The Tory lame duck hobbles towards local elections – cartoon - The Guardian

Skip to main content

Adblock test (Why?)

The Tory lame duck hobbles towards local elections – cartoon - The Guardian
Read More

Labour has 18-point lead on Tories as local election day looms - The Guardian

Labour’s lead over the Conservatives stands at a commanding 18 points, according to the last Opinium poll for the Observer before a huge set of local elections.

With more than 8,000 council seats across 230 authorities in England up for election on Thursday, the Tories had been hoping that polls would tighten as they attempt to avoid heavy losses in both the red wall of old Labour seats and the blue all – south-eastern seats where, traditionally, they have been strong.

However, the latest poll gives Labour an 18-point lead, with Keir Starmer’s party on 44% of the vote and the Tories down two points on 26%. The Lib Dems were unchanged on a 10% vote share. It is a four-point increase on Labour’s lead a fortnight ago. About 20% of 2019 Conservative voters have switched their vote to Labour.

Overall, recent polling data has revealed a stabilisation in the fortunes of both main parties. While the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, has recovered the Tory position since Liz Truss’s disastrous time in office, the three previous polls put the party on 28%, 29% and 30% of the vote. Labour’s vote share has been 42%, 44%, 41% – findings broadly within a margin of error.

The latest poll also shows a slump in Sunak’s personal approval ratings, with 26% approving of the job he is doing and 44% disapproving. It puts him on a net approval of -18. Starmer is on -3 due to rounding – with 31% approving and 33% disapproving of his performance.

Starmer also narrowly leads on who voters see as the best prime minister, by 28% to 26%. The pollsters said this continued a pattern which effectively sees the two leaders tied on this question.

In particular, the Conservative party brand seems weak, though there has been some improvement over the past month. The party is most seen as knowing what it stands for (-8%), having a clear sense of purpose (-20%), and being tolerant (-27%). It is least seen as being in touch with ordinary people (-48%).

The Labour party brand is a “mixed picture”, Opinium said, with the past month showing signs of some decline across all perceptions. The party is most seen as being in touch with ordinary people (+11%), having the nation’s best interests at heart (+11%), and being tolerant (+6%). It is least seen as being trusted to take big decisions (-6%).

James Crouch, head of policy and public affairs at Opinium, said: “With just one week to go until the local elections, the Conservative party is yet to make a significant dent in Labour’s lead, according to our latest poll.

“Although Rishi Sunak has attempted to restore a basic sense of what his party stands for, the latest results show that still less than a quarter of the country trusts the governing party to make big decisions.

“Until the public feels it can trust the government again, it is no wonder that the Conservatives are struggling to turn around their position in the polls.”

Adblock test (Why?)

Labour has 18-point lead on Tories as local election day looms - The Guardian
Read More

Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Monday, May 01 - NT News

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Monday, May 01  NT News
Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Monday, May 01 - NT News
Read More

Australian local government areas ranked from advantaged to disadvantaged - Sky News Australia

Sydney is home to six of the top 10 most advantaged areas in Australia, new data shows. 

The Australian Bureau of Statistics on Thursday revealed the social-economic indexes for areas across the nation.

Data was pulled from the 2021 census, including income, education, housing and employment to give an overview of an area's social-economic characteristics.

Each area was then provided with a score which indicates "how relatively advantaged or disadvantaged that area is compared with other areas". 

Woollahra local government area in Sydney's east, which includes the suburbs of Point Piper, Vaucluse and Double Bay, took the title of Australia's most advantaged area.

Mosman on Sydney's lower north shore came in second, followed by nearby Ku-ring-gai which is home to suburbs such as Pymble, Killara and Turramurra.

The Northern Territory's Darwin Waterfront Precinct, which has just 293 residents, was ranked fourth.

North Sydney local government area, which includes the namesake suburb as well as Kirribilli, McMahons Point and Crows Nest, rounded out the top five.  

Sixth place went to Waverley in Sydney's east, which has suburbs including Bondi, Bronte and Dover Heights, and seventh was Lane Cove.

Peppermint Grove in Perth's west was eighth, while nearby Nedlands was ninth and Cottlesloe was 10th.

The ABS noted that all but one of the top 10 most advantaged areas are on waterfronts.

At the other end of the scale, six of the 10 most disadvantaged areas were in Queensland, and the remaining four were in the Northern Territory. 

Woorabinda, 170km southwest of Rockhampton and with a population of 1,019, was deemed to Australia's most disadvantaged area, followed by Cherbourg, Queensland.

Belyuen in the Northern Territory was the third most disadvantaged, with West Daly (Northern Territory) fourth and Yarrabah (Queensland) in fifth.

Kowanyama (Queensland) was sixth, then Wujal Wujal (Queensland), East Arnhem (Northern Territory), Doomadgee (Queensland) and Central Desert (Northern Territory).

"Generally, disadvantaged areas tend to be in regional and remote communities, while advantaged areas tend to be in major cities," the ABS noted.

Adblock test (Why?)

Australian local government areas ranked from advantaged to disadvantaged - Sky News Australia
Read More

Conspiracist disruptions to local council meetings must be dealt with quickly - The Age

April 27, 2023 — 9.00pm

That most accessible level of government, the local council, is a humble yet vital forum for community debate on grassroots issues that affect us on a micro level. This year we’ve seen residents fighting to stop a basketball arena being built on parkland in Yarraville, a demonstration against a new bin charge in the City of Yarra and a 784-signature petition to Hobsons Bay council calling for an expensive swimming pool planned for Altona Meadows to be scrapped: all par for the course.

What we saw on Wednesday night at the City of Monash was something entirely different. A crowd of some 190 converged on the council meeting largely to clamour about an upcoming community drag queen event, calling councillors “paedophiles” and demanding they be arrested for promoting “sex in front of our children”. This crossed the line between peaceful protest and intimidation: behaviour that was both unacceptable and part of what has emerged as a worrying trend.

Police guard the Monash council offices ahead of Wednesday night’s meeting.Credit: Paul Jeffers

As The Age has reported, multiple councils have in recent months been targeted by groups associated with fringe online forums such as My Place and Reignite Democracy Australia, which dabble in a grab-bag of conspiracy theories involving 5G, lockdowns, gender issues, government surveillance and the so-called sovereign citizen movement.

The City of Casey, in Melbourne’s south-east, cancelled a drag queen event following threats; Yarra Ranges Council closed its public gallery after meetings were disrupted by questions about 5G phone towers and “15-minute cities” (a theory that claims planning laws aimed at making local neighbourhoods more amenable will be used to set up open-air prison camps); Knox and Whittlesea councils have heard from residents who seem to sincerely believe they are the victims of 5G “radiation poisoning” and fear council-organised “lockdowns”.

Whatever their genesis, these protests are interfering in the everyday business of local democracy, a major concern, and probably emboldening their organisers.

Yarra Ranges is within its rights to close its public gallery if it believes some residents – or likely ring-ins – are being deliberately disruptive or pose a threat to its councillors; Monash is to be commended for standing up to the mob. But neither action is a sustainable solution: councils must find a way to continue to operate transparently and openly, accountable and accessible to their community, without threat of violence or abuse.

All citizens should have the right to air their views in a public chamber – if they do so in a manner that is civil, respectful and allows others the same privilege. Perhaps some protesters have lost the ability to differentiate between what passes for “acceptable” behaviour online – where horrific threats are commonplace – and in real life. We saw disturbing aspects of this, of course, in Melbourne’s lockdown protests and more recently when groups associated with white supremacy performed a Nazi salute at an anti-trans-rights rally on the steps of parliament.

People have a right to protest peacefully, but there is no place for thugs in what should be the “safe space” of a local council chamber.

A fix will be tricky, yet the best minds in law enforcement and policy can surely develop a co-ordinated strategy. It might be as simple as pre-registration to attend meetings or limiting attendance to bona fide locals; it would be disappointing and expensive if security and police attendance emerges as the solution.

Most of all, we all, as citizens, must stop looking the other way and treating these protesters as a mild embarrassment who, we hope, will just go away. We must all make it clear to those around us, in real life or in online forums, that violence, intimidation and abuse will not be tolerated in our community. For the longer we leave these stains untouched, the harder they will be to remove.

Patrick Elligett sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.

Adblock test (Why?)

Conspiracist disruptions to local council meetings must be dealt with quickly - The Age
Read More

Chicago bankers Lincoln find local pairing with Miles Advisory - The Australian Financial Review

Street Talk

Apr 26, 2023 – 9.00pm

Australia’s crowded investment banking market has done little to dull the interest of overseas firms in securing local opportunities.

Street Talk can reveal Lincoln International, the Chicago-based investment bank which dominates middle market transactions globally, is the latest to arrive in Australia, securing a strategic partnership with Miles Advisory Partners.

It is understood Lincoln and Miles Advisory inked the formal collaboration agreement on Wednesday. It will see the merged firm expand access for clients in both directions.

Tim Miles (front) with (from left) Rohan Manikath, Gareth Cope, Stephen Bowring, Craig Andrews, Lloyd Way and Paul Worsley of Miles Advisory Partners Dominic Lorrimer

Both firms specialise in mid-market advisory services. Miles Advisory was founded in 2002 by Tim Miles and has about 20 advisors in M&A, debt advisory and restructuring. Meanwhile, Lincoln, which is also founder-led, is the second-largest global player in the space, with 850 investment bankers across 18 countries.

“We are just so culturally aligned ... Lincoln also has a number of products that will fill a gap for us,” Miles told Street Talk on Wednesday,

Miles Advisory recently worked for Larry Kestelman’s private equity group Queens Lane Capital on a potential exit from its first-ever investment, stone and tiles business Petra Industries, while Street Talk this week reported the firm had been engaged by The Growth Fund to find buyers for its vehicle leasing business CompassCorp.

Previous assignments have included selling CPE Capital’s crackers business Gourmet Food Group to global giant Mondelez, overseeing tradie favourite Total Tools when it went to Metcash, and advising TSA Management when it acquired WorleyParsons’ Capital Projects Advisory business.

Lincoln International’s interest in Australia comes after a number of larger investment banks arrived in the local market. Jefferies came first in 2019, when it took 30 bankers from CLSA in one go, followed by New Zealand bank Jarden the following year.

More recently, Grant Samuel, which specialises in independent expert reports, has been in on-and-off discussions with little-known Spanish player Alantra, negotiations which so far have had little success. That takeover approach – first reported by Street Talk earlier this month – has split the senior ranks of Grant Samuel despite being handled by the company’s co-chief executive, Damien Elias.

Like Miles Advisory, Lincoln International focuses on private equity deals. It has advised Turn/River Capital on the sale of human resources software group Trakstar to Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan and AIM-listed In The Style Fashion’s sale to Baaj Capital, a British family office.

Lincoln has had the largest volume of private equity exits in the last two years globally. Its chief executive, Rob Brown, told Street Talk that he was confident Lincoln’s “global reach, deep industry expertise and complementary suite of products will augment the great work Miles Advisory ... already delivers to its ... clients”.

Miles Advisory’s strategic partnership – as Lincoln International’s Australian and New Zealand affiliate – is expected to be announced as early as Thursday. The local firm fielded a number of approaches from different overseas parties before settling on Lincoln International.

“I had to kiss a lot of frogs before I found my princess,” Miles said.

Sarah Thompson has co-edited Street Talk since 2009, specialising in private equity, investment banking, M&A and equity capital markets stories. Prior to that, she spent 10 years in London as a markets and M&A reporter at Bloomberg and Dow Jones. Email Sarah at sarah.thompson@afr.com

Adblock test (Why?)

Chicago bankers Lincoln find local pairing with Miles Advisory - The Australian Financial Review
Read More

African vaccines: local manufacturers are struggling to access the market - what must change - The Conversation Africa

Two recent developments in South Africa have underscored the opportunities – and challenges – facing vaccine production on the continent.

One was the visit by the World Health Organisation Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus to take stock of Africa’s mRNA vaccine hub. The hub was launched in mid-2021 in a bid to make the latest vaccine technology more readily available to developing countries.

The other development highlighted the main problem that African countries continue to have in developing vaccine production capabilities: markets for their products. On this point, the South African government announced that it had awarded a tender for the pneumococcal vaccine, Prevenar/PCV13, to the local agent of Serum Institute of India. The other product, Hexaxim, is now the subject of a re-tender process. Other winning bidders were GSK (Belgium) and Sanofi (France).

There were high expectations that the tender for Prevenar/PCV13 would go to Biovac. This is a local company that’s developed the capacity to manufacture the vaccine in South Africa through a technology transfer partnership with Pfizer.

The tender outcome is truly paradoxical given that South Africa has expressed a strong commitment to local production of medicines. The request for bids to supply vaccines for the national programme that included Prevenar/PCV13 went as far as to make a reference to special consideration for locally produced products.

The decision suggests that there’s a fragmentation of goals and objectives within the governmental agencies in fostering pharmaceutical production in South Africa. This kind of disconnect can significantly discourage future investments and partnerships, and wreak havoc with expansion plans.

The WHO visit, and the Biovac decision, point to two big challenges: how to support local production of vaccines while meeting national health objectives. And how to create markets for new producers within Africa through national and regional procurement policies.

Market access and local production

The tender decision raises important questions about local production and how its inextricably linked to market access.

Since 2021, vaccine production initiatives in Africa have mostly focused on financing and partnership building, leaving out the central question of market access for products made in African countries.

Market access is crucial for local production of vaccines.

First, competitive production in the vaccine sector depends on scale. The larger the company’s production volumes, the cheaper the price. But to achieve scale, local companies need market access.

Second, market access is key for the survival of new entrants. It enables them to cover their working capital and helps with funds for reinvestment in the business for expansion.

But the current procurement systems for vaccines in the region does not leave much room for African companies. Forty out of 54 countries on the continent rely on vaccines procured by Gavi, the global alliance that provides vaccines to eligible low and middle income countries. Gavi-procured vaccines account for almost 85% of all vaccines procured in the region. This leaves little room for supply through other channels where African companies have to compete with all other global companies.

This is problematic. To address the issue the African Union has has called on Gavi to procure 30% of the vaccines from production facilities on the continent.. This is under discussion but it still won’t be enough.

If the aim is to enable local vaccine production in Africa, we have to ensure that local producers have access to their national markets. Such market access must be facilitated speedily through national procurement policies.

Procurement

Procurement policies can potentially promote three broad goals:

But balancing these three goals is not easy. Focusing just on the lowest prices may in fact, lead to the elimination of local companies, driving them out of business.

This is why countries that have succeeded in building local vaccine manufacturing had done so by, among other things:

• restricting foreign competition when three or more local companies can produce a product. This happened in Bangladesh;

• procuring from local companies as much as possible, or waiting for local companies to develop capacity to introduce products, as has been the case in Indonesia and Brazil;

• offering preference to local companies in the national procurement process. This is a route that Russia has taken.

A reliance on preferential procurement by local companies can sometimes have negative consequences. It can lead to inefficiencies such as higher product prices, which become the norm due to low competition, with a negative impact on public health objectives.

But these can be avoided by designing procurement policies that support local companies more broadly, with a focus on promoting competition. Prices can also be pegged to any select international reference price to ensure that premiums for local production to accommodate the local suppliers are not too high. Price incentives can also be restricted to limited periods to ensure a shift to competitive production.

What Africa needs

Biovac was set up as a public private partnership in 2003. It has faced many challenges. These include uncertain periods as the exclusive supplier to South Africa’s Ministry of Health, and changes in product development trajectories to suit the national protocol choices.

Despite these difficulties, the company has been resilient. Today, it has a workforce of 450, most of whom are highly qualified and skilled scientists. It has over R1 billion (over US$54 million) in foreign direct investments through its partnerships with foreign companies.

But the current basis of all manufacturing activity at the company is the local manufacture of Prevenar/PCV13 and the six-in-one vaccine, Hexaxim. This basis needs to be preserved and nurtured, to enable the company to expand, and to allow the emergence of a vibrant vaccine production sector in the country that can supply to South Africa and the region.

Cutting off the company from supplying to its own local market isn’t beneficial for Biovac, and not a good decision for South Africa given the investment that’s been made in developing capacity in this sector.

A number of lessons stand out from Biovac’s experience.

First, local companies are better off with certainty on access to domestic markets. This can help them plan and expand their production effectively from the start. Tenders offer a good starting point to address this.

Second, product selection in national programmes would do well to take into account local products in the pipeline.

Third, tenders can balance public health with local production if they are structured to promote cost gains in some segments through external supplies that can allow for a small price premium for local companies in other vaccine categories. This would help local companies to stabilise themselves in Africa, which are not equipped to absorb the financial risks of losing out on national tenders.

Africa has come a long way, in the post-COVID era, in boosting the morale around local production investment among local and foreign companies. But countries on the continent still need to carefully consider incentives for local companies, given the harsh international competition and the lack of inroads to markets both in the region and outside for African companies.

It is critically important to work with Gavi to enable procurement from African companies. But it’s equally important for self-procuring countries to commit to – and support – local production capacity building efforts. Without this commitment from African governments, the Africa vaccine manufacturing “project” is under serious threat.

Adblock test (Why?)

African vaccines: local manufacturers are struggling to access the market - what must change - The Conversation Africa
Read More

2023 Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power hybrid joins the local line-up - Drive

The new Nissan X-Trail hybrid family SUV range has expanded with a model starting from less than $50,000 before on-road costs – but it is still $3000 to $6000 dearer than the petrol-only version.

---

13:5326 April 2023

The 2023 Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power hybrid has been announced for Australia ahead of showroom arrivals from the second half of this year.

The X-Trail ST-L e-Power is priced from $49,490 plus on-road costs, and mirrors the dearer Ti and Ti-L e-Power variants offering five seats and a dual-motor hybrid all-wheel drive system.

It is $4700 cheaper than the previous most affordable Nissan X-Trail hybrid, the $54,190 Ti e-Power – and brings the entry price below $50,000 plus on-road costs.

---

---

However, it still holds a price premium of $3200 over the petrol-only, seven-seat, all-wheel-drive ST-L – or $6300 compared to the cheapest five-seat, front-wheel-drive X-Trail ST-L petrol model.

By comparison, the front-wheel-drive hybrid Toyota RAV4 costs $2500 more than the petrol-only Toyota RAV4, rising to a $5500 gap for hybrid all-wheel drive.

Meanwhile, high-grade Ti and Ti-L versions of the X-Trail e-Power cost $4200 more than petrol versions, all fitted with five seats and all-wheel drive.

---

---

The Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power shares its hybrid drivetrain with the other e-Power models, which uses the petrol engine as a generator to power the electric motors on each axle.

Unlike a Toyota hybrid – where the wheels can be driven on petrol or electric power, or both – the wheels in a Nissan e-Power vehicle are driven by electric motors only, claimed to provide an electric-car-like driving experience.

---

---

Nissan X-Trail ST-L petrol.

The petrol engine is a 1.5-litre turbocharged petrol three-cylinder, which feeds a 2.1kWh battery pack, a 150kW front electric motor and a 100kW rear electric motor.

The combined output is listed at 157kW, while claimed fuel consumption is rated at 6.1 litres per 100 kilometres.

Standard features on the X-Trail ST-L e-Power is shared with the petrol ST-L model – aside from the addition of a black grille surround, low-speed pedestrian alert system, interior noise cancelling, and regenerative braking.

---

---

Carry-over features include an 8.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, synthetic leather-look seat upholstery, an eight-way power-adjustable driver's seat, heated front seats, dual-zone auto air conditioning, 18-inch alloy wheels, LED headlights, and a full suite of advanced safety technology.

Compared to the X-Trail Ti e-Power, the ST-L e-Power misses out on adaptive LED headlights, a 12.3-inch touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay, wired Android Auto and satellite navigation, 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster, head-up display, rain-sensing wipers, tri-zone air conditioning, a panoramic sunroof, power-operated tailgate, leather seats, 10-way power-adjustable front seats, and 19-inch alloy wheels.

The 2023 Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power is due in Australian showrooms in the second half of this year.

---

---

2023 Nissan X-Trail Australian pricing

• X-Trail ST five-seat FWD – $36,750
• X-Trail ST seven-seat AWD – $39,790
• X-Trail ST-L five-seat FWD – $43,190
• X-Trail ST-L seven-seat AWD – $46,290
• X-Trail ST-L e-Power five-seat AWD – $49,490 (new)
• X-Trail Ti five-seat AWD – $49,990
• X-Trail Ti-L five-seat AWD – $52,990
• X-Trail Ti e-Power five-seat AWD – $54,190
• X-Trail Ti-L e-Power five-seat AWD – $57,190

Above prices exclude on-road costs such as registration, stamp duty and dealer delivery fees.

2023 Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power standard features:

• e-Power hybrid system with all-wheel drive
• e-Pedal Step high-power regenerative braking
• Active noise cancelling
• Black grille surround
• Acoustic Vehicle Alerting System (low-speed pedestrian warning)
• 18-inch alloy wheels
• Dusk-sensing LED headlights with auto high beam
• LED tail-lights
• 8.0-inch infotainment touchscreen with wired Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, digital radio
• 7.0-inch instrument display
• Six-speaker sound system
• Eight-way power-adjustable driver's seat
• Heated front seats
• Synthetic leather-look seat upholstery
• Sliding rear seats with 40:20:40 split
• Leather-accented steering wheel
• Dual-zone automatic climate-control air conditioning
• Rear privacy glass
• Auto-dimming rear-view mirror
• Fog lights
• Auto-folding, power-adjustable heated side mirrors
• Four USB ports
• Rear-view camera
• 360-degree camera with Moving Object Detection
• Seven airbags (including front-centre airbag)
• Front and rear parking sensors
• Forward and reverse autonomous emergency braking with pedestrian (front and rear) and cyclist (front) detection
• Adaptive cruise control
• Lane-keep assist
• Blind-spot monitoring
• Rear cross-traffic alert
• Traffic sign recognition
• ProPilot semi-autonomous driving tech (advanced lane centring on freeways)
• Tyre pressure monitoring

2023 Nissan X-Trail Ti e-Power adds (over ST-L):

• 19-inch alloy wheels 
• Adaptive LED headlights with LED indicators
• 12.3-inch touchscreen with wireless Apple CarPlay, wired Android Auto
• Satellite navigation
• 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster
• 10.8-inch colour head-up display
• Wireless smartphone charging
• 10-way power-adjustable front seats with lumbar adjustment
• Leather-accented seat upholstery
• Digital rear-view mirror
• Panoramic sunroof
• Tri-zone auto climate control
• Ambient interior lighting (centre console)
• Power tailgate
• Rain-sensing wipers

2023 Nissan X-Trail Ti-L e-Power adds (over Ti):

• 20-inch alloy wheels 
• Quilted Nappa leather-accented seats
• 10-speaker Bose premium sound system
• Hands-free power tailgate with position memory
• Heated steering wheel and rear seats 
• Side mirrors with auto dipping in reverse, and memory functions 
• Memory function for front seats 
• Ambient lighting in door cards
• Remote engine start
• Rear-door sunshades 

Alex Misoyannis has been writing about cars since 2017, when he started his own website, Redline. He contributed for Drive in 2018, before joining CarAdvice in 2019, becoming a regular contributing journalist within the news team in 2020. Cars have played a central role throughout Alex’s life, from flicking through car magazines at a young age, to growing up around performance vehicles in a car-loving family.

Read more about Alex Misoyannis

Adblock test (Why?)

2023 Nissan X-Trail ST-L e-Power hybrid joins the local line-up - Drive
Read More

Australian Army to get $4.1 billion for long-range missiles, local manufacturing boost - The Canberra Times

"This review and the government's response to it does provide for a reshaping of the Australian Army, but in a way which gives it a much greater strike capability and a much longer-range strike capability, but also a much greater ability to operate in a littoral environment," Mr Marles said.

Adblock test (Why?)

Australian Army to get $4.1 billion for long-range missiles, local manufacturing boost - The Canberra Times
Read More

Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Wednesday, April 26 - NT News

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Wednesday, April 26  NT News
Everybody facing Katherine Local Court, Wednesday, April 26 - NT News
Read More

African vaccines: local manufacturers are struggling to access the market - what must change - The Conversation Africa

Two recent developments in South Africa have underscored the opportunities – and challenges – facing vaccine production on the continent.

One was the visit by the World Health Organisation Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus to take stock of Africa’s mRNA vaccine hub. The hub was launched in mid-2021 in a bid to make the latest vaccine technology more readily available to developing countries.

The other development highlighted the main problem that African countries continue to have in developing vaccine production capabilities: markets for their products. On this point, the South African government announced that it had awarded a tender for the pneumococcal vaccine, Prevenar/PCV13, to the local agent of Serum Institute of India. The other product, Hexaxim, is now the subject of a re-tender process. Other winning bidders were GSK (Belgium) and Sanofi (France).

There were high expectations that the tender for Prevenar/PCV13 would go to Biovac. This is a local company that’s developed the capacity to manufacture the vaccine in South Africa through a technology transfer partnership with Pfizer.

The tender outcome is truly paradoxical given that South Africa has expressed a strong commitment to local production of medicines. The request for bids to supply vaccines for the national programme that included Prevenar/PCV13 went as far as to make a reference to special consideration for locally produced products.

The decision suggests that there’s a fragmentation of goals and objectives within the governmental agencies in fostering pharmaceutical production in South Africa. This kind of disconnect can significantly discourage future investments and partnerships, and wreak havoc with expansion plans.

The WHO visit, and the Biovac decision, point to two big challenges: how to support local production of vaccines while meeting national health objectives. And how to create markets for new producers within Africa through national and regional procurement policies.

Market access and local production

The tender decision raises important questions about local production and how its inextricably linked to market access.

Since 2021, vaccine production initiatives in Africa have mostly focused on financing and partnership building, leaving out the central question of market access for products made in African countries.

Market access is crucial for local production of vaccines.

First, competitive production in the vaccine sector depends on scale. The larger the company’s production volumes, the cheaper the price. But to achieve scale, local companies need market access.

Second, market access is key for the survival of new entrants. It enables them to cover their working capital and helps with funds for reinvestment in the business for expansion.

But the current procurement systems for vaccines in the region does not leave much room for African companies. Forty out of 54 countries on the continent rely on vaccines procured by Gavi, the global alliance that provides vaccines to eligible low and middle income countries. Gavi-procured vaccines account for almost 85% of all vaccines procured in the region. This leaves little room for supply through other channels where African companies have to compete with all other global companies.

This is problematic. To address the issue the African Union has has called on Gavi to procure 30% of the vaccines from production facilities on the continent.. This is under discussion but it still won’t be enough.

If the aim is to enable local vaccine production in Africa, we have to ensure that local producers have access to their national markets. Such market access must be facilitated speedily through national procurement policies.

Procurement

Procurement policies can potentially promote three broad goals:

But balancing these three goals is not easy. Focusing just on the lowest prices may in fact, lead to the elimination of local companies, driving them out of business.

This is why countries that have succeeded in building local vaccine manufacturing had done so by, among other things:

• restricting foreign competition when three or more local companies can produce a product. This happened in Bangladesh;

• procuring from local companies as much as possible, or waiting for local companies to develop capacity to introduce products, as has been the case in Indonesia and Brazil;

• offering preference to local companies in the national procurement process. This is a route that Russia has taken.

A reliance on preferential procurement by local companies can sometimes have negative consequences. It can lead to inefficiencies such as higher product prices, which become the norm due to low competition, with a negative impact on public health objectives.

But these can be avoided by designing procurement policies that support local companies more broadly, with a focus on promoting competition. Prices can also be pegged to any select international reference price to ensure that premiums for local production to accommodate the local suppliers are not too high. Price incentives can also be restricted to limited periods to ensure a shift to competitive production.

What Africa needs

Biovac was set up as a public private partnership in 2003. It has faced many challenges. These include uncertain periods as the exclusive supplier to South Africa’s Ministry of Health, and changes in product development trajectories to suit the national protocol choices.

Despite these difficulties, the company has been resilient. Today, it has a workforce of 450, most of whom are highly qualified and skilled scientists. It has over R1 billion (over US$54 million) in foreign direct investments through its partnerships with foreign companies.

But the current basis of all manufacturing activity at the company is the local manufacture of Prevenar/PCV13 and the six-in-one vaccine, Hexaxim. This basis needs to be preserved and nurtured, to enable the company to expand, and to allow the emergence of a vibrant vaccine production sector in the country that can supply to South Africa and the region.

Cutting off the company from supplying to its own local market isn’t beneficial for Biovac, and not a good decision for South Africa given the investment that’s been made in developing capacity in this sector.

A number of lessons stand out from Biovac’s experience.

First, local companies are better off with certainty on access to domestic markets. This can help them plan and expand their production effectively from the start. Tenders offer a good starting point to address this.

Second, product selection in national programmes would do well to take into account local products in the pipeline.

Third, tenders can balance public health with local production if they are structured to promote cost gains in some segments through external supplies that can allow for a small price premium for local companies in other vaccine categories. This would help local companies to stabilise themselves in Africa, which are not equipped to absorb the financial risks of losing out on national tenders.

Africa has come a long way, in the post-COVID era, in boosting the morale around local production investment among local and foreign companies. But countries on the continent still need to carefully consider incentives for local companies, given the harsh international competition and the lack of inroads to markets both in the region and outside for African companies.

It is critically important to work with Gavi to enable procurement from African companies. But it’s equally important for self-procuring countries to commit to – and support – local production capacity building efforts. Without this commitment from African governments, the Africa vaccine manufacturing “project” is under serious threat.

Adblock test (Why?)

African vaccines: local manufacturers are struggling to access the market - what must change - The Conversation Africa
Read More

Local food is not enough — we need a sustainable transition in the food system - The Conversation

Having highlighted the failures and fragility of a globalized food system, the COVID-19 pandemic created a sudden infatuation with local consumption, which was widely encouraged by the Québec government as a measure to mitigate the effects of the pandemic.

On one hand, delays in the arrival of foreign workers and the disruption of slaughterhouse operations were among the greatest difficulties faced by Québec farmers. On the other hand, one of the biggest challenges for smaller-scale local ecological producers was to promptly satisfy an overwhelming demand for fresh, local food.

However, this is not a trend that has lasted: while there was a sharp return to normal in 2021 (compared to 2020), some local farmers even reported a drop in demand for their products in 2022.

Nevertheless, the Québec government has been redoubling its efforts to promote local food in the name of “food autonomy,” whether by increasing its support for Aliments du Québec (the organization responsible for branding food produced within the province), or by adopting its Stratégie nationale d’achats d’aliments québécois (a strategy for local food procurement within public institutions). The province is also investing heavily, albeit narrowly, in technologies such as greenhouses and food processing infrastructure.

So how does one explain the decline in the popularity of local, ecologically grown food?

As researchers in sustainable food systems, we would like to offer some considerations as to why politicians and citizens should be targeting changes that are far more ambitious than short-lived support for local food production and consumption.

Food autonomy is insufficient

The main conclusion that we have drawn from the research we conducted with local farmers and others involved in alternative food initiatives is that “food autonomy,” as a framework for reorganizing the food system of Québec (and other provinces), is not enough. Instead, what is needed is a “just transition”.

How is food autonomy insufficient? First of all, it does not adequately challenge dominant production models. Those of smaller-scale ecological producers, which can be very diverse in terms of on-farm practices, should be both prioritized and replicated.

In the face of climate change in particular, the farmers we interviewed believe that greater biodiversity on smaller scales promotes the resilience of agricultural ecosystems. Conversely, conventional models, often “hyper-specialized” and dependent on a large quantity and variety of off-farm inputs, do not allow for such resilience.

The precarity of farming

However, regardless of the model of production, another blind spot of food autonomy is the considerable and ongoing precariousness experienced by the people growing our food. Our research confirmed what has been demonstrated in recent years: that the financial and mental burden that farmers are facing is worrisome and unsustainable.

Contributing to this burden is the well-known shortage of domestic agricultural labourers, which is being compensated for by migrant workers whose living and working conditions are too often deplorable.

In addition, smaller-scale farmers in particular must very often wear the hat of both food producers and marketing and distribution experts, while they receive very little support in either of these areas. The marketing and distribution side is particularly difficult for local ecological products.

While smaller-scale farmers cannot meet the supply chain requirements of conventional supermarkets, such as a stable supply throughout the year or a long shelf life, direct marketing through farmers’ markets or Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) subscriptions, for example, can be both time-consuming and relatively inefficient.

Moreover, the logistical and economic accessibility of these types of marketing is compromised by socio-economic factors that go well beyond the scope of food production; small-scale ecological growing is often incompatible with the fight against food insecurity. Connections between marginalized consumers and ecological farmers are therefore difficult and only occasionally realized through targeted initiatives.

In sum, it is clear that food autonomy does not address all of these issues, which is why researchers refer to it as the “local trap” when it is promoted as a framework for action on its own. Local consumption alone does not address the majority of the more substantial problems that lie at the heart of our food system.

Although local consumption is in line with food sovereignty, agroecology, and the just transition process, food autonomy alone inevitably leads to the ‘local trap,’ as it does not address the environmental and socio-economic issues that are inseparable from food systems. Graphic by Bryan Dale

Towards a just transition

The objective should not be simply to achieve food autonomy, but to undertake the process of a just transition towards a socially just and agroecological food system. This is an opportunity to actively rethink the current food model, which is currently designed to prevent such a transformation.

It is important to note that this process must be structured in such a way that all agri-food stakeholders move towards a common goal: environmentally friendly localized agriculture that produces healthy, accessible, and inclusive food without compromise. In other words, a just transition is about inviting everyone to the table, from farmers to consumers, to think beyond established models and popular practices.

To date, our research suggests that the development of an “infrastructure of the middle” would provide an effective physical and logistical structure for both smaller-scale farmers and consumers. Briefly, such infrastructure, both tangible and intangible (e.g., networks and resources) would allow for a sufficient mass of ecological farmers and other food producers and processors, on one hand, and consumers, on the other, to overcome the difficulties of direct marketing as well as those associated with conventional supply chains.

More specifically, the infrastructure of the middle would be adapted to local realities and can take the form of, for example, food hubs, community-based abattoirs, or cooperative food markets.

A question of collective responsibility

Of course, it is possible to name such examples because they already exist. However, the current forms of product aggregation and co-operation between farms, organizations and consumers are marginal and need to be further supported. Our research has shown that such examples of infrastructure of the middle require a significantly increased contribution from outside the agricultural community.

Currently, most alternative and collaborative marketing initiatives are carried out by third parties, often community-based food insecurity organizations, and representatives from such organizations agree on an important fact: the development of an infrastructure of the middle requires substantial government support as well as deep public engagement. In other words, the establishment of new infrastructure and new initiatives in general must be taken up as part of the transition toward a more just and ecological food system.

Finally, the just transition as an action framework requires us to no longer ignore the blind spots of food autonomy that include the climate crisis, community well-being, and social justice. Indeed, to engage with our food system is to realize that food is at the heart of our social fabric.

As homesteader, activist, and author Dominic Lamontagne told us, “Since everyone benefits from the act of eating, everyone should be pitching in.”

We all need a healthy and just food system. We all need to get involved in one way or another to shape not only the food system of the future, but healthy, resilient communities in which we will feel proud to be living.

In fact, bringing about such changes is our collective responsibility.

Adblock test (Why?)

Local food is not enough — we need a sustainable transition in the food system - The Conversation
Read More