DOCSLIB.ORG

UK–Turkey Relations and Turkey's Regional Role

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee UK–Turkey relations and Turkey's regional role Twelfth Report of Session 2010–12 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 20 March 2012 HC 1567 Published on 4 April 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £23.00 The Foreign Affairs Committee The Foreign Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its associated agencies. Current membership Richard Ottaway (Conservative, Croydon South) (Chair) Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth (Labour, Coventry North East) Mr John Baron (Conservative, Basildon and Billericay) Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife) Rt Hon Ann Clwyd (Labour, Cynon Valley) Mike Gapes (Labour, Ilford South) Andrew Rosindell (Conservative, Romford) Mr Frank Roy (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rt Hon Sir John Stanley (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling) Rory Stewart (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) Mr Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North) The following Member was also a member of the Committee during the parliament: Emma Reynolds (Labour, Wolverhampton North East) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including news items) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/facom. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the front of this volume. The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in a printed volume. Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Mr Kenneth Fox (Clerk), Mr Eliot Barrass (Second Clerk), Dr Brigid Fowler (Committee Specialist), Ms Zoe Oliver-Watts (Committee Specialist), Mr Richard Dawson (Senior Committee Assistant), Jacqueline Cooksey (Committee Assistant), Vanessa Hallinan (Committee Assistant), and Mr Alex Paterson (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Foreign Affairs Committee, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6394; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s regional role 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 Conclusions and recommendations 5 1 Introduction 13 PART 1: TURKEY AS A UK “STRATEGIC PARTNER” 16 2 Strengthening the bilateral relationship 16 UK-Turkey “Strategic Partnership” 16 FCO resources 19 UK visa regime 21 People-to-people contacts and public opinion 24 British Council in Turkey 27 3 Turkey’s domestic political development and human rights 30 The nature of AKP rule 30 Legal cases and justice system 32 Human rights 37 Kurdish situation 40 New constitution 42 4 Turkey as a foreign policy partner 45 Turkey’s international position and policy 45 Non-Western turn? 48 Turkey and the ‘Arab Spring’ 50 NATO, the US and missile defence 53 Turkey and Iran 53 Exaggerated influence? 55 Turkey and Israel 56 Turkey as ‘model’? 57 Energy security 59 5 Economic and commercial relations 63 Turkish economy 63 UK-Turkey trade and commercial relations 65 Defence sector 70 EU-Turkey Customs Union 70 PART 2: TURKEY’S EU ACCESSION 73 6 Membership goal 73 UK support for Turkey’s EU membership 73 Free movement 76 What kind of EU? 78 2 UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s regional role Will Turkey still want to join? 79 7 Blocked accession process 81 Blocked negotiations 81 Stalemate costs 83 Cyprus breakthrough? 84 8 EU-Turkey partnership? 86 Annex 87 Committee visit to Turkey, 30 October–3 November 2011 87 Map: Turkey and the EU in the wider region 89 Formal Minutes 90 Witnesses 91 List of written evidence 91 List of additional written evidence 92 UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s regional role 3 Summary The Government is right to continue to support Turkey’s accession to the EU, subject to Turkey meeting the accession criteria, and subject to the imposition of restrictions on the right to free movement from Turkey to the UK after any accession by Turkey to the Union. Turkey’s accession would be likely to boost the EU’s economic growth and international weight. However, Turkey’s EU accession process is stuck, effectively hostage to the Cyprus dispute. Neither Turkey nor the EU is likely formally to suspend or abandon the accession process in the foreseeable future. However, by undermining the force of EU leverage, the stalemate in the accession talks is having consequences in Turkey that are detrimental to UK objectives there, as well as to Turkish citizens looking to the EU as an anchor for liberalising domestic reforms. This is especially regrettable at a time when Turkish democracy may be in a critical phase. By helping to create uncertainty over the timing, if not the fact, of Turkey’s EU accession, the stalemate is also discouraging both the EU and Turkey from starting to address some of the most difficult issues that would be involved in Turkey’s EU membership. The Government’s continuing support for Turkey’s EU membership provides a strong basis for the development of enhanced UK-Turkey bilateral relations. The Government is correct to be seeking to strengthen the UK’s relations with Turkey, as a “strategic partner” for the UK. Turkey possesses assets, characteristics and influence that potentially add value to UK foreign policy. It is also a rising regional economic power with which there is significant potential to expand the UK’s economic and commercial relations, although the competitiveness of the market should not be underestimated. However, shortcomings in the Turkish justice system are damaging Turkey’s international reputation and leading to human rights abuses, in ways that make it harder to advocate close UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s EU membership. The current climate in Turkey is limiting freedom of expression and the media. Turkey’s human rights record thus remains a problem for the “strategic partnership” with the UK, and for Turkey’s EU accession prospects. We have encountered no evidence that Turkey has made an overarching foreign policy re- alignment away from the West. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) should not underestimate the extent to which the increased independence and regional focus of Turkish foreign policy may generate differences between Turkish and UK perspectives and policies. However, as long as its foreign policy efforts are directed towards the same ultimate goals, Turkey may add value as a foreign policy partner precisely because it is distinct from the UK. The process of responding to the ‘Arab Spring’ has brought Turkey closer to its Western allies, including the UK, while also demonstrating the utility of Ankara’s strong relations with the Arab League. Turkey has welcome influence in the Middle East and North Africa as an example of a predominantly Muslim secular democracy, albeit one that remains ‘work in progress’. 4 UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s regional role The UK’s visa regime for Turkish nationals is one of the greatest obstacles to the development of closer UK-Turkey ties. The regime undermines the credibility of the Government’s wish for a “strategic partnership” with Turkey, as well as being a significant practical and psychological obstacle to intensified relations. The FCO should explore possibilities to make the acquisition of UK entry visas easier for Turkish nationals, especially frequent visitors. The low visibility of Turkey in the UK, especially among the business community, appears to be a further obstacle to the development of close UK-Turkey ties. The British Council should ensure that the promotion of awareness of the UK in Turkey and Turkey in the UK is a central part of its role. The British Council and the FCO should take advantage of Turkey’s embrace of ‘soft power’ and cultural diplomacy to welcome and assist efforts by their Turkish partners to improve understanding of contemporary Turkey in the UK. UK-Turkey relations and Turkey’s regional role 5 Conclusions and recommendations PART 1: TURKEY AS A UK “STRATEGIC PARTNER” Strengthening the bilateral relationship UK-Turkey “Strategic Partnership” 1. We conclude that the Government is correct to have identified Turkey as a “strategic partner” for the UK and to be pursuing enhanced relations accordingly. We commend the Government for the concerted effort it has been making to this end, and we urge it to ensure that the effort is sustained and sustainable. (Paragraph 15) FCO resources 2. We welcome the fact that the FCO is expanding its diplomatic presence in Turkey. We believe that this will signal to Turkey and others the seriousness of the Government’s intent to develop the UK’s relationship with Turkey, as well as help to deliver enhanced co-operation in key policy areas. (Paragraph 21) 3. The effectiveness of UK diplomatic staff posted overseas is reduced if they cannot speak the language of their host country. We welcome the FCO’s decision to require Turkish language skills of those taking up the new UK-based staff positions in its Turkey network. Although we want to see country experts shaping FCO policy- making in London, we are perturbed that so many of the department’s Turkish speakers are deployed outside Turkey, and we regard this as symptomatic of the drawbacks of the FCO’s current system for filling staff positions.
Recommended publications
  • A Nation of Immigrants? a Brief Demographic History of Britain

    A Nation of Immigrants? a Brief Demographic History of Britain

    A Nation of Immigrants? A Nation of Immigrants? A Brief Demographic History of Britain David Conway Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society London Registered Charity No. 1085494 First Published April 2007 © The Institute for the Study of Civil Society 2007 77 Great Peter Street London SW1P 2EZ Civitas is a registered charity (no. 1085494) and a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales (no. 04023541) email: [email protected] All rights reserved ISBN 978‐1‐903386‐58‐3 Independence: The Institute for the Study of Civil Society (Civitas) is a registered educational charity (No. 1085494) and a company limited by guarantee (No. 04023541). Civitas is financed from a variety of private sources to avoid over‐ reliance on any single or small group of donors. All publications are independently refereed. All the Institute’s publications seek to further its objective of promoting the advancement of learning. The views expressed are those of the authors, not of the Institute. Typeset by Civitas Printed in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press Trowbridge, Wiltshire Contents Page Author vi Acknowledgements vii 1 Introduction 1 2 Clarifying the Question at Issue 7 3 From the Stone Age to the Roman Conquest 10 4 From the Roman Conquest to the Norman Conquest 21 5 From the Norman Conquest to the Reformation 31 6 From the Reformation to the Second World War 40 7 From the Second World War to the Present 64 8 Conclusion 94 Notes 98 v Author David Conway is a Senior Research Fellow at Civitas. His publications include A Farewell to Marx; Classical Liberalism: The Unvanquished Ideal; Free‐Market Feminism; The Rediscovery of Wisdom and In Defence of the Realm: The Place of Nations in Classical Liberalism.
  • Wellbeing in Politics and Policy

    Wellbeing in Politics and Policy

    WELLBEING IN POLITICS AND POLICY Series Editors: Ian Bache, Karen Scott and Paul Allin WELLBEING ECONOMICS The Capabilities Approach to Prosperity Paul Dalziel, Caroline Saunders and Joe Saunders Wellbeing in Politics and Policy Series Editors Ian Bache Department of Politics University of Sheffield Sheffield, UK Karen Scott Cornwall Campus Exeter University Penryn, Cornwall, UK Paul Allin Department of Mathematics Imperial College London London, UK Wellbeing in Politics and Policy will bring new lenses through which to under- stand the significance of the dramatic rise of interest in wellbeing as a goal of public policy. While a number of academic disciplines have been influential in both shaping and seeking to explain developments, the Politics discipline has been relatively silent, leaving important theoretical and empirical insights largely absent from debates: insights that have increasing significance as political inter- est grows. This series will provide a distinctive addition to the field that puts politics and policy at the centre, while embracing interdisciplinary contribu- tions. Contributions will be encouraged from various subfields of the discipline (e.g., political theory, comparative politics, governance and public policy, inter- national relations) and from those located in other disciplines that speak to core political themes (e.g., accountability, gender, inequality, legitimacy and power). The series will seek to explore these themes through policy studies in a range of settings – international, national and local. Comparative studies – either of dif- ferent policy areas and/or across different settings – will be particularly encour- aged. The series will incorporate a wide range of perspectives from critical to problem-solving approaches, drawing on a variety of epistemologies and meth- odologies.
  • Reporting Asylum

    Reporting Asylum

    Reporting asylum The UK Press and the Effectiveness of PCC Guidelines January - March 2005 By the ICAR public images partnership for National Refugee Integration Forum, Community and Media Sub-Group and Funded by Immigration and Nationality Directorate, UK Home Office Kate Smart Roger Grimshaw Christopher McDowell Beth Crosland Reporting asylum The UK Press and the Effectiveness of PCC Guidelines Researcher Kate Smart Academic Directors Dr Roger Grimshaw Dr Christopher McDowell Coordinator Beth Crosland Advisers Mike Jempson Rich Cookson Additional Researchers Hana Esselink, Amadu Khan, Forward Maisokwadzo, Pearl Thevanayagam Conducted by the ICAR public images partnership for National Refugee Integration Forum, Community and Media Sub-Group Funded by Immigration and Nationality Directorate, UK Home Office Contents About the Authors 4 Accurate Terminology 7 List of Abbreviations 7 Executive Summary 9 Acknowledgements Chapter 1 Introduction 23 Chapter 2 Methodology 49 Chapter 3 Analysing asylum reporting in the context 59 of a regulated minimum standard Chapter 4 Analysing asylum reporting in the context of best 84 practice, balance and refugee integration Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations 135 Bibliography 159 Appendix 1 List of articles referred to MediaWise 166 Appendix 2 Reporting asylum and refugee issues, information 167 leaflet produced by MediaWise (The PressWise Trust) for the NUJ Ethics Council, with support from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Appendix 3 Tables for articles with an individual focus 169 Appendix 4 Analysis of ‘1 in 20 asylum seekers is HIV’ 177 Appendix 5 Testimonies of refugee journalists 181 Reporting asylum About the authors The ICAR public images partnership set up to undertake this research comprises the Information Centre about Asylum and Refugees (ICAR) at City University, asyluminitiatives, MediaWise, the Refugees, Asylum seekers and the Media (RAM) Project and the Refugee Council.
  • Briefing Paper

    Briefing Paper

    Migration Watch UK - Our track record History & Miscellaneous: MW 425 Accurate estimates of future net migration and population growth 1. Estimating future net migration is more an art than a science. However we have a long track record of widely recognised success in this area. We have also been acknowledged as ‘migration experts’ by BBC News and by the Financial Times. 2. In 2002, we estimated that non-EU net migration would run at two million over the next decade, includ- ing a small allowance for illegal immigration. At the time our projections were met with howls of derision, indeed sometimes abuse. The Independent wrote in its editorial on 6 August 2002: “Migration Watch UK is a nasty little outfit, and its duplicitous research should be treated with the gravest suspicion. The group de- serves to fail.” On 7 August 2002, The Guardian described the figure as flawed. The ONS later estimated that legal non-EU net migration in the period 2002-2011 was 2.1 million. Read our 2002 paper. 3. In 2003, we described as ‘almost worthless’ estimates relied on by the Home Office that there would be between 5,000 and 13,000 arrivals annually from the EU8 countries of Eastern Europe following the 2004 EU enlargement. We said instead that 40,000 a year would be a cautious, yet more realistic, esti- mate. The Spectator’s Deborah Ross described our estimate as ‘unreliable’. However, in the decade after Accession, EU8 net migration has averaged 72,000 per year (including an undercount identified by the 2011 Census).
  • The Foreign Affairs Select Committee and UK Foreign Policy Written by Tom Pettinger

    The Foreign Affairs Select Committee and UK Foreign Policy Written by Tom Pettinger

    The Foreign Affairs Select Committee and UK Foreign Policy Written by Tom Pettinger This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. The Foreign Affairs Select Committee and UK Foreign Policy https://www.e-ir.info/2012/03/11/the-foreign-affairs-select-committee-and-uk-foreign-policy/ TOM PETTINGER, MAR 11 2012 Has the Foreign Affairs Select Committee made a difference to UK Foreign Policy? Because the executive has held, and still holds, royal prerogative for foreign affairs matters, Parliament has been “unusually limited”[1] in its influence over the area.[2] Scrutiny of foreign policy is unique because unlike in other areas of governance “Parliament is in no sense a regular participant in the process, either by right or custom,”[3] and because there is so little legislation in comparison with other policy areas.[4] Before 1979, an amalgamation of committees existed under different departments, examining specific foreign affairs issues with no oversight of the whole of foreign policy. The establishment of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee (FAC) in 1979 brought an increase in Parliamentary influence in the area, by “[creating] a committee devoted primarily, indeed exclusively, to foreign affairs,”[5] and the Committee was given the role of scrutinising “administration and policy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO).”[6] An in-depth study by The Constitution Unit, however, found that the FAC provided the least substantive recommendations compared with other committees,[7] implying the Committee’s scrutiny role is somewhat hindered – possibly because the main parties’ front benches, to maintain one national voice on international affairs, withhold usual party politicking.
  • Iraq: an Initial Assessment of Post- Conflict Operations

    Iraq: an Initial Assessment of Post- Conflict Operations

    House of Commons Defence Committee Iraq: An Initial Assessment of Post- Conflict Operations Sixth Report of Session 2004–05 Volume II Oral and Written Evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 16 March 2005 HC 65-II [Incorporating HC 721-i-ii, Session 2003–04] Published on 24 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £16.50 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current Membership Mr Bruce George MP (Labour, Walsall South) (Chairman) Mr James Cran MP (Conservative, Beverley and Holderness) Mr David Crausby MP (Labour, Bolton North East) Mike Gapes MP (Labour, Ilford South) Mr Mike Hancock CBE MP (Liberal Democrat, Portsmouth South) Mr Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Richard Ottaway MP (Conservative, Croydon South) Mr Frank Roy MP (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rachel Squire MP (Labour, Dunfermline West) Mr Peter Viggers MP (Conservative, Gosport) The following Member was also a member of the Committee during the period covered by this report. Mr Crispin Blunt MP (Conservative, Reigate) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
  • Download Briefing

    Download Briefing

    BRIEFING Irregular migration in the UK AUTHORS: Peter William Walsh PUBLISHED: 11/09/2020 NEXT UPDATE: 06/09/2021 1st Edition www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk BRIEFING: Irregular migration in the UK This briefing examines irregular migration – also called ‘illegal immigration’ – in the UK, including the difficulties in defining and measuring it, and evidence on its nature and scale. Key Points There is no legal nor broadly accepted definition of an ‘irregular migrant’, though the term is most commonly used to refer to people who are in the UK without the legal right to be so. Irregular migrants are not generally permitted to access benefits, social housing, or free hospital care. Reliable and accurate estimation of the UK’s irregular migrant population has not to date been possible, so available estimates should be treated with caution. Exit checks data do not provide an accurate measure of visa overstaying, and the government does not know with any degree of accuracy how many visa overstayers there are in the UK. In the financial year 2017/18, around 1,800 people trying to enter the country without authorisation were apprehended in the UK, but the total number of attempted or successful unauthorised entries is not measurable. Refused asylum seekers contribute to the UK’s irregular migrant population, but the precise number who have not left the country as required is not known. In recent years, fewer people considered without the right to be in the UK were removed from the country or left voluntarily. There are no statistics on how many people have been regularised through the 14 and 20 year pathways to regular status.
  • Core-Periphery Relations in the European Union

    Core-Periphery Relations in the European Union

    Is a core-periphery cleavage tearing the European Union apart? This timely book critically examines the transformation of political conflict in Europe in the wake of the Eurocrisis. José Magone, Brigid Laffan and Christian Schweiger have assembled a leading group of theoretical and empirical scholars to apply the core-periphery lens on the Eurocrisis. The collection provides a compelling explanation for the intensity of conflict, coalitional patterns, and declining policy effectiveness in the contemporary European Union. It shows how the Eurocrisis has exacerbated – rather than created – old core-periphery tensions, and how the EU institutions’ inability to diffuse these tensions is hastening Europe’s geopolitical decline. This path-breaking study will change our understanding of European governance. It is also a wake-up call for Europe’s leaders. Liesbet Hooghe, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA This page intentionally left blank Core-periphery Relations in the European Union Successive enlargements to the European Union membership have transformed it into an economically, politically and culturally heterogeneous body with distinct vulnerabilities in its multi-level governance. This book analyses core–periphery relations to highlight the growing cleavage, and potential conflict, between the core and peripheral member states of the Union in the face of the devastating consequences of the Eurozone crisis. Taking a comparative and theoretical approach and using a variety of case studies, it examines how the crisis has both exacerbated tensions in centre–periphery rela- tions within and outside the Eurozone and how the European Union’s economic and political status is declining globally. This text will be of key interest to students and scholars of European Union studies, European integration, political economy, public policy and comparative politics.
  • Killing Hope U.S

    Killing Hope U.S

    Killing Hope U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II – Part I William Blum Zed Books London Killing Hope was first published outside of North America by Zed Books Ltd, 7 Cynthia Street, London NI 9JF, UK in 2003. Second impression, 2004 Printed by Gopsons Papers Limited, Noida, India w w w.zedbooks .demon .co .uk Published in South Africa by Spearhead, a division of New Africa Books, PO Box 23408, Claremont 7735 This is a wholly revised, extended and updated edition of a book originally published under the title The CIA: A Forgotten History (Zed Books, 1986) Copyright © William Blum 2003 The right of William Blum to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Cover design by Andrew Corbett ISBN 1 84277 368 2 hb ISBN 1 84277 369 0 pb Spearhead ISBN 0 86486 560 0 pb 2 Contents PART I Introduction 6 1. China 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid? 20 2. Italy 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style 27 3. Greece 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy to client state 33 4. The Philippines 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony 38 5. Korea 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be? 44 6. Albania 1949-1953: The proper English spy 54 7. Eastern Europe 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor 56 8. Germany 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism 60 9. Iran 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings 63 10.
  • House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs, and International Development Committees

    House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs, and International Development Committees

    House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs, and International Development Committees Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report 2009, Quarterly Reports for 2010, licensing policy and review of export control legislation First Joint Report of Session 2010–11 Fourth Report from the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee of Session 2010–11 Second Report from the Defence Committee of Session 2010–11 Fifth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee of Session 2010–11 Sixth Report from the International Development Committee of Session 2010–11 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 22 March 2011 HC 686 Published on 5 April 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £17.50 The Committees on Arms Export Controls The Business Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Development Committees are appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for International Development and any associated public bodies. Current membership BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS: Mr Adrian Bailey*§, Mr Brian Binley, Paul Blomfield*, Katy Clark*, Rebecca Harris, Margot James*, Dan Jarvis, Simon Kirby, Ian Murray*, Mr David Ward, Nadhim Zahawi* DEFENCE: Rt Hon James Arbuthnot*§, Mr Julian
  • Fact Sheet Msps Mps and Meps: Session 4 11 May 2012 Msps: Current Series

    Fact Sheet Msps Mps and Meps: Session 4 11 May 2012 Msps: Current Series

    The Scottish Parliament and Scottish Parliament I nfor mation C entre l ogo Scottish Parliament Fact sheet MSPs MPs and MEPs: Session 4 11 May 2012 MSPs: Current Series This Fact Sheet provides a list of current Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs), Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) arranged alphabetically by the constituency or region that they represent. Abbreviations used: Scottish Parliament and European Parliament Con Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Green Scottish Green Party Ind Independent Lab Scottish Labour Party LD Scottish Liberal Democrats NPA No Party Affiliation SNP Scottish National Party UK Parliament Con Conservative and Unionist Party Co-op Co-operative Party Lab Labour Party LD Liberal Democrats NPA No Party Affiliation SNP Scottish National Party Scottish Parliament and Westminster constituencies do not cover the same areas, although the names of the constituencies may be the same or similar. At the May 2005 general election, the number of Westminster constituencies was reduced from 72 to 59, which led to changes in constituency boundaries. Details of these changes can be found on the Boundary Commission’s website at www.statistics.gov.uk/geography/westminster Scottish Parliament Constituencies Constituency MSP Party Aberdeen Central Kevin Stewart SNP Aberdeen Donside Brian Adam SNP Aberdeen South and North Maureen Watt SNP Kincardine Aberdeenshire East Alex Salmond SNP Aberdeenshire West Dennis Robertson SNP Airdrie and Shotts Alex Neil SNP Almond Valley Angela
  • PMC ANNUAL REPORT 2010 2011 “We’Re Trying to Get the Message Across to Stop Violence Against Women

    PMC ANNUAL REPORT 2010 2011 “We’Re Trying to Get the Message Across to Stop Violence Against Women

    POPULATION MEDIA CENTER PMC ANNUAL REPORT 2010 2011 “We’re trying to get the message across to stop violence against women... it’s not the end, we still have hope.” The actress playing Nini in PMC’s Papua New Guinea drama, Echoes of Change Population Media Center P.O. Box 547 Shelburne, VT 05482 USA T + 1.802.985.8156 F + 1.802.985.8119 [email protected] POPULATIONMEDIA.ORG Cover photo taken in Vietnam by Ly Hoang Long. CONTENTS 02 INTRODUCTION 04 MISSION AND MAP OF PMC’S WORK 08 YEAR IN REVIEW 10 BURKINA FASO 12 ETHIOPIA 16 NIGERIA 17 SENEGAL 18 SIERRA LEONE 19 SOUTH AFRICA 20 PAPUA NEW GUINEA 24 VIETNAM 26 BRAZIL 27 CARIBBEAN 28 MEXICO 30 UNITED STATES 36 WORLDWIDE 38 FINANCIAL STATEMENT 40 DONORS 46 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 47 PROGRAM ADVISORY BOARD 56 WORLDWIDE STAFF William N. Ryerson INTRODUCTION Founder and President, Population Media Center Since the population factor is a major driver of demand October 31, 2011 marked the day human for food, and since so many women choose not to use contraception as a result of desired large family size, population reached 7 billion. misinformation about the relative safety of contraception compared to early and repeated childbearing, disapproval The first Homo sapiens were recorded in 200,000 BC. of contraception by their partners, or lack of self-efficacy By these calculations, it took 201,804 years for human (the belief that one has the right and the ability to determine population to reach 1 billion. But in the last 50 years alone, the number and spacing of children), PMC has a unique we added 4 billion people to the planet – a number most of ability to contribute to helping people make healthy and us can’t even visualize.