Apr 062012
 

At the next meeting of Aberdeen CND on Monday 10th April, Jonathan Russell, Chair of Aberdeen CND and also a member of Campaign Against the Arms Trade, will be leading a discussion on the Arms Trade. The meeting will take place at 7.30pm on the Top Floor of the Belmont Cinema, Belmont Street, Aberdeen.

The arms trade is a deadly, corrupt business. It supports conflicts and human rights abusing regimes while squandering valuable resources which could be used to deal with the many social and environmental challenges we face here on Planet Earth. It does this with the full support of governments around the world, in particular the five permanent members of the United Nations  Security Council: the United States, Russia, France, China and the United Kingdom.

These are the very countries which are meant to be our global custodians, but are in fact the very countries which are feeding global insecurity and conflict.

While very few countries sell large volumes of weaponry, the buyers are spread across the world. Other than to the five permanent UN Security Council members, the largest buyers are in the Middle East and South East Asia. The arms themselves range from fighter aircraft, helicopters and warships with guided missiles, radar and electronic warfare systems, tanks, armoured vehicles, machine guns and rifles.

The common misconception is that it is the illegal trade that is damaging, while the legal trade is tightly controlled and acceptable. However, the vast majority of arms sold around the world including those to human rights abusing governments or into areas of conflict are legal and are supported by governments. In 2007 the value of legal arms around the world amounted to 60 billion dollars. The illegal market is estimated at 5 billion dollars:  many illegal weapons end up as legal weapons.

The arms trade exists to provide weapons to those who can pay for them. What the buyers do with the arms, what political approval the sales signify, and how money could be better spent appears irrelevant to the arms companies and our governments. The UK Government’s 2010 Human Rights Annual Report identified 26 countries of concern. In that year the UK approved arms licences to 16 of these.

There’s a sense that in the past we were embarrassed about supporting defence exports. There’s no such embarrassment in this Government.

David Cameron was in the Middle East on a high-profile mission to sell arms when the democracy movement started in the Middle East. Selling arms to a country in conflict whether internal or external makes the conflict more deadly and longer lasting.
If there is tension between countries or within a country, then arms purchases are likely to increase this tension and make actual conflict more likely.

Even when conflict has ended, arms, particularly small arms, may remain in large numbers (as in Libya at present), fuelling further conflicts and/or criminal activity.

Every year the UK Government authorises the sale of arms to well over 100 countries. This is hardly surprising given that it is Government policy to vigorously support arms exports. Peter Luff, Minister of Defence Exports in the present UK Government, has stated that:

“There’s a sense that in the past we were embarrassed about supporting defence exports. There’s no such embarrassment in this Government.”

Arms companies and Government are inseparable when it comes to selling arms. The Government’s UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) department is a vital element of UK’s arms dealing. In 2008 the Government opened the Defence and Security Organisation which promotes weaponry on behalf of arms companies. There are 158 civil servants in the Defence and Security Organisation while other non-arms sectors have137 staff. This is despite arms accounting for less than 1.5 Percent of UK exports.

• Arms export jobs as a percentage of total employment:  0.2%
• Arms as a percentage of exports:  1.5 %
• UK Government Research Expenditure Spent on Arms:  27%
• UK trade and investment staff committed to selling arms:  54%

Research carried out for Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) by the Stockholm International Peace Institute assesses the level of subsidy by Government to the arms trade in the UK to be around £700 million a year.  In 2010 the UK Government issued 10,850 arms export licences, refused 230, and revoked 14.

Half of the refusals related to proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, with a maximum of 76 being revoked on the grounds that they contributed to internal repression, internal conflict or regional instability. Foreign office embassies also promote the arms sales, as do the Ministry of Defence armed services. Arms fairs are common in the UK and around the world.  The governments of host countries provides support for their arms firms.

Arms sales from the UK seem to vary from year to year:

• 2007    9651 million   (particularly high because of sales of Typhoon aircraft to Saudi Arabia)
• 2008    4367 million
• 2009    7261 million also high as included Typhoon support services to Saudi Arabia)
• 2010    5819 million

Of the 16 countries identified by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute as locations of major conflict in 2009, the UK sold arms to 12.

Columnist Will Self –  “War, the arms trade and the abuse of language”

BAE arms are the UK’s main arms company and has military customers in over 100 countries. BAE’s focus over the past few years has been on increasing sales to the US, specifically targeting equipment for conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, and supplying Euro fighters and other arms to Saudi Arabia. BAE routinely supplies countries which the UK Foreign Office considers as having ‘the most serious wide-ranging human rights concerns’.

The casualties of conflict are now overwhelmingly civilian, increasing from 50% of war related deaths in the first half of the twentieth century to 90% near the end of the century.

The arms trade affects development both through the money wasted on arms purchased and through the conflicts fuelled by arms.

A study in 2007 by Oxfam of the economic cost of armed conflict to Africa estimated that Africa  loses around 18 billion dollars a year due to wars and that armed conflict shrinks an African nations economy by 15%.

As well as the direct effects of military spending, medical costs and the destruction of infrastructure, there are indirect costs on the  economy and employment suffers ( this does not take into account the countless human misery caused by loss of life and sustained injuries effecting families and friends as well as the individuals concerned).

The study estimated that the cost  of conflicts in Africa since 1990 was equivalent to the aid provided to them by major donors.

Even when conflict is not taking place money diverted to arms is a drain on government resources and takes away from vital spending on health education and infrastructure. The massive 1998 South African arms deals for aircraft, helicopters, warships and submarines cost the country over £8billion. Yet most of the population live in shanty towns and other poor housing and South Africans with HIV/AIDS were told that the country could not afford ant-retroviral medication.

Despite desperate poverty and its recent appalling history of armed struggle, the UK government is actively promoting arms struggle to Angola. The UK government not only approved arms exports to Angola it actively organised an “industry day’’ when HMS Liverpool docked in Angola waters and hosted Angolan political and military officials.

The arms trade causes countless misery in our world; it is a poor use of limited resources which should be used to make this world a better place. We need to question the thinking in the world that believes you only get what you want by force. The five members of the Security Council should start taking on their responsibilities and use conflict resolution rather than warfare to sort the many conflicts that take place both between and within countries.

Mar 092012
 

Referendums, deer culls, employers telling employees how to vote, services cuts, classroom assistants under threat.  Old Susannah cuts to the heart of the matter and ponders upcoming Lord Provost parties.

Tally Ho!  It’s been a boring week in Aberdeen; referendums, deer culls, habitation destruction and other criminal activity notwithstanding.  I will write a column over the weekend once a few conditions have hopefully been met.

First, I need to find something important and local to write about, and second – I must find an outfit to wear for the Lord Provost’s upcoming parties.  I’ll need everything from some evening gowns to designer jeans for the nearly £28,000 worth of partying just approved by the ‘Lord Provost Sub Committee’ – and that’s on top of the £4,000 party to launch his £9,000 portrait. I am sure my invitations will arrive shortly.

At the time of writing it is not clear whether residents of a home for people with paralysis issues are still being told not to drink too much fluid at night and buy rubber mattresses, as their overnight on-site assistants are no longer affordable.  Perhaps Lord Provost Stephen will invite some of them to one of his little get-togethers.

Hopefully my party invitatins from the Lord Provost  won’t arrive as late as the bundles of postal votes which showed up too late to be counted in the aforementioned referendum.  Hard luck, eh?  Kind of reminds me of when I personally handed in 63 individual postcards protesting the deer cull to the city’s Town House – only to get a letter from Valerie Watts saying she’d had a total of less than 40 from all sources.  But it would be wrong to mention that, or the deer cull.

Unfortunately national media are about to cover the cull, with one reporter telling me this tree planting/deer cull is ‘bizarre’.  Clearly only Aileen HoMalone (newly crowned queen of the Lib Dems – not counting Nick Clegg), Pete Leonard and Ian Tallboys can understand the importance of ripping up existing habitat to expose industrial waste and rocks on which to plant trees that can’t possibly thrive.  The rest of us are thick.

Being busy with the important business of buying new outfits for all the upcoming Lord Provost events means there’s no time for a column just yet, but don’t despair  – the link below will take you to a spread sheet you can download to keep as a little gift.  This shows how our favourite councillors have voted over Union Terrace Gardens and culling deer – with plenty of room for you to fill in the results of your favourite votes as well.

This may be a handly little reminder when it comes time to vote of who is dynamic, forward-thinking and so on.

Here is the link:  http://oldsusannahsjournal.yolasite.com/

You will also find an additional present with this spread sheet – Old Susannah has made her own portrait of the Lord Provost, complete with wife and glamorous security guard.  I would be happy to sell it for less than £9,000, and rather than holding a £4,000 drinks party to celebrate my artwork, I’d happily go down to BrewDog for a pint instead.

So that’s it for now – more in a few days, if I can find some subject matter.  Cheerio!

Feb 232012
 

Aberdeen Against Austerity, a group campaigning against the £140m redevelopment of the historic Union Terrace Gardens, has released the following statement in response to the P&J article headlined, “Police probe attacks on city garden team” of 21 February 2012. The statement is published verbatim as received by Voice with only minor graphical changes made to AAA’s release to comply with Voice’s house style.

These allegations by Mr Smith and as yet unnamed others are strong indeed – e-mail hacking, online bullying and harassment and personal threats are all criminal offences.
We at Aberdeen Against Austerity are not responsible for any of the alleged offences and do not believe any of our fellow Retain Union Terrace Gardens campaigners would stoop so low either.

We are opposed to unlawful tactics being employed by anyone in this important debate over the future of our city, as dirty tricks cheapen both sides’ arguments. However, we worry that the sensational coverage of these criminal allegations in the Press & Journal and Evening Express will serve as a deterrent to ordinary people speaking out, who oppose the City Gardens Development.

The referendum campaign is being fought on a far from level playing field. Six of the seven groups registered against the development are comprised of ordinary citizens (the 7th being the group of Labour City Councillors). By registering as campaign groups we have all been bound by the referendum rules, which allow a maximum spend of £8,524.45, although most groups have no budget at all.

Of the pro-development campaign groups, only three are registered, allowing the vast majority of campaigning to be done outwith the rules, and at huge expense, by PR company The BIG Partnership on behalf of those who propose the City Garden Project. Their Vote for the City Garden campaign has so far included 4-page flyers and newspaper-style brochures to every house in the city, constant radio advertising on all the local stations, a Facebook page manned by full time staff and daily coverage in the local newspapers.

As with any modern debate, much campaigning is being done online and this is where Mr Smith alleges bullying is taking place. Both sides are being equally forthright in their postings on social media, but Aberdeen Against Austerity are certainly not interpreting the strong wording of some of our opponents as bullying or harassment.

We have chosen to rise above any personal slurs and engage in debate based upon facts and we can still have a wee smile at those posts which satirise us and our efforts, because as Aberdonians we retain a sense of humour.

Aberdeen Against Austerity wonders if Sir Ian Wood, who has donated £50m of his own money to the controversial City Gardens Project, will be reporting local comedians Flying Pig Productions to the police for this week’s P&J column The Butter-Fingered Philanthropist.

Aug 082011
 

Fighting Wildlife Crime in Aberdeenshire is an on-going struggle.  Grampian Wildlife Crime Officers rely on the public to catch criminals as well as to hopefully prevent crime.  Andy Turner puts Aberdeen Voice readers in the picture.

3373.  No, these aren’t the latest winning lottery numbers, but it is the total land area of Grampian Police Force coverage in square miles.
This number can present a bit of a problem for Wildlife Crime Officers.

Divided equally among the 12 Wildlife Crime officers in Grampian, each officer would have a beat of around 281 square miles!

That’s an awful lot of ground to cover and can make for problems in terms of detection, investigation and enforcement of Wildlife Crime.

Wildlife Crime continues to blight Scotland’s outstanding natural heritage.  It can impact upon rare and iconic species, often involves cruelty to animals, can destroy specially protected habitats and interfere with legitimate countryside management and recreation.

In fact the term ‘Wildlife Crime’ covers a huge spectrum of criminal activity, and can occur in both the countryside and urban areas.

Wildlife Crime Officers in Grampian have dealt with cases of poaching (deer, fish and game) crimes against badgers, hare coursing, crimes against birds including: poisoning, trapping, shooting, disturbance, nest destruction and egg collecting, disturbance of marine mammals, crimes against bats, the taking/killing of Fresh Water Pearl Mussels, CITES offences in connection with the trade in endangered species, damage to protected sites and crimes against protected plants to name a few.

The huge diversity of wildlife crime calls for a diverse approach to tackle the problem.  To this end the Grampian Police are part of the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime Scotland or PAWS.  PAWS has representation from police, government agencies such as Scottish Natural Heritage, conservation organisations like RSPB, land management sector and others with the common aim to stamp out wildlife crime through education, awareness raising and enforcement.

Like other crimes, Wildlife Crime is committed by a very small minority of people who either knowingly flaunt the law or commit crime through lack of awareness.

Wildlife crime can often be linked to other rural crime, and for this reasons suspects should never be approached by the public.

While the police keep records of each reported Wildlife Crime, it is hard to establish the true extent of Wildlife Crime that occurs in Grampian and Scotland as a whole.

This is due in the main to one of Scotland’s greatest commodities: its vast areas of countryside, countryside where crime is possibly going on undetected or unreported.

In July 2010 Grampian Police employed a Wildlife Crime Education Officer (WCEO), the first post of its kind in the UK.  The aim of the post is prevention of wildlife crime by raising awareness of the problem, education and encouraging improved reporting.  The WCEO will be working with land managers, conservation groups, outdoor access and sports groups, schools and universities for the duration of the 3 year post.

Around 530,000 live in the Grampian Force area.  The population in general is becoming more mobile, and access to the countryside for recreation is more readily available now than ever before, with pursuits such as mountain biking and hill walking on the increase.

While this access needs to be carefully managed, it does present an ideal opportunity to arm those using the countryside with the facts about wildlife crime and the impacts of crime on both wildlife and people. For those working in the countryside this means enabling them to work in an informed and importantly a safe and legal way.  For those accessing the countryside this means reporting any suspected wildlife crime incidents thereby making the Wildlife Crime Officers 281 mile beat a bit more manageable!

It is important to remember however that for reporting to be effective it must be genuine, timely, accurate and detailed.  If these four conditions are met there is scope for Wildlife Crime officers to focus efforts by responding to real incidents, and reduce time spent scouring the countryside following a poor lead or inaccurate information.

In Grampian Force area alone the Wildlife Crime Unit can receive over 50 calls per month, ranging from hare coursing at Elgin, dolphin disturbance at Aberdeen harbour to salmon poaching on Deeside.

Among the genuine reports are others which can relate to road kill, natural deaths or even miniature penguins at Aberdeen beach – which turned out to be young guillemots.

Legal countryside management practices can sometimes be misconstrued for illegal practices.  In extreme cases legal cage traps, spring traps and snares have been tripped or vandalised, and call birds released by people who misunderstand or disagree with their purpose.  Despite personal views people should never take the law into their own hands.

I do not want to discourage the public from picking up the phone to call the police – in fact it is quite the opposite – but try to have all the information at hand to help the police deal with the call in the best possible way.

By following this simple checklist (below) when reporting a wildlife crime, and hopefully through awareness rising, effective reporting and enforcement it might be possible to establish a true picture of wildlife crime, and to help stamp it out throughout Scotland.

Visit the Partnership for Action Against Wildlife Crime in Scotland (PAWS) for further information on wildlife crime.
www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Wildlife-Habitats/paw-scotland

If you suspect a wildlife crime is/has taken place:

DO:

  • Report any suspicious activity as soon as possible to your Force Service Centre and ask to speak to a Wildlife Crime Officer
  • Take a note of the date, time and weather conditions.
  • If possible, identify a map reference or ideally a GPS reading of both the incident scene and location from where you witnessed the incident.
  • Note a description of person/s involved including gender, age, height, clothing etc.
  • Write down any vehicle registration numbers, make, model, and colour that may be involved.
  • Identify other witnesses and obtain their name and contact details.
  • If possible, video or photograph the scene, or make a rough sketch.
  • Cover up any suspected poisoned baits or victims to prevent any animal / person coming into contact with them.
  • Do report. Even if you are not sure – report the incident. The evidence of wildlife crime is not always obvious. 

DO NOT:

  • Do not disturb the scene by moving items or walking about unnecessarily.
  • Do not touch dead animals or birds, especially if you suspect that poison may have been used. 
  • Do not interfere with legal countryside practices such as the legal use of traps and snares, hides, high seats and shooting butts.

NEVER:

  • Never approach suspects or intervene if you suspect someone is committing a wildlife crime – you may put yourself in danger.

Dog-fighting – No Room For Complacency In Aberdeen

 Aberdeen City, Articles, Community, Featured, Information  Comments Off on Dog-fighting – No Room For Complacency In Aberdeen
Feb 252011
 

By Suzanne Kelly.

The Council said organised dog-fighting is not happening here (at least they put that in writing to me a few years back).
The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the BBC and the police are not so sure.  Back in 2007 there was an allegation that men were deliberately hunting the streets of Aberdeen with Staffordshire type dogs, looking for cats for the dogs to attack.

There was the recent incident in Seaton where a pet cat was held down by two men so a dog could savage it. Unfortunately, the police don’t seem to have found anyone for this crime yet.

Dog-fighting equipment and dogs were found in several areas north of Aberdeen not long ago as well. Two swans were recently found badly injured near Bridge of Dee (they are recovering), and on 14 February a swan was found in this same area – dismembered.  While this last crime (injuring wild animals is a criminal offense) must have been done by a person, it was in the same general area that the dog-injured birds were found. Given these incidents it seems we do have a problem. The problem can be solved if people come forward and let the authorities know (anonymously if they wish) who is involved.

It is bad enough that there is such a visible increase in the number of dogs which could be classified as ‘pit bull cross breeds’ or ‘fighting type dogs’ under the Dangerous Dogs Act. In addition, many of the dogs in the ‘dangerous’ category which we see on the street are not on a lead and a few seem to be owned by people who are simply not interested in the dog’s welfare. The Dangerous Dogs Act was intended in part to counteract the proliferation of types of animals which were frequently involved in incidents where people were injured.

The psychological makeup of the people involved in dog fighting makes them a danger not just to animals, but to people as well

A dog ring in England was broken up not long ago; the dogs were trained to exhaustion, given live cats and other animals to tear to shreds alive and were made to fight in a pit in a woman’s back garden.

Dog-fight attendees are known to film the dogs torturing cats on mobile phones – the purpose of the cats is to rile the dogs up to fight.

If the dogs would not fight (and frankly, any well-treated dog does not normally want to attack another animal), they were tortured with electric shocks.  In one case which involved nationals of several European countries, an English woman in was eventually jailed and fined. Dog-fighting is (obviously) illegal, and penalties include jail and fines – but some say the existing law is not strong enough.

The psychological makeup of the people involved in dog fighting makes them a danger not just to animals, but to people as well. They are detached from suffering, concerned only with money the dogs earn for them;  have abnormal emotional development that make the fights seem ‘thrilling’ and such people are completely ‘beyond the pale’ of what is acceptable behaviour. Getting these people identified, and hopefully convicted will make animals as well as people safer.

The Dangerous Dogs Act saw four types of animal outlawed – but there are now so many cross breeds, it is virtually outdated to say that the fighting is limited to any one breed at all.  As far as breeding goes, a bitch will be bred constantly to produce puppies, kept in complete confinement. One day the exhausted bitch will be so weakened that she and her last litter will be killed, and another bitch takes her place.

This ‘killer instinct’ is drilled into the pups from their first hours.

They are treated with great cruelty, forced into gruelling exercise regimes (which kills some of them in the process), beaten, starved, tortured and ‘rewarded’ by being given live animals to maul.

There is absolutely no place for dog-fighting or for anyone involved in this inhumane, illegal crime in a civilised society.

It is important to remember that even well-treated dogs have ‘turned’ – and attacked, mauled, and killed people – and statistics for these types of attacks are rising year on year. Dogs that have been treated cruelly to deliberately make them vicious are a serious threat to everyone’s safety.

A massive raid in 2007 in Merseyside saw twenty-eight dogs rescued from this fighting culture, and dozens or arrests, brought about by the public confidentially contacting police and animal welfare organisations.

When to call the authorities:

  • Do you see any dogs bearing obvious scarring?
  • Are dogs, cats or other small animals in your neighbourhood disappearing?
  • Do you hear the sounds of animals in pain?
  • Neighbours acting suspiciously and keeping either dangerous dogs or large amounts of dogs?
  • Has a neighbour with a dangerous dog suddenly not own the dog any longer?
  • Suspect something however tenuous?

Scottish SPCA Chief Superintendent Mike Flynn said:

“We believe that any dog, regardless of its breed, can be made aggressive through an owner’s lack of training or through deliberate encouragement of bad behaviour.

“The breeding, trading and owning of a dog banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is not only extremely irresponsible and reckless but is also a criminal offence. Anyone caught doing so can expect to face prosecution and a court may order the destruction of the dog.

“We rely on members of the public contacting us as soon as they become aware of any information relating to dog fighting and urge them to contact our animal helpline on 03000 999 999. We can assure people that all calls are dealt with in strictest confidence and information can be left anonymously.”

Just to get the message home:  anyone with information or with any possible tips – however large or small about animal cruelty should call the SSPCA animal helpline on 03000 999 999.  You don’t have to give your details and any information just might stop animal cruelty.