Tags: NULL by Taboolaby TaboolaSponsored LinksSponsored LinksPromoted LinksPromoted LinksYou May LikeMisterStoryWoman Files For Divorce After Seeing This Photo – Can You See Why?MisterStoryTotal PastThe Ingenious Reason There Are No Mosquitoes At Disney WorldTotal PastPeople TodayNewborn’s Strange Behavior Troubles Mom, 40 Years Later She Finds The Reason Behind ItPeople TodayMoneyPailShe Was The Dream Girl In The 90s, This Is Her NowMoneyPailSerendipity TimesInside Coco Chanel’s Eerily Abandoned Mansion Frozen In TimeSerendipity TimesZen HeraldNASA’s Voyager 2 Has Entered Deep Space – And It Brought Scientists To Their KneesZen HeraldWanderoamIdentical Twins Marry Identical Twins – But Then The Doctor Says, “STOP”WanderoamMagellan TimesThis Is Why The Roy Rogers Museum Has Been Closed For GoodMagellan TimesElite HeraldExperts Discover Girl Born From Two Different SpeciesElite Herald whatsapp whatsapp Read This NextRicky Schroder Calls Foo Fighters’ Dave Grohl ‘Ignorant Punk’ forThe WrapCNN’s Brian Stelter Draws Criticism for Asking Jen Psaki: ‘What Does theThe WrapDid Donald Trump Wear His Pants Backwards? Kriss Kross Memes Have AlreadyThe WrapHarvey Weinstein to Be Extradited to California to Face Sexual AssaultThe WrapPink Floyd’s Roger Waters Denies Zuckerberg’s Request to Use Song in Ad:The Wrap’The View’: Meghan McCain Calls VP Kamala Harris a ‘Moron’ for BorderThe Wrap’Sex and the City’ Sequel Series at HBO Max Adds 4 More ReturningThe WrapNewsmax Rejected Matt Gaetz When Congressman ‘Reached Out’ for a JobThe Wrap2 HFPA Members Resign Citing a Culture of ‘Corruption and Verbal Abuse’The Wrap BROADCASTER ITV will keep considering the possibility of paying a dividend given its newly strong balance sheet, but investing in programmes is more urgent, its chief executive said yesterday.Adam Crozier, who took over in April, said ITV needed to make more of its own content and technology to profit from coming web distribution channels such as Google TV, Apple TV or YouView in Britain.ITV makes only 45 per cent of its own programming, or 17 per cent excluding soap operas Coronation Street and Emmerdale.To cut costs, ITV ran down investments in content during the recession, buying in programmes and relying on mass-audience shows like the X Factor to attract advertisers.“We have some investments we need to make, and we’ve been upfront about that,” said Crozier. Crozier cool on restarting ITV dividend Show Comments ▼ Share KCS-content Thursday 18 November 2010 7:32 pm
Playson secures full approval in Sweden Email Address AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to FacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitter Regions: Europe Nordics Sweden Casino software developer Playson has secured full approval in the regulated Swedish market, confirming that its full range of gaming content is now fully compliant and certified in the country. Topics: Legal & compliance Legal & compliance Tags: Online Gambling Casino software developer Playson has secured full approval in the regulated Swedish market, confirming that its full range of gaming content is now fully compliant and certified in the country.Playson completed a security audit following a rigorous testing process across its engineering, integration and product departments, placing its gaming content in line with requirements set out by national regulator Spelinspektionen.The developer is already active in Sweden and its content is live with a number of licensed operators in the country.“Sweden is an important market for us and to have our offering made fully compliant is an important move for the company,” Playson’s compliance manager, Liubomyr Bedratiuk, said.“As an agile provider, we have a strong infrastructure in place that can react quickly to regulatory changes. We are fully committed to working in regulated markets and look forward to consolidating our presence in Sweden over the coming months.” 6th August 2019 | By contenteditor Subscribe to the iGaming newsletter
The FTSE 100’s recent market crash and subsequent rebound may leave many investors feeling uncertain about the index’s future. After all, a global economic recession seems highly likely in 2020. And this could hurt the FTSE 100’s price level in the short run.However, the valuations of many large-cap shares suggest that they offer long-term growth potential. As such, now could be the right time to invest £1,000 in these two FTSE 100 shares as part of a diversified portfolio that has a long-term focus.5G is here – and shares of this ‘sleeping giant’ could be a great way for you to potentially profit!According to one leading industry firm, the 5G boom could create a global industry worth US$12.3 TRILLION out of thin air…And if you click here we’ll show you something that could be key to unlocking 5G’s full potential…SSEThe recent update by renewable energy business SSE (LSE: SSE) bucked a wider trend among FTSE 100 dividend stocks. The company announced that it will pay a dividend for the most recent financial year, and also plans to pay the dividend as expected for the current financial year.This could increase demand among income investors for the company’s shares. That is especially so as many of its large-cap peers have announced dividend cuts or delays due to the economic impact of the coronavirus.Of course, SSE stated in its update that it is too early to determine to the overall impact of coronavirus on its financial performance. However, it has a business model that may be less closely correlated with the economy’s outlook than is the case for many of its FTSE 100 peers. As such, it may offer defensive appeal at an uncertain time for the world economy.With SSE offering a dividend yield of 6.5%, it seems to offer a margin of safety at its current price level. It plans to raise dividends by at least as much as inflation over the coming years. This could mean that it produces a relatively strong total return following the recent market crash.FTSE 100 beverages company DiageoAnother FTSE 100 share that could offer long-term growth potential is alcoholic beverages company Diageo (LSE: DGE). Its share price has fallen by around 13% since the start of the year. And this could mean that it offers relatively good value for money.Clearly, the company is likely to be affected by the impact of the coronavirus. The closing down of pubs, bars and restaurants across many of its key markets means that demand for its products is likely to have fallen. However, with a strong balance sheet and loyal customers across its range of brands, it seems likely to enjoy a strong recovery in the coming years.As such, now could be the right time to buy Diageo as it has a solid position in emerging markets, as well as an enviable range of popular brands in established markets. Its plans to conserve cash in the short run may aid its capacity to not only survive the present economic difficulties facing the world economy, but to emerge from them in a stronger position compared to its sector peers. I would like to receive emails from you about product information and offers from The Fool and its business partners. Each of these emails will provide a link to unsubscribe from future emails. More information about how The Fool collects, stores, and handles personal data is available in its Privacy Statement. Renowned stock-picker Mark Rogers and his analyst team at The Motley Fool UK have named 6 shares that they believe UK investors should consider buying NOW.So if you’re looking for more stock ideas to try and best position your portfolio today, then it might be a good day for you. Because we’re offering a full 33% off your first year of membership to our flagship share-tipping service, backed by our ‘no quibbles’ 30-day subscription fee refund guarantee. Peter Stephens | Monday, 11th May, 2020 | More on: DGE SSE Our 6 ‘Best Buys Now’ Shares “This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997” Image source: Getty Images. Simply click below to discover how you can take advantage of this. Peter Stephens owns shares of Diageo and SSE. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Diageo. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. I’m sure you’ll agree that’s quite the statement from Motley Fool Co-Founder Tom Gardner.But since our US analyst team first recommended shares in this unique tech stock back in 2016, the value has soared.What’s more, we firmly believe there’s still plenty of upside in its future. In fact, even throughout the current coronavirus crisis, its performance has been beating Wall St expectations.And right now, we’re giving you a chance to discover exactly what has got our analysts all fired up about this niche industry phenomenon, in our FREE special report, A Top US Share From The Motley Fool. Click here to claim your copy now — and we’ll tell you the name of this Top US Share… free of charge! Enter Your Email Address Have £1,000 to invest? I’d buy these 2 bargain FTSE 100 shares in this stock market crash See all posts by Peter Stephens
Imagine an international gathering at the United Nations reporting after 15 years of meetings that it had achieved none of its goals — especially its number one goal of ending extreme poverty and hunger by this year. This happened at the Sept. 25-27 U.N. Sustainable Development Summit, which followed up on the U.N. Millennium Summit held in 2000. Fifteen years ago, the assembly of 149 heads of state, U.N. agencies and international financial institutions set a series of objectives — the Millennium Development Goals. The eight goals sought to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, combat life-threatening diseases, ensure environmental sustainability and build a “global partnership for development.”This year’s summit did not even acknowledge the failure to reach the goals projected in 2000. The U.N. instead set yet another 15-year target to end extreme poverty and hunger, as well as 16 other goals, by 2030 in a project called Sustainable Development Goals. It is important to evaluate this new project’s chances of success. The fate of millions of desperate people worldwide hangs in the balance. The gap between the richest 1% and the very poor is greater than ever. Poverty and hunger have vastly increased. Climate and environmental destruction have worsened. Imperialist-led wars have forced an enormous migration crisis.The goals of reducing poverty, hunger, increasing literacy and solving the climate crisis have inspired individuals and organizations worldwide. Who could argue with such laudable aims?However, the truth about these U.N. summits is that while promising global transformation, they are part of the capitalists’ war on the world’s people. The accumulation of wealth and power has accelerated through these global initiatives because the largest corporations dominate the plans. The biggest banks, transnational companies and financial institutions, like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, structure these projects. Their objectives are to expand capitalist markets, maximize profits and restructure the developing countries more tightly into their economic web — not to redistribute the world’s wealth.International convocations and U.N.-sponsored gatherings, such as the 2005 Millennium +5 Summit, the 2008 Doha Conference for Development, the Millennium Development Review Summit and the 2012 Rio +20 Sustainable Development Conference, have reinforced and legitimized capitalist growth policies as the only way forward.Changing the hunger countThe Millennium Development Goals were declared an overwhelming success in solving the problem of world hunger by statistically changing how underfed people were counted. The U.N. and nongovernmental organizations declared it “the most successful anti-poverty movement in history,” which cut global poverty in half. (Guardian, July 17) But was it really reduced?Studies have exposed how this alleged feat was accomplished by moving the goalposts back to 1990 and changing the methodology for estimating the number of hungry people. They included China’s and Vietnam’s progress — which accounted for 91 percent of the reduction of underfed people since 1990 — even though these countries had nothing to do with the Millennium campaign.Canadian and U.S. scholars and leaders of organizations focusing on sustainable agriculture reported that, by looking at the actual data on global hunger, the real numbers of the underfed had risen from 868 million to 1.33 billion people. (Tufts University, “Framing Hunger: A Response to the State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012,” June 2013) Several questions arise: Why did this Millennium effort fail to meet its goals of ending world poverty and hunger or ensuring environmental sustainability at a time of the unprecedented growth of global productive capacity? Who is making the decisions? What policies are being implemented and in whose interests? Will another 15 years of using the same capitalist market approach yield better results? There is clearly a political agenda behind the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals. These goals rely on projections of neoliberal economic planners who espouse a so-called “trickle-down” economic approach. This capitalist view contends that economic growth in production and profits for capitalist investors will “trickle down” to improve the lives of millions. Their measurements are contrived to prove that capitalist policies are successful.Schemes to privatize human needsThe 2000 and 2015 summits’ goals focus on outsourcing development to private sector financing — to corporations and banks. Their projects in developing countries are described as “public-private partnerships.” They impose privatization plans in education, health care, water, sanitation, mass transit, ports, infrastructure and other areas. Each privatized service or industry must function first as a source of corporate profit and capital extraction. Maximum deregulation is also a goal. These measures in fact rob countries of their resources and destroy their ability to resist the domination of transnational capital. Each privatized service is also a source of increased indebtedness. These debts can only be paid later with austerity programs. Harsh structural adjustment plans result in public school and hospital closings.Peasants and subsistence farmers are driven off the land because agribusiness is given the major role in food development. Tens of millions of the landless pour into urban centers; many are forced to migrate.The reality is the global food surplus can meet all human needs. But food is still unaffordable to millions of people because corporate agribusinesses are not interested in developing locally grown and sustainable crops. Their only goal in processing, storing and shipping food is to get it to locations where it can be sold at a profit.Hand in hand with the 2015 summit’s goals go the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, and the TransPacific Partnership; they create an international legal framework of corporate power that preempts all environmental and labor laws. The capitalists’ “rights” to reap profits supersede human rights and countries’ sovereignty.Sustainable development should mean planning for current human needs without compromising future generations. This is at odds with capitalism’s relentless drive to maximize profits everywhere.People before profitsMissing from the goals of the past and present U.N. summits is the concept that food, clean water, education and health care are basic rights of every person. The U.N.’s plans omit any mention of more equitable distribution. Past international conferences on reparations and debt cancellation have been pushed off U.N. agendas. Since the Millennium Goals were announced in 2000, there has been no mention, other than vague calls to end war, of U.S. wars that have been the greatest source of infrastructure demolition, massive homelessness, destruction of schools and medical services — and the cause of massive migration from the Middle East and North Africa.It is essential to challenge the corporate culture and decision-making process of U.N. summits on “development,” as well as U.N.-sponsored climate summits. These include the Oct. 19-23 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 21st session of the Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21) set for Paris in December. The Campaign for People’s Goals for Sustainable Development is building one such effort. Its statement, “Reclaim Our Future — Oppose the Corporate Development Agenda,” has more than 155 signers from civil society and people’s organizations in more than 45 countries. It warns that the U.N.’s policy agenda will further concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the 1% and deepen dispossession and environmental plunder. The campaign calls for developmental goals that put people before profits.Ultimately, sustainable development and human rights for all can only be achieved by a socialist revolution and the building of socialism, a system that puts the needs of the world’s people and the planet before the profits of the rich. Such a revolution in the United States, the citadel of imperialism and finance capital, will hasten the liberation of peoples around the globe.FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
Reports The resolution onthe promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights ont the Internet, adopted by the UN Human Rights Council during its 32nd session (from 13 June to 1 July 2016), reiterated that: “The same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice, in accordance with articles 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It also urged all states to “address security concerns in accordance with their international human rights obligations, in particular with regard to freedom of expression, freedom of association and privacy.” The Human RightsCouncil’s resolutions are not binding and are not an effective way to restrainthose states that are the worst violators of individual online freedoms. Another Human Rights Council resolution, adopted in September 2016, noted that, “in the digital age, encryption and anonymity tools have become vital for many journalists to exercise freely their work and their enjoyment of human rights, in particular their rights to freedom of expression and to privacy, including to secure their communications and to protect the confidentiality of their sources,” and called on Member States “not to interfere with the use of such technologies, with any restrictions thereon complying with States’ obligations under international human rights law.” However, the Human Rights Council’s resolutions are not binding and are not an effective way to restrain those states that are the worst violators of individual online freedoms. Ever since Edward Snowden’s revelations and the end of US hegemony over Internet governance, the Enemies of the Internet have been trying to increase their role in Internet regulation, above all via such UN agencies as the International Telecommunication Union, UNESCO and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, which have all issued declarations on the defence of fundamental freedoms online and Internet governance. Following the Declaration of Principles issued at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva in 2014, the WSIS has been one of the main multilateral platforms on Internet governance, but it has issued no binding resolutions designed to prevent authoritarian regimes from subjecting their citizens to mass censorship and surveillance. “There is a growing danger that the struggle over the strategic issue of Internet governance will end up officialising a fragmented and censored Internet,” said Benjamin Ismaïl, the head of RSF’s Asia desk. “If every country demands sovereignty over the Internet, we will have a system that grants authoritarian regimes every right to restrict online free speech and information. To avoid this, it is essential that binding international mechanisms are put in place to guarantee the existence of a global free Internet. Now more than ever, this guarantee requires control of Internet companies and companies that export mass surveillance technology.” In June 2014, RSF began asking the UN Human Rights Council to establish an international convention on corporate responsibility with regard to human rights, with the aim of making governments place strict controls on the export of surveillance technology and establish effective recourse for individuals who have been the victims of surveillance and the terrible consequences that can result from it (arrest, imprisonment, physical violence and torture). A few months later, on 28 November 2014, RSF, Privacy International, Digitale Gesellschaft, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and Human Rights Watch hailed the European Union’s decision to add new forms of surveillance technology to the list of dual-use goods and technologies subject to export controls. It was “Europe’s first step towards increased control of surveillance technology,” RSF said. Members of the Coalition Against Unlawful Surveillance Exports (CAUSE) – Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, Digitale Gesellschaft, FIDH, Human Rights Watch, Open Technology Institute and Privacy International – sent a joint open letter on 2 December 2014 to members of the Wassenaar Arrangement, a grouping of 41 nations – most of them EU members – that regulates the export of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies. Referring to the Wassenaar Arrangement upcoming plenary session, the letter urged the groupe to take measures to curb the alarming proliferation of surveillance technology available to authoritarian regimes known to systematically violate human rights. Nearly three years after these calls for effectivecontrol of the private sector, the EU appears to be in retreat. RSF_en Help by sharing this information March 10, 2017 – Updated on March 14, 2017 International regulations: broken or blocked by lobbies Regulation of surveillance technology exports has ground to a halt as a result of pressure from the digital technology industry lobby. Represented above all by the DigitalEurope association, whose executive board includes representatives of such companies as Nokia, Siemens, AMETIC, IBM, ANITEC, Cisco and Microsoft, and backed by a group of diplomats from nine countries (Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom), this lobby has managed to get telecommunications interception equipment, intrusion software, surveillance centres and data storage systems removed from the initial list of technology subject to control in the regulation proposed by the European Parliament and Council. The latest proposal no longer contains the originally envisaged controls on biometric equipment, geolocation systems or deep packet inspection technology (DPI), which enables inspection of data packets as they move through the Internet. By using DPI, governments bent on surveillance can access the content of emails, instant messaging, and VoIP conversations, and can see whether or not an email or message is encrypted. The latest proposal also fails to obligate EU member states to tell the public which companies have been given permission to export. Within the United Nations, the European Union and most national legislation, regulation of Internet surveillance, data protection and surveillance technology exports is still incomplete and inadequate with regard to international human rights norms and standards. The need for a legislative framework that protects online freedoms continues to be primordial with regard to both the issue of Internet surveillance as a whole and the particular problem of companies that export surveillance technology. >> IV – RSF’s recommendations on cyber-censorshipII << Organisation
Algeria : Reporter jailed after covering Tuareg protests in southern Algeria Organisation May 12, 2021 Find out more RSF_en May 9, 2007 – Updated on January 20, 2016 Polisario Front briefly detains two Australian filmmakers at refugee camp Algeria pressures reporters by delaying renewal of accreditation Reporters Without Borders today deplored the action of the Polisario Front’s security services in briefly detaining Australian documentary filmmakers Violeta Ayala and Daniel Fallshaw last week near the Rabouni refugee camp, 25 km from Tindouf in southwestern Algeria.“Western Sahara under Moroccan control and the refugee camps in Algeria are in the areas that are very hard for journalists to visit and work in,” the press freedom organisation said. “The Sahrawi population on both sides of the border are the first to suffer from this information blackout. We urge the authorities concerned to respect the work of the press and to put an end to such political and administrative obstacles.”Ayala and Fallshaw often visit the refugee camps in Algeria to film Sahrawi families whose members are separated by the wall Morocco built a few kilometres from the Algerian border in the early 1980s (http://www.thewallofshame.info).The two journalists were detained by Polisario Front security officials on 2 May and their mobile phone was confiscated. They were then taken to an office used by the security services, where they were held for about five hours. After UN officials intervened, the journalists were able to leave the Rabouni camp and go to Tindouf, from where they caught a plane to France a few days later.The Polisario Front officials criticised the interest the two journalists took in black members of the Sahrawi population, Reporters Without Borders has learned. Ayala told the press freedom organisation that she saw cases of enslavement. “The fact that they are fighting for their independence does not mean that Polisario’s leaders can allow themselves to commit such human rights violations,” she said. “It is our duty as journalists to denounce such practices. We originally went there to work on the problem of separated families. But during our stay, we witnessed scenes of slavery.” The Polisario Front has denied detaining the two journalists.The situation is equally difficult for journalists in Moroccan-controlled Western Sahara. Reporters Without Borders has registered many cases of journalists being detained, expelled or even physically attacked by the authorities. Norwegian journalists Anne Torhild Nilsen and Radmund Steinsvag are still waiting for permission to travel to the Western Sahara capital of El Aaiún although they have made repeated requests at the Moroccan embassy in Oslo and the communication ministry in Rabat.Swedish freelance photographer Lars Björk was arrested in El Aaiún in February for taking photos of a demonstration by young Sahrawis waving the Polisario Front flag. He was expelled the next day. News News Receive email alerts Help by sharing this information News AlgeriaMiddle East – North Africa Follow the news on Algeria Harassment of Algerian reporters intensifies in run-up to parliamentary elections to go further AlgeriaMiddle East – North Africa News May 18, 2021 Find out more April 29, 2021 Find out more
The sensitivity hypothesis seeks to explain the correlation between the wavelength of visual pigment absorption maxima (lambda(max)) and habitat type in fish and other marine animals in terms of the maximisation of photoreceptor photon catch. In recent years its legitimacy has been called into question as studies have either not tested data against the output of a predictive model or are confounded by the wide phylogeny of species used. We have addressed these issues by focussing on the distribution of lambda(max) values in one family of marine teleosts, the lanternfish (Myctophidae). Visual pigment extract spectrophotometry has shown that 54 myctophid species have a single pigment in their retinae with a lambda(max) falling within the range 480-492 rim. A further 4 species contain two visual pigments in their retinae. The spectral distribution of these visual pigments seems relatively confined when compared to other mesopelagic fishes. Mathematical modelling based on the assumptions of the sensitivity hypothesis shows that, contrary to the belief that deep-sea fishes’ visual pigments are shortwave shifted to maximise their sensitivity to downwelling sunlight, the visual pigments of myctophids instead seem better placed for the visualisation of bioluminescence. The predicted maximum visualisation distance of a blue/green bioluminescent point source by a myctophid was up to 30 m under ideal conditions. Two species (Myctophum nitidulum and Bolinichthys longipes) have previously been shown to have longwave-shifted spectral sensitivities and we show that they could theoretically detect stomiid far-red bioluminescence from as far as ca. 7 m. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Home » News » Agencies & People » Tayler and Fletcher’s 100 mile ride Tayler and Fletcher’s 100 mile ride22nd October 20160597 Views Jessica Bates BSc and Edward Bagnall FRICS, colleagues at Tayler and Fletcher in Stow-on-the-Wold took part in the Ride London 100 mile sportive in July raising £5,000 for their nominated charities.Setting off from the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park the route took them through London, Richmond Park and on to the lanes of rural Surrey. The first test came at Newlands Corner after 45 miles. The major ascent of Leith Hill was at mile 56, followed by Box Hill at mile 72. They went on via Oxshott and Esher to the outskirts of London, into Putney crossing the Thames, along the Embankment through Trafalgar Square and along the Mall to the finish line.Jessica said, “I was delighted to ride for Bone Cancer Research Trust in memory of a school friend, Claudia. It was a very memorable day for so many reasons – the support and enthusiasm of the crowds on the streets as well as the support of friends and family towards BCRT.’Edward who had taken part in the three previous Ride London 100 sportives and was riding for Bloodwise, the Leukaemia and Lymphoma charity said, “Once again this was an unforgettable day. With the cycle to the start, the delays during the 100 miles and the cycle through the London traffic back to the hotel I did 10 hours in the saddle. However, it was another rewarding day – from the achievement of completing the course and also for the two charities, so we are delighted.”Matthew Harvey MRICS, a partner of Tayler and Fletcher said, “Congratulations to Jess and Edward on their achievements. I was delighted that they were able to raise such fantastic sums for two such worthwhile charities.”Ride London charity bike ride Tayler and Fletcher fundraising 2016-10-22The NegotiatorAny comments? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles Laptops donated by Hunters in memory of murdered York estate agent28th April 2021 Your Move parent group posts extraordinary profits surge28th April 2021 TPFG boss: Why we’ve joined rival LSL’s mortgage network27th April 2021
Follow the Foreign Office on Twitter @foreignoffice and Facebook October’s conference will focus on tackling the illegal wildlife trade as a serious organised crime, building coalitions and closing illegal wildlife markets.Further information For journalists The illegal wildlife trade is a vile and loathsome crime with organised gangs and criminal scum at the very heart of it. Not only is it wiping out wildlife populations, it is also robbing communities of sustainable incomes and damaging economies across Africa and Asia, all for the senseless demand in live animals and wildlife products for trinkets and quack medicines. Border Force is doing incredible work stopping these items from ending up on the black market here in the UK but more can and must be done on a global scale if we are going to stamp this crime out for good. That’s why we are bringing world leaders together for an international conference this autumn, to find a way to save our charismatic megafauna and endangered species before it is too late. I applaud the work that Kevin and other wildlife campaigners are doing to raise awareness of the plight of endangered rhinos across Africa and Asia. Former England cricketer Kevin Pietersen said: Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and former England cricketer and wildlife campaigner Kevin Pietersen have today (Friday 4 May) teamed up for a visit to see the important role Border Force plays in fighting the illegal wildlife trade at Heathrow Airport.After receiving a briefing from illegal wildlife trade experts in the Border Force team, Mr Johnson and Mr Pietersen were shown confiscated items which people have tried to smuggle through customs and are now housed in Heathrow Airport’s ‘dead shed’.Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said: Follow the Foreign Secretary on Twitter @BorisJohnson and Facebook Stopping the illegal wildlife trade is the only way we will save those endangered species which are on the brink of extinction. In South Africa close to three rhinos are illegally killed every single day. It’s shameful that the world is just sitting back and watching as whole species are being wiped out. I support the vital work going on by governments around the world to tackle this issue head on but we need action now to halt the demand for the illegal wildlife trade before we see species wiped out for good. Media enquiries Follow the Foreign Office on Instagram, YouTube and LinkedIn Email [email protected]
Park Cakes has suffered a pre-tax loss of £3.6m, despite hitting a record turnover of £121.2m, as revealed in its latest financial results.The bakery manufacturing firm, which produces cakes for the retail sector, has filed its directors’ report and financial statements with Companies House for the 53-week period to 31 March 2012.It revealed an operating loss of £700,000, in comparison to 2011 in which Park Cakes reported a profit of £1.2m. This included exceptional costs of £500,000 and an amortisation credit of £1.7m on negative goodwill.The directors’ report said: “The UK cake market grew by 3% last year. Company turnover outperformed the market growing to another record high of £121.2m, up 11% versus the previous year. This was again driven by all year round increases in core categories, particularly in hot eating desserts.”The company attributed its significant sales growth to new product development, meeting customers’ target margins and reacting quickly to additional demand created by successful promotional activity.Looking at the trading environment, Park Cakes’ directors said the strength of its supermarket and food retailer customers, combined with competitive pressure in the industry, represent continuing risks which could result in lost sales to key competitors.It added that sales with supermarkets and consumer demand are inherently uncertain and a fall in demand may result in the company requiring additional funding.