Latest news with #Leave
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Widow's family stuck in India as visa set to expire
Thousands of people have signed a petition calling for a widow and her children not to be deported to India following the death of her husband. Sunil Rastogi died on 18 February in Southmead Hospital, Bristol, hours after suffering a cardiac arrest. His wife Priya Rastogi and their family, who have lived in South Gloucestershire for more than three years, are tied to Sunil's work visa which they depend on to live in the UK, but it expires in August meaning they face deportation. Mrs Rastogi said: "People are supporting me, they're thinking about me. As a single mum, I feel very strongly to fight for my kids and myself." Under Home Office rules, Mrs Rastogi, her seven-year-old daughter and eight-week-old son, are set to lose their right to stay in the UK because of his death. The Home Office has been contacted for comment. More news stories for Bristol Watch the latest Points West Listen to the latest news for Bristol Mrs Rastogi returned to India to be with Sunil's family and take part in religious ceremonies following his death, and is now the subject of a petition asking Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to grant them compassionate Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) in the UK. She said: "It's been very tough actually for me, especially with the two children. "It's not just a loss, it's everything lost - our security, our trust, the future of my child. "My daughter is missing her school, her pals and her home. Life has turned upside down. It's not about the grief, it's about being displaced." "Our life is very much over there [the UK]." An online crowdfunder has so far raised more than £47,750 for the family and petition by a cross-party group of South Gloucestershire councillors has received more than 24,000 signatures. Filton and Bradley Stoke MP Claire Hazelgrove, said she is trying to get clarity on the visa rules so the family "can plan their future", and has raised their case with the Home Office. South Gloucestershire councillor Sanjay Shambhu, said Home Secretary Yvette Cooper "has discretion to gift someone the right to remain" in the UK. He said: "This is a very unfortunate situation with profound impact on this family. A very young family. We're supporting the family. "This family has been a contributor to our economy, society and community." Raman Kumar, a family friend, said: "Sunil's vision was to have a future here. He had his first kid in India but he migrated here, he was a taxpayer working hard to build his family here." North Bristol NHS Trust, which runs Southmead Hospital, said a "comprehensive review" into the circumstances of Mr Rastogi's death is still ongoing, after his family believe he was given minimal medical attention after the cardiac arrest. Follow BBC Bristol on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630. Mother wants to know 'why Daddy was not saved' Home Office
Gulf Today
7 days ago
- Business
- Gulf Today
Calling Cameron ‘man baby' for resigning over Brexit
We hardly need reminding that Brexit is barely living up to the ideal of the buccaneering 'global Britain' we were promised. Right now, it's more like a clown show. Leaving the European Union was the malign gift that keeps on giving. It has caused the social and economic damage we see around us, cramping living standards, public services, and even the defence of the realm for want of the prosperity we once took for granted. It has had a baleful effect on investment and growth, and left Britain a meaner, poorer, grubbier place. Indeed, it may well be said that Brexit broke Britain, and created a new wave of grievances for Nigel Farage to exploit. It's his Ponzi scheme. So won't someone spare a thought for those who got us into this mess? Those like Michael Gove, and his now-former wife Sarah Vine, who has written a memoir of her life as a Westminster Wag. Always a fluent writer, trenchant and not especially likeable, Vine makes it clear in the extracts published thus far that not only did Brexit break Britain, it also broke her and Gove's somewhat one-sided and demi-mercenary 'friendship' with David and Samantha Cameron. It doesn't seem to have done much good to the Goves' own relationship, either (albeit as only one of the many strains inherent in being a political couple). At any rate, Vine still despises Cameron. This is personal. Her illusions about the true nature of their friendship were shattered when she felt the 'abyss of class' between them. Gove was havering about which side to back in the EU referendum, torn between his genuine Euroscepticism (unlike Boris Johnson's) and the loyalty he felt to his party leader. Cameron, pink-faced and charming but always with the whiff of Flashman about him, barked at Vine to 'get her husband under control': 'Sarah, I'm fighting for my political life here.' But it's political contempt, too, that Vine feels, so she also charges David Cameron with cowardice — being a 'man baby' when he lost the Brexit referendum and immediately resigned as prime minister. As she puts it: 'What an impossible, irresponsible child, throwing his toys out of the pram because he hadn't got his own way. It felt a bit like he would sooner bring the country down than let Leave have its victory. Et tu, Pontius Pilate.' Fair? Certainly, it was childish. But in many ways, it feels like it no longer matters. Aside from a brief and, in the end, futile return as foreign secretary under Rishi Sunak, Cameron's political career was over the moment David Dimbleby declared 'We're out' on the television. Same for all of them. Gove is now an elder statesman, a peer and editor of The Spectator, and a one-time Svengali to Kemi Badenoch – but his party is in the toilet. A return to power for any of the people concerned looks about as likely as Elvis Presley being found alive on the moon. The chumocracy was as broken by Brexit as was Britain. Johnson, never that close to Gove, fell out with him shortly after the referendum vote, when Gove stabbed him in the front during the post-Cameron leadership election. Only George Osborne seems to have emerged from it all without serious PTSD. For what it's worth, it seems to me that Cameron did certainly break his promise to the British people — that whatever the result of the referendum, he would carry on as prime minister. But on that grim June morning when everything changed, that felt like a ridiculous idea. It was his referendum. It was his idea. Osborne had cautioned against it, and Gove might have preferred that it hadn't happened, because, in the end, it finished off his chances of ever getting the top job, and of his missus becoming Britain's 'first lady' as opposed to just First Lady of Fleet Street. It would have been impossible for Cameron to carry on and negotiate Brexit. Farage would have claimed he wasn't a 'true believer' (correct, obviously), and Cameron would never have been safe from Johnson's unquenchable ambition. Sean O'Grady, The Independent
United News of India
02-06-2025
- United News of India
Himachal: Police book temple committee in Karsog over alleged animal sacrifice
Karsog, Jun 2 (UNI) The police have registered a case against the committee members of Chanjodi Mahamai Temple in Karsog sub-division of Mandi district in Himachal Pradesh following allegations of animal sacrifice during a religious ceremony. A committee member was questioned on Monday, and investigations are currently underway. Confirming the development, DSP Gauravjit Singh said that an FIR (first information report) has been registered based on a written complaint, and further investigation is being carried out to verify the claims. 'We are examining all available evidence, including videos and eyewitness accounts, to establish the facts. Legal action will be taken if any violation of the 2014 Himachal Pradesh High Court order is confirmed,' he said. The complaint was filed by a local resident, Mehr Singh Kokhlia, who alleged that a goat was sacrificed on the night of May 30 at the temple's sacred pond during the "pran pratishtha" (consecration) ceremony, which followed the renovation of the temple. He claimed that four goats were sacrificed and that he has concrete evidence to support this. Notably, a similar Special Leave Petition (SLP) is pending in the Supreme Court, where pro-animal rights activists have challenged mass animal sacrifices held during the Bhunda festival in the Rohru area of Shimla district. The apex court has sought a status report from the Deputy Commissioner of Shimla in that matter. Back in Karsog, Singh further alleged that animal sacrifices have taken place at three other temples in the area in recent weeks. So far, eight people have been named in the FIR, and the complainant has demanded that action be taken against nine more. However, temple committee president Prithi Singh Negi has denied all allegations, stating that no animal sacrifice occurred and that only coconuts were broken during the rituals. UNI ML SS
Yahoo
01-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump tariffs derailed by law firm that received money from his richest backers
Donald Trump's tariff policy was derailed by a libertarian public interest law firm that has received money from some of his richest backers. The Liberty Justice Center filed a lawsuit against the US president's 'reciprocal' tariffs on behalf of five small businesses, which it said were harmed by the policy. The center, based in Austin, Texas, describes itself as a libertarian non-profit litigation firm 'that seeks to protect economic liberty, private property rights, free speech, and other fundamental rights'. Related: Trump officials to ask supreme court to halt bid by 'activist judges' to block tariffs Previous backers of the firm include billionaires Robert Mercer and Richard Uihlein, who were also financial backers of Trump's presidential campaigns. Mercer, a hedge fund manager, was a key backer of Breitbart News and Cambridge Analytica, pouring millions into both companies. He personally directed Cambridge Analytica to focus on the Leave campaign during the UK's Brexit referendum in 2016 that led to the UK leaving the European Union. For its lawsuit against Trump's tariffs, the Liberty Justice Center gathered five small businesses, including a wine company and a fish gear and apparel retailer, and argued that Trump overreached his executive authority and needed Congress's approval to pass such broad tariffs. The other group who sued the Trump administration over its tariffs was a coalition of 12 Democratic state attorney generals who argued that Trump improperly used a trade law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), when enacting his tariffs. In such a polarized time in US history, it may feel odd to see a decision celebrated by liberal and conservatives. But Trump's tariffs have proven controversial to members of both parties, particularly after Wall Street seemed to be put on edge by the president's trade war. The US stock market dipped down at least 5% after Trump announced the harshest of his tariff policies. Recovery was quick after Trump paused many of his harshest tariffs until the end of the summer. Stocks started to rally on Thursday morning after the panel's ruling. The judges said that the law Trump cited when enacting his tariffs, the IEEPA does not 'delegate an unbounded tariff authority onto the president'. The decision is on a temporary hold after the Trump administration appealed. Related: Why has a US court blocked Donald Trump's tariffs – and can he get round it? While the ruling does not impact specific tariffs on industries such as aluminum and steel, it prevents the White House from carrying out broad retaliatory tariffs and its 10% baseline 'reciprocal' tariff. The White House is appealing the ruling, which means the case could go up to the US supreme court, should the high court decide to take on the case. Members of both groups who sued the Trump administration celebrated the ruling. Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel for the Liberty Justice Center, said in a statement that it 'affirms that the president must act within the bounds of the law, and it protects American businesses and consumers from the destabilizing effects of volatile, unilaterally imposed tariffs'. Oregon's Democratic attorney general, Dan Rayfield, who helped the states' lawsuit, said that it 'reaffirms that our laws matter'. In a statement, Victor Schwartz, the founder of VOS Selections, a wine company that was represented by the Liberty Justice Center in the suit, said that the ruling is a 'win' for his business. 'This is a win for my small business along with small businesses across America – and the world for that matter,' he said. 'We are aware of the appeal already filed and we firmly believe in our lawsuit and will see it all the way through the United States Supreme Court.'
The National
25-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
A different kind of politics is needed to beat Reform in Scotland
In the past few weeks, Reform UK have risen to 21% in Westminster voting intentions in Scotland and 20% in one Scottish Parliament poll in regional list voting intentions. This would make them the main opposition party to the SNP and dramatically alter the composition of Holyrood. And they are challenging for first place in the Welsh Senedd elections. In real votes, the party is making its presence increasingly felt. Just over a week ago, it won 26% – its highest ever Scottish vote – finishing second behind the SNP in the Clydebank Waterfront local by-election. And in just over a week, Reform fancy their chances of polling well in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse which the SNP are defending after the recent untimely death of Christina McKelvie. READ MORE: SNP slam Labour's 'unjust transition' after Ed Miliband energy bills claim This shouldn't come as a surprise. Look at the state of Scottish politics and the track record of the current SNP administration after just under two decades in office. Add to that the unpopularity of UK Labour and the ineptness of Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves, alongside the complete irrelevance of Scottish Labour and Tories. Can the above momentum be a wake-up call to mainstream politics? Or do we need a complete overhaul of how politics is done? And is there anything realistically which can be done politically between now and the 2026 elections? The Reform UK vote in Scotland has a distinctive constituency. There is the 38% Leave vote in the 2016 Brexit referendum who feel unrepresented. There is the absence of a centre-right politics with cut-through in 26 years of the Scottish Parliament. This has seen the failure of successive Tory leaders to critique and offer an alternative to the centrist consensus which defines Holyrood, independence apart. Add to this Scottish Labour's problems with the Starmer government and Anas Sarwar's inability to stand for anything. Scottish Labour's problems run deeper than Starmer and Sarwar and reflect the party north of the Border's failure to adapt both to the age of devolution – despite their role in bringing it about – and the rise of the SNP. Reform UK's vote in Scotland is drawn from 20% of Tories and 15% of Labour's 2024 Westminster vote. With Labour's vote last year being nearly three times the Tory vote (35.3% v. 12.7%), that means there are a lot more Labour switchers to Reform UK; the comparable figures for the LibDems and SNP are 6% and 2% respectively. Reform UK not surprisingly gain more among 2016 Leave voters (39%) compared to 9% among Remain voters; they average 28% among current No supporters and 7% among Yes supporters. Professor John Curtice observes: 'As in the rest of the UK, support for Reform is concentrated among older people, Brexiteers and sometime Conservative voters.' This comes with what he describes as 'two important twists in Scotland'. The first is that 'Labour's vote of last summer appears more vulnerable to Reform than south of the Border – probably because a significant chunk of their support in Scotland came from former Conservative voters.' The second is that 'support for Reform UK is primarily concentrated among Unionists – and in fracturing the pro-Union vote, the party's rise has significantly enhanced John Swinney's chances of remaining First Minister after next year's Holyrood election' albeit with a declining SNP vote and prospect of a pro-independence majority being open to question. Scottish politics likes to emphasise how better it is compared to Westminster. It is a low barrier to jump. Beyond this, a suffocating, complacent consensus defines Holyrood. It is failing Scotland on the fundamentals – health, education, poverty, local government, drug deaths, ferries, Grangemouth and more. Even more existentially, there is a powerlessness and lack of voice in too many communities the length and breadth of Scotland which the Parliament has not addressed. There is an obvious terrain for a politics of insurgency and disruption. The problem for Reform UK is that it comes with baggage. One is Nigel Farage – who has not translated well north of the Border. 'In the days of Ukip, Farage used to treat Scotland like the Romans did – being frightened of going north of Hadrian's Wall,' says Michael Crick, author of the biography of Farage, One Party After Another: The Disruptive Life Of Nigel Farage. 'Farage,' he notes, 'has almost felt fearful of Scotland, regarding it as hostile territory. Big in his memory is the Edinburgh altercation in 2013 with independence supporters. Farage has felt until now that Scotland is not worth the trouble. Wales is much more productive and ripe for challenge.' Reform UK have little Scottish ground operation, zero policy agenda and no Scottish leader. But there is a constituency for their politics. Their voters feel the UK is not a country they recognise from when they were younger. They read disproportionately the Daily Mail and Telegraph, watch GB News and have a pessimistic view of Britain, thinking that its best days are behind it. 'We are fed up being told what we can and can't say in our own country,' comments one Reform UK supporter north of the Border; another opines: 'Someone has to stand up to the SNP and say that we are proud to be British. Labour and Tories haven't done that.' Crick takes the view that 'Farage's parties have evolved' through the serial platforms he has run – Ukip, Brexit Party and now Reform – the latter of which began as a private company owned by Farage and Richard Tice before morphing into a more conventional party. Ukip used to comprise, according to Crick, 'retired colonels in the golf club in the Home Counties and retired people on the South Coast. They have gradually established bridgeheads along the South Coast and worked northwards.' READ MORE: Counter-protesters gather against far-right group in Glasgow city centre We know what the outline of a Reform UK politics would look like in Scotland. It would challenge many of Holyrood's assumptions. It would question the mantras of professional, middle-class Scotland and those that think they know best what is in the public good. They would claim to stand for freedom of speech and assert that the Scottish Government is an embodiment of 'the nanny state' and 'the woke'. Yet, as we can see from Reform UK councillors elected in England, it would introduce a wave of anti-immigrant rhetoric and posturing alongside racist, xenophobic attitudes targeting black and ethnic minorities. They would take an anti-equality stance, trying to row back diversity and inclusion initiatives, and question any net zero policies while embracing climate change denialism. There would be a lot of performative posturing and anti-virtue signalling. All of this would be done in an abrasive, arrogant, cocksure Trumpian manner made for maximum attention and offence; the style of which was seen last week in Reform UK's grotesque and racist allegation that Anas Sarwar commented that 'he will prioritise the Pakistani community', which he never said. Crick thinks that Farage needs to reappraise his approach to Scotland and come up with a new offer if he wants to achieve a Scottish breakthrough. He states that 'Farage should come up to small-town Scotland. He would get a good reception. He is a formidable operator. He would get a lot of opposition. He would win many people over while creating a buzz.' He offers this summation of Farage: 'A lot of politicians hate talking to voters. Farage thrives on speaking to people and has enormous energy and charisma. And from small-town Scotland, he should move onto more hostile territory such as Glasgow and Dundee.' A recent YouGov poll last week predicted that Reform UK would win three Westminster seats – Dumfries and Galloway; Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, and Aberdeenshire North and Moray East. These are all currently Tory rural seats that feel as far removed from Holyrood centralisation as they do Westminster. It might well be too tall an order for Reform UK to break through at Westminster first-past-the-post seats in Scotland. But they are aided here as well as elsewhere by the long-term decline of the Tory Party. In Scotland, the Tory vote is falling off the cliff. In 2024, they won 12.7% - the lowest vote in the party's history and the YouGov poll cited had them on 8%. There is, it appears, no floor in the Tory vote – and that leaves the room clear for Reform UK. Add to this former Labour voters who have shifted to Reform UK and this amounts to a sizeable part of the electorate. It also poses challenges. It necessitates that Reform UK talk right on immigration, Europe and culture wars, and are against red tape, bureaucracy and 'the woke'. At the same time, they need to pivot left on public spending, an interventionist state on key utilities and an industrial strategy – witness Farage's opportunist remarks on Scunthorpe steel and renationalisation. They are 'coming after what was Labour's traditional working-class base' in England, Wales and Scotland, says Crick, and the knee-jerk response of what he calls 'illiberal liberals – just tut-tutting at Farage' will no longer do. One way not to respond to Faragism is to dismiss it as 'far right' or 'fascist'. There are clearly far-right elements in the party, but Farage himself is a skilled political operator who has maintained for more than two decades a cordon sanitaire against the extreme right. This is what drove former Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe from the party with Lowe wanting to make common cause with Tommy Robinson. Reform UK voters are not uniformly 'far right' but disillusioned, cynical and angry at the pale offer from mainstream parties. They are driven in Scotland by the same sense of not feeling listened to and respected and the same dismay at what they see as an insular, out-of-touch political class. All the parties in Holyrood are seen as part of the failed establishment. Another way not to respond to Reform UK was John Swinney's recent anti-far-right summit. This looked and felt like a gathering of the Scottish political establishment and what used to be called 'civic Scotland'. It was an open clarion call and invitation for people to vote Reform UK – for the outsiders against the inside political class. Scottish politics has been locked into the same path at least since 2014 and the indyref; an SNP with a sizeable enough constituency to remain in office as the largest party for the foreseeable future but exhausted, run out of ideas and with little positive to offer for the future for government or independence for now. The pro-Union mainstream parties have struggled. Labour and Tories have failed in their opposition years to develop a convincing critique of SNP Scotland. Independence has work to do but it is also true in the past decade that the case for the Union has not been reset or remade. The LibDems struggle for air and the Scottish Greens will maintain a significant foothold but have irritated many with puritanism and self-righteousness. Many now struggle to find a home. Someone visiting Dumfries and Galloway in the past week said: 'I have always voted. But I can't vote for any of them. Labour and SNP have so disappointed. The Greens are just annoying. For the first time in my life, I might spoil my ballot paper.' She was an enthusiastic Yes voter in 2014 and still supports independence. Such sentiment in others provides a rich stream for Reform UK. Reform UK will arrive as a major presence in next year's Scottish elections and win their first Holyrood representation. That will be a wake-up call and a challenge to the 'business as usual' centrism that defines the Parliament. READ MORE: Israel using Palestinians as human shields, former hostages and Israeli soldiers say Scotland will need to meet this challenge head on. It has to recognise that centrist cautious managerialism is not enough here or anywhere. It is not enough to defeat Faragism in England. Or Trumpism in the US. Or Faragism in Scotland. And, in fact, is part of the problem. A different kind of politics is required to defeat Reform UK and what they represent. That will involve grassroots campaigning, grounded politics and a political vision which speaks to and involves people. That will require a rupture with the present politics of Holyrood and of the SNP, Labour, Tories and others. UK society increasingly feels fractured and fragile, and Scotland is no exception. It should not be a surprise that politics increasingly mirrors this. A political earthquake of dissatisfaction and anger is shaking the West. And Scotland is not immune from this. Reform UK are on the march and the mainstream and unimaginative way that politics is done here, as well as at Westminster, is aiding its appeal.
