.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) have advised today that “planned fiscal adjustment” will be unavoidable if economic recovery fails to take off.

The IMF consultation on Britain will come as a blow for George Osborne, who has been continually insistent that every international organisation supports his policy positions.

Today’s release from IMF says:

Fiscal easing and further use of the government’s balance sheet should be considered if downside risks materialize and the recovery fails to take off.

In particular, if growth does not build momentum and is significantly below forecasts even after substantial additional monetary stimulus and further credit easing measures, planned fiscal adjustment would need to be reconsidered.

To preserve credibility, reconsidering the path of consolidation should be in the context of a multi-year plan focused on further reducing the UK’s large structural fiscal deficit when the economy is stronger and taking into account risks to sovereign borrowing costs. Fiscal easing measures in such a scenario should focus on temporary tax cuts and greater infrastructure spending, as these may be more credibly temporary than increases in current spending.

The OECD reports that Britain will only grow 0.5% in 2012. So by IMF’s definition, hasn’t economic recovery already failed to take off?

• Pre-budget memo to Mr Osborne: Tax cuts for the many, not the few will boost growth 13 Mar 2012

• The double dip begins 25 Jan 2012

• US grew almost twice as fast as UK in 2011 27 Jan 2012

A report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) released in March last year already raised the necessity of a Plan B:

The approach of ‘deficit reduction averaging’ would allow the government to combine reassurance for the markets that an overall target for eliminating the fiscal deficit is in place with some freedom for the government.

If this approach is combined with a slower pace of deficit reduction in the next few years, the likely result would be stronger GDP growth over the medium term, which will help to reduce the deficit in the long run.

The chances of the government adopting such an approach at this time are very slim, as the chancellor and prime minister have persistently ruled out the need for any ‘Plan B’. It would require significantly poor economic performance and probably major political upheaval (including a new Chancellor) for this approach to be adopted.

As shadow chancellor Ed Balls MP said today:

“How much worse do things have to get before David Cameron and George Osborne finally take action? There is no case for delay and there can be no more excuses. Now is the time to act. If we fail to do so, and we see years of slow growth and high unemployment being entrenched, Britain will pay a heavy long term price.

“In Britain cutting spending and raising taxes too far and too fast has backfired, with the resulting slow growth and high unemployment meaning the government is set to borrow an extra £150 billion and borrowing last month higher than a year ago.”

How many institutions have to highlight the flaws of Osborne’s economic strategies before the government considers change?

.

With much of the world now dominated by talk of the need for economic growth the Welsh government today announced a series of measures designed to deliver such growth and secure existing and new jobs.

On the day the head of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde, came to London with a call for the UK government to increase spending on infrastrurue projects to boost growth, ministers at Cardiff Bay published their Plan for Infrastructure Investment (pdf).

In presenting the £15 billion package of measures for the next decade, finance minister Jane Hutt warned AMs:

“Further urgent action is required to stimulate and strengthen our economy.”

The package itself consists of a number key areas designed to:

• Improve the transport and telecommunications networks;

• Support the development of the energy industry in Wales;

• Secure greater investment in housing;

• Deliver more efficient and economical public services in the NHS;

• Improve the quality of the educational estate, particularly schools; and

• Develop Welsh Enterprise Zones.

• Preview 2012 – Wales 29 Dec 2011

Among the measures announced – agreed with the support of the Welsh Liberal Democrats – were several which will help to either create or protect more than 1,300 jobs in Wales.

These include:

• A commitment to the development of a Welsh mortgage guarantee scheme to support house builders and first time buyers;

• An additional £5m for home energy efficiency measures;

• £6m to expand the Welsh Housing Partnership, levering in an investment of £30m in total to deliver 280 family homes for intermediate rent; and

• £5m to double the size of the recyclable empty homes fund, contributing to our target of bringing 5,000 empty homes back into use during this Assembly term.

With other measures including:

• £2.7m for M4 junction improvements;

• An additional £4m to bring forward essential flood protection schemes;

• £6.8m to accelerate major hospital projects at Ysbyty Glan Clwyd and Llandough;

• £500,000 to deliver premises for domestic abuse ‘One Stop Shops’ in Pembrokeshire, Swansea and Gwynedd;

• An additional £5m to support schools projects in Lampeter, Denbighshire, Abercynon and Penarth and £3m for the new Cardiff City Centre post-16 campus;

• £3.5m to support essential infrastructure work for the Northern Gateway site in the Deeside Enterprise Zone; and

• £2.5m to boost the Welsh Economic Growth Fund to support Welsh SMEs.

Whilst pledging that financing the schemes would be primarily “through direct government capital expenditure”, the minister has, however, argued a “strong economic case” now exists for boosting the resources available above the level of government capital budgets where, she says, “the benefits of investment now outweigh additional costs”. This is in part is a result of the sizeable cuts to the Welsh government’s capital budget imposed by Whitehall.

Having outlined that in the longer term Cardiff Bay is “engaged constructively in ongoing talks with the UK government” to enable it to “borrow directly to finance infrastructure investment”, the minister went on to outline a number of new innovative financing approaches that have been adopted to boost the spending power of government.

These include the Local Government Borrowing Initiative – enabling investment of more than £170m to improve local highways across Wales – and the Ely Bridge development, working with the Principality Building Society to unlock capital funding and provide 700 housing units for rent, social rent and open market sales.

In expressing his government’s clear ambitions to kick start growth despite cuts from Westminster, first minister Carwyn Jones said of the plans:

“We are a government committed to the provision of infrastructure and the creation of jobs. We want to take every opportunity to increase capital investment, despite the severe cuts in our budget.

“We want to create a Wales with a strong economy that has 21st century transport, IT and energy networks We want a low-carbon Wales with sustainability at its core and a skilled and efficient Wales where businesses thrive and our expertise are globally renowned. Through the Plan we can make this happen.”

Meanwhile, the economist Gerald Holtham, who advised on the plan, responded:

“The Welsh government has already started using new ways of financing projects such as the Local Government Borrowing Initiative and support for a Welsh Housing Bond to increase the supply of affordable homes. We need to build on these developments to find funding to bring forward other investment with economic, social and environmental benefits.

“In spite of current turmoil in financial markets triggered by economic crises funds are available for sound projects with assured revenue streams and we must find innovative ways to tap those resources.”

The announcements come as EU leaders prepare tomorrow to gather for an informal summit in Brussels with even greater talk of plans to boost spending on infrastructure. The Financial Times this morning reported (£) that European Diplomats have signed off on a pilot programme to issue commonly backed bonds designed to fund pan-European infrastructure projects, the first element of a new “growth compact”.

Ahead of the gathering, Danish prime minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt said the establishment of an EU-wide growth treaty would be a welcome ending for her country’s six-month presidency of the European Union.

In expressing optimism at the potential for “discussions about creating growth and new jobs”, following a meeting with French President François Hollande, she explained:

“The election of Hollande means that there will be wind in the sails for many of the initiatives that the Danish presidency started. We are happy that discussions that previously focused exclusively on the topic of economic discipline have now moved toward talks about growth.”

She continued:

“We are also discussing how to use our structural funds in more intelligent ways that foster growth and job creation.”

Meanwhile, on the eve of the informal summit, the OECD has also called on EU leaders to increase funding for the European Investment Bank to cover the costs of infrastructure spending, whilst China has announced plans to fast-track infrastructure investments.

.

The rising cost of electricity and gas has become voters’ number one concern, yet today’s draft Energy Bill does little to address the issue.

While the ambition to meet CO2 targets and ensure security of supply is correct, the bill has been beset by delays which have caused a hiatus in much needed infrastructure investment.

Meanwhile, specific measures within the package are flawed and could exacerbate voters’ primary concern. For example, the Carbon Price Floor, which was first announced in the 2011 budget, will do nothing to reduce carbon emissions while piling more cost on to the shoulders of already hard-pressed consumers in the UK.

Because the market is Europe-wide, a higher price in the UK will lead to a lower price elsewhere and to the same amount of carbon being emitted. Modelling, published by IPPR last year, suggested that unilaterally introducing a floor price for carbon in Britain will undermine the economic efficiency of the EU emissions trading scheme and could waste up to £1 billion.

Instead, Britain should be pushing for an EU-wide carbon price floor delivered through a European carbon bank.

As well as ironing out the problems with the Bill’s clauses, more is needed to address voters’ concerns. The retail market is clearly not working with some suppliers failing to provide tariffs that properly reflect the true cost of energy.

For example, some households are paying £330 more than their neighbours for the same amount of energy and this difference cannot be accounted for by differences in the suppliers’ costs. Meanwhile, millions are being overcharged with the poor and elderly most at risk of being overcharged.

• Telegraph distorts the truth on energy bills 10 May 2012

• Tories mount a campaign against their own energy policy 17 Apr 2012

• We need more community and co-operative ownership of energy 13 Mar 2012

The Energy Bill should have included clauses to protect consumers with an aim of easing the pressure on living standards caused by rising energy prices. Measures to end anti-competitive practices in the energy market, extend competition and therefore improve efficiency are all needed as these would exert downward pressure on energy prices.

By ending the continued overcharging of loyal customers through tariffs that are not properly cost reflective, the government should do more to protect the most vulnerable consumers. The focus on switching, which is only taken up by 16 per cent of consumers, appears to be failing.

There is a myth that doing the right thing on climate change is unpopular. In fact, analysis by Green Alliance shows that public perceptions are more favourable than they have been in some time.

Green behaviour such as recycling, switching off lights and green consumption is on the rise across all social classes. Meanwhile, the number of people who think climate change is a ‘very serious’ problem has begun to rise again from 43 per cent in 2010 to 49 per cent in 2011 while two-thirds of those asked believe that it poses risks to people in Britain.

Reducing climate emissions can be consistent with stemming the rise in energy bills. But the draft Energy Bill is a flawed attempt to meet these objectives and looks likely to exacerbate voters’ number one concern.

.

Only 46% Conservative MPs want to impose a cap on pay day loan credit charges that are leaving consumers in spiralling debt, a ComRes survey reveals today.

The parliamentary panel survey, commissioned by insolvency practitioners R3, shows that only 33 out of the 72 (46%) Conservative MPs surveyed wanted this change enforced, compared to 90% of Labour MPs surveyed.

MPs will vote later today on Amendment 40 to the Financial Services Bill, which would give the new Financial Conduct Authority the power to cap the charges made for credit and consequently, the cost of borrowing.

Treasury minister Mark Hoban MP said the government supports the FCA’s right to regulate credit charges, but won’t support the amendment, deeming it “not necessary”:

“The Treasury is confident that a range of powers is in place to help people in respect of payday lenders and high-cost lenders.”

The results of a ComRes poll of the general public’s opinion on pay day loans showed that the situation is spiralling out of control and more measures need to be put in place to protect consumers.

• Legal loan sharks are licking their lips as the social fund is scrapped 26 Jan 2012

• Wonga’s student ‘scam’ comes unstuck 13 Jan 2012

• Ignore Wonga’s spin; they’re still targeting students 13 Jan 2012

• Wonga target students with friendly advice: Take our 4000% loan 11 Jan 2012

• Time to muzzle the legal loan sharks 12 Dec 2010

The poll revealed 3.5 million people were considering taking out a high-interest pay day loan in the next six months, and that:

• 60% of those who have taken out a high interest loan regret the decision.

• 48% of those who have taken out a high interest loan believe it made their financial situation worse.

• Only 13% of those who had taken out a pay day loan felt it had had a positive impact on their finances.

Labour MP for Walthamstow Stella Creasy has been campaigning for a cap on pay day loan credit charges since 2010.

On this morning’s Today programme, Creasy said:

“Interest rates in this industry can range from 22% to 16,000% for short-term loans. One in three payday loans is taken out to pay off another payday loan. People are drawn into spiral.

“Which? research shows one in three who take out payday loans get into financial difficulty as a direct result. It is irresponsible of the industry to pretend that there isn’t a problem. That’s why politicians need to act.

“America has lots of different types of capping. Britain is unusual in that it doesn’t. Most countries combine caps and consumer protection with a payday loan market.”

While Frances Coulson, president of insolvency practitioner R3, commented:

“Payday loans are not the best way to resolve debt struggles. We know that many who take them out find them to be a negative experience, often escalating financial troubles.”

By opposing this amendment, the government are turning their back on those suffering in debt and favouring money-hungry loan companies.

.

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Owen Paterson, lauded as the ‘standard bearer’ in the Tory cabinet, wrongly declared that 57,000 jobs had been created, when that was in fact the number of people unemployed.

The omnishambles which has been a hallmark of the UK government over recent months seems now to be contagious as the Northern Ireland office was this week claimed as its latest victim.

Last Wednesday during Northern Ireland Questions, Conservative MP for Shipley Philip Davies called on Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Owen Paterson to present ways to lower corporation tax across Northern Ireland to boost growth. Paterson appeared to indicate that 57,000 jobs have been created across the province.

With Ed Miliband in the chamber, Paterson declared:

“My hon. Friend will be pleased to hear – and the leader of the opposition will be delighted to hear – that, thanks to the reductions in corporation tax introduced by my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor, 57,000 more people are in jobs in Northern Ireland than were in jobs before the election.”

However, the 57,000 figure was suspiciously identical to the number of people out of work as outlined in last week’s employment statistics, published by the Department for Finance and Personnel. It has since emerged that  the figure was a typo by his officials and that the figure of new jobs created was in fact 30,000 lower than the number Paterson had cited; standing instead at 27,000.

• Conservatives in Northern Ireland: What’s the point? 1 Feb 2012

Admitting the mix-up, a statement from the Northern Ireland office read:

Every effort is made when preparing figures for official briefings to ensure that they are 100% accurate. Unfortunately on this occasion a typing error occurred and we didn’t spot it.

The figure should have read 27,000 more people employed in Northern Ireland, not 57,000, and we are happy to correct that.

The fact remains that there are 27,000 more people in employment in Northern Ireland than for the period immediately prior to the general election and that is news that we can all welcome.

Although the creation of 27,000 jobs is to be welcomed, given that the unemployment statistics had been published on the very morning that Owen Paterson was answering questions, one wonders whether he had actually studied them in detail.

Calling on the Secretary of State to “do his homework in future”, shadow Northern Ireland secretary, Vernon Coaker, responded:

“This is another example of an out of touch government and secretary of state. They haven’t got the right policies, and now they can’t even find the right figures. Instead of manufacturing fictional jobs, Owen Paterson should have been calling for measures in the Budget and the Queen’s Speech to create real jobs and economic growth in Northern Ireland.

“These 30,000 made-up jobs don’t make up for the 91,000 pensioners and the 22,500 families in Northern Ireland who are losing out because of the Tory-led government’s granny tax and cuts to tax credits.

“The secretary of state needs to do his homework in future. The people of Northern Ireland don’t expect him to get his sums wrong on something as important as this.”

The developments are likely to have left Owen Paterson, touted as the standard bearer for the Conservative right in cabinet since the departure of Liam Fox, red-faced.

Throughout much of the Gordon Brown era, despite best efforts, each relaunch or attempt by ministers to get things back on track were then followed by an amateurish mistake that demonstrated the luck that they had lost, despite Brown himself having hired an adviser to end a number of visual gaffes he managed to walk into.

Owen Paterson’s slip up might not necessarily be at the top of the list of problems faced by the coalition, but it does point to a loss of luck that all governments crave and which, if lost altogether, can be fatal.

.

The battle lines have been drawn and 6,500 candidates are gearing up for the start of the French parliamentary elections campaign.

On June 10th and 17th the two rounds of the elections will take place for 577 seats where the socialists need to win a majority in parliament in order to support the policies and reform plans of President François Hollande.

They are hoping to continue riding the wave that saw his historic win this month, but will not take anything for granted with their campaign slogan being “Give a majority to change”.

The result of the legislative elections also has a direct impact on the make-up of Hollande’s government, with 26 out of the 34 members are standing in the elections, including newly appointed prime minister Jean-Marc Ayrau.

The socialists are taking a risk by not signing up with the far-left ‘Left Front’ coalition, although this could change as the campaign progresses.

UMP candidates, meanwhile, will be contemplating whether Nicolas Sarkozy’s departure will help or hinder their campaigns. If they gain enough seats it could spell trouble for Hollande. UMP has held the majority in parliament for the past 10 years. Even so, UMP may have to decide whether to court the far right as Sarkozy did in the presidential elections in order to keep their majority.

Marine Le Pen has indicated alliances could be possible in the parliamentary elections, even though this was not the case for the presidential campaign.

UMP’s French defence minister Gérard Longuet and MP have recently indicated talks with Front National are a possibility.

• Mélenchon to take on Le Pen in French Parliamentary elections 14 May 2012

• Vive Hollande! M. Normal wins the day 8 May 2012

• Sarkozy and Hollande chase the disaffected Le Pen vote 30 Apr 2012

Current polls indicate the socialists are at 46%, UMP 33%, and Front National 17%.

.

Simon Bullock is a senior campaigner for Friends of the Earth

Environmentally-friendly industries have seen annual growth of four per cent despite being in recession. So why aren’t the government investing more time and effort into this sector?

Who knows whether Greece will leave the Euro or not. The bookies put it pretty even. Either way, David Cameron is telling the eurozone it “has to put in place the most robust contingency plans for both eventualities”.

But the UK needs its own plan too. Not just to ride out the new economic storm coming our way – whatever Greece decides -  but to come out of it stronger.

A change of course is urgently needed. Families, businesses and banks are nervous, wary and are digging in. So, vital investment for the recovery is far too low. The government must act to create confidence, and get our economy out of what will otherwise be a long downward spiral.

The focus has been on austerity but attitudes internationally appear to be changing. The mood in the G8 this week has turned – a focus on growth is now far higher up the agenda.

A key part of this change of focus should lead the government to throw its weight behind a green economy - a sector which has grown at four per cent a year despite the recession.

Offshore-wind, electric vehicles, smart-grids, energy efficiency, marine renewables: investment in these sectors can help tackle what Aditya Chakrabortty called Britain’s “de-industrialisation”.

This would create jobs and growth, particularly in the North and Midlands, help the UK’s exports and reduce the UK’s chronic over-dependence on expensive fossil fuels imports and other natural resources. Oh, and protect the environment too.

• Osborne’s carbon footprint grows as Shell decides against wind power 1 May 2012

• Cameron’s downgrading of environment policy bodes ill for the future 26 Apr 2012

• Clean energy summit will expose more coalition divisions 23 Apr 2012

So, a “green economy” focus is a quadruple win, and one that’s long been advocated. But as the Environmental Audit Committee sets out in a hard-hitting report this morning, the coalition government is just not delivering. It has no strategic approach, its market-led attitude is too focussed on voluntary action, and the Treasury wrongly sees environmental action as a cost, not an opportunity.

Getting industrial policy right is difficult - as Geoff Mulgan and IPPR have both highlighted. But there are some things the UK can do straight away.

First, end the damaging lack of certainty about the clean energy sector which is making investors take a wait-and-see approach. Tomorrow’s energy Bill should follow the committee on climate change’s advice and state that the electricity sector will be decarbonised by 2030, rather than the leave-it-to-the-market approach of previous years.

Developing clean power and cutting energy waste will also help tackle rocketing fuel bills, which are largely driven by spiralling gas costs. And such a move would be popular, too. A recent YouGov poll Friends of the Earth published to mark the launch of our new Clean British Energy campaign revealed that 85 per cent of the public want David Cameron to force the big six energy firms to develop clean British energy from renewable sources – and ditch dirty coal and gas.

Second, make sure the Green Investment Bank can borrow from the start, rather than hamstring it for the first five years, as current plans allow.

Third, get the business department going on strategies to help regional clusters of industries develop around growth hubs like offshore-wind, and help heavy industry go green and stay competitive.

The green economy potential is huge – there’s a big prize for the political party that changes the deep-rooted old-establishment negative attitude to a clean economy.

And it could go either way. William Hague’s confidential memo to the prime minister in March strongly advocates the green growth route – almost entirely for economic reasons. But George Osborne is yet to be convinced. Maybe the green economy case put forward in a powerful presentation from economic heavyweights Nicholas Stern and Dimitri Zenghelis to HM Treasury officials earlier this month will finally change his mind.

With the government split on this, there’s a clear opportunity for Labour. Caroline Flint outlined the bones of an industrial strategy earlier in the spring; Pat McFadden set out the case this morning. Ed Balls needs to make this case too, and flesh it out with detailed proposals for the green sector. This could put Labour way ahead of the government.

Investing in the green economy can be a major part of helping the UK out of recession. Which party will grab this opportunity?

.

A seemingly plausible article in the Daily Telegraph claims that renewable energy will push up bills, an agenda close to the newspaper’s heart.

It bases the article on research by the enviro-friendly sounding, ‘Renewable Energy Forum’ (REF), adding further credibility.

The Daily Telegraph reports:

“Household electricity bills will rise by as much as a quarter to pay for wind farms and other forms of renewable energy, according to a new report.

“The Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has insisted that energy bills will begin to fall from next year and will be reduced by seven per cent – or £94 – by 2020 because of new energy efficiency policies.

“But a study of the government’s own figures by the Renewable Energy Forum (REF), a specialist renewable energy consultancy, has accused DECC of deliberately misleading the public.”

However, the REF’s report, has an interesting note to editors at the bottom of its press release, that the Telegraph failed to mention:

Shortfall, Rebound, Backfire, by Dr John Constable, Dr Lee Moroney and Diana Beatty, was commissioned by Calor Gas Ltd. Calor wished REF to review the Government’s impact analyses in DECC’s 2011 Annual Energy Statement.

So a report claiming that renewable energies will contribute to an increase in energy bills is sponsored by a, er, non-renewable energy company? Fancy that.

• Telegraph distorts the truth on energy bills 10 May 2012

Unfortunately, the Telegraph fails to mention this connection in its article so readers are presented with information which appears to be from an unbiased report.

.

To much fanfare, the Taxpayers’ Alliance’s 2020 tax commission has reported this morning.

The uber-Thatcherite campaigning group and darling of the Tory backbenchers has delivered a paleoconservative’s wish list: An effective flat rate of income tax of 30 per cent, the abolition of inheritance tax and the slashing of motoring taxes.

However, there is one rather crucial catch before we can all skip off to low-tax paradise:

Our starting point is the chancellor’s long-term forecasts: he hopes to see public spending as a share of GDP fall from 48 per cent last year to 39 per ce in five years’ time.

Our proposals would take this further, reducing public spending to 33 per cent of GDP by 2020 or thereabouts.

State spending at 33 per cent would be at a lower level than at any point sinc 1940.

It touched 34 per cent in 1989 and 35 per cent in 2000, when the baby-boomers – those born between 1945 and 1960 when post-war fertility was at its peak – were in their working-age prime, and more than counterbalanced dependents at either end of the age spectrum.

• Tax Commission proposals would cause £120 billion of extra cuts 21 May 2012

However, as the baby-boomers become pensioners, the pressure on government spending is set to soar, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves, as has been argued by conservative commentator Daniel Knowles:

“In the future, 40 per cent of GDP will not get us anywhere near the level of services and welfare that we got used to under New Labour.

“According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, thanks to our ageing population, healthcare spending alone will have to go up by 5 per cent of GDP just to maintain the same level of service.

“The increasing pensions bill is almost as brutal. At New Labour levels of taxation, public services have to get worse – to maintain them, we have to spend ever more.”

It’s not just the UK where state spending is set to rise.

Josh Barro wrote in  the American free market magazine Forbes about US  federal spending:

“Government spending as a percentage of GDP cannot be expected to stay flat over time.

“That doesn’t mean we should just say “eh, whatever” and balance the budget entirely on the tax side. But it does mean we should expect the federal budget to be a bigger share of the economy in 2020 than it was in 2000, and structure the tax code accordingly.”

However, according to the 2020 Public Services Trust, spending in the UK may rise to near two-thirds of GDP:

Public spending as a percentage of GDP will rise to more than 63% of national income by 2030, a thinktank says, to meet the rising costs of ageing, an unexpected fertility boom, climate change and the price of replacing decrepit infrastructure.

The 2020 Public Services Trust - a “dead centre” commission that includes both Labour and Tory luminaries such as Blair’s former policy guru Matthew Taylor and the Tory MP Stephen Dorrell - calls for a “system redesign” of government to head off a permanent fiscal crisis.

In the worst case scenario - if growth remains sluggish, averaging just 1.75% - then public spending would reach £880bn, eating up almost two-thirds of GDP within two decades.

The think tank suggests that by 2028 the most realistic scenario sees state spending rise to between 49 and 52 per cent.

Whatever the actually figure, basing a tax policy on a government spend of 33 per cent may be give right-wingers great personal gratification, but it only has the loosest relationship possible with reality.

.

What do Jedward, Engelbert Humperdinck and largely-ignored human rights abuses have in common? They will all be present in Azerbaijan this weekend.

The cringey-pop madness of the Eurovision Song Contest will take place in the country’s capital Baku on Saturday, with 42 European countries competing in the annual music competition.

The frivolity of the contest, which is frequently heralded as a fun pick-me-up for Europeans stuck in austere times, is covering up a much darker truth about Azerbaijan’s appalling human rights record.

An Amnesty International media briefing says:

Last May, Azerbaijan secured the right to host this year’s Eurovision song contest thanks to its winning entry “Running Scared”. Only a few months earlier, this is, quite literally, what hundreds of peaceful protesters were doing in downtown Baku, as police violently sought to silence them.

20 years of independence, economic prosperity and relative stability have failed to translate into greater fundamental freedoms for its citizens, while the consolidation of authoritarian rule under President Aliyev has been largely ignored by the outside world over the last decade.

While Eurovision will offer an opulent stage for voices from across Europe, at home few critical voices are tolerated. Self-censorship has increased. Criticism of the president and leading government figures is frequently punished – whether it is voiced through politics, journalism, satire, activism, education, or even social networking websites.

Throughout the year leading up to Eurovision, Azerbaijan authorities conducted a “beautification” urban development project that led to families living around the Baku Crystal Hall, the competition’s venue, being illegally evicted from their homes.

As Amnesty International’s Mike Blakemore pointed out on Left Foot Forward last year:

“In Azerbaijan, Eynulla Fətullayev, a 34-year-old editor of two newspapers critical of the Azerbaijani government, has been jail in since 2007 on a series of trumped-up charges designed to silence him.”

Last year, a young activist, Jabbar Savalan, was arrested for posting an article critical of the government on Facebook. Savalan was beaten by police in custody, forced into signing a confession of drug possession and sentenced to two years in jail. In December 2011 he was released by a Presidential pardon.

The criticism aimed at the Eurovision organisers echoes that experienced recently by organisers of the grand prix in Bahrain. Protestors rallied against the event, believing that Bahrain’s poor human rights record left them undeserving of hosting the race. The Bahrain Grand Prix went ahead and there is very little chance of the Azerbaijan losing the Eurovision contest now.

• The war on journalism in Mexico 7 May 2012

• May Mosley: F1 should not become an instrument of oppression of the Bahrain government 7 Jun 2011

• Fear of death: the ultimate injunction 25 May 2011

Organisers of these big events need to start realising that by allowing these countries to host while turning a blind eye, they are ultimately granting approval of their unacceptable regimes.