KAREN Bradley has been forced to call off a Stormont drinks reception today after her invite was snubbed by all the main parties.
The cancellation, which came just 24 hours ahead of the event, is the latest embarrassing setback for the secretary of state, whose performance has been widely criticised over recent months.
Sinn Féin first signalled on Sunday that it wouldn’t be attending what the Northern Ireland Office described as a “cross-party discussion event” for all MLAs.
The remaining four main parties all confirmed last night that their MLAs would not be accepting Mrs Bradley’s invitation.
The cancellation comes amid growing speculation that the current talks process, which began in early May, is to be wound down over the coming days and parked for the summer.
Last week, Alliance leader Naomi Long told The Irish News that a breakthrough in the negotiations was unlikely before the end of this month.
When the two governments reviewed the process a fortnight ago they identified a “narrow window of opportunity” to reach a deal.
Ian Knox cartoon 18/6/19: Channel 4 stages a debate for Tory party leadership hopefuls which Boris doesn’t attend. Karen Bradley organises a drinks party to bring parties together which nobody attends
Ulster Unionist leader Robin Swann said last night that the talks appeared to be “stuck in no-man’s land”.
“The secretary of state may have been intending to help the talks move to a more meaningful stage by getting all the MLAs together, but that boat has now sailed,” he said.
“It’s time to get political leaders together for some hard political graft instead.”
An SDLP spokesman said the public wanted politicians to working to return to government rather than attending a drinks reception, while an Alliance spokesman said the party’s MLAs would concentrating on the work to restore the institutions.
A DUP spokesman said the event was “unhelpful”.
A British government spokesman said Mrs Bradley believed it would have been valuable to bring together MLAs for “an informal event alongside the ongoing talks process”.
“The secretary of state respects that the parties have concluded they are not ready for this yet,” the spokesman said.
PSNI Launch A Supreme Court Assault On Press Freedom
By AM
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Share
Tweet
Share
Share
EmailJamie Bryson argues that the PSNI is launching a Supreme Court assault on press freedom as they seek to narrow protections for journalistic material.
PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton has launched a full-frontal assault on press freedom as he seeks to restrict the protections for journalistic material under the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1989.
In my recent Judicial Review challenge the High Court ruled that in the event that the PSNI had corporate knowledge that a person may be in possession of journalistic material, then the enhanced protections apply- even if the police are not seeking journalistic material- and as such they would be precluded from procuring standard warrants under Article 10 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1989 (PACE).
This judgement meant that regardless of whether the alleged offence being investigated related to journalistic material or not, the PSNI would still have to go through the more rigorous procedure of applying to a County Court judge in order to obtain a search warrant. This judgement, the significance of which was denied by the PSNI at the time, broadened the scope of protection of journalistic material and set a significant precedent.
On Friday the PSNI Chief Constable lodged an appeal, claiming that the precedent set by the judgement raised a matter of public importance and as such his legal representatives submitted a question to the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
The Chief Constable’s application (below) if successful would mean that PSNI could seize journalistic material- which falls under ‘excluded and special procedure material’- under the pretence of investigating any offence and the only remedy for the subject of the seizure would be a ‘seize and sift’ procedure whereby PSNI would wade through all seized items, themselves assessing what is journalistic material and what isn’t.
This was confirmed by affidavit evidence provided by the PSNI during my High Court case; the officer claimed it wasn’t practical to have any independent assessment of seized material, claiming that it was for investigators to decide what may be covered by journalistic privilege.
The danger of this, especially for all those who may investigate police corruption, is obvious. The police could seize all the journalistic material, wade through it for intelligence purposes and then themselves – without any independent scrutiny – decide what they feel deserves journalistic protection, and what does not.
The PSNI attempt to narrow the protections for journalistic material comes only weeks after the Chief Constable lost another High Court challenged brought by two journalists. It was his second defeat in as many weeks after also losing the challenge I brought earlier in May.
I have alerted the National Union of Journalists to this application by the Chief Constable, which could affect journalists right across the United Kingdom given the Supreme Court decision will be binding.
There may be large sections of the NUJ that despise me, which causes little more than light amusement, but if they look past the person and take a quick look at what is at stake they may realise that the PSNI Chief Constable is launching a full frontal assault on the statutory legal protections for journalistic material.
This assault isn’t a minor little scuffle in a lower court – he is going to the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
The full text of the question the Chief Constable is seeking to be adjudicated upon by the UKSC is as follows:
Is it unlawful to seek a warrant pursuant to Article 10 of the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 in circumstances where a constable does not seek access to special procedure and/or excluded material but where there is a corporate knowledge of a realistic possibility that the materials on the premises may contain special procedure and/or excluded material given the facility for searching and sifting provided by sections 50 and 51 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 and the statutory obligation to return excluded material under section 55 of the 2001 Act?
The 2019 World Police & Fire Games will be held in Chengdu, China, from August 8 – August 18.
Please see the attached flyer for uniform athlete packages. Athlete packages include jumpsuit top and bottom, polo shirt, dry fit t-shirt, hat, shorts and a duffel bag. Athlete packages are to insure everyone participating in the 2019 World Police & Fire Games looks professional and coordinated while representing the FDNY.
Orders must be placed no later than July 1, 2019. For participating athletes with proof of registration, packages will cost $125. For non-participants that wish to order an athletic package, the cost is $250. Payment must be received before your order is placed. Payment will be accepted electronically via Venmo (information will be given out when order is requested) or via check made out to Uniformed Firefighters Association and mailed to: UFA Office of the Recording Secretary 204 E 23rd Street 5th Floor New York, NY 10010
To place your order, contact Antoinette Fatone at afatone@ufanyc.org or 212-545-6974. Have size information and 2019 World Police & Fire Games registration number available. There will be no deadline extension, so be sure to place your order as soon as possible.
Pick-up of the athlete packages is expected to be the last week of July at Fort Totten.
Certain Hospitals No Longer Accepting Empire Blue Cross / Blue Shield Please be advised that certain hospitals are no longer accepting FDNY’s Blue Cross / Blue Shield coverage. Westchester Medical Center and Bon Secours Charity Health System Facilities are currently out of the Empire Blue Cross / Blue Shield Network. As a result of failed contract negotiations, the following hospitals are no longer active in the Blue Cross / Blue Shield Network: Westchester Medical Center*Mid-Hudson Regional Hospital of Westchester*Good Samaritan Hospital in SuffernSt. Anthony’s Hospital in WarwickBon Secours Community Hospital in Port JervisWestchester Medical Center Advanced Physician GroupBon Secours Charity Health System Physician Group * Medicare is not impacted by this termination for Westchester Medical Center & Mid-Hudson Regional Hospital of Westchester Note that emergency care services at Westchester Medical Center and Mid-Hudson Regional Hospital will continue to be covered in accordance with your Empire benefit plan. Refer to the attached letter that was sent to all Blue Cross / Blue Shield participants for further details, frequently asked questions, and alternate facilities.
