What Is Going On With Brexit After ‘No Deal’ On The EU ‘Divorce’?

What Is Going On With Brexit After ‘No Deal’ On The EU ‘Divorce’?
Theresa May went to Brussels on Wednesday in order to seal a deal to take the UK a big step closer to quitting the European Union. Everyone thought it was a formality. It wasn’t.

As it was confirmed there was no agreement on the Brexit ‘divorce’ settlement, here’s where everyone stands after a day of high political drama:

What is the issue with the Irish border?

The Irish border – specifically the border between EU-member Ireland and the British region of Northern Ireland – is proving to be a major obstacle. Protracted talks over its future status is preventing negotiations between the UK government and the EU to start over a future trade agreement.

Dublin fears the creation of a ‘hard border’, replacing the existing ‘soft’ arrangement, could disrupt 20 years of delicate peace in Northern Ireland and put the Good Friday Agreement in jeopardy.

Some have alluded to the the army checkpoints and watchtowers that dotted the 310-mile border during the Troubles, and Ireland has sought assurances that nothing similar will be revived.

However, there has been a stalemate.

Ireland has called on Theresa May to keep Northern Ireland in the EU’s customs union – essentially a free trade area – in order to avoid the ‘hard’ border. But, as the UK government is at pains to argue, this goes against the principles of Brexit, which it says must include the UK leaving both the customs union and the single market.

That’s enough of a catch-22 without the Democratic Unionist Party potentially bringing down the minority Conservative government.

Why is the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) having an influence?

The Northern Irish DUP and its 10 MPs in Westminster has been propping up the Tories after signing a ‘confidence and supply’ agreement following May’s disastrous snap General Election. Walking away from the deal is the Northern Irish party’s trump card.

Last week, speculation mounted that a deal was being thrashed out to harmonise trading relations in some areas between Northern Ireland and the EU (or, in other words, the Irish republic). The DUP appeared willing play its hand, hinting that any deal to “placate Dublin and the EU” would mean the Conservatives “can’t rely on our vote”.

So how does the UK government satisfy both the north and south of Ireland?

With great difficulty.

On Monday, it was reported the UK had agreed that Northern Ireland would maintain ‘regulatory alignment’ with the EU to prevent the need for customs checks at the border.

A draft 15-page joint statement from the European Commission and the UK stated that “in the absence of agreed solutions the UK will ensure that there continues to be continued regulatory alignment” with the internal market and customs union.

This is where confusion reigned supreme. As the text was passed around Brussels, London, Dublin and Belfast, debate raged over whether ‘regulatory alignment’ constituted effectively still being an EU member. A former Treasury adviser did not think so:

To save a week of pointless commentary can we all agree that “regulatory alignment” in some key areas is not the same as staying in the single market or the customs union?

December 4, 2017
In any case, as press conferences and lunches were arranged and cancelled as reports varied as to whether the DUP and the Irish government had agreed the deal, it was soon clear the unionists would not buy it.

“Northern Ireland must leave the EU on the same terms as the rest of the UK, we will not accept any form of regulatory divergence” – DUP leader Arlene Foster on #Brexit talks t.co/VKDYRXgOLk pic.twitter.com/e0FqI0NDq0

December 4, 2017
DUP leader Arlene Foster told reporters they could not back the proposal.

“We will not accept any kind of regulatory divergence which separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the UK,” she said.

“Northern Ireland must leave the EU on the same terms as the rest of the United Kingdom.”

Why is the Irish border dispute blocking wider Brexit negotiations?

Meanwhile in Brussels, May was hoping to announce that a deal had been agreed on Northern Ireland, as well as the rights of EU citizens after Brexit and how much the UK is willing to pay as part of the ‘divorce’ bill.

So with the DUP effectively nixing the border solution, the UK Prime Minister was left in limbo.

Standing side-by-side with European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, she was forced to admit there was no agreement with Brussels on the entire divorce package.

But they remained confident on getting agreement, saying differences remain only on a “couple of issues” – with the Irish question still outstanding.

Negotiations over the ‘divorce’ settlement is known as Phase One, and is crucial to pushing on with Brexit. The EU insists Phase One has to be completed before moving on to Phase Two – namely the talks about fresh trading relationships between the UK and Europe.

Negotiators are working to a strict timetable, with the hope from the UK side  being that Phase One is wrapped up before the December 14 summit of EU leaders. This, in turn, is seen as important to providing enough time for new trading arrangements to be thrashed out by March 29, 2019 – the day the UK official leaves the bloc.

Why has a ‘special’ deal for Northern Ireland prompted Scotland, Wales and London to ask for the same?

Both Nicola Sturgeon and Sadiq Khan demanded ‘special’ Brexit deals for Scotland and London, arguing there was no reason why other parts of the UK can’t get different treatment if Northern Ireland does.

Scotland’s Fist Minister said that if a Brexit deal can be done that “effectively” keeps Northern Ireland in the single European market, there is “surely no good practical reason” why others should not benefit from the same.

If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the single market (which is the right solution for Northern Ireland) there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t.

December 4, 2017
Both Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain part of the EU in the referendum.

The Mayor of London, buoyed by the capital voting by a margin of 59.9 percent to remain within the EU, followed suit:

Huge ramifications for London if Theresa May has conceded that it’s possible for part of the UK to remain within the single market & customs union after Brexit. Londoners overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU and a similar deal here could protect tens of thousands of jobs.

December 4, 2017
The domino effect continued, with Welsh first minister Carwyn Jones also calling for Wales to be allowed to stay in the single market if other parts of the UK could.
We cannot allow different parts of the UK to be more favourably treated than others. If one part of the UK is granted continued participation in the Single Market & Customs Union, then we fully expect to be made the same offer.

December 4, 2017
She hasn’t Text says: In absence of agreed solutions UK will ensure that there is continued regulatory alignment from those rules of internal market and customs union which, now or in the future, support North South co-operation and protection of the Good Friday agreement t.co/pXWIrk2xUR

December 4, 2017
Huge “if” rather. @theresa_may has *not* conceded that NI would remain in CU/SM. The “alignment” language is a classic #EU fudge. Compromise on both sides, but Ireland definitely climbed down from demanding hard guarantees. Only final #Brexit deal will spell it out – in 2019. t.co/JUOUS1cjZc

December 4, 2017
So is Brexit actually going to happen?

Despite the many moving parts, Brexit is moving forward – but at a glacial speed that has led many to question whether it will lead to a decent deal given the multiple compromises already made.

A damning editorial in the London Evening Standard, edited by former chancellor George Osborne, pointed to the series of concessions the UK has made since the EU insisted the terms of trade couldn’t be negotiated until the divorce settlement was agreed. It pointed to:

– Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson telling Europe to “go whistle” if it wanted a generous divorce settlement, only for the UK now being close to agreeing to pay a £50 bn in return for favourable trade talks. – Conceding to all the demands on future status of EU citizens living in the UK, which has included accepting involvement of the European Court of Justice – crossing one of May’s apparent ‘red lines’. – The Irish border, and which Brexiteers “were publicly telling everyone it was a trivial issue which a clever camera could solve”.
Compromises aside, Donald Tusk, the chairman of EU leaders, said today that while time to reach an agreement on divorce terms is “getting very short”, a deal that would unblock talks on a future trade agreement is “still possible” by next week. In short, it’s still on.

Met with PM @theresa_may. I was ready to present draft EU27 guidelines tomorrow for #Brexit talks on transition and future. But UK and Commission asked for more time. It is now getting very tight but agreement at December #EUCO is still possible. pic.twitter.com/oLQQHs9F8q — Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) December 4, 2017

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/what-is-going-on-with-brexit-after-no-deal-on-the-eu-divorce_uk_5a2572aae4b03c44072f26e2

GLAAD spotlights Alliance Defending Freedom’s decade long anti-LGBTQ legal strategy

GLAAD spotlights Alliance Defending Freedom’s decade long anti-LGBTQ legal strategy

ADF to appear before Supreme Court tomorrow in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission case

NEW YORK – GLAAD, the world’s largest LGBTQ media advocacy organization, today released an outline of the Alliance Defending Freedom’s (ADF) case history working to push the radical narrative that non-discrimination protections violate the rights of those seeking to deny services to marginalized communities, including LGBTQ people. The ADF, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated as an anti-LGBTQ hate group, will appear before the Supreme Court of the United States tomorrow as oral arguments in the Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission begin. The case would inscribe hate and discrimination into law by allowing individuals to seek religious exemptions from the existing and future non-discrimination laws intended to protect LGBTQ people.

“With their involvement with Masterpiece Cakeshop, the ADF is attempting to roll back our nation’s progress by pushing discriminatory religious exemptions into law,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, President and CEO of GLAAD. “The twisted narrative they masterminded is part of an insidious strategy that has been pushed by the ADF for decades with the goal of unraveling hard-fought non-discrimination protections for the LGBTQ community.”

The ADF has made it clear that their ultimate goal is to overturn all nondiscrimination laws applying to sexual orientation and gender identity. They are playing a long game of many cuts, and they currently have the full backing of the Trump White House.

Even after the ADF’s long push to normalize their radical agenda the majority of Americans are against religious exemptions to non-discrimination protections. This includes the majority of those of Christian faith the ADF claims to be fighting to protect with only half (50%) of white evangelical Protestants and fewer than half of Mormons (42%), Hispanic Protestants (34%), black Protestants (25%), and Jehovah’s Witnesses (25%) believing that small business owners should be granted permission to refuse services to LGBTQ people, according to a recent PRRI study.

GLAAD has been leading the charge to ask journalists to frame the national discussion around Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission in a fair and accurate way, developing a tip sheet for journalists reporting on religious exemptions, court cases, federal guidance, and legislation and sending an open letter, co-signed by 45 other organizations, calling for newsrooms to reject framing the case around ADF talking points.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Alliance Defending Freedom’s Work to Erode LGBTQ Rights Using Religious Exemptions

 

  • Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission
    Lakewood, CO; ongoing since 2012

    Colorado baker Jack Phillips desires to turn away same-sex couples seeking his services for their events. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission found that Phillips unlawfully discriminated against one such couple. The Colorado Court of Appeals agreed with the civil rights commission, and the Colorado Supreme Court declined to hear it further. ADF petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case.  ADF’s focus is on creative expression rather than the clear cut discrimination at play, arguing that Phillips and others are artisans who should not be forced to use their talents in ways that go against their wishes. In truth, the debate revolves around them as business owners and the demand that all business owners comply with lawful business practices—which is precisely why ADF wants to turn the focus toward the artistry side rather than the business side.
     

  • State of Washington v. Arlene’s Flowers (Ingersoll v. Arlene’s Flowers)
    Richland, Washington; ongoing since 2012

    ADF waged a very public defense of Washington state florist Baronelle Stutzman, a business owner who wishes to turn away same-sex couples who seek her event services. Washington state’s high court has ruled against Stutzman, insisting she and all business owners must apply with state nondiscrimination law. Nevertheless, ADF is persisting all the way to the US Supreme Court, asking the federal high court to reverse the state high court’s ruling against Ms. Stutzman.
     

  • Elane Photography v. Willock
    Albuquerque, NW; began in 2006

    The ADF defended business owners Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, who turned away a same-sex couple seeking photography services for their commitment ceremony. ADF was unsuccessful in its defense of the Huguenins all the way to the US Supreme Court level, when the high court declined to hear the case, letting stand a New Mexico Supreme Court ruling in favor of the same-sex couple.
     

  • Bishop v. United States (Smith v. Bishop)
    Oklahoma; 2004-2014

    The ADF defended Tulsa County Clerk Sally Howe Smith, who had refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. ADF and allies were unsuccessful at the federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, where the courts found the Oklahoma marriage amendment to be discriminatory. Then in 2014, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear the ADF’s petition in the case, opening the path to marriage equality in the state.  
     

  • Barber v. Bryant | Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant
    Mississippi; ongoing

    ADF is co-counsel in defense of Mississippi’s discriminatory “religious freedom” law, which ADF itself helped to draft. The matter is currently playing out in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
     

  • Adams v. Trustees of the University of North Carolina-Wilmington
    Wilmington, NC; 2007-2011

    Mike Adams is a conservative commentator who has written for outlets like the American Family Association. In this capacity, he has written truly heinous things about LGBTQ people. Mike Adams is also a college professor. It is in this latter capacity that ADF defended Adams arguing that his extreme commentary could not be used against his ability to obtain promotion at his teaching job. ADF was ultimately successful here, giving them a rare LGBTQ-centered win. ADF is quite proud of this win and has heavily promoted its work on this case.
     

  • Zamecnik v. Indian Prairie School District // Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie School District #204 Board of Education
    Naperville, IL; 2006-2011

    ADF defended two different students of the same Illinois high school who fought for the right to wear anti-LGBTQ t-shirts during the school day after one of the students was reprimanded for wearing a shirt reading “Be Happy, Not Gay,” arguing that the students were being prevented from expressing their religious views. While losing in lower court, the ADF was ultimately successful at the 7th Circuit.
     

  • Bernstein v. Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association
    Ocean Grove, NJ; 2007-2012

    ADF unsuccessfully represents the owners of an open air pavilion that fought to ban same-sex ceremonies from their facilities. The pavilion had been receiving a special tax break that specifically stated it had to welcome all-comers, but the ADF and its clients fought to discriminate, despite the clear case against them.
     

  • Gifford v. Erwin
    Schaghticoke, NY; 2012-2016

    ADF represented upstate New York business owners who run a wedding business on their farmland. The couple, Cynthia and Robert Gifford, denied wedding services to a lesbian couple, and the couple filed suit. ADF unsuccessfully shepherded the Gifford’s case through the NY court system, culminating in loss at the state Supreme Court Appellate Division. The Giffords were ordered to pay a fine and damages, as well as provide sensitivity classes for employees.
     

  • Baker v. Wildflower Inn
    Lyndonville, VT; 2011

    ADF represented Vermont innkeepers who denied a lesbian wedding. ADF lost.
     

  • Wathen v. Timbercreek Bed and Breakfast
    Paxton, IL; 2011-2016

    ADF unsuccessfully represented an Illinois bed and breakfast that fought to deny a civil unions ceremony to a same-sex couple.
     

  • Cervelli v. Aloha Bed and Breakfast
    Hawaii Kai, HI; 2011-2013

    ADF unsuccessfully represented a bed and breakfast that discriminated against a lesbian couple interested in staying on site.
     

  • Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America, 2011

    ADF filed a friend of the court brief in this case on behalf of a group of conservative military chaplains, arguing that repealing the military’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy would threaten their religious liberty.
     

  • Cochran v. City of Atlanta
    Atlanta, GA; ongoing since 2015

    The ADF is representing Kelvin Cochran, the former fire chief of the city of Atlanta, GA, who was suspended and ultimately terminated for a book he wrote in which he, among other things, equated homosexuality with bestiality and incest. Despite the obvious concerns that the book raises for the city and the fire department, the fact that Cochran did not receive permission before publishing it, and the mayor of Atlanta flatly stating that Cochran’s choice to speak out about the controversy during his suspension period was a major reason for his eventual firing, ADF ignores the facts and frames Cochran’s termination as nothing more than religious discrimination.
     

  • Harper v. Poway Unified School District
    San Diego, CA; 2004-2011

    ADF represented Chase Harper, a California high school student who fought to wear a shirt calling homosexuality “shameful.” ADF lost at the 9th Circuit and unsuccessfully appealed to SCOTUS.

  • Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley
    Augusta, GA; 2010-2012

    ADF represented Jennifer Keeton, an Augusta State University student who claimed she could not complete the requirements of her graduate counseling program because of her religious opposition to homosexuality. ADF lost in federal court.
     

  • Ward v. Polite
    Detroit, MI: 2009-2012

    ADF represented Julea Ward, an Eastern Michigan University graduate student who argued that her religion prevented her from providing fair and accurate counseling regarding LGBTQ people.
     

  • Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission v. Hands On Originals
    Lexington, KY; ongoing since 2012

    ADF is representing Kentucky printer Blaine Adamson in an ongoing case involving his refusal to print LGBTQ-friendly t-shirts for the 2012 Lexington Pride Festival. The case now sits in the Kentucky Court of Appeals.

  • Sklar v. Clough
    Atlanta, GA; 2006-2008

    ADF represented two Georgia Institute of Technology students who cited their religion as reason to oppose a university “Safe Space” program supporting LGBTQ students.
     

  • Lopez v. Candaele
    Los Angeles, CA; 2009-2011

    ADF represented a student who claimed that a professor showed adverse action toward him due to his anti-LGBTQ Christian beliefs. The case died at the 9th Circuit, with an ADF loss.
     

  • Horizon Christian Fellowship v. Williamson
    Massachusetts; 2016

    ADF represented four churches worried that the inclusion of gender identity in state nondiscrimination laws would force them to open up facilities to transgender people. There really was no suit to be had, since churches were exempt (though ADF claims the state made changes as a result of their suit). The whole thing was dismissed.
     

  • Fort Des Moines Church of Christ v. Jackson
    Des Moines, IA; 2016

    ADF filed a lawsuit against the Iowa Civil Rights Commission alleging state and municipal antidiscrimination laws unconstitutionally interfere with the First and Fourteenth Amendment rights of its client, Fort Des Moines Church, despite the fact that the church had no tangible infringement to report. ADF’s motion was denied in District Court since, essentially, this was a theoretical complaint in search of a legitimate controversy.
     

  • Knapp v. City of Coeur d’Alene
    Couer D’Alene, IA; 2015

    ADF represented a Christian couple who wished to limit their wedding chapel to only straight couples.
     

  • 303 Creative v. Elenis
    Denver, CO; ongoing since 2016

    ADF is representing a Colorado graphic designer named Lorie Smith, who wishes to create websites geared toward weddings, but to exclude same-sex couples who seek her services. The suit (known as a “pre-enforcement challenge”) is designed to chip away at a law before any complaint arises. In short: no one has complained about or sued ADF’s client; they are simply trying to reshape the law before any complaint arises.
     

  • Telescope Media Group v. Lindsey
    Minneapolis, MN; 2017

    ADF is representing a Minnesota couple that wishes to exclude same-sex couples from its wedding videography business. The lawsuit (another “pre-enforcement challenge) challenges a portion of Minnesota law applicable to human rights, in hopes of weakening/overturning it.
     

  • Brush & Nib Studio v. City of Phoenix
    Phoenix, AZ; 2017​

    ​​​​​​Yet another “pre-enforcement challenge,” this one is aimed at the city code of Phoenix, AZ, where ADF’s clients wish to limit their custom artwork (including wedding invitations) only to opposite-sex/heterosexual/(and presumably)cisgender clients. This particular case has already been tossed out of Superior Court, but ADF has appealed.
     

  • Amy Lynn Photography Studio v. City of Madison
    Madison, WI; 2017

    Another pre-enforcement challenge, this one involving a photographer and blogger who is hoping to bring down a local nondiscrimination ordinance.
     

  • Southworth v. Board of Regents University of Wisconsin System
    Madison, WI; 1996-2014

    ​​​​​​​ADF represented a student who claimed that forcing him to pay student fees to support on-campus clubs was a violation of his religious beliefs, specifically citing the school’s LGBTQ club as an organization he found objectionable.

December 4, 2017

www.glaad.org/blog/glaad-spotlights-alliance-defending-freedoms-decade-long-anti-lgbtq-legal-strategy

Dianne Feinstein, Obstruction, Anthony Rapp, Roy Moore, Piggie Park, Armie Hammer, Spiders, Alan Ball, Japan: HOT LINKS

Dianne Feinstein, Obstruction, Anthony Rapp, Roy Moore, Piggie Park, Armie Hammer, Spiders, Alan Ball, Japan: HOT LINKS
Jordi

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. Dianne Feinstein sees a case building against Trump. “I think we see this in the indictments, the four indictments and pleas that have just taken place, and some of the comments that are being made. I see it in the hyper-frenetic attitude of the White House––the comments every day, the continual tweets. And I see it, most importantly, in what happened with the firing of Director Comey and it is my belief that that is directly because he did not agree to lift the cloud of the Russia investigation. That’s obstruction of justice.”

Anthony Rapp Star TrekHARASSED. House of Cards fans are coming for Anthony Rapp because his sexual assault revelations started the snowball that got Kevin Spacey canned.

PARANOIA. Everyone at the White House is worried about being recorded: “Everyone is paranoid,” said a person close to Trump’s White House. “Everyone thinks they’re being recorded.”

CHILD MOLESTER ROY MOORE. Thank you Donald Trump.

Thankful for President Trump’s support.

The America First agenda will #MAGA. Can’t wait to help him #DrainTheSwamp.#ALSEN t.co/pYu9h7TYVN

— Judge Roy Moore (@MooreSenate) December 4, 2017

ECHOES OF ’68? How the SCOTUS anti-gay baker case is like South Carolina’s Piggie Park barbecue: ‘When two African-Americans parked their car at a Piggie Park drive-in in August 1964 in Columbia, South Carolina, the waitress who came out to serve them turned back once she saw they were black and didn’t take their order. In the civil rights lawsuit that followed, Piggie Park owner Maurice Bessinger justified the refusal to serve black customers based on his religious belief opposing “any integration of the races whatsoever.”‘

WELCOME TO HELL. SNL’s brilliant commentary on men’s awakening to women’s realities.

armie hammer nipplesSTRAIGHT WHITE MEN. Armie Hammer to make Broadway debut. “Straight White Men is a dark comedy written by Young Jean Lee. This production will mark the first time a female Asian playwright’s work will be produced on Broadway.”

NIGHTMARE FUEL. If spiders worked together, they could eat all humans within a year: “That’s the shock new finding from a piece of research that is set to give everyone nightmares. At the moment, spiders mostly eat insects, although some of the larger species have been known to snack on lizards, birds and even small mammals. But in a report published in the Washington Post, experts said that if you add up the weight of all the food eaten by the world’s entire spider population in a single year is more than the combined weight of every human on the planet.”

COSTA RICA. Thousands march against marriage equality: ‘Under the name “March for life and family”, thousands of people walked this Sunday from the Metropolitan Cathedral to Paseo Colón.’

JAPAN. Calls for marriage equality growing: “While six local governments currently recognize same-sex partnerships, ensuring couples the same treatment and entitlement to local services as married couples, most still face discrimination when searching for public housing, visiting a critically ill partner in hospital or inheriting property on the grounds that they are not family.”

RIP. Elton’s mother.

So sad to say that my mother passed away this morning. I only saw her last Monday and I am in shock. Travel safe Mum. Thank you for everything. I will miss you so much.

Love, Elton pic.twitter.com/dQKXRbpGRy

— Elton John (@eltonofficial) December 4, 2017

MICHELANGELO OF THE DAY. Tatsuo Horiuchi, a retiree who creates paintings on Microsoft Excel.

TEASER OF THE DAY. Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.

MORE TEASERS. Alan Ball’s “Here and Now”. “A multi-racial, adopted family has themselves tested when one of them begins seeing things.”

MONDAY MUSCLE. Jordi.

Instagram Photo

 

Instagram Photo

 

Instagram Photo

 

Instagram Photo

The post Dianne Feinstein, Obstruction, Anthony Rapp, Roy Moore, Piggie Park, Armie Hammer, Spiders, Alan Ball, Japan: HOT LINKS appeared first on Towleroad.


Dianne Feinstein, Obstruction, Anthony Rapp, Roy Moore, Piggie Park, Armie Hammer, Spiders, Alan Ball, Japan: HOT LINKS

This Week In Climate Change – What You Need To Know

This Week In Climate Change – What You Need To Know

You’re busy, we get it. Here’s everything essential that you may have missed from the last week’s environmental news.

***

1. Co-Op and Iceland back bottle deposit schemes 

The two supermarkets were the first in the UK to come out in favour of a mandatory bottle deposit return scheme [DRS], after responding to a survey carried out by Greenpeace.

This comes in the wake of the government seeking industry views on implementing such an idea. 

“This cannot carry on… deposit return schemes work. In Norway theirs has led to 96% of all bottles being returned, with similar results in other countries that have adopted a DRS. Britain urgently needs to do the same,” Richard Walker, director of sustainability for Iceland, told the Guardian. 

Read more here.

2. Research has found that oceans failing to absorb heat will lead to drastic global temperature increases

Research carried out by the experts behind documentary ‘Chasing Coral’ have warned that if our oceans become unable to absorb heat from polluting greenhouse gases, the average temperature on land could rise as high as 50°C.

Read more here.

3. The Mayor of London has a plan to cut down plastic bottle waste

Sadiq Khan has confirmed plans to roll out new water fountains and bottle-refill stations across London. The move should help to cut down on the volume of plastic bottles bought in the capital every day. 

Read more here.

4. The UN is in talks about a ‘zero tolerance’ treaty to halt plastic pollution 

Due to the threat posed by the plastic pollution of the oceans, experts are encouraging a global treaty that bans plastics flooding into the sea from the land. This is due to be discussed at a UN environmental summit.

Read more here.

5. Thirty-one per cent of Republican voters believe that humans are to blame for climate change

According to a new eight year study looking into the opinions of people who identify with the USA’s two major political parties, a relatively low amount of Republican voters believe that human activity is responsible for the rise in global temperatures.

Eighty-two per cent of Democrats, on the other hand, reckon that human activity is primarily to blame.  

Read more here.



www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/this-week-in-climate-change-what-you-need-to-know_uk_5a257151e4b03c44072f2452

Informe HRC Equidad MX reconoce 32 centro laborales inclusivos de personas LGBT en México

Informe HRC Equidad MX reconoce 32 centro laborales inclusivos de personas LGBT en México

Hoy, la Fundación Human Rights Campaign, en colaboración con PEMEX – la compañía petrolera estatal más grande de México- lanzó el Informe HRC Equidad MX 2018, la primera evaluación de su tipo, diseñada para promover la inclusión LGBT en los centros laborales en México. Un total de 32 importantes empresas obtuvieron la mayor calificación en el informe inaugural, demostrando así su notable compromiso con la igualdad LGBT y la adopción de políticas y prácticas fundamentales para la comunidad.

El Informe HRC Equidad MX 2018 evaluó a las principales empresas y compañías multinacionales mexicanas en base a los tres pilares de inclusión LGBT:

  • Adopción de políticas de no discriminación;
  • Creación de grupos de recursos para empleados o consejos de diversidad e inclusión;
  • Participación en actividades públicas para apoyar la inclusión LGBT.

“Estos empleadores han invertido en la inclusión LGBT porque son negocios justos e inteligentes. Los 32 empresas reconocidas saben que la economía del futuro se construye con el talento de hoy; ser más inclusivo es clave para atraer y retener a la mejor fuerza laboral”, dijo Deena Fidas, Directora de HRC Equidad MX y el Programa de Igualdad en el Centro Laboral de HRC. “Honramos el nombramiento de dichas empresas como ‘Mejores Centros Laborales para la Inclusión LGBT’ y esperamos continuar trabajando juntos en los próximos años”.

Desde septiembre de 2016, HRC Equidad MX ha estado trabajando con empresas mexicanas para promover la importancia de la diversidad e inclusión LGBT en los lugares de trabajo en México. El programa crea modelos de consultoría y educación para empresas y organizaciones mexicanas interesadas en promover sus esfuerzos de inclusión. Las empresas serán honradas por su compromiso con la creación de centros laborales inclusivos en un evento organizado por PEMEX, el mayor empleador de México.

“Estoy segura de que esta certificación HRC Equidad MX será un parteaguas y motivará a más personas a construir entornos laborales más respetuosos. Este año fue muy grato poder hacer visible el compromiso de PEMEX con sus principios de igualdad y no discriminación, sobre todo con sus trabajadores y trabajadoras de la comunidad LGBT”, dijo Melissa García Godínez, Gerente de Inclusión de PEMEX. Estamos orgullosos de que las personas que trabajan en PEMEX puedan aportar su talento y esfuerzo al crecimiento de la empresa sin importar su orientación sexual o identidad de género.”

A través de HRC Equidad MX y el Índice de Igualdad Corporativa (CEI), la Fundación HRC ha establecido pautas para implementar políticas inclusivas, mejores prácticas y beneficios en corporaciones nacionales e internacionales para la comunidad LGBT. El año pasado, HRC realizó su segundo lanzamiento internacional del CEI en Ciudad de México, reconociendo el impacto positivo de las compañías líderes de inclusión LGBT. Además, HRC Equidad MX lanzó un manual de directrices en español para los centros laborales en México y Latinoamérica.

HRC se enorgullece de unirse Accenture México (Accenture), American Express Company (México), S.A. de C.V. (American Express), AT&T, México (AT&T), Cinépolis de México (Cinepolis), Grupo Financiero Banamex, S.A. de C.V. (Citibanamex), CompuCom México (Compucom), Dow Química Mexicana, S.A. de C.V. (DOW), Edelman México, S.A de C.V. (Edelman), EY (EY), Ford Motor Company (Ford), GE México, S.A. de C.V. (General Electric), Google México (Google), Herman Miller México, S.A. de C.V. (Herman Miller), IBM de México (IBM), J P Morgan Grupo Financiero, S.A. de C.V (J.P. Morgan), Kellogg Company (Kellogg), Lubrizol Servicios Técnicos, S de R.L. de C.V. (Lubrizol), Mastercard México (Mastercard), Nielsen México (Nielsen), PayPal México (PayPal), Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) y sus empresas productivas subsidiarias (PEMEX), PepsiCo México – PepsiCo Internacional México, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Pepsico), Pfizer de México (Pfizer), P&G México (Procter & Gamble), SAP México, S.A. de C.V. (SAP), Scotiabank Inverlat, S.A. (Scotiabank), SODEXO México (Sodexo), TE Connectivity México (TE Connectivity), The Boston Consulting Group (The Boston Consulting Group), UBER México Technology & Software (Uber), Unilever de México (Unilever), Walmart de México y Centroamérica (Walmart) para celebrar la inclusión LGBT en los centros de  trabajo.

Para obtener más información sobre el programa HRC Equidad MX, o para descargar una copia gratuita del informe, visite hrc.im/equidadMX.

www.hrc.org/blog/informe-hrc-equidad-mx-reconoce-32-centro-laborales-inclusivos-de-personas?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss-feed

SCOTUS Lets Troubling Ruling by Texas Supreme Court Stand, Undercutting Rights of Married Gay Couples

SCOTUS Lets Troubling Ruling by Texas Supreme Court Stand, Undercutting Rights of Married Gay Couples
Supreme Court SCOTUS

Supreme Court SCOTUS

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up the appeal of a Texas Supreme Court ruling against the rights of married same-sex couples. The Texas high court had ruled that “the right to a marriage license did not entitle same-sex couples to spousal benefits under employee insurance plans.”

The Texas Tribune reports:

Denying the city of Houston’s request, the U.S. Supreme Court will not review a June decision by the Texas Supreme Court, which ruled that the landmark decision legalizing same-sex marriage does not fully address the right to marriage benefits.

The high court on Monday announced it would not take up the case — which centers on Houston’s policy to provide spouses of gay and lesbian employees the same government-subsidized marriage benefits it provides to opposite-sex spouses — just months after the city of Houston filed its appeal, arguing the state court’s June decision “disregarded” precedent.

In that decision, the Texas Supreme Court threw out a lower court ruling that said spouses of gay and lesbian public employees are entitled to government-subsidized marriage benefits, and it unanimously ordered a trial court to reconsider the case. The ruling found that there’s still room for state courts to explore “the reach and ramifications” of marriage-related issues that resulted from the legalization of same-sex marriage.

The post SCOTUS Lets Troubling Ruling by Texas Supreme Court Stand, Undercutting Rights of Married Gay Couples appeared first on Towleroad.


SCOTUS Lets Troubling Ruling by Texas Supreme Court Stand, Undercutting Rights of Married Gay Couples

Why Is The Government Still Failing To Protect Assistance Dog Owners From Frequent Taxi And Minicab Refusals?

Why Is The Government Still Failing To Protect Assistance Dog Owners From Frequent Taxi And Minicab Refusals?

It will soon be Christmas again, and many of us are gearing up for the hectic weeks of shopping, Christmas parties, the anticipation and planning, and then, finally, the quality time spent with friends and families. Most of us look forward to this time of the year.

For guide dog owners however, Christmas can throw a year-round problem into sharp relief. Often, they rely on taxis and minicabs to go about the same festive activities as everyone else, but far too often they face embarrassment, humiliation and inconvenience on the way when they are illegally refused by a taxi or minicab driver because they are with their guide dog.

A report this week by the charity Guide Dogs shows that the number of these illegal refusals has doubled in the last three years.

Because of these refusals, and the prospect of being refused again, guide dog owners miss out on opportunities, employment and social events. This leads to increased social isolation and loneliness.

This discrimination is not only breaking the law – taxi and minicab drivers have to carry assistance dogs under the Equality Act 2010 – it causes a lasting impact on the person and their community.

Many refusals stem from the driver’s lack of awareness of their legal obligations, along with a general lack of consideration for the impact of a refusal. The best way to change this is through disability equality training, which makes sure that drivers know the rights and needs of people with disabilities.

Last November, I used my Private Member’s Bill to attempt to introduce a new law to require all taxi and minicab drivers to undertake disability training. It received much support from inside and outside Parliament, but time ran out. The Minister promised further action, but to date, we still have not seen a commitment from the Government to make disability equality training a requirement for all drivers.

At the moment, local licensing authorities can choose to introduce the training in their area, and some already do, with positive results. However, uptake under this voluntary model remains too low. To make sure that guide dog owners don’t miss out at again – at Christmas or any other time of the year – we need all drivers to undertake this essential training.

I’m supporting the Guide Dogs #AccessAllAreas campaign and urge the Government to introduce this essential law change to enable guide dog owners and others to go out and about as they wish, using taxis and minicabs with confidence.

Please show your support by signing the Guide Dogs petition: www.guidedogs.org.uk/petition.  

 

 

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/why-is-the-government-still-failing-to-protect-assistance-dog-owners-from-frequent-taxi-and-minicab-refusals_uk_5a257ad7e4b03350e0b867cc