GEMOLOGY

New Zealand couple with 'gem fever' spending every winter 12 metres underground in Qld

ABC Capricornia / By Jasmine Hines and Erin Semmler
Posted Yesterday 

Shovelling dirt is a far cry from Lynette Bailey's more glamorous business consultancy work in New Zealand.

But, with husband Gregg Smith, she digs and moves up to 2 tonnes of dirt from 12 metres underground while working on their sapphire mine in Queensland's Gemfields.

The couple first purchased the mining claim after Mr Smith toured the region on a trip around Australia in 2013, after which they decided to get off the corporate "hamster wheel".

"We got a touch of gem fever to start off, and then the lifestyle just took over," Mr Smith said.

"People are fascinated by what we do because we just can't do that sort of stuff at home."

Gregg and Lynette Bailey say nothing compares to life on Queensland's Gemfields.

(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

The pair leave NZ every winter to hunt for precious gemstones in Australia and then return to their lives when the weather warms up.

While Ms Bailey is a business consultant, her husband works in NZ's maintenance industry.
A 'huge learning curve'

Ms Bailey said their lives could not be more different when they were living on their mining claim.


"In New Zealand, we've got an acre [0.4 hectares], we've got a brand new house, we've got all the bells and whistles … over here we have a long drop," she said.

"We're off the grid, the world really stops and it's like [how it was] 100 years ago.

"As long as we've got hot water for a shower and food in the cupboard, it's all we need."

Gregg and Lynette's mine is 12 metres underground and features several rooms and tunnels.(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

Mr Smith said when they first began chasing sapphires eight years ago it was a "huge learning curve for his wife" as she had never worked a manual job.

"She crashed every night," he said.

One of many dazzling finds from Gregg and Lynette's mine.(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

In 2021, the couple found a 52-carat sapphire valued at about $29,000.

In the several years since they bought their claim, Mr Smith said they have only had about five days without finding a gem.

"I often tell people that are visiting us … when they pick a sapphire out at the end of the day and hold it up to the light, that stone hasn't seen daylight for maybe 50 million years," he said.

"You're saving that little stone from being stuck in the dark for the rest of its life."
How do they mine it?

While small-scale mining claims can be bought in Queensland, the use of heavy machinery is restricted to regular mining and exploration.

Gregg and Lynette comb through a tray of rocks, hoping to pick out a sapphire.

(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

Small-scale claims are also currently subject to a state government discussion paper, with proposals to reform the sector.

Mr Smith said their mine had a rounded roof with pillars to support it in some sections.

He says at the heart of it, the couple "just shift dirt."


"We can't use machinery but we can use jackhammers, so it's jackhammer the dirt off the wall, break it up … to about fist size, so it goes through the plant better," Mr Smith said.

The pair load the dirt into a wheelbarrow and then send it up their mine shaft through a pulley system to be sorted above ground.

The Baileys rarely go a day without finding at least one gem.(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

Ms Bailey said they aimed to move about 20 wheelbarrows worth a day.

"We have fans circulating in the area, so we've always got fresh air down there," she said.

"It's always 23 degrees [Celsius]. Even if it's a wet day we can come down here and have a dig."
Pioneers in 'tummy tunnels'

While the Bailey's operation allows for some power tools, small-scale mining has come a long way since the days of its pioneers.

Michelle Jarvis says she loves showing tourists through the Miner's Heritage tour.

(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

Michelle Jarvis works as a tourist guide at Miner's Heritage in Rubyvale, which offers the largest underground walk-in sapphire mine tour in Australia.

Ms Jarvis said the mine, which is 440 metres long, includes original "tummy tunnels" that date back as far as 1906.

Microbats live inside the Miner's Heritage underground site.

(ABC Capricornia: Erin Semmler)

At that time, miners would dig with a pick and shovel.

"Back then, it was all on their stomach and in very low-roofed tummy tunnels. It wouldn't have been much fun," Ms Jarvis said.

Instead of ladders, Ms Jarvis said miners would shimmy up and down the mine shaft using their back, hands and feet to move.

Related Stories

A 'holy dooley' moment as rains unearth sapphire the size of a 'small child's fist'


Murray says he could hand-mine sapphires on his land for another 30 years. But a government proposal could stop that


This small town is rich in sapphires — and now the word is out

AUSTRALIA

Meteorite field found north of Port Augusta

ABC North and West SA / By Dixie Sulda and Narelle Graham
Posted Yesterday 

Scientists uncover a field of meteorites north of Port Augusta.
abc.net.au/news/meteorite-field-found-9-years-after-asteroid-sa-outback/101707426

Scientists have mapped out the fall zone of a six-tonne asteroid that crashed through the atmosphere leading them to a field of meteorites in South Australia.

Key points:A field of meteorites has been located nine years after an asteroid crashed through Earth's atmosphere
The field was discovered along a 6km stretch north of Port Augusta
Some of the meteorites were handed to the SA Museum for a new exhibition

The asteroid landed on Earth in 2013, and was alerted to researchers by defence satellites in the United States.

A "treasure map" was then developed by Curtin University using weather radars and drones that covered a six-kilometre-long stretch north of Port Augusta, leading researchers at Monash University to 44 meteorites in various sizes.

"The guys at Curtin University provided us with a map of where to go and we packed the car … and within about 10 minutes we started picking up meteorites almost straight away," Professor Andy Tomkins from Monash University's School of Earth, Atmosphere and Environment said.

"It's pretty rare for us, we are usually walking around for hours before we find anything."

The meteorites found north of Port Augusta varied in size.(Supplied: Andy Tomkins)

The field of meteorites is the biggest discovery since the Murchison meteorite fall in Victoria in 1969.

"The biggest one [meteorite] we've found so far is about half a kilogram [and] they're down to about 10 grams, so the size of a kangaroo poo — they look a lot like kangaroo poo too," he said.

"You're walking around looking for a rock, which is almost black, sort of dark grey to black in colour, with occasional chips of lighter-coloured stuff shown inside.

"It's quite a distinctive different black colour to everything else that's out there in this particular place."

Meteorites were located within 10 minutes of researchers arriving at the "likely fall zone".(Supplied: Andy Tomkins)

The asteroid crashed through Earth's atmosphere at 20 kilometres a second, causing the explosion of meteorites.

Samples of the meteorites were provided to SA Museums for a new exhibition.
What now?

Professor Tomkins said the meteorites were cut with a diamond saw, and they were identified as stony meteorites.

A team of biologists is looking at how meteorites are inhabited by microbes straight after they've fallen to Earth.

 

Scientists are now able to take a closure look at the meteorites.(Supplied: Andy Tomkins)

"Meteorites floating around in space don't have any microbes in them, they're pristine," Professor Tomkins said.

"When they come and land on the earth they're a sample of stuff that's never seen life before.

"So we can look at the minerals that the microbes use to gain energy to get insight into how the earliest processes of the start of the earth's history worked when life was just getting started."

Australian meteorite one of three with key building blocks for life's 'prebiotic soup'

Return of truce is vital to Yemen as global food and energy crises take toll

The one-sided implementation of the Stockholm deal has empowered the Houthis and entrenched the country’s divide

DAMIEN
MCELROY

Houthi supporters rally to mark the Ashura day in Sanaa, Yemen in August. Reuters

Yemen nervously awaits signs that a truce involving all main factions can hold, despite a failure to renew it after the most recent deadline expired.

The truce is absolutely vital, not least because the main drivers in Yemen are now shaped by the fallout from the 2018 Stockholm Agreement as well as the global energy and food crisis.

Those living in Yemen are left to grapple with a cascading set of dire daily realities. The failure to achieve peace and restore the national government throughout the country is something to be squarely laid at the feet of the UN.

The agreement was badly rolled out. One of the pillars of the Stockholm Agreement was the Hodeidah Accord, which opened up the Red Sea port and associated road routes to ensure that food and other flows could increase to ease the threat of famine.

Last week, a representative of the Aden-based Southern Transition Council (STC), which is a partner with the national government, set out how what looked like a viable solution was, in fact, twisted by the implementation.

By overriding the safeguards on how trade and revenues are freed up, Houthi commanders and checkpoints were granted a gatekeeper. The consequences have been downplayed. The outcome is an escalatory cycle, according to the STC, that has granted the Houthi leadership “infinite” military and political capacity.

With its new space within the context of conflict, the Houthi leadership has taken the opportunity to be take a stand that is both stubborn and prolonging. “Maybe on the surface it looks like you might have a variable solution, but typically giving [the advantage] to one side causes the problem to become more complicated,” is the view of one source in Aden.

The failure to achieve peace is something to be squarely laid at the feet of the UN

Rising oil prices have given the Houthi leadership and its backers in Iran more cause to block an overarching solution in Yemen. As another Yemeni last week observed, the seas around the country’s coast are the main route for energy exportation to Europe and the Houthis are trying to take advantage of this vantage point.

Escalation along that route is obviously something that European countries are very alert to, and the regimes hostile to the West are just as alert to the advantages of disruption of those corridors.

Iranian efforts to have another coast to launch attacks on the tanker lanes to Europe are holding Yemen hostage. This, for the Iranian leadership, is a potential pinch point that would allow Tehran to exercise pressure through escalation.

At a time when Iran’s internal dynamic is one of siege by the opposition demonstrations, this gives Tehran an external card to play to ensure that the international community does not support the regime’s opponents.

For the wartime administration in Yemen, this is a dire squeeze. This is particularly as the people who have fled the oppressive situation in Sanaa or the hardships across the frontlines wait for a return to their properties or towns in dire straits.

“On top of our own population, we have more than 3 million refugees from the north and we have more than a million that have come from Africa,” said the STC representative. “Although there is pressure on our resources, the aid that is given by the international community is given to refugees. Whereas our own people who are suffering from this extra pressure are not getting anything.”

A report published last week by the Italian Institute for International Political Studies drew interesting parallels between the situation in Yemen and the effects of stalemate in Libya, and how the energy economy played into the conflict’s power balance there.

UN special envoy for Yemen, Hans Grundberg. Reuters

“In Yemen, the Houthis collect illegal fees and levies especially from oil and communications, also confiscating the assets and funds of individuals and entities,” it noted. “In 2020-21, however, most of the Houthis’ fuel income 'likely came from their control of the supply chain and sales via the Yemen Petroleum Corporation and the parallel market'.”


The report also noted how the areas of Yemen that are oil hubs, while never unimportant, are now prized as revenue hubs in a way that was less so before. “Together with the import of oil derivatives, the export of crude oil represents the largest source of potential revenue for armed groups in Yemen,” the report said.

Take that to the next level and there is the trap that Yemen can’t currently escape. That of the families and extended social networks that are now bound up in a decade of fighting for local and national control.

Alistair Burt, the former UK minister of state for the Middle East and North Africa, put it well at an event organised by the Royal United Services last week.

“The benefits of war are evident to a man who has a gun and controls the checkpoint and can extract taxes and has more power over people that perhaps he's ever had in his life,” Mr Burt said. “So what is the incentive to that individual to bring an end to it? Where's the incentive to those holding the guns to stop the conflict?”

Where indeed, when the people of Yemen have been so badly let down by UN diplomacy, is the hope for viable solution.

Published: November 27, 2022 

                      

Damien McElroy is a foreign correspondent who has covered politics and conflict across Europe, the Middle East, the US, Africa and Asia. Before joining The National in 2017, he worked for The Sunday Times and Telegraph titles as an editor and roving reporter. He started his career in China and has a degree in finance.

Energy bills: direct payments needed, not fossil subsidies

LUKE HAYWOOD 

22nd November 2022
SOCIAL EUROPE

Subsidising high energy costs might seem the obvious answer to the cost-of-living crisis—but it’s not.
Lisa, a karate instructor from Esch in Luxembourg, is using its Klimabonus to insulate the home she inherited and so reduce her energy bills (Klima-Agence)

How to cope with high energy prices continues to dominate European politics. A recent paper by the European Commission avows that a gas price cap cannot reduce prices structurally—only increased supply or reduced demand could do so.

All European Union member states should heed this advice when reviewing their strategies to provide relief. Governments have attempted to reduce fossil-fuel prices, but this is dangerous for the environment, uses public funds ineffectively and can lead to negative consequences for unprotected consumers.

In the short run, the better alternative is direct payments to citizens. In the long run, the best alternative is to invest to reduce demand for fossil fuels by switching technologies.

The arguments for eco-friendly and just relief for high energy prices apply not only in the context of the current cost-of-living crisis. They also serve as a model of how best to compensate for higher prices resulting from climate policy.
Our job is keeping you informed!

Establishing channels for direct payments now can pave the way for distributing revenues from carbon pricing. At the EU level, social measures funded via the Social Climate Fund, using revenues from the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), could follow this pattern.

Subsidies ineffective

Apart from seeking additional sources of energy and promoting savings, governments can attempt to influence energy prices with subsidies, for example via tax rebates, in an attempt to reduce the net prices paid by consumers. This however risks being entirely ineffective.

Recall the origin of the high prices: supply of fossil fuels to Europe was reduced significantly by Russia. With limited capacity to increase the flow of gas, prices rose because demand had outstripped supply at previous prices. Prices rose until some consumers decided they no longer wished to consume so much gas at such high prices.

Imagine consumers are faced with the same net price after the subsidy that they faced before Russia’s war. Then demand remains at prewar level—but supply is not. Then gross prices (before application of the subsidy) may rise. At the extreme, net prices before and after the subsidy are exactly the same. The effect of subsidies for consumers is minimal, the cost to the public finances is large and only the energy producers benefit.

Such price-inflating effects could be reduced by limiting the scope of subsidies: while subsidised consumers would benefit from lower prices, non-subsidised consumers would pay more than otherwise. But consumers in rich EU countries receiving subsidies would still benefit at the cost of consumers in other countries, as the commissioners for the internal market and the economy, Thierry Breton and Paolo Gentiloni respectively, warned in response to Germany’s plans.

Alternatively, governments might fix prices, without providing subsidies. Yet while the prospect of keeping energy affordable is attractive, if all consumers can continue to afford their consumption, supply will be insufficient—measures to reduce demand are needed. Governments have so far focused only on fairly soft measures of energy saving and efficiency; it is not clear that these will be enough.

Lowering the price then requires alternative, non-market mechanisms to allocate scarce gas supplies. With a price cap, some rules for allocating supplies would need to be found in case these were to become rare.
Practical alternative

The fact that only those most able to pay higher prices now receive adequate gas supplies is unfair should actually be the starting-point for public intervention. Where high prices erode the standard of living, a practical alternative to trying to alter prices is increasing incomes—until energy savings and increased production of renewables can lower prices.

Trade unions are rightly arguing for wage increases, stressing there is no evidence of a wage-price spiral. And in a few European states, including Germany, the United Kingdom and France, individuals on social assistance have received specific payments. Of course, increases in energy prices also affect non-unionised workers and low-income households not in receipt of social assistance. So other groups have received payments—for example pensioners in the UK and in Denmark, where child-support payments have also been temporarily increased.

A more radical route has been chosen by Austria—to pay every citizen a fixed amount. The Klimabonus was set up to redistribute revenues from carbon taxes but is now also being used to compensate for high energy prices.

Many people instinctively prefer ‘targeted’ support for those most affected. Yet as the Nordic welfare states have shown more generally, universalism brings buy-in from all, including the professional middle class, and avoids the stigmatisation of benefit recipients.

Making direct payments liable to income tax would mean that the net amount of the payment will still vary by household income. In many EU countries, a considerable proportion of the population is not liable to income tax, while the highest rates can top 50 per cent. In this situation, the richest households will receive considerably less after tax than the poor. Direct payments could even be means-tested ex post if wished, by adding the totality of the payment as a tax liability for households above the income-tax threshold.

Distributional effects

It is also important in this light to recognise the distributional effects of energy subsidies. While direct payments are usually focused only on households, energy subsidies also benefit firms, so their effects are large: businesses are after all owned by wealthy people.

According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the 40 per cent of households with the least private net wealth hold only 3 per cent of household wealth across the OECD area, while the top 10 per cent own more than half. Targeted help for firms may be warranted to secure jobs, but energy subsidies benefiting all firms mainly benefit rich households.

Proponents of energy subsidies typically argue that poorer households spend a greater proportion of their income on energy. This is true: in the most extreme cases of Estonia, Czechia and Slovenia, the 20 per cent of households with lowest incomes spend around 15 per cent of their income on energy, compared with only 6-9 per cent for households with the highest incomes.

Yet in all cases the absolute expenditure on energy is higher for the highest income bracket. So subsidising energy transfers more money to rich than poor households. Direct payments to all households benefit the rich less and the poor more. They can also be used by consumers to reduce their dependency on fossil fuels by investing in decarbonised solutions, such as heat pumps, measures for energy efficiency or electric bicycles.

But can states afford direct payments to all citizens? The rapid increase in energy prices could not be foreseen and compensation is affordable for a limited period. Taxing windfall profits resulting from the high prices is an obvious and sensible route for this.

Short-term compensation however needs to be complemented by investments in long-term decarbonisation. Not only is there no obvious scenario for a change in Russian attitudes towards EU countries, but the climate catastrophe means carbon taxes or regulations will make using fossil fuels less and less affordable in the long run.




Luke Haywood is policy manager for climate and energy at the European Environmental Bureau, having worked at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin, the OECD in Paris and the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change. His focus has been on just transition, climate governance and labour-market policies.

Humanoid robots won’t roam 

our streets any time soon

The Tesla Bot is cool, but it also shows the

 limitations  of humanoid robots.

By Chloe Olivia Sladden

Credit: VCG / Getty Images. A Tesla Bot is on display at Automobile Exhibition Area during the 5th China International Import Expo at the National Exhibition and Convention Center (Shanghai) on November 6, 2022 in Shanghai, China.

Humanoid robots have long been a common staple of science fiction. Arnold Schwarzenegger killing machines and synthethics like Bishop from the Aliens movies have long been confined to realms of fantasy. However, a wave of innovative tech companies are actively trying to make those visions a reality.

“There is a chance that one day life will imitate art and robots and people will look alike,” according to a recent report from research firm GlobalData. “If and when that happens, societies will face an ethical conundrum: what rights to give to non-human creatures that look like us?”

Those ethical considerations are clearly worthwhile, but before it’s time to roll out the old Turing test, the technology actually has to materialise first. Despite decades of trial and error, those humanoid robots still don’t roam our streets, factories and homes.

Nevertheless, the topic of humanoid robots made its way back into the news recently, thanks to Elon Musk’s Tesla unveiling the long-rumoured humanoid robot Optimus in September. The robot staggered around on stage, waved and demonstrated its holding capacity.

The robotics community gave the presentation a mixed response. While some hailed the Tesla Bot’s achievements so far, others, like Dan O’Dowd, founder of The Dawn Project, panned Optimus, saying it’s not ready because it runs on the same artificial intelligence (AI) used in Tesla’s self-driving software, which has suffered serious safety defects.

“Robots are [still] developing rapidly, however [the Tesla bot] is laughable compared to the competition,” O’Dowd says. “Optimus is a shining example of an Elon Musk vanity project, designed to distract from serious safety problems in Tesla’s flagship Full Self-Driving software and the decline of the company’s stock in recent months.”

O’Dowd says humanoid robots will get here, but Musk and Tesla are miles behind. He likened Tesla’s Optimus to a “high school science product” compared to a commercial product.

“[Robots like] Tesla’s humanoid are still a very long way from being a product ready to enter the market – let alone our homes,” Mark Gray, UK and Ireland country manager at Universal Robots, tells Verdict.

How will humanoid robots work?

Experts say humanoid robots will only work if they are safe, capable and affordable. To achieve all that, humanoid robots need a powerful AI. AI will help robots “identify human emotions” and complete human tasks, according to the GlobalData report.

Many companies are also looking into soft robotics, which uses compliant materials rather than traditional rigid materials, enabling them operate more cautiously and safely.

“[Robots] need to be able to produce a ‘soft collision’ with whatever they are interacting with so that they can perform tasks without breaking the object or themselves,” Bernt Øivind Børnich, CEO of Halodi Robotics, which is developing its own humanoid robot, tells Verdict.

Similarly, humanoid robots must take the safety of humans into consideration and to be able to accurately calculate risks.

“[Safety] requires advanced technology to be built in, such as a power and force limiter that can reduce speed and motions when detecting a human close by – or stop all together if there is contact made,” Gray says.

Where will humanoid robots be used?

Robotics is big business. The market will be worth around $568bn by 2030, according to GlobalData forecasts.

Ben Goertzel, CEO of Singularity NET and co-creator of the humanoid robot Sophia, tells Verdict that there is potential for humanoid robots to be used in industrial settings.

He believes humanoid robots, by simply being the same size contrary to the different shapes and forms humans come in, will create a slew of advantages.

“There is a long-standing history in manufacturing robotics which indicates that there are greater advantages in having differently shaped bodies,” Goertzel says. “Experience has found that what actually works is to re-factor the whole manufacturing process around the strengths and weaknesses of the AI robots, rather than around the strengths and weaknesses of the human mind and body.”

Humanoid robots could arguably also be used in areas such as healthcare, teaching and social work, provided they have a powerful AI and efficient hardware.

However, just like every other piece of innovative tech, there is a risk that the introduction of humanoid robots could displace human workers. Experts, understandably, therefore call on policymakers to tread carefully when signing off on the implementation of these robots.

“The successful integration of humanoid robots within our society will depend on policymakers’ ability to take advantage of the economic benefits provided by robots while minimising the negative social impacts,” Martina Raveni, analyst at GlobalData, tells Verdict.

THE MULTITUDE

Three stowaways survive 11-day Atlantic journey to Spain on ship’s rudder

Online News EditorNovember 29, 2022

Las Palmas, Spain, Nov 29 (EFE).- Three African men survived a 11-day journey hidden on top of the rudder of an oil tanker that sailed non-stop from Lagos, Nigeria to Las Palmas, in the Canary Islands, Spain’s coast guard has said.

The three stowaways were disembarked and received urgent care at the port, and were later taken to two different hospitals for treatment for moderate dehydration.

A Spanish government source told Efe on Tuesday that as they had arrived as stowaways, they are not legally considered migrants and will not be allowed ashore. They will be returned to the ship for the crew to take care of them until it returns to Nigeria.

Two of them are already on board the tanker, with the third following once he leaves hospital.

The three of them were hidden aboard the Alithini II, from Malta, which sailed from Lagos on November 17.

An image provided by Salvamento Marítimo on Monday night shows where they were found: a small space under the stern where the rudder fits into the hull, just above the water line.

“It is a place that is not suitable for a person and at the sea, the risk is to lose one’s life. The risk is maximum,” Sofía Hernández, head of Salvamento Marítimo told Efe.

Hernández highlighted that this was not the first case, with several similar examples since 2018, including four in 2020 alone, when 15 people, including one minor, were rescued.

Spanish journalist and migration advisor to the Canary Islands government, Txema Santana, issued a statement on Twitter in which he warned that the ongoing migration crisis would see more similarly dangerous crossing attempts.

“This is not the first time and it will not be the last,” he said. “Stowaways are not always this lucky.” EFE

nac/aef/ks

Channel crossing deaths: man arrested over deaths of 27 migrants who drowned in English Channel

Harem Ahmed Abwbaker is accused of being a member of an organised crime gang behind the crossing and faces extradition proceedings to France

By NationalWorld Team


A man has been arrested in connection with the deaths of 27 migrants in the English Channel.

A man has been arrested in the UK in connection with the deaths of at least 27 people who drowned while trying to cross the English Channel in a dinghy last year. Harem Ahmed Abwbaker was detained at an address in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, at around 6.45am on Tuesday, the National Crime Agency (NCA) said.

The 32-year-old is accused of being a member of an organised crime gang behind the crossing in November 2021. All but two of the migrants on board died after the boat sank. Four people are still missing.

He is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday for extradition to France, where the NCA said he will face charges of the “French equivalent of manslaughter” and facilitating illegal immigration.

NCA deputy director Craig Turner said: “This is a significant arrest, and comes as part of extensive inquiries into the events leading to these tragic deaths in the Channel.” He added: “Working closely with our French partners we are determined to do all we can to get justice for the families of those whose lives were lost, and disrupt and dismantle the cruel organised criminal networks involved in people smuggling.”

Home Secretary Suella Braverman said: “My thoughts continue to be with the families of all of those who tragically lost their lives in this horrendous incident. I thank the NCA and other agencies across the UK and France for their tireless work to deliver justice for the victims and their families by identifying those we believe to be responsible and ensuring they feel the full force of the law.”

Last week, relatives of those who died marked the first anniversary of the tragedy by demanding the Prime Minister make changes to prevent future tragedies. In a letter to Rishi Sunak, they called for politicians – including Ms Braverman – to end their “poisonous rhetoric” which they said “breeds fear and division”.

Their demands came amid concerns French rescue services had failed to respond adequately and as an official report from the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) found the boat had reached UK waters.

Read More

Relatives of migrant dinghy victims demand answers and ‘justice’ as report finds they had reached UK waters

Channel crossing deaths: first victim identified as Kurdish migrant, 24, travelling to be with fiance in UK

Channel deaths: UK and France agree need for action after boat sinks off Calais leaving 27 people dead

UK COMPETITION WATCHDOG FINDS MAJOR RECORD LABELS ARE NOT ‘MAKING SIGNIFICANT EXCESS PROFITS THAT COULD BE SHARED WITH CREATORS’

 NOVEMBER 29, 2022

BY MURRAY STASSEN

It was a probe into the music business that, for a good moment, had the major record companies rattled. But in the end, following a thorough study of the local music market, the UK’s leading regulatory competition watchdog has concluded that large-scale record labels are “[not] likely to be making significant excess profits that could be shared with creators”.

In July last year, a cross-Parliamentary committee made up of UK politicians called for a “complete reset” of music streaming following an inquiry into the economics of streaming.

An associated report recommended that the majors’ dominance of the UK recorded music industry should be referred to the UK’s competition watchdog – the Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA).

The CMA then launched a ‘market study’ into the power dynamics of the record business. The CMA’s final 165-page report on the matter was published in the UK on Tuesday (November 29).

During the CMA market study, some lobbyists in the UK music business suggested that artists and songwriters weren’t pocketing enough money from streaming services, and accused certain music companies of holding on to outsized profits from royalties.

The CMA ultimately concluded that remuneration from streaming is an elite pursuit, with over 60% of streams in the UK being of music recorded by only the top 0.4% of artists.

The CMA study also concluded that music consumers have benefitted from ‘real terms’ price drops in music streaming services. Due to inflation, the unchanged price paid by consumers in the UK for a service like Spotify Premium fell by more than 20% between 2009 and 2021, said the CMA.

On the topic of major label profits specifically, the CMA explains in its new report that it undertook a profitability analysis, and has not “found evidence of substantial and sustained excess profits by the majors that could be competed away to benefit consumers, for example through more investment in music”.

It adds: “While there are limitations with the profitability analysis, the results of this analysis are consistent with our overall finding that competition elsewhere in the value chain is helping to ensure positive outcomes for consumers.”

Commenting on the impact that streaming has had on the music industry in the report’s concluding remarks, the CMA notes that “the music market has experienced profound changes in recent years from piracy through to the introduction of streaming”.

It also says that “it is widely acknowledged that consumers have benefited from streaming through access to full catalogues of music and innovative services for free or at a fixed monthly price, which has reduced in real terms”.

The CMA believes, however, that “there are real questions as to whether creators – those who write and perform the songs – have benefitted to the same extent.”

“THERE ARE MORE ARTISTS THAN EVER AND, THEREFORE, CREATORS FACE MORE ARTISTS AND SONGS TO COMPETE WITH FOR STREAMING REVENUES.”

CMA REPORT

The report notes further that while “outcomes are generally improving, we note that to some extent changes in the sector, precipitated by streaming, have made it harder for some creators”.

Factors that have made it hard for some creators, according to the CMA, include “reduced barriers to entry and more choice on how to distribute music”, which means that “there are more artists than ever and, therefore, creators face more artists and songs to compete with for streaming revenues.”

This particular observation by the CMA – that there are more artists and more songs than ever before – hits home even more following the news that there are around 100,000 tracks being uploaded to music streaming services each day.

Other challenges faced by artists in today’s streaming economy as outlined by the CMA include, “that it is challenging for music companies to know who among the growing pool of creators will be successful”.

The CMA adds that “this inherent uncertainty combined with consumer tastes that tend to tip to a relatively small number of artists means that there are even greater challenges faced by creators.”

It concludes, however, that it does not “think that these factors are caused or exacerbated by issues relating to how firms in the market compete”.

“WE HEARD FROM MANY ARTISTS AND SONGWRITERS ACROSS THE UK ABOUT HOW THEY STRUGGLE TO MAKE A DECENT LIVING FROM THESE SERVICES. THESE ARE UNDERSTANDABLE CONCERNS, BUT OUR FINDINGS SHOW THAT THESE ARE NOT THE RESULT OF INEFFECTIVE COMPETITION – AND INTERVENTION BY THE CMA WOULD NOT RELEASE MORE MONEY INTO THE SYSTEM THAT WOULD HELP ARTISTS OR SONGWRITERS.”

SARAH CARDELL, THE CMA

Announcing the final report on Tuesday (November 29), Sarah Cardell, Interim CEO of the CMA, said: “Streaming has transformed how music fans access vast catalogues of music, providing a valuable platform for artists to reach new listeners quickly, and at a price for consumers that has declined in real terms over the years.

“However, we heard from many artists and songwriters across the UK about how they struggle to make a decent living from these services. These are understandable concerns, but our findings show that these are not the result of ineffective competition – and intervention by the CMA would not release more money into the system that would help artists or songwriters.

“While this report marks the end of the CMA’s market study, which addresses the concerns previously posed about competition, we also hope the detailed and evidence-based picture we have been able to build of this relatively new sector will provide a basis that can be used by policymakers to consider whether additional action is needed to help creators.”

---

Some other key conclusions from the report include:

ON THE POWER OF THE MAJORS:

“It has been put to us that the CMA could break up the majors, intervene in historic contracts between artists and labels, impose firewalls between the majors’ publishing and recording arms, remove clauses in contracts between streaming services and labels, impose a code of conduct governing the financial relationships between music companies and creators, or otherwise intervene to increase creator remuneration. We have not found significant competition concerns overall, in particular those that are likely to be leading to substantial excess profits.

“This means a competition intervention is unlikely to release more money from within the system in a way that could significantly improve overall outcomes. In such circumstances there is also a greater risk of a competition intervention causing unintended consequences for both consumers and creators.”

“For example, an intervention to separate the publishing and recording businesses of the majors could create incentives for standalone recording businesses to refuse to accommodate any increase in the ‘publishing share’ through a reduction of the recording share, since any losses to their recording revenues would not be mitigated by gains to their publishing share.

“Moreover, the intervention is unlikely to significantly shift the allocation between recording and publishing because, for the reasons we set out in the report, these may be due to licensing negotiation frictions and bargaining power of rightsholders inherent in the market which will not be overcome by more intense competition for songwriters.”

---

ON PROFITS AT MUSIC STREAMING SERVICES:

“We have also currently found no evidence of streaming services earning excess profits – indeed, we find low or negative operating margins for the music streaming services whose accounts we have been able to analyse. This profitability evidence is consistent with strong competition between music streaming services to provide services to consumers.

“#Broken Record Campaign and a record company raised the concern that music streaming services may not be generating excess profits due to investments in unrelated services that are being cross-subsidised by music streaming (notably Spotify’s entry into new formats such as podcasts and audiobooks).

“Investments in other content formats might partially explain the lower margins of music streaming services. However, investment by music streaming services to expand the range of content a music streaming service offers is also consistent with strong competition. Further, offering new bundles of audio-formats may also serve to expand the market of those attracted to music streaming services and we note that streaming services anticipate that over time those additional services will become profitable.”

---

ON THE CHANCES OF FUTURE INTERVENTION:

“The music streaming market is changing rapidly, and further technological advances in the years to come may spark further change to the way we listen to music.

“During our study we have noted the significant innovations introduced on streaming services and that there are now new ways of accessing music such as through UUC platforms with consequential new opportunities for revenue growth.

“It is likely that these changes will continue to raise questions about how these developments will impact consumers and creators. The CMA may intervene in future if changes in the market restrict or distort competition and harm consumers’ interests.”Music Business Worldwide

Christian population in England and Wales falls below 50% for first time as Muslims, Hindus rise

At 15 per cent, ‘Muslim’ was the second largest religious group in London in 2021

Representational image (iStock)

By: Chandrashekar Bhat

Less than half of people in England and Wales identified themselves as Christian for the first time, while the share of Muslims and Hindus in the population rose, Census 2021 data released on Tuesday showed.

According to the figures, 46.2 per cent (27.5 million people) described themselves as “Christian” in 2021 when the most recent census was conducted, a 13.1 percentage point decline from 59.3 (33.3 million) in 2011.

However, “no religion” was the second most common response, increasing by 12 percentage points to 37.2 per cent (22.2 million) in 2021 from 25.2 per cent (14.1 million) a decade earlier.

The number of those who called themselves “Muslim” went from 4.9 per cent (2.7 million) in 2011 to 6.5 (3.9 million) in the 10-year period, while the proportion of Hindus increased from 1.5 per cent (818,000) to 1.7 per cent.

Sikhs’ share in the population increased from 0.8 per cent (423,000) in 2011 to 0.9 per cent (523,000) in 2021. The proportion of Buddhists also went up from 0.4 per cent (248,000) to 0.5 per cent (273,000) between the two censuses, data from the Office for National Statistics showed.

Some 25,000 people said they were Jain in 2021 and the comparative figure 10 years ago is not available.

While no particular reason is attributed to the demographic changes, the ONS said differing patterns of ageing, fertility, mortality, migration and differences in the way individuals chose to answer the religion question might have contributed to it.

Of those who said they did not belong to any religious group, 32,000 said they were agnostic and 14,000 described themselves as an atheist. Some 10,000 said they were humanists.

London remained the most religiously diverse English region where 40.7 per cent (3.6 million) of all usual residents said they were “Christian”, while 25.3 per cent (2.2 million) of the city population identified with a religion other than “Christian”, up from 22.6 per cent (1.8 million) in 2011.

The second largest religious group in the British capital was “Muslim” whose proportion rose to 15 per cent in 2021 from 12.6 per cent in 2011. The growth in the share of the Hindu population in London remained flat at 5.1 per cent in 2021 compared to 5 per cent 10 years earlier.

In the voluntary question included in the census since 2001, people were asked the broad question as to what their religion was instead of being asked more specifically about their beliefs or religious practices.

29 November, 2022

Twitter Says It Stopped Policing COVID Misinformation Under Musk

New York, US - November 18: A view of Twitter Headquarters on 

November 18, 2022 in New York, United States.
Lokman Vural Elibol—Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

BY MAXWELL ADLER/BLOOMBERG
NOVEMBER 29, 2022 

Twitter Inc. said it ended a policy designed to suppress false or misleading information about COVID-19, part of Elon Musk’s polarizing mission to remake the social network as a place for unmoderated speech.

By discarding the COVID rule, the company will no longer apply labels to posts containing falsehoods about the disease or provide supplemental corrective information as it did before. It will apparently no longer remove inaccurate tweets or ban offending accounts either.

The company disclosed the change in a note added to a page on its website outlining the old COVID policy. It says Twitter stopped enforcing the rule on Nov. 23.

Read More: Twitter Was a Lifeline for People With Disabilities. Musk’s Reign Is Changing All of That

Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. Sky News reported on the revision earlier Tuesday.

Over 11,000 accounts had been suspended and over 97,000 pieces of misleading content had been removed from the time Twitter introduced the COVID policy in January 2020 to when it ended last week, according to data on Twitter’s website.

Twitter has received frequent criticism for its lack of action against disinformation and misinformation over the last decade. The critiques were heightened during the presidency of Donald Trump due to his controversial and prolific tweeting, including ones that violated Twitter’s policies on coronavirus misinformation. Musk moved to reinstate Trump’s Twitter account this month, though the former president has yet to post from it.

Twitter quietly drops Covid misinformation prevention policy under Elon Musk

Tuesday 29 November 2022 

Elon Musk has scrapped Twitter's Covid misinformation policy.

Credit: AP

Twitter has quietly ended the enforcement of its policy to stop the spread of Covid misinformation.The social media giant introduced the policy during the pandemic and used it to remove thousands of misleading tweets as part of efforts to stop the spread of “potentially harmful and misleading information” about the virus and vaccines.

Between January 2020 and September 2022, Twitter suspended over 11,000 accounts for breaking Covid misinformation rules, removing almost 100,000 pieces of content that breached those standards, according to internal statistics.

However, a note added to the company’s webpage detailing the policy’s work says that “effective November 23 2022, Twitter is no longer enforcing the Covid-19 misleading information policy”.The company did not publicly announce the change.

The move is likely to raise new concerns about Elon Musk’s approach to content moderation at the company since his takeover last month.

In spite of recent controversies, Elon Musk's popularity on Twitter is growing.

Credit: AP

Musk has said he believes in “absolute free speech” and wants to reduce content moderation on the site— something critics warned would lead to a spike in abuse, harassment, and other harmful behaviour.

In May 2020, as the pandemic was deepening, the Tesla CEO emerged as a champion of defying lockdown orders intended to stop the coronavirus from spreading in the US.

In one instance, Tesla’s factory reopened— with Musk practically daring local authorities to arrest him.

Since taking over the company in October, the billionaire has laid off more than half of the platform’s 7,500 staff, which has increased fears about the firm’s ability to successfully moderate the site with substantially reduced staff numbers.

Earlier this month, the billionaire restored former US president Donald Trump’s Twitter account and has also allowed Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, to return after he was suspended for antisemitic comments.

According to a report from Bloomberg, Musk has also dramatically reduced the size of the team devoted to tackling child sexual exploitation on the platform.

The report suggests that the team of specialists that review and escalate reports of child sexual exploitation has more been halved.

Last week, the SpaceX CEO tweeted that “removing child exploitation is priority #1”.The changes are the latest incidents in Musk’s turbulent reign as Twitter boss.

On Monday, he accused Apple of threatening to remove the platform from its app store and claimed the iPhone maker had halted most of its advertising on Twitter.

Twitter parodies mock Musk's changes but also present misinformation threat

He criticised the tech giant over its commission on purchases made through Apple’s App Store, and posted a meme suggesting he was willing to “go to war” over the issue.

A number of companies have paused advertising on Twitter amid concerns about Musk’s content moderation plans.

The new Twitter boss has already begun looking for ways to diversify the site's revenue, which is currently almost entirely dependent on advertising.

He is hoping to change this by charging a monthly subscription fee for verified status on the platform through the Twitter Blue service.

This was initially launched earlier this month before being paused after a number of incidents of Twitter users paying for verification and then posing as public figures.

Twitter ended its COVID-19 misinformation policy. Here are other major changes under Elon Musk.

Jenna Moon

Nov 29, 2022

THE NEWS

Twitter quietly ended its COVID-19 misinformation policy last week, one of the latest changes to the site’s moderation since Elon Musk took over the platform one month ago.

Under Musk, permanently banned users are back on Twitter, and hate speech policies are changing.

Here's a look at the moderation changes so far.

REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration/File Photo

THE COVID-19 MISINFORMATION POLICY

Twitter is no longer enforcing its COVID-19 misleading information policy as of Nov. 23, the site said in a note last week.

Under the previous policy, implemented in Jan. 2020, accounts which pushed misleading content about the virus or vaccines would be challenged.

More than 11,000 accounts were suspended under the policy, and 97,000 pieces of content were removed.

REVERSING BANS

Under Musk, several permanently banned accounts, as well as restricted accounts have been reinstated.

Most prominently, Musk reversed the permanent ban on former U.S. President Donald Trump’s account after taking a Twitter poll on it. Trump has not started tweeting yet, preferring to use the look-alike site Truth Social, which he helped found.

Right-wing lawmaker Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had been permanently banned for tweeting COVID misinformation, also had her account reinstated.

Here's a running list of Twitter accounts that have been reinstated under Musk.

HATE SPEECH GETS "MAX DEBOOSTED"

Users will not be able to find hateful or negative tweets unless they actively "seek it out" under Musk's new Twitter policy he described as "freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach."

The offending tweets will be "max deboosted & demonetized," Musk said.

It’s unclear what exactly constitutes hateful or negative speech. Musk has said the policy would apply on a tweet-by-tweet basis, and would not affect entire accounts.

Tech journalist Dell Cameron outlined in a Twitter thread how the site's moderation of hateful tweets towards trans users appears to have changed.

AUTOMATING MODERATION

Earlier this month, The Washington Post reported that Musk is seeking to automate parts of the moderation process, removing the human element which offers some nuance during complicated decisions.

It hasn't yet been implemented, but a vast number of Twitter's moderation staff — an estimated 15% — have left the company since Musk's takeover.