Connect with us

International

Boris Johnson Strikes Brexit Deal With EU. Will It Move Through Parliament?

Published

on

  • British Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed to a new Brexit deal with the European Union on Thursday.
  • The deal would get rid of the contentious Irish backstop, but it would create a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K.
  • Johnson is expected to hold a vote on the deal in British Parliament on Saturday, but both opposition Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn and the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland oppose it.
  • If the deal fails, Johnson will likely need to go back to the EU and ask for an extension to the U.K.’s current Oct. 31 Brexit deadline.

Johnson and EU Agree to a New Deal

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed to a new Brexit deal with the European Union Thursday, which notably removes the Irish backstop but adds a controversial Northern Irish-only backstop.

“We’ve got a great new deal that takes back control,” Johnson said on Twitter. “Now Parliament should get Brexit done on Saturday so we can move on to other priorities like the cost of living, the NHS, violent crime and our environment.”

The new deal comes after Johnson said he would negotiate a better deal than the EU offered former prime minister Theresa May. however, the EU previously said it wouldn’t negotiate a different deal.

All of that happened while Johnson lost his majority in British Parliament, as he kicked out members of his own party, and as parliament voted to prevent him from leaving the EU without a deal.

Notably, removing the United Kingdom from the EU has been one of Johnson’s major promises, and he originally said that would happen by the current Oct. 31 deadline with or without a deal.

What’s in the New Brexit Deal?

The new deal provides several key provisions that Johnson hopes will pass parliament’s scrutiny. First and most notably, the deal scraps the massively contentious Irish backstop.

The United Kingdom is composed of four countries: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The controversy surrounding the backstop specifically deals with Northern Ireland, which is on the same island as the independent Republic of Ireland. 

Right now, there is no hard border between those two countries, meaning there are no customs checks for goods crossing between the border. Under May’s deal, that soft border would have remained, but this was actually one of the big reasons her deal failed three times in parliament. Members of parliament believed this backstop would have essentially kept the UK in the EU.

Second, the new deal creates a new Northern Ireland-only backstop, which can become confusing since Northern Ireland is part of the U.K. Basically, the deal sets up a special arrangement where Northern Ireland would still remain subject to certain EU regulations, including agriculture, value-added tax on goods, excise duties, and state aid rules.

That, in turn, would prevent a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, but it would result in a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K., meaning that there would be customs checks and different regulations between the two which could lead to additional trade costs for the U.K.

Another caveat to the deal would also eventually give Northern Ireland lawmakers the chance to decide on whether or not they want to stay so closely aligned with the EU in the future.

Third, while the U.K. would leave the EU, it would still continue to apply EU rules until the end of next year. That time will be seen as a transition period meant to soften the split, especially since the deal does not look to the future relationship between the U.K. and the EU.

The period is meant to give them time to work out a trade deal, among other provisions, and it could be extended by up to two years if both sides agree they need more time. As far as May’s deal, this aspect is similar to her agreement.

Unlike May’s deal, this deal is non-binding, meaning the EU has the ability to change its mind.

Will the Deal Pass?

One of the major questions following the announcement of the agreement was whether or not the bill can stand against a parliament that has rejected Brexit votes multiple times. 

The removal of the Irish backstop is expected to be a sticking point for a lot of pro-Brexit Conservative MP’s, and a few opposition Labour Party MPs have expressed support. 

Johnson is expected to vote on the deal on Saturday, and if it does pass, the U.K. could actually meet its end of the month deadline.

But, it’s not going to be that easy. Many MPs from other parties have already said they will refuse to back the deal.

“From what we know, it seems the Prime Minister has negotiated an even worse deal than Theresa May’s,” Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn said.

The Liberal Democrats have also said they are opposed to the deal and have echoed Corbyn’s call for a second referendum as to whether the U.K. should even leave the EU. Brexit Party Leader Nigel Farage said he’s not voting for the deal, either.

If that’s not enough, the pro-British Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland issued their opposition to the deal, as well. That could make or break the deal’s passage as the DUP is a key ally for Johnson.

“These proposals are not, in our view, beneficial to the economic well-being of Northern Ireland and they undermine the integrity of the Union,” the party’s statement reads. 

Specifically, the party is not happy with Northern Ireland functioning as a hard border between the EU and the rest of the U.K.

Johnson’s deal, however, has been well-received outside of Britain among leaders of other EU countries. The President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, and France’s President Emmanuel Macron all expressed support for the deal and moving it forward.

Leo Varadkar, Prime Minister of Ireland, also agreed the deal was fair and said the deal solves the issue with Northern Ireland.

“[It] also creates a unique solution for Northern Ireland recognising the unique history and geography of Northern Ireland, one which ensures there is no hard border between north and south,” he said. 

If the deal ultimately passes through British Parliament, it will need to be approved by EU leaders in the European Parliament to bind them to the agreement.

If the deal fails, Johnson will be forced to ask the EU for an extension until the end of January. Though there’s been a lot of concern over whether he would actually do that, a secretary for Johnson has now said he will comply with the law.

See what others are saying: (Business Insider) (Washington Post) (The Guardian)

International

95-Year-Old Woman Dies After Police Tases Her in Nursing Home

Published

on

The officer involved was suspended with pay and charged with assault.


A 95-year-old Australian woman whom police tasered in a nursing home last week has reportedly died from her injuries.

Clare Nowland, who had dementia and required a walking frame to stand up and move, was living at the Yallambee Lodge in Cooma in southeastern Australia.

At about 4:15 a.m. on May 17, police and paramedics responded to a report of a woman standing outside her room with a steak knife.

They encountered Nowland, then reportedly tried to negotiate with her for several minutes, but she didn’t drop the knife.

The five-foot-two, 95-pound woman walked toward the two officers “at a slow pace,” police said at a news conference, so one of them tasered her.

She fell to the floor and reportedly suffered a fractured skull and a severe brain bleed, causing her to be hospitalized in critical condition.

Nowland passed away in a hospital surrounded by her family, the New South Wales police confirmed in a statement today.

After a week-long investigation, the police force also said that the senior constable involved would appear in court next week to face charges of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and common assault.

NSW police procedure states that tasers should not be used against elderly or disabled people absent exceptional circumstances.

Following the incident, community members, activists, and disability rights advocates expressed bewilderment and anger at what they called an unnecessary use of force, and some are now questioning why law enforcement took so long to prosecute the officer involved.

See what others are saying: (Reuters) (The New York Times) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

U.K. Police Face Backlash After Arresting Anti-Monarchy Protesters

Published

on

London Mayor Sadiq Khan said that some of the arrests “raise questions” and “investigations are ongoing.”


The Public Order Act

A controversial protest crackdown law in the U.K. is facing criticism after dozens of anti-monarchy protesters were arrested during the coronation ceremony in London over the weekend.

The law, dubbed the “Public Order Act” was passed roughly a week ahead of the coronation for King Charles III. It gives police more power to restrict protesters and limits the tactics protesters can use in public spaces. It was condemned by human rights groups upon its passing, and is facing a new round of heat after 52 people were arrested over coronation protests on Saturday.

In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said protesters were arrested for public order offenses, breach of the peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. The group said it gave advance warning that its “tolerance for any disruption, whether through protest or otherwise, will be low and that we would deal robustly with anyone intent on undermining the celebration.”

It is currently unclear how many of those arrested were detained specifically for violating the Public Order Act, however, some of those arrested believe the new law was used against them.

“Make no mistake. There is no longer a right to peaceful protest in the UK,” Graham Smith, the CEO of anti-monarchy group Republic tweeted after getting arrested. “I have been told many times the monarch is there to defend our freedoms. Now our freedoms are under attack in his name.”

An Attempt to “Diminish” Protests

During a BBC Radio interview, Smith also said he believes the dozens of arrests were premeditated. 

“There was nothing that we did do that could possibly justify even being detained and arrested and held,” Smith claimed. 

“The whole thing was a deliberate attempt to disrupt and diminish our protest.”

Yasmine Ahmed, the U.K. Director of Human Rights Watch, also tweeted that the arrests were “disgraceful.”

“These are scenes you’d expect to see in Russia not the UK,” she wrote. 

When asked about the controversy, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told reporters officers should  do “what they think is best” in an apparent show of support for the Metropolitan Police. 

For his part, London Mayor Sadiq Khan said he is looking into the matter.

“Some of the arrests made by police as part of the Coronation event raise questions and whilst investigations are ongoing, I’ve sought urgent clarity from Met leaders on the action taken,” Khan tweeted.

See what others are saying: (The Guardian) (CNN) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading

International

Foreign Nationals Make Mad Dash out of Sudan as Conflict Rages

Published

on

The conflict’s death toll has surpassed 420, with nearly 4,000 people wounded.


As the 10-day-long power struggle between rival generals tore Sudan apart, foreign governments with citizens in the country scrambled to evacuate them over the weekend.

On Sunday, U.S. special forces landed in the capital Khartoum and carried out nearly 100 American diplomats along with their families and some foreign nationals on helicopters.

An estimated 16,000 Americans, however, remain in the country and U.S. officials said in a statement that a broader evacuation mission would be too dangerous.

Christopher Maier, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity warfare, said in a statement that the Pentagon may assist U.S. citizens find safe routes out of Sudan.

“[The Defense Department] is at present considering actions that may include use of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to be able to observe routes and detect threats,” he said.

Germany and France also reportedly pulled around 700 people out of the country.

More countries followed with similar efforts, including the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Indonesia.

Yesterday, a convoy carrying some 700 United Nations, NGO, and embassy staff drove to Port Sudan, a popular extraction point now that the airport in Khartoum has closed due to fighting.

Reports of gunmen prowling the capital streets and robbing people trying to escape, as well as looters breaking into abandoned homes and shops, have persuaded most residents to stay indoors.

Heavy gunfire, airstrikes, and artillery shelling have terrorized the city despite several proposed ceasefires.

Over the weekend, the reported death toll topped 420, with nearly 4,000 people injured, though both numbers are likely to be undercounted.

See what others are saying: (The Guardian) (The New York Times) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading