A British minister said on Tuesday there was an "active debate" in government about apologising for the killing of hundreds of Indian civilians, as India prepared to mark the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/uk-flags-financial-implications-of-jallianwala-bagh-apology-calls-it-work-in-progress-209137">100th anniversary of the atrocity</a>.

On April 13, 1919, in Jallianwala Bagh British troops opened fire on thousands of unarmed protesters which remains an enduring scar of British colonial rule in India.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dt9RKu7i-W0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Colonial-era records show about 400 people died in the northern city of Amritsar when soldiers opened fire on men, women and children in an enclosed area, but Indian figures put the toll at closer to 1,000.

&nbsp;

Former British prime minister David Cameron described it as "deeply shameful" during a visit in 2013 but stopped short of an apology.

In a debate on the subject in London on Tuesday, foreign&nbsp;office Minister Mark Field said the massacre was a "shameful episode in our history and one that we deeply regret to this day."

He said: "It would not be appropriate for me, in the context of this particular debate, to apologise today, but I have found many of the speeches very very compelling and I will take up with the foreign secretary and number 10 Downing Street a sense that we perhaps need to do a little more than the very deep regrets that I have set out today."

He said representatives from the British High Commission would visit the site to lay a wreath and that the government would also publicly acknowledge the centenary in Britain.

A ceremony was due to take place at the site of the massacre on Saturday.

Earlier Bob Blackman, the Conservative MP who organised the debate, also called for the British government to say sorry, "not just explaining away what happened, but apologising for our involvement and what was done in our name". 
&nbsp;

A British minister said on Tuesday there was an "active debate" in government about apologising for the killing of hundreds of Indian civilians, as India prepared to mark the 100th anniversary of the atrocity.

A British minister said on Tuesday there was an "active debate" in government about apologising for the killing of hundreds of Indian civilians, as India prepared to mark the 100th anniversary of the atrocity. On April 13, 1919, in Jallianwala Bagh British troops opened fire on thousands of unarmed protesters which remains an enduring scar of British colonial rule in India. Colonial-era records show about 400 people died in the northern city of Amritsar when soldiers opened fire on men, women and children in an enclosed area, but Indian figures put the toll at closer to 1,000. Former British prime minister David Cameron described it as "deeply shameful" during a visit in 2013 but stopped short of an apology. In a debate on the subject in London on Tuesday, foreign office Minister Mark Field said the massacre was a "shameful episode in our history and one that we deeply regret to this day." He said: "It would not be appropriate for me, in the context of this particular debate, to apologise today, but I have found many of the speeches very very compelling and I will take up with the foreign secretary and number 10 Downing Street a sense that we perhaps need to do a little more than the very deep regrets that I have set out today." He said representatives from the British High Commission would visit the site to lay a wreath and that the government would also publicly acknowledge the centenary in Britain. A ceremony was due to take place at the site of the massacre on Saturday. Earlier Bob Blackman, the Conservative MP who organised the debate, also called for the British government to say sorry, "not just explaining away what happened, but apologising for our involvement and what was done in our name".

Need to do little more than very 'deep regrets' on Jallianwala Bagh: British minister Mark Fields

The British Ministry of Defence is in close touch with US officials and reviewing the status of its <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/rescue-teams-find-f-35-stealth-fighter-jet-wreckage-off-japan-coast-209186">17 F-35B fighter jets</a> after the crash of a Japanese F-35 jet in the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday, a ministry spokesperson said.

"Safety is of the utmost importance and very closely managed on the F-35 programme. We will continue to review the situation as further information becomes available," the spokesperson said.

Britain, which plans to buy a total of 138 F-35 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin, declared its fleet of F-35B fighter jets ready for initial combat operations from land in January.

The British Ministry of Defence is in close touch with US officials and reviewing the status of its 17 F-35B fighter jets after the crash of a Japanese F-35 jet in the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday, a ministry spokesperson said.

The British Ministry of Defence is in close touch with US officials and reviewing the status of its 17 F-35B fighter jets after the crash of a Japanese F-35 jet in the Pacific Ocean on Tuesday, a ministry spokesperson said. "Safety is of the utmost importance and very closely managed on the F-35 programme. We will continue to review the situation as further information becomes available," the spokesperson said. Britain, which plans to buy a total of 138 F-35 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin, declared its fleet of F-35B fighter jets ready for initial combat operations from land in January.

UK reviewing status of 17 F-35s after Japan crash

UK PM Theresa May releases video statement about Brexit

The British government said on Monday it will explore making <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-rights-groups-hit-out-at-singapores-fake-news-bill-207343">social media executives personally </a>liable for harmful content published on their platforms, in a raft of new online safety proposals.

The plans unveiled in a policy paper, which also include creating an independent regulator, aim to tackle all kinds of harmful content from encouraging violence and suicide to spreading disinformation and cyberbullying.

The issue has gained added urgency with <a href="Facebook chief Zuckerberg wants 'more active' govt role regulating internet">Facebook's failure to immediately</a> halt live streams of a March 15 attack by a self-avowed white supremacist on two mosques in New Zealand that killed 50 people.

Prime Minister Theresa May warned tech companies they had "not done enough" to protect users and that her government intended to put "a legal duty of care" on the firms "to keep people safe".

"For too long these companies have not done enough to protect users, especially children and young people, from harmful content," she said in a statement. "That is not good enough, and it is time to do things differently.

"Online companies must start taking responsibility for their platforms, and help restore public trust in this technology."&nbsp;

The new laws envisaged will apply to any company that allows users to share or discover user-generated content or interact with each other online.

That will include file hosting sites and chat forums as well as the better known social media platforms, messaging services and search engines.

Firms could face tough penalties for failing to meet the standards.

"We are consulting on powers to issue substantial fines, block access to sites and potentially to impose liability on individual members of senior management," the government said.

Under the proposals, a new regulator would have the power to force platforms and others to publish annual transparency reports. 
They would include the levels of harmful content disseminated on their sites and how they addressed the problem.

The regulator will also be able to issue codes of practice, which could compel companies to meet certain requirements, such as hiring fact-checkers, particularly during election periods.

"The era of self-regulation for online companies is over," Digital Secretary Jeremy Wright said, adding he wanted the sector to be "part of the solution".

"Those that fail to do this will face tough action," he vowed.

Proponents of tougher social media regulations welcomed the proposals.

"For too long social networks have failed to prioritise children's safety and left them exposed to grooming, abuse, and harmful content," said Peter Wanless, head of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

"It's high time they were forced to act through this legally binding duty to protect children, backed up with hefty punishments if they fail to do so."&nbsp;

The British government said on Monday it will explore making social media executives personally liable for harmful content published on their platforms, in a raft of new online safety proposals.

The British government said on Monday it will explore making social media executives personally liable for harmful content published on their platforms, in a raft of new online safety proposals. The plans unveiled in a policy paper, which also include creating an independent regulator, aim to tackle all kinds of harmful content from encouraging violence and suicide to spreading disinformation and cyberbullying. The issue has gained added urgency with Facebook's failure to immediately halt live streams of a March 15 attack by a self-avowed white supremacist on two mosques in New Zealand that killed 50 people. Prime Minister Theresa May warned tech companies they had "not done enough" to protect users and that her government intended to put "a legal duty of care" on the firms "to keep people safe". "For too long these companies have not done enough to protect users, especially children and young people, from harmful content," she said in a statement. "That is not good enough, and it is time to do things differently. "Online companies must start taking responsibility for their platforms, and help restore public trust in this technology." The new laws envisaged will apply to any company that allows users to share or discover user-generated content or interact with each other online. That will include file hosting sites and chat forums as well as the better known social media platforms, messaging services and search engines. Firms could face tough penalties for failing to meet the standards. "We are consulting on powers to issue substantial fines, block access to sites and potentially to impose liability on individual members of senior management," the government said. Under the proposals, a new regulator would have the power to force platforms and others to publish annual transparency reports. They would include the levels of harmful content disseminated on their sites and how they addressed the problem. The regulator will also be able to issue codes of practice, which could compel companies to meet certain requirements, such as hiring fact-checkers, particularly during election periods. "The era of self-regulation for online companies is over," Digital Secretary Jeremy Wright said, adding he wanted the sector to be "part of the solution". "Those that fail to do this will face tough action," he vowed. Proponents of tougher social media regulations welcomed the proposals. "For too long social networks have failed to prioritise children's safety and left them exposed to grooming, abuse, and harmful content," said Peter Wanless, head of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. "It's high time they were forced to act through this legally binding duty to protect children, backed up with hefty punishments if they fail to do so."

UK plans to hold social media giants liable for harmful content

Leaking roof suspends UK Parliament proceedings

Britain has begun issuing passports with the words "European Union" removed from the front cover -- <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-proposes-brexit-extension-to-end-on-june-30th-pm-theresa-may-to-eu-208119">despite Brexit being delayed</a> and uncertainty over when the country will leave the bloc.

The interior ministry confirmed that some passports introduced from March 30, the day after Britain was originally due to depart, no longer include references to the EU following a 2017 decision.

However, it said some newly-issued travel documents would still bear the bloc's name -- which has sat atop British passport covers -- in a bid to save public money.

"In order to use leftover stock and achieve best value for the taxpayer, passports that include the words 'European Union’ will continue to be issued for a short period," a spokeswoman said.

"There will be no difference for British citizens whether they are using a passport that includes the words European Union, or a passport that does not," she added, noting both designs would be "equally valid for travel".

Britain was set to leave the EU on March 29 but has been forced to delay its exit amid political paralysis in Westminster over the terms of the divorce deal.

Prime Minister Theresa May on Friday was forced to ask the bloc for another extension, until June 30, to prevent the country crashing out next Friday without an accord.

But it is unclear whether the other 27 EU members, which must give unanimous backing, will grant the request or insist on an even longer delay.

British passports have become ensnared in the country's Brexit divisions after the government announced in 2017 it would return to traditional blue passports "to restore national identity".

The travel documents had dark blue covers from 1921, but Britain switched to burgundy from 1988, in common with other passports in what was then the European Community.

Brexit backers are thrilled by the highly symbolic change, while those who support remaining in the bloc have mocked their excitement.

Last year it emerged that Franco-Dutch company Gemalto had won the contract to make the new blue passports, prompting fury from Brexit campaigners and more ridicule from Remainers that a British company was not chosen.

The new production contract is to begin in October 2019, with the passports currently being issued without reference to the EU on them still in the burgundy colour.

Britain has begun issuing passports with the words "European Union" removed from the front cover -- despite Brexit being delayed and uncertainty over when the country will leave the bloc.

Britain has begun issuing passports with the words "European Union" removed from the front cover -- despite Brexit being delayed and uncertainty over when the country will leave the bloc. The interior ministry confirmed that some passports introduced from March 30, the day after Britain was originally due to depart, no longer include references to the EU following a 2017 decision. However, it said some newly-issued travel documents would still bear the bloc's name -- which has sat atop British passport covers -- in a bid to save public money. "In order to use leftover stock and achieve best value for the taxpayer, passports that include the words 'European Union’ will continue to be issued for a short period," a spokeswoman said. "There will be no difference for British citizens whether they are using a passport that includes the words European Union, or a passport that does not," she added, noting both designs would be "equally valid for travel". Britain was set to leave the EU on March 29 but has been forced to delay its exit amid political paralysis in Westminster over the terms of the divorce deal. Prime Minister Theresa May on Friday was forced to ask the bloc for another extension, until June 30, to prevent the country crashing out next Friday without an accord. But it is unclear whether the other 27 EU members, which must give unanimous backing, will grant the request or insist on an even longer delay. British passports have become ensnared in the country's Brexit divisions after the government announced in 2017 it would return to traditional blue passports "to restore national identity". The travel documents had dark blue covers from 1921, but Britain switched to burgundy from 1988, in common with other passports in what was then the European Community. Brexit backers are thrilled by the highly symbolic change, while those who support remaining in the bloc have mocked their excitement. Last year it emerged that Franco-Dutch company Gemalto had won the contract to make the new blue passports, prompting fury from Brexit campaigners and more ridicule from Remainers that a British company was not chosen. The new production contract is to begin in October 2019, with the passports currently being issued without reference to the EU on them still in the burgundy colour.

UK starts issuing passports without 'European Union' on cover

British Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday afternoon met with opposition Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as part of her efforts to end Brexit impasse, but it seems that Corbyn is not in a rush to make a deal, according to experts.

Fraser Cameron, senior advisor of the European Policy Center, shared his views at the program Global Insight on the China Global Television Network (CGTN).

"It is obviously different this time in that she's reaching to the Labor Party, something that she should have done obviously two years ago. Having said that, I don't think Mr Corbyn is going to be [in] any rush to make a deal with Mrs May, because I don't think he wants the Labor Party tarnished with the Brexit brush," said Cameron.

"They want the Conservative Party to own this Brexit deal, and then Labor will hopefully win an early election. That is the strategy for Mr. Corbyn. I think there's a better chance, however, of getting a deal through parliament next week, which is the second alternative that Theresa May put to the nation last night," Cameron added.

Thom Brooks, professor of law and government at Durham University, said in the program that the problem of the United Kingdom is about a withdrawal agreement instead of a trade deal. He said that the Conservatives are divided over the Brexit deal, which makes the situation even worse.

"This big disagreement, this problem that Britain is in right now, is not about any trade deal, it's about a withdrawal agreement, it's about agreeing to the terms of leaving the European Union, not about the terms of the new wonderful trade deal that many who campaigned for Brexit were hoping to be moving on to. The largest party in parliament, the Conservatives, they are this divided as to what they want. It seems you get three people in the room, you get three different views as to what Brexit means. And the way they have been publicly attacking leaders of the European Union does not bode well for the kind of trade deals that they want to have in the future. So I think it is very much political," said Brooks.

In addition, Cameron said the EU will agree to extend the Brexit deadline again.

"There are two main reasons for this. One, they don't want to be blamed for no deal. So I think that's a very important concern, even for the French. Secondly, a no-deal will be extremely sort of damaging to the EU, as well as the UK. It is obviously, damage to UK more, but they don't want to have to go through all the very bad repercussions of a no-deal," Cameron said.

"I think if they want an extension, and I think this time what will be a lengthy extension, I think Britain will have to take part in the European Parliament elections in May, but at the end of the day, I think everybody will prefer the UK to stay in, rather than to actually leave. So there may be conditions attached to the decision next week, but I think in general, they will agree to an extension," said Cameron.

British Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday afternoon met with opposition Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as part of her efforts to end Brexit impasse, but it seems that Corbyn is not in a rush to make a deal, according to experts.

British Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday afternoon met with opposition Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn as part of her efforts to end Brexit impasse, but it seems that Corbyn is not in a rush to make a deal, according to experts. Fraser Cameron, senior advisor of the European Policy Center, shared his views at the program Global Insight on the China Global Television Network (CGTN). "It is obviously different this time in that she's reaching to the Labor Party, something that she should have done obviously two years ago. Having said that, I don't think Mr Corbyn is going to be [in] any rush to make a deal with Mrs May, because I don't think he wants the Labor Party tarnished with the Brexit brush," said Cameron. "They want the Conservative Party to own this Brexit deal, and then Labor will hopefully win an early election. That is the strategy for Mr. Corbyn. I think there's a better chance, however, of getting a deal through parliament next week, which is the second alternative that Theresa May put to the nation last night," Cameron added. Thom Brooks, professor of law and government at Durham University, said in the program that the problem of the United Kingdom is about a withdrawal agreement instead of a trade deal. He said that the Conservatives are divided over the Brexit deal, which makes the situation even worse. "This big disagreement, this problem that Britain is in right now, is not about any trade deal, it's about a withdrawal agreement, it's about agreeing to the terms of leaving the European Union, not about the terms of the new wonderful trade deal that many who campaigned for Brexit were hoping to be moving on to. The largest party in parliament, the Conservatives, they are this divided as to what they want. It seems you get three people in the room, you get three different views as to what Brexit means. And the way they have been publicly attacking leaders of the European Union does not bode well for the kind of trade deals that they want to have in the future. So I think it is very much political," said Brooks. In addition, Cameron said the EU will agree to extend the Brexit deadline again. "There are two main reasons for this. One, they don't want to be blamed for no deal. So I think that's a very important concern, even for the French. Secondly, a no-deal will be extremely sort of damaging to the EU, as well as the UK. It is obviously, damage to UK more, but they don't want to have to go through all the very bad repercussions of a no-deal," Cameron said. "I think if they want an extension, and I think this time what will be a lengthy extension, I think Britain will have to take part in the European Parliament elections in May, but at the end of the day, I think everybody will prefer the UK to stay in, rather than to actually leave. So there may be conditions attached to the decision next week, but I think in general, they will agree to an extension," said Cameron.

UK's Labor Party unlikely to make deal with May quickly, say experts

Gravitas: Are referendums healthy for democracy?

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - April 2nd, 2019

Britain, France and Germany are <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-says-missile-programme-defensive-after-us-alleges-it-carried-out-missile-test-180909">accusing Iran of developing missile technology</a>, following recent activities, that they said was inconsistent with a UN resolution, and are calling for a full UN report, according to a letter released Tuesday.

The European trio cited Iran's launch of a space vehicle and the unveiling of two new ballistic missiles in February as forming "part of trend of increased activity inconsistent" with the resolution, according to the letter sent to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.

UN Security Council Resolution 2231 — adopted just after the 2015 nuclear deal — calls on Iran "not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons."&nbsp;

Tehran insists that its missile program is defensive and that it has no intention of developing a nuclear capability.

The three countries asked Guterres to "report fully and thoroughly on Iranian ballistic missile activity" in his next report, which is expected in June.

The letter from the European countries, which are signatories to the nuclear deal along with the United States and Russia, came nearly a month after the United States made a similar appeal to the council, saying it was time to bring back tougher international restrictions on Tehran.

President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the nuclear accord in May last year and reimposed sanctions on Iran, citing concerns about missile development among its reasons.

At a council meeting in December, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for tighter restrictions on Iran to curb its missile program but Russia flatly asserted that there was no proof that Iran's missiles can carry a nuclear payload.

The European countries said the Safir space launch vehicle used for a satellite blastoff on February 6 is based on two other missiles and uses technology closely related to the development of long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles.

On February 7, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards unveiled the Dezful surface-to-surface missile which they claimed had a range of 1,000 kilometers, according to the letter sent on March 25.

During a public display in Tehran on February 4, Iran revealed a variant of the Khorramshahr ballistic missile that the letter said was "potentially an intermediate-range ballistic missile."

Iran reined in most of its nuclear program under the landmark nuclear deal with major powers but has kept up development of its ballistic missile technology.

Britain, France and Germany are accusing Iran of developing missile technology, following recent activities, that they said was inconsistent with a UN resolution, and are calling for a full UN report, according to a letter released Tuesday.

Britain, France and Germany are accusing Iran of developing missile technology, following recent activities, that they said was inconsistent with a UN resolution, and are calling for a full UN report, according to a letter released Tuesday. The European trio cited Iran's launch of a space vehicle and the unveiling of two new ballistic missiles in February as forming "part of trend of increased activity inconsistent" with the resolution, according to the letter sent to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. UN Security Council Resolution 2231 — adopted just after the 2015 nuclear deal — calls on Iran "not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons." Tehran insists that its missile program is defensive and that it has no intention of developing a nuclear capability. The three countries asked Guterres to "report fully and thoroughly on Iranian ballistic missile activity" in his next report, which is expected in June. The letter from the European countries, which are signatories to the nuclear deal along with the United States and Russia, came nearly a month after the United States made a similar appeal to the council, saying it was time to bring back tougher international restrictions on Tehran. President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of the nuclear accord in May last year and reimposed sanctions on Iran, citing concerns about missile development among its reasons. At a council meeting in December, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called for tighter restrictions on Iran to curb its missile program but Russia flatly asserted that there was no proof that Iran's missiles can carry a nuclear payload. The European countries said the Safir space launch vehicle used for a satellite blastoff on February 6 is based on two other missiles and uses technology closely related to the development of long-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles. On February 7, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards unveiled the Dezful surface-to-surface missile which they claimed had a range of 1,000 kilometers, according to the letter sent on March 25. During a public display in Tehran on February 4, Iran revealed a variant of the Khorramshahr ballistic missile that the letter said was "potentially an intermediate-range ballistic missile." Iran reined in most of its nuclear program under the landmark nuclear deal with major powers but has kept up development of its ballistic missile technology.

UK, France, Germany accuse Iran of developing missile technology

Brexit: No consensus on what next, 11 days to Brexit deadline

By Andy Price

For all the complexity that surrounds how (and, crucially, if) the UK leaves the European Union, the story of how it got into its current situation is actually incredibly simple. The Brexit that Prime Minister Theresa May has tried to engineer, a product of the internal tensions of her own party, was doomed from the start.

Coming to power as she did in the aftermath of the referendum, May made the one decision from which all her other missteps of the last few years would stem: she chose to represent one side, and one side only of the Brexit debate, and used this as the guiding star for her entire approach to Brexit.

From the moment she took office, she drew the reddest of red lines. At her Conservative Party conference speech in 2016, she introduced the mantras that would come to define her. We heard that “Brexit means Brexit”, that Britain would have a bright future as a sovereign nation outside of the EU.

A few months later at Lancaster House, she told the country she aimed to end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK. That essentially meant committing to leaving the single market and the customs union. Across these speeches, she also introduced into the political lexicon the phrase that has haunted most politicians since – that the “losers” of the 2016 referendum must respect the result as the “will of the people”.

Later still, as prime minister, May called a snap election in the name of helping her deliver Brexit. She openly dismissed anyone opposing Brexit – which at the very least meant the 16.5m who had voted remain – as “playing games with politics”.

In hock to the hardline Brexiteers within her own party, May pushed a for a version of Brexit that would make this small group of around 100 or so individuals happy, regardless of what millions out in the country though.

The impact of this approach should not be underestimated. It not only polarised the national debate, entrenching the fissures brought forth by the referendum, but it bound May to an approach to Brexit negotiations that rendered her deal dead on arrival. Her commitment to essentially a pure Brexit meant a border between the UK and the EU in Ireland or a softening of the very parameters she had staked her entire project on. It’s not hard to see how this would end.

Failings across the board 
 
May’s own mishandling of the entire project should form the centre of any analysis of how the UK got where it is now. However, she had many handmaidens helping her along the way.

Indeed, almost all MPs were blindsided by the result of the referendum. They were then rapidly cowed into submission by the “will of the people” mantra. The overwhelming parliamentary support for triggering Article 50 in February 2017 is a great example of this.

But there are individual MPs, and smaller groupings, who would help dye May’s red lines even redder. Of course, the European Research Group (ERG) has been key. Vocal ideologues like Iain Duncan Smith and Jacob Rees Mogg have kept the pressure up, hoping for a hard Brexit. For all their protestations, such a plan has never come close to carrying majority support in parliament.

In addition to the ERG, there are individual politicians who appear to view the whole exercise as one, great political game. Boris Johnson is the example par excellence. He amends his position on May’s deal according only to how it seems to apparently benefit his own leadership aspirations. And Nigel Farage – the most arch of the arch Brexiteers, who played a major role in the Brexit campaign, even if not an official one – continues to make great personal headway out of the whole farrago. He has radio shows, TV appearances, transport in private jets. He has most recently even been seen enjoying jolly japes with his supposed enemies in the EU. 
 
But perhaps the greatest helping hand May has had in limping towards the sad end of her Brexit project has come from the opposition. Blindsided by the fact that many of their constituencies voted Leave, and led by a man who is historically a eurosceptic, Labour has failed throughout the past two years to do the one thing the House of Commons is built to engender. Labour’s approach has been constructive ambiguity.

Though this may now finally be shifting at the eleventh hour, for nearly three years, Labour has neither come out against May’s Brexit or Brexit in general out of fear of its Leave constituents. It has therefore failed to challenge the government on its legislative programme. It has robbed the country of the one thing it needed more than ever in the face of a minority government that wasn’t listening – strong and clear opposition.

None of the above is particularly new, or hidden, or opaque: it is there in the historical record, for all of us to see. And it must be seen: to move past the unparalleled failure of May’s Brexit, the UK needs to learn – and quickly – from the woeful mistakes of a woefully unprepared political class.

(Andy Price is Head of Politics, Sheffield Hallam University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-is-not-just-theresa-mays-disaster-britains-whole-political-class-has-failed-a-nation-114463">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Andy Price For all the complexity that surrounds how (and, crucially, if) the UK leaves the European Union, the story of how it got into its current situation is actually incredibly simple.

By Andy Price For all the complexity that surrounds how (and, crucially, if) the UK leaves the European Union, the story of how it got into its current situation is actually incredibly simple. The Brexit that Prime Minister Theresa May has tried to engineer, a product of the internal tensions of her own party, was doomed from the start. Coming to power as she did in the aftermath of the referendum, May made the one decision from which all her other missteps of the last few years would stem: she chose to represent one side, and one side only of the Brexit debate, and used this as the guiding star for her entire approach to Brexit. From the moment she took office, she drew the reddest of red lines. At her Conservative Party conference speech in 2016, she introduced the mantras that would come to define her. We heard that “Brexit means Brexit”, that Britain would have a bright future as a sovereign nation outside of the EU. A few months later at Lancaster House, she told the country she aimed to end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK. That essentially meant committing to leaving the single market and the customs union. Across these speeches, she also introduced into the political lexicon the phrase that has haunted most politicians since – that the “losers” of the 2016 referendum must respect the result as the “will of the people”. Later still, as prime minister, May called a snap election in the name of helping her deliver Brexit. She openly dismissed anyone opposing Brexit – which at the very least meant the 16.5m who had voted remain – as “playing games with politics”. In hock to the hardline Brexiteers within her own party, May pushed a for a version of Brexit that would make this small group of around 100 or so individuals happy, regardless of what millions out in the country though. The impact of this approach should not be underestimated. It not only polarised the national debate, entrenching the fissures brought forth by the referendum, but it bound May to an approach to Brexit negotiations that rendered her deal dead on arrival. Her commitment to essentially a pure Brexit meant a border between the UK and the EU in Ireland or a softening of the very parameters she had staked her entire project on. It’s not hard to see how this would end. Failings across the board May’s own mishandling of the entire project should form the centre of any analysis of how the UK got where it is now. However, she had many handmaidens helping her along the way. Indeed, almost all MPs were blindsided by the result of the referendum. They were then rapidly cowed into submission by the “will of the people” mantra. The overwhelming parliamentary support for triggering Article 50 in February 2017 is a great example of this. But there are individual MPs, and smaller groupings, who would help dye May’s red lines even redder. Of course, the European Research Group (ERG) has been key. Vocal ideologues like Iain Duncan Smith and Jacob Rees Mogg have kept the pressure up, hoping for a hard Brexit. For all their protestations, such a plan has never come close to carrying majority support in parliament. In addition to the ERG, there are individual politicians who appear to view the whole exercise as one, great political game. Boris Johnson is the example par excellence. He amends his position on May’s deal according only to how it seems to apparently benefit his own leadership aspirations. And Nigel Farage – the most arch of the arch Brexiteers, who played a major role in the Brexit campaign, even if not an official one – continues to make great personal headway out of the whole farrago. He has radio shows, TV appearances, transport in private jets. He has most recently even been seen enjoying jolly japes with his supposed enemies in the EU. But perhaps the greatest helping hand May has had in limping towards the sad end of her Brexit project has come from the opposition. Blindsided by the fact that many of their constituencies voted Leave, and led by a man who is historically a eurosceptic, Labour has failed throughout the past two years to do the one thing the House of Commons is built to engender. Labour’s approach has been constructive ambiguity. Though this may now finally be shifting at the eleventh hour, for nearly three years, Labour has neither come out against May’s Brexit or Brexit in general out of fear of its Leave constituents. It has therefore failed to challenge the government on its legislative programme. It has robbed the country of the one thing it needed more than ever in the face of a minority government that wasn’t listening – strong and clear opposition. None of the above is particularly new, or hidden, or opaque: it is there in the historical record, for all of us to see. And it must be seen: to move past the unparalleled failure of May’s Brexit, the UK needs to learn – and quickly – from the woeful mistakes of a woefully unprepared political class. (Andy Price is Head of Politics, Sheffield Hallam University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Brexit is not just Theresa May’s disaster – Britain’s whole political class has failed a nation

No end to Brexit chaos

The chairman of British Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative Party said all options were on the table for how to get Britain out of its <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/brexit-mps-reject-theresa-mays-deal-by-58-votes-206641">Brexit impasse</a> but that seeking a customs union with the European Union would be difficult.

"We've got to look at what we can do next and we have to do something different," Brandon Lewis told BBC radio on Saturday when asked if May might try to put her withdrawal agreement to a parliamentary vote yet again.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-reject-brexit-deal-for-third-time-206565">Lawmakers rejected May's Brexit deal for a third time</a> on Friday, leaving Britain's withdrawal from the EU in turmoil on the day it was originally due to leave the bloc.

"Parliament will continue this process on Monday and we've got to look at all the options," Lewis said.

With parliament and the government deadlocked on May's deal, it remains unclear how, when or even whether Britain will leave the EU.

On Monday lawmakers will try to agree on an alternative Brexit plan that could command majority cross-party support. The options that have so far gathered most support involve closer ties to the EU and a second referendum.

Lewis said the option of a customs union would be difficult to pursue because it flew in the face of the Conservatives' pledges before the 2017 national election and did not respect the outcome of the 2016 Brexit referendum.

When asked if a way out of the impasse was to hold a fresh national election, Lewis said he did not think British voters wanted to return to the polls.

The BBC said government officials had not ruled out the possibility of a run-off vote in parliament between the most popular option proposed by lawmakers and May's deal.

Lewis backed May to continue as prime minister but said he was aware of a letter sent to her by Conservative lawmakers calling for her to resign.

The chairman of British Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative Party said all options were on the table for how to get Britain out of its Brexit impasse but that seeking a customs union with the European Union would be difficult.

The chairman of British Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative Party said all options were on the table for how to get Britain out of its Brexit impasse but that seeking a customs union with the European Union would be difficult. "We've got to look at what we can do next and we have to do something different," Brandon Lewis told BBC radio on Saturday when asked if May might try to put her withdrawal agreement to a parliamentary vote yet again. Lawmakers rejected May's Brexit deal for a third time on Friday, leaving Britain's withdrawal from the EU in turmoil on the day it was originally due to leave the bloc. "Parliament will continue this process on Monday and we've got to look at all the options," Lewis said. With parliament and the government deadlocked on May's deal, it remains unclear how, when or even whether Britain will leave the EU. On Monday lawmakers will try to agree on an alternative Brexit plan that could command majority cross-party support. The options that have so far gathered most support involve closer ties to the EU and a second referendum. Lewis said the option of a customs union would be difficult to pursue because it flew in the face of the Conservatives' pledges before the 2017 national election and did not respect the outcome of the 2016 Brexit referendum. When asked if a way out of the impasse was to hold a fresh national election, Lewis said he did not think British voters wanted to return to the polls. The BBC said government officials had not ruled out the possibility of a run-off vote in parliament between the most popular option proposed by lawmakers and May's deal. Lewis backed May to continue as prime minister but said he was aware of a letter sent to her by Conservative lawmakers calling for her to resign.

All Brexit options are on the table: UK Conservatives chair

UK Parliament votes on Brexit again

MPs are set for a momentous third vote Friday on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-theresa-may-offers-to-resign-in-parliament-on-brexit-206392">Prime Minister Theresa May</a>'s <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/brexit-no-majority-for-any-options-after-mps-votes-206299">Brexit</a> divorce deal, which could end a months-long crisis or risk Britain crashing out of the EU in two weeks.

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-vote-against-all-alternative-brexit-options-206122">House of Commons</a> has twice rejected May's withdrawal agreement, both times by large margins, but has been unable to agree any alternative -- and time is running out.

The pivotal vote takes place on the day Britain was supposed to leave the European Union until May asked the bloc's leaders last week for a little more time.

In a last-ditch bid to garner the support of discontented Conservative colleagues, she dramatically promised Wednesday to resign if the deal passed.

She appealed to Brexit supporters to back her, saying that under the delay plan hatched with Brussels, approval on Friday could see Britain out of the bloc on May 22.

But if the deal falls again, she must set out a new plan by April 12 -- with the options including a potentially catastrophic "no deal" Brexit, or a lengthy delay.

May's sacrifice swayed some of her critics, including former foreign minister Boris Johnson, but more than a dozen Conservative MPs still publicly oppose her deal.

Her Northern Irish allies, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), also continue to insist that its arrangements for the Irish border are unacceptable.

'Blindfold Brexit'

Without the support of her own side, May would have to rely on opposition Labour votes to get her deal through, but leader Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to vote against her.

Tory minister Andrea Leadsom issued a rallying cry, tweeting that "we can still make the 29th March the day we unite to make leaving the EU a reality.&nbsp;

"I hope colleagues across the House will take this last opportunity."

The government has decided to put only one part of the Brexit package to MPs, separating out the withdrawal terms from an accompanying political declaration on future ties.

Another vote will be required for Brexit to happen, but a date has not been set.

Labour's Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer said separating the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration was "not part of a plan, it's a desperate measure," that the party would not vote for.

"Take the political declaration off and it's completely blind, you've no idea what you're really voting for."

Britain is leaving the EU after 46 years of membership following a divisive 2016 referendum in which voters decided 52 to 48 percent for Brexit.

But MPs appear incapable of agreeing on how to implement the result, reflecting the nationwide divisions that persist on the issue.

The ensuing chaos has led business leaders and trade unions to warn of a "national emergency", while the pound slipped again on Thursday amid fears of what might happen.

May admits her agreement, reached last November during more than 18 months of negotiations, is a compromise but insists it is the best available.

It covers citizens' rights, Britain's financial settlement, plans for the Irish border and for a transition period to ease the split until new trade terms are agreed.

'Give people certainty'

Ardent Brexit supporters say it keeps Britain too close to the EU, but others say it does not do enough to protect relations with Britain's largest trading partner.

The crunch vote caps a tumultuous week in Westminster which also saw MPs seize control of parliamentary business for a day to test support for various Brexit options.&nbsp;

However, none of the eight options drawn up by various lawmakers secured a majority, although they are hoping to narrow down the field in another round of votes next Monday.

Any new approach at this point would likely require a much longer extension that would force Britain to take part in European Parliament elections in May.

"The EU will only agree an extension until&nbsp;May 22 if the withdrawal agreement is approved this week," said Leadsom.

"I encourage all MPs to support it and ensure that we leave the EU... giving people and businesses the certainty they need."&nbsp;

MPs were not originally due to sit on Friday but the government called an emergency session, starting at 9.30am (0930 GMT) with voting due at 2.30pm (1430 GMT).

MPs are set for a momentous third vote Friday on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit divorce deal, which could end a months-long crisis or risk Britain crashing out of the EU in two weeks.

MPs are set for a momentous third vote Friday on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit divorce deal, which could end a months-long crisis or risk Britain crashing out of the EU in two weeks. The House of Commons has twice rejected May's withdrawal agreement, both times by large margins, but has been unable to agree any alternative -- and time is running out. The pivotal vote takes place on the day Britain was supposed to leave the European Union until May asked the bloc's leaders last week for a little more time. In a last-ditch bid to garner the support of discontented Conservative colleagues, she dramatically promised Wednesday to resign if the deal passed. She appealed to Brexit supporters to back her, saying that under the delay plan hatched with Brussels, approval on Friday could see Britain out of the bloc on May 22. But if the deal falls again, she must set out a new plan by April 12 -- with the options including a potentially catastrophic "no deal" Brexit, or a lengthy delay. May's sacrifice swayed some of her critics, including former foreign minister Boris Johnson, but more than a dozen Conservative MPs still publicly oppose her deal. Her Northern Irish allies, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), also continue to insist that its arrangements for the Irish border are unacceptable. 'Blindfold Brexit' Without the support of her own side, May would have to rely on opposition Labour votes to get her deal through, but leader Jeremy Corbyn has vowed to vote against her. Tory minister Andrea Leadsom issued a rallying cry, tweeting that "we can still make the 29th March the day we unite to make leaving the EU a reality. "I hope colleagues across the House will take this last opportunity." The government has decided to put only one part of the Brexit package to MPs, separating out the withdrawal terms from an accompanying political declaration on future ties. Another vote will be required for Brexit to happen, but a date has not been set. Labour's Brexit spokesman Keir Starmer said separating the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration was "not part of a plan, it's a desperate measure," that the party would not vote for. "Take the political declaration off and it's completely blind, you've no idea what you're really voting for." Britain is leaving the EU after 46 years of membership following a divisive 2016 referendum in which voters decided 52 to 48 percent for Brexit. But MPs appear incapable of agreeing on how to implement the result, reflecting the nationwide divisions that persist on the issue. The ensuing chaos has led business leaders and trade unions to warn of a "national emergency", while the pound slipped again on Thursday amid fears of what might happen. May admits her agreement, reached last November during more than 18 months of negotiations, is a compromise but insists it is the best available. It covers citizens' rights, Britain's financial settlement, plans for the Irish border and for a transition period to ease the split until new trade terms are agreed. 'Give people certainty' Ardent Brexit supporters say it keeps Britain too close to the EU, but others say it does not do enough to protect relations with Britain's largest trading partner. The crunch vote caps a tumultuous week in Westminster which also saw MPs seize control of parliamentary business for a day to test support for various Brexit options. However, none of the eight options drawn up by various lawmakers secured a majority, although they are hoping to narrow down the field in another round of votes next Monday. Any new approach at this point would likely require a much longer extension that would force Britain to take part in European Parliament elections in May. "The EU will only agree an extension until May 22 if the withdrawal agreement is approved this week," said Leadsom. "I encourage all MPs to support it and ensure that we leave the EU... giving people and businesses the certainty they need." MPs were not originally due to sit on Friday but the government called an emergency session, starting at 9.30am (0930 GMT) with voting due at 2.30pm (1430 GMT).

UK lawmakers to vote for pivotal vote on May's Brexit deal

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-vote-against-all-alternative-brexit-options-206122">Britain's government</a> said it intended to hold a third parliamentary vote on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal on Friday but was awaiting the go-ahead from House of Commons speaker.

"We recognise that any motion brought forward tomorrow will need to be compliant with the speaker's ruling and that discussion is ongoing," Andrea Leadsom, who represents the government in parliament, told MPs.

"A motion will be tabled just as soon as possible and obviously by later today," Leadsom said Thursday.

Commons Speaker John Bercow has previously blocked a third vote on the deal, invoking a 17th-century statute that prevents parliament from voting on the same thing again and again.

"The only way we ensure we leave in good time on May 22 is by approving the withdrawal agreement by 11:00 pm on March 29," she said.

Leadsom pointed out that EU leaders had granted an extension until May 22 "provided that the withdrawal agreement is approved by the House of Commons this week".

 
&nbsp;

Britain's government said it intended to hold a third parliamentary vote on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal on Friday but was awaiting the go-ahead from House of Commons speaker.

Britain's government said it intended to hold a third parliamentary vote on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit deal on Friday but was awaiting the go-ahead from House of Commons speaker. "We recognise that any motion brought forward tomorrow will need to be compliant with the speaker's ruling and that discussion is ongoing," Andrea Leadsom, who represents the government in parliament, told MPs. "A motion will be tabled just as soon as possible and obviously by later today," Leadsom said Thursday. Commons Speaker John Bercow has previously blocked a third vote on the deal, invoking a 17th-century statute that prevents parliament from voting on the same thing again and again. "The only way we ensure we leave in good time on May 22 is by approving the withdrawal agreement by 11:00 pm on March 29," she said. Leadsom pointed out that EU leaders had granted an extension until May 22 "provided that the withdrawal agreement is approved by the House of Commons this week".

UK government plans third Brexit deal vote on Friday

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - March 26, 2019

UK lawmakers voted to take control of Brexit process

A man who hit the leader if Britain's opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn with an egg in an apparent attack provoked by his stance on Brexit was sentenced to 28 days in jail on Monday.

Closed-circuit television footage showed John Murphy, 31, approach Corbyn, who was visiting a Muslim community centre in London's Finsbury Park on March 3 with his wife and party supporters, and crack the egg on the side of his head.

Prosecutors said Murphy shouted "respect the vote", an apparent reference to the 2016 EU referendum result. The attack occurred days after Corbyn, 69, had said Labour would support a second referendum if it could not get backing for its alternative Brexit plans.

"Although Mr Corbyn was not seriously hurt, Murphy had come with a number of eggs that he could have used had he not been detained quickly," Kevin Christie, District Crown Prosecutor at CPS London North.

Murphy, who pleaded guilty, was jailed for 28 days and made to pay a 115-pound ($152) victim surcharge.

"Whilst I am in a very public role, it is often very painful to see my wife, my sons and my wider family suffer deep stress because of my role and because of this attack upon me," Corbyn said in a statement read out in court.

A man who hit the leader if Britain's opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn with an egg in an apparent attack provoked by his stance on Brexit was sentenced to 28 days in jail on Monday.

A man who hit the leader if Britain's opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn with an egg in an apparent attack provoked by his stance on Brexit was sentenced to 28 days in jail on Monday. Closed-circuit television footage showed John Murphy, 31, approach Corbyn, who was visiting a Muslim community centre in London's Finsbury Park on March 3 with his wife and party supporters, and crack the egg on the side of his head. Prosecutors said Murphy shouted "respect the vote", an apparent reference to the 2016 EU referendum result. The attack occurred days after Corbyn, 69, had said Labour would support a second referendum if it could not get backing for its alternative Brexit plans. "Although Mr Corbyn was not seriously hurt, Murphy had come with a number of eggs that he could have used had he not been detained quickly," Kevin Christie, District Crown Prosecutor at CPS London North. Murphy, who pleaded guilty, was jailed for 28 days and made to pay a 115-pound ($152) victim surcharge. "Whilst I am in a very public role, it is often very painful to see my wife, my sons and my wider family suffer deep stress because of my role and because of this attack upon me," Corbyn said in a statement read out in court.

Watch: Man jailed for hitting UK opposition leader Coryn with an egg

By Philomena Murray

There is a song by the Melbourne band Little Heroes, called One Perfect Day, from back in 1982 (though it still attracts a cult following). In it, the lead singer asks his ex-girlfriend in England: tell me, is it still raining there in England, and did the government fall last night?

Well, it is still raining. And there is still talk of the government of Theresa May falling. We just observed a week of three parliamentary votes on Brexit, where the government was defeated in two of them.

In another extraordinary day yesterday, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, invoked the “Erskine May” parliamentary rules of procedure. That means that an amendment “which is the same, in substance” as an issue that has already been voted on cannot be proposed again in parliament. The speaker said that a new proposal must be “not different in terms of wording, but different in terms of substance”. Unless there are significant changes to the substance of the government’s proposed Withdrawal Agreement, it cannot be sent back to the House for a third “meaningful” vote.

So, what might happen now, with nine days to go until the UK is supposed to leave the EU?

The UK could still leave without an agreement

If there is no parliamentary support for the Withdrawal Agreement, that does not mean the UK does not leave. The UK will leave on 29 March unless the UK government requests an extension to Article 50, which was activated by Theresa May two years ago on 29 March 2017. The Article says, among other things:

The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

If the UK leaves in a little over a week, it will no longer be in the EU and will no longer be party to hundreds of international treaties and thousands of pieces of legislation.

Proroguing the parliament is an option

What are the options in order to avoid crashing out this way? Could the British government somehow get the Withdrawal Agreement through parliament on a third attempt?

One step that Theresa May might be contemplating is taking the extraordinary measure of “proroguing” the parliament. Proroguing effectively means terminating the current session, without actually dissolving it, and having parliament reconvene in a new session. The government would then have the option – if the temporary suspension of the parliament goes smoothly – to re-send the Withdrawal Agreement for a meaningful vote to a newly-convened parliament.

This may not occur in time for the looming exit deadline, and May is unlikely to attempt to present the deal for a third time, unless the Speaker changes his position. So, May could be obliged to yet again set out for Brussels and some EU national capitals to shore up support for an extension of Article 50.

So far, no request to extend Article 50 
 
The EU has not yet received a formal request for an extension of Article 50, even though the House of Commons voted last week for such an extension and May has now indicated she will request one. Nathalie Loiseau, the French Minister for the EU, said, “No such request has been made”.

Perhaps giving a sense of the frustration in some EU capitals about the negotiations, Loiseau revealed she has called her cat Brexit because it is indecisive, as it “meows loudly to be let out each morning, but then refuses to go outside when she opens the door”.

The EU would no doubt request that an extension be fully justified – and there is little European appetite to reopen negotiations with Britain. The EU has been preparing for Brexit for some time.

It is conceivable that Theresa May could seek to justify a request that Article 50 be extended well beyond the 30 June 2019 date currently under discussion in the UK. But there are major problems with this, as the UK would need to take part in the European Parliament elections to take place in May this year. It could also be obliged to contribute to the new EU budget round, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework.

The Brexit saga continues 
​​​​​​​ 
Of course, the idea of voting more than once on a Brexit deal in Parliament raises again the call for a second referendum on EU membership by the people – a people’s vote.

Alternatively, the UK could remain in the EU and revoke Article 50. A recent court ruling that this does not require the consent of the other 27 EU states has emboldened those who are campaigning for a new referendum – although it is far from clear what questions would appear on the ballot paper.

The possibility of Theresa May resigning is never far from the minds of her detractors – whether the European Research Group in her own party, or the Labour party leadership under Jeremy Corbyn.

Meanwhile, the UK Trade Secretary Liam Fox has announced a trade deal that has just been initialled with Iceland and Norway. He stated that this was in addition to the agreement signed with Liechtenstein. At least Norway and Iceland are larger than Liechtenstein, a country of fewer than 38,000 people – famous for being the world’s largest exporter of false teeth.

These new trading partners are considerably smaller than the EU Single Market of over 500 million that the UK currently belongs to. They will certainly not fill the huge void left by Brexit.

Yet again, Theresa May’s government is no doubt hoping for just One Perfect Day, but it is not looking likely at the moment.

(Philomena Murray is Professor, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/nine-days-and-counting-what-options-does-the-uk-have-before-the-brexit-deadline-113910">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

By Philomena Murray There is a song by the Melbourne band Little Heroes, called One Perfect Day, from back in 1982 (though it still attracts a cult following). In it, the lead singer asks his ex-girlfriend in England: tell me, is it still raining there in England, and did the government fall last night?

By Philomena Murray There is a song by the Melbourne band Little Heroes, called One Perfect Day, from back in 1982 (though it still attracts a cult following). In it, the lead singer asks his ex-girlfriend in England: tell me, is it still raining there in England, and did the government fall last night? Well, it is still raining. And there is still talk of the government of Theresa May falling. We just observed a week of three parliamentary votes on Brexit, where the government was defeated in two of them. In another extraordinary day yesterday, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, invoked the “Erskine May” parliamentary rules of procedure. That means that an amendment “which is the same, in substance” as an issue that has already been voted on cannot be proposed again in parliament. The speaker said that a new proposal must be “not different in terms of wording, but different in terms of substance”. Unless there are significant changes to the substance of the government’s proposed Withdrawal Agreement, it cannot be sent back to the House for a third “meaningful” vote. So, what might happen now, with nine days to go until the UK is supposed to leave the EU? The UK could still leave without an agreement If there is no parliamentary support for the Withdrawal Agreement, that does not mean the UK does not leave. The UK will leave on 29 March unless the UK government requests an extension to Article 50, which was activated by Theresa May two years ago on 29 March 2017. The Article says, among other things: The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period. If the UK leaves in a little over a week, it will no longer be in the EU and will no longer be party to hundreds of international treaties and thousands of pieces of legislation. Proroguing the parliament is an option What are the options in order to avoid crashing out this way? Could the British government somehow get the Withdrawal Agreement through parliament on a third attempt? One step that Theresa May might be contemplating is taking the extraordinary measure of “proroguing” the parliament. Proroguing effectively means terminating the current session, without actually dissolving it, and having parliament reconvene in a new session. The government would then have the option – if the temporary suspension of the parliament goes smoothly – to re-send the Withdrawal Agreement for a meaningful vote to a newly-convened parliament. This may not occur in time for the looming exit deadline, and May is unlikely to attempt to present the deal for a third time, unless the Speaker changes his position. So, May could be obliged to yet again set out for Brussels and some EU national capitals to shore up support for an extension of Article 50. So far, no request to extend Article 50 The EU has not yet received a formal request for an extension of Article 50, even though the House of Commons voted last week for such an extension and May has now indicated she will request one. Nathalie Loiseau, the French Minister for the EU, said, “No such request has been made”. Perhaps giving a sense of the frustration in some EU capitals about the negotiations, Loiseau revealed she has called her cat Brexit because it is indecisive, as it “meows loudly to be let out each morning, but then refuses to go outside when she opens the door”. The EU would no doubt request that an extension be fully justified – and there is little European appetite to reopen negotiations with Britain. The EU has been preparing for Brexit for some time. It is conceivable that Theresa May could seek to justify a request that Article 50 be extended well beyond the 30 June 2019 date currently under discussion in the UK. But there are major problems with this, as the UK would need to take part in the European Parliament elections to take place in May this year. It could also be obliged to contribute to the new EU budget round, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework. The Brexit saga continues Of course, the idea of voting more than once on a Brexit deal in Parliament raises again the call for a second referendum on EU membership by the people – a people’s vote. Alternatively, the UK could remain in the EU and revoke Article 50. A recent court ruling that this does not require the consent of the other 27 EU states has emboldened those who are campaigning for a new referendum – although it is far from clear what questions would appear on the ballot paper. The possibility of Theresa May resigning is never far from the minds of her detractors – whether the European Research Group in her own party, or the Labour party leadership under Jeremy Corbyn. Meanwhile, the UK Trade Secretary Liam Fox has announced a trade deal that has just been initialled with Iceland and Norway. He stated that this was in addition to the agreement signed with Liechtenstein. At least Norway and Iceland are larger than Liechtenstein, a country of fewer than 38,000 people – famous for being the world’s largest exporter of false teeth. These new trading partners are considerably smaller than the EU Single Market of over 500 million that the UK currently belongs to. They will certainly not fill the huge void left by Brexit. Yet again, Theresa May’s government is no doubt hoping for just One Perfect Day, but it is not looking likely at the moment. (Philomena Murray is Professor, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Melbourne) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

What options does the UK have before the Brexit deadline?

Gravitas: UK issues warrant against Nirav Modi

Brexit Chaos: British Parliament vote to delay Brexit

British lawmakers <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/british-mps-rejects-prime-minister-theresa-mays-brexit-deal-by-149-votes-202966">crushed Prime Minister Theresa May's European Union divorce deal</a> on Tuesday, thrusting Britain deeper into crisis and forcing parliament to decide within days whether to back a no-deal Brexit or seek a last-minute delay.

Lawmakers voted against May's amended Brexit deal by 391 to 242 as her last-minute talks with EU chiefs on Monday to assuage her critics' concerns ultimately proved fruitless.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/theresa-mays-brexit-deal-defeat-plunges-uk-into-complete-uncertainty-203013">Also Read:&nbsp;Theresa May's Brexit deal defeat plunges </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/theresa-mays-brexit-deal-defeat-plunges-uk-into-complete-uncertainty-203013">UK</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/theresa-mays-brexit-deal-defeat-plunges-uk-into-complete-uncertainty-203013"> into complete uncertainty</a>

Remain supporters celebrated outside parliament on news that May's deal was rejected, but a leave supporter called the process of exiting the European Union a "farce".

The vote puts the world's fifth largest economy in uncharted territory with no obvious way forward; exiting the EU without a deal, delaying the March 29 divorce date, a snap election or even another referendum are all now possible.

In a tweet, the European Union's Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said the EU will not negotiate Brexit again.

"Listening to debate in @HouseofCommons : there seems to be a dangerous illusion that the UK can benefit from a transition in the absence of the WA (Withdrawal Agreement). Let me be clear: the only legal basis for a transition is the WA. No withdrawal agreement means no transition," Barnier wrote on his Twitter page.

In a separate tweet, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he regretted the outcome of the vote adding that the "EU continues to stand by the Withdrawal Agreement, including the backstop."

The bloc insists the divorce deal - already rejected by parliament in January - will not be revisited.

It expects Prime Minister Theresa May to ask for a delay to Brexit to avoid economic disruption should Britain leave with no plan in place.

British lawmakers crushed Prime Minister Theresa May's European Union divorce deal on Tuesday, thrusting Britain deeper into crisis and forcing parliament to decide within days whether to back a no-deal Brexit or seek a last-minute delay.

British lawmakers crushed Prime Minister Theresa May's European Union divorce deal on Tuesday, thrusting Britain deeper into crisis and forcing parliament to decide within days whether to back a no-deal Brexit or seek a last-minute delay. Lawmakers voted against May's amended Brexit deal by 391 to 242 as her last-minute talks with EU chiefs on Monday to assuage her critics' concerns ultimately proved fruitless. Also Read: Theresa May's Brexit deal defeat plunges UK into complete uncertainty Remain supporters celebrated outside parliament on news that May's deal was rejected, but a leave supporter called the process of exiting the European Union a "farce". The vote puts the world's fifth largest economy in uncharted territory with no obvious way forward; exiting the EU without a deal, delaying the March 29 divorce date, a snap election or even another referendum are all now possible. In a tweet, the European Union's Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said the EU will not negotiate Brexit again. "Listening to debate in @HouseofCommons : there seems to be a dangerous illusion that the UK can benefit from a transition in the absence of the WA (Withdrawal Agreement). Let me be clear: the only legal basis for a transition is the WA. No withdrawal agreement means no transition," Barnier wrote on his Twitter page. In a separate tweet, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said he regretted the outcome of the vote adding that the "EU continues to stand by the Withdrawal Agreement, including the backstop." The bloc insists the divorce deal - already rejected by parliament in January - will not be revisited. It expects Prime Minister Theresa May to ask for a delay to Brexit to avoid economic disruption should Britain leave with no plan in place.

UK parliament rejection of May's deal deepens Brexit division

By Chris Stafford

With just over two weeks to go until Brexit, Theresa May has once again failed to get her Brexit deal through parliament, leaving complete uncertainty about where the nation goes next. May lost the vote on her deal 391 to 242, a slightly higher level of support than in January but still a resounding defeat for a prime minister who increasingly appears to have lost control.

Following the defeat, the Prime Minister confirmed that MPs will now be able to vote on whether to oppose a no-deal Brexit. But she warned that the government would press ahead with planning for a no deal and that MPs would have to acknowledge that their vote does not change EU or UK law. If they fail to make a decision on what to do, no deal remains the default on March 29.

May said this will be a free vote, meaning she will not whip her party into voting to support her. In announcing this, she noted that “just like the referendum there are strongly held and equally legitimate views on both sides”, suggesting that this is another attempt to keep her fragile party together and prevent any more resignations, at least in the short term.

There will then be a vote on March 14 on whether to extend the Brexit process beyond March 29. But in another warning, May said “this does not solve the problems we face”. If MPs vote to extend, she said, the EU will want to know what they intend to do with that time. Do they want to revoke Article 50 entirely? Do they want to hold a second referendum? At the latter question, a large number of MPs cheered – while others shouted “no!”.

May added that she also believes there is still a majority for a deal. No one can doubt her tenacity and staying power. While other ministers have been scrambling to save their own careers and distance themselves from the ongoing mess, the prime minister has been nothing but persistent. Once again, pressure has been mounting on her to resign and although it is doubtful that such an action would really solve anything after her Brexit deal was once again rejected by parliament, even May must be asking herself whether it is worth staying on.

Time to go? 
 
May’s run as prime minister cannot go into the history books as anything other than a failure. To be fair, her inheritance from David Cameron was pretty lousy – a divided party tasked with delivering a major political action that had barely been planned for at all. But the difficulty of this task was compounded by weak leadership, a lack of party discipline and numerous bad decisions. Her latest was to try to sell a minor concession from the EU as a last-minute victory to try and convince MPs to support her deal. Once again, they weren’t buying what she was selling.

Backbench MPs continue to stir up trouble from the sidelines, refusing to follow the party line and facing minimal repercussions for their disloyalty. May’s loss on this latest vote came after the European Research Group of backbenchers held a meeting in their so-called “star chamber”, agreeing to rebel en masse and further suggesting that May has lost control of her party.

The fact that May has managed to make her time as PM last nearly three years with all of this going on is pretty impressive. And there are no clear mechanisms to force her to step down if she decides not to. She has shown she can weather votes of no confidence and she is safe from another party leadership challenge until the end of the year. But following this latest rejection of her Brexit deal, it is hard to see what she can do next or why she would even want to go to all the effort.

Many suspect that May will simply get parliament to vote again, hoping that enough MPs will flinch at the last minute and vote for it to avoid a no deal Brexit. But while not as large as her first defeat, this loss was significant. And with her rivals once again sensing blood in the water, many people probably wouldn’t hold it against her if she just decided to abandon ship like so many before her and get a head start on the lucrative lecturing circuit that has served some of her predecessors so well.

Now what? 
 
We know that the majority of MPs don’t want a no deal, but in voting against May’s deal they have made that much more likely. A vote in parliament against a no deal Brexit has no direct effect on the EU and Jean-Claude Juncker has already warned that there will be no third negotiation. It would be foolish to assume that this is not sincere. That all just makes a no deal more, not less, likely.

Taking this into account, it, therefore, isn’t clear if extending Article 50 will achieve much more than delaying the inevitable. Despite constant assurances from prominent Leavers that the EU will see sense at the last minute and give Britain what it wants, the remarkable outward unity of the EU has not wavered in the nearly three years since the referendum.

The fact is that the EU isn’t prepared to give into unrealistic demands from the UK to the detriment of itself. Given that the EU hasn’t seen fit to amend the terms of the deal by now, it is hard to see that this will change. The EU will likely grant an extension because it won’t want to be seen as forcing a no deal situation, but the fact that an extension into May would likely see Britain having to participate in the next European Parliament elections raises issues for both sides.

Regardless of how well you think she has done in the job, there is little doubting that May has done more or less all she can as prime minister. Delivering Brexit was never going to be an easy task and it has proved all consuming. With other policies failing as a result and her party even more divided, it may now be time for her to her to retire from Number 10 and let her critics in the party make good on their claims that they could do it better.

 
&nbsp;(Chris Stafford is Doctoral Researcher, University of Nottingham)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/theresa-may-loses-another-brexit-vote-is-it-time-she-just-gave-up-113294">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

 
&nbsp;

By Chris Stafford With just over two weeks to go until Brexit, Theresa May has once again failed to get her Brexit deal through parliament, leaving complete uncertainty about where the nation goes next.

By Chris Stafford With just over two weeks to go until Brexit, Theresa May has once again failed to get her Brexit deal through parliament, leaving complete uncertainty about where the nation goes next. May lost the vote on her deal 391 to 242, a slightly higher level of support than in January but still a resounding defeat for a prime minister who increasingly appears to have lost control. Following the defeat, the Prime Minister confirmed that MPs will now be able to vote on whether to oppose a no-deal Brexit. But she warned that the government would press ahead with planning for a no deal and that MPs would have to acknowledge that their vote does not change EU or UK law. If they fail to make a decision on what to do, no deal remains the default on March 29. May said this will be a free vote, meaning she will not whip her party into voting to support her. In announcing this, she noted that “just like the referendum there are strongly held and equally legitimate views on both sides”, suggesting that this is another attempt to keep her fragile party together and prevent any more resignations, at least in the short term. There will then be a vote on March 14 on whether to extend the Brexit process beyond March 29. But in another warning, May said “this does not solve the problems we face”. If MPs vote to extend, she said, the EU will want to know what they intend to do with that time. Do they want to revoke Article 50 entirely? Do they want to hold a second referendum? At the latter question, a large number of MPs cheered – while others shouted “no!”. May added that she also believes there is still a majority for a deal. No one can doubt her tenacity and staying power. While other ministers have been scrambling to save their own careers and distance themselves from the ongoing mess, the prime minister has been nothing but persistent. Once again, pressure has been mounting on her to resign and although it is doubtful that such an action would really solve anything after her Brexit deal was once again rejected by parliament, even May must be asking herself whether it is worth staying on. Time to go? May’s run as prime minister cannot go into the history books as anything other than a failure. To be fair, her inheritance from David Cameron was pretty lousy – a divided party tasked with delivering a major political action that had barely been planned for at all. But the difficulty of this task was compounded by weak leadership, a lack of party discipline and numerous bad decisions. Her latest was to try to sell a minor concession from the EU as a last-minute victory to try and convince MPs to support her deal. Once again, they weren’t buying what she was selling. Backbench MPs continue to stir up trouble from the sidelines, refusing to follow the party line and facing minimal repercussions for their disloyalty. May’s loss on this latest vote came after the European Research Group of backbenchers held a meeting in their so-called “star chamber”, agreeing to rebel en masse and further suggesting that May has lost control of her party. The fact that May has managed to make her time as PM last nearly three years with all of this going on is pretty impressive. And there are no clear mechanisms to force her to step down if she decides not to. She has shown she can weather votes of no confidence and she is safe from another party leadership challenge until the end of the year. But following this latest rejection of her Brexit deal, it is hard to see what she can do next or why she would even want to go to all the effort. Many suspect that May will simply get parliament to vote again, hoping that enough MPs will flinch at the last minute and vote for it to avoid a no deal Brexit. But while not as large as her first defeat, this loss was significant. And with her rivals once again sensing blood in the water, many people probably wouldn’t hold it against her if she just decided to abandon ship like so many before her and get a head start on the lucrative lecturing circuit that has served some of her predecessors so well. Now what? We know that the majority of MPs don’t want a no deal, but in voting against May’s deal they have made that much more likely. A vote in parliament against a no deal Brexit has no direct effect on the EU and Jean-Claude Juncker has already warned that there will be no third negotiation. It would be foolish to assume that this is not sincere. That all just makes a no deal more, not less, likely. Taking this into account, it, therefore, isn’t clear if extending Article 50 will achieve much more than delaying the inevitable. Despite constant assurances from prominent Leavers that the EU will see sense at the last minute and give Britain what it wants, the remarkable outward unity of the EU has not wavered in the nearly three years since the referendum. The fact is that the EU isn’t prepared to give into unrealistic demands from the UK to the detriment of itself. Given that the EU hasn’t seen fit to amend the terms of the deal by now, it is hard to see that this will change. The EU will likely grant an extension because it won’t want to be seen as forcing a no deal situation, but the fact that an extension into May would likely see Britain having to participate in the next European Parliament elections raises issues for both sides. Regardless of how well you think she has done in the job, there is little doubting that May has done more or less all she can as prime minister. Delivering Brexit was never going to be an easy task and it has proved all consuming. With other policies failing as a result and her party even more divided, it may now be time for her to her to retire from Number 10 and let her critics in the party make good on their claims that they could do it better. (Chris Stafford is Doctoral Researcher, University of Nottingham) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Theresa May's Brexit deal defeat plunges UK into complete uncertainty

The United Nations Security Council's 1267 committee will decide on March 13 whether <a href="http://www.wionews.com/photos/ghost-of-kandahar-how-masood-azhars-release-keeps-haunting-india-200294#the-deadly-kandahar-hijack-200288">Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar</a> should be listed as an international terrorist. (The vote will take place at 3 pm, New York time or 1.30 am on March 14, Indian Standard Time.)&nbsp;

India has urged the UNSC to put Azhar on the UN terror list.&nbsp;

The UN-listed, Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed had claimed responsibility for the February 14 Pulwama attack that had left over 40 CRPF personnel dead in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.&nbsp;

"All members of the UNSC are aware about Jaish-e-Mohammed training camps in Pakistan and about the chief of Jaish-e-Mohammad and his presence in Pakistan. We call upon all members of UNSC to list Masood Azhar as a designated terrorist under 1267 UN Sanctions Committee," Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Raveesh Kumar had said. &nbsp;

Azhar's listing as an international terrorist will put a freeze on his assets and put him on a global no-flight list. His listing will also help New Delhi point out how Pakistan has been an epicentre of terrorism.

France, along with the United States and the UK, had proposed Azhar's listing in the last week of February. Russia has supported the listing.

Deputy spokesperson of the US State Department Robert Palladino, reacting to Azhar's possible listing, said, "We will continue to work with the sanctions committee to ensure that the list is updated and that it’s accurate."

That leaves <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/responsible-discussions-can-resolve-the-issue-in-a-sustainable-manner-china-on-listing-jem-chief-masood-azhar-as-global-terrorist-at-unsc-202820">China as New Delhi's only worry</a>.&nbsp;

Beijing has blocked Masood Azhar's listing three times since 2016 when India first called for it.&nbsp;

Asked about Azhar's listing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang said on Monday that the matter can only be resolved in a "responsible manner".

"China has all along participated in relevant discussions in a responsible manner and in strict accordance with the rules of procedure and provisions of the 1267 committee. China will continue to communicate and work with relevant parties in a responsible manner so as to properly resolve this matter. Only by making a decision through responsible and serious discussions can we find a lasting solution."

While pressure has been growing on Islamabad — from Washington to Kabul — to act on terrorists, China has been reluctant so far to call out its all-weather ally. The reluctance has been primarily due to economic considerations which include CPEC — the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which provides China with connectivity to west Asia.

The United Nations Security Council's 1267 committee will decide on March 13 whether Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar should be listed as an international terrorist.

The United Nations Security Council's 1267 committee will decide on March 13 whether Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar should be listed as an international terrorist. (The vote will take place at 3 pm, New York time or 1.30 am on March 14, Indian Standard Time.) India has urged the UNSC to put Azhar on the UN terror list. The UN-listed, Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed had claimed responsibility for the February 14 Pulwama attack that had left over 40 CRPF personnel dead in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. "All members of the UNSC are aware about Jaish-e-Mohammed training camps in Pakistan and about the chief of Jaish-e-Mohammad and his presence in Pakistan. We call upon all members of UNSC to list Masood Azhar as a designated terrorist under 1267 UN Sanctions Committee," Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Raveesh Kumar had said. Azhar's listing as an international terrorist will put a freeze on his assets and put him on a global no-flight list. His listing will also help New Delhi point out how Pakistan has been an epicentre of terrorism. France, along with the United States and the UK, had proposed Azhar's listing in the last week of February. Russia has supported the listing. Deputy spokesperson of the US State Department Robert Palladino, reacting to Azhar's possible listing, said, "We will continue to work with the sanctions committee to ensure that the list is updated and that it’s accurate." That leaves China as New Delhi's only worry. Beijing has blocked Masood Azhar's listing three times since 2016 when India first called for it. Asked about Azhar's listing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lu Kang said on Monday that the matter can only be resolved in a "responsible manner". "China has all along participated in relevant discussions in a responsible manner and in strict accordance with the rules of procedure and provisions of the 1267 committee. China will continue to communicate and work with relevant parties in a responsible manner so as to properly resolve this matter. Only by making a decision through responsible and serious discussions can we find a lasting solution." While pressure has been growing on Islamabad — from Washington to Kabul — to act on terrorists, China has been reluctant so far to call out its all-weather ally. The reluctance has been primarily due to economic considerations which include CPEC — the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which provides China with connectivity to west Asia.

Decision today, India urges UNSC to list Masood Azhar as international terrorist

British Prime Minister Theresa May's government on Monday secured a three-part package of changes from the EU to the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/in-case-of-no-deal-brexit-eu-to-ask-britain-to-pay-close-to-50-billion-euros-202675">terms of its withdrawal deal</a>, hoping to win over <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/brexit-in-peril-as-pm-may-faces-heavy-defeat-202425">sceptical MPs</a>.

As May sealed the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/theresa-may-rushes-to-strasbourg-to-find-a-deal-as-brexit-crunch-looms-202707">deal in Strasbourg </a>with EU leaders, her de facto deputy, David Lidington, updated parliament in London on the plans.

"This evening in Strasbourg the prime minister... (has) secured legally binding changes that strengthen and improve the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration," he said.

He said this should be enough to persuade MPs to vote for the agreement on Tuesday, just 17 days before Britain is scheduled to leave the EU.

"Tomorrow there will be a fundamental choice -- to vote for the improved deal or to plunge this country into a political crisis," he said.

Three new documents have been agreed to run alongside the withdrawal agreement, which governs Britain's exit terms, and the political declaration on future trade terms.

First is a "joint legally binding instrument" on the withdrawal text, which addresses the deal's controversial "backstop" plan to keep open the border between EU member Ireland and the British province of Northern Ireland.

This "provides confirmation that the EU cannot try to trap the UK in the backstop indefinitely, and that doing so would be an explicit breach" of commitments on both sides, Lidington said.

The backstop would keep Britain in a customs union with the EU if and until another way -- such as a new trade deal -- could be found to avoid checks on the Irish border.

If the EU failed to try to find an alternative to the backstop, Lidington said Britain could use this joint instrument "as the basis for a formal dispute through independent arbitration", and ultimately get the backstop suspended.

The document also emphasises that both Britain and the EU want to find an alternative to the backstop by December 2020.

Finally, the document would put assurances EU leaders about the temporary nature of the backstop "onto a legally binding footing", Lidington said.

A second document would supplement the political declaration, and outline commitments from both sides on moving swiftly to this new relationship.

Thirdly, Britain has put forward a "unilateral declaration" with legal status in international law emphasising the temporary nature of the backstop, Lidington said.

This would clarify that Britain believes there is nothing in the Brexit deal to stop it seeking to exit the backstop if the EU fails to live up to its commitments to find a replacement.

British Prime Minister Theresa May's government on Monday secured a three-part package of changes from the EU to the terms of its withdrawal deal, hoping to win over sceptical MPs.

British Prime Minister Theresa May's government on Monday secured a three-part package of changes from the EU to the terms of its withdrawal deal, hoping to win over sceptical MPs. As May sealed the deal in Strasbourg with EU leaders, her de facto deputy, David Lidington, updated parliament in London on the plans. "This evening in Strasbourg the prime minister... (has) secured legally binding changes that strengthen and improve the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration," he said. He said this should be enough to persuade MPs to vote for the agreement on Tuesday, just 17 days before Britain is scheduled to leave the EU. "Tomorrow there will be a fundamental choice -- to vote for the improved deal or to plunge this country into a political crisis," he said. Three new documents have been agreed to run alongside the withdrawal agreement, which governs Britain's exit terms, and the political declaration on future trade terms. First is a "joint legally binding instrument" on the withdrawal text, which addresses the deal's controversial "backstop" plan to keep open the border between EU member Ireland and the British province of Northern Ireland. This "provides confirmation that the EU cannot try to trap the UK in the backstop indefinitely, and that doing so would be an explicit breach" of commitments on both sides, Lidington said. The backstop would keep Britain in a customs union with the EU if and until another way -- such as a new trade deal -- could be found to avoid checks on the Irish border. If the EU failed to try to find an alternative to the backstop, Lidington said Britain could use this joint instrument "as the basis for a formal dispute through independent arbitration", and ultimately get the backstop suspended. The document also emphasises that both Britain and the EU want to find an alternative to the backstop by December 2020. Finally, the document would put assurances EU leaders about the temporary nature of the backstop "onto a legally binding footing", Lidington said. A second document would supplement the political declaration, and outline commitments from both sides on moving swiftly to this new relationship. Thirdly, Britain has put forward a "unilateral declaration" with legal status in international law emphasising the temporary nature of the backstop, Lidington said. This would clarify that Britain believes there is nothing in the Brexit deal to stop it seeking to exit the backstop if the EU fails to live up to its commitments to find a replacement.

UK, EU agree three-part deal on Brexit deal

The future of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/brexit-in-peril-as-pm-may-faces-heavy-defeat-202425">Britain's exit from the European Union</a> hung in the balance on Tuesday as lawmakers prepared to vote on a divorce deal after Prime Minister Theresa May won last-minute assurances from the European Union.

Scrambling to plot an orderly path out of the Brexit maze just days before the United Kingdom is due to leave, May rushed to Strasbourg on Monday to agree 'legally binding' assurances with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

British lawmakers, who on January 15 voted 432-202 against her deal, were on Tuesday studying the assurances with lawyers. The government's top lawyer, Geoffrey Cox, is due to give his opinion on Tuesday ahead of the vote due around 1900 GMT.

"We have secured legal changes," May said in a late night news conference in Strasbourg beside Juncker, 17 days before the United Kingdom is due to leave the EU on March 29.

May said the assurances created an arbitration channel for any disputes on the backstop, "entrenches in legally-binding form" existing commitments that it will be temporary and binds the UK and EU to starting work on replacing the backstop with other arrangements by December 2020.

After two-and-a-half years of haggling since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Juncker cautioned this was the last chance for Britain. "It is this deal or Brexit might not happen at all," he said.

Sterling rose 1.5 percent against the dollar and to a near two-year high against the euro.

If lawmakers vote down May's deal, she has promised a vote on Wednesday on whether to leave without a deal and, if they reject that, then a vote on whether to ask for a limited delay to Brexit.

The United Kingdom's labyrinthine crisis over EU membership is approaching its finale with an array of possible outcomes, including a delay, a last-minute deal, a no-deal Brexit, a snap election or even another referendum.

Brexit will pitch the world's fifth largest economy into the unknown and many fear it will divide the West as it grapples with both the unconventional U.S. presidency of Donald Trump and growing assertiveness from Russia and China.

BREXIT VOTE

Supporters of Brexit say while the divorce might bring some short-term instability, in the longer term it will allow the United Kingdom to thrive and also enable deeper EU integration without such a powerful reluctant member.

Brexit-supporting lawmakers in May's party had accused her of botching the negotiations with Brussels. Many Brexiteers fear the backstop, aimed at avoiding controls on the border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU-member Ireland, could trap the United Kingdom in the EU's orbit indefinitely.

May announced three documents - a joint instrument, a joint statement and a unilateral declaration - which she said were aimed at addressing the Irish backstop, the most contentious part of the divorce deal she agreed with the EU in November.

Former Brexit Secretary David Davis welcomed the requirement to make alternative arrangements for the backstop, the date and the international arbitration.

"All those things together, make this just about, just about acceptable to me but it depends very, very heavily on a robust, clear response from (Attorney General Geoffrey) Cox," Davis told Talk Radio. "If Geoffrey Cox is at all equivocal about it then I think it will fall again."

The immediate reaction was cautious from Brexit-supporting lawmakers and from the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) which props up May's minority government.

"We will be taking appropriate advice, scrutinising the text line by line and forming our own judgement," a DUP spokesman said.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of a faction in May’s Conservative Party demanding a clean break from the EU, also said he was waiting for legal advice. "This has been desperately rushed," he told the BBC. "I think it would be better to have the vote tomorrow when people had more mature consideration."

The motion put forward by the government said the joint instrument "reduces the risk" that the United Kingdom would be trapped in the backstop.

If the backstop comes into force and talks on the future relationship break down, May said the unilateral declaration she announced would make clear there was nothing to stop London from moving to leave the backstop.

Former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, an opponent of Brexit, said the changes to May's deal did not make a material difference.

The future of Britain's exit from the European Union hung in the balance on Tuesday as lawmakers prepared to vote on a divorce deal after Prime Minister Theresa May won last-minute assurances from the European Union.

The future of Britain's exit from the European Union hung in the balance on Tuesday as lawmakers prepared to vote on a divorce deal after Prime Minister Theresa May won last-minute assurances from the European Union. Scrambling to plot an orderly path out of the Brexit maze just days before the United Kingdom is due to leave, May rushed to Strasbourg on Monday to agree 'legally binding' assurances with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. British lawmakers, who on January 15 voted 432-202 against her deal, were on Tuesday studying the assurances with lawyers. The government's top lawyer, Geoffrey Cox, is due to give his opinion on Tuesday ahead of the vote due around 1900 GMT. "We have secured legal changes," May said in a late night news conference in Strasbourg beside Juncker, 17 days before the United Kingdom is due to leave the EU on March 29. May said the assurances created an arbitration channel for any disputes on the backstop, "entrenches in legally-binding form" existing commitments that it will be temporary and binds the UK and EU to starting work on replacing the backstop with other arrangements by December 2020. After two-and-a-half years of haggling since the 2016 Brexit referendum, Juncker cautioned this was the last chance for Britain. "It is this deal or Brexit might not happen at all," he said. Sterling rose 1.5 percent against the dollar and to a near two-year high against the euro. If lawmakers vote down May's deal, she has promised a vote on Wednesday on whether to leave without a deal and, if they reject that, then a vote on whether to ask for a limited delay to Brexit. The United Kingdom's labyrinthine crisis over EU membership is approaching its finale with an array of possible outcomes, including a delay, a last-minute deal, a no-deal Brexit, a snap election or even another referendum. Brexit will pitch the world's fifth largest economy into the unknown and many fear it will divide the West as it grapples with both the unconventional U.S. presidency of Donald Trump and growing assertiveness from Russia and China. BREXIT VOTE Supporters of Brexit say while the divorce might bring some short-term instability, in the longer term it will allow the United Kingdom to thrive and also enable deeper EU integration without such a powerful reluctant member. Brexit-supporting lawmakers in May's party had accused her of botching the negotiations with Brussels. Many Brexiteers fear the backstop, aimed at avoiding controls on the border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU-member Ireland, could trap the United Kingdom in the EU's orbit indefinitely. May announced three documents - a joint instrument, a joint statement and a unilateral declaration - which she said were aimed at addressing the Irish backstop, the most contentious part of the divorce deal she agreed with the EU in November. Former Brexit Secretary David Davis welcomed the requirement to make alternative arrangements for the backstop, the date and the international arbitration. "All those things together, make this just about, just about acceptable to me but it depends very, very heavily on a robust, clear response from (Attorney General Geoffrey) Cox," Davis told Talk Radio. "If Geoffrey Cox is at all equivocal about it then I think it will fall again." The immediate reaction was cautious from Brexit-supporting lawmakers and from the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) which props up May's minority government. "We will be taking appropriate advice, scrutinising the text line by line and forming our own judgement," a DUP spokesman said. Jacob Rees-Mogg, leader of a faction in May’s Conservative Party demanding a clean break from the EU, also said he was waiting for legal advice. "This has been desperately rushed," he told the BBC. "I think it would be better to have the vote tomorrow when people had more mature consideration." The motion put forward by the government said the joint instrument "reduces the risk" that the United Kingdom would be trapped in the backstop. If the backstop comes into force and talks on the future relationship break down, May said the unilateral declaration she announced would make clear there was nothing to stop London from moving to leave the backstop. Former Attorney General Dominic Grieve, an opponent of Brexit, said the changes to May's deal did not make a material difference.

UK parliament to vote tonight on Prime Minister May's tweaked Brexit deal

Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba and other top officials of the Navy will embark on a three-day visit to the United Kingdom, starting Tuesday.

The upcoming visit of Admiral Lanba to the UK will integrate existing maritime cooperation initiatives as well as explore new avenues.

It also aims to take forward the vision that was set forth during Prime Minister Narendra Modi`s visit to the UK in November 2015.

During the three-day visit, Admiral Lanba is scheduled to hold discussions with the Chief of Defence Staff, the UK in London and the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff of the Royal Navy at Portsmouth.

He is also scheduled to visit the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) in London, RN Submarine Rescue Facility at Glasgow and interact with the organisers of the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo at Edinburgh.

In 1995, with the constitution of Indo-UK Defence Consultative Group (DCG) and the Group (MSG) a two-tier structure of cooperation was established to progress various areas of defence cooperation.

In September 2004, the two countries had inked a pact to embark upon strategic partnership which prominently figured by defence cooperation.

The ‘Service-level Staff Talks’ forum is officially known as ‘Executive Steering Group’ which is the primary mechanism for enhancing cooperation between the two Armed forces.

Indian Navy and Royal Navy are partners in the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), a Maritime Cooperation construct conceptualised and pioneered by Indian Navy in 2008.

RN participated in the 10th-anniversary celebrations of IONS at Kochi in November 2018.

The bilateral naval exercise KONKAN is a significant operational link between the two navies and is held every year, alternately off the coast of India and UK.

The two navies also interact on a host of issues like training, doctrinal concepts and Maritime Domain Awareness.&nbsp;

Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba and other top officials of the Navy will embark on a three-day visit to the United Kingdom, starting Tuesday. The upcoming visit of Admiral Lanba to the UK will integrate existing maritime cooperation initiatives as well as explore new avenues.

Indian Navy Chief Admiral Sunil Lanba and other top officials of the Navy will embark on a three-day visit to the United Kingdom, starting Tuesday. The upcoming visit of Admiral Lanba to the UK will integrate existing maritime cooperation initiatives as well as explore new avenues. It also aims to take forward the vision that was set forth during Prime Minister Narendra Modi`s visit to the UK in November 2015. During the three-day visit, Admiral Lanba is scheduled to hold discussions with the Chief of Defence Staff, the UK in London and the First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff of the Royal Navy at Portsmouth. He is also scheduled to visit the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) in London, RN Submarine Rescue Facility at Glasgow and interact with the organisers of the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo at Edinburgh. In 1995, with the constitution of Indo-UK Defence Consultative Group (DCG) and the Group (MSG) a two-tier structure of cooperation was established to progress various areas of defence cooperation. In September 2004, the two countries had inked a pact to embark upon strategic partnership which prominently figured by defence cooperation. The ‘Service-level Staff Talks’ forum is officially known as ‘Executive Steering Group’ which is the primary mechanism for enhancing cooperation between the two Armed forces. Indian Navy and Royal Navy are partners in the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS), a Maritime Cooperation construct conceptualised and pioneered by Indian Navy in 2008. RN participated in the 10th-anniversary celebrations of IONS at Kochi in November 2018. The bilateral naval exercise KONKAN is a significant operational link between the two navies and is held every year, alternately off the coast of India and UK. The two navies also interact on a host of issues like training, doctrinal concepts and Maritime Domain Awareness.

Navy Chief to embark on 3-day UK visit on Tuesday

Britain will face EU demands for billions of euros in cash if it fails to strike a Brexit deal, Brussels officials and diplomats said on Monday after talks with London stalled 18 days before it is due to leave the bloc.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/may-back-in-brussels-for-latest-brexit-showdown-195815">Prime Minister Theresa May</a> agreed a withdrawal treaty last year under which Britain would pay the European Union close to 50 billion euros over the coming years to meet commitments made while a member. But the British parliament has rejected the deal and the treaty will be void if nothing changes by March 29.

In the event of a no-deal exit, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uk-mps-outraged-by-tusks-special-place-in-hell-slur-195672">likely to cause economic disruption</a>, the EU would insist on Britain committing to settle those bills — a significant part of the EU budget — before any resumption of talks on how to manage future trading relations.

"Imagine all the bad blood and acrimony should we end up with a no-deal after two years of negotiations," an envoy who follows Brexit for one EU member state told Reuters.

"Yes, we would need to engage with them again. But not right away. And not before they show us the money."

With May planning to put the package to a second vote in parliament on Tuesday, her negotiators failed to secure concessions in Brussels at the weekend.

EU officials and national diplomats told Reuters they were growing pessimistic and looking at how a collapse of talks might play out.

An assumption in Brussels that May would ask for, and get, a delay to the deadline of a few weeks is in question: "We really want to be over with it now," one official said. "It's not going anywhere so even an extension is unlikely to break the impasse.

"There's not much patience or goodwill left on our side."

Even if there is a disorderly departure, both sides acknowledge that they will have to return to the table to negotiate a long-term free trade agreement and arrangements to avoid a "hard" customs border on land between the EU and the British province of Northern Ireland, the issue on which May's divorce deal has stalled.

But, EU diplomats and officials said, Brussels would put a price on those talks.

"First, they would have to agree to pay what they are due," an EU official said. Diplomats said negotiators have briefed the 27 other governments that this would be a condition for talks.

The other conditions would be to safeguard citizens' rights and find solutions for the Irish border, the sources said.

Another EU diplomat painted a picture of a Brexit snake eating its own tail in eternity.

"We have been very firm on these three issues because they are essential for us. And that doesn't change after a no-deal Brexit," the person said on condition of anonymity.

"So these would be back on the table as very clear conditions for starting trade talks, only the UK's position would be weakened again. It will be about what is your threshold for pain?"

Britain will face EU demands for billions of euros in cash if it fails to strike a Brexit deal, Brussels officials and diplomats said on Monday after talks with London stalled 18 days before it is due to leave the bloc.

Britain will face EU demands for billions of euros in cash if it fails to strike a Brexit deal, Brussels officials and diplomats said on Monday after talks with London stalled 18 days before it is due to leave the bloc. Prime Minister Theresa May agreed a withdrawal treaty last year under which Britain would pay the European Union close to 50 billion euros over the coming years to meet commitments made while a member. But the British parliament has rejected the deal and the treaty will be void if nothing changes by March 29. In the event of a no-deal exit, likely to cause economic disruption, the EU would insist on Britain committing to settle those bills — a significant part of the EU budget — before any resumption of talks on how to manage future trading relations. "Imagine all the bad blood and acrimony should we end up with a no-deal after two years of negotiations," an envoy who follows Brexit for one EU member state told Reuters. "Yes, we would need to engage with them again. But not right away. And not before they show us the money." With May planning to put the package to a second vote in parliament on Tuesday, her negotiators failed to secure concessions in Brussels at the weekend. EU officials and national diplomats told Reuters they were growing pessimistic and looking at how a collapse of talks might play out. An assumption in Brussels that May would ask for, and get, a delay to the deadline of a few weeks is in question: "We really want to be over with it now," one official said. "It's not going anywhere so even an extension is unlikely to break the impasse. "There's not much patience or goodwill left on our side." Even if there is a disorderly departure, both sides acknowledge that they will have to return to the table to negotiate a long-term free trade agreement and arrangements to avoid a "hard" customs border on land between the EU and the British province of Northern Ireland, the issue on which May's divorce deal has stalled. But, EU diplomats and officials said, Brussels would put a price on those talks. "First, they would have to agree to pay what they are due," an EU official said. Diplomats said negotiators have briefed the 27 other governments that this would be a condition for talks. The other conditions would be to safeguard citizens' rights and find solutions for the Irish border, the sources said. Another EU diplomat painted a picture of a Brexit snake eating its own tail in eternity. "We have been very firm on these three issues because they are essential for us. And that doesn't change after a no-deal Brexit," the person said on condition of anonymity. "So these would be back on the table as very clear conditions for starting trade talks, only the UK's position would be weakened again. It will be about what is your threshold for pain?"

In case of no-deal Brexit, European Union to ask Britain to pay close to 50 billion euros

British police briefly shut London's Westminster bridge and roads close to parliament and the capital's police headquarters on Saturday due to a suspicious vehicle.

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said officers had sealed off roads at Victoria Embankment next to the River Thames and close to New Scotland Yard, the head office of the Metropolitan Police, and by Parliament Square.

Images on social media showed a heavy police presence at the central London location that is popular with tourists. The roads were later re-opened.

"The incident in Victoria Embankment has now concluded," police said on Twitter. "The vehicle has been deemed non-suspicious. All roads will now be reopened."

The United Kingdom is on its second-highest level of terrorism alert after five attacks in 2017 killed a total of 36 people, including one incident on Westminster Bridge.

British police briefly shut London's Westminster bridge and roads close to parliament and the capital's police headquarters on Saturday due to a suspicious vehicle.

British police briefly shut London's Westminster bridge and roads close to parliament and the capital's police headquarters on Saturday due to a suspicious vehicle. A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said officers had sealed off roads at Victoria Embankment next to the River Thames and close to New Scotland Yard, the head office of the Metropolitan Police, and by Parliament Square. Images on social media showed a heavy police presence at the central London location that is popular with tourists. The roads were later re-opened. "The incident in Victoria Embankment has now concluded," police said on Twitter. "The vehicle has been deemed non-suspicious. All roads will now be reopened." The United Kingdom is on its second-highest level of terrorism alert after five attacks in 2017 killed a total of 36 people, including one incident on Westminster Bridge.

British police briefly close roads near parliament over security alert

Uk, News on Uk, stories on Uk, articles on Uk, Uk stories at Wion, Uk news, Uk latest news