GREEN ENERGY

Where things stand one year after China promised to stop building coal-powered projects overseas

Beijing’s push for renewable energy in other developing countries requires changes in its investment and financing models.

Han Chen & Shen Wei
Yesterday · 

A worker conducts the quality-check of a solar module product at a factory of a monocrystalline silicon solar equipment manufacturer in Xian of China's Shaanxi province in December 2019. | Reuters

On September 21 last year, China’s president, Xi Jinping, told the United Nations General Assembly via video link that China would increase support for green and low-carbon energy in developing countries, and not build any new coal-fired power projects overseas.

The move reflected a wider backing away from coal among traditional and emerging aid donors. Two of Asia’s main exporters of coal power projects, Korea and Japan, had made similar statements in June 2021. The month after Xi’s announcement, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development members said they would no longer offer export credit support for coal power plants unless plans to abate emissions were in place.

China has been a major builder of coal power plants around the world, often providing both the finance and the technology. Its decision is having and will have a profound effect, both at home and in expanding the low-carbon development and energy transition paths of developing nations.
Policy announcements and signs

Since the announcement, China’s government bodies, financial institutions and power plant builders have been working at the policy, finance and project level to increase support to renewable energy projects in its overseas energy investments.

At the policy level, in March this year the National Development and Reform Commission and three other government bodies published a joint document on promoting green development in Belt and Road nations.

It called for “a full stop to new coal power projects overseas, and cautious progress on those already under construction”, as well as the green and low-carbon development of overseas coal power projects which have already been built, which in practice means retrofitting plants to improve efficiency and reduce pollution. These were the first concrete instructions from Chinese officialdom on how to handle projects at different stages of implementation since the initial announcement.

Between September 2021 and April 2022, 15 overseas coal power projects that were in the pre-financial closure and pre-construction stages were shelved or cancelled. These were projects that had nonetheless received Chinese financial backing or EPC – engineering, procurement and construction – support.

Question marks still hang over projects where financial closure has already occurred but construction has not yet started, and “captive” power plants being built specifically to power industrial zones. In these cases, compensation for breaches of contract could be due if a Chinese party unilaterally withdraws, making cancellation more complicated.

On 6 January 2022, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment and the Ministry of Commerce published guidelines on environmental protection in overseas investments. These focus on managing environmental risks across the lifespan of projects in Belt and Road nations, and encouraging firms to apply standards produced by international organisations and multilateral bodies, or Chinese standards where tougher.

The rapid tempo of policy announcements shows that there is unanimity across government on decarbonising China’s overseas projects. While producing high-level policy and specific guides for project-level operations at home, China was also active diplomatically, working with developing nations to build platforms and mechanisms for international green and low-carbon cooperation.

In November 2021, the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation issued a joint declaration on tackling climate change. The following month, a China-ASEAN forum on high-quality Belt and Road development was held. In May 2022, a joint statement was issued at a high-level meeting on climate change of the BRICS nations – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

In October 2021, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment and domestic and overseas partners founded the Belt and Road Initiative International Green Development Coalition, with 10 topics identified for research. Important outputs include a green development guideline for the BRI, which created a classification and screening system for projects based on their potential environmental impacts.

The second phase of the development of this guideline includes a handbook for companies and financial institutions, and a green development guide for construction of highways and railways. These promote green management of projects on the Belt and Road by helping stakeholders identify, evaluate, manage and improve the environmental impacts of Belt and Road Initiative projects; and by providing processes and tools for management and self-assessment of projects.

The Exim Bank of China, the China Development Bank and the China Export and Credit Insurance Corporation (Sinosure) are the main state-owned financial institutions funding overseas projects, and as such have been quick to respond to the change in government policy.

Exim Bank has successfully issued 3 billion yuan (US$425 million) in green bonds earmarked for clean energy investment, which will fund the construction and operation of renewable energy projects such as hydropower and wind power. The China Development Bank has signed memoranda of understanding on funding climate action with both the Green Climate Fund and the United Nations Development Programme.

Sinosure, meanwhile, has sped up its processes for approving renewable energy projects and set up a team to analyse risk control and insurance models for renewable projects in developing countries. Building a green export credit system for clean energy is becoming part of the agenda at these “policy financial institutions” – state-owned financial institutions charged with policy implementation.

Meanwhile, in the commercial banking realm, the Bank of China and the Postal Saving Bank of China have said they will not fund new coal mining or coal power projects overseas. The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China has said it will “produce a roadmap and timetable for a gradual withdrawal from financing coal”.
Reforming investment

Our research at the Green BRI Center in the International Institute of Green Finance, Beijing, has found that power plant construction firms owned by central government have already pulled out of projects where binding commitments have not yet taken effect, and are actively looking at how to expand their renewable energy portfolio.

The proportion of fossil fuel projects in China’s Belt and Road energy sector projects started to fall in 2016 and bottomed out in 2020, when 58% of investment went to renewables (hydropower, solar, wind and bioenergy), the first time renewables surpassed fossil fuels. And apart from the 15 Chinese-built or funded coal power projects that were cancelled between September 2021 and April 2022, the country made no overseas coal power investments in 2021 or the first half of 2022.

As for renewables projects, hydropower accounted for the bulk of China’s investment in the Belt and Road in 2021–2022, at 56% of the renewables’ share, followed by solar and then wind.

To promote global energy transitions and low-carbon development, China should build on this foundation and expand cooperation with developing nations on renewables capacity building and grid construction, and so gradually increase the proportion of renewables projects in its overall investment.

Credit: via China Dialogue.

China has a complete renewable energy industrial chain, with strong R&D, manufacturing, installation, operation and maintenance capabilities. It should make use of this leadership in the renewables sector by providing technical support and capacity building for developing nations, and also by promoting the sharing of information on green development and the use of green tech in such nations.

China’s low-carbon approach to overseas energy investments requires its financial institutions to be flexible, open and innovative, leaving behind homologous, closed and rigid investment models. Specifically, they can no longer rely on EPC+F (engineering, procurement and construction plus financing) contracts underwritten by sovereign guarantees from the host nation. These have for many years been the dominant model for large coal power and hydropower projects.

In the renewable sector, by contrast, independent power producers and more flexible project financing are the norm. China’s financial institutions should work with third parties, strengthen cooperation with international development funders and commercial financial institutions in order to level their learning curve for overseas renewable energy financing.

Cooperation with third parties allows: financial power to combine with project management experience; exploration of hybrid financing, non-recourse loans and structured financing; improvements to environmental and social management of the project throughout its lifespan; and more private capital. This will allow full potential of renewables in developing nations to be realised.

China should coordinate its overseas renewable investments, including: major renewable generation facilities and the associated grid and other infrastructure; knowledge transfer and capacity building under the South–South cooperation mechanisms; distributed projects; and other types of development aid.

China’s renewable energy investments should cover both the “software” (knowledge transfers) and “hardware” (equipment and infrastructure), big projects and small projects, equity investments and construction contracting, as well as the combination of export credits and development aid. Only this will truly help developing nations achieve the necessary power sector transitions.

This article was first published on China Dialogue.

Massive recall issued for dry shampoo products over cancer risk

CBC/Radio-Canada - Thursday

More than a million dry shampoo products from brands Bed Head TIGI, Dove and Tresemmé are being recalled across Canada due to the detection of a cancer-causing chemical.


Unilever Canada says potentially elevated levels of benzene were detected in the affected products, which are packaged in aerosol cans.© Health Canada

Health Canada issued the recall Tuesday for 15 different products that were sold between January 2020 and October 2022 (see the full list here). Parent company Unilever reported that more than 1.5 million units of the affected products were sold across the country.

In a statement on its website, Unilever Canada said potentially elevated levels of the chemical benzene were detected in the affected products, which are packaged in aerosol cans.

Benzene is classified as a human carcinogen and exposure to the chemical by inhalation, orally or through the skin can result in cancers such as leukemia, blood cancer of the bone marrow, and blood disorders, according to Health Canada.

The federal department noted that "daily exposure to benzene in the recalled products at the levels detected in testing would not be expected to cause adverse health consequences" based on exposure modelling and the cancer risk assessments from the Environmental Protection Agency.

As of Oct. 7 this year, Unilever had not received any reports of incidents or injuries related to the affected products, Health Canada said.

Unilever said an internal investigation identified the aerosol can propellant as the source of the elevated levels of benzene and it has worked with its propellant suppliers to address the issue.

"Unilever Canada is recalling these products out of an abundance of caution," it said.

Health Canada said consumers "should immediately stop using the recalled product and dispose of it in accordance with the instructions for disposal on the packaging." They can contact the company for reimbursement, it said.

Analysis. 

The new administration’s proposal brings intersectionality to the promise of equal opportunity, going beyond most equal rights schemes in the world. 

The priority of the new ministry would be the protection of the rights of women and the most vulnerable sections of the population.

In Colombia, a ministry that affirms the right to equality

written by Elena Marisol Brandolini  

IL MANIFESTO
Published on October 23, 2022


“To bring back equality to all people in Colombia, so that dignity becomes something they’re used to” – this was the goal set out on Tuesday by President Gustavo Petro and Vice President Francia Márquez in their speech before Congress as they introduced the bill to establish the Ministry of Equality and Equity.

This is the first step by the Colombian government towards creating the new Ministry of Equality and Opportunity, to be approved by Congress, whose portfolio will be held by the vice president and whose task will be to guarantee the rights of traditionally excluded populations, adopting the criterion of intersectionality. It was a promise made on the campaign trail, which was brought before Parliament in the first 100 days of government, to consolidate the path towards Colombia as a “World Power of Life,” where “Vivir sabroso” (“Living joyfully”), in Márquez’s words, will mean that people can “live without fear.” And it reaffirms the “Total Peace” strategy launched by Petro to combat poverty and social marginalization, because the armed conflict that has gripped the country for decades has produced only misery and death.

The object of the new ministry will be to “adopt, coordinate and execute policies to promote the elimination of economic, political and social inequalities; foster the right to equality; and enforce the principle of non-discrimination.” Its scope will cover all the country’s most vulnerable population groups: women, the LGBTQI community, Afro-descendant and indigenous peoples, peasants, children, adolescents and the elderly, people in extreme poverty, victims of violence, people with disabilities, homeless people and migrants.

Guaranteeing women’s rights and the full protection of women will be the first task of the new ministry, Petro stressed. It aims at “full equality” of women and men, because inequality is the main problem and equality represents “the right path to take for Colombian society to overcome violence and lack of democracy.”

In Europe, the prohibition against any kind of discrimination is in Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. In Italy, the first Ministry of Equal Opportunities was born in 1996, led by Anna Finocchiaro. In Spain, one had to wait until the government of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero for a similar ministry to be created, in 2018, led by Bibiana Aído. The latter’s responsibilities have been similar to those of the Italian ministry, with a predominantly focus on women; but it has been evolving over time, and currently, under Minister Irene Montero, the Spanish Ministry is focusing on the rights and safeguards of both women and the LGBTQI community. In France, since 1974, the French government has included women’s rights in the portfolio for various ministries, and they are now under the purview of the Minister for Equal Opportunities, led by Elisabeth Moreno since 2020.

The main novelty of the ministry being set up in Colombia, compared to the developments in the abovementioned European countries, can be found in its transversal character: in the context of South America, the recognition of women’s multiple positions in hierarchies defined in terms of gender, ethnicity, and social condition makes it possible to envision equality policies that are not limited to one particular group, but aimed at all the various population groups that are being discriminated against in different ways. This is possible because in Colombia, as in Chile or in Iran, women have been, and are, at the forefront of the processes and movements bringing general transformation to society.

Elena Marisol Brandolini
Originally published in Italian on October 21, 2022

https://ilmanifesto.it/in-colombia-un-ministero-che-afferma-il-diritto-alluguaglianza

Bolsonaro vs Lula: Brazil looks to its past to elect its future President

Brazil has to pick between two candidates surrounded by controversies as the next president. Former President Luiz Ignacio Lula and current President Bolsonaro are the two candidates in the race. Here's all you need to know.

Nandini Singh
New Delhi,

: Oct 24, 2022

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and leftist former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva 

(Photo: Reuters)

By Nandini Singh:

 Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, whose first tenure was marred by scandals, Covid and deforestation of the Amazon, is currently trailing behind leftwing candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in the race for the top post. According to a poll survey, Lula enjoys 49 per cent of voter support compared to Bolsonaro's 44 per cent ahead of the October 30 runoff vote.

However, the more things change, the more they remain the same in Brazil. The country has to pick between two candidates surrounded by controversies. Former President Luiz Ignacio Lula and current President Bolsonaro are the two candidates in the fray. Brazilians have to look into their past to elect their future leaders.

Let's first look at Lula, a two-time President. Lula served eight years as President till 2011. His tenure saw high economic growth and reduced inequality. Lula introduced a left-wing agenda into policies and measures implemented during his term.

Lula, who did not have any formal education, reportedly had one of the highest approval ratings the country has ever seen.

However, corruption was rampant under the Lula regime. During his watch, a corruption scandal broke out in which politicians and businessmen were accused of laundering money in collusion with a state-owned oil company.

Subsequently, Lula was convicted and imprisoned on charges of money laundering and corruption, but he always said that he was not guilty. In a dramatic turn of events, just before this election, a court annulled his conviction, and he is back again running in yet another President's campaign.

Jair Bolsonaro is the exact opposite of Lula, a far-right conservative leader who admired former US President Donald Trump. Bolsonaro has sparked controversy with statements such as "We as Brazilians hate homosexuals". Despite the initial backing, Bolsonaro's popularity dropped due to the mishandling of Covid pandemic.

Bolsonaro remained a vaccine sceptic and refused to allow vaccines in his country. Brazil had one of the highest mortality rates during multiple Covid waves. Over six lakh people died of the infection in Brazil under Bolsonaro's rule.

Read | Jair Bolsonaro and his crimes against humanity

In mid-2019, massive fires caused by deforestation scorched whole sections of the Amazon rainforest, provoking a chorus of global criticism of Bolsonaro's policies. Under his presidency, the destruction of Brazil's portion of the world's biggest rainforest has increased by 75 per cent compared to the previous decade. Bolsonaro has been heavily criticised for undermining the powers of supervisory authorities in the Amazon and for encouraging mining and agriculture in the protected areas.

Australia taking notes on New Zealand wellbeing budgets

Share on Linked In

Could attempts to make New Zealand's national budget more widely focused on wellbeing influence economic policy in Australia? Photo: 123rf

Australia's Budget, to be released on Tuesday will have a "wellbeing" section, modelled on the New Zealand budget concepts.

New Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers said his country should start to measure wellbeing in other ways than the usual economic statistics, such as measuring the state of the environment or access to childcare.

He said he'd had extensive talks with New Zealand Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson on how Aotearoa's wellbeing budget worked.

Wide interest in wellbeing components to national budgets

When Grant Robertson meets his counterparts at global events he has regularly been asked about wellbeing.

Not his own wellbeing, but the wellbeing of his entire country.

"I suspect it is in the talking points," he laughed, during an interview with the ABC.

"There is a real interest in it."

Among economists and those who study public policy, he has become known for handing down a "wellbeing" budget in 2019, declaring the success of the economy under his stewardship would be measured by more than just traditional indicators like productivity and growth.

Underpinning the approach was a simple idea - the financial prosperity of a country alone was not an accurate enough measure of the quality of life of its citizens.

"Traditionally, budgets have looked at mainly the financial outcomes of the decisions that governments make - and they're incredibly important," Robertson said. "But that's not the be-all and end-all."

His wellbeing budget was developed with reference to some 60 indicators of living standards, and the government had five "wellbeing objectives".

They included pledges to reduce child poverty, help workers transition to a low-emissions economy, boost the physical and mental health of New Zealanders and improve outcomes for Māori.

Robertson said the goal was to "give a much richer picture about what success actually is" and make a budget more relevant to New Zealanders.

"There's a lot of numbers and charts, definitions and acronyms that go with financial management, and they don't always have huge meaning for people," he said.

"But I think [the wellbeing concept] makes it more real."

"If we don't have a population that's feeling well, healthy and happy, then they're going to be less productive."

How much has New Zealand's approach achieved?

But it was not yet clear how much of a difference the "wellbeing" budget approach had made overall.

Some measures did not appear to have moved much, while others appeared to have worsened, though the Covid-19 pandemic certainly had not helped things.

"I think the way this was rolled out was a bit of a marketing gimmick," said Arthur Grimes, the former chairman of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand.

"I'm a big fan of wellbeing measurements, but you need explicit targets. We did not do that, so it's not quite clear what has been achieved and what has not been achieved in many areas."

"The wellbeing approach in NZ is just pretty vague. To make it work I think you need better targets."

Robertson said he did not agree with some of the criticism his government had faced and argued progress on difficult goals would simply take a long time to achieve.

"We've lifted about 66,000 kids out of poverty in the past few years, so we can say yes, that measure is something we've succeeded on," Robertson added.

"Equally, the world can intervene, and Covid came along and that's disrupted a lot of what we wanted to do".

Measuring wellbeing is not a new idea

Australia's new treasurer Jim Chalmers (left) takes an oath in front of the Australian Governor General David Hurley and new Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (right), in Canberra, following the country's national election in May. Photo: AFP/ Saeed Khan

The idea of measuring how wellbeing relates to government spending was not new or unique to New Zealand, although the country did capture a lot of headlines with the move in 2019.

The concept has been discussed and tried in various ways, including in places like Scotland and Wales.

The Australian Treasury developed its own wellbeing framework in 2004 - though it was scrapped in 2016 - former UK prime minister David Cameron spoke about the approach when he was in power and so did former French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

"Australia was arguably a world leader in this area," Grimes said.

"Every budget since at least 1900 has had a wellbeing focus. Governments spend a huge amount on things like health, education and welfare. wellbeing is just a synonym for welfare."

Supporters of a specific wellbeing approach to government policy argue it can provide a more targeted way to address long-term problems in a society and ultimately be a good thing for budgets in the long run.

For example, if children are lifted out of poverty and get access to good education, it is presumed they are likely to contribute more to the economy through work, innovation and taxes later in life.

"This approach is an opportunity," said professor of public policy Michael Mintrom from Monash University.

"It treats policies as investments."

"In terms of wellbeing for the nation as a whole, putting an emphasis on early intervention is absolutely critical."

However, opponents argue economic indicators, particularly inflation, growth and unemployment, are going to remain the biggest determiners of societal wellbeing, particularly given the global economy faces choppy waters and the cost of living had soared.

Australia's budget on Tuesday will have a wellbeing chapter

New Australian treasurer Jim Chalmers had been interested in wellbeing budgeting for some time.

He described Robertson - a fellow Labour (Labor in Australia) politician - as a "great bloke" and had repeatedly spoken with him about how a similar concept could be implemented in Australia.

The Albanese government's first economic blueprint on Tuesday will not feature any explicit wellbeing goals, though they look likely to be introduced next May.

But the budget books would contain a dedicated section to discuss what sort of measurements might work in Australia. For example, the state of the environment or access to childcare.

"The October budget is the start of this important discussion - it explores international best practice and how we can best apply it here at home," Chalmers said.

"It's critical that we measure what matters as a country, to help us track and make progress when it comes to our national priorities."

"The wellbeing budget is about how we can add to our traditional economic indicators, not replace them."

Former treasurer mocked wellbeing concept

Chalmers was well aware his opponents could try to portray the focus on wellbeing as out-of-touch nonsense at a time when more families were struggling with the rising cost of food, fuel, healthcare and housing.

His predecessor Josh Frydenberg, who lost his seat in May, notably mocked the concept of a wellbeing budget in 2020.

Speaking in parliament, Frydenberg claimed it could involve meditation mats, incense, beads and Chalmers walking barefoot into the chamber.

"Hugs for all," Frydenberg joked.

The Morrison government left office with an enormous amount of projected debt and the budget in structural deficit, in part due to massive spending programs aimed at getting Australia through the pandemic.

New Coalition's Treasury spokesperson Angus Taylor did not mock the idea of a wellbeing budget when asked about the proposal by the ABC.

However, he argued that, given the darkening economic clouds around the globe, traditional indicators needed to be the government's main focus right now.

"I think having good outcomes in health and education and mental health is enormously important, but what's important for the treasurer and the budget is to focus on Australia's economic position," he said.

"It's going to be a tough Christmas for many Australians as they see interest rates going up, they see the cost of living going up."

Wellbeing can work during a crisis: NZ deputy PM

On Australia's budget night, the wellbeing concept was likely to be overshadowed by other news, the ABC said.

The treasurer seemed to speak about it less in recent weeks, and preferred instead to focus on inflation or talk about the "tough decisions" he needed to make to curb spending and budget waste.

But New Zealand's deputy prime minister argued wellbeing budgets could work at any time.

"Even in a time of crisis, like we've got with high inflation, the wellbeing approach helps because it helps understand which groups in the community need to be supported," Robertson said.

"Inequality as an issue is now - I think - regarded by most people as an economic issue as much as a social issue."

He said he did not expect Australia to end up adopting the same wellbeing measurements as New Zealand, though he was pleased Chalmers was looking at following in his nation's footsteps.

"Jim will make this his own, I'm absolutely sure of that," Robertson said.

"But I think the underlying kind of philosophy is actually a really important one for the progress of our countries."

-ABC

REALITY TV PURGE

Xi Jinping's iron grip over China and his party has grown over the past decade changing the face of the country forever

By East Asia correspondent Bill Birtles
ABC.NET.AU

Former Chinese president Hu Jintao (centre) was escorted out of congress on Saturday, just one move which shows the power behind Chinese President Xi Jinping (right)

(Reuters: Tingshu Wang)

Xi Jinping's extraordinary accumulation of personal power at the 20th Communist Party Congress over the weekend has gone beyond most observers expectations, with some suggesting his control is now greater than in Chairman Mao Zedong's day.

And his warning of dark times to come and obsession with security is foreshadowing a difficult period ahead.

It wasn't his precedent-busting third five-year term at the helm of the world's most powerful political party that shocked analysts, as that was on the cards for the past four years, ever since he scrapped State Presidential term limits.

Rather two moments over two days helped crystallise just how much of an iron grip he's managed to secure over both the Party and China as a whole.

The first was a moment on Saturday that, even with the most sympathetic explanation, still involved the incredibly undignified act of a former Chinese leader being manhandled off stage.

Just moments after journalists were allowed to enter the Great Hall of the People, Hu Jintao, Xi's predecessor, was filmed in some sort of dispute or distress involving the documents in front of him.

Sitting between Mr Xi and Xi loyalist Li Zhanshu, both who spoke to him, Mr Hu looked confused and upset, and then was forced to his feet by an aide of Mr Xi who led him off stage.

Most of the other top leaders sat stone-faced and largely ignored this luminary of Chinese politics as he was led away.

Chinese state media has censored discussion of the incident but has allowed the video, filmed by foreign media, to continue to circulate on the main messaging app, WeChat.

Only in English on a platform blocked in China, Twitter, has the state newsagency said the 79-year old ex-leader was feeing unwell.

It's an explanation many analysts believe is credible.

Mr Hu's image and attendance wasn't scrubbed from state TV reports of the Congress closing ceremony, so the likelihood he was purged is very low.

The moment former Chinese president Hu Jintao is escorted out of party congress

But his forced, unhappy exit stage right, with a pat on the shoulder to protege Li Keqiang on the way out was, at the very least, extraordinary timing.

Because it came just after the Party delegates all voted to approve a new group of leaders that cut Mr Li and all other factional associates of Hu Jintao from top positions.

"It's clear that he either had some sort of medical issue or this was a deliberate attempt to humiliate him, as his allies inside the Chinese Communist Party were being removed from all positions of power," said Alex Joske, a senior China analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and the author of a new book on China's covert operations named Spies and Lies.

"It's a reflection of the sort of opaque medieval workings of the Chinese Communist Party that something as simple as a man being led off stage can spark so much speculation," he said.

The second moment putting Xi's power play into clearer view came on Sunday, when he led six men out on to a stage as his new Cabinet.

Expectations were high that Mr Xi would try to fill the positions with loyalists, but few predicated a straight flush.

All six of the men are regarded as Xi associates, especially his new Number 2 Li Qiang, a politician without national-level experience, best known for overseeing a draconian COVID lockdown in Shanghai this year that led to food shortages and tanked the economy.

It won Xi Jinping's approval though because it eradicated the virus from the city as new cases dropped to zero.

Temporarily.

Now parts of Shanghai are back in lockdown as COVID-19 cases have returned.
Politburo tightening Xi's grip

The Shanghai shutdown contributed to a yearly quarter of almost stagnant national economic growth.

But despite that, Mr Li will likely takeover management of the world's second largest economy as the new Chinese Premier next year.

If there are any doubts about his credentials, there are none about his loyalty to the one man who counts.

"The way I read it, Xi Jinping for the past decade has been trying to transfer the [Politburo Standing Committee] from a board of directors, where there is some institutional means of power sharing, into a team of division managers," said Dr Fengming Lu, a lecturer on Chinese politics at the Australian National University.

While the tea leaf reading of elite Chinese politics is fascinating to some, a more general steer on where Xi's China is going next is more relevant to most.

And optimism is in short supply.

Xi Jinping, who first took power in 2012, will serve a third five-year term as General Secretary of the CCP.(Reuters: Thomas Peter)

Xi's defence of his COVID-zero policy and his promotion of Li Qiang leaves little room to imagine China opening its borders anytime soon.

His defence of the country's economic fundamentals and repeat of an oft-used line about China "opening the door wider" clashes with the reality of the last few years.

His increasing talk of "security", spanning everything from political security to economic security, shows rising paranoia both from forces at home and abroad.

His promotion of the head of China's Ministry of State Security to the Politburo for the first time signals tightening control.

His decision not to include a woman among the 24-member Politburo, returning it to an all-male leadership group for the first time in a quarter of a century, shows a widening gulf compared to expectations for more equality in countries abroad.

Increasing zero-sum competition with the US, which the Biden administration is now reciprocating, will be the theme of foreign relations.

"Xi Jinping's main priority is still to deal with the US, and in this process he's trying to make more friends than enemies in the Western camp," Dr Lu said.

"There is still some leeway for the Australian/China relationship in the next few years", he said, pointing to recent overtures by the Chinese embassy in Australia.

But others are less optimistic about the broader trends, believing the nineties and early noughties heyday of China opening up to the world is now firmly in the rear-view mirror.

"We're not going to be walking into a future where we can return to more friendly relations," Mr Joske said.


"The Chinese Communist Party is really showing that it's locked into long-term competition with Western countries, so we're in for a really bumpy ride."

Nuclear chief: Iran leading producer of radiopharmaceuticals in world

By IFP Editorial Staff
September 30, 2022



The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) says the Islamic Republic has become one of the major producers of radiopharmaceuticals in the world despite relentless sanctions.

In a tour of eastern Iranian province of Kerman on Thursday, Mohammad Eslami said Iran managed to beat the challenges and facilitate 205 medical centers across the country with pharmaceutical medicines.

He explained that the technology is mainly used for treatment of cancer as it can target cancer cells with high accuracy and save patients from the side effects and various complications of chemical drugs.

Eslami pointed out that, unlike the wrong perception in the world, nuclear technology is not only used for uranium enrichment, clarifying its power can be used to generate electricity and its radiation is used for various purposes, including in medicine for diagnosis, treatment, equipment, and producing radiopharmaceuticals.

The AEOI head also stated that Iran is planning on increasing the capacity to produce radiopharmaceuticals, stipulated in the country’s strategic document and the 20-Year Vision.

The number of homegrown radiopharmaceuticals is increasing every year and Iran has been exporting its radiopharmaceuticals to many countries, including India, Lebanon, Iraq, and some European countries, he added.

UK

Why Did it All go Wrong (so Quickly) for Liz Truss?

22 OCTOBER, 2022

BEN WORTHY  

PQ

In September 2022, Prime Minister Liz Truss became the UK’s latest ‘takeover’ leader, securing the post via the second route rather than the first. Remarkably, she is the fifteenth takeover since 1916 and the second woman appointed mid-term since 2016. Takeovers often get little time in power, with an average of just 3.6 years compared with an average of 6.6 years for those who came to office following a general election.

However, Truss’ premiership lasted just forty-five days, far behind her closest modern comparators with 211 days (Andrew Bonar Law) and Alex Douglas Home (363 days).

As I found in my 2016 review of a century of such leaders, while replacing prime ministers who step down represents the most common way into power, takeover premierships are often difficult. The most recent takeovers are bywords for failed premierships, especially the successive takeovers of Theresa May (2016–2019) and Boris Johnson (2019–2022). Further back, Anthony Eden and Neville Chamberlain are stark warnings of quite how badly takeovers can fare. Yet, Liz Truss’s premiership was far shorter and more tumultuous even than those. What happened?

A SELF-INFLICTED CRISIS

Takeovers inherit the problems and crises. These can be economic, as happened with Major and Brown, or political, as when David Cameron gifted Theresa May the problem of Brexit. What makes Liz Truss different was that her crisis, unlike her recent predecessors, was self-inflicted. During the leadership hustings, Truss had repeatedly promised tax cuts and a radical break with ‘treasury orthodoxy’. It was these policies, created with ideological ally, Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng, that immediately plunged her new government into deep crisis and controversy, from which it never recovered.

Truss’s initial action was to institute an energy price cap, which was broadly well received. However, a ‘financial event’ or ‘mini-budget’ followed, made up of an un-costed combination of tax cuts and a stamp duty cut, rush-released with little scrutiny and no analysis from the Office for Budget Responsibility, and leading to a series of financial shocks.

Truss’s fiscal event had two immediate effects, one economic and one political. First, mortgages became more expensive, as pension teetered on the brink of collapse and the pound fell in value. The IMF urged the UK to rethink ‘large and untargeted fiscal packages’, while the Bank of England was forced to step in. Second, in an echo of the poll tax, this hit exactly the homeowner voters Conservatives had cultivated. Truss’s own polling fell lower than Johnson’s when he was forced to office, while pollsters recorded record levels of support for Labour.

Truss initially rejected any change of course, calling critics ‘declinists’, before U-turning on the controversial 45 pence top-rate tax cut on the eve of her first speech to conference. After just thirty-eight days, Truss sacked her Chancellor and replaced him with Jeremy Hunt, who then reversed the entire raft of policies. By day forty-two of her premiership, the entirety of her ‘radical’ policy platform had effectively been reversed, including the energy price plan.

RADICAL ACTION WITH BRITTLE SUPPORT

As well as crises, takeovers often inherit unhappy parties. Truss came to office aware that of the four most recent takeover leaders prior to herself, three had to face a formal leadership challenge.

Few prime ministers, and no takeovers, have dared do anything so radical with so little party support. Truss was the favourite of grassroots members, but gained the support of just 32 per cent of her MPs, less than any candidate since 1998. The party she inherited had been deeply divided by Brexit and had developed an increasing ‘taste for rebellion’ ever since. After Truss installed a Cabinet of loyalists, her already uneasy backbenches were filled with a new group of ‘the rejected, the ejected and the dejected’. This included Rishi Sunak, a possible leadership rival, as well as influential and experienced former ministers such as Michael Gove and Priti Patel. Remarkably, over her shoulder sat two former Prime Ministers.

Her mini-budget had immediate consequences for her already brittle party relationship, with MPs publicly criticising her stance and speculating about her removal. More dangerously, Conservative MPs were reportedly putting in letters of no confidence (despite the Prime Minister being safe for a year) and rumours swirled of plots to replace her with a unity candidate. On 19 October, relations finally fell apart in a bungled confidence vote triggered by Labour’s fracking ban motion, with scenes of bullying and manhandling of Tory MPs in the voting lobby.

So what went wrong? In carrying out her promises, Prime Minister Truss created a deep crisis, which fractured an already divided and unhappy party and created a policy disaster reminiscent of the poll tax or Black Wednesday. Her radical policies were done with little party support, and so both policies and party came rapidly apart. Truss entered office knowing that, of her past four Conservative predecessors in Downing Street, three faced formal removal attempts and only one, long ago in 1997, was removed by a general election. Anthony King wrote back in 1992 that Britain now had ‘over the shoulder politics’, shaped by the relationship between governments and their own backbenchers. Brexit has now accelerated and toxified this politics and Truss is the third takeover in a row to be destroyed by it.

Ben Worthy is Lecturer in Politics at Birkbeck, University of London.

UK PM polls: What led to  Rishi Sunak's defeat against Liz Truss 6 weeks ago?

Livemint.23 Oct 2022

Britain's former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Conservative MP, Rishi Sunak leaves his home in London on October 22, 2022. - Former prime minister Boris Johnson on Saturday returned to Britain from a holiday to launch an audacious political comeback, as Conservative leadership rival Rishi Sunak reached the minimum threshold to contest the UK's top job. (Photo by Daniel LEAL / AFP) 

• Former UK finance minister Rishi Sunak announced on Sunday announced that he is running to replace outgoing PM Liz Truss

Rishi Sunak, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer of British government, an Indian origin British politician on Sunday, 23 October declared that he is going to run for Prime Minister of United Kingdom, again. Sunak lost the race to Tory leadership to Liz Truss, six weeks ago after former Prime Minister Boris Johnson declared that he was quitting the position following a series of scandals.

Liz Truss became the shortest serving Prime Minister of Britain after she announced her resignation only 44 days after being elected. Truss was forced to resign following a series of faulty economic and financial decision.

Sunak in the last race had remained a strong contender, enjoying more popularity than his rival Liz Truss, however, even if he was touted as the favourite initially for the race to Downing Street, Rishi Sunak started losing his spark midway.

Here's taking a look at why Sunak lost out 6 week ago

Surging unpopularity:

Rishi Sunak's image was permanently tainted when a video of his came into foray where he accepted that he took money from deprived urban areas. His comments, boasting of shifting money from “deprived urban areas" to fund projects in the Kent commuter belt sparked outrage, considering it cut across the UK government’s rhetoric about ‘levelling up’ Britain and spreading wealth beyond the south-east.

Data have shown that even when Sunak was the chancellor in the British cabinet, his approval rating among the public was declining. As of 8 August, 2022, only 22% of the people thought that Rishi Sunak was doing a good job, as against his rating two years ago, 48%, according to a YouGov survey.

Image of backstabber:

Hours after Boris Johnson announced his resignation, Sunak threw his hat into the ring with a campaign video titled ‘Ready for Rishi’. This gave him the image of a backstabber, as he was also the first among cabinet ministers to resign from the Boris Johnson led government.

Sunak's wealth and other controversies:

Rishi Sunak's wealthy status brought him under the least favoured quota in the Tory race last time. Sunak is married to Akshata Murthy, the daughter of Infosys founder Narayana Murthy. Notably Akshata Murthy owns 0.93% stake worth 690 million in the tech company. 

In May 2022, Rishi Sunak and his wife featured in The Sunday Times UK Rich List of the top 250 wealthiest people in the UK.

Rishi Sunak aim to bag the PM position in Britain took a dive in April after reports revealed that his wife holds a non-domiciled status in the UK, and hence does not pay British taxes on her foreign earnings.

View Full Image

A protestor against Rishi Sunak becoming prime minister holds a placard outside Houses of Parliament in London, Britain October 21, 2022. 

REUTERS/Henry Nicholls

Sunak also criticised the handling of Covid-19 pandemic by the Boris Johnson government, saying it had been a mistake to "empower" scientists and that the downsides of lockdowns were suppressed.

Losing support of conservatives:

Declaring that he is ready to run for Prime Minister only hours after his boss and mentor Boris Johnson had resigned on 8 July, costed Sunak the support of the conservative party members.

Top conservative leaders like Sajid Javid, who was also once a close ally of Sunak, took the public platform to endorse Truss's candidature. Javid even went ahead to warn that Sunak's economic prescription would mean sleepwalking into a high-tax, low-growth economy.

Another top Tory leader Nadhim Zahawi backed Liz Truss, saying that the UK needs a 'booster' attitude to the economy, not a 'doomster' one.

UK PM polls post Truss's resignation

Even though the former finance minister was not the supported candidate last time, following Truss's resignation SUnak seems to be a clear favourite. However, one cannot rule out the presence of his rival Boris Johnson who has decided to run the race again. As per polls, Sunak has 55% chance of winning the next PM race, far ahead of second favourite, Penny Mordaunt, who has only a 16% chance.