The Benefits Of Going To Cosmetology School

Monday, March 14, 2022

Wikinews received clarification earlier this month from the United Kingdom Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) regarding the government’s response to the cost of living crisis following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The UK anticipated Russian action against Ukraine for several months, and has coordinated a response with NATO and the European Union. Many “swift retributive responses including an unprecedented package of sanctions” promised in January were imposed after the Russian invasion began in February.

They now include “financial, trade, aircraft, shipping and immigration sanctions” to urge Russia “to cease actions which destabilise Ukraine, or undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty or independence of Ukraine.” Most recently, it includes a commitment made by Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng Tuesday to phase out Russian oil and natural gas in the UK by the end of the year.

The announcement came the same day United States President Joe Biden announced a ban on imports of Russian oil, coal and gas.

However, a UK government spokesperson told Wikinews: “We cannot have a cliff-edge where oil and gas are abandoned overnight. Turning off the taps would put energy security, British jobs and industries at risk and we would be even more dependent on foreign imports.”

The European Commission was more cautious, planning to cut Union dependence on Russian imports by two-thirds this year, before ceasing altogether “well before 2030”. But whereas Russia supplies 40% of the EU’s natural gas, much of the UK’s energy is produced domestically.

The spokesperson contrasted the British situation with that of the EU: “Our single largest source of gas is from the UK Continental Shelf and the vast majority of imports come from reliable suppliers such as Norway.

“There are no gas pipelines directly linking the UK with Russia. Imports from Russia made up less than 4% of total UK gas supply in 2021.

“Ministers and officials continue to engage constructively and regularly with energy intensive industries and our priority is to ensure costs are managed and supplies of energy are maintained.”

A government FAQ published February 25 adds the UK has three liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals, while Germany has none. The fact sheet urged “European countries on the continent reduce their reliance on Russian gas both through alternative supplies, including the global [LNG] market”.

A press release from Tuesday specifically named Vladimir Putin, Russia’s president, and called the invasion “illegal”. The spokesperson said: “We continue to monitor the impacts that Putin’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine is having on the cost of living in the UK, so we keep our approach under review.”

The release asserted Russian oil “is already being ostracised by the market”. And in any case: “In a competitive global market for oil and petroleum products, demand can be met by alternative suppliers. We will work closely with international partners to ensure alternative supplies of fuel products.”

But high inflation, already associated with the rising cost of petrol, has seen prices rise in all key areas. Before the Russian invasion, the Bank of England forecast inflation to rise to about 7% in spring, from 5.4% last year. And economists cited by The Guardian reportedly project inflation to rise to almost 8% next month.

Consultancy firm The Centre for Economics and Business Research more than halved its growth expectations for 2022 from 4.2% to 1.9% Tuesday. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said the £9 billion package by Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak “would now offset only about one fifth of the rise in household energy bills.”

The government spokesperson said: “We recognise the concerns people have about the cost of living, which is why we have set out a generous package of support worth around £21bn including a £150 council tax rebate from April and a further £200 energy bill discount in October – cutting energy bills quickly for the majority of households.”

They added: “We are already providing support to families worth around £20 [billion] this financial year and next, including cutting the Universal Credit taper to make sure work pays, freezing alcohol and fuel duties to keep costs down, and providing £9.1bn to support 27 million households with their energy bills.”

As hinted, all measures were introduced prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which began on February 24.

On February 3, it was announced those in England in Council Tax bands A-D would get £150 off their council tax payments. It was also announced there would be a £200 discount on all Britons’ energy bills in autumn. The £200 would be repaid automatically over the next five years, which Leader of the Opposition Sir Keir Starmer likened to a loan.

During Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) Wednesday, he derided Sunak for proposing “a forced £200 loan for every household paid back in mandatory instalments”.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson defended the government for their £20 billion support package, calling the measures “unprecedented”. He added he plans to set “out an energy independence plan for this country in the course of the next few days to ensure that we undo some of the damage of previous decisions taken”.

Sunak announced changes to Universal Credit and the continued freeze of fuel levies during his autumn budget statement on October 27. The amount withheld workers making above the worker allowance threshold per pound was reduced from 63 pence to 55 pence. It follows the UK government’s cancellation of a Covid-19 uplift of £20 per week to Universal Credit in early October, which cut the income of six million claimants by £1040 per annum.

The fuel duty was frozen twelve years ago and has not been lifted since. It is estimated to save motorists £1900.

The statement also included a “radical simplification” of alcohol duties, reducing the taxable bands from fifteen to six and suspending a planned hike at a £3 billion loss to HM Treasury. This was encouraged by many organisations, including the British Beer and Pub Association.

Even so, the measures have been criticised as too meagre to address the reality of the situation. Ahead of Sunak’s spring statement slated for March 23, Conservative MPs have pressured the Chancellor to consider new measures. A source reportedly told The Guardian officials in HM Treasury are weighing options; publicly, they state “There’s only so much that can be done, and we’ve never seen oil prices where they are now.”

Analysts warned Britons from February 24 household gas and electricity bills could reach £3000 per year. The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets announced it would lift a cap on default energy tariffs by 54% to £1971 from April.

Though oil prices stabilised to below USD120 per barrel Wednesday, Brent Crude briefly reached a 2008 high of $147.50 per barrel and remain substantially higher from before the Russian invasion. To minimise the effect this will have on British consumers, Sir Keir pushed for nuclear power, renewable energy and home insulation at PMQs.

Johnson defended his record on renewables, calling the UK “the Saudi Arabia of wind power”. The UK spokesperson told Wikinews “It’s the right thing to do to move away from dependence on Russian oil and gas across Europe and this means looking at more nuclear and much more use of renewable energy.”

However: “Companies and skilled employees right across the UK’s gas sector are working to maximise production through this winter, helped by several small new wells and fields that have come online in recent months and edged production up.” The example Wikinews raised over the Abigail oil field in the North Sea, which was greenlit for development by an Israeli firm on February 2, was not addressed. At the time, the director of the Oil and Gas Authority told Sky News oil and gas will remain a source of British energy for decades.

The government spokesperson continued: “The issues we are facing are a result of high international gas prices rather than supply, and further UK oil and gas licensing is unlikely to have a major impact in the short term.”

The Labour Party has urged a windfall profits tax to be imposed on excess profits made by major fossil fuel companies, including BP and Shell plc. Both companies reported historic profits for 2021 in February. BP saw profits of $12.8 billion from -$5.7 billion in 2020, and Shell $19.3 billion from $4.85 billion in 2020.

After BP’s announcement, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves tweeted “The chancellor’s energy plans last week left families more worried than ever. It’s time for Labour’s plan for a one-off windfall tax on oil and gas producers to cut bills.” However, when pressed at PMQs, Johnson urged a “a sober, responsible approach.”. He said: “The net result of [a windfall tax] would be to see the oil companies put their prices up yet higher, and make it more difficult for them to [divest] from dependence on Russian oil and gas.”

The UK government spokesperson told Wikinews: “A windfall tax could deter £14 billion worth of opportunities awaiting investment, which would risk both security of our energy supply, as well as almost 200,000 jobs that rely on the industry.

“Oil and gas companies in the North Sea are already subject to a tax rate on their profits that is more than double those paid by other businesses. To date, the sector has contributed more than £375 billion in production taxes.

“We keep all taxes under review but we do not comment on speculation about tax changes.

“The UK Government places additional taxes on the extraction of oil and gas, with companies engaged in the production of oil and gas on the UK Continental Shelf subject to headline tax rates on their profits that are currently more than double those paid by other businesses. To date, the sector has paid more than £375 billion in production taxes.”

The government is also criticised for its plan to retrofit homes with poor insulation. In March last year, the government’s flagship green homes grant was scrapped, having only installed 5800 energy efficiency measures.

The government spokesperson responded: “We are investing almost £6.6 billion to support the installation of energy efficiency measures in low energy performance homes including older properties with low income home owners and tenants.

“The Heat and Buildings Strategy set out a comprehensive package of measures we are taking to kickstart the transition to low-carbon heat and build the market for heat pumps. This includes investment in a new £450 [million] Boiler Upgrade Scheme, the £950 [million] Home Upgrade Grant and the £60 [million] Heat Pump Ready research programme.”

Friday, October 5, 2007

Johan Boyden is running for the Communist Party in the Ontario provincial election, in the Toronto Centre riding. Wikinews interviewed him regarding his values, his experience, and his campaign.

Sunday, June 29, 2008

While nearly all coverage of the 2008 Presidential election has focused on the Democratic and Republican candidates, the race for the White House also includes independents and third-party candidates. These prospects represent a variety of views that may not be acknowledged by the major party platforms.

Wikinews has reached out to these candidates throughout the campaign. We now interview Green Party Presidential candidate Dr. Kent Mesplay.

Why do you want to be President?

I run for president to help improve society, pointing out that we are more secure when we live in a sustainable manner. As of this writing our culture is based on the consumption of limited materials such as petroleum, coal and uranium with great emphasis placed on the consumption of “goods” that are produced and purchased with little regard for the well-being of future generations. Government, ideally, provides an independent, objective forum through which solutions to the needs and wants of our time can be raised, discussed and implemented in a thoughtful, respectful manner. In contrast to this ideal, our current central, national government exists largely to protect and preserve the status quo of relatively few stake-holders, having undue political influence and acting in a manner not in the best interest of the majority of people. We cannot blindly consume our way to peace and stability.

A Green presidential administration would put the needs of current and future generations above the rude demands and expectations of the well-heeled political donor class. It is not important that we have a new president bearing the face of change. We need vital, core change to our political institutions to decentralize control, empower rational science-based decision-making and cut the damaging influence of corporate money on public policy. This change is unlikely to arise from within the current two political parties that are intrinsically corrupted by the ubiquitous “greased-palm” bribing handshake with corporate entities. We need to only ask how many corporate media conglomerates regularly advertize the question, “Should a corporation have the legal status of a super-person?” to realize the extent of the current dilemma. A corporation should never have been considered to have the legal rights of an individual. The Green Party is independent from business interests. This political arm of the environmental, peace and justice movements represents meaningful change to public policy and to our fragile, centralized, short-sighted way of life.

Green solutions are largely local solutions: more community gardens and small farms, reasonable use of fresh water, grey-water and waste-water, including more water storage and community responsibility for the entire water stream, energy-efficient housing and transportation, health care for all, protecting besieged ecosystems. Practically, what this means is a higher base-line of essential services with the costs shared and supported broadly. To be clear, our basic physical security deserves support, not gaming at the hands of profiteers. A common wealth for all citizens is possible, with local regional flavors in commerce and culture atop this “baseline” of security. To be danced out of the way, one finds the current heavy-handed players of agribusiness, pharmaceuticals, energy, insurance and the congressional-military-industrial complex all dependent upon “corporate socialism” for subsidies and protection from real, meaningful, positive change and shielded from probing questions as to why, for example, we so frequently go to war.

Mottos include “sustainability is security” and “freedom to debate.” I run to help define, popularize and grow the Green Party, to be an advocate for: single-payer health-care, renewable energy, increased energy efficiency, rail transport, organic local agriculture, indigenous rights, wise water use, banning lobbying/bribery, over-turning the legal fiction that a corporation is a person, and equal media exposure for all political candidates, having open debates between all political parties and beating those “swords into plowshares” by focusing on improving diplomacy, communication and basic physical security in water, food and energy in particular to mitigate the negative effects of global climate change and to provide emergency readiness. Also, I get bored easily and this keeps me busy.

Have you ever run for political office before? (President, senate, congress, city councillor, school trustee… etc.) Have you ever been a member of a political party, other than the one you’re currently in?

I ran for president in 2004 and 2008, being one of the four “finalists” at the nominating conventions. Also, I ran for U.S. Senate in California as part of a contested race in the Green Party Primary Election in 2006. I plan to run for U.S. Congress in 2010 and I am now taking the steps to begin running for the 2012 presidential race. I have been a member of both main U.S. parties and I cannot adequately express my disgust for them both. I encourage people everywhere to register Green, vote Green and support Green Party efforts at achieving and maintaining ballot access within the current hostile political environment. Ideally, we can together displace one of the two major parties; such is the near-majority level of disapproval of the antiquated mainstream parties and the desire for a true alternative.

Have you ever campaigned for another political candidate?

In 1996 I helped organize a press conference for then-presidential candidate Ralph Nader, after having helped support efforts to draft him as a candidate.

What skills or ideas do you bring from this position, or previous positions, that will benefit the Oval Office?

I believe in the separation of power within government, including economic power. Due to the influence of money in politics and within government we do not have a political system that works well to advance the needs and concerns of “we the people.” There are few, muted voices within our government supporting the dispossessed, the disenfranchised, the “left out,” the lower echelon within our socio-economic strata. Especially now, with high energy costs, questionable food supplies, shredded social safety nets, job loss due to outsourcing and other losses, loss of civil liberties and rights, the consolidation and concealment of governmental power, the “fascist” confluence of military-industrial business with governmental power, threats of unstable weather, retaliation by terrorists and opportunistic foreign governments following our model it is a good time to not be silent. I have lived with and among many different cultures, religions and peoples, I have a multi-cultural background and a mixed ancestry, I value art, music and science, I am both intuitive and analytical and I enjoy solving problems. Our nation would benefit greatly from my services. Plus, I am not “on the take.”

Campaigning for the American presidency is one of the most expensive exercises in the world. How do you deal with the cost and fundraising?

Small contributions from many people not expecting a return of favors approximates public funding of campaigns. In order to “get the word out” about my existence as a candidate it is necessary to adapt and adopt alternative, low-cost strategies. With my campaign team steadily growing I anticipate utilizing modern low-cost communication methods to help “spread the word.” Fund-raising is among the least palatable activities that I have to endure as a candidate and I will be the first to admit that I have done very little fundraising. The reader who is a U.S. Citizen of voting age is encouraged to support my candidacy by visiting my web site, www.mesplay.org, and making a small donation in accordance with Federal Election Commission guidelines. Also, simply e-mailing friends helps tremendously with these small campaigns.

What are you/were you looking for in a running mate?

My running mate would likely represent a demographic that I do not, such as being female and non-white, since I am a white male. As to character and experience, I would want to be supported by someone with great practical public experience who has remained in integrity with the original idealistic hopes and dreams that once drew them into the public eye or political arena.

Can you win the 2008 Presidential election?

I can win the 2008 presidential election by becoming the Green nominee, by inspiring otherwise non-voters to register Green and to grow Green Parties in those states where they are not yet granted ballot access and to subsequently vote in some creative, time-urgent manner circumventing the severe limitations put on candidates and parties by the secretaries of state through the country. I would have to win many of the states where the Green Party is on the ballot and I would have to find a manner allowing erstwhile green voters to legally vote in those states where we are not on the ballot.

If you can’t make it into the Oval Office, who would you prefer seeing taking the presidency?

I cannot support candidates who foolishly support nuclear power and weapons, who do not recognize the need for peace and who do not offer real, meaningful, substantive systemic change.

What should the American people keep in mind, when heading to the polls this November?

When heading for the polls this November U.S. citizens should support Green Party candidates, policies and values. Thank you.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

An explosion has been reported at Japan’s stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant after its cooling system was damaged by a massive 8.9 magnitude earthquake that hit off the North-East coast of Japan on Friday. The explosion occurred at around 3:00pm local time (6:00am UTC). According to the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, four workers were injured in the explosion.

The explosion occurred as workers were attempting to cool a reactor by injecting water into its core. Local media are reporting that the plant’s exterior walls have been destroyed and only a skeleton structure remains.

More than 45,000 residents within a 10-kilometre radius of the plant have been evacuated.

Television reports show white smoke coming from the plant. Local authorities are warning residents in the vicinity of the plant to stay indoors, turn off air-conditioners and not to drink tap water. According to Japan’s nuclear agency, radioactive caesium and iodine has been identified at the plant. Authorities speculate that this indicates that containers holding uranium fuel at the site may have ruptured and are leaking.