Stacey Abrams is the ghost haunting Georgia’s presidential vote

Brittany Gibson
Fri, November 1, 2024 

ATLANTA — Not too long ago, Stacey Abrams had reason to believe that she, not Kamala Harris, would be in a tight presidential contest.

In 2020, Abrams and Harris were on the top of Joe Biden’s list of vice presidential choices, and Abrams was fired up: “As a young Black girl growing up in Mississippi, I learned that if I didn’t speak up for myself, no one else would, so ... ‘Yes, I would be willing to serve,’” she declared on NBC in April of 2020.

That chance went to Harris.

Now, Harris’ fate is again intertwined with Abrams, as the vice president tries to replicate Biden’s surprise victory in Georgia — a victory largely credited to Abrams’ vision and fundraising prowess. But compared to 2020, when she was at her political peak, Abrams is something of a diminished figure, and there are doubts about whether her legacy is strong enough to rouse voters and help Harris eke out a victory — even if she makes a real effort.

Despite their parallel paths, Abrams and Harris have had little interaction over the years. After appearing together at the very first Georgia rally after Harris secured the nomination in July, Abrams was largely invisible on the campaign trail for weeks. Now, she’s stepped up her appearances, but few people expect that she can be the decisive political force that she’s been in past elections.

“Leader Abrams played that role when the president won in 2020. I think that the machine that she helped build facilitated the Georgia wins at the U.S. Senate level for Warnock and for Ossoff,” said Kasim Reed, the former Democratic mayor of Atlanta. “She paid a price for her organizing work, but I don’t think any serious person would argue that Leader Abrams is the same messenger today as she was in ’18 or ’20 or ’22.”

There are similar doubts about Abrams’ vaunted network of nonprofit groups.

The nonprofits she founded, which once spurred widespread voter registration in Black neighborhoods and engaged low-propensity voters, are struggling. Fair Fight Action has been beset with fundraising woes, starting the election year $2.5 million in debt, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution — in 2020, it started the year with almost $1 million in the bank, according to its annual tax filing. The New Georgia Project, which specialized in community organizing, is trying to recover from financial scandals that led to a state ethics probe and the departure of its longtime leader.

Though she is no longer directly involved in the groups, they drew heavily on the power of her political brand. But that brand suffered after her surprisingly large 7.5-point loss to GOP Gov. Brian Kemp in their highly touted rematch in 2022. (Four years earlier, the margin was just 1.4 percent for Kemp.)

From the start of her 2018 campaign for governor through the end of her second gubernatorial run in 2022, Abrams’s campaign committees, PACs and the nonprofits she founded raised and spent $460 million for her own bids for public office and to organize, register and inspire Democratic voters in Georgia.

But in 2024, Abrams’s fundraising has brought in less than $4 million: less than $200,000 to a state PAC that also reported about $800,000 cash on hand and is in debt for about the same amount due to expenditures from her 2022 gubernatorial campaign, according to the most recent financial disclosure; and an additional $3.6 million to a newly formed federal PAC founded by Abrams, Speak Up PAC, according to an October financial disclosure filing.

Democratic officials in Georgia say those numbers don’t reflect all the fundraising she’s done for other groups and for Harris directly. Plus, she’s stepped up her activity in the final weeks of the campaign, headlining a rally the day before early voting began and multiple canvassing kick-off events. In recent days, Abrams has joined former President Bill Clinton in Fort Valley and Julie Roberts in Atlanta and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff in Athens.

Abrams did not respond to an interview request made through Fair Fight Action.

The Harris campaign declined to comment.

Other leading Democrats expressed hope that the structures Abrams built are strong enough to propel the party forward, even if she is no longer at the vanguard of the movement.

“Stacey Abrams was very keen on making sure it was not about her being on the ballot or not about her just doing the organizing work,” said Rep. Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), who is also chair of the Democratic Party of Georgia. “There are so many organizations and so many organizers on the ground that benefited from the training and the investment that she made in the state of Georgia.”

Rev. Al Sharpton, who has been close to both Abrams and Harris, predicted that Harris would benefit from Abrams’s emotional presence in the minds of Georgia voters.

“I have an office in Atlanta for the National Action Network. I had young people that were not interested in the electoral process and Stacey brought them in, and they never left because Stacey gave them an identity,” said Sharpton. “She was young, she was energetic, she could talk their language. They became the infrastructure [and] … it was built by Stacey Abrams.”

Nonetheless, some political observers see Georgia slipping away from Harris. The polls remain very close, but the 538 polling average gives Donald Trump a two-point advantage. And despite the state’s purple status, Republicans have won more statewide races than Democrats since Biden’s shocking 12,000-margin victory in 2020.

Black voters — Abrams’ organizing specialty — are a challenge for Harris in Georgia. The state electorate is about 25 percent Black, one of the highest percentages in the country, but Harris’s polling margins within that group aren’t as strong as those of Biden in 2020 or even Hillary Clinton in 2016 in public surveys. Last weekend, former First Lady Michelle Obama visited the state, in an implicit acknowledgment of the need to rally Black voters for Harris.

A surge in activity by Abrams in the final days could be a difference-maker, according to Georgia Democrats, but the campaign declined to share information about where Abrams would be deployed.

Abrams is important to Harris for another reason, because each represents a different face of a Black woman’s experience in America: Harris, the daughter of immigrants from India and Jamaica, grew up in liberal Northern California; Abrams, the second of six children of United Methodist ministers, was raised in conservative Gulfport, Mississippi. After moving to Atlanta, Abrams worked the back roads of Georgia politics to become Democratic leader in the state legislature. Harris, meanwhile, was a protégé of legendary San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, and rose through the legal ranks as San Francisco DA and state attorney general.

Since the 2020 election, Harris and Abrams have been frequently lumped together as Black trailblazing women in the party. They were credited for increasing enrollment at HBCUs. They were both shortlisted in speculative media stories to fill a Supreme Court vacancy that would eventually go to Ketanji Brown Jackson. And they were each floated as possible replacements for Biden before the 2024 election cycle kicked off.

But during Harris’s tenure as vice president, the two have rarely crossed paths in person, according to a POLITICO review of press clips and event archive pages.

The last time before July’s Atlanta rally that both Harris and Abrams were on the campaign trail together was in November of 2020 when then-Sen. Harris was stumping in Georgia as Biden’s running mate. Abrams’ stock was high in anticipation of her 2022 gubernatorial comeback run, but some local Democrats had felt disappointed by Biden’s selection of Harris over their home-state favorite.

Sharpton was one of many Black leaders who had pressed Biden to pick a Black woman as his vice presidential nominee. “I said [that] to Joe Biden, and I said that Stacey Abrams, Kamala Harris or [former Florida Rep.] Val Demings are certainly qualified,” he said, recalling his personal shortlist.

Abrams was not shy about wanting the number two job.

“I would be an excellent running mate,” Abrams said in an interview with Elle Magazine. “I have the capacity to attract voters by motivating typically ignored communities. I have a strong history of executive and management experience in the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. I’ve spent 25 years in independent study of foreign policy. I am ready to help advance an agenda of restoring America’s place in the world. If I am selected, I am prepared and excited to serve.”

Abrams was also insistent that Biden pick a woman of color for his number two in 2020, saying on “The View” that April that failure to do so would be “a slap in the face” to a key cohort of the Democratic Party’s base.

Coming from a working-class background, Abrams regularly related her personal story on the campaign trail with that of the broader Black and Southern experience.

Harris’s upbringing in urban California as the daughter of immigrants represents an entirely different dimension of the Black experience in the U.S. It’s also something Harris has steered away from making a focal point of her campaign. Though Trump has attacked her, saying she “became a Black person” — a statement that is false — Harris has given the comment as little oxygen as possible.

Abrams has been less hesitant to talk about the role of race and gender in politics, defending Harris from criticism that she deemed racist and sexist while serving as vice president.

“We are not always great with new," Abrams told MSNBC in late-2023. "But more importantly, I know if you filter through the critiques, if you think about how she is castigated, it is inextricably linked to race and gender. I applaud the poise with which she has responded.”

After Abrams’s surprisingly lopsided loss to Kemp in 2022, her campaign manager and longtime political ally, Lauren Groh-Wargo, blamed the defeat in part on the work Abrams did for other Democrats, including Biden and Sens. Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff.

“In the end, Stacey leveraged her time, talents and organizations to secure the wins of 2020 in the major battleground states as well as Georgia in 2020 and 2021. In doing so, she also made the 2022 gubernatorial race against a well-funded incumbent nearly impossible,” Groh-Wargo said in a 52-post thread on X.

The 2022 defeat depleted Abrams’s stock. And the dimming of her personal star coincided with hard times for the flagship nonprofits she founded, even though she was no longer involved in them.

Fair Fight Action, the largest of the Abrams-founded nonprofits, spent most of its fundraising haul on a sweeping voting-rights lawsuit in federal court, which it lost. The law firm overseeing the case — headed in part by Abrams’ former campaign chair and friend from law school — took in more than $19 million over four years.

Groh-Wargo returned to lead Fair Fight Action in January, telling the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the nonprofit was $2.5 million in debt and that it had laid off 75 percent of its staff. She did not respond to an interview request for this story made through her communications team.

Fair Fight Action is still operating and recently claimed that it aired a TV ad to call attention to potential changes to state election laws implemented by a Republican-controlled State Elections Board — though there is no record of the TV spot on the ad-tracking website, AdImpact.

Fair Fight Action did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Also on the sidelines is the formerly litigious — and often victorious in its cases — New Georgia Project, another Abrams-founded nonprofit that has had significant turnover since the 2022 election.

Days before the 2022 midterm, Abrams’s hand-picked leader of the New Georgia Project was fired and accused in federal financial disclosures of owing $27,127 for unauthorized expenditures in 2021 and 2022.

The New Georgia Project still focuses on voting rights but has broadened its mission to include access to affordable housing, environmental justice and childcare, according to its website.

The New Georgia Project did not respond to an interview request.

In their prime, those groups vacuumed up money, but left little room for more locally focused grassroots organizations. As millions flooded into Georgia campaigns, smaller nonprofit organizations often found themselves left out of the financial windfall. Now, those groups are promising to fill the gap and deliver for Harris.

Christine White, head of Georgia Alliance for Progress, which helps to fund hyper-local and smaller nonprofit groups for year-round organizing, said she had never heard from small grass-roots groups about having received money from Abrams’ network, even though some donors were under that impression.

The need for greater funding of what White described as an entire ecosystem of organizing — including the campaigns, parties, PACs and nonprofit groups — has been a constant since Georgia first became a swing state.

With only days before the election, the Harris campaign is outspending the Trump campaign on airwaves in the state. The vice president’s ground team was faster to open field offices across the state than Trump. Democrats involved in the campaign insist that smaller nonprofit organizations are succeeding in their goal of filling the void left by Abrams’s network.

But whether Georgia stays blue is far from a settled question.

Abrams told MSNBC during the Democratic National Convention in August that she believes Harris can win Georgia. And she feels her own campaigns helped laid the groundwork.

“Part of the challenge was building, first and foremost, the imagination: people believing that this was a possibility,” Abrams said. “The second was the conscience: showing the people the consequence of not acting. So I would look at my ’18 race as the imagination race, showing people you should pay attention to Georgia. 2020 and 2021 and again in 2022 was the conscience race, here’s what happens in America and in Georgia if we don’t act. And this third race, which will be our third cycle, will be the opportunity to show change.”

Harris edges Trump in Nevada poll; 

Rosen leads in Senate race

Filip Timotija

Fri, November 1, 2024 

Vice President Harris edged former President Trump in the battleground state of Nevada, while Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) holds a healthier lead in the state’s Senate race, according to a poll released Friday.

The new survey, from Emerson College Polling/RealClearWorld, found Harris with a 48 percent to 47 percent lead over Trump among Nevada’s likely voters. Some 2 percent chose a third-party candidate, while another 2 percent were undecided. The lead was within the poll’s margin of error.

Respondents were split fairly evenly on their views of the candidates, with about half holding a favorable or unfavorable view of both Harris and Trump.

The economy was the top issue for Nevada’s voters at 40 percent. In second place was housing affordability (13 percent), closely followed by immigration (12 percent). Threats to democracy and education were both at 9 percent.

Harris has more union support with 50 percent of union households backing her and 45 percent picking Trump. The nonunion vote is slightly closer, with 48 percent supporting the ex-president and 47 percent picking Harris.

Recent polling from CNN had Trump leading Harris 48 percent to 47 percent in Nevada among likely voters. The Republican nominee leads against Harris in Nevada 48.5 percent to 47.3 percent, according to the latest The Hill/Decision Desk HQ’s aggregate of surveys.

In the state’s Senate race, Rosen holds a 4-point lead over Republican Sam Brown, 49 percent to 45 percent. Another 4 percent were undecided.

“Independent voters are nearly evenly split between the two senate candidates – 47 percent support Rosen, while 46 percent support Brown,” said Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling. “Hispanic voters break for Rosen over Brown by 23 points, 58 percent to 35 percent, while white voters lean toward Brown, 51 percent to 44 percent.”

The Emerson College Polling/RealClearWorld was conducted Oct. 29-31 among 700 Nevada residents. The margin of error was 3.6 percentage points.

Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Maddow Blog | Trump tries to rewrite the story of his anti-ACA crusade as Election Day nears

Steve Benen

Updated Fri, November 1, 2024 


President Donald Trump is flanked by House Republicans after they passed legislation aimed at repealing and replacing ObamaCare during an event in the Rose Garden at the White House, on May 4, 2017.

Donald Trump stumbled into another mess of his own making on Wednesday night, declaring at a campaign rally that he intends to “protect” women “whether the women like it or not.” Not surprisingly, Kamala Harris wasted no time in seizing on the former president’s comments, but the Democratic vice president did so in an interesting way.

Trump’s rhetoric, Harris explained, was “very offensive to women in terms of not understanding their agency, their authority, their right, and their ability to make decisions about their own lives including their own bodies.” But as part of the same pushback, she tied the GOP candidate’s comments to a larger argument about health care.

“I’ve been saying throughout this campaign, being very clear that among the stakes of this election are whether we continue with the Affordable Care Act, or not,” Harris told reporters. “It has been a part of Donald Trump’s agenda for a very long time. He has made dozens of attempts to get rid of the Affordable Care Act.”

Evidently, the former president was watching the Democrat’s press conference and felt the need to respond. Trump wrote via his social media platform:

“[Harris] is giving a News Conference now, saying that I want to end the Affordable Care Act. I never mentioned doing that, never even thought about such a thing.”

Gaslighting at this level isn’t just annoying, it’s insulting. Trump’s approach to the debate is rooted in the idea that American voters have no memories, no access to search engines, and no critical thinking skills.

If the GOP nominee wanted to argue that he intends to protect the integrity of the ACA during a possible second term, fine. I’d find such a boast very difficult to take seriously, but it’s difficult to say with certainty exactly what he might do if he’s returned to power.

But the idea that he “never mentioned” ending the Affordable Care Act, and “never even thought about such a thing” is so utterly bonkers that one can only assume that Trump sees voters as suckers.

The record isn’t exactly ambiguous. As a candidate in 2016, the then-candidate repeatedly vowed to repeal and replace the law he called “Obamacare.” His campaign website was explicit about his goal: Trump wanted “a full repeal” of the ACA.

On literally the first day of his presidency, the Republican signed an executive order that read in part, “It is the policy of my Administration to seek the prompt repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

In the weeks and months that followed, the then-president pushed GOP majorities on Capitol Hill to end the ACA. After House Republicans passed a bill to do exactly that, Trump held a celebratory event in the White House Rose Garden, where he told the public that “Obamacare” was “dead.”

Months later, the repeal effort failed in the Senate, and Trump soon after launched a yearslong crusade against the late Sen. John McCain because the Arizona Republican helped scuttle the party’s anti-ACA crusade.

Trump nevertheless spent the remainder of his term undermining and sabotaging the effective health care reform law.

After leaving the White House, Trump continued to rail against the Affordable Care Act. As recently as late last year, for example, the Republican whined that some GOP senators had failed to help him “terminate” the ACA in 2017. “It was a low point for the Republican Party, but we should never give up!” Trump added.

A month later, the Republican posted a video to his social media platform vowing to “replace” the existing health care system.

More recently, Trump touted his “concepts of a plan” that would replace the ACA, and at his latest rally in Nevada, held hours after his denial about his intentions, the former president said the Affordable Care Act “still stinks.”

Trump “never even thought about” ending the ACA? Please.

The result are some important questions for voters in the race’s final days: Are American families willing to vote for a presidential candidate who’s eager to tear down the nation’s health care system and replace it with an alternative he doesn’t want to talk about?

If you’re concerned about your family’s health security, would you really want to take a dramatic risk based on vague assurances and obvious lies?

This post updates our related earlier coverage.

This article was originally published on MSNBC.com

OBAMACARE WAS BASED ON CURRENT REPUBLICAN AND RIGHT WING THINK TANKS SUCH AS THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION AT THE TIME. 

HENCE THE GOP AND TRUMP'S INABILITY TO OFFER AN ALTERNATIVE, OBAMA OUT MANOUVERED THEM. 

US Presidential candidates silent on opioid crisis beyond ‘war on drugs’ rhetoric: ‘It’s easier to point fingers’

Hannah Harris Green
Sun 3 November 2024

THE GUARDIAN

Experts say that targeting the drug supply without addressing the demand leads to more overdoses.

Photograph: Sukanya Sitthikongsak/Getty Images


Overdoses killed 108,000 people in the US last year, more than Covid-19 or diabetes, yet overdose prevention has barely gotten mention this election cycle.

On the relatively rare occasions when presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris discuss opioids, they draw from “war on drugs” rhetoric – suggesting that tougher border and law enforcement policies are the answer to the problem.

Harris’s campaign has promised to spend $160bn on efforts to keep fentanyl from crossing the border.


Related: New class of opioids that may be more potent than fentanyl emerges globally

“As president, I will double the resources for the Department of Justice to go after those transnational cartels and take action to stop the flow of fentanyl coming into our country, which is destroying entire communities,” she said in a speech in Las Vegas in September.

Trump has used more explicit language to blame the overdose crisis on migrants crossing the border.

“What we actually know, from our own law enforcement agencies no less, is that almost all fentanyl entering the country is brought by American citizens through legal ports of entry and not by immigrants,” says Ryan Marino, an addiction medicine specialist and professor at Case Western Reserve University’s school of medicine. “Not to mention that a non-insignificant amount is actually trafficked by members of law enforcement.”

Misleading rhetoric that places the blame for the overdose crisis outside US borders is frustrating for medical professionals, activists and family members of opioid users whose main goal is to stop preventable overdose deaths.

“We’ve lost over 1 million loved ones, neighbors and family members to preventable drug overdoses since the 90s, yet our political candidates continue to offer the same drug war playbook that created the current crisis we’re in,” says Kassandra Frederique, executive director at Drug Policy Action. “Both Harris and Trump have used the overdose crisis as an opportunity to compete for who can appear tougher on immigration and the border instead of offering a real plan to save lives.”

Frederique suspects that Harris and Trump are avoiding meaningful engagement with the realities of the overdose crisis because some of the blame lies with their respective administrations.

The Trump administration criminalized all fentanyl-related substances in 2018, which led to more fentanyl seizures. These policies did not curtail overdose deaths – they continued to climb, from fewer than 70,000 in 2018 to nearly 108,000 in 2022.

“It’s easier to point fingers at the border to distract voters from the harm their policies and inaction have caused. While the Biden-Harris administration has taken important steps toward embracing harm reduction and expanding access to [the overdose-reversal drug] naloxone, their efforts have ultimately fallen short of the scale and magnitude this crisis demands,” Frederique says.

On the local level, election candidates are also avoiding the topic, even in the cities most ravaged by overdoses, such as Baltimore.

Logan Hullinger, a Baltimore-based independent journalist, has covered the political silence on the overdose crisis in the city.

“I’m a recovering addict myself, and I overdosed multiple times during the 10 years I was in active addiction,” he says.

Hullinger hoped his reporting could offer a humane, insightful perspective compared with media coverage that exacerbates the stigma surrounding people who use opioids. But he’s been frustrated at how little Baltimore politicians are engaging with the topic. He says they often say they are unable to comment on the crisis due to the city’s ongoing lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies and drug distributors.

“At times, it feels as though the lawsuits have been used as an opportunity to avoid talking about a public health crisis that isn’t exactly good PR for the city,” Hullinger says.

Local candidates in other overdose hotspots, such as San Francisco, are taking a similar approach to Harris and Trump, and promising crackdowns. Still, crackdowns do nothing to help with addiction.

“Targeting the supply without addressing the demand actually increases the risk and leads to more overdoses,” says Marino. For people who are dependent on opioids, losing access to a reliable supply could mean they look to more unfamiliar, dangerous sources.

Frederique notes that since the beginning of the prescription opioid overdose crisis, a chain reaction of crackdowns have made the drug supply increasingly dangerous.

Prescription opioid restrictions did not stop people from using opioids, but “did send people to the underground heroin supply, which was cheaper”, says Frederique. Heroin crackdowns led to illicit fentanyl, fentanyl crackdowns led to fentanyl analogues. Now that those, too, have been criminalized, nitazenes, a class of synthetic opioid that can be up to 40 times more potent than fentanyl, are already circulating in the US, as the Guardian has previously reported.

Access to overdose-reversal drugs, such as naloxone; opioid cessation drugs, such as methadone; and drug testing services is proven to drastically reduce the risk of overdose fatalities.

Frederique and Marino advise voters to push politicians to put more resources into these proven strategies, but have different ideas about whether voters care enough to do so. Frederique says that voters “absolutely” care about this issue and that they “want and deserve a real plan that puts health and saving lives first. Most Americans agree that the drug war has failed.”

Marino, on the other hand, has found that it’s more politically popular to focus on immigration and drug interdiction. Hullinger is also ”unsure where the [opioid] crisis ranks among voters’ priorities”. He says voters do care about the state of Baltimore’s drug scene, “but not always for the right reasons. Many people, for example, consider drug users public nuisances, and they demand that the city does more to ‘clean up’ their neighborhoods.”

Britons who claim they were tortured by UAE demand arrest of Interpol president

Daniel Sanderson
Sun 3 November 2024

Matthew Hedges (L) and Ali Issa Ahmad (R) say they were unlawfully detained and tortured by the United Arab Emirates - GEOFFROY VAN DER HASSELT/AFP


British nationals who claim they were tortured by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are demanding that Scottish police arrest the president of Interpol while he is in Glasgow for its general assembly.

Matthew Hedges and Ali Issa Ahmad, who say they were unlawfully detained and tortured by the Arab state, have filed a complaint with Police Scotland against Major General Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi, also a high-ranking official in the Emirati security services.

Dr Hedges, an academic who spent seven months in a UAE prison and was sentenced to life in jail after being accused of spying for the UK, said Police Scotland had a “duty” to act on his complaint and urged the organisation not to “roll over and cower”.


The Foreign Office was last year told to make a formal apology to Dr Hedges, who claims he was kept in solitary confinement and fed a cocktail of drugs while in detention, and for failing to spot signs of “potential torture”.

Mr Ahmad travelled to the UAE in 2019 to attend the Asian Cup football tournament, and claims he was beaten, cut and burnt by police officers who arrested him for wearing a Qatar football shirt.

At the time, the UAE and Qatar had cut diplomatic ties and public shows of support for the country were not tolerated by Emirati authorities.

The pair are calling on Police Scotland to question Mr Al-Raisi under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which means those involved in torture can be arrested and detained regardless of where the alleged crimes were committed.

Major General Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi is the president of Interpol and a high-ranking official in the Emirati security services - MONEY SHARMA/AFP

Dr Hedges was pardoned by the UAE in November 2018 and Mr Ahmad was detained between January and February 2019. The UAE has denied their mistreatment claims.

However, Dr Hedges told The Telegraph that Police Scotland had “more than enough evidence” to investigate and that it was an “opportune moment” for officers to interview Mr Al-Raisi while he is in the country.

The 92nd Interpol General Assembly begins in Glasgow on Monday and runs until Thursday.

“He is someone known to oversee this system of abuse and torture that does occur in the UAE,” Dr Hedges said.

“The idea that he’s the president of Interpol, or is here for this big conference, shouldn’t matter. There is a suspect here, and the Scottish police should act as if this was any other case.

“The Scottish police can stand among their international peers and demonstrate that they pursue justice, and are not an organisation simply to roll over and cower.

“They have a responsibility and a duty to do this. Anything else would be a dereliction.”

Dr Hedges and Mr Ahmad said they were still dealing daily with the trauma of their detention and alleged torture.

Dr Hedges said he remained dependent on medication he was forced to take, was still grappling with mental issues and was also impacted by the “false” spying conviction.

Mr Ahmad said the ongoing impact of his detention was “huge”, that he was on medication for mental issues, and that he still felt in danger whenever he travelled abroad.

He said: “They treated me so cruelly and with total disregard for my life. Since my release the UAE have done nothing at all to hold who did this to me to account.

“Al-Raisi instead comes here to Glasgow to parade around as someone who stands to end crime. Nothing could be further from the truth. He needs to be subjected to justice for his actions and failures to act.”

A similar investigation has been launched in France, where Interpol’s headquarters are located. The pair claim Mr Al-Raisi was summoned for questioning by judges but failed to attend.

Matt Hedges with his wife Daniela Tejada - Paul Grover for The Telegraph

Rodney Dixon KC, who is representing the pair, said the Scottish authorities had both the authority and a responsibility to “investigate and prosecute these very serious allegations of torture”.

He said: “He’s not the one who was in the cells torturing, but he was the one supervising those who were. He has the power to investigate all of these complaints and ensure there is justice, which hasn’t happened.”

Earlier this year, a claim for damages brought by Dr Hedges and Mr Ahmad against UAE officials, including Mr Al-Raisi, was dismissed at the High Court, after they claimed immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978.

A spokesman for Interpol said: “In relation to the allegations relating to Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi, this is an issue between the parties involved.”

Police Scotland said: “We have received correspondence and it will be responded to in due course.”


He’s a wanted man accused of overseeing torture of Britons – now Emirati general is heading to UK

Tom Watling
Sun 3 November 202

Ahmed Naser Al Raisi is the director of Interpol (Ipixelpro)


British student Matthew Hedges was about to board a plane back to the UK from Dubai airport when Emirati authorities suddenly arrested him, accusing him of being a spy.

It was 5 May, 2018, and the PhD student had just finished a research trip for his doctorate into aspects of the United Arab Emirate’s foreign and domestic security strategy.

While he was there, an Emirati man apparently reported him to the authorities for “asking sensitive questions about some sensitive departments” and “seeking to gather classified information on the UAE”.


Mr Hedges was then accused of working for MI6 and "spying for or on behalf of" the UK government, a charge then head of the secret service Sir Alex Younger personally denied.

For nearly eight months after, the academic says he was interrogated for up to 15 hours a day, force fed a cocktail of medication, kept in a windowless room without a bed and denied regular access to the British embassy and his lawyers. He suffered panic attacks and was placed under intense psychological pressure, before being sentenced to life imprisonment.

Matthew Hedges with his wife Daniela Tejada (Daniela Tejada/ PA) (PA Media)

It was only after intense, although belated lobbying from the UK government, international outcry and a forced confession that Mr Hedges was pardoned and released on 26 November 2018, the country’s National Day. The UAE called it “gracious clemency”.

Mr Hedges said his ordeal left him with post traumatic stress disorder and insomnia. He still has to take drugs seven years later as a result of being force fed medication.

Two months after Mr Hedges was pardoned, UAE authorities detained another Briton, Ali Issa Ahmad, then 26. The Sudanese-born football fan was arrested in January 2019 after being accosted by security officials for wearing a Qatar football shirt, not knowing that doing so is an offence in the UAE punishable with a large fine and an extended jail sentence.

For around three weeks, he says he was beaten, cut and burnt by police officers, and detained in a security facility. While in detention, he was electrocuted, beaten, and repeatedly deprived of food, water, and sleep. An attempt was made to kill him by stabbing.

“I thought that was going to be my last moments,” he says.

UAE officials claimed Mr Ahmad had harmed himself and charged him with making false statements, and wasting police time. He was convicted without any fair trial, then released on 12 February.

Ali Issa Ahmad, left, and Matthew Hedges were both detained in the UAE (AP)

Their cases are just two of “numerous” allegations against the UAE state security system of abuse and torture of prisoners, irrespective of their innocence.

Joey Shea, a researcher for Human Rights Watch who focuses on the UAE and Saudi Arabia, says the allegations they have documented include forced disappearance, prolonged solitary confinement, torture, physical assault, abuse and the use of extremely loud music to stop prisoners from falling asleep.

On Monday, the man responsible for the state security services and police forces that reportedly carried out this torture, and has since allegedly failed to investigate the two cases, will arrive in the UK.

Mr Hedges and Mr Ahmad are demanding that he is arrested.

Major General Ahmed Naser Al Raisi, who was educated at the University of Cambridge and received a doctorate from London Metropolitan University, will touch down in Glasgow on Monday for the annual general assembly of the International Criminal Police Organisation (Interpol).

He is the organisation’s director, having been elected in November 2021 despite significant protest. Four years previously, the UAE donated $54 million (£42m) to Interpol, almost equivalent to the required contributions of all the organisation’s 195 member countries in 2020, which amounted to $68m.

Ms Shea says the appointment was a blatant “part of the UAE’s broader strategy to whitewash its reputation and human rights record”.

“His position in that role says a lot about how much Interpol is concerned with human rights,” she adds.

Mr Raisi was summoned to appear before a French judge to be questioned in 2023 (AP)

Three months after the appointment, French prosecutors opened a preliminary inquiry into torture and acts of barbarism allegedly committed by Mr Raisi in relation to the cases of Mr Hedges and Mr Ahmad. The UAE has previously denied the allegations.

After Mr Raisi appeared in Lyon, where Interpol is headquartered, the major general was summoned to appear before a French judge to be questioned in June 2023.

He failed to show up for that date. A day later, the judge resumed interviews with the two Britons, and further evidence was provided to help prosecute the Interpol director.

If he visits France again, the judge may request to compel him to give his testimony. Beyond that, they could seek an international arrest warrant.

But ahead of Mr Raisi’s arrival in Glasgow, Mr Hedges and Mr Ahmad are demanding that the Scottish police follow suit and open their own investigation.

“The torture I suffered, the sets of abuses that others have gone through in the UAE, is ultimately under Mr Raisi’s guide,” says Mr Hedges. “Any failings that occur, he is the person that oversees that.”

The pair have submitted a criminal complaint with supporting evidence to the Scottish police against Mr Raisi. It has been filed under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which enables states to arrest and prosecute those involved in torture who are on their territory, regardless of where the crimes are committed.

Rodney Dixon KC, Temple Garden Chambers, London and The Hague, who acts for Mr Hedges and Mr Ahmad, says they believe the evidence submitted “shows [Mr Raisi’s] responsibility for both cases” given his role as inspector general of the interior ministry since 2015.

It includes medical evidence of what happened to both men and issues they are still grappling with.

The purpose of the complaint is two-fold, says Mr Dixon. It aims to show Mr Raisi’s “complicity” in the initial acts of torture and his subsequent “command responsibility” for failing to investigate those acts when the UK Foreign Office issued a formal complaint to the UAE about the two men’s cases.

Ms Shea says beyond the two British cases, she has “received no indication that any allegations have been investigated” by Mr Raisi’s office.

For Mr Hedges, though, the pain of his treatment has for years been worsened by the inaction of the UK government. The Foreign Office may have filed a complaint, but they were forced to apologise to Mr Hedges after a lengthy review for the way they handled his case.

Despite that, the British police have declined to investigate Mr Raisi, which is why, according to Mr Dixon, they are now issuing a complaint to the Scottish police.

“The UK government knows what happened to me,” says Mr Hedges. “How could they know what’s happened and yet still simply let this legal process go by them? Inaction is not an option.”

The Independent has approached Interpol for comment.

UK

Support for nuclear power will evaporate at next election, Chris Bowen predicts

Adam Morton Climate and environment editor

The Guardian
Sun 3 November 2024 

Chris Bowen says there is a difference between Australians being open to nuclear energy and agreeing to it.Photograph: Jessica Hromas/The Guardian


Support for nuclear power is likely to evaporate once Australians face a clear choice at the next election and realise the Coalition’s policy would mean relying more on old coal plants and increased risk of blackouts, Chris Bowen says.

The climate change and energy minister said that while some polling had suggested some voters were open to nuclear plants being allowed in Australia surveys had also consistently found they preferred renewable energy.

“Every bit of research I’ve seen, public and private, says that when shown details and given a choice between nuclear and other forms of energy, nuclear fares very, very badly,” he said. “If you look at the popularity of different forms of energy, it’s solar, wind, gas, daylight, coal, nuclear, in that order, every single time.”


The Coalition has named seven sites where it says it would eventually replace coal-fired power plants with nuclear plants but not how much this would cost. Multiple energy analysts argue nuclear energy would be more expensive than other options and a nuclear industry would not be possible in Australia until after 2040. The bulk of the country’s coal plants are scheduled to close in the 2030s.

The opposition has suggested it would limit the rollout of large-scale renewable energy – it has criticised Labor’s goal of 82% renewable energy by 2030 – and bridge the gap by keeping ageing coal plants running longer and using more gas-fired power.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

It has not yet said what type of gas plants this means. With nuclear banned, gas is the most expensive form of electricity in the national electricity market and it use is largely restricted to “peaking” power turned on only when needed. It provided less than 3% of electricity in the national grid over the past month.

The chair of the Australian Energy Regulator, Claire Savage, told a parliamentary inquiry she did not believe that nuclear plants could be built in enough time to cover the closure of coal-fired power plants. More than a quarter of the coal power capacity in the national grid was offline on the day she gave evidence due to planned and unplanned outages.

Related: Trump says ‘I shouldn’t have left’ White House, despite losing 2020 election

Polling on nuclear energy in Australia has produced varied results. A Lowy Institute poll in June found 61% strongly or somewhat supported its use alongside other sources of energy.

A Guardian Essential poll was roughly split between people who considered it “an attempt to extend the life of gas and limit investment in large-scale renewables” and those who said it was “serious, and should be considered as a part of the nation’s energy future”.

In an interview with Guardian Australia, Bowen said some Australians were open to nuclear energy but he was not concerned as there was a difference between people being open to it and agreeing to it.

“When you say to people, whether it’s in a formal market research setting or a punter in the street setting, ‘I don’t object to nuclear, morally … but I object to it because it’s so expensive, but probably even more importantly, because it takes so long, and we don’t have time if we’re going to wait the 20 to 30 years it would take, and that means more coal in the system and coal in the system longer, and even the Liberals aren’t proposing to build new coal-fired power stations so they’re just going to rely on these old ones longer, and that’s blackouts’ – then the support or openness evaporates.”

The Coalition’s climate change and energy spokesperson, Ted O’Brien, has promised more details of the opposition’s proposal before the end of the year.

He has rejected claims there would be a risk of an electricity shortage under its plan and said government and clean energy industry analysis of how much it would cost were inaccurate as they were not based on its full policy.

Moldova pro-EU leader Sandu wins re-election despite Russian meddling allegations

NEWS WIRES
Sun 3 November 2024 

Moldova's incumbent President and presidential candidate (C) celebrates with staff and supporters following preliminary results of the second round of the presidential election, in Chisinau November 3, 2024.

Moldova's pro-Western President Maia Sandu has secured a second term, defeating a Russia-aligned rival amid allegations of Russian interference, voter fraud, and intimidation. The win bolsters the pro-Western government’s EU integration agenda.

Moldova's pro-EU incumbent Maia Sandu on Sunday won a tense presidential runoff, beating her rival backed by a pro-Russian party in what she described as a "lesson in democracy".

The election in the ex-Soviet republic that lies sandwiched between war-torn Ukraine and the European Union has been overshadowed by allegations of meddling by Moscow.


The key vote took place just two weeks after a referendum backed joining the EU by a razor-thin margin.

Sandu stood at 54.94 percent of the vote against 45.06 percent for Alexandr Stoianoglo, who is supported by the pro-Russian Socialists and whom Sandu fired as prosecutor general last year, according to near-complete results published by the election commission.

"Today, dear Moldovans, you have given a lesson in democracy, worthy of being written in history books.... Freedom, truth, and justice have prevailed," Sandu declared.
'Honest vote'

Earlier, the 52-year-old former World Bank economist thanked jubilant supporters for "their honest vote".

Her rival Stoianoglo, 57, urged people "to remain calm, regardless of the figures".

Moldovan authorities reported "attacks, provocations and attempts at destabilisation" on Sunday.

Pro-EU incumbent Maia Sandu re-elected to second term as president of Moldova

Euronews
Sun 3 November 2024 

Pro-EU incumbent Maia Sandu re-elected to second term as president of Moldova

Moldova's pro-Western incumbent president Maia Sandu has won a second term in a pivotal presidential runoff against a Russia-friendly opponent, in a race overshadowed by claims of Russian interference, voter fraud and intimidation.

With almost 99% of votes counted in the second round, Sandu had 55.03% of the vote, according to the Central Electoral Commission.

Her competitor, the former prosecutor general Alexandr Stoianoglo, was polling at just under 45%.

Speaking at the headquarters of her Action and Solidarity party in the capital Chișinău, Sandu struck a conciliatory tone and said she had listened to those who had voted both for and against her, adding that her priority in the coming years would be to be a president for all Moldovans.

But she went on to claim that her country's vote had faced an "unprecedented attack" through alleged schemes including dirty money, vote-buying and electoral interference "by hostile forces from outside the country."

"You have shown that nothing can stand in the way of the people's power when they choose to speak through their vote," she said.

When polls closed locally at 9pm local time, turnout stood at more than 1.68 million people, around 54% of eligible voters, according to the Central Election Commission.

Moldova's large diaspora, which cast ballots in record numbers of more than 325,000, voted heavily in favour of Sandu.

In the first round, which was held on 20 October, Sandu took 42% of the vote but failed to win an outright majority over second place Stoianoglo.

Moldova's presidential role carries significant powers in areas such as foreign policy and national security and has a four-year term.

Allegations of interference

On Sunday, Moldovan police said they had "reasonable evidence" of organised transportation of voters, illegal under the country's electoral code, to polling stations from within the country and from overseas and are "investigating and registering evidence in connection with air transport activities from Russia to Belarus, Azerbaijan and Turkey."

"Such measures are taken to protect the integrity of the electoral process and to ensure that every citizen’s vote is cast freely without undue pressure or influence," police said.

Moldova's foreign ministry said on Sunday afternoon that polling stations in Frankfurt, Germany, and Liverpool and Northampton in the UK had been targeted by false bomb threats, which "intended only to stop the voting process."


Maia Sandu's main competitor was former prosecutor general, Alexandr Stoianoglo, 3 November, 2024 - Vadim Ghirda/Copyright 2024 The AP. All rights reserved.

Stanislav Secrieru, the president's national security adviser, wrote on X: "We are seeing massive interference by Russia in our electoral process,” which he warned had a “high potential to distort the outcome" of the vote.

Secrieru later added that the national voter record systems were being targeted by "ongoing coordinated cyberattacks" to disrupt links between domestic polling stations and those abroad, and that cybersecurity teams were "working to counter these threats and ensure system continuity."

Moldova's Prime Minister Dorin Recean said that people throughout the country had received “anonymous death threats via phone calls” in what he called "an extreme attack" to scare voters in the former Soviet republic, which has a population of about 2.5 million people.

Vote-buying scheme

Moldovans voted twice on 20 October; first for the president and second in a referendum on whether to enshrine the aim of EU membership in the country’s constitution.

That passed with a razor-thin majority of 50.35%, given a boost in the final hours of ballot counting by overseas voters.

In the wake of those October votes, Moldovan law enforcement said that a vote-buying scheme was orchestrated by Ilan Shor, an exiled oligarch who lives in Russia and was convicted in absentia last year of fraud and money laundering.

Shor denies any wrongdoing.

Prosecutors allege that $39 million (€35 million) was paid to more than 130,000 recipients through an internationally sanctioned Russian bank to voters between September and October.

Anti-corruption authorities have conducted hundreds of searches and seized over $2.7 million (€2.5 million) in cash as they attempt to crack down.

In one case in Gagauzia, an autonomous part of Moldova where only 5% voted in favour of joining the EU, a physician was detained after allegedly coercing 25 residents of a home for older adults to vote for a candidate they did not choose.

Police said they obtained "conclusive evidence", including financial transfers from the same Russian bank.

Moldova's EU future

A pro-Western government has been in power in Moldova since 2021 and parliamentary elections are set to take place next year.

Moldova watchers warn that the 2025 vote could be Moscow's main target.



A man casts his ballot at a polling station in the capital Chișinău, 3 November, 2024 - Vadim Ghirda/Copyright 2024 The AP. All rights reserved.

In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Moldova applied to join the EU. It was granted candidate status in June of that year, and in summer 2024, Brussels agreed to start membership negotiations.

The sharp westward shift irked Moscow and significantly soured relations with Chișinău.

Since then, Moldovan authorities have repeatedly accused Russia of waging a vast "hybrid war", from sprawling disinformation campaigns to protests by pro-Russia parties to vote-buying schemes that undermine countrywide elections.

Russia has denied any meddling.

Resisting Russia, Moldova’s President Fights to Keep Power

Andra Timu, Lina Grau and Irina Vilcu
Sat 2 November 2024 



(Bloomberg) -- The several hundred people gathered inside a hall in the Moldovan village of Pirlita wore winter clothes to keep out the chill. Heating is a luxury the local mayor can’t afford, even when the president visits.

The scene was a sharp reminder of the economic backdrop for Maia Sandu, the country’s leader the past four years, as she seeks re-election in a runoff vote on Sunday that has geopolitical implications beyond the tiny nation.

Moldova is one of the poorest places in Europe, sandwiched between the relative riches of Romania and war-torn Ukraine. Sandu is determined to persuade her country the path toward European Union integration is the right one, but it’s also one Russia is keen to derail. A referendum two weeks ago on future membership unexpectedly saw Moldova split down the middle.

Sandu, 52, faces Alexandr Stoianoglo, 57, a former general prosecutor who favors closer ties with Moscow, with everything to play for. Sandu secured 42% of the vote in the first round held the same day as the EU referendum versus 26% for her opponent. The gap is expected to have significantly narrowed as Stoianoglo picks up ballots from other pro-Russian candidates.

While Sandu has enjoyed the support of EU leaders passing through the country in recent months, her opponent has benefited from what Western governments have called a disinformation campaign led by pro-Russian politicians. Moldovan authorities also accused Russia of bribing voters, which Moscow denies.

The vote comes a week after Georgia, another former Soviet state with ambitions for Western integration, backed a Kremlin-friendly leader in an election disputed by international observers and some European leaders. Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Moldova could be next.

“The fact that the referendum passed is essential for Moldova’s future, but looking at what happened in Georgia we’re in a totally different paradigm,” said Iulian Chifu, chairman of the Bucharest-based Center for Conflict Prevention and Early Warning. “Maia Sandu seems to have understood that and took some good steps, but she still needs to secure more votes.”

Sandu is counting on the villages where she placed second and third in the first round of voting. In the cold hall in Pirlita, she was mobbed by people with bouquets of yellow chrysanthemums, a ubiquitous flower in autumn and the color of her Action and Solidarity Party.

Also hailing from a village, Sandu pointed to the importance of European money in building new roads, schools and sewage systems. If a pro-Russian candidate wins the presidency, she said, this support will stop.

She told the elderly audience that for young people to return to the country — one of the most quickly depopulating in the world — Moldova needs to grow its economy and that’s only possible with the support of the West. She acknowledged mistakes, asking them to give her more time to push through much-needed reforms, especially in the judiciary.

“I know that we have many problems, but we should not set fire to the country because we got angry,” said Sandu.

But the scale of her challenge was also evident. Many locals say they still don’t feel the positive impacts of European funds. They’re concerned about rising prices, scarce jobs and basics like a lack of drinking water. The pro-Russia message is that the EU is to blame.

Some villagers asked whether Christian Orthodox church celebrations would be banned if Moldova joins the EU. They said they read on social media platform Telegram that the EU will take away their land, bring war, and even forbid keeping chickens in backyards. They applauded when Sandu reassured them.

(Sign up to our Eastern Europe Edition newsletter, delivered every Friday.)

One younger man in the audience, Anatol, said he was waiting for the result of the election to decide whether or not to stay in Moldova. He said incomes are low and prices are high and the country needs the prospect of EU integration or there’s no point in staying.

“We don’t want us young people to have to leave,” he said. “But for that, you in government should have done more, and those who contributed to corrupting the votes should go on trial.”

Sandu’s struggle was most apparent during a debate with her opponent on Oct. 27. While she stressed her stance against Russia, Stoianoglo advocated “good ties with all partners — the EU, the US, Russia and China” and stopped short of condemning Moscow’s aggression against Ukraine.

While Sandu branded him as Moscow’s “Trojan horse,” Stoianoglo has struck a more cautious tone than previous pro-Russian politicians in Moldova. He said he wasn’t against EU integration but dismissed the referendum as a move by Sandu to boost her support. He accused her of incompetence, mismanaging the economy and leading the country into deeper divides.

QuickTake: Why Russia and the West Are Sparring Over Moldova

How Sandu arrived at this critical juncture goes back a decade to when she was serving as Moldova’s minister of education. A Harvard-educated economist, Sandu had left the World Bank in Washington to take up the role.

Her reforms merging small schools in depopulating villages were so unpopular that colleagues openly betted on how long she would last, she said. But another event that put Moldova on the map turned out to be more of a defining moment.

In 2014, $1 billion was siphoned out of three state-owned banks, costing Moldova the equivalent of 12% of its gross domestic product. The crisis turned her into a prominent pro-European figure opposed to the oligarchs that controlled swathes of the economy.

Two years later, she narrowly lost to pro-Russian President Igor Dodon, whose campaign derided her as an unmarried woman, before beating him in 2020 by promising to tackle corruption. Stoianoglo is the candidate backed by Dodon’s party this time around.

Sandu’s four years in power have been turbulent as Russia’s war next door in Ukraine escalated the tension within Moldova while whacking the already fragile economy. Gross domestic product per capita is still less than half that of Bulgaria, the EU’s poorest member.

If she retains power, it will be a prelude to another fight between pro-Western and pro-Russian political forces next year when the country holds parliamentary elections. The Russia-based Pravda newspaper called the presidential vote simply a “rehearsal for the main political battle.”

Yet Sandu is popular among Moldova’s large diaspora, which bolstered her support in the first round and ensured the EU referendum on enshrining membership in the constitution ended up passing by a whisker, 50.4%. Those people may again swing the vote on Sunday.

Winning over voters at home remains the key challenge, especially given their disillusionment with the country’s future and their susceptibility to disinformation. Polls had shown support for the EU at 60% before the vote.

One story Sandu uses is how her mother confronted two women on a trolleybus in the capital, Chisinau, who claimed the president had sent her to the US.

“The stakes are much higher now because the first round of the presidential elections and the referendum showed that fighting Russian disinformation isn’t easy,” said Chifu, who expects her to win. “If before, everyone was expecting a landslide victory from her part and to crush any opponent, now we’ll probably see a much tighter result.”

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

Gig economy firm under fire for telling restaurants they can avoid UK’s new tipping laws

A tip plate at a restaurant.Photograph: Alicia Canter/The Observer

Tom Wall
Sun 3 November 2024

A gig economy firm has been criticised for telling its hospitality clients they can avoid new fair tipping laws and a forthcoming ban on zero-hours contractors by using its freelance workforce.

Temper Works, which supplies workers to more than 5,000 companies, including Hard Rock Cafe, Alexandra Palace and Claridge’s, is promoting its workforce to restaurants, hotels and bars on the basis that “they are not covered by the provisions of the new [tipping] legislation”.


The Netherlands-based firm, which opened an office in the UK in 2022, warns companies that agency workers “must now be included in tip-sharing schemes” but claims gig economy workers sourced through its website fall outside the legislation. “By engaging freelancers through Temper, businesses can continue to access flexible labour without the added costs and complexities associated with tip allocation for agency workers,” it states in a briefing published last month.

Under the Employment (Allocation of Tips) Act, which came into force last month, firms must share all tips between workers, including temporary agency staff. The legislation was prompted by a public outcry over high street chains deducting money intended for waiting and kitchen staff. The Observer revealed that Pizza Express was taking 8p of every £1 paid when tips were given by card in 2015. The policy was later scrapped by the chain.

The Unite union, which campaigned for the new tipping rules, said it was potentially unlawful to exclude gig workers from tips shares as the courts would probably find they were not genuinely self-employed. “For Temper Works to be so flagrantly advertising services which seek to flout new and well-established employment law to line their own pockets isn’t just morally reprehensible, it is almost certainly illegal,” said Bryan Simpson, Unite lead organiser in the hospitality sector. Temper Works is also advising firms to use its 60,000-strong pool of freelancers to get around a proposal to ban zero-hours contracts, which is a key plank in Labour’s new ­worker’s rights legislation. Under Labour’s the forthcoming employment rights bill, agency workers on zero-hours contracts will have the right after 12 weeks to a contract with guaranteed hours.

A document by Temper Works from August argues the changes “present significant challenges for businesses that have come to rely on the flexibility offered by zero-hour contracts”. It adds the requirement to offer stable contracts means “overall labour costs are likely to rise”. It says firms should instead “use independent contractors as [a] pool of temporary workers” which “allows businesses to benefit from a flexible workforce that can adapt to changing demands while ensuring that the business isn’t burdened with the obligations and restrictions associated with permanent employment contracts”. Another briefing on Temper’s website claims it can help firms “survive the national minimum wage increase” earlier in the year, which the chancellor announced last week would rise again to £12.21 in April 2025. Temper says shifts can be as long or as short as a business wants: “We frequently see shifts of just 60-90 minutes, to cover the lunchtime rush. You only need to pay for staffing precisely when required, and only for the actual time worked on shift.”

The UK government is planning to consult on bringing in a simpler two-tier employment framework, which distinguishes between genuine self-employment and all other types of workers. A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said: “Employers shouldn’t try to circumvent the spirit or letter of the law through practices like bogus self-employment or not passing on tips. If they do, workers can take them to a tribunal where they may be made to pay significant compensation.”

Temper Works said it did not recognise the “strong claims” made by Unite. “Temper is a platform that has always operated, and will continue to operate, transparently and according to UK law,” it said in a statement. It said a Dutch court had found it was a platform for work, not an employment agency. It added that the functions built into the platform, including the ability to appoint substitutes to perform work, negotiate hourly rates and turn down work, ensured it was “a marketplace for independent contractors”. Temper said independent contractors sat outside of the tipping legislation but clients were free to “allocate tips to contractors on Temper if they wish to do so”. It added that contractors were given a range of protections,which are not typically offered to agency staff, including a minimum of £12 an hour and compensation for loss of earnings for up to 12 months. It said the average pay on the site was £14.09 an hour in September while shifts of 60-90 minutes were in reality “uncommon”.

It said the government’s zero-hours ban would do little to shift the balance of power towards employees whereas the independent contracting model “puts control back in the hands of the person working the shift” as they can choose their hours.

Thousands take to London streets demanding cleaner water

AFP
Sun 3 November 2024 


Protesters attend a "March for Clean Water" in London, calling for the government to "stop the poisoning of Britain's waters" (BENJAMIN CREMEL) (BENJAMIN CREMEL/AFP/AFP)


Thousands of people marched through central London on Sunday demanding action on cleaning up Britain's rivers and seas.

Environmental activist and singer Feargal Sharkey and Fast Show comedian Paul Whitehouse were among those joining The March for Clean Water, which was backed by groups including Greenpeace, the Wildlife Trusts and British Rowing.

"Who likes dirty rivers? Not I. Lots of people love to use the rivers, waterways, and they're under threat from agricultural pollution and from the water companies," said Whitehouse, star of hit UK show "Gone Fishing".


Protesters are demanding reviews of water regulator Ofwat and the Environment Agency along with stricter enforcement for water companies who break existing pollution rules.

River Action said that there were around 15,000 marchers, who were encouraged to wear blue and to bring a sample from a body of water close to their heart.

Many wore elaborate costumes, while others held signs reading "tides not turds", "cut the crap" and "water for life".

Jenny Linford, a 61-year-old food writer, told AFP that it was "disgusting what has happened to our waters since the water companies were privatised.

"It's absolutely obscene that Britain's rivers and lakes and seas are having more sewage pumped into them.

"We're here because we want to speak up for water... and just say to politicians 'please act'," she said, adding that the issue was a factor in the Conservative Party's defeat in the July election.

The new Labour government last month set out legislation that will give regulators powers to issue harsher penalties, including prison sentences, to polluting water companies and their executives.

Lewis Pugh, endurance swimmer and ocean advocate, told AFP the march was "an opportunity to tell government that we really do need them to sort out what's happening in our rivers.

"When you allow agricultural runoff to go into rivers, or industrial waste or plastic pollution to go into rivers, not only do you kill the river and everything in it, but it goes into our oceans and does exactly the same thing," he added.

Water UK, the industry's trade association, acknowledged that the current system "is not working".

"It is too complicated, too slow and is not delivering for people or the environment," said a spokesperson.

"We cannot delay upgrading and expanding vital infrastructure any longer and need Ofwat to reconsider its approach," it added.

Around 100 protesters turned out for a similar march in Northern Ireland capital Belfast.

Siobhan Keegan, who open swims in Northern Ireland's Lough Neagh, said that she had not been able to "dunk" in the lake for the past two summers due to bacterial build up.

"If we don't act now it'll be too late for future generations," she warned.


The March for Clean Water will see protesters rally in Parliament Square to call for more action to keep the UK's rivers and seas clean. (Image: PA)