Connect with us

Politics

The brutal truth behind Italy’s migrant reduction: beatings and rape by EU-funded forces in Tunisia | Global development

Published

on


When she saw them, lined up at the road checkpoint, Marie sensed the situation might turn ugly. Four officers, each wearing the combat green of Tunisia’s national guard. They asked to look inside her bag.

“There was nothing, just some clothes.” For weeks Marie had traversed the Sahara, travelling 3,000 miles from home. Now, minutes from her destination – the north coast of Africa – she feared she might not make it.

An armed officer lunged towards her. Another grabbed her from behind, hoisting her into the air. By the road, on the outskirts of the Tunisian city of Sfax, the 22-year-old was sexually assaulted in broad daylight.

Advertisement

“It was clear they were going to rape me,” says the Ivorian, her voice wobbling.

Her screams saved her, alerting a group of passing Sudanese refugees. Her attackers retreated to a patrol car.

Marie knows she was lucky. According to Yasmine, who set up a healthcare organisation in Sfax, hundreds of sub-Saharan migrant women have been raped by Tunisian security forces over the past 18 months.

Advertisement

“We’ve had so many cases of violent rape and torture by the police,” she says.

Marie, from the Ivory Coast city of Abidjan, knows others who describe rape by Tunisia’s national guard. “We’re being raped in large numbers; they [the national guard] take everything from us.”

Members of the national guard’s special unit. One Sfax organisation says it is aware of a large number of cases of violent rape and torture by the national guard. Photograph: Unité spécial Garde Nationale

After the attack, Marie headed to a makeshift camp in olive groves near El Amra, a town north of Sfax. Migration experts say that tens of thousands of sub-Saharan refugees and migrants, encircled by police, are now living here. Conditions are described as “horrific”.

Humanitarian organisation, aid agencies, even the UN, are unable to access the camp.

Advertisement

What happened to Marie in May has relevance beyond her continent: her attackers belong to a police force directly funded by Europe.

Her account – along with further testimony gathered by the Guardian – indicates that the EU is funding security forces committing widespread sexual violence against vulnerable women, the most egregious allegations yet to taint last year’s contentious agreement between Brussels and Tunis to prevent migrants reaching Europe.

That agreement saw the EU pledge £89m migration-related funding to Tunisia. Large sums, according to internal documents, appear to have gone to the national guard.

The pact vows to combat migrant smugglers. A Guardian investigation, however, alleges national guard officers are colluding with smugglers to arrange migrant boat trips.

Advertisement

The deal also pledges “respect for human rights”. Yet smugglers and migrants reveal that the national guard is routinely robbing, beating and abandoning women and children in the desert without food or water.

Senior Brussels sources admit the EU is “aware” of the abuse allegations engulfing Tunisia’s security forces but is turning a blind eye in its desperation, led by Italy, to outsource Europe’s southern border to Africa.

In fact there are plans to send more money to Tunisia than publicly admitted.

Despite mounting human rights concerns, the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, prompted dismay on Monday by expressing interest in the model of paying Tunisia to stop people reaching Europe.

Advertisement
A camp near El Amra on the outskirts of Sfax in April, where tens of thousands of people are said to live in desperate conditions. Photograph: Fethi Belaid/AFP/Getty Images

During a meeting in Rome with his rightwing counterpart, Giorgia Meloni, Starmer admired how the pact had prompted a “dramatic” reduction in numbers reaching Italy.

By contrast, the number of refugees and migrants near El Amra continues to grow. One migration observer in Sfax estimates there may be at least 100,000, a number that some feel Tunisia’s increasingly autocratic president, Kais Saied, is deliberately cultivating as a threat to Europe: keep the money coming, or else.

“If Europe stops sending money, he’ll send Europe the migrants. Simple,” says the expert, requesting anonymity.

It is a predicament that provokes questions around Europe’s willingness to ditch commitments to human rights to stymie migration from the global south. And how much abuse of migrants such as Marie is Brussels prepared to overlook before re-examining payments to Saied?

Advertisement

Moussa could almost taste freedom. Ahead, searchlights shimmering in the water: the Italian coastguard which would ferry him to Europe. But behind, closing in quickly, Tunisia’s national maritime guard. Moussa’s dream was soon shattered.

The 28-year-old from Conakry, Guinea, was on board one of four boats intercepted off Sfax during the night of 6 February 2024. The occupants – about 150 men, women and children – were brought ashore to Sfax, handcuffed and herded on to buses.

Moussa, from Guinea, witnessed the mass rape of migrant women by Tunisian security forces. Photograph: supplied

At about 2am they arrived at a national guard base near the Algerian border. Shortly after, says Moussa, Tunisia’s security forces began methodically raping the women.

“There was a small house outside and every hour or so they’d take two or three women from the base and rape them there. They took a lot of women.

Advertisement

“We could hear them screaming, crying for help. They didn’t care there were 100 witnesses.”

Afterwards Moussa says some could hardly walk. Others were handed back their babies. Some were viciously beaten.

“There was a pregnant woman and they beat her until blood started coming from between her legs. She passed out,” whispers Moussa in the upstairs area of a Sfax coffee shop. Foreign media are not welcome in the city. Outside, a lookout scouts for police.

His account is corroborated by Sfax organisations working with sub-Saharan migrants.

Advertisement

“We’ve had so many cases of women being raped in the desert. They take them from here and attack them,” says Yasmine, whose group helps survivors overcome physical injuries from such attacks.

Requesting anonymity to avoid being detained, Yasmine says their caseload suggests “nine in 10” of all African female migrants arrested around Sfax had experienced sexual violence or “torture” by security forces.

At another cafe in the gritty neighbourhood of Haffara, a smuggler describes witnessing a sexual assault by police.

“It was dawn and the national guard started searching women for money, but really they were searching their private parts. It was very violent,” says Youssef.

Advertisement

Another Sfax smuggler, Khaled, who ferries migrants from Kasserine, near the Algerian border, to Sfax, describes meeting migrant women attacked in the desert.

“Many times I pick up women who are crying, saying they’ve been raped,” says Khaled, a veteran of more than 1,000 trips.

A young woman from Cameroon cries as she recounts the trauma she suffered. Photograph: Amine Landoulsi

Along with sexual violence, physical beatings appear routine. Joseph, 21, was taken from the El Amra camp last September during a national guard raid.

“We were handcuffed and put on a bus. Police were beating everyone with batons: kids, women, elderly. Everyone.”

Advertisement

Pointing to a scar above his left eye, the Kenyan adds: “I was hit many times.”

Others fared worse: one guard fired a teargas shell into a friend’s face. “His eye was hanging from his socket plus his leg was broken by police so he had to hop.”

Joseph was left near Algeria where the national guard seized his money, phone and passport. “After thrashing me with a stick they said, ‘Go there [Algeria], don’t come back.’”

Advertisement

In the chaos Joseph lost his friend with the fractured limb. He never saw him again.

Central to the EU-Tunisia deal is its desire to dismantle “criminal networks of migrant smugglers”.

The EU states it wants to improve a code of conduct for Tunisia’s police, an ambition that incorporates human rights training.

Sfax smugglers, however, tell the Guardian of widespread and systematic corruption between them and the national guard.

Advertisement

“The national guard organise the Mediterranean boats. They watch them go into the water then take the boat and motor and sell them back to us,” says Youssef.

Often, he says, the scarcity of £2,000 motors in Sfax means the national guard are the only sellers.

The Tunisian maritime national guard intercept boats trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea and return the passengers to Sfax. Photograph: Hasan Mrad/IMAGESLIVE/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock

“Smugglers call the police for spare motors. A smuggler might buy the same motor four times from the national guard.”

Another element of the EU-Tunisia deal is facilitating prosecutions against smugglers. When asked for details, the European Commission could not share data on convictions.

Advertisement

The commission says Tunisia and the EU’s police agency, Europol, are seeking to build a partnership to tackle smugglers. Europol says it has no working arrangement with Tunisia.


From afar, it looked like a football, bobbing in the water off Sfax. Closer, the grisly truth: a human head, eyes devoured by fish, probably severed from its body by a passing boat.

Ahmed’s most recent catch was on 15 July. On other days he has found legs, occasionally an arm. Usually it is an entire body – normally young, always black – ensnared in his fishing net.

That morning the fishers retrieved one body, then another, and another. Finally, a fourth: a young woman with long hair.

Advertisement

Ahmed brought them ashore but almost none were identified. Some were buried in unmarked graves labelled “African”.

The UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, normally registers new arrivals, a process “critical to their protection”. But UNHCR has been banned from Sfax by the government.

The agency lists 12,000 refugees or asylum seekers in Tunisia, although officials concede this constitutes a “fraction” of migrant numbers at El Amra.

Abdel, the head of a Sfax-based NGO, which cares for migrant children, estimates a minimum of 100,000.

Advertisement
In the cemetery of Essada, near Sfax, graves of the nameless can be found. The stones, bearing only numbers, are believed to be the tombstones of drowned individuals. A similar cemetery exists in the Turkish city of Van. Photograph: Stefanos Paikos

The UN’s International Organisation for Migration has no updated data, fuelling concern that large numbers of migrants are not being registered. “Individuals disappear as if they never existed,” Abdel says.

More arrive daily. In a smoke-filled Sfax bar, Ali Amami of the Tunisian League for Human Rights says: “Throughout Africa everyone heads here.” Last year Tunisia – with Sfax its centre – was the busiest departure point for migrants reaching Italy.

Now Sfax is off limits. Police have “cleansed” neighbourhoods of migrants, forcing them to El Amra. Cafe owners are arrested if a migrant is caught ordering a coffee.

Police “snatch squads” scout districts such as Haffara, ready to remove any stray migrant.

Advertisement

“Only women have the courage to go shopping,” says Mohamed, a migrant from Guinea. Courage is required. Last month one of his friends – seven months pregnant – visited central Sfax for groceries.

At a checkpoint, police pulled her into a van and took her to the Algerian border. “For days she was begging for water for her and her unborn child.”

Her body was found mid-August near Kasserine, face down in sand. Mohamed estimates up to 50 of his friends have been snatched from Sfax by the national guard and dumped in the desert. Of these five have disappeared or were found dead. Another 10 crossed into Algeria.

Although conditions in the desert are bleak, for many it is preferable to El Amra.

Advertisement

A crackdown, fuelled by Saied’s anti-migrant tirades, has meant organisations that helped El Amra’s migrants have shut. Staff are questioned or arrested. Yasmine folded her group in July after police intimidation.

Images of her colleagues were posted on Facebook, chastising them for helping migrants. “We couldn’t leave our houses for days,” she says.

For the migrants themselves, it means even food and water no longer reach the camp.

“They eat dead animals, roadkill, anything they find,” says Youssef.

Advertisement

Denied all healthcare, Yasmine says the camp is rife with disease including tuberculosis, HIV, scabies and syphilis. Concern is mounting over the infant mortality rate. “Babies are born in 40C heat without medical help, vaccination, food. How can they survive?”

Youssef adds: “I’ve watched women giving birth in the bushes. They need to go to hospital but instead die.”

Food and water no longer reach the camp at El Amra, where disease is rampant due to a lack of healthcare. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

Unmarked graves of migrants are “everywhere” around El Amra, says Youssef. An olive farmer, he says, recently found two bodies in a shallow grave.

Smuggler Khaled also worries about the body count. He recalls being chased by police as a heavily pregnant woman wailed in the back seat.

Advertisement

“At Sfax I finally turned around and there was a baby! I wept.”

He watched as the mother lowered the infant into a carrier bag and set off walking in 35C heat towards El Amra.

Many more die crossing the Mediterranean. Officially more than 30,000 migrants have gone missing in the Med over the last decade, but many believe this is a significant underestimate.

Few know the route’s escalating risks better than Youssef. More people are crowded on to more dangerous boats. Hastily assembled from metal barrels, the boats float an inch or two above the water.

Advertisement

“They should hold 10 people, but carry 50. From my experience as a smuggler I know many more have died than ever succeeded.”


In Sfax, it is known as the “mousetrap”. Abdel, speaking in his office near the city’s medina, says: “You allow the mice over the border but close the sea. Trapped, their numbers boom.”

Using patrol boats provided by Europe, Tunisia’s maritime national guard has prevented more than 50,000 people crossing the Med this year, prompting the steep fall in numbers reaching Italy that so piqued Starmer’s interest this week. “Tunisia is being paid to become Europe’s coastguard,” says Amami.

It is a well-remunerated role, seemingly for its president too. It is claimed that £127m as part of a wider migration and development deal was transferred directly to Saied. Asked for clarification, the European Commission says the payment followed Tunisia meeting “mutually agreed conditions”.

Advertisement

There are also questions about why no EU human rights impact assessment into Tunisia was commissioned before the pact was announced. Similarly, why it has avoided parliamentary oversight.

Emily O’Reilly, the EU ombudsman, says it is inconceivable the EU had no idea the police were repeatedly abusing migrants. “They would not be unaware of the situation in Tunisia.”

Even so, no apparent attempt has been made to suspend payments to Tunis.

Next month O’Reilly publishes the result of her inquiry into the agreement, findings likely to raise fresh questions over its integrity.

Advertisement

A European Commission spokesperson says about reports of abuses by the national guard: “The EU remains engaged to improve the situation on the ground.”

A figure walks through the Tunisian desert in Nefta, near the Algerian border. Long journeys by migrants are often ended in squalid camps. Photograph: Stefanos Paikos

Documents indicate payments have already been made to the national guard. Circulated last December, an action plan indicates that £21m has been “delivered” for patrol vessels, training and equipment for the maritime national guard.

Reports suggest the EU is already planning to extend funding up to £139m over the next three years to Tunisia’s security forces.

The Tunisian authorities have rejected the Guardian’s allegations as “false and groundless”, saying that their security forces operate with “professionalism to uphold the rule of law on our territory, while fully observing international principles and standards”.

Advertisement

A statement says Tunisian authorities “spared no efforts” to meet migrants’ basic needs, combat criminal networks that “exploit vulnerability” and tackle irregular migration by complying with international human rights law.

Yet, as Starmer’s meeting with Meloni this week confirmed, the EU’s deal with Tunisia is increasingly seen as the template for how Europe deals with migration, a salient issue as far right parties gain influence.

Similar deals have already been struck with Mauritania and Egypt. Others are expected to follow.

Back in Tunisia, preparations are under way for presidential elections next month. Saied is certain to win, a coronation that will confirm the unravelling of Tunisia’s democratic experiment since its 2011 revolution.

Advertisement

“In 2011 we dreamed of freedom, now it’s about survival,” says Yasmine.

Marie’s dream remains Europe, but it is slipping away. On a recent voice note from El Amra, she sounds terrified: “There’s a lot going on here. I’m really scared, we’re trapped in hell.”

The northern Sfax coast, from where thousands of sub-Saharan migrants leave Tunisia heading for Italy. Those on board intercepted boats allegedly face rape and vicious beatings. Photograph: Alessio Mamo

* Names have been changed for safety reasons.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Trump says Fed’s rate cut was ‘political move’

Published

on

Trump says Fed's rate cut was 'political move'


Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump holds a rally at Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum, in Uniondale, New York, U.S., September 18, 2024. 

Brendan Mcdermid | Reuters

Advertisement

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Thursday the U.S. Federal Reserve’s decision to cut interest rates by half of a percentage point was “a political move.”

“It really is a political move. Most people thought it was going to be half of that number, which probably would have been the right thing to do,” Trump said in an interview with Newsmax.

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday kicked off what is expected to be a series of interest rate cuts with an unusually large half-percentage-point reduction.

Trump said last month that U.S. presidents should have a say over decisions made by the Federal Reserve.

Advertisement

The Fed chair and the other six members of its board of governors are nominated by the president, subject to confirmation by the Senate. The Fed enjoys substantial operational independence to make policy decisions that wield tremendous influence over the direction of the world’s largest economy and global asset markets.



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Sue Gray’s salary isn’t the problem – it’s the backstage power struggle Starmer cannot afford | Simon Jenkins

Published

on


The most remarkable feature of the Sue Gray saga is not how much the Downing Street chief of staff earns, but how little Britain’s prime minister does. Keir Starmer gets just £166,786, which is about £3,000 less than Gray. But then she gets less than many permanent secretaries, not to mention the consultants and lawyers Whitehall is crawling with these days. Besides, as we are tired of hearing, Starmer gets dazzling benefits in kind.

A second feature of the saga is its mess. Just 12 weeks into the rosy dawn of a new Labour era, Downing Street is enmeshed in a spat more typical of a regime on its last legs. Starmer has spent his time in office telling Britons they face a shambles, requiring a clampdown on public spending. The new army of special advisers – approximately 70-strong – is duly being paid a relative pittance, but one that has been fixed by a boss who decided to take a thumping pay rise. To put it mildly, this suggests poor political judgment. As one insider joked, Gray is the only pensioner likely to do better under Labour.

Fixing the machinery of Downing Street is the first crucial job of a new prime minister. Starmer has hit the ground stumbling. It is customary for those closest to the leader’s ear to be a circle of trusted friends ready to act as his alter ego. This was true back in the days of Thatcher and certainly of Tony Blair. When Blair came to power, his senior aide Jonathan Powell said to expect “a change from a feudal system of barons to a more Napoleonic system”. What he meant was a downgrading of the traditional civil service hierarchy, one of permanent secretaries with the cabinet secretary at their head. Instead, government was conducted more informally, from “the sofa”, as Kenneth Clarke dismissively described it.

Advertisement

This had benefits. Under Thatcher, the civil service acted initially as a brake on change, but she eventually gathered loyalists round her and bent the system to her will. Although she still listened to advice, as when in 1988 she did a U-turn on NHS privatisation. Under Blair, media management from the sofa overwhelmed policy. Foreign Office advice on Iraq was suppressed, and Blair made his greatest mistake with the invasion of that country. Since then, the balance in Downing Street between politicians and officials has become ever more informal and sometimes fractious. It reached its nadir under Boris Johnson and his maverick aide Dominic Cummings.

A measure of the disruption was that internal pressure succeeded in evicting Cummings, but when dissent occurred under Liz Truss, it was politics that evicted the head of the Treasury, Tom Scholar. In the case of Gray, it seems that an early victim of her boisterous style will be the cabinet secretary, Simon Case. She is already reported as controlling access to security briefings, appointing close allies as civil servants and pushing her pet building projects. This may be fine if you can keep it secret, but not if those round you keep leaking.

Gray was a civil servant who became a political adviser. They are different professions. Civil servants have spent their careers working together, with Downing Street and the Cabinet Office at the peak. They are supposedly discreet suppliers of truth to power. Political advisers are rarely used to big organisations. They are mostly the beneficiaries of party patronage, thinktanks and the murky world of lobbying. Some fit in; others do not.

The most recent grit in this machine has come from the growth of the No 10 Policy Unit, staffed by special advisers. Its proclaimed purpose is to keep Whitehall to the manifesto straight and narrow. But it inevitably cuts across similar units in departments, also staffed by advisers. It was war between the two top units – and Cummings’ reported desire to have Treasury advisers dismissed – that forced Johnson’s chancellor Sajid Javid to resign. So critical is this relationship in the realm of economic policy, that Starmer’s No 10 unit has apparently been downgraded. It will reportedly be just “a point of contact” on economic policy, “more like the nervous system than the brain”. We await the outcome with interest.

Advertisement

It is easy to adapt Tolstoy and say that every unhappy Downing Street is unhappy in its own way. But unhappiness starts at the top. Starmer must now support Gray to the hilt. She must at least have her own colleagues loyal to her – and to her confidences. At the same time, prime ministers have clearly strayed too far in the direction of Blair’s Napoleon. Second opinions must get through to a leader making decisions, even if the civil service must ultimately obey and deliver. Dissent should not take the current form of media leaks and disloyal gossip.

There has to be virtue in a well-established architecture of public administration. So much of this has now broken down. That is why there must be a tilt back to the tradition of a formalised and articulate civil service, with the cabinet secretary at its apex. The satire Yes Minister portrayed civil servants as subjecting the ambition of ministers to pragmatic reality. It had its virtues, and the civil servants did not always win. It is worth a repeat.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Biden Fed Jay Powell meeting Oval Office

Published

on

Biden Fed Jay Powell meeting Oval Office


Chairman of the Federal Reserve Jerome Powell (left) meets with President Joe Biden in the Oval Office on May 31, 2022.

Saul Loeb | AFP | Getty Images

Advertisement

President Joe Biden on Thursday said he had “never once spoken” to Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell while he was president.

But the pair, joined by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, met in the Oval Office on May 31, 2022 to discuss inflation, photos and videos from the meeting show.

The president made the inaccurate claim during remarks at the Economic Club of Washington, D.C., the day after the Fed announced a decision to cut interest rates by 50 basis points.

Touting his own respect for the independence of the central bank, Biden said “By the way, I’ve never once spoken to the chairman of the Fed since I became president.”

Advertisement

Asked about the apparently inaccurate recollection by a reporter at Thursday’s White House press briefing, Council of Economic Advisors Chair Jared Bernstein said Biden had been referring only to discussions about interest rates.

“The president was saying that he has not spoken to Chair Powell about interest rates,” said Bernstein. “He did not pressure Powell and has never done so.”

But the error undercut Biden’s critique of Republican former President Donald Trump, who has threatened to challenge the independence of the Federal Reserve if he is elected to a second term.

“Unlike my predecessor, I respect the Federal Reserve’s independence as they pursue its mandate to bring inflation down. That independence has served the country well,” Biden said Thursday.

Advertisement

“It would also do enormous damage to our economy that independence was ever lost.”

Even in his 2022 Oval Office meeting with Powell, Biden stressed the importance of the Fed’s independence in addressing inflation.

“My plan to address inflation starts with a simple proposition: Respect the Fed. Respect the Fed’s independence,” Biden said at the time. “My job as president is not to not only nominate highly qualified individuals for that institution, but to give them the space they need to do their job.”

Trump, the Republican nominee for president, said in August that presidents should “have at least [a] say” about the Fed’s decisions on interest rates.

Advertisement

“Yeah, I feel that strongly,” Trump said at a Mar-a-Lago press conference on Aug. 8.

“I think that in my case, I made a lot of money, I was very successful, and I think I have a better instinct than, in many cases, people that would be on the Federal Reserve or the chairman.”

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that Trump advisors were putting together a plan that would inject Trump into the Fed’s interest rate decision-making process, if the Republican returns to the White House in January.

Read more CNBC politics coverage



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

With a lust for freebies and hobbled by infighting, Labour look like the Tories 2.0 | John Crace

Published

on


During the last election campaign it was hard to escape the impression that, whatever his other faults, Rishi Sunak just wasn’t very good at politics. The charge sheet included getting drenched announcing the election and leaving D-day veterans on the beaches. And insisting that black was white: that he was stopping the boats, that the economy was in good shape, that the Tories were on course for victory.

Just a couple of months later, it very much feels like Keir Starmer and Labour are saying: “Hold my beer.” Keen to prove that they, too, are amateurs at the political PR game. It’s almost as if there is something about being in government that makes fools of everyone. Though few would have imagined that Labour could manage it quite so quickly. A period of grace would have been more fitting.

Take the freebies. And Keir has. The Arsenal tickets. The Taylor Swift tickets. The suits. The designer glasses. The clothes for his wife. Starmer’s big shtick was that he was going to do politics differently. The antidote to Tory corruption and scandal. A man who could be trusted. He was one of us. So why put himself in a position where you can so easily be criticised by the rightwing press?

Advertisement

If you want to set yourself up as a model of propriety then you can’t start making exceptions. Especially not so early on. A couple of years in and people may not notice so much. You have to be above reproach. Yes, it might be a loss not to go to the football. And you might resent having to buy a few more suits for yourself. But that all rather goes with the job. Being prime minister may be a career highlight for a politician but you have to take the downsides.

Perhaps Starmer has been too honest for his own good. Maybe he should have been more like Boris Johnson. Keir has made himself accountable by listing his freebies in detail. We know exactly where all the money went. With Boris we are largely in the dark. He took whopping gifts from all sorts of undesirables and we aren’t entirely sure of the details. Being prime minister was a licence for Boris to cash in. No one expected any different from him. He never pretended to be on the side of the angels.

Then there is the question of Sue Gray’s pay. You could say that someone should have suggested that Sue drop £4,000 in salary just for appearances. So she earned less than the prime minister. Maybe throw in a clothes allowance and an events expense account to make up the difference. No one will notice. Surely. I guess she is a tough negotiator. One of the reasons she was made chief of staff.

But all this is not really the point. The issue is why the Labour party is indulging in open feuds with itself by leaking the story in the first place. We were promised a government of service and yet it already appears to be totally dysfunctional. It’s as if Starmer has taken the Tories as his role model. How did it come to this that half of the No 10 top team hate the other half? And vice versa. Couldn’t someone have just got in a therapist? Or at the very least established a workplace culture where people talked to one another? Or – and here’s a thought – pay junior staff the proper rate?

Advertisement

Still, Keir isn’t entirely a slow learner. There’s a tradition that prime ministers do a round of regional radio stations on the Thursday before a party conference. But after the last two years, when Liz Truss and Sunak had an hour they would rather forget, Starmer decided to reset the format to pre-recorded outings where he hoped there would be less room for disaster. All the interviews would be released at 5pm when he hoped no one would be watching.

So it was left to the business secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, to do the morning media round. An experience he would rather forget. Reynolds comes across as a decent man but too much more of this and he will find himself Labour’s answer to Mel Stride. The minister who gets to do the rubbish jobs that no one else will. In future, on days like this, I am sure he will learn to put his phone on mute and not take calls from the No 10 comms team. It’s early days, I suppose.

On Times Radio, Aasmah Mir cut to the chase. Why did Starmer accept so many freebies? Reynolds forgot to engage his brain. It was like this, he said. Politicians get invited to events all the time and it would be rude not to go. It was the way people tried to engage with decision makers. Sure thing. That’s why it was vital for Boris Johnson to accept a freebie to Evgeny Lebedev’s party in Italy. And a Taylor Swift concert is a prerequisite for stopping the winter fuel allowance.

It very much sounded as if he was talking about the perks of the job, said Mir. Oh no, replied Reynolds. Far from it. Perish the thought. Just that politicians worked extremely hard and deserved a little downtime. Especially if they didn’t have to pay for it. The thought occurred that if Starmer was desperate to see Arsenal he could have afforded the cost of a seat with the corporates. It was just strange that all these dazzling freebies were never offered to the rest of us.

Advertisement

Over on Sky, Kay Burley was outraged by the size of Sue Gray’s salary. One wonders what Burley’s wedge is. I’m not sure she would get out of bed for £170,000. She would consider that an insult. But I’m sure that’s not the point. Even so, Reynolds still couldn’t think straight. Why not just say that Dominic Cummings and other Downing Street heads of staff would have been on a similar sort of salary if you allowed for inflation. The same people outraged now were not outraged then. It could just be that £170,000 is the going rate for the job and that it is the prime minister who is underpaid. A thought.

So the nonsense will continue into the Labour party conference starting this weekend. And Labour really doen’t have anyone to blame but itself. Freebies and staff pay should have been headed off ages ago. And maybe it doesn’t matter if we have a government that is bad at politics if it gets the big calls right. After all, the chances are we’ll be talking about something else in a month’s time. Head down and onwards and sideways.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Home Office urged to scrap long, expensive and ‘racist’ visa route | Immigration and asylum

Published

on


A long and expensive visa route for immigrants has been called racist after analysis showed most applicants who feel forced to go through it are people of colour.

The “10-year route” visa is used by hundreds of thousands of people who are not eligible for other immigration schemes because of a lack of income or professional qualifications. Many work in low-paid jobs, such as cleaning or care work. Other common routes to settlement in the UK take five years.

According to freedom of information data obtained by the charity Ramfel, there are 218,110 people on the 10-year route.

Advertisement

Guardian analysis of Home Office data showed that all but one country in the top 10 nationalities who felt forced to use this route were those with predominantly minority ethnic populations. The top five were Nigeria, Pakistan, India, Ghana and Bangladesh. Overall, 86% using the route were from Asian or African countries, while 6% were from Europe.

Bar charts showing approvals to remain in the UK of people from different parts of the world

People seeking to gain a visa via the 10-year route must renew their leave to remain with the Home Office every 30 months, meaning four renewals. The fee for each renewal is £3,850. The Home Office can grant a fee waiver but many requests are refused.

Advertisement

According to a 2023 report on the 10-year route by the legal advice and support service Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit (GMIAU), the thinktank the Institute for Public Policy Research and the charity Praxis, the most common way of covering the fees was to borrow money, leaving many people in debt and struggling to pay for basic living costs.

A 41-year-old woman from Ghana said she was struggling with the 10-year route. She has a British child, who was born in 2017, and was granted leave on the 10-year route in 2018 after applying. But she was several weeks late in applying to renew her leave in March this year and has become an overstayer awaiting a new decision from the Home Office.

Because of her late application, she has lost the years accrued and has to restart the 10-year route from day one. “This immigration route is brutal. It makes me feel like I’m in a prison. I want to go to university and qualify as a nurse but I can’t do that until my immigration status is sorted out. The government should at least change this route to five years, not 10,” she said.

A GMIAU spokesperson said: “These numbers confirm what people on the 10-year route already know: it is a racist policy. People are being driven into debt, forced to choose between paying thousands of pounds in visa fees to keep their legal status and keeping their families fed and warm.

Advertisement

“Ten years is far too long for anyone to wait to settle. The route must be scrapped. A good place to start would be to cap all routes to settlement at five years.”

skip past newsletter promotion
Advertisement

Nick Beales, of Ramfel, said: “The 10-year route is an enduring legacy of the hostile environment. Like many other Conservative policies from this period, the racist intent is clear, with African and south Asian nationals far more likely to be placed on this arduous and often brutal route towards securing permanent immigration status.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “In cases where a family does not qualify for a five-year route, but where refusal would breach obligations under the European convention on human rights, the Home Office places them on a 10-year route. Neither the race, ethnicity, nor nationality of an applicant is a factor in the decision to place individuals on this route.

“We encourage all individuals to apply for any visa renewals prior to their leave to remain ending in the UK.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Domestic abuse experts to be embedded in 999 control rooms

Published

on

Domestic abuse experts to be embedded in 999 control rooms


West Midlands Police/PA Raneem Oudeh (l) and her mother Khaola Saleem (r)West Midlands Police/PA

Raneem Oudeh (l) called 999 four times on the night she and her mother Khaola Saleem (r) were murdered by Raneem’s ex-husband

Domestic abuse specialists will be embedded in 999 control rooms in England and Wales as part of the government’s pledge to halve violence against women and girls in a decade.

The measure is part of “Raneem’s Law” in memory of Raneem Oudeh, 22, and her mother Khaola Saleem who were murdered by Ms Oudeh’s estranged husband in 2018.

The government also announced a new domestic abuse protection order pilot that will order more abusers to stay away from victims and impose tougher sanctions if they fail to do so.

Advertisement

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said victims “need to know the police will be there for them” and if they come forward, any report “will be treated with the seriousness and urgency it deserves”.

“Failure to understand the seriousness of domestic abuse costs lives and far too many have already been lost,” Ms Cooper said.

The aim is for specialists with expertise in domestic abuse to be on hand in control rooms to ensure victims get a fast response from officers on the ground and are quickly referred to support services.

The scheme will be piloted in select police forces from early next year. Details on which forces are taking part in the pilot have not yet been announced.

Advertisement

Ms Cooper described the new measures as “vital” and “a personal priority for me”.

She told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg in January about her plans for the measures, which Labour also proposed in February.

Almost 100 domestic abuse-related offences were recorded by police every hour on average last year, the government said.

On the night Ms Oudeh and her mother were killed, she rang 999 multiple times, but officers failed to reach the two women in time.

Advertisement

In total, 13 reports were made to the police about concerns for her safety – but no arrests were made until it was too late.

An inquest found police errors “materially contributed” to their deaths. West Midlands Police has since apologised to the family.

Nour Norris, Ms Oudeh’s aunt and Mrs Saleem’s sister, said having domestic abuse specialists in control rooms would “save lives by making sure no warning signs are ignored, unlike in Raneem’s story”.

“Their suffering and the way the system failed them is something I will never forget,” Ms Norris said. “What started as a quest for justice for my family became a mission to improve outcomes for all domestic abuse victims everywhere.”

Advertisement

Ms Oudeh’s estranged husband, Janbaz Tarin, was jailed for a minimum of 32 years in December 2018, after admitting to the murders.

In another effort to protect women and girls, the government also announced a new domestic abuse protection order pilot that will start in November.

Police already have the power to legally order abusers not to contact or go within a certain distance of victims for up to 28 days.

The pilot will introduce no maximum time limit for orders, impose electronic tagging of offenders and require perpetrators to notify police of any change in name or address.

Advertisement

The new orders will cover all forms of domestic abuse, including violence, stalking and controlling behaviour.

Breaching an order will be a criminal offence punishable by up to five years in prison.

Victims and other third parties such as charities will also be able to apply directly for an order, rather than having to rely on police and criminal courts.

The new domestic abuse protection orders will be piloted by officers in Greater Manchester Police, the Metropolitan Police (South London Borough Command Unit) and British Transport Police.

Advertisement

Refuge, the charity which supports survivors of domestic violence, welcomed the changes but called for “far more detail on how these plans will be implemented and how staff will be safely recruited, vetted and most importantly trained”.

Refuge’s interim chief executive Abigail Ampofo warned that police rarely act on breaches of existing protection orders, making them often “worth little more than the paper they are written on”.

“We need a real sea change in internal policing culture and the police forces’ response to domestic abuse overall,” said Ms Ampofo.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.