Home News

Conservationists have walked out of talks with ministers over a proposed shake-up of laws on trophy-hunt imports, claiming the changes will lead to “government-approved” wildlife kills.They say the plan – part of a radical overhaul of animal welfare legislation – opens the door to shooting critically endangered species such as black rhinos, elephants and polar bears.Eduardo Goncalves, of the Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting (CBTH), warned that the loophole created would be “absolutely disastrous”.“Britain wanted to be a world leader on this. As it stands, it is set to be a world loser,” he said.The government’s animal welfare action plan, unveiled on Wednesday, involves fundamental changes ranging from recognising animal sentience and a ban on live exports and foie gras, to giving police more power to protect sheep from out-of-control dogs.In their 2019 election manifesto, the Conservative Party promised a ban on imports of trophy hunting of endangered animals.But the new document pledges to ensure that UK imports and exports of hunting trophies “are not threatening the conservation status of species abroad” – which campaigners say is considerably weaker, allowing wealthy UK hunters to claim an exemption on conservation grounds.The proposed ban is based largely on EU wildlife trade regulations, which would still allow hunters to bring into the country carcasses or body parts of about 100 species, many of which are officially classed as being at risk of extinction and where hunting has been listed as a threat, according to Mr Goncalves, whose group has been in talks with the government behind the scenes.Zebra, reindeer and the Cape buffalo could still be legally targeted if the hunter paid a substantial fee to “support conservation”.The exemption – branded a “blood money” loophole – was applied in the US to allow trophy hunters to shoot and take home trophies of critically endangered black rhinos.It is feared that imports of body parts from farmed lions could be allowed under the new clause.At the moment, a hunter who wants to bring in parts of a threatened species needs a permit from the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to ensure that taking the trophy is not “detrimental” to species conservation. The new proposals add the option for hunters to import trophies of critically endangered species such as the black rhino on the grounds that they could contribute to conservation.Humane Society International/UK said it was urgently seeking clarification on the proposals.The charity’s executive director, Claire Bass, said: “We are extremely concerned the government appear to be rowing back on their commitment to bring in the ‘toughest trophy-hunting rules in the world’ and end the ‘morally indefensible’ practice of trophy hunting.“Adding a caveat to imply that if a trophy is not ‘threatening the conservation status of a species abroad’ it could still be imported, would create a giant loophole and mean the legislation would provide no meaningful improvement on the status quo.“If Defra pursues this line, we could effectively end up with UK government-approved trophy-hunting. If the government plan to just repackage the old system, we cannot support them, or celebrate any progress for wildlife protection. We urgently need clarification on this important point.”The CBTH says that in its talks with the government, it was told there must be exemptions.“What has been presented today is not a ban. At best it represents no change to the current system. At worst, it opens the door to shooting critically endangered species such as black rhinos,” said Mr Goncalves.“Even canned lions would fall through this new regime, and that is something the mainstream hunting industry supports a ban on.“The government’s new position is completely unacceptable. We have no choice but to condemn the government’s terrible proposals.“We therefore cannot continue our dialogue with Defra under these circumstances and will be boycotting any further talks.“We call on the government to urgently and radically revise its position. Until then we have no option but to campaign vigorously against the new policy.”The government points to its manifesto commitment to ban imports of trophies from endangered animals, and says a consultation and talks with experts will influence which species are covered by the policy.Animal welfare minister Lord Goldsmith told The Independent: “There’s no point having a ban on imports of hunting trophies if it still allows the export of body parts from endangered animals under a loophole. Details will be produced shortly, but it will be an effective and comprehensive ban. I understand the concern, but when details are revealed, those concerns will be allayed.”Supporters of trophy hunting argue that safeguarding areas for hunting protects wildlife against the greater threats of land conversion and poaching, which would increase deaths. In addition, income from hunting helped pay for conservation of species, it is claimed. More

Health chiefs in Greater Manchester have requested permission to vaccinate everyone over the age of 16 after a sudden surge in Covid-19 cases among young people in Bolton.Andy Burnham, the region’s mayor, said he and officials had made the plea amid concerns the spike – seemingly driven by the India variant – could grow out of control without decisive action.“I can report that Greater Manchester has submitted for consideration to the JCVI [Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation] a request that we have permission to vaccinate all over 16s in Bolton and more widely,” he said. “That request has gone in and we understand it is being considered.”Current government policy is to get the jab to everyone aged over 18.Infection rates have doubled among under 25s in Bolton in the space of a week: there were 152 cases per 100,000 people reported in the seven days up to 7 May but, for those aged 15-19, the rate stands even higher at to 223 per 100,000.In total, the north west town now has the second highest infection rate in England, according to government data.Public Health England has said the town has one of the highest rates of the India variant anywhere in the country and that there is some evidence of community transmission.Mr Burnham, who was re-elected as the region’s Labour mayor last week, said: “The way to mitigate the risk is to accelerate vaccination, particularly in the communities most affected by the Indian variant.“It is the Indian variant that is largely responsible for the increase that we’re seeing in Bolton.”The Department for Health and Social Care said in a statement no decisions have been made on whether under-18s should be routinely offered vaccinations.A spokesperson said: “We continue to follow the advice of the independent JCVI to vaccinate the most vulnerable people in society first. The priority order is primarily based on age, which is the biggest factor determining mortality.”Bolton Council said rates in three areas – Rumworth, Deane and Great Lever – were “worrying” especially as the take up of vaccinations was 10 per cent lower than the national average.The latest surge comes on the back of an especially torrid year for the town. In September it became the first place in the UK where bars and restaurants were told to shut for a second period after infection rates there became the highest in the country. More

Lambeth Council and the Metropolitan Police Service have expressed regret after being found guilty of breaching the human rights of 34 Black activists following a landmark legal battle.The authorities imposed an illegal ban of a scheduled broadcast of a speech by controversial Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan on the topic of transatlantic slavery reparations at a public event in 2017 – and further prohibited all of the Nation of Islam members from discussing the issue.During a High Court hearing on Monday, the judge declared that both parties had “unlawfully infringed the claimants’ rights act under the Human Rights Acts 1998, namely article 9 and article 10.”The Africa International Day of Action event was given permission to be held at Kennington Park in south London, but the authorities imposed the restrictions on topics of discussion citing concerns because of controversy surrounding Minister Farrakhan.The claimants argue that this was a “blanket” ban of their right to free speech and launched a civil claim in the High Court for breach of their Human Rights Act, under article 9 which denotes religious, social and political expression, and Article 10 which entails freedom of speech rights.Both the Met and Lambeth Council accepted liability, settling out of court, and tens of thousands of pounds in damages will be paid to the claimants who are comprised of members of the Nation of Islam.Minister Farrakhan, 86, has previously made offensive remarks about Jewish communities and has been banned from entering the UK since 2002.Though organisers assured the authorities that the religious leader would only speak upon the topic of reparations, the Met and Lambeth Council disallowed both the minister and anyone in attendance from addressing the issue.On the day, officers attended to ensure compliance.Speaking to The Independent, solicitor Andre Clovis, who represented the claimants, said: “My clients only wanted to speak about reparations for the historical and ongoing effects of slavery. “They wanted to discuss self-help and others in the black community wanted to hear what Minister Louis Farrakhan had to say on that subject alone. This is not controversial, in fact it is discussed and debated in the black community, in some of our most prestigious universities, between historical and political experts and on the political stage domestically and internationally.“Lambeth Council and the Metropolitan Police in removing the claimants’ ability to speak their minds, sought to suppress their ability to think about matters of central importance to their very being.” More

Easing lockdown restrictions may increase the number of Covid-19 cases and variants of the virus in the UK, a minister has warned. Health minister Nadine Dorries said that Brits must remain “cautious” after the third stage of the prime minister’s roadmap out of lockdown is reached later this month because the UK is “still in the tail end of the pandemic”. From 17 May, small groups of people will be allowed to meet inside their homes as well as in pubs, cafés, restaurants and other businesses and some international travel for leisure will resume. Boris Johnson is expected to announce that this stage of lockdown easing will go ahead as planned at a press conference this afternoon. Ms Dorries told BBC Breakfast: “The important thing is that we are all aware that as we move into each step of easement that there may be an increase in the variants or there may be an increase in the virus. “Our objective is to nail that virus to make sure that we are never as a country in the position we were last year again and that we move out of this cautiously and safely.” But met with the suggestion that people should “cautiously cuddle” when social distancing restrictions are relaxed for close friends and family next week, Ms Dorries said with a laugh that she doesn’t believe such a thing is possible. “I don’t think you can cautiously cuddle. We’re incredibly aware that everybody wants to get together, people want to hug each other, people want to entertain in their own homes,” she said. “That’s why we have a roadmap that people can follow.” The best way to prevent variants from scuppering the the UK’s progress in fighting Covid-19 is to help speed up the global vaccine rollout, according to an Oxford University immunologist. “Tactically the most important thing for us to do is to make sure that other bits of the world get vaccines faster – the state of global vaccination is pretty lamentable at the moment and I think we need to really push to help that happen much more effectively,” Professor John Bell told Good Morning Britain. “Because, in the end, we’re vulnerable, not because we haven’t vaccinated our population, but if more variants come onshore from overseas – which they will naturally as people start to travel – we’re potentially going to be in trouble and that’s why we have a real interest in making sure everyone else is vaccinated. That plus the humanitarian importance of making sure that people don’t die unnecessarily.”One third of adults in the UK have now been fully vaccinated against Covid-19 and two thirds have received their first jab. But in India, for instance, where the B.1.617.2 variant – recently named a variant of concern by Public Health England – originated, fewer than one in ten adults have received even a single vaccine doses, official figures show. Cases of B.1.617.2 in the UK doubled last week from 202 to 520, according to health officials, with the majority identified in northwest England – mainly Bolton – and London. But foreign travel for leisure purposes will remain heavily restricted even from 17 May, with just 12 destinations on the UK’s ‘green list’ of countries to which relatively restriction-free travel is possible. More

All councils in England would have the same recycling rules for householders under a government shake-up of bin collections.Nationwide recycling standards would end the current confusion over which materials residents can put out for reprocessing.And all homes could be given a weekly food-waste collection, to cut the amount of waste going into landfill.Ministers are launching a public consultation on plans tostreamline recycling from 2023, involving giving local authorities and waste companies a list of specific materials they must collect from homes and businesses, such as plastic, paper and card, glass, metal and food waste.Free garden waste collections for every home are also being considered, a service for which householders currently pay £100m a year. Councils have the option of whether to provide garden waste collections.The proposals, set out in a consultation document, would help the government meet its target of eliminating all avoidable waste by 2050.At the moment, less than half – 45 per cent – of household waste is recycled, partly because rules vary from council to council, with insufficient detail given to householders.About 9.5 million tonnes of food a year in the UK are thrown away by households, manufacturers, retailers and others, according to anti-waste charity Wrap.The government says it will provide council with extra funding and support for recycling collections, partly through reforming the packaging industry, forcing firms to meet the full cost of managing their packaging waste. The idea is to reduce the amount of unnecessary packaging thrown away.Environment secretary George Eustice said: “Householders want more frequent recycling collections. Regular food and garden waste collections will ensure that they can get rid of their rubbish faster, at no additional cost to them.“Our proposals will boost recycling rates, and ensure that less rubbish is condemned to landfill.”In 2019, just over a third of England’s district councils and unitary authorities – 133 out of 309 – offered a separate food-waste collection service.The consultation, which runs until 4 July, also seeks to set new “minimum service standards” for bin collections on local authorities, forcing them to make standard rubbish collections at least once a fortnight, alongside the weekly collection of food waste.Ministers are already consulting on a deposit return scheme for drinks containers, whereby consumers would be given incentives to return and recycle bottles and cans. More

A Metropolitan Police Service officer who was found to have racially profiled a Black driver during a stop-and-search last year will face no penalty for their actions.The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) launched an investigation after a 27-year-old man was stopped after being observed by officers while driving in Old Kent Road in south London, in May 2020. The victim was placed in handcuffs and had a Taser pointed at him, and his car and his three passengers were searched under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The watchdog found that one officer had a case to answer for misconduct due to bias as he racially profiled the man during the incident, did not provide adequate grounds for the stop and failed to follow the guidance provided by the College of Policing.It was also found that the officer breached coronavirus force policy by failing to wear proper PPE and could have used tactics to de-escalate the situation rather than handcuffing and using the ‘red-dot’ function of the Taser on the man.The Metropolitan Police Service agreed that the officer should address these issues and focus on what constitutes reasonable grounds for stop and search and consider the impact of the disproportionate use of stop and search on Black and minority ethnic communities.The force said the IOPC had agreed the officer should take part in equality and diversity training, but will face no other action over the incident.IOPC Regional Director Sal Naseem said: “Stop and search is an important policing tool but can also be very intrusive and affect the trust and confidence that Black communities have in the police service. It is vital it is used with care. “Our investigation found evidence that racial bias played a part in an officer’s decision to stop the member of the public and the officer will now have to reflect and learn from this.“It is this sort of incident that can undermine the legitimacy of stop and search as a policing tactic.”He added: “For those members of the community affected disproportionally by the use of stop and search, they must have confidence that racial bias plays no part in how this policing power is used.”In a statement to The Independent, the Met said the officer’s future stop and search data will be reviewed by his supervisor to review any potential for unconscious bias.A spokesperson added: “In all three instances (relating to the search carried out by the officer, racial profiling and lack of PPE) the IOPC concluded that there was misconduct and agreed that should be addressed through reflective practice for the officer concerned, including reviewing the relevant legislation relating to stop and search powers as well as completing further training in this area. “Stop and search is a vitally important tool in the fight against violence and associated criminality and we are acutely aware that its use must be justifiable in every instance. We are also aware of the impact it has on the black community. “Where our standards slip below where they should be, we should be challenged and rightfully held to account. On this occasion the IOPC and MPS agree that the officer involved should reflect on their performance and actions to determine whether a better outcome could be achieved in future.” More

Campaigners have launched a legal challenge against a blanket ban on elderly residents making trips away from their care homes, saying the government’s guidance strips people of their basic rights and effectively turns sheltered accomodation into a “prison”.Under the rules, which were updated last month, people in residential care over the age of 65 are prevented from leaving home apart from in exceptional cases.This, campaigners say, prevents residents from enjoying simple activities such as walking in a local park.Those who are permitted to leave the care home, for example to visit a friend or relative at the end of their life, must self-isolate for 14 days on their return.John’s Campaign, which has campaigned for the rights of families and care homes residents throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, has launched a legal challenge against the ban and the quarantine rule.Read more:The group said the imposition of a blanket ban, and the failure to communicate and ensure individualised risk assessments are taken for every resident who wishes to make a visit out, is unlawful.They argue that an individual who is 64 but may suffer from conditions that make them particularly vulnerable to infection could have an individualised risk assessment that would allow them to take a trip out of the home, but an individual aged 66 who may be less vulnerable to infection is not afforded the same right.In a letter sent to the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC), the group also questions the requirement to self-isolate, arguing that as care homes now have rapid testing, designated visitors are permitted and residents are vaccinated, the requirement is unnecessary.Julia Jones, co-founder of John’s Campaign, said: “I am at a loss to understand how the basic right of a person living in a care home to make their own simple choices over a walk in the park, for instance, has been so comprehensively ignored – and denied – over the past 12 months. “The 440,000 people living in care homes include some who moved in through their own volition, with full mental capacity, never guessing that this simple freedom, enjoyed by everyone else in the population – apart from prisoners – could so easily be denied them.”Nicci Gerrard, also co-founder of the group, called the rules “discriminatory, harmful and wrong”.She said: “Care homes are not prisons, and people living in them should have the same rights as everyone else in society.“What’s more, to make them self-isolate for 14 days if they do leave the care home is to cruelly continue to enforce separation from those they love that has blighted too many lives in the past year.”Tessa Gregory, a partner at law firm Leigh Day, which is supporting the challenge, said: “Care home residents and their families have suffered disproportionately through the pandemic both from the virus itself but also from enforced isolation.“It is vital that as the rules are relaxed for the general population, care homes residents are not left behind. “There is no reason, if appropriate precautions are taken, to prevent residents over working age from having much needed visits out and it also cannot be right that if residents do leave their homes they always have to always isolate for 14 days on their return.”A DHSC spokesperson said: “We know just how crucial visits are in supporting the health and wellbeing of residents. Our current guidance provides a range of opportunities for visitors to meet and spend time with their loved ones in a care home under carefully designed conditions to keep everyone safe.“Residents over 65 can make visits outside of care homes in exceptional circumstances and all decisions in relation to visiting should be made on the basis of a risk assessment centred around the individual. This is made clear in our guidance.“As we move along the roadmap, we are looking to open up more opportunities for visiting both into and outside of care homes – wherever this can be done safely and is supported by data.” More

Britain is no longer a country where the “system is deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities”, according to the “insulting” and “divisive” report by the Race Commission, appointed by the government in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement.Months overdue, and 258 pages long, the report’s findings and 24 recommendations feature some staggering assertions – and a lot of glaring omissions. The body, headed by prime minister Boris Johnson’s friend and former charity boss Dr Tony Sewell, argued that geography, family influence, socio-economic background, culture and religion all impact life chances more than racism. Evidence of institutional racism, it says, was not found. The commission was established by Munira Mirza, a No 10 adviser who has previously expressed doubts over the existence of institutional racism. Dr Sewell has said the same. And sponsoring minister, Kemi Badenoch, has made similar remarks, denying “systemic injustice” has an impact on Covid death rates, and saying it should be illegal to teach the concept of white privilege in schools. All of this has been carried out at the behest of the PM, whose history of racist remarks has been well documented.There have been concerns about other members of the board and their politics, which seem to be invariably aligned with Conservative values. Hence some have questioned the extent to which this purported independent commission is in fact independent.Indeed, shortly after the commission panel was announced last summer, I spoke with Lord Simon Woolley who described them as a “motley crew of deniers” on the “profound nature of systemic racism” which, he added, has been brutally exposed by Covid-19 and Black Lives Matter. Now that the report has finally been published – after an extraordinary four-month delay – it is clear that the commission has cherry picked data to suit its narrative, one which gaslights ethnic minority communities by suggesting institutional racism is a mere figment of their imaginations. It offers an incomplete picture of what drives inequalities and disparity in outcomes across the UK, and misses vital parts of the puzzle. AccountabilityThroughout the 258-page report, the commission notes that the Black Lives Matter protests last year saw many young people in Britain calling for change.It further states that while it understands the “idealism” of these “well-intentioned” young people who have protested for racial equality, it questions whether a narrative claiming that nothing has improved “will achieve anything beyond alienating the decent centre ground”.Activists, particularly those with experience of campaigning, have seldom claimed that nothing at all has changed. But more needs to change to achieve a society that’s fair – including the dismantling of institutional racism. By denying its existence, the government avoids accountability for the ills which continue to plague the lives of marginalised groups. This is further demonstrated through the commission’s call for more research into why “some ethnic minority groups are doing better than others” and whether this is due to differences in family structures, social networks or health behaviours such as alcohol and smoking. The report notes improvements such as increasing diversity in elite professions which have often been measured by the same “Bame” label which the commission is now lobbying to get rid of – partly due to the unreliable data it yields, insofar as not knowing how each ethnic minority group fares within that bracket.By clear contrast, current statistics paint a grim picture of the reality: Black mothers are four times more likely to die during childbirth, in which racism has been cited as a factor. Institutional racism was also found to have been a factor in the Windrush Scandal, which is very much ongoing, and Black men are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police.Perhaps the clearest omission in the report is the dismissal of people’s real, everyday and often painful lived experiences. Over the years, numerous reports have been produced which have cited and evidenced the existence of institutional racism and structural inequalities in British society such as The Lawrence Review (2020) and The Windrush Lessons Learned Review (2020), beyond the sporadic instances of racist trolling online as cited by Sewell in this new report. Anecdotally, virtually everyone from within ethnic minority communities has spoken of very real lived experiences of grappling with the same sort of ingrained discrimination – and yet this report does not acknowledge this.So why then, did the commission very quietly ask for evidence from the public to “better understand why racial disparities thrive in Britain”, rather than launching an open invitation far and wide?This failure to seek and search for evidence from all corners of the country, to interrogate fully these tragically widespread experiences of racism, smacks of a wilful reluctance of the report authors to open their eyes to evidence they did not want to see. More