Reports are coming out of Chechnya, about the arrests, imprisonment, torture and in some cases murder of gay men. Paul Nuttall, the UKIP leader has condemned the actions of the Putin backed warlord Ramzan Kadyrov, “If these reports are true, … read more
The Government Chemist is required to act as the national focus of technical appeal in specified areas where there is an actual or potential dispute between food businesses and regulators on the results of chemical analysis or their interpretation.
Many such disputes have involved aflatoxins, which are toxins generated by moulds that can cause cancer. Port Health Authorities safeguard the food supply coming into the UK by sampling large consignments of food for aflatoxin testing by Public Analysts. However, mould growth is notoriously patchy – so how good is the sampling and does it really protect us from these toxins?
The Government Chemist team investigated the effectiveness of the current sampling protocol, which sees multiple increments taken and aggregated to form a sample up to 30 kg in size. The sample is then reduced to manageable proportions for testing by statistically controlled sub-sampling and high speed mixing with water.
In this study, six replicate sampling exercises were carried out on a 1.5 tonne cargo of groundnuts (peanuts) known to be contaminated by the toxin-producing mould. The results confirmed that when carried out properly, the elaborate sampling was able to spot the contamination each time.
The full report is available in an open access scientific paper.
The lead author of the paper, Dr Michael Walker, said:
Importers and Port Health officials work hard together to ensure food brought into the UK is safe to eat by lengthy and painstaking sampling. It is important to be sure this costly work is effective and I am pleased our findings bore this out.
The Government Chemist team would like to acknowledge the kind assistance of Prof Duncan Thorburn Burns, Institute of Global Food Security, Queen’s University, Belfast, in the publication of this work.
Corbyn: We will use the £200bn government spends in the private sector and powers taken back from Brussels to upgrade our economy and create good jobs
Speaking at Wabtec train maintenance company in Doncaster this afternoon, Jeremy Corbyn will pledge that the next Labour government will use the enormous £200 billion national and local government spends in the private sector to upgrade our economy, create good local jobs and reduce inequality.
This will include requiring best practice from firms government does business with on:
· paying tax
· workers’ rights
· equal opportunities
· environmental protection
· training and apprenticeships
· paying suppliers on time, and
· boardroom excess, by moving to a 20-1 limit on the gap between the lowest and highest paid.
He will also announce how Labour would use powers repatriated from Brussels after Brexit to create high quality local jobs, develop new industries and support good domestic businesses – large and small. This would mean allowing public bodies to support local jobs and businesses with local employment and content requirements.
Jeremy Corbyn will also call on the government to consider extending the rights of local authorities in left-behind areas to require local suppliers and jobs in public contracts, in relation to World Trade Organisation procurement rules, as has happened in the US.
Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party, speaking at the event, will say:
“For years we’ve been told that there’s nothing that can stop the race to the bottom in the jobs market that is making people’s lives harder and holding back our economy.
“Well, today I say, Britain doesn’t have to be so meek, and settle for things getting worse and more insecure for so many. We can make the change we need if we understand the power we already have – and how we can better use it.
“National and local government spends £200 billion per year in the private sector. That’s an incredible purchasing power, which we can use to support the good companies and improve the behaviour of the bad ones that undercut with unfair practices.
“Under the next Labour government, Britain will subsidise bad corporate behaviour no longer. Our business partners should have the same values we as a country hold: enterprise, fairness, high-quality service and doing right by everyone.
“And while Brexit presents many challenges to Britain, it can give us more powers to encourage best practices and support new and existing businesses and industries in Britain.
“While the Conservatives seem intent on using Brexit to turn us into a low-wage tax haven, Labour will use every power possible to upgrade our economy so we can all lead richer lives.”
Ends
Notes to editors:
1. Require all companies bidding for a government contract to meet the following:
a) Give full trade union recognition for their workforce and comply with collective bargaining agreements
b) Move towards a ratio of 20-1 between the lowest and highest paid, matching the target in the public sector, over a transitional period
c) Pay their suppliers the full amount owed within 30 days
d) Maintain high environmental standards in relation to energy use, emissions and waste disposal, while taking appropriate measures to aid the transition to a low carbon economy
e) Provide training and apprenticeship opportunities proportionate to firm size
f) Full tax compliance
g) Adopt best practices in equal opportunities
This is all possible within existing EU rules, provided it’s done on a non-discriminatory basis. In particular:
· The 2014 EU Directive expressly requires Member States to take into account the widest possible range of social and environmental considerations, as well as price, when buying goods and services for the public sector.
· In UK law, the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 requires authorities that are engaging in certain procurement exercises for services, to consider first how the proposed procurement might improve the economic, social and environmental well-being of their area, and how these improvements might be secured. The Act applies to England, and to Wales to a limited extent.
2. For government contracts that fall outside the WTO General Procurement Agreement (GPA), we would introduce local jobs and content requirements to allow public bodies to use local pounds on local jobs and businesses.
· Currently, both EU and the WTO General Procurement Agreement (which the UK is a member of in virtue of being in the EU) require that public procurement contracts above certain thresholds be opened up to potential suppliers from other countries. These thresholds are £5,446,950 for construction contracts, £141,621 for central government contracts for goods and services, and £217,878 for subcentral government contracts for goods and services.
The thresholds for central government entities are 130,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) for goods and services, and 5m SDR for construction; UK central government bodies that are covered by the GPA are listed here (at the bottom of the document). The thresholds for sub-central government entities are 200,000 SDR for goods and services, and 5m SDR for construction; these include county council and city council procurement bodies, as well as local schools, fire authorities, NHS procurement etc. Calculations above are made on the basis of a 1SDR = £1.09 exchange rate.
· Below these thresholds, much procurement is opened to suppliers in other EU member states because of principles that are part of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Leaving the EU should therefore create scope for additional flexibility for public authorities to require the use of local or regional suppliers after Brexit below these thresholds. That would allow procurement contracts below GPA thresholds to contain local jobs and content requirements, directing public money back into local economies.
“As regards below-threshold procurement, the practical importance of covering this may depend on the extent to which regional or local discrimination is prohibited internally in the UK, since this kind of discrimination may provide the greatest barrier to market access.” Source: Sue Arrowsmith, Consequences of Brexit in the area of the public procurement, April 2017
· In 2012 the UK had €96.8 billion of public procurement contracts above threshold. Of these contracts, €74.4 billion (or 77%) were covered by the GPA and €22.4 billion (or 23%) were not. Since 2012 there the GPA has been revised and EU procurement directives have been updated. In 2015, the UK spent €127.56 billion on above threshold public procurement. This is roughly a third to a half of all procurement spending, implying that at least half falls under thresholds.
These figures are indicative figures only. They are provided by the House of Commons library with the following notes:
· 2012 figures are from WTO Committee on Government Procurement, STATISTICS FOR 2012 REPORTED UNDER ARTICLE XIX:5 OF THE AGREEMENT: REPORT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION, June 2016 – UK annex (annex 29), Total table
· 2015 figure is from European Commission, Public Procurement Indicators 2015, December 2016 – this figure is based on the value of tenders published in the EU TED (OJEU) database, including for utilities and defence. Tenders must be published in the database if they are over threshold. The database – and therefore the statistics – do include some tenders that are under the threshold – about 8% of UK tenders are under the lowest of the thresholds.
· There are a couple of ways to calculate total public procurement spend and these affect the calculation of the proportion of all spending that is above threshold – figures from the Whole of Government Accounts give a lower total (and a higher proportion) as they exclude public sector purchases from the public sector itself.
3. Labour is calling on the Government to do an impact assessment of the level and extent of coverage of the GPA on “left behind” local authorities
· The UK is currently subject to the GPA as a member of the EU, but not in its own right – the government is apparently “considering the UK’s position” as to whether it will seek to remain a member after Brexit.
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmintrade/817/81705.htm
· While the USA is signed up to the GPA, there is significant variation in the level of coverage across different states. Only 37 of the 50 states are included in the GPA, and, among those that are, the GPA has extensive coverage over public spending by the states of, for example, Washington and California and much more limited coverage in Mississippi and Hawaii.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/gp_app_agree_e.htm
· The USA and Canada also have higher thresholds for sub-national contracts for goods and services than the UK currently does within the EU.
355,000 SDR compared to 200,000 SDR for EU countries, see https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/thresh_e.htm
· Given the restrictions imposed by the GPA on local authorities, Labour is calling for an impact assessment of different levels of GPA coverage on local authorities in the UK and of the thresholds to which they are currently signed up.
In 2014/15, UK public sector procurement was worth £191.7 billion. Of this, £68.9 billion was local government procurement and £115.5 billion was central government (including NHS) procurement. Note that these figures do not include public sector procurement from other parts of the public sector. Source: House of Commons Library.
read moreMAIB’s report on the investigations of two fatal accidents on board the UK registered yacht CV21 on 4 September 2015 and 1 April 2016 is now published.
The report contains details of what happened, subsequent actions taken, and recommendations made. Read more.
Press enquiries during office hours 01932 440015
Press enquiries out of hours 020 7944 4292
Thank you Madam President. And I would also like to thank you Staffan for your briefing, and for your unrelenting efforts to secure a political solution to the conflict in Syria. You have our continued full support.
Despite your efforts and those of this Council, and the international community, the people of Syria have been denied a political solution for more than six years. They have suffered over six years of ever increasing, ever escalating barbarity; over six years of failed ceasefires and false dawns. For over six years, this Council has been held to ransom by Russia’s shameless support for the Asad regime; support which the regime is flaunting. Throughout that time, we have met in this Chamber to discuss atrocity after atrocity. Hoping that Asad had finally reached the depth of his cruelty and would finally see the need for dialogue. And yet every time, without fail, he has plunged to new lows.
Chemical weapons scientists at Porton Down, in the United Kingdom, have analysed samples obtained from Khan Shaykun, and these have tested positive for the nerve agent sarin, or a sarin-like substance. The United Kingdom therefore shares the US assessment that it is highly likely that the regime was responsible for a sarin attack on Khan Shaykun on the 4th of April.
This sickening use of chemical weapons – weapons that Asad agreed in 2013 to destroy – is just the latest in a long list of abhorrent acts. With that attack, he has made clear that he is not committed to a ceasefire, or to the Astana process, ruining Russia’s credibility.
And as we mourn the victims of the chemical attack on Khan Shaykun, we must not forget the 13.5 million people who, thanks to Asad, are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, who are in urgent need of a long overdue peace.
It is clear today, as it has been for some time, that there can be no place for Asad in Syria’s future.
But, Madam President, there is a way to end this nightmare that the Syrian people continue to suffer. The Geneva Communiqué of 2012 and our unanimous resolution 2254 charts the way to peace in Syria. We have a Special Representative in you, Staffan, who is rightly determined to keep the political process alive and pursue a renewed UN facilitated effort. We have an opposition prepared to take a pragmatic approach to discussions. And we have millions upon millions of Syrians, inside and outside the country crying out for long overdue peace.
And yet we are still here in this chamber, with the regime showing no interest in peace, encouraged by Russia’s support in this Council to keep dropping bombs, to keep using chemical weapons.
Time and time again Russia has abused its veto to protect the regime and to defend its use of chemical weapons. And what has Russia got in return for its seven vetoes in six years? Let me tell you.
Russia’s initiative in 2013 to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons has been exposed as a shambles. Russian pride in the Astana process has been turned to humiliation. And Russia’s credibility and reputation across the world have been poisoned by its toxic association with Asad. They have chosen to side with a murderous, barbaric criminal, rather than with their international peers.
They have chosen the wrong side of history.
However, it is not too late for Russia to change course. It is not too late for Russia to fulfil its responsibilities as a permanent member of this Security Council. It is not too late for Russia to use, finally, its influence over the regime to bring this conflict to an end. Those efforts must begin meaningfully with attempts to end the use of chemical weapons and barrel bombs, real efforts to bring about a ceasefire and real efforts to ensure proper humanitarian access.
In doing so, Russia can create the space needed for a renewed push on the political process; one that leads to that political transition to a government that represents all Syrians.
Should they do so, should they choose that path, we stand ready to work with Russia to preserve Syrian institutions through the political transition. We stand ready to find ways of cooperating with Russia to counter Da’esh and other international terrorist threats. We stand ready to engage with Russia as a constructive partner on this Council. While Asad offers Russia only shame and humiliation; we offer Russia something else; the chance, once again, to work with the international community as a credible member.
Finally, Madam President, the Syrian people have waited for over six years. Hundreds of thousands have died. Countless hospitals, schools and homes have been destroyed. Now, more than ever, the international community must come together to end this senseless conflict.
And that’s why we stand shoulder to shoulder with the United States and their decision to take military action against the Shayrat airfield, from where last week’s attacks were launched. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our G7 allies and all those who are committed to deter the future use of chemical weapons and, finally, to bring peace to Syria.
Thank you.
read more