LONDON — When Britain’s top finance minister held a doomy pre-budget press conference earlier this month, it seemed like a traditional Westminster affair. But it didn’t take long for the established members of the press corps to spot that two front-row seats had — for the first time — been reserved for online finance influencers hand-picked by the government. “I could feel the glares hitting the back of my head from people wondering who I am and why I was on the front row,” recalls Cameron Smith — a creator best known as “Cazza Time” to his hundreds of thousands of online followers. For Smith, this was only his latest involvement in a developing government comms strategy that both influencers and Whitehall insiders say is genuinely innovative for the U.K. At the same time, the growing operation has traditional journalists grumbling, political comms specialists nodding — and influencers themselves wrestling with how to maintain their prized independence. “Obviously there is a risk it becomes a bit of a gravy train, and people end up willing to do anything to get a video with the prime minister or whoever it may be,” says fellow climate creator Laura Anderson. “But I hope people’s audiences will hold them accountable.” ‘NOT JUST THE WESTMINSTER BUBBLE’ Smith — or “Cazza,” as Prime Minister Keir Starmer apparently calls him — first got tapped up under the previous Conservative government, long before he found himself bagging a front-row seat at Reeves’ speech. An out-of-the-blue email invited him to cover what would be Jeremy Hunt’s last budget before the 2024 general election. It felt, Smith says, as if the flailing Conservative government was “clutching around” to drum up support — but he eventually agreed. His first-ever interaction with a politician was a face-to-face chat with the country’s top finance minister. The civil-service-led operation behind that early foray has ballooned under Labour. A dedicated New Media Unit has been tasked with tapping into the U.K.’s less politically-engaged audiences. The unit recently embarked on a hiring spree to help it identify and engage with Britain’s biggest online creators. That has further opened the door for creators like Smith, who focuses on personal finance content for people aged 18 to 35. He’s been able to put his audience’s questions directly to senior establishment figures, and in the last several months alone has enjoyed direct access to Reeves, Starmer and even the governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey. “What we’ve tried to do is really appeal to audiences in the real world, not just the Westminster bubble,” said one senior Whitehall communications official, granted anonymity like others in this story to discuss the project. “Through partnering with creators who have a strong audience and strong reputation, you can have conversations about what government is doing while avoiding some of the traps we get into with journalists.” Content creators are “very ordinary people” asking the questions members of the public want answering, according to a government New Media Unit insider. | Tolga Akmen/EPA Talk of “traps” is likely to raise eyebrows among Westminster’s traditional journalists, who fiercely prize their ability to hold the government to account. Some veterans of the Westminster lobby smiled when Abi Foster, the other online creator invited to grill Reeves, went on Times Radio just after the press conference to bemoan the stage-managed event as “not the stuff of viral clips.” For good measure, she also lamented the chancellor’s “long-winded” answers. Government figures insist there’s no attempt to control influencers, and appear keen to distance themselves from the U.S. Trump administration’s efforts to bring content creators that are aligned with the president into the fold. Many of those invited in the U.K. include experts on the various topics: doctors, nurses, teachers, academics and campaigners, they point out. “If you draw the comparison with America, it’s very much those on the political right who sit in those rooms,” the same official quoted above said. “That doesn’t apply here.” PUSHBACK Still, the unprecedented access to ministers has left some creators concerned about how to balance close political engagement with the hard-earned trust that keeps their audiences loyal. “It’s something that we don’t take lightly,” says Jack Ferris, content lead for Earthtopia, a channel that has become one of the largest eco-communities on TikTok. Ferris’ first interaction was as part of a group of climate influencers invited for coffee and pastries with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and his comms team to discuss how they could work together. “We also got a tour of No. 10, which was very cool,” he recalls. “I told my mum immediately after I got out.” But while the channel he helps run focuses primarily on good news stories around net zero, Ferris insists it won’t be “cowed” in criticizing the government. “You don’t want to make it look like because we are going to all these nice political events now we’re only going to be talking about what they do in a positive light.” Laura Anderson, a climate content creator and PhD researcher known to her audience as “Less Waste Laura,” shot to online prominence in part because of a successful campaign to persuade governments to ban disposable vapes. Anderson said she recognizes the risk that influencers could “get dazzled by Downing Street and the canapés and drinks, and forget this is a government that we should be holding to account.” But she says creators used a recent roundtable inside government to “bluntly” ask whether they were expected to become “mouthpieces” for the administration. The answer? “Absolutely not.” ‘THEY NEVER ASK: CAN YOU DO THIS?’ Ferres, who outside his online creator role works as a comms consultant, insists the relationship doesn’t differ much from a traditional PR approach. Government departments send over press releases and ask if there’s a way they can make an announcement work for creators. “They never ask: Can you do this? It’s more around whether it would be of interest to our audiences — and it’s down to our editorial control to say if it’s interesting,” he says. Smith, who built his vast audience without that proximity to power, seems wary about how to move forward. While tranches of his audience perceive him as a trusted voice who is now able to grill leaders, others view him as a political novice who is being “manipulated.” Having gained followers unaided, most creators say they do feel empowered to push back. Smith says he has repeatedly refused to post content when he feels he’s been given a “politician’s answer.” “Really, really clever” — that’s one eco influencer and comms consultant’s verdict on Energy Secretary Ed Miliband’s Instagram content. | Pool picture by Tolga Akmen/EPA And the consensus is that cutting off access to a critical voice would lead to an online firestorm that would do real reputational harm to the government. “Ultimately, I don’t need Rachel Reeves in the room with me to explain what the budget is going to mean to people’s finances,” Smith argues. “People listen to me regardless, so I don’t need them — but there’s a way we can work together and that adds credibility to what I’m saying.” ‘GENUINELY FUNNY AND ENGAGING’ There are few signs yet that the government — which lags right-wing Nigel Farage in the polls and has spent the week locked in internal warfare — is benefiting from its online strategy. But some individual ministers are throwing themselves into it with gusto — and seem to be avoiding the kind of trend-chasing content that can afflict middle-aged politicos who’ve spent too much time online. “Ed Miliband, for example, is doing lots of different types of content on Instagram,” Ferres says. “It’s actually genuinely funny and engaging, but managed to loop back into his clean energy vision — it’s really, really clever.” “I think there’s something about the fact that content creators are very ordinary people who are asking genuine questions,” an NMU insider says. “That helps, and then ministers know when they are speaking to them, they are getting questions that the public really care about. “It’s different to having to sit opposite [BBC interviewer Laura Kuenssberg] and having to answer all these different questions on different topics.”

BELÉM, Brazil — Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) will arrive Friday at the COP30 climate summit — making him the sole U.S. federal representative at United Nations talks that the Trump administration is skipping. Whitehouse’s office said he will meet in the Amazonian port city of Belém, Brazil, with elected officials along with business and global climate leaders. It said his goal is to show that the U.S. public still broadly supports addressing climate change despite Trump abstaining from the negotiations. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom delivered a similar message earlier this week during his own swing through Belém. The White House has defended the U.S. absence from the talks, maintaining that the annual global climate gatherings work in the interests of rival countries like China. “President Trump will not allow the best interest of the American people to be jeopardized by the Green Energy Scam,” spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in an email last week. One GOP lawmaker, Sen. John Curtis of Utah, had planned to attend the summit but canceled because of the federal government shutdown. Whitehouse said he plans to harp on Trump and GOP policies that he cast as unpopular and responsible for boosting energy costs. “Amidst sinking approvals and a shellacking in the most recent elections, it’s no surprise the Trump administration is unwilling to defend the fossil fuel industry’s unpopular and corrupt climate denial lies on the global stage.” Whitehouse will participate in events Friday on offshore wind, shipping and non-carbon-dioxide greenhouse gas emissions before delivering a keynote speech at a roundtable with elected officials from other nations hosted by the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition. On Saturday, he will weigh in on methane rules, net-zero policies and the effect climate change has on oceans.

SÃO PAULO — California Gov. Gavin Newsom isn’t even at the United Nations climate talks yet — but he’s already getting bombarded with meeting requests. Newsom kicked off his trip to Brazil 1,800 miles south of the Amazonian city of Belém that’s hosting this year’s international gathering, talking to Brazilian and American financiers at an investors’ summit in São Paulo. His first question from the Brazilian press on Monday, fresh off last week’s redistricting victory: whether he would run for president (“Nothing else matters but 2026 and taking back the House of Representatives,” he said). Newsom couldn’t walk halfway down a hallway without fielding a meeting request from CEOs and NGOs — or a selfie request. One Brazilian picture-taker had him repeat the Portuguese word for “Let’s go”: “Vamos.” His remarks to investors at the Milken Global Investors’ Symposium sounded more like a campaign rally than a business speech. “We have seen this complete reversal of so much of the progress that the Biden administration made,” he said. “What Trump is doing is unprecedented in American history … This should not be through the lens or prism of red, in American vernacular, versus blue.” Then he held an hour-long roundtable meeting with representatives from major investment funds, philanthropies, development banks and energy leaders, who he said pushed him to bolster economic ties in existing voluntary agreements with Brazilian governments. Newsom told POLITICO he and his team were getting a “disproportionate number of calls” to meet on the sidelines of the talks, where the U.S. government’s delegation numbers zero (“not even a note taker,” Newsom said.) “We’re at peak influence because of the flatness of the surrounding terrain with the Trump administration and all the anxiety,” Newsom said in an interview in São Paulo. Newsom is playing a well-rehearsed role for California, which has staked out a leading role in international climate diplomacy for decades under both Democratic and Republican governors, including during Trump’s first term. The Trump administration’s dismantling of climate policies to favor oil and gas interests only give California more space to fill, said former Gov. Jerry Brown, who got a hero’s welcome himself at the United Nations climate talks in 2017, the first year of Trump 1.0. “Trump, he’s saying one thing,” Brown said in an interview. “Newsom is saying something else, very important.” The impact, he said, will be determined in Belém. “That’s why it’s exciting. There’s not an answer yet.” That gives Newsom an opening — and a risk. Where Brown led a coalition of states eager to demonstrate continued commitment on climate in Trump’s first term, Newsom will arrive in Belém, near the mouth of the Amazon River, at a time when U.S. politics are tilting rightward and even Democrats are pulling back on embracing climate policies. And there’s little Newsom’s team, which includes ex-State Department climate negotiators, can actually do in the closed-door talks reserved for countries. But the governor’s goal is to influence from just outside the door. “We’re in every room, because California has been the inspiration for a lot of these jurisdictions,” he told POLITICO. Newsom’s heading next to Belém, where he’s scheduled to meet with other subnational leaders and renew environmental pacts with other countries and states — starting on Tuesday with the environment ministers from Germany and the German state of Baden-Württemburg, which Brown first partnered with to promote the soft power of subnational governments during Trump’s first term. Newsom said he would also meet with representatives from Chile. He’s also expected to give plenary remarks at the UN. After that, he’ll head deeper into the Amazon rainforest to meet with Indigenous communities on conservation — one of the goals of the Brazilian organizers of the climate talks. Newsom said he saw the visit to the Amazon as a spiritual opportunity. “It connects us to our creator,” he said. “It connects us to thousands and thousands of generations.”

LONDON — Britain’s financial watchdogs have been on a crypto journey — with a little help from Donald Trump.  The Bank of England publishes its long-awaited rules for stablecoin Monday. Two years after the central bank’s Governor Andrew Bailey dismissed the virtual currency — a theoretically more stable form of crypto — as “not money,” its rulebook is now expected to get a cautious welcome from an industry that’s been lobbying hard for a rethink. It would mark quite a shift from the U.K. central bank. Stablecoins “are not robust and, as currently organized, do not meet the standards we expect of safe money in the financial system,” Bailey told a City of London audience in 2023.  Now his top officials herald a “fabulous opportunity.”  The Bank chief’s initial position — that he doesn’t see stablecoins as a substitute for commercial bank money — has put him at odds with the U.K. Treasury, which is on an all-consuming mission to get the sluggish British economy moving. Chancellor Rachel Reeves wants the U.K. “at the forefront of digital asset innovation.”  The United States crypto lobby, fresh from several wins stateside, spied an opportunity. Exploiting those divisions — and pointing to a more gung-ho approach from Trump’s U.S. — has allowed firms to push for a British regime that more closely aligns with their own.  Monday could be a very good day at the office.  TREADING CAREFULLY Stablecoins are a type of cryptocurrency pegged to a real asset, like the dollar, with the largest and best-known offering being Tether. They’re seen as a more palatable version of crypto, and are used by investors to buy other cryptocurrencies, or allow cross-border payments.  The pro-stablecoin camp says their development is necessary to improve payments and overseas transactions for businesses and consumers, particularly as cash usage declines and sending money abroad remains clunky and expensive. If done well, a stablecoin could maintain a reliable store of value and be a viable alternative to cash.  Stablecoins (USDT) are a type of cryptocurrency pegged to a real asset. | Silas Stein/picture alliance via Getty Images Those more cautious, including the BoE, warn there are risks for the wider financial system including undermining public confidence in money and payments if something goes wrong.  And stablecoins are not immune to things going wrong: In 2022, the Terra Luna token lost 99 percent of its value, along with its sister token TerraUSD, a stablecoin which went from being pegged to the dollar on a $1-1 TerraUSDbasis, to being valued at $0.4. Tether also fell during that time to $0.95.  Other central bankers seem to agree with Bailey’s early caution. The Bank for International Settlements, a central bank body, issued a stark warning on stablecoins in June, saying they “fall short” as a form of sound money.  There are also concerns such coins are used to skirt money-laundering laws, with anti-money laundering watchdog the Financial Action Task Force, warning that most on-chain illicit transactions involved stablecoins. The EU has tough regulation in place for digital assets. The bloc prioritizes tighter control over the market than the U.S., with stricter rules on capital and operations.  That’s in stark contrast to the U.S., which passed its own stablecoin regulation — the GENIUS act — earlier this year, which is much more industry-friendly. Donald Trump, whose family is building its own crypto empire, has described stablecoins as “perhaps the greatest revolution in financial technology since the birth of the Internet itself.”  That’s put post-Brexit Britain in a bind: align with the EU, the U.S., or go it alone?  “The U.K. is a bit caught,” a former Bank of England official who now works in digital assets said. They were granted anonymity, like others in this article, to speak freely. “It doesn’t have the luxury of completely creating a bespoke regime. It can do, but essentially, no one’s going to care.” AMERICAN PUSH For a Labour government intent on deregulating for growth, aligning with the U.S. was immediately a more attractive proposition.  Warnings came from the City of London, Britain’s financial powerhouse, that the government would need to embrace crypto and stablecoin for the U.K. to become a global player. Domestic financial services firms wrote to the government calling for it to align its regime with the U.S., talking up “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to establish the future rules for digital assets.   “Securities are getting tokenized,” said one former Treasury official, now working in the private sector. “Bank deposits are getting tokenized. If we don’t build a regime that is permissive enough [to make the U.K. attractive], then the City’s relevance will diminish as a consequence.”  For the pro-crypto brigade, the BoE has been the main hurdle in achieving a U.S.-style, free-market stablecoin rulebook. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, whose party is currently leading in the polls, accused Bailey of behaving like a “dinosaur.  For the pro-crypto brigade, the BoE has been the main hurdle in achieving a U.S.-style, free-market stablecoin rulebook. | Niklas Helle’n/AFP via Getty Images “The Bank’s really got itself into a twist on this one. From what I understand from people who have been at the Bank, this is coming from the top,” said the former BoE employee quoted above.  “Andrew Bailey has made it publicly clear for some many months now that he is sceptical about the two new alternative forms of money, which is stablecoins and central bank digital currencies,” said a financial services firm CEO.  In recent weeks, however, Bailey and his colleagues have softened their rhetoric as well as indicating a relaxed policy is forthcoming.  Sarah Breeden, Bailey’s deputy governor for financial stability, has repeatedly said any limits on stablecoin will be temporary, and recent reports suggest there will be carve-outs for certain firms. Other BoE officials have also backed away from tougher rules on the assets which must be used to underpin the value of a stablecoin.  A second former BoE employee, who now works in the fintech industry, said Bailey was “under a huge amount of pressure, from the government and the industry. He is worried about looking like he is just anti-innovation.”  The BoE declined to comment. The Treasury did not respond to a request for comment. US interest  A state visit by Trump to the U.K. this fall appeared to help shift the debate.   In late September, the Trump administration and the British government agreed to explore ways to collaborate on digital asset rules.  Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Reeves announced that financial regulators and officials from the U.S. and U.K. would convene a “Transatlantic Taskforce for Markets of the Future.”  During Trump’s visit, Bessent held a financial services roundtable in London with key figures from industry. “There was a steady slate of crypto attendees there, and the discussion predominantly focused on stablecoins,” said the former Treasury official.  “Rachel Reeves met Scott Bessent and seems to have been told, actually, we’d like you to be much more supportive of … digital assets,” the financial services CEO added.   The U.K. Treasury has been “pretty proactive” in taking meetings with crypto firms and traditional finance firms interested in crypto, in the New York consulate and British embassy in Washington, added the former Treasury official.   The BoE too met with the crypto industry and U.S. politicians, with Breeden at the helm of discussions while she was in the U.S. in October for IMF-World Bank meetings, in an effort to better understand U.S. stablecoin rules.  Last month saw a major olive branch.  A Bailey-penned op-ed in the Financial Times saw the Bank chief recognize stablecoins’ “potential in driving innovation in payments systems both at home and across borders.”   Going further still, Breeden told a crypto conference just this month that synchronization between the U.S. and the U.K. on stablecoin marks a “fabulous opportunity.”  She has heavily indicated there will be more than a slight American influence when she announces the proposals on Nov. 10. “It’s a fabulous opportunity, to reengineer the financial system with these new technologies,” Breeden told the Nov. 5 crypto conference.  “I think a lot of people have observed that it was the U.S. crypto firms that really pushed the dial on getting political will, whereas British firms haven’t been able to secure that,” the former Treasury official said.

BRUSSELS — Heard the one about the 12-and-half-hour meeting of 27 national leaders that succeeded in agreeing very little apart from coming up with quite a lot of “let’s decide in a couple of months” or “let’s just all agree on language that means absolutely nothing but looks like we’re united” or “let’s at least celebrate that we got through this packed agenda without having to come back on Friday”? No? Well let us enlighten you. And if that makes you question how we’ve managed to squeeze 29 things out of this, well let’s just say one of these is about badly functioning vending machines… 1 . STRAIGHT OUT OF THE BOX WITH A QUICK WIN ON SANCTIONS … The day was off to a flying start when Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico lifted his veto over the latest raft of Russia sanctions on the eve of the summit — allowing the package to get formally signed off at 8 a.m. before leaders even started talking. Fico rolled over after claiming to achieve what he set out to do: clinch support for Slovakia’s car industry. He found an unusual ally in German Chancellor Friedrich Merz who he met separately to discuss the impact of climate targets on their countries’ automotive sectors. 2. … BUT AGREEMENT ON FROZEN RUSSIAN ASSETS WAS LESS FORTHCOMING There was a moment earlier in the week where the EU looked to be on the cusp of a breakthrough on using Russian frozen assets to fund a €140 billion loan for Ukraine. Belgium, the main holdout, appeared to be warming to the European Commission’s daring idea to crack open the piggy bank. But Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever stuck by his guns , saying he feared taking the assets, which are held in a Brussels-based financial depository, could trigger Moscow to take legal action. 3. BELGIUM DIDN’T MOVE ON ITS BIG THREE BIG DEMANDS The Flemish right-winger’s prerequisites were threefold: the “full mutualization of the risk,” guarantees that if the money has to paid back, “every member state will chip in,” and for every other EU country that holds immobilized assets to also seize them. Leaders eventually agreed on that classic EU summit outcome: a fudge. They tasked the European Commission to “present options” at the next European Council — effectively deciding not to decide. “Political will is clear, and the process will move forward,” said one EU official. But it’s uncertain whether a deal can be brokered by the next summit, currently set for December. 4. DE WEVER REJECTS THE ‘BAD BOY’ LABEL After POLITICO ranked the Belgian leader among its list of “bad boys” likely to disrupt Thursday’s summit (rightfully, might we add), he protested the branding. “A bad boy! Me? … If you talk about the immobilized assets, we’re the very, very best,” he said. The day was off to a flying start when Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico lifted his veto over the latest raft of Russia sanctions on the eve of the summit. | Olivier Hoslet/EPA 5. URSULA VON DER LEYEN ALSO CONCEDED THEY’RE NOT QUITE THERE YET The high-level talks “allowed us to identify points we need to clarify,” the Commission president said tactfully. “Nobody vetoed nothing today,” European Council President António Costa chimed in. “The technical and legal aspects of Europe’s support need to be worked upon.” Translation in case you didn’t understand the double negative: The EU needs to come up with a better plan to reassure Belgium — and fast. 6. UKRAINE: EVER THE OPTIMIST Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ― a guest of the summit ― told reporters Russia must pay the price for its invasion, calling on the EU to follow through with its frozen assets proposal, adding he thought the leaders were “close” to an agreement. “If Russia brought war to our land, they have to pay for this war,” he said. 7. AND ZELENSKYY IS STILL HOLDING OUT FOR TOMAHAWKS “We will see,” was Zelenskyy’s message on the topic of acquiring the long-range missiles from the U.S., which Donald Trump has so far ruled out selling to Kyiv. “Each day brings something … maybe tomorrow we will have Tomahawks,” Zelenskyy said. “I don’t know.” 8. UKRAINE WANTS GERMANY TO SEND MORE WEAPONS TOO Merz held a meeting with Zelenskyy about “the situation in Washington and the American plans that are now on the table,” a German official said, adding Zelenskyy made “specific requests” to the chancellor about helping Ukraine with its “defense capabilities.” After the summit, the German leader said Berlin would review a proposal on how German technologies could help to protect Ukrainian’s energy and water infrastructure. 9. THUMBS UP TO DEFENSE ROADMAP! EU leaders endorsed the Defense Readiness Roadmap 2030 presented last week by the Commission, which aims to prepare member countries for war by 2030. One of its main objectives is to fill EU capability gaps in nine areas: air and missile defense, enablers, military mobility, artillery systems, AI and cyber, missile and ammunition, drones and anti-drones, ground combat, and maritime. The plan also mentions areas like defense readiness and the role of Ukraine, which would be heavily armed and supported to become a “steel porcupine” able to deter Russian aggression. As leaders deliberated, a Russian fighter jet and a refueling aircraft briefly crossed into Lithuanian airspace from the Kaliningrad region, underscoring the need for the EU to protect its skies. 10. KYIV IS PROMISING TO BUY EUROPEAN — MOSTLY Ukraine will prioritize domestic and European industry when spending cash from the proposed reparation loan funded by Russia’s frozen assets, Zelenskyy told leaders at the summit — but wants to be able to go across the pond when necessary. 11. MUCH THE SAME FOR SPAIN Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said the country had committed to contributing cash to a fund organized by NATO to buy weapons for Ukraine from the U.S. | Nicolas Tucat/Getty Images Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez said the country had committed to contributing cash to a fund organized by NATO to buy weapons for Ukraine from the U.S. “Today, most of the air defense components, such as Patriots or Tomahawks … which Ukraine clearly needs, are only manufactured in the United States,” he said. Madrid has been a thorn in Washington’s side over its lax defense spending. 12. THERE WAS A MERCOSUR SURPRISE Merz stunned trade watchers when he announced the leaders had backed a controversial trade agreement with Latin American countries. “We voted on it today: The Mercosur agreement can be ratified,” the German chancellor told reporters, adding that he was “very happy” about that. “All 27 countries voted unanimously in favor,” Merz added on Mercosur. “It’s done.” The remark sparked confusion amongst delegations, as the European Council doesn’t usually vote on trade agreements — let alone one as controversial as the mammoth agreement with the countries of the Latin American bloc of Mercosur, which has been in negotiations for over 25 years. One EU diplomat clarified that it’s because European Council President António Costa sought confirmation from EU leaders that they would agree to take a stance on the deal by the end of this year — and no formal vote was taken yet. 13. CLIMATE TALKS PASSED WITHOUT A HITCH One of the hotter potatoes ahead of the summit passed surprisingly smoothly. Leaders ultimately refrained from bulldozing the EU’s climate targets, agreeing to a vaguely worded commitment to a green transition, though without committing to a 2040 goal, which proposes cutting emissions by 90 percent compared to 1990 levels. In the words of one diplomat: “Classic balance, everyone equally unhappy.” 14. AT LEAST ONE LEADER SEEMED PLEASED, THOUGH Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the summit a “turning point” in Europe’s approach to green policy, adding he succeeded in inserting a “revision clause” into the EU’s plan to extend its carbon-trading system to heating and transport emissions that will give member countries the option to delay or adjust the rollout. “We’ve defused a threat to Polish families and drivers,” he declared, calling the change a signal that “Europe is finally speaking our language.” 15. BUT THE ISSUE WON’T STAY BURIED FOR LONG Ministers are set to reconvene and cast a vote on the 2040 goal on Nov. 4, described by one diplomat as “groundhog day.” 16. MEANWHILE, THERE WAS NOTHING ON MIGRATION … Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the summit a “turning point” in Europe’s approach to green policy. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images Aside from promising to make migration a “priority,” the EU’s leaders failed to make any kind of breakthrough on a stalled proposal for burden-sharing. Reminder: The EU missed a deadline last week to agree on a new way of deciding which member countries are under stress from receiving migrants and ways of sharing the responsibility more equally across the bloc. 17. … BUT THE ANTI-MIGRANT BREAKFAST CLUB LIVES ON Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen and the Netherlands’ Dick Schoof have kept up their informal pre-summit “migration breakfasts” since last June, swapping innovative ideas on tougher border and asylum policies. They met again on Thursday with von der Leyen, who updated them on the EU’s latest plans for accelerating migrant returns, and the trio agreed an informal summit will take place next month in Rome. 18. NOR DID THE EU’S SOCIAL MEDIA BAN GET MUCH OF A LOOK IN As expected, the leaders endorsed a “possible” minimum age for kids to use social media, but failed to commit to a bloc-wide ban, with capitals divided on whether to make the age 15 or 16, as well as on the issue of parental consent. 19. THERE WAS A WHOLE LOT OF WAITING FOR NEWS… Journalists were frantically pressing their sources in the Council and national delegations to find out what was happening at the leaders’ table as the meeting dragged into the late hours. It eventually finished at 10.30 p.m. ― 12 and a half hours after it began. 20. … AND THE GREENS SEIZED THEIR MOMENT The EU Parliament’s Greens group co-chair Bas Eickhout wandered the hallways of the Justus Lipsius building ready to brief bored journalists about the wonders of the Green Deal — while leaders debated how to unravel it in the other room. 21. THE COMBUSTION ENGINE BAN FELL FLAT One of the pillars of the EU’s green transition, its 2035 de facto combustion engine ban, was set to play a major role in the competitiveness and climate discussions, with Merz and Fico spoiling for a fight over the proposal — yet it barely registered as a footnote. Slovakia used the climate talks to oppose the ban, and the Czech Republic chimed in to agree, but in the end the summit’s official conclusions welcomed the Commission’s proposed ban without mentioning how it should be watered down. 22. THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL’S VENDING MACHINES AREN’T VERY, ER, COMPETITIVE Officials and journalists alike found that the vending machines in the EU’s Justus Lipsius building, which incidentally is due for a €1 billion renovation, about as efficient as a roundtable of 27 national leaders lasting 12 and a half hours. 23. THE BLOC IS WORRIED ABOUT CHINA… Beijing’s export controls on rare earths came up in the talks on competitiveness, according to two EU officials, with some leaders expressing their concerns. 24. … BUT THEY’RE NOT READY TO GO NUCLEAR — YET One of the officials said the EU’s most powerful trade weapon, the Anti-Coercion Instrument, was mentioned, but didn’t garner much interest around the table. 25. HOUSING GETS 40 MINUTES — NOT BAD FOR A FIRST RUN Leaders spent a chunk of time discussing the continent’s housing crisis. A solid start for the topic, which made it onto the agenda for the first time at Costa’s behest. The EU executive “is ready to help,” von der Leyen said after the summit, announcing a European Affordable Housing Plan is in the pipeline and the first EU Housing Summit in 2026. | Dursun Aydemir/Getty Images During talks, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis called on the Commission to create a database tracking which housing policies work — and which don’t — across Europe. Most leaders agreed that, while housing remains a national competence, the EU still has a role to play. 26. AND THE COMMISSION WANTS TO ROLL UP ITS SLEEVES The EU executive “is ready to help,” von der Leyen said after the summit, announcing a European Affordable Housing Plan is in the pipeline and the first EU Housing Summit in 2026. 27. LEADERS ENJOYED A FEAST OR TWO For lunch, langoustine with yuzu, celeriac and apple, fillet of veal with artichokes and crispy polenta, and a selection of fresh fruit. For dinner, cannelloni with herbs, courgette velouté, fillet of brill with chorizo and pepper, and fig meringue cake. Yum. 28. THOUGH A FEW COULDN’T MAKE IT Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was the most notable absence, rocking up several hours late due to a national holiday in Budapest. Portugal and Slovenia’s leaders were also absent at one point. 29. AND COSTA KEPT HIS PROMISE … JUST The European Council president pledged to streamline summits under his watch, making them one-day affairs instead of two. And with just a couple hours to spare, he was successful. Okay, breathe. Did we miss anything? (Don’t answer that.) Gerardo Fortuna, Max Griera Andrieu, Jordyn Dahl, Gabriel Gavin, Hanne Cokelaere, Clea Caulcutt, Hans von der Burchard, Kathryn Carlson, Tim Ross, Jacopo Barigazzi, Gregorio Sorgi, Eliza Gkritsi, Carlo Martuscelli, Nicholas Vinocur, Saga Ringmar, Sarah Wheaton, Louise Guillot, Zia Weise, Camille Gijs, Bartosz Brzezinski and Giedre Peseckyte contributed to this report.

Russia’s Supreme Court outlawed what it termed the “International Movement of Satanists” as hostile to traditional religions on Wednesday, in the latest incarnation of the Kremlin’s sweeping crackdown on ideological dissent. “Today, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the lawsuit filed by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, Igor Krasnov, recognizing the International Movement of Satanists as extremist and banning its activities within Russia,” the Prosecutor General’s Office said in a statement. “As established, the movement is based on extremist ideology, hatred and hostility toward traditional religious confessions,” the statement added. Despite the official-sounding name, the “International Movement of Satanists” does not appear to exist, at least not under that moniker. Independent Russian-language news outlet Meduza, based in Latvia, wrote that the Supreme Court has previously “also banned other fictitious movements” such as the “international LGBT movement” and then “used that designation to persecute LGBTQ+ individuals and censor artistic works.” Undeterred, the prosecutor’s office accused the Satanists of inciting violence against religious institutions and engaging in “destruction, damage and desecration of Orthodox churches,” and linked the movement to “radical nationalism and neo-Nazism.” Russia’s Deputy Justice Minister Oleg Sviridenko said the ban was the result of coordinated efforts between law enforcement and the judiciary “within the framework of state control aimed at protecting national interests and strengthening public safety.” The Russian Orthodox Church and conservative lawmakers have called for years for Satanist ideology to be outlawed. In April Russia’s lower house of parliament, the State Duma, hosted a roundtable on combating Satanism and other beliefs considered a threat to Russian statehood. The ruling adds to a growing list of ideological and religious movements targeted under Russia’s 2002 extremism law, a tool critics argue has often been used to stifle criticism of the Russian Orthodox Church and Kremlin policies. 

LONDON — In a crowded Turkish restaurant on Monday night, two of the British Labour Party’s most infamous power brokers rallied the troops. Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson, who turned up at a fundraising event with No. 10 chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, said every day in government was tough, and today’s media made it even harder than his time as a minister two decades ago. Just how hard became clear 15 minutes later. The media was not to blame. A mile away in parliament, more than 100 of Keir Starmer’s own MPs had launched a mass effort to kill a £5 billion plank of his agenda. The scale and format of an amendment against the prime minister’s cuts to disability benefits blindsided some in government, and left the PM scrambling to agree concessions this week. It also led to dark mutterings about the authority of McSweeney — who led Labour to a landslide in last year’s election on a strategy of suppressing the left. While British politics is no stranger to civil war, Starmer’s army was meant to be different. McSweeney’s aides selected candidates so ruthlessly for loyalty that the media nicknamed them Starmtroopers. But some MPs see the welfare issue as a tipping point after months of frustration at difficult decisions, U-turns and what they brand a lack of engagement from No. 10 — just as May’s local election results suggest they will lose to Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in 2029. With 400 Labour MPs scrambling for a legacy, some also fear they are running out of time to become a minister, or make any mark at all. Many of the MPs coming out of their shell are those on the so-called “soft left,” rather than the centrist model of McSweeney. Many remain loyal. But one Cabinet minister said MPs — Tory and Labour alike — are now more willing to speak their minds “across the board.” “Lots of colleagues just don’t feel that they are listened to or that they have a way to shape policy and thinking,” said a second Cabinet minister. Like around two dozen Labour MPs, ministers and officials who spoke to POLITICO, they were granted anonymity to speak frankly. Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson said every day in government was tough, and today’s media made it even harder than his time as a minister two decades ago. | Pool Photo by Bonnie Cash via EPA They added: “I think it’s blown into the welfare bill in particular, but it’s part of a wider frustration. Some of it is reasonable — they want to be listened to and involved. But sometimes the work of government is delivering the things you said you were going to do.” ‘I’VE NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM’ Keir Starmer heads an army of 402 MPs. There’s one problem: some of them have never met him. “I met him on the day we had our group picture taken — in the sense he moved through the crowd,” Neil Duncan-Jordan, a new MP, told POLITICO by WhatsApp.  “I’ve never had a conversation with him. He’s never sent me a note congratulating me on my amazing victory etc. The public can’t believe it, but it’s true. I doubt he knows who I am.” A second backbencher told POLITICO they had never met the PM in their life. Starmer’s brisk, efficient style is his sales pitch; as PM his big promise is “delivery.” Yet those qualities now work against him, argued Mark Spencer, chief whip for almost three years under Boris Johnson.  During Spencer’s time a Tory majority of 80 collapsed into chaos amid stories of Downing Street parties during the COVID pandemic. Ironically, Spencer argues Johnson’s problem was that he couldn’t host drinks for MPs due to the virus. “If I were the chief whip [now], I would be chewing the ear of No. 10 saying, you’ve got to open those doors. You’ve got to try and schmooze these Labour MPs,” he said.  MPs need to have fun, Spencer added: “There are a lot of upsides to being an MP, aren’t there? You know, visits with APPGs [single-issue pressure groups] or social events. Some of the lobbying events [are] actually quite pleasant. And MPs in the 2019 intake got all the hassle … without any of the upside.” When Tory MPs oversaw austerity cuts in 2010, Spencer says PM David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne visited the Commons tearoom regularly. That helped steel them for the electoral fight in 2015. But one Labour frontbencher said Starmer, while he does visit the tearoom, is “not a fucking regular … he doesn’t know anyone there. He doesn’t go to Stranger’s [the bar for MPs], he doesn’t go out on the terrace, he doesn’t vote very often. And it’s led to more of an ‘us and them’ mentality between parliament and No. 10 than was necessary.” They added: “The mood of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] is really fractured. [Some] people are now entrenched in their positions … everywhere you look there are huddled conversations. You know whether their names are on the list [of rebels] or not. It makes for quite a tense atmosphere.” For months, Starmer has hosted Wednesday lunches with Pret a Manger sandwiches in his Commons office with small groups of MPs.  One Labour MP, however, complained: “It’s not a proper meeting. He likes to muse about what he said to Macron at some summit or another but it’s like there’s nothing there behind the eyes.” Starmer is making up for lost time. The PM phoned rebels personally on Thursday night in a bid to reach a compromise over the welfare cuts — while his Chief Whip, Alan Campbell, went on the Commons terrace. ‘THERE’S NO ENGAGEMENT’ Several MPs have been demanding more attention from the relatively small No. 10 political team, led by seasoned former No. 10 aide Claire Reynolds and ultimately presided over by McSweeney. One MP complained to POLITICO in January: “There’s no engagement, nothing. It’s astonishing really.” Some MPs who dislike McSweeney’s politics lament the departure of Luke Sullivan, Starmer’s former political director who was not brought into government when Labour took office last summer, and Keir Cozens, who left his role as PLP Secretary in 2023. They were “of a slightly different part of the party, and have broad appeal and good relationships,” said one Labour official. Instead, the official argued, there are “the remnants of quite a factional operation.” The frontbencher quoted above added: “After Luke left … they’ve never really invested time in it, whether that’s staff time or the prime minister’s time. You get your set-piece roundtable, your set-piece trip into No. 10 but that’s it.” One Labour regional mayor suggested No. 10 was too preoccupied with seeming tough: “There are too many books being read in No. 10 about Machiavelli, and not enough books about charm and love.” Starmer’s and McSweeney’s allies insist the criticism is unfair. One supportive frontbencher said letters go out constantly to engage with MPs, and there are “hundreds of hours of meetings.” A third cabinet minister said some rebels had signed the amendment against welfare cuts without realizing that it could sink the entire bill.  Another loyal MP pointed out plenty of their colleagues are still diehard supporters of the government. “When I looked at the list of names on the [welfare] amendment, there were only one or two who surprised me,” they added. Downing Street figures argue that Reeves’ spending review this month — which poured billions of capital investment into infrastructure projects — left MPs feeling happier. | Andy Rain/EPA But a loyal senior member of the government argued: “They [MPs] are not spoken to, they’re not listened to … their thoughts just aren’t considered.” Pointing the finger at McSweeney, they added: “For the inner group of people, this has always been their problem — they don’t understand politicians. “I don’t think it’s a fundamental breakdown, but I think it is about an urgent need for a reset. And I don’t mean a reset like ‘go on the TV and do a speech,’ I’m talking about internal things. They need a radical shake-up.” FINDING THEIR VOICE The welfare cuts created a perfect storm, but grumblings started earlier. The first noses were put out of joint last summer, when a small group of new MPs received promotions to ministerial ranks. Other MPs eyeing their legacy fear they will never be promoted, even though there are persistent rumors of a July reshuffle. One ambitious new MP said: “A lot of people say ‘I’ve got no chance of getting a job so I’ll have to do things by other means.’ [No. 10] haven’t done a wide enough job of showing people it’s a possibility.” Another Labour MP put it more bluntly: “I don’t want to have spent four years of my life as lobby fodder for a government I often didn’t agree with.” Plenty of issues have now arrived where MPs can use that voice. Several cited the recent debate over assisted dying, where MPs had to make up their own mind rather than following the party whip, as a clarifying moment. Learning how parliamentary procedure works is also making MPs more confident, just as they finally settle on their friends, their pet issues — and perhaps in future, their factions.  Formal groups of Labour MPs are centered around old “red wall” seats, growth, coastal areas, specific regions, rural seats, the socially conservative “Blue Labour” movement, trade unions, the Co-Op Party and a new group, Labour Future. While several of these back the government forcefully, they still create more bases for MPs away from No. 10. Whips have noted an uptick in skirmishes in recent months with the left-wing Socialist Campaign Group, some of whose members lost the whip after rebelling on welfare cuts last year. One Labour official said drily: “It’s tolerated as long as it’s at a low level and not very visible.” Individual issues drive MPs too. New MP Chris Hinchliff challenged the government over its bill to free up housing developments, while Paul Waugh, the Labour MP for Rochdale, backed (with caveats) calls for a national inquiry into grooming gangs in January, when the government was still resisting one. The war between Israel and Gaza — and the U.K.’s restrained response — has tested many MPs’ resolve. ‘OPEN SEASON’ The question in No. 10 will be what comes next. Speculation continues within government that a small number of frontbenchers will resign over welfare cuts, though it was not immediately clear if this would be prevented by Starmer’s planned concessions on Thursday. Keir Starmer heads an army of 402 MPs. There’s one problem: some of them have never met him. | Pool photo by Chris Ratcliffe via EPA Starmer’s allies recently downplayed talk of a ministerial reshuffle in July, arguing the prime minister and McSweeney view personnel changes as a long-term strategy for the next election. Whenever the next reshuffle does happen, it will create a moment of danger, argued one person who speaks regularly to No. 10. They said: “Once that’s passed, it’s sort of going to be open season, especially as a lot of MPs are now contemplating just being a one-term MP.” Another moment of danger from “soft left” MPs will be the government’s delayed child poverty strategy, which two people in government said was likely to be tied to Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ budget in the autumn. Senior figures in government have been pushing for the strategy to end the two-child limit on benefits, a prospect Starmer has not ruled out. A Labour figure close to No. 10 said the strategy would spend large amounts of money. They added: “Keir cares passionately about reducing child poverty. He thinks it’s one of the defining purposes of a Labour government.  “So he’ll be absolutely clear he has to make sure child poverty is lower at the end of the parliament than the beginning. He’d be mortified if it wasn’t — and I think he’ll pull whatever levers are needed to prevent it.” MPs will then face Reeves’ autumn budget — with all the speculation that it will raise taxes — and a king’s speech laying out the next phase of Starmer’s agenda. Some are already arguing that backbench MPs should be consulted about the next king’s speech. Downing Street figures argue that Reeves’ spending review this month — which poured billions of capital investment into infrastructure projects — left MPs feeling happier. But with difficult Scottish and Welsh elections coming next May, some MPs continue to feel gloomy. A frontbencher said: “I think if things haven’t shifted in a year’s time, the center simply can’t carry on as it is … we have 12 months to really prove ourselves.” They dismissed talk of blaming McSweeney, saying: “It’s a Keir problem. He has to take responsibility.” One MP on the Labour left put it more bluntly: “I just can’t see him leading us into the next election. He’s just so damaged on what he is and who he is. You’ve got to stand for something, haven’t you?” That prospect remains remote, for now — but more of Starmer’s MPs are taking a stand anyway. Emilio Casalicchio, Annabelle Dickson, Noah Keate and Andrew McDonald contributed reporting.