Há 16 horas
sexta-feira, 7 de novembro de 2025
HOW ELON MUSK IS BOOSTING THE BRITISH RIGHT
HOW ELON
MUSK IS BOOSTING THE BRITISH RIGHT
For nine
months, Sky News' Data and Forensics team has been investigating whether X's
algorithm amplifies right-wing and extreme content. It does.
Kaitlin Tosh
and Michelle Inez Simon, Data and Forensics journalists
https://news.sky.com/story/the-x-effect-how-elon-musk-is-boosting-the-british-right-13464487
‘Trump is against humankind’: World leaders at climate summit take swipes at absent president
‘Trump is
against humankind’: World leaders at climate summit take swipes at absent
president
Some of
Thursday's speeches reflected anger and dismay at U.S. policies but could not
hide the ambivalence that many countries feel about this year's climate talks.
Gabriel
Boric and Gustavo Petro talk.
By Sara
Schonhardt and Karl Mathiesen
11/06/2025
01:35 PM EST
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/06/leaders-admonish-trump-cop30-absence-00640036
Donald
Trump isn’t at the global climate summit in Brazil. But he was on the minds of
some of his fellow world leaders Thursday, who used their time on stage to try
to isolate the U.S. president and his hard-line opposition to their agenda.
In
speeches meant to highlight their support for efforts to halt rising
temperatures, a few of the heads of state at the COP30 climate talks in the
Amazonian port city of Belém could not resist the chance to admonish the U.S.
president directly.
“Mr.
Trump is against humankind,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who
pointed to the American president’s absence from the gathering and called for
an economy free of oil and natural gas.
Gabriel
Boric, Chile’s president, took Trump to task for a September speech to the U.N.
General Assembly in which the U.S. leader denounced the notion of human-caused
climate change as a “con job” and a “hoax made up by people with evil
intentions.”
“That is
a lie,” Boric said, emphasizing the importance of science and facts. “We might
have legitimate discussions about how to face these things, but we cannot deny
them.”
When
asked for comment, White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers responded that
“President Trump will not allow the best interest of the American people to be
jeopardized by the Green Energy Scam.
“These
Green Dreams are killing other countries, but will not kill ours thanks to
President Trump’s commonsense energy agenda!” she said by email.
Brazilian
President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, whose country is hosting the two-week
summit, did not name Trump but hit out at “extremist forces that fabricate fake
news on climate for political gain.”
He urged
countries gathering at the conference to develop a road map to “overcome fossil
fuels.”
Since
returning to office in January, Trump has championed coal, oil and gas and
sought to squash clean energy efforts in the U.S. and abroad. He has removed
the U.S. from the 2015 Paris climate change agreement, for the second time, and
has used the threat of tariffs to try to bolster sales of American fossil
fuels.
The
speeches from a handful of leaders displayed, at times, the anger and dismay
that countries feel about the U.S. breaking its promises and attempting to
undermine the global effort to tackle global warming. Other leaders tried to
brush off the American absence as simply an act of economic self-harm.
But the
tough talk could not hide the ambivalence that many countries beyond the U.S.
have toward this year’s U.N. climate talks.
Just a
small number of European leaders turned up, while some other countries have
sent ministerial representatives. Canada’s Mark Carney, a former U.N. climate
representative, stayed home. The EU’s 27 member countries could not agree on a
climate goal to present at the conference until Wednesday morning — and only
after watering down existing pollution-cutting rules to get a deal. Also absent
is Chinese President Xi Jinping, whose country tops the U.S. as the world’s No.
1 greenhouse gas polluter.
Even the
host Brazil has drawn criticism from green groups for opening new oil and gas
fields of its own in the run-up to hosting the COP30 talks.
The U.S.
does not plan to send any high-level representatives to the COP30 conference,
according to a White House spokesperson. Whether it intends to try to swing the
talks from afar remains to be seen.
Trump and
his Cabinet ministers led a pressure campaign that succeeded last month in
delaying, and possibly killing, a vote on a global carbon tax for shipping that
had seemed on a glide path for approval. The U.S. effort drew in help from
other countries, including some EU members.
British
Prime Minister Keir Starmer lamented that the global unity that had landed the
Paris deal 10 years ago was being broken, not just by Trump but by Starmer’s
opponents in the U.K.
“Sadly,
that consensus is gone,” he declared.
But he
said walking away from climate efforts would only raise energy costs for
businesses and households and miss out on building new industries.
“This is
not just a problem to be solved, but also an immense opportunity to be seized,”
Starmer said.
Similarly,
French President Emmanuel Macron told his fellow leaders, without naming names,
that “climate misinformation today poses a threat to our democracies, to the
Paris agenda.”
“We must
support free and independent science,“ Macron said, adding: “We must choose
multilateralism over isolationism, science over ideology, and action over
fatalism.”
The main
economic beneficiary of the clean energy transition has, to date, been China,
which has built the world’s largest production line of solar panels, electric
vehicles, batteries, critical minerals and other products essential to greening
the global economy.
“China is
a country that honors its commitments,” Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang said at the
podium Thursday.
He didn’t
name Trump directly either but did make a case for a “sound environment” for
global trade and cooperation.
“We need
to strengthen international collaboration on green technology and industry,
remove trade barriers and ensure the free flow of quality green products to
better meet the needs of global sustainable development,” Ding said through a
translator.
Von der Leyen tries to keep Meloni onside by stalling action over banking saga
Von der
Leyen tries to keep Meloni onside by stalling action over banking saga
Brussels
has completed its analysis of Italy’s decision to block the merger of two
Milanese banks, but Ursula von der Leyen has yet to take action.
November
7, 2025 4:14 am CET
By
Francesca Micheletti, Ben Munster and Bjarke Smith-Meyer
https://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-hesitates-to-bash-italy-for-derailing-banking-merger/
BRUSSELS
— The European Commission appears to be slow-walking a decision to take action
against Italy over its controversial use of national security powers to stall a
banking merger between UniCredit, the Milan-based bank, and its crosstown rival
BPM.
Officials
at the competition and financial services directorates handed in their
assessment of the case weeks ago to President Ursula von der Leyen’s Cabinet,
but have yet to hear back, five people familiar with the matter told POLITICO.
The assessment is not in favor of Rome, said one of the people, granted
anonymity to discuss a private matter.
Commission
insiders speculate that the delay has to do with broader political bargaining
at the highest level between Brussels and Rome. According to another of the
people, von der Leyen is taking care not to annoy Giorgia Meloni because she
needs the Italian premier’s support to shore up the increasingly shaky
political coalition that backed her for a second term last year.
Earlier
this year, Italy decided that UniCredit’s €10 billion takeover of BPM was a
threat to national security. Under the government’s rules on screening foreign
direct investments — known as its “golden power” — Rome imposed conditions on
April 18 that effectively prevented UniCredit from completing the deal.
The
Commission opened a so-called EU Pilot procedure — carried out by its financial
services directorate — to determine whether the use of national security
measures in a bank merger is in line with EU banking regulations and
single-market freedoms. The process can ultimately lead to an infringement
procedure — as happened when the Spanish government obstructed BBVA’s
acquisition of Catalan bank Banco Sabadell.
The
Commission’s competition directorate gave a conditional green light to the deal
on June 19. A month later it warned Italy that by applying the golden power to
a domestic deal, Italy may have violated merger rules as well as other
provisions of EU law.
The
Commission is currently assessing Italy’s replies in both investigations, a
spokesperson for the EU executive said.
Golden
power
The
golden power equips Italy with wide-ranging screening tools to curb bids on
national champions by foreign investors that are deemed risks to national
security, such as those from China.
The use
of the tool to derail a domestic merger appeared to flout the EU’s push for
greater banking consolidation across Europe — which it sees as necessary for
the continent’s financial sector and for the economy more broadly — to compete
with U.S. rivals. The largest American bank, JP Morgan, has a market
capitalization more than four times that of its nearest European counterpart,
Santander.
Banking
and Financial Services Commissioner Maria Luís Albuquerque has repeatedly
spoken out in favor of banking consolidation across the bloc.
The
competition and financial services teams had their assessment of the case ready
shortly after Italy submitted its last round of responses to the Commission in
August, said one of the people who spoke to POLITICO. But von der Leyen’s
Cabinet, which ultimately has to sign off on a decision, has taken no action so
far, they added.
According
to Italian media reports, Italy has been trying to buy more time and stave off
an infringement procedure by suggesting it could amend its golden power
legislation. Financial daily Milano Finanza reported on Tuesday that the
Commission has set Nov. 13 for a decision.
An
Italian official with knowledge of the file said the Commission could very well
be slow-walking action against Italy given that Unicredit’s withdrawal from the
deal is by now irreversible. That would allow time to review whether Italy’s
golden power is in line with EU competition rules without the pressure of a
live deal.
“A
medium-term, out-of-the-spotlight agreement on golden power could be the best
outcome,” this official explained.
Reuters,
citing sources familiar with the matter, reported last week that Italy could be
willing to amend its golden power to address the Commission’s concerns over how
it was used in the Unicredit-BPM case.
All
matters pertaining to the golden power are steered from von der Leyen’s office,
said another Commission official who is not directly involved in the matter and
was also granted anonymity to speak candidly. It is usually quite simple to
perform a technical analysis of such files, but “politics always trumps it,”
they added.
Spokespeople
for Meloni and Italy’s economy ministry declined to comment.
Lucy Powell says Labour must stand by promise not to raise key taxes
Lucy
Powell says Labour must stand by promise not to raise key taxes
New
deputy leader also calls on government to lift two-child benefit cap urgently
and in full
Rowena
Mason and Jessica Elgot
Thu 6 Nov
2025 18.43 GMT
Labour
should stand by its manifesto commitment not to raise income tax, national
insurance or VAT, its deputy leader, Lucy Powell, has said in a challenge that
will put pressure on Rachel Reeves.
With the
Treasury examining whether to raise income tax to plug a £30bn fiscal hole,
Powell said it was “really important we stand by the promises we were elected
on and do what we said we would do”.
She said:
“Trust in politics is a key part of that because if we’re to take the country
with us then they’ve got to trust us and that’s really important too. We should
be following through on our manifesto, of course. There’s no question about
that.”
Powell
made the significant intervention on BBC Radio 5 Live, calling at the same time
for the two-child benefit cap to be lifted in full rather than softened.
She said
she wanted a “budget of fairness”, with more money being put into people’s
pockets, rather than less, and one with a “strong Labour story about how we are
rewiring the country in the interests of the many not just the few”.
Her
remarks are likely to be uncomfortable for the chancellor and Keir Starmer as
both have in recent weeks declined to repeat their commitments to stand by the
manifesto pledge on tax.
The
government has been looking at the possibility of raising income tax as a way
of giving a substantial boost to the public finances and leave an extra buffer
for potential financial shocks.
Powell’s
spokesperson later clarified that she would support the chancellor whatever the
decisions made in the budget, which will be taken by Reeves and Starmer.
A
spokesperson for Powell said: “As Lucy made clear in the interview the
chancellor and prime minister make decisions on the budget in the round. As the
chancellor said this week the context for this budget is particularly difficult
and Lucy will continue to support them on these issues.”
Downing
Street had no comment on Powell’s remarks.
Reeves
gave a speech this week that was widely interpreted as making the case for tax
rises to allow greater investment in public services.
“It is
important that everyone – the public and politicians – understands that
reality. The less we spend on debt interest, the more we can spend on the
priorities of working people … our NHS, our schools, our national security …
the public services essential to a decent society and a strong economy,” she
said.
However,
it is still not certain that Reeves will opt for a rise in income tax, which
could raise £7bn, instead of an array of smaller tax measures. The final
forecasts have not yet been presented to the chancellor, meaning the decisions
are still to be taken.
Powell’s
intervention before the budget is a sign that she is willing to question the
dominant thinking in Downing Street, after she won the deputy leadership
election on the back of promising not to “sugar-coat” her views.
She is in
a unique position to challenge Starmer and Reeves as the party’s deputy leader,
who was chosen last month by the membership to replace Angela Rayner ahead of
the government’s choice, Bridget Phillipson. Powell had previously been pushed
out of her job as leader of the House of Commons by the prime minister at the
reshuffle after the summer recess and is not bound by collective
responsibility.
The
deputy leader’s statements echo the concerns of a number of Labour MPs who are
privately worried about the impact on trust of breaking a manifesto pledge and
Reeves’s own claim last year that she would not come back to the public with
further tax rises.
Cabinet
ministers appear to be largely resigned to the idea of raising income tax,
rather than fiddling with a large number of small tax measures, having bought
the argument that it is better to make a big tax-raising move relatively early
in the parliament.
However,
some backbenchers are concerned that it is a “dangerous moment” for the
government to be seen as going back on a promise and that it may not be
forgiven by the electorate.
“The two
major reasons people are leaving us is they perceive we broke our promises and
secondly because of the cost of living. This entrenches that,” one Labour MP
said.
“Emotionally,
colleagues don’t feel the same way about this as with welfare. But before Rishi
[Sunak, the former Conservative PM] raised national insurance in 2021, it
‘polled’ well. Not when it hit the ground. But it’s hard to go to chancellor
and say don’t do X when everything has to add up.”
In her
BBC interview, Powell also said the two-child benefit cap “should be lifted in
full” as a matter of urgency to deal with “grotesque levels” of child poverty.
“Every
year that passes with this policy in place, another 40,000 minimum, 40,000
children, are pushed into deep levels of poverty as a result of it and that’s
why it is urgent that we do lift it and we lift it in full.”
Reeves is
believed to be looking at only partly lifting the two-child benefit cap
affecting universal credit, after the government previously hinted earlier in
the autumn that it would be scrapped entirely. Instead, she is thought to be
considering smaller measures that would go some way to blunting its impact.
The
Guardian first reported last month that Reeves was considering raising income
tax to help reduce a shortfall, expected to be between £20bn and £30bn, after a
bigger-than-expected downgrade in productivity forecasts.
However,
government insiders believe the economic landscape to be less gloomy than
predicted, which may allow Reeves to avoid the problem of breaking the
manifesto pledge. While the Office for Budget Responsibility’s productivity
downgrade has created a headache, they point out that a fall in debt financing
costs and more people coming into the jobs market may help limit the damage.
D66 and JA21, VVD and GL-PvdA: duo coalition talks on Friday
D66 and
JA21, VVD and GL-PvdA: duo coalition talks on Friday
November
6, 2025
https://www.dutchnews.nl/2025/11/d66-and-ja21-vvd-and-gl-pvda-duo-coalition-talks-on-friday/
Talks on
forming a new Dutch coalition government will centre on Friday on preliminary
discussions between two sessions involving two parties, Wouter Koolmees, the
man charged with assessing the current situation, told reporters on Thursday
evening.
Rob
Jetten, leader of D66, the biggest party in last week’s general election, and
Joost Eerdmans of the far-right JA21, which won nine seats, will first talk
together with Koolmees.
Later,
Dilan Yesilgöz, leader of the right-wing liberal VVD, will meet Koolmees and
new GL-PvdA leader Jesse Klaver to talk about their differences.
“She says
their differences cannot be bridged but it is my job to find out if this really
is the case,” Koolmees said.
Yesilgöz
has said repeatedly she will not take her party into a coalition with the
left-wing green alliance and that she prefers a centre-right option. Jetten,
set to be the future prime minister, has said he prefers a broad coalition
including the VVD, GL-PvdA and the Christian Democrats.
Koolmees
said he wants to get a better idea of the objections the parties have to each
other and find out if these are “real” or perceived differences.
Koolmees
has now met the leaders of all 15 parties which will be represented in
parliament from next week and said there is a unanimous wish for a speedy
cabinet formation process, given the big issues facing the Netherlands.
2 Days Ago: What Everyone Misses About Nick Fuentes
What
Everyone Misses About Nick Fuentes
The
racialist influencer represents a spectacle that demands cool analysis rather
than emotional reaction.
Christopher
F. Rufo
Nov 05,
2025
https://christopherrufo.com/p/what-everyone-misses-about-nick-fuentes
The
racialist influencer Nick Fuentes has caused an uproar with his appearance on
Tucker Carlson’s podcast. Fuentes, a 27-year-old live-streamer, has built a
reputation as the most controversial voice on the right. He’s embraced
seemingly every taboo: praising Hitler, disputing the Holocaust’s death toll,
calling himself a “white nationalist,” musing about domestic violence, and
opposing interracial marriage.
Carlson’s
invitation has divided conservatives. Some suggest that Fuentes’s appearance on
the podcast represented an unacceptable mainstreaming of his views. Others,
most notably Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, argue that Fuentes
must be debated instead of “canceled.”
Both
sides fail to understand the Nick Fuentes phenomenon. They take his statements
seriously and engage with them in good faith. But Fuentes’s stated beliefs,
while abhorrent, are not best parried by taking them at face value. Instead,
the Right should consider him an actor in what postmodern theorist Jean
Baudrillard called “hyperreality”: a system in which the simulation of reality
comes to replace reality itself.
Under
conditions of hyperreality, symbols of past phenomena lose their original
meaning. Emptied out, they then circulate through digital media, where they
drive the discourse and, while purely derivative, still spark real emotional
involvement. In this way, the hyperreal becomes “more real than real,” masking
the true nature of reality.
We should
understand Fuentes through this framework. He embraces taboos not because he
has an authentic faith in Hitler or a deep-seated opposition to interracial
marriage. He may well believe these things, of course, but that isn’t why he
pushes them. Rather, he embraces taboos because doing so drives attention and
creates a spectacle in digital media that benefits him.
The tone
of his discourse is not authentic, serious, or reflective. It is ironic,
cynical, and provocative. When Fuentes lauds Hitler and, in another interview,
praises Stalin—irreconcilable ideological enemies—he is not expressing a
comprehensible ideology that can be scrutinized in debate. He is engaging in a
performance, which only becomes coherent when read as a demand for attention.
Unfortunately,
both liberals and conservatives have played into the act. The Left, which for a
decade has tried to push the narrative that conservatives are Nazis and that
Donald Trump is the new Hitler, has finally found in Fuentes an avatar of
right-wing fascism. They play along with Fuentes’s irony-laden, hyperreal
Nazism because it is useful to them. They give him attention, print his name in
prestige publications, and enter into a symbiotic relationship. The Left
finally gets its Nazi—and Fuentes gets more attention.
In the
recent controversy, the Right has also unwittingly reinforced Fuentes’s Nazi
performance. Some conservatives have criticized Fuentes, Carlson, and Roberts
by posting that “Nazis are bad.” That’s self-evidently correct—Nazism is
monstrous. But leaning on that truism blurs the distinction between reality and
hyperreality.
In the
real world, Germany was denazified after 1945 and, apart from small pockets of
skinheads and neo-Nazis, Nazism is a dead ideology. Fuentes is not a Nazi in a
real historical sense, but a live-streamer who wields the still-charged symbol
of Nazism to hijack the discourse and bait his opponents into a reaction. He
may genuinely believe what he says—I doubt it—but, in either case, that is
orthogonal to the point that he is using people’s horror at Nazism to serve his
ends. Every time conservatives operate on his terms, they reinforce his
taboo-breaking, making him stronger.
How,
then, should conservatives approach a figure like Fuentes, reject right-wing
racialism, and move forward constructively? The first prerequisite is simple:
do not engage emotionally. The politics of hyperreality sustains itself to the
extent that its symbols drive an automatic reaction, rather than careful
analysis and reflection.
Railing
against Nazis might provide a temporary satisfaction—being in the right usually
does. But in the long run, this reaction feeds Nazism as a symbol, when it
should be buried as one of the disasters of history, never to be resurrected.
Rather
than engage in the surface-level debate, conservatives should seek the deeper
ground of reality and deconstruct the “metapolitics,” or underlying rules, of
this conflict. Conservatives should do this by treating Fuentes as an
essentially fraudulent phenomenon. He is a manipulator who pretends to believe
in every evil in order to drive clicks, cause chaos, and achieve celebrity,
even as a villain.
The
right-wing case against Fuentes should, therefore, focus on actions and
outcomes. Fuentes divides the Right, taps into the left-wing fantasy about
conservatives as Nazis, rails against President Trump and Vice President J. D.
Vance, and does not lead young men toward a better life. The incentives for
Fuentes and the incentives for the Right are completely opposed. If he wins,
conservatives lose.
This is a
major test for the Right, and one that it must win. Arguing within the
“Nazism-versus-anti-Nazism” frame misses the point, even if one side is correct
on the merits.
We need
to rely on cool analysis instead of heated reaction. Instead of feeding the
Fuentes phenomenon, we should point the public in a constructive direction and
marginalize those who would sabotage the conservative cause.
The era of fine speeches and good intentions is over. Brazil’s Cop30 will be about action
The era
of fine speeches and good intentions is over. Brazil’s Cop30 will be about
action
Luiz
Inácio Lula da Silva
This is
our message to world leaders: make this the ‘Cop of truth’, before people lose
faith
Luiz
Inácio Lula da Silva is the president of Brazil
Thu 6 Nov
2025 05.00 GMT
Today, in
the Brazilian Amazon, the Belém summit opens ahead of the 30th United Nations
climate change conference (Cop30). I have convened world leaders in the days
leading up to the conference so that we can all commit to acting with the
urgency the climate crisis demands.
If we
fail to move beyond speeches into real action, our societies will lose faith –
not only in the Cops, but in multilateralism and international politics more
broadly. That is why I have summoned leaders to the Amazon: to make this the
“Cop of truth”, the moment we demonstrate the seriousness of our shared
commitment to the planet.
Humanity
has shown its ability to overcome great challenges when it acts together and is
guided by science. We protected the ozone layer. The global response to the
Covid-19 pandemic proved that the world can act decisively when there is
courage and political will.
Brazil
hosted the Earth Summit in 1992. We approved the conventions on climate,
biodiversity and desertification, and adopted principles that defined a new
paradigm for preserving our planet and our humanity. Over the past 33 years,
these gatherings have produced important agreements and targets for reducing
greenhouse gas emissions – from ending deforestation by 2030 to tripling
renewable energy capacity.
More than
three decades later, the world returns to Brazil to confront climate change. It
is no coincidence that Cop30 takes place in the heart of the Amazon rainforest.
This is an opportunity for politicians, diplomats, scientists, activists and
journalists to witness the reality of the Amazon. We want the world to see the
true state of the forests, the planet’s largest river basin, and the millions
of people who live in the region. Cops cannot be mere showcases of good ideas
or annual gatherings for negotiators. They must be moments of contact with
reality and of effective action to tackle climate change.
To
confront this crisis together, we need resources. And we must recognise that
the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities remains the
non-negotiable foundation of any climate pact. That is why the global south
demands greater access to resources – not out of charity, but justice. Rich
countries have benefited the most from the carbon-based economy. They must now
rise to their responsibilities, not only by making commitments but by honouring
their debts.
Brazil is
doing its part. In only two years, we have already halved deforestation in the
Amazon, showing that concrete climate action is possible.
In Belém,
we will launch an innovative initiative to preserve forests: the Tropical
Forests Forever Facility (TFFF). It is innovative because it operates as an
investment fund, not a donation mechanism. The TFFF will reward those who keep
their forests standing and those who invest in the fund. A genuine win-win
approach to tackling climate change. Leading by example, Brazil has announced
an investment of $1bn in the TFFF, and we expect equally ambitious
announcements from other countries.
We also
set an example by becoming the second country to present a new nationally
determined contribution (NDC). Brazil has committed to reducing its emissions
from 59% to 67%, covering all greenhouse gases and all sectors of the economy.
In this spirit, we call on all countries to present equally ambitious NDCs and
to implement them effectively.
The
energy transition is fundamental to meeting Brazil’s NDC. Our energy matrix is
among the cleanest in the world, with 88% of our electricity coming from
renewable sources. We are a leader in biofuels and are advancing in wind, solar
and green hydrogen energy.
Redirecting
revenues from oil production to finance a just, orderly and equitable energy
transition will be essential. Over time, oil companies worldwide, including
Brazil’s Petrobras, will transform into energy companies, because a growth
model based on fossil fuels cannot last.
People
must be at the centre of political decisions about climate and the energy
transition. We must recognise that the most vulnerable sectors of our society
are the most affected by the impacts of climate change, which is why just
transition and adaptation plans must aim to combat inequality.
We cannot
forget that 2 billion people lack access to clean technologies and fuels for
cooking, and 673 million people still live with hunger. In response, we will
launch in Belém a declaration on hunger, poverty and climate. Our commitment to
fight global warming must be directly linked to the fight against hunger.
It is
also fundamental that we advance the reform of global governance. Today,
multilateralism suffers from the paralysis of the UN security council. Created
to preserve peace, it has failed to prevent wars. It is our duty, therefore, to
fight for the reform of this institution. At Cop30, we will advocate for the
creation of a UN climate change council linked to the general assembly. It
would be a new governance structure with the force and legitimacy to ensure
that countries deliver on their promises, and an effective step toward
reversing the current paralysis of the multilateral system.
At every
climate conference, we hear many promises but see too few real commitments. The
era of declarations of good intentions has ended: the time for action plans has
arrived. That is why today we begin the “Cop of truth”.
Luiz
Inácio Lula da Silva is the president of Brazil
quinta-feira, 6 de novembro de 2025
Não são lojas, são barcos! / António Sérgio Rosa de Carvalho / 16 de Janeiro de 2024
OPINIÃO
Não
são lojas, são barcos!
Todos
já concluíram, com excepção das autoridades, que muitas destas lojas de
bugigangas constituirão uma fachada para máfias que as utilizam como plataforma
rotativa para imigração ilegal.
António Sérgio Rosa de Carvalho
16 de Janeiro de 2024, 14:45
https://www.publico.pt/2024/01/16/opiniao/opiniao/nao-sao-lojas-sao-barcos-2076992
O encerramento da loja Vida Portuguesa marca,
como sintoma irreversível, uma nova dimensão no desaparecimento no quotidiano
das vivências portuguesas num originalmente centro histórico, agora reduzido a
mero décor híbrido.
O encerramento da Livraria Ferin (1) e da Barbearia Campos (2)
fazem parte deste diagnóstico, mas o caso específico da primeira loja de
Catarina Portas, ultrapassa estes no plano simbólico, de forma sintomaticamente
grave.
Catarina Portas pertence a uma geração, como
muitos outros, que tentou habitar o centro histórico de Lisboa. Mas Catarina
foi mais longe.
Demonstrando uma capacidade de empreendimento
criativo, associada a uma visão cultural única, características raras numa
sociedade de sonâmbulos entorpecidos, ela criou um projecto determinado por uma
revisitação refrescante do artesanato português, colocando-o com grande
sensibilidade estética em interiores de património arquitectónico ameaçado.
Assim, de forma dialéctica, ela conseguiu, de
forma única, inverter o conceito de nostalgia passiva implícito no mito da
Saudade, em algo activo, dinâmico e criativo.
O PÚBLICO publicou recentemente uma entrevista
(3) com Catarina Portas.
Nela, ela exprime o seu espanto pela
omnipresença na Baixa lisboeta e portuense de centenas de lojas de bugigangas
asiáticas, que sobrevivem a todos sobressaltos, pagando acima de 10 mil euros
de renda mensal sem uma dinâmica comercial que justifique tais investimentos.
Com relação a este mistério pronunciei-me já
em Julho de 2017,(4) com perguntas directas e um
apelo aos jornalistas. Este apelo foi seguido por Bárbara Reis, moradora da
Baixa e ex-directora do PÚBLICO, que em Maio de 2021 publicou um artigo no qual
explicitamente perguntava: "Que negócio há atrás das lojas de bugigangas
para turistas?"(5)
Ora, todos já concluíram, com excepção das
autoridades responsáveis, que muitas destas lojas constituirão uma fachada para
máfias que as utilizam como plataforma rotativa para avalanches de imigração
ilegal, a fim de, aproveitando-se da permissividade apática e de uma nova lei
da imigração que concede a qualquer um seis meses para procurar trabalho, e
através de um registo na Segurança Social, garantirem o direito a residir.
Este paradoxo, em total contraciclo com a
Europa (ver as novas leis de imigração em França, Alemanha, Países Baixos,
Escandinávia) transformou Portugal numa fábrica de legalizações e principal
exportador de imigração ilegal para os Países de Schengen (ver também, da minha
autoria, "Chega de dar razões ao Chega para ter razão"(6) e ainda "Um apelo à revisão da nova Lei da
Imigração e à reposição do SEF").(7)
Os leitores já compreenderam. Este fenómeno,
que constitui mistério apenas para aqueles que não querem ver aquilo que é
evidente, forma a nossa versão dos barcos que tanto tumulto político têm
provocado em Inglaterra e Itália.
Máfias organizadas(8)
ganham fortunas com os sonhos de vítimas. Também as lojas são geridas por
máfias internacionais onde “são os empregados que pagam aos patrões, não são os
patrões que pagam aos empregados”.
Temos eleições brevemente, seguidas de
eleições europeias. O tema da imigração vai dominar as eleições europeias.
E Portugal continua alheio a tudo quanto se
passa à sua volta, numa apatia submissa e sonâmbula, sempre à espera que Tudo e
Todos determinem o nosso futuro!
Historiador de Arquitectura
(3) https://www.publico.pt/2023/12/24/local/entrevista/precisamos-dez-lojas-pasteis-nata-rua-2074612
(4) https://www.publico.pt/2017/07/12/local/opiniao/o-misterio-das-lojas-asiaticas-1778557
(5)https://www.publico.pt/2021/05/15/local/opiniao/negocio-ha-atras-lojas-bugigangas-turistas-1962506
(6) https://www.publico.pt/2023/04/04/opiniao/opiniao/chega-dar-razoes-chega-razao-2044760
Mini-mart crime network a 'pull factor' for illegal migrants, say MPs
Mini-mart
crime network a 'pull factor' for illegal migrants, say MPs
1 day ago
Sam
Francis
Political
reporter
BBC
Undercover footage which captures a customer buying illegal cigarettes. BBC
Undercover
filming by the BBC found illegal cigarettes and vapes for sale in the
mini-marts
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ced6wjy5qqjo
Senior
politicians have warned that a UK-wide criminal network uncovered by the BBC is
acting as a pull factor for illegal migration to the UK.
The Home
Office has promised to investigate after a BBC investigation uncovered more
than 100 businesses linked to a Kurdish gang enabling migrants to work
illegally selling counterfeit cigarettes in High Street mini-marts.
Home
Secretary Shabana Mahmood said these kinds of networks "create an
incentive for people to come here illegally".
Responding
to the investigation, Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said
"no wonder illegal immigrants want to cross the Channel", while
Reform UK accused the government of "looking the other way".
Criminal
network behind UK mini-marts enables migrants to work illegally - BBC
investigation
The BBC
uncovered a criminal network using "ghost directors" to represent
companies' official paperwork while remaining uninvolved in day-to-day
operations.
Undercover
journalists posing as asylum seekers were told how easy it was to take over a
shop and make thousands of pounds a week from illegal tobacco.
HMRC
estimates the trade in illegal cigarettes and vapes costs the UK at least
£2.2bn in lost revenue annually.
The
investigation found asylum seekers working 14-hour shifts for as little as £4
an hour, often in legal limbo while waiting for Home Office decisions.
More than
100 mini-marts, barbershops and car washes, operating from Dundee to south
Devon, were linked to the crime network by the BBC. But a financial crime
investigator told the BBC he believes it goes much wider.
The BBC
also discovered Kurdish builders offering to construct hidden compartments to
conceal contraband during police raids, and Facebook groups advertising
mini-marts for sale.
"This
rampant illegal activity is happening right under the government's nose,"
Philp said.
"No
wonder illegal immigrants want to cross the Channel and come to the UK when it
is possible to do this here."
Only
quitting the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) would unlock the
increased powers to stop illegal "crossings and subsequent illegal
working", Philp said.
Emergency
asylum processing centres were needed to allow refugees to move into legal work
"while those who don't have a right to stay must be returned", the
Liberal Democrats said.
"The
asylum system was broken by the Conservatives and Labour hasn't fixed it,"
Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson Max Wilkinson said.
"The
fact that we have tens of thousands of asylum seekers waiting to be processed
means there's an obvious group of potentially vulnerable people for organised
crime gangs to exploit."
Reform
UK's head of policy Zia Yusuf described the criminal network as
"absolutely scandalous".
"Our
high streets are being used for organised crime, and the government is looking
the other way," he said.
"It's
time these sham businesses were shut down and these criminals deported."
Why do
Channel migrants want to come to the UK?
Was
Starmer right to link Brexit to a rise in small boat crossings?
Business
and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle branded the network uncovered by the BBC as
"unacceptable" adding it "won't be allowed to happen on our
watch".
"Under
this government there's been an increase of 51% of raids on shops and
businesses up and down the country," he said.
Through
Operation Sterling, the government has invested £5m into immigration
enforcement - acknowledging the loose regulation of Britian's labour market was
acting as a pull factor for those entering the UK illegally.
Under the
scheme more than 8,000 illegal migrants were arrested in the past year, with
about 1,000 removed from the UK.
Last
month, Mahmood said she wanted to "shrink the black economy" and
dismantle the business model of smuggling gangs.
For
obvious reasons, estimating the size of the black economy in the UK is
complicated - but a recent study from researchers at the European Parliament
suggests the size of the UK's was about 11% of the total economy in 2022. This
is lower than the average of 17% across 31 European countries.
The Home
Office say the government's roll out of digital ID will help combat illegal
working by making it easier for employers to check the status of their
employees.
Conservative
shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately dismissed the digital ID plan
as a "distraction and a red herring", saying the scheme would not
have stopped the criminal network uncovered by the BBC.
Subscrever:
Comentários (Atom)
