Sunday, August 27, 2023

‘Incredibly poor’ British Museum security let thief take valuables over years, ex-curator claims

Tara Cobham and Jane Dalton
THE INDEPENDENT
Sun, 27 August 2023 

‘Incredibly poor’ British Museum security let thief take valuables over years, ex-curator claims


A former curator at the British Museum has claimed security there was “incredibly poor”, which led to the theft of hundreds – and possibly thousands – of precious artefacts.

And a second expert has told The Independent a colleague raised concerns to the museum numerous times as far back as 2020, after spotting certain items for sale on eBay.

The London institution was rocked by scandal last week when it emerged that irreplaceable treasures had vanished from its vaults.

Hartwig Fischer has now quit as the museum’s director over the handling of the matter (Benedict Johnson/The British Museum/PA Wire)


Its director Hartwig Fischer resigned on Friday, admitting the museum “did not respond as comprehensively as it should have in response to the warnings in 2021, and to the problem that has now fully emerged”.

Mr Fischer is the second scalp the scandal has claimed so far. Last month, the head of the museum’s department of Greece and Rome was sacked after the disappearance of the ancient and antique items, such as gold jewellery, glass and semi-precious stones. Thought to be worth tens of millions of pounds, most had been kept in a storeroom.

Antiquities expert Peter Higgs denied having stolen the artefacts, with his family protesting his innocence.

The Metropolitan Police have interviewed a man, but no-one has been arrested.

Now an ex-curator in a different department has claimed scores of other conservators, specialists and researchers may go into any storeroom in the same week or even on the same day with no oversight of cataloguing, leaving invaluable items at risk.

“The British Museum really does need to review its security policy,” the former member of staff, who did not wish to be named. told The Independent.

Antiquities expert Peter Higgs, 56, who was sacked, denied being responsible (Brick Classicists Empire)

“Cataloguing was incredibly spotty. Each object does have a number and designated place in the store, but in probably most cases that’s all they have... The stores are alarmed but not otherwise monitored.

“I would call up security, tell them which room I was entering, get the key and that’s all I needed to do to have access to a huge range of objects.

“Many of the collections are stored in the same rooms as others so if a person were dishonest they would have the cover of knowing that scores of other curators, conservators, specialists and researchers would have been in that room in the same week or even day.”

The ex-curator told how she was never required to let anyone know which objects she was working with on any day.

Experts put tags in drawers when removing items, but there was no oversight of that, she said.

Mr Higgs’ family came out in his defence, insisting his name had been “dragged through the mud” (Sourced)

Pay in the sector, and particularly at the museum, is so poor that many experts with world-class reputations “end up making tough decisions about having children or eating”, she claimed, adding: “And when you’re that desperate, things can go wrong”.

“A lot of my colleagues are barely making enough for rent, particularly with the cost-of-living crisis. At the British Museum this was brought up by the supervisor of my line manager at nearly every departmental meeting.”

Calling the museum’s security “incredibly poor”, she further suggested Mr Higgs was innocent.

“He also wouldn’t have had a lot of control,” she said. “Even if he knew it was happening, which is incredibly doubtful unless he was directly involved, I don’t think he could have himself even sacked the responsible party without showing clear evidence of what had happened.”

Museum bosses have launched an independent investigation (Getty Images)

Separately, a leading expert on Roman art at the University of Oxford said a colleague had alerted museum bosses to eBay listings, but was “constantly apparently getting nowhere with the museum and getting very upset as a consequence”..

Professor Martin Henig told the Independent he believed reports that up to 2,000 items vanished over several years.

“To my eyes, these were major treasures of perhaps inestimable value, a window into ancient life. It is equivalent to ransacking a room in an art gallery,” he said.

He agreed with the former curator there had been cataloguing failures, especially of smaller items.

“The British Museum has been rather negligent with this aspect of the collection,” he said, claiming “neglect” and “disregard” of the gem collection ultimately led the thief to think they could “get away with most things”.

The professor said the collection of at least 4,000 Greek and Roman items alone in 1926 contained “superb” material. “Having worked on this material for over 50 years, though not from the Greek and Roman Gallery, I am heartbroken.”

The museum, which houses the Parthenon Marbles, also known as the Elgin Marbles, needs to “tighten security” (AFP via Getty Images)

Suggesting the delay could have been due to fears the scandal would “upset the institution”, Prof Henig said: “The British Museum should have acted [when my colleague flagged the thefts] and clearly didn’t, so there is moral culpability more widely and probably higher up.”

An eBay spokesperson said it supported the police investigation, adding: “eBay does not tolerate the sale of stolen property. If we identify that a listing on our site is stolen, we immediately remove it and work with law enforcement to support investigations and keep our site safe.”

A British Museum spokesman said: “Our new research-and-storage facility outside Reading, the British Museum Archaeological Research Collection, allows us to document parts of the collection with unprecedented precision. Projects already under way to digitise and better document the collection will fully modernise our record-keeping.

“We take the care of all the objects in our collection extremely seriously, and thankfully incidents of this kind are incredibly rare.

“We have already tightened security arrangements and launched an independent review to fully understand what happened.

“This review will also make recommendations about further measures to ensure this doesn’t happen again. The independent review will conclude this year and we will publish the recommendations.”

On the director’s resignation, George Osborne, a trustee chairman, said: “The trustees will now establish an interim arrangement, ensuring that the museum has the necessary leadership to take it through this turbulent period as we learn the lessons of what went wrong, and use them to develop plans for a strong future.

“I am clear about this: we are going to fix what has gone wrong. The museum has a mission that lasts across generations.

“We will learn, restore confidence and deserve to be admired once again.”


British Museum director dismissed warning about artefact missing since 1963

Gordon Rayner
Sat, 26 August 2023 

Dr Jonathan Williams mused that the jewel might have been damaged during the war - Mattis Kaminer/Alamy

An antiquities dealer contacted Jonathan Williams, deputy director of the British Museum, in 2020 with evidence that a Roman jewel he had bought belonged to the institution.

When he returned the artefact in May 2021, after the lifting of Covid restrictions, he says that his concerns were dismissed because the piece had been listed as missing since 1963.

The plasma portrait of a young man also had a piece missing, raising the possibility that a thief had broken it when removing it from its setting, but Dr Williams mused that it might have been damaged during the war.


The item is now thought to be one of more than 2,000 objects that may have been stolen over more than a decade, many of which were sold on eBay.

Ittai Gradel, the Danish antiquities expert whose warnings were ignored - Matthew James Harrison

A museum source said: “We believed it had been missing since 1963, so had no reason to believe it was as a result of theft.”

The claim came after George Osborne, a former Conservative Cabinet minister, issued an apology to the nation and blamed “groupthink” for senior management’s failure to face up to the scale of the scandal of artefact thefts from the museum.

Mr Osborne, who is chairman of the British Museum’s trustees, said some missing items had been recovered, but conceded that hundreds more may have been stolen from its vaults and added: “On behalf of the British Museum, I want to apologise for what has happened. We believe we’ve been the victim of thefts over a long period of time and, frankly, more could have been done to prevent them.

“But I promise you this: it is a mess that we are going to clear up. I can tell you today that we’ve already started to recover some of the stolen items.”

Mr Osborne spoke after Hartwig Fischer, the director of the British Museum, resigned and Mr Williams “voluntarily stepped back” from his duties over their failure to uncover the theft of objects, despite years of warnings from whistleblowers.

George Osborne (left), chairman of the British Museum and Hartwig Fischer, former director - Dave Benett/Getty

Mr Fischer announced that he was quitting his role as director after seven years because the museum “did not respond as comprehensively” as it should have done when presented with a dossier of evidence in 2021.

He also expressed “sincere regret” for comments he made about Ittai Gradel, a Danish antiquities expert whose warnings were ignored, but whom Dr Fischer tried to blame for the delays.

Mr Osborne said the review will look into “what has happened not just in 2021, but for the many years before then, into how come the museum missed some of the signals that could have been picked up”.

The former chancellor said the estimate of 2,000 items stolen or missing was “a very provisional figure”.

Last week, the museum announced that it had sacked a member of staff, now known to be Peter Higgs, the acting keeper of Greek collections, after jewellery and gems were found to have gone missing. Mr Higgs denies any wrongdoing.

On Wednesday, Metropolitan Police officers investigating the case interviewed an unnamed man under caution.


UK

RMT chief says pay ‘no longer primary issue’ as new wave of action sparks chaos - when will train strikes end?

Sophie Wills
Sat, 26 August 2023 

Secretary-General of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) Mick Lynch stands with union members at a picket line outside Euston Station

RMT general-secretary Mick Lynch says “pay is no longer the primary issue” and accused industry chiefs of “attacking” workers as a new wave of strike action begins. Thousands of rail workers staged a mass walk out today (Saturday, August 26), sparking bank holiday travel chaos amid huge events such as Leeds and Reading festivals.

Drivers represented by ASLEF are holding a separate strike next week on Friday (September 1) while the union will also ban overtime on the same day as the second RMT strike on Saturday, September 2. Disputes between unions and train companies have been dragging on for well over a year, but Mr Lynch said that pay is no longer in the spotlight after the recent closure of hundreds of ticket offices.

He told Sky News: “Pay is not the primary issue because they are attacking our people and telling them they’re going to be made redundant. My members won’t get a pay deal if they’re made unemployed.

“So, just on the stations they want to get rid of a quarter of staff. You don’t get any pay if you’re not employed by the company. The Government is saying they’re going to take people out of the ticket offices and employ them in the stations, but what they’re actually going to do is give them P45s and say you’re out of the industry.”

Mr Lynch said in order for the strikes to be resolved the very structure of the rail industry would need to change. He added: “They’ve got some demands that they’re making on our members about how they want them to work - they want them to have new contracts, they want to introduce lower pay rates [even lower] than the ones we’ve got now. So if we can sort that stuff out, we can move on then to dealing with pay.

“And if they want to make us a pay proposal without the condition that we have to accept massive job cuts then we will consider that proposal. But we’ve never had a suggestion that we can have a pay rise independent of these changes they want to make at any stage in the last two or three years.”

What dates are the train strikes in August and September?

RMT are set to strike on the following dates in August and September 2023:

  • Saturday, August 26

  • Saturday, September 2

Drivers represented by ASLEF are holding a separate strike on Friday, September 1, while the union will also ban overtime on the same day as the second RMT strike on Saturday, September 2. The last strikes took place over three days on Thursday, July 20,Saturday, July 22 and Saturday, July 29.

Which train operating companies are affected by the strikes?

The 14 train operating companies affected by the most recent RMT train strikes are:

  • Avanti West Coast

  • c2c

  • Chiltern Railways

  • CrossCountry (also affected by industrial action on Saturday 9 September)

  • East Midlands Railway

  • Gatwick Express

  • Great Northern

  • Great Western Railway

  • Greater Anglia

  • Heathrow Express

  • Island Line - ASLEF strike only

  • London Northwestern Railway

  • LNER

  • Northern

  • South Western Railway

  • Southeastern

  • Southern

  • Stansted Express

  • Thameslink

  • TransPennine Express

  • Transport for Wales (not on strike, but service changes on some routes)

  • West Midlands Railway

The companies affected by the driver union’s action (ASLEF) are:

  • Avanti West Coast

  • Chiltern Railways

  • c2c

  • CrossCountry

  • East Midlands Railway

  • Greater Anglia

  • GTR Great Northern Thameslink

  • Great Western Railway

  • Island Line

  • LNER

  • Northern Trains

  • Southeastern

  • Southern/Gatwick Express

  • South Western Railway

  • TransPennine Express

  • West Midlands Trains

Children reaching UK in small boats sent to jail for adult sex offenders

Mark Townsend, Sian Norris and Katharine Quarmby
Sun, 27 August 2023 

Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA

Vulnerable children who arrive in Britain by small boat are being placed in an adult prison that holds significant numbers of sex offenders.

A growing number of cases have been identified where unaccompanied children, many of whom appear to be trafficked, have been sent to HMP Elmley, Kent, and placed among foreign adult prisoners.

According to the most recent inspection of Elmley, the block where foreign nationals are held also houses sex offenders.


Of 14 unaccompanied children so far identified by staff at Humans For Rights Network as being sent to an adult prison, one is believed to have been 14 when they spent seven months in Elmley.

Most of the cases involve Sudanese or South Sudanese children who travelled to the UK via Libya, with most appearing to have been trafficked or having experienced some form of exploitation.

This weekend there were calls for the Home Office to launch an immediate investigation into the issue and urgently release anyone believed to be a child who is inside an adult jail.

Maddie Harris, of Human Rights Network, said the group had worked with more than 1,000 age-disputed children and that those sent to adult prisons were among the most “profoundly harmed”.

She said: “These children are locked down in their cells, not knowing who to call for help, prevented from adequately accessing legal advice and from challenging the arbitrary decision made about their ages by immigration officials upon arrival in the UK. These are children looking for safety who instead find themselves in an adult prison, denied that protection and exposed to great harm.”

Anita Hurrell, head of the migrant children’s project at the children’s charity Coram, said: “It is wrong to criminalise these children and dangerous to send them to adult men’s prisons.”

The children – whose ages are contested by the Home Office – have been charged with immigration offences introduced under the Nationality and Borders Act, which became law last year and introduces tougher criminal offences to deter illegal entry to the UK. Lawyers warn that the practice of sending unaccompanied children to adult prisons appears to be increasing. On Thursday, an age-disputed child was identified in Folkestone magistrates court bound for prison, and there were reports that another minor was in police custody in Margate and also expected to be sent to Elmley.

The imprisoning of minors is, say critics, the latest facet of a broken asylum system. On Thursday, the asylum backlog rose to a high of more than 175,000, up 44% from last year, despite government spending on asylum almost doubling.

The children sent to Elmley were declared adults by the Home Office following what many experts describe as a “cursory and arbitrary” age assessment by officials, often conducted within hours of them reaching the UK by small boat.

A number of Home Office decisions that meant children were sent to an adult prison have already been overturned after detailed assessments by independent or local authority specialists.

New data obtained by the Observer confirms that hundreds of asylum-seeker children are being wrongly treated as adults by the Home Office. According to data from dozens of councils, more than half of the unaccompanied asylum-seeking children who undergo Home Office age assessments on arriving into the UK are later confirmed to be children.

Data from 55 councils under freedom of information laws shows that of 1,416 age assessments carried out over the five years to April 2023 by specialist social workers on age-disputed asylum seekers, 809 were found to be children. In 10 councils, all of the young people assessed were found to be children.

Syd Bolton, co-director of Equal Justice For Migrant Children, said: “Age assessment has developed into the most monstrous of procedural devices.”

Bolton said he considered the practice to be a “deliberate barrier to accessing asylum protection and denying young asylum seekers access to children’s services. It is a major tool of the Home Office in discrediting an asylum claim.”

Wrongly classifying children as adults means they can also be placed alone in unsupervised accommodation alongside adults. In Elmley, Harris said, youngsters shared cells, although a number of age-disputed children had since been released.

According to Elmley’s latest inspection, one in four inmates in a survey said they felt unsafe in the jail. It also said that, despite the prison being “no longer designated to hold prisoners convicted of a sexual offence”, 70 such inmates were still there.

Days ago, details emerged of a paedophile being held at Elmley who was convicted of 14 sex offences and found guilty of abusing two children.

Harris added: “The children are always deeply harmed by the time they have spent in prison in the UK, expressing clearly how they are unable to sleep, do not understand why they were held there and struggle to speak about their time there.”

She added: “It should be made clear that neither adult or child should be criminalised for arriving in the UK to claim asylum, an offence that clearly contravenes the refugee convention.

Hurrell referred to a recent court ruling that unaccompanied minors should be looked after by councils “where they can be kept safe and recover”. It is thought that many more unaccompanied children have been placed in adult prisons. Human Rights Network staff attending hearings at Folkestone magistrates court have identified them by noticing a young person contesting the date of birth given to them by immigration officials upon arrival in the UK.

Related: Asylum seekers say Bibby Stockholm conditions caused suicide attempt

A government spokesperson said: “Assessing age is a challenging but vital process to identify genuine children and stop abuse of the system. We must prevent adults claiming to be children, or children being wrongly treated as adults – both present serious safeguarding risks.

“To further protect children, we are strengthening the age-verification process by using scientific measures such as X-rays.”

The spokesperson added that the government had not been provided with the information needed to investigate the points raised by the Observer, although at the time of publication it had not asked to view any evidence.
Grenada prime minister calls on Britain to pay slavery reparations: ‘It’s the decent thing to do’


Nadine White
Updated Sat, 26 August 2023

The prime minister of Grenada has issued fresh calls to King Charles and Rishi Sunak to apologise and pay slavery reparations to former colonies of Britain.

Speaking from his home in an exclusive interview with The Independent, Dickon Mitchell criticised Britain’s failure to atone for the mass enslavement of African people and said failing to do so sent a bad message.

“If the UK wants to continue being a country that demonstrates that it upholds the values of justice, fairness, democracy, [and] equal treatment of human beings, then it should be upfront in apologising for slavery,” Mr Mitchell said as the nation prepared for its annual Spicemas carnival.

Grenada prime minister Dickon Mitchell 
(Que Media)

“Reluctance or refusal to do so then sends the opposite message. In Grenada, as a former colony of the UK, we recognise the legacy issues that we’re dealing with and therefore I think it’s the decent thing to do, frankly.

“Even in a post-colonial era, I think it is critical to ensuring that going forward ... we improve our relationship with Britain and see that there’s a genuine sense that the former colonies, the people who live there, are viewed as equals by the country that colonised us.”

His call comes as the family of former UK prime minister William Gladstone are due to travel to the Caribbean to apologise for the role of their ancestors in the slave trade.

Mr Gladstone, who was prime minister on four occasions in the 19th century, was the son of John Gladstone – one of the largest slave owners in the British West Indies. Charlie Gladstone, the great-great-great-grandson of John, said he “felt absolutely sick” when he found out about his family’s slave-owning past and has vowed to apologise.


Nadine White interviews Mr Mitchell at his home in Grenada 
(Que Media)

The UK has never apologised for slavery or committed to paying reparations, despite multiple requests to do so from MPs over the decades.

In April, Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy asked Mr Sunak if he would make a “full and meaningful apology” on behalf of the government and “commit to reparatory justice” during a parliamentary session.

But the prime minister declined, saying “trying to unpick our history is not the right way forward”.

The month before, Foreign Office minister David Rutley told Labour MP Clive Lewis, who has family links in Grenada: “We acknowledge the role of British authorities in enabling the slave trade for many years before being the first global force to drive the end of the slave trade in the British empire.”

Mr Mitchell slammed that response – likening it to a killer dodging responsibility for a heinous crime.

“Well, that’s almost like seeing someone who’s committed murder be applauded for having committed murder,” he told The Independent.

“To my mind, that’s nonsensical and, in reality, an attempt to, in a sense, whitewash your own conscience. It was wrong, you should say it’s wrong, give a commitment that you will never support something like that – and then help the victims of the descendants who have to deal with this.”

King Charles has recently spoken of his “sorrow” and deepening “understanding” of slavery, but Mr Mitchell said he hoped he would go further and lead impactful change on the issue.

“I think it’s easy sometimes for people to conveniently forget the past,” the Grenada prime minister said.

The Molinere Underwater Sculpture Park in Grenada was designed by British sculptor Jason deCaires Taylor and is thought to be a tribute to enslaved African people (Supplied)

“So I applaud the King’s comments – I hope they actually lead to action and that that helps to bring parts of the UK that have steered away from this conversation into the conversation, so that ultimately, we couldn’t get the right consensus and be able to move on.”

It comes amid mounting calls for the UK to pay reparations as numerous Caribbean nations, which are former colonies of Britain, including Grenada, signal their intentions to ditch the monarchy and become a republic.

 Is It Time The UK Paid Reparations For Slavery? | Good Morning Britain 

Aug 24, 2023  

'It may have been a long time ago, but there are obviously current-day consequences.' Leading UN judge, Patrick Robinson, says the UK will no longer be able to ignore calls for slavery reparations. It’s been suggested Britain owes £18.8 trillion.

Is it time to pay reparations?


Mr Mitchell said he hoped his nation would make such a move – which would require a referendum – however, he said it was not a priority and he was keen to avoid the matter being used as a “political football”.

“I need to make sure that we get sufficient buy-in from all sectors of society to say ‘this is what we want’, and the average Grenadian understands the benefits of moving to a republican type of government, rather than just the political class,” he said.

Last April, the UK was cautioned against glossing over its past atrocities, as Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex were forced to cancel a royal tour of Grenada following concerns over tensions around reparations talks.


UK prime minister Rishi Sunak has declined to apologise for Britain’s links to the slave trade
(2023 Getty Images)

As the UK marks Windrush’s 75th anniversary – remembering the arrival of the first ship carrying Caribbean families to the UK to fill the need for more workers after the Second World War – Mr Mitchell said there could be no mistaking the fact that multiculturalism was behind the UK’s success.

He said Mr Sunak’s own position, as the first Asian prime minister, reflected this and his government should bear that in mind when considering immigration strategies.

“So, there is no doubt in my mind that the future success of the UK is actually built on remaining a multicultural open society,” said Mr Mitchell. “In order for that to continue, you also have to recognise that immigrants – including persons who are not traditionally white – are critical towards the continued success of the UK.

“It’s obvious that the conversation about reparations, migration, immigrants, maintaining an open, plural society – rather than one that’s closing off against itself – is something that has to happen.”

The UK government and Buckingham Palace both declined to comment.



UK

Home Office’s ex-asylum boss joins pro-migrant charity  
OUCH


Edward Malnick
Sat, 26 August 202

Ms Haddad was known as being 'very difficult' during her time at the Home Office, one source claimed

A former Home Office chief accused of resisting key Conservative policies while in charge of asylum is joining a charity that has said the Government’s policies are “inhumane, racist and divisive”.

Emma Haddad, who was the Home Office’s director general for asylum until October 2022, will help to oversee Amnesty International UK, which has been campaigning against the Government’s attempts to halt Channel crossings and deport migrants to Rwanda.

Ms Haddad’s appointment will intensify tensions between Conservative ministers and senior officials. A senior Tory said: “This demonstrates the extent of the institutional hurdles that we have been up against.”

One source described Ms Haddad as “very difficult” and the “chief blocker” of ministers’ policies during her time at the Home Office. A Home Office source claimed that, during her time at the top of the department, the senior civil servant was “hostile” to the Government’s agenda on asylum, including a plan to move migrants out of taxpayer-funded hotel rooms and into large-scale accommodation.

The Home Office source said that Ms Haddad also oversaw the introduction of “lenient” guidance in which asylum caseworkers were told they could not reject the testimony of a migrant caught lying.

Sources cited her move to Amnesty as evidence that Ms Haddad was politically opposed to Conservative policies on asylum and immigration.

Obeyed Civil Service code


Responding to the claims, Ms Haddad said: “As with any civil servant, my job was to serve the government of the day. All civil servants must abide by the Civil Service code and uphold the Civil Service’s core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality.”

The row came as a poll by Public First found that almost half of pro-Leave voters who backed the Conservatives in 2019 believe the Government is not trying hard enough to deal with asylum and immigration.

The survey highlights a potential backlash brewing among the primary group of voters that Mr Sunak had set out to win over with his pledge to stop illegal Channel crossings.

Ms Haddad’s move to Amnesty will also heighten concerns about the “revolving door” between Whitehall and organisations that seek to influence government policies.

The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, which vets jobs taken by former senior officials, said the Home Office acknowledged that Ms Haddad’s knowledge of the department’s “strategic thinking” on asylum and immigration would improve Amnesty’s “effectiveness as a lobbying organisation.”

It has banned Ms Haddad from lobbying the Government for two years, and added: “Ms Haddad has confirmed she will not have contact with the Government in this role and is inwardly focused.”

During Dame Priti Patel’s stint as home secretary, which ended in September 2022, scores of officials voiced their opposition to the Government’s Rwanda asylum deal on an internal Home Office online noticeboard – with some threatening to strike over the issue.

In March, mandarins complained after an email in Suella Braverman’s name to Conservative members blamed an “activist blob of Left-wing lawyers, civil servants and the Labour Party” for blocking the Government’s plans to stop small boats carrying migrants across the Channel.

It later emerged that the Home Secretary had not seen or sanctioned the email before it was sent out.

Ms Haddad, who has also taken up a post as chief executive of St Mungo’s, the homelessness charity, since leaving the Home Office, applied for the unpaid role at Amnesty having seen an advertisement.

Amnesty has been one of the fiercest opponents of the Government’s crackdown on illegal Channel crossings over several years, describing Rishi Sunak’s Illegal Migration Act, which became law in July, as “inhumane, racist and divisive”.

The legislation changed the law so that those who arrive in the UK illegally can be detained and then deported, either to their home country or a “safe third country” such as Rwanda – an element currently being challenged in the courts.

In April, the charity stated: “Harsh asylum and immigration policies do not deter people from making dangerous journeys, indeed, the Home Office’s own research contradicts this … The Home Secretary has spread nonsensical scare stories about the numbers of people trying to come to the UK and blamed people for failing to take safe and legal routes that do not exist.”

Ms Haddad left the Home Office a month after Mrs Braverman was first appointed as Home Secretary by Liz Truss, having served as director general for asylum since February 2021, when Dame Priti was home secretary.

Dame Priti introduced the Nationality and Borders Bill, which tightened up asylum rules, including by creating a two-tier system under which those who arrive via illegal crossings may receive less protection and support. Ms Haddad’s approach at the time was “all about not being able to do things,” a source claimed.

The legislation under Dame Priti was opposed by Amnesty on the grounds that it was “racist” and “drags the UK’s reputation through the mud”.

A spokesman for Amnesty International UK said: “Non-executive directors at Amnesty International UK do not determine our policy positions on legal or human rights matters but are expected to support those positions while serving on the Board of Amnesty UK, and we have full confidence that all the members of our board do so.”



‘It’s like doing an Arctic expedition with German scientists in 1943’: life on the International Space Station at a time of war

Stephen Walker
Sat, 26 August 2023 

Photograph: Dima Zel/Shutterstock

LONG READ

One evening in January 2015, Terry Virts, a Nasa astronaut onboard the International Space Station (ISS), decided to pop over to the Russian quarters, catch up with his Russian colleagues and check out the view. For views, nothing beats the space station. From this orbiting perch approximately 250 miles (400km) above the Earth, scores of astronauts have waxed lyrical about the beauty of our planet: its mesmerising, fast-motion sunrises and sunsets, its brilliant colours and startling fragility.

As a 47-year-old former space shuttle pilot, then on his second visit to the space station, Virts had experienced all of this himself and would do so many times again. But this night would be different.

Joining Virts at the window was Alexsandr Samokutyayev. Three years younger than Virts, the Russian cosmonaut was also on his second visit to the space station. Both men had been military pilots in their countries. They spoke each other’s languages. They exchanged Christmas presents. They were friends. Now the Russian and the American floated companionably side by side in the microgravity of orbit and gazed down at the world below.

The space station passed over eastern Ukraine. Down there was darkness, punctuated by sudden red flashes. They were watching a war

Usually at night the inhabited areas of the Earth present a sensational spectacle of dazzling city lights. But at this point the space station happened to be passing over eastern Ukraine. Down there was darkness, punctuated by sudden red flashes. They were watching a war.

It was only a year since Russia had annexed Crimea. Now pro-Russian forces were engaging Ukrainians on their eastern border. The two men stared, transfixed. “We were watching people being killed by the Russian war from space,” Virts tells me. “We both looked at each other. It was a sombre moment. But we didn’t say a word.”

Today, many more guns are firing, and astronauts and cosmonauts on the space station are also seeing what Virts and Samokutyayev saw – and much more besides. The fact that they’re up there together at all makes Virts very angry. “It’s like partnering with German scientists in 1943 to go on an Arctic expedition,” he says. “That’s basically what we’re doing right now.” His own relationships with his former Russian comrades have almost entirely collapsed. Last year, Samokutyayev himself, now a member of the Russian State Duma, was sanctioned by the UK and other western nations. He has proved an active supporter of Vladimir Putin’s invasion. “It’s a betrayal,” says Virts, “at the most profound level.”

Commander Terry Virts. Photograph: Larry French/Getty Images

Betrayal or not, ever since the war began, the official word from Nasa and the European Space Agency (Esa), as well as from their fellow Canadian and Japanese agencies, has been that it is business as usual onboard the ISS. In April this year, their Russian partner Roscosmos, a state corporation, formally committed itself to continuing operations on the station until 2028, just two years before it is scheduled to be decommissioned. While every other joint space venture between the west and Russia has been cancelled, and while the US and its allies are imposing the biggest sanctions package in history on Russia, the space station remains immune, a sanctions-free zone. “It’s exempt,” Robyn Gatens, Nasa’s director of the ISS, tells me from her Houston office. “We do business together.”

We’ll come to why a little later. Meanwhile, this engineering marvel of laboratories and living quarters keeps orbiting the Earth at 10 times the speed of a rifle bullet, 16 times a day, every day, just as it has for the past quarter of a century – floating in a physical, and some might say moral, vacuum, high above the mess down here. Four fresh crewmates, including a Russian and an American, launched this morning and are expected to dock with the station tomorrow. Before that, there were seven people living inside: three Americans (Stephen Bowen, Warren Hoburg, Frank Rubio); three Russians (Sergey Prokopyev, Dmitri Petelin, Andrey Fedyaev); and, perhaps a little awkwardly in the metaphorical middle, one Emirati, Sultan al-Neyadi. As the war in Ukraine claims more lives on both sides, and the shouting between Russia and the west gets louder, these seven humans have had to coexist in space for months on end. And three of them have had to do it for almost a year.

Their home is approximately the size of a six-bedroom house, with separate living and working areas for the Russians and the Americans (the Emirati bunks down with the latter, as all non-Russians do) linked by a corridor – “a 10- to 15-second float away”, explains Canadian astronaut Bob Thirsk, who was there in 2009. And, apart from the odd spacewalk in the most hostile of environments, they have absolutely nowhere to go.

How do they cope up there? How do they function when their countries are at loggerheads, or when Putin makes threats about waging nuclear war? Do they mention the war? And as the ISS approaches its 25th anniversary in November, how far has it shifted from the international ideals underscored in its name? In 2014, it was even nominated for a Nobel peace prize. But is the partnership today between Russia and the west more like one of those awful marriages where both parties would love to get out but are well and truly stuck?

To find answers to those questions, you need to begin at the beginning, with the space station itself. Exactly what is it, and what is it for?

In a nutshell, says Charles Bolden, a spry, 77-year-old former astronaut and Nasa’s chief from 2009 until 2017, the space station exists to make all our lives better on Earth. Even he smiles at the grandiosity of that claim. “I know that sounds kinda mom-and-apple-pie,” he adds, “but that’s a fact.” The 16 pressurised modules that today make up the station are designed around one central purpose: to be a permanently inhabited orbiting laboratory. Over the decades, thousands of experiments have been conducted in the unique conditions of microgravity. Enthusiastically, Bolden begins listing some of the life-saving results, such as the engineering of protein crystals that, he claims, has helped shape modern cancer vaccines.

It was, Bolden explains, “a matter of necessity” for the ISS to become international. The station was originally conceived during the Reagan administration as a project called Freedom, but proved far too expensive, and despite several major design changes was never built. By the early 90s, the USSR had collapsed and Russia was in chaos. But the Russians knew about space stations: in the Soviet days they had built seven of them, beginning with Salyut 1 back in 1971. Here, then, was a golden opportunity to harness Russian expertise and personnel, and at the same time save billions of dollars.

President Bill Clinton threw his weight behind the project, now rebranded as the International Space Station, claiming that by bringing in the Russians he was helping their fledgling democracy. “We brought them in to stop them from behaving worse than they were behaving before,” Bolden says, noting the irony. Less openly discussed was the motive of giving Russian rocket engineers a paying job in Russia, rather than seeing them end up building missiles in Iran or North Korea. “It was a case of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer.”

By marrying exclusive areas of US and Russian knowhow, the two biggest partners were effectively creating one interdependent system. “It’s all one integrated spacecraft,” says Jay Chladek, the ISS’s biographer. “Think of it like two people building houses and hooking them together into one duplex.” The Russians bring the propulsion and altitude control to maintain it in orbit, as well as the fuel to feed those systems. The Americans look after the internal power and other systems. That division of labour held fast as the space station grew, module by module like pieces of Lego, to the awesome engineering achievement it is today, a monster that on Earth would weigh almost the same as two Statues of Liberty.

There weren’t just Russians and Americans in that marriage. This was, and remains, the largest and most ambitious collaboration in space ever. Altogether, there are five space agencies involved, including Esa, which represents 22 countries. Built into their contracts is a provision allowing any agency to exit the station with a year’s notice, but there is no provision to kick anyone else off. Once you add all that interdependence into the mix you begin to appreciate why it’s very difficult to abandon the programme. “If you want a divorce,” says Anatoly Zak, an independent Russian space reporter who now lives in the US, “you can’t [do it] without losing the space station.” And if you lose the station, argues Bolden, you lose “a crown jewel” whose benefits to humanity are “much greater than the relationship with any country”.

Which is why it ultimately remains exempt from sanctions. “We need each other to be able to operate,” says Gatens. The crews even drink each other’s urine – after it has been recycled. “It gets recycled with over 90% efficiency,” Hoburg told reporters recently. “It actually tastes delicious.”



Within hours of Russia’s invasion, Dmitry Rogozin, the rabble-rousing chief of Russia’s space agency, was threatening to crash the space station

But if the marriage is still intact, it was brutally put to the test on 24 February 2022. Within hours of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Dmitry Rogozin, the rabble-rousing chief of Russia’s space agency, a man who once notoriously claimed that Alaska still belonged to Russia, was threatening to crash the space station.

Responding on Twitter to Joe Biden’s announcement that day of sanctions against Russia’s aerospace industry, Rogozin accused the US president of suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, tweeting that any blocking of cooperation could mean the “500-ton” space station might enter an “uncontrolled deorbit and fall into the US or Europe. The ISS does not fly over Russia, so all the risks are yours. Are you ready for them?” Fantastic as it seemed, Rogozin was threatening to pull the plug on the propulsion system that kept the space station aloft – and leave it to its fate.

Nasa and its western partners pointedly ignored him, reaffirming their commitment to continue operations. “We disregarded the tweets of Mr Rogozin,” says Frank De Winne, head of Esa’s Astronaut Centre in Cologne, responsible for the selection and training of European astronauts. “It was a very volatile time,” remembers Gatens. “We did our best to keep relations normal, specialist to specialist, programme manager to programme manager … We wanted to take the temperature down.”

They might have wanted to, but Rogozin didn’t. Already sanctioned by the US in 2014 for his vocal support of the annexation of Crimea, he had been appointed to run Roscosmos by Putin in 2018. “He’s big, he’s loud, he drinks a lot,” says Virts, who met him while training in Russia. “He’s Putin squared,” says Zak. “An extreme nationalist, famous for making Hitler salutes.”

US astronaut Mark Vande Hei on the ISS, 2022. Photograph: Kayla Barron/AP

And so the provocations kept coming. Nine days after the invasion, a spoof video apparently created by Roscosmos appeared on Telegram, tagged with the logo of the Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti. In the heavily edited clip, a mix of real footage and CGI, two Russian cosmonauts were seen waving goodbye to their US colleague Mark Vande Hei before climbing into the Russian segment, closing the hatches, and – to the applause of Moscow’s mission controllers – detaching the entire Russian portion from the rest of the space station, abandoning Vande Hei on board.

It was a ludicrous and totally impractical scenario. But the video sparked an uproar in the western media as Vande Hei was due to return to Earth with his Russian colleagues just three weeks later, after nearly a year in space. Vande Hei’s mother, Mary, described the whole thing as “a terrible threat”, telling a reporter: “We are just doing a lot of praying.” Roscosmos claimed the video was only a joke and brought Vande Hei back with the two cosmonauts as scheduled. At a press conference after he landed, the astronaut declared that his “Russian crewmates were, are and will continue to be very dear friends of mine”. But Roscosmos’s joke was lost on its international partners. And presumably on Vande Hei’s mother.

More was to come. First, a spacewalk the following month when two cosmonauts unfurled a Russian victory banner supposedly to mark the defeat of nazism in 1945, a nakedly inflammatory gesture given the running Russian narrative about denazifying Ukraine. Then, in July, all three Russian cosmonauts on the station took selfies with the flags of the “people’s republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk. Roscosmos described the Russians’ capture of the Luhansk region as “a liberation day to celebrate both on Earth and in space”.

At which point, Nasa’s patience finally snapped. The agency deplored the use of the ISS to support the war, reminding Rogozin that it was “fundamentally inconsistent with the station’s primary function”, namely to advance science for peaceful purposes. By Nasa’s usually diplomatic standards this was like lobbing back a nuclear bomb. “In general,” says Gatens, “we’ve been trying not to fan any sort of political flames.” But the statement hit home. Eight days later, Rogozin was fired. “He was leading the Russian space programme into the gutter,” says the American space reporter Eric Berger. And in the process seriously annoying his boss. “Only Putin is allowed to make brushfire statements,” says Cathleen Lewis, curator of international space programmes at the Smithsonian Institution. “And Rogozin out-Putined Putin.”

Rogozin’s replacement was Yury Borisov, a former deputy prime minister and as colourless a figure as Rogozin was not – certainly not one given to making brushfire statements. Things are “much more stable now”, Gatens tells me, with palpable relief. But the really interesting thing is that, for all of Rogozin’s bluster, the relationship held firm. Mission controls in Houston and Moscow still communicated. Nasa maintained staff in Russia and its astronauts would continue to have a seat on the venerable Russian Soyuz, flying to and from the ISS. And, under a new seat-swapping arrangement, Russian cosmonauts would get a ride on one of Elon Musk’s Crew Dragons, a cutting-edge spacecraft that had only begun operations in 2020. It would carry its first Russian, Anna Kikina, to the space station in October 2022, launching from Cape Canaveral.

As for Rogozin, he went on to spend the next few jobless months posing in military uniforms for his Telegram account before a Ukrainian shell exploded on his 59th birthday party in December 2022 at a restaurant in Donetsk, seriously injuring him. He has recently returned to form by casting doubts on the truth of the Apollo moon landings. But the space station has survived.

***

So much for the partnership: what about relationships between the crews? Take the Russians first. “I do know,” says Berger, “that a lot of cosmonauts are very sympathetic to the war.” Samokutyayev, Virts’ former colleague, is not the only one to have been sanctioned. Many are products of the military, and they only hear one side of the story. “Some of them are completely brainwashed out of their minds. It’s just insane,” claims Scott Kelly, a former Nasa space station commander who returned his Russian space medal in disgust after the invasion.

Here’s one example from last May, when Oleg Novitsky, a former fighter pilot and veteran of three ISS tours between 2012 and 2021, received the Order for Merit of the Fatherland from Putin himself. “At all times,” Novitsky declared, “our enemies, mostly western ones, have tried to seize our land and enslave our people.” He then offered to fight on the frontline, at the age of 51. Also decorated was fellow cosmonaut Pyotr Dubrov, who proclaimed that “today the masks are thrown off and western nazism has shown its true face to the world”.

It might come as a surprise to learn that Novitsky and Dubrov are those same “dear friends” with whom Vande Hei lived on the space station. But what matters is who’s listening. “These incidents are certainly provocative,” says Lewis, “but directed toward their audience on the ground, not their colleagues on the space station.” And there are some cosmonauts who feel very differently about the war; they just won’t tell you because it’s too dangerous. Every one of the eight western astronauts I speak to has essentially stopped communicating with their Russian colleagues or, on the very rare occasions that they do, never about politics. Apart from anything, it could put the Russians at risk. “People are turning each other in,” says Kelly. “I don’t want to compromise anybody’s security.” For the same reason, not a single cosmonaut has openly opposed the war. Only one, Gennady Padalka, who clocked up a record 879 days in space, made a mildly questioning comment in the since-banned newspaper Novaya Gazeta. That was 16 days after the invasion. He has not spoken out since.

But try to discuss the war’s impact on current crew members with space agency insiders and the response is an almost visceral recoil. “This is not an easy call to take, I can tell you,” says De Winne. Choosing his words carefully, he says he hasn’t seen “any deterioration in crew dynamics”. But he acknowledges that “it is extremely stressful for our crews to be there in those circumstances”. Spending long periods in a confined environment is hard, he explains – as a space station commander himself in 2009, he would know – but the war “adds a layer of discomfort”.

German astronaut Matthias Maurer at an air show earlier this year. Photograph: Reuters

Very few serving astronauts will admit publicly what that layer feels like. Vande Hei is one, revealing at his post-flight press conference in April 2022 that the war was “heartbreaking” and had left all his crewmates, Russians included, feeling “powerless”. They discussed it, he said, and then got on with the mission. His German colleague, Matthias Maurer, who returned to Earth a month later, described seeing “huge clouds of smoke over cities like Mariupol” and rocket hits on Kyiv. “We raised the issue very quickly and proactively. All six, seven of us immediately agreed that it’s a horrible situation. We were all shocked, the Russian colleagues, the American colleagues – nobody could understand what was happening down there.”

But Vande Hei and Maurer are exceptions. The rule in press conferences is to focus on the mission, not the war; any questions about “crew dynamics” are briefly dealt with, then swatted away like flies. When I ask De Winne if I can speak to Maurer or another of his astronauts who have been on the ISS recently, I can almost hear the shutters slamming down. Repeated requests over the following weeks draw a blank. At Nasa it is the same story: no astronauts are available. But I keep trying.

Meanwhile, I gather clues from astronauts who have left the job and are less constrained. Patterns of behaviour emerge: inevitably those working on the ISS are bonded by the common purpose, the shared passions. “The war is an elephant on the station,” says Thirsk, “but cosmonauts are very similar to western astronauts in many ways. We’ve all dreamed about flying in space since we were young, we’re all geeks. And after a few days or weeks you sort of lose your sense of national identity – it goes to the back of your brain.”

Those bonds are strengthened by the shared dangers. In July 2015, Kelly and his two Russian crewmates had just 90 minutes’ notice to hunker down in their Soyuz escape capsule as a hail of space debris hurtled past the station. ”You literally rely on each other for your life,” he says. Nor was this an isolated incident. With an ever-increasing amount of space junk and satellites in low orbit, the ISS has to manoeuvre to avoid collisions almost every year. In November 2021, just three months before the invasion, all seven crew members – including two Russians – were forced to take temporary refuge in their escape capsules after 1,500 pieces of trackable debris from a Russian anti-satellite missile test threatened the station. Fortunately, they missed – but the same debris field keeps coming back.

Even Virts, who argues that continuing to allow Russians to fly on American spacecraft and vice versa is an “outrage”, nevertheless accepts that things are different once you’re up there. “Politics is politics. We’re not going to change politics so let’s just try not to die in the vacuum of space. Let’s work together as a crew.”

That capacity is hardwired in the selection process. Out of almost 23,000 astronaut applications the Esa received last year, De Winne reveals, individuals were chosen partly for what he calls their “stress resistance”. To stiffen that resistance further, Nasa has various training tricks up its sleeve. One of them is the Nasa Extreme Environment Mission Operations (Neemo), an underwater habitat on the ocean floor off the coast of Florida, where astronaut trainees spend time learning to cope without tearing each other’s eyes out. Another is the gruelling team expeditions run by the US National Outdoor Leadership School in the wilder parts of America.

Steve Swanson, a former Nasa flight engineer, did one of those and never forgot the lessons it taught him. His 10-day stint on an island in the Pacific north-west was to prove crucial after he docked at the ISS in March 2014 in a Soyuz with two Russian crewmates. They arrived within days of Putin’s annexation of Crimea. Things got awkward when one cosmonaut, Aleksandr Skvortsov, told Swanson his Russian brother had been thrown out of Ukraine. Over and again he insisted that Ukrainians were Nazis and hooligans. “He was really, really upset,” says Swanson. “But I wasn’t going to tell him what I thought about it, because that wasn’t going to help the situation. I let him talk. Because he needed to vent.”

Such voices help illuminate life on the station today. But I keep hoping for an eyewitness who has been there since the invasion. And then I find Mike López-Alegría, who has been an astronaut for longer than the ISS has existed. He first flew there on the space shuttle in 2000 and went back again, in 2002 and 2006-7. By then he had performed 10 spacewalks, more than any other US astronaut at the time. “It is an amazing experience to be a human satellite,” he tells me with awe. “You’re out there, you’ve got this suit that’s protecting you that is a marvel of engineering, that allows you to exist in these unsurvivable conditions … It’s minus 200, it’s plus 200, it’s a vacuum, it’s full of radiation. It’s very exhilarating. I would do it again a hundred times.”

In 2012, López-Alegría left Nasa, but last year, at the age of 63, he was back on the station. By then, he’d joined Axiom, a rising company in today’s brave new world of space commerce whose plan is to build the world’s first commercial space station from 2025, complete with interior designs by Philippe Starck. López-Alegría’s mission was to chaperone three space tourists, Larry Connor, Mark Pathy and Eytan Stibbe, to the ISS. López-Alegría won’t be drawn on the price per seat, but $50m-plus is “in the ballpark”. They arrived on 9 April 2022, just six weeks after the invasion. And since he is retired from Nasa, López-Alegría can talk about it.

He stayed for 15 days. Apart from noticing how much had changed since 2007 – “There seems to be stuff everywhere, it’s just loaded with laptops and cables,” he says – he noted that none of the inhabitants (three Americans, three Russians and Maurer, a German) mentioned the war. “Whatever was going on wasn’t going on,” he says. “It was as if nothing like that was going on on the planet.” As a guest, López-Alegría never brought the subject up. “Why would you disrupt the harmony? I think you just let it go.”

Astronaut Mike López-Alegría (second right) chaperones three space tourists to the ISS last year. Photograph: AP

Even with your fellow Americans, I ask. López-Alegría pauses. “I think sometimes we talked about not discussing it.” Meanwhile, the Russians “were extraordinarily gracious”. On their two Saturday nights everybody met to watch movies. They saw The Princess Bride and Salyut 7, a Russian film loosely based on reality about a damaged Soviet space station the Americans attempt (and fail) to kidnap during the cold war. Whatever the ironies of that choice, nobody spelled them out. On the Orthodox Easter, the cosmonauts invited them to join the celebrations. They had dessert and Russian tea and one of them, Oleg Artemyev, gave them gifts – special cookies prepared by his wife. “It was lovely,” López-Alegría says. The Russians even let them use their toilet when the American one broke down. In fact, it broke down twice.

Nothing in López-Alegría’s story contradicts the impressions I’ve heard already. But here’s the thing. Just four days after he departed on 24 April, two of those cosmonauts, Denis Matveev and Artemyev of the homemade cookies, went on to unfurl that inflammatory Russian victory banner on their spacewalk. And all three cosmonauts posed that July with the flags of Donetsk and Luhansk. Perhaps again, it is the home audience that counts. “But it made me sad,” López-Alegría says, “because those guys have to do what they’re told.” And then he adds: “I don’t want to speculate as to where they are personally on that topic, but even if they were all for it, I think it’s not lost on them that using that platform for that kind of message is inappropriate.”

I don’t know if the ISS is a symbol or not. But it’s the best example of how we should all behave on the ground

That sadness touches everyone I speak to in this small community. Swanson also flew with Artemyev, remembering him as “just a wonderful person, the nicest guy. But you never know what’s going on there.”

Meanwhile, every attempt I make to reach a Russian cosmonaut for this piece hits brick walls. When I ask one Russian space insider who prefers not to be identified if he can help, he tells me bluntly: “I don’t know any such person in Russia who will talk openly these days. It’s the wrong time. Trust me. The country is busy with other problems.”

Russian cosmonaut Alexander Misurkin. Photograph: Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

Then, finally, through a friend of a friend, I do find someone. Alexander Misurkin has flown three times on the ISS, most recently in 2021, returning just two months before the invasion. I do not know his politics and we keep our Zoom conversation, very likely to be monitored, non-political – indeed, in a slightly surreal twist, some of it revolves around his love of badminton. He talks enthusiastically about his career in space, and his affection for his fellow crew members feels very genuine. And the more we talk, the more it strikes me that our interaction curiously mirrors those of the crews’: chat about sports, family, the job, everything else, but no politics. Then he tells a story that he says still haunts him to this day.

In 2013, the Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano was on a spacewalk when his helmet began to fill with water from a leak. Misurkin was inside as the emergency rapidly unfolded. Out in the void, the water rose up Parmitano’s face. “He almost sank inside his spacesuit.” Somehow he was able to get back through the airlock – “It is still unbelievable for me how he managed it” – and everyone, Russians and Americans, came together to pull off his helmet, get him breathing and save his life. “It was the most dangerous situation in all my space experience,” says Misurkin. “Thank God he lived.” He stops for a moment, reliving the drama. And then, with real feeling, he says: “I don’t know if the International Space Station is a symbol or not. But I do know for sure it’s the best example of how we should all behave on the ground.”

If it is, it’s all Russia has now got. While America and its allies, and China on its own, forge ahead with new space stations, a return to the moon and ultimately Mars, Russia’s only real human space programme today is the 25-year-old ISS. That is one legacy of Putin’s terrible war. Sanctions and isolation have done the rest. The tech is ageing, the money is running out, the equipment sometimes defective. defective. And the blows keep falling. Only last week Luna-25, the first Russian probe to return to the moon in almost half a century, crashed onto the surface just four days before an Indian probe landed there successfully. Within the last year, two Russian spaceships docked at the ISS experienced alarming coolant leaks in identical systems, suggesting serious production deficiencies on the ground. And, as I saw for myself in late 2019, the spaceport at Baikonur in Kazakhstan from where Yuri Gagarin launched into history in 1961 is visibly decaying, with its faded Soviet murals, crumbling buildings and stray dogs running wild.

Once, the world marvelled at the nation that sent the first human being into space. But the world has moved on. The Russians talk about building their own space station or going to the moon or collaborating with China but, as Zak says: “The key word is talking. Russia has nothing. Russia has nowhere to go without the ISS.”

Meanwhile, the station soldiers on, the first and perhaps the last great collaboration of its kind. And barring Putin doing something really stupid – in which case, as Gatens tells me drily, “our leadership would definitely have some conversations” – it will get to live out its final few years, carving elliptical orbits of the planet while the men and women on board continue to perform their experiments, to eat, sleep, watch movies together, celebrate each other’s holidays, take in the views, avoid talking politics and, in the last resort, look out for each other. You may even spot it in the sky one clear night, a brilliant star moving steadily west to east as its acre of solar panels catch the sunlight below the horizon, a moral embarrassment for some, a beacon of hope for others. But undeniably astonishing.

@SWalkerBeyond
• Beyond – The Astonishing Story of the First Human to Leave Our Planet and Journey into Space by Stephen Walker is published by HarperCollins. 
UK
No wealth tax under Labour, Rachel Reeves pledges

SIR KEIR STARMER'S RED TORIES


Edward Malnick
Sat, 26 August 2023 

'Whatever it takes': shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves - Lorne Campbell

Rachel Reeves has ruled out any version of a wealth tax if Labour forms the next government, declaring that additional taxation will not lead to prosperity.

In an interview with The Telegraph, the shadow chancellor launches a bold bid for support from businesses and wealthier households, saying she will not introduce a levy to target wealth or expensive properties, and will not increase capital gains tax or the top rate of income tax.

Instead, she says, she will do “whatever it takes” to attract private investment to Britain.


The interview signals a major shift for the Labour Party as it prepares for a conference in October in which Ms Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer will fire the starting gun on their general election campaign.

The pair believe the party must demonstrate economic competence above all else if it is to capitalise on its 20-point lead in the polls and win an election.

Ruling out a tax raid on wealthier voters is also designed to blunt a key Conservative attack – that Labour would launch a class war that would punish the wealthy.

In the clearest break yet from the hard-Left policies that lost the 2019 election for Labour under Jeremy Corbyn, Ms Reeves puts an end to speculation over the prospect of either a discrete wealth or mansion tax, or higher levies for those earning money from stocks and shares or buy-to-let properties.

She also confirms that Sir Keir’s 2020 leadership pledge to increase the top rate of income tax is now off the table – making explicit a suggestion by the party leader in June that he was no longer keen on the idea.

Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are planning their moves ahead of next year's election - Christopher Furlong/Getty

In other revelations, Ms Reeves said Labour was preparing to overhaul planning laws to make it easier to build green infrastructure and the shadow chancellor also pledged to do “whatever it takes” to win green jobs and investment from firms already being wooed with lucrative offers by countries such as France and the US.

Labour frontbenchers are also being told they should draw up reforms or identify schemes that can be scrapped if they want to fund new projects, as “the money is simply not going to be there”.

And it emerged the annual business forum hosted at Labour’s conference is over-subscribed by some 75 per cent, with 200 delegates due to attend and 150 on a waiting list, compared with 130 attendees last year.

Ms Reeves also effectively recants remarks made in September 2021 when she said that “people who get their income through wealth should have to pay more”.

At the time she highlighted those “who get their incomes through stocks and shares and buy-to-let properties”.

The shadow chancellor told The Telegraph those remarks were in the context of Rishi Sunak’s ill-fated attempt to increase National Insurance to raise an additional £12 billion for the NHS and social care.

She said: “The point I was making then, the Government said that they needed to raise £12 billion, and I said, well, why do you always have to come to working people and ask them to contribute more?”

She added: “I don’t have any spending plans that require us to raise £12 billion worth of money. So I don’t need a wealth tax or any of those things ... We have no plans for a wealth tax.”

“We don’t have any plans to increase taxes outside of what we’ve said. I don’t see the way to prosperity as being through taxation. I want to grow the economy.” She added of the prospect of any form of wealth tax: “We won’t be doing that. It’s a denial.”

A Labour source said the denial also applied to “any form of ‘mansion tax’”, which has also been discussed by Labour in recent years.

Asked if the party had ditched Sir Keir’s 2020 pledge to increase the top rate of income tax, Ms Reeves replied: “Yeah. The tax burden is at its highest in 60, maybe even 70 years ... I don’t see a route towards having more money for public services that is through taxing our way there. It is going to be through growing our way there. And that’s why the policies that we’ve set out are all about how we can encourage businesses to invest in Britain.”

Ms Reeves said she would overturn a “minister knows best” approach, to incorporate firms more closely into decisions made in Whitehall.

Sources said that the number of businesses flocking to the Labour conference showed that Ms Reeves was winning firms over.

She pledged to do “whatever it takes” to draw investments and jobs to Britain from firms such as electric car manufacturers amid a global race to host the “gigafactories” needed to produce batteries for zero-emission cars.

A new National Wealth Fund would invest £2 billion to help “crowd-in” further private sector investment in eight new gigafactories.

On reforming planning laws, she added: “There are also other things that we can do and need to do, for example, reforming our planning so it’s easier to build the gigafactories, or the warehouses or the housing, or the grid connections.”

She continued: “We need to set the planning rules a bit free. You take, for example, offshore wind, it takes something like 10 to 13 years between the conception of a project and actually getting that energy onto the grid.”





Opinion

Labour’s backtracking on casual workers will weaken the rights of all employees

Kenan Malik
Sun, 27 August 2023 


If you have a job, are you a worker or an employee? In everyday conversation, it is a distinction without meaning, and the two are usually taken to be synonymous and used interchangeably. In British law, though, workers and employees form discrete categories.

Legally, only an employee, who has a contract of employment, regular hours or shifts, and a guaranteed wage, enjoys full employment rights such as sick pay and maternity and paternity leave. A “worker”, often in casual, irregular or temporary work, possesses some of these rights, being entitled, for instance, to the national minimum wage and protection from discrimination, but is denied others, such as sick leave, protection against unfair dismissal, and statutory redundancy pay. The self-employed have no workers’ rights.

The distinction between “employees” and “workers” was codified by John Major’s government in the 1996 Employment Rights Act. It was a deliberate attempt to blur the line between an “employee” and someone “self-employed”, and to create a workforce more suited to a “flexible” labour market, establishing in essence a formal category of “insecure” workers.

Over the past quarter of a century, employers have taken full advantage of the flexibility afforded them, increasingly hiring workers on temporary, part-time or zero-hours contracts, and often as ostensibly “self-employed”, even if they are expected to work as normal employees. The most visible expression of this is the “gig economy”. However, the casualisation of labour extends, far beyond Amazon workers or Uber drivers. A recent report by the Living Wage Foundation estimated that 6.1 million workers were in insecure work – one in five of British workers. These included 1 million in temporary jobs and another million on zero-hours contracts.

study last year by the thinktanks Autonomy and the Centre for Labour and Social Studies on the “Uberisation” of the British economy observed how “insecurity” had “become an endemic part of British working life”. The kind of precarity once associated solely with the gig economy now spreads through many employment sectors: health and care, hospitality, cleaning, hair and beauty, and even “previously protected middle-class jobs in academia”.

It was against this background that the Labour party pledged two years ago to erase the distinction between employee, worker and the bogus self-employed “by creating a single status of ‘worker’ for all but the genuinely self-employed”. All workers, “regardless of sector, wage, or contract type”, would be “afforded the same basic rights and protections”. This, as Labour’s green paper, A New Deal for Working People, observed, would ensure that employers would “no longer be able to treat their staff like regular employees while falsely claiming they are not, denying staff rights they are owed as employees”.

Now, Labour appears to have backtracked, reducing the pledge to a “consultation”. It is part of the attempt by the party to make itself “business-friendly” in the run-up to the election. Criticism of Labour’s original plans has focused on the supposed difficulties in formalising a distinction between “bogus” and “genuine” self-employed and on the harm that single status might do to businesses. Many countries – including France, Spain, Ireland and Australia – recognise only one category of worker and have no problem in distinguishing between an employee and someone self-employed.



Many countries – including France, Spain, Ireland and Australia – recognise only one category of worker

When conservatives and business leaders talk of the “harm” of single status, what they mean is harm to the ability of employers to enforce low pay, poor conditions and a lack of rights, and to evade their responsibilities by categorising employees as being “self-employed”.

Labour’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, says of the new deal paper that “far from watering it down, we will now set out in detail how we will implement it”, and that “we’ll tackle insecure work by banning zero-hours contracts, ending fire and rehire and ending qualifying periods for basic rights”. Given Labour’s track record of U-turns on a host of important policy pledges, one might be sceptical of Rayner’s breezy optimism.

To backtrack on single status is to diminish much of the power of policies such as the abolition of zero-hours contracts or the banning of fire and rehire. As Keith Ewing, professor of public law at King’s College London, and John Hendy, chair of the Institute of Employment Rights, have asked, if workers, as opposed to employees, have no protection against unfair dismissal, how will it be possible to ban the practice of firing and rehiring except for employees? Maintaining two sets of workers’ rights will, they point out, only “create an even greater incentive for employers to hire workers on precarious contracts”.

Introducing single status would neither end the exploitation of workers nor halt the gig economy. Nevertheless, it is important to enforce the rights of workers who are now denied them and to insist that all workers should possess the same rights. Abandoning the commitment to single status is to abandon workers who are in the most precarious and vulnerable jobs.

The pushback against single status has echoes of the objections in the 1990s to proposals for a minimum wage. In 1997, the Economist wrote of Labour’s plans that “there is much that is half-baked, or plain wrong. The minimum wage will cost jobs.” The CBI insisted that “even a low minimum wage would reduce job opportunities”. Michael Portillo called it “immoral” while Philip Hammond, later to be chancellor under Theresa May, told parliament that “the result of minimum wage legislation … will be to drive some small businesses into the black economy”. All eventually changed their mind.

The torrent of criticism aimed at the minimum wage proposal did have an impact. The level at which the minimum wage was set in 1999 by the Low Pay Commission was much lower than many campaigners had hoped for. So “modest” was it, in fact, in the words of Portillo, by now the shadow chancellor, that he felt able to reverse Tory opposition to the measure.

The meagreness of the minimum wage led to campaigns for a “living wage” (now statutory for those over 23) and a “real living wage”, based on the cost of living. Nevertheless, for all its defects, the principle of the minimum wage was important to maintain.

The principle behind single status – that workers’ rights should be universal, and not discriminate between types of employees – is even more important. It is a principle on which we cannot afford to backtrack.

• Kenan Malik is an Observer columnist