UK - England, Wales, N.Ireland, Scotland

[keith]

King Chuck

Never never never "Chuck", that's purely American, not used in the Old Country. Either Charlie or Chas (rhymes with jazz, based on an old convention of abbreviating given names on signs and in documents, in this case Charles–>Cha^s).

Kind of amusing to watch the frenzy. I’m waiting for a mob to descend on Windsor to demand proof of life.

Perhaps the mob will chase the king away ("you murdered (future) Queen Catherine, is Henry VIII your role model?") and he'll be forced to hide somewhere obscure, perhaps up a tree in Worcestershire like the previous King Charles?

Lots of Aussies call him Chuck or less often Chuckie

[Sam the Centipede]

Thx keith, I've never been to Oz and I never noticed that in my contacts with Ozzies in Yurrp or via Strine language meejah.

I wonder what they'd have called Charles if that suggestion in the 1970s or 80s that he could obtain work experience by becoming Governor-General of Australia had happened?

Background for those unfamiliar with British Empire politics: the G-G is appointed by and represents the British monarch, (still) the head of state of Australia. The G-G can dismiss the government (that's not the same as dissolving the parliament, it's sacking the prime minister etc.), as happened in … looks it up … in 1975*, causing, I believe, some annoyance amongst the colonials.

Imagine if the President had similar powers in the USA!

The current king was known occasionally as "Brian" (the old queen was "Brenda") because the satircal magazine Private Eye used those labels, claiming that they were code among staff at royal palaces. The code allowed to could have an exchange: "when is Brenda returning?", "at three o'clock, but Brian will be back an hour earlier." while that people overhearing (tourists, etc.) would be unaware of the significance. Or that was my recollection of the back-story: Wikipedia says differently:

Elizabeth II was regularly referred to as "Brenda" and Charles III as "Brian". Historically, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh was "Keith", Princess Margaret (Brenda's younger sister) was "Yvonne", and Diana, Princess of Wales, was "Cheryl" – a satire on the perceived nature of Royal affairs as a soap opera.[

Who knows? Who cares?
____________
* National Museum Australia: Whitlam dismissal

[RTH10260]

P&O Ferries has paid some crew less than half UK minimum wage
Company is using legal loophole UK government promised to close two years ago, Guardian analysis suggests

Simon Goodley
Mon 18 Mar 2024 17.30 CET

P&O Ferries, which controversially sacked about 800 workers in 2022, has paid some crew members less than half the UK minimum wage thanks to an ongoing legal loophole the British government promised to close two years ago.

Agency workers at the company, which is owned by the Dubai-based DP World, have in some cases been earning about £4.87 an hour – even lower than the £5.15 an hour the company suggested was its lowest pay rate – an analysis of recent payslips conducted by the Guardian and ITV News suggests.

The low-cost crew, who replaced many of the workers P&O axed two years ago, are being hired from countries including India, the Philippines and Malaysia.

They are understood to be working 12-hour daily shifts, without a day off for months at a time, on the Dover to Calais route. One worker described the whole experience as like being in “jail”.

Grant Shapps, who was the UK’s transport secretary when P&O fired its workers in March 2022, had promised to legislate to improve pay for cross-Channel ferry workers. At the time he accused the ferry company of operating like “pirates of the high sea” and wrote to the company to state: “This government will not stand by while the requirement to treat seafarers with due respect and fairness is brazenly ignored.”

While the British government has so far failed to deliver legally binding pay rates equivalent to the UK minimum wage, the French government is poised this week to make its own response to P&O’s sackings, with the introduction of legislation that will force cross-Channel operators to pay their workers the French minimum wage of at least €11.65 (£9.95) an hour.

The UK minimum wage now stands at £10.42 an hour and will rise to £11.44 an hour from April – but the rates do not apply to maritime workers employed by an overseas agency who work on foreign-registered ships in international waters.



https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... nimum-wage

[RTH10260]

Unions condemn Tata Steel decision to shut Port Talbot coke ovens early
Unite calls for strike action after firm had previously said closure of blast furnaces would happen by end of year

Alex Lawson
Mon 18 Mar 2024 17.00 CET

Tata Steel has abruptly announced it will cease operations of coke ovens at its Port Talbot plant in south Wales, a move condemned by one union as a “massive blow”.

The steelmaker, owned by the Indian conglomerate Tata, said it had made the decision after a “deterioration of operational stability”. The move is likely to impact about 200 workers, but the immediate impact remains uncertain.

Unions said the announcement had come months earlier than they had anticipated. Alun Davies, Community’s national officer for steel, said: “The early closure of the coke ovens is a massive blow but we knew they have been deteriorating and our No 1 concern is the safety of our members.”

The Unite union is calling for strike action over Tata’s proposals. Its regional secretary for Wales, Peter Hughes, said: “Tata needs to halt its plans and wait for Labour’s promised £3bn to reinvigorate the UK’s steel industry.

“The time to fight for Port Talbot is now, which is why we are urging Tata’s workers to vote yes to strike action.”

In January, Tata Steel said it would shut down its two blast furnaces in Britain by the end of this year, putting close to 3,000 direct jobs at risk, as part of a plan to turn around its loss-making UK steelmaking business by switching to lower carbon electric arc furnaces.

Coke ovens are manufacturing plants used to heat coal to make a hard residue called coke, a fuel with high carbon content and few impurities that is a key raw material in steelmaking. The ovens had been due to close by June.



https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... n-expected

[northland10]

Imagine if the President had similar powers in the USA!

That'd be a neat trick. Since the President is also the head if the government (chief executive), the President would have to dismiss... checks notes... the President.

[Sam the Centipede]

Imagine if the President had similar powers in the USA!

That'd be a neat trick. Since the President is also the head if the government (chief executive), the President would have to dismiss... checks notes... the President.

But dissolving the parliament, i.e. the senate and house of representatives? Or not accepting the results of elections?

[northland10]

Imagine if the President had similar powers in the USA!

That'd be a neat trick. Since the President is also the head if the government (chief executive), the President would have to dismiss... checks notes... the President.

But dissolving the parliament, i.e. the senate and house of representatives? Or not accepting the results of elections?

I replied about the head of government part which is a Prime Minister because you had said:

The G-G can dismiss the government (that's not the same as dissolving the parliament, it's sacking the prime minister etc.)

You were not saying the G-G can dissolve parliament. In a British-based parliament, the PM is a party leader, a MOP, and heads the government. To dismiss the government means to dismiss the Prime Minister from his government role, though they remain a MOP (along with the cabinet ministers).

In their terminology, IIRC, the "government" referred to above would be our executive branch. We change our governments on a scheduled basis, and can do it as often as every 4 years (or every at the most).

I think a certain candidate would love to have the power to dissolve Congress. There are probably many presidents who have had days they would have liked Congress to go away but would never suggest that out loud.

[Volkonski]

Catherine, Princess of Wales, Has Cancer

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/03/22 ... ton-cancer

Catherine, Princess of Wales, has been diagnosed with cancer and has begun chemotherapy, she announced in a video message on Friday, in which she described the past two months as “incredibly tough for our entire family.”

Her diagnosis follows that of King Charles III, who announced his own cancer diagnosis and treatment in early February. It comes after a period of intense uncertainty about the health of Catherine, who underwent abdominal surgery in January and largely disappeared from public view as she tried to recuperate.

Like the king, Catherine, 42, did not specify what kind of cancer she has, but asked the public and news media to respect her desire for privacy.

“We hope that you will understand that, as a family, we now need some time, space and privacy while I complete my treatment,” said Catherine, who is the wife of Prince William and a future queen.

“This of course came as a huge shock,” Catherine said, “and William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately for the sake of our young family. As you can imagine, this has taken time.”

Catherine’s announcement is a grim coda to a period of increasingly wild rumors about her health and well-being. But it plunges the British royal family into a period of even deeper uncertainty, with both the 75-year-old monarch and his daughter-in-law, the wife of his eldest son and heir and the mother of Prince George, the second in line to throne, facing grave health problems.

[MsDaisy 2]

Very sad, I wish her all the best!

[AndyinPA]

[Ben-Prime]

I wish her a total recovery.

But I'm not going to lie and pretend I didn't see the brief period last week where a certain segment of the Royal Media Industrial Complex actually took the "we blame Harry and Meghan for causing so much stress" story line for a trot.

[RTH10260]

Details of millions of UK voters accessed by Chinese state, ministers will say
Deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden to update MPs on cyber-attacks by Beijing, some of whom may also have been targets

Cash Boyle
Mon 25 Mar 2024 01.11 CET

The personal details of millions of voters are believed to have been accessed in an attack by China on Britain’s democratic process, ministers will say.

MPs and peers are thought to be among 43 people who the government looks set to confirm have been targeted by cyber-attacks backed by the Chinese state. The UK could impose sanctions on individuals believed to be involved in these acts of state-backed interference, one of which was a separate attack on the Electoral Commission in which Beijing accessed the personal details of about 40 million voters.

Ministers will set out full details on Monday, with the deputy prime minister, Oliver Dowden, expected to tell parliament that Beijing is behind this wave of cyber-attacks.

With the UK under pressure to respond, multiple reports suggested that sanctions against individuals thought to be connected with the alleged activity are under strong consideration.

A small group of politicians who are hawkish on China are said to have been called to a briefing by parliament’s director of security, Alison Giles, in relation to the activity.

They include former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former minister Tim Loughton, the crossbench peer Lord Alton and the SNP MP Stewart McDonald, the Times reported.

The four are members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (Ipac) pressure group, which focuses on issues involving the increasingly assertive Asian power.

Some of those affected are understood to be preparing to jointly address the matter publicly on Monday. A government spokesperson refused to comment on Sunday.

At an Ipac meeting on Friday, Luke de Pulford, its executive director, said: “About a year ago the Belgian and French foreign ministries publicly confirmed [Chinese state] sponsored cyber-attacks against our members.

“Other countries have done the same privately. Beijing has made no secret of their desire to attack foreign politicians who dare to stand up to them.”



https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... s-will-say

[RTH10260]

Tories delete Sadiq Khan attack ad showing New York instead of London
Footage of people panicking, designed to attack the London mayor’s record on crime, was filmed in a New York subway station

Donna Ferguson
Tue 26 Mar 2024 00.15 CET

The Conservatives have deleted an online video that used scenes of a panicked crowd at a New York subway station to criticise Sadiq Khan’s record on crime in London.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ork-london

[keith]

Background for those unfamiliar with British Empire politics: the G-G is appointed by

Sorta. The Monarch must appoint the person nominated by the Aussie Government

and represents the British monarch,

Yes

(still) the head of state of Australia.

The Monarch is the Head of State of Australia.

The G-G can dismiss the government (that's not the same as dissolving the parliament, it's sacking the prime minister etc.), as happened in … looks it up … in 1975*, causing, I believe, some annoyance amongst the colonials.

Imagine if the President had similar powers in the USA!

The corresponding simile would be if the Executive power in the USA was vested in the Speaker of the House, and the total sum of the President'S power was that he could sack the Speaker and sign bills.

The GG is also REQUIRED to sign any bills the Government tells him to sign. The Monarch has and/or GG has ZERO authority to interfere in politics, except to break on impass over the ability to pass a budget (denial of supply) by asking someone else to try by changing the PM. That's what happened in 1975, but there is controversy about whether supply was really blocked or if the GG (a notoious drunkard) was hoodwinked.

It would be kinda cool if the Pres could sack the Speaker if he couldn't get a budget passed.

[RTH10260]

CBI = Confederation of British Industry

Revealed: CBI uses gagging clauses to prevent discussion of sexual misconduct claims
Up to 10 non-disclosure agreements signed in last year alongside substantial financial settlements

Anna Isaac
Tue 26 Mar 2024 18.00 CET

The CBI has used gagging clauses to prevent staff from discussing their experiences of sexual misconduct and bullying at the organisation, the Guardian can reveal.

Up to 10 non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) have been signed in the past year after the lobbying group’s sexual misconduct scandal, in which more than a dozen staff alleged they had been victims of sexual harassment, assault and rape. Those agreements have been accompanied by substantial financial settlements from the CBI.

Sources told the Guardian that the total bill could be as much as £1m, accounting for legal fees, settlement deals and pension agreements. The CBI refused to confirm or deny the figure.

The use of NDAs is increasingly controversial after they were used to silence victims of repeat harassers or offenders in a number of prominent cases of workplace misconduct.

MPs on the Treasury committee investigating Sexism in the City recently called for the use of NDAs to be banned in such cases, saying they had the effect of “silencing the victim of harassment and forcing them out of an organisation, while protecting perpetrators”.

Advisers to the CBI, as well as current and former staff, said that in their view, its use of gagging clauses was deeply problematic for an organisation trying to overhaul its culture. They said it called into question the CBI’s commitment to fostering a so-called “speak up” culture.



https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... uct-claims

[Volkonski]

Fears for the future of the great British pint of beer

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68636451

Climate change threatens to "call time" on the great British pint.

But scientists are working with the brewing industry to help save it.

Hops give bitter its taste but the plant doesn't like the hotter, drier conditions we've experienced in recent decades and production has plummeted.

Researchers in Kent are isolating hop genes in the hope of producing more climate-change resilient varieties.

They also want to produce more intense flavours that are now becoming popular.

"Without it, the British pint is going to die off," Danielle Whelan of the Shepherd Neame brewery said of the work.

"We are just going to be importing beer and we won't have the culture that goes with it anymore."

Warmer, drier conditions have also affected the trademark bitter flavour hops gives beer. And the worry is that because of climate change, the problem is only going to get worse. Eddie Gadd, the head brewer at Ramsgate Brewery said that it was already having an impact.

"Climate change is very relevant to me," he said.

"I buy most of my hops from Kent and I've seen the harvests over the past 10 or 12 years going up and down. It has been a real rollercoaster.

"The growers have been feeling the impact and the search for drought-resistant genes is going to be exceptionally important."

It is an issue across Europe. An analysis published last year found that in some key hop-growing areas, there was a drop of nearly 20% in output.

[RTH10260]

Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention
Sewage scandal has put extra focus on the race but enthusiasm is undimmed with Oxford favourites to end rivals’ dominance

Fri 29 Mar 2024 19.00 CET

Throughout the Boat Race’s 195-year history, it has been regarded by the rest of the world as one of those peculiar British eccentricities, like Marmite and pantomime, that are best ignored. Not this year.

The New York Times, Fox News, ABC, CNN and numerous other international media have run stories in the buildup to Saturday’s race – although it is what is floating in the Thames, rather than on top of it, that has piqued their interest.

As Thursday’s New York Times put it: “The warning was stern: Do not enter the water. Not because of the tide. Not because of sharks. Because of the sewage.

“For almost two centuries, rowers from Oxford University have raced their rivals from Cambridge in a contest that typically ends with jubilant members of the victorious crew jumping into the River Thames in celebration. This year they will be staying as dry as possible.”

The discovery of high levels of E coli on the 4.25-mile course has not only further fuelled public anger at the deteriorating state of Britain’s rivers, but – as first revealed by the Guardian – also led organisers to issue tough new safety guidelines.

And according to Cambridge’s Carys Earl, a 21-year-old medicine undergraduate, everyone is taking those rules very seriously. “As soon as we get off the water – and before we touch any of our other kit or food – we immediately wash our hands,” she says. “We are also showering, covering cuts or bruises, and then making sure we’ve got fresh kit to get into. We’re constantly washing the boats and washing equipment as well.”

Meanwhile Oxford’s Annie Sharp, a 24-year-old who is studying for an MSc in water science, policy and management, has a professional as well as sporting interest in the gunk in the Thames. “The problem links back to the Victorian era,” she points out. “The sewage system was fantastic at the time, but it was built for a two million population. Now we have over 9.5 million.



https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/ ... -attention

[RTH10260]

creative book keeping, I know a senior citizen in FL who appreaciates this

UK accused of double counting £500m of aid to meet climate pledge
Humanitarian work in Afghanistan and Yemen now classified as climate finance, FoI request reveals, as £11.6bn pledge slips

Helena Horton Environment reporter
Tue 16 Apr 2024 06.00 CEST

The UK government has been accused of double counting £500m of overseas aid as climate finance in an attempt to meet its commitments under the Paris agreement .

Money for humanitarian work in Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia is now being classified as climate finance, according to documents released under a freedom of information request by the website Carbon Brief.

Last year, the Guardian reported that a pledge to spend £11.6bn on international climate finance between 2021-22 and 2025-26 was slipping out of reach because of chronic underspending and the oversea aid budget being reduced from 0.7% to 0.5% of national income.

Some of the aid being counted as climate finance have no clear climate link, as it involves mainly the provision of food and basic necessities. The previous climate projects funded under the £11.6bn pledge, in contrast, include renewable energy, low-pollution transport and forest preservation in sensitive areas around the world.

Gideon Rabinowitz, the director of policy and advocacy at the international development network Bond, told Carbon Brief: “The change of definition means they will be able to reach the target by spending less money than they would have done otherwise through double counting development and climate finance.”

This redefinition of funding is expected to add £1.72bn to the total amount of the UK government says it spends on climate aid. Part of the reclassification includes an assumption that 35% of the money it gives to the World Bank counts as international climate funding. This does not mean any new money will be committed towards climate projects as the government has already pledged this funding.

Humanitarian aid for countries described as climate vulnerable will also be reclassified as climate finance. Thirty per cent of the spend towards basic humanitarian provisions in Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Zimbabwe and Sudan will now automatically count as climate finance. This is funding that has already been committed and not new money for climate projects.

Euan Ritchie, a senior policy adviser at the thinktank Development Initiatives, said: “Just because humanitarian aid is going to a country that is vulnerable to climate change doesn’t mean it addresses that vulnerability. And these projects have already been screened for their climate focus.”

Civil servants warned ministers last year that in order to meet the £11.6bn target, the government may have to count other already-committed amounts as climate payments, but said: “This would be seen as the UK ‘moving the goalposts’ and would be seen as a backwards step, reducing UK standing and influence in climate negotiations.”



https://www.theguardian.com/global-deve ... ate-pledge

[RTH10260]

UK passes bill to send asylum seekers to Rwanda
Lawyers prepare for legal battles on behalf of individual asylum seekers challenging removal to east Africa

Rajeev Syal, Kiran Stacey and Tom Ambrose
Tue 23 Apr 2024 01.42 CEST

Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda deportation bill will become law after peers eventually backed down on amending it, opening the way for legal battles over the potential removal of dozens of people seeking asylum.

After a marathon battle of “ping pong” over the key legislation between the Commons and the Lords, the bill finally passed when opposition and crossbench peers gave way on Monday night.

The bill is expected to be granted royal assent on Tuesday. Home Office sources said they have already identified a group of asylum seekers with weak legal claims to remain in the UK who will be part of the first tranche to be sent to east Africa in July.

Sunak has put the bill, which would deport asylum seekers who arrive in the UK by irregular means to Kigali, at the centre of his attempts to stop small boats crossing the Channel.

The home secretary, James Cleverly, said it was a “landmark moment in our plan to stop the boats”.

In a video posted to social media, he said: “The safety of Rwanda bill has passed in parliament and it will become law within days.

“The act will prevent people from abusing the law by using false human rights claims to block removals. And it makes clear that the UK parliament is sovereign, giving government the power to reject interim blocking measures imposed by European courts.

“I promised to do what was necessary to clear the path for the first flight. That’s what we have done. Now we’re working day in and day out to get flights off the ground.”

Denisa Delić, director of advocacy at International Rescue Committee UK, said on Monday: “Irrespective of today’s passage of the safety of Rwanda bill, sending refugees to Rwanda is an ineffective, unnecessarily cruel and costly approach.

“Rather than outsourcing its responsibilities under international law, we urge the government to abandon this misguided plan and instead focus on delivering a more humane and orderly immigration system at home.

“This includes scaling up safe routes, such as resettlement and family reunion, and upholding the right to seek asylum.”

The Home Office has whittled the list down to 350 migrants who are deemed to pose the least risk of submitting successful legal challenges blocking their deportation.




https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ment-sunak

[RTH10260]

Rwanda flights will deport asylum seekers ‘indefinitely’, says Cleverly
Home secretary visits Lampedusa in Italy as National Audit Office says scheme could surpass £580m by 2030

Rajeev Syal and Diane Taylor
Thu 25 Apr 2024 01.01 CEST

Several flights a month will deport asylum seekers to Rwanda “indefinitely”, the home secretary has said, as he argued that the £1.8m a person cost of the scheme was justified.

James Cleverly, in his first interview since the government’s plan was approved by parliament on Monday, said he had booked a succession of initial flights and was preparing to order the detention of people seeking refuge in the UK so they could be sent to east Africa.

Aiming to defuse criticism that the Rwanda plan was a waste of money, which the National Audit Office said could exceed £580m by the end of the decade, Cleverly said it would “massively reduce” the costs of housing asylum seekers in the UK.

Analysis from the Refugee Council suggests the Rwanda policy could cause “a system meltdown”.

The home secretary’s most detailed comments on the scheme were made on a visit to Lampedusa, the Mediterranean island that has been the first European landing point for hundreds of thousands of people escaping war and famine in Africa.

Cleverly told the Guardian: “The prime minister has made clear we’ve got facilities, we’ve got plans in place, that will facilitate multiple flights per month, indefinitely.

“We have booked a number of initial flights. And we have got the facilities to continue booking flights on a regular drumbeat, through the summer.”

Cleverly speaking to International Red Cross staff on his visit to Lampedusa. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA
Royal assent, when the monarch formally agrees to make a bill an act of parliament, is expected to be granted on Thursday, according to Whitehall sources. This is expected to be swiftly followed by the ratification of the Rwanda treaty, which is the government’s attempt to respond to criticism from the supreme court.

The troubled scheme, which is two years old, has so far sent no one to Rwanda. But its success is an important component of Rishi Sunak’s plan to revive his fortunes before a general election.

If the Rwanda scheme was to fulfil its aim of deterring people from travelling to the UK in small boats, there must be regular and repeated deportation flights, Cleverly said.

“Obviously, people will take a huge amount of interest in the first flight,” he said. “But we recognise that it is when people say, ‘Hang on a minute, there’s another flight and then another one and then another one’ – that regularity is what will trigger the deterrent effect in the Channel.”

Cleverly said the cost of the Rwanda treaty, which would pay the Paul Kagame government £490m once 300 people have been sent, would be justified if small boats stop coming to the UK.

“A lot of this expenditure is linked to the success of the project,” he said. “And the project’s success will itself massively reduce the cost to the British government, for example, of the asylum accommodation bill. So when we’re looking at the costs, we’ve got to look at it in the context of the alternative reality.”

Cleverly clambers on to a Guardia di Finanza police boat to learn about how they tackle illegal crossings. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA
Lawyers representing asylum seekers who have previously faced possible removal to Rwanda are considering legal action once the legislation is passed, the Guardian understands.

They are expected to mount a challenge on the grounds that the law is incompatible with the European convention on human rights. Cleverly declined an invitation to say that his plans were legally watertight.



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... s-cleverly