Talks held over making Trump first US president to be given Freedom of the City of London
According to a source, the proposal to give President Trump the honour was made because it would give the Corporation the opportunity to meet the US leader and make the case for free trade and against tariffs at the ceremony.
It would also be a way of marking the UK receiving the first of the Trump trade deals with questions still over tariffs on steel.
The president would helicopter in from Windsor Castle to the US ambassador's Winfield House residence in Regent's Park for the ceremony.
The Independent was told: 'It would be an important honour for the president just as our countries prepare to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence next year.
'More importantly it would be the perfect opportunity for the City to address the importance of free trade and the issues of tariffs.
'The symbolism of being allowed to herd your sheep across the bridge and not pay taxes is very important all things considered.'
But while the president was understood to be keen on the idea of receiving the honour, the Freedom Applications Sub (Policy & Resources) Committee chaired by Sir William Russell, half brother of the actor Damian Lewis, has not been persuaded.
According to sources the sub committee was warned that the award would be 'too controversial'.
The Corporation rarely gives government leaders the honour and had to withdraw it from Myanmar'ss Aung San Suu Kyi after criticism of her government being involved with persecution of the Rohingya.
However, the official explanation is that President Trump has not been in government long enough.
A spokesperson said: 'By convention, only Heads of State or Government who have served a minimum of seven years in office are eligible to be considered for the Honorary Freedom.
'The decision to grant the Honorary Freedom rests solely with the Court of Common Council – our highest decision-making body – not with any individual elected member.'
The last head of government to be awarded the Honorary Freedom was Baroness Margaret Thatcher, who was recognised after serving 10 years as prime minister.
The Honorary Freedom has never been awarded to a sitting US president, although Dwight Eisenhower received it after the Second World War for his role as commander in chief of the allied forces.
According to a source, the City may change its mind if there is a request from the government which has not been made yet.
It means that the US president is facing a second snub in his state visit. It follows a decision not to ask him to address a joint sitting of the Houses of Parliament with the state visit happening the day after parliament rises for the conference season recess.
This is despite the fact that when Pope Benedict came on a state visit in 2010 he was given the honour of addressing Parliamentarians in Westminster Hall even though it was the day after recess had begun.
Trump's state visit - the first time an individual has been granted a second state visit - will take place between 17 and 19 September. It will include a state banquet hosted by the King with the president staying at Windsor Castle.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Trump gushes over Karoline Leavitt: ‘It's that face, it's that brain, it's those lips, the way they move!'
Donald Trump offered high, if not slightly uncomfortable, praise for his White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, gushing over 'that face' and 'those lips.' The president gave the unorthodox compliments during a Friday interview with Newsmax in response to Leavitt's claim that he should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his alleged success since returning to office. 'She's become a star. It's that face. It's that brain. It's those lips, the way they move. They move like she's a machine gun,' Trump said. 'She's a great person, actually. But she's – I don't think anybody has ever had a better press secretary than Karoline. She's been amazing.' The 27-year-old is Trump's fifth press secretary overall, though remains the only one from his second term so far. At a White House Press briefing Thursday, Leavitt praised Trump in a similarly effusive fashion. 'President Trump has brokered, on average, about one peace deal or ceasefire per month during his six months in office,' she claimed. 'It's well past time that President Trump was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.' Social media was quick to react to the president's comments during his Newsmax sit-down, with some accusing him of being 'creepy.' 'This definitely sounds like something Jeffrey Epstein's best friend would say,' one user wrote, referring to the ongoing furor surrounding the president and his connection to the deceased pedophile financier. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and said that he and Epstein had cut ties many years before allegations of sex-trafficking were made against the financier. 'Will ANYONE in the MSM ask him or the White House about this incredibly bizarre, creepy, cringey comment? Of course not,' wrote one user. 'It's amazing how his 'super Christian-y' base just love that he's such a creepy old pervert,' added another. A third wrote: 'If any man said this on the job about a fellow employee, they'd be fired instantly, and the company sued.'
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Drugmakers are pouring billions of dollars into new US manufacturing. It still won't achieve all of Trump's tariff goals
Ever since President Donald Trump started promising to slap tariffs on pharmaceutical imports, drugmakers have unveiled a flurry of commitments to build or expand US manufacturing operations in the coming years. AstraZeneca is investing $50 billion to expand its drug manufacturing in the US. Johnson & Johnson is pouring $55 billion into domestic production and research. And Eli Lilly said it will spend $27 billion to build four new manufacturing plants here. In total, the planned investments exceed $250 billion, according to two industry analysts. Trump is wielding the threat of tariffs to get drugmakers to increase their domestic production, which he says will strengthen national security. He's also pushing pharmaceutical companies to reduce their prices, one of his longstanding goals. But the pharma companies' moves are not expected to decrease the United States' reliance on foreign sources for key pharmaceutical ingredients and drugs, experts say. Nor are they likely to result in lower costs for American consumers. Still, the White House regularly touts the steady drumbeat of commitments as proof Trump's strategy is working. 'Another win for American manufacturing. @AstraZeneca's $50 billion pledge to expand U.S. manufacturing and R&D shows our tariff strategy at work,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick posted on X in late July. 'The investment will bring high-paying jobs to Virginia, Indiana, Texas, and across the country while hardening our supply chains. Reshoring pharma production is one of our top priorities.' But it's just not that simple. Complex supply chain The pharmaceutical industry is a global web, with ingredients and finished drugs being manufactured in a multitude of locations around the world. The economics of brand name and generic drug manufacturing vary widely, and the price that the US consumer ultimately pays is determined by multiple players and factors. Both American and foreign drugmakers already produce many medications in the US and have been investing in their operations here for years. The prospect of tariffs certainly has prompted some brand-name manufacturers to shift more production to the US. However, some of the investments were already in the works before Trump took office, and other commitments may never be fulfilled, analysts say. Johnson & Johnson's $55 billion investment announcement in March, for instance, included the building of a North Carolina facility that was originally unveiled in October. 'They are just reiterating it because they're probably trying to make sure that the president is aware that they have manufacturing here and that they are listening to him,' Evan Seigerman, senior biopharma analyst at BMO Capital Markets, said of pharmaceutical companies. 'They're playing ball. It's all about the deal with President Trump.' Generic drugmakers, however, are not making the same types of commitments – largely because they can't afford to, as their profit margins are much thinner. While certain generic medicines are made in the United States, including sterile injectable drugs, oral liquid medications and controlled substances, the majority of drugs in pill or capsule form are produced abroad, primarily in India. But two generic drug manufacturers have announced domestic investments in recent months, according to the Association for Accessible Medicines, a trade group for the generic and biosimilar drug industries. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA said it would invest $1 billion by 2030 to expand its manufacturing and research and development capabilities in several US locations, while Amphastar Pharmaceuticals said it would quadruple its production in the next three to five years. They both manufacture sterile injectable drugs, among other products. Other companies are more hesitant. 'We're not sure the market will support it if we build it,' said John Murphy III, the industry association's CEO, noting that reimbursements are so low that companies may not get returns on their investments. Much of the national security concerns center on generic drugs, which account for more than 90% of US prescriptions and are also critical to medicine administered in hospitals and doctors' offices. A sizeable share of the supply chain for certain generic medications comes from abroad and could be disrupted during geopolitical crises, a risk that's been repeatedly flagged by a bipartisan group of senators. Blanket tariffs, however, won't spur more domestic manufacturing of these drugs, said Erin Fox, associate chief pharmacy officer at the University of Utah Health. 'It's highly, highly unlikely we will see generic production expand in the US without significant incentives for these companies,' she said. 'If we do move production on some drugs to the US because we want to be sure from a national security standpoint, that's fine, but that's going to cost money.' Just what tariffs the pharmaceutical industry will face – and on which products from which countries – remain to be seen. The Trump administration is in the midst of negotiating various trade deals and has yet to release the findings of its investigation into national security implications of drug imports, which is expected to set the stage for tariffs on the industry. In late July, Trump unveiled the framework of a deal with the European Union, which calls for a 15% tariff on pharmaceutical imports – though some generic drugs could be exempt. Trump had been signaling in recent weeks that he would soon announce drug tariffs of up to 200%, but that he would give drugmakers a year or so to expand their domestic production before the full amount kicks in. That would be enough time for some companies to expand existing operations, though building new facilities could take three to five years, experts said. Even so, it's difficult for the manufacturers to make significant longer-term investment decisions amid the uncertainty of both the tariffs and future presidential administrations. Cost considerations Increasing their domestic manufacturing will help brand name drug companies escape tariffs, though they may have to pay some levies if they import pharmaceutical ingredients from other countries. Still, making more drugs in the US doesn't mean that the products will be any cheaper for patients, experts say. For one thing, the cost of production is typically higher in the US, said Stephen Farrelly, ING's global health care sector lead. Plus, the prices that consumers pay are largely governed by the nation's complex health system, which includes manufacturers, insurers and pharmacy benefit managers, known as PBMs. So whether Americans get a break on the high cost of their prescriptions will also depend on whether the president can achieve his other initiatives, including bringing US prices more in line with those in Europe and reforming the PBM industry, he said. While brand name manufacturers have more wiggle room to absorb some of the increased expenses, many experts believe they will pass along at least some of the added burden to consumers – who could eventually feel it in their out-of-pocket cost at the pharmacy counter or in their monthly insurance premiums. As for generic medicine, shifting more manufacturing to the US would entail higher production costs, which these companies could not afford to cover. Tariffs would be more likely to prompt these drugmakers to pull out of the US market, exacerbating shortages. 'At a time when the administration is clearly looking to still keep the cost down, we don't see a wholesale redistribution of generic capacity towards the US anytime soon,' Farrelly said. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Liverpool UNLOCK move for Alexander Isak after striker bid confirmed
Liverpool were knocked back in their first formal approach for Alexander Isak. Newcastle informed the Reds they had NO WISH to conduct business over the 25-year-old striker. Liverpool's bid was believed to be in the region of £120m - with Isak now pushing hard for a move away. It's been claimed that TWO factors are holding up the potential record-breaking transfer. Shop the LFC Store 🚨2025/26 LFC x adidas range🚨 LFC x adidas Shop the home range today! LFC x adidas Shop the goalkeeper range today LFC x adidas Shop the new adidas range today! One - Newcastle's valuation. Eddie Howe's side do not want to sell Alexander Isak - but these are far from ideal circumstances. He does not want a new contract and has asked to explore a transfer away from St. James' Park this summer. The Sweden hitman is under contract until 2028 - meaning Newcastle are well within their rights to ask for a big fee. That price has been reported at £150m - although a deal could possibly be done around the £135m-mark. Newcastle find a breakthrough Liverpool's bid will have to rise from its current level at around £120m. And secondly - Newcastle need strikers. Having lost Callum Wilson, the only other specialist in the position that Howe has got at his disposal is untested William Osula. The Magpies have been chasing forwards throughout the transfer window but have been frustrated in their attempts to add to their strike line. But now a breakthrough is on the horizon - which in turn could unlock Liverpool's deal for Isak. Newcastle bidding for Sesko That's because several sources - including Newcastle insider Keith Downie - are reporting that a bid has been made for Benjamin Sesko. The Slovenian, 22, is under contract at RB Leipzig but it's believed that he will be allowed to leave this summer should certain conditions be met. Newcastle are competing with Manchester United for this transfer - but appear to have struck first. Sesko in, Isak out? 'Newcastle have made a formal bid to RB Leipzig for Benjamin Sesko,' Downie writes on X. 'The bid is €75 + €5m — which matches Leipzig's valuation. (£65.5m + £4.3m) 'NUFC have presented their vision to the Slovenian striker and made it clear they want the deal to happen. 'Sesko is considering his situation with Manchester United also at the table. He is open to both projects.' So now we play the waiting game. Newcastle have been rejected this summer by the likes of Joao Pedro, Bryan Mbeumo and Hugo Ekitike - who joined Liverpool for an initial £69m. Despite their Champions League status, Eddie Howe is finding it difficult to attract star names to the North East. Let's see what happens with Sesko - who is being lined up as the crucial domino in Liverpool's Isak deal.
