At least 13 people are feared dead and many wounded after two explosions hit Brussels Airport and at a Metro station in the Belgian capital.
Witnesses told UK Independent that the airport blasts happened shortly before 8am local time (7am GMT) in the departure hall near the check-in desks for American Airlines and Brussels Airlines.
Little over an hour later, another explosion was reported at the Maalbeek (Maelbeek) station, near the European Council headquarters and other EU buildings. The capital’s entire public transport system was being shut down.
The explosion reportedly took place in the Departures lounge, beyond airport security areas.
The Belga news agency reported that shots were fired before the explosions and shouting was heard in Arabic.
Authorities have not released a statement confirming casualty figures but the VRT News quoted officials saying at least 13 had died and 35 were injured.
Clinton and Trump trade insults on CNN with sights set on general election
The two leading candidates for the US presidency did not come face to face on Monday, but they still managed to trade insults on primetime television.
Hillary Clinton, the Democratic favourite, launched her most direct attack yet on Donald Trump, accusing him of “bigotry and bluster and bullying” and inciting violence at his campaign rallies.
The Republican frontrunner, meanwhile, renewed his claim that Clinton lacked the “stamina” and “strength” needed for the presidency, while also fending off charges of sexism ahead of the latest round of primary voting on Tuesday.
Clinton and Trump’s attacks were lobbed during a CNN event featuring all five remaining presidential candidates from both parties. They did not directly debate each other, rather they were interviewed by CNN stalwarts Anderson Cooper and Wolf Blitzer.
Trump’s principal rival for the nomination, Texas senator Ted Cruz, used the platform to argue that although he understands why people are supporting Trump, “his entire campaign is built on a lie”.
“The lie behind Donald’s campaign is that he will stand up to Washington. He is the system. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are flip sides of the same coin. Donald Trump has made billions buying influence in Washington. Hillary Clinton has made millions selling influence in Washington.”
Cruz predicted that he – and not a surprise establishment candidate – would beat Trump in a head-to-head battle if the Republican convention were to be contested.
Trump, Clinton and more candidates take the stage at Aipac - as it happened
Protesters blocked a Trump rally in Arizona, where Tuesday there are Republican and Democratic caucuses, in addition to Utah caucuses and Idaho’s primary
Clinton, who had earlier criticised Trump in a speech to Aipac, a pro-Israel lobby organisation, was even more specific in an interview with Cooper. “I think it’s important to listen to what he says,” she said. “You have to take him at his word so to speak. He has been engaging in bigotry and bluster and bullying.
“And I think when it comes to understanding what he would do as president there are serious questions that have been raised in this campaign. Should he be the nominee we’ll have to address them.”
Like Trump’s Republican rivals, Clinton is regarded as a conventional politician who in a general election would have to devise a winning strategy against the maverick who thrives on his anti-establishment candidacy.
Asked by Cooper if she believes Trump really is a bully, Clinton replied: “Well, I think his behaviour certainly qualifies for that. I think his incitement of violence, his constant urging on of his supporters in large numbers to go after protesters, his saying I want to punch people in the face and telling somebody who did punch somebody I will pay your legal bills – I think that raises very serious questions.”
She itemised some of Trump’s problematic statements from the past few months, ranging from “calling Mexican immigrants rapists and criminals, saying John McCain was not a war hero, being reluctant to denounce the Ku Klux Klan and David Duke. And the list goes on.”
Likewise Trump, who has prospered by attaching labels to his rivals, offered a clue to his potential line of attack against Clinton. He told Blitzer: “I think she doesn’t have the stamina. You watch her life. You watch how she’ll go away three or four days; she’ll come back.”
He added: “Look, we’ve got to beat China in trade. We’ve got to beat Isis. We’ve got so many problems in this country; I say she does not have the stamina to be a good president ... doesn’t have the energy, she doesn’t have it. Doesn’t have the strength to be president, in my opinion.”
During the interview with Blitzer, Trump was confronted with a recent TV advert from a Republican Super Pac in which women repeat some of his most outlandishly sexist comments including: “A person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10”; “I’d look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers”; “Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that?; “I like kids. I mean, I won’t do anything to take care of them. I’ll supply funds, and she’ll take care of the kids.”
After playing the clip, Blitzer asked Trump: “Has your language come back to haunt you?”
“No. I think people understand,” Trump said. “First of all, half of that was show business. The dropping to the knees, that was in The Apprentice. The Rosie O’Donnell stuff. But I think people understand. Look, these politicians, I know them. They say far worse when they’re in closed doors or where they’re with a group of people that they trust.”
“But that’s not how you feel about women in those words?”, Blitzer pressed.
Trump replied: “Of course not. Nobody respects women more than I do. Nobody takes care of the women – and they take care of me because they do such a great job.”
Trump also defended his persistent attacks on Fox News presenter Megyn Kelly. “Every night, the show, it’s like an infomercial, always negative stuff, always negative stuff, always. Not fair. So I will fight back with Twitter. I will let people know she’s a third rate talent. I will say what I have to say, it’s very simple. But it’s not fair that she – you know, let her not talk about me. And by the way, seriously, if she didn’t talk about me, her ratings would go down like a rock.”
On a day when Trump’s foreign policy credentials were under the spotlight at the Aipac conference in Washington, he said the US should rethink its involvement in Nato more than two decades after the end of the cold war. “It’s costing us too much money, and frankly, they have to put up more money,” he said in remarks likely to raise eyebrows in Europe. “They’re going to have to put some up also.
“We’re paying disproportionately, it’s too much, and frankly, it’s a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea and everybody got together. We’re taking care of, as an example, the Ukraine. I mean, the countries over there don’t seem to be so interested. We’re the ones taking the brunt of it. So I think we have to reconsider – keep Nato but maybe we have to pay a lot less toward the Nato itself.”
Republican primaries will be held in Arizona and Utah on Tuesday, and Trump, who is facing the possibility of the first contested convention in decades, insisted that it does not matter if he falls short of the 1,237 delegates needed to clinch the Republican nomination on the first ballot.
Referring to past comments that an attempt to deny him the prize could lead to riots, Blitzer asked: “Will you unequivocally say to your supporters, you don’t want any violence, you don’t want any riots at the convention?”
Trump answered: “Of course I would, 100%. But I have no control over the people ... Wolf, these people have been disenfranchised. They lost their jobs. They make less money now than they made 12 years ago. .
“They see their jobs going to Japan and to China and to Mexico. Mexico, forget it, it’s the new China. You know what, they’re very – they’re not by nature angry people, but I will tell you, right now they’re angry people.”
Cruz said that he understood why people were supporting Trump, since they were fed up with Washington but insisted that his rival had long “been enmeshed in the corruption of Washington”.
Cruz insisted that he could achieve the 1,237-delegate target but acknowledged that he and Trump might both fall short. “And if that happens, then the convention is going to decide,” he said. “Now they’re not going to do what people in the fevered swamps of Washington want, which is bring in a white horse who wasn’t on the ballot, who wasn’t running. That’s not going to happen.
“The delegates are going to decide between Donald and me. And if we go in with a bunch of delegates each, I believe we win that and we win that by earning the support of the delegates elected through the democratic process.”
Meanwhile, John Kasich, the governor of Ohio, who is trailing in third, gave no hint of dropping out. “I don’t think anybody’s going to have enough delegates to win the nomination before the convention,” he said. “Delegates are gonna think about two things: who can win? I’m the only one who can win in a general election. And number two: who can be president?”
He ruled out becoming Trump or Cruz’s running mate. “There’s zero chance I would be vice-president for either of them: zero. Less than zero.”
Despite the media reports in Washington suggesting that Democratic senators are gently leaning on Bernie Sanders to quit the race against Clinton, Sanders insisted: “I think we have a road – a narrow road – but a road to victory. We’re going to drive up the voter turnout in November no matter who the nominee is.
“I am not a quitter – we are gonna fight this to the last vote,” Sanders said, appearing on CNN via a videolink.
Sanders also took a swipe at Clinton as “the candidate of the establishment”, adding: “She has the support of public officials across America. What is also clear is that we are running an insurgent campaign across the country.
“I think as people look at our records, how we raise money, what our views are on income and wealth inequality, that is Bernie Sanders, and that is why we are creating so much excitement at the grassroots level.”
Thanks for reading.
EU’s military mission in Mali attacked by gunmen
Gunmen have attacked the European Union military training mission’s headquarters in the Malian capital, Bamako, in what appeared to be the latest in a string of attacks on Western interests in the region.
Armed forces killed at least one man. It was not immediately known how many people had launched the assault.
Sgt Baba Dembele from the anti-terrorism unit in Bamako said it was believed some attackers had entered the Hotel Nord-Sud, where the mission is headquartered.
The EU mission later said on Twitter that no personnel had been wounded and its forces were securing the area.
EU soldiers, the Malian army, national police and other security forces stood outside the hotel.
The assault comes about four months after jihadis attacked the Radisson Blu hotel in Mali’s capital, killing 20 people. Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb and al-Mourabitoun claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it was their first joint attack since al-Mourabitoun joined al-Qaida’s north Africa branch in 2015.
In January, other extremists from the same militant groups attacked a cafe near a hotel popular with foreigners in Burkina Faso’s capital, killing at least 30 people. And last week al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb claimed responsibility for an assault on a beach in Ivory Coast that left at least 19 dead, identifying the three attackers as members of al-Mourabitoun and Sahara units.
This week marks the fourth anniversary of the coup that unleashed widespread chaos in Mali. After the overthrow of the democratically elected president, extremists in the northern half of Mali took over the major towns and began implementing their strict interpretation of Islamic law. The amputations and public whippings only ended when a French-led military mission forced them from power in 2013.
Over the past year, the jihadis have mounted a growing wave of violent attacks against UN peacekeepers who are trying to help stabilise the country.
Thanks for reading.
Drinks makers consider legal action against sugar tax
Soft drink makers are considering taking legal action against the government over its controversial sugar tax as George Osborne’s budget shows further signs of unwinding. Suing the government is one option that companies are considering as they await more details on the tax, which will come into force in 2018 and cost £1bn to implement, almost double the amount that it is expected to raise. The cost of the sugar tax has been revealed in documents published by the Office for Budget Responsibility alongside the budget. The extra cost will come from a predicted rise in accrued interest that the government will have to pay on debt that is linked to the rate of inflation. The new tax will add 24p a litre to soft drinks with the highest sugar content, a cost that could be passed on to shoppers through higher prices, meaning inflation would rise. The chancellor has predicted the tax will raise £520m in its first year, far less than the cost of introducing the levy. Gavin Partington, director general of the British Soft Drinks Association, said: “This just reaffirms our view that this tax is ill-considered. The evidence does not suggest it will be effective and taxpayers will be left paying a heavy price for it.” The announcement of the sugar tax led to sharp falls in the share prices of major drinks companies, such as Britvic, the maker of Robinson, and AG Barr, the maker of Irn-Bru. The leading companies are now considering how to respond to the tax, with legal action against the government one option. The soft drink makers could sue the government through European courts on the basis that other types of food and drink – such as fruit juice and milkshakes – are not included. Similar taxes in Scandinavia have been successfully challenged. Partington added: “At this stage all options are on the table. We need clarification about how this tax is going to work, exactly what’s excluded and what’s not. Nothing can be ruled out at this stage.” Coca-Cola also refused to rule out legal action. A Coca-Cola Great Britain spokesperson said: “We need to know more about the levy and how the government plans to implement it. Once this is clear to us, we’ll decide on what steps to take as a business and how best to continue the work we have done to help people consume less sugar and calories from our drinks.” However, the government defended the tax, claiming the chancellor was putting the next generation first, and that the soft drink makers had two years to cut the sugar content in their products. A HM Treasury spokesperson said: “He introduced a new levy on the soft drinks industry to pay for a doubling of dedicated sport funding for every primary school in the country, a huge expansion of breakfast clubs to ensure that every child gets the best start to the day, and new funding for a longer school day. “The chancellor also made clear that this was a policy aimed at driving meaningful change. The new levy will not be introduced until 2018, giving companies plenty of time to change product mix and reduce sugar content.” Thanks for reading.
Brexit could trigger credit downgrade for UK’s biggest firms
Britain’s biggest companies could face a credit downgrade – potentially forcing up their borrowing costs – should the UK vote to leave the EU in June, according to a report by a leading ratings agency.
Moody’s said the prospect of lengthy and uncertain negotiations would deter foreign investors and limit the profits of mainstream corporations that trade with the rest of the EU. But banking and insurance would be less affected than non-financial companies.
The warning came as the Oxford Economics thinktank said Britain could quit the trade bloc largely unscathed only if it “cut a good trade deal with the EU, adopted a raft of tax cuts and deregulation measures, and continued to allow a high level of immigration from the EU”.
And a report by the CBI said the savings from reduced EU budget contributions and regulation were greatly outweighed by the negative impact on trade and investment. The business lobby group said by 2020, the overall cost to the economy could be up to £100bn and 950,000 jobs.
If, as Moody’s suggests, companies would have their ratings downgraded after Brexit, it could increase the borrowing costs of British business and limit their investment in new projects. While many companies have enough cash to fund investment, shareholders are likely to be concerned about backing investments that will carry higher loan repayments.
Moody’s previously warned that it may be forced to downgrade the government’s credit rating after analysis showed growth was likely to slow after a no vote, hitting tax receipts.
In the latest report it scrutinised four main areas of economic activity – trade, migration, investment and regulation – to judge the impact on British business. It found that while the banking sector would be largely unaffected in the short term, the additional trade barriers, possible downturn in foreign investment, regulatory changes and curbs to migration would hurt other firms selling goods and non-financial services in the EU.
It said: “For non-financial corporate issuers in the UK, Brexit would be credit negative, reflecting the weakened macroeconomic outlook. While Moody’s believes the UK and the EU would preserve most of their existing trading relationships, any substantial new barriers to trade would pose a more significant threat to corporate creditworthiness. Infrastructure companies could face uncertainty around new regulatory regimes.”
The impact of a British withdrawal on the EU also features in the report, echoing the concerns of many in Brussels that Brexit will trigger political and economic turmoil in what remains of the trade bloc.
The German finance minister suggested on a recent visit to Britain that the EU would suffer should the UK leave, hitting British exports to the EU and slowing growth even further. Wolfgang Schäuble also said it was unlikely the UK would secure a free trade agreement that matched the single market, adding that “there would be a cost” to British business for leaving the EU.
Moody’s said: “The general uncertainty following a Brexit vote would likely hit confidence across the EU and could weigh on economic growth. Brexit would also be credit negative for the EU as it could increase the risk of further exits from the bloc and heighten support for independence movements elsewhere.”
Oxford Economics played down the impact on the EU, saying the the union “had nothing to fear” in the longer term from the exit of the UK – which would suffer slower growth and weaker public finances.
It said that while the UK stood to benefit from the elimination of EU budget contributions, this was likely to be a false economy. “In any scenario involving a significant clampdown on immigration, the overall fiscal position deteriorates markedly by 2030. This would require further annual tax rises or spending cuts equivalent to between £22bn and £31bn today, a fiscal hole that could be closed by raising VAT by between 4% and 6%,” it said.
“The only way to avoid a deterioration in economic fortunes would mean entering a trade settlement involving continued contributions to the EU budget, like Norway and Switzerland, or the UK having limited access to the single market.”
Henry Worthington, an analyst at Oxford Economics, said: “The long-term impact of Brexit on the UK need not be severe. But benign scenarios involve retaining some of the least popular aspects of EU membership: continued high levels of immigration, restrictions on our ability to make trade deals with non-EU countries, and continuing to pay money to Brussels.”
THANKS FOR READING.
TVR to create 150 jobs with new car factory in south Wales
A second British sports car brand has announced that it is to open a factory in south Wales, creating much-needed jobs and giving a boost to the Labour-led devolved government.
TVR, the independent sports car manufacturer, will open a base in Ebbw Vale, 40 miles north of the plant where Aston Martins are to be built in the Vale of Glamorgan.
The TVR investment is expected to create 150 jobs in an area due to be transformed by the building of the £315m Circuit of Wales project, which includes a racetrack and a motor sports centre of excellence.
Last month Aston Martin announced it would build its new DBX crossover model at a plant in St Athan from 2020 after a worldwide search for a new manufacturing facility.
Founded in 1947 in Blackpool, TVR became a leading light in the British niche sports car market, building an international reputation for high-performance vehicles and innovative design.
Aston Martin to open Wales factory for new DBX model
Read more
The current management team acquired the brand in 2013 and has been looking for a base in which to build a new version of the car.
The Welsh first minister, Carwyn Jones, said: “This is yet another fantastic high-profile investment for Wales and a great boost for our automotive sector. TVR is another iconic and much-loved, world-class brand that still commands a strong and loyal international following. I am delighted the next generation of TVRs will proudly bear the label ‘made in Wales’.
“Today’s news follows hot on the heels of the Aston Martin announcement and sends out a strong, clear message that Wales is the location of choice for advanced manufacturing.”
Advertisement
According to the Welsh government, there are more than 150 companies involved in the automotive supply chain, employing 18,000 people and generating more than £3bn for the Welsh economy.
The TVR chairman, Les Edgar, said: “This is a fantastic opportunity both for TVR and the Welsh government. South Wales is becoming a major hub for automotive and motor sport technology and development and I am delighted TVR is investing here.”
Edgar said the company already had enough orders for the new car to keep it busy until the end of 2018, and planned to be making 2,000 vehicles a year by 2022.
The announcement will go down well in Ebbw Vale, where high-quality jobs have been in short supply since the vast steelworks closed a decade ago.
The Circuit of Wales CEO, Martin Whitaker, said: “Today’s news regarding TVR’s production facility in the Ebbw Vale is fantastic news for the region. Paired with Aston Martin’s recent announcement, it reinforces our vision of Ebbw Vale and the south Wales region growing into a cluster of excellence for automotive and related industries.”
Thanks for reading.
IFS analysis chimes with Duncan Smith's budget warning
Iain Duncan Smith’s warning that George Osborne’s budget will hit poorer families hardest while preserving the incomes of the better off and pensioners has been backed up by an influential thinktank. Analysis The IDS way: Victorian morality, reforming zeal and gross incompetence Iain Duncan Smith established a raft of welfare reforms none of which will be remembered for the right reasons Read more Sustained benefit cuts will result in many households in the bottom 20% of earners losing up to 12% of their income by 2019, according to a report published on Monday by the influential Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). Meanwhile, households in the top half of income brackets will be no worse off and even the poorest pensioners will be 2% in the red at most. The former work and pensions secretary resigned on Friday, accusing Osborne of delivering a “deeply unfair” budget that inflicted substantial reductions in disability benefits while offering tax cuts for the most affluent. The report said the tax and benefit changes from April last year to 2019 would end a period when income distribution was squeezed, mainly as a result of top earners paying higher taxes and suffering the withdrawal of generous pension-saving subsidies.
Paul Johnson, the director of the IFS, said: “Raising the threshold for paying higher-rate tax is clearly helping people in the middle- and upper-income brackets, while the cuts to benefits reduce the incomes of families on lower incomes.” He highlighted the switch from tax credits to universal credit as a major blow to working households at the bottom of the income scale. “Once universal credit is in place, the benefit system is much less generous,” he said. Duncan Smith was responsible for introducing universal credit and unsuccessfully fought Treasury demands for it to be less generous than the current tax credit system. In recent years, he has argued for some pensioner benefits such as the winter fuel allowance to be means tested so the government could show that all groups are sharing the pain of austerity. A chart in the report illustrating the impact of tax and benefit changes until the end of the current parliament shows the lowest 10% of households with children losing almost 10% of their income, while the next band lose more than 12%. The poorest 10% of pensioners lose 2% of their income; pensioners in the top 20% of earners gain or avoid losing any income at all. The IFS report stated: “Pensioners are protected while poorer working-age households are hit hard, especially those with children. This is the result of the continued protection of pensioner benefits (including maintaining the ‘triple lock’ on the basic state pension) while making further deep cuts to working-age benefit spending. “Households in the upper half of the income distribution (but below the very top) are likely to see little direct impact of tax and benefit changes on their incomes on average, as some benefits cuts and small tax rises are offset by further increases in the income tax personal allowance, and the raising of the higher-rate threshold.” Thanks for reading.
