If ever enacted, proposals by Marine Le Pen and the AfD leader, Alice Weidel, to hollow out EU institutions would be a continental act of self-harm

Following the Brexit referendum in 2016, Marine Le Pen was in a predictably celebratory mood. Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, she told one interviewer, was the first breach in the “Brussels Wall”. Ms Le Pen’s Front National party was at that point committed to taking France down the same path, given the chance. But as the UK’s self-inflicted economic wounds became a cautionary tale for the rest of Europe, the notion of Frexit was put on ice.

Instead, Ms Le Pen now hopes to lead far-right allies in hollowing out the EU from within. This month, both she and the leader of Alternative für Deutschland, Alice Weidel, outlined their visions of a “Europe of nations” in which EU institutions would be stripped of both cash and power. Ms Weidel’s “new deal for Europe” would abolish elections to the European parliament, and seek German opt-outs in areas such as migration, defence and common borrowing. Ms Le Pen’s party, now called National Rally, proposes slashing French contributions to the EU budget by 60% over a five-year presidential term, and ending the role of Brussels in proposing common policies for the 27 member states.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Christophe Petit-Tesson/EPA

© Photograph: Christophe Petit-Tesson/EPA

© Photograph: Christophe Petit-Tesson/EPA

THE government’s plan to distribute 500,000 Chromebooks to students over two years could help narrow Pakistan’s digital divide. The devices, which will come with MiFi internet connectivity, are meant for students handpicked under the scheme. In a country where access to computers and reliable internet still depends heavily on family income and location, that matters.

A student who cannot afford a laptop should not be locked out of online learning, digital skills or job opportunities. But the value of the scheme will depend on how it is carried out. The state should publish clear eligibility criteria, ensure that poorer students are not crowded out by those who already have devices, and explain how the refurbished Chromebooks will be procured, tested and distributed.

The total cost should also be disclosed, along with safeguards against political influence in selecting recipients and suppliers. There should also be a plan for repairs, replacement and technical support. A device that stops working after a few months, or cannot connect reliably outside major cities, will do little to close the gap it was meant to address.

More importantly, access to hardware is only one part of Pakistan’s education problem. A Chromebook cannot compensate for weak teaching, poor literacy, overcrowded classrooms or schools without dependable electricity and internet access. Nor will handing out devices automatically improve learning. Teachers need training to use digital tools well, students need access to useful content, and schools need systems that can blend technology with ordinary classroom instruction.

The government should therefore set measurable goals for the scheme: whether students use the devices regularly for learning, whether their digital skills improve, and whether this leads to better educational outcomes. Independent evaluation would help determine if the programme deserves expansion. There is also a case for giving students in remote and low-income areas greater weight, since they stand to benefit most from access they currently lack.

Pakistan has launched laptop schemes before; what matters now is whether this one produces more than a distribution ceremony. Technology can widen opportunity, but only when it is tied to good teaching, reliable connectivity and clear educational purpose.

Published in Dawn, October 27th, 2026

The American people have a chance to allow the nation to glimpse the end of the Trump era and the start of something brighter.

© Illustration by The New York Times

Editorial: All the signs are that John Healey’s first Budget on Wednesday will be a very modest event indeed. Without precise measures to bring down the cost of living, it could leave the government looking rudderless

© Kirsty O'Connor/Treasury

THE proposed merger of the Privatisation Commission and the Public-Private Partnership Authority (P3A) into a single institution is a sensible move. It will end the duality of functions and provide a more coherent framework for mobilising private capital to manage public assets and develop physical infrastructure for which the state has limited resources to spare.

Although the two bodies operate under separate laws, their mandates intersect in bringing private capital and expertise into areas dominated by the state. A unified entity could offer a common platform for evaluating these options.

Privatisation involves transferring ownership or control of state assets, while public-private partnerships (PPPs) allow governments to enlist private capital for projects they cannot finance. Both approaches require sound financial assessments and clear risk allocations.

With Pakistan facing persistent fiscal constraints, the state cannot afford to finance loss-making enterprises indefinitely. Private investment can help ease these pressures, but it is not an end in itself. Poorly structured transactions can leave the state with inadequate returns or costly contractual obligations.

The proposed legislation envisages four public funds to support privatisation and PPP transactions. These instruments could help prepare viable projects and attract investment. However, they must not become vehicles for subsidising commercially unsound ventures. Government guarantees and liabilities should be disclosed and assessed before deals are approved.

The proposed legal protections for serving and former officials acting in good faith also require careful rethinking. Officials should be protected against frivolous litigation when making decisions in the public interest. Such protection must not, however, become immunity from accountability.

Making PPP agreements accessible as public documents is also positive. Public scrutiny is particularly important when private investors enter long-term arrangements that may impose financial obligations on taxpayers and successive governments.

The new arrangement offers an opportunity to improve the management of state assets and infrastructure investment. Its success will depend on securing fair value for public property, attracting credible investors and ensuring that partnerships deliver tangible benefits.

The bill proposes a majority-independent board with private-sector representation to strengthen commercial decision-making. Its effectiveness will require transparent appointments, relevant expertise, political independence, clear performance benchmarks, strong accountability, and enforceable conflict-of-interest rules to ensure effective governance.

The state must now ensure that commercial discipline, transparency and accountability guide its implementation.

Published in Dawn, October 27th, 2026

<![CDATA[

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, con una remontada histórica, se ha impuesto en la segunda vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales en Brasil, superando al ultraderechista Flávio Bolsonaro, que había ganado la primera ronda por dos puntos de ventaja. Será su cuarta presidencia –segunda consecutiva– y, si la acaba, habrá gobernado el país más poblado de Sudamérica durante 16 años.

Seguir leyendo...