SNP group calls on John Swinney to confront Donald Trump about Gaza
Nadia El-Nakla, SNP councillor and the wife of the former first minister Humza Yousaf, is also the convener of the party's Friends of Palestine group ([[SNP]] FOP).
READ MORE: Keir Starmer panned for 'fuelling far-right' with new asylum seeker crackdown
Now, she has told The Times that Swinney should 'demand' that Trump 'compel' Israel to end the suffering of Palestinians.
El-Nakla (below with Yousaf) said that, while SNP FOP agrees with Swinney meeting with Trump, it must be used to put pressure on the US president.
(Image: @HumzaYousaf, via Twitter/X)
'Of course, the first minister should meet with President Trump. This is a critical opportunity to raise, directly and unequivocally, the ongoing genocide in Gaza.,' she said.
'Time is not on the side of the people there. As I speak, my family — like millions of others — is starving. The first minister must demand that Trump use his influence to compel Israel to end the starvation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
British steelmakers boosted by change to EU tariffs
British steelmakers will be able to sell more to the EU tariff-free from Friday in a boost for the beleaguered sector. The EU has agreed to more than double the UK's tariff-free quota for certain steel products in a move the Government described as a 'direct win' from Sir Keir Starmer's deal with the bloc earlier this year. At May's UK-EU summit, Sir Keir and European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen agreed to restore Britain's steel quotas to historic levels after they were slashed in March. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the announcement was 'yet another positive step forward for the UK steel sector' that would give producers 'certainty'. The agreement comes at a difficult time for the industry, which continues to face 25% tariffs on exports to the US. An agreement with President Donald Trump to effectively reduce those tariffs to zero is yet to come into effect, but Britain has been protected from the 50% tariff Mr Trump imposed on steel from the rest of the world last month. UK Steel director general Gareth Stace said Friday's change was 'excellent news' for the sector that had been 'plagued by problems' in exporting steel to the EU. He added: 'The quota will restore historic trade flows and is good news for both UK steelmakers and their EU customers.' The decision means the UK can export 27,000 tonnes of 'category 17' steel – which includes angles and sections of steel – to the EU each quarter without paying tariffs. The figure had been cut to 10,000 tonnes after the EU introduced a cap intended to prevent a single exporter dominating the market. In total, the UK exports around 2.4 million tonnes of steel to the EU, worth nearly £3 billion and accounting for 75% of British steel exports. Ministers expect the change to help protect jobs in the industry, which has been a priority for the Labour Government since coming to power. In April, the Government used an almost unprecedented weekend recall of Parliament to take control of British Steel to prevent the shutdown of its blast furnaces and maintain the UK's primary steel-making capacity. British Steel's interim chief operating officer Lisa Coulson said: 'The removal of EU tariffs on British-made steel is a significant boost to our business. 'The EU is an important market to us, particularly for the products our highly skilled colleagues manufacture in Scunthorpe, Teesside, and Skinningrove.' But Conservative shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith described the quota as 'tiny' and 'embarrassing from a Government which has nothing to show on removing the US tariffs on steel which the PM claimed to have delivered back in May'. He added: 'It's a paltry return for giving up 12 years of fishing rights and tying the energy costs of every business to a higher cost EU emissions regime over which the UK will have no say. 'When Labour nationalised British Steel we said they had no plan. This government by press release shows we were right.'
BBC News
25 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump's global tariffs 'victory' may come at a high price
In April Donald Trump stunned the world by announcing sweeping new import tariffs – only to put most on hold amid the resulting global financial months later, the US president is touting what he claims are a series of victories, having unveiled a handful of deals with trading partners and unilaterally imposed tariffs on others, all without the kind of massive disruptions to the financial markets that his spring attempt least, so worked to reorder America's place in the global economy, Trump is now promising that the US will reap the benefits of new revenue, rekindle domestic manufacturing, and generate hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign investment and that turns out to be the case – and whether these actions will have negative consequences – is still very much in is clear so far, however, is that a tide that was (gently) turning on free trade, even ahead of Trump's second term, has become a wave crashing across the globe. And while it is reshaping the economic landscape, it hasn't left the kind of wreckage in its wake that some might have predicted - though of course there is often a lag before impact is fully seen. What's more, for many countries, this has all served as a wake up call - a need to remain alive to fresh so, whilst the short term result might be - as Trump sees it - a victory, the impact on his overarching goals is far less certain. As are the long-term repercussions, which could well pan out rather differently for Trump - or the America he leaves behind after his current term. The '90 deals in 90 days' deadline For all the wrong reasons, 1 August had been ringed on international policymakers' calendars. Agree new trading terms with the US by then, they'd been warned – or face potentially ruinous White House trade adviser Peter Navarro predicted "90 deals in 90 days" and Trump offered an optimistic outlook on reaching agreements, the deadline always appeared to be a tall order. And it the time the end of July rolled around, Trump had only announced about a dozen trade deals – some no more than a page or two long, without the kind of detailed provisions standard in past negotiations. The UK was first off the blocks, perhaps inevitably. Trump's biggest bugbear is, after all, America's trade deficit, and trade is in broad balance when it comes to the the baseline 10% applied to most British goods may initially have raised eyebrows, it provided a hint of what was to follow – and in the end came as a relief compared to the 15% rate applied to other trading partners such as the EU and Japan, with whom the US has larger deficits; $240bn and $70bn respectively last year even those agreements came with strings attached. Those countries that weren't able to commit to, say, buying more American goods, often faced higher Korea, Cambodia, Pakistan - as the list grew, and tariff letters were fired off elsewhere, the bulk of American imports are now covered by either an agreement or a presidential decree concluded with a curt "thank you for your attention to this matter". Capacity to 'damage' the global economy Much has been revealed as a result of the good news. The wrangling of the last few months means the most painful of tariffs, and recession warnings, have been dodged. The worst fears – in terms of tariff levels and potential economic fallout (for the US and elsewhere) - have not been realised. Second, the agreement of tariff terms, however unpalatable, reduced much of the uncertainty (itself wielded by Trump as a powerful economic weapon) for better - and for better, in the sense that businesses are able to make plans, investment and hiring decisions that had been paused may now be resumed. Most exporters know what size tariffs their goods face – and can figure out how to accommodate or pass on the cost to growing sense of certainty underpins a more relaxed mood in financial markets, with shares in the US notably gaining. But it's for the worse, in the sense that the typical tariff for selling into the US is higher than before – and more extreme than analysts predicted just six months may have hailed the size of the agreement of the US with the EU – but these are not the tariff-busting deals we equated with tearing down trade barriers in previous greatest fears, the warnings of potential disaster, have receded. But Ben May, Director of global macro forecasting at Oxford Economics, says that US tariffs had the capacity to "damage" the global economy in several ways."They are obviously raising prices in the US and squeezing household incomes," he says, adding that the policies would also reduce demand around the world if the world's largest economy ends up importing fewer goods. Winners and losers: Germany, India and China It's not just about the size of tariff, but the scale of trading relationship with the US. So while India potentially faces tariffs of over 25% on its exports to the US, economists at Capital Economics reckon that, with US demand accounting for just 2% of that nation's gross domestic product, the immediate impact on growth could be news is not so good for Germany, though, where the 15% tariffs could knock more than half a percentage point off growth this year, compared to what was expected earlier in the due to the size of its automotive sector - unhelpful for an economy that may be teetering on the brink of recession. Meanwhile, India became the top source of smartphones sold in the US in the last few months, after fears of what may lie in store for China prompted Apple to shift the other hand, India will be mindful that the likes of Vietnam and the Philippines – which face lower tariffs when selling to the US – may become relatively more attractive suppliers in other the board, however, there's relief that the blow, at least, is likely to be less extensive than might have been. But what has been decided already points to longer-term ramifications for global trading patterns and alliances the element of jeopardy introduced into a long-established major relationship with the US, lent added momentum to the UK's pursuit of closer ties with the EU – and getting a trade deal with India over the many countries, this has served as a wake up call - a need to remain alive to fresh alliances. A very real political threat for Trump? As details are nailed down, the implications for the US economy become clearer in the late spring there actually benefitted from a flurry of export sales, as businesses rushed to beat any higher tariffs imposed on American goods. Economists expect that growth to lose momentum over the rest of the year. Tariffs that have increased from an average of 2% at the beginning of the year to around 17% now have had a notable impact on US government revenue – one of the stated goals of Trump's trade policy. Import duties have brought in more than $100bn so far this year - about 5% of US federal revenue, compared to around 2% in past years. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expected tariff revenue this year to total about $300bn. By comparison, federal income taxes bring in around $2.5tn a shoppers remain in the front line, and have yet to see higher prices passed on in full. But as consumer goods giants such as Unilever and Adidas start to put numbers on the cost increases involved, some sticker shock, price rises, loom – potentially enough to delay Trump's desired rate cut – and possibly a dent to consumer spending. Forecasts are always uncertain, of course, but this represents a very real political threat for a president who promised to lower consumer prices, not take actions that would raise and other White House officials have floated the idea of providing rebate checks to lower-income Americans – the kinds of blue-collar voters who have fuelled the president's political success – that would offset some of the pocketbook an effort could be unwieldy, and it would require congressional also a tacit acknowledgment that simply boasting of new federal revenue to offset current spending and tax cuts, and holding out the prospect of future domestic job and wealth creation is politically perilous for a Republican party that will have to face voters in next year's midterm state and congressional midterm elections. The deals yet to be hammered out Complicating all this is the fact that there are many countries where a deal is yet to be hammered out – most notably Canada and Taiwan. The US administration has yet to pronounce its decisions for the pharmaceuticals and steel industry. The colossal issue of China, subject to a different deadline, remains agreed to a negotiating extension with Mexico, another major US trading partner, on Thursday of the deals that have been struck have been verbal, as yet unsigned. Moreover it is uncertain if and how the strings attached to Trump's agreements – more money to be spent purchasing American energy or invested in America – will actually be delivered some cases, foreign leaders have denied the existence of provisions touted by the president. When it comes to assessing tariff agreements between the White House and various countries, says Mr May, the "devil is in the detail" – and the details are clear, however, that the world has shifted back from the brink of a ruinous trade war. Now, as nations grapple with a new set of trade barriers, Trump aims to call the history tells us that his overarching aim - to return production and jobs to America – may meet with very limited success. And America's long-time trading partners, like Canada and the EU, could start looking to form economic and political connections that bypass what they no longer view as a reliable economic may be benefitting from the leverage afforded by America's unique position at the centre of a global trading order that it spent more than half a century establishing. If the current tariffs trigger a foundational realignment, however, the results may not ultimately break in favour of the questions will be answered over years, not weeks or months. In the meantime, Trump's own voters may still have to pick up the tab – through higher prices, less choice and slower reporting: Michael Race. Top image credit: Getty Images BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Battle for Heathrow's third runway is set for take off! Airport unveils £49BILLION plans - but greens and mayor remain bitterly opposed
A planning row was set to take off today as Heathrow unveiled its designs for a third runway. Britain's biggest airport believes the project, including terminals and infrastructure, can be built within a decade at a cost of around £49 billion. If passed, it will allow flights to 30 new destinations, add 0.43 per cent to the UK's GDP and carry 66 million more passengers per year, Heathrow says. But it is set to face a battle, with Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, who is strongly opposed to a third runway on noise and environmental grounds, suggesting he could launch a legal challenge. The extension would involve diverting a section of the M25 through a tunnel running underneath the new runway and will mean a major redesign of the airport. The submission of the plans comes ahead of the Government formally approving proposals for a second runway at Gatwick in the next few weeks. It marks the largest expansion of Britain's airports for half a century, as Labour attempts to revive Britain's sluggish economy with infrastructure projects. But it will also reignite a major row within the party and highlight sharp divides between those who want growth and those concerned about the environment. While a majority of MPs are likely to back the project if it goes to a vote, Sir Keir Starmer and many of his Cabinet ministers have previously voted against Heathrow expansion. But it is set to face a battle, with Mayor of London Sadiq Khan (pictured), who is strongly opposed to a third runway on noise and environmental grounds, suggesting he could launch a legal challenge Earlier this year, Ed Miliband, the Secretary for Energy Security and Net Zero, had to issue a statement saying he wouldn't quit over the third runway given his previous opposition to the plans. Political rows and legal challenges over pollution have repeatedly held up plans for a Heathrow expansion, which were first raised more than two decades ago. The plans will be reviewed by Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander before a consultation on the airport's national policy statement. Should permission be granted for a new runway, a full planning application can then be submitted in 2028. The new runway would mean 276,000 new flights annually and 68million more passengers. It would cost £21billion, with the rest of the planned budget paying for a redesign of the airport. The total number of flights would increase to 756,000 a year, carrying 150million passengers. Heathrow CEO Thomas Woldbye said: 'It has never been more important or urgent to expand Heathrow. We are effectively operating at capacity to the detriment of trade and connectivity.' The expansion will be financed by private investment, but airlines have expressed concern that the airport will hike its passenger charges to pay for the project. Business groups welcomed the plans, saying they were 'an investment in the nation's future'. A joint statement from the Confederation of British Industry, British Chambers of Commerce, MakeUK, Federation of Small Businesses and Institute of Directors said: 'The benefits are clear: for exporters, it opens up vital access to major and emerging markets; for visitors, it enhances global and domestic connectivity; and for businesses, it unlocks billions in private investment, strengthening supply chains, creating jobs, and driving skills across the country.' But green campaigners continue to oppose the expansion, arguing that it is bad for the environment due to noise and air pollution. Dr Douglas Parr, policy director for Greenpeace UK, said: 'The Government has decided yet again to prioritise more leisure opportunities for a comparatively small group of frequent fliers, while the rest of us have to live with the consequences of their disproportionate polluting.' Richard Holden, Shadow Transport Secretary, welcomed the announcement but said it was vital it got the expansion right. 'The Government's role is now to ensure the process delivers real benefits for Britain, for passengers, protects taxpayers, and guarantees proper local consultation,' he said. A rival expansion plan has also been submitted – hotel tycoon Surinder Arora's proposal includes a shorter third runway, which he claims will be cheaper and quicker to build.
