UPC Reminds EC of the Agreed IPOD Posistion on the Electoral Reforms (23.11.2016)

upc-23-11-2016-p1

upc-23-11-2016-p2

upc-23-11-2016-p3

Brexit: Labour has plans to counter the non-existence “Moving-On” plans of the Tories!

yougov-poll-on-voting-intentions-in-different-brexit-scenarios-790x395

Its days after and just two weeks after leaked Memo that said how little plans the Conservative Party or Tories Government had. So this report is a answer to that. Like the certain quote of the memo:

“The divisions within the Cabinet are between the three Brexiteers on one side and Philip Hammond/Greg Clark on the other side. The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself – which is unlikely to be sustainable. Overall, it appears best to judge who is winning the debate by assuming that the noisiest individuals have lost the intra-Government debate and are stirring up external supporters” (Sky News, 2016).

When the matter comes into the light like this; it’s fruitful to see that the major Opposition Party have now showed alternative path or at-least thought things through where they have propositions to a counter-party that doesn’t care for fulfilling their mandate and exercising the vote of the people.

Theresa May, was voted into the Parliament to be MP and not a PM. Therefore she might forget how to get the popular vote and get consensus. Here is one set of ideas and suggestions to how to make amends of the Brexit. This is worth listening to and also reading to get ideas of how to fix the problems of the European Union and the United Kingdom. Take a look!

Infrastructure Policy:

“So what should be done? Brexit offers British policy-makers the opportunity to step back and examine the future direction of infrastructure and housing policy. The Autumn Statement should be used signal a change in direction towards an economic strategy which uses infrastructure and housing policy as a tool to boost growth and productivity in regions that have suffered a lack of investment” (Moving On, P: 12, 2016). “Ignore this problem and it is clear that unity in our divided country will be even further away. Accept the challenge, take steps to rebalance investment, and the United Kingdom has half a chance at sticking together“ (Moving On, P: 14, 2016).

Working Policy:

“First, he should do all that he can to stimulate investment in innovation. Coming up with new ideas, products and services which the rest of the world wants to buy is the best way we can remain internationally competitive post Brexit without seeking to pursue an alternative strategy, advocated by those on the Right, of making our labour markets ever more flexible and embarking on a race to the bottom on people’s terms and conditions of work. Innovation will also help improve UK productivity which is 18% below the G7 average, the largest gap since 1991 when the ONS started collecting such data” (Moving On, P: 19, 2016). “Limited digital connectivity is one of the biggest barriers to business and Ofcom estimates that 1 in 5 small business premises will still not be able to access superfast broadband without further action from government. The Universal Service Obligation – which sets a target of all homes having 10MB per second speeds by 2020 is nowhere near ambitious enough – a more ambitious target and timeframe for delivery should be set if Britain is to be at the forefront of the fourth industrial revolution” (Moving on, P: 22, 2016). “The biggest boost he could provide is by declaring that the Government’s goal during the Brexit negotiations is to continue with the UK’s membership – not just access to – the European Single Market, as I set out in my speech to the Centre for Progressive Capitalism last month” (Moving on, P: 24, 2016).

Skills/Education:

“The National Audit Office for instance has recommended that the Department of Education should set out the planned overall impact of its apprenticeships policy on productivity and growth, along with short-term key performance indicators to measure the programme’s success. The Government must also adequately fund welfare-to-work in the Autumn Statement, get a grip on inclusive regional growth and ensure that welfare-to-work helps those in areas with high unemployment and not just those who find it easiest to get back into work. As the Science and Technology Select Committee has said, the Government should now publish its Digital Strategy policy without further delay and include goals for developing better basic digital skills and increasing digital apprenticeships as well as providing a framework through which the private sector can more readily collaborate with communities and local authorities to raise digital skills in local SMEs” (Moving On, P: 30, 2016).

Welfare:

“The ‘digital skills gap’ meanwhile has been estimated as costing the economy £63 billion a year in lost additional GDP. Also holding us back from the high tech economy of the future is the lack of new engineering and technology recruits meeting employers’ expectations. We are also facing an engineering ‘retirement cliff’ with the average engineer currently in their fifties.18 According to the Engineering UK 2016 report, engineering employers have the potential to generate an additional £27 billion per year from 2022 but only if we can meet the forecasted demand for 257 000 new engineering vacancies.19 And these are exactly the type of professions we need to build our industries and export to the world after we leave the European Union” (Moving On, P: 28, 2016).

Welfare II:

“Firstly, he must reverse cuts to Universal Credit (UC) and restore confidence after the programme’s chaotic introduction so it genuinely provides an incentive to work. Secondly, the Chancellor has to do more to help parents join or re-join the workforce and give every child the best start in life. We should move towards a system of universal free childcare for all working parents of pre-school children, starting with free childcare for all two year olds” (…) “There is also a worrying picture on pay progression too. Universal Credit was intended to help workers move onto higher pay levels, as well as get a job in the first place. But as the Resolution Foundation has said “implementation realities scuppered the ambition of the design”. The likely result is that UC will leave an increasing number of workers stuck on the minimum wage when they should be looking to earn more” (Moving On, P: 32-34, 2016).

Championing Key Sector:

Because Brexit austerity could last beyond a conventional economic cycle, it will require fundamental policy change and supply-side efforts to counteract. Take, for example, the risks now hanging over the financial services sector – which represents 12% of our economic output, nearly two million jobs in the UK and which generates £67billion of revenues for the public purse. It’s not simply a case of having an ‘industrial strategy’ to play to this core comparative advantage for the UK. We will need to negotiate long term access to EU markets where a whole series of product lines face the prospect of being banned and outlawed. Should this turn out to be the case, and the cluster of specialisms in UK financial centres erode with core competences like clearing relocating to Frankfurt or to New York, then we lose a vital skills infrastructure as well as year by year corporation and income tax revenues” (Moving On, P: 38, 2016).

“So we should test the Autumn Statement for whether it counteracts the looming Brexit austerity and whether it can deliver access and opportunities for sectors under threat, like financial services. Yes, there are reforms still needed to many of the tax regimes in which the financial services sector operate. Some lucrative practices need loopholes closing – for instance in the taxation of financial spread betting or old Osborne legacies such as the wasteful ‘shares for rights’ dodge that is rife for abuse” (Moving On, P: 2016).

This here shows the proofs that the Labour Party can have things that works for the nation, if they get people to believe it, but the simplistic dogma of the Tories is sold to the commoners like coke and cheddar cheese, while the Labour Party message is a rock to hit your head instead of being served feasible to the public. Therefore the Labour has to change their ways of sending their message and make sense to the ones blinded by the PM May and her deceptive tone of arrogance from White Hall. Peace.

Reference:

Alison McGovern MP, Chuka Umunna MP, Shabana Mahmood MP, Rachel Reeves MP & Chris Leslie MP – ‘Moving on – A Labour approach to the post-Brexit economy’ (November 2016)

Sky News – ‘Leaked memo shows Government’s lack of Brexit plans’ (15.11.2016) link: http://news.sky.com/story/leaked-memo-shows-governments-lack-of-brexit-plans-10658063/revision/1479197701

Uganda: Mak Visitiation Committee 2016 – Inaugural Press Statement (22.11.2016)

mak-22-11-2016-p1mak-22-11-2016-p2

Ugandan farmers praise UN report citing flaws with Bidco (22.11.2016)

IFADPalm P1

The report acknowledges that a partnership with Bidco “could adversely damage UNDP’s reputation and the communities it seeks to help”

KAMPALA, Uganda, November 22, 2016Embattled Ugandan farmers fighting threats and land grabbing by Bidco have praised a draft report by U.N. investigators that calls into question the company’s business practices.

The report is the result of a complaint by the Bugala Farmers Association to the U.N.’s Social and Environmental Compliance Unit (SECU).

The report can be found on the following link: APO.af/cWkh3e

In the complaint, the farmers stated that the United Nations had not performed sufficient due diligence on Bidco before inviting it to join Business Call to Action, which is part of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The farmers provided evidence that Bidco has engaged in human rights, labour and environmental violations in the Kalangala District of Bugala Island, Lake Victoria, Uganda, where Bidco has grabbed land from smallholder farmers and cut down over 18,000 acres of rainforest to make way for a large-scale palm oil business.

The U.N. investigators found fault with the decision to invite Bidco into partnership with UNDP: “After the fieldwork and additional research, SECU concluded that the processes employed by UNDP for admission of Bidco were not consistent with UNDP policies.”

The report acknowledges that a partnership with Bidco “could adversely damage UNDP’s reputation and the communities it seeks to help”, and Bidco’s activities “may be considered risky”.

Kenya-based Bidco has tried to distance itself from the allegations of land grabbing and environmental destruction in Uganda, but the UNDP investigators found there is a clear link between the company’s corporate structure, overseen by CEO Vimal Shah, and operations in Uganda.

The investigators also determined that Bidco’s claim of not being involved in land acquisition in Uganda is not accurate. Bidco “knew of, relied on, and encouraged the purchase (of land) by the government.” Bidco Uganda also was “engaged in decisions and discussions related to the purchase,” the report says.

John Muyisa, a representative of the Bugala Farmers Association, commended the work of the U.N. investigators, who visited remote Kalangala District as part of their research.

“We are very pleased that the United Nations has performed an objective evaluation of its internal processes and determined that it is risky to partner with Bidco. The United Nations is a globally admired organisation, and it is absolutely correct that, as the report says, ‘Communities should be empowered’ and not be trodden upon by predator corporations like Bidco.”

In light of the report’s findings, the Bugala Farmers Association has called on the United Nations to terminate its partnership with Bidco.

Any member of the public can comment on the U.N. draft report until 7 December. The report can be found on the following link: APO.af/cWkh3e

Kenya: Press Statement on the Status of the Recruitment of Chairperson, Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (21.11.2016)

kenya-eacc-nov-2016

Kadaga Criticizes Museveni’s Closure of Makerere University (Youtube-Clip)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y14WKXKo3cw

“The Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Alitwala has criticized a decision by President Yoweri Museveni to indefinitely close Makerere University without consulting other stakeholders. Kadaga is concerned that the closure has affected various other institutions utilizing the university’s services especially health centers.
Kadaga’s remarks come after the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Committee on Health Dr. Michael Bukenya informed parliament on the worrying state of Kawempe Hospital where over 15 new born babies are dying daily as a result of the medical interns leaving their posts in the wake of the University’s closure” (NTV Uganda, 2016)

White House Report states that the A.I. regulations are lacking in both military and privately at this current day in the U.S.

uas_map

Simultaneously, industry has been increasing its investment in AI. In 2016, Google Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Sundar Pichai said, “Machine learning [a subfield of AI] is a core, transformative way by which we’re rethinking how we’re doing everything. We are thoughtfully applying it across all our products, be it search, ads, YouTube, or Play. And we’re in early days, but you will see us — in a systematic way — apply machine learning in all these areas.” (White House, 2016).

Present AI-enabled Products:

“Currently relevant examples of the regulatory challenges that AI-enabled products present are found in the cases of automated vehicles (AVs, such as self-driving cars) and AI-equipped unmanned aircraft systems (UAS, or “drones”). In the long run, AVs will likely save many lives by reducing driver error and increasing personal mobility, and UAS will offer many economic benefits. Yet public safety must be protected as these technologies are tested and begin to mature. The Department of Transportation (DOT) is using an approach to evolving the relevant regulations that is based on building expertise in the Department, creating safe spaces and test beds for experimentation, and working with industry and civil society to evolve performance-based regulations that will enable more uses as evidence of safe operation accumulates” (White House, 2016).

Recommendation to the States:

“Recommendation 1: Private and public institutions are encouraged to examine whether and how they can responsibly leverage AI and machine learning in ways that will benefit society. Social justice and public policy institutions that do not typically engage with advanced technologies and data science in their work should consider partnerships with AI researchers and practitioners that can help apply AI tactics to the broad social problems these institutions already address in other ways.

Recommendation 2: Federal agencies should prioritize open training data and open data standards in AI. The government should emphasize the release of datasets that enable the use of AI to address social challenges. Potential steps may include developing an “Open Data for AI” initiative with the objective of releasing a significant number of government data sets to accelerate AI research and galvanize the use of open data standards and best practices across government, academia, and the private sector” (White House, 2016).

Recommendation to the Federal Government:

“Recommendation 3: The Federal Government should explore ways to improve the capacity of key agencies to apply AI to their missions. For example, Federal agencies should explore the potential to create DARPA-like organizations to support high-risk, high-reward AI research and its application, much as the Department of Education has done through its proposal to create an “ARPA-ED,” to support R&D to determine whether AI and other technologies could significantly improve student learning outcomes.

Recommendation 4: The NSTC MLAI subcommittee should develop a community of practice for AI practitioners across government. Agencies should work together to develop and share standards and best practices around the use of AI in government operations. Agencies should ensure that Federal employee training programs include relevant AI opportunities” (White House, 2016).

On LAWS:

“Over the past several years, in particular, issues concerning the development of so-called “Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems” (LAWS) have been raised by technical experts, ethicists, and others in the international community.79 The United States has actively participated in the ongoing international discussion on LAWS in the context of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW),80 and anticipates continued robust international discussion of these potential weapon systems going forward.

State Parties to the CCW are discussing technical, legal, military, ethical, and other issues involved with emerging technologies, although it is clear that there is no common understanding of LAWS. Some States have conflated LAWS with remotely piloted aircraft (military “drones”), a position which the United States opposes, as remotely-piloted craft are, by definition, directly controlled by humans just as manned aircraft are. Other States have focused on artificial intelligence, robot armies, or whether “meaningful human control” – an undefined term – is exercised over life-and-death decisions. The U.S. priority has been to reiterate that all weapon systems, autonomous or otherwise, must adhere to international” (White House, 2016).

US Government and the DoD:

“The U.S. government is also conducting a comprehensive review of the implications of autonomy in defense systems. In November 2012, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued DoD Directive 3000.09, “Autonomy in Weapon Systems,” which outlines requirements for the development and fielding of autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons. Weapon systems capable of autonomously selecting and engaging targets with lethal force require senior-level DoD reviews and approval before those weapon systems enter formal development and again before fielding. The DoD Directive neither prohibits nor encourages such development, but requires it to proceed carefully and only after review and approval by senior defense officials. Among other things, the DoD Directive requires that autonomous and semi-autonomous weapon systems are rigorously tested and that personnel are trained appropriately in their use to advance international norms pertaining to armed conflict” (White House, 2016).

Recommendation 23: The U.S. Government should complete the development of a single, government-wide policy, consistent with international humanitarian law, on autonomous and semi-autonomous weapons” (White House, 2016).

These findings are showing how the current Obama Administration has worked on the matter and studied the use of AI in workforce and military. Together with the DoD, the DoD and usage of the AI and UAS. United States Government has made decisions, but has not apparently a current vision on how to use or how regulate the technology of the moment. What is problematic is that there are no common ground for the Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS), neither the DoD Directive neither prohibits nor encourages such development, but requires it to proceed carefully and only after review and approval by senior defense officials. This shows the importance of the current regulations and how to develop the technology to use it in combat and in private sector in the US.

Certainly the Trump Administration has to work on this, but they will surely use this for their benefit. We can all wonder what they will use of this technology and the AI and UAS. Peace.  

Reference:

United States White House – ‘Science and Technology Council PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE Executive Office of the President National Science and Technology Council Committee on Technology’ (October, 2016)

Zimbabwe: Patson Dzamara recounts his abduction and beating

zim-abduction