sábado, 27 de abril de 2024

‘Dismissing global warming? That was a joke’: Jeremy Clarkson on fury, farming and why he’s a changed man

 


‘Dismissing global warming? That was a joke’: Jeremy Clarkson on fury, farming and why he’s a changed man

 

The former Top Gear presenter claims his controversialist persona was just a caricature, and he’s really a reformed character living the good life. But do old habits die hard?

 

by Charlotte Edwardes

Sat 27 Apr 2024 07.00 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/apr/27/jeremy-clarkson-interview-global-warming-fury-farming

 

“Are you happy?” I ask Jeremy Clarkson. A few times on Clarkson’s Farm, you said were happy. His thick eyebrows seem low, like storm clouds gathering. “I said that in season one, episode one,” he replies. “And I meant it then. Lockdown was a blessed relief. You thought: no one’s inviting me out, I don’t have to go anywhere. Lisa would say, ‘Let’s go on holiday again next weekend.’ And I could say, ‘No! We can’t!’ It was brilliant. We were stuck here. So I was very happy at work then.” Didn’t he say he was happy at another point, while building his pigpen or sowing on his tractor? He looks at me, eyebrows locking, lips pursed in thought. He has perfect recall of the entire Clarkson’s Farm archive. He was pleased when he did those things, but it wasn’t a blanket expression of happiness. Pleased? “Well, what did I do for 25 years? I drove around corners shouting and achieved nothing. Nothing! And then you plant a field of mustard, which I did last year, and some of it grew. Not as much as I’d been hoping, but some. So you have a sense of achievement.”

 

Could we allow for the possibility that he might be contented, then? Clarkson concedes that springtime is nice. “This is going to sound awfully pretentious, but I’ve never noticed the buds coming on the trees before. I spent a good 20 minutes yesterday staring at buds, going, is that too early? Or is that later than normal?”

 

Reasons Jeremy Clarkson might have to be happy: his Amazon Prime show Clarkson’s Farm is the most watched on the streamer in the UK and series four has already been commissioned. He hosts Who Wants to Be a Millionaire and writes two newspaper columns, has his own brewery and is looking to buy a pub. He has a beautiful Georgian-style Palladian house, built in honey-coloured stone atop a gently sloping hill. His bedroom has a balcony with stone balustrades and miles of galloping rural views. He has a beautiful not-wife, but wife-adjacent partner in the form of towering Irish blond Lisa Hogan, Aunt Sally to his Worzel Gummidge. He has two fox-red Labrador bitches, Arya and Sansa, whom he is not supposed to feed crisps from the table, but does. He has pigs of all shapes and sizes including new little piglets. “I love my pigs, truly love my pigs.”

 

So he can sit at his kitchen island, laptop on the polished stone, surrounded by 10-foot windows, and think of ideas for shows, columns, what to have for supper. He can walk over to the fridge and eat the mustard he grew, feeling that sense of achievement you get when you plant something with a tractor, “which is quite complicated”, as opposed to in a vegetable garden. He can have Sunday lunch with beef or lamb from the farm, gravy made with flour from the farm, vegetables from the farm, potatoes and even beer from the farm. This is all, in his words, “properly satisfying”.

 

This is just me being me, for once. I don’t have to think, ‘Right, I’m going to say something stupidly provocative now’

 

It’s a very different Clarkson to the one I interviewed eight years ago. Back then, on a spring morning like this one, he’d been sitting at the bottom of a swimming pool in Barbados with a head-crushing hangover and an oxygen tank, wondering what to do with his life. “My luck stopped suddenly,” he said then. He was grieving his mother, angry at the explosive end to his career at the BBC (he was sacked for punching a producer in 2015), defensive that he’d been forced to go “somewhere like prison” (a clinic) for “stress” (treatment) and had given up drinking for four months. Over two days, I watched him move seamlessly from beer at 11am to wine to banana daiquiris to wine again, while making his way through 60 cigarettes, boxes stacked beside him.

 

But when I suggest the Clarkson before me today is a changed man, happier, maybe one age has mellowed – he’s 64 – or maybe one who has less to be angry about, now that every TV concept he’s had since has been not just gold, but pure 24-carat liquid gold on tap, he bridles. “No, no, no. I’ve got slightly more air in my lungs. But changed, no. People’s perception of me may have changed, but I haven’t.” The Clarkson I met before, the one everyone watched on Top Gear, followed by The Grand Tour, the one who wrote outrageous things (which we will get to), that Clarkson was a caricature, “a comic creation”, he insists. “Everyone assumes the character they see on motoring shows is me, but it’s exaggerated. To think that I was like I was on Top Gear is the same as thinking that Anthony Hopkins is a cannibal.”

 

He feels no pressure to be controversial any more. He can say a line like, “I noticed the buds today” and it can mean that and not have a perverse double meaning. “That’s just me being me, for once. I don’t have to think, ‘Right, I’m going to say something stupidly provocative now.’ That’s relaxing.” Pause. “Also, you,” he means him, “don’t wake up every morning to find you’re in the middle of a tabloid maelstrom for something you’ve said or done.” I study his face for a flicker. It remains impassive, a bear emerged from a 500-year hibernation.

 

Can we talk about what he wrote in the Sun in December 2022 about the Duchess of Sussex? “You can try. You won’t get anywhere.” Clarkson said his hatred of Meghan operated on a “cellular level”, that he disliked her more than the serial killer Rose West and fantasised of a day “when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant ‘Shame!’ and throw lumps of excrement at her”. It was written in the controversial era, he says, the era he has just told me is firmly behind him, “So, actually, I’ve already addressed that.” Right, it wasn’t the real you.

 

Is it true the Sun’s editor tried to stop him, but he went over her head? “I won’t say anything. Put me in a half-nelson and I won’t say anything.” Is it right he emailed Harry to apologise, and Harry didn’t email back? “Honestly, I’m not talking about that. There’s enough to be talking about with farming. You can say you tried.”

 

Later, I see a wicked twitch in the mouth of nouveau era Clarkson, when the idea of baiting me becomes irresistible. “I don’t have to be contrary, but I might say something Guardian readers might say, ‘That’s contrary.’ Badgers are a case in point. Badgers are much loved in certain circles. Not here.” Wildlife group activists – “hunt saboteurs” – report him for illegally filling in badger setts which means there’s a policeman in a stab vest in his kitchen on a near weekly basis. “But we haven’t filled in a badger’s sett. There’s no point, because we’ve shot them. So is it contrary to say we’ve shot our badgers? It’s a true fact. So, yeah, it’s difficult to know where contrary starts and ends, really.”

 

When I arrive from London, Clarkson is waiting for me, arm resting on the open window, in the car park of the local train station. It’s a glorious spring morning, sky wide open across the vast Cotswolds landscape. We speed past hedgerows of hawthorn blossom in his old Land Rover, moss-green and muddy in the footwell. He’s smoked so much in this car over the years that even the steering wheel has emphysema. He slows so that I can hear a noise like an expiratory wheeze when he turns it. Does he miss smoking? “No.” He chews nicotine gum constantly. About him are balls of it, carefully removed from his mouth and placed on the closest convenient surface once the active ingredient has been thoroughly drained into his bloodstream, before he pops another from the blister pack.

 

On the gravel outside his house there is topiary of a dog cocking his leg, a white Aston Martin (“a bargain”) and a brand new Land Rover (“Lisa’s”). There’s also a red vintage Massey Ferguson, waxed to a sheen. “Vintage tractors: mark of a hobby farmer,” he says when I stop to admire it (later he’ll say the same of chickens; “hobby farmers” are evidently low in farming hierarchy). The Massey had to have a new engine after his neighbour David Cameron, the David Cameron, Lord, and current foreign secretary, blew it up. “He’s got his own tractor now,” Clarkson says.

 

The Camerons live on the left side of the valley. Across there is Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News UK, queen of the “country supper”. He dots the landscape with his finger naming people. Film people, business people, aristos. Not far are Lord and Lady Bamford, the Conservative party donors who lent Boris Johnson a house when he was ejected. No wonder Chipping Norton has a reputation for being an incestuous nest of media and politics. As I’m saying this, Clarkson spies a lorry coming up the road to his house. “Not another fucking delivery,” he mutters, darkly. “Lisa’s.”

 

In the kitchen he insists I try their water because it tastes delicious. He recently had a glass of tap water in London and mouth-sprayed it across the room in disgust; London is a place he rarely visits. Now, his life has contracted to this small corner of the Cotswolds. He’s been here on and off nearly 30 years (previously with his second wife, Frances Cain, mother of his three grown-up children). Judging by the bored “Mornings” from locals, they’ve just about come to terms with him. Diddly Squat is the 1,000 acre working farm he bought in 2008. It comprises a farm shop run by Lisa, a burger van, 29 goats, 60-70 pigs, seven cows (soon to be 30-40), 40 chickens, 100 sheep and a cat. “Lisa’s cat, not my cat.” He had a restaurant in the lamb barn but the council closed it.

 

Clarkson’s Farm is gentler than The Grand Tour. There’s hugging and crying – I can’t say why because I’ve signed an NDA. There’s a lovers’ tiff between Clarkson and Kaleb Cooper, his young blond-mopped farmer foil. A concession to car fans was buying an enormous Lamborghini R8 270 DCR tractor in series one. Don’t worry, lads, he hasn’t forgotten you in the new series! When the vet asks if they have lube to help the pigs give birth, Clarkson suggests Lisa does. Teehee. There are further run-ins with the council over planning permissions for the shop and van. I fear this storyline may set off frothing over red tape.

 

Clarkson has filed 11 applications since he bought the farm (the latest at Christmas for a large grain store) which lies in an area of outstanding natural beauty – “Because farmers have made it outstanding,” he points out. “Nothing natural out there.” He says the government tells farmers to diversify, to use buildings and broaden businesses. “But if you try, your local authority will say, no, you can’t. We put in for planning permission to turn the lambing barn into a restaurant and all hell broke loose.” In this series, the future of the burger van hangs in the balance. The council have denied a “vendetta” against Clarkson, driven by a few newcomers, but the highs and lows are woven through the show.

 

At one point in 2022, “when it was getting really sticky”, Clarkson remembered he knew Michael Gove – who is in charge of planning – and rang him up. “Put it this way, he was the person in government who I actually had a phone number for. I thought, ‘Who do I know? Boris has gone. Cameron’s gone. Gove!’” Clarkson says it was “flattering” that Gove agreed to a meeting and he was expecting a quick coffee in Whitehall, but, “bugger me, he’d got half the government in there. Kemi Badenoch and countless others. It seems to have done the trick, though. Exactly what I said to him now seems to be becoming reality. In the papers this morning, a Defra minister said, ‘I’ve just had enough of these local councils’ and he’s going to make it easier for farmers to convert buildings into gyms and things, so that’s good.”

 

In the first series, the farm turned a profit of £144. He blames uncontrollable outside forces, such as extreme weather: “Somebody’s going to say, ‘You drive cars!’ but you know what I mean.” This year earnings were better, but still not a living wage. Yes, he knows he is not going to starve, but most farmers don’t have TV shows and they are “fucked. And it’s terrifying because they’re going to have to sell. The farms are going to be snapped up by hedge funders or farming conglomerates, who will see hedgerows and woods as annoyances and will bulldoze and turn England into Canada. We will lose the countryside unless we protect farmers.”

 

I don’t have long. I’ve probably only got, what, 70,000 hours left, maybe?

 

He highlights the suicide rate in farming, “worse than any other industry”. Low wages combined with the loneliness of 12-14 hours a day in a tractor is lethal, he says. “They’re thinking, ‘I can’t afford the diesel, I can’t afford the seed, and there’s a risk the weather will be all wrong and it’ll be pointless and wasted.’”

 

Proximity to nature has made him far more aware of the climate. He measures rainfall like a meteorologist, so if you say it was a wet weekend, he’ll be able to tell you it was 25mm. He can also tell you that we’ve already had this year’s allocation of rain because it’s always 38in, “give or take”, and this is “a fucking nightmare” because you need varied weather for farming. Where does that put his shrugging disregard for global warming on his motoring shows? “That was part of the caricature,” he says. “It was a joke.” He mocks his own controversial era voice, saying, “Oh, come on.” Then says, “Now you think, ‘Jesus Christ, my neighbours over there, they’ve had to replant everything because it’s all drowned.’ I can’t believe it’s not dominating the news agenda,” he adds sardonically. “Oh no, wait, it is.”

 

It is, except Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer have both scrapped their green commitments, I say. “Because they don’t really work and they won’t achieve anything,” he counters. Would he take a role as a climate tsar? “No, no, no.” Why? “I won’t drive a Tesla. I’ve got probably 10 cars, all with V8 engines. I don’t think electric cars solve anything. Science is going to be needed here, not politics. Science will solve it eventually. Always does.”

 

In time? He pouts. “Don’t know. It’s happening really fast. That’s what always surprises me. In the last five years, I’ve noticed a dramatic change here – ”He breaks off and smirks. “I’m like a Guardian reader’s wet dream, aren’t I?” Then continues, “It hasn’t snowed for five years. We probably get a minute of sleet. We used to get snowed in every year.” Does he still hate Greta Thunberg? “Well, I’m not going to be lectured by someone who’s never been to school.” Doesn’t he tell A-level students on X every year that school doesn’t matter? “It doesn’t, but you need to learn something. You could say, The School of Life, but she hasn’t been to that either.”

 

The only way to get a look behind the scenes of the Saturday magazine. Sign up to get the inside story from our top writers as well as all the must-read articles and columns, delivered to your inbox every weekend.

 

‘I come from a generation where we stiffen the upper lip and get on with it.’

 

He nips off to speak to someone and Lisa pops her head round the door, hesitant. She’s blonde, freckly, very smiley, very tall. She whispers that she has a present for me: two bottles of scent she’s launching at the farm shop called Wet and Drive. Yes, seriously. She perches, cautious, on the sofa and we talk about kids. When her three and Clarkson’s three get together on holiday, they slag them both off, but in her eyes that’s the mark of a successful blended family.

 

“What are you two talking about?” Clarkson seems cross, coming back in, and it occurs to me that he thinks she’s stealing his interview. Lisa singsongs, “Nothing” and slips away. We are sitting in his second or third sitting room – he has another with a stocked circular bar, like a cruise ship. This one has a wall of Dinky Toys from his childhood, a ball of chewed Nicorette and a dental floss stick on the ottoman, and the biggest TV I’ve ever seen. “There’s an even bigger TV next door,” he says, “because I’m blind and deaf.” Recently he had hearing aids fitted, which he’s enjoying, if mostly for their comic potential. “I’ve tuned them to dial out the Irish accent, which makes my life much more comfortable.” Ho ho. Clearly the accent tickles him because Lisa is subtitled in one scene.

 

He’s tried Ozempic, “Didn’t lose any weight on it. I saw Flavio Briatore the other day. Now, I’m not for a moment suggesting he has been on Ozempic, but holy cow, he looked like Willem Dafoe: unbelievably thin. I’m just getting fatter. I’m surrounded by all this great food. Yesterday morning we had boar bacon. Good God, you can’t not eat it. Then there’s the venison: delicious. Lisa is growing potatoes like crazy.” Surely, he walks it all off outdoors? He pulls a face, puts his hand on his tummy. “I was going for a walk yesterday and had to stop, I was so exhausted. But my lungs are probably cleaner.”

 

What about drinking? “Well, I don’t drink when I’m operating heavy machinery, that’s for sure. While it’s legal to sit in a tractor with a refreshing glass of beer or wine, you wouldn’t be operating any of the stuff on the back if you want both your arms on at the end of the day.”

 

We’re back in the Land Rover on our way to the pub for lunch and halfway down his private road we meet a grey BMW. A man who doesn’t look as if he’s from Amazon leaps out with a package. “My book,” he says, passing it through the window. It’s a self-published work and comes with a note: “From one car enthusiast to another.” Well, he can’t read, Clarkson observes: “The sign on the gate says absolutely no public.”

 

This is a benign ambush compared with the time there was a man sitting in his kitchen. Clarkson assumed he was with the crew and carried on working on his laptop. “He was looking at me writing the voiceover for Clarkson’s Farm and said, ‘Oh, is this the new series?’ I said, ‘Yeah.’ I was chatting away, then suddenly went, ‘Who are you?’ And he went, ‘I was just passing.’ I said, ‘No, I’m sorry, you cannot just walk into somebody’s house and pull up a chair.’ He looked a bit baffled. They all do. The other day there was a knock on the door. Four sweet little kids. Their mothers at the gate, going, ‘Go on, kids.’ Like, ‘Walk in.’ I was like, no! You have to be nice to the children, obviously, it’s not their fault. But I did take their mothers to one side and say, ‘You can’t do that.’” Arguably the worst encounter was Lisa coming out of the shower in a towelling robe and bumping into a couple having a nosy around. Their attitude, Clarkson says, was, “He’s on television, he won’t mind.”

 

After the pub, where he has two swift rosés, I ask, because his friends have told me how happy he is with Lisa, if he’d marry again. He says no. He’s been married twice – his first wife, Alex Hall, left him after six months for one of his best friends. Earlier I’d asked if he’d been hurt by anything in his life. “Oh God, countless things. But you’ve got two choices: wallow or stiffen your upper lip and get on with it. I come from a generation where,” he’d inhaled deeply, “we stiffen the upper lip and get on with it.” An element of his “park that and move on” approach is an increasing preoccupation with his own mortality. “I don’t have long,” he says. “I’ve probably only got what, 70,000 hours left, maybe?”

 

After an afternoon tramping round the farm, we kick off our wellies and go in for tea. Clarkson is less fidgety than earlier, but seems a touch riled. His back was hurting by the chickens and goats, and when we went to see the pigs, he looked in real pain. He says he’s fine. He’ll take painkillers. I raise something we discussed years ago: how he was bullied as a boarder at Repton School, routinely beaten over his head and back with a suitcase. Perhaps he’s annoyed he ever mentioned it, or now sees it as the tear-stained soft toy subject of pampered millennials. Either way, he’s dismissive. “I don’t want to belittle bullying which can be dreadful. But it didn’t do me any harm. Actually, I’m glad I was bullied.” Why? “Because I was a bit of a prick. And I wasn’t a prick after I’d been hit over the head with a suitcase. The priggishness was knocked out.” That sounds like you’re saying you asked for it. “I don’t really want to get into bullying because it’s such a bloody awful subject.”

 

We sit at the table and look at the astonishing blue glow of the late afternoon sky. Lisa opens some Diddly Squat crisps for me to try, pours some rosé and asks advice on the copy she’s written for the label on the Diddly Squat honey tequila. She has a 50/50 deal with Clarkson on profits from the Diddly Squat merch, in addition to her TV appearance fees. She makes the point that she needs to think of her retirement because if he were to drop dead, his kids would turf her out. This echoes what he told me – that they have no interest in the farm. “I keep telling them, listen, when I’m dead, I don’t want you to sell it. They look at me like, ‘Are you joking?’”

 

We discuss retirement. The idea makes him shudder, and a retirement “hobby” makes him want to walk into his gun vault and “shoot myself in the head”. (He feels the same about film premieres.) He tried to write “a crash, bang, wallop” thriller a couple of years ago, but couldn’t get past chapter one because he hated describing rooms. But it’s OK, he has two or three other ideas for his final 70,000 hours. He wants to open a pub. “We found one the other day which isn’t called The Shaven Mound, but is in my mind. Astonishingly beautiful, 750 years old, but parking would be impossible.”

 

Of all my questions, his favourite is whether he’s a secret lefty. He chuckles, repeating, “Am I secret lefty?” to himself all day long. In 2020, he said he’d consider voting for Keir Starmer. Today he says he has “genuinely” no idea who he’ll vote for. He despairs of the broken NHS – which was invented at a time when “we only had broken arms and aspirins, not heart transplants. But what do you do about it? I literally haven’t got a clue. Roads? Dunno. Airports? I know exactly what I’d do there: my own airline, “I’ll-Take-My-Chances Air. Drive up to the plane. No security, no passports. Get on. And it takes off. If it blows up, it blows up. If it crashes, it crashes. Just have planes lined up – like buses – with where they’re going in the window. That’s the only political thing I could do, mend air travel.” (Afterwards Amazon’s PR rings to check he didn’t make any political statements and I decide this probably doesn’t count.)

 

Listening to my tape back, I hear the glug of wine regularly poured. Lisa tells me they usually get through at least two bottles a night. They recently went to a health retreat in Portugal, she says. “It wasn’t hard not to drink those few days.” But Clarkson was miserable, the juice diet made him ill, and he ended up in hospital with an abscess on his back. She starts to describe lancing it herself, saying it was like the film Alien, and the cyst got baby cysts, “and he got greyer and greyer and almost died”. He grumbles in dissent. “No,” she insists, “you had to have a 40-minute operation.”

 

In general, she doesn’t want to analyse him (or for me to), because if you solve the mystery of why he’s like he is, she argues, you neutralise his genius, which comes from his anguish, she believes. She told another journalist that Clarkson likes watching war films of an evening. “I am pretty much word for word on Where Eagles Dare, so she may have a point,” he says. He’s never watched Bake Off, but “Countryfile used to be jolly good, didn’t it? And then it all just became hijacked.” Who hijacked it? He gives me a look and I sense the presence of controversial era Clarkson. “Well, with the greatest of respect, the Guardian community at the BBC looked at it and thought, ‘No, we can’t have all these country people.’ So nowadays it’s just a smörgåsbord of everything that’s necessary for a modern-day television programme to be commissioned.

 

“I saw one item recently where a woman went with another woman into a wood and was invited to lay down under a tree and it looked awfully soggy, but she lay down and was invited to hum. I couldn’t see what that had to do with Countryfile. I also noticed that Adam Henson [the presenter], who I like very much, said ‘a cow’s gestation period was the same as it is for people’. I thought, ‘You didn’t say people in the first take, did you? You said women. And somebody said, ‘Could you do it again and say people?’ I’d have told them to fuck off.” He looks at me, turns his palm up to continue the point. “This is Sunday night on BBC. Average age of the audience? 60? Social demographic? ABC1. They don’t want to be told men have babies. Because they’ll go, ‘No they don’t, what are you on about? It’s Countryfile. Stop confusing me. I’m very old and set in my ways.’” He seems relieved to have got this off his chest.

 

I ask how often his children roll their eyes at him for being contrary. He protests that “it’s difficult to know what contrary is. The other day I said something, and they said, ‘You can’t say that!’ I said, ‘Well, you could three weeks ago.’ What was it the other day that I got told I couldn’t say?” Fortunately, he can’t remember. “It’s complicated being not contrary,” he insists, undermining what he told me at the start of the day. “It’s complicated saying anything.”

 

 Clarkson’s Farm series 3 launches globally on Prime Video on 3 May.

King Charles set to return to public duties after positive response to cancer treatment

King Charles to return to public duties after positive response to cance...

King Charles to return to public duties while continuing cancer treatment

 


King Charles to return to public duties while continuing cancer treatment

 

Monarch to resume public-facing engagements after palace says doctors ‘very encouraged’ by his progress

 

Caroline Davies

Fri 26 Apr 2024 18.00 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/26/king-charles-to-return-to-public-duties-while-continuing-cancer-treatment

 

King Charles, who is being treated for cancer, is to return to public duties, with doctors pleased and “very encouraged” by his progress and “positive” about his continued recovery, Buckingham Palace has said.

 

Charles, who announced in early February he had been diagnosed with an unspecified form of cancer, will continue treatment while resuming some public-facing engagements, though he will not undertake a full summer programme.

 

His first engagement will be to visit a cancer treatment centre on Tuesday accompanied by Queen Camilla, though it is not a centre directly involved in his medical care. There he will meet medical specialists and patients as patron of Cancer Research UK and Macmillan Cancer Support.

 

He will also host a state visit by the emperor and empress of Japan in June.

 

A palace spokesperson said Charles was “greatly encouraged to be resuming some public-facing duties and very grateful to his medical team for their continued care and expertise”.

 

In a statement, Buckingham Palace said: “His Majesty the King will shortly return to public-facing duties after a period of treatment and recuperation following his recent cancer diagnosis.

 

“To help mark this milestone, the king and queen will make a joint visit to a cancer treatment centre next Tuesday, where they will meet medical specialists and patients. This visit will be the first in a number of external engagements His Majesty will undertake in the weeks ahead.

 

“As the first anniversary of the coronation approaches, Their Majesties remain deeply grateful for the many kindnesses and good wishes they have received from around the world throughout the joys and challenges of the past year.”

 

The spokesperson said the king’s treatment programme would continue, “but doctors are sufficiently pleased with the progress so far that the king is now able to resume a number of public-facing duties”.

 

Engagements will be adapted to minimise any risks to his continued recovery. The spokesperson added it was too early to say how much longer Charles’s treatment would continue, but his medical team “are very encouraged by the progress made so far and remain positive about the king’s continued recovery”.

 

“Any public-facing engagements will be announced nearer the time in the usual way, and will remain subject to doctors’ advice, but it will not be a full summer programme. His Majesty will of course continue with all official state business and selected audiences, as he has done throughout his period of treatment.”

 

Though Charles will now be able to meet people indoor and outdoors, each engagement will be carefully reviewed and managed to reduce any risk to his continued recovery.

 

His engagements will also be paced to prevent him overdoing it while continuing treatment. The “pacing” will be “carefully calibrated as his recovery continues, in close consultation with his medical team”, the spokesperson said.

 

The king’s summer programme would, under normal circumstances, include the Birthday Parade, D-Day commemorations, the annual Buckingham Palace garden parties, Royal Ascot and an autumn tour overseas.

 

“Planning continues for ways in which Their Majesties may attend such summer and autumn engagements, though nothing can be confirmed or guaranteed at this stage,” the spokesperson said,

 

Charles’s cancer was diagnosed after treatment for a benign enlarged prostate, though it is not prostate cancer. Buckingham Palace has said it has no plans to share further details of his specific condition or treatment plan at this stage.

 

The Princess of Wales revealed on 22 March that she had also been diagnosed with an unspecified cancer, and is undergoing preventive chemotherapy.

 

The king has been dividing his time between his Sandringham estate in Norfolk and London, where he is receiving qutreatment.

 

A new picture of the king and queen has been released to mark the anniversary of their coronation on 6 May. It was taken in the Buckingham Palace garden on 10 April, the day after the couple’s 19th wedding anniversary.

Press Preview: Saturday's front pages

sexta-feira, 26 de abril de 2024

US Supreme Court hears President Trump immunity case | BBC News

George Conway thinks this is ‘worst case scenario’ if Jan 6 trial is delayed

Watch The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell Highlights: April 25

'Scary and mortifying' for Trump if Hope Hicks takes the witness stand

‘Visible difference’: Sketch artist details moment Trump’s behavior chan...

Von der Leyen finally stands up for nature law — just as it may fall

 


Von der Leyen finally stands up for nature law — just as it may fall

 

After months of silence, the Commission chief made a plea for her embattled bill in a letter obtained by POLITICO — just before Slovakia pulled its support.

 

APRIL 25, 2024 7:03 PM CET

BY LOUISE GUILLOT AND KARL MATHIESEN

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-ursula-von-der-leyen-finally-support-nature-restoration-law-green-deal-as-it-may-fall/

 

BRUSSELS/BRATISLAVA — It took her a year, but European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is finally defending her own law to protect nature — just as the coalition behind it is fracturing.

 

In a letter sent to European Parliament members and obtained by POLITICO, the top EU executive expresses fulsome support for her Nature Restoration Law, calling it “the flagship proposal” of the Green Deal’s “biodiversity pillar” and “key to delivering on the EU’s global biodiversity commitments.”

 

Von der Leyen has come under huge pressure from her own European People’s Party over the law. Parliamentarians from the conservative group have repeatedly tried to torpedo the bill, driving a wedge between the Commission president and the party she is now leading into the EU elections.

 

Through it all, von der Leyen has remained largely silent, refusing to engage as her own political allies pilloried the measure as bureaucratic overreach. That makes her new letter, dated April 16, all the more notable. It comes nearly a full year after MEPs pleaded with the EU boss in a memo to defend the measure.

 

Despite von der Leyen's absence, EU countries and the Parliament reached a handshake deal last November on the legislation, which would force the EU to rehab 20 percent of its land and seas by 2030. Parliament later gave its formal assent, but EU countries have since balked. Von der Leyen claimed in her letter that the European Commission, the EU executive she oversees, is nonetheless working with other EU institutions “to achieve formal adoption of the Regulation in the coming months.”

 

That's looking increasingly unlikely, as more countries are starting to express a desire to revise the law before adopting it.

 

On Thursday, Slovakia, which had previously appeared to be in von der Leyen’s “yes” column on the bill, switched sides. In an interview with POLITICO, Slovakian Environment Minister Tomáš Taraba said he could not support the law for fear it would create more liability for governments.

 

“If we are opening a Pandora's case for suing the states and the rest of the world will not be sued by their inhabitants, by their NGOs and the others, then we have to prepare that perhaps really the industry and everything will be destroyed in this Continent,” said Taraba, who represents the far-right Slovak National Party.

 

“And if this would not be cleared,” he added, “then I'm ready or I'm much more eager to vote against it.”

 

Taraba's concerns echo a point Dutch politicians raised during negotiations: The new rules could clash with infrastructure and housing developments. But officials tweaked the legislation to quell the Dutch anxiety.

 

Taraba also backed Hungary’s argument that the law gives Brussels too much power to dictate how EU countries use their land. 

 

“According to Hungary — and I'm fully in accordance with the attitude — we should not incorporate the idea that environment can be protected only when Brussels decides about it,” he said. “It should reflect the mood and the involvement of the local people.”

 

The rising opposition caused the Council of the EU, representing EU capitals, to hold off on a final vote on the bill, realizing it no longer had enough support. Countries including Belgium and Finland are even going public now with calls to revise the bill after the EU election, which is expected to swing the European Parliament to the right.

 

The bill’s defenders aren't giving up. They argue that altering the text now — after Parliament and EU countries already reached a deal in principle — would shatter valuable EU norms.

 

"We have created a precedent that is a little bit dangerous," said Ionuț-Sorin Banciu, Romania's secretary of state for environment and forests, whose country is backing the bill. He warned against playing "political games" with policies ahead of elections.

 

Ironically, even though Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo wants the law changed, his government is still scrambling to win over enough support as it holds the Council’s rotating presidency.

 

Brussels’ Environment Minister Alain Maron — who called the situation "really very problematic” — is trying to get countries to come around before Belgium's presidency ends at the end of June.

 

In general, Taraba said he did not oppose protecting natural areas, pointing to Slovakia’s high percentage of conservation zones. It’s just the way the EU has gone about it that bothers him.

 

“This is not an issue that we are against,” he said.

Het wordt steeds NORMALER en dat is gevaarlijk | Sophie & Jeroen | BNNVA...

Geert WILDERS op CPAC Hungary: "Europe is facing an IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CRISIS" / Wilders does not want his speech at far right conference to cause a political problem.


FRIDAY, 26 APRIL 2024 - 17:50

https://nltimes.nl/2024/04/26/wilders-want-speech-far-right-conference-cause-political-problem

Wilders does not want his speech at far right conference to cause a political problem

With his speech to the ultra-conservative CPAC Hungary conference in Budapest, PVV leader Geert Wilders said that he did not want his prepared remarks to cause a political problem in the Netherlands. The leader of the far-right party is negotiating with three more moderate right-wing parties to form a new coalition government. Talks with the VVD, NSC, and BBB have been ongoing since the November elections, and the current round is set to end within two weeks.

 

At the start of the speech, he said that as the leader of the largest political party in the Netherlands, he has a big responsibility and is taking it because he wants the negotiations to succeed.

 

After that, Wilders, as usual, criticized the “left elite” before attacking woke culture and warning his listeners of mass immigration from Africa.

 

Wilders claimed that left parties had opened the borders for immigrants with a “totally different cultural background” in the last decades while they were usually not asylum seekers. He also said these men usually come alone from Africa or Asia. He added that they do not contribute to the society and only cost money. Mass immigration has not been discouraged but rather encouraged, he said.

 

Wilders praised his “good friend,” the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who he called a courageous leader because he stands for Jewish-Christian values and protects his people from illegal immigration.

 

The PVV leader added that he hopes more European leaders follow his immigration policy, as many more immigrants want to come to Europe, he said.

 

Wilders also denounced wokism, which, in his view, is another existential threat to Europe. He claims wokism is the dominant idea in the university world and the media, that there is “no objective truth, no loyalty or freedom, and that everything is subjective. Everything for them is interchangeable and without value.”

 

Many media outlets that wanted to attend the congress were not welcome because they were described as “woke.”


Former Scottish first minister slams SNP strategy | Lord McConnell

Andrew Neil blasts SNP: 'Humza the Brief' is 'finished'

Dreaming of Pedro Sánchez, Brussels could be headed for a rude awakening

 



Dreaming of Pedro Sánchez, Brussels could be headed for a rude awakening

 

Spain’s PM is a hot tip to run the European Council. Would he be any good?

 

For Pedro Sánchez, moving to Brussels could prove a deft exit from Spain’s fractured — and toxic — political scene. |

 

APRIL 26, 2024 4:00 AM CET

BY BARBARA MOENS, CLAUDIA CHIAPPA AND AITOR HERNÁNDEZ-MORALES

https://www.politico.eu/article/pedro-sanchez-eu-top-jobs-spain-brussels-european-parliament-election-2024/

 

Could Pedro Sánchez, the Spanish prime minister nicknamed “Mr. Handsome,” be the next president of the European Council?

 

That’s what European officials and diplomats have been asking since Sánchez’ surprise announcement Wednesday that he is considering resigning as the head of Spain’s government. The news triggered feverish speculation regarding Spain’s political future — as well as on Sánchez’s odds of netting a top job in Brussels.

 

In a bombshell four-page letter, Sánchez expressed exasperation with the constant attacks on his family by newspapers and right-wing militants. The extreme nature of the assaults, he said, had led him to ponder whether leading the country was worth the trouble.

 

“I need time to reflect,” Sánchez said. “I urgently need to answer a question that I keep asking myself: Is it worth it for me to remain [in office] in spite of the right and far-right’s mudslinging?”

 

Brussels is gearing up to allocate the EU’s most senior jobs following June’s European Parliament election. The political parties that get the most votes will stake their claims to the leadership of the European Commission, the European Council, the European Parliament and the EU’s foreign policy arm.

 

The socialists, who are likely to remain the second-largest group in the Parliament, are eyeing the top job at the European Council, currently held by Belgian liberal Charles Michel.

 

For Sánchez, moving to Brussels could prove a deft exit from Spain’s fractured — and toxic — political scene. The socialist’s domestic public image has never been great, and his controversial decision to grant Catalan separatists a blanket amnesty in order to secure their support for his continued tenure has only increased public resentment.

 

Europe calling

Sánchez may not be popular in Spain but he is well-liked in Brussels, and is appreciated by his European peers.

 

That doesn’t mean he’s a shoo-in for a top job, however.

 

EU officials and diplomats are divided on a prospective Sánchez candidacy. For starters, it remains to be seen if and how he leaves office, and who takes over on the home front. If Sánchez were to leave Spain, Europe’s fifth-largest economy, in a state of political chaos it could tarnish his appeal in Brussels.

 

There are also doubts as to whether Sánchez has the right profile for European Council president. The EU leaders who will decide who gets the job would likely prefer someone at the end of their political career — someone such as Herman Van Rompuy, the former Belgian prime minister who was the first to hold the role and who proved to be a discreet referee keen to broker compromises.

 

Michel, meanwhile, has been faulted for his perceived preoccupation with his own ambitions and international profile.

 

“We need an older man or woman who doesn’t do turf battles with Ursula [von der Leyen] and doesn’t have his or her next job in mind,” said one EU official, who expressed pessimism about the 52-year-old Sánchez’s chances. The official, like others quoted in this piece, was granted anonymity to speak freely about future European leaders.

 

Sánchez, who took office in 2018 and won a third term as prime minister last year, raised eyebrows in Brussels when Spain was in charge of the rotating presidency during the second half of last year.

 

He didn’t hesitate to use his agenda-setting power in Brussels to further his own domestic goals, while some diplomats chafed at his push to get Basque, Catalan and Galician recognized as official EU languages — a campaign he launched to secure Catalan support for his preferred candidate to preside over Spain’s parliament.

 

And then there’s Palestine

Sánchez’s outspoken support for Palestinian statehood — Spain intends to extend official recognition within two months — could also be a liability. It’s unclear whether EU members with close links to Israel will back a Council president that some in the Israeli government view as an antagonist.

 

Others may resent Sánchez for saddling the EU with its current and problematic foreign affairs chief, and could be reluctant to see another Spaniard in a top post so soon.

 

“Sanchez doesn’t have a good name for some EU countries … He gave us [outgoing High Representative Josep] Borrell, who proved unable to steer countries together on sensitive topics like Israel or previously Russia,” said a senior EU diplomat.

 

Ultimately, there are so many “buts” regarding Sánchez’ getting a top EU job that “the speculation … says more about the lack of candidates among the socialists than about Sánchez’s actual chances,” said one EU diplomat.

 

The names that are currently on the socialist shortlist for the Council job do indeed come with serious question marks. Former Portuguese Prime Minister António Costa is still under investigation for his alleged connection to an influence-peddling scheme, while Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen is disliked because of her government’s controversial immigration policies, which are a source of discomfort for other socialist leaders.

 

Sánchez is poised to address the nation on Monday and to reveal whether he will step down. Spanish citizens and European diplomats are struggling to decipher whether the prime minister’s threat to quit is a political maneuver intended to unite the left against the country’s right-wing forces, or whether he truly is considering walking away. The center-right Popular Party has accused the prime minister of playing the victim.

 

Sánchez’ letter comes, after all, with two major elections on the horizon. On May 12 a snap regional vote is set to take place in Catalonia, while a month later Spaniards will vote in the European election.

 

The Sánchez speculation in Brussels could therefore be short-lived. But as one female EU diplomat quipped: “We can only dream, right?”

 

Stuart Lau and Jakob Hanke Vela contributed to this report.

Europe votes: Basque, Catalan issues impact EU election campaign in Spai...

Global National: April 25, 2024 | What led to Harvey Weinstein's overtur...

Hollywood reacts to overturning of Harvey Weinstein rape conviction: ‘Beyond disappointed’

 


Hollywood reacts to overturning of Harvey Weinstein rape conviction: ‘Beyond disappointed’

 

Surprise reversal of producer’s New York conviction led to anger from stars and accusers, including Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino

 

Benjamin Lee

Thu 25 Apr 2024 20.37 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/apr/25/harvey-weinstein-rape-conviction

 

Hollywood has reacted with shock to the news that the disgraced producer Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction has been overturned by a New York court.

 

The fallen movie mogul was sentenced to 23 years in 2020 for two sex crimes, a decision that a court of appeals has now called the result of an unfair trial.

 

Weinstein will remain imprisoned after also being convicted of rape in Los Angeles and sentenced to 16 years.

 

Ashley Judd, who was among the first to share her allegations against him, told the New York Times: “That is unfair to survivors. We still live in our truth. And we know what happened.” Later at a press conference, she added: “This is what it’s like to be a woman in America, living with male entitlement to our bodies.”

 

Rosanna Arquette, who also made accusations against Weinstein, said in a statement to the Hollywood Reporter: “Harvey was rightfully convicted. It’s unfortunate that the court has overturned his conviction. As a survivor, I am beyond disappointed.”

 

Rose McGowan, who has accused Weinstein of raping her, said in a video statement: “No matter what they overturn, they cannot take away who we are and what we know, what we’ve gone through and what we can achieve in this life. We are not victims. We are people that were injured by evil.”

 

Katherine Kendall, who also accused Weinstein of harassment, said she was “flabbergasted”.

 

Oscar winner Mira Sorvino, who claimed that Weinstein sexually harassed her before stifling her career, posted that she was “horrified” and “disgusted” with a system of justice that skews towards “predators not victims”.

 

Actor, author and activist Amber Tamblyn has also called the decision “a loss to the entire community of women who put their lives and careers on the line to speak out”. Ellen Barkin, who claimed that Weinstein verbally abused her during production of 1992’s Into the West, has called the reversal an “outrage”.

 

Rosie Perez, who testified at the Weinstein trial to say her friend Annabella Sciorra told her she had been raped by him, shared the news on Twitter/X, adding: “WTF!”

 

Tarana Burke, credited as the founder of the #MeToo movement, said that “moments like this underscore why movements are necessary”.

 

A statement from Weinstein referred to his state as “cautiously excited” before later calling it “a great day for America”.

 

The outpouring of stories detailing alleged experiences with Weinstein kicked off the #MeToo movement in 2017, with over 80 women ultimately accusing him of various acts of sexual assault and harassment.

Why Harvey Weinstein’s rape conviction was overturned | About That

Harvey Weinstein's rape conviction overturned by New York appeals court

Laurence Fox told to pay £180,000 in libel damages | BBC News

Laurence Fox ordered to pay £180,000 over 'paedophile' slur

Crise de l'Occident: vivons-nous un choc des civilisations ?

2 months ago: Qui sont les Frères musulmans ? Les explications de Pierre Vermeren

Bruxelles : "Il y a une influence des Frères musulmans qui est très impo...

L'heure des pros : "Emmanuel Macron regroupe les Etats comme on fusionne les entreprises"

Europe : pourquoi Macron dramatise ?

Le discours d'Emmanuel Macron à la Sorbonne a-t-il été entendu par les Français ?

'Genuinely shocking': Pro-Trump justices give presidential immunity case bad faith treatment

Conservative Justices Appear Poised to Rule Ex-Presidents Have Some Level of Immunity

 



Conservative Justices Appear Poised to Rule Ex-Presidents Have Some Level of Immunity

 

Such a ruling would probably send the case back to a lower court and could delay any trial until after the November election.

 

Adam Liptak

By Adam Liptak

Reporting from Washington

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity-case.html

April 25, 2024

 

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared ready on Thursday to rule that former presidents have some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution, a move that could further delay the criminal case against former President Donald J. Trump on charges that he plotted to subvert the 2020 election.

 

Such a ruling would most likely send the case back to the trial court, ordering it to draw distinctions between official and private conduct. It would amount to a major statement on the scope of presidential power.

 

Though there was seeming consensus among the justices that the case could eventually go forward based on Mr. Trump’s private actions, the additional proceedings could make it hard to conduct the trial before the 2024 election.

 

There were only glancing references to the timing of the trial and no particular sense of urgency among the more conservative justices at Thursday’s argument. Instead, several of them criticized what they suggested was a political prosecution brought under laws they said were ill suited to the case at hand.

 

If the court effectively blocks a prompt trial, particularly after it acted quickly in March to restore Mr. Trump to the ballot in Colorado, it will surely ignite furious criticism from liberals and others who view the former president’s actions as an assault on democracy and the rule of law.

 

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who understands himself to be the custodian of the court’s prestige and legitimacy, did not tip his hand very much, though he seemed deeply skeptical of the decision from a unanimous three-judge panel of an appeals court in Washington rejecting Mr. Trump’s immunity claim.

 

The appeals court ruled, he said, quoting from its decision, that a former president can be prosecuted for his official acts “because the fact of the prosecution means that the former president has allegedly acted in defiance of the laws.”

 

Michael R. Dreeben, a lawyer on the special counsel’s team, said the passage was tautological, a term the chief justice seized on.

 

“Why shouldn’t we either send it back to the court of appeals or issue an opinion making clear that that’s not the law?” Chief Justice Roberts asked.

 

Such further proceedings would take time, of course. If Mr. Trump prevails in the election, he could order the Justice Department to drop the charges.

 

The argument, which lasted more than two and a half hours, was largely focused on whether Mr. Trump and other presidents could be prosecuted for their official conduct and on how to tell the difference between those actions and private ones.

 

D. John Sauer, Mr. Trump’s lawyer, argued for an expansive understanding. In answer to hypothetical questions, he said that presidential orders to murder political rivals or stage a coup could well be subject to immunity.

 

But several of the conservative justices seemed disinclined to consider those questions or the details of the accusations against Mr. Trump. Instead, they said the court should issue a ruling that applies to presidential power generally.

 

“We’re writing a rule for the ages,” Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said.

 

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh also said the court should think about the larger message of its decision. “This case has huge implications for the presidency, for the future of the presidency, for the future of the country,” he said, adding: “It's going to cycle back and be used against the current president or the next president.”

 

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., in an inversion of the conventional understanding of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, said that a ruling for Mr. Trump could enhance democratic values.

 

“A stable, democratic society requires that a candidate who loses an election, even a close one, even a hotly contested one, leave office peacefully,” he said, adding that the prospect of criminal prosecution would make that less likely.

 

“Will that not lead us into a cycle that destabilizes the functioning of our country as a democracy?” he asked. “And we can look around the world and find countries where we have seen this process, where the loser gets thrown in jail.”

 

Justice Gorsuch identified what he said was another negative consequence of allowing prosecutions of former presidents. “It seems to me like one of the incentives that might be created is for presidents to try to pardon themselves,” he said.

 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said she had a different understanding. “A stable democratic society,” she said, “needs the good faith of its public officials.”

 

If there was a member of the court’s six-justice conservative majority who seemed ready to send at least a part of the case to trial in the near future, it was Justice Amy Coney Barrett. She elicited concessions from Mr. Sauer that, for instance, Mr. Trump’s use of “a private attorney who was willing to spread knowingly false claims of election fraud to spearhead his challenges to new election results” was private conduct.

 

Mr. Dreeben, the government lawyer, said it was beyond question that parts of the case concerned private conduct.

 

“When working with private lawyers and a private public relations adviser to gin up fraudulent slates of electors,” Mr. Dreeben said, “that is not any part of a president’s job.”

 

Mr. Trump is accused of a sprawling effort to overturn the outcome of the 2020 election, including by seeking to recruit bogus slates of electors in a bid to alter vote counts and pressuring an array of officials, like Vice President Mike Pence, to subvert the results. Mr. Trump faces a count of conspiring to defraud the government, another of conspiring to disenfranchise voters and two counts related to corruptly obstructing a congressional proceeding.

 

The case before the court involves just one of four sets of pending criminal charges against Mr. Trump, including those at issue in a trial underway in state court in Manhattan over accusations of hush-money payments meant to skew the 2016 election. Whatever happens after Thursday’s argument, the 2024 election will take place in the shadow of the criminal justice system.

 

Justice Alito proposed a broad principle to distinguish official and unofficial conduct. “Suppose,” he said, “the rule were that a former president cannot be prosecuted for official acts unless no plausible justification could be imagined for what the president did, taking into account history and legal precedent.”

 

Justice Sotomayor objected, saying that “plausible” is little different from absolute. “What is plausible about the president insisting and creating a fraudulent slate of electoral candidates?” she asked.

 

The two lawyers on Thursday faced many questions about which of Mr. Trump’s acts were official and which private. They drew different lines, but neither took a categorical position.

 

Justice Kavanaugh said more work needed to be done.

 

“The president is subject to prosecution for all personal acts, just like every other American for personal acts,” he said. “The question is acts taken in an official capacity.”

 

Lower courts, he said, should sort out which is which.

 

The court has heard two other cases this term concerning the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

 

In March, the court unanimously rejected an attempt to bar Mr. Trump from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which made people who engage in insurrection ineligible to hold office. The court, without discussing whether Mr. Trump was covered by the provision, ruled that states may not use it to exclude candidates for the presidency from the ballot.

 

Last week, the court heard arguments in a challenge to the use of a federal obstruction law to prosecute members of the mob that stormed the Capitol. Two of the four charges against Mr. Trump are based on the obstruction law.

 

The justice seemed skeptical that the law, which was a reaction to an accounting scandal, applied to the rioters’ actions.

 

That skepticism was evident on Thursday, too, with Justice Gorsuch recasting the Jan. 6 assault to illustrate what he suggested was a misuse of the law.

 

“Let’s say a president leads a mostly peaceful protest sit-in in front of Congress because he objects to a piece of legislation that’s going through,” Justice Gorsuch said. “And it, in fact, delays the proceedings in Congress.”

 

He added: “So a president then could be prosecuted for the conduct I described after he leaves office?” His tone suggested that the answer must be no.

 

Adam Liptak covers the Supreme Court and writes Sidebar, a column on legal developments. A graduate of Yale Law School, he practiced law for 14 years before joining The Times in 2002. More about Adam Liptak