More than 100,000 spectators gathered in London on Monday evening to watch Europe’s largest annual firework display as the world welcomed the new year with a series of spectacular celebrations.
With less than three months until Britain leaves the EU, London mayor Sadiq Khan said the display showed Europe that the capital will remain “open-minded” and “outward looking” post-Brexit.
Big Ben returned to action to kick off the sold-out show – Europe’s largest annual firework display – after a year of renovation works.
As London’s landmark clock tower chimed, 70,000 projectiles made up of 12,000 fireworks lit up the sky above the capital in an occasion Mr Khan hoped would “send a message of support” to the more than one million European citizens who call the city their home.
The words “London is open” were spoken in seven languages as the capital welcomed in 2019 with a dazzling riverside fireworks display.
Mr Khan spoke the adage in English around two minutes into the new year, which was then uttered in Spanish, Polish, French, Romanian, German and Italian.
We Are Your Friends, Stay and Don’t Leave Me Alone were some of the songs chosen for the 11-minute soundtrack, which featured artists from Ireland, France, Sweden and elsewhere.
History has shown us repeatedly how the lunar pull of Europe is irresistible – and will be until the end of time
They are sick of the whole thing. They just want it to be over. No more uncertainty. Brexiteers want resolution. They will be disappointed. Willing something does not make it so. Aethelred wanted Viking raids to stop. The kingdoms of Wales, Scotland and Ireland wished the Norman and Plantagenet monarchs of England would cease their predatory lunges into their territory. Neville Chamberlain hoped that Hitler would be content with Czechoslovakia. Oliver Letwin wished there was an island we could send all migrants to. The hopes of politicians and rulers are whispers in a gale.
... ... ...
Mayor’s use of New Year’s Eve event to stress city’s openness to Europeans enrages leavers
[...]
In a tweet after the display, the mayor said: “Our one million EU citizens are Londoners, they make a huge contribution, and no matter the outcome of Brexit, they will always be welcome.”
While the sentiment might be popular with many Londoners, given the capital voted strongly in favour of staying in the EU, the display brought condemnation from militant Brexiters.
The Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen said the message had been “a betrayal of democracy”, telling the Sun: “It’s low, it’s very low to politicise what is an international public event.”
Roger Helmer, a former Conservative MEP who defected to Ukip, tweeted: “While the UK is locked in critical negotiations with Brussels, Sadiq Khan chooses to display the other side’s flag on the London Eye. Would he have shown an Argentinian flag during the Falklands War?”
The annual display was paid for by £2.3m in funding from the Greater London Authority, offset by revenue from 100,000 ticket sales.
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain is more likely to leave the EU without a deal if lawmakers reject the agreement Prime Minister Theresa May has negotiated, one of her ministers said on Thursday, while a second said a no-deal exit would hit the farming sector hard.
Brexit is scheduled for March 29 but, while Stephen Barclay and Michael Gove both warned against an unmanaged departure, what will actually happen on that day remains far from clear.
The future of May’s agreement hangs in the balance in the run-up to a parliamentary vote, and calls for a second referendum - which she has consistently rejected - are growing.
“No deal will be far more likely if MPs (Members of Parliament) reject the government’s Brexit deal,” Brexit minister Barclay wrote in the Daily Express newspaper, arguing that May’s plan was the only “workable deal” available.
Environment Minister Gove said British farmers and food firms would face rising costs in the event of no deal, as export tariffs kicked in and border inspections slowed traffic through ports.
Lawmakers must choose whether to accept May’s plans for a structured exit and relatively close economic ties, or reject it and spawn huge uncertainty about the country’s next steps. The vote is due in the week beginning Jan. 14.
May is seeking extra reassurances from Brussels to help persuade skeptical lawmakers within her own party - and the small Northern Irish party that props up her minority government - to back her plan.
Within the opposition Labour Party, which has so far backed a negotiated exit but does not support May’s deal, there is growing support for a second Brexit referendum. But the Guardian newspaper reported that its leader Jeremy Corbyn would resist such a policy change.
Britons voted by a narrow majority to leave the EU in June 2016.
Sterling has fallen against the dollar in recent weeks, in part due to growing concerns over the course of the Brexit process.
Barclay, whose primary remit is to make sure Britain is ready in case a deal cannot be reached, said that next week the government would step up its campaign to make sure citizens are prepared for such an outcome.
“On Tuesday we will start a new phase in our public information campaign, using radio and social media to further raise awareness about the need to prepare,” he wrote.
A new government website will contain advice on what no-deal preparations businesses, Britons, and EU nationals living in the country should make. Billboard advertisements for the website will appear in coming weeks.
Sterling has fallen against the dollar in recent weeks, in part due to growing concerns over the course of the Brexit process.
Britain Needs a Brexit Insurance Plan
Without a deal, the country’s departure from the European Union will be a disaster.
HAMBURG, Germany — I learned by mail the other day that Brexit poses a risk to my life insurance. My Britain-based insurance company, unsure about whether it would legally be able to cover European Union citizens like me once Britain leaves the 28-nation bloc, wrote me that it intends to transfer my policy to a subsidiary in Dublin.
So far, most of the news and commentary about Brexit has been over how London and Brussels are going to manage their unprecedented divorce. Less attention has been paid to how European governments, companies and everyday citizens are wrestling with the hundreds of ways things will change for them at 11 p.m. on March 29, when Britain officially leaves the union, with or without a deal in place. My insurance transfer is just one answer to a particularly difficult question: What happens once the hundreds of millions of European Union citizens are cut off from Europe‘s most powerful finance pump, the City of London?
At the moment, it looks possible that all this will happen in the worst possible way, with no arrangement in place between Britain and the union on how to manage the separation. Theresa May, the British prime minister, is likely to fail with her draft for transition regulations; too many members of the House of Commons seem to feel that her proposed withdrawal agreement, which she negotiated with Brussels, does not go far enough. But the European Union insists that it will not revisit the deal.
As a result, one minute Britain will be a part of the union; at 11:01 that evening, it won’t. It’s like, in split second, chopping off all branches of a tree and watching what happens to the tree and to the community that used to draw a share of its fruits.
With no deal, trade relations between Britain and the European Union would revert to the very basic rules of the World Trade Organization. These entail that neither side is allowed to treat the other more favorably than they treat other trade partners around the globe. If Britain steps out of the union without any bilateral trade deals, a customs regime would have to be installed between Britain and its European neighbors. In the interim, thousands of businesses on both sides, and millions of customers, will be thrown into a costly confusion. At least my insurer has a plan; many other companies are still struggling to find one.
The old, once-amusing British headline “Fog in the Channel — Continent Cut Off” could finally come to bear some truth, particularly for Germany‘s key industry: automakers. Within Europe, Britain is by far their biggest market. Last year auto manufacturers based in Germany exported three times more cars to Britain than they did to China, according to their trade association’s data. The auditing firm Deloitte believes that the number of German cars sold to Britain could drop from 800,000 to 550,000 annually, endangering 18,000 German jobs.
The auto industry is a great example of just how complicated and messy a “hard” Brexit will be. It’s not just that fewer British customers will buy German cars. It’s that well-established, just-in-time-supply chains could be destroyed. As The Guardian reported, the crankshaft of a BMW Mini crosses the Channel three times before it becomes part of the finished car: The cast is made in France, then goes to a BMW plant in Warwickshire where it is drilled, then it travels to Munich where it is set into the engine. The engine finally is shipped back to the Mini plant in Oxford, to be mounted into the car. With a customs regime in place, all those cross-Channel trips will become much more expensive.
Brexiteers claimed that Britain could shake off the union’s principle of free movement of people yet somehow maintain the usual level of free trade with the continent. Those were pipe dreams. So were expectations that as the hour of Brexit approached, the European Union would bow to Britain’s demands.
Despite the damage Brexit will cause in the remaining 27 countries of the union, they are unflinching in their message to London: This will be painful for both of us, but we can’t let you change the rules. Germany, which sells far more cars to the rest of the union than to Britain, has insisted on this hard line throughout the talks. Germany doesn’t want to lose British buyers, but it can’t afford to undermine the common-market structure that undergirds its sales to the rest of Europe.
And even if Germany were willing to budge, the more important question is where. No one in Berlin now knows what else to give to Mrs. May to overcome Parliament’s resistance to the withdrawal plan. Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly asked Theresa May for insights at the last Brussels summit but, as on previous attempts, got no detailed answer.
Consider this, though: What if Mrs. May actually wants her agreement to be voted down? Parliament would then have to deal with the Brexit mess itself. And, as things stand, none of its members want a hard Brexit, either. Aside from the hard-liners, the closer the Westminster lawmakers are pushed toward the abyss of Brexit and the clearer they see the horrors of it, the more they are coming to embrace a third option: give the vote over Brexit back to the people through a new referendum.
This would of course hurt the credibility of democracy. Hard-line Brexiteers would bemoan the betrayal of the majority who voted Leave in 2016. The rift that runs through the country could get deeper and even more difficult to heal.
But it’s either allow a second vote or face a free-fall — without a safety net — into an economic void. Choose your poison, Britain. But before you do, take out some life insurance. I can recommend a firm, now based in Dublin.
Our 50,000 EU staff and 130,000 EU students, not to mention the 15,000 UK students studying in Europe, are starting the new year facing significant uncertainty about their futures.
Vital research links will be compromised, from new cancer treatments to technologies combatting climate change. The valuable exchange of students, staff and knowledge would be seriously damaged. And we share the concerns of business about the impact of no deal on everything from supply chains to security and travel.
In their letter, the university leaders say the government needs to “demonstrate the required ambition, put the right measures and guarantees in place, and, crucially, avoid the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal on 29 March.” As a matter of urgency, they call for a guarantee that research funding from which the UK may be excluded at the end of March will be replaced.
European Research Council (ERC) and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) schemes will be worth an estimated €1.3 billion to the UK over the next two years, and fund vital scientific discovery, including in developing new cancer treatments and to combat climate change. The UK is currently the most successful country in hosting ERC grantees, ahead of Germany, but would immediately become ineligible in the event of no deal.
... ... ...
Union boss Minette Batters says tariffs would price British farms out of export market
The UK’s farmers face a profound crisis in the event of a no-deal Brexit, and there is dangerous ground ahead even if a deal is agreed, according to the head of the National Farmers’ Union.
Minette Batters, the union’s first female leader, is determined to be cautiously positive about Brexit, for which a majority of farmers voted. “We have to embrace the future … and make sure we have a goal and a plan,” said Batters, who declined to reveal how she voted in the referendum.
But she is extremely worried by the possibility of no deal. In that case, she said, the government had “made it clear that they would obliterate the tariff wall on food so that products could just keep coming in here without a tax – that is what they’ve said. Which makes sense, because who wants to see food prices rising?”
A government briefing in December suggested that in the event of no deal, the government could allow some products to continue to enter the UK without paying a tariff to keep food prices stable.
Batters pointed out that UK farmers would have third-party status and would face high tariffs to sell their goods into Europe. “We’d be priced out of the market,” she said, claiming that the result for UK farmers would be catastrophic. “Forty per cent of our lamb goes to Europe, for just one example. We’re not going to suddenly start eating more lamb here. If we don’t have that export market, what happens to it?”
Some experts have predicted that 25% or more of farmers could go out of business in the first year, which Batters does not think is impossible.
British food should be selling itself around the world on its high welfare standards and environmental stewardship, Batters argues, and she has laid down an ambition for UK farming to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2040. “We want to have a big British brand and going to net zero is part of that ambition … part of a much bigger joined-up plan that delivers on many fronts for society.”
Animal welfare and environmental campaigners point out the irony of these moves from the NFU, which resisted environmental and welfare reforms for years.
Batters also has reservations about Michael Gove’s plans to move UK farmers away from the EU system of subsidies based on land area and towards a “public money for public goods system”, where farmers would be paid for environmental services. The environment secretary’s agriculture bill will go to the House of Lords this month: under its terms, the current subsidy system would be phased out over seven years and the new system phased in.
Both Batters and environmental campaigners are concerned that despite trumpeting high UK standards, the government refuses to include them in the legislation. The US has said it will only do a trade deal with the UK if it accepts America’s very different food standards, and there are fears that the British government is trying to leave the door open for a possible US deal, which would have a huge impact on UK farmers.
“It would be very unfair on British farmers and consumers if they were then subjected to product coming in where they’ve had access to things that we’ve had banned in this country,” said Batters.
The shadow trade secretary, Barry Gardiner, told the Oxford Farming Conference this week: “The rhetoric has been great on standards.” But Gardiner said that during the progress of the legislation, every time Labour tried to add amendments to get the standards included, the Conservatives made sure the amendments failed.
“Liam Fox is still up for a ‘quick and massive deal’ with the US,” Gardiner said, claiming that lower food standards could be imposed under the powers the government has given itself.
Brexit is just one of a number of existential issues faced by farmers in the next 10 years. A tax is being proposed on red meat, known to be a significant contributor to climate change. Meanwhile, innovative companies around the world have been creating alternatives to milk and meat that are starting to eat up large chunks of the market. Gene editing, robotics and big data are all growing in influence, each presenting different challenges.
So are UK farmers ready for the tidal wave of change that is coming their way? “No,” said Batters. “And that’s why it’s a good thing that we have seven years to look at turning things around.”
Love letters to Europe is an installation by Message from the Skies conceived as part of Edinburgh’s Hogmanay festival. The words of six writers – Billy Letford, Chitra Ramaswamy, Kapka Kassabova, Louise Welsh, Stef Smith and William Dalrymple – appear with accompanying tracks nightly until 25 January
Environment secretary claims fresh public vote would be ‘huge blow to our democracy’
Voters would back leaving the European Union in a fresh Brexit referendum by a bigger margin than in 2016, Michael Gove has claimed.
The environment secretary said he believed another public vote would be a worse outcome than a no-deal Brexit but predicted that voters would deliver an “even stronger” demand to leave the EU.
Calls for the public to be given the chance to break the deadlock in parliament have grown louder with less than three months to go until Brexit.
Theresa May has repeatedly said there will not be a second referendum if, as expected, MPs vote down her Brexit deal later this month.
Reports suggest she is instead likely to return to the Commons at a later date to try again.
Mr Gove dismissed calls for the public to be given a fresh vote, saying it would be “a huge blow to our democracy”.
He told The Times: “The loss of faith people would have in our political system would be far greater than any other political or economic event in our lifetimes.”
He added: “If people are told, ‘Sorry you got it wrong last time, you were too stupid or misled, you have to think again’, I think the country would be angry.”
But he predicted that Leave would win any second vote, saying: “I think if there were another referendum Leave would win by an even bigger majority and be even stronger.”
The prime minister has urged MPs to back her Brexit deal, saying it is the only way to honour the referendum result and protect the economy.
Writing in the Mail on Sunday, Theresa May said her critics - both Remainers and Brexiteers - risk damaging democracy if they oppose her plan.
But a poll carried out for the People's Vote campaign suggests fewer than one in four voters support her Brexit deal.
Quote:But a poll carried out for the People's Vote campaign suggests fewer than one in four voters support her Brexit deal.
A majority of voters believe the final say on Britain’s impending exit from the EU should be determined by the public, according to the biggest Brexit poll held since the 2016 referendum.
The YouGov survey of 25,000 citizens showed 53 per cent favour a second referendum while 47 per cent do not, once those answering “don’t know” have been discounted.
The survey, commissioned by the People’s Vote, indicated the British public would back remaining in the EU by 54 per cent to 46 per cent if there was a re-run of the 2016 question.
The new poll also offers fresh evidence Labour could be punished by voters if Jeremy Corbyn’s party either backs or does not oppose Theresa May’s Brexit deal in the Commons.
It indicates Labour’s share of the vote would slump another eight points – from 34 per cent to 26 per cent – if its MPs join with the Tories to support the prime minister’s Brexit deal.
This would be even worse than the 28 per cent share secured by Labour under Michael Foot, when the party slumped to defeat against Margaret Thatcher’s Tories in 1983.
The 26 per cent vote share would remain the same if Labour MPs were not ordered to oppose a deal – possibly by being given a free vote or being told to abstain.
[...]
The latest survey suggests less than a quarter of voters – just 22 per cent – back the prime minister’s plan, despite a concerted effort by Downing Street to sell the deal directly to the public in the face of opposition from MPs. Support for the current deal rises to only 28 per cent among Leave voters.
Theresa May has hinted she will force MPs to vote multiple times on her Brexit deal if, as expected, they reject it in a Commons showdown next week.
The prime minister dismissed speculation that she will pull the “meaningful vote” for a second time, because of the scale of the opposition, saying: “We will be holding the vote.”
But she refused – four times – to rule out bringing back the vote “again and again and again”, as the looming threat of a no-deal Brexit, now just weeks away, piles pressure on MPs to back down.
Asked, by the BBC’s Andrew Marr, if she would “bring it back” after a defeat, Ms May said only: “I am working on getting this vote through parliament.
“It is for those who oppose the deal to say what the alternative is and, so far, nobody has put forward an alternative that delivers on all those issues and, crucially, delivers on the referendum result.”
But the prime minister also hinted that MPs could decide what happens next, saying: “We are going to be in uncharted territory. I don’t think anybody can say exactly what will happen in terms of the reaction we’ll see in parliament.”
Strikingly, Ms May appeared unable to point to any significant progress in persuading the EU to give ground on the Irish border backstop, since last month.
She said she was still seeking “further assurances from the EU on the issues raised”, as well as on how to give parliament a stronger role over future trade negotiations.
Last month, when fighting off the vote of no confidence by Tory MPs, the prime minister vowed to secure a new “legally binding” power for the UK to break free of the backstop, if implemented.
But, in the interview, she said the “crucial element” was speeding up a future trade deal, to remove the backstop – designed to avoid border posts and checks in Ireland – quickly.
However, experts have warned trade talks will take many years, while the backstop would be in place from January 2021, unless the transition period is extended as an alternative.
MPs will resume debating the withdrawal agreement on Wednesday, with the vote expected on 15 or 16 January. Ms May said it would be “that sort of timing”.
If the deal is thrown out, Labour will push for a no-confidence vote, to force a general election – but this is also expected to fail, with no sign of Tory or Democratic Unionist Party support.
Quote:Theresa May has hinted she will force MPs to vote multiple times on her Brexit deal if, as expected, they reject it in a Commons showdown next week.
'I’ve consulted with the clerks of the House of Commons on this – you cannot do that,' prime minister told
Parliamentary rules will prevent Theresa May bulldozing her Brexit deal through by staging multiple repeat votes until the Commons surrenders, MPs believe.
The tactic – increasingly seen as the prime minister’s only hope of rescuing her unpopular agreement – is explicitly barred by procedures to stop the government bullying the legislature, they say.
Even if Ms May tries to evade the rules by changing a few words of the motion put before MPs, it would be ruled out of order if it is “the same, in substance, as a question that has been decided”, the rules say.
The crucial hurdle emerged after the prime minister refused several times to rule out bringing back the vote “again and again and again” if, as expected, she loses heavily next week.
... ... ...
More than 200 MPs from across the Commons have signed a letter to the prime minister urging her to rule out a no-deal Brexit.
The letter, which has been signed by both Leave and Remain supporters, was organised by the former Conservative cabinet minister Dame Caroline Spelman and Labour’s Jack Dromey.
Dame Caroline told BBC Radio 4’s Westminster Hour: “Crashing out of the EU without a deal will cause job losses and bring to an end the renaissance of manufacturing that we’ve seen in regions like mine in the West Midlands, and both Jack Dromey and I know the human interest and impact of this.”
All signatories to the letter have been invited to meet Theresa May in Downing Street on Tuesday. The prime minister is also hosting drinks receptions for Tory MPs on Monday and Wednesday as part of a charm offensive to win support for the Brexit deal.
While the letter does not bind the signatories to supporting the prime minister’s deal, Dame Caroline said it offers a “platform” which would stabilise the economy and offer reassurance to businesses.
“We are united on one thing – we want to protect jobs and livelihoods by making sure we don’t crash out without a deal,” she said.
“If parliament gives expression to not wanting to crash out without a deal, it means effort has got to be renewed to find an agreement which is acceptable to a majority of parliamentarians.
“Taking a step back and at least agreeing we’re not going to crash out without a deal means that on 29 March we’re not just going to fall over the cliff edge.”
Ms May has warned that the UK will be in “uncharted territory” if the deal is rejected in the vote, expected on 15 January.
However, the former foreign secretary Boris Johnson has dismissed warnings against a no-deal Brexit, branding them “downright apocalyptic” while claiming leaving the EU without an agreement in place is an outcome “that is 209 MPs by some margin preferred by the British public”.
Writing in The Daily Telegraph, Mr Johnson said: ”We must hope that Theresa May really does remove the backstop from the withdrawal agreement, in such a way as to give real legal protection to the UK.
“Failing that, we should approach the challenge of leaving on WTO terms in a way that is realistic and sensible, but also with the optimism and self-confidence displayed by the majority of the British public.”
He said the UK “didn’t vote for anything like Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement”, adding: ”It is no deal or WTO terms that actually corresponds to their idea of coming out, and they view that option with a confidence that is now directly proportional to the growing strength of the government’s warnings against it.”
The prime minister’s hopes of getting her deal through parliament were dealt another blow on Sunday as it emerged parliamentary rules will prevent her bulldozing her Brexit deal through by staging multiple repeat votes until the Commons surrenders.
The tactic – increasingly seen as the prime minister’s only hope of rescuing her unpopular agreement – is explicitly barred by procedures to stop the government bullying the legislature, they say.
[...]
WHO?
The debate takes place in the lower house of parliament, the House of Commons. May does not have an outright majority of the 650 lawmakers, and the DUP, the small Northern Irish party that usually props up her government, is opposed to the deal.
May needs 318 votes to get a deal through parliament as seven Sinn Fein lawmakers do not sit, four speakers do not vote and the four tellers are not counted.
WHEN?
Parliament held three days of debate in December before the vote was postponed. The debate is scheduled to restart next Wednesday. The government will propose a timetable for how many days it should last and when the vote will be.
So far the government has set out plans to hold the debate on Jan. 9 and 10. It has also proposed continuing the debate on Jan. 11, although parliament is not due to sit that day.
The December debate was scheduled to last five days, so the restarted debate is expected to continue into the week of Jan. 14, when the government has said the vote will be held.
Each day can last up to eight hours, with start and finish times will vary from day to day.
On the final day, there will be a series of votes: first, to approve or reject up to six amendments to the government’s motion, and then to approve or reject the motion. It is not yet clear what time the voting will start.
WHAT?
The debate will be on whether to approve a motion stating that parliament has approved the Withdrawal Agreement - a legal text setting out the terms of departure - and a separate political declaration outlining the long-term relationship Britain will have with the EU.
WHAT ARE AMENDMENTS?
Lawmakers are able to put forward amendments to this motion. John Bercow, the Speaker of the House, chooses no more than six of these on the final day, and they will be voted on unless the proposers opt to withdraw them.
If approved, an amendment would be included in final motion’s wording. While any successful amendments would not bind the government to comply with them, they would be politically hard to ignore, and could dictate May’s next steps.
Ministers have expressed concerns that if any amendment is passed by parliament, it could prevent the deal being ratified because the final vote may not then provide the legally necessary clear and unequivocal approval of May’s deal.
The amendments will be voted on before the deciding ballot on whether to approve the overall motion - meaning May has to win a series of votes, rather than just one, each with the potential to scupper her plan.
HOW WILL THE RESULT BE ANNOUNCED?
Once the debate is finished, the speaker will typically ask those in favor of each amendment to shout “aye”, and then those against to say “no”. As long as some lawmakers shout “no”, the speaker will call a formal vote, known as a division.
Votes are registered by lawmakers walking through different doorways, out of sight of television cameras and onlookers. Once the headcount is complete - which can take up to 15 minutes - lawmakers return to the debating chamber.
Four appointed tellers will assemble in front of the speaker, and one will read the result out loud.
Once all the amendments have been voted upon, the main motion is put to a vote using the same process.
WHAT HAPPENS IF SHE LOSES?
By law, if the deal is rejected, ministers have 21 days to state how they intend to proceed. The government has previously said that if the agreement is rejected, Britain will leave the EU without a deal on March 29.
The reality is that the huge uncertainty in the world’s fifth largest economy and the likely adverse reaction of financial markets would demand a much quicker political reaction.
Some media have reported May would ask parliament to vote again on the deal. With 117 of her party’s 317 lawmakers having voted against her in a confidence vote in December, she is also likely to come under pressure to resign.
A Dutch approach to transforming old homes through a dramatic green makeover has arrived in the UK and cut tenants’ energy bills in half.
Nottingham has become the first city council to pioneer the “Energiesprong” (energy leap) initiative, which has radically upgraded the energy efficiency of thousands of homes in the Netherlands.
More than 150 social housing homes in Nottingham will receive new wall cladding, windows and solar panels after the local authority won £5m from the EU’s European Regional Development Fund.
