LONDON'S MAYOR

Sadiq Khan awarded honorary fellowship for work on air quality

Noah Vickers
Tue, 27 June 2023 

Sadiq Khan has been made an honorary fellow of the Faculty of Public Health (PA)

Sadiq Khan has been awarded an honorary fellowship by the Faculty of Public Health “in recognition of his leadership in tackling poor air quality”.

The award is the highest category of the association’s membership and is awarded to those who have made “exceptional contributions towards improving the health of the public”.

Professor Kevin Fenton, the association’s president, said the mayor “has shown his willingness to take on major challenges for London to improve the health, wellbeing and economic productivity of all Londoners”.

Mr Khan said he was “honoured” to receive the recognition “on behalf of all those who have worked so hard in London to improve air quality, save lives and reduce health inequality”.

As well as introducing hopper fares on buses and trams, the mayor has increased the cost and area covered by the congestion charge, and is expanding the Ultra low emission zone (Ulez) to cover the whole of Greater London from August 29.

The Ulez expansion plan has been criticised by the Conservatives, who say the expansion will do little to improve air quality while hitting people’s pockets during a cost of living crisis.

Air pollution scientists, doctors and environmental groups have meanwhile said the scheme is a vital step towards cleaning the capital’s air and reducing pollution-related illnesses and deaths.

WHY THEY WENT EXTINCT
Scientists find cannibal human ancestor species that likely butchered and ate each othe

Vishwam Sankaran
Tue, 27 June 2023 


Scientists have identified the oldest evidence hinting at cannibalism in humans’ close relative species who likely butchered and ate each other.

The study published on Monday in the journal Scientific Reports, assessed nine cut marks on a 1.45 million-year-old left shin bone from a relative of modern humans found in northern Kenya.

Researchers, including those from the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History in the US, say the cut marks seem to have been caused due to damage inflicted by stone tools.

They say this could be the oldest instance of cannibalism in a human relative species known with a high degree of confidence and specificity.

“The information we have tells us that hominins were likely eating other hominins at least 1.45 million years ago,” study co-author Briana Pobiner said.

“There are numerous other examples of species from the human evolutionary tree consuming each other for nutrition, but this fossil suggests that our species’ relatives were eating each other to survive further into the past than we recognized,” Dr Pobiner said.

Researchers first came across the fossil shin bone in the collections of the National Museums of Kenya’s Nairobi National Museum while looking for clues about which prehistoric predators might have been hunting and eating humans’ ancient relatives.

When looking at the shin bone for bite marks from extinct beasts with a handheld magnifying glass, Dr Pobiner instead noticed what immediately looked to her like evidence of butchery.

She then sent molds of the cuts made with the same material dentists use to create impressions of teeth.

Researchers then created 3D scans of the molds and compared the shape of the marks to a database of 898 individual tooth, butchery, and trample marks created through controlled experiments.

Scientists could positively identify nine of the 11 marks as clear matches for the type of damage inflicted by stone tools and the other two as likely bite marks from a big cat.

While the cut marks by themselves do not prove that the human relative who inflicted them may have also made a meal out of the leg, Dr Pobiner suspects this was the most likely scenario.

She says the cuts are located on the shin where a calf muscle would have attached to the bone – a good place to cut if the goal is to remove a chunk of flesh.

The marks were also found to be all oriented in such a way that a hand wielding a stone tool could have made them all in succession without changing grip or adjusting the angle of attack.

“These cut marks look very similar to what I’ve seen on animal fossils that were being processed for consumption. It seems most likely that the meat from this leg was eaten and that it was eaten for nutrition as opposed to for a ritual,” Dr Pobiner said.

However, scientists say there is not enough evidence to conclusively infer this as a sign of cannibalism as that would require the eater and the eaten to hail from the same species.

While the fossil bone is known to be that of a human relative species, experts say there is not enough information to assign the specimen to a particular species of hominin.

They say the use of stone tools also does not narrow down which species might have been doing the cutting.

Some researchers have further called into question the once-common assumption that only one genus, Homo, made and used stone tools.

While this fossil evidence may be a trace of prehistoric cannibalism, it is also likely that this may have been a case of one human ancestor or relative species chowing down on a cousin species.

It is also hard to infer anything about the order of events that took place based on the bite marks, researchers say.

They say a lion may have scavenged the remains after hominins removed most of the meat from the leg bone or alternatively a big cat that killed an unlucky hominin was likely chased off before opportunistic hominins took over the kill.

However, the findings underscore the value of museum collections, researchers say.

KPMG WERE ENRON'S ACCOUNTANTS
KPMG Australia launches internal review after potential conflict-of-interest concerns raised

Henry Belot
Tue, 27 June 2023 

Photograph: Quentin Bargate/Alamy

The consultancy firm KPMG has launched an internal review to address concerns about potential conflicts of interest after sustained criticism from senators, unions and transparency advocates.

The federal government has paid KPMG to conduct safety and quality audits of aged care facilities, while a separate division within the firm simultaneously charges providers for advice on audits and accreditation.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup

KPMG says all potential conflicts of interest are carefully managed but Greens senator Barbara Pocock has raised concerns during a parliamentary hearing into the government’s use of consultants.

“In aged care, you are both an auditor of aged care residential services and you are a consultant to those services,” Pocock said.

“The conflict of interest is very clear. It’s repetitive. Chinese walls will not protect against it. It is a real concern that this very important separation is not under way.”

KPMG chief executive Andrew Yates told the inquiry he was aware of public commentary and concern about the arrangements.

“I need to listen to what we are hearing and make sure that we are doing the right thing,” Yates said.

Related: PwC to publicly name all staff involved in tax scandal, inquiry told

“We feel we are doing the right thing. Our clients are telling us that we are doing the right thing. We are hearing the comments you have been making. I have asked our risk team to review this to make sure that we are actually doing the right thing.”

The scope of the review and its duration are not known. KPMG was contacted for comment but did not respond before deadline.

Government consultancy firms have faced intense scrutiny after the misuse of confidential tax policy information at PwC, which has damaged the firm’s revenue and reputation. It now plans to divest its government work – worth about 20% of revenue – for just $1 to save more than 1,000 jobs.

The Community and Public Sector Union has warned KPMG’s work as an auditor and an adviser could expose taxpayers and residents to potential conflicts of interest, as consultants could be asked to audit clients that are not disclosed to or detected by government.

“What we have here is a consultancy assisting the aged care regulator to audit aged care facilities, while at the same time, it seems that same consultancy is also advising aged care providers,” CPSU assistant national secretary, Michael Tull, told the inquiry. “At face value, that looks like a potential conflict of interest.”

“We’re talking about aged care regulation, an area of serious public concern, where many people think profit motives stand in the way of quality care. There cannot be even the slightest room for people to doubt the independence of the aged care regulator.”

The aged care safety and quality commission has previously told a parliamentary inquiry that it prompts KPMG to declare any conflicts of interest every month and that when conflicts are identified, work is not awarded.

KPMG executive Paul Low told the inquiry the firm would welcome additional transparency over the movement of staff from government to consultancy firms.

Related: PwC tax scandal: firm engaged in a ‘calculated’ breach of trust, Senate committee finds

“If there is ambiguity around the separation from government and there are opportunities to make that clearer for other employers, that is something that KPMG would support,” Low said.

“If we have a senior executive who is moving into our business formerly from government or from a political role in the last two years, we engage with our national managing risk partner and the client lead partner for that client in our business.”

Another parliamentary inquiry has been launched into ethics and professional accountability in the government consulting industry. Labor senator Deborah O’Neill said continued scrutiny was required to ensure accountability.

“I think we have opened the lid on a set of practices that this sector has tried to keep quiet and just considered business as usual for a very, very long period of time,” O’Neill said.

NEW DEFINITION OF STEAMPUNK
Grandad smashes land speed record on 'nutty' STEAM POWERED motorbike he made in his shed


Tom Burgess
Tue, 27 June 2023 

Graham Sykes during his world record breaking attempt. (Image: PROHIBITION PR)

A GRANDFATHER-OF-NINE has smashed the world land speed record for a steam powered motorcycle - on a machine he invented himself.

Graham Sykes, a self-described 'nutty inventor', reached a groundbreaking 163mph in just under four seconds on his three-wheeled steam bike at Elvington Airfield near York.

Mr Sykes designed his steam powered bike in his garden shed at the back of his house in Bedale, North Yorkshire.


It was the culmination of a 10 year effort with Diane Sykes, his wife, to create the fastest steam-powered bike in the world.

The 59-year-old, who turns 60 later this week, named his creation 'The Force of Nature' to emphasise his commitment to eco-friendly methods of travel.

He believes that there is no need to sacrifice speed when trying to invent vehicles in an environmentally friendly way.

The Northern Echo: The self described 'nutty inventor' from Bedale in action

The bike uses hydrogenated vegetable oil to superheat water to create pressurised blasts of steam which launch it forwards.

Mr Sykes lies prone on the vehicle to achieve the most aerodynamic shape possible as twin nozzles propel steam out of the rear.

At the UK&ITA World Records Speed week at Elvington Airfield the 'Force of Nature' performed incredibly well - but Graham thinks it still has more to give.

Before this eco-invention the fastest steam-powered motorcycle speed was held by Bill Barnes, an American inventor, who reached 80mph in 2014.

Mr Sykes said: "It's just a big bomb really, and it all started in my shed.

"I've taken the principles of chemistry, and married them with precision engineering to create something I'm passionate about - fast bikes.

"I wanted to do this in a way that is sustainable for the planet and demonstrates that you don't have to compromise on speed, you just have to get creative."

The Northern Echo: The steam powered motorbike flying down the track at Elvington Airfield, near York.

Looking forward, he hopes to break 200mph over an eigth of a mile after a stationary start.

He believes that the full potential of the vehicle is "yet to be unleashed".

Get more from The Northern Echo with a Premium Plus digital subscription from as little as only £1.50 a week. Click here for details.

Graham has previously broken the British record for fastest three-wheeled vehicle in 2015 with a self-built V8 motorbike.

In that attempt he reached a peak speed of 180.3mph.

The 'Force of Nature' will be showcased by Graham and his team in Germany as part of the Nitro Olympics night show.

Greek far-right makes vote comeback


Petros KONSTANTINIDIS
Mon, 26 June 2023 

Neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn's former spokesman Ilias Kasidiaris is in jail but the Spartans advertised his support for them in their campaign posters (STRINGER)

The far right has made a dramatic return to Greek politics, swept back on a wave of anger over the name deal on North Macedonia and the enduring power of a locked up neo-Nazi leader.

For the first time since the restoration of democracy nearly 50 years ago, Greek voters on Sunday sent not just one nationalist party but three into parliament.

Between them the parties garnered 12.8 percent of the vote, taking 34 out of 300 seats in parliament.

Chief amongst them are the Spartans -- whose logo is an ancient warrior's helmet -- a party so little known that local journalists did not even know where their offices were.

Sunday's general election was their first, and they only appeared in opinion polls barely two weeks before the vote.

But everyone in Greece knows the man who backs them -- Ilias Kasidiaris, the former spokesman of neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn, which was banned from contesting elections after being labelled a criminal organisation by the courts.

Kasidiaris is serving a 13-year prison sentence with other leading members of Golden Dawn over crimes including the murder of an anti-fascist rapper.

Hellenes, the party he founded after leaving Golden Dawn, had also been blocked from standing in the polls.

Despite his criminal record, Kasidiaris' endorsement was apparently sufficient for the Spartans to pick up over 240,000 votes and win 12 seats.

Their leader Vasilis Stigas -- a relative unknown who had previously tried his luck with other nationalist parties -- thanked Kasidiaris after Sunday's vote, calling him "the fuel that gave us the push to get this result."

Beyond the Spartans, the more established pro-Russia party Greek Solution, led by former telesales marketer Kyriakos Velopoulos, also obtained over 230,000 votes, enough for 12 lawmakers.

Velopoulos, whose party first appeared in the 2019 European parliamentary election, used to peddle beeswax as a treatment for hair loss on his television show, as well as letters allegedly written by Jesus Christ.

And another newcomer, the anti-abortion Victory party, led by a theologian fond of reciting psalms during his speeches, took 10 seats.

Its manifesto included a plan to require immigrants to undergo monthly health, working status and penal record checks. Anyone who failed to comply would be expelled from Greece.

"Although I was afraid of the far right's rise, I did not expect us to be facing the most far-right parliament in recent Greek history and one of the worst in Europe," wrote Aristides Chatzis, a law professor at the University of Athens, in Kathimerini daily.

- 'Treason' -

Support appears to be strongest in northern Greece, a traditional stronghold of the right.

Far-right parties took more than 20 percent of the vote in six electoral districts in the northern Macedonia region.

Anger has been simmering there since the signing of the Prespa Agreement by a leftist government in 2018, resolving a quarter-century-long name dispute with neighbouring North Macedonia, with the former Yugoslav republic agreeing to add "north" to its name.

While the agreement with Skopje was hailed in the West, many hardliners in Greek Macedonia viewed it as high treason.

"It is evident that there are significant interconnections among these parties, primarily stemming from their shared stance on the Macedonian dispute and their steadfast refusal to accept the outcome in 2018," Georgios Samaras, Assistant Professor in Public Policy at King's College London, told AFP.

"Furthermore, these parties have consistently launched relentless attacks on the lockdown policies implemented during the pandemic, alongside propagating anti-vaccine sentiments."

Writing in the centrist newspaper Ta Nea, journalist Michalis Mitsos said the "nationalist positions on Greek-Turkish relations, anti-Europeanism and xenophobia mixed with the anti-vax movement and pro-Putin sentiment" had produced a vortex of support for the parties that would otherwise be marginalised.

With three parliamentary parties, "far-right voters in Greece now have access to a range of highly customised, almost tailor-made political options," Samaras said.

pk/jph/hmn/fg

'No one will leave' the EU market because of new AI rules, says Thierry Breton

Méabh Mc Mahon
Tue, 27 June 2023 

 Thierry Breton

"No one, of course, because it's the biggest digital market in the world. So no one can afford it," he went on.

"It's (a market) that is bigger than the one in the US (so) no one could afford not to be. And we welcome everybody."

Breton's comments come in the midst of negotiations for the AI Act, an ambitious law that aims to rein in the excesses of artificial intelligence and ensure the rapidly evolving technology respects the European Union's fundamental values.

The draft legislation is considered a world-first attempt to regulate AI through a human-centric, risk-based approach; and its potential success – or failure – could influence rules in other countries around the world.

"We don't only regulate AI. We have decided to organise our digital space," Breton said in his interview with Euronews.

But the AI Act, which has been subject to thousands of amendments and intense lobbying, has been met with certain scepticism from the industry it tries to govern.

Last month, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, the company behind the revolutionary ChatGPT, caused a stir when he suggested the firm might consider leaving the European market if it could not comply with the proposed rules.

Altman later walked back from the remarks, which attracted considerable media attention, and said he had "no plans" to exit.

Breton had a chance to discuss this issue withAltman in a recent trip to San Francisco during which he also met with several directors of big tech companies, including META's Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter's Linda Yaccarino.

"He (Altman) told me that it was misinterpreted. So he changed his tweet, and he said: 'I love the regulation, we will follow it.' By the way, including on watermarking," Breton said, referring to the digital technique that allows AI-generated content to be identified as such.

"The rules are rules," Breton went on, speaking of himself as "the enforcer."

"Politicians are here to make the rules to secure when we believe it's important the way our fellow citizens are living in this space or that space, and companies are here to follow the rules. And they will."

EU’s flagship nature laws in jeopardy after voting stalemate

Lisa O'Carroll Brussels correspondent
Tue, 27 June 2023 

Photograph: Thierry Monasse/Getty Images

The future of the EU’s flagship environment laws are again hanging by a thread with a cliffhanger vote, flared tempers and accusations of lies, fake news and manipulation of voting in the European parliament.

Emotions were running high after voting on the European parliament committee steering through the Nature Restoration Law (NRL) ended in a dead heat on Tuesday, with 44 votes in favour and 44 against. It can now progress to a vote of the full parliament in a plenary session in July.

The centre-right European People’s party (EPP) is calling for a delay until a “solid impact assessment” on the consequences for food production and biodiversity in farming.

Related: EU’s biodiversity law under threat from centre-right MEPs

In tense scenes at a press conference shortly after the vote, the chair of the environment committee, Pascal Canfin, accused the EPP of “clear manipulation”, claiming it had “substituted” one-third of its 22 members on the committee to ensure the NRL hit the buffers.

MEP Cesar Luena, rapporteur of the committee, said: “A lot of lies have been told about this proposal. There have been lies and myths spread about”.

He accused the right of using arguments over the environment and migrants for their political convenience, and said young people were watching on in disbelief as the EU pulled together to fight Russia in Ukraine but was “not able to drive through a law on nature and diversity” in the face of a mounting climate emergency.

The law’s fate was sealed after the EPP, the centre-right political grouping across the EU, decided to withdraw from negotiations earlier this year, claiming it would reduce food production and hinder hydroelectric and hydrogen green energy development.

Peter Liese, the German MEP and environment spokesperson for the EPP, launched a scathing attack on Canfin after the vote.

“The chair has always to defend the vote whether he likes it or not. But Pascal Canfin is the worst and most partisan chair of the Envi (environment committee) I have ever experienced and I am here since 1994,” he said.

He dismissed claims that the EPP was going against one of the flagship Green Deal policies of the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, saying the European parliament had already adopted 27 pieces of legislation on the environment, with 13 “more to come”.

The EPP has been pitching itself as the voice of farmers’ across Europe, arguing the NRL has failed to listen to their concerns over the specifics of the new rules.

It has been careful not to criticise Von der Leyen, who has said little on the dispute despite the NRL being a pillar of her Green Deal plans for Europe.

Canfin is confident the law will pass if they can negotiate a truce before the July plenary but the EPP would rather it be dropped altogether.

It has renewed its call on the European Commission vice-president, Frans Timmermans, to withdraw the legislation and find a compromise way forward.

Voting on 2,500 compromises had begun two weeks ago in Strasbourg, France but had timed out, forcing extra voting on Tuesday.

MEPs of environment committee vote down the Nature Restoration Law, throwing its survival into doubt

Jorge Liboreiro
Updated Tue, 27 June 2023 

The legislation, which seeks to reverse biodiversity loss by rehabilitating Europe's degraded land and sea areas, has become the object of relentless criticism by conservative parties.

After going through a long series of amendments, the text as a whole received 44 votes and 44 against, meaning it failed to garner the necessary simple majority to move forward by one single ballot.

The tally prompted a mix of applause and jeers inside the room, a vivid reflection of the stark ideological divide prompted by the law.

It marks the first time the parliament's environment committee (ENVI) rejects an element of the European Green Deal. Previously, two affiliate committees, agriculture (AGRI) and fisheries (PECH), had struck down the text.

As a result, the legislation will be sent to plenary in its original form, as proposed by the European Commission, with a recommendation to be scrapped in its entirety.

The decisive vote is expected to be held in the week of 10 July.

Non-attached lawmakers and independent-minded conservatives could tip the balance and save the draft text, although this is far from guaranteed.

If the hemicycle does follow the advice of the 88-member committee, the legislative process will come to an end: MEPs will not be able to enter negotiations with member states, which have already agreed on a common position, and the law will be effectively dead.

"The process, as far as we understand, is not finished in the European Parliament," said a spokesperson for the European Commission. "Of course, we respect the process that is currently ongoing."

The spokesperson then confirmed that if the Nature Restoration Law were to fall apart, the executive would not table a second proposal.

A bitter exchange of accusations

Tuesday's knife-edge vote took place amidst a political atmosphere of unprecedented hostility against the draft piece of legislation.

Over the past months, the centre-right European People's Party (EPP), the largest formation in the parliament, has mounted an incessant negative campaign against the Nature Restoration Law, which the group sees as a direct threat to the traditional livelihoods of European farmers, fishers and forest managers.

The EPP describes the law as a case of "good design, bad intentions" and says its legally-binding targets to rehabilitate land areas will disrupt supply chains, decrease food production and raise prices for everyday consumers.

The claims put forward by the conservatives have been forcefully contested by progressive parties, environmental NGOs, climate scientists and the renewable energy industry, which argue nature restoration and economic activity are two compatible goals that can thrive side by side.

The back-and-forth played out in public view on Tuesday during the press conferences that the two opposing sides held right after the key vote.

César Luena, the socialist MEP who serves as the law's rapporteur, and Pascal Canfin, the liberal MEP who chairs the ENVI committee, denounced the EPP for distorting the legislation and teaming up with far-right parties to bring it down.

"About this law, a lot of lies and hoaxes have been said," Luena told reporters. "One has to have a bit of class. In the political fight, you have to argue with data, with knowledge, with ideas, but not lies."

Canfin bluntly accused EPP Chair Manfred Weber of replacing "one-third" of the conservative members in the ENVI committee with "nature-sceptic" lawmakers in order to secure the rejection of the draft law.

"It was a very clear manipulation of the ENVI vote," Canfin said. "It cannot happen in the plenary because Manfred Weber cannot replace members in the plenary."

"As a chair of a committee, it's very appalling to see (that) a political group is able to manipulate to that extent," he added.

Christine Schneider and Peter Liese, two German lawmakers from the EPP, immediately fired back, calling Canfin's comments shocking and unacceptable.

"Pascal Canfin is the worst and most partisan chair of the ENVI committee I've ever experienced since 1994," Liese told reporters. "This has never happened before."

Liese admitted his party had "many substitutions" during the vote because "we wanted to be on the safe side" and said his Czech colleague Stanislav Polčák had been the "only one" who had expressed a desire of voting in favour of the law. (Polčák did not take part in Tuesday's vote.)

"Our problems with the law are still the same," Schneider said, calling the text "impractical," "backward-looking" and the "wrong way to go."

Schneider asked the European Commission to withdraw the law before the plenary vote and accused Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who is in charge of the European Green Deal, of threatening MEPs ahead of the closely-watched vote.

Timmermans's office denies the characterisation and insists he is committed to discussing the legislation with co-legislators and finding solutions.

Notably, the EPP's scathing campaign has so far spared Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, who is affiliated with the conservatives.

"It's very obvious that Timmermans drafted this law and Timmermans is the one who did the threats. Ursula von der Leyen didn't do so. So there's a big difference," Liese said when asked about this omission.

A Commission spokesperson said President von der Leyen "fully" supported the Nature Restoration Law and was keeping a "close eye" on the legislative talks.

Meanwhile, beyond the parliamentary fray, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), BirdLife and Greenpeace decried Tuesday's outcome and blamed the EPP for playing "dirty tactic" and spreading "misinformation."

"It's a disgrace that politicians and lobbyists have spread the lie that nature and farming are somehow in conflict – the whole parliament must ignore that nonsense and vote to restore Europe's precious nature," Greenpeace said.

In a sign of the high stakes created by the bitter political sage, an increasingly large number of private companies have spoken on the record in defence of the law.

Earlier this month, CEOs and top executives from 50 companies, including IKEA, Nestlé, H&M, Iberdrola and Unilever, signed a joint letter urging lawmakers to adopt rules on nature restoration and create legal certainty for businesses.

"Our dependence on a healthy environment is fundamental to the resilience of our economies and, ultimately, our long-term success," the CEOs wrote.

What is the Nature Restoration Law?

The Nature Restoration Law was first presented by the European Commission in June 2022 as part of the European Green Deal and the 2030 biodiversity strategy.

The legislation, referred to as the "first continent-wide, comprehensive law of its kind," aims to rehabilitate habitats and species that have been degraded by human interference and climate change.

According to the Commission, 81% of European habitats are in poor status, with peatlands, grasslands and dunes hit the worst.

The law sets out legally-binding targets in seven specific topics, such as farmlands, pollinators, free-flowing rivers and marine ecosystems, that put together should cover at least 20% of the EU's land and sea areas by 2030.

In the now-rejected amended text, MEPs had boosted the goal to 30% in order to align the bloc with the landmark deal that was achieved in December at the end of COP15 in Montreal.

Under the legislation, governments would be asked to draft long-term plans on nature restoration, laying out the projects and initiatives they wish to pursue in order to meet the overarching targets.

Possible actions include planting trees, beekeeping, rewetting drained peatlands and expanding green spaces in urban areas.

Upon its presentation, the Nature Restoration Law was well received by environmental organisations, which hailed the legally-binding targets and the far-reaching scope, but triggered a significant backlash from farmers, fishers and foresters, who later called it an "ill-thought out, unrealistic and unimplementable" proposal bound to have "devastating consequences."

The EPP built upon this reaction to launch its opposition campaign, which critics say is heavily influenced by the upcoming European elections and the emergence of the sudden rise of BBB, the agrarian populist party that has disrupted Dutch politics.

This piece has been updated with new details about the vote.

PwC walks back report used to claim Australia’s nature repair market could be worth $137bn


Paul Karp Chief political correspondent

The Guardian AUS
Tue, 27 June 2023 

Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian

PwC has walked back a report used to claim the nature repair market could be worth $137bn, accepting it measures “indirect spending towards biodiversity” but the amount spent on “threatened species conservation, with clear outcomes, is likely much less”.

The consultancy firm made that submission to a Senate inquiry examining the Albanese government’s nature repair market bill in response to a critique of the report from progressive thinktank the Australia Institute.

Related: Teal MPs criticise Greens’ ‘short-sighted’ opposition to Labor’s planned nature repair market

PwC has also come under fire from Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, who says the firm has questions to answer about whether the report was written to “get their foot in the door to win more work” associated with the market.

The environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, announced the nature repair market in August 2022 and introduced the bill in March. It proposes to create a market to incentivise investment in nature restoration by creating tradable certificates for projects that protect and restore biodiversity.

The Coalition at first agreed in principle, because it replicated a policy of the Morrison government, but withdrew support in June, putting the bill at risk of defeat in the Senate.

In March Plibersek cited the PwC report, titled “A nature-positive Australia” and published in December 2022, which she said had found a biodiversity market that “could unlock $137bn to repair and protect Australia’s environment by 2050”.

The report measured the “direct value [of] financial flows to biodiversity” with estimates of components including: private biodiversity, conservation and natural capital investments ($78bn); forest carbon and biodiversity offsets ($33bn); conservation NGOs and environmental charities ($11bn); government expenditure and subsidies ($8.5bn).

The Australia Institute submitted to the Senate environmental legislation committee that the report was “misleading on a number of fronts and is entirely unrelated to the nature repair market”.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup

“Critically, the $137bn figure presented in the PwC report seems to be in 2050 dollars,” it said.

“That is, PwC has inflated the figures to what they would be in 2050. It is not an accurate representation of what the financial flows it presents are in 2023 or will be in the near future.”

The Australia Institute also argued that “a significant share” of the financial flows estimated by PwC were “not related to ‘markets’ at all, such as direct government intervention and environmental spending by NGOs and charitable donations”.

“Adjusting the estimates to 2023 dollars lowers the total financial flows to just $70bn, and ‘market-based’ flows down to $18bn,” it concluded.

The Australia Institute also took aim at evidence in Senate estimates on 23 May, in which the environment department deputy secretary, Lyn O’Connell, said it “did not commission or pay for that report”.

“It came out of a conversation I had with a principal at PricewaterhouseCoopers in terms of, ‘here’s something that would be useful for us to know’,” she said.

Hanson-Young told Guardian Australia that “there are questions as to whether this is part of a PwC strategy to get their foot in the door to win more work – it’s a corporate strategy we know has been used elsewhere by PwC”.

A PwC spokesperson said: “PwC regularly authors thought leadership on important topics, and in this case saw an important opportunity to progress a conversation around the role of biodiversity markets and the role for the private sector in funding nature repair.”

In its reply submission, PwC’s acting chief executive, Kristin Stubbins, said its report was “developed in light of government interest in market-based mechanisms, as well as businesses and financial institutions becoming increasingly aware of nature-related risks and opportunities”.

PwC accepted the methodology involved estimating “financial flows from a range of vehicles” and the report “details the limitations” of estimates given the lack of data.

“We also acknowledge in the report that financial flows capture indirect spending towards biodiversity through environmental and conservation initiatives, but the proportion spent on targeted threatened species conservation, with clear outcomes, is likely much less.”

“The report did not attempt to outline the impacts specific to the nature repair market, as it was developed both independently of the Australian government and at a time when the [bill] was yet to be made public.”

Plibersek said: “I’ve been clear that I expect the nature repair market will generate billions of dollars of investment in nature repair to better protect our environment for our kids and grandkids.”

“Any extra investment in nature should be welcomed by people who care about the environment,” she said, citing support for the bill from the World Wildlife Fund, National Farmers’ Federation, Australian Land Conservation Alliance, Landcare and the Northern Land Council.

The bill is opposed by many environment groups due to concerns that the scheme as proposed could be used to offset habitat destruction caused by other developments.

The bill passed the House of Representatives on Wednesday evening, with Labor and most independent MPs in favour, while the Coalition, Greens and Zoe Daniel opposed it at the second reading stage.

Hanson-Young said “the last election was about climate action and integrity but the government’s Green Wall Street scheme has neither”.

“We need stronger environment laws to protect nature and the climate, not koala credits for greenwashing.”

Iranian art school students beaten and arrested for defying headscarf rules

Alijani Ershad
Tue, 27 June 2023

© Observers

A group of Iranian students, incensed at rules imposed on June 12 requiring female students to wear a maqna’a – a conservative Islamic headscarf in black that covers the head, neck and shoulders – began a sit-in in protest. They also wrote an open letter to the university administration, which said: “We have nothing to say to you except ‘no'.” A number of students were beaten and arrested for taking part in the protest, while also being threatened with suspension and even death. Thousands of people have posted “no” on their social media accounts in solidarity and students at dozens of other universities have published open letters in support of the Tehran art students.

It all started on Monday, June 12, when students at Tehran University of Art received a text message: “Female students must wear a maqna’a starting June 17 if they want to attend university classes.”

The new rule was imposed just days before final exams and the end of the semester. One student we spoke to said students who still refused to wear a headscarf felt “taken hostage” by the strict imposition at exam time. Students began a sit-in and protested against the rule.

The message was a shock to a number of students at the university, a prestigious art school known to be a relatively liberal institution in the Islamic Republic. Since the widespread “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests began in September 2022, many Iranian women have refused to wear any type of Islamic headscarf.

UK

RED TORY

Starmer fails to commit to recommended public sector pay rises



Sky News
Updated Tue, 27 June 2023 


Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he too will not be following recommendations on public sector pay rises, saying his party are set to "inherit a real mess" if they win the next general election.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has faced a backlash from opposition parties and unions after hinting he will not adopt proposals from pay review bodies for the coming year in a bid to tackle inflation.

Asked at a New Statesman event what his course of action would be, Mr Starmer did not answer the question, and instead pointed to the UK's "really badly damaged economy".

Pay review bodies (PRBs) take evidence from across sectors like the NHS and education each year, as well as submissions from government, before saying what wage rises should be introduced across the public sector for the following 12 months.

The PRBs' recommendations are expected to be published next month, alongside formal pay offers, with reports claiming the proposed figure could be around 6% for the health service and 6.5% for teachers.

Amid anger from unions about the numbers failing to match inflation last year, Health Secretary Steve Barclay insisted it was right for ministers to "continue to defer to that process to ensure decisions balance the needs of staff and the wider economy".

Asked for Labour's position on PRB recommendations, Sir Keir said he understood there was "a real squeeze" on workers, saying their wages hadn't gone up "in material terms" for 13 years.

He put the blame at the door of the Conservatives for their "failure to grow the economy and the additional damage that Liz Truss did".

But Mr Starmer did not say he would accept PRB recommendations if he becomes prime minister, instead saying: "I am not going to hide from this.

"If we are privileged enough to come into power at the next election, and I hope we are so that we can serve our country, we are going to inherit a real mess, a really badly damaged economy.

"Public services that aren't on their knees but on their face - the NHS in particular - and a sense that we have got to go at pace to try to repair, rebuild and run towards the future which is available for us as a country.

"And Rachel [Reeves - the shadow chancellor] has been clear that will require us to have strong fiscal rules which we are not going to break.

"But you know, we urgently need to get on with the task now of picking the country up, rebuilding and moving forwards."

After numerous reports over the weekend and a raft of ministers refusing to commit to accepting the recommendations for the coming year, Mr Sunak hinted he might block them.

He told broadcasters on Monday: "I think everyone can see the economic context we are in, with inflation higher than we'd like it, and it is important in that context that the government makes the right and responsible decisions in things like public sector pay.

"I think people need to recognise the economic context we are in, and I am going to make the decisions that are the right ones for the country.

"That's not always easy, people may not like that, but those are the right things for everybody, that we get a grip on inflation, and that means the government not excessively borrowing too much money and being responsible with public sector pay settlements."