special “career building cowards” who want to “kick him when he's down”.

As my brave corruption exposing journalist son has his hands tied behind his back (sick, in pain & suffering in solitary)

the career building cowards who call themselves "journalists" from the #BBC state funded media kick him when he's down!#Ecuador#auspolhttps://t.co/Hw4dGyi8SM

— Mrs. Christine Assange (@AssangeMrs) August 1, 2018

Mail Online

Published  6 months ago

Tory Dominic Grieve is said to be working with a group of rebel MPs to try and block a No Deal. The amendment would let backbenchers introduce legislation to extend or revoke Article 50.

Sky News

Published  7 months ago

The dire prediction comes as the newly-appointed Brexit secretary did not dismiss reports of official contingency planning.

Mail Online

Published  7 months ago

ANDREA JENKYNS: I hope the Prime Minister will now use the summer break to reflect on the direction the Brexit negotiations are taking under her leadership. Change course we must.

Express.co.uk

Published  7 months ago

A survey conducted by YouGov for the Sunday Times found that almost half of people think the Chequers deal would be bad for Britain.

A total of 43 percent of people say the Chequers plan would work for the UK, with only 12 percent of people disagreeing with them.

Just one in nine - 11 percent - of voters would choose the Chequers option if they were presented with it on a referendum ballot.

The Government could consequently face further delays to the Brexit negotiations if the UK were to go to a second referendum.

If voters were given the option of overturning the 17 million strong vote in 2016, it seems likely they would.

The same poll found 54 percent of people would rather Remain in the EU if the alternative option was crashing out with no deal, which was favoured by 46 percent.

The Prime Minister has already ruled out another referendum on the grounds it would be undemocratic.

Theresa May is facing increasing pressure over the Chequers deal, with ten ministers having resigned so far over the proposed plans.

Fri, July 6, 2018

The Prime Minister gathered her cabinet together ahead of a crunch Brexit showdown at her country retreat at Chequers in Buckinghamshire

Former Brexit Secretary David Davis and former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson both stepped down from their front bench positions over the deal, which many have labelled a ‘soft’ Brexit.

This could spell problems for the Prime Minister with Brexiteers already warning of a revolt if she pushes through with her soft Brexit plans.

Mrs May maintains her popularity among Tory voters, with six in ten thinking she should stay on to fight the Brexit battle.

But, if she is forced out, her former Foreign Secretary may be placed in the best position to replace her.

The polling data concluded that a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson would be neck and neck with Labour in a General Election.

His closest potential leadership rivals - Sajid Javid, Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove - couldn’t match a Jeremy Corbyn led Labour Party.

They would all lag by ten to 12 percentage points.

The Electronic Intifada

Published  7 months ago

Despite group's public denials, director Ella Rose privately admitted to working with Shai Masot.

The Sun

Published  7 months ago

DONALD Trump today accuses the PM of wrecking Brexit — and warned she may have killed off any chance of a vital US trade deal. In an extraordinary intervention timed to coincide with his UK visit, …

Sky News

Published  7 months ago

Close

07/12 2:25 am

A Labour MP who was once suspended by her party amid claims of anti-Semitism has been made shadow equalities minister.

In 2016, Naz Shah had the parliamentary whip removed and was banned from party activity for three months while an investigation was carried out.

This was sparked when it emerged the Bradford West MP had shared a post on Facebook which suggested Israel should be relocated in the US, along with the comment "problem solved".

Then, a Twitter post came to light in which Ms Shah urged supporters of the Palestinian cause to vote in an online poll on Israeli military action, claiming that "the Jews are rallying" to skew the result.

Ms Shah later said she had been "ignorant" about discrimination against Jews and said she wanted to win back the trust of that community.

News of Ms Shah's appointment comes in the wake of criticism of Labour's new code of conduct on anti-Semitism.

The party has described the guidelines as "detailed and comprehensive", but campaigners and community groups were quick to label them "toothless".

The announcement of Ms Shah's promotion came as Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn announced a series of appointments to fill vacancies or maternity cover in his top team.

Mr Corbyn said: "I am delighted to welcome new colleagues to Labour's frontbench to strengthen our team as we continue to expose the Tories' failings and prepare to form a government that works for the many, not the few."

Mike Amesbury is now shadow employment minister, Justin Madders becomes shadow labour minister and takes on the shadow health and social care brief, while Jo Platt becomes shadow minister for the Cabinet Office.

Gatestone Institute

Published  7 months ago

The approach the British authorities have taken in response to this national disaster appears largely based on countering secondary issues -- most notably, individuals that protest the grooming, including at one point the arrest of parents attempting to

Breitbart

Published  7 months ago

The mainstream media has given breathless coverage of how Britons can protest the visit of the democratically-elected U.S. President.

the Guardian

Published  7 months ago

The leader of backbench Conservative MPs has made a dramatic plea to warring cabinet ministers to unite at a crucial Chequers meeting this week – or risk a botched Brexit and a Jeremy Corbyn-led government.

Writing in the Observer, Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 committee, suggests that ministers should learn lessons in discipline from their backbench colleagues, after an extraordinary week of infighting at the top of government. Without an outbreak of unity at Chequers on Friday, he says the British people risk being sold short on Brexit and having to endure the “disaster” of a Labour government led by Corbyn.

The voters trust May, so ministers now need to unite behind her | Graham Brady MP

Read more

“The danger of disunity at the top of the party is not just that it makes the prime minister’s job more difficult in negotiations with Brussels, and therefore puts at risk the good Brexit deal that is in reach,” Brady writes. “It also gives an impression of division to the country. Electorates these days are volatile, but one thing is certain: they do not vote for divided parties. They rejected decisively the divided Tory party in 1997. If we were to let Labour in again, it would be a disaster for this country.”

He adds: “It’s not just backbench Conservative MPs who expect ministers to pull together behind Theresa May: the great swathe of the electorate, which either voted Leave or voted Remain but recognises that a united team will achieve a better trading relationship for the future than a divided one, expects it too.”

Cabinet anarchy as Chequers summit looms

Read more

His intervention follows a week in which cabinet ministers have openly disagreed about the Brexit process and also allowed disagreements over domestic policies and the overall direction of the party to burst into the open. The squabbles appear to be affecting Tory supporters’ views on who their next leader should be with Sajid Javid topping a poll for ConservativeHome - the first time the Home Secretary has done so since the website revived its monthly survey following the election.

With tensions rising before the Chequers showdown, where ministers are due to approve a final position on arrangements for customs and trade post-Brexit, it emerged on Saturday that the environment secretary, Michael Gove, had torn up a copy of May’s plan for a customs partnership with the EU at a meeting with other key figures in the Brexit debate.

Earlier in the week the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, said that it was “completely inappropriate” for big businesses to make their views known on the dangers of a hard Brexit, only to be immediately slapped down by the business secretary, Greg Clark, who said their views should be respected and listened to. Ahead of the Chequers meeting, to be attended by all cabinet ministers, May has vowed to rule out any major concessions over freedom of movement after Britain leaves the EU, in a move that risks seriously limiting her ability to win a soft Brexit deal from Brussels.

The prime minister will use the meeting to warn that time is running out to secure a deal and prevent the UK from crashing out of the bloc with no agreement in place.

Over recent days there have been suggestions that the government would consider rules limiting the right of EU nationals to come to Britain to those with a solid job offer. However, sources said Downing Street was “not in that market”.

“In the build-up to Chequers, there has been some speculation that the UK is willing to allow free movement to continue as part of the negotiations,” said the source. “The PM is clear that such a decision would not respect the will of the British people in the referendum.”

The latest draft of a white paper that will form the basis of the UK negotiating position is said to contain a commitment that Britain would keep its manufacturing regulations “substantially similar” to those used by Brussels. Senior Brexiters said they were happy with the wording, stating that there was nothing binding the UK to those regulations.

Senior sources in Brussels say, meanwhile, that May is using her political weakness as leverage in the Brexit talks, with British negotiators warning the EU of what could happen without a generous offer from the bloc on future trade.

The UK government has resorted to spelling out that the parliamentary arithmetic means that without a “precise and substantive” offer from the EU, it is likely that the prime minister will not be able to muster the votes in favour of the total agreement on the terms of the UK’s withdrawal.

EU sources say the tactics highlight just how desperate the UK government is and how precarious the negotiations have become. EU leaders at a summit in Brussels on Thursday and Friday expressed their growing anxiety at the cabinet divisions and the lack of progress, which have increased the chances of a no-deal outcome.

BBC News

Published  8 months ago

"We will not let terrorists divide us" says Prime Minister Theresa May, one year on from the attack.

Express.co.uk

Published  8 months ago

The Tory MP urged the Prime Minister to ignore Remainers, after she was forced to make concessions to rebel politicians who demanded a ‘meaningful vote’ on the Brexit deal.

Led by Dominic Grieve, rebel MPs want Parliament to have the power to send Theresa May back to the negotiating table if they reject her Brexit deal.

After an amendment was added in by the House of Lords, Theresa May was forced to offer concessions to rebel MPs at the eleventh hour to stop them voting down the EU Withdrawal Bill – which could block Brexit.

Mr Duncan Smith said the EU will only come to the table if there is a threat of a no deal and Mrs May is right to say that “no deal is better than a bad deal”.

The threat of a no deal is the “ultimate weapon” that makes Brussels come to the table, the eurosceptic MP said.

Writing in The Sun, Mr Duncan Smith said: “The British people voted for freedom, and Parliament must remember that nothing should stop the Government delivering on that vote”.

The Tory MP said Theresa May had been too soft on the EU, but Brussels has been behaving like an “opponent who wishes to impose their will and force the UK to repent what they believe is the folly of Brexit.”

He said: “Too often it seems as though it is the UK which negotiates as a supplicant — despite the reality that, as the EU’s largest trade partner and the fifth largest economy in the world, with the world’s fourth most potent defence forces, the UK is deserving of much more respect from the EU.”

Following hours of debate on Tuesday, MPs voted by 324 to 298 to reject a House of Lords amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill which would have given MPs the ability to tell the PM to return and renegotiate the Brexit deal.

It is now a critical time in the Brexit negotiations as Theresa May attempts to keep both sides of her divided cabinet happy. She is due to reveal her compromise plan before the week is through, and it is not known how she will keep both Brexiteers and Remainers in her party appeased.

It is feared the PM may have given the EU the upper-hand in negotiations.

Mr Duncan Smith said the EU would be happy with the peers in the House of Lords who have demanded 15 amendments to the EU Withdrawal Bill, but he claimed the peers had set out to “humiliate” the Government and were just wanting to reverse the result of the referendum.

He said Mr Grieve’s amendment could mean Parliament could block Brexit would be a “betrayal of British voters”, according to Mr Duncan-Smith.

Mr Grieve withdrew his own proposals giving MPs more power to vote on a final deal and did eventually vote with the Government.

In the article, IDS also lashed out at Jeremy Corbyn for voting against the Government on the EU Withdrawal Bill “for his own political ends”.

BBC News

Published  1 year ago

They say in a letter to the home secretary that, as her family, they "cannot simply abandon her".

BBC News

Published  1 year ago

The Labour leader says Theresa May will lose the right to govern if her deal is voted down by MPs.

Mail Online

Published  1 year ago

Witnesses heard a 'loud bang' as the silver vehicle hit barriers in Westminster at around 7.30am this morning.

Sky News

Published  1 year ago

Just one in seven Britons think the draft Brexit deal proposed by Theresa May is better than either a "no-deal" Brexit or remaining in the EU, a Sky Data poll reveals.

The prime minister warned that these were the only three options available to Britain after concluding negotiations with the trading bloc.

Her cabinet appeared to have backed the draft deal, but several ministers including Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab have since resigned to oppose the proposed deal.

Over half - 54% - would prefer to remain in the EU, while 32% would prefer to leave the EU without a deal - just 14% would choose Brexit on the terms negotiated by the government.

Just over half of Britons - 55% - would also support a referendum choosing between those three options, with 35% opposed and 10% unsure.

Some 44% strongly support such a move.

Mrs May remains the most trusted politician to lead the country to Brexit among the leaders we asked about - but in total, many more people are backing alternative leaders than supporting her.

Three in 10 (31%) think she is the best person to lead the country through Brexit - ahead of Jeremy Corbyn on 24%, Jacob Rees-Mogg on 18%, Boris Johnson on 17% and Dominic Raab on 10%.

Sky Data interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1,488 Sky customers via SMS on 15 November 2018. Data are weighted to the profile of the population.

For full Sky Data tables, please click here.

Change.org

Published  2 years ago

Sign the Petition

04/12 8:00 pm

Theresa May MP: Deselect Anna Soubry for creating divisions in the Brexit process

->