Latest news with #Kiernan
Daily Mirror
15 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Tommy Robinson LIVE: Far-right activist seen agitated near 'unconscious man'
Video shows far-right activist Tommy Robinson acting agitated close to a man lying on the floor at St Pancras station. Tommy Robinson - real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon - can be heard shouting "he came at me" as walks down an escalator. British Transport Police said it was called to St Pancras station just after 8.40pm yesterday following reports of an assault. Officers attended and a man was taken to hospital with serious injuries. A spokesman added: "Officers have been making arrest enquiries". Did you see what happened? Email webnews@ 09:43Kelly-Ann Kiernan Bystanders raced to help man A concerned bystander can be heard desperately trying to get someone to help the injured man. The eyewitness could be heard saying "Quick, quick, can we get someone here quick." The man does not appear to be moving as he lies face down in the station. 09:40Kelly-Ann Kiernan Tommy Robinson was in London Mr Robinson posted a video to his account on social media platform X just hours earlier stating he was in London preparing for what he called "the biggest free speech event the world has ever seen". He said: "Today we have walked the route of our event on September 13, where we will be meeting at Waterloo Station." "Make your plans. We are having a festival of fun, of British identity, of celebration of every single bit of it." 09:32KEY EVENT Police statement in full A statement from the British Transport Police said: "[We] were called to St Pancras station just after 8.40pm yesterday (28 July) following reports of an assault. "Officers attended and a man was taken to hospital with serious injuries, which are not thought to be life threatening. "Overnight the investigation has been ongoing and officers have been making arrest enquiries.
NZ Herald
7 days ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Explainer: Why have New Zealand butter prices gone up – and when will that change?
To paraphrase former US President Bill Clinton: it's the economics, stupid. One big factor behind the rise, according to economists, is that New Zealand exports wholesale butter products and the price for this has soared internationally. As Infometrics economist and chief forecaster Gareth Kiernan explained, a 74% rise in international butter prices at Fonterra's Global Dairy Trade auctions between August 2023 and May this year has 'directly flowed through into retail prices within New Zealand'. What's behind that jump? Kiernan explains it 'reflects a mixture of demand and supply factors, including lower dairy production volumes in the US, Europe, South America, and China' as well as 'a sharp drop in Australian [dairy] production between 2021 and 2023 that has not been fully recovered from; and strong demand growth in Asia'. 'Weather events, including both drought and periods of excessive rainfall, have been a contributing factor to many of the supply issues overseas. However, tougher environmental regulations, higher energy prices, and a bluetongue virus outbreak in late 2024 have also negatively affected European dairy production,' Kiernan added. So a reduction in global supply, together with stronger demand, has pumped up the prices. Michael Harvey, senior analyst in dairy and consumer foods for Rabobank, makes similar points and highlights the rise in the cost of dairy products that New Zealand exports. 'It's across all channels,' he told the Herald. 'And it ultimately comes down to global prices'. The reality is that New Zealand exports 98% of the dairy products it produces, Harvey says, and the country has a very large and very successful dairy industry. Because we export so much, our local prices are heavily affected by the demand in those export markets. In a sense, we are paying the price of our own success. New Zealand exports the overwhelmingly majority of the dairy it produces. Photo / NZME This morning, David Seymour told Herald NOW's Ryan Bridge that high butter prices are actually really good news for the economy, and we should all be happy about the money flowing into farmers' pockets. Is David Seymour right? Yes, Kiernan says. 'They are undoubtedly painful for consumers, but they mean that dairy farmers' incomes are increasing, which will help drive New Zealand's economic recovery over the next 18 months,' he adds. 'Low dairy prices (along with high costs) during 2022 and 2023 led to a pull-back in farm spending, hurting economic activity in provincial areas. Improving incomes will see more spending on farm supplies, equipment, and machinery, boosting economic activity and jobs in provincial areas.' Kiernan goes further and says that rising dairy prices are more important to the country's economic recovery than lower interest rates: 'In our view, the lift in dairy prices, along with rising meat prices and high horticulture prices, is shaping as an even more important component of the economy's recovery than declining interest rates'. Consumer NZ, however, said Seymour 'missed the point' with his statement. Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand David Seymour says high butter prices are good news for the country's economy. Photo / Michael Craig 'Our research this month has found that 70% of New Zealanders rank the cost of food and groceries as a top three financial concern. 'Most New Zealanders don't believe the Government is doing enough to keep food affordable – two-thirds of people said they have low confidence in current government policies.' They said the conversation about butter prices 'overshadows' the wider issue – prices are becoming unsustainable for more and more New Zealanders. 'Of course, we should be focused on growing a high-wage economy to roll with global price spikes – but when this is contrasted with an increasing number of people who are struggling to pay for the basics, we question at what cost?' When can we expect butter prices to drop? Let's start with the good(ish) news for consumers: international butter prices have been stabilising over the past couple of months. 'There are expectations of improving supply conditions in Europe, in particular, that should help to alleviate some of the current mismatch between supply and demand. Growth in Chinese demand is likely to remain reasonably modest over the next 18 months, also helping to provide some relief in prices,' Kiernan says. The not-so-good news: The latest OECD/FAO forecasts show only an 8% correction in prices between 2024 and 2026, which means there is no immediate relief on the horizon, as this will still leave butter prices higher than people were used to a few years ago. The reason behind this, Kiernan says, is 'further growth in demand from India, Pakistan, the Middle East, and North Africa, which is expected to remain reasonably strong'. So the bad news for bakers, cakers and scone-makers: not only are butter prices not about to drop any time soon, they may actually go even higher. 'The full effects of international butter price rises through to May have probably not quite flowed through into retail butter prices in NZ yet, so there is still a near-term risk that retail prices could push a bit higher,' Infometrics' chief forecaster says. 'Because we have yet to see any dip in international prices, it's too early to be certain about the timing of any reversal in retail prices, so it might not be until late 2025 or early 2026 that supermarket butter prices start to ease a little from current highs.' Rabobank's Harvey agrees: 'We are not expecting the global price to rapidly decline in the next six to 12 months, but there'll be some pressure. Relief is on the horizon, but there won't be a dramatic decline'. If you look at the Global Dairy Trade (GDT) as a global indicator of prices, these have fallen marginally in recent months, but are still very high, Harvey explains. 'It becomes a question of when we will see some correction,' he adds. How that correction will happen also depends on several factors. 'It could be that customers just stop buying, because the price is too high, or a supplier response from manufacturers. You'll get a balance of that,' Harvey says. If it's a global issue, how can places like Costco sell cheaper butter than anywhere else? The question, Harvey says, gets complex when we try to do price comparisons across different geographies. 'There's nuance around the retail structure in each market and there's variability in the category itself,' he says, adding that there are 'excluding mechanisms' that could be at play. For example, some retailers could be buying on contract for a period of time, thus locking into a certain price for longer. West Auckland wholesaler Costco has put purchase limits on its Kirkland Signature butter, restricting customers to 30 blocks at a time. Photo / Grace Xin Yin Wu 'You're never going to get them all to line up and agree on a price, but the reality is consumers in all geographies are paying more for butter.' What other items on supermarket shelves could be set to spike in price? Rabobank's Harvey says products like cocoa and coffee beans are 'commodities to watch' because, among other factors, there are current shortages that could affect pricing. Canola oil is going through a similar cycle, he says. What can the Government do about this? Not much, apparently. Willis met with Fonterra chief Miles Hurrell this afternoon about the dairy giant's pricing model. As a result, Hurrell will publicly explain the different components of the price of butter, which Willis said will come later in the week. Willis did say the Fonterra CEO blamed supermarkets for prices being quite as high as they are. When asked whether anything raised in the meeting would lead to lower prices, Willis said, 'All roads lead back to supermarket competition. 'What Miles acknowledged, and what every New Zealander can see, is that supermarkets make choices about what margin they charge for butter. Now this is at the margin, it is a small proportion of the overall price that you pay, between 5% and 10% of the overall price shared between Fonterra and the retailer. 'What is clear is that different retailers make different decisions about what margins they charge,' Willis said. Speaking to the Herald before the meeting, Harvey said there's 'not much the Government can do' in the short term as the Beehive is largely unable to influence global pricing. There are some players along the supply chain who can have an impact, though. 'Retailers will look to trade down where they can. They are very mindful of this,' Harvey says, adding that we should expect to see more 'promotional activity' that customers can take advantage of. In summary Butter is expensive right now, but it's probably going to get worse before it gets better – and there isn't much anyone can do about it. That's good if you sell butter (or the raw ingredients used in production). For those who buy it as part of their weekly shop, it's something that's a lot harder to swallow.
Yahoo
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘Accelerated censorship': advocates criticize US supreme court ruling on LGBTQ+ books
Kiernan, a 24-year-old transgender person from Colorado, feels drained from dealing with legislation that consistently limits the spaces and freedoms of people like him. Since he transitioned in 2016, it's been the same – first bathroom bills, then censorship in the education system – routine attacks on LGBTQ+ rights that Kiernan feels have now just become part of living in the US. Now, in the wake of the Mahmoud v Taylor supreme court ruling, the stigmatization of these communities is likely to worsen. The highest court in the US ruled that parents in Maryland's Montgomery county school district can opt their children out of lessons that include books with LGBTQ+ themes and characters if they feel that it violates their religious rights. The move angered LGBTQ+ groups and civil rights advocates who also say that the lengthy and judicial process of these opt-outs could have chaotic implications for the US education system nationwide. 'LGBTQ-relevant books are just the beginning in accelerated censorship,' Sabrina Baêta, a senior member of PEN America, told the Guardian. 'What's to stop schools from backing away from any books that may be offensive? We have already seen other topics like Black history disappear as districts try to avoid anything potentially controversial.' Related: Hegseth announces new name of US navy ship that honored gay rights icon Harvey Milk PEN America highlighted in a recent report that teachers may be more likely to overlook topics that require parental consent, thereby brushing over crucial books and subjects in classrooms that promote diverse identities and learning. In administrative terms, the court's ruling also poses problems for teachers and educators. Rather than focusing on lessons at hand, they will have to grapple with what is or isn't appropriate on religious grounds. And while anything with LGBTQ+ themes will constitute a student being able to leave the classroom, it creates a grey zone for topics like science and history, where certain lessons – such as about reproduction – could be seen as now potentially inappropriate. Opt-outs are believed by experts to have a pernicious effect on educational environments, but their implementation is not a new phenomenon. For a short period between the 2022-2023 school year, the Montgomery county board of education allowed them after introducing several 'LGBTQ+ inclusive' texts into the curriculum. Less than a year after the books were introduced, however, the board rescinded this option, saying it 'could not accommodate the growing number of opt-out requests without causing significant disruptions to the classroom environment'. Moreover, a school board official stated that permitting some students to opt out while stories were being told would expose others to 'social stigma and isolation'. 'It's really frustrating and a burden on my psyche,' Kiernan said, speaking on the mounting number of bills and legislation that have recently targeted LGBTQ+ youth. 'These bills aren't doing anything positive for children; it's a political agenda that's trying to veil itself in support for religious people,' he said. 'I wish it would go away. Let people be people and stop using us as a political scapegoat.' Justin Driver, a professor at Yale Law School, submitted a document to the court in the Mahmoud v Taylor hearing in support of the Montgomery county school district, saying: 'the decision succeeds in opening Pandora's box in countless classrooms located in our nation's public schools.' Driver, who specializes in education law, believes it unwise that parents and students be granted the authority to veto individual school lessons and assignments, and added that legal experts have 'long extolled local control of public education'. 'Public schools must now brace themselves for a dizzying array of curricular opt-out demands,' Driver said, adding: 'the American education system will be much poorer for it.' When the conservative-dominated court ruled 6-3 in favour, siding with the Muslim, Christian and Catholic parents who brought the case, Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion, and the three liberal justices – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson – were in dissent. In the ruling, Alito wrote: 'We have long recognized the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children.' While parents will be able to uphold these rights under the new ruling, teachers may be overwhelmed at the beginning of the school year. Schools could struggle to determine what constitutes infringement on someone's religious liberty while simultaneously honoring the freedom of speech guaranteed by the first amendment. Assessing the validity of removing books on religious grounds will also be problematic, given the broader ongoing campaign by parents' rights groups and religious organizations to remove LGBTQ+ content from schools across the nation, especially in Republican-led areas. 'The creation of opt-outs is license to censor the very existence of the LBGTQ+ community and their families,' the PEN American writer AJ Connelly concluded in her report. 'It is not difficult to imagine that other groups might soon be added to the list of those who may not be named,' she added.
The Guardian
04-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Accelerated censorship': advocates criticize US supreme court ruling on LGBTQ+ books
Kiernan, a 24-year-old transgender person from Colorado, feels drained from dealing with legislation that consistently limits the spaces and freedoms of people like him. Since he transitioned in 2016, it's been the same – first bathroom bills, then censorship in the education system – routine attacks on LGBTQ+ rights that Kiernan feels have now just become part of living in the US. Now, in the wake of the Mahmoud v Taylor supreme court ruling, the stigmatization of these communities is likely to worsen. The highest court in the US ruled that parents in Maryland's Montgomery county school district can opt their children out of lessons that include books with LGBTQ+ themes and characters if they feel that it violates their religious rights. The move angered LGBTQ+ groups and civil rights advocates who also say that the lengthy and judicial process of these opt-outs could have chaotic implications for the US education system nationwide. 'LGBTQ-relevant books are just the beginning in accelerated censorship,' Sabrina Baêta, a senior member of PEN America, told the Guardian. 'What's to stop schools from backing away from any books that may be offensive? We have already seen other topics like Black history disappear as districts try to avoid anything potentially controversial.' PEN America highlighted in a recent report that teachers may be more likely to overlook topics that require parental consent, thereby brushing over crucial books and subjects in classrooms that promote diverse identities and learning. In administrative terms, the court's ruling also poses problems for teachers and educators. Rather than focusing on lessons at hand, they will have to grapple with what is or isn't appropriate on religious grounds. And while anything with LGBTQ+ themes will constitute a student being able to leave the classroom, it creates a grey zone for topics like science and history, where certain lessons – such as about reproduction – could be seen as now potentially inappropriate. Opt-outs are believed by experts to have a pernicious effect on educational environments, but their implementation is not a new phenomenon. For a short period between the 2022-2023 school year, the Montgomery county board of education allowed them after introducing several 'LGBTQ+ inclusive' texts into the curriculum. Less than a year after the books were introduced, however, the board rescinded this option, saying it 'could not accommodate the growing number of opt-out requests without causing significant disruptions to the classroom environment'. Moreover, a school board official stated that permitting some students to opt out while stories were being told would expose others to 'social stigma and isolation'. 'It's really frustrating and a burden on my psyche,' Kiernan said, speaking on the mounting number of bills and legislation that have recently targeted LGBTQ+ youth. 'These bills aren't doing anything positive for children; it's a political agenda that's trying to veil itself in support for religious people,' he said. 'I wish it would go away. Let people be people and stop using us as a political scapegoat.' Justin Driver, a professor at Yale Law School, submitted a document to the court in the Mahmoud v Taylor hearing in support of the Montgomery county school district, saying: 'the decision succeeds in opening Pandora's box in countless classrooms located in our nation's public schools.' Driver, who specializes in education law, believes it unwise that parents and students be granted the authority to veto individual school lessons and assignments, and added that legal experts have 'long extolled local control of public education'. 'Public schools must now brace themselves for a dizzying array of curricular opt-out demands,' Driver said, adding: 'the American education system will be much poorer for it.' When the conservative-dominated court ruled 6-3 in favour, siding with the Muslim, Christian and Catholic parents who brought the case, Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion, and the three liberal justices – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson – were in dissent. In the ruling, Alito wrote: 'We have long recognized the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children.' While parents will be able to uphold these rights under the new ruling, teachers may be overwhelmed at the beginning of the school year. Schools could struggle to determine what constitutes infringement on someone's religious liberty while simultaneously honoring the freedom of speech guaranteed by the first amendment. Assessing the validity of removing books on religious grounds will also be problematic, given the broader ongoing campaign by parents' rights groups and religious organizations to remove LGBTQ+ content from schools across the nation, especially in Republican-led areas. 'The creation of opt-outs is license to censor the very existence of the LBGTQ+ community and their families,' the PEN American writer AJ Connelly concluded in her report. 'It is not difficult to imagine that other groups might soon be added to the list of those who may not be named,' she added.
The Guardian
03-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Accelerated censorship': advocates criticise US supreme court ruling on LGBTQ+ books
Kiernan, a 24-year-old transgender person from Colorado, feels drained from dealing with legislation that consistently limits the spaces and freedoms of people like him. Since he transitioned in 2016, it's been the same – first bathroom bills, then censorship in the education system – routine attacks on LGBTQ+ rights that Kiernan feels have now just become part of living in the US. Now, in the wake of the Mahmoud v Taylor supreme court ruling, the stigmatization of these communities is likely to worsen. The highest court in the US ruled that parents in Maryland's Montgomery county school district can opt their children out of lessons that include books with LGBTQ+ themes and characters if they feel that it violates their religious rights. The move angered LGBTQ+ groups and civil rights advocates who also say that the lengthy and judicial process of these opt-outs could have chaotic implications for the US education system nationwide. 'LGBTQ relevant books are just the beginning in accelerated censorship,' Sabrina Baêta, a senior member of PEN America, told the Guardian. 'What's to stop schools from backing away from any books that may be offensive? We have already seen other topics like Black history disappear as districts try to avoid anything potentially controversial.' PEN America highlighted in a recent report that teachers may be more likely to overlook topics that require parental consent, thereby brushing over crucial books and subjects in classrooms that promote diverse identities and learning. In administrative terms, the court's ruling also poses problems for teachers and educators. Rather than focusing on lessons at hand, they will have to grapple with what is or isn't appropriate on religious grounds. And while anything with LGBTQ+ themes will constitute a student being able to leave the classroom, it creates a grey zone for topics like science and history, where certain lessons – such as about reproduction – could be seen as now potentially inappropriate. Opt-outs are believed by experts to have a pernicious effect on educational environments, but their implementation is not a new phenomenon. For a short period between the 2022-2023 school year, the Montgomery county board of education allowed them after introducing several 'LGBTQ+ inclusive' texts into the curriculum. Less than a year after the books were introduced, however, the board rescinded this option, saying: 'it could not accommodate the growing number of opt-out requests without causing significant disruptions to the classroom environment.' Moreover, a school board official stated that permitting some students to opt out while stories were being told would expose others to 'social stigma and isolation'. 'It's really frustrating and a burden on my psyche,' Kiernan said, speaking on the mounting number of bills and legislation that have recently targeted LGBTQ+ youth. 'These bills aren't doing anything positive for children; it's a political agenda that's trying to veil itself in support for religious people,' he said. 'I wish it would go away. Let people be people and stop using us as a political scapegoat.' Justin Driver, a professor at Yale Law School, submitted a document to the court in the Mahmoud v Taylor hearing in support of the Montgomery county school district, saying: 'the decision succeeds in opening Pandora's box in countless classrooms located in our nation's public schools.' Driver, who specializes in education law, believes it unwise that parents and students be granted the authority to veto individual school lessons and assignments, and added that legal experts have 'long extolled local control of public education'. 'Public schools must now brace themselves for a dizzying array of curricular opt-out demands,' Driver said, adding: 'the American education system will be much poorer for it.' When the conservative-dominated court ruled 6-3 in favour, siding with the Muslim, Christian and Catholic parents who brought the case, justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion, and the three liberal justices – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson – were in dissent. In the ruling, Alito wrote: 'We have long recognized the rights of parents to direct 'the religious upbringing' of their children. And we have held that those rights are violated by government policies that substantially interfere with the religious development of children.' While parents will be able to uphold these rights under the new ruling, teachers may be overwhelmed at the beginning of the school year. Schools could struggle to determine what constitutes infringement on someone's religious liberty while simultaneously honouring the freedom of speech guaranteed by the first amendment. Assessing the validity of removing books on religious grounds will also be problematic, given the broader ongoing campaign by parents' rights groups and religious organizations to remove LGBTQ+ content from schools across the nation, especially in Republican-led areas. 'The creation of opt-outs is license to censor the very existence of the LBGTQ+ community and their families,' PEN American writer AJ Connelly concluded in her report. 'It is not difficult to imagine that other groups might soon be added to the list of those who may not be named,' she added.
