I think the main issue I have, and likely many others too, is how strongly it is phrased. If he thinks he'll die in the next 5 or 10 years... fine, I guess? But that's unlikely, and with how things have shifted just in the past 25 years, making a statement like this seems arrogant.
Is that overanalysing a one line answer to a question? Probably, but that's what a politician gets and the effect of modern media.
Not to mention how the population and especially Labour supporters have turned pro-EU so he'll likely alienate that part of his base. Strong stances are seen as better, but I really feel sometimes he should take a softer approach.
Utterly insane take from him. Based on the strength of a single referendum that was likely influenced by a foreign power and carried out by some of the most determinedly incompetent leaders we've seen in a generation, we are to lose free trade, influence abroad, freedom to roam, consumer protections, and countless other benefits, to continue for the lifetime of an as yet unelected PM who has purged his party of anyone to the left of Barack Obama.
It should be enough to know that Russia prefers the current situation. I'd happily ditch the pound on that basis - it's not exactly as if sir Isaac has been running the mint lately.
Eh, why feed Reform or Conservatives any on-the-edge voters at this late an hour by making them fear a vote for Labour is a vote for more Brexit madness.
His statements are full of weasel words too, as have other party member’s statements. It’s not an insane take, just a “I don’t think we will” to avoid arming opponents with something to fearmonger with.
They need a term, and if they can change the perspective on EU membership and see polling supports rejoining (and they’ve the funds to pump into the obscene political advertising it’ll require to not get drowned out by Conservatives like before the referendum), they just might go for it in a second term.
Analysts say the far-right party has benefited from public anger at Macron, whose pro-business reforms have spurred the economy but…
French growth was only 0.9% in 2023, inflation is finally starting to slow down but was violent until recently and therefore purchasing power has collapsed, and unemployment has fallen mainly thanks to write-offs.
The far-right National Rally (RN) has strengthened in final polls, including one suggesting it could be on course for a historic parliamentary majority, as candidates fought for votes on the last day of campaigning before the first-round ballot in France’s most momentous election for decades.
One poll, for Les Echos newspaper, showed RN could win 37% of the national vote, two points more than a week ago, while another, for BFM TV, estimated the far-right party was on course for 260-295 seats – potentially giving it an outright majority.
A hung parliament, with Macron’s forces squeezed between two hostile bigger blocs, would lead to near-certain deadlock, while an RN majority would deliver a fraught cohabitation with a party radically opposed to the president on almost everything.
In a televised debate on Thursday evening, Bardella sought to reassure voters about RN’s foreign policy, saying he would “not let Russian imperialism absorb an allied state like Ukraine”, although he was opposed to sending long-range missiles to Kyiv.
Separately on Thursday, France’s media watchdog, Arcom, warned one of the country’s leading radio stations, Europe 1, over a two-hour elections talkshow presented every morning during the campaign by the controversial host Cyril Hanouna.
Hanouna, whose evening TV show has been fined a total of €7.5m (£6.36m) by Arcom for breaching rules on political balance, recently told listeners the leftist NFP alliance sought “the destruction of the republic, of the country and of our civilisation”.
The original article contains 838 words, the summary contains 240 words. Saved 71%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Valbuena, 37, is from Cali, which he describes as “the capital of salsa”; he now finds himself in the more sedate surroundings of Campdevànol, a village of 3,200 people in the foothills of the Catalan Pyrenees, as a pioneer in the programme Comunitats Rurals Queer.
With funding from the equality ministry of the Catalan regional government, Valbuena now shares a house in the village with two other Colombian refugees: Edwin Cardenas, 54, a trans man, and his partner Nazareth Moreno, 51, who is a lesbian.
One beneficiary of the Oportunitat500 scheme is Sabiha Kammoush, 50, a refugee from Aleppo, Syria, who for the past two years has been living in Bellaguarda, a tiny village – population 289 – surrounded by olive and almond groves in the Catalan interior, along with three of her six children.
Eunice Romero Rivera, responsible for migration, refugees and antiracism in the Catalan government, agrees: “If you dump 300 people in a village with a small population, and furthermore in a country which is quite racist, it’s hardly surprising that there’s a populist reaction,” she says.
Inspired by Riace, the social cooperative JungiMundu (“unite the world” in the local dialect) set about repopulating Camini, another Calabrian village, which now hosts 118 migrants in a total population of 810.
And in last month’s regional election, Campdevànol voted for Catalonia’s own xenophobic party, Aliança Catalana, whose leader Sílvia Orriols, says, among other things, that “it is impossible for a Muslim to be a Catalan”.
The original article contains 2,214 words, the summary contains 246 words. Saved 89%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
But a last-minute change of heart by Austria’s Green climate minister, whose vote is credited with saving the proposal, led to fury in Vienna, with the party of the chancellor, Karl Nehammer, announcing it would seek criminal charges against her for alleged abuse of power.
Seeking criminal charges for a democratically elected representative voting in favor of their alleged agenda sounds more fascist than conservative to me. Must be the evolution of language.
All of this is coming to the whole of Europe, with an ageing population and not reformed pension systems, you better start investing now and hope the stock market doesn't go the drain.
Here's a really good analysis of how it's not true the Boomers have all the money - there are lots of very comfortable Millennials too. It's more complicated than people like to think
Anywya, I do my own analysis based on data released by the federal reserve along with bls reports for income distributions. Not some shiti twatter shit post.
there are lots of very comfortable Millennials
Nobody said there werent affluent millenials, who mostly who come from rich families lol
Ah, yes, I had forgotten I should have invested when my rent was 100€ higher than my income.
Like, I mean, it is good advice for some people at the individual level. Specifically, those who can afford it. But an issue of this magnitude requires political, collective solutions.
I was thinking recently, with how many pollinators we're hemorrhaging, often simply because their habitat is destroyed or poisoned by pesticides, we really need to get some strips of untouched nature around the place. Cool, that there was already something in the works here.
Unfortunately it only tells countries to make a good effort. But that's better than nothing, and the current policy of doing nothing is at least out of the window.
As someone whose country just put the moronic Farmers party in charge of the environment, this EU law makes me very happy
Do you have some kind of pointer to a summary of what concrete impacts it actually has? Like, the article here doesn't list any concrete material. I see some phrases like "20% of land and sea". Given that Hungary and Austria were apparently both reluctant and both are land-locked, I am wondering if it was "20% of land and sea", where sea can substitute for land.
Does it basically ask EU members to designate at least 20% of their territory as a sort of national park?
The EC has a section on their website on the thing, but it's...really fluffy and full of marketing material. Their factsheet on the law is...very sparse on actual facts about the law.
EDIT: This Wikipedia page seems to reference what is a superset of it:
But the targets there don't seem to match up with what is going through, like:
The EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 includes the following targets:
Protect 30% of the sea territory and 30% of land territory especially primary forests and old-growth forests.
...whereas the law that went through uses "20%".
EDIT: Okay, that's definitely a superset of what was planned for the law, because the page does reference the targets that were actually taken being 20%.
The factsheet is vague because it tells countries to find a way to fix a problem. All countries have to come up with a realistic method to improve natural areas, 20% by 2026, 30% need a concrete plan by 2030 and 90% by 2050.
More importantly, there's a requirement that Member States make a significant effort to prevent worsening in the meantime.
What those plans are, is up to the Member States, but they need to be solid and realistic, not the usual vagueness
But a last-minute change of heart by Austria’s Green climate minister, whose vote is credited with saving the proposal, led to fury in Vienna, with the party of the chancellor, Karl Nehammer, announcing it would seek criminal charges against her for alleged abuse of power.
In an extraordinary display of division at the heart of Austria’s coalition government, Nehammer wrote to the Belgian presidency of the EU Council before the vote urging it to disregard his minister’s support and arguing that she did not have the right to take the position she had.
“Today marks a significant day for Europe as we transition from merely protecting and conserving nature to actively restoring it,” said César Luena, a centre-left MEP from Spain who led the European parliament’s negotiations on the law.
Copa and Cogeca, the EU’s biggest farming lobby group, criticised the slim majority of ministers voting in favour of the law, calling it a “flawed proposal” that would cause legal battles in regional, national and European courts.
“Political rhetoric aside, the question of the lack of clear and consistent funding for ecosystem restoration across the EU remains unanswered – partly explaining the great embarrassment and headlong rush that surrounds this law,” a spokesperson said.
Špela Bandelj Ruiz, a Greenpeace biodiversity campaigner, said: “Despite the weakening of the law, this deal offers a ray of hope for Europe’s nature, future generations and the livelihoods of rural communities.”
The original article contains 1,014 words, the summary contains 236 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I feel this is like the least controversial thing to happen in Austrian politics in the last 10 years... There is a long list of shit before this one that the ÖVP should be sued for...
Copa and Cogeca, the EU’s biggest farming lobby group, criticised the slim majority of ministers voting in favour of the law, calling it a “flawed proposal” that would cause legal battles in regional, national and European courts.
I suspect this is not so much to do with the lack of clarity regarding funds as the lobby group suggested in the article, and more to do with the fact this law paints a target on the back of the Agribusinesses that hide within this "Agricooperative" lobby, who are responsible for large biodiversity losses, and carbon emissions.
A Chinese state-owned company sought to use a partnership with a leading British university in order to access AI technology for potential use in “smart military bases”, the Guardian has learned.
Emails show that China’s Jiangsu Automation Research Institute (Jari) discussed deploying software developed by scientists at Imperial College London for military use.
Ministers have spent the past year stepping up warnings about the potential security risk posed by academic collaborations with China, with MI5 telling vice-chancellors in April that hostile states are targeting sensitive research that can “deliver their authoritarian, military and commercial priorities”.
They together raise questions about whether British science faculties understand that China has become increasingly authoritarian and militarised under Xi Jinping, and that proper due diligence is required in dealings with this state.”
A Channel 4 documentary last year revealed that Guo had written eight papers with Chinese collaborators at Shanghai University on missile design and using AI to control fleets of marine combat drones.
Of his previous collaborations, he said that the papers were classified as “basic research” and were written to help advance scientific knowledge in a broad range of fields rather than solving specific, real-world problems.
The original article contains 872 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
theguardian.com
Heiß