تابع رؤية 2030
بذكاء سياقي

Ten long years have passed since that queasy morning of 24 June 2016, when Boris Johnson and Michael Gove addressed the cameras to hail the victory of the Vote Leave campaign, and a leap into the unknown for the UK. In the no-holds-barred battle of Brexit that spring, many alluring promises were made to tempt voters to turn their backs on the European Union. A decade on, we take a look at which of them ended up being met. 1. £350m a week for the NHS – enough for a new hospital to be built every week View image in fullscreen The Vote Leave battlebus. Photograph: Jack Taylor/Getty Images “At the end of the war, Britain created the NHS. It protects us throughout our lives, but it’s in danger. You can help it.” That was the plea at the start of one of Vote Leave’s more memorable broadcast adverts during the referendum campaign. “Every week we send £350m to Brussels. Money that’s wasted. That’s enough to build a new hospital every week.” That figure was contested from the start. Experts quickly pointed out that it failed to take account of the benefits the UK received in return, such as funding for scientific research and regeneration projects in deprived areas. But Johnson revelled in the row, repeating the figure at various points after the referendum result, and £350m for the NHS was famously plastered all over the side of Vote Leave’s battlebus. So did the NHS get that much-needed injection of resources? Max Warner, an expert on health and social care spending at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, says it’s true that health spending has risen in real terms – adjusted for inflation. “Consistently over time, going back almost as far as the start of the NHS, we as a country spend more on health, more or less every year, than we did in the previous year. That is true in real terms, that’s true as a share of GDP,” he says. “Broadly, health spending rises.” Part of the reason the “£350m a week for the NHS” argument may have resonated with voters was that the growth rate of spending had dropped since 2010, as the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition squeezed budgets. “It was like a lot of areas of public spending, where you had significant increases in the Labour period, and then you had a period of retrenchment from 2010 onwards,” Warner says. “And I think you can broadly see that particularly from the mid-2010s, NHS performance does start getting worse.” Two years after the referendum, in 2018, prime minister Theresa May gave a speech at the Royal Free hospital in north London, announcing a five-year funding settlement for the NHS that would see spending increase by 3.4% a year in real terms. By the end of the period covered, in 2023-24, she said, that meant spending would have risen by £394m a week. “Some of the extra funding I am promising today will come from using the money we will no longer spend on our annual membership subscription to the EU after we have left,” she claimed at the time. In the event, NHS spending ended up being much, much higher than May could possibly have envisaged, because of the struggle to contain the Covid pandemic, and treat its many victims, in 2020. “Health spending, in real terms, is much higher than it was pre-pandemic, and that’s substantially higher than it was at the Brexit referendum,” Warner says. However, he says it is impossible to disentangle whether leaving the EU had any direct bearing on the path of NHS spending since. That said, most economists believe the economy is smaller as a result of Brexit – by at least 4%, or up to 8% in one estimate recently cited by Rachel Reeves. “To the extent to which that is going to lower tax revenues, then all else being equal, that is going to make it harder to spend more on the NHS,” says Warner. He adds that this has more than outweighed any benefit of halting those budget contributions to Brussels: “A 4% hit to GDP we estimate would have a bigger effect on tax revenues than £350m a week.” 2. Bigger bottles of olive oil View image in fullscreen Olive oil … ‘the rules are exactly as they were.’ Photograph: Very Good/Getty Images In Johnson’s Vote Leave launch speech, he complained about the EU “telling us we can’t sell olive oil in containers bigger than five litres”. He repeatedly used the same example throughout the campaign – and it was also referred to by Gove as an example of bonkers Brussels bureaucracy. Charles Carey is the founder of The Oil Merchant, a specialist importer of fine estate olive oils – and hasn’t noticed Brussels bureaucracy receding in the decade since. “Little has changed,” he says. “The rules are all exactly as they were – for instance, the font size and typeface of the words Extra Virgin Olive Oil on the front label have to be the same as in the EU. The nutritional facts are all the same as in the EU, and the import codes for bottles and tins have not changed; there is still a different code for containers of five litres or less than there is for bulk oil.” He does report one minor Brexit bonus, however: labels now have to carry the importer’s address, and this has been helpful in sending new buyers his way when they see his products on sale elsewhere. 3. ‘The easiest free trade agreement in human history’ View image in fullscreen Theresa May with the then EU chief Jean-Claude Juncker, in 2017. Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock It was actually a year on from the Brexit vote that Liam Fox, who had become international trade secretary, made this claim. But it encapsulated leavers’ casual confidence about the speed and ease with which the UK could draw up a new agreement with the EU – on the basis that the two sides had become so closely entwined through 40 years of EU membership. As Jill Rutter, senior fellow at the Institute for Government thinktank recalls, however: “That didn’t prove to be the case.” The EU refused to start discussing the post-Brexit trading relationship with the UK until the terms of its exit had been settled. May and her chief negotiator, Olly Robbins, agreed to that “sequencing”, as it was known, despite her pugilistic Brexit secretary, David Davis, hoping to make it the “row of the summer” after Article 50, kicking off the exit process, was invoked in March 2017. This “withdrawal agreement” included around £30bn paid by the UK to the EU for its exit; settling the fate of EU citizens living in the UK; and deciding how a hard border in Ireland could be avoided. The border issue became the subject of furious debate, with the EU determined not to just wave through imports across the border into the single market to placate the British. Rutter says part of the problem was that the leavers “just didn’t get the extent to which the EU really believed in the integrity of the single market, as a whole”. May and then Johnson eventually had to request extensions to the two-year article 50 deadline, while the Tories conducted a fierce internecine battle. Once the withdrawal agreement was finally ratified – in January 2020, after Johnson’s landslide general election victory – it took another 10 months, until Christmas Eve that year, to complete what became known as the “trade and cooperation agreement”. This did include tariff-free trade in goods, but did not exclude UK exporters from facing additional customs checks and paperwork. Rutter says an agreement might have taken longer had Johnson’s chief negotiator, Lord David Frost, not been prepared to make significant concessions, including on regulatory checks between Northern Ireland and Great Britain – the so-called “border down the Irish Sea”, which May had once said no UK prime minister could agree to. “If you just roll over and stick your paws in the air, then you can do a deal,” Rutter says. 4. Super-powered vacuum cleaners In a speech early on in the campaign, Johnson complained that it was “absolutely crazy that the EU is telling us how powerful our vacuum cleaners have got to be”. This in fact referred to an EU rule from 2014 that set a maximum energy input for electrical appliances, to incentivise manufacturers to make them more efficient – and therefore more environmentally friendly. It did not dictate their suction power. For vacuum cleaners, the limit was set at 1,600W, falling to 900W in 2017. Ten years later, that limit remains in place in the UK, despite Jacob Rees-Mogg touting its potential for the chop in 2022, when he was Brexit opportunities minister. There has been no clamour from industry to go back to producing more energy-hungry appliances. 5. A free trade zone stretching from Iceland to Turkey Gove used a speech at Vote Leave headquarters on the south bank of the Thames to promise that the UK could leave the EU, but remain in “a free trade zone stretching from Iceland to Turkey”. I asked John Springford, associate fellow at the Centre for European Reform, if that has proved to be true. “I remember that statement,” he says. “I saw that as veiled language. Because the whole strategy in the campaign was to avoid giving any kind of specificity about what sort of relationship they really wanted … a free trade area can mean all sorts of things.” “If we think of all the other agreements that European countries have with each other, then, yes, this is a ‘free trade zone’. But it didn’t really tell us much because obviously there’s a wealth of difference between a free trade zone and the single market, in terms of how much it covers, what sort of checks it involves and how easy it makes it for importers and exporters.” Springford argues that most of these deals, including with the EU itself, but also the European Economic Area for example, embracing Iceland, are “significantly deeper” than the trade and cooperation agreement that Johnson ended up signing. “The closest would be the association agreement with Ukraine – but even that has got a lot more regulatory cooperation,” Springford says. The EU–UK trade and cooperation agreement, signed on 30 December 2020, did secure tariff-free trade; but withou

https://sarabic.ae/20260622/بين-الانقسام-الحزبي-والضغط-الأمريكيمن-يخلف-نتنياهو-في-رئاسة-الحكومة-المقبلة؟-1114604746.html بين الانقسام الحزبي والضغط الأمريكي..من يخلف نتنياهو في رئاسة الحكومة المقبلة؟ بين الانقسام الحزبي والضغط الأمريكي..من يخلف نتنياهو في رئاسة الحكومة المقبلة؟ سبوتنيك عربي تتجه الأنظار في الأوساط السياسية الإسرائيلية والدولية نحو صناديق الاقتراع المرتقبة، في ظل مشهد سياسي معقد يشي باحتمالية طي صفحة رئيس الوزراء الحالي بنيامين... 22.06.2026, سبوتنيك عربي 2026-06-22T18:43+0000 2026-06-22T18:43+0000 2026-06-22T18:43+0000 العالم حصري تقارير سبوتنيك إسرائيل الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية الكنيست الإسرائيلي بنيامين نتنياهو الانتخابات الإسرائيلية https://cdn.img.sarabic.ae/img/07ea/06/08/1114155217_0:0:1984:1117_1920x0_80_0_0_6e18dc494ce36f02eeaac0b86703afee.jpg وتأتي هذه الانتخابات وسط تراجع ملحوظ في شعبية معسكر اليمين الحاكم، وتصاعد حدة الانقسامات الداخلية والضغوط الخارجية، مما يفتح الباب واسعًا أمام سيناريوهات جديدة حول هوية الشخصية التي ستخلف نتنياهو وتتولى قيادة الحكومة في مرحلة مفصلية من تاريخ إسرائيل.وتتصدر قوى المعارضة استطلاعات الرأي الأخيرة التي تمنحها أغلبية مريحة في الكنيست، وسط صعود لافت لأسماء عسكرية وسياسية بارزة تطرح نفسها كبديل قوي لإنهاء حقبة نتنياهو، في مقدمتها يبرز رئيس الأركان السابق والجنرال غادي آيزنكوت الذي يحقق حزبه قفزات متتالية، إلى جانب التحالفات التقليدية والمناورة التي يقودها يائير لابيد ونفتالي بينيت، مما يحول المعركة الانتخابية الحالية إلى تنافس محتدم بين أقطاب المعارضة نفسها على من سيتولى الدفة، وسط مؤشرات على إمكانية الذهاب نحو حكومة تناوبية جديدة.وقال الخبراء إن المشهد الانتخابي الراهن يحمل طابعا مركبا وفريدا، كونه يأتي امتدادا لارتدادات الأحداث الإقليمية الكبرى والملاحقات القضائية التي تلاحق رئيس الحكومة الحالي، مؤكدين أن حظوظ نتنياهو، رغم تراجعها، لا يمكن إغفالها تماما نظرا لخبرته في إعادة ترتيب أوراق معسكر اليمين وتكتل الحريديم.صعود المعارضةقال محمد حسن كنعان، رئيس الحزب القومي العربي وعضو الكنيست السابق، إنه كلما اقترب موعد الانتخابات كلما تغيرت نتائج استطلاعات الرأي في إسرائيل، مشيرا إلى أن الأيام العشرة الأخيرة شهدت 3 استطلاعات للرأي أكدت بوضوح تقدم رئيس الأركان الإسرائيلي السابق غادي آيزنكوت على نفتالي بينيت ويائير لابيد، مما يمنحه الحظ الأوفر لتشكيل الحكومة القادمة.وبحسب حديثه لـ "سبوتنيك"، تراوح القضية الانتخابية الحالية ما بين آيزنكوت الموجود في المعارضة وبين تحالف لابيد وبينيت، حيث يدور التنافس بين هاتين القائمتين على من سيتولى تشكيل الحكومة القادمة بعد الانتخابات، موضحا أن هناك مؤشرات كبيرة جدا تشير حتما وبشكل واضح إلى نهاية حقبة حكم بنيامين نتنياهو ورئاسته للحكومة وحدوث تغيير جذري بعدها.وأشار إلى أن التنافس ينحصر بين آيزنكوت الذي يشهد حزبه ارتفاعا مستمرا، وبين لابيد وبينيت اللذين يواجهان هبوطا ملحوظا إلى حد معين، مرجحا أن ينتهي هذا التنافس بالتوصل إلى اتفاق لتقاسم رئاسة الحكومة القادمة بين هذين الحزبين المعارضين.مشهد مركب ومعقدبدوره قال خليل أبو كرش، الخبير في الشؤون الإسرائيلية إن إسرائيل تعيش حاليا أجواء انتخابات واضحة وحملات مسعورة في بعض الأحيان، مرجحا أن تكون هذه الانتخابات أكثر قوة من غيرها لكونها الأولى التي تأتي بعد أحداث السابع من أكتوبر والحرب على إيران ولبنان، حيث ستشكل إجابة حاسمة على كل الجدل والنقاش الداخلي.وبحسب حديثه لـ "سبوتنيك"، بدأت استطلاعات الرأي الأخيرة في منح الأغلبية للمعارضة بوصولها إلى 61 عضوا في الكنيست بزعامة رئيس الأركان السابق الجنرال غادي آيزنكوت، ويرجح أن يكون الحصان الأسود في هذه الانتخابات، مؤكدًا أن الاستطلاعات ما زالت تعطي الأفضلية لبنيامين نتنياهو كالشخصية الأنسب لدى الإسرائيليين لتشكيل الحكومة.وأشار أبو كرش إلى أن المكون العربي في الداخل يمثل عاملا حاسما في هذا المشهد، موضحا أن تشكيل قائمة عربية مشتركة تضم الأحزاب الأربعة سيكون عامل ضغط ومؤثرا يعيق تشكيل نتنياهو للحكومة، بينما يؤدي دخول العرب بشكل منقسم دون قائمة مشتركة إلى تعزيز حضور نتنياهو ومعسكر اليمين.وأوضح أن الخلاصات الحالية تشير إلى وجود فرص لنتنياهو وللمعارضة المنقسمة والمفتتة بأكثر من رأس، مشيرًا إلى أن نتنياهو يعيد ترتيب أوراقه استعدادا للمعركة المقبلة عبر إجراء انتخابات داخلية في حزب الليكود، وإغلاق الدائرة بضم الحريديم بشكل نهائي لتكتله، بالإضافة إلى الضغط على سموتريتش وبن غفير للدخول بقائمة واحدة لضمان عدم إهدار أصوات اليمين.ويرى أن المشهد الإسرائيلي أمام أيام حاسمة ومتغيرة قد تشهد الكثير من المفاجآت وتنقلب رأسا على عقب، لافتا إلى وجود عامل خارجي مؤثر يتمثل في العلاقة الأمريكية الإسرائيلية والانتقادات الحادة الموجهة لنتنياهو من قبل الأمريكيين، إلى جانب ملاحقته أمام القضاء الدولي والمحلي بقضايا الفساد والرشوة وإساءة الأمانة، مشددا على أن رفع الغطاء الأمريكي عن نتنياهو وعدم دعمه بشكل مباشر من قبل ترامب سيقلل من حظوظه بشكل كبير.وأعلن حزب "الليكود" ترشح رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي بنيامين نتنياهو للانتخابات القادمة، وذلك في معرض رد الحزب على تشكيك الرئيس الأمريكي دونالد ترامب في نية نتنياهو خوض الانتخابات مرة أخرى.وكان ترامب قد صرح لشبكة "إيه بي سي نيوز" بأنه لا يعلم ما إذا كان نتنياهو يخطط للترشح في الانتخابات المقبلة، التي يجب أن تجرى بحلول 27 أكتوبر/تشرين الأول. وجاءت تعليقات ترامب بعد تقارير عن نشوب خلافات مع نتنياهو حول الحرب في إيران، واتساع الفجوة بينهما.وصوّت الكنيست الإسرائيلي، مؤخرا بالقراءة التمهيدية على مشروع قانون يقضي بحل البرلمان والدعوة إلى انتخابات مبكرة، وذلك بأغلبية 110 أعضاء، دون تسجيل أي أصوات معارضة.وأفادت وسائل إعلام إسرائيلية، بأن "الجلسة، شهدت غياب رئيس الوزراء بنيامين نتنياهو، بسبب انشغاله بعقد اجتماع أمني"، مشيرة إلى أن "الحريديم وأعضاء حزب جانتس صوتوا لصالح حل الكنيست". وقدّم الائتلاف الحاكم في إسرائيل، مؤخرا، مقترح قانون لحل البرلمان في البلاد (الكنيست) والتوجه إلى انتخابات مبكرة.ويأتي ذلك بعد إصدار المحكمة العليا الإسرائيلية قرارًا يطالب الدولة بالاستعداد لفرض عقوبات على "الحريديم" الذين لا يلتحقون بالخدمة العسكرية، وذلك في إطار الالتماسات المقدمة ضد ما وصفته المحكمة بعدم تطبيق قوانين التجنيد في ظل غياب قانون واضح وملزم.وكانت المحكمة العليا أصدرت، في نوفمبر/ تشرين الثاني الماضي، قرارًا بالإجماع يلزم الحكومة بوضع سياسة فعالة تتضمن عقوبات لتطبيق التجنيد الإجباري، مع التأكيد على منع تقديم أي مزايا أو إعانات للمتهربين من الخدمة العسكرية. https://sarabic.ae/20251017/استطلاع-رأي-إسرائيلي-معسكر-الائتلاف-يحصل-على-52-مقعدا-مقابل-58-للمعارضة-لو-أجريت-انتخابات-الآن-1106110732.html https://sarabic.ae/20260610/بعد-إعلان-الليكود-خوضه-للانتخابات-ما-فرص-نجاح-نتنياهو-في-الكنيست-المقبل-وتشكيل-الحكومة؟-1114239691.html https://sarabic.ae/20260620/خبير-في-الشؤون-الإسرائيلية-لـسبوتنيك-استطلاعات-الرأي-تصفع-نتنياهو-وتسقط-أوهام-النصر-في-غزة-ولبنان-1114548655.html https://sarabic.ae/20260619/ترامب-واشنطن-بحاجة-إلى-إبقاء-نتنياهو-متزنا-بعض-الشيء-1114525456.html إسرائيل الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية سبوتنيك عربي feedback.arabic@sputniknews.com +74956456601 MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“ 252 60 2026 وائل مجدي https://cdn.img.sarabic.ae/img/07e9/0a/1e/1106558693_0:0:960:960_100x100_80_0_0_d437e7fc90fed1e597a6601f966188c7.jpg وائل مجدي https://cdn.img.sarabic.ae/img/07e9/0a/1e/1106558693_0:0:960:960_100x100_80_0_0_d437e7fc90fed1e597a6601f966188c7.jpg الأخبار ar_EG سبوتنيك عربي feedback.arabic@sputniknews.com +74956456601 MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“ 252 60 1920 1080 true 1920 1440 true 1920 1920 true سبوتنيك عربي feedback.arabic@sputniknews.com +74956456601 MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“ 252 60 وائل مجدي https://cdn.img.sarabic.ae/img/07e9/0a/1e/1106558693_0:0:960:960_100x100_80_0_0_d437e7fc90fed1e597a6601f966188c7.jpg العالم, حصري, تقارير سبوتنيك, إسرائيل, الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية, الكنيست الإسرائيلي, بنيامين نتنياهو, الانتخابات الإسرائيلية

Keir Starmer has faced a problem no Labour government has needed to deal with before. His energy and climate policies – core to solving the cost of living crisis – have come under attack from opposition parties, which have made dismantling the agenda one of their top priorities, second only to immigration, in their pitch to voters. This is new in British politics, where a cross-party consensus on the climate and environment has held at least since the days of Margaret Thatcher. She warned the UN of the climate crisis in 1988; David Cameron in 2006 urged voters to “vote blue, go green”; Theresa May enshrined in law the requirement to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050; Boris Johnson championed the Cop26 UN climate summit in Glasgow in 2021; even Rishi Sunak only tried a partial rollback of green policies as a last desperate throw before calling an election. But Kemi Badenoch has weaponised the climate and energy agenda, with Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, her most frequent named target in the cabinet. She has vowed to abandon the net zero target, boost drilling in the North Sea, scrap the windfall tax on oil and gas profits, and repeal the 2008 Climate Change Act. View image in fullscreen The Prince of Wales with Keir Starmer during a visit to the Emilio Goeldi Museum in Belém, Brazil, during the Cop30 summit. Photograph: Aaron Chown/PA Nigel Farage’s Reform party has gone even further, openly denying climate science and threatening to withdraw from the 2015 Paris agreement. This tearing apart of the longstanding consensus threw Labour into disarray. Some within Starmer’s inner circle started to whisper that his eye-catching pledge – one of the five key “missions” he set for his government – to decarbonise the UK’s electricity by 2030 was a liability, and should be dropped. They briefed against Miliband to key sections of the media and forced a halving of the target of a pledged investment of £28bn in the green economy. That advice was out of step with voters, and deeply flawed, according to some experts. Ed Matthew, UK director of the E3G thinktank, points out that polls continue to show that voters still support climate action. Polling for More in Common, for the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit on the eve of the local elections in May, showed that two-thirds of the public still wanted the country to meet the net zero target. “Starmer made the bold move to set a whole of government mission to make the UK a clean energy superpower,” says Matthew. “This was visionary. But he was constrained by his former adviser Morgan McSweeney, who was concerned this mission would lead Labour voters to defect to Reform. That was a misreading of these voters, with polls showing the majority want to take back control of their energy and support more renewables.” View image in fullscreen Starmer and Rachel Reeves are shown a heat pump by the Octopus Energy CEO and founder, Greg Jackson, during a visit to the company in Slough, Berkshire. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/PA Rowing back on the climate helped the resurgence of the Green party. “By tempering his ambition on the clean energy front, [Starmer] left his left flank open, which the Green party is now pouring through, with their pledge to speed up the transition [to a low-carbon economy] and take on the fossil fuel industry profiting from the war,” says Matthew. The irony, amid large voter losses from Labour to the Greens in the recent local elections, and to the Liberal Democrats who have also held firm on their climate and environmental policies under Ed Davey, is that Starmer has a good story to tell on the government’s green achievements. “Starmer’s record of supporting Miliband’s climate action is strong,” says Mike Childs, head of science at Friends of the Earth. “He intervened in the spending review to ensure the warm homes plan [for insulating houses] was not cut further by the Treasury, insisted that the government’s revised climate plan must be legally compliant, and has voiced support for green energy and jobs.” While the cost of living bites, investments in renewable energy reduced wholesale electricity prices by about a third last year, according to the ECIU thinktank. Households have seen little of the upside so far, because bills have been sent soaring again by two consecutive fossil fuel crises, one sparked by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the second by the Iran war, but Labour is hoping to change that by breaking the outdated mechanisms that shackle electricity prices to the cost of gas. Record numbers of people are opting for solar panels and heat pumps, made easier by Labour’s changes to regulations and more generous grants, and electric car sales leapt 60% in April, helped by investments in charging infrastructure. The government’s stance on the North Sea, vociferously attacked by the Tories and Reform, has also been endorsed by the world’s leading energy economist. Fatih Birol, chief of the International Energy Agency, regarded as the global gold standard for energy research, saidin April the moratorium on new licensing made sense as it would not come onstream for years, and any green light for projects already in the licensing system – such as the controversial Rosebank and Jackdaw fields – would make little difference to the UK’s energy security, nor ease prices. Pippa Heylings, vice-chair of parliament’s all-party climate group, says: “Birol is right that new exploration for oil and gas will not help lower people’s energy bills. We need to take back control of our energy security and strengthen clean energy cooperation with our European neighbours. To truly free ourselves from our dependence on fossil fuels and Trump’s America, our focus needs to be on a clean shift away from fossil fuels to homegrown renewable energy, with prices we can control.” View image in fullscreen Starmer and Ed Miliband (right), the energy security and net zero secretary, meet staff at a decontamination and decommissioning lab during a visit to Springfields (Preston Lab), National Nuclear Laboratory facility in Preston, Lancashire. Photograph: Oli Scarff/PA While some within Downing Street have sought to row back on green policy, Starmer in public has always shown clear support. Last year, he hosted 60 governments at an energy security conference in Westminster where he declared that the UK was “going all out” for renewables and would “accelerate” the transition to a low-carbon economy, because it was “in the DNA of my government”. He has appeared less enthusiastic, however, over nature policy. Rachel Reeves, chancellor of the exchequer, dismayed conservationists when she opened up a war of words over planning regulations and development, lambasting rules that protect “bats and newts”, which she claimed were acting as a brake on growth. Her target should instead have been the housebuilders, who have planning permission for more than 1m homes but fail to build them, argues Craig Bennett, chief executive of The Wildlife Trusts. He calls the attacks on nature protections “performative”, as “they decided to pick a fight with nature because they thought it would make them look big and strong”, rather than reflecting economic realities. “I don’t think they even really believed it.” This fight “just demonstrates them to be unbelievably out of touch with where the British public is”, because polls show that roughly 80% of people want stronger nature protection, not less, according to Bennett. View image in fullscreen Starmer with the Norwegian prime minister, Jonas Gahr Støre, during a trip to Norway to announce plans for a green energy deal in December 2024. Photograph: Leon Neal/PA Starmer leaves a legacy of strong action on net zero, undermined by anti-nature rhetoric and squabbling among his own advisers over how green to paint this government. Andy Burnham, his likely successor, is showing signs of the same struggle – despite previous strong support for renewable energy and net zero – now that he is equivocating on North Sea drilling, perhaps to placate the unions. The lesson to draw from Starmer’s time in office, however, is that voters are greener than the Tories and Reform would have the public believe, and Labour has much more to lose to the left than the right on these issues. Ami McCarthy, head of politics at Greenpeace UK, says the government cannot afford more mistakes: “Despite all the noise around Reform’s gains, Labour risks alienating even more voters by abandoning its policies on climate and nature.”

الرياض - مباشر: أنهى مؤشر السوق الموازية السعودية (نمو) تعاملات جلسة الأحد على انخفاض محدود بلغت نسبته -0.11%، ليفقد 26.71 نقطة ويغلق عند مستوى 23,202.13 نقطة. وشهدت الجلسة تداول نحو 2.52 مليون سهم، بقيمة إجمالية بلغت 14.47 مليون ريال. ومالت كفة الأداء نحو الشركات غير المتغيرة التي بلغ عددها 65 شركة، مقابل ارتفاع 33 شركة وانخفاض 27 أخرى. سجلت قيمة التداولات خلال الجلسة 14.47 مليون ريال موزعة على 2.51 مليون سهماً، وتصدر سهم تدوير قائمة الأسهم الأكثر نشاطاً من حيث القيمة والكمية، حيث بلغت قيمة تداولاته 5.54 مليون ريال بعد تداول 1.1 مليون سهم، ليغلق السهم مرتفعاً بنسبة +1.53% عند سعر 5.3 ريال. وجاء سهم إدارات في المرتبة الثانية من حيث السيولة بقيمة 1.11 مليون ريال، مسجلاً تراجعاً بنسبة -2.16% ليصل إلى 262.2 ريال. وفي قائمة الأسهم الأكثر ارتفاعاً، صعد سهم ملان بنسبة 9.52% ليغلق عند 1.15 ريال، تلاه سهم دي آر سي بارتفاع قدره 8.50% مغلقاً عند 43.4 ريال. كما حقق سهم جمجوم فاشن مكاسب بنسبة 6.47% ليصل إلى 118.4 ريال، وارتفع سهم قمة السعودية بنسبة 5.97% ليقفل عند مستوى 7.1 ريال، وسهم الدولية بنسبة 5.92% عند 5.19 ريال. وشملت الارتفاعات أيضاً أسهم معيار بنسبة 5.77%، وريشيو بنسبة 4.98%، وموبي للصناعة بنسبة 4.65%. في المقابل، تصدر سهم رماث قائمة التراجعات بنسبة 6.63% ليغلق عند 29 ريال، متبوعاً بسهم المداواة الذي انخفض بنسبة 6.49% ليصل إلى 4.9 ريال. وتراجع سهم الأشغال الميسرة بنسبة 4.52% ليغلق عند 13.3 ريال، وسهم مفيد بنسبة 4.35% عند 33 ريال، ومصاعد أطلس بنسبة 3.90% عند 9.6 ريال. كما ضمت قائمة الانخفاضات أسهم فيو بنسبة 3.70%، ونت وركرس بنسبة 3.68%، والراشد للصناعة بنسبة 3.11%. وعلى صعيد النشاط التشغيلي، سجل سهم حلوة تداولات بقيمة 0.93 مليون ريال مع تراجع سعره بنسبة 1.52% ليغلق عند 2.6 ريال. واستقر سهم دار المركبة دون تغيير عند سعر 1.35 ريال رغم تداول 0.35 مليون سهم بقيمة 0.47 مليون ريال. كما سهم الرازي تداولات نشطة نسبياً بقيمة 0.38 مليون ريال، مرتفعاً بنسبة 2.65% ليغلق عند 29.4 ريال. وتراجع سهم الرعاية المستقبلية بنسبة 1.12% بقيمة تداول بلغت 0.35 مليون ريال، وسهم ملكية بنسبة 2.26% عند سعر 39 ريال وبسيولة بلغت 0.35 مليون ريال.

Hailing his Iran deal this week amid the excess of Versailles, Donald Trump urged sceptics to take Wall Street’s word for its success. “There is nothing as smart as the market – and the market loves it,” he said, claiming credit for ending the economic chaos that had kicked off when he started bombing Iran in late February. Without the agreement, he said, “the alternative would be a worldwide depression”. By the weekend, the outlook was less optimistic after planned US-Iran peace talks in Switzerland were abruptly called off, then reinstated, and Iran said Israeli bombing in Jordan meant it was justified in closing the strait of Hormuz again. Still, hopes persist that the sea passage carrying about 20% of the world’s oil supplies will reopen fully in the coming days and weeks. If the oil does start to flow more freely again, it should forestall the shortages of key products, such as jet fuel, that some analysts had predicted would occur if the war persisted. Energy markets are already anticipating the hoped-for resurgence in supply: the cost of a barrel of crude oil dropped below $80 a barrel after the agreement was announced, for the first time since the early days of the war. Yet governments are still counting the economic costs of a war they did not want any part of. The severity of the impact varies by region. Gulf economies, which have seen exports of their main revenue-raiser choked off and found themselves the target of Iranian bombs, are expected to plunge into recession. Analysts at Oxford Economics are expecting GDP in the region to decline by 2.6% this year. Economic growth in the US, now a net energy exporter, has remained strong, with stock markets bolstered by the AI investment boom, and SpaceX just the first of a series of mega market launches expected this year. But American drivers are paying $1 a gallon more for petrol than a year ago, and economy-wide inflation in the US has surged to 4.2%, its highest rate in three years – news that Trump greeted by claiming: “I love the inflation.” View image in fullscreen American drivers are paying $1 a gallon more for petrol than a year ago. Photograph: Carolyn Kaster/AP Trump’s newly appointed pick as Federal Reserve chair, Kevin Warsh, was chosen in the hope he would deliver a string of interest rate cuts. In fact, Warsh is likely to face pressure to raise borrowing costs in the coming months. Dario Perkins, the head of global research at the consultancy TS Lombard, said that of the leading central banks, “as the economy has remained strong and inflation has increased, the Fed is probably going to increase rates the most, maybe as much as four times (to a range of 4.5% to 5%) by the end of next year”. He said the US economy had remained strong thanks to consumers running down their savings to continue spending, while shoppers in the UK and continental Europe had been more circumspect. “The euro consumer, while they have savings, are more worried about the war and its outcome,” he said. In the EU, which is heavily reliant on gas imports, the European Central Bank (ECB) has already raised interest rates for the first time since 2023, in the hope of choking off surging inflation. The impact on prices in the UK has been somewhat more muted, with inflation hitting 2.8% in April and interest rates on hold for the moment – but confidence has been hit hard and the jobs market remains weak. Sanjay Raja, the chief UK economist at Deutsche Bank, said inflation would rise further – perhaps by up to another percentage point – in the coming months. “All of the data suggests that there’s something coming – we are going to see some pressure.” However, he expects the downward effect on growth to be relatively modest – knocking up to a quarter of a percentage point off GDP growth. Many developing countries have been forced to ration fuel in the face of rocketing prices and are braced for the impact of surging fertiliser costs over the coming months. This “demand destruction” – cutting back on usage when prices become unaffordable – may be part of the reason why oil prices have not surged even higher since February. Raja argues it is also because countries including China have been able to rely on strategic oil supplies, some of which may not have been known about by analysts. View image in fullscreen Kevin Warsh is likely to face pressure to raise borrowing costs in the coming months. Photograph: Will Oliver/EPA Despite Trump’s bullishness, his tentative agreement with Iran leaves many questions unanswered and will not immediately draw a line under the economic damage caused by the war. Ryan Sweet, the chief global economist at the consultancy Oxford Economics, said: “The difficulty of quantifying the economic cost is that the economic timeline doesn’t equal the military timeline, so we’re still going to be feeling the economic impact of this through the rest of this year and potentially early next.” He pointed out that while Trump had stressed that the strait of Hormuz would reopen, the details remained hazy. “There’s still the risk that tolls are imposed on ships, or the number of ships that go through the strait is a lot less than before the conflict – there’s still a lot of uncertainty around that.” Fears remain that hostilities could yet be reignited – for example, if Trump comes to doubt that Tehran is serious about winding down its nuclear plans. Trump is also facing some pushback against the deal at home, even from Republicans. Neil Shearing, the chief global economist at the consultancy Capital Economics, said policymakers should view the agreement as fragile. “It’s a good start. But there are several ways the deal can fall apart. Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah and Lebanon, Iran exploiting its chokehold over the strait of Hormuz, and a dispute over how to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions.” He added that the oil markets may be too sanguine about the next few months. “Our modelling of the oil price shows that prices of Brent crude should be about $90 a barrel in the third quarter and $80 a barrel in the fourth quarter. However, the market has raced ahead and is already pricing oil at $80. That’s a Goldilocks outcome to the war when there is plenty more negotiating to be done.” Matt Gertken, the chief geopolitical strategist at BCA Research, said in a recent research note that the US-Iran memorandum of understanding “should not be seen as a complete and durable peace deal that uncorks the global commodity bottleneck and concludes the war”. Instead, he said, “we would still assign a 60% chance of renewed fighting after the midterm [elections in the US] as President Trump gains a window, from 4 November 2026 until the end of 2027, to try to get better terms and better implementation”. Even if the deal holds, many economists are wary of assuming the energy markets will quickly snap back to normal. First, that is because it will take time for Gulf oil infrastructure to be restored and for the backlog of ships stuck in the region to transit through the strait and beyond. Second, and more worrying, there is a risk that by illustrating so starkly Iran’s ability to choke off Gulf oil supplies at will, the conflict may have permanently increased the cost of some commodities by prompting firms to build more slack into their supply chains. As Sweet put it: “I think there’s going to be a long shadow from this.”