Weekend Box: Saudi deal, Elgin Marbles row & more
Welcome to The Weekend Box, Audley’s weekly round-up of interesting or obscure political, business and cultural news from around the world.
SAUDI SEALS THE DEAL
Saudi Arabia clinched another significant win this week in its efforts to transform its image and attract visitors, by winning the bid to host the World Expo in 2030. In the vote held by the Bureau International des Expositions in Paris, 165 delegates from 182 member states cast secret ballots to give Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh 119 votes, easily defeating South Korea’s Busan and Italy’s Rome, which got 29 and 17 votes respectively.
The win gives Saudi Arabia the spotlight in the year when ‘Vision 2030’, Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s plan to diversify the kingdom’s petrodollar economy and become a more open society, reaches its conclusion. Several giga-projects including the cities of Neom and Qiddiya are in development. Meanwhile, Riyadh has already secured the 2029 Asian Winter Games and the 2034 World Cup, as well as luring football talent such as Cristiano Ronaldo to its national league and muscling into the international golf circuit through its merger with the PGA tour.
If Dubai’s experience is an indicator, hosting the World Expo will go a long way in putting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) on the map: Dubai’s Expo 2020 attracted over 24 million visitors. Saudi Arabia has assigned $7.8 billion for World Expo 2030, along with the rather cryptic slogan, ‘The era of change: together for a foresighted tomorrow’.
The Saudis certainly played to win, systematically securing individual nation states’ votes through a worldwide exercise in ‘transactional diplomacy’ and bling-drenched receptions, culminating in Paris. They had already secured French support from President Macron, said to have lucrative civil and military contracts in mind. The win has not been without controversy, but as with this week’s acquisition of a 10% stake in Heathrow airport for £1bn, KSA's sovereign wealth fund gives it the resources to often prevail when it chooses to bid.
Image credit/Txllxt TxllxT/License
A MONUMENTAL EMBARRASSMENT
Someone has poured more fuel on the fire of Britain and Greece’s feud over the Parthenon Marbles. No. 10 would have you believe it was Greek PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis, but it’s not looking good for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Greece claims a planned meeting between the two prime ministers was suddenly cancelled because Prime Minister Mitsotakis had demanded once again that the Parthenon Marbles, otherwise known as the Elgin Marbles, be removed from the British Museum and returned to Greece. The UK’s refusal to concede to Greece is a longstanding source of grievance between the two nations. Secret talks to negotiate the return of the Marbles were reported late in 2022, but since then Rishi Sunak has ruled this possibility out, saying Britain’s museums and their “treasures” are a “huge asset to this country.”
No. 10 has accused Kyriakos Mitsotakis of “re-litigat[ing] long-settled matters,” but Prime Minister Sunak has received criticism from all directions for showing a lack of diplomacy, including from members of his own party.
If a war of words between governments isn’t enough, The Telegraph has tried to draw another British institution into the fray: Auntie Beeb. If you didn’t know, the Today programme has begun referring to the artefacts as the Parthenon Marbles, after the Ancient Greek temple from which they were taken, rather than the Elgin Marbles. ‘Elgin’ was Lord Elgin, who received permission from the Ottoman sultan to take the marbles from the Parthenon in the nineteenth century. The legality of this has been a source of controversy since; some argued it was an act of cultural vandalism at the time.
Call the name-change political correctness run amok if you want, but it is a necessary reminder of the colonialist history in which the Marbles are embroiled. They may be a ‘huge asset’ to Britain, but do they belong here?
NZ LAW UP IN SMOKE
New Zealand led the way with its world-leading law to ban smoking for future generations, but this week, in another chip at Jacinda Ardens’ progressive agenda, the new government scrapped it.
The pioneering legislation, which the UK is now the sole torchbearer of, was set to steadily raise the smoking age to stop those born after January 2009 from ever being able to legally buy cigarettes. It also sought to reduce the amount of nicotine in tobacco products and dramatically slashed the number of stores legally allowed to sell cigarettes from 6,000 to just 600 nationwide. No doubt the equivalent of cold turkey for many smokers.
The law was designed to prevent thousands of smoking-related deaths and save the health system billions of dollars. However, the reason for this U-turn lies in tax cuts put forward by the government – which is a coalition alliance between the National Party and the populist New Zealand First Party – which it looks to fund with the revenue generated from cigarette sales.
The money generated by cigarettes is not to be sneered at – many will remember the Yes Minister sketch which joked that smokers were ‘national benefactors’. In the UK, it is estimated that tobacco duties will raise £10.4bn in 2023-4 with around 80% of the price of a packet now made up of tax. It’s hard to pinpoint exactly what the costs are of smoking beyond the £2.6bn it costs the NHS when you look at productivity, cigarette-caused fires, and littering, but many suggest smokers certainly pay for their habits.
The rise of Gen Z’s clean living is already squeezing tobacco tax revenue for the UK Treasury, but there is cross-party consensus on the tough measures to fight what is still one of the biggest causes of death and illness in the UK. Quitting smoking is hard, as the case of New Zealand demonstrates, but as the Kiwis succumb to cravings, the UK has emerged as the global frontrunner in the war against cigarettes.
WORKPLACE DISTRACTIONS TO DIGITAL DANGERS
The release of Ofcom’s annual Online Nation report, which examines the UK’s online behaviours and experiences, stole headlines for one reason in particular: one-fifth of the 13.8 million people who watch porn are doing so at work.
Moving swiftly on, in addition to this insight, the report’s statistics highlight the prevalence of dangerous or harmful content for young users online. 71% of teenagers said they had encountered one or more potential harms online in the past four weeks.
The top harms 13-17-year-olds reported encountering online included: offensive language (47%); misinformation (34%); unwelcome friend requests or messages (30%); content showing dangerous stunts (30%); content encouraging gambling (25%). Just over half of those said they took action (disengaged with the site, reported the content) after seeing this content.
In particular, the expectation of seeing harmful content on video-sharing platforms is widespread, with 51% of users anticipating it. This number is higher for those 18-24 (75%); for those in a minority ethnic group (70% vs 48% for White users); and for those with a limiting or impacting condition (59% vs 46%).
The recently passed Online Safety Act is designed to tackle harms like this, making organisations that operate online services legally responsible for keeping people safe. Ofcom has a significant role in enforcing this, ensuring that these organisations (likely to exceed 100,00 in number), comply with the new rules. It was given new powers to fine and block companies that do not cooperate and start criminal proceedings against senior managers.
However, as the heavy criticism of the Act evidences, whether we are capable of moving quickly enough to police the online Wild West is a question many doubt. Ofcom plans to begin enforcing its first duties by the end of 2024, a year after the Act passed.
VAR FLIES HIGH
The ongoing saga of VAR in the footballing world took an interesting turn recently as Howard Webb, Head of Refereeing for PGMOL - the body responsible for refereeing English professional football - called on air traffic controllers and pilots to help him teach his referees how to communicate more effectively under pressure.
Webb invited two pilots to speak at a Professional Game Match Officials Limited training camp last month. The airmen gave their best tips of the trade on how to maintain clear communicative skills in stressful environments, in particular where there are multiple voices in the mix. It comes after a number of VAR scandals that have plagued the current football season and continue to blight the sport.
By way of example, to name only a few, on the opening weekend of the Premier League campaign, Man United goalkeeper Andre Onana punched a striker from the opposing team in the face. His punishment? There wasn’t one. Webb apologised after the game but Wolves had already lost 1-0. Shortly thereafter, VAR Darren England thought he had confirmed a goal in a Liverpool v Spurs match but was actually endorsing an incorrect on-field offside decision against a Liverpool forward which led to the team being denied a goal. Again, the outcome of the match was in favour of Spurs. Fans were not happy.
The choice to use pilots as educators (following on from the previous year’s introduction of air traffic controllers) was down to their ability to stay calm and collected and maintain clarity and accuracy during their flight operations. Often there are multiple voices to contend with and, as they must use English to communicate, this poses a further conundrum when English is not the first language of all those on the airwaves. Learning from the communications skills of wildly different industries is certainly an interesting approach to improve the somewhat challenging situation the VAR hub has got itself into – the question is, will it make any difference?
And that’s it for this week. I hope you found something of interest that you might want to delve into further. If so, please get in touch at cwilkins@audleyadvisors.com.
For now, that’s The Weekend Box officially closed.