this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
145 points (98.0% liked)

World News

51953 readers
2708 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The EU is reportedly demanding guarantees the UK will compensate the bloc if a future government reneges on the Brexit “reset” agreement Keir Starmer is currently negotiating.

The termination clause is a stark reminder of the painful and costly divorce in which the EU set up a colossal €5.4bn (£4.7bn) fund to help its member states cope with the disruption caused by the UK’s exit in 2020.

According to the Financial Times, a draft text of an agreement on agriculture trade, aimed at removing post-Brexit checks on farm produce, calls for any party pulling out of the agreement to cover the cost of reinstating border and infrastructure controls in the future.

Nicknamed the “Farage clause” by EU diplomats, it is seen in some quarters as a means of ensuring the bloc is not left out of pocket should the Reform leader win a general election and make real his threat to cancel any UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement.

However, UK sources dismissed this notion, saying such a clause was routine in international deals and was written “to work both ways”, and would therefore also force the EU to compensate the UK if it backed out of the deal in future.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Suriel@lemmy.world 44 points 3 days ago

Makes sense. Take precautions, minimise damage.