The harsh line comes in stark contrast to recent remarks by Michel Barnier, who has tried to chart a path towards compromise by agreeing to water down the EU's insistence on status quo access.

He has tabled a mix-and-match solution pairing the UK's demand for a system of zonal attachment, which is based on scientific calculations of where fish species live, with weighting to reflect the historic rights of European fishermen.

So far British negotiators have rebuffed the offer and insisted Brussels must accept the UK will take back full control of its waters as an independent coastal state on January 1.

At a meeting of senior EU diplomats last week the French representative lashed out at colleagues from Lithuania and Hungary after they said hardline fishing demands driven by coastal states mustn't stand in the way of a deal.

In a first sign of internal splits within the bloc, France's ambassador accused them of showing a lack of solidarity and undermining unity, calling the comments "unacceptable".

However, privately negotiators in Brussels are confident it is "not that complicated" to find a compromise on access to waters, especially if Boris Johnson can demonstrate a big win for Scottish fishermen.

A senior EU source said: "It's a big ask for the EU and it's not such a big give for the UK, because in the end it's access to waters for access to markets. You can't eat fish in the morning, the evening, and at night."

EU diplomats said a major concern for Member States is that Brussels has the power to hit Britain with sanctions in other areas of trade if it suddenly decides to cut off access to waters for their vessels.

One said: "There is a clear interest on the UK side, because their fleet wont even be able to fish as much as is now being fished in UK waters, and the majority of their fish products exported to the internal market."

During a video conference call with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last month the PM insisted the final deal will have to represent a "huge difference" from the current arrangements.

Meanwhile, Mr Barnier has set a new deadline of October 31 for the negotiations to be wrapped up.

He told the French parliament's foreign affairs committee thatHalloween is the latest possible date if the agreement is to be ratified in time for the end of the year.

Mr Barnier also revealedthe majority of the final trade deal will notneed to be voted on by the 27 member state parliaments, boosting the chances of it being in place on January 1.

A UK spokesman said:The EU continues to insist on fisheries arrangements and access to UK fishing waters in a continuation of the status quo. This is incompatible with our future status as an independent coastal state.

We are fully committed to agreeing fishing provisions in line with the Political Declaration, but we cannot agree arrangements that are manifestly unbalanced, against the interests of the UK fishing industry, and do not respect the UKs right to control access to its waters from January next year.

Read the original here:

Post-Brexit fishing row escalates as France tells the UK it will fight for French fishermen - Telegraph.co.uk

Mr Barclay told viewers: "The wider approach to space fits within two different aims.

"You've got the industrial strategy element of that through Alok Sharma and then you've also got the integrated review in terms of how that fits within our defence capabilities where space is a part of that.

"I think the direction of travel is certainly in the way."

READ MORE:Tory peer dismantles EU claim as he insists UK will thrive on WTO exit

He added: "We are investing 22billion in our R&D, a massive increase and there's a very strong focus on that.

"Clearly there's a link between R&D and our commitment to space.

"I would expect to be doing more in the wider area.

"But obviously individual schemes need to be looked at on their notes as well."

However, Jan Woerner, the boss of the European Space Agency (ESA) described British plans to develop a rival to Galileo as a "bad idea".

He told Express.co.uk: "I don't like Brexit, to be very blunt.

"I don't like it, because this is artificial, what we are doing.

"There might be some effects, for instance, through the Galileo programme, which is implemented through ESA, or the Copernicus programme.

"We will do our utmost to reduce all the impact as much as we can from our point of view."

See the article here:

Brexit Britain to TAKE ON Brussels' Galileo with 'massive' space technology investment - Daily Express

Britain is a democracy with heavy caveats. It allows its citizens an equal vote, but not an equal say. Those with wealth gain power and influence through access to politicians, donations to political parties, lobbying, well-funded thinktanks and ownership of most of the press.

As inequality grows, so does the political influence of the rich, is how that well-known bastion of socialism the Economist put it a couple of years ago. Yet we are denied a proper debate on how British democracy is subverted by vested interests because it would mean most newspapers who play a major part in framing the national conversation having to scrutinise their own role.

This week, the long-delayed intelligence and security committee report into alleged Russian interference in British democracy had troubling findings: not least ministers turning an apparent blind eye. Vladimir Putins kleptocratic gangster regime should be opposed by anyone with progressive inclinations: for its murderous war in Chechnya, in which tens of thousands perished; its state-sanctioned bigotry against LGBTQ people; and for its ties with the European far right. That the Conservatives financially benefit from donations linked to Russian oligarchs is itself a concern, as is Britains status as a safe haven for dirty money worth about 100bn a year.

There is all too little scrutiny into how the wealthy interfere in and distort our democracy

But the spectre of Russian interference has become a crutch for many liberal centrists. Easier to claim the nefarious hand of Putin is responsible for political events we do not like from Brexit to Donald Trump than to ask searching questions about our own dysfunctional democracies. Calls to clamp down on states intervening in each others affairs need to be consistent, or risk being hypocritical and self-serving. The United States backed Boris Yeltsins presidential campaign in 1996: a Time front page in July 2016 hailed The secret story of how American advisers helped Yeltsin win, and the Bill Clinton administration lobbied the International Monetary Fund to provide Yeltsin with a loan to boost his re-election efforts.

Richard Dearlove, the former MI6 chief, has publicly regretted that British security services helped Putin win power in 2000. On the eve of that presidential election, Tony Blair praised Putin as a moderniser who was highly intelligent and with a focused view of what he wants to achieve in Russia, even as Chechnya was being flattened. Postwar history is littered with examples of western-backed coups and meddling in foreign elections.

But when figures such as the Labour peer Andrew Adonis claim Putin helped swing the 2016 Brexit referendum, other far more salient factors are obscured. Facebook advertising undoubtedly played a role the Vote Leave campaign would not have spent more than 2.7m on it otherwise but in 2016, just 7% of the most pro-leave demographic, the over-65s, used Facebook for news, compared with 49% of the most pro-remain age group, the under-25s, according to Ofcom.

Of far more relevance was the role of the two largest newspapers in Britain, the Sun owned by an Australian-born American mogul, if were talking of foreign intervention and the Daily Mail, which forcefully campaigned for Brexit. Not only do they have millions of readers, their front pages play a key role in shaping broadcast news coverage too. And given that immigration played a key role in the referendum, years of inaccurate and inflammatory press reporting on migrants surely had a dramatic impact on the result.

As a 2018 academic study found, while the media are not all-powerful, there is ample evidence that the media can impact on attitude formation, especially (but not exclusively) where the public are dependent on coverage, have weak partisan predispositions, or where reporting is uniform or near-uniform across a range of sources. Polls routinely find that the public believe benefit fraud and teenage pregnancy is far higher than is the case, and that there are more migrants: undoubtedly this has much to do with exaggerated and misleading reporting.

According to Will Straw, formerly of Britain Stronger in Europe, when the official remain campaign conducted a poll in the summer of 2015, it found that 52% supported continued membership of the EU, with 48% for leaving. This was based on two-thirds of Labour supporters and 50% of Tory voters opting for remain. While Labour remain support held up all the way to referendum day, Tory support slumped to 40%, ensuring a Brexit triumph: it would be delusional to ignore the role of rightwing newspapers disproportionately read by Tory voters.

The obsessive focus with Putin robs us of the chance to discuss these issues. After the 2016 defeat, the rational approach by the remain movement would have been to focus on winning over leave voters. Instead, social media helped radicalise some remainers into believing the referendum was illegitimate and hence that it was a legal rather than a political problem. The menace of Russian intervention helped cement this attitude.

That doesnt mean ignoring possible foreign meddling in democratic processes, here or abroad, and measures must be taken to safeguard elections. But while much time and energy has been expended on debating the role of Russia, there is all too little scrutiny about the far greater crisis of how the wealthy, and their vested interests, interfere in and distort democracy. Until we challenge that the question marks over our own democracy will remain.

Owen Jones is a Guardian columnist

Original post:

Russian intervention didn't sway the Brexit referendum our rightwing press did - The Guardian

The report, published today (29 July), says thatfor the first time in nearly half a century, the UK can decide for itself how it wants to trade with the rest of the world.

It adds that Brexit gives the UK the potential to putinto place a system of importing food that can protect both the environment and animal welfare, as well as mitigate climate change concerns.

Dimbleby writes that the Government should 'adopt a statutory duty to give Parliament the time and opportunity to properly scrutinise any new trade deal'.

Time should also be made for relevant select committees to produce reports on any final deal, and allow a debate in the House of Commons.

He notes thatblanket legislation requiring other countries to meet our own food guidelines would make it nigh-on impossible to sign new trade deals post-Brexit.

Instead he suggests the Government 'should only agree to cut tariffs in new trade deals on products which meet our core standards'.

"Verification programmes along the lines of those currently operated by the US Department of Agriculture to enable American farmers to sell non-hormone-treated beef to the EU should be established, so that producers wishing to sell into the UK market can, and must, prove they meet these minimum standards," he writes.

"At a minimum, these certification schemes should cover animal welfare concerns and environmental and climate concerns where the impact of particular goods are severe (for example, beef reared on land recently cleared of rainforest).

"The core standards should be defined by the newly formed Trade and Agriculture Commission."

Other recommendations include that the Government should adopt a statutory responsibility to commission and publish an independent report on any proposed trade agreements.

The report adds that theGovernment should decide whether this impact assessment function requires the establishment of a new body similar to the likes of those used inAustralia, Canada and the US; orwhether it could be performed by either an existing body or independentconsultants.

Dimbleby, who co-founded healthy fast food chain Leon, was appointed to oversee the National Food Strategy last year.

It was described at the time as being 'the first major review of its kind in nearly 75 years'.

As well as considering the UK's trading future, the first part of the report also reflects onthe 'worst cracks' in the British food system that have appeared as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic, with other recommendations designed to make sure 'a generation of our most disadvantaged children do not get left behind'.

The second part of Dimbleby's report, to be published next summer, willexamine the food system 'from root to branch',and lay out a blueprint for a greener food system.

To read the first part of the National Food Strategy in full, click here.

Visit link:

Brexit gives UK 'once-in-a-lifetime opportunity' to reshape its food system - BigHospitality.co.uk

PUBLISHED: 09:31 28 July 2020 | UPDATED: 12:37 28 July 2020

Tommy Robinson takes part in a "Brexit Betrayal" march and rally organised by Ukip in central London. Photograph: Gareth Fuller/PA.

PA Archive/PA Images

Far-right activist Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who goes by the name of Tommy Robinson, has left the country and appears to be residing in Spain.

Email this article to a friend

To send a link to this page you must be logged in.

Become a Supporter

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only continue to grow with your support.

In a new online video circulating online he says that he has had to flee the UK, and said that the governments new quarantine rules has stopped him returning for demonstrations.

Speculation is rife that he is residing in Spain after he complained about the rules shortly after they were imposed on the EU country over the weekend.

Despite basing much of his politics around the scapegoating of immigrants and defending Brexit, the English Defence League founder said he now wants to remain abroad permanently.

He said: Theres something I havent told everyone, I had an incident quite a few weeks ago with an arson.

I do have the video of everything, it was targeted against my wifes property, and at that point we left the country straight away.

And Im looking at relocating my family, which is pretty hard to do, especially with Covid I couldnt even get a hotel.

Referencing a right-wing rally organised by his new organisation Heart of Oak on Saturday, he said he would now be unable to attend, and will instead send a video message.

He explained: I was due to be flying back for the demonstration, but obviously now with the 14-day quarantine if I fly back I probably wont get back out.

Yaxley-Lennon was last year jailed for nine weeks for interfering with the administration of justice, and went on to call for his supporters to back Boris Johnson at the last general election to get Brexit done.

Twitter saw some irony in his decision to seek residence in Europe, having defended Brexit, and supported calls for the abolition of freedom of movement.

Nice to see Tommy Robinson go full circle and become an immigrant with a criminal record, noted Liam Ingram.

Tommy Robinson DOES know that foreign people live in Spain, right? asked James Kennedy.

I hope the people of Spain extend Tommy Robinson the same warmth and understanding as hes always extended to those seeking to make a better life for themselves in the UK, said @SpillerofTea.

Sickening news today as Tommy Robinson confirms hes moving to Spain using the right to FoM [freedom of movement] he so gleefully wanted removed from everyone else. Repulsive man! said @mojitoBaB.

Apparently Stephen Tommy Robinson Yaxley Lennon is considering emigrating to Spain. Talk about hypocrisy. Good thing hes not a brexit advocate or anything or that would be a bit awkward, wrote Ash Smith.

Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu tweeted: No country should give Tommy Robinson refuge. Period. Payback time for inciting hate against all those who sought refuge in UK from persecution/war/economic oppression. He runs to an European country which wouldve been easier to settle in if not for Brexit. Cant make it up.

Almost four years after its creation The New European goes from strength to strength across print and online, offering a pro-European perspective on Brexit and reporting on the political response to the coronavirus outbreak, climate change and international politics. But we can only rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press with your support. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.

Read more from the original source:

Far-right Brexit advocate Tommy Robinson is making plans to move to Spain - The New European

Text Size:A- A+

Rich, unpredictable, xenophobic joker with bad hair playing a populist that is how most of the world saw Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. But between Brexit and the coronavirus pandemic, Johnsons politics underwent an incredible makeover. As he completes a year as Britains Prime Minister, it is increasingly clear that the similarities between him and US President Trump end at the awful hairstyles.

Both Johnson and Trump come across as buffoons, and that erratic style is a part of their charm. The key difference, however, is that unlike Trump, Johnson is a buffoon by choice. This difference was always there, but it has become all too prominent during the pandemic.

The coronavirus pandemic started a race to the bottom among the worlds populist leaders. A little over six months into that race, the partial results are out. And Britains Johnson has fared better than most of his fellow populists. After initial blunders, Johnson got his act together, and unlike Trump in the US, he has actually managed to bring the pandemic under control in the UK.

But Johnsons political makeover isnt just limited to controlling the Covid-19 spread. Over the past few months, his government has spent billions to revive the countrys economy a substantial departure from the usual policies of the Conservative Party. Similarly, moving away from the Tory consensus, Johnson has decided to increase spending on health and education. And the man who is often considered the architect of the deeply xenophobic and anti-immigrant Brexit campaign, has shed that image and made way for residents from Hong Kong to get British citizenship.

As Donald Trump tries to respond to the pandemic with one immigration ban after the other, Boris Johnson is quietly rewriting the rules on how to run centre-Right parties in 2020.

Also read: Why UKs response to coronavirus has been world-class

Until last fall, Boris Johnson, just like Trump, was also accused of helping destroy his countrys position and status in the world. He was chided for prioritising his narrow political ambition over sacred national interest and the welfare of his constituents.

We are deeply grateful to our readers & viewers for their time, trust and subscriptions.

Quality journalism is expensive and needs readers to pay for it. Your support will define our work and ThePrints future.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

But the first signs of change came with his speech following the landslide win at the December 2019 general election.

Johnson had a message for the voters, especially for those who voted for us Conservatives for the first time: You may not think of yourself as a natural Tory. Your hand may have quivered over the ballot paper before you put your cross in the Conservative box, and you may intend to return to Labour next time round.

If that is the case, I am humbled that you have put your trust in me and you have put your trust in us. I, and we, will never take your support for granted, declared Johnson, marking a stark departure from his previous image of a divisive and an opportunist leader.

Also read: Boris Johnson wants Britons to get back to work from office

Throughout the pandemic, it has become apparent that unlike US President Trump, Johnson actually knows a thing or two about governance. It was most visible when he himself was rushed to a hospital after testing positive for Covid-19. But the most important lesson Johnson seems to have learnt is that he can tell when he is wrong, and then change his policy and put a break to the losses.

This was evident after Johnson bought into his key advisor Dominic Cummings maniacal idea of not enforcing any social restrictions in the earlier phase of the pandemic, and allowing the Brits to develop herd immunity instead. This policy was so disastrous that the pandemic spread through the UK like wildfire, and Johnson got infected. But he learnt his lesson and soon changed tack.

Now, the pandemic is relatively under control in the UK, where the number of daily new cases has been brought down to double digits.

Trump, on the other hand, instead of listening to his scientific advisors, decided to launch an all-out public attack on Dr Anthony Fauci, the US top infectious diseases official and the man heading the governments response to the pandemic.

Today, the Covid-19 crisis continues to grow in the US, and is hurting Trumps prospects of being re-elected with each passing day.

Also read: Legal autocrats are on the rise. They use constitution and democracy to destroy both

It is intriguing how Boris Johnson can make decisions unlike other populist leaders.

There is something common among most populists their need to look like an outsider challenging the establishment. Trump sees himself, and is seen by his voters, as an outsider, locked out of the circles he wants to be in, the heir to a real-estate fortune with no political experience and a crude sense of humor, bristling with resentment, and with a background in reality television, writes Andrew Sullivan, former editor of The New Republic.

In that sense, Boris Johnson is in stark contrast with all other populists, including Trump. Throughout his career, Johnson has made one public gaffe after another. He has been referred to as the lovable buffoon by journalists and people in the Westminster and Whitehall circles.

But behind this image of a buffoon lies not only Johnsons rather shrewd political acumen, but also his somewhat best-guarded open secret. Johnson hails from the very British establishment whose foundations he now seems to have shaken. Unlike Trump, Johnson is the quintessential insider.

Johnson went to Eton private school (much like 20 other British PMs before him), then to Oxford University (like 27 British PMs), and then became a journalist and eventually the editor of Conservative-leaning The Spectator a job often considered a prerequisite for high-British politics. From there, he went on to be the twice elected mayor of London, UKs foreign minister, and eventually the prime minister.

In a way, Boris Johnson never became a complete populist. He is someone who could crack a joke on himself.

He has been serious all along, using his humor and ridiculousness to camouflage political instincts that have, in fact, been sharper than his peers, writes Sullivan.

He sensed the shifting populist tides of the 2010s before most other leading politicians did and grasped the Brexit issue as a path to power. But he also understood how important it was not to be fully captured by that raw xenophobic energy.

Views are personal.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

News media is in a crisis & only you can fix it

You are reading this because you value good, intelligent and objective journalism. We thank you for your time and your trust.

You also know that the news media is facing an unprecedented crisis. It is likely that you are also hearing of the brutal layoffs and pay-cuts hitting the industry. There are many reasons why the medias economics is broken. But a big one is that good people are not yet paying enough for good journalism.

We have a newsroom filled with talented young reporters. We also have the countrys most robust editing and fact-checking team, finest news photographers and video professionals. We are building Indias most ambitious and energetic news platform. And we arent even three yet.

At ThePrint, we invest in quality journalists. We pay them fairly and on time even in this difficult period. As you may have noticed, we do not flinch from spending whatever it takes to make sure our reporters reach where the story is. Our stellar coronavirus coverage is a good example. You can check some of it here.

This comes with a sizable cost. For us to continue bringing quality journalism, we need readers like you to pay for it. Because the advertising market is broken too.

If you think we deserve your support, do join us in this endeavour to strengthen fair, free, courageous, and questioning journalism, please click on the link below. Your support will define our journalism, and ThePrints future. It will take just a few seconds of your time.

Support Our Journalism

Link:

Stop comparing Boris Johnson with Donald Trump. From Brexit to Covid, a lot has changed - ThePrint

Minister for Agriculture Dara Calleary says he had a useful exchange with European Commissioner for Trade Phil Hogan regarding Brexit and international trade via video conference.

The meeting took place as part of a range of engagements as the Minister takes office. Last week the Minister met with Irish farming organisations and is set to meet with industry representatives today (Wednesday).

Speaking after his call with Hogan, Minister Calleary said he was pleased to have had the opportunity to establish contact with the Commissioner, with discussion on Brexit and the wider international trading environment the key focus.

I had a very useful exchange with Commissioner Hogan on the current state of play in the EU-UK negotiations, and took the opportunity to reiterate Irelands agri food and fisheries priorities in these negotiations.

International trade

The Minister was positive on discussions on the wider international trading environment, including trade relations with the US and China as well as the EU-Mercosur free trade agreement.

Concluding, Minister Calleary said: I found todays discussions extremely helpful. I have already had significant engagement with the main stakeholders domestically and at EU level and I will be continuing this process of engagement over the coming days."

Read more

Pilot REPS will draw from existing environmental schemes

Farmer view: action required from Minister Calleary

Tillage sector contributes 1.3bn to the Irish economy

View post:

'Useful' talks between Calleary and Hogan on Brexit and trade - Irish Farmers Journal

The PM is facing a barrage of criticism regarding the potential of lowering food standards in the UK post-Brexit.

The Conservative Party was elected on a manifesto which committed Mr Johnsons Government to not compromise on the UKs high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards in all our trade negotiations.

But peers continued to voice concerns about the prospect of cheap imports and pressed for new guarantees to be included in law via the Agriculture Bill, which sets out new policy as the UK quits the EU-wide Common Agricultural Policy.

Labours Baroness Young of Old Scone also warned it would be pretty invidious to allow wealthier people to choose to buy food produced to higher standards while poorer people would have to buy what they could afford.

She said: This is not even Marie Antoinette saying let them eat cake, it is worse, it is let them eat crap.

Green Party peer Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb said she was terrified the Government, desperate to secure a US trade deal, would give in to the Americans on standards.

The Government argues protections are already in place, although it lacks a majority in the Lords and could suffer a series of defeats when the Bill undergoes further scrutiny at report stage after the summer recess.

It would be then for MPs to overturn any amendments, with some Tory backbenchers having already expressed a desire for future trade deals to ensure a level playing field for British farmers.

Liberal Democrat Lord Addington said the Government would be bound to its commitment on standards if it was written into the Bill.

He told the Lords: If we dont get something on the face of this Bill we have no other way of at least making the Government stand up and say yes, were changing it because and I think thats what this is about.

I hope the minister is taking this on board because ping and pong, backhand, forehand and the odd smash might be involved on this one.

We can actually get involved in a very long discussion on this when the House is asking the Government to honour its own manifesto commitment. I wouldnt have thought any government wants that.

Ping-pong in parliamentary terms is when a Bill moves between the Commons and Lords as both Houses seek to come to an agreement over amendments thereby delaying the implementation of the legislation.

Conservative Lord Cormack said his partys 2019 election manifesto made a total commitment to enhance rather than diminish UK food standards, adding: If this Bill does not create a situation where that can happen then it is indeed not fit for purpose.

Lord Cormack predicted there could be a lengthy report stage for the Bill and quite a lot of contact with the Commons as a result of any amendments made by peers if the Government did not make the desired changes.

Labour argued the legislation must include a requirement for agricultural and food imports to meet domestic standards.

Speaking on day seven of the Bills committee stage, shadow environment minister Lord Grantchester said: The simplest way to decide this matter is by enshrining the UKs position here in law.

The Conservative voters that read the Conservative Party manifesto can be forgiven for thinking this is what they were going to get when they voted to get Brexit done.

The Conservative Government is happy to enshrine Brexit twice in legislation.

The Conservative Government is happy to enshrine the position on Huawei into law.

It is happy to do it again on the wearing of face masks.

Id welcome the ministers U-turn on the matter of food standards as well, as soon as he can make it.

Labour former Cabinet minister Lord Hain said so desperate are the Brexiteers to declare UDI (unilateral declaration of independence) from the EU that they are prepared to prostrate themselves at the door of Donald Trumps America-first trade and sell out our farmers while turning a blind eye to environmental degradation and poor animal welfare standards.

But House Of Cards author and Tory peer Lord Dobbs warned the changes being sought to the legislation on food standards would cut off future export opportunities by making trade deals very much more difficult to negotiate or even block them altogether.

But I would suggest the desire to make a post-EU future difficult or impossible may well be the hidden agenda, he added.

For the Government, rural affairs minister Lord Gardiner of Kimble said existing Brexit legislation already retained standards on environmental protections, animal welfare and food safety.

He said: This provides a firm basis for maintaining the same high level of protection for both domestic and imported products.

We already have the rules and robust processes in place to protect UK standards.

Food regulators and current stringent processes would continue to ensure that all food imports into the UK are safe and meet the relevant UK product rules and regulations, he said.

This will include imports under new free trade agreements, he added.

Lord Gardiner said: Given the protections outlined, the Government believes that sufficient measures are already in place. We are committed to ensuring that trade agreements do not compromise our high standards.

Related Tractors descend on Parliament to protest trade deals undermining British food standards

While you are here, we wanted to ask for your help.

Free, independent journalism in Britain is under threat. The government is becoming increasingly authoritarian and our media is run by a handful handful of billionaires, most of whom reside overseas and all of them have strong political allegiances and financial motivations.

Our mission is to hold the powerful to account. It is vital that free, independent media is allowed to exist to expose hypocrisy, corruption, wrongdoing and abuse of power. But we can't do it without you.

If you can afford to contribute a small donation to the site it will help us to continue our work in the best interests of the public. We only ask you to donate what you can afford, with an option to cancel your subscription at any point.

To donate or subscribe to The London Economic, click here.

The TLE shop is also now open, with all profits going to supporting free, independent journalism.

The shop can be found here.

See the original post:

Brexit food standards: 'This is not even Marie Antoinette saying let them eat cake... it is let them eat crap' - The London Economic