Students have been praised by the Education Secretary for their resilience and hard work as hundreds of thousands prepare to collect A level results tomorrow (10 August), enabling them to progress to their next stage of their education or working life.

While exams remain the fairest and best form of assessment, recognising the unprecedented disruption the pandemic has caused to education, the Government and Ofqual decided it would not be fair for exams to go ahead this year.

Grades instead have been determined by those who know students best – their teachers.

Students were assessed only on what they had been taught and were assessed on multiple pieces of work, giving them their best possible chance to show what they can do.

There was also a quality assurance process in place, with all grades being checked by schools – and one in five schools having a sample of their grades checked by exam boards – helping to give students, parents, colleges, universities and employers confidence in grades.

Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said:

Students have worked very hard in what has been an extraordinary and challenging year, and each and every one of them should feel incredibly proud of their achievements. We should all celebrate their resilience and ability to overcome adversity.

Teachers and staff have ensured that, despite the disruption caused by the pandemic, all students are able to get grades this year and so can take their next steps and make their choices about further study or entering the workplace.

I am hugely grateful to teachers and also parents for supporting our young people in progressing to the next stage in their lives with confidence.

Universities Minister Michelle Donelan said:

Results day is the culmination of years of schooling and dedication and I want to congratulate students, teachers and parents on all their hard work.

Despite the challenges of the last 18 months, students will today receive a qualification that carries weight and acts as a passport to wherever they want to go, whether that be to university, or into further education and apprenticeships.

Students were able to be assessed on a range of evidence, including in-class tests, mock papers, optional questions provided by exam boards and coursework – giving them the fairest and greatest opportunity to show their knowledge and abilities.

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of National Association of Head Teachers, said:

All students receiving their results this week deserve our congratulations. This is the culmination of a huge amount of work in the most challenging of circumstances. Students have shown great resilience and determination this year. For each individual student, their grades are a passport to the next phase of their education, training or employment.

Students, parents, education providers and employers have every reason to be confident in this year’s results, even though there have been no exams. This year’s grades are based on students’ actual work, assessed by their teachers, moderated and quality assured. There are no algorithms this year, just human effort and human expert judgement.

Education is a devolved matter for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, however all four nations adopted a system of awarding grades this summer based on teacher based assessment.

While UCAS have predicted that we may see a record number of students get their first-choice places, as in other years, where students have not achieved the grades to take up a conditional course offer, they should speak to their school or college, university or prospective employer, to discuss their options.

The Exam Results Helpline is also available for those students who want additional advice, and just as they do in any normal year, UCAS will help thousands of students to find places through Clearing if they do not receive the grades they were hoping for.

The Government has also worked with the higher education sector to ensure there are additional places on medicine and dentistry courses where there is capacity, to help students progress to their preferred choice. The measures bring the total of fully funded medical and dentistry places to over 9,000 in universities in England, alongside up to £10 million, to support courses which are essential to building back better from the pandemic.

From

Illicit Economies Programme (“CIEP”) is a programme funded through the UK: British Embassy, Colombia (with, and on behalf of, other British Embassies in region).

First published:

August 9, 2021

Overview/Objectives

• The Combatting’s Conflict Stability and Security Fund. It partners with countries in Latin America to tackle threats including serious organised crime (from drugs to money laundering to environmental crime), grand corruption and instability/conflict.

• There are various channels used to move money internationally – whether incoming or outgoing – such as, but not limited to, trade, banking positions, foreign direct investment, and portfolio investment. Each of those will have different relative levels of importance to a given country and including as illicit finance moves between countries. Each country may also experience different levels of vulnerability to the misuse of those channels by a range of actors and whether working within a country or transnationally across the region.

• To better understand the vulnerability of the focus countries to illicit financial flows and relevant importance of those flows the CIEP seeks an implementing partner who will be able to analyse such vulnerability and prioritise them according to a matrix with four variables:

  1. Channels used for illicit financial flows (e.g., international trade, foreign direct investment, etc.);
  2. Volume of those flows;
  3. Counterpart countries where those flows originate or are destined (not restricted to the focus countries); and
  4. Sectors generating those flows (e.g., classification based on the Harmonised System used for international trade).

• The final analysis should, at a minimum, include in relation to each focus country:

  1. Vulnerability ranking for each of the four variables mentioned above;
  2. Composite ranking incorporating 4.a (Channel), 4.b (Volume) and 4.c (Counterpart);
  3. Composite ranking as 5.b, plus 4.d (Sector);
  4. The vulnerability ranking evolution over the past 10 years and their average;
  5. List of actionable recommendations for tackling the identified vulnerabilities/shortfalls; and
  6. Methodology used to assess/quantify each variable.

• The CIEP invites Bidders to propose further channels than the four mentioned above and different sectorial classifications.

• The focus countries which the programme seeks analysis of are: Colombia, Peru, Panama, Venezuela, Ecuador and the Dominican Republic.

Project bids

The project bid should not exceed GBP150,000 albeit the programme will consider bids proposing compelling activity in excess of that. Bidders will need to submit a proposal with the following requirements:

1. Propose methodology. Maximum of three pages describing the approach and operational methodology that will support the proposed delivery solution, providing evidence of the capacity, capability, experience and expertise of the organisation to deliver the proposed solution within the location(s) and context (including the thematic context) specified. Bidders should support their response with evidence from similar/relevant projects already delivered;
2. Curriculum vitae(s) of those proposed to work on the project (maximum of two pages per person);
3. FCDO Project Proposal Template that should include a detailed project plan that includes a clear project timeline and supporting detail; and
4. Activity Based Budged template, with a detailed breakdown of cost per activity proposed in the Project

Proposal.

The project must have completed all activity within four months of signing the grant agreement.

Official Development Assistance

All expenditures must qualify as Official Development Assistance (“ODA”). ODA is a term created by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to measure aid.

ODA should be undertaken by the official sector (official agencies, including state and local governments, or their executive agencies) and has promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective.

Priorities

We are seeking an implementer to carry out a series of country-specific analyses wrapped ultimately into a regional analysis.

It is anticipated the majority of the research will be able to be completed from public, open sources although some close-source interviews may also be necessary. As appropriate, Embassies in region may be able to assist the implementer in making contact with key stakeholders in State agencies/institutions and in order to provide a fuller picture of the movement of IFFs within or out of a country.

Albeit some country-specific, sectoral analysis is called for to demonstrate where and how IFFs are generated within focus countries, the report should nonetheless concentrate on cross-border flows and so as to improve understanding of the international dynamics/mechanisms (trade-based money laundering; free-trade zones etc) that allow for IFFs to proliferate across the region.

Scope and scale

The scope and scale of the personnel, resource and time required to complete this project can be set out within an implementer’s bid for activity.

We anticipate a small team (not necessarily located within any particular of the focus countries but with an ability to reach into each) will be necessary and that the analysis can be completed within four months of signing the grant agreement.

Output features

Structure: for the implementer to decide, as long as it responds to the items identified in the specific Overview/Objectives section of this document. Format: PDF Report. Language: Spanish/English.

Confidentiality:

We anticipate the implementer may be an institution engaged in building awareness around the issues raised by this study.

In principle, the UK Government would not object to the products of this project being made public and, indeed, with implementers including an element of awareness raising around those products as part of overall project design.

In so far as information may be gleaned from sensitive sources though, the parameters of such permission will need to be discussed and agreed with the Embassies at the time of signing a contract/grant. Private consultancy firms, consortia of multidisciplinary experts or non-profit organisations can participate in this call for bids.

How to bid: General Guidance on Project Proposals

1. Stage 1: Potential implementers are invited to submit a full proposal to CSSF.CIEP@fcdo.gov.uk by 29 August 2021, 11.59pm Bogotá time. We will not receive proposals after this deadline.
2. Stage 2: The CIEP Programme team will evaluate all proposals and decide which should move forward to consideration by a technical committee of the programme board due to take place mid-September 2021.
3. Stage 3: The CIEP Programme team will seek to notify the successful bidder before October 2021 and with a view towards activity starting as early as possible in end of October 2021.

Attachments:

1. FCDO CIEP Project Proposal Form – FCDO CIEP Project Proposal Form (ODT, 65.1KB)
2. FCDO CIEP Activity Based Budget Template – FCDO CIEP Activity Based Budget Template (ODS, 10.3KB)

Duty of Care

The implementer is responsible for the safety and well-being of their personnel and third parties affected by their activities under this grant agreement, including appropriate security arrangements. They will also be responsible for the provision of suitable security arrangements for their domestic and business property. HMG will share available information with the implementer on security status and developments in country where appropriate.

The implementer is responsible for ensuring appropriate safety and security briefings for all of their personnel working under this contract and ensuring that their personnel register and receive briefing as outlined above. Travel advice is also available on the FCDO website and the implementer must ensure they (and their personnel) are up to date with the latest position.

Tenderers must develop their tender response on the basis of being fully responsible for Duty of care in line with the details provided above. They must confirm in their tender that:

1. They fully accept responsibility for security and duty of care;
2. They understand the potential risks and have the knowledge and experience to develop an effective risk plan; and
3. They have the capability to manage their duty of care responsibilities throughout the life of the contract.

Acceptance of responsibility must be supported with evidence of capability. In providing evidence, Tenderers should consider the following questions:

1. Have you completed an initial assessment of potential risks that demonstrates your knowledge and understanding, and are you satisfied that you understand the risk management implications (not solely relying on information provided by FCDO)?
2. Have you prepared an outline plan that you consider appropriate to manage these risks at this stage (or will you do so if you are awarded the contract) and are you confident/comfortable that you can implement this effectively?
3. Have you an appropriate mechanism in place to monitor risk on a live/on-going basis (or will you put one in place if you are awarded the contract)?
4. Have you ensured or will you ensure that your staff are provided with, and have access to, suitable equipment and will you ensure that this is reviewed and provided on an on-going basis?
5. Have you appropriate systems in place to manage an emergency/incident if one arises?

Gender sensitivity

The FCDO views gender equality and women’s rights as central to promoting peace and stability overseas. This project will take into account any gender-related differences where data is available; consider its contribution to reducing inequality between persons of different gender; and ensure that the project does no harm to any particular gender group.

As such, gender must be fully integrated across all aspects of the intervention. The project design must be underpinned by a gender analysis that is monitored and updated regularly, and that demonstrably shapes the project’s design and implementation, with concrete commitments and action demonstrating the project is suitably privileging gender.

The work plan and project monitoring mechanism must set out how the implementer proposes to adopt a gender-sensitive approach that demonstrates compliance with UK Equality Act 2010. The implementer is expected to mainstream gender in all activities of the project by integrating a gender equality perspective that takes into account the needs of all beneficiaries, men, women and LGBTQ+ people.

Conflict sensitivity

The FCDO requires implementers to take a robust approach to conflict sensitivity. This includes going beyond ‘do no harm’ principles to include maximising opportunities for positive effect on peacebuilding and conflict dynamics, such as improved community relations, enhanced mediation, and good governance.

The FCDO also expects implementers to demonstrate an understanding of how the project might affect/is affected by extremist groups and can contribute to addressing drivers and enablers of violent extremism. This requires a well elaborated conflict sensitivity plan, including how conflict sensitivity will be brought into design (including processes, baseline analysis), implementation, monitoring, evaluation and lessons learning, and conflict sensitive communications. It requires the Implementer to have the required team capacities, and an approach to building the capacity of beneficiaries and other stakeholders on conflict sensitivity.

Thank you to our good friend, India, and to His Excellency PM Modi for this extraordinary, welcomed initiative. It is a long overdue debate and I am delighted that the United Kingdom will contribute to it.

Of the many things that unite our nations, among the most significant are our mutual dependence on maritime trade, freedom of navigation and the rule of law.

As an island nation, Britain is always aware that those three things are vital to global security, prosperity, and the environment.

Fundamental to them is our absolute commitment to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Upholding UNCLOS must remain a common endeavour of the international community. UNCLOS represents the foundation of ocean governance that must be respected.

The UK has a proud history in maritime security. We build international support to deter and counter hostile state activity at sea including piracy, smuggling, illegal fishing, and other maritime crimes worldwide.

We are currently preparing a new National Strategy for Maritime Security, to articulate in one place the United Kingdom’s full range of objectives and interventions in the maritime domain up until 2025.

But the reality is that preserving the law of the sea, and access to it, matters to everyone here today. And the fact that some are increasingly prepared to use their strategic locations off key international waterways to destabilise and threaten our precious freedoms should concern us all.

A case in point is the incident on 29 July off the coast of Oman which involved the Liberia-flagged ‘Merchant Vessel Mercer Street’. UK and international assessments have concluded the ship was attacked by Iran, using one or more Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Besides damage to the vessel, one British and one Romanian national were killed.

We condemn this deliberate, unlawful and targeted attack. It is a clear violation of international law by Iran. Not only does an attack of this nature threaten global commerce, the safety of shipping, the lives of seafarers and the region’s marine environment, but it undermines the rules-based system on which our shared peace and security depends.

At a time of growing anxiety, it is ever more important that our nations stand in solidarity to shore up that system. Because the rules-based international order is not self-perpetuating and the multilateralism of this place is not an alternative to but an extension of our nations’ determination and ability to proactively maintain it.

That means three things:

First, calling out hostile state activity and unacceptable behaviour at sea, whether piracy, smuggling, illegal fishing, illegal incursions into territorial waters, or other maritime crimes. Together we must be ready to attribute, challenge, deter and penalise such behaviour.

Second, it means promoting the rights and freedoms enshrined by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea – the bedrock of ocean governance – to ensure they remain so, in every part of the world. We have to be clear that a legally enshrined international treaty, bearing the signature of 168 parties, can’t simply be junked on a whim. UNCLOS applies to all the oceans and all the seas. It is not an a la carte option for some states to pick and choose as they wish.

Like India, the UK has a vision for a free, open and secure Indo-Pacific. That is why the United Kingdom’s recent Integrated Review of Foreign, Security, Defence and Development policy set out the importance we attach to the Indo-Pacific – the world’s growth engine, home to half its population and 40% of GDP, offering some of our biggest opportunities but also posing some of our greatest challenges. Whatever happens there, matters to the world.

And that is why you’ll find the UK more persistently engaged and increasingly proactive in the region. As part of this, His Excellency Prime Minister Modi and Prime Minister Johnson agreed a new Maritime Partnership in the Western Indian Ocean in May of this year. And I would like to congratulate India on the election of their candidate for Executive Director of ReCAAP – the Singapore-based counter-piracy and maritime crime information sharing centre.

Finally, though, our commitment on maritime issues must go beyond traditional security. All of us have a responsibility to do what we can to protect our climate. So the UK is leading global efforts to safeguard the marine environment. We are championing the protection of at least 30% of the global ocean by 2030. We are hosting COP26 in Glasgow later this year. And we are supporting the marine environment and poverty reduction around the world through our new $700 million Blue Planet Fund.

Having myself recently returned from a trip to the Indo-Pacific, I have a new-found appreciation for the beauty of that region, but also a renewed appreciation of the threats that all our nations – and our laws – face at sea.

So I have a clear understanding of the UK’s duty, as a P5 nation of this United Nations Security Council, not just to fulfil our essential UNCLOS obligations, but also to uphold it across the world. And I have increased confidence that regional and international cooperation is not just possible, but the only means of enhancing maritime security.

Because, Mr President, I have no doubt that if we work together to ensure the primacy of UNCLOS and to defend our seas then the enhancement to not just our security, but to our trade, our environment and the quality of life of our people will be a benefit to us all.

Thank you.

The Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC) is an armed police force, charged with protecting critical national infrastructure. Our Ambition is to be recognised nationally and internationally as the leading organisation for armed protective security within the critical national infrastructure of the UK.

Our officers are licenced by the College of Policing and trained to the same national standards as Home Office forces. The Constabulary is constituted under the Energy Act 2004, and is governed by different legislation to that of Home Office forces.

The Act does allow CNC officers to assist other forces if necessary at individual incidents or provide mutual aid in a prearranged arrangement, however a more formal agreement is necessary for certain instances to provide a legal framework to allow Chief Constables to request armed officers from the CNC.

As a result, the CNC currently has the below collaboration agreements in place with police forces across the country:

Operation Temperer

An agreement in place with all Home Office forces in England and Wales enabling deployment in the event of a major incident, co-ordinated by National Policing Coordination Centre (NPoCC), and potential for CNC officers to be deployed in any force area.

Operation Plato and other support

An agreement in place with all Home Office forces whose area our sites sit in: Thames Valley, Avon and Somerset, Kent, Suffolk, Lancashire, Cumbria, and Cleveland. The agreement enables us to provide support in the event of a marauding terrorist attack, where there is a threat to life or risk of serious injury or to undertake joint patrolling.

City of London

An agreement to allow CNC officers to assist with particular movements.

Police Scotland collaboration agreement

This agreement enables the CNC to offer support in the event of an Op Temperer or Op Plato scenario, in the event of a threat to life or risk of serious injury, and in any other scenario where it would be either mutually beneficial or beneficial for either force.

In each of the agreements CNC officers are deemed to be temporarily serving with the receiving force, under their direction and control and therefore with the jurisdiction of the receiving force.

The release today of the first part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s sixth Assessment Report makes for stark reading. It reaffirms that anthropogenic climate change is real, present and lasting: it is now unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land to an unprecedented degree, with effects almost certain to worsen through the coming decades.

The report also dispels any notion that the effects of the climate crisis are abstract or distant. Extreme events are being felt across the world, from wildfires in Australia, Sweden and Northwest America to heatwaves in Siberia and Canada and the devastating drought in South Africa. Evidence has grown since the last Assessment Report that human activity has exacerbated extreme weather events. Without urgent action, such events will continue to get worse. Moreover, sea levels are projected to rise over this century. Rises of as much as 2m cannot be ruled out, leaving low-lying lands and coastal communities extremely vulnerable.

One of the headline figures in the report is that average global temperatures in 2011 to 2020 were 1.1°C higher compared with 1850 to 1900. Though this may seem like a small increase on any individual day, the increments matter in the long term. With every additional fraction of a degree increase in global warming, changes in extreme events such as heatwaves, floods and droughts become larger.

The Paris Agreement in 2015 was momentous in committing signatories to limiting global warming to 2°C above pre-industrialised levels, and preferably 1.5°C. The IPCC’s report makes plain that our goal should be to keep temperature rises as small as possible. Relative to a 2°C increase, limiting temperature rises to 1.5°C would reduce the risks of food and water shortages, improve prospects for endangered species and protect human health from air pollution, malnutrition and extreme heat. We must aim for that goal.

Limiting global warming to 1.5°C is ambitious – but is not fanciful. In the 2019 amendment to the Climate Change Act, the UK showed the intent required and committed to reaching Net Zero emissions by 2050. Still, achieving that aim will be a challenge. The climate crisis is as much a rural problem as an urban one. It is both economic and human, domestic and international. This means transformation is required at every level of society: individuals, employers, institutions and international partners will need to work together to understand the trade-offs, agree compromises and seize opportunities. And just as scientists are pooling insights from diverse fields of expertise, policymakers will need to work in new ways, sharing ideas across disciplines to plot a clear path from here to net zero. This is a whole systems challenge. Tackling it will require a systemic approach.

Working back from 2050, it is clear that reaching net zero requires a renewed emphasis on science and innovation. First, we need to assess the technologies already available, identify those we need at scale by the middle of the century and deploy them as fast as possible. Second, we need to rigorously monitor progress against intermediate targets to make sure we are on track. Third, we need to identify areas where practical answers don’t yet exist – where research and innovation is still required to answer specific challenges – and invest accordingly; done well, these investments can seed the industries of the future. Across all this, we need to think globally, ensuring climate innovations are affordable and that their benefits are shared equally.

We must also recognise that the climate has already changed, and will continue to do so as we near 1.5°C. The seas are rising, and floods and wildfires are more frequent. Again, science and engineering can help us to adapt, boosting the resilience of the most vulnerable and strengthening global food security. Existing tools can anticipate adverse events, while adjusting the design of cities, transport systems and agriculture can minimise their worst effects.

Together with the COP President Designate, Alok Sharma, we will ensure that the forthcoming climate change conference (COP26) will emphasise science and innovation, including a dedicated day of activity. We hope that one of the legacies of COP26 will be that science is considered as important in producing solutions to climate change as it is in understanding it.

Each of the IPCC’s Assessment Reports are an extraordinary undertaking, drawing on thousands of experts from around the world to provide the most comprehensive assessment of the present and future climate to date. They have made their mark, too. The second Assessment Report, published in 1995, memorably stated that “the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate” and ultimately led to the Kyoto Protocol committing parties to limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The fifth informed the Paris Agreement of 2015. We hope that the sixth will spur similarly historic action in Glasgow in November and set the world on a safe and sustainable trajectory.

Signed: