Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Mordaunt accuses Oxfam of 'complete betrayal of trust' over Haiti scandal – Politics live

Afternoon summary

  • Penny Mordaunt, the international development secretary, has accused Oxfam of “a complete betrayal of trust” over the way it handled the Haiti sex scandal. In particular she criticised Barbara Stocking, who was chief executive at the time, and Penny Lawrence, who was programme director at the time and who resigned as Oxfam’s deputy chief executive last week, after the scandal came to light. Mordaunt said Oxfam “failed under the watch of Barbara Stocking and Penny Lawrence” by not reporting and following up incidents of wrongdoing when they occurred. She told MPs in a statement:

They did not provide a full report to the Charity Commission, they did not provide a full report to their donors, they did not provide any report to prosecuting authorities.

In my view they misled, quite possibly deliberately.

Even as their report concluded that their investigation could not rule out the allegation that some of the women involved were actually children, they did not think it was necessary to report this to the police either in Haiti or the country of origin for those accountable.

I believe their motivation appears to be the protection of their organisation’s reputation: they put that before those they were there to help and protect - a complete betrayal of trust.

She also said the UK would stop contributing to UN aid programmes unless the UN did more to stop its own aid workers engaging in abuse and misconduct. She said:

We have also been speaking to colleagues across government and beyond about what more we can do to stop exploitation and abuse in the UN and broader multilateral system. The message from us is clear to all parts of the UN: you can either get your house in order or you can prepare to carry on your good work without our money.

I personally and the government sympathise deeply with the situation faced by Alfie Dingley and his family.

I think everyone on all sides of the House and outside it will both understand and respect the desire of the family to try to alleviate his suffering in any way possible.

Can I assure him that we want to try and help find a solution within the existing regulation. The current situation is that cannabis in its raw form is not recognised in the UK as having any medicinal benefits, it is therefore listed as a schedule one drug under the misuse of drug regulations 2001.

We are aware of differing approaches in other countries and continue to monitor the World Health Organisation’s expert committee on drug dependence which has committed to reviewing the use of medicinal cannabis. We will wait ‘til the outcome of the review before considering any next steps.

That’s all from me for today.

Thanks for the comments.

Updated

As ITV’s Robert Peston points out, the Northern Ireland Office insists that Karen Bradley setting Northern Ireland’s budget (see 4.13pm) does not amount to direct rule.

The prospect of same sex marriage equality being introduced into Northern Ireland via Westminster came a step closer today after the secretary of state said any vote on the issue in the House of Commons would be a free one.

Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley a free vote in the Commons would be possible should an MP raise the issue of gay marriage equality in the region. It is the only part of the UK where LGBT couples cannot be married in law. This is due to the opposition of the largest party in the deadlocked Northern Ireland Assembly, the Democratic Unionists.

Several bids in the now suspended regional parliament to bring in same sex marriage have been blocked by the DUP using the so called ‘petition of concern’ which is a parliamentary device that shoots down any legislation a party can argue does not command cross-community support.

After more than 400 days without power-sharing devolved government in Belfast, human rights organisations and gay campaign groups have argued that same sex marriage equality could be imposed at Westminster.

Until now the Tory government have resisted this, arguing that such issues should be a “devolved matter” for local politicians to sort out.

But in a written reply to Labour MP Conor McGinn, the Northern Ireland Secretary appeared to shift ground on the issue on Tuesday. Bradley wrote:

In accordance with the Belfast agreement, this is a devolved matter which should be addressed in the NI assembly; but the power of the Westminster parliament to legislate remains unaffected.

If this issue were to be raised in Westminster, the government’s policy is to allow a free vote on matters of conscience such as equal marriage.

Several Labour MPs already have promised they are prepared to bring forward motions calling for central government to legalise gay marriage in Northern Ireland.

Ann Black, the veteran Labour activist who was deposed as chair of the party’s disputes panel last month after Momentum turned against her and who was prevented from being elected as chair of the national policy forum at the weekend in controversial circumstances (the Labour leadership shelved the vote on dubious grounds because they thought she would win), has written her side of the story on her blog.

She says claims that she is a rightwinger are “ludicrous”, she stresses her support for Jeremy Corbyn’s ideas, but says it would be “sad” if the Corbynites turned out to be “less tolerant of diversity” of New Labour.

Here’s an extract.

Having spent twenty years on the NPF in a small and lonely minority, from Durham in 1999 to Milton Keynes in 2014, being ridiculed, patronised and ignored for voting for policies which Jeremy Corbyn has brought into the party mainstream, the idea that I have turned into a Progress stooge is ludicrous. Labour First and Tony Blair’s people worked against me for many years. My personal politics have not changed, although I have always believed that all positions and all arguments deserve respect, and it would be sad if the current leader was less tolerant of diversity than the Millbank of old.

An Ulster Unionist peer who was part of his party’s team that helped secure the Good Friday agreement has warned Tory MPs and Labour’s Kate Hoey not to be writing the obituary for the 1998 peace accord.

Lord Empey, a former UUP leader, accused the likes of Conservative MP Owen Paterson of “doing nothing more than playing into Sinn Fein’s hands.”

He described Paterson, Hoey and others as being “cheerleaders for the demise of the 1998 Agreement” that he alongside the likes of Nobel peace prize winner David Trimble negotiated 20 years ago. Lord Empey said:

The Belfast agreement gave unionists in Northern Ireland the strongest possible arrangements on retaining our position in the United Kingdom. The principle of consent, the three-stranded approach and the Republic of Ireland giving up its territorial claim put our future in the hands of our people and meant we could go forward with confidence.

The agreement put in place institutions that should have grown in time with society as trust and respect developed. But then Sinn Fein and the DUP got their hands on the steering wheel and we now have institutions that have only earned contempt from our society.

Nicky Morgan, the Conservative former education secretary and leading campaigner for a softer Brexit, has written a Guardian article welcoming David Davis’s speech. She says he has acknowledged the need for compromise.

Here’s an extract.

Successfully delivering Brexit has, in truth, always been about who would be honest enough to set out the compromises needed to actually get the UK to leave. Davis’s speech finally laid out one of those, and offered more clarity on what Brexit can’t deliver if the government really is to keep its “global Britain” promise. The key line is this: “ The future of standards and regulations – the building blocks of free trade – is increasingly global.” UK businesses won’t be relieved of the mythical EU regulations and standards that parts of our media have gone on and on about for decades, because many of them are already global– and in fact, as the secretary of state said, these serve consumers, workers and, in some cases, our environment very well.

As reality bites, it is becoming clearer that those who voted leave because they wanted to pull up the drawbridge on the rest of the world, and because they believed that we could revert to an era when only the UK parliament made our laws, will not be able to get their way. Full marks to Davis for being pretty straight on this and putting an end to the dreams of some that Brexit would herald a low- or minimal-regulatory nirvana.

And here is the full article.

Owen Smith, the shadow Northern Ireland secretary, is responding now.

He says people in Northern Ireland will be “little the wiser” as to what will happen next from what she has said.

He says the DUP leader, Arlene Foster, said there was no prospect of a deal. But Bradley said the opposite, he says.

He says some MPs are using this period to undermine the Good Friday agreement, which they see as an obstacle to Brexit. That is a dangerous game to play, he says.

He says the Belfast agreement ended a conflict that cost more than 3,000 lives.

Smith is referring to MPs like Owen Paterson, the Tory former Northern Ireland secretary, and the Labour MP Kate Hoey. Paterson recently retweeted a link to a Telegraph article saying the Good Friday agreement has outlived its use.

And Hoey has said it is time for “a cold rational look at the Belfast agreement”.

Bradley says this year marks the 20th anniversary of the Belfast agreement.

Northern Ireland has taken huge strides forwards, she says.

Any commemorations will look hollow if there is no progress on power sharing, she says.

Bradley says things in Northern Ireland cannot remain in limbo.

Northern Ireland needs a budget for next year. The government will make an announcement about the next steps soon, she says.

She says she will consider all options for restoring the executive, including another election.

She will also decide soon what to do next about the salaries of assembly members, which are currently still being paid.

Karen Bradley's Commons statement on Northern Ireland talks

Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, is making a statement to MPs now about the failed attempt to revive power sharing at Stormont.

She says Northern Ireland has gone 13 months without an executive.

She says all parties negotiated in good faith. Progress was made, she says. It became possible to see how an executive could be formed.

There was discussion about a package of legislation.

But by last Wednesday it was clear the current phase of talks had reached a conclusion without any agreement.

Today she will give direction as to the next steps.

This government believes in devolution, she says.

She says the government also wants to see the other institutions operating properly.

Devolved government is in the best interests of the people of Northern Ireland.

She says the government will continue to explore whether the basis for an agreement exists.

And it is ready to legislate for this, she says.

The Belfast broadcaster Eamonn Mallie says he will soon be revealing details of the draft agreement between the DUP and Sinn Fein - the one that was supposed to pave the way for the restoration of power sharing before the DUP apparently pulled out at the last minute.

Newsnight’s diplomatic editor, Mark Urban, has been speaking to spooks about the claims that Jeremy Corbyn’s meetings with a Czech spy in the 1980s mean that he was some sort of informant himself.

As my colleague Peter Walker reports, Corbyn himself ridiculed the idea that he gave information to a Czech spy during the cold war when he was speaking at the EEF conference today. Corbyn called the idea “nonsense” and castigating the newspapers that claimed he did so.

Reaction to David Davis's Brexit speech

Here is some assorted reaction to David Davis’s speech.

Nigel Farage, the former Ukip leader, says the UK government should not be promising to maintain high regulatory standards.

Open Britain, which is campaigning for a soft Brexit, says there were four problems with the speech. (Their bold text.)

We already can improve our standards: Davis argued that, post-Brexit, the UK would be able to lead the charge on a “race to the top” on standards. But why would anyone believe him? He hasn’t given a single example of a regulation he would like to improve. And there is nothing within EU rules to prevent countries from raising their own standards. They are a floor not a ceiling.

There is no appetite for deregulation: The Government’s real agenda is clear: leading Brexiters have long campaigned for a lowering of employment and environmental protections and they see Brexit as the opportunity for a ‘bonfire of red tape’. But a survey out today by the IPPR showed the overwhelming majority of the UK population do not want to diverge from existing EU standards.

Lack of detail and proposals: As with recent speeches by Boris Johnson and Theresa May, there was absolutely no in-depth concrete detail about what the Secretary of State actually wanted to achieve. The Brexit Secretary essentially suggested the UK could leave the Single Market and Customs Union but continue to trade with the EU as today.

Still no solutions on Northern Ireland: After speeches from the Foreign Secretary and now the Brexit Secretary we are still none the wiser about what they intend to do about the vital issue of Northern Ireland.

From Stephen Phipson, CEO of EEF, the manufacturers’ organisation

UK manufacturers have long called for the UK to seek high alignment on technical regulations and standards with the EU to protect current trading relationships after its transitional period following Brexit.

The secretary of state is right to say that the that the future economic partnership must include a mechanism to manage regulatory cooperation and recognises the ongoing importance and competitiveness in our sector and is clearly in the national interest and the interest of our closest partners in Europe.

From the Adam Smith Institute, a free market thinktank

When talking about trade we often hear of the importance of rule makers and rule takers. Most countries though know that in some things they make the rules, in others they take them. It will be the same for Britain as we leave the EU. In insurance, in banking, in legal contracts and many commodities it is British rules that are the basis of global trade. In goods we’ve worked for four decades with European partners to set global standards.

The Adam Smith Institute has argued in favour of mutual recognition before and it makes sense that we’ll seek to mutually recognise the work of institutions that we’ve helped to build. Use of a single set of approvals boosts trade by removing barriers and time costs.

But it mustn’t stop at the borders of Europe. The safety of medical devices in the USA, Switzerland, and Canada are just as good as those found on the continent. Cars from Japan are just as safe as those sold by German manufacturers. At the heart of this issue is trust. Governments should trust each other, just as multinational companies do in their supply chains. If we want a globally facing Britain we’d do well to support further mutual recognition and trust between our allies.

From Allie Renison, head of Europe and trade policy at the Institute of Directors

Business leaders welcome the speech made by the secretary of state for exiting the EU, which acknowledges that equivalent standards and regulations should not impede market access, but firms will require more clarity on how this would work in practice.

The IoD is particularly pleased that Davis acknowledges the importance of keeping a level playing field on state aid and competition policy. Minimising trade barriers can and should go hand in hand with a future deal with the EU. However, as we intimated in our latest report, Customising Brexit: A hybrid option for a UK-EU trade framework, the introduction of rules of origin for manufacturing could be a significant barrier in the absence of any partial customs union arrangement with the EU.

We would encourage the Government to be cautious about using previous trade deals as precedents for mutual recognition, seeing as it is broadly limited to conformity assessment, inspections and professional qualifications in other free-trade agreements to date. Brexit could mean asking for an unprecedented degree of mutual recognition of rules and, while we support this as an aim for certain sectors, we have always stressed the need for greater clarity on future regulatory cooperation and how it would work in practice.

Jill Rutter at the Institute for Government says in a blog at last the government is starting to set out how a UK-EU trade deal could would.

David Davis, Theresa May and Michael Gove may give assurances – but they cannot bind their successors. That, after all, is the point of “Taking Back Control”. And it’s far from clear that the rest of the Cabinet is with them. Last week Boris Johnson listed areas where the UK might want to do things differently. Meanwhile, Liam Fox is champing at the bit to do trade deals with the US – which will demand changes in regulation on agriculture as the price for a deal.

The UK is already in the dock for not meeting existing EU commitments on air quality – and is regularly taken to the European Court over environmental protection. The UK has consistently tried to opt out of EU-imposed labour market regulation. And the Opposition has a domestic policy agenda which could bring it into conflict with other areas of European law.

So to be worth anything to the EU, it would need that commitment to be hedged around with mechanisms to ensure compliance and enforce sanctions. We set out what these might look like in Trade after Brexit.

At the heart of the Davis model is an extended mutual-recognition model – of the sort the Legatum Institute has been proposing – based on (arguably) the second most integrated transnational market after the EU: Australia and New Zealand. The Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Agreement allows Australia and New Zealand to trade on the basis of accepting each other’s regulations. But there are reasons to think that model may fail to travel well – and fail to meet expectations on closer inspection.

ITV’s Robert Peston on his Facebook page says Davis’s support for EU state aid rules could be seen as surprising.

This new putative red line might be seen as eccentric if he and Theresa May want parliament to back whatever outline deal they succeed in negotiating on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Because pretty much Corbyn’s and Labour’s only problem with the UK remaining in the EU or its single market is their fear that in doing so they would not be able to subsidise favoured industries in the way they would like.

So if May’s version of Brexit would also prohibit such subsidies, at that point Corbyn has nothing to lose from conceding to the pressure of his members - and shifting his party to full-blooded and full-throated support for single-market membership and another EU referendum.

From the veteran Eurosceptic campaigner Richard North

Pawel Swidlicki, a Brexit analyst at Edelman and a former researcher at the Open Europe thinktank, says Michael Gove was wrong in what he said about the EU state aid rules in his speech earlier. (See 2.52pm.)

MPs criticise proposal to make former Lords leader Tina Stowell chair of Charity Commission

The former Tory minister who is the government’s choice to be chair of the Charity Commission came under heavy criticism from MPs this morning, who accused her of having insufficient experience when the sector is reeling from the Oxfam crisis.

Tina Stowell told a select committee that she believed that the Commission was not active enough when the Oxfam abuse allegations were first reported to it in 2011, but her remarks were not enough to suppress a string of questions about her suitability.

“My view as an observer is that it is disappointing that the Charity Commission was not more curious [in 2011] and did not push back at Oxfam to get more information from them,” Stowell said, and added that the charity sector faced a problem of “declining public trust”.

MPs on the digital, media, culture and sport committee will decide shortly whether to endorse Stowell’s appointment, following a difficult hearing in which Conservative, Labour and an SNP MP all queried her qualifications for the regulatory role.

The peer was leader of the House of Lords between 2014 and 2016 and attended the cabinet under David Cameron. She was made a peer in 2011 after failing be nominated for a safe Conservative seat, and had previously worked at the BBC’s internal regulator, the BBC Trust.

Paul Farrelly, a Labour MP, said:

What were the skills, qualifications and experience that were considered by Number 10 to such an extent that perceived political neutrality was not a core consideration?

In reply, Stowell said she had “an experience of nine years at the BBC, dealing with an internal form of regulation” while her time leading the Lords required her to “manage very complex stakeholder relationships.” She added her status as a candidate “was not politically motivated” and she would resign both the party whip in the Lords and her party membership if she was confirmed in post.

Rebecca Pow, a Conservative MP, said “do you not think a little more experience would be more helpful” while Brendan O’Hara, an SNP MP, “you are the insiders’ insider”.

During the hearing it also emerged that Stowell had been appointed to the board of Crimestoppers and an employment agency Impellam following the initial recommendation of Tory donor Lord Ashcroft.

Davis and Gove disagree over EU state aid rules in respective speeches

As my colleague Dan Roberts points out in his story about David Davis’s speech, Davis and Michael Gove seemed to contradict each other this morning.

In his speech Davis, the Brexit secretary, defended EU state aid rules. He said:

We pushed for — and have always defended — a rigorous state aid system with robust enforcement mechanisms within the European Union.

But Gove, the environment secretary, criticised them in his speech. Gove said:

Of course inside the EU, rules on state aid have prevented us from investing in broadband in a way that is best for the UK.

UPDATE: This is from Open Britain’s Francis Grove-White.

Updated

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is taking questions in the Commons now. In response to a question from the SNP’s Patrick Grady about what discussions he has had with his French counterparts about his plan for a bridge over the English channel, Johnson said at the recent Anglo-French summit it was agreed to set up a “committee of wise men” that would look at a range of issues, including infrastructure projects such as the need for a new channel link.

The Scottish government has warned that time is running out to reach a deal with the UK over key Brexit legislation. David Davis, the Brexit secretary, is due to host talks in London on Thursday in a bid to resolve the stalemate between Holyrood and Westminster over the EU withdrawal bill. As the Press Association reports, ahead of those discussions the Scottish government has warned it will not back down on the crucial issue of the bill’s impact on devolution. A spokesman for Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, said:

Obviously we have made clear consistently that we are intent on protecting the existing devolution settlement and we’re not prepared to sign up to a deal that jeopardises or cuts across the existing devolution settlement. That’s the state of play.

Our position is exactly as outlined before, that all devolved powers exercised at European level must be devolved here ...

We’re in a situation where the UK government promised they would lodge an amendment or amendments regarding the key issues at stake, that promise wasn’t met, the deadline slipped and the EU withdrawal bill left the Commons and went into the Lords.

Weeks and months have passed and there is still no sign of the action that was promised to try to resolve this.

We’re still talking, we’re still intent on being as cooperative as possible, but time is running short and we haven’t made the progress so far that we need to see.

Lunchtime summary

  • Theresa May has promised to act with “restraint” in her upcoming appointments of new political peers to the House of Lords, the Press Association reports. She also made clear she would not operate on the convention that certain holders of high office have an automatic entitlement to a peerage, such as senior police officers and judges. In a letter to the Lord Speaker, responding to his committee on the size of the Lords, May encouraged peers from all parties to retire to bring down numbers amid “real concerns”.

Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley will update MPs today on what are the government’s next moves following last week’s failure to secure a deal to bring back power sharing to the region.

The secretary of state is under pressure to impose a full budget on Northern Ireland in the absence of a devolved administration in Belfast.

Democratic Unionist leader Arlene Foster has called on Bradley to “act decisively” and set the budget now for schools, hospitals, roads etc in the region.

Many in the DUP want to see direct rule re-introduced in the interim period while new talks are started aimed at bringing back regional power sharing government.

Sinn Fein, however, have claimed that direct rule from London cannot be imposed under the terms of the 2006 St Andrews agreement - the peace principally between the DUP and Sinn Fein led that led to almost 10 years of power sharing with the late Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley as first and deputy first ministers.

Conor Murphy, one of Sinn Fein’s key negotiators in the last talks, said the failure of power-sharing should mean some form of joint London-Dublin rule. He said:

The St Andrews agreement was clear - in the process of a breakdown of the executive, the two governments have a joint stewardship role and decision making taken through that role.

We want to see that kick in quickly as possible and decision making being taken through that mechanism that was established for such an eventuality.

On Thursday this week Sinn Fein is expected to meet Theresa May during which new party leader Mary Lou McDonald will raise the party’s total opposition to direct rule from London.

Theresa May spoke to her Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar on Monday about the way forward. A Downing Street spokesman said both leaders recognised “the progress and serious engagement” there had been between the parties in Northern Ireland, even though the talks broke down on St Valentine’s Day without any agreement.

More than half of people who donate to charities like Oxfam less likely to after Haiti scandal, poll suggests

ICM conducted a fresh round of polling as part of its regular work for the Guardian over the weekend. I will publish the main figures, about voting intention and issues, a bit later or tomorrow (when I get a moment), but we also included a question about the Oxfam scandal that helps to explain the significance of 7,000 Oxfam donors cancelling their regulation donations.

We asked people if the news about the Haiti sex scandal made them “less likely to donate to humanitarian charities such as Oxfam in the future”? The replies were:

Yes, less likely to donate: 35%

No, no less likely to donate: 24%

Don’t donate anyway: 32%

Don’t know: 9%

As ICM’s Alex Turk points out, that suggests that more than half of people who do donate to humanitarian charities will be now less likely to as a result of the scandal. He says:

Excluding those who don’t donate to humanitarian charities, a majority (52%) of the Great British public say that this news has made them less likely to donate to humanitarian charities such as Oxfam. Only about a third (36%) claim that they are no less likely to donate as a result, while 1 in 8 (13%) say they don’t know if they are less likely to donate or not.

ICM Unlimited interviewed a representative online sample of 2,017 adults aged 18+ on 16 to 19 February 2018. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules.

Updated

DfID chief says Oxfam scandal has undermined public support for aid spending

The international development committee hearing has just finished. The final main witness was Matthew Rycroft, permanent secretary at the Department for International Development, who end by saying the Oxfam scandal had undermined public support for spending money on aid. In response to a question from Stephen Twigg, the committee chair, about whether he recognised the damage done to the sector, Rycroft replied:

Yes. This is a huge crisis for the aid sector. I welcome the inquiry that you have announced today (see 11.18am) as a contribution to turning this crisis around, to learning from it, to rooting out the evil which exists within the sector, and through those improvements to grab an opportunity and to create something better as a legacy of this crisis and the awful things that happened to people in Haiti and elsewhere.

The reputation of the sector, the reputation of aid, the reputation of the 0.7% commitment [the commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on aid], all of those I think have been pulled into the mix. But, as the previous witness was saying, it is very important to consider why the British government, why all the main parties have committed to spend 0.7% of our economy each year on international aid, and to do a better job that we have done in the past of explaining to the British people why that is a good thing to do, for our own country.

All of those things, I think, are threatened by this crisis. But we are determined to act with you, with the charities, with the private secretary, with others to turn that around.

It is worth pointing out that public support for the 0.7% aid target is meagre at the best of times. For example, this poll from 2017 found people two to one in favour of getting rid of the target.

Matthew Rycroft
Matthew Rycroft Photograph: Parliament TV

Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, has given a speech to the conference of the EEF, which represents manufacturers, and it’s fair to say it wasn’t full of new insights.

Fox told a packed hall at the venue in Westminster that manufacturing was doing very well in the UK - he briefly criticised the media for not reporting this enough - and gave his standard line about Brexit allowing Britain to trade on a more global scale.

Brexit would bring no new trade barriers, Fox said - but added that he could not as yet give any details as to precisely what the government’s strategy for it was. With that, he bounded off on the stage towards an exit at such speech that not even a hand could be raised for a question.

The delegates (and me) get Jeremy Corbyn at about 1.30pm. His speech has been well trailed, but we’re told he should answer a question or two.

Liam Fox speaking at the EEF conference.
Liam Fox speaking at the EEF conference. Photograph: James Gourley/REX/Shutterstock

While Oxfam was giving evidence to the Commons international development committee, Tina Stowell, the former Conservative leader of the Lords, was at the culture committee being questioned prior to her appointment at the new chair of the Charity Commission. (It’s parliament’s version of a confirmation hearing.) As my colleague Dan Sabbagh, the Oxfam scandal came up.

Tina Stowell.
Tina Stowell. Photograph: Ben Quinton for the Guardian

Oxfam's evidence about the Haiti sex scandal - Summary

Here are the main lines from the Oxfam evidence to the Commons international development committee.

  • Oxfam has received 26 new misconduct allegations since news of the Haiti sex scandal broke, MPs were told. Oxfam’s chief executive, Mark Goldring, told the hearing:

Across Oxfam Great Britain we have had about 26 stories, reports come to us which were either new reports come out as a result of the stories, or earlier stories where people said, ‘I didn’t necessarily report this at the time’. Over an extended period of time, I am not talking about recent cases.

We really want people to come forward wherever they are and whenever this happened. Some of those cases relate to the UK, some of them relate to our international programme.

  • Goldring apologised for appearing to downplay the significance of the Haiti scandal in an interview he gave to the Guardian last week. (See 10.39am.) Asked about his comment about how Oxfam had not “murdered babies in their cots”, he said:

I do apologise. I was under stress, I’d given many interviews, I’d made many decisions to try to lead Oxfam’s response to this. I was thinking about amazing work I’ve seen Oxfam do across the world, most recently with refugees coming from Myanmar. I should not have said those things. It is not for Oxfam to judge issues of proportionality or motivation.

I repeat Oxfam’s broader apology and my personal apology. I am sorry, we are sorry, for the damage Oxfam has done both to the people of Haiti but also to wider efforts for aid and development by possibly undermining public support.

I wholeheartedly apologise for those comments and commit to work in that greater public interest so that Oxfam can make a powerful role in the world that we all believe in.

Goldring also apologised for telling that Guardian that he had not slept for six days as a result of the pressure he was under. He said:

I make no excuses, I make an apology for comparing what I was going through with the bigger picture.

My first concern is the women of Haiti and anybody else who has been wronged as a result of Oxfam’s programme.

I shouldn’t have put my own sleep, or lack of it, in the public domain.

I have tried hard to balance work and sleep over the last two weeks. The results I believe are that I’m continuing to do my job and I’m continuing to make appropriate decisions.

I hope I have led Oxfam competently, but that’s for others to decide.

  • Goldring said that 7,000 people had cancelled regular donations to Oxfam as a result of the scandal. (See 11.35am.)
  • Goldring said Oxfam had found no evidence that the sex workers involved in the Haiti scandal were under 18. Oxfam had spoken to as many of the women involved as it could find, and all of them were over 18, he said. (See 11.29am.)
Mark Goldring, Oxfam’s chief executive
Mark Goldring, Oxfam’s chief executive Photograph: Parliament TV

Stephen Twigg is summing up what has been learnt from the session.

He says it is striking how often Goldring apologised. There was “a lot to apologise for”, he says. But he says the committee appreciates the tone Goldring adopted.

He says the committee accepts that this is an issue for the whole sector, not just Oxfam.

But Oxfam has to get its house in order, and demonstrate that it has got its house in order, he says.

Q: Do we need to beef up our regulation of the aid sector?

Thomson says that is an interesting question. It could increase trust. But there would be a danger of having the sector covered by multiple regulators.

Goldring says seven staff in Haiti were “seriously culpable”. None of them were British.

He says DBS (disclosure and barring service) checks would be of no use in these circumstances.

Updated

Goldring says there are too many people whose behaviour is unacceptable who have been allowed to work for Oxfam. Oxfam is carrying out a review looking how this can be addressed.

Q: Is the use of prostitutes in a conflict zone contrary to Oxfam’s code of conduct?

Yes, says Goldring. He says the code of conduct did not make that explicit at the time, but it implied this, because those relationships are “exploitative”.

He says the employees should not have been been allowed to resign. But two of them just left before they could be dismissed, he says.

Q: Are references shown to individuals before they are sent out?

Goldring says he does not think that is standard practice. He does not do that, he says.

Labour’s Richard Burden goes next.

Q: Did any of the seven men involved in the Haiti scandal get Oxfam references?

Goldring says one person did. He asked his former manager, who was also involved, to give a reference. The request for that reference went straight to that individual who replied, even though he was no longer employed by Oxfam.

Goldring says Oxfam now insists on all references having to be given through a central database.

And no references will be given out until that database is established, Byanyima says.

Q: Do you think “sex for aid” goes on?

Byanyima says this categorisation is not something we should pay much attention to. This is about abuse of power, she says. Whether it is payment from salary, or in another form, it is still “abhorrent”, she says.

The two Oxfam officials giving evidence alongside Mark Goldring have also apologised for what happened in Haiti.

Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam International’s executive director, told the MPs:

I’m ashamed. I have spent my life trying to stand up for women’s rights and to fight for people living in poverty. This is painful for me. Some hideous men came into our organisation and abused the trust of the British people, the supporters. But they were able to get away, to get a recommendation to leave. This was wrong.

Winnie Byanyima.
Winnie Byanyima. Photograph: Parliament TV

And this is what Caroline Thomson, chair of Oxfam’s trustees, told the MPs:

On behalf of the council of Oxfam, we are ashamed of what happened in Haiti. We don’t think it was well handled and our task now is to make sure we report always with transparency and accountability. My task is to make sure we never again can be at risk of being perceived to have put reputation over accountability.

Goldring says the individuals in the Haiti scandal came from seven different countries in the world, not including the UK. But they were being managed from the UK, he says.

Goldring says Oxfam has to earn back the trust of the public. It will not earn it by words, it will earn it by deeds, he says.

Goldring says Oxfam has told the Charity Commission it will not use words like “sexual misconduct” when reporting cases like this. Instead it will spell out exactly what has happened. Phrases like “sexual misconduct” could give a misleading sense of what actually happened, he says.

Goldring says it is fair to say Oxfam did not tell DfID enough about its investigation into what happened in Haiti.

7,000 people have cancelled donations to Oxfam after Haiti sex scandal, MPs told

Goldring says about 7,000 individuals have cancelled donations to Oxfam since the scandal broke.

  • 7,000 people have cancelled donations to Oxfam after Haiti sex scandal, MPs told.

Oxfam says it found no evidence any of Haitian sex workers used by its staff were under 18

Pauline Latham, a Conservative, goes next.

Q: You said Oxfam did not report the sexual allegations to the Haitian authorities. But prostitution is illegal in Haiti. So why were the allegations were not reported?

Goldring says the allegations should have been reported to the police. He apologises for the fact that did not happen.

Q: But why were the allegations not reported to the police?

Goldring says he assumes the decision was taken on the basis of local advice.

Q: But you have had time to investigate this. Why don’t you know who advised this?

Goldring says he has looked into this. But he cannot find evidence of who gave this advice.

Q: People do not go into prostitution voluntarily. And some of these women may have been under age. These are women and girls looking to Oxfam for help. Your organisation is treating them like “trinkets”. That is shocking.

Goldring says what Oxfam did in Haiti in 2011 was wrong. He was not in post, but he apologises for it.

As part of its investigation, Oxfam tried to speak to the women involved. It spoke to as many as it could trace. It asked them their age, and none of the women spoken to were under 18. That does not mean no women under 18 were involved, he says.

  • Oxfam says it found no evidence that any of the Haitian sex workers used by its staff were under 18.

Q: The country director left. Have any of those seven or eight people who left been re-employed by Oxfam.

Goldring says one was employed as a contractor by Oxfam in another country. That was a mistake, he says.

Q: Did this happen knowingly?

Goldring says Oxfam GB told other Oxfams not to employ these people.

Latham says the men were “predators”.

Updated

Twigg confirms international development committee to hold full inquiry into Haiti sex scandal

Twigg says he now wants to ask more about Haiti. He accepts that the committee realises Goldring was not in charge at the time. And, as he said earlier, the committee will be conducting a full investigation into this.

  • Twigg confirms international development committee to hold full inquiry into Haiti sex scandal.

Updated

Stephen Twigg goes next.

Q: Are you confident that you have always reported serious sexual allegations to the Charity Commission?

Goldring says he thinks so.

Last year Oxfam received 87 allegations. He says 50 of those related to things happening in shops and in Oxfam’s trading operations. Some did not relate to what happened on Oxfam premises; for example, it might have been a domestic abuse allegation. He says 35 incidents were reported to the Charity Commission.

Q: And can you say more about the 26 new allegations? (See 10.59am.)

Goldring says he cannot say more about those now. They have just come to light. It is a full range of incidents, from the “very serious” to allegations that past complaints were not properly investigated.

The Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle is asking questions now.

Q: Can you give an assurance that any staff member who reports bad behaviour will not be victimised, and not be automatically moved out of the country where they are working?

Caroline Thomson, the Oxfam chair of trustees, says she can give an assurance that anyone who reports misconduct will not be penalised. She says she is shocked that people think otherwise.

Russell-Moyle says he was responding to a concern referred by the Unite union.

Goldring says Oxfam has given assurances to Unite about this.

Text of Oxfam boss's apology to MPs for Haiti scandal, and his comments about it

Here is the start of the Press Association story about the Oxfam hearing.

Oxfam GB’s chief executive has apologised to a parliamentary committee for the actions of charity staff who sexually exploited female victims of the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

And Mark Goldring also apologised for his own comments which appeared to play down the seriousness of the scandal, when he told a newspaper that the charity was being attacked as if it had “murdered babies in their cots”.

Goldring was appearing alongside other Oxfam executives in front of the Commons international development committee, which is probing sexual exploitation in the aid sector.

The hearing comes in the wake of the revelation of resignations and dismissals of Oxfam staff in Haiti following allegations of “sex parties” involving prostitutes.

He acknowledged that Oxfam’s actions had damaged the whole aid effort, as well as the people of Haiti.

Calling on Goldring to apologise, committee chairman Stephen Twigg said the parallel he drew with the murder of babies in his interview with the Guardian was regarded by many people as “grossly inappropriate”.

The Oxfam chief executive responded: “I do apologise. I was under stress, I’d given many interviews, I’d made many decisions to try to lead Oxfam’s response to this. I was thinking about amazing work I’ve seen Oxfam do across the world, most recently with refugees coming from Myanmar.

“I should not have said those things. It is not for Oxfam to judge issues of proportionality or motivation.

“I repeat Oxfam’s broader apology and my personal apology. I am sorry, we are sorry, for the damage Oxfam has done both to the people of Haiti but also to wider efforts for aid and development by possibly undermining public support.

“I wholeheartedly apologise for those comments and commit to work in that greater public interest so that Oxfam can make a powerful role in the world that we all believe in.”

Goldring says Oxfam was wrong to allow Roland van Hauwermeiren, the official at the centre of the Haiti sex scandal, to resign.

Oxfam has received 26 new misconduct allegations made since scandal broke, MPs told

The Tory MP Nigel Evans goes next.

Q: In the Guardian article you said you had not slept for six days. What impact has this had on you?

Goldring says it was wrong of him to make a comparison between what he was going through and what people in Haiti suffered. He should not have discussed his sleep patterns. He says has has tried to manage his sleep and his work duties.

Q: How many more revelations have come to your notice since the first reports.

Goldring says about 26 new cases have come forward recently. Some relate to the UK, and some relate to Oxfam work abroad.

  • Goldring says Oxfam has received 26 new misconduct allegations made since the scandal broke. He says 16 relate to international programmes. Some relate to recent events, and some relate to historic events, he says.

Updated

Goldring says he joined Oxfam as chief executive in 2013 he thought the Haiti scandal (which happened before he started) had been properly investigated.

The Tory MP Paul Scully is asking questions now.

Q: There have been reports that one of the people sent to investigate what happened in Haiti was not suitable.

Goldring says Edward McKenzie-Green was one of a team of four. He was not the person in charge. McKenzie-Green was erratic. But he was qualified as an investigator, he says.

Goldring says the investigation was not compromised by McKenzie-Green’s failings.

Oxfam boss apologises to MPs for appearing to downplay Haiti sex scandal

Stephen Twigg, the Labour MP who chairs the committee, starts by saying that the committee will hold an inquiry into this scandal.

Twigg starts by asking Mark Goldring if he will apologise for the comments he made in a Guardian interview last week that appeared to downplay the significance of the scandal.

Goldring does apologise. He made those comments at a time when he was under stress, he says.

  • Oxfam chief executive Mark Goldring apologises for appearing to downplay significance of Haiti sex scandal.

Here is the Guardian interview that Twigg was referring to.

And here is the key quote from Goldring in that interview.

The intensity and the ferocity of the attack makes you wonder, what did we do? We murdered babies in their cots? Certainly, the scale and the intensity of the attacks feels out of proportion to the level of culpability. I struggle to understand it. You think: ‘My God, there’s something going on there.’

Updated

Oxfam to give evidence to MPs about Haiti sex scandal

The Commons international development committee is just starting taking evidence about the Oxfam Haiti sex scandal.

Here are the witnesses who are appearing.

Now

Mark Goldring, Oxfam’s CEO

Caroline Thomson, chair of trustees at Oxfam

Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam International’s executive director

At 11.30am

Kevin Watkins, Save the Children’s CEO

Steve Reeves, Save the Children’s director of child safeguarding

At 11.50am

Matthew Rycroft, permanent secretary at the Department for International Development (DfID)

Gerard Howe, head of inclusive societies at DFID

Beverley Warmington, director of the conflict, humanitarian and security department at DfID

As well as the Haiti scandal, Goldring may be asked about a story in today’s Times (paywall) saying he is is under investigation for his handling of a sexual assault case. Sean O’Neill reports that:

As Mark Goldring is questioned by MPs today over the Haiti scandal, it can be reported that he is the subject of an internal inquiry at the charity after a whistleblower complaint.

The case relates to the sacking in November 2010 of Lesley Agams, the country director in Nigeria, by a senior manager she had accused of sexually assaulting her in Oxford three months earlier. Oxfam staff called for an independent inquiry but Mr Goldring, 60, undertook a personal review. He apologised to Ms Agams, 51, for her experience but said: “I don’t have any grounds to conclude that the decision reached at the time was wrong or unreasonable.”

Davis says the UK has set out legislation to regulate drones. It is one of the first countries in the world to set out specific laws in this area, he says.

Davis says the UK needs to produce regulation that can help turn “inventive ideas into successful industries”. It has to work for firms and for consumers, he says.

The government is developing regulation for self-driving cars, he says.

The same is true for drones.

I soon expect to receive deliveries from Amazon by drone

In fact — at this very moment at my house in Yorkshire — a robot lawnmower, designed in Sweden and built using drone technology in the North East of England, is mowing the grass.

But if we are to realise the full potential of new aerial drone technology, we must also maintain our world-class aviation safety record — and address security and privacy concerns.

Davis quotes from what Emmanuel Macron, the French president, said earlier this month. Macron said:

If we do not define a standard for international cooperation, we will never manage to convince the middle and working classes, that globalization is good for them.

Davis says he “could not agree more”.

Davis says the government does not want to lead a competitive race to the bottom. It wants to lead a global race to the top.

See 10.02am.

Davis says the UK is leaving the EU because it wants to ensure that decisions affecting it are taken in the UK.

It is not because the UK wants to undermine the EU, he says.

He cites examples; look at what Theresa May said on Saturday about wanting the UK to keep contributing to European security, or the environmental plan published by the government committing it to ongoing high environmental standards.

Davis says there are two principles he wants to stress.

First, the UK’s intention to lead a race to the top in terms of standards.

And, second, the principle of “fair competition”.

See 10.02am for more.

Davis says Europeans have shared experiences, and a shared future.

Since the referendum vote there has been a lot of interest in what Brexit means.

He says he wants to explain how the UK can continue being a friend and partner after Brexit.

David Davis is speaking now.

He says it is a pleasure to be in Vienna, a city what is one of Europe’s truly global cities. He says he is one of those people proud to call themselves Europeans.

Vienna is a city that produces ideas, he says.

These global cities bring us together.

Students in London are being taught the ideas of the Austrian school of economics, he says.

David Davis is being introduced now. The host says later today Davis will be going to Athens.

I will be covering the speech until 10.30am, when I will switch to the international development committee’’s Oxfam hearing.

Here is the chorus from Ultravox’s Vienna. I trust Stewart Jackson does not intend it as a commentary on his boss’s speech. (See 10.08am.)

The feeling has gone only you and I

It means nothing to me

This means nothing to me

Oh, Vienna

Stuart Jackson, the former Tory MP who is now David Davis’s chief of staff, has taken to tweeting an Ultravox video while he waits for the speech to start. That dates him ...

Dan Roberts tells me Jon Stone wasn’t joking. (See 9.54am.) There is a decent Austrian media turnout at the speech.

My colleague Dan Roberts says it is standing room only at the David Davis venue.

Extracts from David Davis's speech

Here are some more extracts from the David Davis speech released in advance overnight.

On how the UK will be engaged in “a race to the top in global standards” after Brexit

The agreement we strike will not be about how to build convergence but what to do when one of us wants to make changes to rules.

Neither side should put up unnecessary barriers during this process.

Take a car produced here in Austria to be exported to the UK.

Currently, that vehicle only has to undergo one series of approvals, in one country, to show that it meets the required regulatory standards.

And those approvals are accepted across the European Union.

That’s exactly the sort of arrangement we want to see maintained even after we leave the European Union.

A crucial part of any such agreement is the ability for both sides to trust each other’s regulations and the institutions that enforce them.

Such mutual recognition will naturally require close, even-handed cooperation between these authorities and a common set of principles to guide them.

And the certainty that Britain’s plan, its blueprint for life outside of Europe, is a race to the top in global standards not a regression from the high standards we have now, can provide the basis of the trust that means that Britain’s regulators and institutions can continue to be recognised.

This will be a crucial part of ensuring our future economic partnership is as open, and trade remains as frictionless as possible.

I am certain that is in the interests of both sides

And because of that, I am certain that we can get this right.

On the two principles that should underpin a future trade agreement with the EU

I’m here to explain not just why we must continue to work together as the closest of partners and friends…

But also how we should go about doing it.

I believe there are two important principles which can help point us in the right direction.

The first is Britain’s determination to lead a race to the top in global standards.

The second is the principle of fair competition, which underpins the best elements of the European economy, and which we must work hard to spread.

Updated

This is from the Independent’s Jon Stone.

It does not look like that from what the live feed is showing at the moment.

Venue for David Davis’s speech
Venue for David Davis’s speech Photograph: Guardian

Maybe they are all out of camera shot. Or else Stone is just being sarcastic.

David Davis's Brexit speech

David Davis is about to start his Brexit speech in Austria.

There is a live feed at the top of the blog.

Here is the Labour peer Andrew Adonis on David Davis’s speech.

Labour says Davis's claims about Tories not wanting to weaken standards after Brexit aren't credible

Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, has joined those (see 8.56am) saying David Davis’s promises about the government not wanting to lower standards after Brexit can’t be trusted. Starmer said:

David Davis’ promise to protect workers’ rights and environmental standards after Brexit simply isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

How are people meant to trust the Brexit secretary when his colleague Liam Fox has said current protections mean it’s ‘too difficult’ to fire staff and Boris Johnson has described workers’ rights coming from the EU as ‘back-breaking’?

The truth is there are many in Theresa May’s government who want to use Brexit as an excuse to drive down standards and weaken fundamental rights.

Labour rejects this approach. We want a close future relationship with the EU based on our values of equality. That includes maintaining and extending rights, standards and protections.

If David Davis was serious about stopping a race-to-the-bottom then he would have backed Labour’s call to block Tory ministers from having the power to rip up rights and protections behind closed doors.

Sir Keir Starmer, shadow Brexit secretary, at a shadow cabinet meeting earlier this month.
Sir Keir Starmer, shadow Brexit secretary, at a shadow cabinet meeting earlier this month. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Michael Russell, the Scottish government’s Brexit minister, also seems unimpressed by the overnight briefing from the David Davis speech.

Davis accused of 'living in cloud cuckoo land' after claiming Brexit won't create 'Mad Max dystopia'

On the basis of today’s speech, you can’t accuse David Davis, the Brexit secretary, of over-selling the benefits of leaving the EU. Promising voters that the UK won’t be “plunged into a Mad Max-style world borrowed from dystopian fiction” does seem to be setting the hurdle rather low for a successful public policy outcome. But his language has certainly captured the headlines.

Here is the key passage from the speech extract released in advance. Davis will say:

We will continue our track record of meeting high standards after we leave the European Union.

Now, I know that for one reason or another there are some people who have sought to question that these really are our intentions.

They fear that Brexit could lead to an Anglo-Saxon race to the bottom.

With Britain plunged into a Mad Max-style world borrowed from dystopian fiction.

These fears about a race to the bottom are based on nothing, not history, not intention, nor interest.

And here is the Guardian’s overnight story.

Davis is invoking ‘Mad Max dystopia’ trade model because he wants to make the point that the government is committed to maintaining high regulatory standards after Brexit. But anti-Brexit campaigners are not convinced. Best for Britiain, which is trying to stop Brexit, put out this response from the Green MP Caroline Lucas.

David Davis is living in cloud cuckoo land if he thinks the EU will simply accept assurances about the UK’s standards without blinking.

They will have heard Brexit ministers boasting about how Brexit will be a chance for massive deregulation.

The more likely scenario is that this Government will engage in a race to the bottom on standards - putting at risk both environmental protections and the hard won rights of British workers and consumers in the process.

And Open Britain, which is campaigning for a soft Brexit, put out this response from the Labour MP Chuka Umunna.

David Davis insists that Brexit won’t mean a race to the bottom on everything from workers’ rights to environmental standards but not everyone around the cabinet table agrees with him. Theresa May has repeatedly failed to rule out scrapping working time regulations, Boris Johnson wants to get rid of the social chapter and Liam Fox says he’s in favour of importing chlorinated chicken from the United States.

In reality, the best way to protect and enhance the high standards that exist in this country is to stay in the single market and the customs union, especially when there is no public appetite for the kind of widespread deregulation favoured by Brextremists on the hard right of the debate.

And since we’re on the subject of David Davis, my colleague Dan Roberts’ profile of him is well worth reading.

Here is the agenda for the day.

9.45am: David Davis, the Brexit secretary, gives his speech in Austria.

10.30am: Oxfam executives give evidence to the Commons international development committee about the Haiti sex scandal. The MPs are also taking evidence from Save the Children, at 11.30am, and from the Department for International Development, at 11.50am.

10.30am: The supreme court rules on the Pimlico Plumbers gig economy case.

10.45am: Michael Gove, the environment secretary, gives a speech at the NFU conference.

11.55am: Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, gives a speech to the annual conference of the EEF manufacturers organisation. Jeremy Corbyn is addressing the same conference at 1.30pm.

2.30pm: Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Karen Bradley, the Northern Ireland secretary, makes a statement to MPs about the failed attempt to revive power-sharing at Stormont.

As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.

You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.

Here is the Politico Europe round-up of this morning’s political news from Jack Blanchard. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’ top 10 must reads.

If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.

I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time.

If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter

A scene from “Mad Max: Fury Road,” directed by George Miller.
A scene from “Mad Max: Fury Road,” directed by George Miller. Photograph: Jasin Boland/AP

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Footage Of Christopher Nolan At Universal CityWalk Hollywood Is Going Viral, And The Context Is Even Better
He wasn't there for the Voodoo Doughnuts.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Do Not Try This Egg Trend USDA and FDA Warn It Could Make You Sick
Social media platforms are filled with creative cooking hacks. Users share fast recipes and unique visual tricks to make meal prep entertaining. Sometimes these viral trends cross the line into dangerous territory. A recent breakfast trend is gaining millions of views online. Parents are freezing raw eggs in the shell…
Grocery Coupon Guide
Grocery Coupon Guide
Woman has parallel parking anxiety when she notices what all the men around her are doing: ‘My worst fear’
Ugh, we'd be mortified.
We Got This Covered
We Got This Covered
Amazon Nearly Made Eric Kripke Pull An Episode Of The Boys Last Season. So, What Happened?
This story is wild.
Cinemablend
Cinemablend
Whale watchers delighted as never seen before orcas arrive in Seattle
The visiting orcas have something that local whales don’t: circular scars left by cookie-cutter sharks, which latch on to larger animals and slice a chunk off them
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Kelly Osbourne fuels fresh romance speculation after sharing images of Kiinicki on social media
After her split from fiancé Sid Wilson, Kelly Osbourne has fuelled fresh romance speculation after sharing images of Kiinicki on social media.
BANG Premier
BANG Premier
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play