Britain, European Union, Government, Politics

The UK’s Brexit negotiating position is to be hardened up

BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS

BELGIUM-EU-BRITAIN

It is hoped ‘position papers’ will unify a fractious Cabinet towards a more agreeable position. This comes amid criticism that the UK is woefully underprepared for talks with the EU.

The UK Government is to start publishing a series of ‘Brexit position papers’ ahead of the next round of talks at the end of August in a bid to show the British prime minister is “getting on with the job” and that the Cabinet is unified around a collective position.

At the time of writing it is understood that a number of position papers have been sent to Cabinet ministers for sign off as No 10 prepares to publish the documents outlining its stance on some of the most pressing Brexit matters.

Some of those papers could be published in the next two weeks.

“These papers are meant to facilitate collective decision-making based on facts and evidence,” a senior source has said.

Position papers have been prepared on a range of issues from digital economy and data protection, to Northern Ireland, customs agreement and goods and services arrangements once Britain quits the European Union.

No 10 hopes the position papers will unify a fractious Cabinet on an agreed position; counter the perception that the British Government is unprepared for Brexit; and ease the burden of workload on the civil service.

“I know there is a desire to narrow the set of options and that is coming from departments rather than DExEU. It is a lot of work to keep open five or six scenarios, so there is a desire to make some decisions now, regardless of negotiations,” the source said.

Ministers and officials have been working flat out to draw up the position papers, aware that the Brexit deadline is fast approaching.

“Position papers may determine whether or not we can move to the second stage of negotiations, work in recess is vital,” the source added.

The Government is planning a ministerial write round – where relevant ministers beyond the Cabinet are given sight of the position papers – for the week beginning 21 August, suggesting papers could be published from that week onwards.

Britain and the EU cannot move onto talks about Britain’s future relationship with the EU, the second stage of negotiations, until the European Commission is satisfied “sufficient progress” has been made on the top three priorities: citizens’ rights, Britain’s Brexit bill and the Irish border.

The border issue is proving difficult. The Irish government has rejected a proposal from the British to use technology – cameras, pre-registered cargo – to avoid a hard border, and is instead pushing for the UK to join a new bilateral customs union with the EU.

Mrs May’s renewed focus on Britain’s Brexit position comes after a chaotic few weeks, with her cabinet split over a possible transition period after the UK quits the European Union and what a post-Brexit immigration policy might look like.

Chancellor Philip Hammond said in recent weeks there is now “broad acceptance” among the cabinet that a transitional period will be needed after Britain quits the EU and has said “many things will look similar” for up to three years after leaving.

That position is expected to be formalised in the position paper, with the government seeking a transitional customs arrangement to avoid a hard cliff edge for business.

 

Standard
Aid, Britain, Government, Politics, Society

The UK gave £2bn a year in foreign aid to nations with the worst human rights

UK FOREIGN AID

BRITAIN ploughs almost £2billion of aid each year into countries with dire human rights records.

The Foreign Office has put 30 countries on its human rights watch-list for overseeing rape, torture and extrajudicial killings.

But despite this, it can be revealed the UK’s aid department last year funnelled development cash into more than half of these countries.

It means hundreds of millions of pounds are being poured into 17 of the worst human rights offenders, such as Zimbabwe, Burma and the Palestinian Occupied Territories.

Shockingly, the total amount spent in these countries increased by 7 per cent in one year to £1.87billion in 2016/17.

The findings will raise further questions about how effective the £13billion a year that goes on international aid really is – as well as the wisdom of keeping David Cameron’s target of spending 0.7 per cent of GDP on foreign aid.

It comes after a recent report by the National Audit Office said aid cash was being dispatched overseas in a last-minute frenzy each year to meet spending targets.

The Department for International Development pointed out that British taxpayers’ money does not necessarily go to foreign governments themselves, but often goes to charities and other organisations.

Critics, however, have hit out at the farce of the Foreign Office warning about countries’ human rights records while DFID was pouring cash into them.

Conservative MP Peter Bone, said: ‘It seems extraordinary that we would be giving money to countries whose regimes we regard as failing on human rights. I would have thought we would be concentrating our aid on countries where the government is trying to … improve matters.’

A 2015 report by the Independent Commission on Aid Impact warned ministers risked bring the aid budget ‘into disrepute’ by spending millions on training the police forces of regimes with poor human rights records. In 2015/16, DFID sent £1.74billion to 17 nations on the Foreign Office’s ‘human rights priority’ list – rising to £1.87billion a year later.

This included £417million to Pakistan, up from £328million the year before. This is despite the Foreign Office warning it was concerned about serious violations of women’s rights.

The Foreign Office also warned that the lack of recognition of women’s rights in Afghanistan had left girls ‘susceptible to violence, poverty and exploitation’.

Nevertheless, DFID sent £168million to the war-torn country in 2016/17 – up from £120million.

A Government spokesperson responded by saying: ‘The UK speaks candidly and frankly to all countries in which we work, and firmly holds governments to account on issues of human rights. We will not hesitate to use UN resolutions and sanctions to focus international attention and action on any country where we have concerns.’

DFID says it works closely with the Foreign Office to raise concerns with governments. An official said: ‘UK aid is spent where it is most needed and is subject to rigorous internal and external checks and scrutiny at all stages to ensure it helps those who need it and delivers value for money.’

The Foreign Office said the 30 countries named were not necessarily the worst human rights abusers, but were ones where the UK felt it could have some influence on regimes’ conduct.

Some of the shocking abuses by regimes the UK helps to fund:

. Afghanistan – The country has been accused of a lack of democracy, with many child casualties and women and girls susceptible to violence, poverty and exploitation.

Aid: £168million

. Bangladesh – Concerns over the treatment of women and allegations of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, torture and enforced disappearances.

Aid: £158million

. BurmaClaims civilians have been shelled, as well as allegations of torture, extrajudicial killing, arson and mass rape by security forces.

Aid: £90million

. Democratic Republic of The Congo – A shocking 80,000 are said to be trapped in modern slavery, state attacks on freedom of speech and extrajudicial killings.

Aid: £138million

. Pakistan – Allegations of serious violations of women’s and children’s rights and of freedom of religion, as well as modern slavery. Movement of aid charities is restricted.

Aid: £417million

. Somalia – Serious violations and abuses are perpetrated by state and non-state actors and sexual violence is endemic. Somalia has also seen a rise in child soldiers.

Aid: £166million

. South Sudan – Serious human rights violations carried out by the state, with government forces perpetrating unlawful killings and arbitrary arrests on basis of ethnicity.

Aid: £171million

. Syria – Human rights systematically denied – including torture – largely by Assad regime.

Aid: £217million

. Yemen – Vast number of human rights abuses, with women and children particularly affected. Minorities also face discrimination.

Aid: £110million

. Zimbabwe – Reports of intimidation, rape and vote buying by the ruling party have marred two elections.

Aid: £96million


Foreign Aid Expenditure: How Britain Compares

14A_AID BUDGET TABLE.1

Standard
Arts, Britain, History, Military

The Royal Navy’s Arctic Ghost Ships

NATIONAL MARITIME

HMS Erebus

Painting by J Franklin Wright shows HMS Erebus and HMS Terror as they may have appeared before being lost.

AS A ‘whodunit’, it remains one of the greatest of all time, a British seafaring mystery with such enduring fascination that even after 170 years of rumour, allegations and speculation, it still fires imaginations.

What really did happen to Rear-Admiral Sir John Franklin and the 129 sailors on the HMS Erebus and HMS Terror who set sail to explore the Arctic in 1845 but who never returned home from that frozen wasteland?

Precisely how, where and why they died has only ever been guessed at.

Over the years it has variously become a legendary tale of men fighting against starvation, sickness and extreme elements to stay alive, or a baffling story of unexplained death, with murky under-currents of possible murder, suicide and cannibalism.

At last, though, there has been a breakthrough, as a new exhibition, Death In The Ice, at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, London reveals.

In 2014 and 2016, the wrecks of Erebus and Terror were discovered in the depths and marine archaeologists have been examining them ever since. The exhibition reveals the preliminary findings – and the startling results call for a complete rethink of the saga of Sir John Franklin’s epic last voyage.

The ships and their crews went missing on a Royal Navy expedition to find and chart the last 900-mile section of the fabled North-West Passage – a sea route over the top of the world linking the North Atlantic to the Pacific via the Arctic Circle.

They were sailing into the unknown, trying to weave their way from Baffin Bay to the Bering Strait, between thousands of islands, large and small, where ice-covered land and frozen sea constantly merge and icebergs block the way.

To add to their troubles, they experienced winters so severe that even the Inuit, the native inhabitants of the Canadian Arctic, thought them exceptional.

In command was the 59-year-old Franklin, a much-admired seaman who had fought at Trafalgar and sailed the Arctic three times before.

But he had recently been a failure as governor of the British colony in Tasmania and, desperate to restore his reputation, volunteered to lead the expedition. The Admiralty was concerned about his age but gave him the nod anyway.

Erebus and Terror were, like Franklin, veterans of the ice, having survived previous expeditions to the Arctic and Antarctic.

Their hulls were reinforced with iron sheeting to cope with the frozen seas, and had steam-driven propellers for when they were becalmed or in danger of becoming ice-bound.

 

THE officers and men on board were the Navy’s finest, each one a volunteer for a voyage expected to last up to three years.

In May 1845, the ships left the Thames, sailing north. By July they were in Greenland, and in August their tall masts were spotted by whalers between Greenland and Canada heading for the start of the North-West Passage.

After which, they were never seen or heard from again. So began the mystery.

For two years, the Admiralty did nothing, expressing its “unlimited confidence in the skills and resources of Sir John”. But family and friends were growing anxious, particularly Franklin’s wife, Jane, who lobbied for action.

Ships were finally dispatched to search from both eastern and western ends of the Passage.

In all, more than 30 search teams would be launched over the next decade – some out of altruism, others inspired by an Admiralty award equivalent to £1.5million today for a successful rescue. But no traces of the ships were found.

Then in 1850, three graves were discovered on an island near the start of the Passage, yielding the frozen and intact bodies of two sailors and a Royal Marine private. But of the rest of the crews, there was no sign.

Their fate was by now a Victorian obsession, prompting endless debate, books, magazine articles and folk songs. Spiritualists joined in, claiming to have seen visions of the lost souls.

Then, in 1853 – eight years after the Erebus and Terror had set sail – significant new light was thrown on the plight of the crew.

John Rae, a Scottish explorer, returned with stories he heard from the Inuit. They told of having seen a ghostly party of sick, hungry and desperate qalunaaq (“white men”) who walked across the ice until they dropped dead.

The Inuit said they had found many corpses, and cooking pots with body parts inside.

The obvious conclusion was that starving men had resorted to what Rae described as “the last dread alternative” – cannibalism.

Rae’s discoveries were a massive shock to the British public, and an outraged Charles Dickens denounced the suggestion that British heroes had stooped so low as to eat each other in extremis. The arguments raged on, but from Rae’s evidence, the men’s fate seemed certain. The Admiralty declared the members of the expedition “’assumed dead” and paid out the men’s wages to their relatives.

But Jane Franklin was having none of it – neither the money, nor the idea that all hope had gone. She protested that there still might be survivors sustained by fish or seal or polar bear meat.

Some 12 years after the expedition went missing, she financed her own search mission by Arctic explorer, Leopold McClintock.

On King William Island, McClintock came across Inuit who had in their possession silver spoons and forks and other items from the Franklin expedition. They told him of how ships had been stranded in the ice nearby and of bodies in the snow.

McClintock and his team found three skeletons and a 28ft lifeboat lashed to a sledge, with an array of boots, towels and tobacco inside.

Most revealing of all, they came across a handwritten message inside a cairn with instructions that anyone finding it should forward it to the Admiralty. It gave the position of Erebus and Terror, referred to the ships and their crews wintering on the ice in 1845-46 and declared that “all [is] well”.

But dated April 28, 1848, more scrawled text had been added that told a much bleaker story.

It explained that by now the ships had been stranded in this same place for 20 months; that Franklin was dead (and had been for almost a year), as were 23 other crew members; and that the remaining 105 “souls” were abandoning the ships. The message was signed by James Fitzjames, captain of the Erebus, and Francis Crozier, captain of the Terror who, with Franklin dead, had become the faltering expedition’s commander.

McClintock raced back to London with his findings, establishing the narrative that was now to be generally accepted as the truth about the sad fate of Franklin’s expedition.

The ships had stranded in the ice to the north-west of King William Island and after three winters had run out of provisions.

The men were heroes who tried to save themselves by slogging across the ice to the other side of the island but one by one dropped from exhaustion, hunger, frostbite and sickness. The cannibalism allegations were set aside.

 

HERE instead was a legend of British grit to be proud of – summed up in an iconic Victorian painting that today hangs in the National Maritime Museum depicting Franklin and his men dying in the snow.

What remained missing, though, were the actual ships. McClintock had been told were Erebus and Terror were but, assuming no one was left on board, he had seen no point in finding them.

And in the following century and a half, their location remained unknown, assumed lost for ever.

Then in 2014, following an extensive search authorised by the Canadian government, HMS Erebus was pinpointed and two years later, Terror was also found.

Today, the wrecks rest on the sea bed, upright and amazingly intact, awaiting further investigation by divers and marine archaeologists.

Substantial relics have already been brought to the surface – the ship’s bell of Erebus, a six-pounder cannon, the gilded hilt of an officer’s sword, even willow-pattern china plates from the gallery.

But perhaps most astonishing is that the ships were found more than 100 miles from where their crews abandoned them.

It is possible that shifting sea-ice moved them from their original site. But there is also a strong chance that they may have sailed to their final locations. In which case, the abandoned ships must at some stage have been re-occupied by some of the crew.

Significantly, Terror appears to have been anchored – which could only have happened if there had been crew on board.

And if that’s true, the notion of Franklin’s men heroically remaining together as a disciplined British military unit trekking doggedly through blizzards until the very last man collapsed and died, is thrown up in the air.

HMS Terror may yet contain the answers everyone seeks. She sits in 150ft of water, her hatches closed and the glass windows apparently still intact. In such a closed, cold environment, documents may have been preserved.

Perhaps the ship’s log or diary is nesting there, sealed inside a water-tight container – something that could settle once and for all the long-running mystery of what exactly happened to the 129 lost souls who went out to find a passage through the ice and never returned.

– DEATH In The Ice: The shocking story of Rear-Admiral Sir John Franklin’s final expedition. National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London. Until January 7, 2018.

 

Standard