While France features a 6 am-6 pm curfew for the past few weeks to contain the widespread of the deadly coronavirus within the country, the cases have did not decrease.
Now, with the new variant of coronavirus from the united kingdom , the cases are being expected to ascertain another spike.
The scientific committee advising the govt of France has warned that another massive spike is predicted very soon, and therefore the experts believe the united kingdom variant cases can rise by 50 percent during a week.
Even though the proportion is low, as of now, the doctors expect the united kingdom variant to become more dominant and spread widely by the first weeks of March at max.
After this warning, the France government has, reportedly, also considered a 3rd lockdown within the country, almost like the united kingdom , Ireland, and Portugal.
This has also increased checking for coronavirus on travelers entering the country through international borders. There has been a rise within the elderly patients of COVID-19.
However, experts have also raised concern that there’s an enormous possibility that a lot of elderly are staying home and ying of coronavirus reception , instead of coming to hospitals, resulting in a discrepancy in official figures.
While the amount of coronavirus cases has been decreasing within the UK, an equivalent isn’t being observed for the poorer sections of the country.
According to the analysis of state data, the amount of coronavirus cases per 100,000 people remained higher within the last week of January within the poorer sections of the country instead of the rich ones.
This data, which has been verified by the House of Commons library and compiled by Labour from official statistics, has raised concerns. Scientists believe that when the lockdown ends if this trend continues and a few areas have higher infection rates than others then the virus can spread and lead the country back to face one.
In several areas, the decline in cases was 9 per cent to 14 per cent, whereas the declining percentage was much higher (such as 70 per cent) in other well-off areas like Oxford West and Abingdon constituency within the last week of January.
Some experts believe this gap shows the incompetence of the Boris Johnson-led government which has allegedly did not help the low-income groups of the country.
“Given we’re grappling with new, more infectious variants, a number of which can partially evade vaccines, it’s now more urgent than ever this is often fixed,” Jonathan Ashworth, Labour’s shadow health secretary said. “Without decent financial help, transmission chains won’t be broken these areas. People will remain in danger of illness while Boris Johnson’s promise to ‘level up’ lies in tatters.”
Scientists have also warned the increase within the danger level if people communicate from the better-off areas to those poorer regions that are in peril of upper infection rates.
More than 100 writers and students — including Chomsky , J.K. Rowling and Malcolm Gladwell — have signed a public letter decrying cancel culture and therefore the rising “intolerance of opposing views.”
Published in Harper’s Magazine on Tuesday, the letter argued that the recent “needed reckoning” on racial and social justice has also “intensified a replacement set of ethical attitudes and political commitments” that tend to stifle the norms of debate and tolerating differences.
“The free exchange of data and concepts , the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted,” the letter states.
It warns that censorship, while something “we have come to expect this on the novel right,” is additionally spreading more widely on the left through “an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and therefore the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues during a blinding moral certainty.”
“The democratic inclusion we would like are often achieved as long as we speak out against the intolerant climate that has set in on all sides.”
The letter doesn’t cite specific examples but notes that “institutional leaders, during a spirit of panicked control , are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments rather than considered reforms.”
“Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class…,” it reads.
“This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the foremost vital causes of our time,” the letter adds. “The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive government or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those that lack power and makes everyone less capable of democratic participation.”
Some of the 150 notable figures who signed on include ny Times op-ed contributors David Brooks and Bari Weiss, Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias and novelists Rushdie and Margaret Atwood.
The letter sparked backlash on social media from pundits and journalists on each side of the aisle, with some saying it had been whiny or self-pitying, remarking that a lot of of these who signed it have access to large platforms.
Others called the letter hypocritical, noting that a number of the signees took no issue when “cancel culture” came for conservatives.
Hollywood star Johnny Depp accused his ex-wife Amber Heard of lying about him beating her up, and told London`s supreme court on Tuesday that she had actually struck him.
Depp, the 57-year-old star of the ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ films, is suing The Sun`s publisher, News Group Newspapers, and its executive editor, Dan Wootton, for libel over a piece of writing Wootton wrote in April 2018 calling him a “wife beater”.
The paper`s lawyers said they might show the claim was true which he had beaten actress Heard, causing her to fear for her life, during violent rages brought on by alcohol or drugs, sometimes when he had falsely accused her of infidelity.
“For the avoidance of any doubt, I even have never abused Ms Heard, or, indeed, the other woman, in my life,” Depp said during a witness statement during which he characterised his ex-wife as a calculating, emotionally dishonest narcissist.
Wearing a dark suit and glasses and speaking during a deep clear tone, Depp gave evidence at the start of the case at London`s supreme court . Heard, who arrived wearing a red scarf tied round her face, is additionally thanks to give evidence.
In a written statement outlining Depp`s case, his lawyer David Sherborne said Heard had first aired the abuse allegations in May 2016, saying it had been hard to consider “more extreme or violent” claims of abuse than she would make during the trial.
“The Claimants position is clear; Ms Heards allegations are complete lies,” Sherborne said. “The Claimant wasn’t violent towards Ms Heard, it had been she who was violent to him.”
In papers submitted to the court, Depp`s team also said Heard had begun an affair with Tesla chief executive Elon Musk in early 2015 shortly after that they had got married and had engaged in a minimum of one extra-marital relationship together with her co-stars, with actor James Franco named.
Appearing within the witness stand , American Depp said he was the victim of attacks from his ex-wife and had himself sought to avoid confrontation.
“I would attempt to attend my very own corner because it were,” he said. Asked about one argument, Depp said: “It escalated and it got physical … Miss Heard struck me.”
The couple met on the set of the 2011 film ‘The Rum Diary’ and married in February 2015. Heard filed for divorce after 15 months, and days later obtained a restraining order against Depp. Their divorce was finalised in 2017 when the restraining order was dismissed.
Cross-examined by lawyer Sasha Wass, Depp agreed he had taken “every drug known to man” by the age of 14 and said he had a difficult childhood and struggled to return to terms along with his fame and success.
“Even once I speak my very own name it sounds foreign to me,” he said.
The court was shown mobile footage taken by Heard which showed an angry Depp slamming kitchen cupboard doors and pouring himself a “mega” glass of wine.
“I can only say i used to be upset, very upset,” he said, adding it had been not a pleasing video to observe .
Wass said he would become an alternate persona which he himself described as “the monster”, which was brought on by anger, jealousy or drugs.
He said “the monster” Heard mentioned was when he yelled back at her in arguments.
“It would become a screaming match which was the monster,” he said. “It`s not Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.”
Depp denied Wass`s suggestion that he had a “nasty, angry side”.
Depp is additionally being sued by a crewman from one among his films in 2018 who accused him of punching him twice within the ribs, the court heard.
Wass recounted a press release from actress Ellen Barkin, who said Depp had thrown a bottle of wine across a bedroom on one occasion and had got jealous and angry.
“Untrue,” Depp replied, saying Barkin held a grudge. “I don’t have an anger management problem.”
In his witness statement, Depp said Heard had thrown a vodka bottle at him, severing his finger off, which his ex-wife or one among her friends had defecated in their bed.
The case is about to last for 3 weeks, the judge, Andrew Nicol, said. Also thanks to give evidence via videolink are Vanessa Paradis, Depp`s former partner, and actress Winona Ryder.
British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab rejected on Tuesday China’s accusation that Britain had indulged in “gross interference” over Beijing’s imposition of latest security legislation in Hong Kong .
“This isn’t a gross interference in domestic affairs,” Raab told Reuters in an interview.
“It’s a matter of trust and much of nations round the world are asking this question: does China live up to its international obligations?” Earlier on Monday, China’s ambassador to London accused Britain of creating unwarranted accusations about the new security legislation in Hong Kong which he said could damage future Chinese investment.
“The UK government keeps making irresponsible remarks on Hong Kong affairs,” Ambassador Liu Xiaoming told reporters within the strongest rebuke Beijing has issued to London since Britain criticised the safety law.
On Britain’s offer to offer British National Overseas (BNO) passport-holders in Hong Kong a path to British citizenship, he said: “This move constitutes gross interference in China’s internal affairs.” Britain has said that China’s imposition of a security law on Hong Kong was a “clear and serious” violation of the 1984 Joint Declaration which London would offer around 3 million residents of the previous colony a path to British citizenship.
Critics of the law have slammed the shortage of transparency around it before its publication and therefore the speed at which it had been pushed through. Beijing unveiled details of the legislation late on June 30 and therefore the law came into effect the subsequent day, sparking protests.
The new law punishes crimes of secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces with up to life in prison. it’ll also see mainland security agencies in Hong Kong for the primary time and allows extradition to the mainland for trial in courts controlled by the Communist Party .
Hong Kong’s government has repeatedly said the safety law won’t affect freedom of speech and other rights within the city.
A clothing factory named Jaswal Fashions based within the eastern England city of Leicester faces a contemporary slavery investigation after an undercover reporter alleged sweatshop-like conditions and below wage payments to its workers, many of them from India.
According to ‘The Sunday Times’, its undercover reporter found that workers were being paid as little as 3.50 pounds an hour as against the UK’s legal wage of 8.72 pounds an hour and was also operating last week during the localised coronavirus lockdown imposed on the town .
UK Home Secretary Priti Patel described the allegations as “truly appalling” and commended the undercover investigation for its role in “uncovering such abhorrent practices”.
“I won’t tolerate sick criminals forcing innocent people into slave labour and a lifetime of exploitation,” said Patel.
“Let this be a warning to those that are exploiting people in sweatshops like these for his or her own commercial gain. this is often just the beginning . What you’re doing is against the law , it’ll not be tolerated and that we are coming after you,” she said.
Last week, the senior Cabinet minister had directed the UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) to research modern slavery allegations in Leicester’s clothing factories after alarm was raised that they were a key source of the spike in coronavirus infections within the region, which led to England’s first localised COVID-19 lockdown for the town .
“Within the previous couple of days NCA officers, along side Leicestershire police and other partner agencies, attended variety of business premises within the Leicester area to assess concerns of recent slavery and human trafficking,” the NCA said, which is looking into the undercover reports.
The UK’s Modern Slavery Act was passed in 2015, making it a criminal offense to take advantage of labour and not pay the wage .
The newspaper’s undercover reporter spent two days at Jaswal Fashions, a factory which supplies garments to at least one of Britain’s fastest-growing online retailer Boohoo, which owns labels like Nasty Gal, PrettyLittleThing, MissPap, BoohooMAN, Karen Millen and Coast. A statement from Nasty Gal said the corporate would investigate the newspaper’s claims, but insisted that Jaswal Fashions wasn’t a “direct supplier”.
“Nasty Gal doesn’t allow any of its suppliers to pay but the wage and features a zero-tolerance approach to incidences of recent slavery,” said Nasty Gal during a statement.
“We have terminated relationships with suppliers where evidence of non-compliance with our strict code of conduct is found. we’ll take immediate steps to completely investigate the allegations raised and if the allegations are substantiated we’ll make sure that our suppliers immediately cease working with Jaswal Fashions,” it added.
The boxes packed at the factory displayed the name Morefray Limited, another Leicester-based clothing manufacturer. The newspaper said that the person who was identified because the boss of the factory refused to answer questions intimately , but said: “We have legit staff.”
The campaign group Labour Behind the Label alleged recently that factories in Leicester making Boohoo garments had put staff in danger of contracting COVID-19, by pressuring them to figure without proper personal protective equipment (PPE) or social distancing.
“Emerging evidence indicates that conditions in Leicester’s factories, primarily producing for Boohoo, are putting workers in danger of COVID-19 infections and fatalities as some factories have remained open for production during the lockdown, whilst others are now re-opening,” the group claimed in its report.
The allegations are denied by Boohoo, which said it uses about 150 factories in Leicester, employing 50 people each on the average . Company CEO John Lyttle told the newspaper that he had “personally written to all or any the factories”, outlining company standards and what they have to try to to in terms of following the “government guidelines”.
Inquests are to be held into the deaths of 4 former patients of a rogue breast surgeon who is serving a 20-year jail sentence.
Consultant Ian Paterson, who was employed by the guts of England NHS foundation trust and also practised within the independent sector, was convicted in 2017 of 17 counts of wounding with intent and three counts of unlawful wounding.
He was jailed at Nottingham crown court for 15 years, and therefore the court of appeal increased his sentence to a 20-year term.
A statement issued on behalf of the senior coroner for Birmingham and Solihull, Louise Hunt, and therefore the area coroner, Emma Brown, said inquests into the deaths of 4 patients would open next Monday.
The statement said the coroners had been completing preliminary investigations under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 “to identify whether there’s reason to suspect that any former patients of Mr Paterson have died an unnatural death as a results of any of the care they received.
“Following preliminary investigations, the senior and area coroner believe there’s evidence to possess reason to suspect that a number of those deaths could also be unnatural.
“In accordance with the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, inquests will now be opened in reference to four former patients of Mr Paterson.”
Preliminary investigations also are ongoing into the deaths of other patients of Paterson, 62, and it’s anticipated that further inquests are going to be opened in due course.
West Midlands police asked Birmingham and Solihull coroner’s office to research variety of deaths of carcinoma patients Paterson had treated.
An independent inquiry which released its findings in February this year said Paterson was ready to continue performing unnecessary operations for years under a dysfunctional healthcare system that failed patients.
The Paterson inquiry, launched in May 2018, published 15 recommendations after hearing 177 first-hand accounts from the surgeon’s patients.
Among the recommendations, it urged the NHS trust that employed Paterson and personal health firm Spire Healthcare to see that each one of over 11,000 patients he treated had been recalled.
The inquiry chairman, the Rt Rev Graham James, a former Bishop of Norwich, said the NHS and independent providers had let patients down over a few years and there had been a culture of avoidance and denial.
He said there have been missed opportunities to prevent Paterson, and described the failure to suspend him in 2003, when an NHS colleague first raised concerns, as inexplicable.
Linda Millband, the national clinical negligence lead at Thompsons Solicitors who led the team taking action on behalf of 650 of Paterson’s former patients, said: “This is yet one more twist within the terrible story of Ian Paterson. This has been a horrific tale from start to end , and it seems as if, for the families, the nightmare isn’t over yet.
“It is completely essential that we get to the reality , so I welcome the coroner’s inquests into the deaths. My heart goes bent the families who are affected, and who now need to face yet more upheaval while they await answers.”
In recent days, the BBC’s retelling of the 2018 Salisbury poisoning has gripped many British viewers, reminding us of the continued threat from Russian state and non-state actors.
This despicable act undermined UK-Russia relations like no other event in recent history. Russia has continued to deny any culpability despite the overwhelming evidence. For me, this poisoning symbolises the ever-present threat of Russia’s efforts to destabilise the united kingdom and European Union .
As foreign secretary at the time of Vladimir Putin’s Delaware visit to the united kingdom in 2003, i used to be strongly in favour of introduction a replacement era of UK-Russia cooperation. Powell , former US secretary of state, wont to say that we must practice progressive realism when it involves handling Russia. that is still my view. Russia continues to be a crucial international player, within the UN Security Council et al. , and can’t be wished away. It feels burnt by its pre-invasion cooperation over Iraq, and in respect of the west’s air campaign against Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. It continues to cooperate with the united kingdom , France and Germany over the Iran nuclear deal. However, despite high spending on its military, it’s no match for the US, which spends 12 times the maximum amount , nor China, which spends fourfold its budget. Russia’s population is declining, and its GDP per head is simply 50th within the world. It feels isolated, surrounded by potentially hostile forces, and weak.
Human rights lawyers have launched a scathing attack on the house Office for failing to grant asylum to an 11-year-old girl found by judges to be at high risk of female genital mutilation if faraway from Britain.
The girl, who is flourishing at college and only speaks English, was delivered to the united kingdom in 2012 by her mother, herself a victim of what’s referred to as type 3 FGM whose two sisters died after being cut in their native Sudan.
Charlotte Proudman, a barrister on the mother’s legal team, has accused the house Office of hypocrisy in digging its heels in over the case and says its unwillingness to guard the girl makes a mockery of FGM protection orders, designed to prevent those in danger being taken abroad.
Her comments come after Priti Patel, the house secretary, mounted a costly legal challenge round the family court’s role in risk assessing the girl, which was dismissed during a landmark case at the court of appeal on 15 June.
Proudman, who specialises in cases of gender-based violence, said: “It is appalling and shameful the house secretary is wasting taxpayers’ money to attain points around policy yet amid the political jostling is ready to risk the effective torture of this girl. “With one hand the department is pursuing FGM prosecutions in Britain. With the opposite it’s sending girls abroad to urge cut, just because they’re not British.”
The mother’s claim for asylum was rejected after officials deemed she lacked credibility. But it later transpired through domestic relations court proceedings she was a reliable – albeit highly traumatised – witness.
Proudman said: “This woman is that the most vulnerable client I’ve seen during a decade. regardless of her assessment, her child shouldn’t be punished for her immigration status. I’m deeply concerned the house Office is making unsafe decisions leaving children in danger of harm or maybe death.”
The single mother, who brought her daughter to Britain to guard her from FGM, exhausted her appeal rights in 2018 and was given notice of the family’s removal to Bahrain where they lived before coming to the united kingdom .
The day before she was thanks to board a plane, Suffolk administration obtained an FGM protection order, preventing the girl’s departure.
Court documents explain the family were likely to be directed from Bahrain, where their citizenship has expired, back to Sudan. they’re from North Kordofan state where the prevalence of FGM is 97.7%. Three of the girl’s cousins are known to possess been cut.
After a series of hearings, Justice Newton concluded: “It is difficult to consider a more serious case where the danger to [the girl] of FGM is so high.”
Yet Patel launched an appeal claiming that the immigration court’s risk assessment of overseas FGM – “that there was no substantial grounds for believing there was a true risk” – should are the start line within the domestic relations court .
A court of appeal judge found the house secretary “misses the point” because assessing risk is different within the domestic relations court where the child’s welfare is central to inquiries – instead of simply being the dependent of an adult making a claim.
Proudman said: “They don’t have children’s guardians within the immigration courts and this girl’s vulnerabilities weren’t properly considered. If it weren’t for Suffolk administration she would are on a plane.”
She added: “I work on tons of those cases and not all local authorities are this proactive. This case shows how dangerous it’s counting on the immigration courts to try to made decisions about the danger of FGM.”
Nuala Mole, founding father of the AIRE Centre, a London-based legal charity, insists the govt features a duty to guard vulnerable children from FGM. She said the strain between the 2 legal orders highlighted the necessity for a fanatical service within the immigration courts.
She said: “For the family courts considering whether to form an FGM protection order, the child’s welfare is paramount. It trumps everything else. the kid is represented and has her own voice. In immigration proceedings the child’s interests don’t take precedence over other issues.
Mole added: “Most significantly, the kid isn’t normally represented or heard. that’s why we’ve been posing for years for a fanatical immigration court for youngsters to be established.”
The Home Office said it didn’t discuss specific cases. A government spokesperson said: “Female genital mutilation (FGM) is abuse which causes extreme and lifelong physical and psychological suffering to women and girls and that we won’t tolerate it.
“We share the eagerness of these who want to finish FGM and can still work closely with them, and repose on what we’ve already done to eradicate this terrible practice once and for all.”