Open letter to the European Parliament: Call out the EU Council on its rule of law hypocrisy ǀ View
Euronews published the following article: A few weeks ago, the European Council appointed the European prosecutors who will be part of the European Public Prosecution Office (EPPO). Some might remember the controversy surrounding the appointment of its Chief Prosecutor last year. The Council appointed an independent panel to evaluate the candidates but, under pressure from the Romanian government, initially planned on choosing a different candidate other than Romanian prosecutor Laura Codruța Kövesi who was preferred as its first choice. Ultimately, the European Parliament shielded the procedure from national interference and the independent panel prevailed in their choice.
The Council has now done the opposite with respect to the selection of the European Prosecutors who will work under the guidance of the Chief Prosecutor. With respect to the candidates of three member states Belgium, Bulgaria, and Portugal, the Council has decided to choose a candidate other than the one recommended by the independent panel, all without providing any reasons as to why it has done so and without its deliberation being made public. This strikes a blow at the credibility of the independence of the EPPO and the rule of law in the European Union.
The Council Regulation which set up the EPPO put in place a set of institutional guarantees aimed at safeguarding its independence. These include an impartial and independent selection process for the European prosecutors, guided by criteria of fairness and competence. Under the Regulation, member states are only permitted to nominate three candidates for a position (without any order of preference) with the selection and appointment to be done by the Council with the support of an independent panel that reviews and ranks the candidates.
Respect for the integrity of this procedure is crucial to protect trust in the independence of the EPPO. One of the reasons for the selection to be done at the European – and not national – level is because these prosecutors, while part of the EPPO, will have significant powers in regard to the investigations to be conducted in their member states of origin. They cannot owe their appointment to their national governments. The way the decision of the Council in appointing the new prosecutors was taken clearly undermines this objective.
It is true that the Council is not legally bound by the ranking made by the independent panel. But the Council must, at least, provide the reasons for when it opts for a different candidate. The independent panel provided reasons for its ranking. The Council cannot change this ranking without any explanation. In the absence of these reasons, a shadow is cast over the selection made by the Council, diminishing the trust of European citizens in the independence of the prosecutors.
The absence of reasons, as well as the total lack of transparency, also makes it impossible for EU citizens and other EU bodies (in particular the European Parliament) to effectively scrutinise the selection made by the Council.
The suspicion (based on the statements made by some national governments critical of its decision) is that the Council simply replaced the preferences of the independent committee by those expressed by the national governments of the candidates. This undermines the intent of the Council Regulation for the selection to be done at the European level. As stated, the Regulation did not even authorise member states to express a preference for any of the three candidates of their nationality. EU law expressly differentiates instances when the power of appointment is conferred on member states acting together or, as in this instance, it is vested in the Council, a Union institution acting on behalf of the rule of law and governed by the rule of law.
By undermining the role of the independent committee without providing any reasons to do so, the Council undermined the credibility and the independence of the EPPO. This is reinforced by the absolute lack of transparency and the strong suspicion that the choice was ultimately placed in the hands of the national governments of the different candidates. This is the exact opposite of the rule of law that the European Union claims to protect.
It is also contrary to what the EPPO stands for. It is for this reason that we call upon the European Parliament – whose own authority in this matter is also at stake, having helped to set up the independent committee – to seek the annulment of the Council decision before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Union cannot claim to be a defender of the rule of law if its own Prosecution Office is born in violation of such rule of law.
Signed,
Alberto Alemanno, Professor, HEC, Paris
Andrea Simmoncini, Dean, Law School, Universitá de Firenze
Dimitry Kochenov, Professor, Groningen University Law School
Dominique Ritling, Professor, Strasbourg University Law School
Federico Fabrinni, Professor and Director Law Research Center, Dublin City University
Harm Schepel, Director of Law Programmes, Brussels School of International Studies, University of Kent
Laurent Pech, Head of the Law Department, Middlesex University, London
Loic Azoulai, Professor, Sciences Po, Paris University
Kalypso Nicolaides, Professor, Oxford University and School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute
Kim Lane Scheppele, Professor, Princeton University
Miguel Poiares Maduro, Professor, Global Law School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa and School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute
Oreste Pollicini, Law School, Universitá Bocconi
Paul Craig, Professor, Oxford University
Sébastien Platon, Professor of Public Law, University of Bordeaux
Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz, Professor and Director of the Department of European and Comparative Law, University of Gdańsk
<img class="js-image-replace" alt="Boris Johnson and Ursula von der Leyen" src="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/8356/production/_114722633_59e932f9-b3c9-48c5-af63-83b92dc6706b.jpg" width="976" height="549"/><span class="off-screen">Image copyright</span>
<span class="story-image-copyright">Reuters</span>
</span>
<figcaption class="media-caption"><span class="off-screen">Image caption</span>
<span class="media-caption__text">
Boris Johnson and Ursula von der Leyen spoke via video conference on Saturday
</span>
</figcaption></figure><p class="story-body__introduction">Prime Minister Boris Johnson and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have "agreed the importance" of finding a post-Brexit trade deal, Downing Street has said. </p>
They agreed progress has been made in talks between the EU and UK but “significant gaps” remain, No 10 said.
Both have instructed their chief negotiators to “work intensively” in order to try to bridge those gaps.
Negotiations between the UK and EU broke up without agreement.
Both sides are calling on the other to compromise on key issues, including fishing and government subsidies.
Mr Johnson and Mrs von der Leyen spoke during a phone call on Saturday and agreed to speak on a regular basis.
A Downing Street spokesperson said the two had agreed on the importance of finding an agreement “as a strong basis for a strategic EU-UK relationship in future.”
The UK’s chief negotiator, Lord Frost, tweeted that work to resolve differences between the UK and EU “begins as soon as we can next week”.
Speaking earlier, while on a visit to Leeds, Mr Johnson said he wants a deal like one struck between the EU and Canada, but reiterated the UK was ready should it have to leave without a deal.
“We’re resolved on either course, we’re prepared for either course and we’ll make it work but it’s very much up to our friends and partners,” Mr Johnson said.
It comes after Mrs von der Leyen called for talks to “intensify”, as both sides set an October deadline to settle their differences.
Asked about potential compromises that could be made, Mr Johnson said: “The balance of trade is overwhelmingly on the side of the EU in the sense that they export much more to us than we do to them, certainly in manufacturing goods, and so we think there is a big opportunity for both sides to do well.”
He pointed out that Canada is “some way away” but had managed to strike a deal with the EU while the UK remained the bloc’s biggest trading partner.
But he acknowledged a no-deal outcome where the UK would follow mainly World Trade Organization rules on trade with the EU was possible and would “work very well” – describing it as an Australia-style arrangement.
Speaking at the virtual Conservative Party conference, Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove said the talks with the EU had been “a tough process” but “with goodwill we should be able to get a deal”.
He added: “Recognising that we share the same high environmental and workforce standards as they do, but we want to do things in our own way, is a bit difficult for them and also there is the very vexed issue to do with fisheries.”
However, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told the conference the “days of being held over a barrel by Brussels are long gone”, as he stressed any trade deal must be “fair”.
The prime minister has set the deadline of the EU Council meeting on 15 October for securing a deal.
After six months of trade talks with the EU, Lord Frost has claimed the outlines of an agreement are visible, but he warned that, without further compromise from the EU, differences over the contentious topic of fishing may be impossible to bridge.
He described the final round of negotiations as “constructive” but “familiar differences remain”.
On fishing, the gap was “unfortunately very large” and he called for the EU to “move further before an understanding can be reached” on state aid.
His EU counterpart, Michel Barnier, agreed the negotiations had been conducted in a “constructive and respectful atmosphere”, with some “positive new developments on some topics” – such as aviation safety and police co-operation.
But he said there was “a lack of progress on some important topics”, such as climate change commitments, “as well as persistent serious divergences on matters of major importance for the European Union”, including state aid and fishing.
<span class="off-screen">Image copyright</span>
<span class="story-image-copyright">PA Media</span>
</span>
<figcaption class="media-caption"><span class="off-screen">Image caption</span>
<span class="media-caption__text">
The UK's chief negotiator, Lord David Frost
</span>
</figcaption></figure><p>The UK formally left the EU in January, but entered a transition period - where the UK has kept to EU trading rules and remained inside its customs union and single market - to allow the two sides to negotiate a trade deal.
Formal talks began in March and continued throughout the pandemic, but there have been concerns over whether a plan would be agreed before that period runs out on 31 December.
Issues that have become particular sticking points between negotiators are state aid – where governments give financial support to businesses – and fishing rules.
The EU has said a deal must be reached before the end of October to allow it to be signed off by the member states before the end of the year, while Mr Johnson has said both sides should “move on” if agreement was not reached by the middle of the month.
If a deal is not done, the UK will go on to trade with the bloc on World Trade Organization rules.
</span>
</figure><ul class="story-body__unordered-list"><li class="story-body__list-item">TEST AND TRACE EXPOSED: <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000n1xp/panorama-test-and-trace-exposed?xtor=CS8-1000-%5BIn_Article_Promo_Box%5D-%5BNews_Promo_In_Article%5D-%5BNews_Promo_In_Article_BBCiPlayer%5D-%5BPS_IPLAYER~N~m000n1xp~Panorama_testandtraced_0310_news%5D" class="story-body__link">Panorama hears from whistleblowers working on the coronavirus tracking system</a>
Jean-Paul Kamba, SJ – Lubumbashi, DRC & English Africa Service – Vatican City
Mwapusukeni Technical College, located in Lubumbashi, in the south-eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, opened its doors seven years ago.
In ciBemba, a language spoken around Lubumbashi in the DRC and neighbouring Zambia, Mwapusukeni comes from the verb “ukupusuka.” This means “to escape, survive or to rescue from danger.” Mwapusukeni is, therefore, a phrase addressed to someone who has just escaped an unfortunate or challenging situation; someone who has just been pulled out of danger or rescued before they could drown -literally or metaphorically. For a technical college to bear this name is both a challenge and an ambitious mission. The technical college’s aim is to become an educational institution that moulds students for a productive future, thus rescuing and empowering them for life. By mastering professional technique, the student graduating from Mwapusukeni will thus be trained to make a living for himself and family but also will be an asset for the region and t nation. He or she will contribute to the development of the DRC.
Mwapusukeni Technical College came into being as a donation from the couple, Carine and Moïse Katumbi, then Governor of what was known as the Katanga Province.
Educating young people is a priority for Jesuits
The education of young people is an integral part of the mission of the Society of Jesus, wherever the Jesuits are to be found. The Society has a long tradition of this, said the Mwapusukeni Director. It constitutes one of the four Universal Apostolic Preferences (To accompany young people in the creation of a hope-filled future) that the Jesuits gave to themselves in in 2019, added Fr Senker.
Mwapusukeni Technical College is a mixed school with an intake of about twenty per cent being girls. It aims to offer necessary technical training for young technicians and artisans. When everything is finally in place, the planned overall structure for Mwapusukeni, will be one that consists of the primary cycle (nursery & primary school); secondary school and the technical sections. Already in operation are the Automotive mechanics; Metal construction and the Industrial electronics departments. Plans are also underway to introduce specialised classes in plumbing, welding, electricity and IT.
Working in harmony with the Archdiocese of Lubumbashi
Asked about the response of the community to the technical college, Fr. Senker believes that the presence and contribution of the Jesuits is part and parcel of the pastoral vision of the Archdiocese of Lubumbashi.
“The echoes which reach us, and the results obtained to date prove, if need be, that the complementary contribution of the Society of Jesus in the educational sector in Lubumbashi is appreciated,” he said.
Challenges
Challenges are never lacking. The main ones are twofold: The first is the formation of both learners and formators in terms of skilled technical know-how. This challenge is being overcome by way of constant and ongoing training as well as updating of skills. The second, continues Fr. Senker, concerns the expensive cost of running a technical school, especially a private school, that does not benefit from any state subsidy. Fr. Senker appeals to people of goodwill to support the efforts of the college.
“In the case of a country like the Democratic Republic of Congo, having quality technicians is an asset for the nations’ development,” he emphasised.
“My life would be unthinkable without the Swiss Guards. They are always near me, day and night,” are the words of Pope Francis in the presentation of the plans. “Their professionalism, discipline, discretion, reliability and courtesy,” he wrote, “fill me with a great sense of gratitude.” “They are young men with a disciplined daily life, working 24 hours a day to assure me safety. For this reason it is extremely important that in the Vatican, which is becoming more and more a second homeland for them, their wives and children, that they have modern and at the same time safe housing,” the Pope wrote.
The project is being financed by the Foundation for the Renovation of the Barracks of the Papal Swiss Guard in the Vatican, a Swiss charity established in Solothurn in 2016. The president of the Foundation Jean-Pierre Roth, Commander Christoph Graf, architects Pia Durisch and Aldo Nolli, and a delegation from the Foundation had several meetings in the Vatican in recent days to present the new project.
“We have been encouraged and told to move forward and this is what we intend to do despite the difficult times we are living in,” Roth explained. He expressed confidence they will find the necessary funds from donors and foundations.
The current barracks clearly shows the signs of the times. “It is dilapidated and no longer offers the framework and equipment necessary to accommodate the Guards in conditions that conform to the norms in force,” wrote Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin in a letter, thanking the Foundation and donors.
The current barracks has become too small to house the Guards, making it impossible for family members to be accommodated there. This is why the Foundation chaired by Roth was created, in order to find donors who could contribute to the realization of the project, to make the Vatican “a second home” not only for soldiers who in their colourful and fascinating uniforms defend the Pope and guard the entrances to the State and the Apostolic Palace but also for their wives and children. Roth said, “It is important that the Guards can live in the Vatican with their families and that those who wish to marry are not forced to live outside.”
The need for space has in fact grown by about 30% due to the change in the rules regarding marriage, which have become less rigid. After a careful architectural study, it has been calculated that it is impossible to obtain the necessary space simply by renovating the current building. Therefore, a completely new building will have to be built in the same place.
Ecologically sustainable
The construction of a new building will be an opportunity to experiment with eco-sustainable construction techniques. According to architect Durisch, “Respect for the environment will be central according to what Pope Francis wrote in the encyclical “Laudato si’”, whose fifth anniversary is being celebrated this year.” He said they will recycle the demolition material and transform it into concrete. The new construction will have an eco-certification. Architect Nolli explained that the new Swiss Guard barracks will be “a sober structure which will need little maintenance and will use simple materials”.
Commander Christoph Graf is “convinced that the new building will make it easier to recruit Swiss youth who are enthusiastic about serving the Pope”.
Who are the Pontifical Swiss Guards?
The Pontifical Swiss Guard is the world’s longest-standing, but the smallest army in the world’s smallest independent state. What is regarded as the pope’s personal army, the Swiss Guard celebrated the 500th anniversary of its founding in 2006. Established on January 22, 1506, this year it turned 514.
However, the finest hour of the Pontifical Swiss Guard would come 21 years later when its members would be called upon to demonstrate not only their fighting skills but most importantly their absolute loyalty to the person of the Pope.
When the troops of Charles V of Spain, the Holy Roman Emperor, descended on Rome against Pope Clement VII on May 6, 1527, with all savagery in what is known as the Sack of Rome, the defence of the city was left only to the Roman Militia and the Swiss Guard.
Vastly outnumbered by the invaders, every single Swiss Guard defending the main point of entry, 147 of them, was slaughtered in the attack. In turn, they left 900 of the enemy dead. They fell gloriously together with two hundred fugitives, on the steps of the High Altar in St. Peter’s Basilica. Only 42 of the 189 Swiss Guards survived.
Pope Clement VII was spirited away at the last minute by the surviving Swiss Guard through a secret corridor called the ‘passetto’ from the Vatican to the nearby fortress of Castel Sant’Angelo.
The massacre of May 6th, 1527 was the proudest moment of the Swiss Guards and is commemorated each year in the Vatican with a swearing-in of all new guards to help remind them of the seriousness of their commitment in defending the Pope.
The signing of the Peace Agreement between the civilian-led Transitional Government and the Sudan Revolutionary Movements today is an historic achievement paving the way for inclusive and comprehensive peace in Sudan. The EU acknowledges the role of South Sudan in hosting and mediating the Sudanese peace talks.
All stakeholders are expected to implement the different aspects of this peace agreement in good faith and with continued spirit of collaboration for the benefit of the Sudanese people, who deserve and wish for peace, stability and economic development.
Those who have not yet joined, in particular the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North-Abdalaziz Al-Hilu and the Sudan Liberation Movement-Abdul Wahid Al-Nur, should follow and engage in serious negotiations with the Transitional Government.
The European Union will continue to support the country’s political and economic transition, which offers a unique opportunity to work towards a peaceful, democratic and prosperous Sudan.
Dominic Raab has vowed that Britain will no longer be ‘held over a barrel by Brussels’ as Downing Street insisted the two parties had agreed to ‘work intensely’ to resolve differences in Brexit talks.
Boris Johnson had said prior to today’s video call with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that he wanted to secure a trade deal similar to what Brussels has with Canada or Australia.
Negotiations have stalled over key issues such as fishing and government subsidies, with both sides calling on the other to reach a compromise.
Foreign Secretary Mr Raab echoed the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for a deal but insisted it needed to be in Britain’s interest.
Speaking at the virtual Conservative Party conference today, Mr Raab said: ‘Yes we want a free trade deal with the EU, but any deal must be fair.
‘The days of being held over a barrel by Brussels are long gone.
‘Under the Conservatives, there is no question: our Government will control our fisheries, our Parliament will pass our laws and our courts will judge them.’
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab, pictured, has vowed that the UK will no longer be ‘held over a barrel by Brussels’
Boris Johnson, pictured at a construction site in west London today, has said he wants a trade deal with Brussels similar to what the European Union has with Canada or Australia
The Prime Minister held talks today with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (Ceta) is the name of the type of deal Boris Johnson is eyeing up between the EU and Canada.
The two parties began negotiating more than a decade ago but only provisionally came into force in 2017, and still has not been formally signed off by all states within the block.
Ceta does not remove all tariffs, with taxes on imports remaining on poultry, meat and eggs, but does get rid of most.
It also increases the amount of goods that can be exported without extra charges, known as quotas, but some of them still remain as well.
There are also concerns over how much it benefits services and financial services, which are crucial to the UK economy.
Border checks also still remain, meaning goods, and paperwork, may have to be looked over at ports to ensure they meet regulatory requirements.
It has an impact on standards, with Ceta protecting EU ‘geographical indications’, meaning products such as Parma ham and camembert cheese can only be made in Italy and France respectively.
Canada then can’t import products calling themselves as such from other countries.
Government contracts are also opened up to each other as part of the deal, meaning Canadian companies could bid to carry out infrastructure projects in member states.
A Canada-style off-the-shelf deal has previously been proposed by the EU’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier but was turned down by Theresa May’s team.
Advertisement
It comes as Downing Street said this afternoon that the UK and the EU have agreed to ‘work intensively’ to resolve the differences in the talks.
Mr Johnson and Mrs Von der Leyen spoke via video conference to take stock of progress in the negotiations following the final scheduled round of talks between Brussels and the UK this week.
The pair have tasked chief negotiators, Britain’s Lord Frost and the EU’s Michel Barnier, with intensifying the talks after acknowledging that ‘significant gaps remained’ between the UK and Brussels.
The Prime Minister has set the deadline of the EU Council meeting on October 15 for securing a deal – only 12 days away.
A Downing Street spokesman said: ‘They agreed on the importance of finding an agreement, if at all possible, as a strong basis for a strategic EU-UK relationship in future.
‘They endorsed the assessment of both chief negotiators that progress had been made in recent weeks but that significant gaps remained, notably but not only in the areas of fisheries, the level playing field, and governance.
‘They instructed their chief negotiators to work intensively in order to try to bridge those gaps.
‘They agreed to speak on a regular basis on this issue.’
Earlier this morning, Mr Johnson told reporters that he was looking for a deal similar to what the bloc has with Canada or Australia.
He said: ‘I think there’s a good deal to be done and everybody knows what we want to do.
‘The EU has done a deal with Canada which is a long way away, big country but some way away.
‘Here we are, we’re the biggest trading partner of the EU, their biggest export market, plus we’ve been a member for 45 years – we want a deal like Canada’s, we want that one!’
He added: ‘If that’s not possible, and that wouldn’t be our call that would be their call, then the alternative is to have a deal like Australia which is another big country, further away, but it would work well and we could make it work very well.
‘We’re resolved on either course, we’re prepared for either course and we’ll make it work but it’s very much up to our friends and partners.’
It comes as the Environment Secretary said last night that Britain is ready to fight and win a new ‘Cod War’ with the EU if the trade negotiations collapse.
The Prime Minister held a video call with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, pictured together in January, this afternoon to try and come to an arrangement after weeks of deadlock
In an interview with the Mail, George Eustice said ministers have quietly put in place a ‘five-fold increase in our enforcement capacity’ over the last year in preparation for a possible stand-off with European trawlermen.
Fishing remains one of the key sticking points to a deal, with Boris Johnson unwilling to bow to demands that would allow EU trawlers to maintain permanent access to British waters.
Officials fear this could lead to a repeat of the 1970s ‘Cod Wars’, when British trawlers backed by the Royal Navy clashed with Icelandic coastguard vessels in a doomed attempt to maintain historic fishing rights in the North Atlantic.
Asked directly if Britain was ready to defend its waters in the event of No Deal, Mr Eustice said: ‘Yes, we are. And in fact, the main lesson of the Cod War was it’s much easier to protect your waters against access from overseas vessels than it is to try to defend a notion of an historic access that’s no longer available to us.’
Meanwhile, his predecessor, Michael Gove, said today he was ‘optimistic’ about the prospects of a deal.
Speaking in conversation with West Midlands Mayor Andy Street at the virtual Conservative Party conference, Mr Gove said: ‘I’m optimistic. It has been a tough process because the EU has never had to cope with any country leaving its orbit before, and it is a bit difficult.
‘As we leave the nest and become good neighbours rather than uncomfortable lodgers, the EU has to adjust.
‘And several aspects of the adjustment have proved difficult for the European Union – recognising that we share the same high environmental and workforce standards as they do but we want to do things in our own way is a bit difficult for them and also there is the very vexed issue to do with fisheries.
‘The EU think that they should have exactly the same access to our waters outside the European Union as they have inside.
‘But I think with goodwill we should be able to get a deal.’
It comes after Britain’s Brexit negotiator last night declared the ‘outlines of a deal’ were visible even as it emerged the process could last into next month.
Following the latest round of talks, David Frost said the two sides had held constructive discussions in a ‘good spirit’.
United Kingdom’s Brexit envoy David Frost arrives for a meeting with European Commission’s Head of Task Force for Relations with the United Kingdom Michel Barnier at the European Commission in Brussels today
Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, also spoke of progress on ‘many, many’ fronts.
Boris Johnson has suggested he could walk away from the negotiating table if no agreement is struck before an EU summit on October 15.
However the Mail understands that talks could last into next month if both sides feel an accord is in sight.
Environment Secretary George Eustice told the Mail last night that talks could continue for another three weeks.
‘We’ve really got to have some kind of heads of terms understanding about whether there’s a landing zone by the middle of October,’ he said. ‘And we really can’t let things stretch on much beyond the first week of November because businesses need to know where they stand.’
A source told the Mail that Michel Barnier, the lead EU negotiator, believed an agreement might not be signed until early next month.
In an interview last night, Mr Johnson appealed for European leaders to be ‘commonsensical’ and come to terms.
‘I hope that we get a deal, it’s up to our friends,’ he told the BBC. ‘They’ve done a deal with Canada of a kind that we want, why shouldn’t they do it with us? We’re so near, we’ve been members for 45 years. It’s all there, it’s just up to them.’
Mrs von der Leyen called for trade talks to intensify as she prepared to take stock of progress with Mr Johnson. The two leaders are to speak later today to discuss the next steps following the conclusion of the final scheduled round of formal talks.
News of the conference call prompted speculation of a final series of intensive talks – dubbed ‘the tunnel’.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, takes off her protective mask prior to making a statement regarding the Withdrawal Agreement at EU headquarters in Brussels yesterday
Mrs von der Leyen said the most difficult issues – including fisheries and state aid rules – still had to be resolved to get an agreement in place before the Brexit transition period ends on December 31. ‘It is good to have a deal, but not at any price,’ she said. ‘We have made progress on many, many different fields but of course the most difficult ones are still completely open.
‘But overall, where there is a will, there is a way, so I think we should intensify the negotiations. We are running out of time – around 100 days to the end of the year – so it is worth stepping up now.’
Speaking after the end of the ninth round of negotiations, Lord Frost said: ‘These were constructive discussions conducted in a good spirit.
‘In many areas of our talks, although differences remain, the outlines of an agreement are visible. I am concerned that there is very little time now to resolve these issues ahead of the European Council on 15 October.
‘For our part, we continue to be fully committed to working hard to find solutions.’
German chancellor Angela Merkel said the bloc was in ‘a constructive mood’ to seal a deal but that there had been no breakthrough so far. ‘As long as negotiations are ongoing, I remain optimistic,’ she said.
‘It will be a crucial phase over the next few days.’
Mr Barnier said: ‘We will continue to maintain a calm and respectful attitude, and we will remain united and determined until the end.’
He held a private meeting with MEPs earlier this week and a source familiar with the discussions said he downplayed the possibility of a deal before the summit.
A Downing Street spokesman said: ‘The middle of October is where we believe we would need to see a resolution to this in order to make sure we have all the things we need to have in place for the end of the transition period.’
If the EU want a Cod War, we’ll give them a Cod War! Environment Secretary George Eustice threatens standoff with EU trawlers if Brexit trade talks collapse
Britain is ready to fight and win a new ‘Cod War’ with the EU if Brexit trade negotiations collapse, the Environment Secretary said last night.
In an interview with the Mail, George Eustice said ministers have quietly put in place a ‘five-fold increase in our enforcement capacity’ over the last year in preparation for a possible stand-off with European trawlermen.
Fishing remains one of the key sticking points to a deal, with Boris Johnson unwilling to bow to demands that would allow EU trawlers to maintain permanent access to British waters.
Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs George Eustice arrives in Downing Street in central London to attend a Cabinet meeting on 30 September, 2020 in London, England
Officials fear this could lead to a repeat of the 1970s ‘Cod Wars’, when British trawlers backed by the Royal Navy clashed with Icelandic coastguard vessels in a doomed attempt to maintain historic fishing rights in the North Atlantic.
Asked directly if Britain was ready to defend its waters in the event of No Deal, Mr Eustice said: ‘Yes, we are. And in fact, the main lesson of the Cod War was it’s much easier to protect your waters against access from overseas vessels than it is to try to defend a notion of an historic access that’s no longer available to us.’
By the start of next year the so-called ‘cod squad’ of Royal Navy patrol craft will have doubled from three to six.
The Snezhkov family at a protest in Gomel on September 27
As reported by the World Union of Old believers, The Old Believers living in the historical region of their historically traditional regional residence in the Republic of Belarus became victims of the violence unfolding in this country before the whole world. On September 27-29, the Old Believers stated, the spouses German and Natalya Snezhkov were detained in the city of Gomel, after which the Belarusian authorities removed their young children – Aglaya and Matvey – to an orphanage.
Their supposed ‘crime’ was “simply to support the protests against falsification of the last presidential elections in Belarus”. The Snezhkovs did nothing illegal and did not violate the law in any way. Acting upon their rights, guaranteed by both international and national Belarusian laws, they peacefully, without weapons and even without slogans, took to the streets of their hometown together with other residents of Gomel demanding fair elections – according to the law. A few hours after this action, policemen came to the Old Believers’ home and carried out a search, after which the head of the family was taken away and then, a couple of days later, his wife was arrested and the children were taken away. The World Union of the Old Believers regards these actions as “an act of intimidation and an attempt to suppress the human freedoms given by God to openly express their moral views on the ongoing processes in society”.
The Old Believer tradition fosters in a person such qualities as utmost honesty, pedantic execution of the law, conscientiousness and responsibility in work, in social and family life. “It is not surprising that the carriers of these high moral qualities cause fear among ill-wishers” said the spokesperson of The World Union of Old Believers.
When speaking on behalf of the many millions of Old Believers throughout the world, their representative demands that “the Belarusian authorities immediately release the captured Snezhkov family. We intend to follow their fate, provide them with all possible legal and material assistance, turning, inter alia, to international institutions that ensure the protection of human rights. May the Lord give peace and prosperity to the long-suffering land of Belarus!” said the representative of the World Union of Old Believers.
At bottom, Christianity is favored in the policies and practices of government officials. Other religions are disfavored, as with Muslim travel bans.
Buzz Thomas | Guest columnist
Show Caption
Hide Caption
U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos discusses religious freedom during Nashville visit
U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos answers questions about religious freedom in education at the National Religious Broadcasters convention at the Gaylord Resort and Convention Center.
Buzz Thomas is a retired minister, attorney and a member of USA Today’s Board of Contributors.
Republicans can’t stop talking about religious freedom. Me neither. Liberty of conscience is one of the founding principles of our republic. Just read the first 16 words of the First Amendment.
But calling a cow a billy goat doesn’t make it one.
I’m afraid that what President Donald Trump and other Republican thought leaders keep referring to as religious liberty may not be the real deal. In fact, it comes dangerously close to something that might undermine the very freedom it purports to protect.
‘A haven for the cause of conscience’
America was founded as a “haven for the cause of conscience,” to borrow a term from Roger Williams, Pastor of the first Baptist church in America and founder and first governor of Rhode Island, Williams said it about his own state, but after passage of the First Amendment, it was true for all of America.
The U.S. Constitution guarantees “free exercise” of religion for persons of all faiths and “no establishment” for any faith – thereby erecting a “wall of separation” between church and state, according to Thomas Jefferson.
America’s churches flourished under this new arrangement. They were reliant on their own resources instead of tax dollars, and they were free to exercise their faith with enthusiasm and criticize their government where appropriate. Mostly, they were free to advocate their faith to the world without fear of reprisal, and hearers were free to answer yes or no. That’s what real religious freedom looks like.
Among modern U.S. presidents, none took to religious freedom more enthusiastically than Bill Clinton. He provided critical support to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, directed Secretary of Education Richard Riley to issue strong guidelines for protecting religious freedom in public schools and released guidelines to protect religious freedom in the federal workplace. Some of these guidelines have been updated and strengthened by Trump. President Barack Obama was also a friend to religious freedom, and when the Affordable Care Act was passed, he ensured that religious organizations had easy access to opt-out provisions from the ACA’s contraceptive mandate. Again, that’s what religious freedom looks like.
The tricky thing about religious freedom is that it has to be for everyone. Even for religions you may not like or people of no faith whatsoever. Otherwise, you slip back into that Old World European model that our ancestors fought so hard to escape.
Your state. Your stories. Support more reporting like this. A subscription gives you unlimited access to stories across Tennessee that make a difference in your life and the lives of those around you. Click here to become a subscriber.
What is Christian nationalism?
Which brings me to Christian nationalism. The merging of two very good things – Christianity and patriotism – into one very bad (and very dangerous) thing. Sort of like gasoline and matches. We want them both. Just not together.
Pence talks faith, pandemic, police at Latter-day Saints for Trump event
Vice President Mike Pence spoke Tuesday about issues like religious freedom, COVID-19 and the police at a Latter-day Saints for Trump event in Mesa.
Christian nationalism happens when church and state are linked. Politicians use God to baptize their policies, and clergy use tax dollars to fund their churches and schools. At bottom, Christianity is favored in the policies and practices of government officials. Other religions are disfavored, as with Muslim travel bans. Or where government-funded programs are allowed to hire only Christians. Or where the Supreme Court is asked to allow tax dollars to be used for private religious education. All of which the Trump administration is doing.
At first blush, this may appeal to you if you’re a Christian. But think back to what government support ultimately does to religion. In Europe, it destroyed it. Roger Williams said that on good days it produces hypocrites. On bad days? Rivers of blood.
What we want in America is what we’ve had. Religious freedom for all. And the recognition that my freedom is best guarded by protecting the freedom of my Jewish neighbor, my Muslim classmate or my Buddhist employee. America has the strongest religious and political institutions on the planet due in no small measure to the genius of our Constitution, which has kept the government neutral in matters of faith.
Christian nationalism threatens all of that. It would render unto Caesar not just Caesar’s things but God’s things. That can’t be good for either church or state. (To learn more about Christian nationalism, visit christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org).
Buzz Thomas is a retired minister, attorney and a member of USA Today’s Board of Contributors.
The purpose of the meeting was to provide an update to those present on the ongoing negotiations for a future relationship between Gibraltar and the EU
Gibraltar Chief Minister Fabian Picardo and the Deputy Chief Minister Dr. Joseph Garcia held a virtual meeting with members of the All-Party Group on Gibraltar on Thursday, which included Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords with Group Chair Sir Bob Neil MP.
The meeting included a broad cross spectrum of Members from the Conservative Party,
Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Scottish National Party and the Democratic Unionist Party
The purpose of the meeting was to provide an update to those present on the ongoing
negotiations for a future relationship between Gibraltar and the European Union.
The Chief Minister explained the objectives of the Gibraltar Government which were for an agreement on the future which does not cross Gibraltar’s red lines on sovereignty, jurisdiction and control. The Deputy Chief Minister provided an update on the plans for leaving the transition at the end of the year without an agreement.
There was a keen interest on the part of MPs and Peers in the situation here, which was reflected in many questions, and they expressed their continued support for Gibraltar going forward.
Member of the European Parliament Anna Cinzia Bonfrisco posted the following on her Facebook page:
“Today I made a parliamentary statement drawing attention to the evolving trade relations between EU and Azerbaijan, regardless of ongoing hostilities against Armenia, for which the Azerbaijani government bears responsibility, as well as to the latter’s very dangerous relations with Erdogan.
Hence, I addressed a question to the Commission, to clarify whether it was realized without the European values being taken into consideration, without the necessary mechanisms for monitoring the European subsidies, and moreover, how exactly is the EU going to answer to the President of Armenia calling for the assistance of the international community.
The Azerbaijani aggression against Armenia is a result of the EU institutions policy of giving consideration to the geopolitical perspective only when the business is concerned and keeping silence when there is a need to protect the weakest from injustice and violence.”
