After the Cup Trust – what next?

February 3, 2013 Leave a comment

Cup TrustRevelations about the Cup Trust – a charity set up to raise millions of pounds for wealthy investors – have rightfully raised imperative questions about the UK tax and charity systems.

I sourced this story for the Times. From the moment I saw documents relating to the charity’s activities it was clear something was massively wrong. My first reaction was bewilderment over why no one else had questioned its behaviour.

It is apparent now that the Charity Commission and HM Revenue & Customs did try to “challenge” the Cup Trust. But in a letter to the Times, the Charity Commission’s chair William Shawcross says the body was powerless to stop the charity. “We were forced to conclude that it is legally a charity, which we were required by law to register,” said Shawcross.

I hope that over the next few weeks we will understand more about how it was possible for the Charity Commission to be in this position. When Shawcross is questioned by the Public Accounts Committee next month, I hope he will be asked what more he could have done, why his organisation did not do it, and what needs to change to ensure this cannot happen again. What confidence can we have in the commission, set up to “challenge inappropriate use of charitable status”, if the law allows such abuse to continue? It is an insult to every charity that employs people to ensure compliance with charity laws that the Cup Trust was able to exist.

There are so many ill elements in this picture. The Times also revealed that while the Cup Trust may be the biggest gift aid scam of its kind, it is by no means the only one. But policing charities behaviour has become harder as budgets and staffing levels at the Charity Commission and HM Revenue and Customs have been cut. Meanwhile, tax specialists at Britain’s wealthiest accountancy firms are being paid huge sums to find loopholes.

I hope exposing the Cup Trust has established the platform from which to raise these important questions. They should have been raised a long time ago.

Filed under Media, Politics, Society, Third Sector

Dry January – are non-alcoholic drinks the answer to not drinking?

January 29, 2013 Leave a comment

As I’m writing this blog, I’m sipping a cool beer and have a half-full, opened bottle of rose sitting next to me. “What?!” I hear you gasp. “But it’s Dry January!” Don’t worry – it’s non-alcoholic – and I’m beginning to develop a taste for it.

Drinking imitation wine and 0% alcoholic beer is not something I thought I’d ever take to. Before this campaign, I’d only once had a bottle of non-alcoholic beer. I’d recently passed my driving test and was much too young to sit in a pub without a ‘real’ drink. But I felt like people were looking at me funny, so I never tried one again.

Sorelle, Becks Blue, Equator and Bavaria beers - some more consumed than others.

Sorelle, Becks Blue, Equator and Bavaria beers – some more consumed than others.

My bubble burst when we moved house a couple of weeks ago. After days of packing, all I could think about was what a shame it was we couldn’t toast the new flat with champagne over the obligatory takeaway. Fortunately, I had been sent some non-alcoholic wine called Sorelle, and this really saved the day. Having fixed the legs onto our dining table and located the cutlery, we ceremonially opened the bottle with some friends. Simply because it looked like a wine bottle made me feel we were drinking something a bit special. It looks like wine, and while the taste is not as complex, it’s satisfyingly winey and refreshingly not as sweet as the usual soft drink alternatives. It’s made of grape juice and flavourings, and has only 24 calories per 100ml – which is a bonus. So that made the evening a bit different, guilt-free, and no hangover the next day when the great unpack began.

Opening the flood gates

Since then, my boyfriend and I have tried a few non-alcoholic beers. Sainsbury’s and Tesco (among other supermarkets) have pretty wide selections, which I’d never noticed before. And they’re much cheaper than the real thing. We tried one called Equator, which looks like a trendy bottled Spanish or Mexican beer. This tasted flat and more like a light ale than a beer.

I’ve also been testing them out on my other Dry January friends. As people have been coming to see the new flat, we’ve been tying over these difficult later January days with some Becks Blue. I must admit, it makes you feel like you’re cheating a bit. Becks Blue tastes so much like real beer, but joyfully you don’t get hit by the sudden fuzziness and you feel fine the next day. Bavaria’s Regular and Wit beers (like a wheat beer) are also great and I’ve treated myself to a couple of these during the week after difficult days at work.

I’m sure it’s just psychological, and maybe the effect would wear off if you went without alcohol for longer. But the taste of beer is so associated with relaxation for me that I find these drinks help me unwind, even though there’s no alcohol in them. That’s a good thing, because it means I can get up again after a drink and get on with other jobs. One of the aspects I hate about alcohol is that a couple of glasses can write-off your whole evening. But are these alternatives better for your health?

Is non-alcoholic healthier?

According to the non-alcoholic beer producers, they are. Bavaria says its non-alcoholic beers have about 79 calories per 330ml bottle, which is much less than a comparable bottle of Budweiser at 135. A similar-sized soft drink would also have more at around 150 calories. Equator has no calories at all. Even Becks Blue, which is as filling as a normal beer, only has about 60 calories per bottle. Those are big calorie wins over an evening or a week. In that sense they are much healthier.

The low alcohol content also makes them better for your insides. Bavaria, Equator and Sorelle are all brewed to ensure they have 0% alcohol, whereas Becks Blue uses a process where the beer is brewed normally then the alcohol extracted afterwards. This means it could have up to 0.05% alcohol in it, so someone who was strictly alcohol-free wouldn’t be able to drink it. But if you’re just cutting down, that’s a tiny amount. Replacing a few alcoholic with non-alcoholic drinks each week, if not completely, could have a hugely positive effect. Considering the stats that show rising levels of liver disease among people in their 20s and 30s, it’s clear it doesn’t take long to do serious damage to your insides.

Sorelle prior to drinking, on the recently assembled dining table (surrounded by violently pink raspberry juice),

Sorelle prior to drinking on the recently assembled dining table

Is non-alcoholic the future?

These non-alcoholic options are sounding great, but come February, am I really going to continue with the imitation drinks? Looking at the evidence, I’d be silly not to. But I think this is where culture comes in and makes you feel like you’re doing something weird. My boyfriend says there’s too much stigma attached to non-alcoholic drinks. “Because there is a certain kudos with drinking alcoholic drinks, drinking non-alcoholic drinks is the opposite of that. Therefore, non-alcoholic drinks are less cool than other soft drinks,” he told me. I can definitely see that case – and probably more so for men.

Another friend, who is a strict vegan and regularly eats meat substitutes, also turned them down. “I have never drunk, and would not be interested in drinking any non-alcoholic beers or wines – I don’t see the point,” she told me. “I would much rather have a more interesting mocktail like a home-brewed shrub or an exotic fresh juice.”

The drinks companies say they are targeting people like us. Equator is for men in their late twenties who are “health and image conscious”, while Sorelle hopes to attract women in their 30s “who lead busy lives juggling a family and work”. I could see myself drinking these drinks out in a bar, because they do look quite sophisticated and I wouldn’t stand out. It would be great to have some better non-alcoholic drinks available in bars, because apart from elderflower cordial (which I’ve drunk a lot of this month), the other options are all so sweet. They would also be good for people who drive and, according to Bavaria, pregnant women who are one of their customer groups.

So maybe I will mix it up a bit in the future. In some ways, I think these are the perfect alternative. In other ways, I wonder if it’s not a clean-break from a form (however mild) of alcohol dependency. Should you replace alcohol with something that mimics alcohol? Or should you move away completely?

I asked Emily Robinson, director of campaigns at Alcohol Concern what she thought, and she told me: “Your social life doesn’t stop just because you’ve given up booze for a bit and we want people to carry on socialising and going to the pub during Dry January. But we know it can be tough going out and not having a tipple so it’s great to see more non-alcoholic and soft drink options out there for people to choose from.”

So maybe I over-think this. More choice is a good thing and any way we can drink less must be a positive. After all, they’re just another kind of soft drink.

Here are a few interesting facts about non-alcoholic drinks:

  1. According to Bavaria, beer sales in general are experiencing a decline in Western Europe, but the sales of non-alcoholic beer are on the increase.
  2. Spain is the highest consumer of non-alcoholic beers in Europe, with non-alcohol beer sales per capita in 2011 at 13% of all beer consumed, compared to the UK and the rest of Europe where only about 2% of all beer consumed is non-alcoholic.
  3. In Spain, it’s quite normal for pubs and restaurants to have at least one non-alcoholic beer available on draught, let alone on offer in bottles and cans.

Filed under Society

Dry January – the debate heats up

December 9, 2012 1 Comment

The Telegraph highlighted the health benefits of cutting back on alcohol.

The Telegraph highlighted the health benefits of cutting back.

This week I gave an interview to the Telegraph to help promote Alcohol Concern’s Dry January campaign before the campaign kicks off in the New Year. Victoria Lambert wrote an insightful piece with some interesting ‘science bits’ about the positives of drinking less. I had never realised, though it makes sense, that you miss the sugar contained in alcohol if you drink less, and thus start craving sweet foods. This sugar withdrawal can also cause headaches. It seems incredible that you’re body can become so quickly dependent on alcohol.

One of the pleasant surprises following the article’s publication are the comments people left. I’m normally cautious about reading these, as people often see this space as carte blanche to attack for the smallest of reasons. But on this occasion is a genuine debate that’s really worth reading.

Some respondees had given up alcohol temporarily or permanently, and none of them regretted it. Some said their social lives had been altered – that spending time with people who are drinking when you are not wasn’t as enjoyable. But the benefits seemed to outweigh the negatives. I particularly liked this comment: “I have not had a drink in 11+ years. I don’t miss it. Life is very good. My relationships have healed and opened up. I have regained credibility and respect. I am hardly perfect but perfection is not the goal… just a better life.”

Just one month

Some people also said giving up booze for a month wasn’t really worth it – you wouldn’t reap the benefits in four weeks, and the campaign is a gimic. But I feel they slightly missed the point, because there is a big difference between going teetotal and cutting down.

Giving up drink completely for a month will be a challenge, something fun, and hopefully a springboard for a future when many of those who try it naturally drink less as a result. Someone else commented on the story that they gave up alcohol and “lost the taste for it within 2-3 weeks”. I think that’s the key to January – it’s not saying give up for good, it’s saying give your body and mind the chance to see a different side.

So much of why we drink is psychological. Again, comments on the article point out the fear that people have of not drinking in social situations. But actually when you try it, and with the excuse of being part of a national campaign, it will be easier than people think.

The hardest part will probably be if someone has a bad day, or there is a special occasion. Stylist magazine had a thought-provoking feature a few weeks ago that suggested people who did drink (in moderation) could actually be more stressed than those who don’t drink at all. I think there are other ways to de-stress, but it’s worth thinking about.

There is also a lot of difference between people who drink a lot and people who are addicts. But whether you are drinking out of choice or not, alcohol harms your body indiscriminately. Information on the Liver Trust’s website (particularly the case study at the bottom about Henry) illustrates this all too well. Raising awareness of the unknown damage you could be doing to your body is one of the most important aims this campaign can achieve.

Worth a read:

Filed under Media, Society, Young People

A few thoughts on Sierra Leone’s elections

November 18, 2012 Leave a comment

Image

An avid All People’s Congress fan at an inauguration ceremony outside Makeni in October 2011

In northern Sierra Leone there is only one winner: the current president. Ernest Bai Koroma is a Temne tribe member from Makeni, and when you spend time in that region people tell you this with pride. They will point out the Sierra Leone Church Primary School he attended in Makeni, the the Magburaka Government Secondary School for Boys where he later studied in nearby Magburaka, and will offer to walk you to his father’s village if you want to see it. But it’s not just the north that gets to vote in these elections.

On Saturday the country went to the polls for the third time since its civil war ended in 2002. Koroma’s All People’s Congress (APC) faces eight other parties in the vote, including the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP), which has its roots in the Mende south. The other two main rivals are the People’s Movement for Democratic Change (PDMC) and the Revolutionary United Front Party (RUF) – a name that invokes fear in many for the violence it is believed to have committed during the civil war. One candidate needs to secure 55% of the vote in the first round to win, or there will be a run-off. I spoke to a Sierra Leonean last week who said this was what many people expected to happen. But we have to wait for the results, which must be announced within ten days of the vote.

Reports in the media say the election has been peaceful, which is a relief. This has been one of the biggest anxieties for many locals. Last year when I was in Sierra Leone, people said they feared outbreaks of violence as the elections approached. Having endured the most unimaginable war for ten years, this is the one thing people are trying to avoid. Aid workers were sent out of the country in case their security was compromised. But today the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon congratulated the country for its nonviolence.

The elections have brought Sierra Leone into the media agenda this week, and I have read some fascinating pieces. This one from the BBC highlighted young people’s perspective. The Sierra Leonean population is incredibly youth-heavy – about 70% is aged below 30 according to this report. Education is one of the most important priorities for rebuilding the country, as is obvious from this story’s suggestion that 50% of children and young people are illiterate. So empowering these young people and giving them the skills to improve their country is imperative.

Another report came from the Guardian, which revealed people with disabilities would be unable to vote in the election, because of changes to electoral procedures. There is a disproportionately high number of amputees in Sierra Leone, because of atrocities committed during the war, so failing to accommodate them affects a significant proportion of the population. And that’s only added to by the number of people who have a disability as a result of polio or other diseases that go untreated in this poor country.

Finally, a quick look at the statistics shows how much people value the opportunity to vote. According to the BBC, the National Electoral Commission has reported more than 2.5 million people have registered to vote. That is almost the entire adult population in a country where around 5.5 million live (42% are aged under 14 and therefore unable to vote as eligibility begins at 18).

Filed under International, Media, Politics, Sierra Leone

Dry January – take up the challenge

November 11, 2012 1 Comment

Mmm… bubbles. But not in Dry January! (pic: James Barker)

Could you go a whole month without any alcohol? That’s the challenge being posed by charity Alcohol Concern with its Dry January campaign. The drive was launched last Friday, ahead of the festive period, and asks people to give up the booze throughout January 2013.

After weeks of Christmas parties and increased home drinking with family and friends, I think this isn’t such a tall order. If anyone wants to have a go at not drinking for a while, January is probably the best month to do it. Yes, you’ve got used to treating yourself a little more throughout December, and you’re feeling glum because there’s nothing to look forward to apart from dark, cold days. But you’ve probably overdone it and a detox and positive start to the new year is appealing. The really good thing about this campaign is that while it sounds scary, you won’t be doing it alone.

As someone who has recently cut down on drinking, I can testify that one of the hardest things is being the only one in a bar ordering a lime and soda. Not only do you feel like a pooper, your friends and people around you can either be concerned or offended. Are you ill? Pregnant? Or do you think you’re better than them? Relaxing over a few drinks can become a lot less relaxing when your drinking partners aren’t drinking. So being that person is often difficult and it’s much easier to cave and grab a pint.

But with Dry January, Alcohol Concern is going to offer support through social media and from the (hopefully) hundreds or thousands of people that will sign up. Throughout January they’ll be sending tweets and Facebook updates about how else you can spend your time away from drinking, and encouraging tips to keep going.

To mark the launch, Emily Robinson, director of fundraising and campaigns at Alcohol Concern, gave an interview to Radio 5 Live about the campaign. She said the event was a chance to: “Take a break and have a think about your drinking. Everyone loves talking about alcohol, but what we’re trying to say is, are you having the right conversation?” Good point.

I expect I’ll be blogging a lot about this in the coming weeks. I have so many reasons for thinking this is a good idea, and I really want other people to discover the massive benefits of not drinking so much. Just for starters, here are a few improvements I’ve noticed from cutting down:

  1. Increased energy – I’m doing much more exercise now and have more time to do fun things rather than lying immobile on a sofa watching the Sunday Eastenders omnibus
  2. Weight loss – magically, weight that hasn’t shifted for years has just disappeared. That’s so encouraging when I think I might just have one more drink. Not drinking is so much easier than not eating cake
  3. Happy bank account – I still rub my hands together with glee when I’ve had a whole evening of drinks that cost the equivalent of one glass of wine

So, we’ll see how it goes. Maybe you’ll join too?

Filed under Society, Young People

BBC ready for Olympics after Jubilee flop

June 26, 2012 Leave a comment

With a month to go until the London 2012 Olympic Games, media outlets are putting the final touches to their reporting plans in time for a monumental challenge in sports coverage. The BBC will lead in broadcasting, but following the criticism it received for its reporting of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, is the corporation on track to please viewers?

Amanda Farnsworth of the BBC speaking at the event

I put the question to Amanda Farnsworth, BBC project executive overseeing BBC coverage of the Games, at an event held by the Commonwealth Journalists Association last night. She told me the two events were incomparable. Unlike the government, which treated the Jubilee events as a test-run to see how London could cope, she said the BBC did not view its coverage as a trial for the Games.

“I did work on it, but I was not in charge,” explained Farnsworth. “The BBC did not treat it as a test-run – it was an event worthy of a huge amount of work in its own right.

“The Olympics are very unique and different from anything you’ll ever experience,” she continued. “Logistically, technically and editorially, the challenge is unique. We could not do anything to prepare for it. We’ll focus on covering the sport as best we can. News will cover the news, and we hope to bring people together around this unique event.”

During the discussion, Farnsworth was keen to emphasise that sport and news reporting of the Games would be kept separate at the BBC. “My news colleagues are free to report warts and all,” she said, adding that this was essential to maintain the BBC’s commitment to impartial reporting.

The BBC has high aspirations for its output during the Games. Farnsworth said the corporation aims to broadcast “virtually every minute of the games”, primarily online. At its peak, she said there would be 24 live streams going out simultaneously. “So you can even watch greco-roman wrestling,” she added, a comment later picked up by fellow panel member, sports journalist Mihir Bose.

He defended the BBC, saying the corporation would deliver.  “The jubilee coverage, as I understand, was criticized because it dumbed it down,” Bose explained. “Sport will not do this, it will rather ‘dumb it up’.  I’m sure the BBC will get it right and not have any flippant comments about greco-roman wrestling.”

Filed under International, Media

Bullfighting in Peru – a fair tourist attraction?

May 8, 2012 Leave a comment

The bulls square up to clash horns

Is it acceptable to watch a bull fight? In 2010, the tradition for which Spain is most famous was outlawed in the Spanish state of Catalonia. Other blood sports such as dog fighting, and fox hunting with dogs, were delegalised in the UK years ago. But in a country where bull fighting is still legal, is it ok to take part as a cultural spectator?

These were thoughts I contemplated as we drove to the outskirts of Arequipa in Southern Peru on an overcast Sunday afternoon in April. We were keen to see the real side of Peru – away from the main tourist attractions in the town centre – and felt fortunate to be in the town on the weekend of a main event.

Huge crowds at the arena

As we turned the corner of a dusty road in our matchbox-sized taxi, we saw the arena for the first time. Unlike the bull rings in Spain, it was semi-circular with the flat side used as a drive for the cattle trucks. But in the stands were more people than I could have ever imagined. The whole place was heaving with Arequipeños: husbands, wives, children, grandparents, groups of young people. All there to enjoy a great Sunday out at the bull fight.

Many were wearing rodeo-style, wide-brimmed hats and had dressed for the occasion. It was impossible to find any space on which to sit in the concrete stalls, so we huddled near the ring edge where others were perched on upturned beer crates, slowly consuming the bottles of Arequipeña beer contained within.

Battle commences

The bulls entered the ring, but unlike Spanish fights, there were no toreadors. Instead, bulls here fight each other, much like a boxing match. The contest began with light-weight bulls, who at first seemed uninterested in fighting. Their owners circled around them, goading them on, but not in a physical way. Suddenly one bull would get a sense of what it was there for, scrape a hoof across the dirt and lower its head to lock horns with its opponent. In this position, they wrestled for a while, until one gave up and backed off, and the commentator called the winner. And that was it.

The event is not without its glamour

I was very surprised by how tame the event was. Could it really be that no blood was shed? That the hundreds of people watching the fight every weekend, and the countless others who tune in at home to see the event televised, didn’t want something more gritty?

It seemed so. Chatting to people in the crowd, we were told the bulls are never harmed. The locals have their favourites and want to see them crowned champion three times, after which the bull can retire. Extra interest is added to each round by side-lines betting, with spectators putting large sums on each round, but in a sociable and leisurely way.

Victory

One bull won his third championship at this event, and the occasion was thoroughly celebrated by everyone. A gold plate was placed on his nose, and he was led around the ring in a victory lap while the crowd sprayed beer on him like champagne. What would happen to him now? I asked our neighbours. Some said he would be looked after and treated well, but others said he would be slaughtered for meat. “There’s a lot of meat on him,” they insisted.

The bull wears his gold crown proudly as he takes his victory lap

The bulls were outstandingly impressive. I’d never seen such huge animals. The heavy-weight category weighed in at about 1,000kg, and could barely be led by their owners. Even when they fought they moved slowly, and I couldn’t understand why they got angry enough to fight. “They are like us,” explained one of the locals. “We Arequipeños are friendly to visitors and very welcoming. But between each other, we are very aggressive. The bulls are the same.”

Something’s gotta give

There was one moment, in what was otherwise a surprisingly enjoyable day, which did shock. Two bulls were nearing the end of a session, with one looking stronger from the start. As his opponent turned to run away and signal defeat, the other bull’s horn managed to snag his skin. I watched in horror as the horn pierced through the hide like a piece of clothing on a thorn, and ripped the skin, exposing red muscle below. Strangely, there was no blood and the injured bull carried on walking away calmly as if nothing has happened, his uncovered limbs slipping in and out of view through flapping skin. “They’ll just stich him right back up,” explained one of the regulars. It was gruesome, but the crowd’s reaction convinced me it was a rarity and not the intention of the sport.

I left the arena feeling more positive about this type of bull fighting than I had expected. Perhaps there are bad practices going on behind the scenes, and if anyone reading this blog knows more about them, it would be good to have your comments. But it did seem genuinely that the bulls were behaving quite naturally and were being cared for. It was also a great way to meet locals and understand Peruvian culture – the contemporary Peru, not the Incan Peru many tourists discover. Something for visitors to Arequipa to consider.

A member of Peru Antitaurino collecting signatures in the streets of Lima

A different story

In other parts of Peru, the picture is different. While in the capital, Lima, I came across an anti-bullfighting protest in a busy shopping area. Peru Antitaurino is an organisation that wants the North Peruvian practice of a bull and toreador fighting to the death to end. Its members are currently collecting signatures across the country to build their case that Peruvians don’t want to live in a society that thinks killing animals is entertaining. It will be interesting to see if, as in Catalonia, they are successful.

Filed under International, South America

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.