Thousands of demonstrators march through Rome to call for an immediate end to the war in Gaza
Tens of thousands of demonstrators marched through the streets of Rome on Saturday against the war in Gaza in a protest called by Italy 's main opposition parties, who accuse the right-wing government of being too silent.
Protesters held a banner reading 'Stop the massacre, stop complicity!' at the start of the march, which moved peacefully through the center of Rome amid a massive display of rainbow, Palestinian and political party flags.
The protest attracted a diverse crowd from across the country, including many families with children. According to organizers, up to 300,000 people participated in the rally organized by the leftist opposition to ask the government for a clear position on the conflict in Gaza.
'This is an an enormous popular response to say enough to the massacre of Palestinians and the crimes of (Israeli leader Benjamin) Netanyahu's government,' the leader of Italy's center-left Democratic Party, Elly Schlein, told reporters at the march.
'There is another Italy that doesn't remain silent as the Meloni government does," she said, referring to Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
Meloni was recently pushed by the opposition to publicly condemn Netanyahu's offensive in Gaza, but many observers considered her criticism too timid.
'(The Italian government) is not reacting despite an abnormal massacre, despite an absolutely cruel and inappropriate reaction. The (Italian) government remains silent,' said Nadin Unali, a Tunisian demonstrator at the march.
Earlier this week, the Italian premier urged Israel to immediately halt its military campaign in Gaza, saying its attacks had grown disproportionately and should be brought to an end to protect civilians.
Israel faces mounting international criticism for its offensive and pressure to let aid into Gaza during a humanitarian crisis.
Gaza has been under an Israeli blockade for nearly three months, with experts warning that many of its 2 million residents are at high risk of famine.
The war broke out on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants launched a surprise attack on Israel, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducted 251 hostages. They are still holding 56 hostages, around a third of them believed to be alive.
Since then, Israel has killed more than 54,000 Palestinians in its military campaign, primarily women and children, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its figures.
___
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
41 minutes ago
- Times
Reeves considers energy bill subsidy for manufacturers
Rachel Reeves is scrutinising proposals to provide a £1 billion annual subsidy to manufacturers after being warned that Britain faces rapid deindustrialisation if she fails to reduce energy costs. The chancellor is considering lowering energy costs for industry amid fears that they are holding back investment and the country's competitiveness. The plans include a scheme by which taxpayers would compensate manufacturers when the price of electricity rises above a fixed level and the companies would pay the government when the price falls below the agreed level. Several European countries have adopted a similar model, including France, Denmark, Greece and Hungary. The proposal has been seen by Sir Keir Starmer, Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, and Reeves. A source close to Reynolds said industrial energy prices were a 'live issue', while a No 10 source confirmed that measures to lower costs were under 'serious consideration'. Reeves is preparing for Wednesday's spending review and the subsequent publication of the industrial strategy for eight key areas of the economy that the government has promised to promote to bolster economic growth. Industry argues that the price it pays for energy is double that paid by European competitors and four times that of America, which is leaving Britain at a disadvantage. It affects not just the country's existing steelmakers, ceramic industry and chemical businesses but also attempts by the government to attract new technologies, such as energy-hungry data centres. In a document seen by The Sunday Times, the industry lobby group Make UK warned the government: 'If we do not address the issue of high industrial energy costs in the UK as a priority we risk the security of our country. We will fail to attract investment in the manufacturing sector and will rapidly enter a phase of deindustrialisation.' Rain Newton-Smith, chief executive of the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), warned the chancellor last week that high energy prices were an 'anchor on our ambition, a crack in our economic security and must be fixed'. The plan being drawn up by Make UK, which it calls a contract for difference, would cost £1.1 billion a year for five years from 2027 to provide a guaranteed energy price. But the organisation argues this 'upfront cost' should be considered in the context of its estimates that it would generate a medium-term boost for the economy of about £3 billion a year — or 0.1 per cent of gross domestic product — and also provide more tax revenue. It claims the policy is politically expedient for the government as it would help the red wall constituencies in the Midlands and northern England where Labour is vulnerable to the threat posed by Reform. The biggest energy-intensive companies already receive a subsidy through the British Industry Supercharger scheme, which was set up by the Conservatives in 2024 and which the Financial Times reported last week could become more generous under plans being considered by ministers. But this does not benefit many industrial companies, which still say they are struggling with high energy prices. When she appeared at an event hosted by the CBI last week, Reeves told the audience of business leaders: 'We know that one of the questions that we need to answer is how we're going to make energy more affordable, particularly for some of our most intensive energy-using businesses where the price differential with other countries is just too acute for many to be competitive. That's a question we know we need to answer and we will answer in the industrial strategy in a few weeks.' Other ideas being presented to the government include stepping up drilling in the North Sea, which is likely to create tensions with Miliband. Solving the energy situation is regarded as a crucial plank of the industrial strategy, which the business secretary put out for consultation six months ago to look at eight sectors: advanced manufacturing; clean energy; the creative industries; defence; digital; financial services; life sciences and professional and business services. The result of the consultation had widely been expected to be published alongside Reeves's spending review but it is not now expected for another two weeks. It is understood that the delay has been caused by a desire to resolve the issue of industry energy costs. Stephen Phipson, chief executive of Make UK, said: 'If we don't want to lose the big corporates we have to get competitive and the government is going to have to make tough choices.' Jakob Sigurdsson, chief executive of the FTSE 250 Lancashire chemical business Victrex, said the industry was not 'asking for handouts' but needed a government policy to ensure it was viable. His energy bill is £12 million — double what it was before Russia's invasion of Ukraine pushed up oil prices — while profits are £60 million. 'When you look at it from a global perspective, for the price of power we're paying four to five times the price for electricity that a Chinese company would be paying,' he said, with a similar situation compared to the US. 'It's a cost disadvantage for us so a sound energy policy and how we deal with pricing mechanisms is paramount,' he said. 'This is not going to be solved through incremental changes. There needs to be a bold energy shift.'
Times
an hour ago
- Times
If I were Rachel Reeves: Hunt, Zahawi and Mel Stride give their advice
Sir Lots of people think being chancellor is like being Santa Claus with lots of goodies to dole out. The reality is rather different as both Rachel Reeves and I have found out. As I explain in my new book Can We Be Great Again? the biggest difference between good and bad governments is the extent to which you manage to carve out space for long-term decisions as opposed to daily firefighting. Here are the three crucial things I will be looking out for when it comes to the long term. First, given the austerity cuts about to be imposed on the police and criminal justice system, are we going to invest in modernising them so they really can deliver better outcomes with less money? Police officers spend up to eight hours a week on unnecessary admin tasks. They are crying out for modern IT systems which are normally the first casualty of any spending negotiations. If we want services to improve, things that unlock greater efficiency should be top and not bottom of a government's list. Second, when Europe is at war, you cannot commit to a programme that costs 3 per cent of GDP and only provide 2.5 per cent in funding — as the government appears to have done. That is a scandalous and dangerous black hole if ever there was one — not least a fortnight before the Nato summit. I was at the table when Trump nearly pulled the US out of Nato in 2018 so we are taking a big risk. But if we plug the gap, France and Germany are likely to as well. If we don't, and the US pulls out of Nato, it will not be 3 per cent we are arguing over but double that. Keir Starmer has shown he can be an international statesman — now really is the moment we need him to do the right thing. Finally, we have to avoid the doom loop of ever higher taxes creating ever lower growth. That means longer term supply-side policies to boost our growth rate. But in the short-term the only game in town is welfare reform as I explain in my new book. Getting the working age benefit bill to 2019 levels saves £49 billion — more than enough for 3 per cent of GDP on defence and to avoid tax rises. It would also be far better for people on benefits to be in work. Welfare reform isn't easy for Labour but with a large majority and four years in the mandate, if not now when? Nadhim Zahawi Rachel Reeves is in a difficult position. As the only cabinet member with real private sector experience, she should by now understand the difficulties businesses are facing because of the government's actions, not to mention families. Crucial to fixing this is to be able to reduce the tax burden, and that requires getting serious about growth. That will come from getting out of the way, deregulating and allowing supply-side reforms, but it also means attracting investment rather than driving it away. The closure of the non-doms regime has been a catastrophe for this, signalling that Britain isn't interested in prosperity. A flat-rate charge for wealthy individuals and entrepreneurs, as they do in Italy, would be a smart move, and worth eating humble pie over. Rome has had 2,200 multimillionaires settle there — raising hundreds of millions in tax and investment for the Italian people. If the chancellor can tempt them to the UK through a mix of a more welcoming tax regime, and a pledge to tackle law and order concerns, we could be back in business. Even before counting their ingenuity and investment, if we attracted just 3,000 new wealthy residents to Britain, charging them £400,000 per year to have an equivalent of non-dom tax status, she would be able to reverse the winter fuel allowance cut. Taking this further, and aiming for the sort of numbers America is hoping to attract with their Golden Visa programme, and she could do anything from abolishing the hated inheritance tax, which does so much to destroy family businesses and long-term investment in Britain, to an immediate increase in defence to 3 per cent of GDP or more. These are popular, easy fiscal policies which would unlock so much investment and revenue for the government. All Reeves needs to do is convince Labour not to hate wealth creators, which I grant may be a steep political challenge. Nadim Zahawi was Conservative chancellor between July and September 2022 Sir Mel Stride If I were in Rachel Reeves's shoes next week, I would do things very differently. First, I'd level with the public. Our country faces serious economic constraints and Labour's reckless policies are only deepening those problems — high debt, sluggish growth, rising cost of living. LEON NEAL/GETTY IMAGES The chancellor will no doubt tell us she is exercising judicious fiscal discipline, without mentioning that most of the new projects and programmes she is announcing are paid for with hundreds of billions in extra borrowing. I'd focus on what actually moves the dial. Productivity, public service reform and fiscal responsibility. That means rooting out waste, and being clear-eyed about what government can and cannot afford. And I wouldn't be afraid to say 'no'. Sometimes leadership means doing the difficult thing, not the easy or popular one. The scale of the spending being set out next week was confirmed in March, before the chancellor began being forced into embarrassing U-turns on welfare. We've seen what happens when fiscal credibility is lost — I would never let that happen again. So if I were the chancellor, I'd offer a serious plan. Rebuild stability, drive growth and restore trust. No gimmicks. Just hard truths and a credible path forward for our country.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Trans former judge says Supreme Court gender ruling risks lives
The UK's only judge to ever publicly say they are transgender has told the BBC she is concerned the Supreme Court's ruling on biological sex puts lives at risk and fears "someone's going to get killed" because of Victoria McCloud is planning to take the government to the European Court of Human Rights over the April ruling, which said a woman is defined by biological sex under equalities led to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issuing new interim guidance to services and businesses on access to public facilities, such as toilets and changing Forstater, of campaign group Sex Matters, said Dr McCloud's comments were "alarmism". Speaking to Laura Kuenssberg on Newscast, the BBC's daily news podcast, Dr McCloud said: "This incident is putting lives at risk. I can't go out to the pub now, for example. It might not be the be all and end all of life but I am a lawyer."I've got to use the men's loos in a south London pub with a bunch of blokes who are drunk. I mean, come on. That's now government policy. Someone's going to get killed."Dr McCloud said she agreed with an argument put forward by "the gender critical ideological movement" that it is "risky" or "at least rather intimidating" to have a space designated for women, such as a changing room, that is occupied by men."But that applies to me too," she to the full Newscast interview on BBC Sounds"That danger is all the more if it is not going to be me and a bunch of women and one man, instead it's me - one woman - in an entirely male space in a drunk pub."That's absolutely clearly dangerous."Ms Forstater said: "Women have already been assaulted and many, many are self-excluding because of the policy Dr McCloud endorses of allowing men to self-identify into women's toilets, showers and changing rooms."Where's the concern for the female half of the population who need privacy, safety and dignity?"If McCloud isn't comfortable using male-only spaces, then there are usually gender-neutral options available. This is irresponsible alarmism."In the wake of the unanimous Supreme Court judgement, Equalities Minister Bridget Phillipson, speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme in April, stopped short of explicitly saying trans women should use the men's toilets. She said: "The ruling was clear that provisions and services should be accessed on the basis of biological sex."Pushed further for clarification on whether a trans woman should use the men's or women's toilets, she repeated: "The ruling is clear."The EHRC has already suggested trans people should use their "powers of advocacy" to campaign for so-called third spaces that are gender-neutral to avoid these sorts of Minister Sir Keir Starmer said in April the ruling gave "much-needed clarity" for those drawing up guidance."We need to move and make sure that we now ensure that all guidance is in the right place according to that judgement."A woman is an adult female, and the court has made that absolutely clear."Dr McCloud moved to Ireland after leaving her job as a judge last year and says she visits the UK only on essential said she is going to challenge the Supreme Court judgement at the ECHR, arguing the court did not hear from trans people before its ruling, and therefore breached her human Supreme Court did consider arguments on trans issues from the human rights campaign group Amnesty International, but not from exclusively trans activists.
