Babak Belurs

Jumat, 21 Juni 2019

'Clean electricity' will dominate power supply - BBC News

For the first time since the Industrial Revolution, Britain is obtaining more power from zero-carbon sources than fossil fuels.

The milestone has been passed for the first five months of 2019.

National Grid says clean energy has nudged ahead with 48% of generation, against 47% for coal and gas.

The rest is biomass burning. The transformation reflects the precipitous decline of coal energy, and a boom from wind and solar.

National Grid says that in the past decade, coal generation will have plunged from 30% to 3%.

Meanwhile, wind power has shot up from 1% to 19%.

Mini-milestones have been passed along the way. In May, for instance, Britain clocked up its first coal-free fortnight and generated record levels of solar power for two consecutive days.

Why does it matter?

The shift is being driven by the need to cut emissions of the greenhouse gases that are over-heating the climate. The electricity sector was seen as the easiest place to start.

John Pettigrew, CEO of National Grid, told BBC News: "Over the last 10 years there’s been real progress in de-carbonisation of the energy system – but 2019 is going to be a key milestone.

"It's the first time since the Industrial Revolution that more electricity has been produced from zero and low-carbon sources rather than fossil fuels. It's tremendously exciting because it's such a tipping point."

National Grid says it is confident to make predictions for Britain's whole year power generation based on figures so far and on historical patterns.

In years to come, more energy storage will be needed as the share of wind and solar energy swells further.

Can cars help with electricity supplies?

Mr Pettigrew told us some of the renewable energy generated when the wind is blowing or the Sun is shining will be stored in the batteries of people's electric cars for use later.

The cars' charging systems will be reversed so their batteries can feed electricity back to the grid when demand peaks – like when people are cooking supper.

"One of key attributes of electric vehicles is they have a battery and therefore they can be used as a source of energy on to the network," he said.

"We could aggregate all the cars and use that electricity to support the grid when it’s needed. It's going to be a really effective tool for us to keep costs down."

The firm estimates this vehicle-to-grid technology (V2G) could solve 10-15% of the UK's demand for storage.

But it's hard to be confident about projections because autonomous vehicles may disrupt patterns of car usage and ownership.

How much energy will we buy from Europe?

Another way of filling in the gaps in energy when the wind's not blowing is by trading with continental neighbours.

National Grid expects that giant cables from continental Europe will soon supply enough to power eight million homes.

The firm says 63% of electricity imported through interconnectors this year has come from zero-carbon sources – much of it from French nuclear.

The zero-carbon share should increase to 90% by the 2030s as the UK trades more electricity with Norway’s vast hydropower system.

There's still major uncertainty about low-carbon energy, though, with no clarity over nuclear power, and increased expected demand from motorists.

Mr Pettigrew has joined the chorus of critics warning government that the progress of electric vehicles is too slow – and urging much more effort to decarbonise heat.

Has technology cracked the climate problem?

The veteran energy analyst Tom Burke from e3g told BBC News: "Today's landmark is a real tribute to technologists. We have cracked technical problems of dealing with climate change.

"The problems we face are political. As we move towards Net Zero (carbon emissions), jobs will be lost in fossil fuel industries and created in low-carbon industries.

"The government has blown hot and cold on climate policies – and it's shown no sign of thinking about managing the politics of this."

A government White Paper on energy is due soon.

Follow Roger on Twitter @rharrabin

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48711649

2019-06-21 08:47:34Z
CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ4NzExNjQ50gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvbS9uZXdzL2FtcC9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ4NzExNjQ5

'Clean electricity' will dominate power supply - BBC News

For the first time since the Industrial Revolution, Britain is obtaining more power from zero-carbon sources than fossil fuels.

The milestone has been passed for the first five months of 2019.

National Grid says clean energy has nudged ahead with 48% of generation, against 47% for coal and gas.

The rest is biomass burning. The transformation reflects the precipitous decline of coal energy, and a boom from wind and solar.

National Grid says that in the past decade, coal generation will have plunged from 30% to 3%.

Meanwhile, wind power has shot up from 1% to 19%.

Mini-milestones have been passed along the way. In May, for instance, Britain clocked up its first coal-free fortnight and generated record levels of solar power for two consecutive days.

Why does it matter?

The shift is being driven by the need to cut emissions of the greenhouse gases that are over-heating the climate. The electricity sector was seen as the easiest place to start.

John Pettigrew, CEO of National Grid, told BBC News: "Over the last 10 years there’s been real progress in de-carbonisation of the energy system – but 2019 is going to be a key milestone.

National Grid says it is confident to make predictions for Britain's whole year power generation based on figures so far and on historical patterns.

In years to come, more energy storage will be needed as the share of wind and solar energy swells further.

Can cars help with electricity supplies?

Mr Pettigrew told us some of the renewable energy generated when the wind is blowing or the Sun is shining will be stored in the batteries of people's electric cars for use later.

The cars' charging systems will be reversed so their batteries can feed electricity back to the grid when demand peaks – like when people are cooking supper.

"One of key attributes of electric vehicles is they have a battery and therefore they can be used as a source of energy on to the network," he said.

"We could aggregate all the cars and use that electricity to support the grid when it’s needed. It's going to be a really effective tool for us to keep costs down."

The firm estimates this vehicle-to-grid technology (V2G) could solve 10-15% of the UK's demand for storage.

But it's hard to be confident about projections because autonomous vehicles may disrupt patterns of car usage and ownership.

How much energy will we buy from Europe?

Another way of filling in the gaps in energy when the wind's not blowing is by trading with continental neighbours.

National Grid expects that giant cables from continental Europe will soon supply enough to power eight million homes.

The firm says 63% of electricity imported through interconnectors this year has come from zero-carbon sources – much of it from French nuclear.

The zero-carbon share should increase to 90% by the 2030s as the UK trades more electricity with Norway’s vast hydropower system.

There's still major uncertainty about low-carbon energy, though, with no clarity over nuclear power, and increased expected demand from motorists.

Mr Pettigrew has joined the chorus of critics warning government that the progress of electric vehicles is too slow – and urging much more effort to decarbonise heat.

Has technology cracked the climate problem?

The veteran energy analyst Tom Burke from e3g told BBC News: "Today's landmark is a real tribute to technologists. We have cracked technical problems of dealing with climate change.

"The problems we face are political. As we move towards Net Zero (carbon emissions), jobs will be lost in fossil fuel industries and created in low-carbon industries.

"The government has blown hot and cold on climate policies – and it's shown no sign of thinking about managing the politics of this."

A government White Paper on energy is due soon.

Follow Roger on Twitter @rharrabin

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48711649

2019-06-21 07:55:21Z
CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ4NzExNjQ50gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvbS9uZXdzL2FtcC9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ4NzExNjQ5

Kamis, 20 Juni 2019

'Historic' UK decision outlaws arms sales for Saudi war on Yemen - Aljazeera.com

London, United Kingdom - Campaigners hailed an "historic" ruling by the United Kingdom's court of appeal declaring British arms sales to Saudi Arabia for use in its war against Yemen unlawful as a potential turning point in the conflict.

The decision in London on Thursday follows a challenge by the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) that accused the UK government of licensing arms sales despite a clear risk their use could breach international humanitarian law.

Although it will not halt the Saudi-led war in Yemen - in which an estimated 100,000 people have died since 2016 - it adds enormous support to international efforts to end the conflict.

"This ruling is huge," said Sam Perlo-Freeman, a research coordinator at CAAT.

"We can see that arms sales for use in Yemen are now being challenged internationally - in the US and Europe - but this from a court in one of Saudi Arabia's top two arms suppliers takes that to a whole new level.

"It is historic in terms of the government's approach to export licences being found to be illegal and adds huge momentum to the campaign both in this country and internationally for a halt to arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the Saudi-led coalition."

Since the Saudi-led coalition began its military intervention in Yemen in 2015, the UK has licensed at least 4.6 billion pounds ($6bn) worth of arms to Saudi forces. Weapons and military support from Britain to Saudi Arabia - that now accounts for 43 percent of London's arms exports - is crucial to the war effort.

However, public disquiet has grown about Britain's role with a poll commissioned by CAAT indicating only six percent of people in the country support arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

CAAT's Andrew Smith talks to Al Jazeera following the court's ruling

The UK's sales have significantly bolstered the Saudi air force's capability to carry out air attacks in Yemen. The final six Typhoon jet fighters of 72 ordered in 2007 were delivered in 2017. The following year, Riyadh signed a memorandum of intent to buy an additional 48 Typhoons

CAAT has been arguing for three years that the sales break UK laws, which block export licences if there is a clear risk of weapons being used in "serious violations" of international humanitarian law.

Perlo-Freeman added: "We welcome this verdict but at the same time really think it should not have taken a three-and-a-half-year court procedure to get the UK government to even start considering doing the right thing.

"The British government's whole priority in promoting arms exports over everything else and in choosing to support and enable the Saudi-led war on Yemen - which is causing the worst humanitarian catastrophe in the world - is fundamentally wrong."

Can ruling end the war?

The UK government must now change the way it assesses the risk of breaches of international humanitarian law before approving exports. Prime Minister Theresa May has already said the government will appeal against the ruling.

The court's decision also does not mean that licences to export arms to Saudi Arabia must immediately be suspended, and it will not affect existing stocks of weapons held by the country or ground support and maintenance provided to the Saudi air force by BAE Systems personnel.

"We are now calling for an immediate end to all arms sales to Saudi Arabia and that the UK simply should not be supporting the Saudi-led war in Yemen at all," Perlo-Freeman said.

Anna Stavrianakis is a senior lecturer in international relations at the University of Sussex and an expert on the arms trade. "This legal decision finally provides some accountability for the UK's role in the war in Yemen and the humanitarian disaster it has caused," she told Al Jazeera.

"Not only has the government spent four years providing diplomatic cover for the Saudi-led coalition's abuses committed with UK- and US-supplied weapons, it has also expended significant amounts of energy in trying not to know, or be seen to know, about possible violations of international humanitarian law.

"At long last, the government has been held accountable for its reckless policy."

190618230449908

The London-based Stop the War Coalition welcomed the court of appeal's decision. Spokesperson Lindsey German said it should result in a complete change of British policy and end any logistical or political support for the war.

"We are delighted at the ruling but it should never have come to court," German told Al Jazeera. "Our government has repeatedly been prepared to sell arms to the Saudis, one of the most repressive regimes in the world.

"This should stop immediately, and the British government should apologise to all those who have suffered as a result of its policy."

But the UK government has significant interests at stake and "will do as much as it can to carry on supporting the war", added German.

"Most people in Britain are opposed to the killing of civilians and to the Yemen war. We must continue to build protests and organise against it, making clear to whoever becomes prime minister that this barbarism has to end."

Humanitarian crisis

The humanitarian crisis caused by the war in Yemen has been described as the world's worst and has put nearly 10 million people at risk of starvation.

Human rights groups have long dismissed British government arguments - that its approach was lawful, that it operated "robust" export controls, that its military advisers working with Saudi forces had not been directing air raids, and the Saudi-led intervention was endorsed by the United Nations.

Earlier this year British ministers provided an additional 200 million pounds ($250m) to Yemen to help feed 3.8 million people, bringing total UK humanitarian support to the war-torn country to 770 million pounds ($980m).

Aid organisations such as Oxfam have said this "incoherent policy means that what it gives with one hand, it takes away with another", while other groups claim the UK is ignoring alleged Saudi war crimes.

Mark Kaye of the Save the Children charity, which works in Yemen to alleviate poor humanitarian conditions, said: "The ruling essentially is what we have been pushing the UK government to acknowledge for the last three to four years of this conflict - that continuously fuelling this conflict by selling weapons to the Saudi-led coalition is both morally and legally wrong.

"We are pushing the UK government to accept that this new legal advice means it needs to reevaluate its engagement with the Saudis, it needs to cancel all of the arms exports that it currently has, and do a proper review of its processes and policies to make sure that there are no British-made bombs resulting in the deaths of innocent people in Yemen."

Kaye added the poor humanitarian conditions in Yemen - from a cholera outbreak to mass displacement by flooding and the destruction of hospitals in Saudi air raids - are as bad as ever.

"We are seeing very little tangible improvement on the ground - in fact, if anything, we are seeing things getting worse."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/06/uk-decision-outlaws-arms-sales-saudi-war-yemen-190620110547372.html

2019-06-20 13:03:00Z
52780317693166

Saudi arms sales: Court of Appeal demands review - BBC News

Campaigners have won a legal challenge over the UK government's decision to allow arms sales to Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in the war in Yemen.

Campaign Against Arms Trade argued the decision to continue to license military equipment for export to the Gulf state was unlawful.

It said there was a clear risk the arms might be used in a serious violation of international humanitarian law.

Judges said licences should be reviewed but would not be immediately suspended.

International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said the government would not grant any new licences for export to Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners while it considers the implications of the judgment.

A spokeswoman for Prime Minister Theresa May said the government was "disappointed" and would be seeking permission to appeal against the judgment.

Under UK export policy, military equipment licences should not be granted if there is a "clear risk" that weapons might be used in a "serious violation of international humanitarian law".

Giving judgment at the Court of Appeal in London, Master of the Rolls Sir Terence Etherton said the government "made no concluded assessments of whether the Saudi-led coalition had committed violations of international humanitarian law in the past, during the Yemen conflict, and made no attempt to do so".

He said the government "must reconsider the matter" and estimate any future risks.

Mr Fox said the government always took its export obligations very seriously.

"Today's judgment is not about whether the government has made the right or wrong decisions about granting export licences, but concerns the rationality of the process used to reach decisions," he added.

'Preventing further bloodshed'

The UK has licensed more than £4.7bn of arms exports to the Saudis since the bombing of Yemen began in March 2015.

Equipment sold to Saudi Arabia includes Typhoon and Tornado fighter jets, as well as precision-guided bombs.

The sales contribute to thousands of engineering jobs in the UK and have provided billions of pounds of revenue for the British arms trade.

Campaign Against Arms Trade spokesman Andrew Smith welcomed the judgment, saying the Saudi Arabian regime was one of the most brutal and repressive in the world - yet for decades had been the largest buyer of UK-made arms.

"No matter what atrocities it has inflicted, the Saudi regime has been able to count on the uncritical political and military support of the UK," he said.

"The bombing has created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world."

Lucy Claridge, director of strategic litigation at Amnesty International, said the judgment was "a major step towards preventing further bloodshed".

"This is the first time that a UK court has acknowledged the risks of continuing to lavish Saudi Arabia with military equipment for use in Yemen," she said.

Labour and the Liberal Democrats called for the government to immediately suspend all arms sales for use in the Yemen conflict.

Labour's shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry demanded "a full parliamentary or public inquiry" to find out how the breach of law was allowed to happen, and which ministers were responsible.

There has been much public debate about the supply of weapons to Saudi Arabia, particularly in light of the Saudi involvement in the conflict in Yemen.

Research by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a think tank which monitors the global weapons industry, puts Britain in second place as a supplier of "major arms" to Saudi Arabia, behind the United States and ahead of France.

Saudi Arabia's total imports of major arms more than tripled in the period from 2012 to 2017 compared with the previous five years.

This ruling is a blow to the government and to the British arms industry.

More than 40% of UK arms exports are destined for Saudi Arabia.

Last year alone the largest UK defence company, BAE Systems, made £2.6bn worth of sales to the Gulf state.

While the court ruling does not necessarily mean an end to future sales, it does put them in jeopardy.

The government has always insisted it has some of the world's most rigorous arms exports controls. But today's ruling shows they are not tough enough.

The Court of Appeal says ministers have a legal obligation to assess allegations of serious human rights violations before allowing those sales.

In the case of Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen the court clearly stated the government had "made no attempt to do so".

The government says it will appeal against the decision.

But proving that UK jets and weapons have not been involved in serious human rights violations may prove difficult, given Saudi Arabia's conduct in the war.

What is happening in Yemen?

The country has been locked in a seemingly intractable civil war for four years, which has left thousands dead and pushed millions to the brink of starvation.

The conflict began in 2015 when the rebel Houthi movement seized control of much of the west of the country and forced President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi to flee abroad.

Alarmed by the rise of a group they saw as an Iranian proxy, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and seven other Arab states intervened in an attempt to restore the government. The US, UK and France have provided logistical and intelligence support to the coalition and sold it weapons.

The UN says at least 7,070 civilians have been killed and 11,205 injured in the conflict - 65% of the deaths are attributed to Saudi-led coalition air strikes.

Thousands more civilians have died from preventable causes, including malnutrition, disease and poor health.

About 80% of the population - 24 million people - need humanitarian assistance and protection, and almost 10 million are just a step away from famine, says the UN.

Last month, rebels pulled out of three key Red Sea ports in partial implementation of a ceasefire deal agreed last December, according to the UN. This could allow vital humanitarian aid into the country.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48704596

2019-06-20 11:11:41Z
CBMiJGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy91ay00ODcwNDU5NtIBKGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9hbXAvdWstNDg3MDQ1OTY

Rabu, 19 Juni 2019

A 'muted' Johnson inches closer to premiership after TV debate - Al Jazeera English

London, United Kingdom - The frontrunner to become the United Kingdom's next prime minister has edged one step closer to Downing Street on Tuesday after a television debate which did not shed any new light on his views on Brexit.

However, Boris Johnson - who has pledged to take the UK out of the European Union on October 31 without a withdrawal deal - came under pressure in the BBC discussion over tax-cut pledges and comments that have earned him a reputation as reckless.

Upstart rival Rory Stewart - who has pledged to avoid a "no-deal" Brexit at all costs - was unable to capitalise on the unexpected momentum he had gained earlier in the day during a second poll among Conservative MPs, who are whittling down the field of candidates.

190524164357221

"My colleagues and I all came to the same conclusion - we felt it was a bit of a rabble really," said Anthony Ridge-Newman, a senior lecturer at Liverpool Hope University and the head of conservatism studies in the UK.

"There is no clear narrative coming out because all the candidates are trying to compete with each other."

David Jeffery, a lecturer in British politics at the University of Liverpool who has studied the Conservative Party, described the debate as "a bit of a farce". Members of the public who posed questions to the candidates came away dissatisfied.

"Nobody moved away from their pre-prepared scripts. At some points, Boris Johnson looked a bit uncomfortable - but there was nothing there that changed the status quo."

All eyes on Johnson

The debate on Tuesday would have provided the public with the first opportunity to delve into Johnson's Brexit policies. He did not turn up for an earlier Channel 4 debate on Sunday.

Although his bid to become the leader of the Conservative Party and Britain's prime minister now appears unstoppable - critics say he remains vulnerable. In an earlier vote, Johnson secured the support of 126 out of 313 Conservative MPs.

His campaign strategy has been to keep a low profile and avoid journalists, despite being a highly paid newspaper columnist himself. His florid language has often landed him in trouble before - he once compared Muslim women in veils to "letterboxes".

Jeffery said: "Boris Johnson was definitely muted - he wasn't forcing himself into the spotlight because he doesn't need to. His first choice would have been to not be there today. His second choice is to say as little as possible, and avoid making a gaffe."

Staying below the parapet put Johnson at particular risk from attack by Stewart - who has openly denounced his Brexit strategy as bogus, and is the only candidate to rule out a 'no-deal'.

In the debate, the frontrunner's pledge to cut taxes for high-income earners was also heavily criticised by other candidates.

Johnson told viewers: "We must come out on the October 31 because otherwise, I am afraid we face a catastrophic loss of confidence in politics. The British people are getting thoroughly fed up. They were asked a question, they returned a verdict, the politicians said they were going to honour that verdict, and three years later we have still failed to leave.

"Unless we get out on October 31, I think we will all start to pay a really serious price."

According to Ridge-Newman, by keeping his head down Johnson has enhanced his strategic position in the contest, which will eventually go to a final vote in July.

Johnson has clearly been schooled in the last couple of weeks to make him come across as a lot more boring than the public has ever seen him before.

"I actually think it is absolutely the right strategy for him because although he didn't really engage much in the debate or offer anything new or particularly interesting, it was absolutely his to lose."

Stewart fires a blank

Stewart, who has scored well with television audiences but is not a favourite with Conservative Party members, failed to live up to the momentum he'd gained in recent days.

Insisting that the way to unify a divided country was to be "honest and realistic", he said: "If I were lucky enough to be your prime minister I am committed that there would never be 'no deal' - it is unnecessary, it is damaging, and it is so unnecessary and damaging that it is not even a credible threat."

190617023901734

Jeffery said that despite Stewart's leap in Tuesday's ballot - in which he doubled his support - he had not come across well.

"He is saying basically the only thing we have got is Theresa May's withdrawal agreement, which is still hideously unpopular with Conservative Party members. So nothing has changed."

Ridge-Newman added: "Stewart has been talked up a lot in the last couple of days and I think it is possibly even going to his head because he was very awkward in the debate."

Hunt, Gove and Javid

The race now appears to be on to secure a slot in July's final runoff for second place, with Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt vying with Environment Secretary Michael Gove as the two most likely runners up.

Hunt told the BBC debate: "We have to resolve Brexit and we have to resolve this quickly because this is about the trust of the British people in people like us, the politicians, and whether we actually do what we are told or whether we impose our will - and we mustn’t let them down."

Gove, an architect of the victory secured by the "Leave" campaign in the 2016 Brexit referendum but damaged by an admission that he snorted cocaine, described Stewart’s approach as "cooled porridge".

However, he admitted that a short delay after the October 31 Brexit deadline might be necessary to achieve the UK's aims.

"You sometimes have extra time in football matches in order to slot home the winner," he said. "My view is that the most important thing is to win for Britain and that means getting out, honouring the vote."

Home Secretary Sajid Javid - currently polling last among the five candidates - said: "One of the fundamental mistakes we have made so far is that we didn't prepare well enough for 'no deal' - and that's why we are in this mess today."

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/06/muted-johnson-inches-closer-pm-chair-tv-debate-190619024250507.html

2019-06-19 03:17:00Z
52780315109064

Selasa, 18 Juni 2019

Conservative party members would rather break up the United Kingdom than stop Brexit - Business Insider

Boris JohnsonGetty

Conservative members would rather break up the United Kingdom and destroy their own party than see Brexit stopped.
A new YouGov poll finds hardline views on Europe and the UKs future among those soon to choose the next prime minister.
A clear majority would rather Scotland and Northern Ireland left the UK and would be willing to accept significant damage to the economy, if it allowed Brexit to go ahead.
The findings come ahead of the next round of voting in the Conservative party leadership contest.
Visit Business Insider's home page for more stories.

LONDON — Conservative members would rather break up the United Kingdom, and destroy their own party, than stay in the European Union, according to a new poll.

The latest YouGov poll of Conservative party members, who will soon be charged with choosing the UK's next prime minister, suggests they would opt to see both Scotland and Northern Ireland leave the UK, if it was the only way to ensure the UK leaves the EU.

Sixty three per cent say they would rather Scotland left the UK if it secured Brexit, with 61% willing to accept "significant damage" to the economy and 59% willing to see Northern Ireland leave the UK.

A further 54% would want Brexit to go ahead even if it meant the destruction of their own party.

The poll suggests that Brexit has hardened the divide over Europe in the party. It found that 46% of members would now be "happy" to have Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage as their leader, with just 40% unhappy.

Overall, Conservative party members now see the Brexit Party as their biggest threat, with 67% describing it as a "big threat" compared to just 34% saying the same of Labour.

Views on Europe appear to have hardened significantly in the race to succeed Theresa May as prime minister, with a majority now saying it would be unacceptable for their next leader to be opposed to leaving the EU without a deal.

While Esther McVey had pledged to banish Remainers from cabinet, what matters to party members is not the 2016 vote but that a candidate is willing to back a no-deal Brexit. Only 26-29% could get behind someone who took no-deal off the table https://t.co/Ao8BLH7FfE pic.twitter.com/9S9rAwpX18
— YouGov (@YouGov) June 18, 2019

Brexit has put strains on the constituent nations of the UK with questions over the post-Brexit border with Ireland and Scottish independence dominating UK political discussion since Britain voted to leave.

The poll findings come ahead of the second round of the Conservative leadership contest.

Tory MPs will on Tuesday afternoon vote on who should proceed to the next round, with the former foreign secretary Boris Johnson expected to win by a large margin.

The remaining candidates will then take place in a televised hustings event on BBC 1 at 20.00 (BST.)

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.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.businessinsider.com/poll-conservative-members-break-up-uk-destroy-party-stop-brexit-2019-6

2019-06-18 08:59:58Z
CAIiEINYiDj2v2pXzYoxlr0PVUEqLggEKiUIACIbd3d3LmJ1c2luZXNzaW5zaWRlci5jb20vc2FpKgQICjAMMJzw5wE

Senin, 17 Juni 2019

British Home Secretary on Trump: Time to stop 'interfering' in UK politics | TheHill - The Hill

British Home Secretary Sajid Javid on Monday condemned President TrumpDonald John Trump Trump cites tax cuts over judges as having biggest impact of his presidency Trump cites tax cuts over judges as having biggest impact of his presidency Ocasio-Cortez claps back at Trump after he cites her in tweet rejecting impeachment MORE's criticisms of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, telling the president to stop "interfering" in U.K. politics.

“I did see the tweet," Javid told BuzzFeed News, referring to a tweet where Trump called Khan a "disaster" after a knife crime in London. "I think President Trump should stick to domestic politics."

“It's unbecoming of the leader of such a great state to keep interfering in the domestic politics of another country. The president is right to be concerned about serious violence but he should be concerned about serious violence in his own country, which is more than ten times higher than it is in the UK."

Trump on Saturday also retweeted right-wing commentator Katie Hopkins, who referred to the city as "Khan's Londonistan."

Javid is reportedly the first of the contenders for the Conservative Party's leadership position, which Prime Minister Theresa MayTheresa Mary May As US neglects its duty, UK leads fight against climate change Victim of homophobic violence pens op-ed Victim of homophobic violence pens op-ed MORE abdicated earlier this month, to defend Khan from Trump's barbs.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, another Tory leadership contender, distanced himself from Trump's wording, but agreed with the president's point.

"President Trump has his own style and I wouldn't use those words myself," Hunt told BuzzFeed on Monday. "We have a mayor of London who has completely failed to tackle knife crime and in that I 150% agree with the president".

The Prime Minister's office declined to criticize Trump's tweet on Monday, arguing it was a "matter for the US," per BuzzFeed.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn blasted the president's tweets about Khan as “absolutely awful.”

Trump has taken aim at Khan, who is Muslim, for years and earlier this month referred to the mayor as a "stone cold loser" just ahead of his first state visit to the United Kingdom and London.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/448858-british-home-secretary-on-trump-time-to-stop-interfering-in-uk

2019-06-17 13:21:25Z
CBMicWh0dHBzOi8vdGhlaGlsbC5jb20vaG9tZW5ld3MvYWRtaW5pc3RyYXRpb24vNDQ4ODU4LWJyaXRpc2gtaG9tZS1zZWNyZXRhcnktb24tdHJ1bXAtdGltZS10by1zdG9wLWludGVyZmVyaW5nLWluLXVr0gF1aHR0cHM6Ly90aGVoaWxsLmNvbS9ob21lbmV3cy9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdGlvbi80NDg4NTgtYnJpdGlzaC1ob21lLXNlY3JldGFyeS1vbi10cnVtcC10aW1lLXRvLXN0b3AtaW50ZXJmZXJpbmctaW4tdWs_YW1w