Johansen.se

Sarah was in a comfortable job, working for an archaeology business before being diagnosed with cancer. Much of her 20-year career had left her with reliable employment rights in the civil service.

But having made a career change and moved to a small business, she was now reliant on statutory sick pay, just over £100 a week at the time. To avoid a catastrophic loss of income, she had to work from her hospital bed in between sessions of chemotherapy, before being forced to return to work just weeks after a bone marrow transplant.

This is a stark reminder of how anyone can have the fundamental dignity of life stripped away.

Many of the lowest-income families continue to face unacceptable levels of hardship. But these pressures have spilled into higher earners, too. Those out of work continue to face the greatest risk of being in poverty, but rising costs and largely stagnant incomes have meant that many more people are living on inadequate wages.

The government has rightly recognised the current settlement stores up huge problems. The Employment Rights Bill, laying out the details of the government’s “make work pay” policies, has been presented to parliament and has been described by Labour as “the biggest shake up-in workers’ rights in 30 years”.

But is it really a gamechanger? While the package undoubtedly contains reforms that will improve the working lives of millions, it’s worth considering how far these go in raising living standards.

Affording a decent life

Using the minimum income standard benchmark developed by the Centre for Research in Social Policy, two measures can be assessed: baseline hourly pay and reforms to statutory sick pay.

The work we do at the centre, where I am co-director, sets out what the public thinks everyone needs for a minimum standard of living in the UK today. Through hours of discussions and deliberations, groups decide what households need to live in dignity.

This is not just about being able to afford the basics – it is about being part of society, feeling included, connecting with others, and thriving rather than just surviving. We’ve updated this minimum income standard research every year since 2008, tracking what the UK public thinks is important to live a dignified life, and in September we published our latest update.

This research highlighted the strains on public services and what this can mean for the costs faced by households. For the first time, groups included £200 a year per adult to spend on private health services like counselling or physiotherapy. Accessing these services can be critical in avoiding long periods of time off work.

But costs like this potentially add to the financial pressures already facing millions of workers. Our analysis of household incomes shows that 64% of households without the income they need for a dignified life include at least one adult in work – that’s around 3.3 million working households.

The bill is intended to support low-paid workers, and while the proposed changes are a welcome and long-overdue step, the measures focused on income do not go as far as they could.

There are two key components. First, the current national living wage (NLW), payable to employees over 21, and what the prospective increase might look like in the next year. We know from our latest research that even where both parents are working full time on the NLW, a family with two children still fall around £140 a week short of the income they need for a minimum standard of living.

Read more:
How much income is needed to live well in the UK in 2023? At least £29,500 – much more than many households bring in

The Low Pay Commission, which advises the government on the NLW, estimates that it could increase from £11.44 to £12.10 in 2025 – while this increase would be welcome, it would still leave a significant shortfall for many working households.

The proposed reforms to statutory sick pay are another area needing proper scrutiny.

Earlier this year, I worked with cancer charities and the Centre for Progressive Change to look at the financial effect of the rate of statutory sick pay on workers. For a worker with a serious illness, this doesn’t do much to tackle their financial predicament. A person on an average salary taking two months off for cancer treatment, for example, would face a loss of around £3,500, plus any extra costs of travelling for treatment.

Nothing is less dignified than struggling back to work after a serious illness, because of money worries. The new deal should place more emphasis on helping millions of low-income workers at risk of losing even more money – and falling deeper into poverty as a result.

Statutory sick pay will be a right from the first day of employment.
Mr. Ashi. Sae Yang/Shutterstock

The new deal promises sick pay from day one of employment, a very welcome change, and also removes the previous lower earnings limit. But based on average illness periods and the current rate of £116.75 a week, this might only increase the incomes of sick workers by an average of £60-£120 in a given year.

That’s just a fraction of the income they would lose from not being able to work and still leaves the UK at the bottom of OECD league tables.

So, while it offers important reforms, what has been announced so far may not offer transformative change in terms of living standards.

There is a real opportunity to introduce changes that genuinely improve living standards for all. But to achieve this, we would need to see several things that are not properly laid out as yet.

First, the government should now move quickly to make sure that all workers aged over 18 are paid the same rate of NLW. Second, the Low Pay Commission should give real consideration to the cost of living in recommending the NLW rate in future years, building this into every annual increase.

Lastly, the government must detail how it will improve sick pay. It needs to lay out a transparent and evidence-based process to set this at a level that avoids creating further hardship for some of the most vulnerable workers in the UK. Läs mer…

The 2024 Nobel peace prize has been awarded to Nihon Hidankyo, a Japanese grassroots organisation created by survivors of the two US atomic bombs that were dropped on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The Norwegian Nobel committee recognised the organisation “for its efforts to achieve a world free of nuclear weapons and for demonstrating through witness testimony that nuclear weapons must never be used again”.

Discussion of the bombings, which killed more than 100,000 Japanese people, was largely a taboo in the immediate post-war period. This was, in part, thanks to American press censorship in occupied Japan.

But, in 1954, an American nuclear weapons test at Bikini Atoll in the Pacific Ocean produced such extensive radioactive fallout that it affected a Japanese fishing boat, the Lucky Dragon, causing one death from radiation poisoning.

The Lucky Dragon incident prompted many of the atomic bomb survivors, who are known as the hibakusha, to speak out about their experiences. And it was within this context that Nihon Hidankyo was created in 1956.

Since then, the hibakusha have played an immeasurable role in activism against nuclear weapons worldwide. Their testimony, the Nobel committee said, has “helped to generate and consolidate widespread opposition to nuclear weapons around the world”.

The US detonated an atomic bomb over the Japanese city of Hiroshima on August 6.
Shutterstock

In 1975, for example, a group of hibakusha that included Setsuko Thurlow, a member of Nihon Hidankyo and a globally renowned campaigner against nuclear weapons, organised an exhibition on the atomic bombings at the Toronto public library.

This helped trigger the development of a significant anti-nuclear movement in Canada. By the early 1980s, tens of thousands of Canadians regularly demonstrated against their government’s support for US nuclear weapons.

Then, in 1984, another survivor of the Hiroshima bombing called Takashi Morita co-founded a hibakusha organisation based in São Paulo to share their stories and raise awareness in Brazil of the devastating consequences of nuclear weapons.

Growing awareness of the experiences of the hibakusha throughout the 1980s inspired Europeans to protest against the deployment of new nuclear missiles in their countries. The phrase “no Euroshima!” became a popular slogan for the European peace movement.

Nihon Hidankyo’s efforts have focused not only on sharing the experiences of hibakusha, but also using them to gain support for the abolition of nuclear weapons worldwide.

The organisation has been a key supporter of the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. This treaty, which entered in force in 2017 and has been signed by 94 countries, prohibits states from participating in any nuclear weapon activities.

The International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons – in which Setsuko Thurlow is a leading figure – was awarded the Nobel peace prize in 2017 for its efforts to achieve this legally binding prohibition of such weapons.

Still work to do

Within Japan, Nihon Hidankyo has worked to challenge the government’s position on nuclear weapons. The Japanese government is supportive of American nuclear weapons, despite the horrors witnessed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and depends on them as a deterrent against its several nuclear-armed neighbours.

Successive Japanese governments have insisted on the importance of nuclear weapons for the country’s national security. But it remains a controversial stance for many in Japan. Every Japanese school child typically visits Hiroshima or Nagasaki to learn about the nightmarish consequences of nuclear weapons.

The decision to award the Nobel peace prize to Nihon Hidankyo is particularly timely. In 2023, the world’s nine nuclear powers spent over US$91 billion (£69.5 billion) on nuclear weapons. And since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russian president Vladimir Putin has repeatedly threatened to use his nuclear arsenal.

These concerning developments were acknowledged by the Nobel committee. When awarding Nihon Hidankyo with the prize, the committee said it was “alarming that today this taboo against the use of nuclear weapons is under pressure.”

The world’s nuclear powers – especially China and the US – are expanding and modernising their arsenals. North Korea is continuing to develop its nuclear weapons programme. And tensions are fast escalating between nuclear-armed Israel and near-nuclear Iran.

The threats posed by nuclear weapons are more apparent now than they have been at any time since the cold war. With barely 100,000 hibakusha alive today, it is imperative that we listen to their voices and their warnings. Läs mer…

Scientists and engineers are developing new ways to destroy per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) efficiently and sustainably. This class of chemicals is known as “forever chemicals” because PFAS persist and accumulate in the environment, animals and our bodies.

PFAS have been used for decades to make everything from firefighting foam, packaging, waterproof clothes and non-stick frying pan coatings. The chemistry that makes these compounds so useful makes them extremely difficult to destroy or fully remove from the environment.

PFAS are associated with numerous illnesses including cancers and infertility. The annual cost of inaction on resultant health issues is around €84 billion (£70 billion) for European countries.

Getting rid of the more than 14,000 different PFAS poses a huge and costly challenge. In England alone, remediation costs are predicted at up to £121 billion. There are many ways to remove PFAS from contaminated soil, groundwater or drinking water, but the key challenge is to destroy PFAS without contributing to pollution elsewhere.

Existing removal tech

Recommendations for safe PFAS concentrations in drinking water are in the range of nanograms per litre or parts per trillion – this is like counting grains of sand in an Olympic-sized swimming pool.

To treat contaminated water, PFAS need to be removed, usually by some kind of separation or concentration technique, before then being destroyed.

Separation techniques traditionally use tiny solid particles of porous activated carbon – this is like small grains of charcoal with tiny holes. The carbon is packed into a column that the PFAS-contaminated water flows through.

PFAS stick to the particles in the column and when no more PFAS can be collected the carbon solid is treated at high temperatures (900°C-950˚C) to remove the PFAS. Any PFAS not destroyed in this process must be exposed to even higher temperatures for complete destruction. Then the activated carbon can be reused to collect more PFAS.

Activated carbon is used to filter contaminated water and filter out some PFAS.
VVVproduct

Another way to collect PFAS could involve 3D-printed materials. Some researchers have added catalysts to activated carbon to collect and degrade PFAS simultaneously.

PFAS contamination can be separated from water using techniques such as filtration to create a PFAS concentrate or foam fractionation which bubbles air through contaminated water. Since PFAS act like soap (or a surfactant), they are attracted and stick to the surfaces of those bubbles which then rise to the top of the tank and can be removed.

Read more:
Here’s how to remove some persistent pollutants from your drinking water at home

Strong bonds, high heat

PFAS are fluorinated chemicals, which means the carbon atoms within their structure are bonded to fluorine atoms – those strong chemical bonds are hard to break, hence needing very high incineration temperatures.

Most PFAS destruction occurs via creation (and slower destruction) of smaller PFAS. The carbon-fluorine bonds in shorter chain PFAS are the most difficult to break down, so the creation of smaller, more persistent PFAS should be avoided.

Unsurprisingly, PFAS are resistant to methods that destroy other pollutants such as exposure to ozone (a powerful oxidising agent), bacteria or high temperatures.

Only temperatures above 1,400˚C will completely destroy PFAS but the UK only has four high-temperature incinerators, not all of which will accept PFAS-contaminated waste.

New solutions

More widely available, cost-effective and sustainable technologies to degrade PFAS are urgently needed. Many new solutions aim to work in ambient conditions (at room temperatures and pressures) to save energy. Innovations include microbial degradation whereby bacteria feed on PFAS pollution and degrade it. Energy input is low but microbial processes tend to produce different PFAS.

Our team uses high-frequency sound waves to destroy PFAS through what’s known as “ultrasonic degradation” or “sonolysis”. This completely degrades PFAS at room temperature so high energy inputs and pressures are not needed. Sonolysis can break down a range of contaminated materials, including used firefighting foam and liquid leachate from landfills.

When a contaminated liquid is treated with high-pitched sound waves (ultrasound), gas bubbles compress and expand rapidly, up to millions of times per second. The bubbles grow and then violently collapse in these pressure cycles, momentarily reaching temperatures hotter than the Sun and pressures around a thousand times higher than our atmosphere, breaking down PFAS.

Another method called “hydrodynamic cavitation” uses fast-moving water to create bubble cavities that works in a similar way.

Three other chemical destruction techniques that don’t use extreme heat or high pressures include electrolysis, photolysis and plasmas. Electrolysis can destroy PFAS using an electric current that travels via specialist electrodes.

Photolysis uses a catalyst that is powered by sunlight or other light sources, but the contaminated liquid has to be clear for the light to activate the catalyst.

Plasmas are like a soup of charged particles that drive difficult-to-achieve reactions such as PFAS destruction. Plasmas on or just beneath the surface of contaminated water are formed using high voltage electricity or electromagnetic energy. However, this technology is largely limited to laboratory research.

Whatever technology is used for the destruction of PFAS, the challenge is to ensure effective treatment for all PFAS types. Ideally, PFAS pollution should be prevented altogether. But even if PFAS production was stopped now, the legacy of more than 70 years of PFAS manufacturing and release has created a long-lasting challenge. Läs mer…

There was tension hanging in the air as I walked through Tunisia’s capital city, Tunis, in July, just months before the country’s latest presidential election. The conversations I had in cafes and markets confirmed people’s uncertainty and apprehension about the state of their country.

Tunisia was the location of an uprising against corruption, poverty and political repression in 2011 that ousted longtime autocrat Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. The uprising, which came to be known as the Jasmine Revolution, inspired a wave of pro-democracy protests throughout the Middle East and North Africa called the Arab spring.

But some Tunisian journalists, lawyers and members of non-governmental organisations have argued that the country has slowly returned to a dictatorship. Tunisia’s current president, Kais Saied, was elected democratically in 2019. However, since then he has suspended parliament and backed a referendum on a new constitution that has allowed him to rule by decree.

Shortly after the polls closed on Sunday, October 6, it became clear that Saied had again emerged victorious, securing a second term with more than 90% of the vote. His victory had been widely expected. Saied’s closest challenger, Ayachi Zammel, won 7% of the vote, but had been sentenced to 12 years in prison five days before the poll for allegedly falsifying documents.

Saied’s presidency has been controversial, and the slide back towards centralised control is a sharp contrast to the pluralistic democracy Tunisians had hoped for following the Arab spring. Yet for Saied’s supporters – of which there are many – this has been necessary in a country that has for years wrestled with political gridlock and economic stagnation.

The Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia forced out the country’s longtime dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in 2011.
Idealink Photography / Alamy Stock Photo

The Jasmine Revolution ultimately failed to deliver a stronger economy and a government free from corruption. Tunisia’s 2019 score of 43 out of 100 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index is, in fact, slightly higher than it scored in 2012.

Corruption remains a problem that affects every part of Tunisian society and is impeding economic growth and stability. Many Tunisians have expressed frustration over the past decade with widespread nepotism and favouritism, which have hurt efforts to address high unemployment and soaring public debt.

So, Saied’s move to control power and implement economic reforms, accompanied by promises to crack down on corrupt political elites, has given him some support among a population tired of the slow rate of change.

As one Tunisian told me during my visit: “We didn’t need more debates in parliament. We needed someone to act. And Saied acted.”

This is a view shared by others. In an interview with Al Monitor, a news website focusing on the Middle East, a server working in a cafe in the northern suburbs of Tunis described Saied as “modest and kind”, and said “he has put the country back on track”.

Falling support

However, in general, Saied’s support has waned since 2021. Living standards have fallen due to high inflation and the youth unemployment rate is on the rise.

Critics, both in Tunisia and elsewhere, have voiced concerns about Saied’s concentration of power. Amnesty International has denounced the “worrying decline in fundamental rights” under his government. And Saied’s main opponents in Sunday’s election, as well as many other hopefuls, were either imprisoned or left off the ballot.

Indeed, the election saw the lowest turnout in Tunisia since 2011. Tunisia’s election authority reported that only 27% of registered voters cast their vote, a significant drop from the 55% that turned out in 2019.

A Tunisian man holds a ballot at a polling station during the presidential election in Tunis, Tunisia, on October 6.
Mohamed Messara / EPA

The current economic challenges facing Tunisia also require immediate action. In 2022, Saied’s administration negotiated a US$1.9 billion (£1.45 billion) bailout loan with the International Monetary Fund as Tunisia’s economy grappled with severe inflation, rising public debt and a lack of essential goods.

However, the deal now hangs in the balance. The loan was contingent on Tunisia implementing punitive reforms aimed at stabilising the country’s economy. Saied has expressed reservations about these conditions, saying that such measures would increase poverty, fuel social unrest and compromise Tunisia’s sovereignty.

While celebrating his victory, Saied told state television that his reelection was “a continuation of the revolution”. “We will build and will cleanse the country of the corrupt, traitors and conspirators,” he said. During his victory speech, he then pleaded with his fellow Tunisians to work together for the common good.

As I left Tunisia in the summer, I couldn’t help but feel the country was standing at the edge of a precipice. Saied will need to honour the promises he has made to restore the country’s economy and political systems, or else his presidency could come to a premature end. Läs mer…

In 2021, Sister Nathalie Becquart became the first woman to vote at any Vatican meeting when Pope Francis appointed her undersecretary to the synod, a gathering of bishops whose second session opened on Oct. 2, 2024.

Becquart is, in the words of Catholic media, “the synod’s face and voice,” even “a synodal icon.” She describes “synodality” as “like having a coffee together” – encouraging many Catholics to hope that their church will reimagine itself in less hierarchical ways. With her appointment, Cardinal Mario Grech, the synod’s secretary-general, remarked, “A door has been opened.”

Grech did not mention it, but Catholic women have been knocking on this door for over a century. Becquart and the synod’s 53 other female participants, both lay and religious, follow a long line of Catholic women who have cogently, and often critically, analyzed church governance.

At the current synod, whose purpose is to address “communion, participation, and mission” in the church, women’s role is on the agenda. But Catholic women have historically found ways to speak to and about their church leadership, even when they have been excluded from its proceedings.

Pope Francis poses with a group of women before a session of the Synod of Bishops at the Vatican on Oct. 28, 2023.
AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino

Uninvited guests

In 1869, when Pope Pius IX convened the First Vatican Council, no one dreamed of inviting women, but they were nonetheless there.

Vatican I was the first churchwide meeting of bishops since the Reformation. Its most momentous – and controversial – result was the proclamation of papal infallibility, sealing the church’s view of itself as an absolute monarchy. Critics both within and outside the church condemned the assertion that the pope alone, without the counsel of bishops, could determine doctrine. Women who witnessed the council, especially those who published accounts of the event, were eloquent critics of this top-down church.

Many well-educated and well-connected laywomen traveled to Rome in 1869 to witness their church set its future direction. They hosted salons where bishops exchanged news in the evenings after council sessions. They corresponded with absent friends and were nodes in a network of Catholics who opposed infallibility.

German writer Charlotte von Leyden, who later became Charlotte, Lady Blennerhassett.
ullstein bild Dtl./Getty Images

When the German priest Ignaz von Döllinger wrote a devastating critique of infallibility from his study in Munich, he relied in part on information forwarded from Rome by his friend and protegée, 27-year-old Charlotte von Leyden. Outliving the council fathers of Vatican I, she got the last word in 1907, when she published the chapter on papal Rome for the landmark “Cambridge Modern History.”

The conservative Catholic press relentlessly mocked these women as misguided busybodies. Vatican I sidelined the laity of both sexes, but women who claimed a voice in church affairs seemed especially impertinent to the bishops who endorsed infallibility. Violating St. Paul’s injunction that women be silent in church, they defied clerical authority and the logic of a church that spoke with only one voice.

Change comes slowly to Vatican II

Vatican II began in 1962 much like Vatican I: an all-clerical, all-male assembly.

Women initially sought influence in similar ways as well. Every night the Belgian journalist Betsie Hollants made a pot of soup and held open house for the council fathers. Soup broth and red wine were cheap, she recalled, but they made for convivial gatherings that kept her informed about the council. Responding to women’s request to participate formally, however, one dismissive cardinal reportedly suggested that they should “try again at Vatican III or IV.”

As the council proceeded, the absence of women seemed increasingly incongruous. Douglas Horton, an American Protestant pastor invited as an observer, noted the “air of artificiality” of an assembly without women. By the second session in 1963, Mildred Horton and other non-Catholic observers’ wives could attend some events, but no Catholic women were present. When the Catholic press corps received Communion, a Swiss Guard physically prevented the only female journalist from approaching the altar.

Pope John XXIII had declared “aggiornamento” – bringing the church up to date – the order of the day, but these incidents made many wonder if aggiornamento was possible without women.

Sister Mary Luke Tobin, one of the few women auditors at Vatican II.
Courtesy of the Sisters of Loretto Heritage Center and Archives

Signs of change arrived at the fourth session in September 1964, when the new pope, Paul VI, appointed 23 women auditors: 10 religious and 13 lay women. They participated in preparatory sessions, especially those concerning the laity, where they were, in Paul’s words, “experts in life.”

No woman ever addressed the council fathers; their efforts to do so were rebuffed, but their presence in preliminary meetings was significant. In a discussion of marriage, for instance, Luz María Alvarez-Icaza – a Mexican woman who, with her husband, José, was an auditor – informed the assembled clerics that she was confident that their mothers had conceived them in acts of love, not animal lust. One of the most significant changes to emerge from Vatican II was the reassessment of marital sex. Whereas the church once viewed sex between husband and wife as a check on humanity’s essentially sinful nature, new teachings described it as a positive expression of love.

More than ‘flowers and light’

The documents produced by Vatican II say relatively little about women, which was, arguably, a victory for female auditors. Many of them mistrusted the council fathers’ view of women as a separate, even foreign, species.

The Australian theologian Rosemary Goldie, listening to the eminent French theologian Yves Congar’s extravagant descriptions of women’s role, told him, “You can cut the references to women as flowers and light. … We don’t need any of that grandiose stuff. … All we want is to be treated as full human beings.”

“Women are not ‘a category’ in the church,” Sister Mary Luke Tobin, an American, maintained: “Men and women are the church.”

Thanks to these 23 “mothers of the council,” Vatican II’s teachings on women are, for the most part, incorporated into its larger treatment of human dignity, not segregated into separate chapters on women’s nature.

Possibilities today

Advocates for women’s ordination protest on Oct. 4, 2024, in front of the Vatican, where Pope Francis is holding the Synod of Bishops.
AP Photo/Andrew Medichini

How much will it matter that 54 voting women have replaced the hostesses, writers and auditors of Vatican I and Vatican II? We probably won’t know for a long time – decades at least.

Revolution is unlikely. Many Catholics support allowing women to serve as deacons – ministers who can perform some, but not all, of the priest’s duties. That possibility, however, is off the synod table, handed to a commission for further study. The ordination of women as priests seems impossibly distant.

It could be, however, that 54 female voices teach their church how to speak of and to women as equals. Or it may be that those voices disappear amid the cacophony of nearly 400 participants. As Pope Francis reminds both conservatives and progressives, the synod is not a parliament. Votes are counted, but as a step toward discernment of truth, not a moment of decision. Läs mer…

Sue Gray has resigned as the chief of staff to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer. This resignation came alongside the drip drip of information about donations to key members of the inner circle of the Labour government, including to Starmer himself.

Using material from the British official record, broadly defined as the sum total of material created as a result of the operations of the British state, we can trace Gray’s career to see both why she was chosen to work for Starmer and why she ended up having to quit so soon. Her time in government has coincided with some key moments in recent British political history and changes at the top of the British state.

Prior to more high-profile roles, Gray worked in the Department for Transport, the Department of Health and the Department for Work and Pensions. During a career break, she was also a publican in Northern Ireland.

Gray first worked for the Cabinet Office in the late 1990s, and worked as director general for propriety and ethics there for six years from 2012. From 2018 to 2021 she went on secondment to become the permanent secretary at the Northern Ireland Executive’s Department of Finance. In May 2021 Gray moved back to the Cabinet Office to become permanent secretary with responsibility for the Union and Constitution Directorate.

The House of Commons Committee of Privileges has released new images of parties in Downing Street during lockdowns.
The House of Commons Committee of Privileges

Following media reporting on gatherings held at the department of education and 10 Downing Street that may have contravened COVID-19 regulations in early December 2021, an investigation was launched.

This was initially led by cabinet secretary Simon Case but he soon recused himself after being caught up in the allegations himself. It was Gray who was tasked to take over what became known as the partygate investigation.

Partygate report and Johnson resignation

Gray first published an update on her work looking into partygate in January 2022, followed by a full report in May of that year.

Among other things, she found that at least some of the gatherings amounted to “a serious failure to observe not just the high standards expected of those working at the heart of Government but also of the standards expected of the entire British population at the time”. She wrote that “failures of leadership and judgment by different parts of No 10 and the Cabinet Office” had occurred.

Less than two weeks after Gray’s final report was published, Prime Minister Boris Johnson survived a vote of no confidence, although 148 Conservative MPs (41%) voted against him. Many MPs cited Johnson’s lack of repentance as justification for their votes against him. By July, Johnson had been convinced to resign when dozens of members of his government walked out en masse during the course of one 24-hour period.

Joining and leaving Labour

In March 2023, Gray resigned from the civil service. She had been recruited by the opposition to prepare Labour for government when it started to look like the party could really take power.

However, after seeking legal advice from the advisory committee on business appointments, she took six months out to ensure a “clear break” between working for the civil service and a political party.

Nevertheless, Gray’s decision to change roles led a government investigation to accuse her of breaching the civil service code. Labour rejected this claim and accused the government of “wasting time on this Mickey Mouse nonsense”.

As Labour entered government in early July, Gray transitioned to being chief of staff for Starmer. However, just over two months later, details of how much Gray was being paid were leaked to the BBC.

At £170,000, Gray’s salary was £3,000 higher than Starmer’s. An interesting question here is why this is actually a problem. Perhaps some were unhappy about the difference between the salary of Gray and their own salary. Or maybe the story that she earned more than the prime minister was just too tempting to leak looking to cause trouble for other reasons.

This story broke as details about how Starmer and others in the central Labour team had taken gifts and hospitality from party donors also emerged. As happened towards the end of the Conservative period in power in recent years, multiple stories and scandals, including the details about Gray’s salary, started to been seen as part of a single narrative.

It may also be the case that, after 14 years out of government, those at the top of the Labour party were unprepared for the greater level of scrutiny that comes with being in power.

On October 6, two-and-a-half weeks after details of her salary were leaked, Gray resigned. In her resignation statement, Gray said: “It has become clear to me that intense commentary around my position risked becoming a distraction to the government’s vital work of change.”

Beyond the salary story, concerns had also been raised about power and decision-making being concentrated in Gray’s hands. Her case also raises questions about how possible it is to smoothly transition from the civil service to a political post.

Gray has now moved into the newly created, and seemingly ill-defined, role of “envoy for the regions and nations”. This will include work on the new Council of Nations and Regions, the body Starmer has set up to focus on delivering more equitable devolution.

It’s not clear whether this new role is a way of massaging Gray out of frontline roles permanently, if it’s a role with real teeth that will allow Gray the ability to impact events in a way she has in the past, or a placeholder until another prominent position more suited to her skills is available. For the latter to be possible though, the political winds will need to change. Läs mer…

Ratan Tata, who has died at the age of 86, was a giant of global industry, whose interests included cars, steel, hotels, travel and tea. But he was also hailed as a visionary whose work went far beyond the business world, through his company’s commitment to social causes.

As the head of Tata Group, an Indian business empire founded over 150 years ago, Tata became deeply intertwined with India’s corporate growth and societal development. And he was instrumental in expanding the Tata’s global presence.

One of his most notable achievements was buying the British tea company Tetley for £271 million in 2000, making Tata one of the largest tea companies in the world.

It was a bold step towards transforming the Tata group from an Indian powerhouse into a global player. So too was the acquisition of Jaguar Land Rover in 2008.

Despite the motoring company’s financial struggles at the time, Tata saw potential in the British brand. He oversaw significant investment in technology and design, and his gamble paid off. New models gained global recognition and Tata Motors became a major force in motoring.

Yet another defining moment in Ratan Tata’s leadership was the US$12 billion (£9.2 billion) purchase of Corus Steel in 2007, one of the largest takeovers in Indian corporate history.

Although the deal presented challenges, including fluctuating steel prices and economic downturns, it underscored Ratan Tata’s strategic vision of expanding the company’s global footprint – and his ability to see beyond short-term gains and focus on long-term growth for the group.

Not all of his plans worked out of course. He was heavily involved in the creation of the Tata Nano in 2008, which was supposed to be a car that was an affordable and safer alternative to two-wheeled vehicles.

Billed as the “world’s cheapest car”, it cost just over US$2,000. But the Nano probably deserved better marketing and less hype, and was discontinued in 2019. Yet it remains a symbol of the company’s innovative spirit – and Ratan Tata’s determination to improve the everyday lives of Indians.

Philanthropy

That vision was also clear in the ethical business practices that mean much of the Tata group’s profits are used to support philanthropic work in education, healthcare and scientific research.

Ratan Tata hands over the keys of the first ever Tata Nano in July 2009.
EPA/STR

There are several Tata research centres in India, including the Tata Institute of Social Sciences. Tata Trusts have also contributed to the likes of Harvard Business School and the London School of Economics.

His dedication to philanthropy was also displayed in moments of crisis, particularly after the 2008 Mumbai attacks which targeted the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel, owned by the Tata Group. Ratan Tata later ensured that all affected employees and guests were provided with medical care and financial compensation.

And when COVID changed the world, Tata Steel announced that it would continue paying salaries and medical benefits to the families of Indian employees who died from the virus, until the deceased worker would have turned 60.

Ratan Tata’s compassionate response to crises, providing aid during natural disasters and supporting communities in need, further solidified his reputation as an industrialist who placed people’s wellbeing at the core of his business.

Ratan Tata’s legacy as a “people’s industrialist” is cemented by his deep sense of responsibility toward improving the lives of ordinary people. “I would like to be remembered as someone who made a difference; nothing more, nothing less,” he once said.

Many Indians will remember him as something more. His philanthropy and inclusive approach to business have made a lasting and positive impact on India. And his ethical leadership, long-term vision, and deep compassion for others has cemented his reputation as a man who worked not just for profits, but for the betterment of society as a whole. Läs mer…

Humans seem to have been adapted to the last ice age in similar ways to wolves and bears, according to our recent study, challenging longstanding theories about how and where our ancestors lived during this glacial period.

Previous studies have supported the view of most archaeologists that modern humans retreated into southern Europe during the height of the last ice age and expanded during the later increase in global temperatures. But our study is the first to use genetic data to show that at least some humans stayed in central Europe, unlike many other animals and despite our species having evolved in the much warmer climate of Africa.

Scientists have known since the 19th century that the distributions of animals and plants across the world may fluctuate with the climate. But the climate crisis has made it more important than ever to understand these fluctuations.

Populations of the same species that live in different places often have different genetics to each other. More recently scientists have studied how climate change has altered the distribution of these genetically distinct populations of species.

Most of the studies in this field focus on individual species of animal or plant. They have shown that many species, including humans, expanded their geographical ranges since the height of the last ice age, approximately 20,000 years ago.

At this time, European ice sheets reached Denmark and south Wales. Europe was cold but mostly unglaciated, probably much like Alaska or Siberia today.

Our team’s new study, led by Oxala García-Rodríguez at Bournemouth University, took a different approach and reviewed the genetic history of 23 common mammals in Europe. In addition to humans, these included rodents such as bank voles and red squirrels, insectivores like shrews and hedgehogs, ungulates like red deer and wild boar, and carnivores like brown bears and weasels.

An important metric in our study was where the greatest diversity is today across Europe. This is because areas of high genetic variation are likely to be the areas of longest occupation by species.

These areas, known as refugia, are locations where species retreated to survive during periods when environmental conditions were unfavourable elsewhere. For the mammals we studied, these refugia would have been occupied since the height of the last glaciation, at least. These refugia were probably the warmest areas or places where it was easiest for the animals to find food.

The genetic patterns we found include cases where some mammals (such as red foxes and roe deer) were restricted to glacial refugia in southern areas such as Iberia and Italy, and that they expanded from these areas as global temperatures warmed following the ice age. Other mammals (such as beavers and lynx) expanded from glacial refugia to the east of Europe only to spread west.

Species such as pygmy shrew and common vole had been restricted to sheltered areas such as deep valleys in northern Europe, small enclaves in otherwise inhospitable glacial landscapes. These patterns have previously been documented by other scientists.

But we found a fourth pattern. Our study indicated some species (such as brown bears and wolves) were already widely distributed across Europe during the height of the last glaciation with either no discernible refugia or with refugia both to the north and south.

Humans seem to have followed the same distribution pattern as brown bears in the last ice age.
Volodymyr Burdiak/Shutterstock

This pattern includes Homo sapiens too. Neanderthals had already been extinct for around 20,000 years by this point.

It’s not clear why ancient humans and other animals in this group lived in this seemingly harsh climate rather than explore more hospitable places. But they seemed able to tolerate the ice age conditions while other animals withdrew to refugia.

Perhaps most important of all is that among the species that seem to conform to this pattern, where little or no geographical contraction in population took place at the height of the last ice age, are modern humans. It is particularly surprising that humans are in this group as our ancestors originated in Africa and it may seem unlikely that they were resilient to cold climates.

It is unclear whether these humans relied on ecological adaptation, for example the fact that they were omnivorous meant they could eat many different things, or whether they survived due to technology. For instance, it is well established that humans had clothing, built dwellings and controlled fire during the cold conditions of the last ice age.

This new pattern, and the inclusion of humans within it, could cause rethink of climate change and biogeography among scientists, especially for those studying human distribution changes. It could mean that some areas may be habitable for longer than expected as the climate changes. Läs mer…

Ticks are responsible for spreading over 25 human and animal diseases. While you may be familiar with some of these – such as Lyme disease – there are many others you’ve probably never heard of, including some that have been discovered only in the past few years, such as wetland virus.

In a new case study, researchers in China have published details about wetland virus. It was first identified in 2019, after a patient bitten by a tick while visiting a wetland park in Inner Mongolia was admitted to hospital with symptoms of fever, headache and vomiting that progressed to multiple organ dysfunction.

To understand the cause of the patient’s illness, the researchers sequenced the genetic material extracted from a blood sample to find the virus responsible for the disease. They found a previously unknown virus – a close relative of other tick-transmitted viruses, including the dangerous Crimean–Congo haemorrhagic fever virus, which has a 30% mortality rate. Wetland virus is a member of the orthonairovirus genus in the Nairoviridae family.

The research team then screened other patients from across north-eastern China who had developed an acute fever within one month of a tick bite. This led to them identifying another 17 cases of wetland virus infection – confirming the virus was well established in the region.

Next, the team carried out a large-scale ecological survey to understand the source of wetland virus. They looked at ticks, as well as livestock and wild animals living in the region, as animals often play an important role in the spread of tick-borne pathogens. They found some sheep, pigs and horses were infected, suggesting livestock could be reservoirs for wetland virus.

So far, wetland virus has only been found in north-eastern China. However, the tick species implicated in transmitting it has a much wider distribution across Europe and Asia, so it’s likely the virus is far more widespread. Surveys of ticks and livestock, and even patients with unexplained fever, elsewhere in Asia and in Europe could confirm this.

Tick-borne diseases

So why does it seem like we are finding a lot of new tick-borne diseases at the moment?

First, many tick-borne diseases have non-specific symptoms such as fever, headaches and fatigue, making them easily mistaken for other common illnesses. Furthermore, tick-borne diseases are not contagious, so do not occur in dramatic epidemics like COVID or flu.

Taken together, these characteristics make spotting a tick-borne disease for the first time very difficult. However, new genetic sequencing techniques, including the one used to identify the wetland virus, has made spotting new pathogens easier.

Second, even if a new pathogen is detected in a patient, linking it to ticks is not always straightforward. Many people get bitten by ticks without knowing.

Unfed ticks are small and often attach to our skin in places that are hard to check, like the backs of our legs. Also, we don’t “feel” a tick bite in the same way as you would, say, a mosquito bite. So many patients with a tick-borne disease don’t have any recollection of being bitten.

Many people don’t realise they’ve been bitten by a tick.
Ocskay Mark/ Shutterstock

Plus, for many tick-borne diseases, the onset of symptoms can be delayed, so linking them with a tick bite is not an obvious step. For instance, Lyme disease symptoms typically show up three to ten weeks after a bite.

Third, medical awareness of tick-borne diseases – particularly those that are emerging or rare – is patchy and, in many parts of the world, the resources needed to diagnose them often just aren’t there.

These shortfalls reflect the fact that most tick-borne pathogens have only been described relatively recently. Even the cause of Lyme disease wasn’t understood until the early 1980s. So scientific and medical understanding of tick-borne illnesses is still nowhere near as well established as it is for many other infectious diseases.

These factors make it difficult to determine if tick-borne illnesses are really on the rise, or whether we just need to improve surveillance and diagnosis.

In addition to discovering new tick-borne diseases, we’re also seeing the distribution of established tick-borne diseases changing. There are several reasons why this is happening, among which is climate change.

Tick activity is strongly affected by temperature and humidity, so changes in climate can affect when ticks are active and create conditions that allow ticks to thrive in areas that weren’t previously suitable for them.

This may be happening with tick-borne encephalitis virus. This virus has historically only been seen in parts of Asia and central and eastern Europe, but cases have recently been reported in the Netherlands and the UK, which is concerning given we’d previously assumed that the UK’s climate was unsuitable for this virus.

In temperate parts of the northern hemisphere, Lyme disease remains by far the most common tick-borne disease. However, other diseases are increasingly being reported. Human anaplasmosis is becoming more common in the US, and cases of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever are on the rise in southern and eastern Europe.

To protect yourself from tick-borne diseases, you should wear long trousers and use repellent sprays when hiking and camping in grassy and wooded areas. Thoroughly check yourself (and your dog) for ticks when you get home.

If you are bitten, as soon as possible remove the tick carefully to avoid leaving the tick’s mouth parts stuck in your skin. If you develop a rash, fever or flu-like symptoms, go to your GP and tell them about the bite. Läs mer…