” … he move comes in the wake of an ongoing scandal that has seen developers take advantage of leaseholds to maximise profits, leaving 100,000 families facing crippling ground rents – and a difficulty selling.
All new-build houses will be sold as freehold, although the ban is not applied retrospectively, which means only future homeowners will benefit. Flats will still be able to be sold leasehold. …”
” …Deaths in East Devon specifically from drug misuse have risen from 18 in 2012-14 to 26 in 2015-17 (+44%) and alcohol mortality rates are also up, with 67 deaths in 2012 compared to 79 in 2017 (+18%). In Devon, there were 152 drug deaths (+32%) and 391 alcohol-related deaths (+18%) when comparing the same periods. …”
https://exmouth.nub.news/n/drink-and-drug-deaths-rise-in-east-devon-after-funding-cut
Opinion piece from EDDC Lib Dem Councillor Eileen Wragg. Though Owl feels obliged to add that she was flexible enough herself as a Lib Dem to be a member of the overwhelmingly Tory council cabinet last time around!
“We are living in uncertain times, with politics in turmoil, unrest at home and abroad. We seem to have lost direction and are desperately in need of leadership.
For some years now, I have believed that the party political system has been failing, the public despairing that they are not being listened to by those in positions of power.
Recent local elections gave voters the opportunity to express their frustrations and disquiet, which resulted in the Conservatives being ousted from power at East Devon District Council (EDDC), after 45 years, and at Exmouth Town Council after twelve years.
Having attended the first full council meeting at EDDC, I found the situation bizarre.
The Independents now form the largest group on that council.
I cannot get my head around how an Independent can become part of a group.
To me it is a contradiction; either you are an Independent or you’re not.
I tried to reason this view with the chief executive there, and he told me that it was due to political balance.
My beliefs became further compounded when, at that first meeting, the Independents, who sat together at the front of the council chamber, appeared to vote in unison in making appointments to the various committees.
The electorate who voted in May’s elections were mostly disillusioned with how local government had been operating, and there was definitely a strong protest made.
But what do we have now?
An intake of new councillors, who, unless they are known to voters, many of us don’t know what they stand for.
The next four years will be interesting, during which time the new councils will be able to prove their worth.”
https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/east-devon-wragg-independent-council-opinion-1-6127634
Owl says: It’s always someone else’s fault … there is no buck so it can’t stop anywhere!
“Theresa May speaks out against construction of ‘tiny’ houses, calling for new design standards”
Theresa May is calling for new design standards for house builders to ensure future owners and tenants are not forced to live in “tiny” homes with inadequate storage space.
In her latest move to secure a political legacy, the prime minister will hail figures showing that by the autumn, a million new homes will have been added in under five years.
But her comments come as a parliamentary report warns that the government’s target of delivering 300,000 new homes a year is “way off track” because of problems at the heart of the planning system.
The cross-party House of Commons Public Accounts Committee said that “much more needs to be done” to scale up house building.
The Ministry of Housing has been “reluctant to take decisive action” to deal with councils which fail to produce the up-to-date local plans which are needed to drive delivery, said the committee in a report.
And local authorities have found it difficult to secure sufficient contributions from private developers to help with the cost of the infrastructure needed to support housing developments.
Committee chair Meg Hillier, said: “Progress against the government’s annual new house building target is way off track and currently shows scant chance of being achieved.
“The government has set itself the highly ambitious target of building 300,000 homes a year by the mid 2020s – levels not seen since World War Two – even though there is no clear rationale for this figure and the ministry themselves say only 265,000 new homes a year are needed.
“Government needs to get a grip and set out a clear plan if it is not to jeopardise these ambitions.”
In a speech to the Chartered Institute of Housing conference in Manchester on Wednesday, Ms May will say that the drive to build more homes must not lead to the quality of new housing being compromised.
Tenants and buyers are currently facing a “postcode lottery”, with many councils still not applying space standards introduced by the government in 2015 as a condition of planning permission, she will say.
In a clear message to her successor as prime minister, she will call for the creation a new system of universal mandatory regulation.
“I cannot defend a system in which owners and tenants are forced to accept tiny homes with inadequate storage, where developers feel the need to fill show homes with deceptively small furniture, and where the lack of universal standards encourages a race to the bottom,” she is expected to say.
Ms May will point to figures showing that since she entered No 10 in 2016, the number of extra homes being created was up by 12 per cent in Manchester, 43 per cent in Nottingham and 80 per cent in Birmingham.
Last year, she will say, more additional homes were delivered than in all but one of the previous 31 years while the number of affordable housing starts this year has risen to almost 54,000.
But she will warn against complacency: “The housing shortage in this country began not because of a blip lasting one year or one parliament, but because not enough homes were built over many decades.
“The very worst thing we could do would be to make the same mistake again.”
Ms May will also confirm plans to end so-called “no-fault” evictions, with a consultation to be published shortly, and set out a timetable for action on social housing including improved rights for tenants.
The PM is pushing for higher house building standards (AFP/Getty)
Polly Neate, the chief executive of homelessness charity Shelter, said Ms May’s commitment to improving quality in the housing market was “to be applauded” but added: “The huge numbers of people in this country who are at the sharp end of the current housing emergency will never be able to afford those new houses.
“What this country needs – and what it wants – is a commitment from the top, from any prime minister, to a renewal of social housing. We need 3.1 million homes in the next 20 years to provide affordable and stable homes for generations to come.”
Local Government Association housing spokesman Martin Tett denied the planning system was a “barrier to housebuilding”, pointing to statistics showing councils approve nine in 10 applications but hundreds of thousands of homes given planning permission are yet to be built.
Cllr Tett said councils needed freedom to build more social homes themselves.
“The last time the country built more than 300,000 homes a year was 1977-78, when councils built 44 per cent of them,” he said.
“Latest figures show councils were only able to build 2,000 homes last year – the highest level since 1992 – but need to be able to do so much more. To help end the housing crisis, we need to kick-start a genuine renaissance in council house building.”
Responding to the PAC report, housing minister Kit Malthouse said:“This government is determined to restore the dream of home ownership for a new generation by delivering 300,000 homes a year by the mid-2020s.
“We’re committed to building more, better and faster, including £44bn of funding and guarantees to support more homes, reforming the planning system to free up more land, and removing the cap on how much councils can borrow to build.
“We’re making real progress, last year delivering more new homes than in all but one of the last 31 years.”
These are not benefits – they are entitlements.
“More than a million pensioner households across the UK are living in poverty because of the government’s failure to act on unpaid pension credit, according to the older people’s charity Independent Age.
Almost 2 million people aged 65 and over are living in poverty in the UK. Pension credit is the income-related benefit specifically designed to lift them out of poverty. But it is estimated that four in 10 pensioner households who are entitled to the help do not receive it.
Since the 2017 general election, the government has “benefited” from £7bn in unclaimed pension credit, the charity said. This figure will increase to more than £17bn by 2022.
“The recent decision to limit the TV licence to only those who receive pension credit adds insult to injury to over a million pensioners who between them, due to government inaction, are missing out on a staggering £10m every day that should be in their pockets,” said George McNamara, the charity’s director of policy and influencing. …
Pensioners entitled to the benefit are missing out on an average of £49 a week, just under the average amount that the poorest fifth of pensioner couples spend on food and non-alcoholic drinks in a week. It can, said McNamara, make the difference between being isolated at home or being able to take part in social activities. …”
Many readers will be too young to remember Rast Devon’s plans to develop an ‘inter-modal transport hub’ on the outskirts of Exeter, about which many promised were made and broken. There was even a cursory planning application in 2010:
Eventually all or part of the site (Owl is none too sure) was bought up by Sainsbury’s who said they would build, well, something. Another promise broken.
Eventually, part of the site was bought by Lidl, who built a massive warehouse.
Now, it seems Amazon is going to build a second massive warehouse, next to the Lidl one:
Many jobs (200 in the article) are promised to the lucky (or unlucky) residents of Cranbrook – which way you look at it depends on what you research about both Amazon’s working conditions and future plans:
The desire of most of these warehousing companies – including Amazon – is NOT to treat their workers like robots (though it is alleged that some of them do) but to REPLACE them by robots.
Progress it’s called.
“The government has removed a paragraph from the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) intended to support the extraction of “unconventional hydrocarbons” following a High Court ruling earlier this year which found that a public consultation on the policy was flawed.
Paragraph 209 (a) of the NPPF had stressed the benefits of onshore oil and gas development, including “unconventional hydrocarbons”.
It stated that such developments benefit the security of national energy supplies and support the transition to a low-carbon economy. It went on to give a commitment that policies will be put in place to facilitate on-shore exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons, including fracking for shale gas.
The paragraph was added to the NPPF as part of revisions to the document published last year.
But in March, environmental campaign group Talk Fracking successfully challenged the new paragraph at the High Court.
Judge Mr Justice Dove ruled that the public consultation on the new policy was unfair and unlawful and the government had failed to take into account up-to-date scientific evidence on the climate change impacts of such development.
He ruled that the secretary of state “did not consciously consider the fruits of the consultation exercise in circumstances where he had no interest in examining observations or evidence pertaining to the merits of the policy”.
“This had the effect of excluding from the material presented to the minister any detail of the observations or evidence which bore upon the merits of the policy,” he added.
Yesterday, the housing ministry announced that it had removed the paragraph from the NPPF.
This followed a written ministerial statement in May which stressed that, despite paragraph 209 (a) being removed, the remainder of the NPPF policies “and, in particular, Chapter 17 on ‘Facilitating the Sustainable Use of Minerals’ remain unchanged and extant”.
“For the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework, hydrocarbon development (including unconventional oil and gas) are considered to be a mineral resource,” it added.
In addition, the statement added that the written ministerial statements of 16 September 2015 on ‘Shale Gas and Oil Policy’ and 17 May 2018 on ‘Planning and Energy Policy’ “also remain unchanged and extant”.
It added: “The written ministerial statements sit alongside the National Planning Policy Framework.
“Planning Practice Guidance is also unaffected by the ruling. This suite of policies and guidance remain material considerations in plan making and decision taking for hydrocarbon development and they should be afforded appropriate weighting as determined by the decision maker.”
Government axes ‘pro-fracking’ paragraph from NPPF following court defeat
A warning here for all councils.
“A town council did not give due consideration as to what powers it had to open a café, the decision was based on a poorly prepared business plan and, as a result, the decision to open the establishment was unlawful, the Auditor General for Wales has found.
Since opening the café in 2011, Connah’s Quay Town Council went on to incur a cumulative deficit of more than £234,000.
Finding failures in its decision making, the Auditor General’s report made three clear recommendations for the council to:
undertake a full option appraisal for the operation of Quay Café, incorporating a full financial appraisal of each option;
ensure appropriate advice is received prior to making decisions on the provision of new or novel services;
review the services it provides and ensure that it understands the statutory basis on which it provides those services.
The town council now has one month to consider the issues raised within the report and to make a decision on whether to accept these recommendations.
The Auditor General’s report is issued alongside public interest reports for Glynneath Town Council, Maenclochog Community Council and Cynwyd Community Council.
These reports set out significant failures in governance arrangements and inadequacies in financial management and internal control at all four councils.
The Auditor General for Wales, Adrian Crompton, said: “Given the scale of the deficit incurred at Connah’s Quay Town Council, I believe it is important that the public has a full and proper awareness of the events concerning the council. When it opened the café, the council did not have the statutory authority to do so and its decision was not supported by a clear and coherent business plan. As a result the decision was, in my view, unlawful.
“There are lessons to be learnt not just by this council, but by all town and community councils in Wales. The public interest reports issued today serve to highlight the shortcomings at four different town and community councils. Councils need to be innovative in dealing with community issues, but they must at all times display appropriate risk management and operate within their legal framework.”
Crompton added: “All four councils now have an opportunity to demonstrate that the risk of such governance failures recurring is reduced to a minimum. The public need to be assured that town and community councils have proper governance arrangements in place to manage the activities of the council both financially and administratively.”
Owl says: you could not make this up.
“Hospitals in England are relying on backup beds to carry out routine care, research has found.
Hospitals in England are relying on backup beds to carry out routine care, research has found.
Reliance on emergency beds suggests NHS trusts are at a “critical stage” and struggling to cope with demand, the British Medical Association has said.
The BMA submitted two waves of Freedom of Information requests to all 134 acute trusts in England in March and May 2019, which revealed the extent to which ‘escalation beds’ were being used routinely.
The first round of data received responses from 105 trusts showing that there were 3,428 escalation beds in operation.
In May, according to responses from 54 trusts, there were 1,637 instances of the these beds being used, though the BMA noted that due to a lower response rate, the real figure is likely to be higher.
The beds are only supposed to be used in emergencies and when there is a spike in demand.
Rob Harwood, BMA consultants committee chair, said: “The use of escalation beds is a sign that trusts are at a critical stage and are unable to cope with demand with their current bed stock.
“Some hospitals are forced to designate their theatre recovery beds as ‘escalation’, resulting in elective surgical operation being cancelled as there is no space for those patients who need immediate care after their surgery.”
Harwood noted that the pressure on capacity can see patients placed on beds in corridors and overcrowding treatment areas.
The BMA said that while escalation beds were traditionally used mainly in the winter, this was no longer the case as the number used in the first week of April was comparable to those in early January. There was an average of 20 escalation beds used per trust in early April and the start of January.
A total of 3,000 extra beds are needed to stop routine use of escalation beds outside of winter, while up to 10,000 are needed to bring occupancy to safe levels, the BMA estimated.
Jonathan Ashworth, Labour’s shadow Health Secretary, said: “The use of escalation beds is yet another sign that hospitals are struggling to cope under continued pressure. We know this is compromising patient care.”
Just when you think all the juice had been extracted from buyers, another scandal pops up.
“Contracts for new-build homes and the industry-led code of practice that informs them are heavily weighted in favour of the developer. The Consumer Rights Act does not include new builds, giving buyers less protection than high-street shoppers, and each year hundreds of purchasers are left in limbo when a home is not finished in time. They can’t pull out and reclaim their deposit until building works look likely to exceed what’s known as the “long-stop” date – the final date by which a property can be finished, which is often buried in the small print.
This can be up to six months later than the legal completion date cited in the contracts, and the legal completion date is often months later than the estimates given when contracts are exchanged. Most mortgage offers are only valid for three months.
While purchasers are legally bound to the developer’s timetable for the exchange and completion of contracts and face substantial penalties if they delay, developers allow themselves generous leeway.
A completion date only becomes legally binding when the home is ready and a “completion notice” is served, after which purchasers have seven to 10 days to pay up or else face interest charges on the balance.
Nor are developers obliged to pay compensation for delays, unless the developer exceeds the “long-stop” date. Purchasers who have to proceed with the sale of their old home after exchanging contracts, or to rearrange a mortgage when their offer expires, can be left heavily out of pocket. …”
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/jun/23/new-build-homes-buy-delay-bill-developers?
“Grant Thornton announced an independent review and a 7 million pound revamp of its UK accounting operations on Saturday to improve standards after regulators opened an investigation into its audit of café chain Patisserie Valerie that came close to collapse last year.
The accounting firm said the measures were part of its response to recent “scrutiny of its audits of large listed companies”, and wider efforts to prepare the business to compete for audit work from Britain’s top 350 listed companies “should changes in the market present a more level playing field for competition”.
Britain’s accounting watchdog, the Financial Reporting Council, said in November it was investigating Grant Thornton’s audit of Patisserie Valerie for 2015-2017.
Dave Dunckley, chief executive of Grant Thornton in Britain, said the firm would work with clients and the regulator to go further.
“The independent review of our audit practice this autumn will be an important part of our continued efforts to improve,” Dunckley said in a statement.
Britain’s Competition and Markets Authority has proposed sweeping reforms of the UK audit market after questions were raised about accounting standards following the collapse of retailer BHS and construction company Carillion, which took place before Patisserie Valerie’s problems were came to light. …
“… Reviews of air pollution in schools, similar to Ofsted inspections, will be launched for the first time amid mounting concerns over the effect of toxic fumes on pupils’ health and education.
Air quality audits will be carried out in classrooms and playgrounds, with a range of measures being introduced to clean up the worst affected schools.
This includes the possibility of cars being banned from streets bordering some schools and moving bus stops further away from schools. …”
Source:Times, paywall
Jusge the actions, not the words:
Swire was Raab’s campaign manager – Raab was knocked out of the race.
Parish backed old coke-snorter Gove, who is also out of the race.
So who will they back now?
Both started off as Remainers and switched to Brexit (they can change their minds, we can’t).
Johnson and Swire are both Old Etonians, so that looks a pretty likely match.
Parish left school at 16 to work on the family farm so Bojo AND Hunt, who have no interest in agriculture, will patronise him, if they notice him at all.
Neither of them says anything (much at all) on their websites.
Probably still trying to extricate themselves from the tangled voting webs.
No vote today, but a vote tomorrow:
A commentator has just drawn Owl’s attention to Chairman Swire’s Conservative Middle East Council website:
“The outsourcing firm Serco was awarded new contracts to house vulnerable asylum seekers despite having been fined nearly £7m for previous failings, the Guardian can reveal.
Responsibility for housing people seeking asylum in the UK was taken away from local authorities in 2012 and given to the companies Serco, G4S and Clearsprings under deals with the Home Office known as Compass contracts.
Despite concerns by leading charities that outsourcing the service had resulted in “squalid, unsafe, slum housing conditions”, in January the Home Office awarded Serco, Clearsprings and the company Mears new contracts to provide housing for asylum seekers for 10 years from September.
Figures released following freedom of information requests and a parliamentary question show that £6.8m worth of “service credits” were imposed on Serco between April 2013 and December 2018. The figures do not include the month of March 2016.
Service credits are sums deducted from a company’s monthly invoice when it fails to meet key performance indicators included in its contract, such as property standards or how quickly issues are resolved.
Serco was fined a total of £2.8m for its contracts to provide asylum seeker housing in Scotland and Northern Ireland over that period, and just over £4m for its contract in north-west England.
Serco’s penalties were at their highest in 2013/14 (£3.9m) and 2016/17 (£1.16m). Between April to December 2018, after the new contracts were put out to tender, it was fined £850,000. In January the firm was awarded two contracts to provide asylum seeker housing: – one in the north-west and one in the Midlands and the east of England, from September.
The figures also show G4S was fined just over £2m for breaches of contract – £1.5m for its contract in the Midlands and east of England and £500,000 for its contract in the north-east and Yorkshire and the Humber, both of which end in August. Most of these fines (£1.7m) were incurred in 2013/14.
Clearsprings, which manages asylum accommodation in Wales and south-west England and London and the south-eaast, was not fined, despite also being criticised over standards of accommodation.
The Home Office initially refused to release data on the fines it had imposed, claiming the information was commercially sensitive, but it was forced to do so following a ruling by the Information Commissioner’s Office. …”
From his website – there is no date but probably just before bin Salman’s visit to UK in March 2018:
“Visit to the UK by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammad bin Salman
The Government expects the visit to usher in a new era in bilateral relations focused on a partnership that delivers wide-ranging benefits for both the United Kingdom and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The Government intends to enhance our co-operation in tackling international challenges such as terrorism, extremism, the conflict and humanitarian crisis in Yemen and other regional issues such as Iraq and Syria.
I am aware that Vision 2030, a programme of internal reforms, has been set in motion in Saudi Arabia by the Crown Prince. These include lifting the ban on women driving from June this year, opening up attendance at major sporting events to women and allowing cinemas to operate in the country. Vision 2030 aims to catalyse and open up the country’s economy over the next 15 years, which will provide opportunities for British businesses to help support delivery in areas such as education, entertainment and healthcare where they have world-class expertise.
It is my view that maintaining a good relationship with Saudi Arabia allows us to support their important programme of reform, and to have frank conversations on matters where we both have concerns. It is for this reason that I did not agree with the petition to prevent the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia from visiting the UK.
Additionally, as the Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council (https://cmec.org.uk) I am committed to improve our understanding of the threats, challenges and opportunities in the Middle East which as you will be aware is a complex but important part of the world.”
https://www.hugoswire.org.uk/visit-uk-crown-prince-saudi-arabia-mohammad-bin-salman
“Local authorities are being urged to restrict traffic around schools after a study in London found “relatively high levels” of air pollution inside classrooms, posing a risk to children’s health.
The Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL) study, Healthy Air, Healthier Children, reported data from the monitoring of indoor and outdoor air pollutants at seven primary schools in Lambeth in March, April and May this year.
Results shows the presence of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) both inside classrooms and outside all the schools. NO2 is a pollutant that comes predominantly from traffic, the study said, and can lead to asthma as well as make health problems of asthmatic people worse.
As there were no indoor sources of NO2, worryingly, the pollutants inside classrooms could only have come from outdoor air pollution, the report highlighted.
While NO2 was also detected outdoors (it was measured at school entrances for one month) at all the schools, at two schools levels came close to the annual EU legal limit and World Health Organization guideline of 40µg/m3, with averages of 35µg/m3 and 36µg/m3. Although, the study noted, these levels are averages and are likely to have been higher during school hours.
In addition, the research found high concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) inside classrooms well above the recommended level of 1,000 parts per million (ppm).
This indicates that there is a need for more ventilation, the report said.
“Poor ventilation inside schools may cause asthma, dizziness, inability to concentrate, headaches and irritated throat – amongst other symptoms.”
It added: “Children at school should not be exposed to these levels of air pollution as they are especially vulnerable to its negative health effects since their bodies are still developing.
HEAL has called on local authorities to widen out an initiative called School Streets, already implemented in 40 schools across the UK, where streets immediately surrounding a school are closed off to cars during the school run.
The government also needs to help local authorities fund and deliver a network of walking and cycling routes to school, it added.
Anne Stauffer, director for strategy and campaigns at HEAL, said: “In cities, emissions from cars, buses and lorries are a major contributor to poor air quality, so investments should be made into not only reducing traffic around schools, for example with a ban on engine idling or restricted school streets, but also to finance those measures that will lead to a decrease in car use overall.”
It has been a bad week for Swire. His choice for PM (Dominic Raab, whose campaign he helped to conduct) was defeated early on and now questions are being asked (and decisions made) about the thorny subject of arms deals to Saudi Arabia during his time as a Foreign Office minister and since then during his (continuing) chairmanship of the Conservative Middle East Council.
Swire was made Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on 4 September 2012 and was in the job until 15 July 2016.
During his time as Foreign Minister, Swire made trips to Saudi Arabia in the company of BAE Systems and an attempt was made to examine arms sales to the country (and to Colombia) in 2016, as reported by East Devon Watch here:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/12/crispin-blunt-to-intensify-row-about-saudi-arms-sales?
and here:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/07/22/swire-economical-with-the-truth-at-the-foreign-office/
Since then Swire has again visited the country in his capacity as Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council (CMEC) and a Labour MP tried to instigate an inquiry into the CMEC dealings in Saudi Arabia last year, mentioning Swire:
and Wikipedia states:
“Swire became Chairman of the Conservative Middle East Council (CMEC) in September 2016, having previously been a member of the group. In June 2016, he accepted a donation of £10,000 from the wife of a billionaire with links to the leadership of Saudi Arabia. The journalist Peter Oborne has criticised the direction of CMEC away from its earlier focus on Palestine, to greater interest on the Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia.[16]”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Swire
Now, the Appeal Court has ruled that arms sales to Saudi Arabia are (and have been since 2015) unlawful because they contributed to civilian casualties in indiscriminate bombing:
The Guardian explains:
“… The UK has licensed the sale of at least £4.7bn worth of arms to Saudi Arabia since the start of the civil war in Yemen in March 2015, with most of the recorded sales taking place before 2018.
Sales are signed off by the foreign, defence and international trade secretaries, and ministers and former ministers including the Tory leadership candidates Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt have defended the UK’s arms relationship with Riyadh.
Latest figures estimate that the death toll in the complex civil war in Yemen since 2016 is fast approaching 100,000 – although there is currently a ceasefire – with nearly 11,700 civilians killed in attacks that have directly targeted them.
Estimates say that two-thirds of the civilian deaths were caused by the Saudi-led coalition; the rest were victims of actions by the Houthi rebels they are fighting.
Andrew Smith of Campaign Against Arms Trade said: “We welcome this verdict but it should never have taken a court case brought by campaigners to force the government to follow its own rules.
“The Saudi Arabian regime is one of the most brutal and repressive in the world, yet, for decades, it has been the largest buyer of UK-made arms. No matter what atrocities it has inflicted, the Saudi regime has been able to count on the uncritical political and military support of the UK.
“The bombing has created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. UK arms companies have profited every step of the way. The arms sales must stop immediately.”
East Devon Watch 