Canadian banks, insurance companies have poured millions into Russian oil and gas

By John Woodside 

NATIONAL OBSERVER 


A Gazprom oil-producing facility in Russia's Yamal region. Canadian banks and insurance companies have invested millions in the country's oil and gas companies, which make up nearly 40 per cent of Russia's revenue. (AP Photo/Petr Shelomovskiy)

Canadian banks, insurance companies and asset managers have pumped millions into Russian-owned oil and gas companies that have flowed into the petrostate’s war chest.

New research from international climate non-profit Stand.earth shows Manulife, RBC, CIBC, BMO and others have collectively financed Russia’s three largest oil and gas companies — Gazprom, Lukoil and Rosneft — with more than US$110 million worth of investments. The data was compiled using financial software called a Bloomberg terminal that tracks investments in real-time.

Specifically, Manulife holds $14.7 million worth of stock and about $7 million worth of Gazprom bonds. It owns about $39 million in Lukoil stock and roughly $590,000 worth of bonds. It also holds roughly $5.8 million worth of shares in Rosneft. Together, Manulife’s exposure to the three Russian oil and gas companies adds up to about $67 million, or about 60 per cent of the total investments of identified Canadian financial institutions.

According to the data, RBC owns $6.3 million in shares of Lukoil and over $31 million worth of bonds from Gazprom. Similarly, BMO owns $4.3 million worth of shares as well as $3.3 million worth of bonds in Gazprom. CIBC holds $7.8 million worth of shares in Lukoil and just over $240,000 worth of shares in Rosneft.

Other financial institutions supporting the Russian oil and gas giants include AGF Management, MD Financial Management, Sun Life Financial, Desjardins Trust, Fidelity Investments Canada, 1832 Asset Management and Power Corp of Canada.

Stand.earth climate finance director Richard Brooks told Canada’s National Observer that even if the total figures aren’t enough to fundamentally change the calculus of the invasion of Ukraine, these institutions should divest themselves as part of the Canadian response to Russia, from symbolic actions — like lighting up the CN Tower in Ukraine’s colours to other economic tactics like sanctions.

“The investment isn't in the billions of dollars, but that doesn't mean Canadian financial institutions are off the hook in terms of taking responsibility for where their money is being invested and what kind of activities their money is supporting,” he said.

“If Vladimir Putin didn't have Russian oil and gas revenue, then he wouldn't have been able to amass the war chest that he has to be able to invade Ukraine,” he added.

Russian President Vladimir Putin at the UN General Assembly debate in 2015. 

Photo via United Nations / Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Russia is a fossil fuel energy superpower. Its energy policies often dovetail with its foreign policies given how significant fossil fuel exports are to the country’s economy. Oil and gas made up 60 per cent of exports and nearly 40 per cent of the country’s revenue in 2019. The country reportedly receives upwards of $500 million in revenue every day from oil and gas. The multibillion-dollar Gazprom-owned Nord Stream 2 pipeline, designed to double capacity for natural gas flowing from Russia to Germany via the Black Sea, is just one example of how Putin has been able to leverage European energy needs to Russia’s advantage.

Canadian financial institutions are pumping millions into Russia's war chest via oil and gas investments. Pressure is mounting to divest. #cdnpoli


Brooks said the ongoing invasion of Ukraine underscores how financing fossil fuels carries risks for more than just the climate, noting: “Geopolitics are what they are because of the energy industry, to a large degree.”

“We wouldn't be in this situation if we had begun the transition to renewables and off of fossil fuels 20 years ago,” he said. “Many European countries wouldn’t be beholden to Russian oil and gas if that transition had already happened.”

Countries are waking up to this. On Monday, The Associated Press reported Germany’s vice-chancellor would travel to Washington to discuss ramping up renewable energy to achieve better energy security.


Despite the security benefits of decarbonizing, Big Oil boosters in Canada, including the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and some Conservative Party MPs, have called on ramping up domestic fossil fuel production.

“I think that's just despicable that they would try to use this crisis to drive an expansion of oil and gas production and exploration in North America. That's exactly what we should not be doing,” Brooks said.

“We need to put investments into renewables and get off fossil fuels because in the end, nobody controls the wind and nobody controls the sun,” he said. “And when nobody has control over those two fuels, that changes the whole geopolitical system globally and could go a long way to preventing this type of thing from happening again.”

People flood the streets of Vancouver last month to demonstrate Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Photo by Bruno / Unsplash

Part of the international response against Russia is to sanction key elements of its economy. That’s why the U.S. slapped sanctions on Nord Stream 2 last week, and Reuters reports the company is now considering filing for insolvency given sanctions are only expected to tighten. Many Russian banks have been cut off from SWIFT, the plumbing of the global financial system.

Western oil and gas giants are also starting to distance themselves. On Sunday, after decades of working in Russia, BP announced it would divest itself of its 19.75 per cent stake in Rosneft, potentially costing BP $25 billion. Similarly, Shell said on Monday it would exit all of its Russian operations, including the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and the Sakhalin 2 LNG plant, where it holds a 27.5 per cent stake, and where Gazprom is a 50 per cent owner.

Stand.earth is calling for Ottawa to require Canadian companies to divest from Russian-owned companies in an expected next round of sanctions.

The federal government, Manulife, RBC, BMO, and CIBC did not return a request for comment by deadline.

#4 of 11 articles from the Special Report: Financing disaster
March 2nd 2022

John Woodside
Reporter
@Woodsideful

Wind Energy Company to Pay $8 Million in Killings of 150 Eagles

ESI Energy pleaded guilty based on the documented “blunt force trauma” deaths of golden eagles struck by fast-moving turbine blades, prosecutors said.


ESI Energy was sentenced to probation and agreed to spend up to $27 million on measures to “minimize additional eagle deaths and injuries,” prosecutors said.

Credit...Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times

By Eduardo Medina
April 10, 2022

A wind energy company pleaded guilty last week to killing at least 150 eagles at its wind farms and was ordered to pay $8 million in fines and restitution, federal prosecutors said.

The company, ESI Energy, a wholly owned subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources, was also sentenced to probation for five years, during which it must follow an eagle management plan, after pleading guilty on Tuesday to three counts of violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

ESI acknowledged that at least 150 bald and golden eagles had died at its facilities since 2012, and that 136 of those deaths were “affirmatively determined to be attributable to the eagle being struck by a wind turbine blade,” the Justice Department said in a statement.

The deaths occurred across 50 of the 154 wind farms that the company operates in the United States, the Justice Department said.

The company failed to take steps to protect the eagles or obtain the permits that are necessary when eagle deaths are documented or predicted, the Justice Department said. By not taking these steps, prosecutors said, ESI had “gained a competitive advantage.”

“This prosecution and the restitution it secures will protect the ecologically vital and majestic natural resources of our bald eagle and golden eagle populations,” Phillip A. Talbert, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of California, said in a statement.

Rebecca Kujawa, the president of NextEra, said in a statement that she disagreed with the federal government’s enforcement of the policy because “the reality is building any structure, driving any vehicle, or flying any airplane carries with it a possibility that accidental eagle and other bird collisions may occur as a result of that activity.”

“We have a longstanding and well-earned reputation for protecting our environment and positively coexisting with and supporting wildlife around our facilities,” Ms. Kujawa said. “And we have never sited a wind turbine knowing an eagle would fly into it, nor have we taken any action in disregard of federal law.”

The company agreed to spend up to $27 million on measures to “minimize additional eagle deaths and injuries,” prosecutors said. Steven Stengel, a spokesman for NextEra, said that there was so far no specific breakdown of how that money would be spent.

The case comes as the bald eagle, the nation’s symbol whose resurgence is considered one of the greatest conservation stories of the 21st century, faces a new threat: lead poisoning.

All but a few hundred bald eagles were presumed dead by the mid-20th century, killed off largely by the widespread use of the synthetic insecticide DDT. A ban on DDT in 1972 and conservation efforts helped the population to rebound. The bald eagle was removed from Endangered Species Act protection in 2007 and its estimated population grew to 316,700 by 2019.

But researchers found this year that of the 1,200 eagles they tested, nearly half had been exposed repeatedly to lead, which can lead to death and slow population growth. Scientists believe that the primary source of the lead is ammunition used by hunters, who shoot animals that the eagles then scavenge.

Protecting the eagles has become a “challenging situation,” especially when it comes to wind turbines, said Julia Ponder, a professor and associate dean at the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Minnesota, whose research focuses on raptor medicine and surgery.

“I’d love it if it were black and white, but it’s not,” she said.

While wind turbines can harm eagles and other birds, they are also an alternative form of energy that is cleaner than fossil fuels, which are contributing to a warming of the planet, she said.

The tips of a wind turbine’s blades can spin at about 200 miles per hour, fast enough to immediately kill any bird, Professor Ponder said.

A 2013 study found that between 140,000 and 328,000 birds are killed each year in the United States at monopole turbines.

Roberto Albertani, a professor of mechanical engineering at Oregon State University, said in 2017 that he and his team had devised a system that sought to make wind turbines safer for eagles.

It called for using cameras to determine if the birds were approaching the blades, triggering on-the-ground inflatable tubes, or “wind dancer” figures, like those often seen at car dealerships, to scare the birds away, Professor Albertani said in a presentation last year.

Eagles appear to be “annoyed by anthropomorphic figures,” he said.

Professor Ponder said some researchers were looking into using audio signals to keep the birds away from turbines. Others are working on detection systems that would shut off a turbine when eagles approach — a measure that could be effective, but costly, for power companies.

“These are really complex questions,” she said. “And we have to work to find the right questions to ask, and the answers to them.”

Eagles

After Mounting a Comeback, Eagles Face a New Threat
Feb. 19, 2022

A Struggle to Balance Wind Energy With Wildlife
Dec. 16, 2013

Wind Energy Company to Pay $1 Million in Bird Deaths
Nov. 22, 2013

Eduardo Medina is a reporter covering breaking news. He is also a member of the 2021-22 New York Times fellowship class. @byEduardoMedina

A version of this article appears in print on April 12, 2022, Section A, Page 17 of the New York edition with the headline: Wind Energy Company to Pay $8 Million After Eagles Are Killed by Turbine Blades. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Workers ‘have more cards to play than ever’ as wages on the rise. But how likely are you to see your pay go up?

Employers should expect workers to ask for more — or leave for greener pastures. “We are going to start to see this exodus.”

By Rosa Saba

Business Reporter

TORONTO STAR
Tue., April 12, 2022

Wages are rising, but inflation is rising faster — and workers in some industries are being left behind.

Statistics Canada’s monthly Labour Force Survey found that average hourly wages rose by a dollar, or 3.4 per cent, between March 2021 and March 2022.

That’s a slightly faster pace year-over-year than February, but not as fast as inflation — the Consumer Price Index was up 5.7 per cent in February.

And wages aren’t rising as quickly as they were pre-pandemic, when labour market conditions were similarly tight.

The growth in wages in March was partly driven by the professional, scientific and technical services industry, which saw overall employment go up by 13 per cent while wages went up 7.5 per cent.

Other industries that saw more significant wage growth include agriculture at more than eight per cent; manufacturing at almost seven per cent; and wholesale and retail trade at almost seven per cent.

However, wages stagnated and in some cases went down year-over-year in education, health care, accommodation and food services, transportation, utilities, public administration and more.

Jim Stanford, director of the Centre for Future Work, said the most recent data puts wage growth back on track compared with pre-pandemic. But thanks to burgeoning inflation, there’s some catching up to do in the coming months, he said.

Overall, goods-producing sectors are seeing higher wage growth than services, said Stanford.

He noted that in the provinces with the weakest wage growth — Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta — there are “harsh” caps on public sector wages, such as Ontario’s one-per-cent raise cap for public sector workers.

That’s why he’s not surprised to see wages stagnating in those sectors.

Sheila Block, senior economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, agreed.

“That’s not the result of market forces,” Block said. “That’s the result of government policy.”

Given the ongoing labour difficulties in food and accommodation, Block said she’s surprised there wasn’t a bigger wage increase in that sector, but said it’s too soon too tell whether March was just an odd month or if wages will catch up later in the year.

But one thing is for sure: if inflation continues while some sectors don’t see their wages go up, those workers are losing purchasing power, said Block, who added the lagging wage growth in health and education is a “huge concern.”

Deena Ladd, executive director of the Workers’ Action Centre, said workers in those essential sectors aren’t going to stick around if they have the opportunity to work elsewhere for better wages and less precarious hours.

“We are going to start to see this exodus,” she said.

In fact, that’s already happening, Stanford pointed out: though total employment is high, some sectors such as hospitality are still struggling to hire.

“That reflects not that people aren’t working, it’s that they’re working somewhere else,” he said.

Employers should expect more raise asks from individual employees and from unions, said Stanford.

The rising cost of living, combined with a tight labour market and wages going up, means new hires may be getting competitive compensation packages that leave existing employees in the lurch.

That’s why, in the coming months, many companies may have to bump up salaries for their existing workers, according to new research from recruitment agency Robert Half.

In online surveys of 234 C-suite executives in March by the firm, two-thirds of respondents said they have noticed salary discrepancies between new and existing staff. Of those, more than half are reviewing and increasing compensation to keep those existing employees at market rate.

In another recent survey by Robert Half, this one of Canadian workers, half of those surveyed said they plan to ask for a raise this year, to reflect current market rates and deal with rising inflation.

Michael French, national director for Robert Half, said the balance is shifting in favour of employees.

“Now you have more cards to play than you’ve ever had before,” he said.

Across Canada, governments are raising their minimum wages. The federal minimum wage went up to $15.55 an hour at the beginning of April, while at the beginning of the year Ontario increased its minimum wage to $15 and eliminated the lower liquor server minimum wage. This fall, Ontario’s wage — which is tied to the Consumer Price Index — will again rise, this time to $15.50.

Minimum wages in Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and New Brunswick all went up, though all four provinces’ minimums are below $15.

Meanwhile, Quebec’s minimum wage will go up to $14.25 in May, while British Columbia’s minimum wage, which is tied to inflation, will go up to $15.65 in June.

But advocates say minimum wages pale in comparison to what’s truly needed to live in Canada in 2022.

For example, the Ontario Living Wage Network calculates that a true living wage in Toronto is more than $22 an hour. This calculation includes the costs of food, clothing, shelter and other basic necessities, but does not include saving for retirement or home ownership, debt repayment, or other long-term costs.

Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, said unions are getting increased pressure from their workers to fight for higher wages, and some are seeing more interest in unions from non-organized workers.

She’s optimistic that the tight labour market and high inflation rates will continue to embolden workers to ask for better conditions, but said it’s not an easy fight.

“We’re in for a rough ride over the next number of months,” said Bruske.

ONTARIO

Unions calling for return of mask mandates at schools

Niagara teachers report fewer students in class

By Allan Benner

Standard Reporter
Mon., April 11, 2022

Niagara’s elementary school teachers are increasingly at the head of half-empty classrooms as students are off sick with COVID-19, says the labour groups representing them.

Jennifer McArthur, president of the Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association Niagara elementary division, said teachers are reporting “rising numbers of student absences as a result of COVID-19, in some cases totalling a quarter to half of the class.”

“It’s not just students who are absent, teachers are also getting COVID,” she said. “When teachers and education workers have to stay home to isolate, that leaves their colleagues scrambling to cover classes or managing two classes that have been put together due to the shortage of occasional teachers. Last week alone, there were schools with absence rates of more than 20 per cent.”

Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario Niagara local president Brian Barker said the union expected a “small uptick of cases once the safety measures were lifted.”

“But the reported number of 100,000 cases a day in the province of Ontario is extremely concerning,” he said.

“It’s unfortunate that the government removed the tracking and reporting of COVID cases in schools, so it is hard to nail down the data, but there have definitely been more teacher absences that have been left unfilled due to sickness since the mandates were lifted,” he said in an email.

“If I had to infer why that was the case, I would surmise that it’s due to the introduction of the new BA.2 variant and the lifting of the safety precautions that protected teachers, children and education workers.”

Monday, École élémentaire LaMarsh in Niagara Falls reported 31.2 per cent of staff and students were absent — enough to require the school to inform Niagara Region Public Health. Absences of more than 20 per cent were reported at 15 Niagara school facilities, including Prince Philip Public School in St. Catharines where 29.1 per cent of staff and students were absent.

As absentee rates increased across Ontario, the Catholic teachers’ association issued a statement last week, calling on the provincial government to immediately reinstate a mask mandate in Ontario’s schools.

In an email, McArthur said the teachers she represents primarily want to be in schools and working in person with their students.

“They know that students enjoy the many benefits of in-person learning. Unfortunately, we are now witnessing the consequences of the (Premier Doug) Ford government’s decision to lift masking mandates in schools following the March break and teachers are calling and emailing to inform us of what is happening,” she said.

McArthur blamed increasing infections on the provincial government’s decision to lift mask requirements and other protections for schools.

“None of this was inevitable. At every turn, the Ford government has made short-sighted, politically motivated decisions that threaten health and safety, and leave parents, students, educators and public health units in the dark about the presence of COVID-19 in our schools and communities,” she said.

“It has been painful for teachers to watch students suffer through repeated in-class learning disruptions, negatively impacting their mental health and academic well-being. They want to be healthy and at work, teaching to a full class of healthy and engaged students.

Barker agreed, adding, “Ford needs to address this with immediacy; if not, it will only cause further disruption to in-person learning, and have negative impacts on the health and safety of education workers, students and their families.

“If the premier chooses to keep ignoring this health crisis, my hope is that Dr. Mustafa Hirji (Niagara’s acting medical officer of health) and the local public health unit, working alongside the District School Board of Niagara, will take the necessary steps to keep Niagara safe.”

Allan Benner is a St. Catharines-based reporter with the Standard. Reach him via email: allan.benner@niagaradailies.com

‘This isn’t a wise decision’: Taliban reversal on girls’ education met with condemnation

AFGHAN GIRLS WON AN INTERNATIONAL  ROBOTICS COMPETITION

Mushtaq Yusufzai and Rhoda Kwan
Mon, April 11, 2022

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — On March 23, the Taliban turned away teenage girls, who had arrived excited and carrying new textbooks, from school gates across Afghanistan. Classrooms would be closed to girls from the sixth grade on, the leaders said, until an appropriate dress code could be decided on for girls and female teachers.

It was the first day schools had been set to open for girls since the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in August. The Ministry of Education, only two days before, had said all girls would be allowed to attend school.

Asked about the closure, Taliban spokesperson Bilal Karimi told NBC News there were “multiple issues” at play, but he did not have any details. “The leadership held its meeting recently and discussed in detail the girls schools. They, however, decided to keep the schools closed until a further meeting,” he said.

The flip-flop signals fundamental divisions within the Taliban between hard-liners and moderates over how to rule the country as the regime faces mounting international condemnation amid a spiraling humanitarian crisis.

 Girls leave their school after attending only hours following reopening in Kabul on March 23, 2022. (Ahmad Sahel Arman / AFP - Getty Images)

“They’ve considered the different options available to them, they’ve dealt with internal divisions on these issues and this is the path that they seem to be choosing,” Heather Barr, associate women’s rights director at Human Rights Watch, told NBC News following the ban.

The decision to bar millions of girls from education has frustrated some members of the Taliban. Several Taliban leaders, who spoke with NBC News on the condition of anonymity, as they are prohibited to speak with the media, said many of their peers were not happy about depriving girls of their right to education.

“Look, more than half of our population comprises females. How can you develop your country and build institutions when you stop your females from getting education?” a senior police officer and Taliban leader asked.

“This isn’t a wise decision, as we can’t afford to annoy the Afghan people by banning girls’ education,” he said. “It should be our top responsibility to create an environment for girls to freely go to schools, colleges and universities as per the Islamic Shariah and our local customs and traditions.”

Women were barred from attending school and employment under Taliban rule, from 1996 to 2001, when the regime was toppled by American forces after leaders refused to hand over Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.

The Taliban had promised to respect women’s rights according to Islamic law and tradition when it retook control of the country last August.

Karimi, the Taliban spokesperson, said that schools would remain closed to girls beyond sixth grade pending further approval by the leadership but could provide no further information.

When and if this will happen remains unclear. A meeting of the council of religious scholars in the week following the ban decided to keep schools closed for girls indefinitely.

“The Ulema Council ... stated they are not against girls’ education but before sending the girls to schools, they want to create a safe environment for them in the country,” a Taliban leader, who requested anonymity out of fear of breaching the ban on speaking about official issues with reporters, said following the meeting.

The council also discussed the issue of a dress code for girls but said it considered it “a minor problem,” two Taliban leaders with direct knowledge of the meeting said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the media ban.

The school ban also signals incoherence in the Taliban’s policy toward girls’ education. Universities remain open to women, despite rumors that that could soon change. Karimi said the rumors were false.

Some Taliban leaders have also secretly sent their own daughters to private schools in Qatar, according to a report published in January by the Afghanistan Analysts Network.

Wisna Sultani, a 23-year-old female student in Kabul, said the Taliban’s decision “showed that the group has no obligation to comply with the basic rights of women and Afghan citizens.”

“The world should break its silence against this obvious oppression and the explicit violation of the rights of millions of female students in Afghanistan,” she said.

But withholding aid as leverage to punish the Taliban for depriving millions of girls of their right to attend school threatens to exacerbate Afghanistan’s already dire humanitarian crisis. The education of girls has remained one of the international community’s main concerns in talks over whether to recognize the group as leaders of the country and release humanitarian aid.

“Everybody did think that the secondary schools were going to open. ... So this has thrown everything up in the air and left a lot of people struggling to think how do you engage ... with a group that behaves this way,” Barr from Human Rights Watch said.

The issue of educating girls in Afghanistan holds “some very serious consequences on people’s ability to eat and literally survive,” she continued. “This is a devastating, devastating decision for Afghans who are trying to survive and live decent lives in that country.”

Image: School girls Malahat Haidari, right, and her sister Adeeba Haidari, center, study at their home with their younger sisters and mother in Kabul on March 24, 2022. 

(Ahmad Sahel Arman / AFP - Getty Images)

Around 95 percent of Afghans are not getting enough food to eat, while 23 million are suffering from acute hunger as of March, according to the United Nations.

In a move that may further exacerbate the country’s economic woes, the Taliban last week placed a ban on cultivating opium poppies, a crop farmers had turned to for income amid the desperate food shortage.

The Taliban reversed its decision to allow teenage girls to study eight days before a United Nations conference in London on March 31, which aimed to raise $4.4 billion for humanitarian relief for Afghanistan from international donors, an appeal that surpassed drives for Syria or Yemen.

The conference raised only half of its target goal, with representatives from Germany and the U.K. taking issue with the Taliban’s last-minute school ban.

“Our potential to provide support will depend on how constructively the Taliban engage on key issues like the rights of women and girls and also ethnic and religious minorities. ... No nation can succeed if half of its population is held back,” said Liz Truss, Britain's foreign minister.

Mushtaq Yusufzai reported from Peshawar and Rhoda Kwan from Taipei, Taiwan.

They broke the law and are disgraced. 

Whatever they do now, shame will cling to Johnson and Sunak

‘Breaking the law and lying about it would have seen any other prime minister and chancellor resign instantly.’

They will be forever followed by tales of people who abided by the Covid rules and died alone – while Downing Street partied

 Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson outside 10 Downing Street, December 2021. 

Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

Polly Toynbee

Tue 12 Apr 2022 

They broke the rules they set for everyone else. Then the prime minister lied and lied again to parliament. “Never before in history has a prime minister broken the law,” Chris Bryant, chair of both the standards and privileges committees, told me this afternoon. “These aren’t just rules; they broke the law.” Johnson’s chancellor, asked if he had attended two Downing Street Christmas parties, told the Commons: “No, Mr Speaker, I did not attend any parties.”


Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak fined for breaking lockdown laws

Breaking the law and lying about it or misleading the house would have seen any other prime minister and chancellor resign instantly. But nothing can make them go if they cling to their posts. Only their own MPs can oust them, with a flurry of those famous letters to the backbench 1922 committee chair. There should be queues forming outside Sir Graham Brady’s door right now, but don’t hold your breath. Instead, you hear calculating perplexity: without them, who would be our winning leader? But for the sake of their reputations, these MPs should only consider the probity of their party.

More sententiously, they pretend concern for the country: a war is no time to ditch a leader. Really? In both world wars, inadequate leaders were dumped unceremoniously for someone better suited for that serious and decisive role. None of them selected Boris Johnson expecting him to make a war leader. God knows how long the war in Ukraine may last, but the time may come, before long, when citizens across Nato countries will be asked to make sacrifices, in energy, in supply lines, in taxes. An immoral lawbreaker who has failed to acknowledge the grievousness of his own behaviour is hardly the man to call on others to tighten their belts in the national interest.

This government pretends Covid has gone away, because it wishes it had. It has chosen to ignore the hundreds of deaths a day, the hospitals and ambulance services overwhelmed, pretending it’s all over. But wherever Johnson and Rishi Sunak go, if ever again they dare face an unscripted audience, someone will stand up and say, “My mother died alone, because we obeyed the law” or “My children had to say goodbye to their dying mother on a tablet, because we all obeyed the law while you held 12 parties.” Imagine trying to dodge every ordinary citizen who might have a story to tell during an election campaign.

Bryant has a constituent, a university student, who was fined £2,100 for attending – not organising – a party during lockdown. Many others will wonder why these two got off so lightly. To the hundreds of thousands with painful Covid stories, those Downing Street parties will always be an affront, not a mere bagatelle as the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg pretend. And for none of them will all this fade away by the next election.

Tory MPs need to hear loud and clear from all their electors. They need a frightening avalanche of emails and letters, today, right now. Nothing else will stir them to do what their party would certainly have done at any other point in its history.

Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist

Abrams-backed election lawsuit goes to trial in Georgia


 Georgia gubernatorial Democratic candidate Stacey Abrams talks to the media after qualifying for the 2022 election on Tuesday, March 8, 2022, in Atlanta. When she ended her first bid to become Georgia governor in 2018, Abrams announced plans to sue over the way the state’s elections were managed. More than three years later, as she makes another run at the governor’s mansion, the lawsuit filed in Nov. 2018 by Abrams' Fair Fight Action organization is finally going to trial on Monday, April 11.

 (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson, File)


KATE BRUMBACK
Sat, April 9, 2022

ATLANTA (AP) — When she ended her first bid to become Georgia governor in 2018, Stacey Abrams announced plans to sue over the way the state's elections were managed. More than three years later, as she makes another run at the governor's mansion, the lawsuit is going to trial.

Filed in November 2018 by Abrams' Fair Fight Action organization, the suit alleged that state officials "grossly mismanaged” the election, depriving some citizens, particularly low-income people and people of color, of their right to vote. The lawsuit originally called for a sweeping overhaul of the state's elections, but its scope was considerably narrowed after the state made changes that addressed some allegations and others were dismissed by the court. The trial is set to begin Monday.

Even if U.S. District Judge Steve Jones sides with the plaintiffs, it’s unclear whether that will affect elections this year. Jones and other federal judges have been reluctant to order last-minute changes, noting that the Supreme Court has repeatedly said federal judges shouldn’t alter rules “on the eve of an election."

In the months preceding the 2018 election, Abrams, a Democrat, accused her Republican opponent in the governor’s race, then-Secretary of State Brian Kemp, of using his position as Georgia's chief elections officer to promote voter suppression, an allegation Kemp has vehemently denied.

In the more than three years since that fiercely fought contest captured national attention, the focus on Georgia's elections has only intensified. Problems during the 2020 primary drew sharp criticism. Later that year, former President Donald Trump hurled insults at state officials who declined to overturn his narrow general election loss in the state. And the nation watched closely in January 2021 as a pair of Democrats unseated the state’s two incumbent Republican U.S. senators.

Numerous GOP-led state legislatures passed election bills last year after Trump stoked false claims that widespread fraud led to his 2020 defeat. Georgia's bill, which Kemp signed into law a year ago, was one of the broadest. Among other things, the state's measure reduced the window to request an absentee ballot, stripped power from the secretary of state and sharply curtailed the use of absentee ballot drop boxes in populous and Democratic-voting metro Atlanta counties. Voting rights groups and the U.S. Department of Justice promptly sued; those lawsuits are pending.

Republicans in Georgia this year passed legislation to let the Georgia Bureau of Investigation initiate probes into alleged election wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, Abrams, a state lawmaker who was little known outside Georgia when she ran four years ago, has become a household name and Democratic Party star. The only Democrat running for governor, she'll face Kemp again in November if he fends off a primary challenge from former U.S. Sen. David Perdue.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger accused Abrams and her allies of trying to undermine the integrity of Georgia elections.

“Her 3-year ‘stolen election’ campaign has been nothing more than a political stunt to keep her in the national spotlight, and it’s a disservice to Georgia voters,” he said in an emailed statement.

Fair Fight says it works to promote voting rights and support progressive candidates around the country, and its PAC has raised more than $100 million since its founding. It filed the lawsuit along with Care in Action, a nonprofit that advocates for domestic workers. Several churches have also joined as plaintiffs.

Fair Fight collected statements from people who said they had problems voting. The lawsuit cited multiple alleged problems, including the purging of eligible voters from voter rolls under a “use it or lose it” policy; the state’s so-called exact match voter registration rules; an insufficient number of voting machines at some precincts; and a lack of sufficient training for election officials. It asked a federal judge to find that Georgia’s elections processes violated the U.S. Constitution and federal law.

“Since the start of this lawsuit, we have highlighted real voters and their challenges because we believe that is one of the most effective ways to demonstrate the barriers in Georgia’s elections system," Fair Fight executive director Cianti Stewart-Reid said in an emailed statement. She added that voters from around the state will testify at trial about obstacles faced while trying to vote.

Some of the alleged problems were addressed by changes in state law. For example, a 2019 law called for replacing the state's outdated voting machines. The new system was implemented statewide in 2020.

In February 2021, Jones threw out parts of the lawsuit, saying some allegations were made irrelevant by changes in state law or the plaintiffs’ lack of standing. Among them were some of the claims about voting machines and election technology, as well as the security of voter lists and polling place issues. The following month, Jones dismissed claims targeting the “use it or lose it” policy and some allegations of inadequate training of poll workers. He also dismissed some claims relating to provisional and absentee ballots.

The issues remaining for the trial have to do with the “exact match” policy, the statewide voter registration list and in-person cancellation of absentee ballots. The plaintiffs claim that Georgia's secretary of state and State Election Board members are “denying and abridging Georgians' right to vote" in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the U.S. Constitution.

Under the “exact match” policy, information from voter registration applications is checked against information held by the state Department of Driver Services or the federal Social Security Administration. If there's a discrepancy, the would-be voter must show identification to county officials before being able to cast a regular ballot.

The plaintiffs say data entry errors or differences as minor as a missing hyphen or apostrophe can trigger a non-match and that naturalized citizens can also be wrongly flagged as noncitizens if records are outdated. These problems disproportionately affect people of color and can depend on where a person lives because counties do things differently, the plaintiffs say.

The statewide voter registration database is “error-ridden,” the plaintiffs say, resulting in the erroneous deletion of eligible voters' registration or critical information being incorrect. That can prevent eligible voters from being able to vote or force them to overcome undue burdens to do so, the plaintiffs say.

The plaintiffs also say election officials aren't sufficiently trained on canceling an absentee ballot if someone chooses to vote in person instead, which can cause voters to be turned away or forced to cast a provisional ballot.

Lawyers for the state argue the claims in the lawsuit “are not supported by the evidence.” The number, geographic scope and severity of the alleged problems experienced by voters identified by the plaintiffs “do not rise to a level sufficient to demonstrate an unconstitutional burden on voting in Georgia,” state lawyers wrote in a filing. Additionally, they argue, the alleged problems cited are not the responsibility of the state officials named in the lawsuit.

Thirty-one Calgary election candidates fail to file financial disclosures

The highest-profile candidate on the list was Brad Field, who finished fourth in the mayoral race

Author of the article: Jason Herring
Publishing date: Apr 10, 2022 • 

Calgary City Hall was photographed on Monday, November 22, 2021. 

PHOTO BY AZIN GHAFFARI/POSTMEDIA

More than two dozen Calgarians who ran for office in last fall’s civic election will face sanctions for failing to disclose their campaign donations.

In a report to city council, Elections Calgary published the names of 31 council hopefuls who did not file a disclosure of their election finances and contributions by deadlines set out in provincial legislation.

Candidates were required to file disclosures by March 1 or face a $500 late penalty. Those who still didn’t file by March 11 were named in the report to council, and are now ineligible to run in the 2025 election. Those who don’t file at all will also be barred from running in the 2029 election.

The absence of financial disclosures means Calgarians aren’t able to see how much money these candidates raised, how they spent it and who donated to them.

None of the candidates who failed to file their disclosures won office, and the vast majority finished with only a small share of the vote. The list of non-disclosures includes four candidates who had withdrawn their candidacy and did not appear on the ballot.

The highest-profile candidate on the list was Brad Field. He finished fourth in the mayoral race, behind front-runners Jyoti Gondek, Jeromy Farkas and Jeff Davison, and finished with just under five per cent of the vote share. Field did not immediately respond to a request for comment Sunday.

Among others who failed to file are Ward 1 runner-up Steve Webb and prominent anti-vaxxer Kevin J. Johnston, who was arrested in the United States in January. Johnston, a fringe candidate in the mayoral race, was sentenced to time served last month for his attempt to flee Canada after failing to show up to complete a weekends-only jail term related to ignoring orders he comply with COVID-19 restrictions.

Election spending and donation disclosures from candidates who did file revealed an election characterized by high spending, particularly among candidates vying for the mayor’s chair.

Farkas ran up the largest bill, spending $821,241 en route to a second-place finish in the mayoral race. Gondek, who won the office, spent $633,342, and Davison spent $359,545 in finishing in a distant third.

Jan Damery, the fifth-place finisher, spent $437,083 on her campaign, racking up a nearly $100,000 deficit when compared to funds raised.

Among all councillors, Ward 9 candidate Gian-Carlo Carra spent the most, dropping $201,345 on his successful re-election bid.

Candidate financial disclosures can be viewed online via calgary.ca/election.

Prominent Hong Kong journalist Allan Au reportedly held on sedition charge

Reporter and lecturer’s arrest in dawn raid another blow to city’s press amid Beijing crackdown

Police stand guard outside the Stand News office building in Hong Kong during a raid by police in December. Former columnist Allan Au has reportedly been arrested on a sedition charge. Photograph: Vernon Yuen/Rex/Shutterstock


Agence France-Presse in Hong Kong
Mon 11 Apr 2022

A veteran Hong Kong journalist has been arrested by national security police for allegedly conspiring to publish “seditious materials”, a police source and local media said, in the latest blow against press freedom.

Allan Au, a 54-year-old reporter and journalism lecturer, was arrested in a dawn raid on Monday by Hong Kong’s national security police unit, multiple local media outlets reported.

A senior police source confirmed Au’s arrest on a charge of “conspiracy to publish seditious materials”. Police have yet to release an official statement.


Hong Kong democracy and media freedom has ‘entered endgame’

Au was a former columnist for Stand News, an online news platform that was shuttered last December after authorities froze the company’s assets using a national security law.

Two other senior employees of Stand News have already been charged with sedition.

National security charges have also been brought against jailed pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai and six former senior executives of Apple Daily.

Once Hong Kong’s most popular tabloid, Apple Daily collapsed last year when its newsroom was raided and assets were frozen under the security law.

Soon after Stand News was shut down, Au began to write “good morning” each day on his Facebook to confirm his safety. One of the city’s most experienced local columnists, he was a Knight fellow at Stanford University in 2005 and earned a doctorate from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

In 2017 Au published a book about censorship in Hong Kong titled Freedom Under 20 Shades of Shadow. Au spent more than a decade working for RTHK, Hong Kong’s government broadcaster, running a current affairs show.

But he was axed last year after the authorities declared a shake-up that began transforming the once editorially independent broadcaster into something more resembling Chinese state media.


Ronson Chan: the former Hong Kong editor who is now a delivery driver

Introduced by colonial ruler Britain in 1938, sedition was long criticised as an anti-free speech law, including by many of the pro-Beijing local newspapers now praising its use.

By the time of the 1997 handover, it had not been used for decades but remained on the books. It was used by police and prosecutors in the wake of huge and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests in 2019.

Over the past two years sedition has been wielded against journalists, unionists, activists, a former pop star and ordinary citizens, leading the city’s media-freedom rating to plummet.

Sedition is currently separate from the sweeping national security law that Beijing imposed on Hong Kong in 2020. However, the courts treat it as a national security offence, which means that bail is often denied for those charged.

Next month Hong Kong is expected to get a new Beijing-anointed leader, former security chief John Lee, who oversaw the police response to the 2019 democracy protests and subsequent crackdown.

Asked on Monday whether Au’s arrest would worsen press freedom, Lee declined to comment, saying all investigations should be carried out independently.

The super-rich
Name the eight oligarchs given ‘golden visas’, demands Labour

Exclusive: Call for Priti Patel to name the Russians on sanctions list and publish report on defunct visa purchase scheme

About 3,000 millionaires bought the ‘golden visas’ from 2008 to 2015, more than 700 of whom were Russians. 

Photograph: Neil Hall/EPA


Jasper Jolly
THE GUARDIAN 

Sun 10 Apr 2022 12.00 BST

The government is facing fresh calls to reveal the identities of eight sanctioned Russian oligarchs who were allowed to buy “golden visas” to live in the UK.

Stephen Kinnock, the shadow minister for immigration, is demanding that the home secretary, Priti Patel, name the eight Russians on the sanctions list and publish a long-withheld report on the now scrapped visa purchase programme.

The government closed the “tier 1 investor visa” scheme in February as diplomatic relations with Russia came under severe strain. A week later, Russia invaded Ukraine, prompting the US, EU and UK to impose sanctions on many of Russia’s richest people to try to put pressure on Putin’s regime.
Advertisement

Those on the sanctions list include Roman Abramovich, the billionaire owner of Chelsea FC; Alisher Usmanov, the steel and mining magnate described by the EU as one of Putin’s “favourite oligarchs”; and Andrey Guryev Jr, whose family reportedly owns Witanhurst, a mansion in Highgate, north London, that is London’s second largest home after Buckingham Palace.

Critics had long warned that the golden visa scheme, under which the super-rich could essentially buy the right to reside in the UK, was open to abuse. The scheme allowed people with at least £2m in investment funds and a UK bank account to apply for residency rights, along with their family.

The Home Office last month committed to publishing a 2018 report on golden visas that covered the period from their introduction in 2008 by the Labour government up to 2015. The government has not said when it will do so.

During that period few if any checks were carried out on applicants, in what the campaign group Spotlight on Corruption described as a “red carpet for dirty money”. About 3,000 millionaires bought the visas during that time, more than 700 of whom were Russians.

In the letter to Patel, seen by the Guardian, Kinnock wrote: “By failing to be transparent about the contents of report the government is likely to raise public suspicion, and that this will in turn erode trust in government and politics more widely.

“It is simply not enough that the scheme is now closed and a small number of oligarchs sanctioned; politicians and the public alike must be able to understand the findings of the report and learn the lessons.”

The closure of the scheme in February was welcomed across parliament, although MPs have expressed security concerns related to those granted the visas. Spotlight on Corruption said last year that 6,312 golden visas – half of all such visas ever issued – were being reviewed for possible national security risks.

The Home Office said: “Following Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, the government moved quickly to sanction those linked to the Putin regime and to ensure that there is no safe haven in the UK for his allies to hide their dirty money.

“The New Economic Act, which received royal assent after an expedited passage through parliament, delivers a package of measures to bring tougher sanctions against those who facilitate illicit finance in the UK and empowers law enforcement to investigate entities who do not comply. As part of the Act, a new register of overseas entities also compels faceless foreign companies who own UK property to reveal their identities.”