Latest news with #ChristopherFurlong
Boston Globe
3 days ago
- Business
- Boston Globe
Trump criticized the idea of presidential vacations. His Scotland trip is built around golf.
The White House isn't calling Trump's five-day, midsummer jaunt a vacation, but rather a working trip where the Republican president might hold a news conference and sit for interviews with U.S. and British media outlets. Trump was also talking trade in separate meetings with European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Trump is staying at his properties near Turnberry and Aberdeen, where his family owns two golf courses and is opening a third on Aug. 13. Trump played golf over the weekend at Turnberry and is helping cut the ribbon on the new course on Tuesday. Advertisement He's not the first president to play in Scotland: Dwight D. Eisenhower played at Turnberry in 1959, more than a half century before Trump bought it, after meeting with French President Charles de Gaulle in Paris. But none of Trump's predecessors has constructed a foreign itinerary around promoting vacation sites his family owns and is actively expanding. Advertisement It lays bare how Trump has leveraged his second term to pad his family's profits in a variety of ways, including overseas development deals and promoting cryptocurrencies, despite growing questions about ethics concerns. 'You have to look at this as yet another attempt by Donald Trump to monetize his presidency,' said Leonard Steinhorn, who teaches political communication and courses on American culture and the modern presidency at American University. 'In this case, using the trip as a PR opportunity to promote his golf courses.' A parade of golf carts and security accompanied President Trump at Turnberry, on the Scottish coast southwest of Glasgow, on Sunday. Christopher Furlong/Getty President Trump on the links. Christopher Furlong/Getty Presidents typically vacation in the US Franklin D. Roosevelt went to the Bahamas, often for the excellent fishing, five times between 1933 and 1940. He visited Canada's Campobello Island in New Brunswick, where he had vacationed as a child, in 1933, 1936 and 1939. Reagan spent Easter 1982 on vacation in Barbados after meeting with Caribbean leaders and warning of a Marxist threat that could spread throughout the region from nearby Grenada. Presidents also never fully go on vacation. They travel with a large entourage of aides, receive intelligence briefings, take calls and otherwise work away from Washington. Kicking back in the United States, though, has long been the norm. Harry S. Truman helped make Key West, Florida, a tourist hot spot with his 'Little White House' cottage there. Several presidents, including James Buchanan and Benjamin Harrison, visited the Victorian architecture in Cape May, New Jersey. More recently, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama boosted tourism on Massachusetts' Martha's Vineyard, while Trump has buoyed Palm Beach, Florida, with frequent trips to his Mar-a-Lago estate. But any tourist lift Trump gets from his Scottish visit is likely to most benefit his family. 'Every president is forced to weigh politics versus fun on vacation,' said Jeffrey Engel, David Gergen Director of the Center for Presidential History at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, who added that Trump is 'demonstrating his priorities.' Advertisement 'When he thinks about how he wants to spend his free time, A., playing golf, B., visiting places where he has investments and C., enhancing those investments, that was not the priority for previous presidents, but it is his vacation time,' Engel said. It's even a departure from Trump's first term, when he found ways to squeeze in visits to his properties while on trips more focused on work. Trump stopped at his resort in Hawaii to thank staff members after visiting the memorial site at Pearl Harbor and before embarking on an Asia trip in November 2017. He played golf at Turnberry in 2018 before meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Finland. Trump once decried the idea of taking vacations as president. 'Don't take vacations. What's the point? If you're not enjoying your work, you're in the wrong job,' Trump wrote in his 2004 book, 'Think Like a Billionaire.' During his presidential campaign in 2015, he pledged to 'rarely leave the White House.' Even as recently as a speech at a summit on artificial intelligence in Washington on Wednesday, Trump derided his predecessor for flying long distances for golf — something he's now doing. 'They talked about the carbon footprint and then Obama hops onto a 747, Air Force One, and flies to Hawaii to play a round of golf and comes back,' he said. On the green... Christopher Furlong/Getty ... and in the sand. Christopher Furlong/Getty Presidential vacations and any overseas trips were once taboo Trump isn't the first president not wanting to publicize taking time off. George Washington was criticized for embarking on a New England tour to promote the presidency. Some took issue with his successor, John Adams, for leaving the then-capital of Philadelphia in 1797 for a long visit to his family's farm in Quincy, Massachusetts. James Madison left Washington for months after the War of 1812. Advertisement Teddy Roosevelt helped pioneer the modern presidential vacation in 1902 by chartering a special train and directing key staffers to rent houses near Sagamore Hill, his home in Oyster Bay, New York, according to the White House Historical Association. Four years later, Roosevelt upended tradition again, this time by becoming the first president to leave the country while in office. The New York Times noted that Roosevelt's 30-day trip by yacht and battleship to tour construction of the Panama Canal 'will violate the traditions of the United States for 117 years by taking its President outside the jurisdiction of the Government at Washington.' In the decades since, where presidents opted to vacation, even outside the U.S., has become part of their political personas. In addition to New Jersey, Grant relaxed on Martha's Vineyard. Calvin Coolidge spent the 1928 Christmas holidays at Sapelo Island, Georgia. Lyndon B. Johnson had his 'Texas White House,' a Hill Country ranch. Eisenhower vacationed in Newport, Rhode Island. John F. Kennedy went to Palm Springs, California, and his family's compound in Hyannis Port, Massachusetts, among other places. Richard Nixon had the 'Southern White House' on Key Biscayne, Florida, while Joe Biden traveled frequently to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, while also visiting Nantucket, Massachusetts, and St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin Islands. George H.W. Bush was a frequent visitor to his family's property in Kennebunkport, Maine, and didn't let the start of the Gulf War in 1991 detour him from a monthlong vacation there. His son, George W. Bush, opted for his ranch in Crawford, Texas, rather than a more posh destination. Advertisement Presidential visits help tourism in some places more than others, but Engel said that for some Americans, 'if the president of the Untied States goes some place, you want to go to the same place.' He noted that visitors emulating presidential vacations are out 'to show that you're either as cool as he or she, that you understand the same values as he or she or, heck, maybe you'll bump into he or she.'
Scotsman
4 days ago
- Politics
- Scotsman
How Labour minister's attack on quality of Scotland's water backfired badly
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Westminster went into recess this week, a time of year when MPs can take a breath, undertake summer surgery tours and constituency visits, and generally catch up with work back home that can be difficult with the weekly commute to London. It is also historically when we enter what is known as 'silly season', described in the Collins dictionary as 'the time around August when the newspapers are full of unimportant or silly news stories because there is not much political news to report'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This week it arrived a few days early as a Labour Cabinet minister sought to make the case against water nationalisation using inaccurate figures about Scottish water quality. A Labour politician, Environment Secretary Steve Reed no less, arguing against a successfully nationalised public utility and showing a courageous streak by criticising Scots over the quality of their tap water. Just 16 per cent of England's water bodies are in good ecological status, compared to 66 per cent in Scotland (Picture: Christopher Furlong) | Getty Images Swimming in sewage Now, there are times, when stories that the political bubble, politicians and journalists alike, think are terribly serious fail to capture the public imagination. The quality of Scotland's water is not one of them. People in Scotland, of all political persuasions and none, take some pride in the quality of Scotland's water – not least those of us who drink London tap water during our weekly London commute! The Secretary of State was swimming in sewage of his own making and gave Scottish Government Cabinet minister Gillian Martin ample opportunity to rebut his claims in a pointed letter. Sixty-six per cent of Scotland's water bodies are of good ecological status compared to 16 per cent in England and 29 per cent in Wales. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Whilst there is always more that can be done and Scottish ministers are right to focus on areas for which they have responsibility, Scottish water is improving with 87 per cent assessed as 'clean or good', up from 82 per cent in 2014. There is always work to be done in Scotland, and in fairness Scottish ministers have the benefit of being answerable to the public rather than shareholders, but nonetheless the intervention was 'courageous' by the British minister. £78bn in shareholder dividends A recent report by the UK Environment Agency showed serious pollution incidents in England were up 60 per cent compared to the previous year with 'consistently poor performance from all nine water and sewage companies' in England. The Environment Agency put this down to 'persistent underinvestment in new infrastructure, poor asset maintenance and reduced resilience due to the impacts of climate'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The Secretary of State even conceded on Sky News this week that most of the £104 billion investment needed in the water industry in England would have to be paid back by bill payers. What's more, since privatisation by the Tories in the 1990s, water companies have paid out £78bn in dividends and millions in bonuses to water company bosses, a system that a Labour minister was now seeking to defend. One might say that the UK Government has found itself up a rather polluted creek without a paddle. No wonder so few voices are calling for Scottish water to be privatised given the unfolding disaster south of the Border. Bill payers in Scotland gain from successive devolved administrations managing water better. Since 2010 for instance, average charges to Scottish customers have reduced by over 10 per cent with average prices significantly lower than in England and Wales. Given all of this you might have expected the Secretary of State to be more focused on keeping to past Labour commitments that might help voters down south. In the 2020 Labour leadership race, one of Keir Starmer's ten key pledges was to 'support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water'. That commitment appears to have been one of many dropped by Labour in office. Scottish Labour's favourite tactic Labour finds itself politically rudderless in stormy waters, pun absolutely intended. No wonder, the party has won power and doesn't know what to do with it. The Secretary of State was left gasping, a fish out of water. When he was interviewed, unable to defend his own record, he did what Labour MPs are getting rather good at, talk about something else entirely. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It's a favoured tactic of Scottish Labour MPs to talk about anything but their own Westminster government. At the most recent Scotland Office question time, supposed to be Scotland's voice in the UK Government, only my Dundee colleague Chris Law and I seemed to be bothered to ask about issues pertinent to the UK Government. Labour MP after Labour MP stood up to talk about the Scottish Government, telling us something of who is setting the policy agenda – and it isn't this Labour administration. The lack of Labour MPs' curiosity about the work of their own government and the Secretary of State's brazen deflection tells us of a Westminster government and UK ruling party without much of a political compass, holed below the water line by their own lack of purpose. My experience of speaking to voters tells me that people want to know what you are for, rather than what you are against. Even where voters disagree with you, and plenty do, they respect parties who are clear on their beliefs. Things could always be better and Scottish ministers should continue to keep up their work to ensure that Scottish water is cheaper, less polluted and more sustainable than elsewhere. The same goes the other way, and given the state of England's waters maybe, just maybe, Labour ministers could do with focusing on areas over which they have responsibility. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Water is a precious commodity, and it has rightly grabbed a bit of attention this week. It's certainly more deserving than this week's early silly season but we shouldn't let that wander into September. Time for some serious politics about a serious resource – time for Labour ministers to focus on the day job?
Toronto Sun
7 days ago
- Entertainment
- Toronto Sun
That time Ozzy Osbourne bit the head off a bat
Published Jul 23, 2025 • Last updated 7 minutes ago • 4 minute read Flowers are placed in memory of Ozzy Osbourne next to a mural in Navigation Street on July 23, 2025 in Birmingham, England. Photo by Christopher Furlong / Getty Images Reviews and recommendations are unbiased and products are independently selected. Postmedia may earn an affiliate commission from purchases made through links on this page. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account On a cold January night in 1982, thousands of heavy metal fans streamed into a Des Moines auditorium for what radio DJs promised would be the concert of the year. Ozzy Osbourne, the former lead singer of British band Black Sabbath, was about to rock. The mood was festively macabre. Posters for the 'Diary of a Madman Tour' showed Osbourne in his 'Prince of Darkness' alter ego – complete with devil horns – and warned attendees that eating before the concert was 'not recommended.' But no one knew just how stomach churning the performance would prove, or how it would become synonymous with the oddball musician, who died July 22 at the age of 76. In the 1980s, Ozzy concerts were often raucous events, with crowds tossing rubber snakes or cockroaches onstage and the then-33-year-old singer firing stuff back, including raw meat from a catapult. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. So when a teenage boy in the Des Moines crowd that evening tossed something small and dark toward the tenor, it wasn't surprising that Osbourne picked it up. It was a bat. 'Obviously a toy,' Osbourne recalled thinking in his memoir. The singer held it up to the lights, bared his teeth to the crowd's delight and did what he usually did with rubber toys thrown onstage: He bit it. 'Immediately though, something felt wrong,' he wrote. 'Very wrong. For a start, my mouth was instantly full of this warm, gloopy liquid, with the worst aftertaste you could ever imagine. I could feel it staining my teeth and running down my chin. Then the head in my mouth twitched.' The animal was not, in fact, a toy, but rather a real bat that local 17-year-old Mark Neal had smuggled into the concert in a baggy inside his coat. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'It really freaked me out,' Neal told the Des Moines Register at the time. 'I won't get in any trouble for admitting this, will I?' In his memoir, Osbourne says he spat out the head and looked over to his future wife, Sharon, who screamed that the bat was real. 'Next thing I knew I was in a wheelchair, being rushed into an emergency room,' he wrote. 'Meanwhile, a doctor was saying to Sharon, 'Yes, Miss Arden, the bat was alive. It was probably stunned from being at a rock concert, but it was definitely alive. There's a good chance Mr. Osbourne now has rabies.' The incident made national headlines, with some skepticism over whether it was real or just another one of Osbourne's antics. 'You have to understand this is what's called 'shock rock' and the kids love it,' Rick Freiberg, in charge of bookings at the Milwaukee Exposition and Convention Center and Arena, told the Des Moines Tribune, which later merged with the Register. 'It's all illusion.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Then again, Freiberg had reason to play down the controversy: Osbourne was due to play at his arena a few days later. 'Everyone thought I'd bitten the head of a bat on purpose, instead of it being a simple misunderstanding,' Osbourne wrote. 'For a while, I was worried we might be closed down, and a couple of venues did go ahead and ban us. The fans didn't help, either. After they heard about the bat, they started bringing even crazier stuff to the gigs. Going onstage was like being at a butchers' convention.' Osbourne had previous experience decapitating animals, however. Just a year earlier, the singer – who was using drugs and alcohol heavily at the time – had bitten the head off a dove during a meeting with CBS Records in what he said was a response to the label's tepid attitude toward his album. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. That incident – which, unlike the Des Moines controversy, appears to have been captured on camera – helped spur Neal to toss the bat onstage in the first place, he told the Register. Whether intentional or not, the bat bite became emblematic of Osbourne's growing brand. Decades later, it remains one of the most memorable things about his long and odd career. Osbourne once complained that he would be getting questions about the bat until he died – and beyond, according to the Register. 'And then they'll dig me up and ask me again,' he said. Read More Love concerts, but can't make it to the venue? Stream live shows and events from your couch with VEEPS, a music-first streaming service now operating in Canada. Click here for an introductory offer of 30% off. Explore upcoming concerts and the extensive archive of past performances. Canada Toronto & GTA Ontario Sunshine Girls Relationships
Scotsman
24-06-2025
- Business
- Scotsman
Why guaranteed £28,000 income would be a disaster for Scotland
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... What's not to like about the idea that the government should pay everyone a guaranteed minimum income? That is the latest proposal from an expert group set up by the Scottish Government. It is by no means a new concept. The notion of a minimum income paid to everyone by government without conditions has been around for at least decades. Although generally an idea put forward by those on the political left, even those on the right have sometimes flirted with the notion, labelling it as 'negative income tax'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The essential argument is that, rather than having a complex welfare system to help those who are out of work or for various reasons unable to work, there should be a universal benefit paid to all set at a level which would avoid abject poverty. Individuals who worked would then be able to top up this income, although they would of course pay tax on any additional earnings, and it is likely there would be some level of clawback once earnings reached a certain amount. When the UK Government paid people to stay off work during the Covid lockdowns, many people's mental health suffered due to isolation and loneliness (Picture: Christopher Furlong) | Getty Images Unconditional payments For those who did not work, even if they made an active choice not to, they would still be entitled to these unconditional government payments. Proponents argue that this would create a much simpler welfare system and therefore save large sums on administration that could then be used to fund this more generous system. The SNP government was interested enough in this notion to establish an expert group to consider the arguments, which reported just last week. A combination of charities, campaigners and academics have put forward a set of detailed recommendations for how such a scheme might work if established in Scotland. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This expert group proposes a minimum income guarantee set at £11,500 per year for a single adult, £20,000 for a couple, and £28,000 for a couple with a child, or a single parent with two children. These sums would be paid to all, but for those who were earning there would be a gentle taper with people on the highest incomes receiving nothing. The group suggests that there could be a 12-month time limit on this payment, after which claimants would return to the existing system of welfare payments. They recommend a pilot of the policy being run in the next parliamentary session, with a view to a full scheme being established by 2036. 'Transformative' The group's chair, Russell Gunson of the Robertson Trust, says: 'A minimum income guarantee could be transformative, putting in place a universal guarantee that's there for everyone in Scotland. Given the levels of poverty and inequality we see, we must act urgently. The first steps we set out over the next five years are affordable in the current context, and doable within existing powers.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It all sounds superficially attractive in terms of providing a welfare safety net for families, and reducing poverty. But more careful consideration reveals the serious flaws in what is being proposed here. Firstly, there is the obvious issue of affordability. The Scottish Government's own analysis shows that this policy would cost a staggering £8.1 billion annually, although that total would reduce to a mere £5.9bn were the payments to be tapered for those who are earning. In the context of an overall Scottish Government budget in the region now of £60bn, that represents a massive additional sum. Unrealistic to increase tax burder The expert group suggests this cost could be met by income and council tax hikes on the better off. But, as I have often argued in this column before, already we see that higher taxes in Scotland are proving counterproductive, raising much less money than predicted due to both behavioural change on the part of taxpayers, and the slower economic growth that Scotland enjoys compared to the UK average. Hiking taxes of above-average earners yet further would undoubtedly exacerbate the current situation, leading to even lower tax revenues than currently are being generated. It is completely unrealistic to expect that extending the tax burden even higher, beyond today's record levels, will be anything other than self-defeating. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This is a policy proposal which is simply unaffordable. But that is not the only reason why it is such a bad idea. Lockdown harmed mental health Work is good for us as human beings. It is through work that we find purpose in life, where, as sociable beings, we engage with others, and where we form and maintain relationships. There is an unlimited number of social studies that demonstrate how being in work is good for people's wellbeing. Anything, therefore, which encourages individuals not to work, simply to exist on government handouts, is bad not just for the wider economy, but for individuals themselves. Worklessness drives loneliness, depression and anxiety. If ever evidence of this was required, we only need to look at the consequences of the Covid lockdowns this country experienced. The government furlough schemes, necessary as they were to maintain family incomes, effectively paid individuals to stay at home and not work for extended periods. Our society still lives with the consequences of that today, with levels of poor mental health having spiralled since Covid. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Incentivising work Creating a scheme that will pay people to stay at home and do nothing, rather than work, is simply going to contribute to a society where people feel purposeless and disconnected from those around them. What our benefit system should be doing is quite the opposite, and incentivising work to a greater extent, particularly for the growing number of those of working age who are currently either out of work or under-employed. It tells its own story that no government anywhere in the world has successfully implemented the sort of scheme that has been proposed here. Both the eye-watering costs, and the likely negative societal outcomes, mean that such plans should never escape the bounds of academic research.
Scotsman
31-05-2025
- Scotsman
SNP must act urgently to stem horrifying epidemic of violence in Scotland's schools
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It is becoming increasingly clear that the scandalous breakdown of law and order – for it is nothing less – in Scotland's schools is an issue that requires urgent and radical action. We cannot allow generations of children to learn all the wrong lessons about violence but, based on reports of increasing desperation from those on the frontline, that is exactly what is happening and the consequences for society as a whole will be very real. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad According to the GMB union, classroom assistants in primary schools are the most likely staff to suffer violence and abuse in schools. A snapshot survey of 30 in Edinburgh found every single one had either been a victim of violence or had witnessed it. Four out of five said incidents were taking place on a daily basis and 92 per cent said there are no consequences for pupils who used violence against assistants. Schools needs to be safe places where children are able to learn and neither they nor their teachers feel at risk of attack (Picture: Christopher Furlong) | Getty Images Violence cannot go unpunished Keir Greenaway, a senior union organiser, said: 'Until the true nature and extent of school violence is properly understood and acknowledged, it will never be properly addressed. We need an honest conversation about what is happening, where it is happening and how to address it.' The union added that the 'presumption of mainstreaming' – a Scottish Government policy that encourages pupils with behavioural problems and other 'additional needs' to attend ordinary schools – had to be properly funded or it would fail both children and staff. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It is past time for the Scottish Government to think again, given some children clearly need more help than it is possible for mainstream schools to provide. The risk is that children will take away the message that violence goes unpunished or can even get them what they want. Eventually, they will realise their mistake but this may only happen after some hideous tragedy. The Netflix drama Adolescence provided a chilling example of the consequences of allowing a culture of violence to develop among young people.
