UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/path-cleared-for-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-to-leave-ecuador-embassy-president-moreno-182030">Julian Assange</a> to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention reiterated its finding published in February 2016 that Assange had been de facto unlawfully held without charge in the embassy, where he has now been holed up for more than six years.

He initially took asylum to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where authorities wanted to question him as part of a sexual assault investigation. That investigation was dropped.

Assange, whose website published thousands of classified US government documents, denied the Sweden allegations, saying the charge was a ploy that would eventually take him to the United States where prosecutors are preparing to pursue a criminal case against him.

Britain says Assange will be arrested for skipping bail if he leaves the embassy, but that any sentence would not exceed six months if convicted. It had no immediate comment on the experts' call, but in June, foreign office minister Alan Duncan said Assange would be treated humanely and properly.

"The only ground remaining for Mr Assange’s continued deprivation of liberty is a bail violation in the UK, which is, objectively, a minor offence that cannot post facto justify the more than six years confinement that he has been subjected to since he sought asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador," the UN experts said in a statement.

"It is time that Mr Assange, who has already paid a high price for peacefully exercising his rights to freedom of opinion, expression and information, and to promote the right to truth in the public interest, recovers his freedom,” they said.

Lawyers for Assange and others have said his work with WikiLeaks was critical to a free press and was protected speech.

The experts voiced concern that his "deprivation of liberty" was undermining his health and could "endanger his life" given the disproportionate amount of anxiety that has entailed.

Ecuador in October imposed new rules requiring him to receive routine medical exams, following concern he was not getting the medical attention he needed. The rules also ordered him to pay medical and phone bills and clean up after his cat.

Assange has sued Ecuador, arguing the rules violate his rights. An Ecuadorean court on Friday upheld a prior ruling dismissing Assange's suit.

"We have lost again," said Carlos Povedo, Assange's attorney in Ecuador, adding that the legal team would consider bringing a case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition.

UN rights experts called on British authorities on Friday to allow WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to leave the Ecuador embassy in London without fear of arrest or extradition. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention reiterated its finding published in February 2016 that Assange had been de facto unlawfully held without charge in the embassy, where he has now been holed up for more than six years. He initially took asylum to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where authorities wanted to question him as part of a sexual assault investigation. That investigation was dropped. Assange, whose website published thousands of classified US government documents, denied the Sweden allegations, saying the charge was a ploy that would eventually take him to the United States where prosecutors are preparing to pursue a criminal case against him. Britain says Assange will be arrested for skipping bail if he leaves the embassy, but that any sentence would not exceed six months if convicted. It had no immediate comment on the experts' call, but in June, foreign office minister Alan Duncan said Assange would be treated humanely and properly. "The only ground remaining for Mr Assange’s continued deprivation of liberty is a bail violation in the UK, which is, objectively, a minor offence that cannot post facto justify the more than six years confinement that he has been subjected to since he sought asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador," the UN experts said in a statement. "It is time that Mr Assange, who has already paid a high price for peacefully exercising his rights to freedom of opinion, expression and information, and to promote the right to truth in the public interest, recovers his freedom,” they said. Lawyers for Assange and others have said his work with WikiLeaks was critical to a free press and was protected speech. The experts voiced concern that his "deprivation of liberty" was undermining his health and could "endanger his life" given the disproportionate amount of anxiety that has entailed. Ecuador in October imposed new rules requiring him to receive routine medical exams, following concern he was not getting the medical attention he needed. The rules also ordered him to pay medical and phone bills and clean up after his cat. Assange has sued Ecuador, arguing the rules violate his rights. An Ecuadorean court on Friday upheld a prior ruling dismissing Assange's suit. "We have lost again," said Carlos Povedo, Assange's attorney in Ecuador, adding that the legal team would consider bringing a case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

UN calls on UK to allow Julian Assange to leave Ecuador embassy freely

WION Speed News: Watch top national and international news of the morning - December 21st, 2018

Breaking News: Jim Mattis to step down in February, 2019

Gatwick airport reopens after 32 hours

British <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/what-next-for-brexit-four-main-scenarios-184840">ministers agreed Tuesday to make no-deal Brexit planning "an operational priority"</a> amid continued opposition to Prime Minister Theresa's May draft divorce deal, just 14 weeks before the country leaves the EU.

Following a meeting of her cabinet -- the last before parliament breaks for the Christmas/New Year break -- Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said around 3,500 troops would be on stand-by to help deal with "any contingencies" from a no-deal outcome.

But Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay said ministers still hoped to secure backing for May's agreement in a House of Commons vote delayed until next month.

He added that any responsible government would intensify preparations for the "default option" of leaving the European Union without a deal on March 29 next year.

"We agreed that preparing for no deal will be an operational priority within government," Barclay said. "But our overall priority remains to secure a deal."

He said departments would step up their advice to businesses on how best to prepare for the scenario, which many fear could be catastrophic for the British economy.

Businesses will be provided with a 100-plus page online preparation pack and emails will be sent to 80,000 of those most likely to be impacted over the next few days, according to Downing Street.

- Divisions - 
May's cabinet is divided between ministers who want the government to embrace a no-deal outcome and those who favour parliament having a final say in a series of votes on potential scenarios for Brexit.

One option is the prime minister's own Brexit deal, but that is hanging by a thread after she was forced to pull a vote on it last week in the face of huge opposition from within her own Conservative Party.

Earlier Tuesday, Downing Street reportedly blocked opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn's request Monday for a non-binding no-confidence motion in May.

That had followed her telling MPs they will not get to vote on her deal this week, but instead in the week beginning January 14.

The delay prompted accusations she was stalling to increase pressure on MPs to back the plan -- and fresh calls for Labour to table a binding no-confidence vote against the whole government.

However, such a move faces likely defeat after Conservative Brexit hardliners and the Democratic Unionist Party, which props up her government, both said they would back May.

- 'Running down the clock' - 
May insisted Monday that she was continuing to seek "assurances" from the EU over elements of her plan, although EU officials said no meetings were planned.

The postponed vote has left members of her own party and Labour opposition politicians infuriated.

"The prime minister has cynically run down the clock, trying to manoeuvre parliament into a choice between two unacceptable outcomes" -- her deal or no deal, Corbyn said.

May is also facing calls for a second referendum to resolve the impasse, with dozens of MPs from all sides now supporting another poll and reports that May's officials are also considering the possibility.

But the prime minister argued that this would betray the 2016 Brexit referendum result and undermine public confidence in politics.

"Let us not break faith with the British people by trying to stage another referendum," she told parliament on Monday.

"Another vote... would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics," May said, adding that it would also &nbsp;"likely leave us no further forward".

British ministers agreed Tuesday to make no-deal Brexit planning "an operational priority" amid continued opposition to Prime Minister Theresa's May draft divorce deal, just 14 weeks before the country leaves the EU.

British ministers agreed Tuesday to make no-deal Brexit planning "an operational priority" amid continued opposition to Prime Minister Theresa's May draft divorce deal, just 14 weeks before the country leaves the EU. Following a meeting of her cabinet -- the last before parliament breaks for the Christmas/New Year break -- Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said around 3,500 troops would be on stand-by to help deal with "any contingencies" from a no-deal outcome. But Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay said ministers still hoped to secure backing for May's agreement in a House of Commons vote delayed until next month. He added that any responsible government would intensify preparations for the "default option" of leaving the European Union without a deal on March 29 next year. "We agreed that preparing for no deal will be an operational priority within government," Barclay said. "But our overall priority remains to secure a deal." He said departments would step up their advice to businesses on how best to prepare for the scenario, which many fear could be catastrophic for the British economy. Businesses will be provided with a 100-plus page online preparation pack and emails will be sent to 80,000 of those most likely to be impacted over the next few days, according to Downing Street. - Divisions - May's cabinet is divided between ministers who want the government to embrace a no-deal outcome and those who favour parliament having a final say in a series of votes on potential scenarios for Brexit. One option is the prime minister's own Brexit deal, but that is hanging by a thread after she was forced to pull a vote on it last week in the face of huge opposition from within her own Conservative Party. Earlier Tuesday, Downing Street reportedly blocked opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn's request Monday for a non-binding no-confidence motion in May. That had followed her telling MPs they will not get to vote on her deal this week, but instead in the week beginning January 14. The delay prompted accusations she was stalling to increase pressure on MPs to back the plan -- and fresh calls for Labour to table a binding no-confidence vote against the whole government. However, such a move faces likely defeat after Conservative Brexit hardliners and the Democratic Unionist Party, which props up her government, both said they would back May. - 'Running down the clock' - May insisted Monday that she was continuing to seek "assurances" from the EU over elements of her plan, although EU officials said no meetings were planned. The postponed vote has left members of her own party and Labour opposition politicians infuriated. "The prime minister has cynically run down the clock, trying to manoeuvre parliament into a choice between two unacceptable outcomes" -- her deal or no deal, Corbyn said. May is also facing calls for a second referendum to resolve the impasse, with dozens of MPs from all sides now supporting another poll and reports that May's officials are also considering the possibility. But the prime minister argued that this would betray the 2016 Brexit referendum result and undermine public confidence in politics. "Let us not break faith with the British people by trying to stage another referendum," she told parliament on Monday. "Another vote... would do irreparable damage to the integrity of our politics," May said, adding that it would also "likely leave us no further forward".

UK puts 3,500 soldiers on standby for no-deal Brexit

A group of British MPs have launched a year-long campaign to lobby for Sikhism to be added as a separate ethnicity tick-box in the next UK census in 2021 after the country's statistical authority concluded it was not required.

The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for British Sikhs accused the Office of National Statistics (ONS) of ignoring "overwhelming" Sikh community support for such an additional category in order to ensure fair treatment of British Sikhs and address racial discrimination.&nbsp;

"The ONS with its latest proposals in the White Paper has now opened itself up to legal action and a claim of institutionalising discrimination against Sikhs," said Labour MP Preet Kaur Gill, Chair of the APPG for British Sikhs.

"MPs, with the support of gurdwaras, Sikh organisations and the community, are starting a year-long nationwide campaign to put this right and a Sikh ethnic tick box to be added when the Census Order 2019 is presented in the House of Commons," she said.

In a recently released White Paper, titled 'Help Shape Our Future: The 2021 Census of Population and Housing in England and Wales', the ONS said the estimates of the Sikh population can be met through data from the specific response option in the Sikh religion question.

"The ONS does not propose adding an additional specific response option to the 2021 Census ethnic group question because of the evidence that this would not be acceptable to a proportion of the Sikh population," the White Paper states.

"There are differing views within the Sikh population as to whether a specific response option should be added to the 2021 Census, and views on each side are passionately held. All respondents who stated they were ethnically Sikh (in question versions with or without a specific Sikh response option) also stated their religious affiliation was Sikh, it notes.

Sikhs are already recognised as a separate religion in the optional religious question introduced in the 2001 Census. The UK's Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 placed an obligatory and specific duty on the country's public authorities to monitor and positively promote race equality in the provision of public services.&nbsp;

According to some British Sikh groups such as Sikh Federation UK, public bodies tend to only reference the ethnic groups used in the census and demand a separate Sikh ethnic tick-box to ensure Sikhs have fair access to all public services.

"The recommendations fully recognise the need for good data on the Sikh community, both in terms of the need for high-quality data from the census and also wider across all public services. Everyone who wishes to identify as Sikh will be able to do so," said John Pullinger, UK's National Statistician, who has also written to the APPG for British Sikhs with assurances.&nbsp;

The Network of Sikh Organisation (NSO), which had campaigned against such a separate ethnicity tick-box, welcomed the conclusions of the White Paper as "common sense".

"The ONS has conducted significant research and consultation on this matter across the British Sikh community over a long period of time. They revealed focus groups conducted showed, 'younger second-generation participants wanted to express their Sikh background through the religion question as this is how they expected Sikh identity to be recorded'," the NSO said in a statement.

"In any case, from a doctrinal perspective, Guru Nanak was the founder of a great world religion, not an ethnic' group. Sikh teachings reject division of society on grounds of caste, creed, colour and, by the extension of this debate, ethnicity," it adds.

The ONS has also stressed that its "Digital First" census in 2021 will have a new "search-as-you-type" facility on the online form, which will allow anyone to identify as being of any particular ethnic identity, including Sikh.

"The ONS will also utilise the Digital Economy Act 2017 to help ensure data on the Sikh population is available across public services not just census collected data," it said.

The date for the next UK census has been confirmed as March 21, 2021, subject to parliamentary approval.&nbsp;

A group of British MPs have launched a year-long campaign to lobby for Sikhism to be added as a separate ethnicity tick-box in the next UK census in 2021 after the country's statistical authority concluded it was not required.

A group of British MPs have launched a year-long campaign to lobby for Sikhism to be added as a separate ethnicity tick-box in the next UK census in 2021 after the country's statistical authority concluded it was not required. The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for British Sikhs accused the Office of National Statistics (ONS) of ignoring "overwhelming" Sikh community support for such an additional category in order to ensure fair treatment of British Sikhs and address racial discrimination. "The ONS with its latest proposals in the White Paper has now opened itself up to legal action and a claim of institutionalising discrimination against Sikhs," said Labour MP Preet Kaur Gill, Chair of the APPG for British Sikhs. "MPs, with the support of gurdwaras, Sikh organisations and the community, are starting a year-long nationwide campaign to put this right and a Sikh ethnic tick box to be added when the Census Order 2019 is presented in the House of Commons," she said. In a recently released White Paper, titled 'Help Shape Our Future: The 2021 Census of Population and Housing in England and Wales', the ONS said the estimates of the Sikh population can be met through data from the specific response option in the Sikh religion question. "The ONS does not propose adding an additional specific response option to the 2021 Census ethnic group question because of the evidence that this would not be acceptable to a proportion of the Sikh population," the White Paper states. "There are differing views within the Sikh population as to whether a specific response option should be added to the 2021 Census, and views on each side are passionately held. All respondents who stated they were ethnically Sikh (in question versions with or without a specific Sikh response option) also stated their religious affiliation was Sikh, it notes. Sikhs are already recognised as a separate religion in the optional religious question introduced in the 2001 Census. The UK's Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 placed an obligatory and specific duty on the country's public authorities to monitor and positively promote race equality in the provision of public services. According to some British Sikh groups such as Sikh Federation UK, public bodies tend to only reference the ethnic groups used in the census and demand a separate Sikh ethnic tick-box to ensure Sikhs have fair access to all public services. "The recommendations fully recognise the need for good data on the Sikh community, both in terms of the need for high-quality data from the census and also wider across all public services. Everyone who wishes to identify as Sikh will be able to do so," said John Pullinger, UK's National Statistician, who has also written to the APPG for British Sikhs with assurances. The Network of Sikh Organisation (NSO), which had campaigned against such a separate ethnicity tick-box, welcomed the conclusions of the White Paper as "common sense". "The ONS has conducted significant research and consultation on this matter across the British Sikh community over a long period of time. They revealed focus groups conducted showed, 'younger second-generation participants wanted to express their Sikh background through the religion question as this is how they expected Sikh identity to be recorded'," the NSO said in a statement. "In any case, from a doctrinal perspective, Guru Nanak was the founder of a great world religion, not an ethnic' group. Sikh teachings reject division of society on grounds of caste, creed, colour and, by the extension of this debate, ethnicity," it adds. The ONS has also stressed that its "Digital First" census in 2021 will have a new "search-as-you-type" facility on the online form, which will allow anyone to identify as being of any particular ethnic identity, including Sikh. "The ONS will also utilise the Digital Economy Act 2017 to help ensure data on the Sikh population is available across public services not just census collected data," it said. The date for the next UK census has been confirmed as March 21, 2021, subject to parliamentary approval.

British MPs campaign for separate Sikh ethnicity in UK census

Perhaps one of the most important events of 2018, Brexit will completely change&nbsp;the fabric of the UK's economy.

And while its impact is still to be understood full, HBO has created a drama on it. Titled 'Brexit', the movie's trailer was recently released.&nbsp;

The film has Benedict Cumberbatch playing the man — Dominic Cummings — who orchestrated the "Vote Leave"&nbsp;campaign. Cummings was the Vote Leave campaign director from its creation in October 2015.

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E5S1EMmCWAE" width="560"></iframe>

The trailer has Cumberbatch playing the 'man behind Brexit', who goes around asking questions to the people of UK and creating an awareness about why the country had to leave the European Union. &nbsp;“Is it immigration? You can be honest. Is it race? Which countries don’t you like?” Cumberbatch can be seen asking.&nbsp;

The film’s trailer though received criticism on social media platforms as UK remains undivided on whether the decision to leave EU was taken fairly or not.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
How dare you make money from a criminal activity that its investigations are still ongoing!!!!
— Minoo Osborne (@MinooOsborne) <a href="https://twitter.com/MinooOsborne/status/1073881895736406017?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 15, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Perhaps one of the most important events of 2018, Brexit will completely change the fabric of the UK's economy. And while its impact is still to be understood full, HBO has created a drama on it.

Perhaps one of the most important events of 2018, Brexit will completely change the fabric of the UK's economy. And while its impact is still to be understood full, HBO has created a drama on it. Titled 'Brexit', the movie's trailer was recently released. The film has Benedict Cumberbatch playing the man — Dominic Cummings — who orchestrated the "Vote Leave" campaign. Cummings was the Vote Leave campaign director from its creation in October 2015. The trailer has Cumberbatch playing the 'man behind Brexit', who goes around asking questions to the people of UK and creating an awareness about why the country had to leave the European Union. “Is it immigration? You can be honest. Is it race? Which countries don’t you like?” Cumberbatch can be seen asking. The film’s trailer though received criticism on social media platforms as UK remains undivided on whether the decision to leave EU was taken fairly or not. How dare you make money from a criminal activity that its investigations are still ongoing!!!! — Minoo Osborne (@MinooOsborne) December 15, 2018 ×

'Brexit' trailer: Benedict Cumberbatch plays man behind the 'Vote Leave' campaign

By Robin Pettitt

In winning a Conservative Party no-confidence vote by 200 to 117, Theresa May has defeated the most serious attempt so far at ousting her as leader of the party. The effort was never likely to succeed for the simple reason that there was no openly declared challenger for the top job. Not a single Conservative MP has been willing to publicly state that they would be able to do better than the prime minister and demand the job in her stead.

The lack of a challenge after she lost the government majority in the 2017 snap election showed the reluctance of likely successors to put themselves forward. This should be seen in the context that the Conservative Party traditionally does not take kindly to its leader doing badly electorally. May’s win in this vote illustrates with blinding clarity that no one in the Conservative Party thinks they could do better in negotiating with the EU27.

In the lead-up to the vote, there was plenty of speculation on what would count as a “good” result for May. However, keeping in mind all the humiliations and defeats the prime minister has already experienced, a victory in this no-confidence vote of any scale would be enough. May is now safe from a formal challenge to her position for a full year. This will massively increase her hold on the position as party leader.

Still stuck

However, even though the hardcore Brexiteers in the European Research Group (ERG) have failed in their attempt at ousting May, her victory will do little to undo the parliamentary stalemate. The result of the no-confidence vote shows that within the Conservative Party the ERG and the hard Brexiteers do not command anything like a majority. However, considering the parliamentary arithmetic, they have enough power to scupper almost any deal presented for approval to the House of Commons. The ERG and the DUP are pretty much in lockstep in their view of what is an unacceptable deal so while the prime minister may still be in office, it’s also clear that her effective power is very close to zero.

The question then is what is next for both the prime minister and her hard Brexit opponents? May now has the unappealing task of deciding what to do with her dead-in-the-water withdrawal agreement. The EU27 have made it very clear that they do not want to reopen negotiations. Even if they did there is every chance that a new agreement could be worse, especially considering France’s wish for concessions on access to UK fishing waters, and Spain’s designs on Gibraltar.

Election time?

Arguably, May’s most realistic option could be a fresh general election in which the main/only topic on the agenda would be her withdrawal agreement. That is entirely doable in parliamentary terms. It would put her internal Conservative opponents in the awkward position of effectively having to campaign against their own party, and should she not lose would give her the ability to say that she has a democratic mandate to push through the agreement. However, all ways forward have to face the fundamental fact that the March 29, 2019 deadline is now uncomfortably close.

That ticking clock is arguably the hard Brexit supporters’ biggest asset. Knowing that it is extremely unlikely that any withdrawal agreement will come before parliament that could command majority support, they could simply continue to block approval and run down the clock. There are rumours that they are considering supporting a no-confidence motion against the government, working with Labour and the Liberal Democrats to force an election. That would be a nuclear option and would undoubtedly cause profound damage to the Conservative Party. And Brexiteers were moving to downplay that possibility in the aftermath of the leadership vote.

In short, while May can feel justifiably smug about having successfully faced down her opponents in the Conservative Party, the result in no way helps her find a way out of the parliamentary stalemate. The no-confidence vote hurdle has been successfully cleared, but May is no closer to solving the problem that sparked that vote in the first place.

(Robin Pettitt is Senior Lecturer in Comparative Politics, Kingston University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/theresa-may-survives-confidence-vote-but-her-brexit-deal-is-still-in-deep-trouble-108728">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Robin Pettitt In winning a Conservative Party no-confidence vote by 200 to 117, Theresa May has defeated the most serious attempt so far at ousting her as leader of the party.

By Robin Pettitt In winning a Conservative Party no-confidence vote by 200 to 117, Theresa May has defeated the most serious attempt so far at ousting her as leader of the party. The effort was never likely to succeed for the simple reason that there was no openly declared challenger for the top job. Not a single Conservative MP has been willing to publicly state that they would be able to do better than the prime minister and demand the job in her stead. The lack of a challenge after she lost the government majority in the 2017 snap election showed the reluctance of likely successors to put themselves forward. This should be seen in the context that the Conservative Party traditionally does not take kindly to its leader doing badly electorally. May’s win in this vote illustrates with blinding clarity that no one in the Conservative Party thinks they could do better in negotiating with the EU27. In the lead-up to the vote, there was plenty of speculation on what would count as a “good” result for May. However, keeping in mind all the humiliations and defeats the prime minister has already experienced, a victory in this no-confidence vote of any scale would be enough. May is now safe from a formal challenge to her position for a full year. This will massively increase her hold on the position as party leader. Still stuck However, even though the hardcore Brexiteers in the European Research Group (ERG) have failed in their attempt at ousting May, her victory will do little to undo the parliamentary stalemate. The result of the no-confidence vote shows that within the Conservative Party the ERG and the hard Brexiteers do not command anything like a majority. However, considering the parliamentary arithmetic, they have enough power to scupper almost any deal presented for approval to the House of Commons. The ERG and the DUP are pretty much in lockstep in their view of what is an unacceptable deal so while the prime minister may still be in office, it’s also clear that her effective power is very close to zero. The question then is what is next for both the prime minister and her hard Brexit opponents? May now has the unappealing task of deciding what to do with her dead-in-the-water withdrawal agreement. The EU27 have made it very clear that they do not want to reopen negotiations. Even if they did there is every chance that a new agreement could be worse, especially considering France’s wish for concessions on access to UK fishing waters, and Spain’s designs on Gibraltar. Election time? Arguably, May’s most realistic option could be a fresh general election in which the main/only topic on the agenda would be her withdrawal agreement. That is entirely doable in parliamentary terms. It would put her internal Conservative opponents in the awkward position of effectively having to campaign against their own party, and should she not lose would give her the ability to say that she has a democratic mandate to push through the agreement. However, all ways forward have to face the fundamental fact that the March 29, 2019 deadline is now uncomfortably close. That ticking clock is arguably the hard Brexit supporters’ biggest asset. Knowing that it is extremely unlikely that any withdrawal agreement will come before parliament that could command majority support, they could simply continue to block approval and run down the clock. There are rumours that they are considering supporting a no-confidence motion against the government, working with Labour and the Liberal Democrats to force an election. That would be a nuclear option and would undoubtedly cause profound damage to the Conservative Party. And Brexiteers were moving to downplay that possibility in the aftermath of the leadership vote. In short, while May can feel justifiably smug about having successfully faced down her opponents in the Conservative Party, the result in no way helps her find a way out of the parliamentary stalemate. The no-confidence vote hurdle has been successfully cleared, but May is no closer to solving the problem that sparked that vote in the first place. (Robin Pettitt is Senior Lecturer in Comparative Politics, Kingston 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)

Theresa May survives confidence vote – but her Brexit deal is still in deep trouble

Britain plans by 2040 to develop the world's first net-zero carbon industrial centre by teaming up emitters with industries that can reuse their polluting gases or by moving to lower carbon fuels such as hydrogen, it said on Thursday.

The government said it will commit up to 170 million pounds ($215 million) to the project, which could include capturing emissions from factories and reusing them in industries such as brewing to put the fizz in drinks.

Britain has been making progress in cutting emissions from the electricity sector by increasing renewable power generation as it seeks to phase out coal-fired generation by 2025.

"But to sustain this track record we need to tackle emissions from energy-intensive sectors and bring clean growth to our great industrial centres," energy minister Claire Perry said in a statement.

Industrial emissions, such as from the production of steel, ceramics and chemicals account for 25 per cent of the country`s greenhouse gases.

The hub could be developed in existing industrial regions such as Grangemouth in Scotland, in South Wales or in England at Merseyside, Teeside, Humberside or Southampton.

The announcement comes as delegates from more than 190 countries meet in Poland to flesh out how to reach commitments made under the 2015 Paris Agreement to keep the rise in global temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius this century.&nbsp;

Britain's greenhouse gas emissions have fallen 43 per cent since 1990, meaning it is more than halfway towards meeting a legally binding target to cut them by 2050 to 80 per cent below 1990 levels.

Britain plans by 2040 to develop the world's first net-zero carbon industrial centre by teaming up emitters with industries that can reuse their polluting gases or by moving to lower carbon fuels such as hydrogen, it said on Thursday.

Britain plans by 2040 to develop the world's first net-zero carbon industrial centre by teaming up emitters with industries that can reuse their polluting gases or by moving to lower carbon fuels such as hydrogen, it said on Thursday. The government said it will commit up to 170 million pounds ($215 million) to the project, which could include capturing emissions from factories and reusing them in industries such as brewing to put the fizz in drinks. Britain has been making progress in cutting emissions from the electricity sector by increasing renewable power generation as it seeks to phase out coal-fired generation by 2025. "But to sustain this track record we need to tackle emissions from energy-intensive sectors and bring clean growth to our great industrial centres," energy minister Claire Perry said in a statement. Industrial emissions, such as from the production of steel, ceramics and chemicals account for 25 per cent of the country`s greenhouse gases. The hub could be developed in existing industrial regions such as Grangemouth in Scotland, in South Wales or in England at Merseyside, Teeside, Humberside or Southampton. The announcement comes as delegates from more than 190 countries meet in Poland to flesh out how to reach commitments made under the 2015 Paris Agreement to keep the rise in global temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius this century. Britain's greenhouse gas emissions have fallen 43 per cent since 1990, meaning it is more than halfway towards meeting a legally binding target to cut them by 2050 to 80 per cent below 1990 levels.

Emissions in, bubbles out: UK plans world's first carbon-neutral industry hub

Watch: WION Gravitas, 12th December, 2018

Watch: WION Fineprint, 12th December, 2018

Global stock markets rallied Wednesday on upbeat China-US trade news, while the pound hit yet another 20-month low as <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uk-pm-may-to-challenge-leadership-contest-says-ousting-would-delay-brexit-183454">British Prime Minister Theresa May</a> faces a no-confidence vote.

Oil prices jumped one dollar as volatility continued to grip world crude markets.

A flurry of positive developments in the tariffs stand-off between the world's top economies provided early Christmas cheer on trading floors, fuelling hopes an all-out trade war can be avoided.

In afternoon deals, Frankfurt fizzed 0.9 per cent higher, London won 1.1 per cent and Paris added 1.6 per cent.&nbsp;

The positivity spilled over from Asia, where Tokyo ended 2.2 per cent higher and Shanghai rose 0.3 per cent, while Hong Kong jumped 1.6 per cent.

"The equity markets are taking encouragement from recent reports of a potential truce in the US-China trade dispute," noted VTB Capital analyst Neil MacKinnon.

Canada on Tuesday released on bail <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/huawei-cfo-meng-wanzhou-freed-on-bail-leaves-courthouse-183504">Meng Wanzhou</a>, chief financial officer (CFO) at Chinese telecoms giant Huawei, whose arrest last week sparked fury in Beijing and worries about a truce agreed at the G20 by Donald Trump and Xi Jinping this month.

Providing some extra support to the news of Meng's release was an interview in which Trump said he could intervene in the case if it helps seal a trade pact with China, adding: "Whatever's good for this country, I would do."

China added to market-friendly noise by saying it had agreed to cut tariffs on US autos to 15 per cent from 40 per cent -- wiping out a levy imposed earlier this year in response to US measures.&nbsp;

Investors welcomed the headlines but sounded a note of caution.

"Newsflow regarding developments in the US-China trade dispute has been notoriously erratic and positive news can quickly give way to negative news," added MacKinnon.

May no-confidence vote

The British pound meanwhile ducked as low as $1.2478 -- a level last seen in April 2017 -- in a torrid week for the Brexit-hit currency.

The latest low came as the head of a Conservative Party committee in charge of organising leadership challenges announced that May would Wednesday face a no-confidence vote over her Brexit negotiations.

The weak pound boosts London-listed multinationals whose earnings abroad are converted back into sterling, handing a fillip to the FTSE 100 shares index.

The news came after May had delayed Tuesday's parliamentary vote on her EU divorce agreement to avert a crushing defeat.

In midday deals, sterling clawed background to stand at $1.2534, up from $1.2487 late on Tuesday.

"So far sterling has played the waiting game in regards to the impending vote of no-confidence in Theresa May," noted Spreadex analyst Connor Campbell.

"If the prime minister comes out the other side with her job intact, then it takes one of the many uncertainties that have swirled around UK politics for the last few months off the table.

"If she loses, on the other hand, then well, the pound's likely going to have a very unpleasant run-in to Christmas."

Global stock markets rallied Wednesday on upbeat China-US trade news, while the pound hit yet another 20-month low as British Prime Minister Theresa May faces a no-confidence vote.

Global stock markets rallied Wednesday on upbeat China-US trade news, while the pound hit yet another 20-month low as British Prime Minister Theresa May faces a no-confidence vote. Oil prices jumped one dollar as volatility continued to grip world crude markets. A flurry of positive developments in the tariffs stand-off between the world's top economies provided early Christmas cheer on trading floors, fuelling hopes an all-out trade war can be avoided. In afternoon deals, Frankfurt fizzed 0.9 per cent higher, London won 1.1 per cent and Paris added 1.6 per cent. The positivity spilled over from Asia, where Tokyo ended 2.2 per cent higher and Shanghai rose 0.3 per cent, while Hong Kong jumped 1.6 per cent. "The equity markets are taking encouragement from recent reports of a potential truce in the US-China trade dispute," noted VTB Capital analyst Neil MacKinnon. Canada on Tuesday released on bail Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer (CFO) at Chinese telecoms giant Huawei, whose arrest last week sparked fury in Beijing and worries about a truce agreed at the G20 by Donald Trump and Xi Jinping this month. Providing some extra support to the news of Meng's release was an interview in which Trump said he could intervene in the case if it helps seal a trade pact with China, adding: "Whatever's good for this country, I would do." China added to market-friendly noise by saying it had agreed to cut tariffs on US autos to 15 per cent from 40 per cent -- wiping out a levy imposed earlier this year in response to US measures. Investors welcomed the headlines but sounded a note of caution. "Newsflow regarding developments in the US-China trade dispute has been notoriously erratic and positive news can quickly give way to negative news," added MacKinnon. May no-confidence vote The British pound meanwhile ducked as low as $1.2478 -- a level last seen in April 2017 -- in a torrid week for the Brexit-hit currency. The latest low came as the head of a Conservative Party committee in charge of organising leadership challenges announced that May would Wednesday face a no-confidence vote over her Brexit negotiations. The weak pound boosts London-listed multinationals whose earnings abroad are converted back into sterling, handing a fillip to the FTSE 100 shares index. The news came after May had delayed Tuesday's parliamentary vote on her EU divorce agreement to avert a crushing defeat. In midday deals, sterling clawed background to stand at $1.2534, up from $1.2487 late on Tuesday. "So far sterling has played the waiting game in regards to the impending vote of no-confidence in Theresa May," noted Spreadex analyst Connor Campbell. "If the prime minister comes out the other side with her job intact, then it takes one of the many uncertainties that have swirled around UK politics for the last few months off the table. "If she loses, on the other hand, then well, the pound's likely going to have a very unpleasant run-in to Christmas."

World stocks rally on China-US trade; pound slides on UK turmoil

Scotland Yard on Tuesday used a Taser gun to detain and arrest a man who broke into the UK Parliament building grounds, at almost the same area where a terror attack occurred last year.

The man, who is held on trespassing charges while further investigations continue, had reportedly jumped over railings before being Tasered by the Metropolitan Police officers on duty at the Parliament building within the Palace of Westminster in central London.

"A man was detained and arrested by Carriage Gates inside the Palace of Westminster on suspicion of trespassing at a protected site," a Met Police statement said.

"A Taser was deployed. Enquiries into the circumstances continue," the statement said.

The man, described as in his 20s, was handcuffed and bundled into a police van, and driven away. The incident is not thought to be terrorism-related as it is not being investigated by the Met Police's Counter Terrorism Command.

Extra police officers, some of them armed, were brought in to bolster security at the gates, but were stood down around 45 minutes after the intrusion.&nbsp;

"Always in awe at the professionalism, courage and dedication of the police who guard the Palace of Westminster. Thank you all,? UK international development secretary Penny Mordaunt tweeted soon after.

The trespass incident occurred in the same area inside the Parliament's courtyard as a terror attack last year by Islamic State inspired Khalid Masood, who ran in through the gates with a knife after ramming his car into the side of the building.

Met Police officer Keith Palmer, who was guarding the gates, was stabbed and killed, after the attacker had knocked down pedestrians indiscriminately on Westminster Bridge, killing four people. Masood was shot dead by armed officers just inside the Parliament gates in March 2017.

Since the attack, security at the Parliament gates has been beefed up, with a permanent armed presence at the entrance.&nbsp;

Scotland Yard on Tuesday used a Taser gun to detain and arrest a man who broke into the UK Parliament building grounds, at almost the same area where a terror attack occurred last year.

Scotland Yard on Tuesday used a Taser gun to detain and arrest a man who broke into the UK Parliament building grounds, at almost the same area where a terror attack occurred last year. The man, who is held on trespassing charges while further investigations continue, had reportedly jumped over railings before being Tasered by the Metropolitan Police officers on duty at the Parliament building within the Palace of Westminster in central London. "A man was detained and arrested by Carriage Gates inside the Palace of Westminster on suspicion of trespassing at a protected site," a Met Police statement said. "A Taser was deployed. Enquiries into the circumstances continue," the statement said. The man, described as in his 20s, was handcuffed and bundled into a police van, and driven away. The incident is not thought to be terrorism-related as it is not being investigated by the Met Police's Counter Terrorism Command. Extra police officers, some of them armed, were brought in to bolster security at the gates, but were stood down around 45 minutes after the intrusion. "Always in awe at the professionalism, courage and dedication of the police who guard the Palace of Westminster. Thank you all,? UK international development secretary Penny Mordaunt tweeted soon after. The trespass incident occurred in the same area inside the Parliament's courtyard as a terror attack last year by Islamic State inspired Khalid Masood, who ran in through the gates with a knife after ramming his car into the side of the building. Met Police officer Keith Palmer, who was guarding the gates, was stabbed and killed, after the attacker had knocked down pedestrians indiscriminately on Westminster Bridge, killing four people. Masood was shot dead by armed officers just inside the Parliament gates in March 2017. Since the attack, security at the Parliament gates has been beefed up, with a permanent armed presence at the entrance.

Scotland Yard arrest man within UK Parliament grounds

The European Union is willing to give Britain further clarifications on its Brexit deal but will not renegotiate the treaty or its <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/brexit-breakthrough-the-irish-issue-explained-177345">protocol on the Irish border</a>, EU chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker said on Tuesday (December 11).

Addressing the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the European Commission president said he was "surprised" at Prime Minister Theresa May's inability to get the package agreed with the EU last month through the British parliament.

Noting that he would meet May in Brussels on Tuesday evening ahead of an EU summit on Thursday and Friday, Juncker said that the deal the EU and the UK achieved was the best and only deal possible.

Juncker repeated that neither side wanted ever to use a "backstop" that would keep Britain in a customs union with the EU in the absence of a better way to avoid extensive border checks between Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland.

May is on a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/may-tours-europe-in-desperate-bid-to-save-brexit-deal-183199">tour of EU capitals</a> to seek last minute changes to the already agreed deal on Britain's withdrawal from the EU in order to push the agreement through British parliament. She was also expected to meet European Council President Donald Tusk later in the day in Brussels.

The European Union is willing to give Britain further clarifications on its Brexit deal but will not renegotiate the treaty or its protocol on the Irish border, EU chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker said on Tuesday (December 11).

The European Union is willing to give Britain further clarifications on its Brexit deal but will not renegotiate the treaty or its protocol on the Irish border, EU chief executive Jean-Claude Juncker said on Tuesday (December 11). Addressing the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the European Commission president said he was "surprised" at Prime Minister Theresa May's inability to get the package agreed with the EU last month through the British parliament. Noting that he would meet May in Brussels on Tuesday evening ahead of an EU summit on Thursday and Friday, Juncker said that the deal the EU and the UK achieved was the best and only deal possible. Juncker repeated that neither side wanted ever to use a "backstop" that would keep Britain in a customs union with the EU in the absence of a better way to avoid extensive border checks between Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland. May is on a tour of EU capitals to seek last minute changes to the already agreed deal on Britain's withdrawal from the EU in order to push the agreement through British parliament. She was also expected to meet European Council President Donald Tusk later in the day in Brussels.

European Union offers new Brexit deal clarity, won't renegotiate: EU chief executive Juncker

Breaking News: Theresa May could postpone Brexit deal vote

Extradition case: 67 fugitives extradited in last 16 years

Breaking News: UK judge orders Vijay Mallya's extradition

Extradition case: Fugitive Mallya faces UK court

Vijay Mallya extradition verdict expected shortly

Vijay Mallya arrives in UK court; verdict on case shortly

By Oliver Patel

Stopping Brexit is possible, but it’s complicated. I’m not arguing here that no Brexit is going to happen, only that it is legally and practically possible, and recent events render it slightly more likely.

The only way Brexit can be stopped is if the Article 50 notification, triggered in March 2017 to begin the UK’s departure from the EU, is revoked. Under EU law, once Article 50 is triggered, the departing state automatically leaves the EU after two years, unless Article 50 is extended.

Unfortunately, the short text of Article 50 doesn’t say whether the departing state can unilaterally revoke its notification to leave, or whether the consent of the remaining EU member states is required. A case, currently under consideration by the European Court of Justice (CJEU), will determine just that.

On December 4, the advocate general, Campos Sánchez-Bordona, issued his opinion to the court, arguing that Article 50 is unilaterally revocable. He argued that if the consent of the EU27 was required, this could lead to the departing state being forced to leave the EU against its will, which would be unacceptable.

If the CJEU upholds this opinion in its final judgement due on December 10 – which is not guaranteed – the UK would be able to revoke Article 50 unilaterally, provided it was acting in good faith.

Changes needed to UK law

A revocation of Article 50 would have to be initiated by the UK. It’s anticipated that parliamentary approval, via an act of parliament, would also be required to revoke Article 50, although some constitutional lawyers disagree. Even if parliamentary approval was not legally required, it’s difficult to imagine the government revoking Article 50 without parliament’s backing.

The June 2016 referendum imposed no legal obligation on the government to implement the result. However, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 sets the date of Brexit as March 29, 2019 in law. Crucially, it also repeals the European Communities Act 1972, which is the legislation that brought the UK into the EU. This means that a change in UK law is also required to stop Brexit.

So, to stop Brexit, Article 50 would need to be revoked, and, after that, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 must be repealed. Even if parliamentary approval is not required for the former, it is for the latter.

A new mandate from the public

In the UK’s democracy, parliament is sovereign and it would be entitled to try and stop Brexit if it wanted. Still, it’s implausible to imagine this parliament, or any future parliament, trying to stop Brexit without some form of electoral mandate.

A general election or second referendum could provide one. The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 means that a general election is unlikely, as it would require two-thirds of MPs to vote in favour of one. Alternatively, a majority of MPs would need to vote in favour of a no-confidence motion against the government. If no new government can then be formed within 14 days, a general election would be triggered.

A second referendum is perhaps more likely. It would require primary legislation, and therefore the support of a majority of MPs. A referendum could come about via an amendment to the “meaningful vote” on the withdrawal agreement on December 11 which makes approval of it, or approval of the subsequent implementing legislation, conditional on a referendum.

A referendum could also emerge if MPs reject Theresa May’s deal. To avoid the UK leaving the EU without a deal – and if no better deal can be negotiated and win the support of parliament – MPs might then seek to force a second referendum to break the impasse.

Dominic Grieve’s amendment, passed on December 4 in a significant defeat for the government, makes such a move easier. By law, the government is required to produce a written statement to MPs outlining its plan, within 21 days of the deal being rejected.

MPs then vote on a motion on the basis of that statement. Grieve’s amendment now enables MPs to table amendments to this motion, thereby giving them much more political control over what happens next if the deal is voted down. If at this stage, a majority of MPs support a second referendum, they could amend the motion to require one, and it could be politically impossible for the government to ignore their will.

A second referendum would require a minimum of 22 weeks to organise and hold. This means that Article 50 would need to be extended because there wouldn’t be enough time before the end of March 2019. It’s reasonable to assume that the EU would unanimously agree to an extension if it was for the purpose of a second referendum. The date of Brexit in UK law would also need to be amended, but this should not be a problem if a majority of MPs have voted for a second referendum.

High levels of uncertainty

The path to stopping Brexit is fraught with legal uncertainty and political controversy. Although it’s possible – and more likely now than a few days ago – it remains a highly uncertain prospect. May’s deal could pass, perhaps in a second vote if the first ends in defeat. No deal still remains the default outcome, and so cannot be ruled out. Crucially, the UK will automatically leave the EU on March 29, 2019, with or without a deal, unless Article 50 is extended or revoked.

Amid the uncertainty, what’s clear is that stopping Brexit requires a majority in parliament to change the law, force a second referendum or general election, and revoke Article 50. It also requires a cooperative and patient EU, to allow for an extension of Article 50 and potentially consent to its revocation. Finally, it requires a willing public, which is probably the biggest obstacle on the tumultuous path to stopping Brexit.

(Oliver Patel is Research Associate, UCL European Institute)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/brexit-is-it-possible-to-stop-it-107750">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 Oliver Patel Stopping Brexit is possible, but it’s complicated. I’m not arguing here that no Brexit is going to happen, only that it is legally and practically possible, and recent events render it slightly more likely.

By Oliver Patel Stopping Brexit is possible, but it’s complicated. I’m not arguing here that no Brexit is going to happen, only that it is legally and practically possible, and recent events render it slightly more likely. The only way Brexit can be stopped is if the Article 50 notification, triggered in March 2017 to begin the UK’s departure from the EU, is revoked. Under EU law, once Article 50 is triggered, the departing state automatically leaves the EU after two years, unless Article 50 is extended. Unfortunately, the short text of Article 50 doesn’t say whether the departing state can unilaterally revoke its notification to leave, or whether the consent of the remaining EU member states is required. A case, currently under consideration by the European Court of Justice (CJEU), will determine just that. On December 4, the advocate general, Campos Sánchez-Bordona, issued his opinion to the court, arguing that Article 50 is unilaterally revocable. He argued that if the consent of the EU27 was required, this could lead to the departing state being forced to leave the EU against its will, which would be unacceptable. If the CJEU upholds this opinion in its final judgement due on December 10 – which is not guaranteed – the UK would be able to revoke Article 50 unilaterally, provided it was acting in good faith. Changes needed to UK law A revocation of Article 50 would have to be initiated by the UK. It’s anticipated that parliamentary approval, via an act of parliament, would also be required to revoke Article 50, although some constitutional lawyers disagree. Even if parliamentary approval was not legally required, it’s difficult to imagine the government revoking Article 50 without parliament’s backing. The June 2016 referendum imposed no legal obligation on the government to implement the result. However, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 sets the date of Brexit as March 29, 2019 in law. Crucially, it also repeals the European Communities Act 1972, which is the legislation that brought the UK into the EU. This means that a change in UK law is also required to stop Brexit. So, to stop Brexit, Article 50 would need to be revoked, and, after that, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 must be repealed. Even if parliamentary approval is not required for the former, it is for the latter. A new mandate from the public In the UK’s democracy, parliament is sovereign and it would be entitled to try and stop Brexit if it wanted. Still, it’s implausible to imagine this parliament, or any future parliament, trying to stop Brexit without some form of electoral mandate. A general election or second referendum could provide one. The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 means that a general election is unlikely, as it would require two-thirds of MPs to vote in favour of one. Alternatively, a majority of MPs would need to vote in favour of a no-confidence motion against the government. If no new government can then be formed within 14 days, a general election would be triggered. A second referendum is perhaps more likely. It would require primary legislation, and therefore the support of a majority of MPs. A referendum could come about via an amendment to the “meaningful vote” on the withdrawal agreement on December 11 which makes approval of it, or approval of the subsequent implementing legislation, conditional on a referendum. A referendum could also emerge if MPs reject Theresa May’s deal. To avoid the UK leaving the EU without a deal – and if no better deal can be negotiated and win the support of parliament – MPs might then seek to force a second referendum to break the impasse. Dominic Grieve’s amendment, passed on December 4 in a significant defeat for the government, makes such a move easier. By law, the government is required to produce a written statement to MPs outlining its plan, within 21 days of the deal being rejected. MPs then vote on a motion on the basis of that statement. Grieve’s amendment now enables MPs to table amendments to this motion, thereby giving them much more political control over what happens next if the deal is voted down. If at this stage, a majority of MPs support a second referendum, they could amend the motion to require one, and it could be politically impossible for the government to ignore their will. A second referendum would require a minimum of 22 weeks to organise and hold. This means that Article 50 would need to be extended because there wouldn’t be enough time before the end of March 2019. It’s reasonable to assume that the EU would unanimously agree to an extension if it was for the purpose of a second referendum. The date of Brexit in UK law would also need to be amended, but this should not be a problem if a majority of MPs have voted for a second referendum. High levels of uncertainty The path to stopping Brexit is fraught with legal uncertainty and political controversy. Although it’s possible – and more likely now than a few days ago – it remains a highly uncertain prospect. May’s deal could pass, perhaps in a second vote if the first ends in defeat. No deal still remains the default outcome, and so cannot be ruled out. Crucially, the UK will automatically leave the EU on March 29, 2019, with or without a deal, unless Article 50 is extended or revoked. Amid the uncertainty, what’s clear is that stopping Brexit requires a majority in parliament to change the law, force a second referendum or general election, and revoke Article 50. It also requires a cooperative and patient EU, to allow for an extension of Article 50 and potentially consent to its revocation. Finally, it requires a willing public, which is probably the biggest obstacle on the tumultuous path to stopping Brexit. (Oliver Patel is Research Associate, UCL European Institute) (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 it possible to stop it?

London pub displays 95 Christmas trees, 21,500 fairy lights

In a candid conversation with WION, the UK-based Bharulata Patel opened up about her achievement of becoming the first Indian-origin woman to drive single-handedly through the Arctic Circle.&nbsp;Bharulata was accompanied by her two children, Priyam, 13, and Aarush, 10. &nbsp;

"Driving has been my passion for a very long time. I started driving 22 years ago. As a young college girl, I got a second-hand car and took it for a spin. Loud music was also a part of the joyful rides and eventually, the drill became my therapeutic hobby and stress buster. Soon I was an explorer and this became a part of me," Bharulata told WION.&nbsp;

But it has been no easy journey. In October 2007, Bharulata met with a major accident while she was pregnant with her second child. As a result, apart from her other serious injuries, she gave birth to a premature baby.&nbsp;It took her 55 counselling sessions and five years to get behind the wheel again.

Since then, Bharulata has achieved the stupendous feats of travelling 35,000 kilometres across 32 countries (from UK to India), and travelling 2,792 km in 39 hours (that was a record).

"I was diagnosed with cancer in December 2017, which has changed my life. One day both my children came to me and the younger one gave a fantastic idea that we should go to the North Pole and meet Santa. He wanted to meet Santa Claus and ask him to pass his message to God to remove cancer from the world. They also made the suggestion that this trip would also take my mind off cancer," said&nbsp;Bharulata.

And so on October 21 this year she began to drive up to the Arctic Circle. She completed her expedition on November 9.&nbsp;

WION: How difficult or easy was it to take your children with you?

Bharulata Patel: I think the most difficult part was convincing the school to send the children with me. Here in UK, if the kids take a break from school then both the parents have to pay a fine of 60 pounds per child per day. Which is a huge amount of money, but I was able to convince the school that it would be a great educational and learning opportunity for the kids and they would get to know about the weather, landscape, flora, fauna and the human habitat there. Later, the journey was followed by a lot of schools. Also, my children got a chance to see the 7 kilometre-long tunnel which is 700 feet below the sea. They also saw the Nordkapp Globe Monument in Norway where the land ends five feet after the structure.

WION: Most memorable moment on your Arctic expedition?

BP: The most memorable moment for me which will always make me proud is that I was able to give my children an opportunity to hoist the Indian flag in the Arctic Circle. Seeing my children hoisting it made me really happy and feel honoured. Another horrific instance that has become a memory now is when I was stuck and stranded in the snow for a couple of hours amid a snowstorm. Later, Swedish authorities had to come to rescue us. However, I had this idea in my mind constantly whether I am putting my children through too much? But they enjoyed the snow and were sure that somebody will come to get them. Also, they would have an amusing tale to tell their friends.

<img alt="Bharulata and her children at Norway's Nordkapp Globe Monument which marks Europe's highest point. " data-align="left" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="324fcdaa-c7fb-49a3-9df0-a1f9d7210b4f" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design_4.jpg" />

(Bharulata and her children at Norway's Nordkapp Globe Monument which marks Europe's highest point.)

<img alt="Bharulata and her children on the road. " data-align="left" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d6b5b73d-f4f9-4781-a831-7b108306d841" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%283%29_3.jpg" />

(Bharulata, Priyam and Aarush on the road.)

<img alt="A snapshot from the road. " data-align="left" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="60459fc0-6b06-4a3c-84ad-3ebbbab00775" src="/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%281%29_3.jpg" />

(A snapshot from the road.)

WION: How do you feel after your feat?

BP: I feel absolutely brilliant. I follow one motto in my life — Be bold, be the Change! You can be the change. You have the ability to change the world but start with yourself.&nbsp;

WION: What are your future expedition plans?

BP: I have planned to travel across 50 countries alone, this project has already been presented in the British parliament but the cancer treatment has put the plan on hold. However, I would be working on achieving the record soon which still remains unconquered.

WION: Who has been your source of inspiration?

BP: I draw my inspiration from my grandfather who always taught me to remain positive no matter how people behave with you. He inspired me to work hard, have a clear goal and perseverance to achieve.

WION: Did your passion meet societal — a woman driving out on expeditions single-handedly — hindrances? &nbsp;

BP: My husband has been my support system. He was always been there for me and has always encouraged me. He did not tell my in-laws about my 32-countries journey. It came as a surprise for them but they also took it positively. However, there were other people who asked me to stay at home as I had a well-settled life. They used to remind me about my accident and nobody believed that I could do it but then I travelled to 32 countries. People used to tell me that I am insane to which I just replied, 'Only insane people create history'.

In a candid conversation with WION, the UK-based Bharulata Patel opened up about her achievement of becoming the first Indian-origin woman to drive single-handedly through the Arctic Circle.

In a candid conversation with WION, the UK-based Bharulata Patel opened up about her achievement of becoming the first Indian-origin woman to drive single-handedly through the Arctic Circle. Bharulata was accompanied by her two children, Priyam, 13, and Aarush, 10. "Driving has been my passion for a very long time. I started driving 22 years ago. As a young college girl, I got a second-hand car and took it for a spin. Loud music was also a part of the joyful rides and eventually, the drill became my therapeutic hobby and stress buster. Soon I was an explorer and this became a part of me," Bharulata told WION. But it has been no easy journey. In October 2007, Bharulata met with a major accident while she was pregnant with her second child. As a result, apart from her other serious injuries, she gave birth to a premature baby. It took her 55 counselling sessions and five years to get behind the wheel again. Since then, Bharulata has achieved the stupendous feats of travelling 35,000 kilometres across 32 countries (from UK to India), and travelling 2,792 km in 39 hours (that was a record). "I was diagnosed with cancer in December 2017, which has changed my life. One day both my children came to me and the younger one gave a fantastic idea that we should go to the North Pole and meet Santa. He wanted to meet Santa Claus and ask him to pass his message to God to remove cancer from the world. They also made the suggestion that this trip would also take my mind off cancer," said Bharulata. And so on October 21 this year she began to drive up to the Arctic Circle. She completed her expedition on November 9. WION: How difficult or easy was it to take your children with you? Bharulata Patel: I think the most difficult part was convincing the school to send the children with me. Here in UK, if the kids take a break from school then both the parents have to pay a fine of 60 pounds per child per day. Which is a huge amount of money, but I was able to convince the school that it would be a great educational and learning opportunity for the kids and they would get to know about the weather, landscape, flora, fauna and the human habitat there. Later, the journey was followed by a lot of schools. Also, my children got a chance to see the 7 kilometre-long tunnel which is 700 feet below the sea. They also saw the Nordkapp Globe Monument in Norway where the land ends five feet after the structure. WION: Most memorable moment on your Arctic expedition? BP: The most memorable moment for me which will always make me proud is that I was able to give my children an opportunity to hoist the Indian flag in the Arctic Circle. Seeing my children hoisting it made me really happy and feel honoured. Another horrific instance that has become a memory now is when I was stuck and stranded in the snow for a couple of hours amid a snowstorm. Later, Swedish authorities had to come to rescue us. However, I had this idea in my mind constantly whether I am putting my children through too much? But they enjoyed the snow and were sure that somebody will come to get them. Also, they would have an amusing tale to tell their friends. (Bharulata and her children at Norway's Nordkapp Globe Monument which marks Europe's highest point.) (Bharulata, Priyam and Aarush on the road.) (A snapshot from the road.) WION: How do you feel after your feat? BP: I feel absolutely brilliant. I follow one motto in my life — Be bold, be the Change! You can be the change. You have the ability to change the world but start with yourself. WION: What are your future expedition plans? BP: I have planned to travel across 50 countries alone, this project has already been presented in the British parliament but the cancer treatment has put the plan on hold. However, I would be working on achieving the record soon which still remains unconquered. WION: Who has been your source of inspiration? BP: I draw my inspiration from my grandfather who always taught me to remain positive no matter how people behave with you. He inspired me to work hard, have a clear goal and perseverance to achieve. WION: Did your passion meet societal — a woman driving out on expeditions single-handedly — hindrances? BP: My husband has been my support system. He was always been there for me and has always encouraged me. He did not tell my in-laws about my 32-countries journey. It came as a surprise for them but they also took it positively. However, there were other people who asked me to stay at home as I had a well-settled life. They used to remind me about my accident and nobody believed that I could do it but then I travelled to 32 countries. People used to tell me that I am insane to which I just replied, 'Only insane people create history'.

My kids wanted to meet Santa at North Pole, Indian-origin woman who drove through Arctic Circle tells WION

The United Kingdom government`s move to not publish the full legal advice based on which it formulated the Brexit plan, was on Tuesday (local time) found to be in contempt of the Parliament.

This marks the first-ever instance where the British government has been found to be in contempt of the Parliament, CNN reported.

The Prime Minister <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/british-government-loses-key-parliament-vote-on-brexit-181516">Theresa May-led Conservative Party government</a> lost the vote&nbsp;by a margin of 18 votes (311 for, 293 against) in the House of Commons, a heavy blow to the government ahead of the five-day debate on the proposed Brexit agreement.

The House of Commons took to Twitter to confirm the outcome of the vote and that ministers were found to be in contempt.

"House of Commons votes 311 to 293 to approve the privilege motion, finding Ministers in contempt and ordering the immediate publication of the full legal advice on the #Brexit deal," the tweet read.

Following the defeat, the government confirmed that it would release the legal advice, which was prepared by Attorney general Geoffrey Cox, on Wednesday.

Prior to the voting, May spoke to the Cabinet about the "candid" legal advice given to ministers, stressing the importance of keeping it confidential.

According to CNN, the Labour Party`s Brexit spokesperson Keir Starmer said that the defeat in the House was a "badge of shame" for the government. He further told the British Press Association that the decision had "huge constitutional and political significance".

The contempt vote comes as senior legislators from six parties urged, via a joint letter, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, to launch proceedings under contempt of Parliament against the government.

"The Government has failed to publish the Attorney General`s full and final legal advice on the Brexit deal, as was ordered by Parliament. We have been left with no option but to write to the Speaker of the House of Commons to ask him to launch proceedings of contempt," Starmer tweeted earlier.

Starmer had accused the government of "willfully refusing to comply" with the order of the Parliament during the debate on Tuesday. "This is contempt," he added.

The day started on a bad note for the British government as a top European Union (EU) law officer that the UK could unilaterally cancel the Brexit process.

The Advocate General told the European Court of Justice that the approval of the remaining 27 EU member nations is not necessary for the cancellation of the two-year countdown for Brexit.

This was followed by the House of Commons approving an amendment which gives the Parliament more influence over the process if the government`s deal was to be rejected by lawmakers next week.

In 2016, over 50 per cent of the UK electorate voted to leave the EU, following which the British government had triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, beginning the country`s process of its exit from the European bloc.

According to the draft deal, the UK is scheduled to leave the bloc on March 29, 2019, after which it will move into a 21-month long transitionary period (post-Brexit transition).&nbsp;

The United Kingdom government`s move to not publish the full legal advice based on which it formulated the Brexit plan, was on Tuesday (local time) found to be in contempt of the Parliament.

The United Kingdom government`s move to not publish the full legal advice based on which it formulated the Brexit plan, was on Tuesday (local time) found to be in contempt of the Parliament. This marks the first-ever instance where the British government has been found to be in contempt of the Parliament, CNN reported. The Prime Minister Theresa May-led Conservative Party government lost the vote by a margin of 18 votes (311 for, 293 against) in the House of Commons, a heavy blow to the government ahead of the five-day debate on the proposed Brexit agreement. The House of Commons took to Twitter to confirm the outcome of the vote and that ministers were found to be in contempt. "House of Commons votes 311 to 293 to approve the privilege motion, finding Ministers in contempt and ordering the immediate publication of the full legal advice on the #Brexit deal," the tweet read. Following the defeat, the government confirmed that it would release the legal advice, which was prepared by Attorney general Geoffrey Cox, on Wednesday. Prior to the voting, May spoke to the Cabinet about the "candid" legal advice given to ministers, stressing the importance of keeping it confidential. According to CNN, the Labour Party`s Brexit spokesperson Keir Starmer said that the defeat in the House was a "badge of shame" for the government. He further told the British Press Association that the decision had "huge constitutional and political significance". The contempt vote comes as senior legislators from six parties urged, via a joint letter, the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, to launch proceedings under contempt of Parliament against the government. "The Government has failed to publish the Attorney General`s full and final legal advice on the Brexit deal, as was ordered by Parliament. We have been left with no option but to write to the Speaker of the House of Commons to ask him to launch proceedings of contempt," Starmer tweeted earlier. Starmer had accused the government of "willfully refusing to comply" with the order of the Parliament during the debate on Tuesday. "This is contempt," he added. The day started on a bad note for the British government as a top European Union (EU) law officer that the UK could unilaterally cancel the Brexit process. The Advocate General told the European Court of Justice that the approval of the remaining 27 EU member nations is not necessary for the cancellation of the two-year countdown for Brexit. This was followed by the House of Commons approving an amendment which gives the Parliament more influence over the process if the government`s deal was to be rejected by lawmakers next week. In 2016, over 50 per cent of the UK electorate voted to leave the EU, following which the British government had triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, beginning the country`s process of its exit from the European bloc. According to the draft deal, the UK is scheduled to leave the bloc on March 29, 2019, after which it will move into a 21-month long transitionary period (post-Brexit transition).

Brexit: UK government found in contempt of Parliament

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