Tag Archives: Venezuela

Observations of an Expat: What’s Next

The rules-based world order has been the cornerstone of international diplomacy since the end of World War Two. It is surviving by the friction of inertia alone, and many argue that we have already slipped into the abyss of the unknown.

The ancien régime depended heavily on American support and direction. Donald Trump has indicated that providing that support is no longer in America’s interests. According to Stephen Miller, Deputy Chief of Staff in the White House and a Key Trump adviser, what counts now is not law, but raw power.

As he told CNN: “We live in a world… that is governed by strength. That is governed by force. That is governed by power.”

In early January, Trump demonstrated this approach when he effectively kidnapped Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and announced the takeover of the country’s oil reserves for the “foreseeable future.” In a separate move, he appears to be moving quickly to gain control of Greenland.

This coming week Secretary of State Marco Rubio is expected to fly to Copenhagen with a firm offer to buy Greenland. Trump has made it clear that if the Danes refuse to cooperate, he might consider “military intervention,”  raising the prospect of conflict with a fellow member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark, which retains responsibility for Greenland’s defense and foreign affairs. The Danish government has emphasized that any decision regarding U.S. ownership would ultimately rest with Greenland’s 57,000 residents. The mainly Inuit population has said that it wants nothing to do with America and, in fact, seeks independence from Denmark. However, a country with such a small population would face significant challenges in defending itself.

A U.S. invasion of Greenland would be a serious blow to the international order. One of NATO’s  fundamental principles is that allies respect each other’s territorial integrity. They certainly do not attack one another. An attack on, or annexation of, Greenland—a territory of NATO ally Denmark—would seriously undermine the credibility of the alliance. Since the end of World War Two, American leadership of NATO has helped sustain one of the longest periods of relative peace and prosperity in modern history. Peace in Europe has spread ripple-like throughout the rest of the world.

Oddly enough, there is no need for a clash over Greenland. Under the 1951 U.S.-Danish Defense Agreement, the United States can base as many troops as needed in Greenland, and Denmark has indicated it may also allow American access to Greenland’s mineral resources, although this could face resistance from environmentally-conscious Greenlanders.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 4 Comments

7 January 2026 – today’s press releases

  • Lib Dems blast Reform Mayoral Launch for “talking down” London
  • Govt must state if US military seizure of oil tanker was legal under international law
  • ScotRail disruption payments top £3 million
  • Greene responds to watchdog warning on waiting times
  • Welsh Lib Dems raise ongoing red tape hitting Welsh lamb
  • Greene: Pause business rates revaluation

Lib Dems blast Reform Mayoral Launch for “talking down” London

Responding to a Reform UK press conference, announcing Laila Cunningham as their mayoral candidate, Lib Dem London Spokesperson Luke Taylor MP said:

From its history to its culture to its people, London is the greatest city in the world but all Reform seem to do is talk it down.

Cunningham and Farage care more about sowing division than they do about solving the actual problems that Londoners face.

The Liberal Democrats will stand up for the millions of Londoners who love this city and its values and ensure London is a better place for everyone.

Govt must state if US military seizure of oil tanker was legal under international law

Responding to the US’s seizure of a Russian-flagged oil tanker in the Atlantic, Calum Miller MP, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, said:

The Russian shadow fleet is busting oil sanctions for Russia and allies like Iran. It helps Putin sustain his brutal war on Ukraine. We support measures that stop the illicit flow of oil that powers sanctioned regimes.

But this is another example where Donald Trump’s illegal action in Venezuela has undermined steps to uphold international law.

The use of US air bases in the UK to launch this operation places a particular obligation on the Government to show that we are committed to acting lawfully. So the Government needs to state whether this military intervention is legal and who is now responsible for the vessel.

ScotRail disruption payments top £3 million

Scottish Liberal Democrat transport spokesperson Jamie Greene has today revealed that since the nationalisation of the ScotRail franchise the service has paid out more than £3m in payments to passengers whose trains have been cancelled or delayed.

Passengers whose trains are delayed by more than half an hour can make delay repay claims.

Figures for delay repay payments are typically published by ScotRail with a six-month lag, however figures acquired by Scottish Liberal Democrats reveal that between April 2022, when the service returned to public ownership, and the end of October 2025:

  • £3,089,106.54 was paid to passengers for late trains.
  • There have been 262,747 claims for delay repay in that time, with 178,446 of those being approved and paid out.
  • This means that the average pay-out for delay repay in that time has been £17.32.

Scottish Liberal Democrat transport spokesperson Jamie Greene MSP said:

This is an eye-watering, multi-million-pound bill for delayed trains.

The SNP have been directly responsible for the trains for three and a half years, but these figures point to a serious level of disruption that will be frustrating for commuters, holidaymakers and taxpayers.

Since this figure only covers those who have applied for a refund, there may be many more people who have been similarly inconvenienced but who simply haven’t claimed.

With people across the country struggling to make ends meet, these payments need to be brought under control. That’s also how we create a more efficient service that will help encourage people out of private cars.

Passengers and commuters deserve better. Wherever you are, by backing the Scottish Liberal Democrats on your peach regional ballot next May, you can vote for a public transport that works for all communities, ages and for the planet. We would achieve that with new options for two/three-day-a-week season tickets and by working with councils to explore new lines, especially in areas where public transport links are poor.

Posted in News, Press releases, Scotland and Wales | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , and | 5 Comments

Why liberal internationalism must reject camp politics

Liberal internationalism is under pressure from two directions. On one side sits an authoritarian right that treats power as its own justification. On the other side sits a left that increasingly defines foreign policy by opposing the West rather than by supporting democracy, human rights, and self-determination.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 15 Comments

5 January 2026 – today’s press releases

  • Lib Dems demand release of Venezuela legal advice as Starmer again refuses to say whether Trump breached international law
  • Cole-Hamilton: Scotland deserves better than old divisions
  • Cole-Hamilton responds to World Cup bank holiday
  • Lib Dems raise alarm after Conservative Shadow Minister hints they would cut free bus passes for over-60s in Wales

Lib Dems demand release of Venezuela legal advice as Starmer again refuses to say whether Trump breached international law

The Lib Dems are calling on the Government to publish any legal advice it has received on breaches of international law by the United States in its strikes on Venezuela and kidnapping of Nicolas …

Posted in News, Press releases, Scotland and Wales | Also tagged , , , and | 1 Comment

Mathew on Monday: the rules matter – especially when our allies break them

The arrest and removal of Nicolas Maduro by the United States is a moment that should chill anyone who believes in international law, the rules-based order, and liberal democracy.

Let’s be absolutely clear from the outset: no one is defending Maduro. He presided over a brutal, corrupt, authoritarian regime that crushed dissent, hollowed out democratic institutions, and inflicted immense suffering on the Venezuelan people. His removal from power will prompt relief in many quarters – understandably so.

But relief cannot become amnesia. What matters here is how power is exercised, not simply who wields it. The unilateral seizure of a foreign head of state, without international legal authority or multilateral backing, is a profound breach of the very system of rules that liberal democracies claim to uphold. The rules-based international order does not exist to protect dictators, it exists to prevent chaos, lawlessness, and the return of “might makes right” geopolitics. Once we decide that international law applies only when it is convenient – or only when the violator is an adversary – we surrender the very moral authority on which liberal democracy depends.

That is why Ed Davey is right to have spoken out clearly and unambiguously. His stance – condemning this action while reaffirming commitment to international law -is precisely what principled leadership looks like. It is possible, and indeed necessary, to oppose authoritarianism without endorsing lawlessness. The same clarity and moral purpose has been evident in his decision to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Denmark in the face of reckless rhetoric over Greenland. Sovereignty matters. Borders matter. International norms matter. We cannot credibly defend democracy abroad if we equivocate when those principles are tested by our friends.

Which brings us to the deeply disappointing response from the British government. Keir Starmer has, in effect, chosen to have no stance at all. Carefully worded evasions, an instinctive reluctance to upset Washington, and a studied vagueness masquerading as responsibility. This is not diplomacy; it is abdication.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 18 Comments

When the world’s policeman goes rogue

I was delivering care early one morning when the radio cut through the routine. The BBC was reporting that Donald Trump had authorised direct military action in Venezuela, framing it as a decisive move to remove the tyrant Nicolás Maduro from power.

I won’t pretend to shed tears for Maduro. He has spent years hollowing out democracy, crushing opposition, and driving millions of Venezuelans into poverty and exile. But geopolitics isn’t a boxing ring where the loudest punch wins. It’s more like a line of dominoes: once the first falls, you don’t get to choose how the rest collapse.

When the world’s hegemon decides it can cross borders using “security threats” as justification, it lowers the bar for everyone else. If Washington can point to Venezuelan cartels near its borders, what stops Beijing pointing to “anti-CCP agitation” in Taiwan? What stops Moscow, again, from insisting Ukraine is merely a defensive necessity?

This is how small justifications become big wars. History is littered with leaders who said, “Just this once.”

Trump presents himself as a peacemaker. He boasts of being the “peace president”, even claiming credit for preventing nuclear war between India and Pakistan. But that reveals a shallow understanding of reality. India and Pakistan have been nuclear powers since the late 1990s. They endured an eight-month military standoff in 2002, the Mumbai attacks in 2008, and repeated border crises since none escalated to nuclear war because both sides understand what mutual annihilation actually means. Nuclear deterrence is not Trump’s personal achievement; it’s grim arithmetic.

And the optics matter, because Trump is not governing from a position of strength. His approval rating sits in the low-to-mid 40% range, with disapproval consistently higher. When domestic legitimacy weakens, foreign “strength” often becomes political theatre the strongman equivalent of waving a flag to distract from cracks at home.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 4 Comments

Why is Trump getting away with Venezuela strikes? Thank heavens Lib Dems are condemning him?

It’s not the done thing for the leader of a powerful country  to send his people in to arrest the leader of another country, regardless of how awful a human being he is and ship him and his wife back to said powerful country to face trial.

I am not an expert in international law, but this does not seem to follow any kind of due process.

One of the most depressing things about the first year of the second Trump presidency is that Trump and his officials have got away virtually unchecked with horrific abuses of process carried out by his administration particularly in the treatment of immigrants, whether they have documents or not.

Congress has been unwilling to hold him accountable for misuse of his presidential powers over tariffs.

And the international community has treated him with cloying obsequity in the hope of getting a few crumbs from his table.

This is by far the least of the administration’s outrages, but when its Vice President comes over here and attacks this country and European neighbours for suppressing freedom of speech and gets the hospitality of our Deputy PM rather than the riposte he deserves, it is a pretty sad state of affairs.

What Trump should have had from across the world today is a chorus of condemnation. What he’s had is some vapid word salad from Keir Starmer:

Asked if he condemned the US action, as a number of other UK politicians have, he told reporters he wanted to “establish facts” and speak to Trump first about the “fast moving situation”.

The EU’s top diplomat pulled her punches too, though at least she acknowledged the illegality. From the BBC:

The European Union’s top diplomat said the situation in Venezuela was being closely monitored.

Kaja Kallas said the EU had repeatedly stated that Maduro “lacks legitimacy” but defended a peaceful transition.

She said that “under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected”.

Ed Davey, on the other hand, has been a lot more robust:

Keir Starmer should condemn Trump’s illegal action in Venezuela.

Maduro is a brutal and illegitimate dictator, but unlawful attacks like this make us all less safe.

Trump is giving a green light to the likes of Putin and Xi to attack other countries with impunity.

Just imagine if Xi ordered his troops to arrest Lai Ching-te, the leader of Taiwan.

Or if Putin went in to Kyiv and nabbed Zelensky.

Other Lib Dem MPs have also commented.

Al Pinkerton said:

As if the recent US National Security Strategy wasn’t clear enough, today’s illegal invasion and kidnapping in Venezuela sends a stark signal to dictators everywhere: force works.

That is a lesson Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping will be only too happy to learn — and one for which we may all end up paying a very high price.

Make no mistake: Nicolás Maduro is a brutal and illegitimate leader. But that does not and cannot justify acting unilaterally, without allies, and outside international law.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , and | 32 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

United States

A stroke of the pen is not enough to end America’s birth right citizenship laws. Donald Trump has so many more political and legal mountains to climb before his presidential decree can take effect.

First there is the law. Already 24 Democratic states have launched lawsuits opposing Trump’s sudden end to birth right citizenship.

They are on firm ground. The Fourteenth Amendment of the US constitution says: “All persons born…in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

Trump claims that birth right citizenship has never challenged in the courts. That is wrong. In the …

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 14 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

Donald Trump is the “Great Obfuscator.”

When asked to clarify his outrageous claims he muddies the political waters even more in an attempt to be all things to all people.

Last Friday he told the Christian political pressure group Turning Point Action that if they voted for him in November they wouldn’t have to vote again. He would “fix it.”

Liberals immediately raised the anti-democracy hue and cry. Donald Trump, they said, planned to either abolish elections or rig the system so that conservative Republicans would stay in power forever.

No, no, no, say the MAGA people. That is not what he meant at all. He meant that they won’t have to vote for Donald Trump again because he is prohibited by the constitution from running for a third term.

It was left to Fox News—Trump’s chosen television medium—to clarify the muddle. Interviewer Laura Ingraham pressed him to explain. Trump said the statement was made to encourage Christians to vote in November because American conservatives don’t often vote. He added that the same could be said for gun owners.

This was patently false. As a group, America’s Christians and gun owners are among the largest proportion of voters in the US. His clarification made no sense. So what did the Great Obfuscator mean?

Just as confusing…

…is Trump’s position on the much-discussed Project 2025.

For the benefit of those who have been trapped in a sealed cave for the past six months, Project 2025, is a 900-page report compiled by the right-wing think tank the Heritage Foundation. It sets out in great detail a programme for Donald Trump if he is inaugurated president in 2025.

Among its provisions are proposals to gut the FBI and Department of Justice and replace tens of thousands of federal civil servants with loyal MAGA Republicans. It wants a national ban on abortion and restrictions on contraception and IVF treatments. Project 2025 proposes a strong “unitary executive branch;” an “end to civil rights protections” and no more “safeguards on drinking water.” All efforts to combat climate change would end” and America would focus more on drilling for fossil fuels. The Department of Education would be scrapped along with all economic ties to China.

Democrats immediately denounced Project 2025 as anti-constitutional, anti-Democratic, anti-American and verging on the illegal. And they added that all those antis pretty well summed up Trump himself.

A fair amount of the mud stuck and Trump quickly started to distance himself from Project 2025. This proved difficult because one of the main contributors to the report was his former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The Director of the Heritage Foundation, and the main impetus behind the report, Paul Dans, was Trump’s Chief of Staff for the Office of Personnel Management.

This week Mr Dans resigned as Director of the Heritage Foundation and claimed that Project 2025 was not meant to be an action plan for Donald Trump. Instead, he said, it was merely some thoughts for any future conservative administration.

The Trump campaign immediately put out an “I told you so” release. But then we need to look at what Trump has personally promised to do: Gut the Department of Justice and the FBI and put on trial for treason the “Biden Crime family” and political opponents such as Liz Cheney. “Drill, drill, drill for oil.” Raise tariffs on Chinese exports for between 65-100 percent. Pardon most of the Capitol Hill rioters. Round-up and deport up to 15 million illegal immigrants and “fix it so you won’t have to vote for me again.”

What next in the Middle East?

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | Leave a comment

Observations of an Expat: Colonial Problem

A colonial era Latin American border dispute is threatening to blow up into a major conflict involving the United States, Brazil, Venezuela, the tiny country of Guyana and possibly Britain as the former colonial power.

The catalyst is the discovery of large oil and gas deposits off the coast of the Essequibo region which is claimed by both Venezuela and Guyana. It has been occupied by Guyana since 1840.

On December 3, President Nicolas Maduro held a referendum in Venezuela in which 95 percent of those balloted voted in favour of annexing the 100,000 square mile Essequibo region which is two-thirds of Guyanese territory. It should be noted that international observers labelled the referendum “grossly unfair” and with a “low turnout”. Furthermore, no one in the Essequibo region voted.

International criticism, however, has not stopped Maduro from ordering foreign companies out of the jungles of Essequibo and the exclusive economic zone off the coast.

Venezuela has also mobilised its army of 100,000 in preparation for a possible invasion. Guyana has put its 7,000 troops on alert. And Brazil has sent troops to its border with Venezuela because the Venezuelan army would have to pass through Brazil to attack Guyana.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has said America will protect Guyana’s sovereignty and additional US warships have been dispatched to the Caribbean for manoeuvres with Guyana’s five-boat navy.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 5 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

NATO

The current Arctic military exercises are relatively small by NATO standards. But they are hugely significant. They are they the first manoeuvres in which Finland has participated as a full member of the Alliance.

In fact, 12 countries are participating; two of whom are NATO partners: Sweden and Switzerland. The latter has been neutral for more than half a millennium.

There is no chance that the Swiss will end their neutrality, but in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Sweden decided that the NATO umbrella was more important than its 200-year non-alignment policy. Unfortunately, NATO membership requires the support of all 31 member countries. Two members, Turkey led by President Tayyip Recep Erdogan and Hungary led by self-declared illiberal Prime Minister Viktor Orban, blocked it.

The hope of the rest of the Alliance is that Erdogan will be more receptive to compromise following his 28 May re-election for a further five years. In the next few weeks there will be a constant stream of visitors to Ankara to try to persuade the Turkish leader to drop his veto. They will be led by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg but will also include senior officials from the US, UK, France, Germany, the Baltic states and, of course, Sweden.

The aim is to change Erdogan’s mind so that the Alliance welcome the Swedes into NATO alliance at the heads of government summit in Vilnius, Lithuania on 11-12 July. But NATO has to overcome Hungarian objections as well as Turkish.

Hungary’s veto is based on two important foreign policy pillars: good relations with Russia and Turkey. The former is rooted in land-locked Hungary’s total dependence on Russian oil and gas. This is also the reason Hungary continues to defy Western sanctions by buying Russian energy. The Turkish connection is based more on a common ideology between the two right-wing populists – Erdogan and Orban.

The official stated reason for Hungarian opposition is Swedish criticism of Orban’s democratic credentials. “Stockholm,” wrote a Hungarian government spokesperson recently, “sits on a crumbling throne of moral superiority.” It is a weak argument. Swedish criticism of Orban is no greater than that of most of Western Europe, and the hope is that if Erdogan has been brought into line, Orban will follow.

USA

America will NOT default on its debt. That is a near – but not quite – certainty. The House of Representatives has voted to raise the debt ceiling. The Senate has to follow suit by 5 June and is almost certain to do so.

In the end there was the inevitable compromise between the Republican-controlled House and Democratic President Joe Biden. To please the Republicans $1.3 trillion was shaved off the federal budget.

There were some cuts to welfare spending but not enough to alienate Democratic Congressmen but enough for Republicans to point to an achievement. The biggest White House concession was to allow the building of an oil pipeline through West Virginia in order to secure the support of troublesome Democratic Senator Joe Manchin as well as Republican congressmen.

In the context of the bigger picture the amount saved is insignificant. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the federal government will spend $80-plus trillion over the next ten years.

The problem that both parties face is that there is virtually no room for discretionary spending cuts. To start with there is defense. Both parties support a large defense establishment. The result is that US defense spending is 3.1 percent of GDP and 12 percent of the federal budget.  American government spending on its military represents 40 percent of military spending in the entire world.

But an untouchable military is only part of the budget problem. Two-thirds of federal spending is the even bigger sacred cow of social security (state pensions) and medicare (medical insurance for the elderly). Both of these are increasing in line with an ageing American population.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , and | 14 Comments

10 January 2019 – today’s press releases

I’m posting on the fly today, as I’ve allowed myself to become distracted by other things. So, if this posting changes before your very eyes, don’t be surprised… It’s a bit like Brexit in many ways, a kaleidoscope of images, none of which you can ever recreate again…

  • Lib Dems in bid to change asylum seeker employment rules
  • Cable: Moment of reckoning for our economy
  • Cable: No confidence in Govt or Corbyn
  • Lib Dems: We will use “any means possible” to secure proper Brexit debate
  • Lib Dems call for Venezuelan President to step down
  • Blackwood appointment shows Tories ignoring demands for House of Lords reform

Lib Dems

Posted in News | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , and | 2 Comments

Cable, not Corbyn, is right on Venezuela

The most famous example is in the 1960’s: the Cuba of Fidel Castro turned dictatorial after he let the Soviet Union take over training domestic policing and his secret service (in exchange for buying up his sugar an most of Cuban cigars; see Tad Szulcs biography of Fidel).

But also in the 1980’s the regime of Robert Mugabe over Zimbabwe appeared to start out in 1980 as a better alternative to South African Apartheid, but there the instant imposition and eternal prolongation of the State of Emergency, the role of the North Korean (guaranteed Stalinist) military training mission, their Zimbabwean Fifth Brigade pupils and their Gukurahundi 1983-7 offensive  suppressing Nkomo’s democratic opposition, disillusioned many supporters very fast. When in 1987 the presidency got real executive powers and Nkomo’s party was absorbed in Mugabe’s regime, things turned sour “for keeps”, resulting in misrule, murderous peasant evictions, clobbering opposition leaders to a pulp, and hyperinflation.

The 1979 Sandinista revolt in Nicaragua under Daniel Ortega kept on the democratic, progressive path during the 1980’s, but after losing the 1990’s election Ortega forced social democratic party veterans like Ernesto Cardenal and novelist Sergio Ramírez out, becoming  more autocratic. Ortega and his clique in 1990 kept the nationalized enterprises as their property, and after returning to government in 2006, Ortega was illegally re-elected president in 2011. Ortega, having fought the Roman Catholic hierarchy up to 1990, co-operated with the orthodox wing of that church (archbishop Obando) after returning to government in 2006, banning abortion in all circumstances (his main campaign issue and that of the “liberals”. Human Rights Watch since reported that bleeding pregnant women don’t get treated for fear of breaking that ban, and the Health Ministry ignores complaints about pre- and postnatal care.

Posted in News | Also tagged and | 28 Comments

Venezuela – a failure wrought by paranoia and a cause without much principle

It is noticeable that Venezuela is prominent in the British media at the moment. To be honest, the chaos of a typical Latin American banana republic seldom causes such interest, but given the links between the Venezuelan Government and Jeremy Corbyn, its failure is a convenient stick to beat him with.

And let’s be honest, things are bad there. I had the opportunity to go to Caracas in December 2015, when things were already falling apart, inflation was spiralling and the bolivar was on its way to toilet paper status. At that point, the government had stopped publishing most economic data – it was pretty meaningless anyway – and had acknowledged its exchange rate difficulties by offering an alternative exchange rate for tourists.

The official rate was six bolivars to the dollar. As a tourist, you could legally get two hundred bolivars to the dollar. The black market, usually a fair judge of reality, was offering eight hundred bolivars to the dollar. And, as the largest bank note in circulation was a one hundred bolivar note, you can easily imagine what that meant in terms of carrying money.

So, why are things so bad in Venezuela? Firstly, the economy is almost entirely underpinned by oil exports (which represented 96% of total exports) and when the price of crude fell, GDP fell catastrophically. A market economy can adjust to that, albeit painfully. Sadly for the Venezuelan people, they have a government which not only doesn’t believe in markets, it doesn’t appear to understand them either.

Posted in Europe / International, News and Op-eds | Also tagged | 31 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • George Thomas
    Have just come from the latest post discussing Welsh Lib Dems struggles to a post regarding better transport. Does this mean support for retrospective funding f...
  • Tristan Ward
    “Let’s start by arguing that the economic benefits of the Single Market far exceed having to accept freedom of movement into the UK, and take it from there....
  • Chloe
    'Needless to say the poorest in British society paid the price for this' I remember canvassing , the poorer the area the less interested they were. Membership ...
  • GWYN WILLIAMS
    A balanced and fair assessment of the Senedd campaign. Unlike in Scotland, Wales has not as yet polarised into for and against Independence camps. The Welsh Lib...
  • Jana
    The logic of this article is that we should be rejoining the Single Market. That is different from signing up to complete political Union by joining the EU. ...