radiofree.asia

Category: UK

  • Teachers’ union warns the government as schools experience severe low attendance

    Schools are seeing “very severe low attendance” among pupils and teachers ahead of the Christmas break as the Omicron variant spreads across the country, a headteachers’ union has warned. Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said one school has had around 25% of its staff off for three weeks amid Covid-19.

    His comments come amid reports that some schools and colleges have switched to remote lessons in the run-up to Christmas while some parents are choosing to keep their children off school due to concerns.

    “Pockets of very severe low attendance”

    Barton told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme:

    Listening to the speculation and the news, and certainly the emails I’ve been getting from members, you are getting some pockets of very severe low attendance, partly young people, partly staff.

    One (school) has emailed me this morning saying 25% of staff have been off for three weeks, you can imagine if you can’t then get supply teachers that becomes very difficult to maintain the quality of education.

    The NASUWT teaching union has called on the government to stagger the return of pupils to schools in January – and to publish guidance advising schools and colleges to cancel or postpone non-essential activities and events before Christmas – amid the spread of the Omicron variant.

    The union adds that guidance should make clear the actions that schools can take when dealing with “compromised” staffing levels – including sending pupils home where provision cannot go ahead safely. However, Downing Street has said schools should not be closing early for Christmas unless they have been told it is “necessary” on public health grounds.

    Schools remain open as some move online

    The prime minister’s official spokesman indicated that schools would be kept open unless there is an “absolute public health emergency”. Two schools in Bury St Edmunds in Suffolk – Sybil Andrews Academy and Abbots Green Academy – have moved to remote learning until the end of term on Friday after Covid-19 cases emerged in the schools.

    A joint statement from both academies said:

    Whilst this is far from the end of term we wished for, it remains our intention to be able to salvage Christmas, but more importantly the health and wellbeing of our school communities.

    Abingdon and Witney College in Oxfordshire has moved the majority of its lessons online this week as a “proactive measure” to reduce the number of people at their campuses in the run-up to Christmas.

    In a statement on its website, the further education (FE) college said:

    As a college we’re keen to ensure that we keep ourselves and our families as safe as possible over the festive period.

    Meanwhile, in Wales, two councils, Denbighshire and Anglesey, have decided to end face-to-face classes early on Friday December 17, with students expected to learn from home for the last three days of term. Paul Whiteman, general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT, said:

    Schools and families alike are nervous about the spread of the Omicron variant so close to Christmas.

    School leaders are remembering the chaos and last-minute Government decisions that took place last year – this must not happen again.

    The few schools that have had to close have done so on the advice of public health teams. Some parents are choosing to keep their children off from school as they are so concerned. Many schools are struggling with the levels of Covid amongst both staff and pupils, which have shot up in the last week.

    The government needs to “think very carefully”

    Whiteman has called on the government to “think very carefully” about the mitigations it needs to take to keep schools open next term. In December last year, then education secretary Gavin Williamson threatened legal action against Greenwich council in London if it failed to keep its schools open to all pupils until the end of term.

    After the Christmas holidays last year, prime minister Boris Johnson told parents on January 3 to send their primary-age children back to school. On the evening of January 4, he announced a national lockdown in England – with all schools closed to the majority of pupils.

    Featured image via – Flickr – Allison Meier

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Thousands of people across England have failed to show for cancer treatment since the start of the pandemic

    There was a dip in the number of women coming forward for cervical screening after the pandemic hit, new figures show. Just seven in 10 eligible women in England are “adequately screened”, according to a new report from NHS Digital. This is a drop in coverage of 2 percentage points compared with the previous year.

    Cancer is going undetected

    Many people have raised concerns that cases of all types of cancer have gone undetected due to the effects of the pandemic. The National Audit Office warned that up to 60,000 people across England who would have been expected to start cancer treatment in March 2020 and September 2021 failed to do so.

    The new annual report on cervical screening has shown the effect on cervical cancer. Women between the ages of 25 and 64 are invited for regular cervical screening under the NHS Cervical Screening Programme.

    This is intended to detect abnormalities within the cervix that could, if undetected and untreated, develop into cervical cancer.

    Alarming findings

    Some of the findings of the new report, which covers the period 2021/22 for England, include:

    • In 2020/21, 4.59 million people were invited for screening – a 1% decrease on 2019/20, when the figure was 4.63 million.
    • The number of tests carried out also fell – 3.03 million individuals aged 25 to 64 were tested, a decrease of 5.3% compared with the previous year, when 3.2 million were tested.
    • As of March 31 this year, cervical screening coverage was lower in the 25 to 49 age group – it decreased to 68%, from 70.2% in 2020.
    • In the 50 to 64 age group, coverage decreased from 76.1% in 2020 to 74.7% in 2021.
    • Coverage ranged from 45.8% in Kensington and Chelsea in London to 78.4% in Derbyshire.

    The report also shows the number of individuals referred for colposcopy, a procedure to look at the cervix. In 2020-21, there were 176,561 referrals to colposcopy, compared with 191,563 in 2019-20.

    “Unprecedented strain”

    Commenting on the figures, Samantha Dixon, chief executive of Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust, said:

    A 2% drop in cervical screening coverage is not unexpected given the last year, however it is a worry.

    Our health service is under unprecedented strain at the moment and facing a long winter.

    We cannot afford to let coverage slip further, it will only lead to even more cancers that could have prevented.

    In some areas coverage is lower than one in two and that should be ringing alarm bells.

    It came as separate figures also showed that HPV vaccine coverage has improved but is “still not up to pre-pandemic levels”. Disruption to schooling due to the pandemic led to issues with the HPV vaccine programme, which is delivered through schools.

    The figures from the UK Health Security Agency show that, in the 2020 to 2021 academic year, HPV vaccine coverage was 76.7% for the first dose in Year 8 girls in England compared with 59.2% in 2019/20 and 88% in 2018/19. Among boys in Year 8, 71% had received their first dose.

    Dixon added:

    Today’s data shows the impact of yet another interrupted year to the HPV vaccination programme, with great disparity across the country.

    Coverage is still far lower than it was before the pandemic, meaning many schoolchildren could fall through the gap and miss out on protection from HPV-related cancers.

    Featured image via – Flickr – Garry Knight

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Women asylum seekers to ‘counter the widespread lies’ about people fleeing for safety

    On 8 December, Priti Patel’s controversial Nationality and Borders Bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons. Some MPs and campaigners were outraged and labelled the legislation racist and inhumane. Labour MP Zarah Sultana said it was:

    an attack on refugee rights, criminalising boats rescuing people at sea and violating our 70-year commitment to the Refugee Convention.

    Refugees were already under attack in the UK. In addition to this proposed racist legislation, there’s been a lot of lies spread about refugees arriving here. Moreover, earlier this month, a white supremacist group displayed racist, anti-refugee banners from a road bridge in London. And, as reported by The Canary, those that do make the journey through Europe do so in desperate conditions.

    Set the record straight

    On 14 December, between 12:30 and 2pm, the All African Women’s Group and Global Women Against Deportations are hosting an event. Gloria, chair of the All African Women’s Group, said that members want to:

    counter the widespread lies put out about people arriving in the UK to find refuge and spell out for others in the community how the Nationality and Borders Bill will, if enacted, cause even greater suffering and injustice.

    A combination of women who’ve recently arrived in the UK and those who have been here for decades will answer questions at this live event. The organisers added:

    Women who travelled overland, others who have family left in Greece, France, and in other European and African countries, some who fled homophobia, rape and other violence and mothers separated from their children, will all be speaking.

    Prior to tomorrow’s lunchtime webinar, some of those women spoke about their experiences. They also expressed their opinions on Patel’s racist legislation.

    “You can’t just tell people don’t come by boat”

    A woman called Lara, who was detained in her home country for organising against the government, is applying for asylum. She believes the UK government wants to stop refugees telling their story:

    I think the key thing about this Bill is that the government want to prevent us from ever setting foot in the country. In the justice system in the UK, you’re arrested; go to the court and you say everything out in public. And people decide, and then the judge [decides] based on the evidence. But now with this bill they want to decide outside the court, they want to prevent as many people as possible, from reaching a point where they can openly say what has happened to them.

    She believes it’s important refugees get this chance because:

    Just being there in person in court makes a big difference so that somebody can sit down and have time to listen, give a proper fair hearing. Where you feel safe enough to say everything that has happened to you and to show your evidence, because sometimes you don’t even realise what is evidence? They want to decide your asylum case outside of the asylum system.

    Another woman called Kundi added:

    I came here to escape life-threatening domestic violence.  When I started my case they didn’t believe me. They kept on rejecting me.  It wasn’t until they took me to detention, where a GP saw all the scars and they wrote to the Home Office to say they should believe me.

    Patel wants to play off “two groups against each other”

    In March this year, Patel claimed she was defending women who were “elbowed out of the way by young men” jumping the asylum queue. Chika warned people about this saying:

    please don’t fall for that as there is actually no place for women either

    They went on to say:

    Priti Patel is just playing off two groups against each other. There are no pathways for women to claim asylum. We can’t be fighting over something that doesn’t exist.

    But it’s still harder on women

    Others added that while it was hard for men, in their view it was still harder for women claiming asylum. Natu remembered the terrible time she had when she was pregnant.

    I had my baby in the hospital and immediately the midwives took me out into another room and immigration officers were there to question me. They said we need to know your status. My mind was going everywhere. They’re gonna take me back? They’re gonna take my baby? I was shivering and shaking. Those are the things that women go through because we are the mothers and the children depend on us.

    Visola added.

    It’s quite hard for women to be able to claim asylum and to speak out, because most of the time we are victims. Some men go through rape as well, but women are the [ones] who goes through it more. And they feel the pain because there is no woman that will want to leave her own country to go to another place if it wasn’t to find somewhere to be safe.

    Getting on those boats is a way of escape, whether we make it or not, to just find a place and settle with the children. That’s why we say to people that we must oppose this Bill so that women at least get a listening ear.

    Listen to the women “who have made the dangerous journey”

    The event organisers want people to listen to the women “who have made the dangerous journey”. They can:

    counter the lies put out about people fleeing for safety, including those arriving by boat on UK shores.

    They point out there are:

    no safe and legal ways to get to the UK. Twenty-seven people have now tragically died in the Channel. This adds to the horrendous toll of nearly 40,000 known to have died in the Mediterranean, and those who perished at the Belarus border, in the backs of lorries and in the many other dangerous ways that desperate people have been forced to travel. Without wars, famine and environmental devastation, much of which the UK is guilty of, people wouldn’t have to flee their homes.

    Anybody wishing to attend this event can register for free at this link.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons – DFID – UK Department for International Development

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • ‘Big problem’ for Omicron push as lateral flow tests ‘unavailable’ on government website

    The ordering of lateral flow tests (LFTs) on the government website has been temporarily suspended amid “exceptionally high demand”, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has said. The website on 13 December advised people to “try again later” or to book a coronavirus test site appointment instead.

    “What’s going on!”

    The UKHSA said the pause is temporary and availability refreshed daily, with people encouraged to re-visit the website from 14 December. Boris Johnson was asked about potential supply issues during a visit to a vaccination clinic near Paddington in West London and told broadcasters there is a “ready supply”.

    Coronavirus – Mon Dec 13, 2021
    The message was on the Government website (UK Government/PA)

    A UKHSA spokesperson said:

    Everyone who needs a lateral flow test can collect test kits – either at their local pharmacy, some community sites and some schools and colleges.

    Due to exceptionally high demand, ordering lateral flow tests on gov.uk has been temporarily suspended to fulfil existing orders.

    This comes a day after Johnson announced new measures to combat the Omicron variant which predictably would have led to an increase in demand. UKHSA added there is no shortage of LFTs and the government has enough stock to meet demand.

    Responding to people being unable to order tests, Johnson said:

    They can get those tests, we do have a ready supply of lateral flow tests.

    If you can’t get one online for any reason, then there are ample supplies in the shops.

    Speaking to Sky News, pharmacist Sunil Gautama said he’d been experiencing shortages for the past few weeks:

    Other sources are advising that tests should still be available:

    NHS Covid Pass

    It’s been announced that double-jabbed people identified as a contact of someone with coronavirus (Covid-19) in England will be told to take a daily rapid test for seven days from 14 December. New regulations, set to be put to a debate and vote in the Commons this week, could also see the NHS Covid Pass on the NHS app becoming mandatory for entry into clubs and other large gatherings – but with a negative home test as an alternative for the unvaccinated.

    One person said on Twitter:

    Tried to order a lateral flow test kit and the NHS site says they have no more! What’s going on!

    Paul Taylor, a 37-year-old pharmacy technician from Leeds, told the PA news agency he was “frightened” at the prospect of being unable to order any lateral flow tests. He said he had:

    only recently started to socialise normally (going to the gym, attending big events etcetera). Doing regular LFTs has relieved the anxiety of potentially passing anything on that I’ve felt throughout the pandemic.

    I’m frightened because without tests I only have two choices: (1) go out but risk passing on the virus to other people or (2) stay in and return to self-imposed lockdown.

    Jessica Keogh, a 32-year-old executive assistant from London, told PA she had run out of lateral flow tests and was unable to order more. She said:

    It’s actually my worry that I won’t be able to get any before Christmas and I will worry about being able to visit my family

    However, there appeared to be no problems with the availability of PCR home test kits.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Failure to tackle Omicron ‘chaos’ may keep children away from school longer, union says

    Delaying action until vaccination can take hold may keep children away from the classroom “longer” in the long term, a school leaders’ union has warned.

    “Chaos”

    Paul Whiteman, general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT, has said it is already “chaos” in some schools following the emergence of the Omicron variant of coronavirus.

    His warning came after health secretary Sajid Javid said he could not guarantee schools would not close again due to the pandemic. Asked on LBC whether this remained a possibility, Javid said:

    I don’t want to see that or any of these kinds of measures. I’m just going to focus on everything else we need to be doing, especially the booster programme.

    He added:

    I’d say this, if you are asking me for guarantees, I will just say – as the Health Secretary, of course, I’m not the Education Secretary – that there are, when it comes to our fight against this pandemic, there are no guarantees.

    But what we do know that works is, in this case, a booster shot of the vaccine.

    It comes after education secretary Nadhim Zahawi said on 12 December that he could not guarantee that in January all schools will be open everywhere.

    “Further transmission”

    Whiteman said he was “pleased to see” both ministers showing a “bit of realism” over possible school closures. He added:

    It is already chaos in some schools as the Omicron wave hits. Delaying action until vaccination can take hold may actually keep children away from school longer in the long term. We would urge the Government to take every safety measure possible while maintaining face-to-face education, in order to avoid longer term school closures.

    Infection rates in schools have been growing unabated for a long time. Simply relying on the fact that children tend to suffer less from the virus is not good enough. We have to account for further transmission too.

    The Government must act now to deliver ventilation solutions, sensible and effective isolation protocols, and lift the unnecessary pressure of inspection and other bureaucratic burdens. That way we can concentrate on keeping children where they should be.

    Whiteman added:

    School leaders and their teams have been working tirelessly to keep children in school. They are the very last to want to see schools close.

    Speaking on the BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show on 12 December, Zahawi said the government does not have plans “at the moment” to vaccinate primary school-aged children.

    Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said:

    It’s impossible to rule out school closures and a return to remote education because nobody has a crystal ball which allows them to foresee how the Omicron variant will impact education and wider society.

    All we can say with any certainty is that everybody involved in education is doing everything possible to keep things going under extremely difficult circumstances.

    What we may see is schools periodically having to close or send home year groups, for short periods of time, because of unsustainable levels of staff and pupil absence, or on public health advice.

    This has already been happening during the course of this term and there could be more of this if the Omicron variant means that there is more disruption.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Boris Johnson somehow looks set for an even worse week than the last one

    Following a series of scandals he allegedly brought upon himself. Boris Johnson is facing perhaps the most difficult week since the start of his premiership. As dissatisfaction on the Conservative backbenches has grown, he heads into the next few days against a backdrop of rebellion. Meanwhile, the threat of the Omicron variant of coronavirus looms in the background – not to mention the rolling scandals linked to Christmas parties and questions of corruption.

    As challenging as the week may prove for Johnson, however, others are noting that the real hard work will be – as ever – carried out by others.

    Plan B

    Johnson’s first big challenge comes on 14 December, as MPs are asked to approve the Plan B measures he has set out in a bid to stem the spread of Omicron. Already, more than 70 of his own MPs have signalled they either will, or are considering, opposing some of the plans.

    Commenting on measures Johnson announced on 12 December, doctor Rachel Clarke argued that the government’s plans – much like in the early days of the pandemic – don’t go far enough:

    Others questioned how seriously Johnson is taking the issue:

    Coronavirus – Mon Dec 13, 2021
    Boris Johnson watching others work (Jeremy Selwyn/Evening Standard/PA)

    Tory anger

    Anger on the Conservative backbenches mainly centres on the introduction of coronavirus (Covid-19) passes – where a person must prove their vaccination status or that they have had a negative test – for large venues. However, the bad blood comes as Tory MPs have been left burned by their leader in recent weeks.

    The standards row over former MP Owen Paterson left a sour taste in the mouths of many, as they felt they had been asked – and most obliged – to back the government in a difficult position, only to be left embarrassed when ministers U-turned. The resulting by-election in North Shropshire is on 16 December, and what should be a comfortable win for the Tories – Paterson had a majority of almost 23,000 – is now looking precarious.

    Ill feeling has also been stirred up by the revelations of alleged parties held in Downing Street and elsewhere in government during lockdown restrictions. After denying any parties took place, Johnson has now asked Cabinet secretary Simon Case to investigate and report back, with the Times suggesting the outcome could come as early as the end of the week.

    The Conservative Party leader also faces allegations that he misled his ethics adviser over what he knew about a controversial refurbishment of his No 11 flat.

    Amid all of that, Johnson is attempting to convince the country that it’s essential to follow new coronavirus measures, as the Omicron variant threatens to put even more pressure on the NHS. In an address to the nation on 12 December, the prime minister called the variant a “tidal wave”, and brought forward the deadline for offering booster jabs to all adults.

    However, the question ministers continue to face in interviews is whether the public health messaging has been undermined by the government’s – and Johnson’s – actions, and what that means for his future. On top of that, people are reporting issues with booking their booster and lateral flow tests:

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Daniel Morgan’s family to sue the Met for ‘some semblance of accountability’

    The family of private investigator Daniel Morgan are reportedly preparing to take legal action against the Metropolitan Police over the case. Morgan was killed with an axe in the car park of the Golden Lion pub in Sydenham, south-east London, on March 10 1987.

    Daniel Morgan's brother Alastair
    Alastair Morgan, the brother of murdered private investigator Daniel Morgan (PA)

    “Institutional corruption”

    In June, an independent panel accused the Met of “a form of institutional corruption” for concealing or denying failings over the unsolved murder. The force’s commissioner Dame Cressida Dick apologised to Morgan’s family, saying it was a “matter of great regret that no-one has been brought to justice and that our mistakes have compounded the pain suffered by Daniel’s family”.

    A pattern of failings?

    Maryam Jameela from The Canary‘s investigative unit reported that, unsurprisingly, the panel found the Met to be un-cooperative with the inquiry. However, the Home Office’s lack of support has gone largely unreported. The panel found that:

    the relationship with the Home Office as a department has been more challenging.

    Jameela continued:

    We can go further. It has been 34 years since the murder of Daniel Morgan. The panel’s findings are part of a bigger pattern of institutions slowing down the process of public scrutiny – if not sidestepping it altogether.

    And when The Canary contacted the Met for comment, it said:

    We are considering the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel report and will need time to review its contents and recommendations. We remain in contact with the Home Secretary and the Mayor, and will respond fully in due course.

    Lack of candour?

    At that time, The Canary spoke to Netpol’s Kevin Blowe who explained:

    The Panel’s call for a duty of candour from the police is one of its most important recommendations, because the Metropolitan Police in particular, but policing in Britain more generally, has an obsessive culture of secrecy.

    The search for truth and accountability about Daniel Morgan’s death is not the only investigation to have suffered from this institutional rejection of transparency. The Undercover Policing Inquiry has for years faced police obstruction over the release of information, including evidence of the shredding of documents.

    Jameela then added:

    The findings of the independent panel on the Daniel Morgan inquiry are no doubt heartbreaking for Morgan’s family. They also show a culture of secrecy and protectionism from institutions who should be accountable to the public.

    Indications from the panel that they were not fully assisted in their work by either the police or the government fit into a pattern of an undemocratic lack of candour. To see this reflected in requests from journalists is downright scandalous.

    Dame Cressida Dick speaks to the media
    Dame Cressida Dick has come in for particular criticism from the family of Daniel Morgan (Victoria Jones/PA)

    The Morgan family demand accountability

    The BBC on Monday reported the family had said in a statement they were “saddened – if not surprised” to find out they had been:

    let down again by all concerned

    The broadcaster reported a letter of claim had been sent to the force. The Morgan family added they had no choice but to file a civil claim against the Met:

    in order to achieve some semblance of accountability

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The ‘Colston Four’ trial begins today over toppling of Bristol slave trader statue

    Four people are to go on trial accused of criminal damage in relation to the toppling of a statue of slave trader Edward Colston. Rhian Graham, 29, Milo Ponsford, 25, Jake Skuse, 36, and Sage Willoughby, 21, will go on trial at Bristol Crown Court after denying charges of criminal damage.

    “Heroic”

    The bronze memorial to the 17th century slave merchant was pulled down during a Black Lives Matter protest on 7 June last year. It was later dumped in Bristol Harbour before being recovered by Bristol City Council. The topplers have previously been called “heroic”:

    From left, Milo Ponsford, Rhian Graham and Jake Skuse arrive at Bristol Crown Court earlier this year (Ben Birchall/PA)
    From left, Milo Ponsford, Rhian Graham and Jake Skuse arrive at Bristol Crown Court earlier this year (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Charges allege that the four defendants, together with “others unknown”, damaged the Colston statue and plinth of a value unknown without lawful excuse. They are all on unconditional bail. Judge Peter Blair QC, the Recorder of Bristol, will preside over the trial.

    Legal representatives of three of the defendants said they would fight the charges “vigorously”.

    Sage Willoughby arrives at Bristol Crown Court for a previous hearing (Ben Birchall/PA)
    Sage Willoughby arrives at Bristol Crown Court for a previous hearing (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Support

    The Colston Four are receiving support on this first day of the trial:

    However, there are also those who believe that unrest in Britain today can be directly blamed on the toppling of a slave trader’s statue:

    On 11 December, anonymous artist Banksy sold t-shirts to fundraise for those on trial. He said at the time:

    Next week the four people charged with pulling down Colston’s statue in Bristol are going on trial.

    I’ve made some souvenir shirts to mark the occasion. Available from various outlets in the city from tomorrow. All proceeds to the defendants so they can go for a pint.

    Despite the moral and ethical case for slavery being long-since settled, the statue of Colston remained standing until 2020. It’s unclear how long it would have remained standing if not for the intervention set to be put on trial.

    The Canary has covered the saga of the toppling since the statue first went into the harbour. In June 2021, Eliza Egret wrote:

    The toppling of the statue came after years of campaigning and protests by Countering Colston and its supporters. The group had previously achieved a number of significant concessions, including the decision by Bristol Music Trust to change the name of the Colston Hall. And after the events in June 2020, a number of buildings and landmarks around Bristol named after the slave-trader finally bowed under pressure to change their names.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Julian Assange had a stroke in prison due to stress, fiancee says

    Julian Assange has had a stroke in prison due to the “constant chess game” over his future, his fiancee has claimed.

    “He needs to be freed”

    The WikiLeaks founder is said to have suffered a stroke at the time of a High Court battle over whether or not he should be extradited to the US. He’s being held at HMP Belmarsh, a high-security men’s prison in South-East London.

    Stella Moris, who is the mother of his two children, tweeted:

    Stella Moris
    Stella Moris is seen outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London on 10 December (Kirsty O’Connor/PA)

    In an interview with the Mail On Sunday, she said:

    Julian is struggling and I fear this mini-stroke could be the precursor to a more major attack. It compounds our fears about his ability to survive, the longer this long legal battle goes on.

    It urgently needs to be resolved. Look at animals trapped in cages in a zoo. It cuts their life short. That’s what’s happening to Julian. The never-ending court cases are extremely stressful mentally.

    She added:

    I believe this constant chess game, battle after battle, the extreme stress, is what caused Julian’s stroke on October 27… he was in a truly terrible state. His eyes were out of sync, his right eyelid would not close, his memory was blurry.

    Assange is wanted in America over an alleged conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information, following WikiLeaks’ publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked documents relating to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

    US authorities brought a High Court challenge against a January ruling by then-district judge Vanessa Baraitser. The ruling said that Assange shouldn’t be sent to the US because of a real and “oppressive” risk of suicide.

    After a two-day hearing in October, the lord chief justice Ian Burnett, sitting with lord justice Timothy Holroyde, ruled in favour of the US on Friday 10 December. Moris said that his lawyers intend to take his case to the Supreme Court, the UK’s highest court. Justices will have to decide first whether to hear the case before any appeal is heard.

    A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice told the PA news agency that it would not comment on individual cases.

    Other areas of appeal

    Writing for The Canary on 11 December, Tom coburg noted:

    Lawyers representing Assange have issued a statement saying they will appeal to the Supreme Court… They add that “other important questions”, for example free speech and political motivation, are yet to be heard by the appeal court

    Coburg pointed out:

    There may also be other grounds for appeal.

    In June 2019, it was revealed that star prosecution witness Sigurdur Thordarson was a convicted felon in relation to several offences, including paedophilia. In July 2021, it was further revealed by Stundin that Thordarson admitted he had lied to US authorities in exchange for a deal with the FBI.

    Moreover, surveillance footage of Assange, while a guest of the Ecuadorian embassy, was allegedly passed to the CIA, breaching client-lawyer confidentiality.

    There are also claims that the entire US case is political and therefore should be dismissed in accordance with provisions in the US-UK extradition treaty.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Family of missing nurse assistant Petra Srncova ‘desperately worried’ for her

    Family members of a missing nurse assistant are said to be “desperately worried about her”.

    Missing

    Petra Srncova, 32, is believed to have disappeared on her way home from work at the Evelina London Children’s Hospital on 28 November. She was reported missing by a concerned colleague last week after failing to turn up for work – which has been described as very “out of character” for her.

    MP Harriet Harman speaks in Camberwell, London, as she heads a search party and hands out missing posters of Petra Srncova, 32, who has been missing from south London for a week.
    MP Harriet Harman speaks in Camberwell, London, as she heads a search party and hands out missing posters of Petra Srncova (Sophie Corcoran/PA)

    The Metropolitan Police said Petra left the hospital at 7.45pm on 28 November. And it’s thought she took money out of a cashpoint before getting on two buses. She was last seen in the Camberwell area, where she lives, at around 20.22pm. A man has been arrested in connection with her disappearance and remains in custody.

    “Desperately worried”

    Harriet Harman, MP for Camberwell and Peckham, said Petra’s family in her native Czech Republic are “desperately worried about her”. Harman told a press conference on 11 December:

    Petra is missing and we want people to help find her. She’s been missing quite a few days and she is only 32.

    Her parents are desperately worried about her and we have a responsibility to help find her. She was away from her country and her family here working in our National Health Service.

    The MP urged anyone in the area with CCTV or doorbell cameras to check footage. She added:

    As each day goes by we get more and more concerned. This is her local community, we’ve all got a responsibility to find her.

    I’m very worried indeed for a young woman aged 32 to go missing and not go to work when she is fully committed to her work.

    Local campaign

    Harman was joined by Dora Dixon-Fyle, councillor for the Camberwell Green ward, and councillor Evelyn Akoto, Southwark Council cabinet member for health and wellbeing, as she handed out missing person posters to local residents and businesses in the area.

    A missing poster of Srncova being placed in a window of a shop in the Camberwell area, London (Sophie Corcoran/PA)

    Akoto said:

    I think as each day passes, we grow increasingly concerned for her whereabouts. If you know of anything where she could be, please get in contact with the police.

    Dixon-Fyle said Camberwell Community Council are speaking with constituents about how they feel about safety in public spaces in the area “to make sure the area is safer”.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Omicron wave ‘inevitable’ and more measures may be needed, says expert

    More coronavirus (Covid-19) measures may be needed to tackle the fast-spreading Omicron variant. And the UK is facing an “inevitable” large wave of infections, the UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) chief medical adviser has said.

    Reduced contact advised

    Dr Susan Hopkins said people will have to reduce social contact as much as possible. And she added that lateral flow tests should be used before going out to meet anyone. Her remarks came as education secretary Nadhim Zahawi said the UK is in a “race” to get the coronavirus booster to eligible adults “as quickly as possible”.

    Zahawi said there are people in hospital with Omicron, while Hopkins also confirmed that they are getting reports of individuals going into hospital over the last few days with the variant. She told BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show:

    We’re also seeing hospitals diagnose more and more people coming through their emergency departments, and we expect to see increases in that number. I have not had a report of death yet.

    But it’s really important to remember it is just over two weeks since we first detected the cases in the United Kingdom, and that hospitalisations start to be seen in about two weeks and deaths usually at three to four weeks.

    I think it’s too early to make any assumptions at this point in time.

    Coronavirus – Fri Feb 26, 2021
    Dr Susan Hopkins said people will must reduce social contact as much as possible and take a lateral flow test before going out to meet anyone (Matt Dunham/PA)

    Zahawi told Sky News’ Trevor Phillips On Sunday programme:

    It is now a race between the booster and that protection, and the Omicron variant.

    Asked what action is likely to be taken to increase the rate of booster jabs, Zahawi said:

    There is absolutely a plan, and the Prime Minister will be saying more on this.

    He said the booster programme has been opened to those over the age of 30 and a team of GPs, pharmacies, the military and volunteers is being mobilised to deliver it.

    HEALTH Coronavirus
    (PA Graphics)

    “Inevitable”

    Speaking about what is ahead, Hopkins said:

    It’s inevitable that we’re going to see a big wave of infections. What we are not yet clear on, and which is what we are basically making sure people go out and get their vaccination for, is how much that will affect hospitals.

    She added:

    I think we will have to reduce our social contacts as much as we can, which is the working-from-home guidance.

    She said more coronavirus measures may be needed, adding that the government has “very difficult” decisions ahead. She said:

    I think that the restrictions that the Government have announced are sensible. I think that we may need to go beyond them. But we’ll need to watch carefully what happens with hospitalisations

    According to overall UK Omicron case numbers, 11 December’s figure of 1,898 confirmed cases was up 50% on 10 December’s figure when the total was 1,265.

    New modelling suggests that, under one scenario, almost twice the number of coronavirus patients could be admitted to hospital compared with last year due to Omicron. Experts from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) calculated figures which say a large wave of infections could occur over the next few months if tougher measures aren’t brought in. The study has not yet been peer-reviewed and assumes a similar level of virulence as the Delta variant.

    Analysis by the UKHSA has found that the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines provide “much lower” levels of protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron compared with Delta. It also said a booster dose gives around 70% to 75% protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron. And it urged people to have their boosters.

    All eligible adults can get their booster jab three months (91 days) after their second dose. They can book their booster 61 days after their second dose using the NHS national booking system.

    The national booking system will open to everyone aged 30 to 39 in England from 13 December.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • DWP staff’s office antics are the worst of the lot

    Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) staff have been exposed in the government’s Christmas parties scandal. And although the government claims they weren’t partying, the DWP’s actions are the most contemptible of them all. Because while they enjoyed themselves, the pandemic hit chronically ill people, disabled people, and people who rely on social security the hardest.

    DWP staff: boozing away but ‘they weren’t parties’

    The Sunday Mirror reported that DWP political staff and officials frequently drank alcohol after work until the early hours of the morning. They also ordered food to boss Thérèse Coffey’s office at the DWP. The Sunday Mirror said some of these evenings took place while hospitality and office parties were banned under coronavirus (Covid-19) regulations. On one occasion, Coffey also gave out presents to her team. A source told PA that desks in the office are socially distanced and there was “no party atmosphere going on”.

    This comes amidst the furore over the Tory government repeatedly breaking its own coronavirus rules – something Downing Street denies. The Mirror, its Sunday version and ITV News have made numerous allegations about parties in government offices while the government forced restrictions on the rest of us. Most recently, late on Saturday 11 December, the Sunday Mirror revealed Boris Johnson hosted a quiz as part of a government office ‘do’:

    The government has denied it broke any coronavirus rules. But it’s the DWP staff’s actions which are perhaps the worst of the lot. Because while they ate and drank late into the night, countless people who they make decisions for were suffering.

    A pandemic of chaos

    The pandemic put into sharp focus the state of the UK’s welfare system. For example:

    • The government did not increase so-called legacy benefits like Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) like it did Universal Credit. This affected around two million chronically ill and disabled people.
    • Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s autumn budget removed the Universal Credit £20-a-week uplift. This left millions of claimants worse off.
    • The DWP has already investigated twice as many claimant deaths in 2021 than in 2020; these are deaths where a claimant took their own life.

    But ultimately, perhaps the biggest scandal of the pandemic was that 58% of coronavirus deaths were disabled people. This shows an abject failure by the government to protect those who were clinically vulnerable from coronavirus. And all this was going on while DWP staff drank alcohol at work and shared takeaways.

    The DWP says…

    A DWP spokesperson told PA:

    Throughout the pandemic, DWP officials have followed Government guidance while continuing to deliver vital services for millions of people.

    Staff worked from home where possible but a core team working directly to the Secretary of State regularly worked from the office, in accordance with the Covid-19 rules as they evolved.

    The team regularly worked late into the evening and on a number of occasions they ate takeaway food and drank some alcohol. No karaoke took place.

    Because ‘no karaoke’ makes it all OK, apparently.

    Peak contempt

    For years, the DWP and its staff have treated claimants with contempt and disregard. This led to a report by the UN which accused successive governments and the DWP of “grave” and “systematic” violations of chronically ill and disabled people’s human rights. The chair of the UN committee who did the report said they had created a “human catastrophe”.

    It was only this week that Disability News Service (DNS) reported that the DWP has refused to publish a damning report. It found that despite years of reforms, the social security system was still failing to meet chronically ill and disabled people’s needs. And despite the report being “watered-down”, the DWP has failed to publish it.

    Nothing changes

    It seems that nothing changes in the DWP. Staff think it’s OK to booze while working. The fact they “drank some alcohol” and ate takeaways while countless claimants suffered sums up the contempt they have for the people they’re supposed to be working for: people who, for whatever reason, rely on them to deliver this country’s social security system. After so many chronically ill and disabled people died of coronavirus, the antics of DWP staff are perhaps the most twisted part of the whole government parties scandal.

    Featured image via the Oxford Union – YouTube and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Watchdog launches probe after armed Met officers kill a man in London incident

    Armed police have shot a man dead during an incident in Kensington.

    The police watchdog is investigating what happened in west London on the afternoon of Saturday 11 December. The man died after he sustained gunshot wounds.

    Three shots

    The Metropolitan Police said officers were called to reports of a man with a firearm seen entering a bank and bookmakers near Marloes Road at 3.04pm.

    The force said the man was then seen getting into a vehicle and leaving the area.

    Kensington shooting
    Police cordoned off Kensington High Street (Aaron Chown/PA)

    At 3.19pm, armed officers stopped a vehicle at the junction of Kensington Road and Palace Gate next to Kensington Gardens.

    Reports suggest officers shot at the man, fatally injuring him. According to the Met, the officers fired shots and “a man sustained gunshot wounds”, adding:

    The London Ambulance Service and London Air Ambulance were called and the man was treated at the scene.

    Police said that despite the efforts of the emergency services, he was pronounced dead at 4.08pm.

    Witnesses heard three shots, according to reports.

    Kensington shooting
    Police at the scene in Kensington (Aaron Chown/PA)

    Inquiry

    The Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards has been informed. And the incident has been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

    The IOPC confirmed it has begun an investigation, with a spokesperson adding:

    After being notified of the incident… we sent investigators to the scene and the post-incident procedure to start gathering evidence

    Police said efforts are underway to confirm the man’s identity and inform his next of kin.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Julian Assange’s lawyers to appeal latest ruling and raise ‘other important questions’

    In January 2021, judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled that the US prosecution case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was valid. However, she also ruled that Assange shouldn’t be extradited for health reasons and because there was a risk he could end his life.

    The US subsequently presented assurances that Assange would not be mistreated. On 10 December 2021, the appeal court ruled that those assurances were acceptable and Assange could be extradited after all.

    Lawyers representing Assange have issued a statement saying they will appeal to the Supreme Court regarding the assurances. They add that “other important questions”, for example free speech and political motivation, are yet to be heard by the appeal court:

    Birnberg's letter re Assange appeal

    Assurances meaningless

    The appeal court ruled it accepted US assurances that Assange would not be held in the supermax facility in Florence, Colorado. It also accepted assurances that he would not be detained under special administrative measures (SAMS). These measures include segregation, no visits, and no phone calls. It additionally accepted an assurance that if convicted of charges raised, Assange could serve his sentence in Australia.

    The prosecution listed several ‘assurances’ regarding the kind of prison regime Assange could face. Prosecution lawyer James Lewis claimed Assange would likely be detained in a Communications Management Unit (CMU).

    However, journalists Kevin Gosztola and Mohamed Elmaazi explained that should Assange be detained in a CMU:

    he would likely be limited to two scheduled 15-minute phone calls per week. Those calls could be restricted to immediate family, and the prison could deny him a call if an FBI agent was not available to monitor his conversation.

    The visitation policy for a prisoner in a CMU is harsher than the policy for SAMs. Contact visits are not allowed, meaning Moris and his children, Gabriel and Max, would not be able to hug or kiss him.

    Case study

    In arguments presented to the court, the defence lawyers stated that if the US appeal is accepted, the courts should then consider the trustworthiness of US assurances.

    On this point, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray stated that the US has broken assurances about incarceration in the past:

    Journalist Richard Medhurst has referred to broken assurances given to Spanish citizen David Mendoza. As for Assange, he adds there is no guarantee that, if convicted, he could serve his sentence in Australia, “because Australia hasn’t said it would take him”:

    Flawed charges

    As for raising “other important questions”, The Canary has previously pointed out that the defence may seek to appeal other aspects of the January ruling on matters of law. This could include an alleged agreement between Assange and whistleblower Chelsea Manning, for her to “obtain and disclose” information about war crimes, which Baraitser said “would amount to conspiracy”.

    The Canary further reported how in an alleged conversation between Assange and Manning, the latter asked for help in ‘cracking’ a password. However, Patrick Eller, formerly lead digital forensics examiner with the US Army’s Criminal Investigation Command in Virginia, pointed out that this was unnecessary as Manning:

    already had legitimate access to all the databases from which she downloaded the data… Logging into another user account would not have provided her with more access than she already possessed.

    Eller added that Manning had access to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet). When asked how many people would have access to SIPRNet, Eller answered “in the millions”.

    Other flaws

    There may also be other grounds for appeal.

    In June 2019, it was revealed that star prosecution witness Sigurdur Thordarson was a convicted felon in relation to several offences, including paedophilia. In July 2021, it was further revealed by Stundin that Thordarson admitted he had lied to US authorities in exchange for a deal with the FBI.

    Moreover, surveillance footage of Assange, while a guest of the Ecuadorian embassy, was allegedly passed to the CIA, breaching client-lawyer confidentiality.

    There are also claims that the entire US case is political and therefore should be dismissed in accordance with provisions in the US-UK extradition treaty.

    In January 2020, The Canary published a list of six legal arguments as to why Assange’s extradition should not proceed.

    Bias

    There’s also the question of alleged bias.

    On 2 December, journalists Mark Curtis and Matt Kennard revealed that lord chief justice Ian Burnett, one of two judges who presided over the US appeal:

    is a close personal friend of sir Alan Duncan, who as foreign minister arranged Assange’s eviction from the Ecuadorian embassy.

    And it was previously revealed that the husband of Emma Arbuthnot, the presiding judge in the magistrates court hearings, has connections with defence bodies.

    Epic fight

    American Civil Liberties Union’s Ben Wizner has explained how Assange’s conviction could mean any country in the world can raise charges of espionage against any media outlet in the world:

    Meanwhile Assange’s fiancée Stella Moris starkly commented:

    every generation has an epic fight to fight and this is ours

    On media support (or lack thereof), journalist Glenn Greenwald commented:

    Assange, over the last fifteen years, has broken more major stories and done more consequential journalism than all the corporate journalists who hate him combined. He is not being imprisoned despite his pioneering journalism and dissent from the hegemony of the U.S. security state. He is imprisoned precisely because of that.

    The case against Assange is flawed. Moreover, it’s increasingly clear that US ‘assurances’ are of no value.

    Featured image via Flickr/Cancillería del Ecuador

    By Tom Coburg

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • ‘Heroic’ Colston topplers receive boost from Banksy ahead of trial

    Street artist Banksy will be selling T-shirts to support four people facing trial accused of criminal damage in relation to the toppling of a statue of slave trader Edward Colston.

    Toppled

    The anonymous artist posted on Instagram pictures of limited edition grey souvenir T-shirts. They’ll go on sale on 11 December in Bristol. The shirts have a picture of Colston’s empty plinth with a rope hanging off, with debris and a discarded sign nearby and ‘BRISTOL’ written above.

    Banksy said proceeds from the sale will be given to the four people facing trial next week in Bristol for criminal damage. The topplers have previously been called “heroic”:

    Milo Ponsford, Rhian Graham and Jake Skuse
    Milo Ponsford, Rhian Graham, and Jake Skuse (Ben Birchall/PA)

    A gift from the Bristol-based artist

    In a post on social media, Banksy said:

    Next week the four people charged with pulling down Colston’s statue in Bristol are going on trial.

    I’ve made some souvenir shirts to mark the occasion. Available from various outlets in the city from tomorrow. All proceeds to the defendants so they can go for a pint.

    Bristol-based Banksy said sales would be limited to one per person and each T-shirt would cost £25 plus VAT.

    Sage Willoughby
    Sage Willoughby (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford, Jake Skuse and Sage Willoughby face trial at Bristol Crown Court from 13 December.

    The bronze memorial to the 17th century slave merchant was pulled down during a Black Lives Matter protest on 7 June 2020. It was then dumped in Bristol Harbour and later recovered by Bristol City Council.

    Charges allege that the four defendants damaged the statue without lawful excuse, jointly and with others. The statue of the slave trader is a listed monument belonging to the city council.

    The defendants are accused of committing the offence “intending to destroy or damage such property or being reckless as to whether such property would be destroyed or damaged”.

    A long time coming

    Despite the moral and ethical case for slavery being long-since settled, the statue of Colston remained standing until 2020. It’s unclear how long it would have remained standing if not for the intervention set to be put on trial.

    The Canary has covered the saga of the statue toppling since it first went into the harbour. In June 2021, Eliza Egret wrote:

    “The toppling of the statue came after years of campaigning and protests by Countering Colston and its supporters. The group had previously achieved a number of significant concessions, including the decision by Bristol Music Trust to change the name of the Colston Hall. And after the events in June 2020, a number of buildings and landmarks around Bristol named after the slave-trader finally bowed under pressure to change their names.

    “Glad Colston’s Gone released a statement on the anniversary, saying:

    We…support the anti-racist aims of the protests throughout the summer 2020. We abhor the legacies of institutional and structural racism arising from European colonisation and the trafficking, enslavement and transportation of African men, women and children into plantation slavery in the Caribbean and Americas.”

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • MPs demand inquiry into ‘institutional homophobia’ at Met after Port probe

    A group of London MPs are calling for a public inquiry into claims of institutional homophobia in the Metropolitan Police. It comes after an inquest concluded that failures by officers investigating the victims of serial killer Stephen Port probably cost lives.

    Deadly prejudice?

    Families of the four young gay men killed by sex predator Port have renewed accusations that police prejudice played a part in officers’ failure to listen to their concerns. Margaret Hodge said she and 17 other signatories had written to Met commissioner Cressida Dick demanding that “a public inquiry considers whether the Met is institutionally homophobic”. According to the letter, the Met told Hodge that an inquiry into the issue was not being proposed.

    The letter says:

    The police have admitted their mistakes, instituted new protocols, and emphasised that a lack of resources was to blame. However, resourcing alone does not explain the sheer number of failures by the police in this matter.

    The key question everyone is asking is yet to be answered – whether institutional homophobia in the Met played a role in these investigations.

    The letter concludes that it is “imperative that a public inquiry takes place urgently to consider if institutional homophobia played a role in this case”.

    On 10 December, the inquest jury found officers in Barking, East London, missed repeated opportunities to catch Port. This was after Port drugged first victim Anthony Walgate with a fatal dose of GHB and dumped his body.

    “Litany of failures”

    Port struck three more times before he was caught, killing each victim in near-identical circumstances. But police failed to link him to the other deaths. This was despite detective work carried out by the victims’ family and friends that would lead to the culprit. Officers denied accusations of prejudice and homophobia, instead blaming mistakes on being understaffed and lacking resources, with some acting up in senior positions.

    Jurors at the inquests into the deaths of Walgate, 23, Gabriel Kovari, 22, Daniel Whitworth, 21, and Jack Taylor, 25, concluded police failings “probably” contributed to the deaths of the three last victims.

    The MPs’ letter lists a “litany of failures” by police, including that the individual deaths weren’t properly investigated because “a presumption was made that these were young gay men, some of them ‘rent boys’, who were habitual GHB users and accidentally overdosed”.

    Stephen Port murders
    Daniel Whitworth, Jack Taylor, Anthony Walgate and Gabriel Kovari were Stephen Port’s victims (Handouts/PA)

    MPs wrote:

    Throughout the 12 months the murders took place, family members, partners and friends of the victims were ignored by the police

    The letter also notes that of the 17 officers investigated for misconduct, none were dismissed. Relatives of the victims welcomed jurors’ inquest conclusions. But they were disappointed coroner Sarah Munro QC ruled that, for legal reasons, the jury could not make a finding on the issue of homophobia.

    Port, 46, a bus depot chef, will die in prison after being handed a whole life sentence at the Old Bailey for the murders and a string of sex assaults.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • France may escalate fishing row dispute as deadline passes without UK response

    A Brussels-imposed deadline for solving a post-Brexit fishing row has passed without the UK announcing an agreement.

    There had been suggestions on Friday 10 December that negotiations over fishing licences for small French boats in British waters could reach a resolution. But sources said there was no announcement expected from the UK government as the midnight deadline came and went.

    France had threatened to push the European Union for legal action and trade restrictions against Britain if there was no “sign of goodwill” from Britain by Friday. However, far from showing goodwill, Downing Street had said on Thursday 9 December that it did not recognise the cut-off point.

    “France will never give up its rights”
    France’s maritime minister, Annick Girardin, said on Thursday that if the deadlock remained by Friday night, France would request a meeting of the partnership council to “note the UK’s failure to respect its signature”. The council oversees the implementation of the Brexit agreement. Girardin told a senatorial committee:

    If that is not satisfactory, we ask that litigation proceedings be opened by the European Commission

    She said the proceedings could take “many months”, but “France will never give up its rights”.

    When asked about the negotiations over fishing licences, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs referred to a written statement from Victoria Prentis, a minister at the department. The statement said that trilateral talks with EU and Norway on jointly managed stocks were fruitful, but failed to refer to the France fishing row specifically.

    The European Commission had said it expected the dispute to be resolved by 12am on Friday.

    Punishment

    As a punishment for failing to grant more small fishing boat permits to French boats, French ministers suggested the EU could tell Britain that some of its products could no longer be sold in the bloc.

    The row centres on licences to fish in UK and Channel Islands waters under the terms of Britain’s post-Brexit trade deal with the EU – the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).

    The main source of contention is the number of licences to fish in waters around the British coastline for smaller French vessels that can prove they operated there before Brexit.

    France says Britain has not handed out enough licences to its fishermen. Meanwhile the UK government claims applications have been granted to those who have the correct documentation.

    There are thought to be roughly 100 outstanding fishing licences, from Paris’s perspective.

    Legal proceedings on the horizon

    On Friday, France’s European affairs minister, Clement Beaune, echoed earlier threats to ask the European Commission to start legal proceedings against the UK if it failed to grant more licences to French fishermen.

    But he also suggested the talks could be extended past the deadline as long as the UK shows goodwill by offering “a few dozen extra licences”.

    Speaking to France Info radio Beaune said:

    We won’t get all the licences that we have a right to by tonight.

    If the British say today ‘we’ll give you – and this isn’t a scientific number – a few dozen extra licences as a gesture of good faith to show that the dialogue is bearing fruit and we’re interested in continuing,’ we’ll take that into account and make an evaluation with the European Commission and perhaps we’ll continue.

    But it’s clear now that the UK made no such offer for additional licenses. Discussing the legal action he envisaged, Beaune added:

    A legal procedure does not just involve papers and courts, it’s also measures, for example customs measures, that Europe can take collectively to tell the British in certain sectors ‘since you do not respect the agreement, some of your products are not recognised’.

    Beaune also accused the prime minister of trying to isolate France in the row.

    He said:

    (Boris Johnson) told himself he could isolate the French and divide the Europeans. He didn’t manage and we have re-mobilised.

    Brussels said the dispute must be settled by Friday – but Downing Street said on Thursday it did not recognise the cut-off point

    Beaune said the UK Government’s comment was “surprising”, adding: “It’s not really a sign of trust.”

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • New defence chief lays out a dystopian vision for British military strategy

    More deployments, a more aggressive approach, and more intense state vs state conflict. This is the dystopian vision laid out by the new head of the British military admiral Tony Radakin. He’s the man who just replaced general Nick Carter as chief of the defence staff.

    In a speech at the Royal United Service Institute, Radakin said “British national interest” should become a guiding principle once again. He added that preparing for state-on-state conflict and competition were the order of the day.

    More deployments

    One of his top priorities, Radakin said, is more military deployments:

    It is about having formations, units, platforms, systems and people that are both more deployable and deployed more, whether at home or abroad. This follows from our conclusions about constant strategic competition. We need to be more active and engaged to achieve the deterrence, stability and prosperity at the heart of our national strategy.

    He added that he didn’t want troops frustrated in barracks but out in the world acting as ambassadors:

    Our forces need to be out in the world supporting British interests, deterring and shaping on a continuous basis. This is what our politicians demand, and it gets after the frustrations felt by our people when they find themselves stuck in barracks or delayed by training or equipment when they should be deployed as ambassadors for Global Britain – shaping, training and influencing.

    Industry

    Military forces were a key part of British life, he said. Referring to the military as central to communities around the UK.

    Our air stations and garrisons, our dockyards and training schools, are the life blood of so many communities. We invest billions into aviation, shipbuilding and other high-tech industries, in every region and every community across all of these islands. We’re the experts at levelling up. We’ve been doing it for centuries and we’ll be doing it long into the future.

    Radakin also tried to connect three key Tory slogans to the military’s overall aims. The projects for levelling up, for strengthening the Union, and for a global Britain.

    And it must be recognised that our interests at home and abroad are linked. Global Britain. Levelling Up. Strengthening the Union. These aren’t campaign slogans or catch phrases. They are the policy of the Government and are bound up with our defence and security.

    Powerful?

    Radakin also veered into a rather fantastic vision of Britain as a serious global power. He hyped the country’s alliances and lauded it’s supposed values:

    The rest of the world see us for who we are. A permanent member of the UN Security Council. A nuclear power. A trading power. The world’s fifth largest economy. A strong, powerful country but outward looking, cooperative and generous too.

    The speech overlooked the increased aggression of the UK and her allies in, for example, the Indo-Pacific region. It also overlooked the role of the UK media in the project. For example, this BBC report uncritically hyping the UK foreign policy position which was spotted by investigative journalist John Pilger:

    Fantasy island

    Radakin’s vision is meant to be optimistic. In truth, it looks rather dystopian. It seems to spell more overseas operations despite failure in recent ones like Afghanistan. The arms trade is presented as a point of national pride. A deeper integration of the military into our communities is proposed as a bid to hold a creaking union together. And, above all, it forwards a plan for interacting with the world that’s based on a fantasy vision of British global power.

    Featured image – Wikimedia Commons/PO Phot Si Ethell

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Labour brands investigation a ‘mockery’ as standards adviser demands clarification from PM

    Lord Geidt demanded clarification from No 10 after an Electoral Commission investigation into the refurbishment of Boris Johnson’s flat raised concerns the prime minister may have misled the standards adviser. Downing Street did not deny suggestions Geidt had been angered by the watchdog’s report raising doubts about Johnson’s denial that he knew a Tory peer was behind donations for the works costing more than £112,500.

    Labour has called for the ministerial standards adviser to reopen his investigation into the funding of the lavish renovations over “inconsistencies” between his report and a damning ruling from the Electoral Commission.

    “A mockery”

    It was understood the thinking inside No 10 was that Geidt would not formally reopen his investigation after his latest discussions with Downing Street officials. The prime minister’s official spokesperson said:

    We are liaising with Lord Geidt to answer any further questions he may have but beyond that I wouldn’t get into any private conversations he has with his independent adviser.

    He declined to say whether the peer has been provided with the WhatsApp messages between Johnson and donor lord Brownlow that the Electoral Commission saw and which prompted Labour to accuse the prime minister of lying to the adviser.

    Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner wrote to Geidt calling for him to inspect the apparent contradictions between his report from May and the election watchdog’s report from 9 December, which saw the Tories fined £17,800 for not following the law over donations to cover the work in No 11 from Brownlow. Lord Geidt, however, does not have the power to independently open investigations, with the prime minister rejecting calls to hand the adviser that ability.

    11 Downing Street
    11 Downing Street (Victoria Jones/PA)

    The pressure comes as Johnson faces an investigation into allegations of Covid rule-breaching parties in Downing Street last Christmas and anger from Tory MPs over fresh coronavirus restrictions.

    In a statement, Rayner said:

    We now know that in the days before he imposed the 2021 winter lockdown, the Prime Minister went from allegedly hosting an illegal party in Downing Street to asking super-rich Tory donors to secretly fund the luxury refurb of his flat.

    Not only has the Conservative Party broken the law, but its Prime Minister has made a mockery of the standards we expect.

    If Boris Johnson refuses a fresh investigation, that standard will be lowered significantly – setting the bar woefully low for our country’s public life.

    “Illegal & unethical”

    The Electoral Commission’s report raised further questions by discussing evidence that Johnson had sent the Tory peer a WhatsApp message in November 2020 “asking him to authorise further, at that stage unspecified, refurbishment works on the residence”, to which he agreed. This was despite Johnson having told Geidt he had no knowledge of the payments until immediately prior to media reports in February 2021.

    Johnson’s official spokesman denied Johnson had lied, insisting he has “acted in accordance with the rules at all times”.

    In its defence, Downing Street said Johnson did not know Brownlow was providing the money to the “blind trust” he was organising.

    Former adviser Dominic Cummings has commented on the situation – ‘the trolley’ referring to ‘Boris Johnson’:

    Another complaint

    Meanwhile, the Information Commissioner’s Office said it was asking questions after receiving a complaint over the Cabinet Office saying in a response to a Freedom of Information request from the Times that it had no records of any messages exchanged between Johnson and Brownlow. A statement read:

    We’ve received a complaint regarding the Cabinet Office’s response to a freedom of information request around the renovation of the Downing Street flat, and will be making inquiries

    The Daily Telegraph reported Geidt was on the verge of quitting after the Electoral Commission report was published, in what would be a significant blow to Johnson’s premiership. It would be the second ministerial standards adviser to Johnson to resign amid scandal, after Alex Allan quit in November last year after the PM sided with home secretary Priti Patel when the adviser found she broke the ministerial code with behaviour that amounted to bullying staff.

    Government rolls on

    As reported by The Canary, while Johnson has inflicted numerous scandals upon himself, his government has carried on functioning largely as normal. Sophia Purdy-Moore reported on 9 December that:

    Priti Patel’s controversial nationality and borders bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons on 8 December. International and human rights lawyers have called the legality of the draconian legislation into question.

    She added:

    The bill will allow the home secretary to remove a person’s citizenship without warning. Analysis by the New Statesman found that under the new legislation, two in five racially minoritised Britons could become eligible to be deprived of their citizen status without warning. This is compared to just one in 20 people from a white background.

    Also on 9 December, Purdy-Moore reported:

    The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has published a list of over 200 businesses that have failed to pay their employees the national minimum wage. Low Pay Commission chair Bryan Sanderson stated that the aim of the list is to “help protect low-paid workers from unfair treatment”. But the government needs to do more to protect the rights of vulnerable minimum wage workers.

    On 8 December, Steve Topple reported for The Canary:

    Tory MPs have been recorded groaning and laughing in parliament when a Labour MP was talking about disabled people.

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • High Court hands Priti Patel final decision on US extradition of Julian Assange

    Wikileaks editor Julian Assange has lost his appeal against extradition to the US. Judge Holdroyde ruled that the US appeal was allowed. Assange has been detained in Belmarsh prison since 2019. Prior to that, he was in the Ecuadorian Embassy. The speed of any extradition now appears to depend on home secretary Priti Patel.

    Assange is wanted by the US in connection with the publication of thousands of documents about the Iraq War. Previously a judge ruled against Assange being extradited due to his mental health. The US appealed this decision.

    US journalist Kevin Gosztola was in the courtroom:

    The extradition case will now be handed over to the US Secretary of State:

    It appears that Assange still has options for appeal. Though this is being described as a very serious loss:

    Barrister Adam Wagner tweeted some of the specifics of the decision. The courts claim that the US has provided a satisfactory “package of assurances”.

    Assange’s treatment at the hands of the authorities has been a topic of controversy. In 2020, the Lancet medical journal argued that his treatment amounted to torture and medical neglect.

    Some have argued that due to alleged CIA plans to assassinate Assange, he should not be handed over to the US.

    As Wikileaks pointed out yesterday, the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) share this view:

    For now, Assange’s fate lays with home secretary Priti Patel.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Boris Johnson’s Covid-busting party probe branded a ‘sham’ as new claims emerge

    Fresh claims have emerged over an alleged Christmas bash in No 10 as the prime minister remained under intense pressure. The focus on Boris Johnson’s numerous scandals comes as the government rubber stamped what The Canary described as the “racist immigration bill”.

    “Get a grip”

    A senior Tory MP urged Boris Johnson to “get a grip” on matters following reports that Downing Street’s director of communications made a speech and handed out awards at the event said to have taken place on 18 December 2020. ITV News reported on 9 December that Jack Doyle, who was then deputy director of communications at No 10, addressed up to 50 people at a Christmas gathering said to have been held on that date.

    It’s understood that Doyle spoke to the press office to thank them for their work, as he did every week, and presented some awards to mark the team’s efforts. Downing Street refused to comment further than to say a fact-finding review was ongoing. Doyle has been approached for comment.

    As the new allegations surfaced, a probe into reported Covid-rule busting gatherings in government was branded a “sham” by Labour, while the party’s leader Keir Starmer suggested the PM was not up to the job.

    Meanwhile, Johnson faces the prospect of a growing rebellion over new coronavirus (Covid-19) rules to curb the spread of the Omicron variant, as reports suggest more than 30 MPs may vote against the government next week. The prime minister has been fielding criticism from across the political spectrum in light of allegations that rules were flaunted at the heart of government last year.

    Johnson announced on 8 December that an internal investigation led by Cabinet secretary Simon Case would look into reports of a staff gathering held in Downing Street just days before Christmas, when London was under Tier 3 restrictions. The probe was subsequently widened to include another festive celebration and a reported staff leaving do.

    PACAC hearing
    Simon Case, the Cabinet secretary, is leading an investigation into alleged Covid rule-busting gatherings in Government last year (Aaron Chown/PA)

    Separately, Johnson is facing questions over whether he misled an investigation into donations for refurbishments to his Downing Street flat after the Electoral Commission fined the Tories £17,800. Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner accused Johnsonof having “lied” to his standards adviser lord Geidt by saying he did not know who was behind the payment, but No 10 insisted Johnson had been honest and followed the rules “at all times”.

    Johnson’s former adviser Dominic Cummings claimed that Johnson knew his alleged actions would be illegal:

    “The truth must come out”

    Tory MP Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, who is treasurer of the 1922 Committee, said on 9 December that “the truth must come out” about the various allegations levelled at Downing Street. He told BBC’s Newsnight:

    What we need from all of this is a really straightforward version from the Prime Minister on all of these serious issues – whether it’s by investigation of the most senior (civil) servant Simon Case on the Downing Street parties, whether it’s by investigation by Lord Geidt on the donations to the Downing Street flat – all of these things need to be investigated and the truth must come out.

    Lee Cain resigns
    Jack Doyle in Downing Street (Stefan Rousseau/PA)

    He added:

    The whole parties issue could have been investigated in a day or two, a week or so ago, and the correct version given – whoever it was who organised whatever it is that we don’t know or do know that happened.

    The truth should have been given and then the appropriate action against those who organised these parties – if that’s what they were, or gatherings… the appropriate disciplinary action should have been taken.

    And I think now as other commentators have said, the Prime Minister needs to get a grip on all of these matters.

    Following the latest claims, Rayner said:

    As more details emerge about the Downing Street Christmas party, the Government’s internal investigation has been exposed as the sham it is. The investigation has only just published its terms of reference and we are already seeing more details from the media than the Cabinet Office about the parties.

    Alongside the alleged 18 December party, Case will include in his review a confirmed gathering at the Department for Education’s (DfE) Whitehall headquarters on 10 December last year, and a reported leaving event for a No 10 aide – allegedly attended by Boris Johnson – on November 27. The terms of reference for the investigation said “where there are credible allegations relating to other gatherings, these may be investigated”.

    The two December dates coincide with when mixing between households in London was restricted, with England in a month-long lockdown during November.

    Case’s inquiry was ordered by Johnson after a leaked video emerged showing Downing Street aides laughing about a “fictional” party at No 10 in December 2020.

    Government rolls on

    As reported by The Canary, while Johnson has inflicted numerous scandals upon himself, his government has carried on functioning largely as normal. Sophia Purdy-Moore reported on 9 December that:

    Priti Patel’s controversial nationality and borders bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons on 8 December. International and human rights lawyers have called the legality of the draconian legislation into question.

    She added:

    The bill will allow the home secretary to remove a person’s citizenship without warning. Analysis by the New Statesman found that under the new legislation, two in five racially minoritised Britons could become eligible to be deprived of their citizen status without warning. This is compared to just one in 20 people from a white background.

    Also on 9 December, Purdy-Moore reported:

    The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has published a list of over 200 businesses that have failed to pay their employees the national minimum wage. Low Pay Commission chair Bryan Sanderson stated that the aim of the list is to “help protect low-paid workers from unfair treatment”. But the government needs to do more to protect the rights of vulnerable minimum wage workers.

    On 8 December, Steve Topple reported for The Canary:

    Tory MPs have been recorded groaning and laughing in parliament when a Labour MP was talking about disabled people.

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Tenants face serious ill health and ‘postcode lottery’ over standard of their homes

    Private sector rental tenants face a “postcode lottery” over the standard of their homes, the chair of a powerful committee which scrutinises government spending has said.

    ‘Society’s most vulnerable suffer the most’

    The comment was made by Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), as a report from the National Audit Office (NAO) said regulation in England is not effective in ensuring the sector is consistently fair for renters or that housing is safe and secure.

    There are an estimated 4.4 million privately rented households in England – and the system relies heavily on tenants being able to enforce their own rights, the NAO said. While most tenants have a good experience of renting, some can end up suffering serious illness as a result of poor quality housing, financial issues due to overcharging, or even homelessness as a result of poor conduct by landlords and letting agents.

    The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) does not yet have a detailed plan to address the problems that renters face, the NAO added.

    Dame Meg Hillier
    Meg Hillier said private tenants face a postcode lottery over the standard of their homes (PA)

    Hillier said:

    Private tenants face a postcode lottery over the standard of their homes, and it’s often society’s most vulnerable who suffer the most.

    The department’s approach to regulation has been piecemeal and it’s been hamstrung by a worrying lack of data.

    The department needs to bring some order to the chaos and set out a clear vision for the private rental market and ensure that the growing number of tenants whose only prospect of long term housing is in the private rented sector are better supported.

    The NAO said privately rented properties are less likely to comply with safety requirements than other types of housing, and are more likely to be classified as non-decent.

    An estimated 13% of private rented homes (589,000 properties) have at least one category one hazard – a serious threat to health and safety – with associated costs to the NHS estimated at £340m per year. This compares with 10% of owner-occupied homes and 5% of social housing.

    In addition, an estimated 23% of private rented homes are classified as non-decent – meaning they potentially have a hazard of immediate threat to a person’s health, they are not in reasonable state of repair, they are lacking in modern facilities, or they are not effectively insulated or heated.

    DLUHC has taken a piecemeal approach – including requiring letting agents to be part of approved redress schemes, a ban on charging letting fees to tenants, and temporary restrictions on evictions during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, the watchdog said.

    But the Department does not yet have a strategy for what it wants the regulation of the sector to look like as a whole, it said.

    Lacking

    DLUHC lacks data on key issues where action may be required, such as on harassment, evictions, disrepair that is not being addressed, or on the costs to landlords of complying with obligations, the NAO added. It also has limited data on what tools and approaches are used by local authorities, and therefore cannot meaningfully analyse which are more effective at improving compliance and protecting tenants, the report said.

    The system relies heavily on tenants enforcing their own rights and negotiating with landlords directly or going to court, the NAO argued.

    In 2018, DLUHC introduced mandatory redress arrangements for letting agency work, but landlords are not required to be members of a redress scheme. Some households also experience discrimination, with an estimated 25% of landlords in England being unwilling to let to non-UK passport holders, and 52% unwilling to let to those on housing benefit, the NAO said.

    The department is planning to introduce reforms to the private rented sector and has committed to produce a white paper in 2022.

    A “clear strategy” is needed

    Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said:

    The proportion of private renters living in properties that are unsafe or fail the standards for a decent home is concerning. The Government relies on these tenants being able to enforce their own rights, but they face significant barriers to doing so.

    The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities should improve the quality of its data and insight into the private rented sector, so that it can oversee the regulation of the sector more effectively. It should develop a clear strategy to meet its aim of providing a better deal for renters.

    Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA), said:

    We support the NAO’s call for a more strategic approach. There is a pressing need for a better evidence base to ensure the system focuses on rooting out criminal and rogue landlords who bring the sector into disrepute.

    Too often councils focus much of their time regulating compliant landlords who are easy to find.

    He added:

    We are calling for the development of a meaningful national redress scheme for the sector as part of the Government’s forthcoming white paper on rental reform.

    Alicia Kennedy, director of Generation Rent, said:

    As part of its reforms the Government must require all landlords to register their properties. This would help the Government and councils gather better data about the sector, improve enforcement of the law and give renters better access to redress when things go wrong.

    A Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities spokesperson said:

    We welcome this report. Conditions in the private rented sector are not good enough and we need stronger regulation and reform to ensure everyone has a safe and decent place to live.

    We are taking action to raise standards by driving out rogue landlords and strengthening councils’ enforcement powers but we must go further. Our forthcoming white paper will set out comprehensive reforms to create a fairer private rented sector for all.

    David Renard, the Local Government Association’s housing spokesperson said:

    Councils want all tenants to be able to live in safe and secure, high-quality housing and can play a key role in driving up standards in the private rented sector.

    With more powers such as the freedom to establish landlord licensing schemes, councils would be better placed to support a good quality local private rented offer in their communities.

    Matthew Pennycook, shadow housing and planning minister, said:

    Instead of dragging its feet, the Government needs to prioritise the development of a strategy for protecting tenants’ rights and accelerate work on its promised Renters’ Reform Bill.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Government unveils ban on trophy hunting imports but campaigners denounce delays

    The government has announced long-awaited plans to ban the import of hunting trophies from endangered animals, with campaigners welcoming the measures but denouncing delays.

    More delays

    The proposed law – which will prevent British big game hunters from bringing home body parts of some 7,000 species including lions, rhinos, elephants, and polar bears – comes two years after the government pledged to introduce the ban. Since then, around 300 trophies from endangered animals have been shipped to the UK, according to the Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting.

    The campaign’s founder Eduardo Goncalves noted that the government has not specified a timetable for implementing the legislation. He told the PA news agency:

    The Bill, as far as we’ve seen, looks to be in pretty good shape, but it has been two years since it was originally announced in the Queen’s Speech, and many animals have been cruelly and needlessly killed in that time.

    So it is really imperative for the Government to bring the Bill to Parliament as quickly as possible.

    Goncalves said ministers had told him the bill could come to Parliament next “spring or summer”, by which time “potentially another 100 or more animals will be killed and their trophies brought back to Britain”.

    He said:

    Delay costs lives: every week that goes by without this ban means more animals, including endangered species, are being shot by British hunters, and their trophies brought back to the country. Some of these species are careering towards extinction and certainly, the British public are very strongly opposed to trophy hunting.

    Hunting trophies
    Trophy hunters kill wild animals for recreation and display their spoils – such as horns, antlers, hides or heads (Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting/PA)

    “Long overdue”

    Dr Mark Jones, head of policy at animal charity Born Free, echoed the need for urgency.

    He told PA:

    This announcement is long overdue, and we urge the Government to introduce and implement the legislation as quickly as possible.

    The campaigners urged the government to speed things up by supporting Labour MP John Spellar’s bid to introduce legislation when his Private Member’s Bill to ban hunting trophy imports returns to the House of Commons on 10 December. But Jones said that was unlikely, and that the government was expected to table the bill as part of its Animals Abroad Bill next year.

    The ban is set to be one of the toughest in the world, according to environment secretary George Eustice, who said it would go beyond the government’s manifesto commitment by including near-threatened and threatened species, as well as endangered ones. He said:

    We will be leading the way in protecting endangered animals and helping to strengthen and support long-term conservation

    A less than total ban

    The ban is set to apply whether or not a trophy has been obtained from a wild animal or one bred in captivity specifically for the purpose of trophy hunting. Breaching the rules could land hunters in prison for up to five years.

    Campaigners said they would have preferred a total ban on the import of hunting trophies on moral and ethical grounds rather than the government’s focus on threatened animals.

    Jones said:

    We’re very pleased to see the UK finally promising this kind of action – doesn’t go as far as we’d like it to go, but it’s certainly a very big step in the right direction.

    In this day and age, with biodiversity and wildlife in crisis and so many species at risk of extinction, we have to move away from this kind of colonial paradigm that the only way to realise value for wildlife is to allow relatively wealthy, western hunters to pay to kill it.

    Goncalves said:

    My ideal would have been a total ban, but if we were to score this like a school paper, I would give it an A-.

    He said he hoped the bill would initiate international action, with Britain working with other countries to call for an end to trophy hunting worldwide.

    To raise pressure on MPs to enforce the ban, his Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting is sending them a book with photos of British hunters and their spoils. He said:

    There is sometimes a misperception that trophy hunting is what Americans do. The reality is that British trophy hunters are among the world’s most notorious elephant hunters.

    Original plans for the new law banning hunting trophies were sparked by the shooting of Cecil the Lion in 2015 by American dentist Walter Palmer at a reserve in Zimbabwe. In 2019, the government consulted on a ban which received overwhelming public support. Writing for The Canary, Tracy Keeling has written extensively on the delay since then. She’s also reported on the ivory trade, writing in August this year:

    A group of NGOs recently wrote to the government over the unjustifiable delay. As they point out, other countries have since taken steps “to introduce domestic ivory trade bans”. So, rather than being a ‘world leader’ on the matter, the UK now risks lagging behind others in cracking down on the trade.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The government isn’t doing enough to protect exploited minimum wage workers

    The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has published a list of over 200 businesses that have failed to pay their employees the national minimum wage. Low Pay Commission chair Bryan Sanderson stated that the aim of the list is to “help protect low-paid workers from unfair treatment”. But the government needs to do more to protect the rights of vulnerable minimum wage workers.

    Widespread exploitation of minimum wage workers

    Investigations by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) conducted between 2014 and 2019 identified 208 firms that failed to pay £1.2m to 12,000 workers, breaking national minimum wage laws.

    37% of companies listed were found to have wrongly deducted pay from workers’ wages, including for uniforms. 29% failed to pay employees for every hour they spent working, such as during mandatory training or trial shifts. 16% paid the incorrect apprenticeship rate. 11% failed to increase wages in line with the minimum wage increase, or paid younger workers at a lower rate.

    House of Fraser, Schuh and Waterstones are among the UK employers named. House of Fraser failed to pay £16,235.19 to 354 employees. Schuh failed to pay £807.38 to 39 staff. And Waterstones failed to pay nearly £8,700 to 58 staff.

    The national minimum wage for workers over the age of 23 is currently just £8.91. After years of wage stagnation and rising living prices, the Trade Union Congress TUC has argued the government needs to raise the legal minimum wage. It says it should be at least £10 per hour to avoid more workers being pushed into poverty. This makes employers’ theft of workers’ wages all the more appalling. £8,000 is pocket change for these corporations, but could be make or break for their minimum wage employees.

    In August 2021, the government published another list which “named and shamed” 191 businesses found to be breaking the minimum wage law. Employers on this list included John Lewis, Sheffield United, and The Body Shop International. HMRC found that companies owed a staggering £2.1m to more than 34,000 workers. Together, these lists demonstrate just how widespread the exploitation of minimum wage workers is.

    The government must do more

    TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady told the Independent:

    Every worker deserves fair pay for their work. There’s no excuse for not paying the minimum wage. Firms who cheat staff out of their hard-earned money deserve to be named and shamed.

    She added:

    We also need to see prosecutions and higher fines for the most serious offenders, especially those who deliberately flout the law. Minimum wage underpayment is still far too common in Britain.

    Although 6,500 breaches had been identified, as of August 2021, courts had prosecuted just six employers for paying employees below the minimum wage in the last six years.

    The government has ordered guilty employers to repay their employees. But if the government is serious about tackling the widespread exploitation of minimum wage workers, it must protect them by strengthening workers’ rights, supporting trade unions, and outlawing zero-hours contracts. ‘Naming and shaming’ companies isn’t enough. The government must hold these wage thieves to account.

    Featured image via Christopher Bill/Unsplash

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Ireland to raise concerns with UK over border demands for non-Irish citizens

    Ireland’s tánaiste (deputy prime minister) Leo Varadkar, has said he’ll raise concerns with the UK government over proposed post-Brexit arrangements to cross the border in Ireland. Under the Nationality and Borders Bill any non-Irish or non-UK citizens would need to apply for an Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) to enter the UK, including the north of Ireland.

    The bill is currently going through the House of Commons.

    Sinn Féin TD (Irish MP) Pearse Doherty raised the matter with Varadkar in the Dáil (Irish parliament) on Thursday, saying it was a “disgrace”, claiming it threatened livelihoods and the tourism sector in the north-west and placed stress on residents. Doherty said:

    It undermines the Good Friday Agreement and the Common Travel Area and Ireland once again faces the prospect of the collateral damage of a Tory government in Westminster that doesn’t give a damn about Ireland and it’s so divorced from the reality of life on the border that it could even countenance such a measure like this,

    He pressed Varadkar to “make it absolutely clear to the British government that this is not on”. Varadkar said the Irish government would communicate its concerns and objections to the measure to the UK.

    He added:

    Unfortunately, it doesn’t come as a huge surprise,

    If you recall, part of the argument in favour of Brexit was about controlling their borders, and also about reducing and stopping immigration from the European Union, and this is part of the outworking of that.

    It may be the case that some people who voted for Brexit didn’t realise that but it is part of the outworking of Brexit that the United Kingdom is going to harden its borders and is going to reduce immigration, including from the European Union.

    Ending free movement was a big part of the argument that they made. But we will absolutely be making our views known.

    Featured image via – Tiocfaidh ár lá 1916

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • While we were distracted by No 10’s Christmas party, the government rubber-stamped its racist immigration bill

    While UK headlines were concerned with prime minister Boris Johnson’s 2020 Christmas party, home secretary Priti Patel’s controversial nationality and borders bill passed its third reading in the House of Commons on 8 December. International and human rights lawyers have called the legality of the draconian legislation into question. MPs and campaigners took to Twitter to speak out against the bill, labelling it racist and inhumane.

    A Tory majority in parliament

    Announcing the results of the Commons vote, Coventry South MP Zarah Sultana tweeted:

    Indeed, 298 MPs voted in support of the controversial bill, while only 231 voted against it. This gave the government a 67 vote majority. Sharing the devastating news, Poplar and Limehouse MP Apsana Begum – who had tabled an amendment to the draconian bill – said:

    Sending solidarity to those impacted by the bill, writer Ilyas Nagdee shared:

    A racist immigration bill
    The bill will allow the home secretary to remove a person’s citizenship without warning. Analysis by the New Statesman found that under the new legislation, two in five racially minoritised Britons could become eligible to be deprived of their citizen status without warning. This is compared to just one in 20 people from a white background. According to Institute of Race Relations vice-chair Francis Weber: 
    People with ethnic minority heritage become, effectively, sort of second-class citizens.

    Linking this to the government’s longstanding ‘hostile environment’, Black Lives Matter UK tweeted:

    Lamenting the limited coverage of the legislation which could impact the lives of countless racially minoritised Britons, Mish Rahman tweeted:

    The bill will also empower the home secretary to remove the citizenship of anyone who also has citizenship in another country. This has the potential to continue rendering them stateless. Highlighting the unprecedented case of Shamima Begum, journalist Ash Sarkar said:

    Inhumane legislation

    Ahead of the Commons vote, a Lords committee questioned the legality of the home secretary’s bill. Peers raised particular concerns about Patel’s plan to make border force officials push boats crossing the Channel back into French waters. The inhumane bill will grant immunity to border force staff if people die in these dangerous operations, while criminalising anyone trying to help drowning refugees and asylum seekers.

    The Insider news fellow Bethany Dawson tweeted:

    The United Nations Refugee Agency warns that the bill “would penalise most refugees seeking asylum in the country”. And said it could create a model that “undermines established international refugee protection rules and practices”. Due to its multiple breaches of international and human rights law, Patel’s bill will likely come up against further legal challenges.

    Take a stand against the bill

    Calling on opponents of the overtly racist bill to “resist by any means necessary“, campaign group Movement for Justice shared:

    Highlighting the need for broad-based collective action against the draconian bill and the encroaching carceral state, Garden Court Law barrister Zehrah Hasan shared:

    Additionally, media campaign group, Media Diversified is pushing for people to mobilise against the bill and sign the its petition:

    Indeed, from the racist immigration bill to the anti-protest policing bill, the Tories are trying to push through the most oppressive legislation we have seen in recent history. We must unite to fight the government’s populist, authoritarian, ultra-nationalistic agenda before it’s too late.

    Featured image via UK Parliament/YouTube

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Met decision not investigate the Downing Street party has confused and angered people

    Police won’t investigate the party which allegedly took place at No 10 in December 2020. The lockdown soiree is causing a major headache for Tories because it would have breached coronavirus (Covid-19) rules in place at the time. This was also a time when millions of people sacrificed time with family and were restricted from attending funerals to follow lockdown rules and protect the NHS.

    Already senior communications advisor Allegra Stratton has resigned over the row. PM Boris Johnson is also under pressure to go. Yet the police won’t touch it. They say they don’t do retrospective investigations in cases of this kind. And now people are questioning the very concepts of crime and time.

    All crime matters

    Angry citizens have been airing their concerns on social media. A Twitter user called Foxy got straight to the point. Because, until time travel is invented, all investigations are retrospective:

    Another Twitter user, Roger Call, raised more bread and butter concerns in quite a sarcastic and satirical manner:

    This other contributor responded with a timely meme of Met chief Cressida Dick as a clairvoyant:

    Time cops

    Twitter user Hira pondered how frustrating it must be for cops to never be able to investigate crime that has already happened:

    While this Twitter user offered some practical advice: if arrested, just point out that your crime had happened at some point in the past and therefore can’t be investigated:

    Sky‘s Beth Rigby tweeted the Met’s full statement about investigations – or lack of them.

    Rigby’s tweet is itself slightly ironic. The journalist was taken off air last year for attending a party in breach of coronavirus rules.

    The sacrifices people made

    As the latest scandal has played out, many people have come forward to talk about the sacrifices they made during the 2020 Christmas lockdown. People like Rosie, who had a child during the restrictions:

    Twitter user Kojo Richmond said that there was no way the breach should go unpunished after what regular people had to endure:

    Rebecca Fewtrell tweeted about her anger at the government. Her 38 year old husband had passed away before Christmas. She and her young child were left to deal with their grief in an isolating lockdown.

    We know it’s always been one rule for the ruling class and another for us. But never has that fact been as stark as this week amid the new revelations. While Britain suffered, the Tories appear to have flouted the rules they themselves imposed. And that needs to be dealt with.

    Featured image – Wikimedia Commons/Sgt Tom Robinson RLC.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Covid Pass hit with technical errors hours after Plan B announcement

    The NHS Covid Pass experienced technical difficulties on Wednesday hours after the prime minister announced a move to Plan B in England. Users reported on social media being unable to download their domestic or travel passes from the NHS England app.

    Those who tried to download the domestic pass were faced with a loading screen before it diverted to a page outlining how to get the pass.

    NHS Covid Pass problems
    An error message is seen on the NHS Covid Pass (PA)

    “An unexpected error has occurred”

    Others wanting to download their travel pass were presented with a message which said: “An unexpected error has occurred.”

    Some users said they got a message which said:

    Please try again later. There are currently issues with accessing the Covid Pass on the NHS app and website. We are investigating the issue and will update as soon as we can.

    It comes hours after Boris Johnson announced England would be moving into Plan B following a spike in cases of the Omicron variant of coronavirus.

    Investigation underway

    The NHS Covid Pass, which can be obtained by having two vaccines or a negative lateral flow test, will be introduced for entry into nightclubs and other large venues from December 15. The passes can be downloaded from the NHS app and saved onto mobile phones or saved as a PDF and printed off. They last for 30 days.

    A statement from NHS Digital said:

    We are aware of an issue affecting access to the NHS Covid Pass on the NHS App and website. We are investigating this as a priority and will update as soon as we can.

    A further statement issued later added: “

    We are continuing to investigate the current issues with the NHS COVID Pass and will provide an update as soon as possible. We apologise for any issues this may have caused and appreciate your patience as we work to resolve it.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Foreign secretary admits £400m owed to Iran from the 70s is a legitimate debt

    Liz Truss has said the £400m that Britain owes Iran is a “legitimate debt” that the government wants to pay.

    A long time coming

    The foreign secretary was asked about the amount at a Chatham House event on 8 December, where she set out her foreign policy aims. Truss said the government was going to “work night and day to prevent the Iranian regime from ever getting a nuclear weapon”. But she said they were also working to “resolve the issue” over the debt. It relates to a cancelled order for 1,500 Chieftain tanks dating back to the 1970s. And it’s been linked to the continued detention of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and other UK-Iranian dual nationals held in Iran.

    Truss said:

    We do want to pay this debt, we recognise it’s a legitimate debt.

    But of course, there are lots of issues, which I’m sure you are quite well aware of.

    She added that she had spoken to her Iranian counterpart, but said of paying back our debts:

    It is not simple, for various reasons.

    She added:

    I’m also pressing for the return of our unfairly detained British nationals, including Nazanin.

    Iran nuclear deal

    Truss also warned Iran that a meeting in Vienna on 9 December was the country’s “last chance” to revive a nuclear deal. The foreign secretary previously said a meeting at the end of November was the country’s last opportunity to agree to the original JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, known as the Iran nuclear deal).

    Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe detained
    Richard Ratcliffe held a hunger strike outside the Foreign Office (Aaron Chown/PA)

    On 8 December, she said:

    This is really the last chance for Iran to sign up, and I strongly urge them to do that, because we are determined to work with our allies to prevent Iran securing nuclear weapons.

    So they do need to sign up to the JCPOA agreement. It’s in their interest.

    Iran has ramped up its uranium enrichment since the US, under former president Donald Trump’s leadership, withdrew from the landmark nuclear agreement between world powers and Iran in 2018.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Legality, safety, and rationality of ‘pushing back’ migrant boats questioned by Lords committee

    The legality of Priti Patel’s plans to turn back migrant boats at sea has been called into question by peers including senior lawyers and a former judge.

    “Concerns”

    The Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee has written to the home secretary expressing “concerns” over the legal basis for the so-called ‘pushbacks’. The letter adds to “growing concern both in and outside Parliament” over the policy proposed in a bid to curb Channel crossings, peers said.

    It comes as the Nationality and Borders Bill is being considered by MPs in the Commons. It’s at report stage for a second day before it gets a third reading. Patel insisted the plan has a “legal basis” when questioned by the committee in October. That’s despite concerns being repeatedly raised over its legality and effectiveness which prompted campaigners to threaten her with legal action.

    The Home Office’s permanent secretary Matthew Rycroft previously conceded that only a “small proportion” of boats could be turned back.

    The committee’s Liberal Democrat chairwoman, former solicitor baroness Sally Hamwee, said:

    Statements, including from the Home Secretary, are that there is a legal basis for the policy of so-called ‘turnarounds’. We question that.

    The so-called ‘turnaround’ policy would force fragile small boats crossing the Channel to turn back. It is hard to imagine a situation in which those in them would not be in increased danger or where captains would not be obliged to render assistance.

    Instead, the Home Secretary has set a policy of forcing them to turn around. Even if there is a domestic legal basis, if it were actually implemented, it would almost certainly contravene the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

    Policing borders should be done in full accordance with the principles of national and international law, and we look forward to full engagement with our questions.

    English Channel migrant deaths
    A campaigner wearing a Priti Patel mask tears up an ‘I Welcome Refugees’ placard (Victoria Jones/PA)

    “Not the solution”

    Labour members baroness Shami Chakrabarti, a barrister and former director of human rights group Liberty, and ex-home secretary lord David Blunkett; Conservative member and solicitor baroness Fiona Shackleton, and retired Court of Appeal judge and crossbench peer baroness Heather Hallett also sit on the committee.

    Its letter asks under what powers the tactics could be used as the law stands currently. The letter calls for a response from the Home Office by 5 January. The committee said it “fully” endorses a report published last week by another group of MPs and peers which found the tactic could endanger lives and is likely to breach human rights laws.

    The turnaround tactics are “not the solution” and will “do the opposite of what is required to save lives”, the Joint Committee on Human Rights said.

    It described the proposed Bill as “littered” with measures which are “simply incompatible” with the UK’s international obligations.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.