paid

Villagers on Príncipe, the ‘African Galapagos’, to be paid for protecting the ecosystem | Sao Tome and Principe

At the crumbling colonial farm buildings in Porto Real, agricultural worker Kimilson Lima, 43, has signed the agreement and he’s happy. “With this money we can have a proper floor in the house,” he said. “And an inside toilet.”

Lima is part of a ground-breaking experiment on the West African island of Príncipe, where villagers who agree to follow an environmental protection code will reap a quarterly dividend. To date nearly 3,000 have joined the Faya Foundation’s project, more than 60% of the adult population. The first payment of €816 (£708) has just been delivered, a large amount of money on the island. “This will be truly transformative, both for nature and for the people,” said the president of the self-governing region, Felipe Nascimento.

The special nature of Príncipe’s flora and fauna has been known since the 20-mile-long island was stumbled upon by Portuguese navigators in 1471. Uninhabited and separated from the African mainland by over 160 miles of ocean, both Príncipe and its larger southern neighbour, São Tomé, had evolved unique rainforests where giant land snails and crabs were among the top predators. Even now, new species are still being discovered, leading to the nickname “African Galapagos”.

The Portuguese started a cacao plantation economy, but after independence in 1975, that business fell apart. On Príncipe, the descendants of slaves and labourers from Angola and Cabo Verde became tight-knit communities of subsistence farmers, camping out in the increasingly decrepit colonial-era buildings. For the occasional visitor, it was picturesque, but problems were mounting for residents who were being pushed deeper into unexplored parts of the island, cutting trees and foraging.

Príncipe kingfisher, which are endemic to the island. Photograph: Kevin Rushby

Then, in 2010, South African billionaire Mark Shuttleworth arrived, looking for somewhere to build a house, an idea that was soon replaced by a philanthropic urge to help. One former plantation house was converted into a hotel with locals retrained as staff, but Shuttleworth did not stop there. His quest was to fund the type of sustainable development that also protected and improved the environment. “The normal path to development for Príncipe would be to cut down forest and grow ‘fair trade’ peppercorns,” Shuttleworth said. “But we want to reward them as stewards of their precious environment.”

That dream has now reached fruition, much to the surprise of local sceptics. “They’ve been let down in the past,” says Faya project CEO, Jorge Alcobia. “They didn’t expect us to keep our promises.”

There is still, however, a learning process about how to help the environment. “We have to explain that it’s not free money,” said Alcobia, “Dividends are reduced, for example, if there’s unauthorised tree-felling.” Faya is funding school improvements, organising the moribund cacao business, and giving financial advice. “A lot of people here have no bank account and little experience of handling money.”

So far, however, all the money comes from Shuttleworth’s fortune, a past and future commitment that totals about £87m. Among the developments is a new village, home to Clara Gomes and her daughter. “My money is going on a new kitchen and training in carpentry,” she said.

Clara Gomes at her house in a new village built by the Faya Foundation. Photograph: Kevin Rushby

Her neighbour, Edmundo, is selling cacao to the project. “I had no one to buy it before,” he said. “I’m hoping they might take vanilla next.” He has signed up for the dividend, but others remain sceptical. “It’s a monopoly,” shouted a bystander, “Is that good? And what if everyone buys motorbikes and chainsaws?”

For one man, years spent foraging in the forest have now blossomed into a career as wildlife guide. Yodiney dos Santos now leads scientific expeditions into the forest, discovering several new species, including a previously unknown owl. He knows only too well how fragile this environment is. “My ancestors came here from Angola,” he said. “And, for food, they brought the edible West African snail, which then escaped. Now those snails are pushing out the endemic Príncipe snails.”

This unique social experiment will be watched closely. “If it’s successful,” said Shuttleworth, “I hope other irreplaceable ecosystems might benefit from the idea at scale.”

Source link

The Sullivans star and former Playschool presenter Lorraine Bayly dies aged 89 as tributes paid to ‘showbiz legend’

An image collage containing 1 images, Image 1 shows Black and white photo of Australian actress Lorraine Bayly smiling while looking slightly up and to the right

MUCH-LOVED Australian actress Lorraine Bayly has died at 89.

The Sullivan’s star died in her Sydney care home on Saturday morning.

Lorraine Bayly - Australian Actress - Personality.
Australian actress Lorraine Bayly has died at 89Credit: Getty

Lorraine’s close friend, journalist Craig Bennett confirmed her death to 2GB on behalf of her family.

She was best known for starring in The Sullivans as Grace and presenting popular children’s show Playschool.

The hit show ran from 1976 to 1983.

After leaving The Sullivans, Lorraine took on a role that had been speficially written for her.

She played solicitor Jennifer Carson in Carson’s Law.

In a heartbreaking social media post, the actresses’ friend Craig called Lorraine a “showbiz legend, a bona fide star of stage and screen, a triple Logie winning TV treasure and beautiful friend to many”.

He noted that the award-winning actress only retired 10 years ago.

Source link

Trump Administration Mandates Venezuelan Oil Royalties, Taxes Be Paid to US-Run Accounts

Oil exports remain Venezuela’s most important source of foreign revenue. (New York Times)

Caracas, February 20, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Trump administration is forcing all royalty, tax, and dividend payments from Venezuelan oil production be paid into accounts managed by Washington.

The mandate reinforces the White House’s control over Venezuelan crude export revenues in the wake of the January 3 military strikes and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, as well as a naval blockade imposed in December.

The US Treasury Department updated its FAQ section on February 18 to clarify conditions on recently issued sanctions waivers allowing expanded participation in Venezuela’s oil sector to Western corporations.

Under the licenses, only “routine payments of local taxes, permits, and fees” to Venezuelan authorities are permitted.

“Other payments, including royalties, fixed per-barrel production levies, or federal taxes to blocked persons, such as the Venezuelan government or (state oil company) PDVSA, must be made into the Foreign Government Deposit Fund,” the text read.

The acting Rodríguez administration has yet to comment on the new restrictions. 

Since January, Washington has imposed control over Venezuelan crude exports, with proceeds deposited in a US-administered account in Qatar. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced recently that funds will now be deposited directly in a US Treasury account. Senior administration officials have stated that the arrangement gives the White House “leverage” to condition Venezuelan government policies, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Caracas must submit a “budget request” to access its own oil revenues.

At least US $500 million, out of an initial deal estimated at $2 billion, have been returned to Venezuela and offered by banks in foreign exchange auctions. Venezuelan authorities have also reported the import of medicines and medical equipment from US manufacturers using “unblocked funds.”

On Thursday, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued General License 50A allowing select firms to conduct transactions and operations related to hydrocarbon projects with PDVSA or any other Venezuelan public entity. The document mirrors General License 50 issued on February 13 but added French firm Maurel & Prom to a list including BP, Chevron, Eni, Repsol, and Shell.

Maurel & Prom’s main project in the Caribbean nation is a minority stake in the Petroregional del Lago joint venture, which currently produces 21,000 barrels per day (bpd). The company’s executives recently held a meeting with Acting President Delcy Rodríguez as part of Caracas’ efforts to secure foreign investment.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has issued several licenses to boost US and European involvement in the Venezuelan energy sector, with imports of diluents, inputs and technology now allowed. General License 49, issued on February 13, demands that companies apply for a special license before striking production and investment deals with Venezuela.

The US Treasury issued sanctions waivers while maintaining existing coercive measures against the Venezuelan oil industry in place, including financial sanctions against PDVSA. The licenses likewise block any transactions with companies from Cuba, China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia.

The selective flexibilization of sanctions followed the Venezuelan National Assembly’s approval of a pro-business overhaul of the country’s Hydrocarbon Law. The reform grants private corporations expanded control over operations and sales, while opening the possibility for disputes to be taken to external arbitration.

The reformed law also allows the Venezuelan executive to arbitrarily reduce royalties and a new “integrated tax,” capped at 30 and 15 percent, respectively. The executive is likewise entitled to grant reductions to the 50 percent income tax set for the oil industry if deemed necessary for projects to be “internationally competitive.”

According to US-set conditions and the reformed law, minority partners such as Repsol are authorized to sell crude from Venezuelan joint ventures before depositing the owed royalty and tax amounts, as well as dividends belonging to PDVSA, to US Treasury-designated accounts.

The initial crude sales as part of the Trump-imposed arrangement were conducted via commodity traders Vitol and Trafigura, which lifted cargoes at Venezuelan ports before re-selling them to final customers. However, according to Reuters, US-based refiners including Phillips66 and CITGO are looking to secure crude directly from Venezuela to maximize profits.

CITGO, a subsidiary of PDVSA, is close to being taken over by vulture fund Elliott Management following a court-mandated auction to satisfy creditor claims against the South American country. The company has been managed by boards appointed by the US-backed Venezuelan opposition since 2019.

Source link

Heathrow Airport £7 fee that must be paid – or travellers face fine up to £80

Visitors can either pay a single fee or pre-pay for multiple online or over the phone

London Heathrow has reminded travellers of a fee that must be paid when using a certain part of the airport. Failure to pay this could result in an £80 fine, reduced to £40 if paid within a fortnight.

On X, formerly Twitter, the London airport explained: “Terminal Drop-Off Charge applies to vehicles dropping off passengers on the terminal forecourts. Use short-stay parking for pick-up; free pick-up/drop-off remains available in Park & Ride car parks. No waiting/picking up is allowed in the drop-off area, and any unattended vehicles may be towed. Blue badge holders are eligible for a 100% discount.”

Drop-off zones are situated immediately outside each terminal, providing the most convenient and fastest option for dropping off passengers. Visitors can either pay for a single drop-off or pre-pay for multiple drop-offs online or over the phone.

Nonetheless, anyone who uses a drop-off zone must pay by midnight the next day. Further online guidance from Heathrow adds: “When you pay in advance, your prepayments last for 12 months. Any prepaid funds that remain unused 12 months from the date of purchase will expire.

“You cannot pay for drop-offs at an airport ticket machine or in the terminal drop-off zones. There are no barriers; you incur a charge when you enter the drop-off zone.”

Anyone with questions about the fee or who requires a refund should contact refunds.heathrowdropoff@apcoa.com, chat to an agent via webchat, or call customer services on 0333 200 7459.

Content cannot be displayed without consent

London Heathrow’s two-bag policy

You might not realise that the capital’s airport also implements a ‘two-bag policy’ at security to prevent hold-ups. This rule means travellers are permitted to take just two items of hand baggage through the screening zone.

London Heathrow explains: “To avoid delays, Heathrow operates a two-bag policy at airport security. Only two items of hand baggage may be taken through security control, and they must be no larger than 56cm x 45cm x 25cm (22in x 18in x 10in).

“Items larger than this must be checked in as hold luggage – you can check your bag size using the gauges at check-in. Handbags and laptop bags count as a piece of hand baggage.”

Beyond this, it’s important to understand what items are suitable for your hand luggage. For instance, only specific electronic equipment is permitted on flights leaving from the UK.

While individual airlines may have varying requirements, the UK Government outlines nine essential items you’re able to include in both your hand luggage and hold luggage:

  • Hairdryers
  • Straighteners
  • Travel iron
  • Electric shaver
  • Most cameras
  • Mobile phones
  • Laptops
  • Tablet devices
  • MP3 players

Those travelling with e-cigarettes are required to store them in hand luggage rather than checked bags. When going through security checks, electronic items should be positioned in a separate tray, allowing security staff to examine them and ensure no prohibited items are hidden.

Get all the hottest shopping deals, cash saving tips and money news straight to your phone by joining our new WhatsApp Community – The Money Saving Club. Just click this link to join https://crnch.it/eutplxS1

We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice here https://crnch.it/jeQqC872

Source link

A Shock to the System : Few people paid much attention to Carol Moseley Braun in the Illinois Democratic primary. But no one is ignoring her Senate campaign now.

Before she had toppled the moneyed and the mighty, back when perhaps a dozen people thought she had a chance to be a U.S. senator, Carol Moseley Braun went to Washington to drum up support for her ragtag campaign.

Waiting in the drafty outer hallways of power, she was treated like a poor relation. And the results were pathetic.

The official gatekeepers of money and political advice simply dismissed Braun and her candidacy for the Democratic Senate nomination from Illinois, recalls Tony Podesta, a college friend who is now is a Washington political consultant. He walked her through receptions, and she got nothing more than a few polite hellos. And although established women’s groups said, “Right on, keep going,” they kept their pocketbooks closed.

“Talk about your underdogs,” Podesta says, laughing. “I couldn’t even find a professional fund-raiser who she could pay to work for her.”

But with no organization, little money and a quintessentially Chicago political title as the Cook County Recorder of Deeds, Braun knocked out a three-term senator, Alan J. Dixon, in the March 17 Democratic primary.

This week, Braun went back to Washington for money and backing. And this time, it was the difference between the Prince and the Pauper.

With the head of the Illinois State Democratic Party in tow, she met with party powerbrokers, including Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell of Maine and Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. All are members of the white man’s club she ran against, but the reception was ecstatic.

Such is the nature of power in Washington. Braun had just eliminated one of their entrenched cohorts, “Al the Pal” Dixon, 64, who has been winning elections for 42 years. But now she stands a fair chance of making history as a double outsider: If she wins against Republican nominee Richard Williamson in November, she’ll be the first black woman in the Senate and only the fourth black to serve in that august chamber.

Although she dismisses political post-mortems that credit anything but her determination, there is evidence she was also buoyed by luck, timing and a third candidate, Al Hofeld, a 55-year-old personal-injury attorney who spent $4.5 million of his own personally injuring Dixon in negative TV advertisements.

“I think it’s fair to say that if this were hockey, Hofeld would get an assist,” quips Hofeld’s media consultant, David Axelrod.

Braun may have had one other unlikely man on her team: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. In fact, without him she might never have entered the race.

Last autumn she was so disgusted by the tone and substance of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Thomas’ nomination to the high court–before and after the allegations of sexual harassment by Prof. Anita Hill–that she decided it was time to break into the men’s club on Capitol Hill.

“I was completely focused on how badly the process had failed,” she says. “If the Senate had done its job right from the start, we all would have been spared the mess. And who were these guys anyway? Where were the women, the minorities and the regular working people?”

She said as much, twice, on a public television talk show and was overwhelmed with letters, phone calls and friends urging her to take on Dixon, who had voted for Thomas. After several meetings, Chicago women activists identified three potential female candidates to challenge Dixon; it was decided that Braun, a University of Chicago Law School graduate who had served 10 years in the state Legislature, had the best qualifications and the best shot.

But she was not a shrinking violet thrust forward into the limelight. Now 44, she has been in the cut and thrust of Chicago politics since her early 20s, and she knew the risks. When a friend warned her that she could be a sacrificial lamb, she reportedly retorted: “If the best my party can do for me is recorder of deeds, then I don’t care about the future.”

With the backing of a coalition of women activists, suburban liberals and her most critical base, blacks throughout Chicago, Braun garnered 38% of the vote compared to Dixon’s 35% and Hofeld’s 28%. Less than two weeks before the upset, Braun had been 12 percentage points behind Dixon.

Hers was a last-minute sprint that came together through a confluence of events, including a television debate in which Hofeld hammered Dixon for his conservative voting record. For the first time, a broader spectrum of the public saw Braun demonstrate her speaking savvy and natural warmth.

In addition, Gloria Steinem came twice to Chicago on Braun’s behalf, attracting attention and contributions to the campaign. And the network of liberals in the suburbs–mostly white women–mounted a word-of-mouth effort to turn Braun into a winner.

In fact, women did well up and down the ballot in the Illinois primary. “I think women, more than men, are convincing elements of change,” says Axelrod. “That will give Carol an edge in November.”

But the “women’s vote” has never materialized consistently in past elections, and it’s still too early to tell whether Braun can make a convincing argument in November that she is a “change agent,” as Washington insiders are fond of saying.

“She’s got to broaden her base beyond blacks and some women and focus, focus, focus, on economic issues,” advise Axelrod and others.

Both Braun and Williamson are positioning themselves as outraged outsiders and setting each other up as a symbol of what catapulted America into an economic morass.

“The fundamental difference between my opponent and myself is that she has made her living for the past 14 years as a career politician and voted 13 times to raise taxes,” says Williamson, 42, a partner in a Chicago law firm who serves on President Bush’s General Advisory Committee on Arms Control.

Speaking from a car phone as he made an eight-city campaign swing last weekend, he added: “I’m not saying it’s always evil to be a career politician–George Bush certainly is. It’s just among the elements that makes differences between my opponent and myself so stark.”

Although exhausted from her sudden status as a political phenomenon–already she’s done “Nightline” and the “Today” show–Braun last week offered her assessment of those differences:

“He’s a typical Reaganite and will have to answer for the policies of the new federalism that screwed up this country. He was part of it.”

Braun doesn’t expect this race to be more challenging than the primary seemed last November–but she does see land mines.

“It’ll be a tough race only to the extent that Williamson (who is white) plays the racial card, directly or subtly, by manipulating symbols like talking about my views on welfare reform,” she says.

Illinois has elected blacks statewide, but many more have been defeated. “If the election was held next week, she’d probably win because of the post-primary euphoria around her,” says Don Rose, a Chicago political consultant. “But we have a way to go, and we don’t know how the wild card–race–plays, and we don’t know how the national ticket plays.”

Williamson insists that he’ll fire anyone in his campaign who uses racism to attack his opponent.

“I won’t hold my opponent accountable for the race of her parents if she doesn’t hold me accountable for the race of mine,” says Williamson, who grew up and lives with his wife and three children on Chicago’s wealthy North Shore.

As he describes it, Williamson has spent most of his career in “public service,” although he has never run for office. He was an aide to the most conservative congressman in the Illinois delegation, Rep. Philip Crane, and later worked for the Reagan Administration as intergovernmental affairs director and for the Bush campaign in 1988.

A fiscal conservative who has etched out more moderate positions on social issues, Williamson is known as an intellectual who reads Hermann Hesse and gives windy speeches on public policy.

So far, he says, his status as a novice campaigner has created the biggest hurdles for him in formulating positions on the spot. For example, while the former Princeton University religion major personally opposes abortion, he decided after consulting “with my wife and others” that he was pro-choice–although he does not support federal funding for abortion. If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, Williamson would support legalizing abortion. But when asked how that law should be defined, on a state or federal level, he bristled: “I’m not going to say any more; I think (reporters) are more interested in this subject than the public.”

The Braun-Williamson competition is as much a horse race for the locals made blase by the oddities of Chicago politics as it is for the national touts who haven’t seen its like since Shirley Chisholm ran for President in the 1970s.

Already, local pundits are joking on the radio that for the first time the Bridgeport neighborhood, home to the late Mayor Richard J. Daley and his son Richard M., the current mayor, may support a black candidate.

“Carol will get the vote,” says the radio announcer, “because Daley wants her out of town and safe in Washington, where she can’t run for mayor.”

The daughter of a policeman and a medical worker, Braun grew up in Hyde Park, an integrated neighborhood near the University of Chicago, admiring such women as Amelia Earhart and Bessie Coleman, a black aviator. After graduating from law school, Braun married a classmate and joined a Republican-controlled federal prosecutor’s office.

Her initiation into politics came in 1977, when she was pushing her young son in his stroller on Hyde Park Boulevard and ran into Kay Clement, a neighbor. Clement was on a search committee to find a replacement for Robert Mann, a well-known liberal state legislator who was among a group that called itself the “Kosher Nostra” and prided itself on being a constant burr in the elder Daley’s side. Clement asked Braun if she’d run.

“She was well-spoken, congenial, and I thought she had the character to continue on in the tradition of us Young Turks,” recalls Mann, now retired.

Braun served 10 years in the Illinois House, eventually becoming assistant majority leader and Chicago Mayor Harold Washington’s floor leader in the mid-1980s.

In the Legislature, she dealt with Democratic politics skillfully but not always defiantly, which angered some of her radical black supporters. Similarly, she riled her white liberal cohorts at times and had problems with Mayor Washington when she formed alliances with his enemies and attempted to run without his approval for lieutenant governor.

“Carol is an ambitious woman, and that’s a sin in our society,” says Mann. “It’s OK for everybody else to be trading horses, making deals, being rainmakers–but not her.”

Braun left the Legislature to be the Chicago recorder of deeds in part to spend more time closer to home; she had been divorced and had a young son and an ill mother to care for.

As an administrator, she updated the deeds system with modern technology and created committees to eliminate patronage. Speaking of the deeds office, a Realtors association spokesman recently told the Chicago Tribune: “It’s not a dungeon anymore. You don’t have to carry your own candle.”

But the administration of Braun’s grass-roots primary campaign did not win as much praise; several members of her staff quit amid reports of conflict over the leadership of campaign manager Kgosie Matthews. And although Braun is likely to draw on the Chicago Establishment, organization is considered her weak point.

Kay Clement, who is on Braun’s committee, says the candidate has confidence in Matthews but plans to bring in more professionals once the money starts rolling in–which is expected at any moment.

Emily’s List, a fund-raising group for women Democratic candidates, gave $5,000 to Braun in the last weeks of the primary campaign and has vowed to support her further. “We will be in the mail for her in the next two weeks and plan to raise an incredible amount of money for her,” vows Ellen Malcolm, the group’s president.

And Chicago women such as Susan P. Kezio are determined that this time around, Braun will get the full respect due her in her hometown.

Kezio, 37, founder of the company Women in Franchising, says she tried during the primary to get Braun as a lunchtime speaker at the city’s Rotary One, the first Rotary Club in America.

“After Dixon spoke to us, I ran up to our director and proudly said, ‘Hey, I can get Carol Moseley Braun to speak,’ ” Kezio recalls. The director suggested they wait until after the primary. Then, a few weeks later, Hofeld came to speak.

Kezio was furious. She complained to the director, who said Hofeld had asked to address the Rotarians and Braun hadn’t. Apparently, Kezio’s request for Braun hadn’t registered.

But this week, according to Kezio, the Rotary director hunted down Braun and eagerly invited her to be a speaker. She said she’d be honored.

“Believe me,” Kezio says, “this time nobody is going to ignore Carol Moseley Braun.”

Source link