Select Page ::

Brexiteer called out for claiming Brexit Party was ‘most diverse’ in European Parliament – The New European

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

PUBLISHED: 09:11 08 June 2020 | UPDATED: 09:14 08 June 2020

Andra Maciuca

Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage speaks in front of newly elected Brexit Party MEPs, including Annunziata Rees-Mogg (L), Dr David Bull (2nd L) and Ann Widdecombe (2nd R) at a Brexit Party event. (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images) (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)

2019 Getty Images

Email this article to a friend

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

Become a Supporter

The claims came from Belinda de Lucy, as part of a tweet complaining that the media accused the Brexit Party of racism on a regular basis.

The tweet was sent in response to a tweet from the official account for Sophy Ridge on Sunday in which the presenter asks health secretary Matt Hancock how many black people there are in the current cabinet - to which Hancock says there is a whole series of people from this background.

De Lucys tweet read: Hey Sophy, we had the most diverse party in the whole of the EU Parliament, and it didnt stop the constant accusation and insinuations from the mainstream media that we were racists.

Its a false narrative that is pushed on anyone not left wing.

Unsurprisingly, Twitter did not support her claims.

Responses to the Brexiteers tweet included have you tried not being racist.

One user tried to explain to de Lucy that BAME MEPs as a proportion of the total MEPs show Brexiteers were far from being the most diverse party.

De Lucy replied: In the EU Parliament - to which the user said: I know. That is why I said MEPs.

An analysis carried out by The New European found that, out of the main national parties in the UK which had MEPs following the May 2019 European Parliament elections, the Brexit Party had the smallest percentage of BAME MEPs only 10% of their members in the European Parliament were not white.

By comparison, Labour had 22% BAME MEPs, while the Green Party had 14% and the Lib Dems had 13%.

The European Network Against Racism (ENAR) found, in the light of last years EP elections, that the UK is the country with the biggest number of minority ethnic MEPs. However, the number is still very small at only eight MEPs, considering the UK had 73 representatives between 2019-2020.

Because of Brexit, which Nigel Farages organisation was built on, the number of both ethnic minorities and people of colour will go down 1% after the UKs exit from the European Union resulting in 4% and, respectively 3% of the European Parliament being made of each group.

The Brexit Party also fared the worst in terms of gender diversity out of the main UK parties in EP 72% of the partys MEPs were men, as compared to 50% of the Tories, 38% of the Lib Dems and 29% of the Greens.

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 the original post:

Brexiteer called out for claiming Brexit Party was 'most diverse' in European Parliament - The New European

Nissan comes out of lockdown and braces for Brexit – The Guardian

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

It must have been a strange last four years for the workers at Nissans Sunderland factory, as they went about their business of making cars while at the same time being caught in a symbolic tug of war between a divided Brexit nation.

When things are going well for the plant, it apparently shows that Global Britain is surging ahead of rivals; when the wind turns, it is a symbol of the UKs industrial decline, with government having to go chequebook in hand to bureaucrats in Japan to keep it afloat.

Workers will return to the plant on Monday, with a phased restart as it gradually raises its output from the zero cars produced in April and May towards the 28,000 monthly total achieved on average in 2019.

Britains largest single car factory has the potential to build 600,000 cars a year, but it last broke the 500,000 mark in 2016. Even if carmaking restarts quickly, production for 2020 will surely be the lowest in years. What happens beyond that is an open question, as a result of comments last week from Nissans chief operating officer, Ashwani Gupta.

You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue, he told the BBC. We are committed.

Two sentences; two inaccuracies. First, Nissan made 346,871 cars in the UK in 2019, against Jaguar Land Rovers 385,197 (although the latter were produced at various locations). The second caveat was rather more important: the carmaker is committed, but only up to a point.

Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, its not our intention, but the business will not be sustainable, Gupta said. Thats what everybody has to understand.

Standard World Trade Organization tariffs would add 10% to the cost of exports to countries with which the UK does not have a trade deal. For companies used to shaving off fractions of a percentage point in efficiencies, the prospect of carrying on as before in such circumstances is as absurd now as it was before the referendum.

The exasperation of car executives at still having to deal with Brexit on top of everything else is almost palpable particularly at Nissan, which has already said it will be shedding 2,800 workers in Barcelona as part of a deep restructuring in favour of the UK plant.

Sunderland is one of 35 Nissan plants worldwide, according to industry data company Marklines, even when those operated by its alliance partners, Renault and Mitsubishi, are not included. It has survived one crisis so far; a second might be tempting fate.

As Adrian Hallmark, chief executive of luxury carmaker Bentley, put it last week after announcing 1,000 job cuts, a no-deal Brexit would add another human-made disaster on top of the virus. Thousands of redundancies at Aston Martin, McLaren, Renault and parts manufacturer ZF are testament to the difficulties facing the entire global car industry. My message to politicians is this: please dont push us off a second cliff, Hallmark told the Financial Times.

So where does this leave Sunderland? A symbol of Great British quality or of Britannias declining fortunes? The truth is, as in most cases, somewhere in between. Britains largest car plant is a genuine exemplar of car-a-minute efficiency, and Nissan does not want to let it go. At the same time, the pandemic has shown how everything can change for the worse overnight whether because of politics or otherwise.

More here:

Nissan comes out of lockdown and braces for Brexit - The Guardian

EU crisis: Brexit risks bloc’s ‘economic threat’ crumbling – ‘We should leave too!’ – Express.co.uk

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Former Brexit Party MEP and director of the Academy of Ideas, Claire Fox, exposed the biggest threat facing the EU. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Ms Fox claimed the EU would be worried about the UK thriving outside the bloc after Brexit as it could jeopardise the integrity of the union. She said other nations will look at the UK and wonder whether they should leave the EU as they will be able to see Britain reclaim its sovereignty.

Ms Fox said: "If the UK does not face a catastrophic collapse economically because of Brexit.

"If we show that we can survive, that then removes one of the threats the EU makes to any Eurosceptic member states threatening to leave the European Union.

"The EU wants to be able to say well at Britain, what a terrible experience that was for them.

"Whereas if the experience in Britain wasn't a terrible one, then you have a situation where you have contagion."

DON'T MISS:Serious SPLITS erupt as member states question what is the EU for?

Ms Fox expanded to explain why the idea of sovereignty was important to Britain and how other member states would look at the UK.

She continued: "Maybe contagion is too strong a word but it would give people the impression that actually, asserting your sovereignty and a way of saying that the accountability of all political decision is made domestically.

"It would also show that a country is entitled to make decisions about its economy, political decisions and everything else.

"They should be able to do this without referring to some top-down bureaucratic body and its rules."

Ms Fox outlined what impact a successful Brexit would have on other member states in the future.

She said: "Other countries might simply decide to do the same.

"The EU must fear that if Brexit happens that other countries will look around and say maybe we should leave the EU too."

Stubborn Barnier blasted by Hancock as he demands EU concessions[VIDEO]Brexit warning: Barnier attacked for plotting 'blame game' in talks[COMMENT]Boris backed by 95% of readers to not sell out fishing in trade deal[POLL]

Ms Fox also warned the EU could see more divisions form in the European Union as the bloc attempts to recover from coronavirus.

She explained that some member states, like Italy, will question the amount of help they received from the European Union during the crisis.

In addition to this, tensions may arise between the rich and poorer states as economies attempt to restart.

Ms Fox predicted that some wealthier countries may resent having to give more money to nations more heavily impacted by the virus.

EU crisis: Brexit risks bloc's 'economic threat' crumbling - 'We should leave too!' - Express.co.uk

The car industry now: will Brexit’s impact now be even greater? – Autocar

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Having dominated the news agenda for the past five years, talk of Brexit practically disappeared in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak.

The UKs position remains that it will not extend its transitional period with the EU beyond the end of this year, and the automotive industrys position remains that anything but a free trade deal between the UK and the EU would have catastrophic consequences for the industry here. From 2021, cars coming in from abroad will be subject to a 10% import tariff if the UK and EU fail to strike a deal. Some 81% of all cars built in the UK last year were exported, with the EU taking almost 55% of that total, at 576,000 cars.

So for now Brexit remains in its seemingly never-ending holding pattern, although Felipe Muoz, Jato Dynamics global analyst, doesnt expect the pandemic to affect its likely outcome to the UKs automotive industry. The economy has already absorbed most of the risks derived from Brexit, he says. All the decisions that were due to be taken due to Brexit were already taken, and this crisis wont change them.

What the pandemic does threaten to do, however, is make the financial position of some car makers even worse and undo any progress made in recovering. A no-deal Brexit at the end of 2020 risks undoing efforts to get the auto industry back on track, says Eric-Mark Huitema, director-general of the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA).

Jaguar Land Rover, for example, has said it would cost it 500m a year in tariffs on vehicle exportsalone, and the ACEA notes that as the UK produces so few electric motors and batteries, EVs become particularly susceptible to high tariffs, given how large a proportion the battery is of a cars overall cost.

New trade deals with countries outside the EU are unlikely to be ready by 2021, either, and the UK may find the terms will be different to before the crisis, as countries may have been spooked by how exposed they are to global supply chains and have more pressing domestic problems to solve first.

Muoz says: The problem for Britain is that other potential commercial partners, like the US, are now heading to recession, so Britain will have more difficulties substituting trade with the EU.

Covid-19 and the British car industry

Excerpt from:

The car industry now: will Brexit's impact now be even greater? - Autocar

Brexit: NI Assembly votes to extend transition period – BBC News

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Image caption The motion was opposed by unionist parties at Stormont

The Northern Ireland Assembly has voted in favour of extending the Brexit transition period.

The transition is due to end on 1 January and a new "trade border" will begin operating between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

The UK government can request a transition extension, but has said it will not do so.

The assembly vote is not binding on the Northern Ireland Executive or the UK Government.

The multi-party Executive has, so far, been unable to reach a position on extending the transition but will reconsider the issue in two weeks time.

The Assembly motion for extension was backed by nationalists, the Alliance party, greens and socialists but opposed by unionists.

That meant it passed by 50 votes to 38.

The motion was proposed by SDLP MLA Matthew O'Toole who told the assembly it was "mad and dangerous" not to extend given the current economic circumstances.

He said: "It is especially dangerous because we know how close we came, in recent weeks, to serious disruption to supply chains across these islands.

"If we end this year with no trade deal and no extension to the transition, we could face the very real prospect of significant disruption to supply chains, not just between Calais and Dover but between Holyhead and Dublin - a route that is critical to the Northern Ireland market - and at Belfast and Larne."

Speaking against the motion, the DUP's Mervyn Storey said an extension would be counterproductive.

"An extension to the transition period would prevent us from taking the radical steps needed to rebuild the post-Covid-19 economy because the United Kingdom would continue to be bound by EU rules and unable to influence them."

At the end of transition period, Northern Ireland will continue to follow EU rules on agricultural and manufactured goods, while the rest of the UK will not.

Additionally, the whole of the UK will leave the EU's customs union, but Northern Ireland will continue to enforce the EU's customs code at its ports.

This will mean some new processes and checks for goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK.

The UK government has confirmed that will need expanded infrastructure at Northern Ireland's ports to carry out checks on animals and food products.

It is generally aiming for a "light-touch" approach to new checks and processes, though the detail will all have to be agreed with the EU.

Read the original:

Brexit: NI Assembly votes to extend transition period - BBC News

Brexit shock: How tensions between USA and China may affect UK’s trade options – Express

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

In an economic climate marred by the coronavirus pandemic and increasing global tensions, experts have warned the UK has started to find itself negotiating with all parties for trade deals, from the EU and the US to China and Australia. The US and China, both close allies of the UK historically, have recently seen boiling tensions with each other, resulting in tariffs and trade disputes. For years, the US has sanctioned Chinese telecoms company Huawei with sanctions, and despite January seeing a Phase One trade agreement between the two nations, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to major distrust and conflict between Washington and Beijing. For the UK, this complicated geo-political situation has led some to question how will Brexit go ahead.

Andrew Northage, head of the International Trade sector group at leading international law firm Walker Morris, believes that the UKs economic situation is already fraught with tension as it departs the EUs pre-existing bloc of trade, and that worsening US/China relations poses difficult questions for how Brexit will go ahead.

He toldExpress.co.uk: The UK could be expected to face a harder economic environment at a time of global economic fragility, which would increase the stress on the UK economy.

Growing US/China tensions may result in the UK seeking to obtain better market access in China and attract Chinese companies and capital to the UK, which could be seen as positive.

If China has reduced access to US financial markets and technology, the UK could look to bridge that gap."

READ MORE:They NEVER wanted a deal! Hannan lets rip at EU over plot for 'subservient' UK

However, he suggested that the UK may be weaker than the EU for trade deals, which could hinder their search for an agreement.

Mr Northage added: The US is likely to put pressure on the UK to support its efforts and may look for the UK to align itself more with Washington.

The price of such cooperation may be concessions in the free trade agreement the UK is looking to conclude with the US.

The issue of food standards (and in particular chlorinated chicken) has been in the news again recently and looks to have some distance to run yet.

But he holds that the UK may look to try to position itself as a middleman between the US and China.

He concluded: Easier said than done but potentially big rewards if done well.

Meanwhile, Professor Stefan Legge, trade expert and economist from the University of St. Gallen, also said that the UK will have a tough time finding a new deal, but more because of the US hardline stance on trade issues.

Prof. Legge pointed out that the Trump administration in the US has not made a lot of international agreements on trade, specifically referring to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Trump withdrew from.

He continues to say that trade agreements usually take years to be negotiated and ratified.

He said: In more than three years the Trump administration has achieved very little - the new NAFTA (USMCA) is not much different from the original NAFTA and will come into effect July 1, 2020.

DON'T MISSBrexit bombshell: Chance of no deal 'higher than ever'[ANALYSIS]Macron's MEP savaged over claims UK's Brexit demands are 'unrealistic'[SPOTLIGHT]Brexiteer brilliantly exposes Barnier for exploiting Remainers[FOCUS]

There is hardly any chance in my view that the UK will secure a trade deal with the US before the end-of-2020 deadline.

If talks start in the coming months, American negotiators will ask for better access to the British health care system (NHS) and food market - both highly sensitive matters in London.

It has always been clear that an `independent UK outside the EU will have a hard time securing trade agreements with key partners.

This is especially true in 2020 when the UK will want to use its scarce resources to negotiate a favourable agreement with its most important partner, the European Union.

However, John Royden, Head of Research at JM Finn added that the tensions may make it easier for the UK to gain access to these markets, due to the US and Chinas decoupling in trade elating a vacuum for UK businesses.

Royden said: "Before COVID-19 the Chinese and US were at each others throats; the US wanted to stop subsidising Chinese economic growth by ceasing to tolerate the expropriation of US technology by Chinese firms.

The expropriation took the form of Chinese laws requiring the majority Chinese ownership of local companies and poor court processes when it was alleged that Intellectual Protocol (IP) theft had occurred.

From a geo-political perspective this was all part of a greater ambition to slow Chinese progress towards the Chinese goal of matching and then exceeding the USs global influence.

Trade wars played an important part of the pressure mixture as well.

Then came COVID-19 and the suspected Chinese cover-up that followed.

Mr Royden also explained that without COVID-19 worsening, it is unlikely that state control of Chinese media will loosen, as it is essential for public relations and international condemnation will look bad on the government.

He continues: "Pressure to relax state controls of Chinese media will come from international condemnation of Xis COVID-19 cover up.

The trade war is likely to morph into a cold war of words and accusations.

The US will like this because trade wars have an element of cutting your nose to spite your face about them.

"The impact on the UKs attempts to do international trade deals should therefore become easier as the spats between the US and China move away from trade.

Watch the next G20 meeting with interest.

The rest is here:

Brexit shock: How tensions between USA and China may affect UK's trade options - Express

Boris Johnson wants to ‘fix’ Brexit deal he once claimed was ‘oven-ready’ – The New European

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

PUBLISHED: 17:09 07 June 2020 | UPDATED: 17:09 07 June 2020

Prime Minister Boris Johnson holds a freshly baked pie while wearing a 'get Brexit done' apron. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA.

PA Wire/PA Images

Boris Johnson reportedly wants to change the terms of the Brexit withdrawal agreement that he spent the general election promoting as oven-ready and ready-to-go.

Email this article to a friend

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

Become a Supporter

In November the prime minister said: This government has succeeded where no one thought we could. We not only got a new deal from our EU partners, but we got a great deal.

He added: After three and a half years of procrastination, we have a great new deal that is ready to go.

But now the UK government reportedly now claims that the agreement has unfair defects after acknowledging most of the deal was copied from Theresa Mays own deal she agreed with the EU.

One of the only changes in the document that Johnson praised surrounded the Northern Irish backstop.

The Sunday Express reports that sources close to UK chief negotiator David Frost say that the PM is looking to fix the deal.

He wants to make changes despite setting a deadline of the end of June to make progress in talks before the end of the transition period in December.

Unfortunately we couldnt fix every defect with the withdrawal agreement last autumn we had to prioritise abolishing the backstop and getting Brexit done in the face of a parliament that was trying to stop us, the source said.

Well now have to do our best to fix it but were starting with a clear disadvantage.

On Friday the EUs chief Brexit negiotator claimed that Johnson was trying to break the political declaration surrounding the withdrawal agreement.

But the UK government said otherwise - claiming that Barnier had misunderstood the purpose of the declaration.

Were committed to the political declaration, but we see it as guiding parameters it is not a treaty, they said.

In my dictionary means parameters means limits, it doesnt require us to agree to everything in it.

Go here to read the rest:

Boris Johnson wants to 'fix' Brexit deal he once claimed was 'oven-ready' - The New European

Claim that extending the Brexit transition period could cost 380 billion is not credible – Full Fact

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Get Brexit done! Majority AGAINST Brexit transition extension in close poll

Daily Express, 17 May 2020

Britains faces 380billion bill if Brexit is delayed beyond December

Sun, 17 May 2020

Extension to Brexit bill could cost 378bn

Mail Online, 17 May 2020

After the UK left the EU on 31 January, it entered a transition period lasting until the end of this year. During this period, the UK remains in the customs union and single market, meaning that things like trade, travel and regulations continue to work as they did before the UK left.

As part of its Withdrawal Agreement with the EU, the UK can extend the transition period for up to two years provided it agrees this with the EU before 1 July 2020. The UK government has said it will not apply for any extension.

A report published recently by the Centre for Brexit Policy (CBP) warned that the public did not want to see an extension, and that it could cost 378 billion.

Neither of these claims is based on credible evidence. The report presents a one-sided viewpoint on the costs of transition, and most studies into the economic impacts of Brexit show leaving the customs union and single market will mean the UK economy is smaller compared to remaining.

The study also reports findings from an opinion poll selectively, which does not fairly reflect what we know about the UK publics views on the transition period.

The CBP commissioned ComRes to poll public opinion on the transition period. The CBP reported that: The public wants the Government to either shorten the transition period or stick to its current timetable by a small margin (44 per cent to 40 per cent)

The Express incorrectly reported this as showing that a majority of the public were against extending the transition period.

In any case, the CBPs summary isnt a fair reflection of all of the polls findings.

The question thats being referred to was: As a result of the Coronavirus pandemic, there have been some suggestions that the transition period for the UK to leave the EU should be extended beyond 31 December 2020, into 2021 or beyond. Others say that the transition period should remain as already agreed between the UK and the EU, and end 31 December 2020, while others say that the transition period should be shortened so that it ends sooner than 31 December 2020. Any change to the transition period would require Parliament to agree. Which of the following statements best represents your view on the length of the transition period?

35% of respondents said the period should stay as it is, 40% said it should be extended, and 8% said it should be shortened (with the remainder saying they didnt know). This rounds to 44% either wanting the period to remain the same or being shortened.

On its own, this might suggest, by a narrow margin, that more people are opposed to extending the transition period than support it, as the CBP said. However findings from other questions in the same poll muddy those waters:

In other words, people agreed to pretty much every question that was put to them, regardless of whether it implied support or opposition to extending the transition period. So reporting the results of one question alone paints a misleading picture of public opinion. Weve discussed this hazard when reading opinion polls before.

Other polls that have been conducted in recent months have consistently shown that more adults in Great Britain are in favour of extending the transition period than are in favour of sticking to the timetable or shortening the transition period, whether or not the context of the coronavirus pandemic is mentioned. These are all older than the ComRes poll used by the CBP, so we cant say definitively what the public currently thinks.

We dont seek to fact check the CBP reports findings in their entirety, but we can set their figures in context.

The report is largely based on assumptions that sit at the extreme end of those which have been made by studies into the economic impacts of Brexit.

By far the largest components of the CBPs estimate are the potential for economic loss which stem from delaying better regulation outside of the single market and customs union (176 billion) and delaying free trade agreements with non-EU countries (132 billion).

Its true that leaving the single market and customs union open up new options in terms of reaching trade agreements with non-EU countries, and of allowing the UK more choice over regulations for businesses. But both figures offered by the CBP appear unrealistic in the context of the weight of evidence provided by other studies.

The CBPs figure on savings from deregulation is based on an assumed boost of 4% of GDP just below the middle of a range from studies it features in the reportbut well above what most estimates have been in the past.

In its own analysis of the economic impacts of several Brexit scenarios in 2018, the Treasury found that there is significant uncertainty around the potential impacts of regulatory flexibility. It highlighted that external studies had produced a wide range of estimates, ranging from a negative or zero impact, to a benefit of 1.3% of GDP.

That higher figure assumed scaling back regulations that might not be politically feasible (for example, scrapping regulations in a way that was at odds with the governments commitments on climate change).

The CBP also estimates economic benefit from new free trade agreements which would be delayed if the transition period was extended. Featuring studies showing impacts ranging from no change to GDP up to an 8% increase, the report arbitrarily assumed a 3% increase to GDP.

Again, this sits in contrast to the bulk of studies which have tried to estimate this.

According to the Institute for Government in 2018: Much has been made of the UKs ability to offset losses in trade with the EU with new FTAs with other countries. But all the studies that have attempted to quantify the benefits of such deals conclude that they are likely to be relatively modest.

It also said that: Most economic analyses of Brexit predict that leaving the EU will result in higher trade barriers. Based on past evidence on the relationship between trade barriers and economic growth, the studies predict that this increase in tariff and non-tariff barriers would lead to lower economic growth.

The analysis by CBP also does not mention any potential gains from extending the transition period that would come from retaining free trade with the EU. Its highly likely the UK will face additional barriers to trading with EU countries after leaving the single market and customs union.

Also, the CBP says that extending the transition period by two years would mean the UK loses out on two years of tariff revenue from EU imports, amounting to 26 billion. Thats because the CBP assumes the UK would leave the transition period without a free trade agreement with the EU, and so both sides would impose tariffs on each others imports.

But it doesnt try to estimate any direct economic gain from keeping tariffs on imports from non-EU countries for an additional two years. While the UK was an EU member, and during the transition period, the UK gets some income from tariffs (like taxes) the EU places on imports from countries from the rest of the world. This tariff income would be lost if, as the CBP advocates, the transition period ends as scheduled and the UK signs free trade agreements with other countries sooner.

Ultimately its still unclear what kinds of trade barriers the UK will face whenever the transition period ends, as the UK and EU have not agreed the terms of their future relationship. That alone means we should place limited trust in specific numbers that represent the supposed cost of remaining in the transition period.

Link:

Claim that extending the Brexit transition period could cost 380 billion is not credible - Full Fact

The Brexit Crisis Led to Totally Incompetent Leadership at a Time of Unprecedented Calamity. Now We are Paying for It – CounterPunch

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Britain is failing to cope with the Covid-19 epidemic as well as other countries in Europe and East Asia have. Out of 62,000 excess deaths in the UK, says former chief scientific officer Sir David King, 40,000 excess deaths could have been avoided if government had acted responsibly.

The failure is devastating: on a single day this week, 359 people died from coronavirus in the UK more than the number of deaths in all 27 EU countries over the same 24 hours. The UK is starting to exit lockdown while the epidemic has not been brought under control, despite all the economic self-destruction.

Two main reasons explain why the crisis in Britain turned into a calamity. Firstly, the political consequences of Brexit turn out to be more lethal and swift than any potential economic damage. It is now clear that the worst outcome of the turmoil over leaving the EU has been to land Britain with a leadership of spectacular incompetence during one of the worst crises in British history.

Boris Johnson emerges, when he does emerge these days, as the sort of shallow self-promoting buffoon that his critics, including many who know him well, have always said that he was. As his governments failures multiply, his default position is evasion and denial: on the very same day that Britain (population 66 million) outpaced the whole of the EU (population 446 million) in fatalities, Johnson told the House of Commons that he was very proud of what we have achieved.

Much of the time it does not matter much who is nominally running a country with an effective civil service, but this is not one of those times. Judgements crucial to the lives and livelihoods of millions must be made, but at this critical moment, Britain is finding that it is run by a Gilbert-and-Sullivan type administration. The analogy is all too appropriate: Johnson, with his fake-patrician bombast and shady dealings, strongly resembles the Duke of Plaza Toro in The Gondoliers who led his regiment from behind/he found it less exciting. The sinister character and dubious doings of Dominic Cummings strongly recall those of the Grand Inquisitor in the same opera.

Almost everybody outside the government believes that at no point during the epidemic has the government been ahead of the game. It has always lagged behind and frequently headed in the wrong direction. The list of errors is long: underestimating the threat posed by the virus; failure to prepare for it through accelerated procurement; late and inadequate testing and tracing; sending untested Covid-19 carriers into care homes; failing to introduce face masks early on; chaotic preparation for a return to normal life and resumed economic activity. In combination, these mistakes may keep Britain in semi-lockdown for the foreseeable future.

Once, Britain had a reputation for having one of the worlds most astute political classes operating through one of its most effective administrative machines. No longer: the pandemic marks the turning point. Johnson and mediocre ministers have throughout conveyed a frightening sense not of malignancy but of amateurs at work, lightweights baffled by what is happening and unable to learn from experience.

Britain is paying a high price for the whole bizarre Brexit project, not so much because of the undoubted economic damage it will do to the country, but because of the inadequacy of the leaders whom it elevated into power. Anybody who seriously believed that Britains troubles stemmed primarily from membership of the EU was either a crackpot, a careerist or simply misinformed. Though claiming to see a golden future for global Britain, the Brexiters were unashamed Little Englanders, their isolationism neatly expressed in the apocryphal weather forecast, Fog in channel, continent isolated.

From the beginning of the crisis this attitude has hobbled cooperation with other countries or even learning from their experience. The Brexiters instinct to stand proudly alone in defiance of reality presumably explains the decision to impose a 14-day quarantine period on travellers arriving in Britain, where coronavirus is still rife, though they may be coming from countries where it has been largely suppressed. This reminds me of travelling to Russia and Iraq in the 1990s, at a time when the health systems in both countries had collapsed and diseases were spreading unchecked, and finding that all arrivals had to have an Aids test.

The second cause of Britains all too world beating fatality rate, to adopt Johnsons famous boast, is the degree to which the operational capacity of the UK government has withered in recent decades. Ministers make self-confident claims about the delivery of testing, tracing, PPE equipment, an app to prevent the spread of the illness and other initiatives, but nothing happens or delivery is halting and unreliable.

Britain is discovering the hard way how far its administrative machine has been weakened by cuts and outsourcing. Central government has monopolised authority and resources and starved local authorities of both, though they should be on the cutting edge of test and trace. An editorial in the British Medical Journal of which the lead author is a professor of European public health, Martin McKee, succinctly sums up what has happened: A hollowed out civil service has long turned to outsourcing companies, despite their repeated failures. Companies with little relevant experience have struggled to organise viral testing or contact tracing. The task of coordinating activities with existing organisations, such as NHS laboratories or local public health departments, is too complex for their business model.

Testing and tracing are central to the governments bid to contain the epidemic. This is scarcely surprising since Dr John Snow, one of the founders of modern epidemiology, first mapped cholera victims in Soho in London in 1854 in order to identify the origins of a cholera outbreak (it was a water pump producing polluted water). More sophisticated trace and track campaigns have since been used to suppress or contain epidemics. Such detective work needs well trained and experienced interviewers to get total strangers to disclose their movements and contacts. German health officials today credit a well-organised test and trace system for their success in bringing the epidemic under control in Germany by 17 April, just six weeks after the first death there from the virus.

In Britain, the recruitment of 25,000 contact tracers has been partly outsourced, 10,000 of them being recruited by Serco and its subcontractors. Directors of public health only learned on the morning of the announcement that the test and trace effort was being launched four days early. It will now only be fully operational by September or October according to its chief operating officer.

The main explanation of the government is that it, along with all the governments in the world, was surprised by the speed and ferocity of the virus. This excuse might have had some validity in February or even March, but not now. Coronavirus has now killed almost twice as many people as died in the Blitz 32,000 and most of them should still be alive.

See the original post:

The Brexit Crisis Led to Totally Incompetent Leadership at a Time of Unprecedented Calamity. Now We are Paying for It - CounterPunch

North-east skipper Jimmy Buchan warns no-deal Brexit ‘will hurt’ Scottish fishing industry – Press and Journal

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Failure to find a fishing compromise in the Brexit talks will hurt the Scottish industry, insiders warned as negotiations entered extra time.

Fishing leaders have told MPs that if differences between the UK and EU are not ironed out before the end of the transition period on December 31 there will be a risk to the industry short-term.

The warnings come just days after the final round of scheduled talks between London and Brussels broke off, with EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier accusing his opposite number, David Frost, of not showing any true will to reach a deal.

Since the outset of negotiations the EU has demanded status quo access to UK waters, which would essentially mean a continuation of the common fisheries policy something that has been categorically rejected by Boris Johnson.

Jimmy Buchan, chief executive of the Scottish Seafood Association, told the Commons environment committee that, despite the differences, a deal must be done no question.

He said: The number one priority for the members I represent is for the UK to get a deal with the EU.

Weve got trade flowing both ways, probably worth about a billion pounds, on seafood coming into the UK and seafood leaving the UK, and therefore it is in the best interest of both parties to make sure they get a deal so that continues, because anything else will hurt both sides.

He added: I would hate to see any type of time delays because we are a just in time delivery service, fresh fish on the slab the next day is what weve built our market on, so we dont want to see any restrictions that is going to create time delays.

There is no question about it, getting a deal with the rest of Europe is really important to our fishermen.

Without an agreement, Mr Buchan said there would be a risk to the industry short term.

Jeremy Percy, director of the New Under Ten Fishermens Association, which represents the UKs small fishing vessels, agreed that a deal was needed.

He said: Eighty percent of the fish we catch is exported and were facing the potential, if we do have a no-deal, of both tariff and non tariff barriers.

Tariff barriers are going to be unhelpful enough, non tariff barriers are potentially far more dangerous.

Were looking at catch certificates, health certificates, transport certificates, on top of that youve got both French customs, who are not exactly renowned for their patience, but also French fishermen.

They can close down the ports or outside the port very quickly and for shellfish exports, especially, thats the death of it.

Barrie Deas, who leads the National Federation of Fishermens Organisations, was much more relaxed about the prospect of no-deal, however.

He cited reconciliations after the Cod Wars in the seventies and said he expects natural economics to work their way through following Brexit.

The comments came as Cabinet Office minister Penny Morduant hinted negotiations were nearing a conclusion.

Speaking in the Commons, she said: We cannot keep negotiating forever, we have to allow our businesses, our farmers, our citizens time to implement the decisions taken.

That is why we are at this key stage now where we have to increase and escalate negotiations because we need to arrive at a deal soon.

Read the rest here:

North-east skipper Jimmy Buchan warns no-deal Brexit 'will hurt' Scottish fishing industry - Press and Journal

Brexit Party took almost 2 million in donations in first quarter of 2020 – The New European

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

PUBLISHED: 13:34 09 June 2020 | UPDATED: 13:41 09 June 2020

Nigel Farage. Photograph: TOLGA AKMEN/AFP/Getty Images.

Archant

The Brexit Party has taken almost 2 million worth of donations in the first quarter of 2020 - despite failing to gain a single seat at the general election weeks before.

Email this article to a friend

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

Become a Supporter

Nigel Farages political organisation reported accepting monies worth 1.95 million between January and the end of March, despite celebrating Brexit getting done in January.

Figures released by the Electoral Commission revealed the Conservative Party accepted the highest amount of donations and other public funds in the same time period - receiving 4.04 million.

The 17 political parties registered in Great Britain and Northern Ireland reported accepting a total of 11.79 million during the years first quarter, up from 9.16 million during the same period in 2019.

Labour reported receiving 3.88 million, the Liberal Democrats 1.27 million and the Scottish National Party 418,305.

Louise Edwards, director of regulation at the commission, said: Publishing this data allows voters to see clearly how parties in the United Kingdom are being funded, enhancing public confidence and trust in our democratic processes.

We welcome the fact that many parties have delivered their donation reports to us on time despite the current challenging circumstances caused by Covid-19.

Where parties were unable to meet the deadline for reasons relating to the pandemic, we will continue to work with them to ensure transparency of their donations.

Farage has previously talked about creating of a new organisation - recently issuing a warning he may try to emulate successes of the Brexit Party in the future.

Go here to see the original:

Brexit Party took almost 2 million in donations in first quarter of 2020 - The New European

Ireland as a seat for International Arbitration Bost-Brexit – Lexology

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

This article first appeared in The Venezuelan Journal of Legislation and Jurisprudence, May 2020.

Current Dominance

Choosing the seat of arbitration is often a fundamental component of international trade. The importance of this choice was neatly stated by the US Supreme Court in Bremen vs. Zapata Off-Shore Co 407 U.S 1, 13-14 (1972): "the elimination of all such uncertainties by agreeing in advance on a forum acceptable to both parties is an indispensable element in international trade".

The choice of arbitral seat has critical importance in relation to the arbitral procedure that will apply and the availability of court measures to support arbitration and regulate appeals against awards. Commercially astute parties generally want to arbitrate in a place where they know they will receive a fair, impartial and expeditious arbitration with a skilled arbitrator and representatives in a process that will be supported, if necessary by the local courts who also recognise the finality of awards.

London has undoubtedly been the most dominant choice as the seat for international arbitration taking a 45% share of the market, according to a survey done by Queen Mary University of London in 2015. Parties frequently chose to resolve international disputes by London seated arbitrations even where they have no connection to, and where the contract was not made or performed in the United Kingdom.

English law is the most commonly used law in international business and dispute resolution worldwide with 27% of the worlds 320 legal jurisdictions using English common law for the dispute resolution according to the survey. The popularity of London seated arbitration is largely attributable to the prevalence of English law given that the choice of English Law as governing law generally goes hand in hand with the dominant choice of London as the seat.

Reasons for this dominance include:

The Brexit Effect

One of the core features of the Brexit vote was the desire to take back control of UK law and bring an end to the jurisdiction of the Courts of Justice of the European Union when the UK leave the European Union the transition period is currently set to end on 31 December 2020. Brexit undoubtedly poses a threat to Londons dominance in the area of international arbitration. While many commentators (particularly those involved in international arbitration in London) contend that Brexit will not impede international arbitration in London and some in fact argue that London may become more popular given the ability of English Courts to revert back to Anti-Suit Injunctions (which the Courts of Justice of the European Union outlawed in Alliance SpA & Others vs. West Tankers Inc. Case C-185/07) and its continued ability to enforce arbitration awards under the New York Convention which they contend will remain unaffected by Brexit.

It is true that Brexit cannot affect the UKs long established laws of contract and tort and its Arbitration Act 1996 which is a beacon of influence on how to attract to international arbitration. Notwithstanding this, Brexit will affect some parties attitude to choosing London as the seat of arbitration. In a recent Thomson Reuters Practical Law survey, 35% of respondents considered that Brexit had affected their approach to the selection of jurisdiction and choice of law clauses (including arbitration). Of the remaining 65%, 39% said that they would review these clauses in their contracts if there was no significant progress on addressing these issues in a Brexit deal. One of the principal reasons for this was a concern over enforcement of court judgments post Brexit.

Close Scrutiny & Enforcement

While the arbitration community in London is confident about its future and indeed has good reasons to maintain that confidence, one area of particular importance which may affect parties choosing London as a seat of arbitration is the ability to enforce the resulting award or related courts orders against the losing party in respect of its assets outside the jurisdiction of the seat of arbitration.

Indeed, the UK Ministry of Justice, in a survey completed in 2015, noted that the enforcement of a Judgment as against the assets of the counterparty was a significant and contributing factor in parties determining to choose English law and the English jurisdiction for dispute resolution. However, upon the UK leaving the European Union, it will suffer a 31% reduction in the number of jurisdictions with whom it has reciprocal enforcement arrangements.

Traditionally, arbitration awards made in the UK have been easily converted into an English Court Judgment pursuant to Section 66(2) Arbitration Act 1996. This Court Order could then be easily enforced in other jurisdictions pursuant to international agreements held by the UK with those other jurisdictions.

Within the European Union, the Recast Brussels Regulation (introduced on 10 January 2015) provides for a very simple, streamlined enforcement procedure whereby a judgment creditor is now only required to present a copy of the Judgment and a Standard Form Certificate issued by the Court which granted the Court Order and it can then begin whatever enforcement measures are available under the local law of the Member State in which it will be automatically recognised and enforceable.

Following completion of the Brexit process, the UK will be unable to rely upon this regime for recognition and enforcement of its Judgments and Orders in other Member States and it is currently not clear whether an equivalent regime can be agreed between the UK and the EU. However, the UK can continue to rely upon the New York Convention for enforcement of the arbitral award. The Convention is subscribed to by 157 States including all 28 European Union Member States.

While this is a viable mechanism for enforcement, there are a number of important considerations and potential shortcomings:

It is conceivable that if the Courts of England and Wales were to resurrect the Anti-Suit Injunction type order in conflict to the Courts of Justice of the European Union in West Tankers, then enforcement of the arbitration award in a Member State of the European Union thereafter, could be refused under the New York Convention on the basis that it is contrary to European Union law.

Similarly, in the event that the arbitral award made in London does not have proper regard for mandatory laws of the European Union in circumstances where they may have produced a different outcome in the case (on the basis that England and Wales will be no longer subject to those laws), then that could also be deemed a reason for refusal to recognise and enforce the resulting arbitral award in a European Union Member State.

In addition, the English Courts have broad powers in support of arbitral proceedings under the Arbitration Act 1996 in terms of facilitating the appointment of an arbitral tribunal, ordering interim measures such as injunctive relief, hearing challenges to the validity of any award and upholding the finality of an award. How far such court orders in support of arbitration will be enforceable in other Member States and beyond remains to be seen and will depend upon the arrangements agreed after Brexit. Certainly, in the event that such orders are in conflict with provisions of European Union law, then one can see difficulties in relation to the enforcement of such orders within the European Union.

Other Practical Concerns

It is unclear as to how or to what extent the UK Courts, when called upon to provide support in relation to arbitral proceedings in the UK, will have any proper regard to European Union legal issues arising.

Where the English Courts are called upon to support an arbitral process in terms of making a variation to an arbitral award under Section 71 Arbitration Act 1996, enforcement of this varied award may prove difficult and not easily enforced in other jurisdictions.

The English Courts have also provided very useful assistance to complex international arbitrations under Section 45 Arbitration Act 1996 by determining preliminary points of law or seeking guidance from the Courts on a point of European Union law. One must seriously doubt whether that can be done post-Brexit. It is generally the case that arbitral tribunals themselves are not permitted to refer a point of law to the Courts of Justice of the European Union for preliminary ruling on the application of European Union law. This may well leave a deficit in relation to resolution of points of European Union law.

One of the great attractions of London as a seat for international arbitration is the availability of highly rated legal specialists including those practising in the area of European Union law. It must be acknowledged that there is a real threat to the exodus of such specialists from the UK post-Brexit. On top of that, basic travel arrangements to and out of the UK will become more complicated as a result of Brexit.

Arbitration in Ireland

Most of the factors that commend the English legal system to international arbitration may also be found in Irish law and the Irish Courts system. That is not to say that Ireland has anything remotely like the experience of London as a place for international arbitration.

The Irish legal system, like its English counterpart, is rooted in common law with much of its statute law reflected in UK statutes. English and Irish case law are regularly cited in each others courts. The procedures operated by the Irish Courts and the remedies available under Irish law are similarly commercially focused to those which pertain in the UK legal system. It is also of importance that English, the lingua franca of business is the de facto language of the Irish Courts system.

Ireland will continue to be a member of the European Union and legal proceedings before the Irish Courts continue to enjoy the benefits of the Recast Brussels Regulation and also the Lugano Convention, which will provide for:

Ireland as a seat for international arbitration post-brexit

Ireland has a long history of arbitration, its first Arbitration Act having been passed in 1698. Article 29(2) of the Irish Constitution 1937 states that "Ireland affirms its adherence to the principle of pacific settlement of international disputes by international arbitration or judicial determination". In 1981, Ireland became a contracting party to the New York Convention. In 2010, Ireland adopted a modern Arbitration Act which incorporated unCitral Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (1985).

In this way, Ireland has effectively modernised its arbitration laws to conform to international commercial arbitration features and practices and it has harmonised its arbitration laws with other modern arbitration countries.

Perhaps most importantly, the Irish Arbitration Act 2010 and the various pronouncements by the Superior Courts in Ireland clearly demonstrate the minimal power of the courts to intervene in the arbitral process and they exhort and mandate that Irish courts are supportive of the arbitral process. Even prior to the introduction of the 2010 Act, it was stated by the Supreme Court in Ireland in Keenan vs. Shield Insurance Company Limited [1989] IR 89 that:

"Arbitration is a significant feature of modern commercial life; there is an International Institute of Arbitration and the field of international arbitration is an ever expanding one. It ill becomes the Courts to show any readiness to interfere in such a process; if policy considerations are appropriate, as I believe they are in a matter of this kind then every such consideration points to the desirability of making an arbitration award final in every sense of the term."

The following features in the Arbitration Act 2010 show that Ireland treats international arbitration with absolute deference and its Courts are very reluctant to intervene:

Concluding Remarks

Broadly, there are two fundamental elements for consideration in deciding upon the seat for international arbitration. The first involves consideration of the national legal system and arbitration law and the attitude of the courts within that country. On the basis of the foregoing analysis, the advent of Brexit brings uncertainty to Londons continued dominance as a forum for international arbitration, particularly having regard to the enforceability of Ireland as a seat for international arbitration post-Brexit awards where there may be differences between the laws of England and Wales and those of the European Union or where a related court order is required to be recognised and enforced in another State.

The second element involves a consideration of non-legal and practical factors such as logistics, neutrality, convenience and familiarity and the qualifications of arbitrators and practitioners. While this element is more subjective, it is common case that being an English speaking common law jurisdiction remaining within the European Union with a well-respected legal system with many similarities to the UK legal system, Dublin as a seat for international arbitration would represent the closest comparator to London.

In the final analysis, while there is no question of Dublin replacing London as the forum of first choice for international dispute resolution, Dublin will nonetheless be an attractive alternative seat post-Brexit particularly having regard to simplified recognition and enforcement of awards within the European Union. In this way, Dublin may not so much compete with, but rather complement London as a forum for international arbitration.

Ireland as a seat for International Arbitration Bost-Brexit - Lexology

Boris Johnson told to ‘stop playing political games’ with millions of citizens – The Parliament Magazine

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Photo credit: Adobe Stock

Belgian MEP Kris Peeters, the EPP Groups representative in Parliament's negotiating team for the new EU-UK agreement, said that after four long rounds of Brexit talks, there were still too many files to be addressed.

At the forthcoming high-level conference we expect Boris Johnson to finally move forward. He must stop playing political games with the situation of millions of citizens on both sides of the Channel.

Let me be clear: the EPP will not give the green light to an agreement if the UK - in return for market access - does not accept EU market rules. This means the same standards on workers rights, the environment or state aid.

Nissan chief says firm is monitoring Brexit negotiations and warns on tariffs – Chronicle Live

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

The head of Nissan's global operations has reiterated the importance of a Brexit agreement for the future of its Sunderland operations.

The company's president and CEO Makoto Uchida has given an interview to American broadcaster CNBC which says the company will "cautiously monitor the negotiations.

He says that any tariffs on cars made at Sunderland "would have a lot of influence in our operation" but adds that the company "would like to keep up our brand in Europe".

His words come not long after the Japanese company gave its Wearside operation a vote of confidence at the end of last month when the plant escaped a global restructuring plan that saw a site in Barcelona, Spain, earmarked for closure.

But a week later Nissan warned it would not be able to sustain operations in the North East if Brexit negotiations failed to establish a trade deal and the UK fell back on World Trade Organisation tariffs for cars.

In the interview, Mr Uchida also outlines how he hopes a new arrangement with its Renault and Mitsubishi alliance partners - in which Renault would take the lead in Europe, while Nissan focusses on Japan and the US - will help the company recover from huge losses.

Asked about Sunderland and the possibilities of a hard Brexit, Mr Uchida said: We need to cautiously monitor how the Government was going to make a deal in terms of Brexit, when it comes to the tariff agreement, because this would have a lot of influence in our operation.

But again, I would like you to focus and emphasise that we would like to keep up our brand in Europe and how we can keep the brand knowing that the anticipation in the future is something that we are building today. So, this is what I can say today.

The motor manufacturer announced its Nissan Next transformation plan at the end of May after announced a net loss of nearly 5bn.

The plan will see it focus on key vehicles and key markets, as well as majoring on new technologies that will meet demands from customers.

But less than a week later global chief operating officer Ashwani Gupta warned the company would not be able to stand by its commitment to the Sunderland plant if the UK left the European Union without a trade deal that enabled tariff-free EU access, saying the business would not be sustainable.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been adamant he will not seek any extension to the current Brexit transition period which ends on December 31, despite warnings the coronavirus outbreak means it will be impossible to conclude a new free trade agreement with the EU by that date.

The latest round of Brexit negotiations, which ended on Friday, failed to break the deadlock, with EUs chief negotiator Michel Barnier saying there had been no significant areas of progress while UK counterpart David Frost said there was a need to intensify and accelerate the process if there was to be any chance of an agreement.

Northern Ireland facing ‘challenge of a generation’ as it confronts Brexit and Covid-19, says accountants society’s new boss – Belfast Telegraph

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Northern Ireland faces the "challenge of a generation" as it confronts the economic difficulties of Brexit and Covid-19, a business boss has said.

aeve Hunt, new chairperson of Chartered Accountants Ulster Society, was speaking at its annual general meeting, which was held online.

Ms Hunt is following in the footsteps of her father, Seamus, who chaired the society in 1990. She is the fourth woman to lead the organisation.

Ms Hunt, who is employed as an associate director for audit and assurance at business advisory firm, Grant Thornton, said: "Around the world, people are still coming to terms with the impact and effects of the Covid-19 pandemic.

"Our key aim will be to support our members and their pivotal role in business and the public sector during these unprecedented times.

"Bouncing back from this health crisis while dealing with the realities of Brexit will be the challenge of a generation.

"The skills and leadership of our profession are needed now more than ever. We will be there to give our support."

It comes as the economy marked another step towards reopening as small retailers were told by the Executive that they could reopen on Friday.

Roger Pollen, head of external affairs at the FSB in Northern Ireland, said the announcement was welcome news.

"Small businesses have been frustrated during lockdown to see larger businesses being able to continue to trade in products which they sell, while they were forbidden from opening. The Economy Minister's announcement will be music to the ears of many business owners, who are eager to open the shutters."

He added: "At FSB, we have made the case throughout the coronavirus crisis that the criteria which determine whether a business can open should be focused on safety, rather than what you sell, or the size of your business.

"We are grateful that the Executive has recognised this principle and small retailers will be relieved that they will soon be permitted to re-open their business, and play their part in re-starting the economy. We would also urge the public now to get behind our smaller businesses."

Belfast Telegraph

Read the original post:

Northern Ireland facing 'challenge of a generation' as it confronts Brexit and Covid-19, says accountants society's new boss - Belfast Telegraph

Analysts think Saquon Barkley could be the next Adrian Peterson – 247Sports

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

The general consensus in the NFL right now is that running backs have a short shelf life in the league. Because of wear and tear on players bodies from taking constant hits, some are hesitant to hitch wagons to running backs for too long. But a few NFL running backs prove that isnt always true.

Adrian Peterson of the Washington Redskins is the prime example right now. Drafted out of Oklahoma in 2007, Peterson is entering his 14th year in the NFL and is still playing full seasons in the league.

So who could be the next running back to follow a similar path of Peterson and remain in the NFL for a long time? On NFL Live on Monday, analyst Rob Ninkovich said he thinks former Penn State star and current New York Giant Saquon Barkley could be that guy.

The guy is built. You look at his stature and how strong he is as a runner, Ninkovich said. I think he has the potential to play a very long time based on look, just the way he plays, the style of play he has. You look around the league at some of these other really good running backs; they might not have the frame, might not have the build that Barkley has. Im going with him. I think hes got a bright future. I know last year he had the ankle injury, but look, its football. Things happen. He came back from that and Im anticipating a very big year for him this year.

Barkley comes off of his second season in the NFL where he had over 200 carries and 1,000 yards. When compared to Peterson, Barkley isnt quite on pace with the workload that Peterson had put on him early. Peterson had 238 carries in his rookie season with the Minnesota Vikings and then 363 the next year for a total of 601 carries. Barkley is currently at 478.

With the drafting of Georgia star lineman Andrew Thomas and the continued development of quarterback Daniel Jones, Barkley could grow even more in 2020 and continue to create quite the name for himself in the NFL.

Everyone knows how I feel about Saquon Barkley, ESPN analyst Louis Riddick added. I think because hes the bigger player, he is the one I would probably pick and hes probably overall the more explosive athlete. Hes the guy who, despite being that size, is someone who isnt to talk about Bruce Lee, he isnt that guy. Hes not the stiff, tree-like figure. Hes one of those guys who does have tremendous physical dexterity and flexibility for a guy whos 228, 230 pounds and runs a low 4.3.

As long as he can stay healthy and doesnt suffer some kind of freak injury, you have to think Saquons upside is unbelievable because of the fact he does have those physical characteristics and he is someome who can play in both a run game and pass game, equally effectively.

Is Saquon Barkley the next Adrian Peterson? – Giants Wire

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

The average career of an NFL player is 3.3 years, so when players sign contracts longer than three years, they are bucking the trend. That stat means most rookies entering the league on standard four-year contracts never see the end of those deals.

So, when you see veterans playing deep into their second contracts, they are actually outliers. One player, running back Adrian Peterson, now with Washington, is heading into his 14th season in the league. Hes really an outlier.

The average career expectancy for an NFL running back is 2.57 years, the lowest of any position in the NFL. Kickers lead the way (4.87 years) followed by quarterbacks (4.44), cornerbacks (2.94) and wide receivers (2.81).

Peterson is essentially a freak, which is something New York Giants running back Saquon Barkley has been called in his two seasons in the NFL. Some believe Barkley will have a long career in the league based on his magnificent physique and the drive to keep himself in top shape.

The guy is built. You look at his stature and how strong he is as a runner, former New England Patriots linebacker and current ESPN analyst Rob Ninkovich said recently. I think he has the potential to play a very long time based on look, just the way he plays, the style of play he has. You look around the league at some of these other really good running backs; they might not have the frame, might not have the build that Barkley has. Im going with him. I think hes got a bright future. I know last year he had the ankle injury, but look, its football. Things happen. He came back from that and Im anticipating a very big year for him this year.

Barkley is listed at 6 feet tall (but has also been listed at 5-foot-11 in some places) and weighs in at 234 pounds. That is a lot of compact power for a ball carrier with his shiftiness, speed and versatility.

By contrast, Peterson is 6-foot-1 and 220 pounds. Tennessees Derrick Henry, the leagues rushing leader last season who is considered the ultimate running back specimen in todays NFL, is 247 pounds. But he has nearly four inches on Barkley at 6-foot-3.

Barkleys durability came into question last season when he suffered a high ankle sprain in the Giants Week 3 victory over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. He missed a month of the season and then wasnt the same player until very late in the season. He didnt have another 100-yard rushing game until Week 14.

ESPN analyst Louis Riddick believes Barkleys career can exceed Petersons if he can stay healthy. Thats always the big if. Keep in mind Peterson who is a surefire Hall of Famer has 14,216 rushing yards, which is fifth on the all-time list, but he only eclipsed 2,000 total yards from scrimmage once in his career. Barkley did that in his first season in the NFL.

Everyone knows how I feel about Saquon Barkley, Riddick said. I think because hes the bigger player, he is the one I would probably pick and hes probably overall the more explosive athlete. Hes the guy who, despite being that size, is someone who isnt to talk about Bruce Lee, he isnt that guy. Hes not the stiff, tree-like figure. Hes one of those guys who does have tremendous physical dexterity and flexibility for a guy whos 228, 230 pounds and runs a low 4.3.

Go here to see the original:

Is Saquon Barkley the next Adrian Peterson? - Giants Wire

Redskins Adrian Peterson Says He Will Kneel During The National Anthem Without A Doubt – uSports.org

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

Numerous NFL players have taken part in protests across the country in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. There have been talks of whether or not we will see protests by players while the national anthem is played at games this season. One NFL player has already come out and said that they will be protesting this season.

Washington Redskins running back Adrian Peterson, when asked by the Houston Chronicle if he will protest this year he said, Yeah, without a doubt, without a doubt.

Petersons reasoning goes back to Colin Kaepernick when he first knelt during the national anthem in 2017. Just four years ago, youre seeing Kaepernick taking a knee, and now were all getting ready to take a knee together going into this season, without a doubt, he said.

The NFL and league commissioner Roger Goodell posted a video on social media Friday saying that the league will support its players who choose to protest peacefully.

See the original post:

Redskins Adrian Peterson Says He Will Kneel During The National Anthem Without A Doubt - uSports.org

How Michigan couples are getting married – or not – during the coronavirus pandemic – MLive.com

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

As if planning a wedding isnt stressful enough already, lets add a pandemic.

A thought along those lines may have run through the heads of thousands of Michigan brides as the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic hit the state in early March, and spurred the closure of non-essential businesses and the halting of gatherings as the 2020 wedding season was about to begin.

"Its stressful, its sad, but things will get better, said bride-to-be Sara Figueroa, who in April postponed her May 2020 wedding to April 2021. Ultimately, what matters is that youre married.

Four Michigan brides spoke to MLive about how they retooled their wedding plans as the pandemic set in. One opted for a small ceremony on her original May date. One postponed until fall. Two rescheduled their nuptials for 2021.

Thousands of couples are married in Michigan annually, but the numbers declined this spring amid the pandemic.

In Kent County alone, the number of marriage license applications between March 15-May 15 declined by 34% this year, compared to 2019, according to the Kent County Clerks Office. The number of recorded marriages during the same timeframe declined by 73%. However, that stat could change as more couples turn in their marriage licenses, officials noted. In the Upper Peninsula, Marquette County marriages declined by 33% during the same period, according to that countys clerks office.

Weddings are planned months and years in advance, so whenever theres a disruption to such an important event, its stressful for all involved, said Kent County Clerk Lisa Posthumus Lyons. Marriage licenses have been, by far, the service for which our office has received the most frantic calls and emails.

The statewide stay-home order aimed at stemming the spread of coronavirus went into effect on March 24 and extended through June 1. Among the temporary closures were government offices, including county clerks offices that are responsible for issuing marriage licenses. With offices closed, many counties stopped issuing them for a couple weeks. It was mid-April when a mail-in process became available in some counties; other counties began offering appointments.

The by-mail process allowed couples like Mackenzie and Matt Mergener, of Lake Orion, to tie the knot in a backyard ceremony on May 24.

We're just happy to start our life together because who knows when the chaos is going to end, Mackenzie Mergener said.

The stay-home order temporarily closed non-essential businesses, including wedding venues, party rental shops, dress and tuxedo retailers, tailors and seamstresses, florists, DJ services, salons, and photographers and videographers, among other wedding vendors. The order also said not to gather with people outside ones household.

While June has brought an easing of coronavirus-related restrictions, gatherings of the size and scope of many weddings still arent allowed. In southern Michigan, indoor gatherings are limited to 10 people and outdoors is limited to 100. In the Upper Peninsula and northern Lower Peninsula, up to 50 people can gather inside and up to 250 outside, starting June 10.

RELATED: Restaurants, pools, libraries reopen: An updated chart of whats allowed in Michigan

The new orders are encouraging for brides planning late-summer and fall weddings, although they are still facing uncertainty.

We just kept pushing out a month at a time, said bride-to-be Jayme Peterson, whose wedding is scheduled for Sept. 24. Finally, in the middle of May, we decided to really push it out to September and hopefully it will be able to happen.

Postponing until 2021 is considered less risky by many brides-to-be, including Nichole Baldwin. Her June 2020 wedding is rescheduled for June 2021.

"It did feel like there was a big weight lifted off after we did postpone things, she said.

RELATED: Is a second wave of coronavirus inevitable? Michigan nears critical point to suppress another outbreak

Baldwin, Figueroa, Mergener and Peterson each approached their wedding planning differently when coronavirus began to spread through Michigan. Here are their stories.

Newlyweds Matt and Mackenzie Mergener steal a moment under Mackenzie's veil on their wedding day, May 24, 2020, in Oakland County, Michigan. The ceremony included the bride, groom and their immediate families. The COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic that kept them from having their dream wedding that day.Courtesy of Kelly Smith | Treasured Images Photography

Newlyweds Mackenzie Mergener, 26, and Matt Mergener, 25, took a lighthearted approach to their pared-down celebration.

With six guests, they drank Corona beer, wore bride and groom face masks for photos, and even ordered a koozie that says, Im not a regular bride, Im a quarantined bride.

If you cant beat em, join em make it a laughable moment, instead of a sad moment, Mackenzie Mergener said.

But being married without having celebrated fully feels a bit eerie, she said. In addition to their big wedding, they missed out on having a bridal shower, bachelor and bachelorette parties, and a honeymoon.

They were wed on May 24, which was their original date but almost everything else about the ceremony was adjusted. While they still wanted to get married on that date, the couple realized their dream wedding would not be possible that day when the statewide stay-home order was extended through May 15.

We held out as long as we could, and then started trying to figure out what to do, she said.

Her parents volunteered their backyard as the venue. The cake and flowers were ordered six days before the ceremony, and her wedding dress not the one she had planned to get married in, which is stuck with the seamstress arrived four days before.

Present for the wedding were the bride and grooms immediate families two parents and a brother each and photographer Kelly Smith of Treasured Images Photography, who maintained social distancing. Mackenzie Mergeners brother, Thomas Soma, 23, served as the officiant after becoming ordained specifically for the occasion.

The day of, it definitely felt like a celebration, she said. It was beautiful.

The couple met while attending Michigan State University in 2016. Matt Mergener proposed during July 2018. He works in sales for Align Technology while she is an elementary special education teacher at Avendale Community Schools.

The couple hopes to have a vow renewal ceremony and a reception later this year possibly in December.

We werent able to see those people who have been working toward this wedding just as hard as we have, she said. It just feels like this thing happened in our lives and nobody really knows, and we dont even know what it is. Were very happy though. Were happy that our forever gets to start right now rather than continuing to postpone.

RELATED: Ann Arbor-area couples cope with wedding planning woes amid coronavirus outbreak

Samuel Winn, 26, and Jayme Peterson, 25, both of Byron Center, pose for engagement photos. Winn proposed on March 8, 2020. The couple hoped to marry quickly to ensure Peterson's terminally ill father could be part of the wedding. Due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, their wedding is now scheduled for Sept. 24, 2020.Marie Peterson

Samuel Winn, 26, proposed to 25-year-old Jayme Peterson on the ice at a Detroit Red Wings hockey game on March 8. Two days later, the first coronavirus cases in Michigan were announced.

They wanted to get married as soon as possible because Petersons father, Jim Peterson, is terminally ill with cancer.

My dad is my everything thats my best friend, Peterson said. Winn is also close with Petersons family, including her father.

As the pandemic settled in, Winn and Peterson began postponing their wedding by one month at a time. Then, Petersons dads health improved after a bone marrow transplant, and that enabled the couple to set the date for Sept. 24.

A major consideration in the wedding planning is that Winns family lives in Detroit where the novel virus hit Michigan hardest. The couple didnt want to risk causing additional spread by bringing a large group from Detroit to the Grand Rapids area.

The bride-to-be has planned her entire wedding during the pandemic unable to go to stores or meet with vendors in person. She has called about 45 DJ services and has yet to book one. A caterer was also difficult to find, but they did eventually get one. The venue, Townsend Park near Rockford, and a photographer are also booked. Decorations have been made with supplies ordered online. A family friend will officiate.

One store Peterson did go to was Bridal Elegance, where she found her wedding dress shortly before stores were ordered to close. But shes hasnt been able to make any progress on the grooms and groomsmens tuxes.

Peterson and Winn have been together about seven years. They met as freshman attending Baker College of Muskegon. Peterson is a caseworker for Samaritas Families First program. Winn works in customer service at Praxis Packaging.

At first, I was thinking Whats the rush? Peterson said. But I want my dad to be part of it. I would be devastated if he wasnt there.

RELATED: From hair salons to gyms, experts rank 36 activities by coronavirus risk level

Nichole Baldwin and fiance Kevin Creason pose for engagement photos in Traverse City.Courtesy of Nikki K Photography

The Baldwin-Creason wedding was always going to be a sparkly affair; now that bride-to-be Nichole Baldwin has an extra year to plan, its going to be extra gaudy, she quipped.

And everyone is just going to have to deal with it, said 31-year-old Baldwin who, after playing bridesmaid 17 times, has no plans of giving up any part of the bridal experience.

35-year-old Kevin Creason proposed to Baldwin on her 30th birthday, using the occasion to disguise his reason for gathering her friends and family for a barhop around Traverse City. He proposed at the end of the evening at Clinch Park, where they had their first date.

Creason, a manager at 2 Lads Winery, and Baldwin, a nursing assistant at Munson Medical Center, have been together for about five years. The Traverse City couple planned to tie the knot on June 13. They pulled the plug on that plan in April. Their new date is June 26, 2021, at Castle Farms.

I did almost a year and a half of planning, so it was devastating having to put it off, Baldwin said. Theres no reason to try to force a wedding and only have 10 people or risk people getting sick. Id rather wait and have everyone there and enjoying themselves.

She was happy to get a June date at her original venue since 2021 calendars are filling up quickly as would-be 2020 brides postpone, and newly-engaged couples work to plan their weddings, too.

By the time they postponed, the couple had paid for the wedding in full - $25,000-$35,000, Baldwin said. Luckily, all the vendors were able to reschedule at no extra charge. Still, there are some costs associated with postponing, like reordering anything with the wedding date on it. They also ordered change-the-date" cards and new invitations.

Her bridal shower was supposed to be in March and the bachelorette party was scheduled for April. Those will both be rescheduled, too.

Ive waited this long. Im not in any rush to get married, Baldwin said. Were going to be together for a lifetime. Ive spent all this time making the tiniest decisions. I want to make sure that I get to have my big day. Now, I just have time to make it extra sparkly.

RELATED: 7 numbers that stand out as Michigan begins to re-open after coronavirus quarantine

Sara Figueroa, 23, and Dennis South, 36, both of Portage pose for engagement an photo. They had planned their wedding for May 16, 2020, but were forced to postpone due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. They are now planning a ceremony on April 24, 2021, but may legally marry before then.Larissa Catherine Photography

When coronavirus was detected in Michigan, Sara Figueroa assumed she would have to postpone her wedding to her fianc, Dennis South.

The Portage couple has been together for about four years. After meeting online and spending two years in a long-distance relationship, South proposed in April 2018 in front of family at their home. They planned to marry on May 16, 2020.

Figeroa, 23, works as an assembler at Stryker Medical while South, 36, is a store manager at Okun Brothers.

With about 50 guests, the couple planned to host their reception at a lodge at Bertha Brock Park in Ionia. But after the stay-home order went into effect, Figueroa knew it wasnt going to happen.

"Everyone was telling me to wait until it got closer, Figueroa said. In the best interest of everyone involved, I would just rather postpone for next year.

Knowing that a lot of couples would have to reschedule, she didnt want to lollygag and risk losing vendors. Fortunately, all her vendors were able to accommodate the new date: April 24, 2021.

I would rather have the wedding that I wanted, Figueroa said.

See the original post:

How Michigan couples are getting married - or not - during the coronavirus pandemic - MLive.com

Analyzing the NY Mets’ Top 10 prospects: No. 6 David Peterson – NorthJersey.com

Posted on June 9, 2020 by Danzig

USA TODAY Sports' Gabe Lacques breaks down the greatest issues surrounding negotiations between Major League Baseball and its' players. USA TODAY

As we wait, with hope, for the start of the baseball season, we are analyzing each of the New York Mets' Top 10 prospects with a series of reports.

If you want to know what the Mets think about lefty David Peterson, recall what manager Luis Rojas said during spring training. Multiple times, he stated the club was stretching out seven starting pitchers.

Wait, what?

There were six arms competing for five rotation spots. The seventh man?

Peterson.

He did not possess a realistic shot to make the Opening Day rotation, but the fact the Mets were preparing him as a starter speaks to how highly they view him. Of all arms in the farm system, he might be closest to making a big-league start.

Analyzing the NY Mets' Top 10 prospects: No. 7 Mark Vientos

Analyzing the NY Mets' Top 10 prospects: No. 8 Thomas Szapucki

Feb 24, 2020; West Palm Beach, Florida, USA; New York Mets pitcher David Peterson (77) throws against the Washington Nationals at FITTEAM Ballpark of the Palm Beaches.(Photo: Jim Rassol-USA TODAY Sports)

In 2017, MLB.com ranked Peterson as the No. 19 prospect in the MLB Draft. The Mets eventually took Peterson with the No. 20 overall pick, and he's risen ever since.

Peterson began2018, his first full pro season, in Low A. Over nine starts, the Oregon alumpitched to a 1.82 ERA as he displayed his first-round talent. He finished the season in High A, where he started 13 games and pitched to a 4.33 ERA.

In 2019, he started 24 Double A games, finishing with a 4.19 ERA.

Fielder independent pitching (FIP) isolates the outcomes a pitcher can control. Simple terms: It does not account for outcomes that involve luck (balls in play).

Peterson's FIP in 2018 was 2.98. A year later, it was 3.19. Those indicate he might have pitched better than his ERA shows.

Perhaps most important, he proved he can handle the grind of a professional starting pitcher. He has not missed extended time.

Often, minor-league pitchers are evaluated over small sample sizes, whether that be because of injuries or innings limits. Peterson, on the other hand, has started two full seasons.

Feb 16, 2020; Port St. Lucie, Florida, USA; New York Mets pitcher David Peterson (77) waits to do defensive drills during a workout at spring training.(Photo: Jim Rassol-USA TODAY Sports)

Since taking over as general manager, Brodie Van Wagenen has been aggressive. He's acted on the organization's desire to win now.

While noble, it has also come at a cost. Trading Jarred Kelenic haunts fans, but the Mets also lost three good pitching prospects over the last year and a half.

In the Robinson Can-Edwin Diaz deal, the Mets sent the Mariners Justin Dunn,who reached the bigs last season and notched a 2.70 ERA over 6 2/3 innings. Months later, the Mets traded their top two pitching prospects Anthony Kay and Simeon Woods Richardson to acquire Marcus Stroman from Toronto.

These moves created an opportunity for others in the New York farm system, though. Suddenly, Petersonbecame one of the best prospect arms.

He represents needed starting pitching depth. In spring training, six starters competed for five spots. The competition eventually worked itself out when Noah Syndergaard underwent Tommy John surgery.

But behind him?

Well, that's where things get interesting. The Mets sent Seth Lugo and Robert Gsellman into last offseason with an order to prepare as if they'd be starters in 2020, but because the club signed Rick Porcello and Michael Wacha, the former two went back to the bullpen.

Walker Lockett made a few spot starts for the Mets in 2019, and could be an option. But Peterson could also be considered.

Peterson made a strong impression this spring, allowing only a run over six innings of Grapefruit League action.

Thus far, his rise has seemed encouraging for an organization that needs capableprospects to move through its ranks.

Justin Toscanois theMetsbeat writer for NorthJersey.com. For unlimited access to allMetsanalysis, news, trades and more, pleasesubscribe todayanddownload our app.

Email:toscanoj@northjersey.comTwitter:@justinctoscano