Trump uses press conference with Starmer to boost his golf business
The UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, looked on in apparent discomfort during Monday's joint press conference as Trump answered a question initially pitched about the expense of refurbishing the Federal Reserve's historic building with a lengthy detour about the maintenance on his luxury golfresort.
Praising the 'great craftsmen' of Ayrshire on Scotland's west coast, he described spending 'probably $100m [£74m]' on the hotel: 'We did a very great job. You see how beautiful it is?
'We had ceilings that were in bad shape. They were falling down. It was very old. It wasn't properly maintained. Now it's brand new and beautiful, and we saved everything. If you look outside, it's equally opulent and beautiful.'
With Trump's use of this visit to further his business interests already in the spotlight, Scotland's first minister, John Swinney, faced significant criticism after announcing that his government was in talks to provide £180,000 of public funding for the Aberdeenshire resort as it hosts the 2025 Nexo championship on the DP World Tour next month.
The US president earlier used his trip to repeat his call for the Open championship to return to Turnberry, declaring it 'the best resort in the world'.
Asked about the Open at Monday's joint press conference, Starmer said 'the decision on the Open is not a decision for me' but was swift to praise Turnberry as 'absolutely magnificent, both inside and out'.
Starmer's comments came after the Guardian revealed that senior Whitehall officials had asked golf bosses whether they could host the 2028 Open at Turnberry after Trump's repeated requests.
US ethics experts later said doing so could break the US constitution's emoluments clause, which prohibits federal officials from accepting benefits from foreign or state governments without congressional approval.
Swinney has refused to confirm the cost of policing Trump's visit, saying he remains in discussion with the UK government, but many critics have questioned why – as one Aberdeenshire protester put it on Monday – 'our taxes are paying for his holiday'.
Leading a hundred-strong protest at Trump's imminent arrival at his Menie resort in the nearby village of Balmedie, Alena Ivanova of the Stop Trump Coalition Scotland said: 'It was very clear from the beginning that this trip was about Trump benefiting himself.'
She also urged people to 'consider the reality' of Trump's business interests in Aberdeenshire.
The Menie resort was built after a bitter and protracted dispute with local people and environmentalists, who fought to save the rare sand dunes and their own dwellings which Trump declared an eyesore. When he eventually won planning permission he promised a £1bn coastal resort including expansive courses, luxury housing and high-rise timeshare flats – promises that many locals point out have yet to be fulfilled.
Ivanova said: 'Trump was supposed to build a £1bn development with accommodation for local people. There were supposed to be a thousand jobs, so far there have barely been a hundred.
'The Scottish government was hoodwinked into agreeing proposals that were previously turned down by the local council and the promises have not materialised.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
16 minutes ago
- BBC News
Billions needed for failing flood defences on Lincolnshire coast
Flood defences protecting the Lincolnshire coast will be "ineffective" by 2040 unless billions of pounds are invested, the Environment Agency (EA) has to projections, a breach in the defences could leave the town of Mablethorpe under about 4ft (1.3m) of water and Ingoldmells, near Skegness, under about 5ft (1.6m).A meeting of the county council's environment committee on Friday heard urgent action was 90% of defences on a 30-mile stretch of coastline between Saltfleet, north of Mablethorpe, and Gibraltar Point, south of Skegness, were expected to fail within the next 20 years, councillors were told. Deborah Higton, flood risk manager for the EA, told the committee it would take "billions" to replace all of the Lincolnshire coast defences."There is real urgency, even though 2040 feels like a long way in the future," she area, which was below sea level, was "completely reliant on flood defences" to protect 20,000 homes and 38,000 static caravans, she added. Councillor Tom Ashton (Conservative) told the committee local holiday resorts faced "stagnation and decline" without investment."If we don't get investment to secure our long-term security, that decline begins relatively quickly."Councillors would also be forced to consider a "managed retreat" if funding could not be secured, a report compiled for the meeting EA currently replenishes thousands of tonnes of sand along the Lincolnshire coast annually at a cost of between £10m and £ Ms Higton said: "We are facing a future where the old ways of protecting the land will no longer be enough."The agency, along with partners, said it hoped to draw up a masterplan by 2028, and secure funding and contracts by after the meeting, Councillor Danny Brookes, the executive member for the environment at the Reform-led authority, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service: "It's worrying, but I'm glad to hear we're taking action."We're trying to get this into the council's corporate plan, and we will make sure this does get done."It comes after Reform abolished the authority's flooding committee following its victory in May's local elections, despite other parties calling for it to be the time, council leader Sean Matthews promised the new administration would work "longer and harder on flooding than ever before". Stark warning Analysis by Paul Murphy, Environment is a pretty stark warning from the specialists charged with defending Lincolnshire's coastal communities from the North recent years the Environment Agency has been revising a lot of its projections to take into account the impact of climate change and rising sea levels on our more the EA scrutinises existing flood defences, the more it is finding areas of of people in the county live at or below sea level, many of them in static caravans nestled behind flood of flood water up to 5ft deep in some places will be sobering for this population, many of whom are older and perhaps more vulnerable in an is mention too of "managed retreat" – the Whitehall euphemism for no longer defending against flooding and letting nature take its course. This could have a profound impact on the local storm surge of 1953 claimed 43 lives along the Lincolnshire coastline and led to the construction of existing defences. The risks are more than just government has already announced extra funding for Lincolnshire, including almost £11.3m to bolster defences between Saltfleet and Gibraltar Point. Listen to highlights from Lincolnshire on BBC Sounds, watch the latest episode of Look North or tell us about a story you think we should be covering here. Download the BBC News app from the App Store for iPhone and iPad or Google Play for Android devices
Finextra
17 minutes ago
- Finextra
Barclays follows HSBC out of the Net Zero Banking Alliance
Barclays has followed HSBC in withdrawing from the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), claiming that the departure of a host of other global lenders means the organisation "no longer has the membership to support our transition". 1 Founded in 2021, the UN-convened NZBA requires members to commit to "transition the operational and attributable greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their lending and investment portfolios to align with pathways to net-zero by 2050 or sooner". At its peak it had around 150 members, including most of the world's largest banks. However, that number has dwindled in the last few months. At the beginning of 2025, ahead of Donald Trump's return to the White House, a host of US banks, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo, pulled out of the global climate-focused alliance. The American banks quit amid attacks from Republicans on "woke" capitalism, with the House Judiciary Committee, led by Republican Jim Jordan, claiming that financial environmental alliances have created "a climate cartel". Now, UK-headquartered HSBC and Barclays have joined their US counterparts. Barclays says it is committed to its "ambition" to be a net zero bank by 2050. Says a statement: "Our targets to mobilise $1 trillion of Sustainable and Transition Financing and for financed emissions remain unchanged. We continue to work with our clients on their transition, finance the transition and scale climate tech, while helping to ensure energy security for our customers and clients." Earlier this week, the CEO of Standard Chartered, Bill Winters, hit out at banks that have rowed back on their climate commitments. 'People that said a lot of stuff, but [when] it was fashionable to say it, [and] who are saying either nothing or the opposite now: shame on them,' said Winters, according to the Guardian.
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Donald Trump's latest Liberation Day means another dark day for America
Precisely what poor, benighted Syria and prosperous, neutral Switzerland have done to deserve US tariffs of 41 per cent and 39 per cent respectively is hard to discern. Neither is the kind of industrial superpower that represents a threat to America's economic hegemony, and both would, in their different ways, prefer to stay on reasonably good terms with the Trump White House. It is, sadly, easier to see why Canada got whacked with a 35 per cent levy on some of its exports – and Donald Trump's tariff tactics do have a hint of the mob about them. Mr Trump suggested that Canada's decision to recognise the state of Palestine as a sovereign nation would make it harder to achieve a trade deal, and he also mentioned the scourge of fentanyl. But then again, Mexico, which has also recognised Palestine and is by far the more important source of the drug, has been granted a 90-day tariff reprieve. Ever since the opening salvo in the Trump tariff war on 2 April – so-called Liberation Day – the shifting schedules and random pauses have lacked both rhyme and reason. Even at the time, their supposed 'reciprocity' was ridiculed. They have generated huge uncertainty, and, for a time, did so much damage to the dollar and US Treasuries on the capital markets that even Mr Trump had to make a tactical retreat. In fact, the US president's observed tendency to cave in whenever a trading 'partner' showed any sign of resistance led to the unwelcome 'Taco' sobriquet – 'Trump Always Chickens Out'. Some countries, such as the UK, Japan and the EU member states, have breathed a sigh of relief that they have escaped the worst, while others – often impoverished ones with no diplomatic leverage, such as Bangladesh and Lesotho – will find it difficult to cope with tariffs that are now considered moderate, but would have seemed shocking even a few years ago. Yet the game, even now, is not over. China – the second-largest economy in the world, and America's most formidable rival – has been left out of this supposedly final list of tariff increases. The trade talks between the two economic giants in Stockholm are dragging on, the prohibitive mutual tariffs having been abandoned, and they may well be extended past the next deadline of 12 August. President Trump met his match in Xi Jinping, and will not be imposing any further punitive trade sanctions on China for fear of another tit-for-tat escalation. Thus far, the markets have received the latest news of tariffs with some equanimity, but a collapse in trade between the world's two greatest economies would generate the kind of turmoil Mr Trump doesn't need right now. Even assuming that the eventual trade truce with China avoids disaster, these US tariffs are, in broad terms, the highest since 1934 and the era of the notorious Smoot-Hawley Act, which helped to strangle world trade and exacerbated the Great Depression. The Trump tariffs are no less damaging to world trade, and thus to economic growth, including that of the United States. But these restrictions on trade are what Mr Trump's Maga 'base' voted for, the folk memory of the previous disastrous experiment with tariffs having faded. The president's winning slogan was 'America First', epitomising a zero-sum, nationalistic view of the world, and unfortunately, he has proved as good as his word on inauguration day: 'Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.' Words that were both misguided and economically illiterate, naturally – but a promise kept. Many of the worst fears of America's friends and allies are coming true in these early months of Mr Trump's second term. With far more preparation than took place prior to his first term (which followed an election that, reputedly, he never expected to win), the US president has pressed on with his protectionist, isolationist, natalist agenda with speed and determination, surrounded by mostly underqualified, grotesquely sycophantic cronies. The judiciary is increasingly cowed, and Congress is listless in defending the constitution. The tendency to Caesarism is apparent in everything from the theatrical executive orders to the grandiose golden remodelling of the White House, and the contempt for the chair of the US Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell – a 'moron', apparently. Mr Trump thinks he can, with a stroke of a Sharpie, abolish the birthright to citizenship enshrined in the 14th amendment, passed in 1868. His conception of 'America First' is more America Alone, yet everything he does weakens American power and prosperity. It is an inward-looking, selfish, exclusionary approach. Undoubtedly it enjoys a political constituency, but ultimately it will prove self-defeating.
