This is the Barrett's. The colour should be pink, not red

Gastroscopy

Gastroscopy today, carried out by Dr C. The scheduled time was 11.20 and I was there 15 minutes early as instructed, but the procedure was actually started at 11.55, continuing until about 12.20. The back of the throat is sprayed to numb it, and enable the patient to tolerate insertion of the tube without gagging. The gastroenterologist examines the oesophagus, stomach and intestine with the aid of a light and camera at the end of the tube, and can also insert a device that enables cuttings to be taken from any tissue that looks interesting.

Dr C said that the stomach was slightly tortuous, but that was no big deal. As a result of earlier acid reflux, the surface of the bottom of the oesophagus had changed to become similar to the stomach lining, a condition known as Barrett's oesophagus [see www.ucl.ac.uk/surgery/nmlc/Barrett.htm]. There was a small stricture above the Barrett's, and Dr C took two biopsies fromm the stricture and the Barrett's. He also wrote an order for a blood sample, which I had after a 20 minute wait at 12.45, then cycled home, arriving conveniently at 13.00, the time prescribed to start eating and drinking again.

For the last four days, taking Domperidome, there has been no reflux, but Dr C prescribed indefinite continuation of Omeprazole 40 mg, an antacid drug.

And by the way, I won the ping-pong yesterday 2-0, making the cumulative score 45-42.

Chagos Islands - letter to David Triesman

From Lord Avebury P0630081

Tel 020-7274 4617
Email ericavebury@gmail.com



August 30, 2006


Dear David,

I wrote to the Foreign Secretary on May 19, after a discussion with Mr Olivier Bancoult, expressing the hope that the Crown wouldn’t appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal in the Chagos Islands case ([2006] EWHC 1038 (Admin), Case No: CO/4093/2004, between LOUIS OLIVIER BANCOULT and THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS), and you replied on June 6 saying that you were then deciding how best to respond. You didn’t say that my representations would be taken into consideration, and I assume that when you finally decided to appeal, you made up your mind to ignore any opinions expressed by Parliament and Parliamentarians, a not uncommon experience.

In Bill Rammell’s written statement of June 15, 2006, he paraphrased the “general conclusion” of the Feasibility Study [‘FS’], delivered in July 2002, as follows:-

“in effect, therefore, anything other than short term resettlement on a purely subsistence basis would be highly precarious and would involve expensive underwriting by the UK Government for an open ended period – probably permanently. Accordingly, the Government considers that there would be no purpose in commissioning any further study into the feasibility of resettlement……..we have therefore decided to legislate to prevent (resettlement)”.

The FS was flawed, however, in two respects.

First, there were unrealistic restrictions on the scope of the consultants’ work. For example. they were forbidden, by Clause 12 from considering the circumstances of Diego Garcia, and thus were unable to compare them with the outer islands. The height above sea level, climatic conditions and water resources are the same in the whole of the archipelago. The US has recently spent several million dollars on protective hangers for Stealth bombers, as well as facilities for nuclear submarines, and accommodation for 4,500 people of whom 2,000 are civilians. Against this strong indication of confidence in the future of Diego Garcia, the generally negative comments about the outer islands are untenable.

Second, Clause. 6(1) confined the FS to underground water resources. It is well known that in general, small islands have little of a fresh water lens, but in the Chagos Islands, the population has for centuries drawn its water supply from the skies. These are amongst the wettest parts of the world, receiving about 4,500 mm of rain per year, a factor the consultants were not asked to consider

Although the Government’s decision was based largely on cost, consultants were precluded from considering costs and benefits of resettlement . There was no evidence, therefore, on which to base the conclusion which Ministers always misquote (eg in your letter to Glenys Kinnock MEP of August 17), that ‘the costs of maintaining long-term inhabitation [sic] are likely to be prohibitive’. The report does not say that ‘any long-term settlement would be precarious and costly’, a much firmer conclusion than the consultants drew. Among the “general conclusions” of the FS there is no reference to life being “precarious” for a resettled population, but that ‘natural events…. are likely to make life difficult for a resettled population’, as they would equally for civilians and service personnel on Diego Garcia.
I respectfully suggest that in letters to MPs, MEPs and peers, the report should be quoted verbatim, not paraphrased in a distorted way to support Government policy.


Clause 17 of the published terms of reference provide that:-

“A draft report will be produced for the FCO and the Government of the BIOT. On receiving comments on the draft report from the FCO and the Government of the BIOT, the consultant will finalise the report and provide the text in both paper and electronic form to the Government of the BIOT and the FCO”..

The drafts were delivered to BIOT several months before publication in July 2002, and this implies that there was extensive redrafting. Would you please lodge a copy of the original draft in the Library of the House of Commons (since that is where the final report was deposited), so that the extent of the changes can be seen? Will you also please explain why, notwithstanding the consultants’ recommendation, the Government decided not to consult.them on the conclusions of the FS.



The Lord Triesman,
Foreign & Commonwealth Office,
London SW1A 2AH.

Adelaide Kemble, by John Hayter

This pastel of my great-great grandmother Adelaide Kemble is posted by kind permission of the curator, Welbeck Abbey. The Duke of Portland is said to have proposed to her in December 1842, when she was already married to Edward Sartoris. But that didn't stop him from commissioning over 30 further pastels by John Hayter of Adelaide in various operatic roles including Norma and La Sonnambula,plus an enormous painting by Grant of her as Seniramis. Anna Jameson wrote detailed notes which have yet to be transcribed, on each of the scenes. But there are no letters between the Duke and Adelaide or the artists that we are aware of. Anna Jameson published several works, but if she had mentioned the Duke's infatuation in any of them, we would surely have known about it. Sne was an inveterate gossip and tole everybody about Adelaide's romance with Francis Thun

Adelaide left the stage immediately after her marriage, and her first child Greville was born in 1843, so there is a mystery as to whether she actually sat for Hayter, dressed up for the parts, when she was pregnant or dealing with a small baby. I think he must have executed all the portraits in 1842, because they are all scenes from the operas she did in her final season at Covent Garden.

At the ping-pong table

I managed to claw one game back from JW today, recovering to 2-1 after a first game which he won 21-9.

Barbara and Hattie Bluestone from Charlotteville arrived from Washington DC this morning having touched down at 06.30, and were determined to ignore jetlag. But they returned after visiting Tate Britain and walking to Parliament Square for a rest mid-afternoon.

Merve Kavakci

www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/heart_and_soul.shtml


Heart and Soul


Heart and Soul BBC World Service 07.32 Sunday

A Woman of Conviction: Merve Kavakci

Trevor Barnes continues his series of challenging conversations with women of conviction.

This week, he meets Merve Kavakci. As a young woman, she won a seat in the Turkish parliament - only to be jeered by her colleagues because she refused to take her seat without her Islamic headscarf in place.

That was in 1999. Her principled stance has condemned her years of virtual exile in America.

So how did she cope with the consequences of her actions?

What does her faith mean to her today?

And, as a campaigner for the right of women to wear Islamic dress, what does she say to those who think that in a post-9/11 world, this is a side issue?

A Woman of Conviction: Merve Kavakci

Trevor Barnes continues his series of challenging conversations with women of conviction.

This week, he meets Merve Kavakci. As a young woman, she won a seat in the Turkish parliament - only to be jeered by her colleagues because she refused to take her seat without her Islamic headscarf in place.

That was in 1999. Her principled stance has condemned her years of virtual exile in America.

So how did she cope with the consequences of her actions?

What does her faith mean to her today?

And, as a campaigner for the right of women to wear Islamic dress, what does she say to those who think that in a post-9/11 world, this is a side issue?

Lulu Todd and her daughter Sarah this morning

Operation April 18

There follows a selection of photographs of the operation to remove a lymphoma from my right lung on April 18, not for the squeamish. To be precise, it was a right thoracotomy and wedge resection of a right upper lobe mass which proved to be a maltoma - a low-grade B-cell lymphoma.

I would like to be able to post a commentary on the pictures, of which this is a selection, but would need some expert advice to be able to say what stage in the operation each of them represents.

The postoperative course was massively complicated by a severe bleed, thought to be or gastro-intestinal origin, but a true bleeding point was never found. By May 9 the wound was well healed and chest x-ray was satisfactory.

Now I'm back to normal apart from reflux, but still have a gastroscopy on August 31.

About to go to the theatre

Work on the back

Quite a lot went on behind my back! No idea what was going in there, but perhaps it was to do with the anaesthesia. Must ask Dr Lanka.

Line into back

Next stop, I'm out for the count

Not sure exactly when I became unconscious, but it was certainly before oxygen was administered

Just about ready to start cutting

Where does it start

The length of the scar is 315 mm, stretching round the side and back. It must be very difficult to avoid cutting blood vessels, muscle and nerves with such a large incision

Start of the incision

The MMR scan show where the tumour is, so there's no problem finding it

A bit more room is needed

Keyhole surgery it ain't

How big a hole do they need?

Digging

This next one is impressive, even if you can't see what is happening down there at the coal face.

What's that?

Getting to grips with it

This looks like the actual tumour. But there aren't any shots of the 'wedge resection'

That presumably is the lymphoma itself

Finishing touches

Mr M with a chunk of my right lung

Opening remarks by Lord Avebury, vice-chair, Parliamentary Human Rights Group, at a seminar on Bahrain in No 2 Millbank Parliamentary Annexe, at 12.00

At the end of last year we were looking at five years of lost opportunities in Bahrain, following the accession of the present ruler on the death of his father. The signs had been good, with the abolition of the state security courts, the amnesty for political detainees, the ending of torture and the return of the exiles; but as we said then, the process of reform leading towards a liberal constitutional monarchy had gone into reverse.

Unfortunately, the eight months since then have witnessed further departures from the norms of human rights, good governance and the rule of law, which this meeting has to address. A week ago a delegation of human rights activists from Bahrain presented a petition signed by 82,000 citizens, one in every 8 of the adult population, to the UN Secretary-General, asking the international body to aid them in determining their political future, and in particular in getting a constitution to replace the one foisted on them by the present ruler in a three-card trick. In May 2001 the people voted for the National Charter in a referendum, but were then given a different solution which allowed them to vote for an emasculated Parliament, a pale imitation of democracy, entrenching the powers of the ruler and his family.

Meanwhile, arbitrary arrests and detention continue, long sentences are passed on activists for political offences, and repressive laws are enacted. The office of the US-based National Democratic Institute was closed down in May and its director, Fawzi Julid was expelled. The Bahrain Centre for Human Rights was banned, although it continues to operate unofficially. The President of the Popular Committee for Martyrs and Torture Victims, Abdul Ra’oof al Shayeb, was arrested and ill-treated in April – and that Committee also exists outside the law. He has since been jailed for a year on trumped-up charges, following his attendance at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Discrimination against the Shi’a majority has attracted adverse comment from the respected International Crisis Group in a report entitled Bahrain’s Sectarian Challenge, which called for an end to the manipulation of the country’s demographic makeup through political naturalisation of foreigners and extension of voting rights to citizens of Saudi Arabia, a matter on which evidence has been heard at our previous seminars. They called on the government of the US – and they should have extended this recommendation to the UK as well – to restore legislative authority to the elected branch of the parliament in accordance with the short-lived 1973 constitution, to end ant-Shi’a discrimination and to redraw electoral boundaries so as to fairly reflect the country’s population. The response of the prime minister of Bahrain, within two weeks of this report, was to issue a decree appointing 56 extra Sunnis to posts in the Ministry of the Interior.

Human Rights Watch has also weighed in recently with a letter to King Hamad about the draft law on public meetings and demonstrations, which they claimed would undermine the right of peaceful assembly contained in Article 21 of the ICCPR, said to be on the agenda for ratification by Bahrain since May 2005. Even before this proposal, there were already severe restrictions on meetings and demonstrations, and the police have been known to attack demonstrators, even when they had been properly notified of an event. In July hooded security men arrested Abbas Abd Ali from Ekr in the district of Sitra after he took part in a peaceful demonstration at al-Dana Mall in Manama, and beat him till he became unconscious and had to be hospitalised. The previous month, the government had banned all demonstrations to mark the International Day against Torture.

Last week the trial of 19 young men who were arrested on March 10 after a demo outside the Dana Shopping Mall, including four minors, was further adjourned. Amongst the detainees is a speaker from our last seminar. The youngsters protested about the long delay, which looks like punishment before sentence, and were beaten up for their pains. Relatives have reported that they suffered various injuries, and are now on hunger strike. I asked Amnesty International on Monday why they hadn’t issued an Urgent Action on behalf of these detainees, and was told they were awaiting the court hearing. Since it has now been deferred without a new date being set, I hope they will now issue a statement.

Another young man who took part in a peaceful demonstration at the airport was sentenced to two years imprisonment in early May. So even without the new law, the treatment of activists and demonstrators would already be in breach of the Covenant if they had signed it. The FCO Minister who deals with Bahrain, Dr Kim Howells MP, told me 6 weeks ago that he hoped to see movement on Bahrain’s signature and ratification soon, but it would be an act of gross hypocrisy if they signed while continuing to arrest and ill-treat peaceful demonstrators, and to prepare even more draconian laws against freedom of assembly.

In my letter to the Minister, I had said that if there had been a functioning civil society in Bahrain, one would have expected the Law on Public Demonstrations discussed, and in particular for there to have been a lively debate in Parliament itself. His puzzling response was that civil society was strengthening, and that it would take time for Bahrain to develop democratic institutions. The Government’s contribution to this process is to spend £191,000 on three projects concerned with enhancing the capacity of the Parliament, supporting the capacity of the Youth Parliament, and empowering lower caste women activists so that in the long run they may become parliamentary candidates. But if the Youth Parliament and the women are hand-picked by the al-Khalifa, or are vetted to make sure they don’t say the wrong thing, that will gold plate the façade which is presented to the outside world and bolster the pretence that progress is being made.

Meanwhile, the King arrived here for a private visit, and the Friday before last the London traffic was stopped so that he and 70 of his cronies could get to the Dorchester for lunch, escorted by two police Range Rovers and six motorcycle outriders. A journalist who was making inquiries about the cost of the operation was questioned by two Special Branch detectives. The Foreign Office say that security for visiting heads of state is a matter for the police, but its funny that when President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, a country with 40 times as many people and ten times the GNP of Bahrain, was here in May, there wasn’t a copper in sight. The Met knows what the party line is on these occasions without being told.

The British - and Americans too – ignore the fact that Bahrain is already in breach of her obligations under the Convention Against Torture, as the Committee Against Torture decided when it considered Bahrain’s first report in May 2005. They say nothing about the need to repeal the decree which exonerated the torturers including the notorious Ian Henderson, a British citizen who was in charge of the security apparatus for many years.

I don’t expect them to make any public comment, either, on the Counter-Terrorism Bill, which passed through both Houses of the docile Parliament, apparently without criticism, and is awaiting final ratification by the King. This Bill defines terrorism even more broadly than our Act of 2000, including ‘threatening national unity’, and providing accommodation or subsistence to persons who are convicted later on charges of terrorism. It implies that any organisation opposed to the Bahraini constitution is terrorist, and allows the courts to impose the death penalty for acts of terrorism. This Bill has attracted criticism from the UN Rapporteur on the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, but not from the Foreign Office, which nevertheless claims that one of its priorities for 2006 is ‘ensuring that the fight against terrorism is taken forward in a way which is consistent with international human rights standards’.

One last point: we have discussed at previous seminars the attempts by the al-Khalifas to restrict critical websites, through control of the monopoly internet provider, Batelco. They have now denied local users access to Google Earth, a program that enables users to zoom in and see details of secret construction works in the territory such as berths for the yachts of the ruling family and their cronies. This may sound pretty trivial compared with the ruling family’s major defects that we’re here to discuss, but it shows how they treat the whole state as their personal property, yet at the same time they are terrified that the people will get to know what they’re doing. It must be the task of all friends of Bahrain to ensure that the people get that information. King Hamad will discover, like King Canute did 1,000 years ago, that he can’t stop the tide coming in. This time, it will be information, not seawater, and with it the information tide will bring true freedom.

Ping pong disaster, and weight

Just when I had narrowed the gap, JW beat me 2-0 yesterday and 2-1 today, making the score 44-39.

Calculated my body mass index (BMI) today - weight in kilograms (63.6) divided by height in metres (1.725) squared = 21.37. Normal is between 18.5 and 24.9 so I'm almost smack in themiddle of the safe range.

Why don't GPs routinely screen their patients by measuring their BMI, and hand them leaflets on the health risks of being overweight if necessary?

Since obesity is caused by excess use of certain ingredients in food like sugar, couldn't those ingredients be made subject to VAT?

My great grandfather, Henry Evans Gordon, by Leighton

By kind permission of the Leighton House Museum. They also have a fine portrait by Leighton of his wife May Sartoris.














.

Fuelling the Middle East conflict

From Lord Avebury P0622083

Tel 020-7274 467

Email ericavebury@gmail.com

August 22, 2006

Dear Mr Ingram,

Could you please explain why the Government are not only increasing arms sales to Israel, but also supplying night vision equipment to Iran which ends up with Hezbollah in Lebanon?

According to The Guardian of April 6, 2006 (see attached article Huge jump in arms sales to Israel), military export licences for Israel almost doubled last year, and now it is revealed (see article from yesterday’s Times attached British Kit found in Hezbollah Bunkers) that at the same time we have been supplying equipment that is of crucial importance to Israel’s mortal enemies.

These policies are profoundly at variance with the aim of achieving a lasting peace in the Middle East, and in the case of Iran, the award of the licence for night vision equipment was also a breach of our own export guidelines (see attached SaferWorld press release Hezbollah night-vision allegations highlight loophole in UK arms export monitoring). Iran has supported Hizbollah has been going on for years, so did it not occur to officials that there was a material risk of diversion to a known illegal client?

I hope the investigation of the sale of night vision equipment will be widened to cover all sales of military and dual use equipment to Israel, Iran and Syria. One immediate contribution we could make to consolidating the fragile peace in Lebanon would be to suspend all shipments of such equipment, and all issues of licences, to the region.

Yours sincerely,

The Rt Hon Adam Ingram MP,

Floor 5, Main Building,
Ministry ofDefence,
Whitehall,
London SW1A 2HB

Huge jump in arms sales to Israel

· Military export licences to country almost double
· Government accused of arming repressive regimes

Richard Norton-Taylor
Thursday April 6, 2006
The Guardian

The number of arms export licences granted for countries the government accuses of human rights abuses increased significantly over the past year, the latest official figures show.

They also show that licences for weapons sales to Saudi Arabia increased by 25% last year, to £25m. They included sales of assault rifles, riot control equipment and body armour.

Licences for British arms sales to Israel last year amounted to nearly £25m, almost double the previous year. The licences covered the export of armoured vehicles and missile components.

Quarterly annual figures appear separately on the Foreign Office website and were collated by the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (Caat), which alerted the Guardian to them. They show that licences were also approved for sales of arms valued at more than £12.5m to Indonesia. Amnesty International last year reported extrajudicial killings carried out by Indonesian security forces in Aceh and West Papua. British-made armoured vehicles were reported to have been deployed against protesters in West Papua in November last year.

Israel, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia are among 11 out of 20 countries described by the FO in its 2005 annual human rights report as "major countries of concern" to which the government licensed military equipment.

The sales cleared for Israel are the highest since 1999. This was before Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, sought assurances from Israel that equipment supplied by the UK was not being used against civilians and in the occupied territories. In 2002 the government said it was tightening controls on arms exports to the country after it found that assurances had been breached.

The increase in arms export licences to Saudi Arabia came at a time the government was negotiating an agreement, worth an estimated £8bn to BAE Systems, to equip Saudi Arabia's armed forces with Typhoon combat aircraft, formerly known as the Eurofighter.

Indonesia is now regarded as an ally against Islamist extremism and Tony Blair held out the prospect of more British weapons sales on his recent visit to the country.

Britain last year licensed military equipment sales to 14 of the 17 countries involved in major armed conflict, Caat said yesterday. It added that Britain had also licensed weapons equipment to 10 countries at the bottom third of the UN human development index.

The FO said last night that all exports were considered under the government's official criteria. "The bottom line is that no piece of kit is used for external aggression or internal repression," it said, adding that it believed the government's arms export licensing system was stringent and transparent.

"The government has committed itself to leading international negotiations on an arms trade treaty to stop global arms flows to war zones and repressive regimes," Mike Lewis of Caat said yesterday. "Yet in the last twelve months it has licensed weapons exports precisely to these regimes ... The government must stop arming the world's human rights abusers."

The Times August 21, 2006

By Bob Graham, Michael Evans and Richard Beeston

AN URGENT investigation was launched last night after Israel accused Britain of indirectly supplying Hezbollah terrorists with military night-vision equipment that helped them to target Israeli soldiers in Lebanon.

The equipment was found by Israeli troops in Hezbollah command bunkers in southern Lebanon. Each set was stamped “made in Britain”.

The Israelis made representations to the Foreign Office after it was revealed that Britain had sold 250 night-vision systems to Iran in 2003 for use against drug smugglers.

Foreign Office officials said early indications seemed to suggest that the night-vision equipment found by the Israelis was not part of the batch sold in 2003 to Iran. However, thorough checks were being made to compare serial numbers on the equipment found in the Hezbollah bunkers with those on the ones exported legitimately to Iran.

The Iranians are the prime sponsor of Hezbollah, and the Israeli authorities are demanding to know whether the equipment sold to Iran three years ago ended up in the hands of Hezbollah, which killed 117 Israeli soldiers during the month-long clashes in Lebanon.

A Department of Trade and Industry official said night-vision equipment of military specification required an export licence. The investigation will look into whether any British company might have breached export regulations.

The batch of 250 night-vision systems were given a special export licence in 2003 because they were intended to be used by Iranian police trying to stem the flow of heroin and opium from Afghanistan into Iran. Although there is what amounts to an arms embargo against Iran, aimed principally at stopping the export of equipment that could benefit Tehran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme, the request for night-vision equipment was approved in recognition of the counter-narcotics work.

When the export was agreed, Mike O’Brien, then Junior Minister at the Foreign Office, told the Commons: “The goods are for the use on the Iran-Afghanistan border against heroin smugglers.” He said there was “no risk of these goods being diverted for use by the Iranian military”.

If any of the equipment has been diverted to Hezbollah, it would be a serious embarrassment for the Government. Hezbollah’s “external security”, the military wing of the militant organisation, is proscribed as a terrorist group. The Government has also made clear its support for Israel’s struggle with Hezbollah and has approved the transit of bunker-busting bombs and missiles for the Israelis from the US through British airports.

Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary, said: “If this turns out to be true, and Iran supplied backing for Hezbollah, it will have consequences for any future military exports to Iran. And it points the finger all the more strongly at Iranian involvement in destabilising the Middle East.”

One set of the equipment was found by Israeli forces in the southern Lebanon village of Mis-a-Jebel on August 10, in a house belonging to a 60-year-old man whose four sons are all Hezbollah fighters.

One was described as a Thermo-vision 1000 LR system with a serial number 155010, part number 193960. Other equipment, including radios also thought to be British, and sophisticated recording and monitoring devices, were found.

Israeli commanders had complained that night-time operations in the border region had been hampered by the ability of Hezbollah fighters to observe and counter their moves. In more than six days of fighting around the village of Mis-a-Jebel, the Israelis lost six soldiers and 20 more were injured.

Lieutenant-Colonel Olivier Radowicz, an Israeli commander, said: “The night-vision unit was used to observe the movement of troops. You can also record what you are watching. Then it is connected to a computer. You can obtain a perfect intelligence picture in real time. It is then connected to firing systems.”

SaferWorld - For immediate release – 22 August 2006

Hezbollah night-vision allegations highlight loophole in UK arms export monitoring

British military night-vision equipment, originally sold to Iran, has allegedly been found in Hezbollah’s possession. This highlights the need for the UK Government to more effectively monitor the final destination and use of its arms exports. (1)

Under the UK Government's own arms export criteria, it is obliged to consider "the existence of a risk that the equipment will be diverted within the buyer country or re-exported under undesirable conditions"(2) when deciding on whether to license an export.

Yet, the UK Government does not have a formal system for checking what happens to arms exports after they have been licensed and left the UK. Introducing such a system would allow the Government to verify delivery and monitor end-use to ensure that exported British military equipment is used as intended – and not diverted elsewhere or used for other purposes. The Government has previously argued that such a system would be impractical, but other countries operate them (3). Earlier this month, a joint committee of MPs called on the Government to look at introducing a system. (4)

Saferworld is urging the Government to close this loophole and establish a formal system of end-use monitoring when it conducts its five-year review of the Export Control Act next year. In the interim, the Government should redouble efforts to ensure that it enforces existing regulations to prevent transfers of weapons or other strategic goods to unintended end users.

“This incident demonstrates that the UK Government needs to do more to ensure that it knows for certain who, in the end, will be using the arms its exports. The Government should listen to MPs and campaigners who have been calling for a system for doing this to be introduced and close this loophole.” said Claire Hickson, Head of Communications and Advocacy at Saferworld.

ENDS

For further information, please contact:

Sonia Rai, Advocacy and Policy Officer, Saferworld

Tel: + 44 (0) 207 324 4646;