分类： politics

As the U.S. Senate gears up to confirm Kevin Warsh, President Donald Trump’s nominee for Federal Reserve Chair, the incoming leader confronts a trio of extraordinary challenges: unprecedented political interference from the White House, persistent inflationary pressures buffeting the American economy, and deep internal divisions among the central bank’s top policymakers.

The confirmation vote is scheduled for 2:00 pm local time (1800 GMT) Wednesday, with Trump’s Republican party holding a narrow majority that is all but guaranteed to push Warsh’s nomination through to replace departing chair Jerome Powell. Once a well-known hardliner on inflation (commonly referred to as a monetary “hawk”), Warsh has shifted his policy stance in recent months to align with Trump’s aggressive public campaign for deep interest rate cuts. He has also pledged to implement what he calls “regime change” at the central bank, criticizing the institution for what he claims is excessive politicization and overly transparent communication around its monetary policy decisions.

But Warsh’s path to immediate rate cuts faces steep barriers. Inflation currently remains well above the Fed’s long-term 2% target, climbing to 3.8% year-over-year in April amid soaring global oil prices sparked by the escalating conflict between the U.S.-backed Israeli campaign against Iran. With price growth still stubbornly elevated, the new chair faces an uphill battle convincing members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed’s rate-setting body, to back an immediate rate reduction. That gridlock sets the stage for renewed public attacks from Trump, who spent years relentlessly criticizing Powell over his policy decisions and has made no secret of his demand for lower borrowing costs to boost the economy ahead of elections.

“Warsh’s biggest challenge will likely be dealing with President Trump,” noted David Wessel, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “The president does not respect the independence of the Fed and he wants interest rates to be lower.”

Trump’s repeated attacks on the Fed and its leadership already represent an unprecedented assault on the central bank’s long-held institutional independence. Earlier this year, Powell claimed a criminal probe launched by the Department of Justice into cost overruns for a Fed building renovation project was a deliberate attempt to pressure him into changing his monetary policy stances. That move came on the heels of a separate Trump administration effort to remove Fed Governor Lisa Cook from the central bank’s board.

The Justice Department dropped the criminal probe into Powell as the administration moved to clear procedural hurdles for Warsh’s nomination, but the Supreme Court still has a pending case on the legality of Cook’s attempted removal. Columbia Law School professor Kathryn Judge, an expert in banking regulation, called both actions “unprecedented,” warning that the pressure on Fed officials is unlikely to ease even after Warsh takes office.

“Fed officials have been put on notice that this president is willing to use all available tools to bully them into acceding to his demands,” Judge explained.

Beyond political interference, Warsh takes the helm of the world’s largest economy still reeling from years of successive economic shocks. The COVID-19 pandemic sent inflation soaring to a 40-year peak of 9.1% in mid-2022; while price growth has cooled from that high, American households have still been grappling with persistent above-target price increases that have eroded purchasing power.

The Fed’s dual mandate creates a particularly intractable policy dilemma for the new chair. While the unemployment rate has held steady at roughly 4.3% — a level near historic lows — that stable headline number hides significant underlying turbulence. Monthly job growth has been weak and volatile for months, swinging between small gains and losses, with nearly all new job creation concentrated in the health care sector. The stable unemployment rate is also propped up by a sharp drop in labor supply, driven by both Trump’s aggressive deportation policies and the ongoing aging of the American population.

The conflicting signals leave policymakers stuck between competing goals: raise rates to bring inflation fully back to target, or cut rates to stimulate sagging job growth?

Compounding these challenges is deep internal division on the FOMC over the appropriate path forward. At the committee’s most recent meeting, an unusual three members publicly dissented from the group’s position, arguing the Fed should signal that a rate hike remains a possible option to rein in persistent inflation. Wessel pointed out that these divisions, which sometimes fall along partisan lines, represent a marked shift from the Fed’s traditionally consensus-driven culture of the past.

Adding an extra layer of institutional uncertainty is the unusual situation of outgoing chair Powell, who will remain on the Fed’s board of governors after stepping down from the leadership role — a break from more than 70 years of precedent where departing chairs leave the board when their term as chair expires.

Australia’s main opposition party, the Coalition, is set to table a sharp, interventionist alternative to the Albanese government’s housing and migration policies in its formal budget reply speech on Thursday evening, led by Opposition Leader Angus Taylor. Scheduled to address parliament shortly after 7:30pm, the plan targets what the Coalition frames as Labor’s failed approach to the national housing crisis, centering on two headline pledges: a legally tied annual cap on net overseas migration linked directly to national housing completion numbers, and full abolition of the current government’s signature housing initiatives.

A landmark court ruling has upended the legal outcome of a high-profile Sydney protest against the Israeli president’s Australian visit, after judges struck down as unconstitutional the police legislation that authorities relied on to break up the gathering and make multiple arrests.

The February demonstration, which drew hundreds of participants to Sydney Town Hall to oppose the presidential visit, saw New South Wales Police move to block the group’s planned march route, disperse sections of the crowd, and take dozens of protesters into custody. Officers based their actions on the Public Assembly Restriction Declaration (PARD), a sweeping post-terror attack law that granted police broad power to restrict public gatherings for up to 90 days following a major extremist incident.

Last month, the NSW Court of Appeal delivered a decisive ruling on the law, siding with a legal challenge mounted by the Palestine Action Group and Blak Caucus. Judges found PARD unlawfully overreached executive power by expanding police authority far beyond what the state constitution allows, invalidating the entire legislative framework.

The law had been rushed into passage by state authorities after the deadly December Bondi Beach terror attack, which left 15 people dead and more than 40 injured when two attackers opened fire during a Hanukkah gathering at the coastal site.

On Wednesday morning, NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon confirmed to ABC Radio that all charges laid directly under PARD for the Town Hall protest will be dropped pending a formal departmental review. Of the 29 protesters facing charges connected to the demonstration, it remains unclear how many will see their cases dismissed, as many accused face additional unrelated offences including assaulting police, offensive conduct, and throwing projectiles, which are being processed separately through the courts.

Legal advocates have raised further questions about whether all police directions issued during the protest operation, including charges for failing to comply with officer instructions, were rooted in the now-invalidated framework, casting doubt over a broader range of charges. State Premier Chris Minns had previously argued that many charges could still stand under a separate major events declaration, a regulation typically used for large-scale sporting and entertainment gatherings that was active during the Israeli president’s visit. But the Palestine Action Group has already signaled it intends to launch a new legal challenge to that framework, arguing it was also improperly used to suppress peaceful political protest.

Greens Member of Parliament and solicitor Sue Higginson welcomed the announcement of charge reviews, saying the commissioner’s confirmation that charges were laid under an unconstitutional law proves the entire police operation was legally flawed. “People were wrongfully arrested and brutally assaulted because the Minns Labor Government chose to impose unconstitutional anti-protest laws on the people of NSW,” Higginson said in a statement, calling for all charges connected to the night of protest to be dropped entirely.

The Human Rights Law Centre also added its voice to calls for sweeping change after last month’s court ruling, noting that judges found PARD unlawfully restricted protected political communication and exceeded the state government’s constitutional authority. The organization is calling for all remaining charges to be dismissed and for a full overhaul of NSW’s protest-related legislation to bring it into line with constitutional protections for peaceful assembly and free speech.

United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces one of the most critical junctures of his 22-month premiership this Wednesday, as he prepares to unveil his administration’s new legislative agenda through the traditional King’s Speech ceremony — an event that will likely shape the embattled leader’s political future. The carefully orchestrated state occasion, held at the Palace of Westminster, comes on the heels of a devastating weekend for the ruling Labour Party, which suffered lopsided losses in recent local and regional elections. The poor electoral performance erupted into open internal conflict on Tuesday, with deep divisions splitting the party over whether Starmer should step down immediately.

As of Tuesday evening, more than 80 sitting Labour Members of Parliament have publicly called for Starmer’s resignation, and four junior ministers have stepped down from their government posts in protest. But the tide has not completely turned against the prime minister: over 100 Labour MPs have signed an open letter backing his leadership, and most senior cabinet members have publicly rallied to his side. Starmer himself has doubled down on his commitment to stay in office, telling supporters that no viable challenger has yet stepped forward to formally launch a leadership contest against him.

Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy has called for calm among restless lawmakers, urging the party to “step back and take a breath” amid the chaos, while a spokesperson for Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood refuted widespread social media rumours that she was preparing to resign her post. Starmer is scheduled to hold a face-to-face meeting Wednesday morning with Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who is widely viewed as one of the leading potential contenders for the Labour leadership if a contest is called. Streeting commands strong support from the centre-right wing of the party, while former Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner is seen as the likely candidate for the party’s left flank if a challenge emerges. Another high-profile potential candidate, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham, is currently ineligible to run because he does not hold a seat in Parliament; however, his backers have called on Starmer to announce an immediate departure timetable that would allow Burnham to win a parliamentary seat and enter the race.

Under Labour Party rules, any would-be challenger needs the public backing of at least 81 sitting Labour MPs — equal to 20% of the party’s parliamentary caucus — to trigger a formal leadership contest. Starmer has repeatedly vowed to fight any challenge to his leadership.

In remarks released late Tuesday ahead of the ceremony, Starmer framed the moment as a turning point for the United Kingdom, arguing that “Britain stands at a pivotal moment.” He added, “We can either press ahead with a plan to build a stronger, fairer country, or turn back to the chaos and instability of the past.” The prime minister has already sought to shore up support from disillusioned voters, who have grown increasingly impatient for tangible change after Labour took office last year, promising that his administration will deliver “better, bolder” policy to address public concerns. Downing Street has framed the upcoming legislative package as an “ambitious programme” that will deliver long-term gains to make Britain “a stronger, fairer” nation. The 35-plus proposed bills included in the programme focus heavily on shoring up economic, energy and national security, with headline pledges including the full nationalization of British Steel and a deepening of political and economic ties with the European Union.

While the speech is delivered by King Charles III in his formal role as head of state, the text is drafted entirely by the prime minister’s government, to lay out its planned legislative agenda for the coming 12 months. The centuries-old ceremony follows a strict, ritualized schedule that dates back hundreds of years. The day begins with a traditional search of the Palace of Westminster’s basement by royal security personnel, a tradition rooted in the 1605 Gunpowder Plot, when Catholic plotters attempted to blow up the parliamentary building. King Charles will then travel from Buckingham Palace to Westminster in a royal carriage, escorted by mounted cavalry. In a longstanding custom meant to ensure the monarch’s safe return to Buckingham Palace, a member of Parliament will be held as a ceremonial “hostage” at the palace for the duration of the event. When a senior parliamentary official known as Black Rod travels to the House of Commons to summon MPs to the House of Lords, the door of the Commons will be ceremonially slammed in Black Rod’s face — a symbolic gesture to assert Parliament’s independence from the monarchy. MPs will then process to the House of Lords, where King Charles will deliver the speech from the golden throne, wearing the diamond-studded Imperial State Crown and a traditional crimson ermine robe, to assembled peers and invited MPs, scheduled for approximately 11:30 a.m. GMT.