UK MPs to vote on ending prosecutions for abortion in England, Wales
United Kingdom MPs are expected to vote on Tuesday on an overhaul of abortion laws in England and Wales which would end contentious prosecutions of women for terminating a pregnancy.
Currently, a woman can face criminal charges for choosing to end a pregnancy after 24 weeks or without the approval
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
No plan A or B: Danyl McLauchlan on PM Chris Luxon's economic tinkering
Walking a fine line between self congratulations and bold policy: PM Christopher Luxon and finance minister Nicola Willis. Photo / Getty Images / composite The government lacks a roadmap for a sustained economic recovery beyond tinkering with childcare rebates and payment surcharges. In the satirical war novel Catch 22, a burnt-out World War II pilot covertly moved the red string on the battle map demarcating the front line, reasoning that this would somehow cause the army to have advanced in real life so he wouldn't have to fly more missions. It's a joke about confusing the map for the territory: our simplified models of reality are not the real world. For most of 2024, US voters told pollsters they were angry about inflation and they'd kick out Joe Biden's government if he didn't do something about it. The Biden administration would exasperatedly reply, 'We did do something! Look at the CPI. The rate of inflation was 9%, it's now 2.9%.' Voters were not persuaded. They felt the government was pointing to a line on the map, not the world. So they voted for Donald Trump, who vowed he would beat inflation. Core CPI is now lower than it was under Biden, though this might change as the effects of Liberation Day's tariffs kick in. But Americans are angry at Trump anyway, because their food prices are up, and expensive groceries and petrol are what most people mean by inflation. US discourse is focused on eggs. In New Zealand, we're upset about butter. Both might seem trivial, but these are things we can point to in the world and shout, 'Forget the CPI. Your map is wrong. Prices are still high!' Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Finance Minister Nicola Willis are trying to walk a fine line between congratulating themselves on their incredible work in defeating inflation and introducing bolder policies to tackle inflation because the public is clearly not convinced by the first claim. Rebate boost The flagship policies include the tax cuts passed last year – stealthily being clawed back as wages rise alongside prices via the infamous fiscal-drag mechanism – and FamilyBoost, a rebate scheme for early childhood education. This has simultaneously been a triumph and a failure, depending on your perspective. The policy has significantly lowered the cost of childcare, because the government is subsidising 25% of weekly ECE fees. But it has simultaneously lifted the price of childcare – because the government is subsidising 25% of weekly ECE fees, providers have every incentive to charge more. We've recently learned the scheme has fully benefited only 249 households instead of the 21,000 predicted by IRD's model. Willis's solution is to extend the rebate to 40% and make this available to households earning up to $229,000 a year. This makes political sense – National can hardly abandon a key campaign promise in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. But it means the state will give up to $250 a fortnight to households earning more than twice the median income, while lecturing both central and local government agencies about the need for prudence and fiscal discipline. Council rap After a spate of dire polls and yet another round of rapacious rates rises contributing to an increase in the CPI last quarter there's talk of a rates cap on councils. Local Government Minister Simon Watts claims to want the policy in place 'as fast as possible' and has introduced legislation along those lines; but neither Act nor New Zealand First appear convinced. There's also a plan to ban payment surcharges for in-store electronic transactions 'by May 2026 at the latest'. If they're voted out of office in late 2026, National will look back in astonishment at how little they did to address the key issue that won them the 2023 election ‒ the cost of living. In the US, there were two popular theories to explain the disconnect between voter perceptions and the economic data, and both feel true for New Zealand. The first came from The Atlantic journalist Annie Lowrey, who explained that most of us anchor cost expectations to the price tags we got used to during the pre-pandemic era of low inflation. Washing powder was $20, now it's $30. Even if the price hasn't changed in the past year, we still register it as an increase every time we pay the higher amount. The 'vibecession' The second theory is from economic commentator Kyla Scanlon, who coined the term 'vibecession'. She argues years of instability caused by Covid, inflation, layoffs and the housing crisis have created a profoundly negative mood about the state of the US economy. This was amplified by social and mainstream media, reinforcing pessimism even during the recovery. Prices here might be more stable than they were three years ago, but the overall vibes are terrible. New Zealand feels broken in a way that banning credit card surcharges will probably not resolve. Both theories are grounded in psychology rather than microeconomics. Both will need a broad, sustained economic recovery to solve them – something National has promised but not yet delivered, a failure the Prime Minister loudly blames on Labour, although local government and the media also seem to be complicit. When Luxon was opposition leader, he assured voters our problems were caused by former prime minister Chris Hipkins and former finance minister Grant Robertson, and they'd be solved when he was running things. They all say that. But incoming governments usually have some kind of plan to address the more serious challenges they're confronted with – such as a sustained economic downturn. Luxon seems to have assumed his mere presence in the Beehive would sort this out. Two years in, it's still hard to see any kind of plan. He doesn't seem to occupy the same bleak territory the rest of us live in, nor does he have a map to guide him or us anywhere. John Maynard Keynes used to mock economists who 'can only tell us that when the storm is long past the ocean is flat again', but even that is preferable to political leaders who squander their time in power whining that the storm is everyone else's fault.
NZ Herald
3 days ago
- NZ Herald
Trump's lawyer in hush money trial is a senior Justice Department official and interviewed Ghislaine Maxwell
After weeks of furore about whether the Justice Department would release much of its file on Epstein – and amid speculation about whether the file had information about Trump and others – Blanche travelled to Florida to interview Epstein's longtime partner, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking. A billboard in Times Square calls for the release of the Epstein files on July 23 in New York City. Photo / Getty Images Prosecutors argued at Maxwell's 2021 trial that she was Epstein's recruiter and enabler for a decade beginning in 1994, showing an interest in teenagers and luring them to his homes in Palm Beach, Florida; New York; New Mexico; and elsewhere ostensibly for jobs as personal masseuses. She was also charged with perjury for allegedly lying during a sworn deposition but did not face a trial on those charges after she was convicted of more serious crimes. Trump said this week that his friendship with Epstein ended years ago after, he said, Epstein hired young female spa workers from his club at Mar-a-Lago. Maxwell spent nine hours over two days last week answering every question posed by Blanche, according to Maxwell's lawyer, David Oscar Markus. The details of the interview have not been released, and Democrats said they feared it was the kind of conflict, they had been concerned about when Blanche was nominated. Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (Democrat-New York) said last week in a floor speech that 'Trump is sending his personal lawyer, Todd Blanche, to try and execute a corrupt cover-up, potentially offering leniency to a woman who also abused the victims'. Schumer said this and other actions by Justice officials represent a conflict but he did not provide evidence of an alleged cover-up. The relationship between Trump and Blanche has been a financially significant one. Blanche's law firm was paid US$9.2 million ($15.6m) by Save America, a pro-Trump political action committee, between April 2023 and December 2024, for work on cases that included the trial about payment of alleged hush money to adult-film star Stormy Daniels, according to federal election records. Trump was found guilty in the hush money case, which has been appealed and is being handled by other lawyers. Why Donald Trump's lawyer is under scrutiny in Jeffrey Epstein inquiry. Photo / Getty Images Blanche, 50, is an unlikely player in the unfolding drama. A former federal prosecutor in New York, he handled violent crimes and led the office's White Plains division in Westchester County. Blanche was well-liked by colleagues and earned a reputation for diligence, according to lawyers familiar with his work. He then worked at a law firm where his clients included Trump ally Paul Manafort. Blanche won the dismissal of mortgage fraud charges against Manafort in a New York case in 2019 on the grounds that the indictment too closely mirrored a federal case against him and amounted to double jeopardy. The case helped bring Blanche to Trump's attention at a time when he was preparing to run for re-election. Trump later pardoned Manafort in a pair of federal cases that included the federal mortgage fraud charges. The Justice Department did not respond directly to questions from the Washington Post about whether Blanche consulted a government ethics official regarding an interview with Maxwell. Instead, the department sent a written statement from spokesman Gates McGavick that said, in full: 'Any suggestion that Todd Blanche has acted unethically while serving as Deputy Attorney General is baseless and defamatory. This gossip column relies on innuendo and the word of an agenda-driven political hack to push a false narrative. This is not a serious article.' Markus said in a statement that it was appropriate for the Justice Department to send a high-level official such as Blanche to address such an important matter and that Blanche 'has conducted himself with complete professionalism throughout this process'. 'It's truly disheartening how quick people are to assume the worst without any basis in fact,' Markus added. 'More akin to a political player' Some of Blanche's ex-colleagues are surprised by what they see as his transformation from the independent litigator they knew to one they say seems willing to prioritise his loyalty to Trump. Mimi Rocah, who previously co-led the White Plains division in the US Attorney's office for the Southern District of New York with Blanche, said that it is 'completely inappropriate and wrong' for him to interview Maxwell – both because of his relationship to Trump and because it is a job that should be reserved for prosecutors on the case, not a Justice official at the highest level. Mimi Rocah (centre) criticised Blanche's interview with Maxwell as 'completely inappropriate', citing his Trump ties and the breach of prosecutorial protocol. Photo / Getty Images If a top Washington official had injected himself into a case Blanche handled as a prosecutor, he would have gone 'running to Main Justice', Rocah said, referring to the department's headquarters in Washington that oversees US Attorneys' offices and other units. 'That just shows how completely far gone he is as an actual prosecutor,' Rocah said. 'He's really more akin to a political player at this point.' In a podcast interview last year hosted by Markus, Blanche recounted receiving a phone call from Trump when he was skiing with his family in Colorado on Super Bowl Sunday in February 2023. At this time before Trump had been indicted, the former President talked with Blanche about representing him in what would become the hush money trial and possibly other cases. A few weeks later, Blanche said, he went to dinner with Trump to discuss his potential hiring. 'And we clicked,' Blanche said. 'He's an enigma, he's an interesting guy, everybody in this country, most people in the world, frankly, have an opinion about him. 'And some may be right, some may be wrong, but he's a really interesting man. And not only because of his past as President of the US, but just the life that he's led.' Around that time, he left the New York firm and started Blanche Law, enlisting as a partner Emil Bove, a former Southern District colleague who later joined the Justice Department at the start of Trump's second term and was nominated for a federal appeals judgeship. Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and 900 former Justice Department lawyers have questioned Bove's fitness to serve. That's based on his handling of a corruption indictment against New York Mayor Eric Adams, allegations that he instructed underlings to ignore judicial orders, and his role in firing or reassigning career Justice Department employees in perceived politically driven punishments. In February, Blanche – not yet confirmed by the Senate – was in attendance as Bove stood in court to defend his decision to dismiss the Adams case, arguing that the mayor needed to be unburdened so he could help the Trump Administration carry out its immigration enforcement and public safety agenda. Blanche was also there when Bove, who was also a defence lawyer for Trump, faced tough questions at his confirmation hearing last month. Bove was confirmed by the Senate 50-49 on Wednesday. Blanche, who had been a registered Democrat as recently as 2022, switched his registration to Republican in January 2024 and said his voting record residence was Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, a community near Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, according to voter records. He spent much of 2024 as a key legal adviser to Trump – spending long hours in Palm Beach with Trump and attending court appearances and meetings up and down the East Coast. The lawyer was the face of Trump's legal team during a six-week trial in New York Supreme Court, where a jury heard evidence that the former President concealed the nature of a US$130,000 payment to Daniels in the final stretch of the 2016 election to keep her quiet about an alleged affair. Blanche recalled in the podcast interview with Markus how Trump 'heard 'guilty' 34 times' in the hush money trial and then spoke to the press. 'For somebody who had just gone through what he went through, I was like, I mean, it sounds maybe a little bit obnoxious to say, but I was like, really, really proud of him on that day.' Throughout the trial, Trump turned the hallway into a campaign stop for news cameras. A stone-faced Blanche stood at his side as the then-candidate launched into meandering tirades about what he called a Democratic conspiracy to use the justice system to keep him from retaking the White House. Todd Blanche's Epstein case role has sparked conflict of interest concerns. Photo / Getty Images Aggressive delay efforts by Blanche and other lawyers helped stall proceedings in a pair of serious federal cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith over Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago and refusing to return them, and for allegedly interfering in the 2020 election. Both matters were unresolved as the 2024 election neared. The classified records case in Florida was dismissed by Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon on grounds that experts widely believed were flawed and reversible. Smith's team was appealing that decision, but after Trump's victory, they moved to withdraw those cases before Trump took office. Blanche and the defence team also secured so many sentencing delays in the hush money case that the proceeding did not take place until 10 days before Trump's inauguration. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan acknowledged having very limited options. Trump was sentenced to unconditional discharge, which amounted to no punishment. 'I will follow the law' Trump, known for frequently firing lawyers when they fall out of favour with him, has showered Blanche with praise for his work on the cases. The closeness between Trump and Blanche continued during the election and culminated in Trump's announcement that he would nominate his lawyer to serve as deputy attorney-general. In his hearing, Blanche sounded fully in sync with Trump's messaging as he said that the President had been a victim of 'partisan prosecutors' but that his 'faith in this country returned in full force on November 5 when the American people rejected this gross abuse of our justice system'. There is a long history of former Trump associates who have been ousted by the President over questions of loyalty. Attorney-General Jeff Sessions recused himself from being involved in the investigation of whether there was Russian interference in the 2016 election, sparking Trump's ire. At another point, Trump said it was 'disgraceful' that Sessions had asked an inspector general to investigate a campaign-related matter, saying, 'Why not use Justice Department lawyers?' Sessions resigned in 2018 at Trump's request. So when Trump nominated Blanche to the No 2 job at Justice, Democrats repeatedly asked during the nomination hearing whether he would push back against Trump and show the independence that is required of Justice officials. Senator Blumenthal voiced concern Blanche might face illegal or immoral requests from Trump and must be ready to say no. Photo / Getty Images Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) said during the hearing that he was 'convinced' that Blanche was committed to impartial enforcement. Nonetheless, Blumenthal expressed concern that, 'if history is any guide, that the President will ask you to do things that are illegal or immoral. I need to be sure that you're willing to say no' to Trump. 'Senator, I respectfully very much reject that premise,' Blanche responded. 'I don't think that President Trump is going to ask me to do anything illegal or immoral and so I don't -' 'But if he does, you would say no?' Blumenthal asked. 'I will follow the law Senator, period - period … And by the way, I've spent thousands, certainly hundreds, probably thousands of hours with President Trump over the past couple of years. So I don't just say that flippantly; I say that with experience and firsthand knowledge.' Experts say that ethics law can be a grey area subject to interpretation in each unique case. In the normal course of events, Blanche would have been advised about the standard of conduct for federal employees, which includes this provision: 'Whether particular circumstances create an appearance that the law or these standards have been violated shall be determined from the perspective of a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts.' Several months after Blanche joined the Justice Department, as the controversy over the Epstein files exploded, Blanche said on X that he was going to interview Maxwell. 'Justice demands courage. For the first time, the Department of Justice is reaching out to Ghislaine Maxwell to ask: what do you know?' Blanche wrote. At the direction of Attorney-General Pam Bondi, he said, he had contacted Maxwell's counsel, adding that 'No one is above the law - and no lead is off-limits'. As it happened, the lawyer representing Maxwell was Markus, the same person to whom Blanche had given the podcast interview in June 2024 about his relationship with Trump. Blanche and Markus came to an agreement, leading to the interviews with Maxwell – and to the questions from Democrats about whether Blanche had a conflict in conducting the private sessions. Blumenthal, who opposed Blanche's nomination, said he nonetheless expected the lawyer to follow ethical norms. He said he has been shocked by Blanche's decision to insert himself into the Maxwell interview, which the senator said was 'a breach'. 'I really expected him to be a serious lawyer,' Blumenthal said in an interview with the Washington Post. 'He had a reputation for being with a big firm and representing the client in difficult circumstances. I respect people who represent unpopular causes or individuals, that's what a lawyer does.' But Blumenthal said 'there's this stench' about Blanche interviewing Maxwell 'that is so powerful it is absolutely mind-boggling, and I frankly would never have expected it of him'. Norm Eisen said he'd never have approved Blanche's role due to impartiality concerns. Photo / Getty Images Norm Eisen, who was the White House special counsel for ethics in the Obama Administration, said in an interview that he would never have authorised that Blanche interview Maxwell because of rules that seek to prevent conflict of interest. 'This is the very definition of the situation where a reasonable person would question the impartiality of Blanche,' Eisen said. 'There is a certain amount of play in these rules, but that is why the public should be concerned … I don't know any government ethicist who worked for any administration of either party who would have authorised Blanche to participate in this.' Unless interview transcripts are released, it may be impossible to know whether and how much Blanche pursued questions about Trump's possible mention in the Epstein files. For his part, Blanche has insisted his loyalty is to the Justice Department. 'This Department of Justice does not shy away from uncomfortable truths, nor from responsibility to pursue justice wherever the facts may lead,' Blanche said in a July 22 statement on X.
NZ Herald
4 days ago
- NZ Herald
Trump warns Canada trade deal at risk over Palestine recognition
France was the first to take the step last week. Days later, Trump announced a trade deal with the European Union, which includes France and several other countries that have recognised Palestinian statehood. Since his return to the White House, Trump has levied 25% tariffs on Canadian goods not covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada trade pact (USMCA). In July, he threatened to raise tariffs on Canada to 35% on August 1 because of unsubstantiated concerns over an 'invasion' of fentanyl from Canada. A White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, said it is likely that USMCA-compliant goods would remain exempt but that Trump would make the final decision. Nearly 60% of US imports from Canada were USMCA-compliant in May, according to data from the US Commerce Department, up from 34% in January. Trump has separately imposed tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminium, and autos. Trump threatened sweeping tariffs on Canadian imports as Canada joins G7 allies in recognising Palestine. Photo / Getty Images Canadian officials have for months travelled to the US to seek a deal that would lift the levies, but they have recently said it is likely that any agreement with the US will involve some level of tariffs. Carney said Wednesday that negotiations might drag on beyond August 1. Canada's Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request early Thursday for comment on Trump's Truth Social post. Carney was elected leader of Canada's Liberal Party in March and led it to a comeback victory in April against a backdrop of rising anxiety over Trump, while running on an explicitly anti-Trump platform. Carney declared the traditional US-Canada relationship 'over' and pledged to fight back with targeted retaliatory tariffs. When Trump repeatedly mused about the US annexing Canada, Carney said his country was 'not for sale'. In recent months, Carney has tried to use flattery and firmness with Trump – to mixed results. Trump has called him 'a nice gentleman'. But in June, Trump abruptly halted trade talks with Canada over the country's digital services tax, calling it 'a direct and blatant attack' on the US and branding Canada as a 'difficult' partner. The Canadian Government later said it would rescind the tax. Days later, Trump threatened more tariffs. Now, geopolitics could further destabilise the talks. Canada is the third major US ally in a week, after France and Britain, to say it is prepared to change its decades-old stance on Palestinian statehood as outrage has grown over the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza. Canada is the third Group of Seven nation to back Palestinian statehood, following France and Britain. Photo / Getty Images Local authorities say more than 60,000 people – including 18,500 children – have been killed in the Israeli military campaign against Hamas in Gaza. Israel has restricted aid into the enclave, prompting the UN to warn about 'mounting evidence of famine and widespread starvation'. Trump acknowledged Monday that there is 'real starvation' in Gaza, breaking with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said Monday that 'there is no starvation in Gaza, no policy of starvation in Gaza'. Yet on Tuesday, when asked about France's and Britain's endorsements of a Palestinian state, Trump said: 'You could make a case that you're rewarding Hamas if you do that. And I don't think they should be rewarded. So I'm not in that camp'. Canada's announcement was met with praise from Palestinian officials and harsh criticism in Israel. The Palestinian Authority's Foreign Ministry said in a statement posted on X: 'This courageous and principled decision marks a significant step towards justice, peace, and the long-overdue realisation of the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination.' The Israeli Foreign Ministry said: 'The change in the position of the Canadian government at this time is a reward for Hamas and harms the efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza and a framework for the release of the hostages'.
