Category Archives: Society

Britain, Politics, Society

Tony Blair says Government does not fear Opposition

BRITAIN

Mr Blair insists that Labour has failed in its fundamental duty in being a competitive opposition.

Intro: Tony Blair demands that ‘urgency’ is now needed if Labour is to remain relevant in British politics. He attacks Jeremy Corbyn for being ‘no competition’ to the Government.

Former prime minister Tony Blair has warned the Government spends “zero” time worrying about the Labour Party as he blasted the current leadership for failing to provide a “competitive” opposition.

Mr Blair said Labour had failed in its “fundamental duty to the British people”, as he hit out at the “ultra-left” takeover of the party.

In an interview with Labour MPs Ruth Smeeth and Wes Streeting for Progress magazine, Mr Blair also dubbed Brexit “the defining moment in British history” as he appealed for Labour to take a more modern approach.

He said: “We (have) failed in what is our fundamental duty to the British people, that is to be a competitive opposition.

“Just ask yourself one simple question. In the Prime Minister’s office, in Tory high command, how much of their time do they spend worrying about the prospect of a Labour victory at the present time? I would guess zero.”

Mr Blair added: “We’ve got to make them wake up every morning and fear us.”

Mr Blair said a previous lurch to the left between 1979 and 1983 had “cratered the Labour party”.

He added: “I don’t want to depress you, but there is a big difference between the ’80s and now.

“In the 1980s, the ultra-left never took control. They tried but they failed.

“The moment when Denis Healey beat Tony Benn was the moment when the Labour Party was saved.”

The Labour leader between 1994 and 2007 warned the current party was putting its principles before power, arguing it had only won “when it has been at the cutting edge of modernity”.

Turning to Brexit, Mr Blair said it was not the answer to the cultural and economic problems of globalisation, warning political parties could “end up in an intellectual and political cul-de-sac”.

He added: “We have to say, the Government’s got a mandate to negotiate Brexit, but we’re going to hold them to account that it’s not going to damage jobs, that it’s not going to damage the economy.”

Asked for his final word for those looking to keep Labour relevant, Mr Blair replied: “Urgency. Because politics moves faster today and Brexit …it’s the defining moment in British history.”

Standard
Britain, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

The sinister tone for Brexit has been set with security warning

BREXIT

Most people would have expected Prime Minister Theresa May to strike a conciliatory tone following the invoking of Article 50. Despite being one of the most significant junctures in British political history, the record indicates that she took the opposite stance.

On a day when Mrs May should have reached out to Europe, she instead issued a thinly veiled threat by raising the spectre of weakened security relations post Brexit.

Any failure to reach agreement between the UK and EU, she said, ‘would mean our co-operation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened.’

In her letter to Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, which contained no fewer than 11 references to security issues, she added: ‘In this kind of scenario, both the United Kingdom and the European Union would of course cope with the change, but it is not the outcome that either side should seek.’

While there can be little doubt that Britain’s security and military apparatus – coupled with its close ties with U.S. intelligence agencies – is the envy of Europe, such remarks were felt as being ill-judged. In some EU countries, such as Belgium and France, who have a reasonably friendly relationship with the UK, and who have borne the brunt of terror attacks in recent years, Mrs May’s remarks risk being seen as crass and insensitive.

If, as seems to be the case, she sincerely believes trading security for prosperity is an acceptable opening salvo in what will be long and torturous negotiations, her reading of the situation is clumsy and damaging. There will be many across Europe, as well as here in the UK, who will clearly see it that way.

Terrorism, as the west well knows, does not respect borders or constitutions, and whatever form the UK’s future relationship with the EU takes, working closely with our European neighbours will be fundamental to tackling a global problem.

As Tim Farron, leader of the Liberal Democrats, pointed out: ‘Security is too important to be used as a bargaining chip and this will backfire in any negotiations, which rather than building up alliances will leave Britain even more isolated.’

After widespread criticism of Ms May’s letter, Downing Street attempted to backtrack, insisting it referred only to security arrangements agreed via the EU, such as the European Arrest Warrant and Europol.

But by then, the damage had been done. Less than 24 hours after Article 50 was triggered, the UK finds itself on the back foot and a needlessly aggressive tone has been set.

Given the hostile contents of Ms May’s letter, the frosty reception on the continent was entirely predictable. A sombre-looking Mr Tusk delivered his own farewell message to the UK. ‘We already miss you,’ he said. ‘Thank you and goodbye.’ If nothing else, it was a remark which ought to impress upon British negotiators that Mr Tusk’s considerable armoury includes sarcasm.

The next two years will shape Britain’s future standing in the world. This week’s developments may be symbolic in more ways than one.

Standard
Germany, Government, NATO, Politics, Society, United States

The U.S. raises spectre on German contributions to NATO

UNITED STATES/NATO

Trump Merkel2

Trump and Merkel share tense first public appearance earlier this month in Washington.

Intro: President Trump issues NATO invoice of some £300bn to Germany. But Chancellor Merkel insists no debt is owed.

ANGELA MERKEL has reportedly ignored Donald Trump’s attempts to extricate £300bn from Germany for what he deems to be owed contributions to NATO.

The controversial President is said to have had an ‘invoice’ printed out outlining the sum estimated by his aides as covering Germany’s unpaid contributions for defence.

Said to be presented during private talks in Washington, the move has been met with criticism from German and NATO officials in Brussels.

While the figure presented to the Germans was not fully revealed by either side, NATO countries pledged in 2014 to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence, something only a handful of nations – including the UK, Greece, Poland and Estonia – currently do.

But the bill has been backdated even further to 2002, the year Mrs Merkel’s predecessor, Gerhard Schröder, pledged to spend more on defence.

Mr Trump reportedly instructed aides to calculate how much German spending fell below two per cent over the past 12 years, then added interest. Estimates suggest the total came to £300bn, with official figures citing the shortfall to be around £250bn, and with £50bn in interest added on.

The Times quoted a German government minister as saying the move was “outrageous”.

The unnamed minister said: “The concept behind putting out such demands is to intimidate the other side, but the chancellor took it calmly and will not respond to such provocations.”

And the London based newspaper quoted a source close to Mrs Merkel saying she has “ignored the provocation”.

The bill follows a disastrous meeting between the pair earlier this month, characterised by Mr Trump’s refusal to shake his peer’s hand.

A day after the meeting, Mr Trump tweeted: “Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with the Chancellor Angela Merkel.

“Nevertheless, Germany owes . . . vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany!”

In response to the claims, German defence minister Ursula Von der Leyen rejected the notion the European nation owed the US or NATO.

She issued a statement saying: “There is no debt account at NATO.

“Defence spending also goes into UN peacekeeping missions, into our European missions and into our contribution to the fight against [Isis] terrorism.”

Her comments were backed by Ivo Daalder, permanent representative to NATO from 2009 to 2013 under the Obama administration, who queried the President’s understanding of the organisation.

He tweeted: “Sorry Mr President, that’s not how NATO works. The US decides for itself how much it contributes to defending NATO.

“This is not a financial transaction, where NATO countries pay the US to defend them. It is part of our treaty commitment.”

Mr Trump has repeatedly voiced his criticism over member payments to NATO, throwing doubt on the US’ future role in the organisation.

He has singled out a number of NATO countries, including Germany, over their defence contributions claiming the US has been forced to bear the brunt and pick up the tab.

Standard