title
stringlengths 28
112
| published_date
stringlengths 10
10
| authors
stringclasses 6
values | description
stringlengths 0
239
| section
stringclasses 95
values | content
stringlengths 178
42.3k
| link
stringlengths 34
77
| top_image
stringlengths 53
143
| news_id
stringlengths 13
55
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Stats watchdog criticises Treasury tax cut claims - BBC News
|
2024-02-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Two Treasury ministers, Laura Trott and Bim Afolami, have been criticised over recent claims on tax cuts.
|
Business
|
The chair of the UK's statistics watchdog has rebuked two Treasury ministers over recent claims on tax cuts for average earners.
Sir Robert Chote said Chief Secretary to the Treasury Laura Trott risked "misleading" or "confusing" the public.
It came after she claimed in November that "taxes for the average worker will have gone down £1,000 since 2010".
Another minister, Bim Afolami, was also criticised. Labour said the verdict was "damning".
The Treasury said that its chief secretary was referring to figures set out in the Autumn Statement document.
In a letter published on Monday, Sir Robert, the chair of the independent UK Statistics Authority, said that the public would be "at least confused" by Ms Trott's statements in the House of Commons in November, "which would probably suggest to a typical listener that the average worker's overall tax bill has fallen in cash terms".
This claim of lower taxes since 2010 is incorrect, but the figure Ms Trott refers to is a comparison to what the average tax bill would have been in 2024-25 if tax thresholds had risen in line with rising prices since 2010.
After 2010, the then Conservative-led government had a policy of raising thresholds above inflation to "take people out of the tax system".
Since the coronavirus pandemic, that policy has been largely reversed, with thresholds frozen, taking many workers back into the tax system and higher tax brackets.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Laura Trott and Evan Davis also recently argued over whether UK debt is rising or falling.
Economic Secretary to the Treasury Bim Afolami was also told in Sir Robert's letter that he "was not as explicit... as he could have been" that a separate claim that "taxes are coming down" made on the BBC's Today programme in January referred solely to a £450 National Insurance cut.
Listeners were unlikely to be misled, however, because the interviewer Justin Webb "immediately put this in the context of broader personal tax changes and trends", he wrote.
The tax burden overall has significantly increased in recent years, and is set to rise to its highest level in 70 years, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Sir Robert, in a reply to Labour MP Angela Eagle, said "to maintain trust and confidence in their statements, and avoid the need for subsequent clarification, ministers and other members [of Parliament] need to consider how a typical listener is likely to understand what they say".
He said this was especially important when they "use 'round number' talking points derived from very specific methods of calculation".
This is not the first time that the UK's statistics watchdog has slapped down ministerial claims about the economy.
In December, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's claim that the government has reduced debt was challenged by the authority.
Debt has been rising as a proportion of the economy, but in a social media post last November the prime minister said "debt is falling".
The watchdog's chairman said that the assertion "may have undermined trust in the government's use of statistics".
Ms Trott also recently got into an argument with BBC PM presenter Evan Davis on debt levels, after he asked her how the government could be sticking to its pledge to get debt down while talking about tax cuts.
He said official projections showed debt rising. She replied: "It's falling as a percentage of GDP" which he then disputed, saying: "I'm amazed that you don't know that debt is rising."
According to the figures the government uses to measure this pledge, he was right and she was wrong.
The opposition called on Ms Trott to correct the record to MPs following Sir Robert's letteron her previous phrasing around tax cuts.
Darren Jones, Labour's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, said: "The UK Statistics Authority's verdict on Laura Trott's comments are damning.
"The truth is working people don't need to listen to government ministers to know they are paying more in tax. They just need to look at their payslips."
He added: "The least Rishi Sunak can do when hammering working people with the highest tax burden in 70 years is make sure his team tell it straight."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68339036
|
news_business-68339036
|
|
Donald Trump has no presidential immunity from election fraud charges, court rules - live updates - BBC News
|
2024-02-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former president will not be granted immunity and won't be shielded from criminal prosecution on election fraud.
|
US & Canada
|
This is a major setback for the former President – who is facing more than 90 charges in multiple cases.
This ruling relates to the election subversion case which was due to be held in Washington next month.
His lawyers’ argument hinged on the idea that because Donald Trump wasn't convicted for impeachment by Congress, he can’t face criminal proceedings.
But the three judges on the panel were sceptical - arguing that with immunity, a president could sell state secrets or order the assassination of a political rival and not face any criminal consequences.
They ruled that for the purposes of this case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump and should be treated like any other criminal defendant.
Trump's team said they would appeal against the ruling – and now have 90 days to take their case to the US Supreme Court.
Trump - who is trying to return to the White House - is hoping it will be delayed until after the Presidential election in November.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68023315
|
news_live_world-us-canada-68023315
|
|
What's next in Prince Harry's war against the media? - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The prince has settled his claim with the Mirror group, but will he fight other newspaper publishers?
|
UK
|
Will the prince continue to fight tabloid newspapers now he's made a settlement with the Mirror group?
Evidence that the Duke of Sussex had been the victim of phone hacking first emerged 11 years ago during the trial of media executives at the now defunct News of the World.
Prince Harry was put off from taking legal action in the civil courts by a palace culture which held that the royals don't sue.
But that changed when his friends Elton John and David Furnish introduced him to David Sherborne, the slim-suited barrister who has led phone hacking cases for much of the last decade.
Now, despite some in the newspaper industry playing down their significance, he has achieved two big wins in his battle against what has become known in court as 'unlawful information gathering'.
Most phone hacking victims reach a settlement with the newspapers, finalised with brief statements and few details.
Prince Harry tried another strategy. He turned down offers to settle, turned up at court, and gave evidence in person.
He was rewarded with a judgement last year which not only backed his claims about 15 newspaper articles but set out in detail what Mirror Group Newspapers knew about unlawful practices at its titles.
That was gold-dust for his campaign. It provided solid proof for his claims that he and others were unfairly victimised by red-top reporters and investigators desperate for celebrity scoops.
It made today's settlement with MGN much more likely.
Incidentally, the damages he's been awarded are not the highest for a phone-hacking case. In 2008 the Professional Footballers Association chief Gordon Taylor was reportedly given a sum of £400,000. Prince Harry's payout is around £300,000, for the repeated hacking of a senior royal, potentially a major security risk.
The former Sun Editor Kelvin MacKenzie suggested Prince Harry had accepted a "much smaller deal than he could have done if he wanted a fight".
Mr MacKenzie went on to talk about the prince's popularity in the UK, saying the settlement "indicates that even he understands that the nation is not behind him, even though the allegations may be serious."
In fact, according to the Prince's barrister, he made the offer, not MGN, which, in accepting it, avoided much larger legal bills.
Though the Prince has been slow to flesh out his comments in statements about his anti-media campaign, it does seem likely he is not in it for the money.
He has repeated many times that he is pursuing "positive change" in the media culture, and that he will "see it through to the end."
A successful end for him would mean defeating Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mail, and News Group Newspapers, now News UK, which publishes the Sun. Those cases are currently crawling through the courts.
There will be protracted legal arguments during 2024. Key to Prince Harry's success will be getting Associated in particular, to disclose evidence it has about payments to private investigators who claimants allege carried out phone hacking and blagging of personal information for the Mail titles.
What might change as a result of this legal battle?
In many ways Prince Harry is fighting to put right historical wrong-doing.
The phone hacking era began in the 90s when journalists realised that by dialling the friend of a celebrity and punching in a default pin-code they could hear the voicemail messages the star had left.
It ended in the 2010s as we replaced "brick" mobile phones with smartphones and moved to encrypted messaging apps for many conversations.
Around that time the police investigations of journalists and investigators made clear that methods relied on to get celeb scoops were actually criminal.
And then celebs started giving away their own secrets on social media. Much easier for the tabloids to digest without the unpleasant legal after-taste.
So perhaps the problem has solved itself.
There is one potential development which could ignite the campaign the prince is fighting.
He has called several times for the police to reopen their investigations into press malpractice and the civil case against Mirror Group has provided new potential evidence.
After convicting senior News International journalists in 2014 a subsequent investigation of the Mirror newspapers was shut down. It's likely the Metropolitan Police has no stomach to get involved again, and currently Scotland Yard isn't commenting.
One thing is clear. Prince Harry's campaign has made him more enemies in the press. So far that has not deterred him.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68256881
|
news_uk-68256881
|
|
Swansea: Husband jailed for murdering wife in car fire - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Judge says killer knew setting her alight with petrol "would cause unimaginable pain and terror".
|
Wales
|
David Clarke was jailed for the "utterly brutal" murder of his wife of more than 50 years
An 80-year-old Swansea man killed his wife in a "uniquely savage" car fire after he admitted an affair with another woman.
David Clarke repeatedly hit Helen Clarke's head with a hammer, doused her with petrol before setting her alight.
Clarke, of Higher Lane, Langland, previously admitted murdering his wife, 77, who died two days after the attack.
At Swansea Crown Court he was jailed for life and will serve a minimum of 21 years and eight months.
Judge Paul Thomas KC described it as a "uniquely savage murder".
He said Clarke murdered his wife of more than 50 years "in an utterly brutal and merciless manner" which he "knew would cause unimaginable pain and terror".
Mike Jones KC, prosecuting, told the court the couple previously lived a "comfortable life" in Zambia, then Zimbabwe, before moving to Swansea in 2018.
He said there were "difficulties in their relationship". Clarke would bully his wife and was "physical towards her", but "despite this they really did love each other".
The court heard how Clarke had an affair while living in Zambia with a woman referred to as L.
Mrs Clarke was unaware of the affair until the month before the murder, when the couple visited Australia where L lived, Mr Jones said.
Helen Clarke was found with significant burns and a head injury and died in hospital two days after the fire
Clarke wanted to visit L, but told his wife the purpose of the trip was to see old friends.
Clarke and his wife met L while in Australia, but Mrs Clarke was unaware of who she was until they were in the airport on the way home, when Clarke admitted to the affair.
Mr Jones said Mrs Clarke accused her husband of "engineering the trip" to see L, which he denied.
There were then "clear arguments" between the couple and the last message their son, David Clarke Jr, received from his mother said she planned to move in with him and his family.
On the morning of September 22, the defendant texted his son saying "I love you".
Emergency services were called to Sketty Lane, Swansea, near Singleton Hospital, on 22 September 2023.
"You killed her in a car on a busy road in Swansea when children were on the way to school," said Judge Thomas.
"When passers-by wanted to help her, you drove off, deliberately preventing them from trying to save her."
Mrs Clarke's family described her as a "loving, kind and courageous" mother and grandmother who had "a great appreciation for life and the beauty of the world".
Police officers were called to the grounds of Singleton Hospital in Swansea on 22 September
A school pupil said they saw the couple's vehicle on Sketty Lane with Mrs Clarke in the passenger seat and wooden chairs in the back.
Mr Jones said the witness "heard a scream" from the car and later saw smoke coming from the area.
A council worker, Liam Davie, tried to help her, but Clarke pushed him away and told him to stop. Clarke then drove the burning car into oncoming traffic and swerved into a hedge.
Mr Jones said the emergency services arrived and saw Mrs Clarke lying on the floor "screaming for help".
She told a paramedic: "My husband has done this.... he is responsible for all of this."
Another witness said Mrs Clarke was asking if she was safe, and said: "We were just going to the beach."
Mrs Clarke was taken to Morriston Hospital where she was treated for burns across 58% of her body and "extensive injuries" to the side of her head.
She died of her injuries on 24 September and a post-mortem examination revealed she had nine separate wounds to her head and severe burns across her legs, torso and arms.
In a statement read in court, David Clarke Jr said the family would never come to terms with the "incomprehensible" murder.
David Clarke, 80, was married to his wife for more than 50 years before he murdered her in a car fire after telling her of his affair
"Not only is our mum not with us, playing games and sitting on the beach, but we have lost our dad too. We miss them both enormously," he said.
The family called the past few months "extremely distressing", and thanked the local community for its support and all those involved in the investigation process.
"We have endured unimaginable pain since she was brutally taken from us," they said.
"The system is however far from perfect, and we will continue to advocate for victim's rights and legislative change."
Following the hearing, Rebecca Carter, of the Crown Prosecution Service Cymru Wales, said: "This has been a tragic case.
"Our thoughts and sympathies go to Helen's family at this difficult time."
Det Ch Insp Paul Raikes of South Wales Police said: "This has been a challenging investigation due to its nature and circumstances.
"To this end, I would like to place on record our condolences to the family of Helen Clarke, and thank them for their cooperation and understanding during extremely difficult times for them."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68252252
|
news_uk-wales-68252252
|
|
Robin Swann: 'I can be MP candidate and health minister' - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The UUP leader had said Robin Swann could be withdrawn from one of the positions.
|
Northern Ireland
|
The health minister has confirmed he will be running as the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) candidate in South Antrim in the next Westminster election.
Robin Swann said running for elections was "what politicians do" and he would be able to carry out both roles.
UUP leader Doug Beattie previously said Mr Swann could be withdrawn as health minister or as a Westminster candidate.
Mr Swann said both men had "moved on" and his focus was being a minister.
He added that both accepted that "politics can be heated and passionate".
Speaking to BBC News NI for the first time since becoming health minister for a second time, Mr Swann said "party politics must be taken out of health" in order for it to progress.
"There will always be politics, there will always be differences of opinion, we have done it before and when parties fall out with each other over other things its important they don't bring their arguments into health," he said.
On being health minister and canvassing to become an MP, Robin Swann said other assembly members would be in a similar position.
He pointed out the a date had yet to be set for the general election, but said he was and would remain 100% dedicated to the job of health minister, adding he would "do both roles well."
Mr Swann, a former UUP leader, said being the only UUP politician around the executive table was not a bad thing
He should whoever was there as "a single UUP health minister" would approach the job honestly and not play party politics.
The Department of Health receives one of the largest budget allocations in Northern Ireland - £7.3bn for the 2023-24 financial year - about half of all departmental spending.
In January, thousands of health care workers took part in 24 hours of industrial action over pay.
Mr Swann said he was continuing to meet unions in an effort to resolve the ongoing pay issues and that his focus in on making sure all health care workers were "properly recompensed".
He said unless funding changed significantly, health could be facing a £1bn deficit, which would have an impact on what services could be delivered.
He said how Northern Ireland was funded needed to be addressed differently as departments needed to work with a recurrent budget and not just from year to year.
He said Northern Ireland had 12 years of catch-up after being underfunded.
He also announced an independent body of experts would be brought in to review the administrative side of Northern Ireland's health service.
The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) team has previously been tasked with looking at orthopaedic and gynaecology services here.
Mr Swann said their focus would now be "to look at the overheads, the management, the back office and the efficiency programmes that are already running".
"We need to be open and transparent", he said, "that accountability has to start within the department and our trusts".
Mr Swann also confirmed a Women's Health Action Plan which would pave the way for a Women's Health Strategy.
He said it would help bring together all parts of women's health across the system and he and his team would listen to women's voices to hear how that strategy should be shaped.
"We are putting women at the centre of these discussions and making sure the action plan is up and running as soon as possible," he said.
Comparing it to the Mental Health Action Plan which preceded the Mental Health Strategy, Mr Swann said it was important to listen, agree on what services are required and then fund them accordingly.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68234960
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-68234960
|
|
Dover legal battle looms over food checks - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Plans to move import inspections 22 miles inland risks Britain's biosecurity, port health chiefs say.
|
UK
|
The Sevington Inland Border Facility, 22 miles away from Dover, is designed to detect illegal produce
Dover health chiefs are on the brink of major legal action against the government over plans to end checks for potentially dangerous foods at the UK's most important ferry terminal.
They warn that illegal food could reach the British plate if commercial lorry inspections are moved 22 miles inland.
Officials fear the changes, a consequence of Brexit, smash a hole in the UK's biosecurity measures.
The government says the new inland facility will ensure biosecurity.
But Dover District Council and its Port Health Authority (DPHA) are urging the government to pause the plans - saying it breaks their legal duties to keep the UK's food supply safe amid fears the move could increase the risk of diseases.
The legal threat to the government would mean asking the High Court to rule whether ministers have broken a series of laws including fully considering the evidence of the risks.
It comes after months of behind-the-scenes arguments over the government's post-Brexit plans for a new commercial food-checking system at Sevington, near Ashford.
That facility, 22 miles from Dover, will be used to inspect goods in lorries in the hope of intercepting illegal and dangerous food stuffs before they reach UK industry and shops.
In November the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) told Dover District Council of the plan to use Sevington to inspect lorries arriving by ferry.
DPHA estimates that at least 3,500 consignments of produce a month, which need to be verified as safe, would be allowed to leave the port unescorted.
While the vast majority of food imports are legal and safe, DHPA has intercepted 68 tonnes of dangerous and illegal meat since 2022. Five tonnes were stopped in the week leading up to Christmas.
Sheep carcasses are among the illegal meats being seized at Dover
Lucy Manzano, head of the authority, told BBC News that the government has been repeatedly warned that the plan to switch checking to Sevington risked breaching the country's biosecurity border - and Dover's legal obligations to carry out the inspections.
"For the first time ever food from the rest of the world will be able to arrive at Dover, and leave Dover, without any checks at all to travel into Great Britain," said Ms Manzano.
"That is not allowed at any other port in the UK. And that is an entirely new gap that is being created.
"Without controlling it at the border, that [food] is free to disappear into Great Britain.
"You could say the field gate has been left completely open."
Port health authorities have duties to check for dangerous imports
Dover District Council and the port health authority retain a duty to carry out spot checks for African Swine Fever.
The disease is so dangerous it could devastate UK agriculture and official government monitoring reports show that it has been creeping slowly into parts of western Europe.
But the government is planning to cut Dover's funding for those checks by 70% - and Ms Manzano said ministers must rethink given the combined risks with moving commercial checks to Sevington.
"There are no controls between here, the point of entry, and Sevington," she said.
"If that system of compliance takes place within the safe compounds of a port, then you can contain that risk."
Last week, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee wrote to Environment Secretary Steve Barclay, demanding that he urgently clarify how the inland checks would maintain biosecurity.
"The inland border facility at Sevington will require vehicles to travel 22 miles unsupervised across Kent, presenting potentially serious biosecurity risks, but also compromising compliance," the committee's chair Sir Robert Goodwill said.
"Drivers will be under no obligation to go to Sevington, if asked to do so. As such, we have real and reasonable concerns about the geographic dislocation of the inland border facility from the point of entry."
A government spokesman said it could not comment on legal proceedings - a clear sign that it has yet to find a way of settling the dispute.
"We have strict border controls in place to protect our high biosecurity standards - and are confident that existing and new infrastructure will have the capacity and capability to maintain these standards," the spokesman said.
"We recognise the strategic importance of the port of Dover and are continuing to work with the port authority on future support options."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68244374
|
news_uk-68244374
|
|
Laura Trott interview: Fact-checking Treasury minister's claim on debt - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Laura Trott told the BBC that government debt is falling but official figures say it is rising.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Laura Trott and Evan Davis argued over whether UK debt is rising or falling.
Chief Secretary to the Treasury Laura Trott and BBC PM presenter Evan Davis got into an argument about whether UK government debt is rising or falling.
He asked her how the government could be sticking to its pledge to get debt down while talking about tax cuts.
He said official projections showed debt rising. She replied: "It's falling as a percentage of GDP" which he then disputed, saying: "I'm amazed that you don't know that debt is rising".
According to the figures the government uses to measure this pledge, he was right and she was wrong.
First, let's look at the debt target.
The pledge is that debt as a proportion of the size of the economy, measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), should be on track to fall in five years time.
That forecast comes from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) - an independent body that looks at the government's plans on tax and spending - and makes economic predictions accordingly.
You can see in the chart below that there is a dip expected in 2028-29 compared with the previous year, which means the pledge is on track to be met.
Mr Davis was referring to these figures from the OBR when he challenged the Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
They exclude the Bank of England's balance sheet and indeed show public sector net debt rising:
Ms Trott said she had "different figures".
We asked the Treasury which figures she was using and they gave us the OBR forecasts for debt including the Bank of England's balance sheet. We'll come back to why the Bank of England makes a difference shortly.
That figure is predicted to go up next year before falling in each of the following four years, which means it would be lower in 2028-29 than it is now.
But that is not the measure of debt that the government uses for its debt pledge, which is what Ms Trott was being asked about.
The reason you might exclude the Bank of England is that some of its activities to support the economy have involved temporary increases in debt, which are not really in the control of the government.
The documents accompanying the Autumn Budget in 2021 said: "excluding the Bank of England's contributions to public sector net debt... better reflects the impact of government decisions".
So on the measure of debt that the government uses for its own targets, it is not right to say that debt is falling or that it will be lower in five years than it is today.
Labour's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones said: "Laura Trott, Jeremy Hunt's number two, doesn't even know the basic facts of her job."
Talking about the debt today, Rishi Sunak said it was "on schedule" to fall.
That is correct, and different to statements he made in November 2023, when he was criticised by the statistics regulator for claiming that "debt is falling".
"Members of the public cannot be expected to understand the minutiae of public finance statistics and the precise combination of definitional choices that might need to be made for a particular claim to be true," the regulator Sir Robert Chote said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68250020
|
news_uk-politics-68250020
|
|
Tucker Carlson: Putin takes charge as TV host gives free rein to Kremlin - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Russian leader was given the opportunity to expound familiar grievances unchallenged.
|
Europe
|
Vladimir Putin lectured, joked and occasionally snarled - but not at his host.
Tucker Carlson laughed, listened - and then listened some more.
During the American's much-hyped encounter with the Russian president, his fixed, fascinated expression slipped a few times.
Especially when Putin's promise of a 30-second history lesson became a 30-something minute rant.
But for the most part, Carlson seemed to lap up what Russia's president was telling him.
Putin was fully in charge of this encounter and for large parts of it his interviewer barely got a word in.
Instead of pushing the Russian leader - indicted as a suspected war criminal - on his full-scale invasion of Ukraine and challenging his false assertions, Carlson swerved off-piste to talk God and the Russian soul.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The American had touted his sit-down with Putin as a triumph for free speech, asserting that he was heading where no Western news outlets dared to tread.
That's untrue. The Kremlin is simply highly selective about who Putin speaks to. It will almost always choose someone who knows neither the country nor the language and so struggles ever to challenge him.
Carlson's claim also ignored the fact that Russia's president has spent the past two decades in power systematically stamping out free speech at home.
Most recently, he made it a crime to tell the truth about Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Multiple critics - Vladimir Kara-Murza, Ilya Yashin and many more - are in prison right now for doing just that.
Evan Gershkovich has been held in Russia since last year
It was a full two hours into his interview before the former Fox News anchor asked about the US journalist Evan Gershkovich. He was arrested last year in Russia while doing his job and accused of espionage.
Carlson suggested Vladimir Putin might release the reporter into his custody, providing a trophy to return with from his trip.
What Putin gave was the strongest hint yet of what he wants in return.
He talked about a Russian "patriot" who had "eliminated a bandit" in a European capital, seeming to confirm previous reports that Russia is demanding a prisoner swap with Vadim Krasikov.
The assassin, a suspected Russian intelligence agent, killed a Chechen separatist in a Berlin park in 2019.
Putin claimed negotiations were under way and "an agreement could be reached".
We already know those complicated talks are not new, involve three countries and likely at least two American prisoners.
The whole encounter in the Kremlin opened with a history lecture.
Putin wrote a long essay before the war that denied Ukraine's existence as a sovereign state. He now appears to have learned it by heart.
He delivered his thesis, eyes burning with conviction, as Carlson's own burned with boredom and disbelief.
For fans who managed to stay tuned any longer, the reward was a re-run of Putin's top, twisted arguments.
He aired his regular grievance about Nato expanding east into what Russia sees as its area of influence. "We never agreed Ukraine could join Nato," as Putin put it.
But it's having an aggressive, unpredictable neighbour like Russia that's led Ukraine to seek extra security.
Putin has always characterised the mass public protests in Kyiv a decade ago as part of a Western-backed "coup", which they were not.
He also called the fighting in the eastern Donbas that Moscow provoked a civil war.
Putin agreed to this chat from a position of relative strength
It's all part of how Putin justified his full-scale invasion, almost two years ago - along with "de-Nazifying" Ukraine, which he claimed is still a work in progress.
Kyiv fiercely disputes every word of it.
At one point Putin insisted "relations between the two peoples will be rebuilt. They will heal".
But I've met many Ukrainians who spoke Russian before the invasion and often travelled there.
After two years of unprovoked fighting and missile attacks, they've switched language in droves and tell me they feel nothing but hatred.
It's just one example of how far Vladimir Putin is from actual facts and reality. Just like in February 2022, when he sent Russian troops rolling on Kyiv thinking they'd be greeted as liberators.
It seems Putin agreed to this chat from a position of relative strength.
The fighting in Ukraine has stalled. Kyiv's allies in the West have been dithering over continued military aid, especially the US.
President Zelensky just sacked his commander-in-chief, talking of the need for a reset and renewal in the war effort.
So there was plenty of swagger from Putin about how Russia is "ready for dialogue" and "willing to negotiate".
He wants to capitalise on any hesitancy among Ukraine's supporters and any doubts among Ukrainians themselves about going on fighting.
"Sooner or later this will end in agreement," was Putin's message, arguing that Nato was coming to realise that defeating Russia on the battlefield would be impossible.
It's all classic Putin and Tucker Carlson let him roll with it.
Not all interviews need to be combative. There is merit in letting people speak and reveal themselves. But this one took that concept to the extreme.
None of Putin's statements were challenged in essence.
None of the actual facts of his all-out invasion were presented to him, including allegations of war crimes in Bucha, Irpin and far beyond.
Evidence of apparent war crimes was discovered following the withdrawal of Russian troops from some areas of Ukraine, including Bucha
Nor did he have to answer for the "high precision missiles" that slam into homes in Ukraine, killing civilians.
The American did not push Putin at all on political repression at home, which includes locking up vocal opponents of the war in jail.
The way Carlson was feted in Moscow was extraordinary. There was breathless coverage of his every move from the same TV hosts who usually rail against the West as a mortal enemy.
Like a spurned lover, suddenly given attention, Russia was excited.
And it seems Carlson was moved by his experience, too.
His interview, which included a question about the supernatural, ended with Putin talking about souls.
Both men fell silent for several seconds, before Russia's leader broke the spell.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68248740
|
news_world-europe-68248740
|
|
US Supreme Court sceptical of Colorado's move to bar Donald Trump from ballot - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Justices intensely questioned attorneys who argued he should be removed from Colorado's primary ballot.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: How the Supreme Court hearing on Colorado's ballot ban on Trump unfolded
The US Supreme Court appeared sceptical of Colorado's move to bar Donald Trump from the state's presidential primary, during tough questioning on Thursday.
The ex-president was removed from the ballot by Colorado's top court in December under the 14th Amendment.
At the hearing, justices grilled the attorney defending the move about its constitutionality, its real-world consequences and defining "insurrection".
It is unclear when the court will rule.
Mr Trump, who did not attend the hearing, remains the overwhelming favourite to clinch the Republican nomination for president and set-up a rematch with President Joe Biden in November.
The legal challenge hinges on a Civil War-era constitutional amendment that bans anyone who has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" from holding federal office.
In its judgement in December, the Colorado Supreme Court said Mr Trump's actions during the 2021 Capitol riot amounted to insurrection, and the state's attorney repeated that claim on Thursday.
Most of the tough questioning went to lawyer Jonathan Murray, representing the five Coloradoans who originally sued to kick Mr Trump from the ballot.
One of the three court members nominated by Mr Trump, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, challenged him about the potential "disenfranchising effect" of kicking Mr Trump from the ballot, by not allowing citizens to cast their votes as they wanted.
Mr Murray said "the reason we're here is that President Trump tried to disenfranchise 80 million Americans who voted against him" during the violence on 6 January 2021, where rioters tried to stop congress from certifying that Mr Biden won the 2020 election.
Mr Trump's team fought back against that allegation, telling justices that the event was "a riot, not an insurrection".
"The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all of those things but did not qualify as an insurrection as that term is used in Section 3," Mr Trump's attorney Jason Mitchell told the court.
Justices on both wings of the court appeared reluctant to uphold the Colorado ban, subjecting Mr Murray to a barrage of complex legal queries as the morning went on.
Chief Justice John Roberts observed that if the court upheld the Colorado ruling it could unleash chaos on the US political system by granting states the unilateral power to strike candidates from the ballot.
"It will come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election. That's a pretty daunting consequence," he said.
And Justice Elena Kagan appeared to agree, noting: "I think that the question that you have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States."
Enforcing the 14th amendment would have "to be federal, national means," she suggested.
But Trump's team were also subjected to a grilling by the justices, who challenged attorney Jonathan Mitchell on his claims that the 14th Amendment didn't apply to the presidency.
Mr Trump's team have long insisted that the term "officer of the United States" outlined in the provision can only apply to an appointed official, not the elected president.
Justice Amy Comey Barrett, a conservative also appointed to the court by Mr Trump, expressed a heavy scepticism when examining the Trump team's claims that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the presidency.
Nonetheless, it appears unlikely that the court will uphold the initial Colorado ruling.
Robert Tsai, a Boston University constitutional law professor, told the BBC that the state's ruling "is toast".
The argument that Prof Tsai said most justices seemed to be attracted to was the idea that the power to remove presidential candidate from a ballot under Section 3 belonged to congress, not the states.
The court has not said when it will issue its decision, but it is expected soon. The court expedited the case and is under pressure to rule before 5 March, when Colorado holds its primary.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68244607
|
news_world-us-canada-68244607
|
|
Keir Starmer: The politics of a U-turn - BBC News
|
2024-02-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
In removing one of its promises, Labour has removed one of its political opponents' targets, writes Political Editor Chris Mason.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. After weeks of speculation, the Labour leader says the party is dropping its spending commitment.
Labour has moved fairly recently into a new headquarters about 15 minutes from Parliament.
I was invited there to interview Sir Keir Starmer about his decision to bin a long standing promise to spend £28bn a year on the green industries of the future.
This is a U-turn where every degree of the twist has played out in plain sight.
It was then diluted in its intended delivery last summer.
Because, in the end, the party felt shackled to a number they felt could only be a political negative; they were never likely to achieve that level of spending anyway, given their self-imposed economic rules.
And meanwhile critics said it was a number that would lead to vast borrowing or tax rises.
Add to that senior figures tying themselves in knots and contradicting each other in public about whether the policy was a goner or not. Something had to give, and pretty quickly.
But attempting to articulate that next to nothing will change in practical outcome - as Sir Keir does - while junking the headline figure, isn't an easy argument to make.
Even if this number that has been causing them so much grief included, according to their projections, vast sums, they had not actually worked out how to spend.
But Conservative folk text me to claim Labour's position amounts to at least partially blaming the change on Tory tax cuts which Labour themselves support and won't reverse, and question the costings of the policies they remain committed to.
Labour counter with what about Liz Truss and her crashing of the economy?
All of which poses this question: was it naïve for Labour to ever commit to £28bn in the first place?
Labour's leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar, told us on BBC Newscast that £28bn had been "arbitrary."
But back to that question I asked at the start; is changing your mind a good thing or a bad thing?
Keir Starmer said in all the places he had worked, the only place that regards changing your mind when circumstances change as a bad thing is Westminster. It even has a label that I used earlier: a U-turn.
He reckons what he is doing amounts to a pragmatic shift which acknowledges changing circumstances.
The Conservatives say he is forever changing his mind.
But the Conservatives have themselves done plenty of about turns.
On HS2, on electric cars, on railway station ticket staff, on a bonfire of old EU era laws to name just a few.
Maybe the original ideas were good ones. Maybe they weren't.
But is switching from one to the other inherently bad?
The challenge for an opposition leader, attempting to define themselves in the minds of voters, is they start from a low base - people not knowing much about them.
If you then change your mind a lot, as Keir Starmer has, that process of introducing yourself and what you're all about, gets harder.
You can be portrayed as not believing in anything.
Sir Keir's opponents hope the breadth of his changes of mind - on bankers' bonuses, childcare in England and overseas aid, to mention just three since he's been leader - is a vulnerability they can expose.
They see £28bn as the latest case study.
Labour calculate a short stint of being accused of a U turn is better than months of being lambasted over that big number, £28bn.
It is perhaps also true that political opponents attack a party for making U-turns when they lack alternative lines of attack.
Not least because a U-turn, often but not always, switches that opponent from a position you oppose to the one you have yourself.
And so the U-turn removes the point of difference.
Which brings me back to a phrase I struggle to shift from my head to describe Labour's approach in recent months.
A phrase first uttered into my ear at the Labour Conference last autumn.
"We need to be the smallest possible moving target".
Critics say Labour is eroding its points of difference with the Conservatives. The very thing, they argue, it should be about.
For others, it's about shaking off points of difference that can be weaponised by opponents.
After an awkward few weeks, Labour has removed a target in removing a promise.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68247994
|
news_uk-politics-68247994
|
|
Lee Anderson: Sadiq Khan accuses Tories of failing to call out 'anti-Muslim hatred' - BBC News
|
2024-02-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The London mayor says Lee Anderson has "poured petrol on the fires of hatred" over "Islamophobic" comments.
|
UK
|
The two biggest political parties at Westminster and parliament itself are finding themselves buckled, bent, warped by the furious arguments provoked by the Israel-Gaza war.
Anger, language and actions that struggle with convention.
Where the battle of ideas becomes a battle in which religion and race sit as prominently as they do awkwardly. Where questions about who we are, what we stand for and what we're becoming hang heavy.
For the Conservatives, the Lee Anderson row about Islamophobia. For parliament, the Commons Speaker row about a ceasefire and parliamentary procedure.
And for Labour, a row about antisemitism and the Rochdale by election in a few days.
The current party of government slinging out, for now at least, a man who was a Conservative deputy chairman until a few weeks ago, appearing in a campaign video with the prime minister.
Labour, the party that aspires to be in government before the year is out, is a mere bystander, a spectator in a by election in Rochdale on Thursday - after its candidate was accused of antisemitism and the party disowned him.
What we are seeing is a noisy, angry mess on three fronts and two big, central questions: what is it legitimate to say about different communities or religious groups?
And, in an election year, is it in the interests of our political parties - and individual politicians - to seek to calm things down, or crank things up?
Right now, the evidence suggests the latter.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-68400238
|
news_live_uk-68400238
|
|
US Supreme Court weighs landmark online free speech case - BBC News
|
2024-02-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Supreme Court justices seem torn as they weigh laws which may limit tech giants' right to police posts.
|
US & Canada
|
US Supreme Court justices appeared torn on Monday as they heard a landmark pair of cases which could fundamentally alter the future of online free speech.
At issue were Republican-backed laws passed in Florida and Texas limiting tech firms' ability to remove political content they deem objectionable.
Tech giants said the laws, passed after the 2021 Capitol riot, infringed on their right to editorial discretion.
At times justices seemed unsure of how to apply existing law to tech firms.
Industry groups have argued that the laws passed in Florida and Texas violated the right to free speech, which included the freedom of private companies to decide what content to publish on their platforms.
Supporters of the laws say they protect the First Amendment rights of conservative users from censorship by what they imply are left-leaning tech companies.
The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects the freedom of speech and expression of American citizens from being censored by the government.
On Monday, the back-and-forth between the justices and attorneys often centred around comparisons, in particular whether social media firms like YouTube and Facebook were more akin to newspapers or telephone companies.
Justice Alito, a conservative member of the court, voiced concern as to whether editorial protections afforded to newspapers were applicable to social media giants. At one point the 73-year-old quipped "if YouTube were a newspaper, how much would it weigh".
Henry Whitaker, Florida's solicitor general, laid out the conservative argument for the court, claiming that tech giants applied censorship policies "in an inconsistent manner" to "deplatform" certain users.
"They contend that they possess a broad First Amendment right to censor anything they host on their sites, even when doing so contradicts their own representations to consumers," Mr Whitaker said. "But the design of the First Amendment is to prevent the suppression of speech, not to enable it."
Former President Donald Trump, who was removed from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in the wake of his inflammatory comments during the Capitol riot, filed in support of the state laws. He argued that tech firms' "decision to discriminate against a user" is not protected under the Constitution.
But a trade group representing the tech giants, and supported by the Biden administration, told the court on Monday that the laws would infringe on their own First Amendment rights by effectively barring them from removing content or accounts which they do not want on their sites - or which would usually be removed under content policies.
Paul Clement, a lawyer presenting the cases on behalf of NetChoice, cited previous Supreme Court rulings that held that private organisers could not be forced to carry messages they did not agree with.
He also suggested that if companies were prevented from moderating content they could be forced to carry all sorts of objectionable content, including antisemitic and pro-suicide posts.
Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative justice appointed by Mr Trump, challenged Mr Whitaker to reconcile the Florida law with prior Supreme Court rulings that "emphasise editorial control as being fundamentally protected by the First Amendment".
Justices seemed sceptical of the sprawling nature of the laws, which they said may be unconstitutional where applied to a Facebook post, but may be permitted when protecting communications on other non-expressive apps, such as the provision of email services.
Justice Alito and Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal, both raised the possibility of returning the case to a lower court to further develop who exactly is covered by the Florida bill in particular.
US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, speaking in support of the tech lobby's case, urged the court to rule narrowly on what she called a "defect" in the Texas law, rather than issuing broad findings on how the first amendment interacts with social media.
Conservatives in the US have long assailed tech giants over their moderation policies, which they say is unfairly biased towards left-wing views.
When signing the Texas bill into law, Gov Greg Abbott said: "It is now law that conservative viewpoints in Texas cannot be banned on social media."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68407977
|
news_world-us-canada-68407977
|
|
Everton points deduction appeal verdict: What happens next? - BBC Sport
|
2024-02-26
|
[]
|
BBC Sport looks at what happens next after Everton's appeal and if there will still be a chaotic ending to the Premier League season.
| null |
Everton's points deduction has been reduced from 10 to six after an appeal - but there remains the potential for a chaotic end to this year's Premier League relegation battle.
The new verdict moves Everton up to 15th and five points away from the drop zone.
It also leaves Burnley and Sheffield United an almost impossible task to save themselves.
But there are still more twists to come.
Everton and Nottingham Forest face fresh cases of alleged breaches of the Premier League's financial rules for the assessment period ending with the 2022-23 season, with Forest's hearing taking place on Thursday 7 and Friday 8 March while a date for Everton's is still unknown.
The reality is that for Everton, they have gone over their limit for the three-year cycle ending in 2021-22, and two of those years count for their next hearing.
It will only be when this next process is complete that they will discover what damage their overspending has ultimately caused.
What the rest of the Premier League clubs think about the appeal panel's new six-point verdict remains to be seen.
There was a desperation not to spend and land in trouble during last month's transfer window. It will be interesting to see if six points proves to be a deterrent in the future.
BBC Sport looks at the key questions and what happens next.
What happens next in this Premier League season?
With the new six-point deduction determined, the Premier League can now move on to these two new cases which have to be heard by 8 April, although given that is a Monday, they are likely to be concluded the previous week.
On 8 April, there will still be six full Premier League match rounds to play, with the possibility of some rearranged games, meaning it is likely the relegation places will not have been decided.
So any decision that ends in more points deductions is virtually certain to be subject to an appeal, even as a pre-emptive strike by the clubs - and that brings the potential for chaos as there is no guarantee any appeal would be heard before the final games of the campaign on 19 May.
In terms of actually playing matches, that is when the season ends. But in terms of regulation, the 2023-24 season remains 'live' until the annual general meeting in June when the relegated clubs transfer their certificates.
A 'backstop date' for the whole thing to be concluded is 24 May.
What are the financial rules?
The profit and sustainability rules (PSR) are aimed at promoting financial stability within the Premier League.
They were introduced in 2015-16, although the demand to protect clubs from overspending can be traced back to Portsmouth who in 2010 became the first - and so far only - Premier League club to go into administration after failing to find a buyer who would pay off spiralling debts of about £60m.
Current rules limit the losses clubs are allowed to make, although the figure can be inflated by external owner-driven funding.
However, the rules are due to be switched so, like Uefa, spending is linked to turnover.
Opponents of the rules argue they prevent significant investment from wealthy backers and, by definition, maintain the status quo of the biggest clubs remaining the richest and most successful.
How much are clubs allowed to spend?
Essentially, clubs are allowed to incur losses of £105m over a three-year reporting cycle.
The rules were loosened slightly during the Covid pandemic and there are various elements of club business, such as academies, that clubs can spend on without it affecting their profit and sustainability submissions.
It is also a quirk of accounting that selling 'homegrown' players - such as Manchester City's £40m transfer of Cole Palmer to Chelsea last summer - has more of an impact than selling a player that has been bought for a fee.
What has changed this season and what changes are coming?
Everton were first charged in March 2023 over alleged profit and sustainability breaches. Their hearing was in October.
They were deducted 10 points in November and almost 12 months from that initial charge - after an appeal - their case is settled. That is a lengthy process, with Everton boss Sean Dyche saying the case may have had a psychological impact on his players.
Last spring, the clubs threatened with relegation over that period - Nottingham Forest, Southampton, Leeds, and Leicester, plus Burnley who had been relegated as Everton survived the season before - threatened legal action because the potential punishment was not going to impact upon the period when the rules were said to have been broken.
In response to this, the Premier League brought in new rules which meant clubs had to make their profit and sustainability submissions for the football financial year ending in June by 31 December in the same year.
Future changes are still to be confirmed but are set to be in line with Uefa's Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules, which will eventually allow clubs to spend a maximum of 70% of their income on wages, transfers and agents' fees.
Will Everton and Forest have points deducted?
Anything from a warning, to a fine, to points deductions is possible. However, in their written reasons over Everton's appeal, the Appeal Board said an immediate points deduction and nothing less than a points deduction was appropriate.
Everton's points penalty for essentially exceeding the limit by £19.5m has focused minds and shows why clubs are so keen to keep their spending within allowable limits.
Everton admitted they had spent more than they were allowed but initially put forward several mitigating factors for their breach, including the Covid-19 pandemic reducing the value of their players and the amounts they were able to generate by selling them.
• None Everton: The inside story of a turbulent 2022-23 season for the Toffees
• None Everton points deduction: Sean Dyche's side gear up for another relegation fight
One response from some football fans assessing profit and sustainability charges tends to be 'what about Manchester City?'
City were charged in February 2023 with more than 100 offences relating to their spending, which date back to 2009 and include allegations of hidden payments and non-cooperation.
Premier League chief Richard Masters recently revealed a date had been set for City's hearing, but would not reveal when.
Because these are historic charges over multiple years, all of which are contested, the case is fundamentally different to the recently announced ones which are regarded as more straightforward, with the arguments over breaches likely to centre around differences of opinion over actual spending or the amounts that can be claimed back.
Despite some speculation, Chelsea have always believed they are compliant with football's financial rules, even with the massive outlay on transfers over the past 18 months under the Clearlake ownership group.
The Blues have spent about £1bn on players, but the way they have gone about it has changed the way transfers are dealt with in the Premier League.
The offering of extra-long contracts, for example the Enzo Fernandez eight-year deal following his £106m transfer, meant the club could stretch the payment of the fee over the length of his contract.
That tactic is called amortisation, and after Chelsea did it with a number of their signings, Premier League clubs have voted to limit the time a club can spread the cost of a transfer over a player's contract to five years.
Chelsea would also point to the £450m in player sales they have brought into the club. The selling of several academy graduates, such as Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Mason Mount, has seen the club put a huge amount of 'pure profit' in their books.
Chelsea could face further scrutiny over reports of payments connected to the club's former owner Roman Abramovich. The FA and the Premier League are investigating, while Uefa fined them in July for "submitting incomplete financial information" between 2012 and 2019.
• None Our coverage of your Premier League club is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68405547
|
rt_football_68405547
|
|
How the Gaza conflict is contorting UK politics - BBC News
|
2024-02-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Conservatives, Labour, and Parliament itself are finding themselves torn by the furious arguments provoked by the Israel-Gaza war.
|
UK Politics
|
The two biggest political parties at Westminster and Parliament itself are finding themselves buckled, bent and contorted by the furious arguments provoked by the Israel-Gaza war.
For the Conservatives, the Lee Anderson row about Islamophobia.
For Parliament, the Commons Speaker row about a ceasefire and parliamentary procedure.
And for Labour, the Rochdale row about antisemitism and the by-election there in a few days.
The prime minister's week began with a trio of BBC local radio interviews, where alongside questions about spending on transport projects in the north of England he was inevitably asked about his former deputy chairman's remarks.
It's only a few weeks back that Rishi Sunak and Mr Anderson were doing a joint campaign video.
Now Mr Sunak is distancing himself from Mr Anderson.
But the prime minister, like his deputy, is not describing what Lee Anderson said as Islamophobic.
In fact, a row about that very word has broken out within the Conservative Party, with former chairman Baroness Warsi at loggerheads with the Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch over it.
Next, the Speaker of the Commons Sir Lindsay Hoyle starts the week with the third biggest party, the SNP, saying it doesn't have confidence in him.
And Conservative MPs' WhatsApp groups are inflamed too, I hear, the sentiment of many being "how can we ever trust him again?"
As it stands, 72 MPs have signed a Commons motion saying he should go.
This may all mean Sir Lindsay concludes he has no option but to address the issue - either by standing down or saying he will at the election.
But the pressure on him seems to have eased a little - or not got worse - for now at least.
The SNP's focus is on securing a debate where they can shift the dial on the government's approach to the Israel-Hamas war.
They want one under what is known as standing order 24.
It only allows for the Commons to consider something, rather than vote on a substantive question, which is what the SNP want.
Which leaves the Speaker in a bind: fail to give them what they want, or bend parliamentary conventions again - which is what got him into trouble in the first place.
Meanwhile, I hear some of the smaller parties have been comparing notes on how they feel they are treated by the Speaker and will see him later to set out their argument too.
And then there is Labour. The Rochdale by-election is on Thursday and the party that aspires to be in government before the year is out is a mere bystander, a spectator - after their candidate was accused of antisemitism and the party disowned him.
What we are seeing is a noisy, angry mess on three fronts and two big central questions: what is it legitimate to say about different communities or religious groups?
And, in an election year, is it in the interests of our political parties to seek to calm things down, or crank things up?
Right now, the evidence suggests the latter.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68404313
|
news_uk-politics-68404313
|
|
Lee Anderson: Outspoken MP suspended over Khan comments - BBC News
|
2024-02-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The MP for Ashfield is known for his controversial views but supporters believe he connects with voters.
|
UK Politics
|
Lee Anderson has rarely been out of the headlines since becoming the Conservative Party's deputy chairman just over a year ago.
This week it's his claims that London mayor Sadiq Khan and Labour leaders Sir Keir Starmer are "controlled by Islamists" that resulted in the prime minister slapping down the comments as wrong and kicking him off the Tory benches.
The newly-independent MP for Ashfield was already in the PM's sights last month, when Mr Sunak warned he would fire any frontbenchers who failed to vote with the government on the Rwanda bill.
Instead, Mr Anderson and his former fellow Tory deputy chairman Brendan Clarke-Smith quit their roles ahead of the vote in order to rebel.
The Nottinghamshire politician - who is paid £100,000 a year on top of his MPs' salary for hosting a GB News show - enjoys speaking his mind and upsetting what he sees as the politically correct "woke" establishment.
In an interview conducted a few days before he was given the deputy chair role in February 2023, Mr Anderson expressed his support for bringing back the death penalty - a position not shared by the government.
He was given the nickname "30p Lee" after comments in Parliament when he suggested people needed to learn how to cook and budget "properly".
"We can make a meal for about 30p a day and this is cooking from scratch," he said.
He's also said that poor families were "more resourceful" in the past - and was criticised by the Hope Not Hate campaign for saying he had sympathy with people protesting outside hotels providing refuge for asylum seekers.
But despite his tendency to create media storms, his supporters in the Conservative Party believe the former Labour councillor can connect with so-called "red wall" voters in the Midlands and the north of England in a way that others can't.
Born in Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, to a family of coal miners, he followed in the footsteps of his father by working in the area's pits for 10 years after leaving school.
After separating from his partner, he raised his two sons as a single parent on what he described as a "meagre wage".
"I've been that man that has to put five quid in the gas meter on a Sunday night and been watching the meter spin round all week," he told TalkTV in 2022.
He went on to volunteer at a local Citizens Advice centre before working in hostels for homeless care leavers.
His first job in politics was working in the office of local Labour MP Gloria De Piero, serving as a district councillor at the same time.
In February 2018 he was suspended from the council's Labour group after hiring a digger and placing concrete blocks to stop travellers illegally camping in a car park.
A month later he defected to the Tories, saying his former party had been "taken over by the hard-left".
In the 2019 general election the Brexit-supporter stood as the Conservative candidate for Ashfield, winning the seat from Labour.
The constituency was one of many Leave-supporting areas to turn blue in Boris Johnson's landslide victory over Jeremy Corbyn.
However, his successful campaign was not without controversy.
He faced mockery after he appeared to be caught setting up a door knock while out canvassing, accompanied by journalist Michael Crick.
During the visit a microphone picked up Mr Anderson asking a voter not to mention he was his friend during filming.
There was further criticism for comments suggesting "nuisance tenants" living on a council estate should be forced to live in tents and pick vegetables.
Mr Anderson continued to attract attention for his strident views as an MP.
During the Euro 2020 football tournament he criticised the England team for taking the knee in protest at racism and vowed to boycott their matches.
He returned to the theme of budgeting, when he posted a photo on Twitter of one of his staff members to illustrate his argument that nurses on £30,000 a year didn't need to use food banks.
The post, which detailed her monthly spending on rent and travel, provoked a backlash on social media.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Lee Anderson: "There's not this massive use for food banks in this country"
The 57-year-old's appointment as deputy party chairman by Mr Sunak came despite Mr Anderson initially backing his rival Boris Johnson in last year's leadership election.
He's also been critical of the government's approach to tackling illegal immigration.
In December, he wrote that he was "putting my party on notice" over the issue, saying the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats was "making us the laughing stock of the world".
In a joint resignation letter, Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith said they backed rebel amendments to the Rwanda bill "not because we are against the Rwanda legislation but because... we want it to work."
They added "our main wish is to strengthen the legislation. This means that in order to vote for amendments we will therefore need to offer you our resignations from our roles".
The two said they believed when it came to asylum claims "there are far too many who wish to cheat our system" yet provisions in international and domestic law meant deportations could still be blocked under the government's bill.
Many of Mr Anderson's former fellow Tory MPs in the Midlands and north of England love his outspoken style.
They think he reflects the concerns of real voters - the people they want to hold on to at the next general election.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64582994
|
news_uk-politics-64582994
|
|
India v England: Jurel, Ashwin and Kuldeep inspire Ranchi fightback - BBC Sport
|
2024-02-26
|
[]
|
England's hopes of forcing a series decider fade dramatically in the face of a stirring India fightback on day three of the fourth Test.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Cricket
Fourth Test, Ranchi (day three of five) India need 152 more runs to win
England's hopes of forcing a series decider faded dramatically in the face of a stirring India fightback on day three of the fourth Test in Ranchi.
With dogged lower-order resistance and spin bowling of the highest quality, India turned the match on its head. From beginning Sunday 134 behind with only three first-innings wickets in hand, the hosts ended 40-0 in pursuit of 192 to take an unassailable 3-1 lead.
They were dragged to 307 by Dhruv Jurel's 90. The wicketkeeper, crucially dropped on 59 by Ollie Robinson, added 76 with Kuldeep Yadav and another 40 with number 10 Akash Deep.
Off-spinner Shoaib Bashir ended with 5-119, at 20 years and 135 days the second-youngest England bowler to claim a five-wicket haul in Test cricket.
England's lead was a precious 46, every run of which seemed vital as India's spinners conjured tricks from the surface on a riveting, tension-filled afternoon.
Zak Crawley's attractive 60 and Jonny Bairstow's counter-punching 30 were invaluable. No-one else passed 17 in England's 145, Ravichandran Ashwin magnificent for 5-51 and Kuldeep unerring in his 4-22.
India were given 25 minutes to bat before the close and used them to great effect, scoring at five an over. Captain Rohit Sharma has 24 and Yashasvi Jaiswal 16.
Somehow, England need an instant rally on the fourth morning to keep the series alive.
• None India start well after England collapse - how day three unfolded
• None TMS podcast: England face huge battle with ball to keep series alive
Series on the line after super Sunday
This was a compelling day of Test cricket, in keeping with what would be most expected of the game in this country: an attritional first innings followed by a rush to the conclusion as the spinners wreak havoc in the second.
For as well as England's Bashir and Tom Hartley have bowled, India's slow trio were able to extract so much from the surface.
To the delight of the biggest and noisiest crowd of the Test so far, every ball was an event.
For once, there is an argument to make that England were not aggressive enough. Ben Duckett, Ben Stokes and Bairstow were all victims of tame dismissals. In mitigation, these were the most difficult batting conditions of the tour.
England's run-rate of 2.69 was comfortably their slowest since Stokes became captain. All except three of the 53.5 overs in their second innings were bowled by India's spinners, who revelled in the sharp turn and untrustworthy bounce.
England opened with the spin of Joe Root and Hartley, the latter struggling with his line and four times clipped to the boundary by Rohit.
India will start Monday as favourites to wrap up the series, but England will hope they can use the pitch to turn the fifth Test in Dharamsala into a decider.
Any sort of flying start from England could have been enough to seal the match. Instead Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja shared the new ball to indicate the ordeal that lay ahead.
Duckett prodded Ashwin to short leg and Ollie Pope was completely befuddled by a carrom ball to be leg before for a golden duck. Pope has bagged a pair in this match, facing only three deliveries in the process.
Crawley fought back with style, peppering the extra-cover boundary. He added 46 with Root, who was aggrieved to be lbw playing across Ashwin, and another 45 with Bairstow.
But Crawley was bowled trying to force Kuldeep against the spin, sparking a collapse of five wickets for 23 runs. Stokes played on via his pad, Hartley swiped to mid-on and Robinson's poor day continued when he was leg-before for a duck, all to Kuldeep.
In between, Bairstow softly patted Jadeja to short cover from the first ball after tea, meaning England lost their last proper weapon capable of pressurising the relentless India bowling.
Ben Foakes and Bashir resisted for more than 12 overs, adding only 12 runs in the process. Foakes survived 75 balls for his 17, then chipped his 76th delivery back to Ashwin, whose first five-wicket haul of the series was sealed by Jurel's reaction catch from a James Anderson reverse-sweep.
If India do complete the turnaround they owe so much to Jurel, the 23-year-old playing only his second Test and possibly only holding a place behind the stumps until Rishabh Pant returns to fitness.
At 177-7 on Saturday, India could have conceded a huge lead. Jurel and Kuldeep battled to 219-7 overnight, with Jurel resuming on 30 on Sunday.
The early conditions were benign, Robinson again struggled for bite and the eighth-wicket pair added 34 runs before Anderson got Kuldeep to chop on for 28.
England did well to contain the scoring, conceding only two boundaries in the first hour, but the life given to Jurel could prove to be match-defining. A clip off the toes at Bashir should have been held at head-height by Robinson at mid-wicket - India were still 87 behind at the time.
With Deep for company, Jurel farmed the strike and played big shots when given the chance - twice Bashir was hit for six. Deep also swung a six of his own, before Bashir skipped one into the pads to complete his first five-wicket haul in professional cricket.
Jurel continued towards a century, heaving Hartley over the leg-side rope, only to play all around the same man and be bowled 10 runs short of three figures.
'On that pitch, anything is possible' - reaction
England bowler Shoaib Bashir on TNT Sports: "I want to dedicate this [five-wicket haul] to my two late grandads who passed away around a year and a half ago, they loved Test cricket and their wish was for me to play. I'm so grateful.
"We'd have liked one or two wickets in that period at the end but we've got a big job to do tomorrow. On that pitch, anything is possible."
India bowler Ravichandran Ashwin on TNT Sports: "I enjoy bowling with the new ball and today was another of those days.
"We showed phenomenal character. Kuldeep was brilliant today. Jurel's defence was gun and he showed great composure, we were very calm in the dressing room. For just his second Test, he had a great game plan and it gave us a huge lift."
Former England captain Michael Vaughan: "India have once again found a way of having a dominant day that looks likely to win them this Test and the series.
"England's bad days are really, really bad - and that looks likely to cost them."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/68379000
|
rt_cricket_68379000
|
|
Donald Trump has no presidential immunity from election fraud charges, court rules - live updates - BBC News
|
2024-02-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former president will not be granted immunity and won't be shielded from criminal prosecution on election fraud.
|
US & Canada
|
This is a major setback for the former President – who is facing more than 90 charges in multiple cases.
This ruling relates to the election subversion case which was due to be held in Washington next month.
His lawyers’ argument hinged on the idea that because Donald Trump wasn't convicted for impeachment by Congress, he can’t face criminal proceedings.
But the three judges on the panel were sceptical - arguing that with immunity, a president could sell state secrets or order the assassination of a political rival and not face any criminal consequences.
They ruled that for the purposes of this case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump and should be treated like any other criminal defendant.
Trump's team said they would appeal against the ruling – and now have 90 days to take their case to the US Supreme Court.
Trump - who is trying to return to the White House - is hoping it will be delayed until after the Presidential election in November.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68023315
|
news_live_world-us-canada-68023315
|
|
Trump seeks Supreme Court pause in 2020 election case - BBC News
|
2024-02-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
He is fighting a ruling denying him presidential immunity in the federal election interference case.
|
US & Canada
|
Ex-US President Donald Trump has asked the Supreme Court to suspend a lower court ruling that he does not have presidential immunity from prosecution.
He had claimed in his election interference case he could not be tried for acts carried out as president.
Three lower court judges disagreed, ruling that he can be prosecuted like any other citizen.
But Mr Trump's lawyers said he should not be tried during an election campaign.
"Conducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump's ability to campaign against President Biden," Trump's attorneys wrote in the filing.
The Supreme Court will now decide if it will put the ruling on hold to allow Mr Trump to appeal.
The conservative-majority top court granting the request would lead to a long delay in the landmark criminal case alleging that Mr Trump plotted to illegally overturn the 2020 election, possibly until after the November election.
However, if the Supreme Court declines to put the ruling on pause, the federal trial overseen by Judge Tanya Chutkan will be scheduled, likely for spring.
As Mr Trump vies for the White House, he faces three other criminal trials in addition to this one.
He faces charges in Georgia for an alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election results in the state and a seven-count indictment in Florida over his handling of classified documents after he left the White House.
The third, based in New York, is related to the alleged concealment of a payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. He has pleaded not guilty against the charges in all the cases.
Mr Trump's legal team has also made repeated attempts to delay his criminal trials until after the 2024 election.
In the federal election interference trial, Mr Trump has been charged with four counts: conspiracy to defraud the US, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against the rights of citizens.
He has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and his lawyers have argued that presidents are immune from prosecution for possible crimes committed while they are in office, even after they leave the White House.
Last week, this argument was rejected by a three-judge panel from the DC Circuit court, made up of one Republican appointee and two Democratic ones, who ruled that "any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution".
Now, Mr Trump's lawyers are asking the Supreme Court to weigh in by putting the lower court's ruling on hold to allow time for all active judges on the DC Circuit court to review the case.
In their filing, they warned that denying the former president immunity would set a precedent where "such prosecutions will recur and become increasingly common".
"Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist," Mr Trump's lawyers argued.
If the lower circuit court declines a review, Mr Trump has asked that the ruling remain on hold while he files a formal appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court could respond to Mr Trump's request in a few ways.
It could deny his ask to put the ruling on hold, which would resume the federal trial. It could deny Mr Trump's request for a review, which would effectively shut down his immunity argument.
The court could also decide to hear Mr Trump's appeal immediately, bypassing a review from the lower court. It could do so on a fast track, similar to a separate case it is currently weighing on whether Mr Trump is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 election.
It could also decide to hear it on the court's usual schedule, which could likely delay a trial in the case well past November's election date.
The Supreme Court previously denied a request late last year by Special Counsel Jack Smith, the lead prosecutor on the case, to issue an expedited ruling on Mr Trump's immunity argument.
It is unclear when the Supreme Court might rule on Mr Trump's request.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68277167
|
news_world-us-canada-68277167
|
|
Paraquat pesticide maker used “weak” data on Parkinson’s - BBC News
|
2024-02-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A UK pesticide producer did not look at key health records in its Parkinson's study, legal papers show.
|
Science & Environment
|
Former farmer Larry Wyles is one of the plaintiffs in the US legal action alleging a link between Paraquat and Parkinson's
A chemical manufacturer facing legal action over alleged links between its pesticide and Parkinson's Disease ignored key health records in studies.
Syngenta insists there is no evidence of a Parkinson's link to the toxic Paraquat, which is made in the UK.
But the BBC has seen legal documents in which it admits it only looked at death certificates, rather than the medical records, of workers at its Widnes site.
Syngenta is fighting legal action by thousands of farmers in the US.
In court documents, the company's chief medical officer acknowledged it did not look at whether any living former workers had Parkinson's Disease. Instead it only looked at causes of death, even though experts say the condition was underreported on death certificates at the time.
Charity Parkinson's UK is now calling for "more robust and independent research" into any link between pesticides, including Paraquat, and Parkinson's.
Mr Wyles's father was one of the first in Pennsylvania to use Paraquat on his farm
The pesticide has not been authorised for use in the UK since 2007 but it is still made at Syngenta's plant in Huddersfield and exported to countries such as Japan, Australia and the US.
Eighty-year-old former farmer Larry Wyles, from Lebanon, Pennsylvania, is one of the plaintiffs with Parkinson's Disease in the US legal action.
Mr Wyles used the pesticide on his own farm for more than two decades but also as a child on his father's farm.
"Back in those days we did not have very good machinery and I remember having to clean out the nozzles on the sprayer," he told the BBC.
"I would blow the nozzles and the Paraquat would get on my hand and all over my clothes. I didn't know at the time what it was doing to me, neither did my father."
The father-of-two was diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease back in 2002
Mr Wyles was diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease in 2002, which he says affects "every facet of my life. It's a horrible disease."
"It's so consuming and it's done my life in as far as my relationship with my wife. It's tough because I am needy and I was never needy. I was always very independent and today I need help with most everything," he explained.
He told the BBC that Syngenta "ought to be banned from making Paraquat ever again. They should be told to take it off the shelves today. I was never told how detrimental it would be to my health."
That was a call backed by Julie Plumley, who runs a care farm in Dorset and whose late father was a farmer who used Paraquat and later had Parkinson's Disease.
She said of how the Syngenta study was carried out: "In my eyes they are trying to protect the company."
Julie Plumley believes her late father's Parkinson's Disease was linked to the chemicals he used on his farm
Syngenta's study of workers involved in the manufacture of Paraquat at its former Widnes site rejected any link with the disease in 2011 and again in 2021 by looking at causes of death recorded on death certificates.
The company has always said it had carried out "long-term monitoring" of workers at the site which showed "no increased risk of developing Parkinson's disease in the workforce who manufactured Paraquat."
The research has become a key part of the company's defence in the ongoing legal action taken by US farm workers against the manufacturer.
But, in the US litigation, the company's chief medical officer, Dr Clive Campbell, who co-authored the research, has acknowledged it never looked at the health records of those workers still alive, which it had access to.
Millions of farmers have used Paraquat to kill weeds on their land
Experts say Parkinson's Disease is underreported on death certificates and would not show the true numbers affected.
The legal papers from the US litigation also show the research was rejected by three different academic journals because it did not look at the health of living workers.
The documents further illustrate that the company already knew in 2009 that Parkinson's was not mentioned in high numbers on death certificates data they already held before it decided to conduct the wider mortality study.
Syngenta told the BBC that it had "considered conducting a morbidity study of the Paraquat manufacturing workforce and consulted with expert external epidemiologists to solicit their views.
"They advised Syngenta that the cohort of Paraquat manufacturing workers was too small, especially when considering the anticipated participation rate, for a morbidity study to yield informative results."
Paraquat is currently manufactured in Huddersfield and exported
It added that it did not have access to the "comprehensive medical records of the cohort - only the occupational health records of those who attended skin clinics".
While the company acknowledged that in the 2011 and 2021 publications of the Widnes study not all cases of Parkinson's were always listed on death certificates, it said "the same would be true of the general population data which were used as a comparator in the study".
They added that the publications were "only two among more than 1,200 safety studies conducted in the 60 years since Paraquat was first registered, both by Syngenta and independent researchers."
In a statement provided to the BBC, it said: "Despite decades of investigation and myriad epidemiological and laboratory studies, no scientist or doctor has ever concluded in a peer-reviewed scientific analysis that Paraquat causes Parkinson's."
Prof Bas Bloem believes Syngenta's mortality study "has very limited value"
The US regulator, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is facing a legal challenge to its approval of Paraquat, said that its current review of the herbicide's use was looking at what measures might be needed to mitigate any health risks.
Last month, its draft report said the benefits of using Paraquat outweighed the health risks but that it had still to look at 90 submissions, including scientific studies, concerning the risks of Parkinson's.
Of the Syngenta study, the EPA told the BBC: "For an outcome like Parkinson's Disease, mortality is unlikely to be a reliable indicator for evaluating an association."
Leading expert Professor Bas Bloem, director of the Radboudumc Center of Expertise for Parkinson & Movement Disorders in the Netherlands, insisted that "scientists across the globe are convinced Paraquat is a cause of Parkinson's."
He pointed to the most recent epidemiological study - carried out by UCLA's Department of Neurology and published this month - to find that Paraquat exposure increases the risk of Parkinson's Disease. He said: "The arguments against Paraquat are piling up."
Of Syngenta's own workers mortality study, he said: "The fact that it is authored by Syngenta lowers the value of this publication. There are methodological issues. It is not heavyweight evidence at all.
"Without a careful clinical analysis, just using mortality as a crude outcome has very limited value."
Independent medical experts in the UK have also told the BBC that Parkinson's Disease would have been underreported in death certificates and a full survey of living workers' health and medical records would have been more useful.
One of those experts is Professor Peter Hobson, a clinical healthcare scientist who carried out a 2018 study of whether death certificates accurately recorded Parkinson's Disease.
He said that "employing death certificates alone to determine increased risk of developing any neurological condition is very weak and will always have questionable reliability."
Because of the weak methodology used, he said he did not believe "anyone with even a basic understanding of epidemiology would support the company's claim that there is no increased risk of developing Parkinson's."
Professor David Dexter, director of research at Parkinson's UK, said that, while evidence was not yet strong enough to prove pesticides, including Paraquat, directly cause Parkinson's, international studies "overall suggest that exposure to pesticides may increase risk of the condition".
"We need more robust and independent research... including studies looking at occupational exposure, to help us understand the role these chemicals may play in the development of the condition," he added.
Larry Gifford, president of campaign group PD Avengers, based in Canada, said: "Syngenta seems more interested in safeguarding long-term commercial interests than upholding scientific rigor.
"A decade passing between publications without actively monitoring Parkinson's cases among the living workforce? It goes beyond being noteworthy; it's outright outrageous."
Syngenta told the BBC that it "is and has always been devoted to pursuing and implementing the best available science to ensure the safety of users and farmers.
"Syngenta has spent millions of dollars over decades to stay abreast of the independent scientific literature related to the safety of Paraquat and has conducted hundreds of studies evaluating the safety of Paraquat."
They added that "it is important to note that Paraquat is safe when used as directed."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68215777
|
news_science-environment-68215777
|
|
Pro-Palestinian protests: Paraglider badge wearers found guilty - BBC News
|
2024-02-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Despite the ruling, a judge did not find evidence that the woman were in support of Hamas.
|
London
|
From left: Heba Alhayek, 29, and Pauline Ankunda, 26, were convicted of offences under the Terrorism Act at Westminster Magistrates' Court
Three women have been found guilty of terrorism offences despite "no evidence" of support for Hamas.
Heba Alhayek, 29, and Pauline Ankunda, 26, attached images to their backs seven days after Hamas militants used paragliders to enter Israel in October, the court heard.
Noimutu Olayinka Taiwo, 27, stuck one to a placard's handle at a central London pro-Palestinian march.
They denied charges under the Terrorism Act.
The three were charged with carrying or displaying an article to arouse reasonable suspicion that they were supporters of a banned organisation.
Convicting them at Westminster Magistrates' Court, Deputy Senior District Judge Tan Ikram said: "Seven days earlier, Hamas went into Israel with what was described by the media as paragliders.
"A reasonable person would have seen and read that.
"I do not find a reasonable person would interpret the image merely as a symbol of freedom."
During their trial, prosecutor Brett Weaver told the court that the images displayed could have been viewed as "celebrating the use of the paragliders' tactic".
But Mr Ikram, delivering his verdict, said: "I want to be clear, there's no evidence that any of these defendants are supporters of Hamas, or were seeking to show support for them."
He said he had "decided not to punish" the defendants, and handed the trio each a 12-month conditional discharge.
Noimutu Olayinka Taiwo, 27, stuck an image of a paraglider to a placard's handle at a central London pro-Palestinian march, the court was told
"You crossed the line, but it would have been fair to say that emotions ran very high on this issue," Mr Ikram said.
"Your lesson has been well learned. I do not find you were seeking to show any support for Hamas."
Lawyers for the group had suggested they were actually displaying images of a parachute emoji rather than paragliders, and claimed police had "mistaken" what they saw that day.
Mark Summers KC, for Alhayek and Ankunda, said the idea that the image was a paraglider started with "an internet group with an agenda".
He also argued that flying-related images were a common symbol of peace in the region.
Reacting to the verdict, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said displaying the images amounted to the "glorification of the actions" of Hamas.
Images circulated of images of paragliders on the backs of the defendants
Nick Price, head of the CPS special crime and counter terrorism division, said: "The fact that these images were being displayed in the context of a protest opposing the Israeli response to the Hamas attacks demonstrates a glorification of the actions taken by the group.
"Displaying these images could be viewed as celebrating the use of paragliders as a tactic to breach the Gaza Israel border, and creates a risk of encouraging others to support Hamas.
"When people break the law - whether by hateful speech, supporting proscribed organisations or by threatening public order - we prosecute swiftly and independently.
"We have already prosecuted a string of offences linked to events in the Middle East and we are working closely with the police and community leaders to make sure our approach commands public confidence."
Their display of the images at the protest on 14 October was widely condemned when footage of the demonstration was published on social media, their trial was told.
Clarification 22 February: This article's original headline said "Protesters who celebrated Hamas found guilty" and was amended on 14 February to make clear that this was the prosecution's argument and not the judge's.
Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68286945
|
news_uk-england-london-68286945
|
|
Natasha Abrahart: University contributed to student's death, court upholds - BBC News
|
2024-02-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The High Court ruling follows the death of 20-year-old University of Bristol student Natasha Abrahart.
|
Bristol
|
Natasha Abrahart killed herself on the day she was due to give a presentation at university
A university's appeal against a judgement that it contributed to the death of a student by discriminating against her has been rejected.
Natasha Abrahart, 20, took her own life in April 2018 on the day she was due to take part in a group presentation at the University of Bristol (UoB).
Ms Abrahart had been suffering from chronic social anxiety disorder.
The High Court upheld the decision that the university had failed to make reasonable adjustments for Ms Abrahart.
But the judge refused to say whether or not universities owe their students a duty of care, saying a ruling on the issue is "not necessary".
Prof Evelyn Welch, vice-chancellor and president of the UoB, said: "Natasha's death is a tragedy - I am deeply sorry for the Abrahart family's loss.
"At Bristol, we care profoundly for all our students and their mental health and wellbeing is a priority and is at the heart of everything we do."
Speaking after the ruling Ms Abrahart's father, Dr Robert Abrahart, said: "It has been a long and painful journey to reach this point, and the University of Bristol has fought us every step of the way.
"The result is that we now have a judgment from the High Court confirming what we always knew to be true.
"The University of Bristol failed our daughter, broke the law, and contributed to her death."
Natasha Abrahart's parents have been campaigning since their daughter's death
On the day Ms Abrahart, from Nottingham, was found in her flat, she had been due to deliver a presentation in front of more than 40 students in a 329-seat lecture theatre.
The physics student was in her second year of university when, according to family, "things started to go wrong" as she was required to complete oral assessments as part of her course.
Dr Abrahart brought legal action against the university alleging it had contributed to his daughter's death by discriminating against her on the grounds of disability.
The judge who handed down today's ruling has been considering an issue that calls into question the very purpose of universities: whether or not they have what is called a "duty of care" towards their students.
That legal duty is what Natasha Abrahart's parents have been campaigning for, arguing that following "best practice" isn't enough.
This judge was considering whether universities must take "reasonable steps" to avoid students coming to harm, and whether universities have a duty not to cause such harm.
If he had found that they did have such a duty, it could have changed the way universities are expected to look after their students - and prompted legislation.
But what it would like in practice is not clear, and some campaigners have told the BBC that it feels too theoretical to support.
During a five day trial in March 2022, Bristol County Court heard that Ms Abrahart had made a prior suicide attempt in the winter term, and university staff were aware she was struggling.
A judge ruled the university had breached its duties under the Equality Act by failing to make "reasonable adjustments" for Ms Abrahart in light of her debilitating anxiety, which is considered a disability.
The judge dismissed a claim that the university had been negligent and ordered the university to pay damages of £50,500.
Natasha Abrahart's parents appeared outside court to make a statement on the verdict
In December last year, the university appealed this ruling on the basis that the judge was wrong to find that it knew, or should have known, enough about Ms Abrahart's condition to make exceptions.
Lawyers for the university added the institution had acted reasonably "given the importance of maintaining academic standards, and fairness to other students".
However, in a 62-page judgement delivered earlier, Mr Justice Linden ruled that the university had failed on all seven of its grounds of appeal.
He found the university had not provided sufficient evidence in its argument that "the assessment of a student's ability to explain laboratory work orally" was "a core competency of a professional scientist".
Dr Abrahart said: "Their arguments that they did not know enough about Natasha's problems, or that they hadn't received the right paperwork, or that fairness to other students meant they couldn't make the adjustments she needed, have now all failed for a second time.
"It is now for the University of Bristol, and higher education institutions across the country, to get their houses in order."
Ms Abrahart was due to deliver a presentation on the day she died
Gus Silverman, a solicitor representing the family, said: "So far as we are aware this is the first time the High Court has considered arguments that disability discrimination has contributed to a person's death.
"Upholding the finding that Natasha's death was linked to this kind of unlawful treatment therefore establishes a powerful legal precedent."
However, having dismissed the university's appeal, Mr Justice Linden concluded that it was "not necessary" for him to "express any view, one way or the other" in relation to whether or not universities owe their students a duty of care.
Judge Alex Ralton had previously dismissed the claim of negligence in 2022 on the basis that the university did not owe Ms Abrahart any relevant common law duty of care because "as a disabled student… she is afforded protection by the Equality Act 2010".
Ms Abrahart's mother, Maggie, urged the university's vice chancellor to read this judgement "very carefully"
Standing outside the Bristol Civil Justice Centre, Ms Abrahart's mother, Maggie, delivered a statement addressed to the vice chancellor of the university.
"We want you to read this judgement very carefully and follow its lessons," she said.
"We want you to think how you would wish your son or daughter to be treated at university if they were disabled and needed their rights protecting."
She added that they have been campaigning for Parliament to pass a statutory duty of care, a petition for which gained 128,000 signatures before it closed.
It would require all universities to act with reasonable care and skill so as to avoid causing harm to students.
Prof Welch said the university was continuing to develop and improve its services and safeguards to support students who need help.
She added: "In appealing, we were seeking clarity for the higher education sector around the application of the Equality Act when staff do not know a student has a disability, or when it has yet to be diagnosed.
"Higher education staff across the country share our deep concern about the increase of mental health issues amongst young people, and with that rise comes the increasing importance that staff, students, and their families are clear on what support universities can and should provide, and that students receive appropriate specialist care under the NHS should they need it."
The professor said UoB received the University Mental Health Charter Award in 2022, adding: "We know there is always more to do, and we will keep working to achieve the best for everyone in our community."
If you've been affected by the issues raised in this report, the BBC Action Line has a list of organisations that may be able to help.
Follow BBC West on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to: bristol@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-68284323
|
news_uk-england-bristol-68284323
|
|
Families of disabled people tell BBC of battle for NHS care support - BBC News
|
2024-02-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
More than 100 families speak to the BBC about how the NHS fails to support severely disabled people.
|
Health
|
Jack has a range of problems including cerebral palsy, epilepsy and learning disabilities
More than 100 families looking after severely disabled adults and children outside hospital, have told the BBC that the NHS is failing to provide enough vital support.
Many got in touch after a BBC report about a mother left on her own for long periods to care for her son.
The NHS says help is based on individual needs and government guidelines, ensuring consistency.
However, some families describe the system as adversarial.
Only those living outside hospital with life-limiting conditions, or at risk of severe harm if they don't have significant support, get this help from the NHS in England and Wales.
It is provided through a scheme called Continuing Healthcare (CHC) for adults, and its equivalent for under-18s, Children and Young People's Continuing Care.
Cases in England are decided by NHS Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) - panels responsible for planning local health and care services. In Wales, they are overseen by local health boards.
The BBC has heard from 105 families who described serious concerns with how the two schemes are working - with most calling for reform.
Some of the families say they were assessed as eligible for funding, then the decisions were reversed. Others saw NHS support disappear when they moved from one part of England to another.
Many had read about Alex Spencer, a single mother looking after her severely disabled son, Declan. She described how a lack of support once meant she'd had to stay awake for 60 hours caring for him. Sadly, Declan died on 26 August last year.
Jack, who's 15 and from Somerset, has cerebral palsy, epilepsy, learning disabilities and challenging behaviour.
Since 2011 he has been cared for by his adoptive parents Louise and Brad, alongside his twin sister Chloe who has cerebral palsy.
Louise and Brad have spent their savings redesigning their home to meet the children's needs, especially Jack.
About two years ago the teenager had to have his right hip removed. It has left him immobile and often in pain.
"He can tolerate a maximum of about three hours in the same position and then you need to move him into a new position," says Louise.
Each night, either she or Brad sit in Jack's bedroom to help when he's in pain. Every three hours, the other one then has to get up because it takes two people to reposition him.
When the couple adopted the twins, a court ordered that council-run children's services should provide them with 77 hours of support a month, split between Jack and Chloe. It is the equivalent of each child getting 90 minutes help a day.
The couple says Jack's increased pain means that simply isn't enough anymore. They are exhausted.
"It has taken a huge toll medically on both of us," says Louise. "We're both in our 60s, we've got additional health complications."
They reached a point in November where they felt they could not go on so borrowed money to pay for two nights' support a week.
Otherwise, Louise and Brad feared Jack would have to go back into care. Without the couple providing most of his support, it would have cost the authorities much more.
Councils provide most social care, which is means-tested, but complex support is supposed to be provided by the NHS.
The couple maintain Jack's needs are primarily health-related.
Their local council has now agreed to pay for the two nights - a decision that will be reviewed soon by a complex care team.
Many families who contacted the BBC say they often feel caught in arguments between cash-strapped councils and the NHS over who should pay.
Louise and Brad: Caring for their children has taken "a huge toll"
Although NHS Somerset assessed Jack as needing 24/7 monitoring and supervision, it concluded he did not qualify for funding.
It said the care paid for by their council included "funding for care to be provided overnight". The decision was upheld by a neighbouring NHS team, who did not meet Jack.
NHS Somerset told the BBC it appreciates "this has been a very worrying time for Jack's family" and that it is "sorry if the assessment process and the outcome of the appeals have caused them additional distress".
Many of the families' experiences reflect wider problems across the health and social care system, including rising costs and staff shortages.
More than 33,000 adults receive long-term CHC support each year in England, while at least 4,500 under-18s receive Children and Young People's Continuing Care, data collated by the BBC suggests.
NHS spending on long-term patients has risen significantly, partly because of the increased complexity of cases.
Some nurses, who assess patients for funding, told the BBC that time pressures and high staff turnovers were having an impact on the process.
The BBC has seen evidence of assessments containing multiple factual and procedural errors, while numerous families have claimed medical records have been misrepresented or ignored.
Even when a patient is assessed by a nurse as eligible for funding, the decision can be overturned.
Seven families say they were denied funding after an NHS panel, that hadn't spoken to them or the patient, reversed a nurse assessor's recommendation that they should get support.
Declan Spencer, who died last August, and his mother, Alex - their experience of NHS care prompted many similar stories
NHS England says the threshold for screening people for funding is at a low level to ensure a full assessment is done, but most who apply won't be eligible.
It also says eligibility is determined on an individual basis in line "with guidance and regulations set by the Department of Health and Social Care, to ensure there is a consistent approach across the country".
Even so, there is huge variation in the numbers found eligible - it depends on where they live.
NHS data shows that in some parts of England more than 50% of adults who apply get support. In other areas, it's fewer than 10%.
The story is even starker for under-18s - with eligibility rates ranging from 14% to 96% in 2022-23, according to data obtained from 33 of 42 NHS Integrated Care Boards (ICBs), who run the schemes.
Margaret, who's 78, knows the impact of this regional variation all too well. She had expected her son Andrew's round-the-clock NHS support would continue when they moved from Dorset to Yorkshire.
Andrew, 57, has severe learning disabilities, mobility issues and frequent seizures - some of which have left him unresponsive for 20 minutes at a time.
His sister Natalie has cerebral palsy after being starved of oxygen at birth and gets council support. Both require help with all their personal needs, and Andrew requires constant monitoring.
Andrew, Margaret and Natalie at their home in Yorkshire
Under the Care Act, when a family moves area, the new location must continue to "meet the adult's needs for care and support".
But for two months after relocating from Dorset, the family got no help at all.
"I had days when I just wanted to sit and cry," says Margaret.
"I was having to care for both of them full-time, 24/7. I would just fall asleep in a chair whenever I sat down."
Had she fallen ill, Andrew and Natalie would have been moved into a care home.
Support did slowly increase, but Margaret had to wait six months before a review of Andrew's case took place.
The NHS team in North Yorkshire concluded his healthcare requirements were the same as in Dorset, but decided not to match the level of support.
It meant Margaret was still caring for Andrew on her own for at least 60 hours a week, and providing significant parts of Natalie's care - including meeting her overnight needs.
"The constant battle you have [over care provision] is demoralising, and soul-destroying," she says.
Margaret says she faces a constant battle over care provision
Since we first contacted NHS Humber and North Yorkshire ICB, it has agreed to another 16 hours support for Andrew at weekends, but problems finding care staff mean it hasn't started yet.
It says: "We will always endeavour to provide the most appropriate support to people, within the 2022 national guidelines."
The Department of Health and Social Care says there is always likely to be "variations in eligibility" in different parts of the country, because CHC is delivered by individual ICBs "whose populations have differing health needs and age profiles".
However, it says that a robust process exists for raising concerns or appeals.
Have you been affected by the issues raised in this story? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
Sign up for our morning newsletter and get BBC News in your inbox.
• None Mum awake for 60 hours as son's care breaks down
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68238040
|
news_health-68238040
|
|
Kansas City shooting: One dead and 21 injured near Super Bowl parade - BBC News
|
2024-02-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Three suspects are in custody following the shooting in Kansas City, Missouri, near the victory parade.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
One person has died and 21 people were wounded in a shooting in Missouri at the end of the Kansas City Chiefs' Super Bowl victory parade.
Officials said they treated eight victims who were in immediately life-threatening condition and seven others who had suffered injuries that could prove life-threatening.
Nine children were among the wounded - all are expected to recover.
Police said they have arrested three suspects in connection to the shooting.
At a news conference on Wednesday, Kansas City Police Chief Stacey Graves said a total of 22 people were struck by gunfire - one of whom is dead - and three individuals were arrested.
More than 800 police officers were already on the scene to monitor the parade. Ms Graves said they responded immediately after the gunshots broke out and detectives who were on the scene quickly opened an investigation. The fire brigade also sprang to action, administering aid to the injured.
A local radio station said one of its DJs, Lisa Lopez, was killed in the shooting.
The surviving victims were transported to three local hospitals, officials said, with the immediately life-threatening cases taken to hospital within 10 minutes of the shooting.
Nine children aged six to 15 with gunshot wounds are being treated at Children's Mercy Hospital, chief nursing officer Stephanie Meyer said.
"The one word I would just use to describe what we saw and how they felt when they came to us was fear," Ms Meyer added.
Local hospitals said they were also treating people who were not shot, but who had suffered other injuries in the sudden stampede that followed the shooting.
City officials did not release the names of any of the victims. They also did not share any information about the suspects who were arrested, including what might have led to the shooting. Police Chief Graves said the motive for the shooting was not yet clear.
A law enforcement source told CBS News, the BBC's US partner, that the shooting appeared to be the result of an argument that turned violent. The source said it was not terrorism-related.
The shots were fired west of Union Station, the train station in downtown Kansas City, which was where the parade ended at about 14:00 local time (20:00 GMT). Thousands of fans had gathered there to watch the festivities.
Local reports said Kansas City Chiefs players were still on a stage there when the first shots rang out.
The gunfire caused the watching crowd, including the city's mayor and his family members, to run for cover.
Police said they were investigating a motive and gathering physical as well as digital evidence.
A 46-year-old man, Paul Contreras, told local television station, KETV, that he was one of the fans who helped "tackle" the man, and saw him drop a gun when he was knocked down.
"The whole time, he's fighting to get up and run away," Mr Contreras said, adding police arrived within moments. "We're fighting each other, you know. We're fighting to keep him down and he's fighting to get up."
He said his 23-year-old daughter, Alyssa, managed to capture the encounter on her phone.
Chief Graves said she was aware of a video purporting to show fans subduing a person, and that investigators were reviewing the footage to determine if the individual was one of the people taken into police custody.
Gunfire erupted as the city celebrated the victory of the Kansas City Chiefs in America's biggest sporting event. But this lesser-known American city was robbed of its exhilarating and unifying moment.
Kansas City's Mayor, Quinton Lucas, said he was inside Union Station when he and others heard the sound of gunfire. He and members of his family started running.
"We went out today like everyone in Kansas City looking to have a celebration," Mr Lucas said at Wednesday's news conference.
"I was there with my wife, I was there with my mother. I never would've thought that we, along with Chiefs players, along with fans, hundreds of thousands of people, would be forced to run for our safety today."
In a statement, the Kansas City Chiefs organisation said it was "truly saddened" by Wednesday's violence. It added that its players, coaches and staff - as well as their families - were accounted for and safe.
Travis Kelce, the star tight end of the team whose relationship with Taylor Swift became a cultural phenomenon, wrote on social media that he was "heartbroken over the tragedy that took place today".
Marquez Valdes-Scantling, a wide receiver for the Chiefs, also took to social media after the tragedy. He said he wanted to get in touch with the young victims of the shooting.
"I want to make sure they're doing OK," Mr Valdes-Scantling said. "But would love to help them out any way I can and get them some stuff from the team to help with the recovery."
The mayor emphasised that the city had security measures in place, and it should make the public think deeply about a path forward. Despite hundreds of law enforcement present, he said, this incident still occurred because of the presence of bad actors with guns.
In a statement, US President Joe Biden also reflected on the issue of gun violence in the country.
"Today's events should move us, shock us, shame us into action," he said, as he called for gun reform and a ban on assault rifles in the US.
Are you in the affected area? If it is safe to do so, email haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68248172
|
news_world-us-canada-68248172
|
|
Dramatic moment off-duty police team charge at knifeman in London - BBC News
|
2024-02-14
|
[]
|
The officers were socialising in a bar nearby when they intervened.
| null |
Dramatic footage has been released showing the moment a group of off-duty police officers intervened to stop a knife attack in south London on 21 July 2023.
The officers were socialising in a bar nearby when they noticed a violent argument between two men, one of them holding a large knife.
The plain-clothed team can be seen rushing to separate the victim from the attacker, who threw the knife at the officers and tried to run away, but was rapidly arrested.
"They placed themselves at real risk of serious injury in order to prevent serious harm," Detective Inspector Jon Summers said, describing the officers' action as heroic and "nothing short of exceptional".
The victim received first aid and was taken to hospital for treatment for a head injury. The attacker, Joseph Jimenez, 20, has been sentenced to eight months in prison for possession of a bladed article and four months in prison for affray.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68299807
|
news_uk-68299807
|
|
Jesse Baird: 'Grave concerns' over TV presenter and boyfriend Luke Davies missing in Sydney - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Blood-stained clothes belonging to the couple were found in a bin and police are worried for their safety.
|
Australia
|
Couple Luke Davies and Jesse Baird have not been seen since Monday
Police say they have "grave concerns" over a TV presenter and his boyfriend who disappeared in Sydney in suspicious circumstances.
Possessions belonging to ex-Network 10 presenter Jesse Baird, 26, and Luke Davies, 29, were found on Wednesday in a bin in a suburb of the city.
Police have been trying to locate a third man - named by local media as a police officer who had dated Mr Baird.
On Friday morning, a man was taken into custody at a local police station.
New South Wales (NSW) Police have not confirmed if the 28-year-old - who handed himself in - is the man they were seeking to question over the disappearances.
It comes after officers searched a home in the Balmain area of Sydney on Thursday night, seizing a number of items.
Officers found blood and moved furniture at Mr Baird's home in the Paddington area, around 28km (17 miles) from Cronulla, the suburb where a worker found the couple's belongings in a bin.
Blood-stained clothes, a phone and credit cards were among the items found.
Police believe the couple were in Paddington on Monday. CCTV footage obtained by 7NewsAustralia shows what it says appears to be the couple going into Mr Baird's flatshare.
CCTV footage showing a white van in the area was also being looked at by police, the news outlet said.
Qantas flight attendant Mr Davies has not been in contact with his family or attended work since Monday, according to police.
Det Supt Jodi Radmore said all lines of inquiry were being investigated and told reporters: "We do believe, from the crime scene at Paddington and from property located at Cronulla, that there has been some sort of incident."
She added that had given the force "great concerns for one, possibly both their safety".
"Witnesses described a verbal argument," she continued, "but it wasn't reported to police at the time ... it was only reported to police yesterday [Monday morning] during canvassing."
New South Wales Police are appealing for information.
Mr Baird had been a presenter and red carpet reporter on Network 10's morning show Studio 10 until the show was axed in December.
Qantas said it was providing support to Mr Davies' colleagues.
"Our thoughts are with family, friends and colleagues of our crew member at this very difficult time," the airline said in a statement.
Jesse Baird (right) had presented on Network 10's morning show Studio 10
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68372050
|
news_world-australia-68372050
|
|
Video shows Alec Baldwin and crew in chaotic aftermath of Rust set shooting - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is accused of involuntary manslaughter and evidence tampering over Halyna Hutchins' death.
|
US & Canada
|
A still taken from body camera worn by Lt Benavidez. Image caption: A still taken from body camera worn by Lt Benavidez.
“This is a crime scene. Everyone needs to stop what they are doing.”
That was the direction from Lt Benavidez when he arrived on the scene.
He starts asking for the props manager on set. Someone else takes the Lieutenant to a cart where there are two guns, but it’s not the one that Alec Baldwin was holding.
It’s a chaotic set with different producers shouting at each other about where the guns are.
Even though he is a witness for the state, the video is showing the very “chaotic” set described by the defence in their opening arguments. No one appears to know who is in charge or what is going on.
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed finally appears and says “This is the gun.”
She looks like she’s been crying
Lt Benavidez then cleared the gun, meaning it was ammunition free, so that he could collect it for evidence.
Hannah then appears looking incredibly frazzled. She says to a colleague nearby, “Oh my god... Are they okay? Oh my god.”
She starts crying hysterically to Lt Benavidez, trying to explain what happened.
What’s noticeably clear at this point is that all three guns shown to the officer are out, not in cases, as safety standards would have called for.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68355789
|
news_live_world-us-canada-68355789
|
|
Wicked Little Letters: Olivia Colman on why abusive notes were original trolling - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The actor stars in a true story of a poison pen letter that pitted two neighbours against each other.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Olivia Colman and Jessie Buckley previously acted together in The Lost Daughter in 2021
In the spring of 1920, the House of Commons scheduled a debate on one of the most pressing issues facing the country at that time - who was behind the slew of profane letters being sent to well respected members of a community.
For months, Littlehampton, a small seaside town in Sussex, had been alight with rumours over who was sending sweary and scandalous letters. A well-respected, pillar-of-the-community Christian, Edith Swan pointed the finger at Irish foul-mouthed neighbour Rose Gooding.
The showdown between the two neighbours is the basis for period comedy drama Wicked Little Letters, starring Olivia Colman as Edith and Jessie Buckley as Rose.
"Parliament absolutely debated it and it was covered by all the broadsheets at the time," Colman tells the BBC. "The fact the nation was gripped by this I found to be hilarious."
Colman's co-star Buckley says the letters "sent the whole country into a frenzy" and was "the sort of sensationalist trolling you would expect in the modern day".
The letters that Edith received were obscene, by both 1920s and modern day standards.
With insults which included suggesting the cakes someone had made had been excreted by a sheep (we couldn't possibly repeat the exact phrasing here), the actors said it was "such an enjoyment" to swear so freely.
Colman won an Oscar in 2019 for her performance in The Favourite
"I swear, and if people's sphincters tighten I just think I'm not killing or hurting anyone, so I don't think that's really a problem," says Colman.
"Some people walked out of the cinema watching our film and I just think they need to get over themselves. It's not a sign of a diminished vocabulary, it's fun, it's just an enjoyment and I see it as a seasoning," she laughs.
"The ones who swear the least are the ones who need a good swear," adds Buckley.
Critics have so far given the film mixed reviews. In a three-star review, the Evening Standard's Nick Huwells said the lead actors "put in less than their usual stellar work".
He added that the swearing was only "ever so slightly hilarious" and that "initial tickle of naughtiness rapidly fades".
A three-star review from Empire said the film was "overly reliant" on the sweary letters "with most raising titters rather than laughs".
In a scathing one-star review, the Guardian's Benjamin Lee said Wicked Little Letters was "an embarrassingly unfunny misfire".
James Mottram of the Radio Times praised the cast, who he said had "to work overtime to deal with the script's patchy nature".
His three-star review particularly highlighted Anjana Vasan for her portrayal of police officer Gladys Moss "who delivers one of the film's better performances, both comic and earnest".
Colman is best known for TV shows Broadchurch and Peep Show, and films including The Father, Empire of Light and The Favourite, which won her an Oscar for best actress.
She and Buckley last worked together on Netflix's 2021 movie The Lost Daughter. Buckley's other film credits include Women Talking, Fingernails and Wild Rose.
During the case of the Littlehampton libels, one judge in the 1923 court case based his argument on the fact a respectable woman would never swear.
Sending offensive letters resulted in prison sentences for the culprit, but 100 years later spreading anonymous hate has become commonplace.
Olivia Colman's character is a pious woman who brands herself as a pillar of the Christian community
"Everybody's cruel to everybody else online and that's awful," reflects Colman. "I would love to go back to the days where it's not OK.
"It's a despicable thing to do to someone and we've seen the terrible things that have happened to people who can't cope with the fact that someone they don't know is so unkind about them."
The 50-year-old said she wants greater measures to be implemented to stop people making anonymous online accounts.
She continues: "I know there's another argument that there are parts of the world where you can't say what you need to say if you are traceable, but if you're just going to be unkind about a fellow human, don't. It shouldn't be allowed."
The film's writer, comedian Jonny Sweet, adds that he hopes there will be "greater regulation because anonymous hate really destroys people's lives and can be a real nightmare".
"That's what this story is about - it shows that you can write something anonymously and say some wretched old stuff and think you'll get away with it," he says.
Perhaps the culprit would have got away with it if it was not for one woman, police officer Gladys Moss.
Sussex's first female officer, Moss served in the force between 1919 and 1941 and was an integral part in solving the Littlehampton libel letter case.
"Gladys is so committed to her work and finding the truth and was not going to compromise and she wins in the face of everyone doubting her," says Irish actor Buckley
But despite her brilliant efforts, historian Emily Cockayne tells the BBC that Gladys received no recognition for being "fundamental and instrumental in the case".
Instead, Cockayne explains, she had to "fight to keep her job as the police were keen on ejecting many of the women in the force who had joined during the war".
The film shows how an unlikely group of women came together to help justice prevail
Alongside Sherlock-like sleuth Gladys, a team of unlikely women who are undermined or overlooked by society work together to bring about justice for the community.
"There's a lot more to this story than what meets the eye," Buckley explains. "These are ordinary women with amazing minds, who, if given half a chance, are bloody great."
Although girl power is a strong force in the film, Cockayne said that in reality "women wouldn't have had the power to put together a plan in the way they do in the film".
"Our fascination with women who break social convention is nothing new - from the first witchcraft trials in the 15th Century to a country that was stunned by a woman using foul language in a letter, behaviour that is not in line with society's expectations has always had the power to shock."
And, watching Colman and Buckley scream hilarious profanities and wickedly scandalous lines at each other will never not be brilliantly shocking.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68357293
|
news_entertainment-arts-68357293
|
|
Porto 1-0 Arsenal: Mikel Arteta insists Arsenal will learn from defeat - BBC Sport
|
2024-02-22
|
[]
|
Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta insists his side will learn from defeat before the second leg of their Champions League last-16 tie in north London.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section European Football
Porto 1-0 Arsenal: Arteta says Gunners will learn from defeat The stats may make nervy reading after defeat at Porto in the Champions League last 16, but Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta insists his side will "learn" before the second leg in north London. The Gunners lost in stoppage time thanks to Galeno's superb strike but Arteta remains confident Arsenal will prevail in the tie. Arsenal have not reached the quarter-final stage since 2009-10 and have won the first leg in just one of their last 12 two-legged knockout ties in the competition (drawing two and losing nine). They are also competing in the Champions League for the first time since 2017 and looked far short of their free-flowing best at the Estadio do Dragao. "We will learn from it. Now it is clear, it is half-time," said Arteta. "If you want to be in the quarter-finals you have to beat your opponent and that will be the purpose and the plan." Arsenal's record signing Declan Rice is confident fans will see a different team next month at Emirates Stadium. "I think it's about keeping our heads. It's hard to concede that leg," he said. "Knowing how we play at home, with our fans and energy, I think you'll see a team on the front foot from the start and we'll be looking to do that. "It's a real kick in the teeth because we've conceded late but we know what to do." Kai Havertz headed wide from a corner as Arsenal failed to find the target against Porto Former forward Theo Walcott, who scored 108 goals in a 13-year spell at Arsenal, was on BBC Radio 5 Live for the game and spoke about the need for a "prolific goalscorer". "We were speaking about the squad depth that Arsenal have before the game," he said. "But now looking back, does Mikel Arteta trust the players outside of that starting XI? He only made one substitution tonight." The Gunners boss named an unchanged side for three successive games and after free-scoring league wins at West Ham and Burnley, this seemed like a game too far for the same set of players. It was a rare off night for Arsenal's attack as they failed to register a shot on target in a Champions League match for only the second time on record (since 2003-04), previously doing so away to Barcelona in the last 16 in March 2011. "I've said this numerous times recently, I think the argument about Arsenal's lack of prolific goalscorer will rear its ugly head again," Walcott continued. "I am a big fan of a certain Brentford forward that I won't name, but it is one of those. Arsenal are a really big team, but with all the set-pieces, if you've got someone like that in your team you are an even bigger threat." Arsenal have been linked to Brentford forward Ivan Toney, who is out of contract at the end of next season. 'Playing with the handbrake on' After 21 goals in five successive league games, Arsenal failed to find the net against Porto Former Arsenal defender Martin Keown described the defeat as a "sucker punch" for Arsenal on TNT Sports. "Maybe it comes down to experience, I hope it doesn't come back to haunt them," he said. "It was a harsh lesson for Arteta and his team tonight. The handbrake was on a little too much - was that inexperience? "They need to hold that hurt now. Porto contained Arsenal." Former Celtic manager Neil Lennon was on BBC Radio 5 Live for the game and thinks Arsenal still have a good chance of going through to the quarter-final stage. "I don't think Arsenal did a lot wrong and I don't think 1-0 will be enough for Porto going to the Emirates," he said. "At 0-0 there is always that potential for a deflection or a wonder goal like we've seen tonight. It was a wonder strike from Galeno. "The ultimate smash and grab, but Porto won't care. That is Champions League football." Walcott also remained positive about Arsenal's ability to advance: "These ties aren't won over one leg. "I am confident that given Arsenal's overall form at the moment and the atmosphere in the Emirates, they will still be able to go through quite comfortably." Arsenal last reached the quarter-final stage in the 2009-10 campaign
• None Our coverage of the Gunners is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
• None Everything Arsenal - go straight to all the best content
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68366361
|
rt_football_68366361
|
|
Nottingham: Commissioners brought in to help run 'bankrupt' council - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
It comes after Nottingham City Council declared effective bankruptcy in November.
|
Nottingham
|
The government has appointed commissioners to help run Nottingham City Council after the authority declared itself effectively bankrupt.
The Labour-run authority issued a section 114 notice on 29 November, amid an in-year budget gap of £23m.
Changes at the council have been overseen by a government-appointed board following the collapse of council firm Robin Hood Energy three years ago.
Now ministers have intervened further in a bid to speed up improvements.
In a statement, local government minister Simon Hoare said: "The Secretary of State is satisfied that Nottingham City Council is continuing to fail to comply with its Best Value Duty, and that the necessary improvements are still not being made quickly enough.
"I am today confirming that commissioners have been appointed to Nottingham City Council and new directions have been issued."
The council has said reduced government funding and soaring demand and costs for social care have contributed to its financial woes
It was confirmed three commissioners would be appointed - a lead commissioner, a commissioner for finance and a commissioner for transformation.
Mr Hoare said: "This team structure reflects the most pressing priorities at the council as highlighted in the Improvement and Assurance Board's latest reports, namely weaknesses in finance, transformation, along with an underlying culture of poor governance."
The commissioners have been appointed for two years, though this could be changed by the secretary of state.
They will work alongside the existing structure of the council, with all officers, elected officials and the leader, David Mellen, remaining in place.
Boasting extensive powers, the commissioners will oversee the full range of the council's improvement activities, including strategies to secure the medium and long-term financial sustainability of the council and plans to transform front-line services.
In early 2021, an improvement and assurance board was appointed by the government to oversee and monitor the council's response to a report on its performance following the demise of Robin Hood Energy, the collapse of which is believed to have cost taxpayers about £38m.
The wrongful spending of nearly £16m from the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) - meant for the council's housing and its tenants - is also believed to have now cost £51m in repayments.
While acknowledging mistakes, the council also cited reduced government funding for local authorities, the cost of increased demand for children's and adults' social care and rising homelessness presentations as reasons for its financial woes.
As a result, it asked the government for "exceptional financial support" - a proposed combination of loans and special permission to raise money from council assets and spend it on day-to-day operational costs.
Major cutbacks have already been proposed, including the planned loss of 554 full-time equivalent posts, but the council's Labour executive refused to endorse these at a recent meeting.
The extensive budget savings package will go back before councillors at a meeting scheduled for 4 March.
Mr Mellen said: "Our preferred option was to continue to work with the Improvement and Assurance Board. We feel that significant progress was being made across the council.
"However, we are committed to working constructively and collaboratively with the commissioners to tackle Nottingham's current challenges."
The government said the commissioners would be asked to provide their first report within the next six months, with further reports roughly every six months.
Similar oversight has also been put in place at cash-strapped councils like Birmingham and Liverpool. As with these councils, the estimated £650,000 annual costs of the commissioners will be met by the authority itself.
Taking the power to make decisions away from those who've been elected to make them shouldn't ever be taken lightly, and is the ultimate sign things have gone very, very wrong.
How much it will tangibly change in the short-term remains to be seen. Remember, sweeping cuts were already on the table.
But looking forward, it could mean future cuts are deeper still as those making the decisions now will be more concerned with the bottom line than anything else.
Doubtless you'll hear much of the argument you've heard before - one side blaming cuts from central government, the other blaming the council's own costly mistakes.
So do just bear in mind - both can be true at once.
Follow BBC East Midlands on Facebook, on X, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2210.
Are you affected by the issues raised in this story? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-68369304
|
news_uk-england-nottinghamshire-68369304
|
|
US-Taiwan: Why are so many Congressmen heading for Taipei? - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Representative Mike Gallagher, head of the House's China committee, is the latest one to make the trip
|
Asia
|
"How would you like it if we started sending official delegations to Honolulu to meet with separatist leaders who want Hawaiian independence from the United States? What would you do if we started selling them weapons?"
It might seem like a false equivalence, but this is a line of argument often deployed by China's legion of armchair warriors, who take to social media to condemn any visit to Taiwan by US government officials - and especially members of the US Congress. China sees self-ruled Taiwan as a breakaway province that will eventually be under Beijing's control, and so, to these social media users, such visits are an unacceptable provocation and interference in China's internal affairs.
Of course, these visits - like the one being made by Representative Mike Gallagher, head of the US House's China committee, this week - are viewed very differently in Washington and Taipei, which sees itself as distinct from the Chinese mainland, with its own constitution and democratically-elected leaders.
But it does raise the question, what is their purpose? Are they a genuine show of support that helps deter China - or are they publicity stunts that serve to provoke Beijing, and solidify the view that Washington is intent on the permanent separation of Taiwan?
The visits are not without consequence. How the US handles its relationships with Beijing and Taipei will do much to determine whether the current tense stalemate across the Taiwan Straits remains that way, or gets a lot worse.
"We have come here to reaffirm US support for Taiwan and express solidarity in our shared commitment to democratic values," said Congressman Ami Bera and Mario Díaz Balart as they wound up a trip here in January. They were the first to make the pilgrimage to Taipei following the 13 January presidential election.
Now, the hawkish Rep Gallagher - who told the Guardian last year Beijing was aiming "to render us subordinate, humiliated and irrelevant on the world stage" - arrives with a number of colleagues a month later. It is likely they will not be the last. Since 2016, the number of US congressional delegations crossing the Pacific has increased dramatically. In 2018, for example, six lawmakers made the trip. Last year, 32 visited, according to a tally by Global Taiwan.
President Tsai Ing-wen met US Representatives Ami Bera (right) and Mario Díaz-Balart in January
That trend has been actively encouraged by Taiwan's current President Tsai Ing-wen, and does not appear to have been discouraged on the US side. Indeed, President Joe Biden has been the most explicit of any US leader yet in his defence of Taiwan - albeit while still continuing a commitment to America's One China policy.
"It's important," says J Michael Cole, a former Canadian intelligence officer and one-time advisor to President Tsai. "The United States keeps saying we have a rock-solid commitment to Taiwan. But you need a public component to that exercise. That's what rattles Beijing, that's what gets journalists writing about it."
And unlike the $80m (£63m) grant signed off by Biden in November, these visits also represent a low-cost way for the US to re-assure the people of Taiwan that they do mean what they say.
"We have research that shows high-level visits increase people's confidence in the US-Taiwan relationship," says Chen Fang-yu, a political scientist at Soochow University in Taipei.
Such visits promote a more friendly attitude towards America from those who remain sceptical of whether the US would actually turn up if Taiwan were attacked by China, he explains. However, there are others here who have imbibed conspiracy theories, many of which originate from across the Taiwan Strait, that America is pushing Taipei down the road to war with China, just as conspiracy theorists say it did with Ukraine's war with Russia.
Meanwhile, American congressmen and women have their own, not always selfless, reasons for coming here. The pilgrimage to Taipei is increasingly a way for those on the right to burnish their anti-China credentials to voters back home - although these days, the left appears just as keen to prove their own tough stances when it comes to Beijing.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The increased frequency, and unabashed publicity, shows how much has changed between Washington and Beijing.
"Before 2016, people thought visits here should be low key," says Chen Fang-Yu. "They wanted to avoid angering China. But now more and more people realise that no matter what they do, they will anger China."
Taiwan's relationship with the US Congress is deep and long. When in 1979, President Jimmy Carter broke relations with Taipei, and recognised Beijing, it was the US Congress that forced him to sign the Taiwan Relations Act. That act is what underpins the relationship with Taipei to this day. It explicitly commits the US to opposing any attempt to change the status quo across the Taiwan Strait by force, and to supplying Taiwan with sufficient weaponry to defend itself against China.
In the 1970s, Taiwan was a military dictatorship. Its US allies were Republican. The cold war was still very chilly, and the islands were seen as a bulwark against Communism. Today, anti-communism may still play a small part. But far more important is solidarity with a fellow democracy. Taiwan is no longer a Republican Party cause. In the wake of things like Trump's trade wars, arguments over Covid's origins and spy balloons being spotted in the US, support for Taiwan among Americans now spreads through both parties.
Added to this, the US also has major national security and economic interests tied to Taiwan - in particular, the semiconductor trade.
It all means that, unlike with Ukraine, there a no voices in Congress calling for the US to cut military support for Taiwan. If anything, it is the opposite.
Reaction to the Pelosi visit in Chinese media
But that question remains. Do the visits do more harm than good? When Nancy Pelosi came here in the summer of 2022, Beijing responded by firing ballistic missiles over the top of the island for the first time, including over the capital Taipei. Opinion polls taken after the visit showed a majority here thought the visit had damaged Taiwan's security.
It is quite common these days to hear those who specialise in Taiwan studies quoting the old maxim from President Theodore Roosevelt to "speak softly and carry a big stick". J Michael Cole says that is exactly what the US and Taiwan are doing. He says the US congressional visits might be symbolic, but they are good PR for Taipei and for the members of Congress. With the exception of the Pelosi visit, they also fall below the threshold of what really upsets Beijing.
But, says J Michael Cole, what do these visits really mean for US-Taiwan relations? After all, "the really substantive aspect … such as the increasingly high-level exchanges on things like intelligence, like defence, those don't make the news".
"Those are constructive," he continues. "And the United States is adamant that those shall not be publicised by Taiwanese government."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68346855
|
news_world-asia-68346855
|
|
Julian Assange put lives at risk by publishing secrets - US - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lawyers for the US say the WikiLeaks founder revealed identities of sources and must face justice.
|
UK
|
A supporter of Julian Assange outside court on Wednesday
Julian Assange "put lives at risk" by releasing classified US documents and should be extradited to face justice, a High Court hearing has been told.
Lawyers for the US said Mr Assange revealed the names of sources when he used Wikileaks to release unredacted files on the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.
The hearing is the latest in his five-year battle to fight extradition.
On Tuesday his lawyers said the US case was "state retaliation" and therefore extradition would be against UK law.
If his appeal is turned down, Mr Assange, 52, could be extradited within weeks.
The US legal team told the court that Mr Assange faces allegations he encouraged and assisted Chelsea Manning, a US intelligence analyst, in obtaining around 400,000 Iraq war-related activity reports and 250,000 US State Department cables.
Many were published unredacted through WikiLeaks.
Clair Dobbin KC said the plans to extradite and prosecute Mr Assange, who founded Wikileaks, were based on his alleged actions, not his political opinions.
She said there were "profound consequences", with some of the named sources in the documents, who had provided information to the US, facing arrest, the loss of assets, threats and harassment.
"This wasn't a slip, or an error, this was the publication of a vast amount of material unredacted," Ms Dobbin told the hearing.
In written submissions, Ms Dobbin and James Lewis KC described the leak as "one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States".
"It is specifically alleged against the appellant that by publishing this information on the WikiLeaks website, he created a grave and imminent risk that the human sources named therein would suffer serious physical harm."
Ms Dobbin said: "The administration in the US of course changed during these proceedings... but nonetheless the prosecution of the appellant remains in foot. Because it is based on law and evidence, not political inspiration."
Stella Assange, the wife of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, speaks to supporters outside the high court
The arguments are the latest attempt by Australian Mr Assange to fight his extradition to the US.
He has been in Belmarsh prison in London since his arrest in 2019 at the request of US authorities.
In a January 2021 ruling, a district judge said that Mr Assange should not be sent to the US, citing a real and "oppressive" risk of suicide.
However, the judge ruled against him on all other issues, including the argument that he was acting as a journalist.
Later that year, the US authorities won a High Court bid to overturn that decision, paving the way for extradition to face conspiracy charges.
The latest hearing has been brought by Mr Assange, who is now asking for the right to challenge the original judge's dismissal of other parts of his case.
Ms Dobbin said on Tuesday, the first day of the hearing, that the original judge "rejected outright" that Mr Assange should be treated like a journalist "or what he did could fall under the ambit of responsible journalism".
Mark Summers KC argued on Tuesday that the US prosecution of Mr Assange would be retribution for his political opinions, meaning it would be unlawful to extradite him under UK law.
He said: "This is a paradigm example of state retaliation for the expression of political opinion. The district judge did not address it - had she done so, it would have been fatal to her decision."
Mr Summers later told the court that the US authorities had allegedly developed a "breath-taking" plan to either kill or kidnap Mr Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian embassy, where he remained for around seven years.
The barrister later said the plan "only fell apart when the UK authorities weren't very keen on the thought of rendition, or a shootout, in the streets of London".
Edward Fitzgerald KC, also for Mr Assange, later said he is being prosecuted for an "ordinary journalistic practice".
The hearing ended on Wednesday with the judges saying they will rule later. Their judgement is not expected before mid-March, based on timelines indicated in court.
If Mr Assange is refused permission to appeal, his only opportunity to avoid being sent to the US is to ask the European Court of Human Rights to stop the flight.
If he wins permission, he will remain in jail while that case is prepared for later in the year.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68361208
|
news_uk-68361208
|
|
Dani Alves trial: Ex-Brazil player guilty of nightclub rape - BBC News
|
2024-02-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A court in Spain has sentenced Alves, who played for Barcelona and Brazil, to four and a half years.
|
Europe
|
Dani Alves was first arrested in January 2023 and has been in pre-trial detention ever since
A court in Spain has found former Barcelona and Brazil footballer Dani Alves guilty of raping a woman in a Barcelona nightclub.
He has been sentenced to four and a half years in prison.
The 40-year-old, who is one of the most decorated footballers in history, had denied sexually assaulting the woman in the early hours of 31 December 2022.
His lawyer had asked for his acquittal and said she would appeal against the verdict.
A lawyer for the victim welcomed the verdict, saying that it "recognises what we have always known: the truth [as told] by the victim and the suffering there has been".
As well as handing Alves a four-and-a-half year sentence, the court said he should face a further five years' probation.
The prosecution had asked for a nine-year prison sentence. In Spain, a claim of rape is investigated under the general accusation of sexual assault, and convictions can lead to prison sentences of four to 15 years.
According to Spanish media, the court took into account Alves's decision to pay the victim €150,000 (£128,500) in damages regardless of the outcome of the trial when it decided on the length of his prison term.
The court did not, however, accept the argument put forward by his lawyers that he should be given a more lenient sentence because he was drunk.
His wife Joana Sanz, 31, said he had appeared very drunk when he got back to their Barcelona home the night of the rape and had bumped into furniture before collapsing on the bed.
But the court argued that his alcohol consumption had not affected his behaviour.
Prosecutors said Alves and his friend had bought champagne for three young women before Alves lured one of them to a VIP area of the nightclub with a toilet which she had no knowledge of.
They argued that it was at this point he turned violent, forcing the woman to have sex despite her repeated requests to leave.
Alves had maintained she could have left "if she wanted to". However, the court found that she did not consent.
Spanish law was changed recently to enshrine the importance of consent under the so-called "Only Yes is Yes" principle.
In a statement, the court said there was evidence other than the victim's testimony that proved that she had been raped.
It said Alves had "abruptly grabbed the complainant" and thrown her to the ground. He had then raped her while preventing her from moving as "the complainant said no and wanted to leave", it added.
The woman said the rape had caused her "anguish and terror", and one of her friends who was with her on the night described how the 23-year-old had cried "uncontrollably" after leaving the bathroom.
Alves has been held in pre-trial detention since January 2023 and has changed his testimony on a number of occasions.
He first denied knowing his accuser only to claim later that he had met her in the toilet but that nothing had happened between them.
He then changed his version of events again, saying that they had had consensual sex. "We were both enjoying ourselves," he alleged.
Alves played more than 400 times for Barcelona, winning six league titles and three Champions Leagues across two spells with the club. He was also part of Brazil's 2022 World Cup squad.
He has won trophies playing for Sevilla, Juventus and PSG and is among Brazil's most capped internationals, with 126 appearances.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68368372
|
news_world-europe-68368372
|
|
Chris Mason: NI power-sharing affords Rishi Sunak chance for a victory lap - BBC News
|
2024-02-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
BBC political editor Chris Mason looks ahead to Rishi Sunak's trip to Belfast as Northern Ireland's executive returns.
|
UK Politics
|
Rishi Sunak visited Northern Ireland last year, to mark the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement
Like the two sets of parents at a wedding, the British and Irish prime ministers are in Belfast today.
The analogy works, just about, I think, because London and Dublin are co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement, the deal signed nearly 26 years ago which provides the foundation for power-sharing devolved government in Northern Ireland.
And, like many a family argument, I detect a splash of irritation in Whitehall that the Irish government is, I hear whispered, muscling in on a moment they think belongs to the prime minister.
After two years of political stasis here, devolved government is up and running again.
Just over four years ago, when Stormont was again revived - after a three-year gap that time - the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach rolled up.
It was Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar back then.
The UK is now two prime ministers on. Ireland has had another Taoiseach in between, but Mr Varadkar is now back.
Expect plenty of grip and grin photo opportunities for both leaders.
Downing Street is emphasising that the focus of Rishi Sunak's trip is what they call "community engagements."
"He will speak with a broad range of people from across Northern Ireland including those delivering public services, those supported by them, and their families," No10 told us.
The message appears to be that there has been a weekend of high rhetoric and highfalutin politics - with all the references to history associated with a first nationalist First Minister - but now the focus should be on improving people's day-to-day lives.
A £3.3bn carrot for Northern Ireland was dangled by the government at Westminster to attempt to lure the Democratic Unionist Party back to Stormont and so allow the institutions to be revived.
Northern Ireland Secretary Chris Heaton-Harris, long on negotiating and short on sleep recently, told me that money is now being delivered.
Incidentally, getting the deal over the line sounded punishing. I hear that on one day in the last week, he flew from Belfast to London, back to Belfast and then back to London, all in a day.
Given air miles like that, there is an expectation within government that things should start to get better, that public sector strikes end and the health service, widely seen as in crisis, improves.
Michelle O'Neill says parties at Stormont will be turning their attention to how Northern Ireland is funded
But the new first minister, Sinn Fein's Michelle O'Neill, told me that, despite the dollop of money from London, all the parties in the Stormont Executive agree that Northern Ireland needs a better funding model from Westminster. She means more money.
After a pandemic, soaring inflation, cost of living pressures and two years of political stasis, politicians here are having to manage expectations about how quickly things will change.
Governing, choices, trade-offs, scrutiny - it all begins here. But the vast majority of members of the legislative assembly, or MLAs, are delighted to be back.
"After two years, part of my brain was atrophying," one said.
As for the prime minister, he can point to this moment as an achievement of statecraft, domestic and international.
The deal with the European Union, a year ago, the Windsor Framework.
The deal with the Democratic Unionists now.
It affords Rishi Sunak a chance for a victory lap, albeit one unlikely to garner many votes, on a wider political circuit that, let's be honest, hasn't offered him many such recent opportunities.
Oh, and after Michelle O'Neill's remarks at the weekend about her belief there could be a referendum within 10 years on Northern Ireland becoming part of the Republic, Mr Sunak writes in the Belfast Telegraph that the agreement of the last week "safeguards the union."
He adds "far from being neutral on the Union, I passionately believe in it."
"The shape of Northern Ireland's future is now clear: devolved government, within the United Kingdom, for as long as the majority wish it," he writes.
The question now is how stable devolution will be this time.
Power sharing has a built-in fragility, with the capacity of political parties to bring it crashing down.
Its history is peppered with collapse.
And empowered with new tools to influence Northern Ireland's Brexit arrangements, there are new tools of potential friction too.
Much is new, much is the same, as Stormont returns.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68200997
|
news_uk-politics-68200997
|
|
Lowitja O'Donoghue: Indigenous leader who changed Australia dies aged 91 - BBC News
|
2024-02-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lowitja O'Donoghue spent her life advocating for the rights and recognition of First Nations people.
|
Australia
|
One of Australia's most revered Aboriginal leaders Lowitja O'Donoghue has died, aged 91.
Dr O'Donoghue spent her life advocating for the health and rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
She received some of the nation's top honours for her pioneering work and in 1984 was named Australian of the Year.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is among those who have paid tribute to her, as a figure of "grace" and "moral clarity".
She had an "abiding faith in the possibility of a more united and reconciled Australia", despite enduring discrimination from the "earliest days of her life", he said in a statement.
"Lowitja O'Donoghue was one of the most remarkable leaders this country has ever known," he added.
Note to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers: Dr O'Donoghue's name and image are used here in accordance with the wishes of her family.
Dr O'Donoghue's family said the Yankunytjatjara woman died peacefully on Sunday in Adelaide, and that she would be remembered "for all the doors she opened" and "arguments she fought and won".
Born in a remote corner of South Australia in 1932, Dr O'Donoghue was removed from her Aboriginal mother at the age of two as part of a series of now-infamous policies aimed at "assimilating" Aboriginal children into white families. Thirty years went by before the two were finally reunited.
She became the first Aboriginal nurse in South Australia - after challenging a decision to ban her from completing training because of her heritage.
After a decade of nursing, she then began a lengthy career in the public service, helping create and lead key Indigenous bodies and becoming the first Aboriginal person to address the UN general assembly.
In that speech in 1992, Dr O'Donoghue advocated for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to be recognised in Australia's constitution as the continent's original inhabitants - a reform brought to a referendum last year but defeated.
She was also instrumental in negotiating Australia's historic Native Title legislation which granted land rights to First Nations people, and in the successful 1967 referendum which saw them included in the national census.
"We have to solve our differences and live together as Australians… Together, we can build a remarkable country, the envy of the rest of the world," she said when accepting her Australian of the Year award.
Along with a bevy of Australian accolades, she was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire and awarded a papal honour from Pope John Paul II.
Prominent Aboriginal leaders - including Marcia Langton, Noel Pearson, and Indigenous Affairs Minister Linda Burney - have paid tribute to Dr O'Donoghue as a giant of Indigenous rights.
"Her leadership in the battle for justice was legendary," said former Senator Pat Dodson, who is known as "the father of reconciliation".
"Her intelligent navigation for our rightful place in a resistant society resulted in many of the privileges we enjoy today."
Her legacy continues through the work of her foundations, such as The Lowitja Institute - a research body dedicated to advancing Indigenous health outcomes.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68201228
|
news_world-australia-68201228
|
|
Ian Ogle: Two men plead guilty to murder of Belfast man - BBC News
|
2024-02-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Two men have been handed life sentences after pleading guilty to the murder of Ian Ogle in 2019.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Ian Ogle, 45, was beaten and stabbed 11 times near his home in Cluan Place in east Belfast in January 2019
Two men have been handed life sentences after pleading guilty to the murder of Ian Ogle in east Belfast.
Mr Ogle, 45, was beaten and stabbed 11 times near his home in Cluan Place in January 2019.
Jonathan Brown, 38, from Whinney Hill in Dundonald and Mark Sewell, 45, of Glenmount Drive in Newtownabbey both pleaded guilty to the charge of murder after being rearraigned on Thursday.
The judge then imposed life sentences for both men at Belfast Crown court.
Members of Mr Ogle's family sat in the public gallery as Mr Justice O'Hara informed both men they would serve life sentences after entering their guilty pleas.
"The minimum length of time which you will be required to serve in prison before your release will be considered will be set at a tariff hearing after the other parts of this trial are finished," the judge said.
Three men will now face trial on murder charges. A fourth defendant also faces a single charge of assisting an offender.
Earlier this week, two men admitted to lesser charges in connection with the murder of Ian Ogle, namely withholding information and assisting an offender.
The only woman charged in connection with the case also pleaded guilty to assisting offenders last week.
Further legal arguments in the case are set to take place next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68165046
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-68165046
|
|
Alice Wood jailed for running over and killing Ryan Watson - BBC News
|
2024-02-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Alice Wood, 24, "used her car as a weapon" on Ryan Watson after the pair rowed at a party.
|
Stoke & Staffordshire
|
Wood repeatedly drove her car at her fiance after she lost her temper, said police
A woman who drove at her fiance before dragging him more than 150m along a road has been jailed for a minimum of 18 years for his murder.
Alice Wood and her partner Ryan Watson had been arguing after a party in May 2022, but she claimed his death was a "tragic accident".
Wood, 24, was found guilty last month at Chester Crown Court, where she was sentenced to life on Friday.
Jurors heard she drove at Mr Watson three times before he was killed.
Sentencing her, Judge Michael Leeming said: "Prison may be hard for you, Alice Wood, but you only have yourself to blame for the situation you now find yourself in."
The couple had attended the party with staff and service users of brain injury charity Headway, where 24-year-old Mr Watson was a support worker.
Ryan Watson died after being dragged a long a road near to where the couple lived
But jurors heard he "clicked" with another woman at the party in Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent, angering Wood.
Andrew Ford KC, prosecuting, said Mr Watson was seen on CCTV footage "having a good time, being a gregarious and outgoing party guest" while Wood was described by one woman attending as "a bit cold".
Tiffany Ferriday, a guest at the gathering, said she and Mr Watson had "clicked" and Wood was "pretty much left out" of conversation.
Wood, who was due to sit exams in theology, philosophy and ethics and had a scholarship for a part-time research masters at Cambridge, had accused him of flirting with her.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. CCTV shows Wood driving at Mr Watson after the couple had a row
Tension had also been building between the pair - who had both been drinking alcohol - in an argument over who was driving home.
Wood told the court that when she drove Mr Watson home in his car, he "flipped" and accused her of flirting with other men.
At their home in Oak Street, Rode Heath, she got into her car as Mr Watson walked around the vehicle.
The couple were seen enjoying themselves in camera footage from the party
Wood then "used her car as a weapon", reversing towards Mr Watson, narrowly missing him, before, seconds later, driving at him again, knocking him onto her car's bonnet.
She drove at him for a third time, this time dragging him underneath the vehicle.
After driving 158m along the road, Wood then stopped and asked a nearby resident "please phone an ambulance, I think I've run over my boyfriend".
Paramedics confirmed Mr Watson had died, with the cause confirmed as crush asphyxiation, the Crown Prosecution (CPS) said.
The court heard Wood wrote a letter to the judge saying she accepted sole responsibility but continued to deny murder, maintaining she used her car only as a weapon for intimidation.
Gudrun Young KC, defending, said the couple appeared to be very much in love and had not long bought the house together and had talked about starting a family.
Wood did not intend to kill Mr Watson and her expressions of remorse at the scene and since were genuine, she added.
"The reality is that she has lost the man she loved and will have to live the rest of her life with the knowledge that it was at her hand," she said.
Judge Leeming told her he was sure there was intent on her behalf to kill Mr Watson.
"In the heat of the moment and having failed to injure him in the first strike, this time you made no mistake. I am sure that there was an intent to kill."
He said he did not accept Wood was provoked by Mr Watson or in fear of violence from him that night.
"Ryan Watson was vulnerable. He was a pedestrian, he was holding his mobile phone, he was standing on the pavement, he had been drinking.
"There was nothing he could do to avoid the fatal act.
"To my mind you have shown no true remorse for Ryan's murder."
Alice Wood was due to sit exams in theology, philosophy and ethics
David Jones, a senior CPS prosecutor, said it was "a tragic loss of life" of a young man with his whole life ahead of him.
"Though it will never make up for their devastating loss, I hope today's conviction brings Ryan's family some solace, knowing his murderer has been brought to justice," he said.
Mr Watson's mother, Lisa Watson, read her victim personal statement read from the witness box in which she said "my world stopped" from the moment she got a knock on her door to say her son had been killed.
She said Wood's actions "showed how little she cared for Ryan".
"My family had been destroyed in an instance and it hurt even more hearing who had killed him," she said.
"The one person Ryan trusted the most is the person who took his life in such a violent way."
Wood wiped away tears as Mr Watson's younger brother, Owen, told the court: "Now Ryan has gone the happiness has turned into darkness.
"Without him I will never be the same again. I have lost my best friend, the happy place in my heart."
Follow BBC West Midlands on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to: newsonline.westmidlands@bbc.co.uk
• None Woman who dragged fiance under car guilty of murder
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-68180241
|
news_uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-68180241
|
|
Ian Ogle: Two men plead guilty to murder of Belfast man - BBC News
|
2024-02-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Two men have been handed life sentences after pleading guilty to the murder of Ian Ogle in 2019.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Ian Ogle, 45, was beaten and stabbed 11 times near his home in Cluan Place in east Belfast in January 2019
Two men have been handed life sentences after pleading guilty to the murder of Ian Ogle in east Belfast.
Mr Ogle, 45, was beaten and stabbed 11 times near his home in Cluan Place in January 2019.
Jonathan Brown, 38, from Whinney Hill in Dundonald and Mark Sewell, 45, of Glenmount Drive in Newtownabbey both pleaded guilty to the charge of murder after being rearraigned on Thursday.
The judge then imposed life sentences for both men at Belfast Crown court.
Members of Mr Ogle's family sat in the public gallery as Mr Justice O'Hara informed both men they would serve life sentences after entering their guilty pleas.
"The minimum length of time which you will be required to serve in prison before your release will be considered will be set at a tariff hearing after the other parts of this trial are finished," the judge said.
Three men will now face trial on murder charges. A fourth defendant also faces a single charge of assisting an offender.
Earlier this week, two men admitted to lesser charges in connection with the murder of Ian Ogle, namely withholding information and assisting an offender.
The only woman charged in connection with the case also pleaded guilty to assisting offenders last week.
Further legal arguments in the case are set to take place next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68165046
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-68165046
|
|
Was Sturgeon just following WhatsApp guidelines by hitting delete? - BBC News
|
2024-02-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Questions are being asked over the Scottish government's policy on Covid messaging.
|
Scotland politics
|
Nicola Sturgeon has said her "informal" messages were handed over to the Covid Inquiry last year
Questions about Scottish government WhatsApps from the pandemic era have rumbled on for months.
There have been claims that some messages were handed over too slowly, and even accusations of exchanges being deleted.
Right now, the figure in the spotlight is Nicola Sturgeon.
Last week the counsel to the UK Covid Inquiry said the former first minister appeared to "have retained no messages whatsoever" from the pandemic.
In a statement issued yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon said messages communicated through "informal means" were handed to the inquiry last year.
She conceded that messages had not been "retained" on her own device, but said she had obtained copies which she'd passed over.
Ms Sturgeon stressed that she acted in line with Scottish government policy.
This has prompted some to ask how guidance can have been followed if messages were not kept on the former first minister's phone.
Here things get a bit complicated. Government guidelines in this area are complex.
The Scottish government brought in new mobile messaging guidance in November 2021 - in the midst of the pandemic. This spells out how ministers should approach informal messaging systems, such as WhatsApp.
Officials and ministers are allowed to use these apps to conduct business, with the guidance stating "you must transcribe the salient points of any business discussions and/or decisions in a mobile messaging app into an email or text document". This should then be saved centrally.
In other words, you can make decisions and have government discussions on WhatsApp, provided you then copy that information and save it.
This will then be stored exactly as official minutes, records etc would be. Crucially, it will be accessible to the public under Freedom of Information laws.
Once this has all been done, the guidance states "you must delete business conversations in the mobile messaging app".
So the Scottish government policy therefore actively encourages the deletion of conversations on apps like WhatsApp.
Former minister Kate Forbes and current First Minister Humza Yousaf have said they kept all their messages
The thinking is that the relevant information has now been saved centrally, and so it's safe to get rid of the original conversation.
What's the logic here? Well, bearing in mind phones can be lost or stolen, you could make the argument that it's sensible to regularly clear them of government conversations.
This potentially explains how Nicola Sturgeon can say she hasn't retained messages on her own device, but was able to submit "copies" to the inquiry.
This could also explain her statement - issued on social media yesterday - that she has always "acted in line with Scottish government policy".
Though there are still important questions to be asked about all of this.
Why does there appear to be a difference in how ministers have approached retaining messages? Humza Yousaf insists he kept all of his from the pandemic. As does the former Finance Secretary Kate Forbes.
The explanation for this may be that this guidance is… guidance. It's not hard and fast rules, and therefore some ministers may have taken a different approach.
Many will also question guidance that essentially allows ministers and officials to mark their own homework.
After all, it looks like it's left up to them to determine which messages are relevant and should be saved for posterity, and which should be chucked into a digital wastebasket, never to be seen again.
And some would say that a looming public inquiry should have led to all ministers keeping everything on their phones intact.
As this guidance is put under the spotlight, it's likely that opposition politicians will question how fit for purpose it is.
When it comes to how civil servants and ministers interpreted all of this, and how assiduously they followed it, that's something known only to each individual.
Nicola Sturgeon will get the opportunity to spell all of this out when she appears in front of the UK Covid Inquiry in the coming weeks.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68049189
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68049189
|
|
India v England: Jurel, Ashwin and Kuldeep inspire Ranchi fightback - BBC Sport
|
2024-02-25
|
[]
|
England's hopes of forcing a series decider fade dramatically in the face of a stirring India fightback on day three of the fourth Test.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Cricket
Fourth Test, Ranchi (day three of five) India need 152 more runs to win
England's hopes of forcing a series decider faded dramatically in the face of a stirring India fightback on day three of the fourth Test in Ranchi.
With dogged lower-order resistance and spin bowling of the highest quality, India turned the match on its head. From beginning Sunday 134 behind with only three first-innings wickets in hand, the hosts ended 40-0 in pursuit of 192 to take an unassailable 3-1 lead.
They were dragged to 307 by Dhruv Jurel's 90. The wicketkeeper, crucially dropped on 59 by Ollie Robinson, added 76 with Kuldeep Yadav and another 40 with number 10 Akash Deep.
Off-spinner Shoaib Bashir ended with 5-119, at 20 years and 135 days the second-youngest England bowler to claim a five-wicket haul in Test cricket.
England's lead was a precious 46, every run of which seemed vital as India's spinners conjured tricks from the surface on a riveting, tension-filled afternoon.
Zak Crawley's attractive 60 and Jonny Bairstow's counter-punching 30 were invaluable. No-one else passed 17 in England's 145, Ravichandran Ashwin magnificent for 5-51 and Kuldeep unerring in his 4-22.
India were given 25 minutes to bat before the close and used them to great effect, scoring at five an over. Captain Rohit Sharma has 24 and Yashasvi Jaiswal 16.
Somehow, England need an instant rally on the fourth morning to keep the series alive.
• None India start well after England collapse - how day three unfolded
• None TMS podcast: England face huge battle with ball to keep series alive
Series on the line after super Sunday
This was a compelling day of Test cricket, in keeping with what would be most expected of the game in this country: an attritional first innings followed by a rush to the conclusion as the spinners wreak havoc in the second.
For as well as England's Bashir and Tom Hartley have bowled, India's slow trio were able to extract so much from the surface.
To the delight of the biggest and noisiest crowd of the Test so far, every ball was an event.
For once, there is an argument to make that England were not aggressive enough. Ben Duckett, Ben Stokes and Bairstow were all victims of tame dismissals. In mitigation, these were the most difficult batting conditions of the tour.
England's run-rate of 2.69 was comfortably their slowest since Stokes became captain. All except three of the 53.5 overs in their second innings were bowled by India's spinners, who revelled in the sharp turn and untrustworthy bounce.
England opened with the spin of Joe Root and Hartley, the latter struggling with his line and four times clipped to the boundary by Rohit.
India will start Monday as favourites to wrap up the series, but England will hope they can use the pitch to turn the fifth Test in Dharamsala into a decider.
Any sort of flying start from England could have been enough to seal the match. Instead Ashwin and Ravindra Jadeja shared the new ball to indicate the ordeal that lay ahead.
Duckett prodded Ashwin to short leg and Ollie Pope was completely befuddled by a carrom ball to be leg before for a golden duck. Pope has bagged a pair in this match, facing only three deliveries in the process.
Crawley fought back with style, peppering the extra-cover boundary. He added 46 with Root, who was aggrieved to be lbw playing across Ashwin, and another 45 with Bairstow.
But Crawley was bowled trying to force Kuldeep against the spin, sparking a collapse of five wickets for 23 runs. Stokes played on via his pad, Hartley swiped to mid-on and Robinson's poor day continued when he was leg-before for a duck, all to Kuldeep.
In between, Bairstow softly patted Jadeja to short cover from the first ball after tea, meaning England lost their last proper weapon capable of pressurising the relentless India bowling.
Ben Foakes and Bashir resisted for more than 12 overs, adding only 12 runs in the process. Foakes survived 75 balls for his 17, then chipped his 76th delivery back to Ashwin, whose first five-wicket haul of the series was sealed by Jurel's reaction catch from a James Anderson reverse-sweep.
If India do complete the turnaround they owe so much to Jurel, the 23-year-old playing only his second Test and possibly only holding a place behind the stumps until Rishabh Pant returns to fitness.
At 177-7 on Saturday, India could have conceded a huge lead. Jurel and Kuldeep battled to 219-7 overnight, with Jurel resuming on 30 on Sunday.
The early conditions were benign, Robinson again struggled for bite and the eighth-wicket pair added 34 runs before Anderson got Kuldeep to chop on for 28.
England did well to contain the scoring, conceding only two boundaries in the first hour, but the life given to Jurel could prove to be match-defining. A clip off the toes at Bashir should have been held at head-height by Robinson at mid-wicket - India were still 87 behind at the time.
With Deep for company, Jurel farmed the strike and played big shots when given the chance - twice Bashir was hit for six. Deep also swung a six of his own, before Bashir skipped one into the pads to complete his first five-wicket haul in professional cricket.
Jurel continued towards a century, heaving Hartley over the leg-side rope, only to play all around the same man and be bowled 10 runs short of three figures.
'On that pitch, anything is possible' - reaction
England bowler Shoaib Bashir on TNT Sports: "I want to dedicate this [five-wicket haul] to my two late grandads who passed away around a year and a half ago, they loved Test cricket and their wish was for me to play. I'm so grateful.
"We'd have liked one or two wickets in that period at the end but we've got a big job to do tomorrow. On that pitch, anything is possible."
India bowler Ravichandran Ashwin on TNT Sports: "I enjoy bowling with the new ball and today was another of those days.
"We showed phenomenal character. Kuldeep was brilliant today. Jurel's defence was gun and he showed great composure, we were very calm in the dressing room. For just his second Test, he had a great game plan and it gave us a huge lift."
Former England captain Michael Vaughan: "India have once again found a way of having a dominant day that looks likely to win them this Test and the series.
"England's bad days are really, really bad - and that looks likely to cost them."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/68379000
|
rt_cricket_68379000
|
|
Jesse Baird: 'Grave concerns' over TV presenter and boyfriend Luke Davies missing in Sydney - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Blood-stained clothes belonging to the couple were found in a bin and police are worried for their safety.
|
Australia
|
Couple Luke Davies and Jesse Baird have not been seen since Monday
Police say they have "grave concerns" over a TV presenter and his boyfriend who disappeared in Sydney in suspicious circumstances.
Possessions belonging to ex-Network 10 presenter Jesse Baird, 26, and Luke Davies, 29, were found on Wednesday in a bin in a suburb of the city.
Police have been trying to locate a third man - named by local media as a police officer who had dated Mr Baird.
On Friday morning, a man was taken into custody at a local police station.
New South Wales (NSW) Police have not confirmed if the 28-year-old - who handed himself in - is the man they were seeking to question over the disappearances.
It comes after officers searched a home in the Balmain area of Sydney on Thursday night, seizing a number of items.
Officers found blood and moved furniture at Mr Baird's home in the Paddington area, around 28km (17 miles) from Cronulla, the suburb where a worker found the couple's belongings in a bin.
Blood-stained clothes, a phone and credit cards were among the items found.
Police believe the couple were in Paddington on Monday. CCTV footage obtained by 7NewsAustralia shows what it says appears to be the couple going into Mr Baird's flatshare.
CCTV footage showing a white van in the area was also being looked at by police, the news outlet said.
Qantas flight attendant Mr Davies has not been in contact with his family or attended work since Monday, according to police.
Det Supt Jodi Radmore said all lines of inquiry were being investigated and told reporters: "We do believe, from the crime scene at Paddington and from property located at Cronulla, that there has been some sort of incident."
She added that had given the force "great concerns for one, possibly both their safety".
"Witnesses described a verbal argument," she continued, "but it wasn't reported to police at the time ... it was only reported to police yesterday [Monday morning] during canvassing."
New South Wales Police are appealing for information.
Mr Baird had been a presenter and red carpet reporter on Network 10's morning show Studio 10 until the show was axed in December.
Qantas said it was providing support to Mr Davies' colleagues.
"Our thoughts are with family, friends and colleagues of our crew member at this very difficult time," the airline said in a statement.
Jesse Baird (right) had presented on Network 10's morning show Studio 10
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68372050
|
news_world-australia-68372050
|
|
Video shows Alec Baldwin and crew in chaotic aftermath of Rust set shooting - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed is accused of involuntary manslaughter and evidence tampering over Halyna Hutchins' death.
|
US & Canada
|
A still taken from body camera worn by Lt Benavidez. Image caption: A still taken from body camera worn by Lt Benavidez.
“This is a crime scene. Everyone needs to stop what they are doing.”
That was the direction from Lt Benavidez when he arrived on the scene.
He starts asking for the props manager on set. Someone else takes the Lieutenant to a cart where there are two guns, but it’s not the one that Alec Baldwin was holding.
It’s a chaotic set with different producers shouting at each other about where the guns are.
Even though he is a witness for the state, the video is showing the very “chaotic” set described by the defence in their opening arguments. No one appears to know who is in charge or what is going on.
Hannah Gutierrez-Reed finally appears and says “This is the gun.”
She looks like she’s been crying
Lt Benavidez then cleared the gun, meaning it was ammunition free, so that he could collect it for evidence.
Hannah then appears looking incredibly frazzled. She says to a colleague nearby, “Oh my god... Are they okay? Oh my god.”
She starts crying hysterically to Lt Benavidez, trying to explain what happened.
What’s noticeably clear at this point is that all three guns shown to the officer are out, not in cases, as safety standards would have called for.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68355789
|
news_live_world-us-canada-68355789
|
|
Wicked Little Letters: Olivia Colman on why abusive notes were original trolling - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The actor stars in a true story of a poison pen letter that pitted two neighbours against each other.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Olivia Colman and Jessie Buckley previously acted together in The Lost Daughter in 2021
In the spring of 1920, the House of Commons scheduled a debate on one of the most pressing issues facing the country at that time - who was behind the slew of profane letters being sent to well respected members of a community.
For months, Littlehampton, a small seaside town in Sussex, had been alight with rumours over who was sending sweary and scandalous letters. A well-respected, pillar-of-the-community Christian, Edith Swan pointed the finger at Irish foul-mouthed neighbour Rose Gooding.
The showdown between the two neighbours is the basis for period comedy drama Wicked Little Letters, starring Olivia Colman as Edith and Jessie Buckley as Rose.
"Parliament absolutely debated it and it was covered by all the broadsheets at the time," Colman tells the BBC. "The fact the nation was gripped by this I found to be hilarious."
Colman's co-star Buckley says the letters "sent the whole country into a frenzy" and was "the sort of sensationalist trolling you would expect in the modern day".
The letters that Edith received were obscene, by both 1920s and modern day standards.
With insults which included suggesting the cakes someone had made had been excreted by a sheep (we couldn't possibly repeat the exact phrasing here), the actors said it was "such an enjoyment" to swear so freely.
Colman won an Oscar in 2019 for her performance in The Favourite
"I swear, and if people's sphincters tighten I just think I'm not killing or hurting anyone, so I don't think that's really a problem," says Colman.
"Some people walked out of the cinema watching our film and I just think they need to get over themselves. It's not a sign of a diminished vocabulary, it's fun, it's just an enjoyment and I see it as a seasoning," she laughs.
"The ones who swear the least are the ones who need a good swear," adds Buckley.
Critics have so far given the film mixed reviews. In a three-star review, the Evening Standard's Nick Huwells said the lead actors "put in less than their usual stellar work".
He added that the swearing was only "ever so slightly hilarious" and that "initial tickle of naughtiness rapidly fades".
A three-star review from Empire said the film was "overly reliant" on the sweary letters "with most raising titters rather than laughs".
In a scathing one-star review, the Guardian's Benjamin Lee said Wicked Little Letters was "an embarrassingly unfunny misfire".
James Mottram of the Radio Times praised the cast, who he said had "to work overtime to deal with the script's patchy nature".
His three-star review particularly highlighted Anjana Vasan for her portrayal of police officer Gladys Moss "who delivers one of the film's better performances, both comic and earnest".
Colman is best known for TV shows Broadchurch and Peep Show, and films including The Father, Empire of Light and The Favourite, which won her an Oscar for best actress.
She and Buckley last worked together on Netflix's 2021 movie The Lost Daughter. Buckley's other film credits include Women Talking, Fingernails and Wild Rose.
During the case of the Littlehampton libels, one judge in the 1923 court case based his argument on the fact a respectable woman would never swear.
Sending offensive letters resulted in prison sentences for the culprit, but 100 years later spreading anonymous hate has become commonplace.
Olivia Colman's character is a pious woman who brands herself as a pillar of the Christian community
"Everybody's cruel to everybody else online and that's awful," reflects Colman. "I would love to go back to the days where it's not OK.
"It's a despicable thing to do to someone and we've seen the terrible things that have happened to people who can't cope with the fact that someone they don't know is so unkind about them."
The 50-year-old said she wants greater measures to be implemented to stop people making anonymous online accounts.
She continues: "I know there's another argument that there are parts of the world where you can't say what you need to say if you are traceable, but if you're just going to be unkind about a fellow human, don't. It shouldn't be allowed."
The film's writer, comedian Jonny Sweet, adds that he hopes there will be "greater regulation because anonymous hate really destroys people's lives and can be a real nightmare".
"That's what this story is about - it shows that you can write something anonymously and say some wretched old stuff and think you'll get away with it," he says.
Perhaps the culprit would have got away with it if it was not for one woman, police officer Gladys Moss.
Sussex's first female officer, Moss served in the force between 1919 and 1941 and was an integral part in solving the Littlehampton libel letter case.
"Gladys is so committed to her work and finding the truth and was not going to compromise and she wins in the face of everyone doubting her," says Irish actor Buckley
But despite her brilliant efforts, historian Emily Cockayne tells the BBC that Gladys received no recognition for being "fundamental and instrumental in the case".
Instead, Cockayne explains, she had to "fight to keep her job as the police were keen on ejecting many of the women in the force who had joined during the war".
The film shows how an unlikely group of women came together to help justice prevail
Alongside Sherlock-like sleuth Gladys, a team of unlikely women who are undermined or overlooked by society work together to bring about justice for the community.
"There's a lot more to this story than what meets the eye," Buckley explains. "These are ordinary women with amazing minds, who, if given half a chance, are bloody great."
Although girl power is a strong force in the film, Cockayne said that in reality "women wouldn't have had the power to put together a plan in the way they do in the film".
"Our fascination with women who break social convention is nothing new - from the first witchcraft trials in the 15th Century to a country that was stunned by a woman using foul language in a letter, behaviour that is not in line with society's expectations has always had the power to shock."
And, watching Colman and Buckley scream hilarious profanities and wickedly scandalous lines at each other will never not be brilliantly shocking.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68357293
|
news_entertainment-arts-68357293
|
|
Shamima Begum loses bid to regain UK citizenship - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Court of Appeal wholly rejects Ms Begum's arguments, meaning the 24-year-old must remain in Syria.
|
UK
|
Ms Begum was 15 when she joined Islamic State group in 2015
Shamima Begum has lost an appeal against a decision to revoke her UK citizenship.
The Court of Appeal ruling means the 24-year-old must remain in Syria. The government stripped her citizenship on national security grounds in 2019.
Ms Begum left London nine years ago aged 15 to travel to Syria and join Islamic State group, or IS.
The ruling by three appeal judges was unanimous. It could still be challenged in the Supreme Court by Ms Begum.
Her solicitor Daniel Furner said that her legal team was "not going to stop fighting until she does get justice and until she is safely back home".
However the judges wholly dismissed all of Ms Begum's arguments - a highly significant rejection that could affect her ability to gain a full appeal at the Supreme Court.
Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said: "It could be argued the decision in Ms Begum's case was harsh. It could also be argued that Ms Begum is the author of her own misfortune.
"But it is not for this court to agree or disagree with either point of view.
"Our only task is to assess whether the deprivation decision was unlawful. We have concluded it was not, and the appeal is dismissed."
Ms Begum's lawyers went to the Court of Appeal after losing a hearing last year. They argued that the Home Office's decision to remove her citizenship was unlawful, in part because British officials failed to properly consider whether she was a potential victim of trafficking.
In that hearing Sir James Eadie KC, for the Home Office, said the "key feature" in the case was national security.
"The fact that someone is radicalised, and may have been manipulated, is not inconsistent with the assessment that they pose a national security risk," he said.
The Court of Appeal ruling represents a substantial victory for the government and averts a potential legal crisis: were the decision to be reversed, home secretaries would in future need to balance national security considerations with questions of whether someone was a victim.
Responding to the court's decision, the Home Office said it was "pleased" at Friday's ruling, adding that its "priority remains maintaining the safety and security of the UK".
A spokeswoman for the prime minister said the government would "always take the strongest possible action to protect our national security", adding that it never took decisions to remove citizenship lightly.
Outside court, however, Ms Begum's solicitors said that it was very likely they would ask the Supreme Court to get involved. A response however could take up to a year.
Gareth Peirce, of Ms Begum's legal team, said the UK was under a moral duty to take Ms Begum back, as other nations had with citizens found in Syria.
Begum (right) as she left London for Syria with two friends
Ms Begum, born in the UK to parents of Bangladeshi heritage, was one of three east London girls who travelled to Syria in 2015 to support the IS group. She left with her friends Kadiza Sultana and Amira Abase.
Ms Sultana is thought to have died when a house was blown up. The fate of Ms Abase is unknown.
Ms Begum lived under IS rule for more than three years. She married a Dutch member of IS, who is currently held in a Kurdish detention centre, and lived in Raqqa, once a stronghold of the group. She had three children, all of whom have died.
She was found in al-Roj camp in northern Syria in 2019 following the defeat of IS, and remains there to this day.
Her lawyers say conditions in the camp have reached a "critical point", with "near starvation" and disease now seen daily.
"The fact of the matter is this - that Shamima, as with other British women and children, is arbitrarily detained in a prison camp in North East Syria," her lawyers said in a written statement on her behalf.
"It is not a refugee camp - those detained are unable to leave and the conditions have, with ever greater urgency, been categorised by every international body as well as by the UK courts in Shamima's case itself, as constituting torture and inhuman treatment."
Ms Begum has admitted knowingly joining a proscribed organisation. She said that she was "ashamed" to have done so and regretted it.
The Shamima Begum Story podcast is available on BBC Sounds and a feature length documentary of the same name, is on BBC iPlayer (UK only).
• None Who is Shamima Begum and how can you lose your citizenship?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68378818
|
news_uk-68378818
|
|
Jesse Baird: Policeman charged with murder of missing Sydney couple - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Australian TV personality Jesse Baird and his boyfriend Luke Davies were last seen on Monday.
|
Australia
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
A 28-year-old police officer has been charged with murdering missing Australian TV personality Jesse Baird and his boyfriend Luke Davies.
Detectives launched a frantic search on Wednesday after the couple's bloodied items were found in a bin near Sydney.
Beaumont Lamarre-Condon, Baird's ex-boyfriend, was being sought by police and handed himself in on Friday.
Detectives say they are yet to locate the men's bodies or confirm their cause of death.
Police allege the couple were killed on Monday inside Jesse Baird's house in Paddington, an inner Sydney suburb, before their bodies were moved in a white van.
Witnesses told investigators they heard "shouting" and a "verbal argument" that morning, and the rented van was captured at the scene on CCTV footage that evening. The van was found in Sydney's south on Friday morning.
New South Wales Police have said a bullet matching Beaumont Lamarre-Condon's work-issued gun was found at the crime scene in Paddington, as was a "significant" amount of blood and upturned furniture.
He did not turn up to work on Tuesday, but the senior constable's gun was later located in a safe at a police station, Det Supt Daniel Doherty told reporters.
Police have also seized blood-stained clothes, a phone and credit cards from an industrial bin in Cronulla, 28km (17 miles) away from the crime scene, and a number of items from a house in Balmain.
Det Supt Doherty said Beaumont Lamarre-Condon was also believed to have travelled to Newcastle - 170km north of the crime scene - at some point after the alleged killings.
Couple Luke Davies and Jesse Baird have not been seen since Monday
He said information gleaned from Beaumont Lamarre-Condon so far had "not assisted" the investigation but tip-offs from the public had been a great help. He again appealed for anyone with information to contact police.
"It's really important that we do locate the bodies, not only for the cause of death but for answers for the family... They are obviously devastated," Det Supt Doherty said.
Mr Baird had been a presenter and red carpet reporter on Network 10's morning show Studio 10 until the programme was axed in December, while Mr Davies was a flight attendant for Qantas.
Happy photos of the pair featured heavily on their social media, which has been flooded with condolences since their disappearance.
Beaumont Lamarre-Condon joined the police force in 2019 and was previously a celebrity blogger who had met stars including Taylor Swift, Harry Styles and Miley Cyrus.
His many encounters with celebrities was reported in Australian media, including a magazine spread asking if he was "Australia's biggest fan?"
Det Supt Doherty declined to identify a motive for the alleged crimes but said the police officer's relationship with Jesse Baird had ended "a couple of months ago", "so that's an obvious line of inquiry".
Beaumont Lamarre-Condon was refused bail and appeared in court on Friday afternoon.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-68377379
|
news_world-australia-68377379
|
|
Shamima Begum loses appeal over UK citizenship - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Court of Appeal ruling means Begum, who left the UK in 2015 to join the IS group, remains in Syria with no chance of return.
|
UK
|
As we prepare to close this page, here's a reminder that earlier all the three judges dismissed Begum's arguments for appeal.
They said there had been “no material shortcoming” on the part of Sajid Javid, the then-Home Secretary, who knew in 2019 Shamima Begum might have been trafficked.
“He was aware of the circumstances of her departure to Syria and the likelihood that she was a child victim of others who wished to exploit her for sexual or extremist reasons,” they said.
Throughout the case, Begum’s lawyers had argued while the government said she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship, in practice she would never be allowed into the country and had therefore been left stateless - something which is banned under British and international law.
But, the judges ruled the home secretary was not under a legal obligation to consider that real-world outcome as over-riding.
Sajid Javid had the power to strip her of her nationality and the law said she was entitled to go to Bangladesh.
“Deprivation decisions often have severe consequences,” said judge Dame Sue Carr.
Quote Message: It could be argued that the decision in Ms Begum’s case was harsh. It could also be argued that Ms Begum is the author of her own misfortune. But it is not for this court to agree or disagree with either point of view. Our only task is to rule on whether the decision was unlawful.” from Dame Sue Carr Lady Chief Justice It could be argued that the decision in Ms Begum’s case was harsh. It could also be argued that Ms Begum is the author of her own misfortune. But it is not for this court to agree or disagree with either point of view. Our only task is to rule on whether the decision was unlawful.”
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-68372112
|
news_live_uk-68372112
|
|
Dani Alves trial: Ex-Brazil player guilty of nightclub rape - BBC News
|
2024-02-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A court in Spain has sentenced Alves, who played for Barcelona and Brazil, to four and a half years.
|
Europe
|
Dani Alves was first arrested in January 2023 and has been in pre-trial detention ever since
A court in Spain has found former Barcelona and Brazil footballer Dani Alves guilty of raping a woman in a Barcelona nightclub.
He has been sentenced to four and a half years in prison.
The 40-year-old, who is one of the most decorated footballers in history, had denied sexually assaulting the woman in the early hours of 31 December 2022.
His lawyer had asked for his acquittal and said she would appeal against the verdict.
A lawyer for the victim welcomed the verdict, saying that it "recognises what we have always known: the truth [as told] by the victim and the suffering there has been".
As well as handing Alves a four-and-a-half year sentence, the court said he should face a further five years' probation.
The prosecution had asked for a nine-year prison sentence. In Spain, a claim of rape is investigated under the general accusation of sexual assault, and convictions can lead to prison sentences of four to 15 years.
According to Spanish media, the court took into account Alves's decision to pay the victim €150,000 (£128,500) in damages regardless of the outcome of the trial when it decided on the length of his prison term.
The court did not, however, accept the argument put forward by his lawyers that he should be given a more lenient sentence because he was drunk.
His wife Joana Sanz, 31, said he had appeared very drunk when he got back to their Barcelona home the night of the rape and had bumped into furniture before collapsing on the bed.
But the court argued that his alcohol consumption had not affected his behaviour.
Prosecutors said Alves and his friend had bought champagne for three young women before Alves lured one of them to a VIP area of the nightclub with a toilet which she had no knowledge of.
They argued that it was at this point he turned violent, forcing the woman to have sex despite her repeated requests to leave.
Alves had maintained she could have left "if she wanted to". However, the court found that she did not consent.
Spanish law was changed recently to enshrine the importance of consent under the so-called "Only Yes is Yes" principle.
In a statement, the court said there was evidence other than the victim's testimony that proved that she had been raped.
It said Alves had "abruptly grabbed the complainant" and thrown her to the ground. He had then raped her while preventing her from moving as "the complainant said no and wanted to leave", it added.
The woman said the rape had caused her "anguish and terror", and one of her friends who was with her on the night described how the 23-year-old had cried "uncontrollably" after leaving the bathroom.
Alves has been held in pre-trial detention since January 2023 and has changed his testimony on a number of occasions.
He first denied knowing his accuser only to claim later that he had met her in the toilet but that nothing had happened between them.
He then changed his version of events again, saying that they had had consensual sex. "We were both enjoying ourselves," he alleged.
Alves played more than 400 times for Barcelona, winning six league titles and three Champions Leagues across two spells with the club. He was also part of Brazil's 2022 World Cup squad.
He has won trophies playing for Sevilla, Juventus and PSG and is among Brazil's most capped internationals, with 126 appearances.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68368372
|
news_world-europe-68368372
|
|
Donald Trump's hush-money trial set to begin in March - BBC News
|
2024-02-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A New York judge refused to dismiss a hush money case against the former president and set the trial for 25 March.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Why Trump will face his first criminal trial in March
The first-ever criminal trial of a former US president is set to start next month, with Donald Trump defending himself against allegations of conducting a hush-money cover-up.
The 77-year-old appeared in court in New York on Thursday, seeking to have the trial dismissed or delayed.
But Judge Juan Merchan was not swayed by arguments that the trial's timetable would hurt his presidential campaign.
Mr Trump called the decision to start the trial on 25 March a "disgrace".
"Obviously I'm running for election again. How can you run for election and be sitting in a courthouse in Manhattan all day long?" he said outside the courtroom after the hearing.
Mr Trump's lawyers had made similar arguments during the pre-trial hearing, but the New York state judge said they were not rooted in law and that he would only delay for legal reasons.
Mr Trump is widely expected to become the Republican nominee for president and face President Joe Biden, a Democrat, in an election rematch in November. He must still go through state primaries to secure the nomination.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has charged the former president with 34 counts of fraud, alleging Mr Trump falsified business records to disguise payments he made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels as legal fees.
Ms Daniels said she was paid $130,000 (£103,000) in 2016 to stay quiet about having sex with the then-presidential candidate. Mr Trump denies they ever had an affair.
This is one of four criminal cases against the former president.
The first step of the New York trial will be putting together a jury of 12 people.
Lawyers and the judge discussed on Thursday how to select jurors for the unprecedented case, given Mr Trump's global fame and the deep political divisions around him.
EXPLAINED: What Trump's first criminal trial could look like
Lawyers from both sides will be able to dismiss people from sitting on the jury. Justice Merchan told them that if they plan to strike possible jurors because they are Democrats or Republicans, then they are going to run out of people very quickly.
Prosecutors said they want to ask about some of the most controversial parts of the 2020 presidential election in a screening questionnaire for potential jurors, such as if they believe the election was stolen, if they believe in the QAnon conspiracy theory and if they have belonged to far-right militia groups or far-left groups like Antifa.
Prosecutors also want to expand a question about which news media a potential juror consumes to include right-wing commentators such as Sean Hannity, Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson.
The defence brought up asking jurors if they ever put a political bumper sticker on their car or candidate sign on their lawn.
There are also potential questions about whether a juror has read or listened to anything from the prosecution's expected star witness, Mr Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, or if they have read Mr Trump's book The Art of the Deal.
The hearing on Thursday coincided with a separate hearing in Georgia, where a judge is weighing up misconduct allegations against prosecutor Fani Willis, Ms Willis is leading an election fraud case against Mr Trump in the state.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68311139
|
news_world-us-canada-68311139
|
|
Kansas City shooting: A dispute led to gunfire after Super Bowl parade, police say - BBC News
|
2024-02-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One person died in Wednesday's shooting. Of the 22 injured, at least half were under the age of 16.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Police in Kansas City say an argument between several people that escalated led to a shooting that killed one and injured 22 others after a Super Bowl victory parade.
The deceased victim was identified as Lisa Lopez-Galvan, 43, a local DJ.
Police said the injured victims ranged in age from eight to 47 years old and that at least half are under 16.
Three suspects were taken into custody shortly after the shootings. Two of them are aged under 18.
"This appeared to be a dispute between several people that ended in gunfire," Kansas City Police Chief Stacey Graves told reporters on Thursday.
Chief Graves said firearms had been recovered, but did not give further details on the type of guns used in the shooting. She said no arrests had yet been made or charges laid and that the investigation is ongoing.
There was no link to terrorism, police said.
Ms Lopez-Galvan, who was identified as the one victim killed in Wednesday's violence, hosted Taste of Tejano, a Tex-Mex music show, on community radio station KKFI.
In a statement posted on Facebook, the station said: "This senseless act has taken a beautiful person from her family and this KC Community."
Nine injured children aged six to 15 were treated at the city's Children's Mercy Hospital. All are expected to recover from their wounds.
Kansas City Police have appealed to the public for further information about the shooting.
"We need to hear from anyone in the vicinity of the parade shooting today that directly witnessed the shooting incident, has any video of the shooting incident or who was a victim of the shooting who has not yet reported being shot," they said in a statement late on Wednesday.
A phone line and online tip page have been set up to collect information from the public.
More than 800 police officers were on patrol as hundreds of thousands turned out to watch a Super Bowl victory parade, which culminated in a rally outside Union Station in the middle of the Missouri city.
A stage was set up outside the station, which was decked in the red and gold colours of the Kansas City Chiefs, who won their second straight NFL championship on Sunday.
The rally had just ended at around 14:00 local time (20:00 GMT) when shots rang out to the west of the station, which remains closed on Thursday.
Videos posted online show members of the crowd tackling one of the alleged suspects on a street near the station.
One of the bystanders who stepped in, 46-year-old Paul Contreras, told NBC that he was at the parade with his three daughters.
"It was just a reaction. He was running the wrong way. There was another gentleman just screaming at the top of his lungs, 'This guy, tackle him'… I took him down," Mr Contreras said.
The videos showed a long-barrelled gun falling to the ground and a member of the public picking it up and placing on the ground away from the confrontation.
Chief Graves on Thursday praised the bystanders who stepped in and the emergency services who responded to the shooting.
"I'm angered about what occurred in our city yesterday, but I am also thankful for the response," she said.
Kansas City Fire Department Chief Ross Grundyson said medical personnel at the scene responded immediately despite some being just 40 feet (12 metres) from the shooting.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The parade violence is not unprecedented - several shootings at sporting celebrations have occurred across North America in recent years.
In 2021, two shootings left three people injured in Milwaukee after the local basketball team won their first NBA championship in 50 years.
In 2020 two people were killed in Los Angeles after the Dodgers won baseball's World Series.
Four people were shot and injured in Toronto in 2019 during a victory parade for the NBA Raptors championship win.
In a statement after the shooting, the Kansas City Chiefs organisation said it was "truly saddened" by the violence. It added that its players, coaches and staff - as well as their families - were accounted for and safe.
Travis Kelce, the star tight end of the team whose relationship with Taylor Swift became a cultural phenomenon, wrote on social media that he was "heartbroken over the tragedy that took place today".
Are you in the affected area? If it is safe to do so, email haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68308372
|
news_world-us-canada-68308372
|
|
Kansas City shooting: One dead and 21 injured near Super Bowl parade - BBC News
|
2024-02-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Three suspects are in custody following the shooting in Kansas City, Missouri, near the victory parade.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
One person has died and 21 people were wounded in a shooting in Missouri at the end of the Kansas City Chiefs' Super Bowl victory parade.
Officials said they treated eight victims who were in immediately life-threatening condition and seven others who had suffered injuries that could prove life-threatening.
Nine children were among the wounded - all are expected to recover.
Police said they have arrested three suspects in connection to the shooting.
At a news conference on Wednesday, Kansas City Police Chief Stacey Graves said a total of 22 people were struck by gunfire - one of whom is dead - and three individuals were arrested.
More than 800 police officers were already on the scene to monitor the parade. Ms Graves said they responded immediately after the gunshots broke out and detectives who were on the scene quickly opened an investigation. The fire brigade also sprang to action, administering aid to the injured.
A local radio station said one of its DJs, Lisa Lopez, was killed in the shooting.
The surviving victims were transported to three local hospitals, officials said, with the immediately life-threatening cases taken to hospital within 10 minutes of the shooting.
Nine children aged six to 15 with gunshot wounds are being treated at Children's Mercy Hospital, chief nursing officer Stephanie Meyer said.
"The one word I would just use to describe what we saw and how they felt when they came to us was fear," Ms Meyer added.
Local hospitals said they were also treating people who were not shot, but who had suffered other injuries in the sudden stampede that followed the shooting.
City officials did not release the names of any of the victims. They also did not share any information about the suspects who were arrested, including what might have led to the shooting. Police Chief Graves said the motive for the shooting was not yet clear.
A law enforcement source told CBS News, the BBC's US partner, that the shooting appeared to be the result of an argument that turned violent. The source said it was not terrorism-related.
The shots were fired west of Union Station, the train station in downtown Kansas City, which was where the parade ended at about 14:00 local time (20:00 GMT). Thousands of fans had gathered there to watch the festivities.
Local reports said Kansas City Chiefs players were still on a stage there when the first shots rang out.
The gunfire caused the watching crowd, including the city's mayor and his family members, to run for cover.
Police said they were investigating a motive and gathering physical as well as digital evidence.
A 46-year-old man, Paul Contreras, told local television station, KETV, that he was one of the fans who helped "tackle" the man, and saw him drop a gun when he was knocked down.
"The whole time, he's fighting to get up and run away," Mr Contreras said, adding police arrived within moments. "We're fighting each other, you know. We're fighting to keep him down and he's fighting to get up."
He said his 23-year-old daughter, Alyssa, managed to capture the encounter on her phone.
Chief Graves said she was aware of a video purporting to show fans subduing a person, and that investigators were reviewing the footage to determine if the individual was one of the people taken into police custody.
Gunfire erupted as the city celebrated the victory of the Kansas City Chiefs in America's biggest sporting event. But this lesser-known American city was robbed of its exhilarating and unifying moment.
Kansas City's Mayor, Quinton Lucas, said he was inside Union Station when he and others heard the sound of gunfire. He and members of his family started running.
"We went out today like everyone in Kansas City looking to have a celebration," Mr Lucas said at Wednesday's news conference.
"I was there with my wife, I was there with my mother. I never would've thought that we, along with Chiefs players, along with fans, hundreds of thousands of people, would be forced to run for our safety today."
In a statement, the Kansas City Chiefs organisation said it was "truly saddened" by Wednesday's violence. It added that its players, coaches and staff - as well as their families - were accounted for and safe.
Travis Kelce, the star tight end of the team whose relationship with Taylor Swift became a cultural phenomenon, wrote on social media that he was "heartbroken over the tragedy that took place today".
Marquez Valdes-Scantling, a wide receiver for the Chiefs, also took to social media after the tragedy. He said he wanted to get in touch with the young victims of the shooting.
"I want to make sure they're doing OK," Mr Valdes-Scantling said. "But would love to help them out any way I can and get them some stuff from the team to help with the recovery."
The mayor emphasised that the city had security measures in place, and it should make the public think deeply about a path forward. Despite hundreds of law enforcement present, he said, this incident still occurred because of the presence of bad actors with guns.
In a statement, US President Joe Biden also reflected on the issue of gun violence in the country.
"Today's events should move us, shock us, shame us into action," he said, as he called for gun reform and a ban on assault rifles in the US.
Are you in the affected area? If it is safe to do so, email haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68248172
|
news_world-us-canada-68248172
|
|
Dramatic moment off-duty police team charge at knifeman in London - BBC News
|
2024-02-15
|
[]
|
The officers were socialising in a bar nearby when they intervened.
| null |
Dramatic footage has been released showing the moment a group of off-duty police officers intervened to stop a knife attack in south London on 21 July 2023.
The officers were socialising in a bar nearby when they noticed a violent argument between two men, one of them holding a large knife.
The plain-clothed team can be seen rushing to separate the victim from the attacker, who threw the knife at the officers and tried to run away, but was rapidly arrested.
"They placed themselves at real risk of serious injury in order to prevent serious harm," Detective Inspector Jon Summers said, describing the officers' action as heroic and "nothing short of exceptional".
The victim received first aid and was taken to hospital for treatment for a head injury. The attacker, Joseph Jimenez, 20, has been sentenced to eight months in prison for possession of a bladed article and four months in prison for affray.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68299807
|
news_uk-68299807
|
|
What's next in Prince Harry's war against the media? - BBC News
|
2024-02-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The prince has settled his claim with the Mirror group, but will he fight other newspaper publishers?
|
UK
|
Will the prince continue to fight tabloid newspapers now he's made a settlement with the Mirror group?
Evidence that the Duke of Sussex had been the victim of phone hacking first emerged 11 years ago during the trial of media executives at the now defunct News of the World.
Prince Harry was put off from taking legal action in the civil courts by a palace culture which held that the royals don't sue.
But that changed when his friends Elton John and David Furnish introduced him to David Sherborne, the slim-suited barrister who has led phone hacking cases for much of the last decade.
Now, despite some in the newspaper industry playing down their significance, he has achieved two big wins in his battle against what has become known in court as 'unlawful information gathering'.
Most phone hacking victims reach a settlement with the newspapers, finalised with brief statements and few details.
Prince Harry tried another strategy. He turned down offers to settle, turned up at court, and gave evidence in person.
He was rewarded with a judgement last year which not only backed his claims about 15 newspaper articles but set out in detail what Mirror Group Newspapers knew about unlawful practices at its titles.
That was gold-dust for his campaign. It provided solid proof for his claims that he and others were unfairly victimised by red-top reporters and investigators desperate for celebrity scoops.
It made today's settlement with MGN much more likely.
Incidentally, the damages he's been awarded are not the highest for a phone-hacking case. In 2008 the Professional Footballers Association chief Gordon Taylor was reportedly given a sum of £400,000. Prince Harry's payout is around £300,000, for the repeated hacking of a senior royal, potentially a major security risk.
The former Sun Editor Kelvin MacKenzie suggested Prince Harry had accepted a "much smaller deal than he could have done if he wanted a fight".
Mr MacKenzie went on to talk about the prince's popularity in the UK, saying the settlement "indicates that even he understands that the nation is not behind him, even though the allegations may be serious."
In fact, according to the Prince's barrister, he made the offer, not MGN, which, in accepting it, avoided much larger legal bills.
Though the Prince has been slow to flesh out his comments in statements about his anti-media campaign, it does seem likely he is not in it for the money.
He has repeated many times that he is pursuing "positive change" in the media culture, and that he will "see it through to the end."
A successful end for him would mean defeating Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mail, and News Group Newspapers, now News UK, which publishes the Sun. Those cases are currently crawling through the courts.
There will be protracted legal arguments during 2024. Key to Prince Harry's success will be getting Associated in particular, to disclose evidence it has about payments to private investigators who claimants allege carried out phone hacking and blagging of personal information for the Mail titles.
What might change as a result of this legal battle?
In many ways Prince Harry is fighting to put right historical wrong-doing.
The phone hacking era began in the 90s when journalists realised that by dialling the friend of a celebrity and punching in a default pin-code they could hear the voicemail messages the star had left.
It ended in the 2010s as we replaced "brick" mobile phones with smartphones and moved to encrypted messaging apps for many conversations.
Around that time the police investigations of journalists and investigators made clear that methods relied on to get celeb scoops were actually criminal.
And then celebs started giving away their own secrets on social media. Much easier for the tabloids to digest without the unpleasant legal after-taste.
So perhaps the problem has solved itself.
There is one potential development which could ignite the campaign the prince is fighting.
He has called several times for the police to reopen their investigations into press malpractice and the civil case against Mirror Group has provided new potential evidence.
After convicting senior News International journalists in 2014 a subsequent investigation of the Mirror newspapers was shut down. It's likely the Metropolitan Police has no stomach to get involved again, and currently Scotland Yard isn't commenting.
One thing is clear. Prince Harry's campaign has made him more enemies in the press. So far that has not deterred him.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68256881
|
news_uk-68256881
|
|
Kuenssberg: Are the politics of climate change going out of fashion? - BBC News
|
2024-02-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Debate is shifting to cost concerns as net zero targets fast approach, says Laura Kuenssberg.
|
UK Politics
|
What's in vogue? Not just Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer in this month's glossy mag, or news that "discreet chic" is back and flamboyant "statement gowns" are out!
Politics has fashions too - what's in and out. It's not so long ago that world leaders were jostling to be pictured with celebs like Leonardo diCaprio, Stella McCartney or Emma Watson at the huge COP26 climate conference in Glasgow where Boris Johnson played host.
Then, it was hip to be green - being at COP in 2021 was the political equivalent of the fashion week front row. But with Labour shrinking away from its big £28bn commitments this week, and the Conservatives shifting tack and rumoured to be dropping the so-called "boiler tax", there's no doubt trends have changed.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took the first steps back in September. He didn't junk the government's green commitments but slowed the pace of existing plans.
Some Conservatives were delighted at he was heeding some voters' concerns about the cost of going green, most notably extending the ultra low emissions zone to outer London. Other Tories were infuriated it sent the message that the environment was less important, and that irritation has festered since then, with former minister Chris Skidmore quitting as an MP.
This week however it's been the Labour leadership's turn, finally getting rid of its vow to spend £28bn a year to help the country go green.
Without adding to the vast acreage of coverage about this decision, it shows above all that Labour wants to reassure voters it would be careful with their cash over anything else.
It's worth noting this week was the deadline for Labour's top team to give their manifesto plans to shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves.
The decision was finally made, after weeks of Tory taunting, when the sums actually had to add up. Alongside its manifesto, Labour will publish a "grey book" that will set out its exact spending plans.
So close to an election the view at the top is that every line of those calculations has to be accurate.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. After weeks of speculation, the Labour leader says the party is dropping its spending commitment.
The leaderships of both main parties have moved, but there isn't agreement among their ranks either. On the right of the Conservatives, there's pressure on No 10 now to ditch the so called "boiler tax" - planned fines payable by boiler makers if they fail to hit targets for selling new heat pumps.
Former cabinet minister Robert Jenrick is one of those thundering about the risks of "dangerous green fantasy economics". But there's a pull from the other direction too.
The previously mentioned Chris Skidmore suggested that "if the UK does not step up, or turns its face against net zero opportunities, it would be an economic disaster".
In turn, Sir Keir Starmer's been accused by Labour former minister Barry Gardiner of being "economically illiterate and environmentally irresponsible".
Another of his MPs, Clive Lewis, responded to this announcement by tweeting a meme of Homer Simpson shrinking backwards into a hedge to describe how he'll feel on the doorstep talking to voters this weekend.
Others are frankly relieved the big number has gone, with one insider telling me it was "not our finest hour in terms of handling but we will look back and be really grateful that we did it".
While the parties' political attitudes have been shifting what has not budged at all is the obligations they face - not because of star-studded celeb pressure or activists gluing themselves to roads.
This is because, just before she left office, Theresa May changed the law in an absolutely profound way by introducing legislation that would force the UK to hit net zero by 2050.
In 2020 that was followed by another target to cut emissions by nearly 70% by 2030.
At the time the former PM pushed it through at breakneck speed 2050 seemed very far away. The practicalities of how such an ambition would be achieved were so vague that MPs (mostly) happily signed up.
One of those involved in the decision told me this week: "We thought it was the right thing to do but we understood we didn't have all the answers. It was a bit like when JFK said we are going to land a man on the moon at the end of the decade. He had no idea how he'd do it but it was a clear ambition."
Despite shifting political passions that clear ambition and obligation has already had a major effect on what the government is actually doing.
One climate leader points to the package for cleaner steel at Port Talbot, or new laws on electric vehicles, for example, but adds that the government is "green hushing" - taking action but playing it down because "they don't want any coverage of it".
There is a definite sense in industry that politicians are yet to understand fully the scale of the changes that have to be made to reboot the energy system - the "transition".
Endless shifts in specifics of policies, or arguments about headline numbers risk missing the big picture. But with both the Conservatives and Labour grappling with the realities of what the big long-term commitments to net zero might really mean, perhaps what we are seeing is a new phase in this argument.
Polling consistently shows that action on climate change is near the top of voters' concerns - at number three on research group More In Common's list behind the cost of living and the health service, and not just among those on the left or the under-40s.
Was the climate in vogue when Rishi Sunak went to the COP27 climate conference in Egypt shortly after becoming prime minister?
But as we move closer to the 2050 and 2030 targets the practical realities of the move to a greener economy will hit closer to home.
As one of the architects of the 2050 law, a former senior Conservative figure, said now "we've got to the point where it is starting to affect individual families it was always going to become politically contentious".
The public wants action generically, but might not like the effect of them - or as it was put to me: "Voters are allowed to be hypocrites - they can say 'I want you to do more' but then when you do, they say 'oh I didn't mean that'."
You can be horrified by what's happening to the planet round the world, but not be too eager to pay thousands for a new boiler at home.
There's a tension between how fast our two main parties are willing to move to tackle climate change and the rules and targets they set themselves.
But there is impatience in industry over how the appetite to act goes in and out of fashion, because much of the money to green the economy will come from them.
Maybe our conversations about the climate are becoming less about emotion and more about the economy. The problem is real. Now the political arguments are here to stay.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68261445
|
news_uk-politics-68261445
|
|
Supreme Court justices sceptical of Donald Trump's Colorado ballot ban - BBC News
|
2024-02-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One justice asked why a single state should decide who can be president, during tough questioning at the top court.
|
US & Canada
|
Video caption: Trump reacts to US Supreme Court hearing on Colorado ballot Trump reacts to US Supreme Court hearing on Colorado ballot
Speaking to reporters outside of his Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump has just called the Supreme Court hearing "a very beautiful process”, adding that he hopes democracy will continue.
He questioned whether 6 January was an insurrection - and said his words at the time were "very heart-warming statements" and telling people to go home.
He went on to claim the Democratic Party was weaponising politics, and brought up the various legal cases against him.
He told the press gaggle that he hopes his argument in court today was "well received”.
The former president also brought up his polling performance, and went on to attack President Joe Biden for what Trump says are "open borders" and crime.
"They loved four years of us," Trump said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-68236239
|
news_live_world-us-canada-68236239
|
|
Robin Swann: 'I can be MP candidate and health minister' - BBC News
|
2024-02-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The UUP leader had said Robin Swann could be withdrawn from one of the positions.
|
Northern Ireland
|
The health minister has confirmed he will be running as the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) candidate in South Antrim in the next Westminster election.
Robin Swann said running for elections was "what politicians do" and he would be able to carry out both roles.
UUP leader Doug Beattie previously said Mr Swann could be withdrawn as health minister or as a Westminster candidate.
Mr Swann said both men had "moved on" and his focus was being a minister.
He added that both accepted that "politics can be heated and passionate".
Speaking to BBC News NI for the first time since becoming health minister for a second time, Mr Swann said "party politics must be taken out of health" in order for it to progress.
"There will always be politics, there will always be differences of opinion, we have done it before and when parties fall out with each other over other things its important they don't bring their arguments into health," he said.
On being health minister and canvassing to become an MP, Robin Swann said other assembly members would be in a similar position.
He pointed out the a date had yet to be set for the general election, but said he was and would remain 100% dedicated to the job of health minister, adding he would "do both roles well."
Mr Swann, a former UUP leader, said being the only UUP politician around the executive table was not a bad thing
He should whoever was there as "a single UUP health minister" would approach the job honestly and not play party politics.
The Department of Health receives one of the largest budget allocations in Northern Ireland - £7.3bn for the 2023-24 financial year - about half of all departmental spending.
In January, thousands of health care workers took part in 24 hours of industrial action over pay.
Mr Swann said he was continuing to meet unions in an effort to resolve the ongoing pay issues and that his focus in on making sure all health care workers were "properly recompensed".
He said unless funding changed significantly, health could be facing a £1bn deficit, which would have an impact on what services could be delivered.
He said how Northern Ireland was funded needed to be addressed differently as departments needed to work with a recurrent budget and not just from year to year.
He said Northern Ireland had 12 years of catch-up after being underfunded.
He also announced an independent body of experts would be brought in to review the administrative side of Northern Ireland's health service.
The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) team has previously been tasked with looking at orthopaedic and gynaecology services here.
Mr Swann said their focus would now be "to look at the overheads, the management, the back office and the efficiency programmes that are already running".
"We need to be open and transparent", he said, "that accountability has to start within the department and our trusts".
Mr Swann also confirmed a Women's Health Action Plan which would pave the way for a Women's Health Strategy.
He said it would help bring together all parts of women's health across the system and he and his team would listen to women's voices to hear how that strategy should be shaped.
"We are putting women at the centre of these discussions and making sure the action plan is up and running as soon as possible," he said.
Comparing it to the Mental Health Action Plan which preceded the Mental Health Strategy, Mr Swann said it was important to listen, agree on what services are required and then fund them accordingly.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68234960
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-68234960
|
|
Why Labour junked its £28bn green investment pledge - BBC News
|
2024-02-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Labour has been in a public tangle and a private tussle over the figure attached to the pledge, BBC political editor Chris Mason writes.
|
UK Politics
|
It was first announced two-and-a-half years ago.
Sir Keir Starmer had had a bumpy few months, including the moment when his leadership was arguably in greatest jeopardy, after Labour lost a by-election in Hartlepool.
The party needed a big, eye-catching idea, as Sir Keir sought to define himself as an opposition leader and begin the colossal task of hauling Labour back to competitiveness after the crushing election defeat in 2019.
But by last summer, the policy had been watered down. By the autumn, senior figures, including the Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves, were swerving mentioning £28bn in public.
And now today the number is being lobbed in a skip.
Labour has been in a public tangle and a private tussle over the number attached to what they call their Green Prosperity Plan recently.
It had got to the point where the only thing that was clear about the idea of spending £28bn a year on green investment was it wasn't remotely clear if they were still committed to it.
One day last week on the Today Programme on BBC Radio 4, the Shadow Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds was asked almost 28 billion times whether the number had been ditched.
He didn't say yes and he didn't say no.
But the words "twenty" and "eight" did not pass his lips.
And Sir Keir Starmer and the shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves pretty much contradicted each other in public.
Like Mr Reynolds, Rachel Reeves was also rather numerically tongue tied when she was repeatedly asked about the number on Sky News. But Sir Keir then plainly restated the policy, including the number.
Any hope of waiting until after the Budget, in four weeks time, when they may have been able to blame the books for no longer being able to afford their plan, looked totally unsustainable.
They were going to have to answer the question with a straight yes or no, with none of the complex contortions. And so away from the cameras they have been wrestling with what to do.
And they have concluded the number, but not the policy itself, is an albatross around their neck - and so it is a goner. How the policy is delivered in the absence of the number is one of the many questions they will now face.
The party reckons that emphasising their commitment to economic credibility is more important
Senior figures are conscious that many voters perceive economic credibility to be a Labour weakness, and so want to address this head on.
But this slow motion U-turn will burnish the arguments of Sir Keir's critics - not least the Conservatives - who claim he is forever changing his mind and doesn't believe in anything.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68236323
|
news_uk-politics-68236323
|
|
US Supreme Court sceptical of Colorado's move to bar Donald Trump from ballot - BBC News
|
2024-02-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Justices intensely questioned attorneys who argued he should be removed from Colorado's primary ballot.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: How the Supreme Court hearing on Colorado's ballot ban on Trump unfolded
The US Supreme Court appeared sceptical of Colorado's move to bar Donald Trump from the state's presidential primary, during tough questioning on Thursday.
The ex-president was removed from the ballot by Colorado's top court in December under the 14th Amendment.
At the hearing, justices grilled the attorney defending the move about its constitutionality, its real-world consequences and defining "insurrection".
It is unclear when the court will rule.
Mr Trump, who did not attend the hearing, remains the overwhelming favourite to clinch the Republican nomination for president and set-up a rematch with President Joe Biden in November.
The legal challenge hinges on a Civil War-era constitutional amendment that bans anyone who has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" from holding federal office.
In its judgement in December, the Colorado Supreme Court said Mr Trump's actions during the 2021 Capitol riot amounted to insurrection, and the state's attorney repeated that claim on Thursday.
Most of the tough questioning went to lawyer Jonathan Murray, representing the five Coloradoans who originally sued to kick Mr Trump from the ballot.
One of the three court members nominated by Mr Trump, conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, challenged him about the potential "disenfranchising effect" of kicking Mr Trump from the ballot, by not allowing citizens to cast their votes as they wanted.
Mr Murray said "the reason we're here is that President Trump tried to disenfranchise 80 million Americans who voted against him" during the violence on 6 January 2021, where rioters tried to stop congress from certifying that Mr Biden won the 2020 election.
Mr Trump's team fought back against that allegation, telling justices that the event was "a riot, not an insurrection".
"The events were shameful, criminal, violent, all of those things but did not qualify as an insurrection as that term is used in Section 3," Mr Trump's attorney Jason Mitchell told the court.
Justices on both wings of the court appeared reluctant to uphold the Colorado ban, subjecting Mr Murray to a barrage of complex legal queries as the morning went on.
Chief Justice John Roberts observed that if the court upheld the Colorado ruling it could unleash chaos on the US political system by granting states the unilateral power to strike candidates from the ballot.
"It will come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election. That's a pretty daunting consequence," he said.
And Justice Elena Kagan appeared to agree, noting: "I think that the question that you have to confront is why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States."
Enforcing the 14th amendment would have "to be federal, national means," she suggested.
But Trump's team were also subjected to a grilling by the justices, who challenged attorney Jonathan Mitchell on his claims that the 14th Amendment didn't apply to the presidency.
Mr Trump's team have long insisted that the term "officer of the United States" outlined in the provision can only apply to an appointed official, not the elected president.
Justice Amy Comey Barrett, a conservative also appointed to the court by Mr Trump, expressed a heavy scepticism when examining the Trump team's claims that the 14th Amendment did not apply to the presidency.
Nonetheless, it appears unlikely that the court will uphold the initial Colorado ruling.
Robert Tsai, a Boston University constitutional law professor, told the BBC that the state's ruling "is toast".
The argument that Prof Tsai said most justices seemed to be attracted to was the idea that the power to remove presidential candidate from a ballot under Section 3 belonged to congress, not the states.
The court has not said when it will issue its decision, but it is expected soon. The court expedited the case and is under pressure to rule before 5 March, when Colorado holds its primary.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68244607
|
news_world-us-canada-68244607
|
|
Trump seeks Supreme Court pause in 2020 election case - BBC News
|
2024-02-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
He is fighting a ruling denying him presidential immunity in the federal election interference case.
|
US & Canada
|
Ex-US President Donald Trump has asked the Supreme Court to suspend a lower court ruling that he does not have presidential immunity from prosecution.
He had claimed in his election interference case he could not be tried for acts carried out as president.
Three lower court judges disagreed, ruling that he can be prosecuted like any other citizen.
But Mr Trump's lawyers said he should not be tried during an election campaign.
"Conducting a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump's ability to campaign against President Biden," Trump's attorneys wrote in the filing.
The Supreme Court will now decide if it will put the ruling on hold to allow Mr Trump to appeal.
The conservative-majority top court granting the request would lead to a long delay in the landmark criminal case alleging that Mr Trump plotted to illegally overturn the 2020 election, possibly until after the November election.
However, if the Supreme Court declines to put the ruling on pause, the federal trial overseen by Judge Tanya Chutkan will be scheduled, likely for spring.
As Mr Trump vies for the White House, he faces three other criminal trials in addition to this one.
He faces charges in Georgia for an alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election results in the state and a seven-count indictment in Florida over his handling of classified documents after he left the White House.
The third, based in New York, is related to the alleged concealment of a payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels. He has pleaded not guilty against the charges in all the cases.
Mr Trump's legal team has also made repeated attempts to delay his criminal trials until after the 2024 election.
In the federal election interference trial, Mr Trump has been charged with four counts: conspiracy to defraud the US, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, and conspiracy against the rights of citizens.
He has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, and his lawyers have argued that presidents are immune from prosecution for possible crimes committed while they are in office, even after they leave the White House.
Last week, this argument was rejected by a three-judge panel from the DC Circuit court, made up of one Republican appointee and two Democratic ones, who ruled that "any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution".
Now, Mr Trump's lawyers are asking the Supreme Court to weigh in by putting the lower court's ruling on hold to allow time for all active judges on the DC Circuit court to review the case.
In their filing, they warned that denying the former president immunity would set a precedent where "such prosecutions will recur and become increasingly common".
"Without immunity from criminal prosecution, the Presidency as we know it will cease to exist," Mr Trump's lawyers argued.
If the lower circuit court declines a review, Mr Trump has asked that the ruling remain on hold while he files a formal appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court could respond to Mr Trump's request in a few ways.
It could deny his ask to put the ruling on hold, which would resume the federal trial. It could deny Mr Trump's request for a review, which would effectively shut down his immunity argument.
The court could also decide to hear Mr Trump's appeal immediately, bypassing a review from the lower court. It could do so on a fast track, similar to a separate case it is currently weighing on whether Mr Trump is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 election.
It could also decide to hear it on the court's usual schedule, which could likely delay a trial in the case well past November's election date.
The Supreme Court previously denied a request late last year by Special Counsel Jack Smith, the lead prosecutor on the case, to issue an expedited ruling on Mr Trump's immunity argument.
It is unclear when the Supreme Court might rule on Mr Trump's request.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68277167
|
news_world-us-canada-68277167
|
|
Trump ordered to pay $355m to New York for lying to banks - BBC News
|
2024-02-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
In the civil case, a judge ordered the penalty to keep him and his sons from continuing "fraudulent ways".
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Former President Donald Trump must pay nearly $355m (£281m) to New York state for lying about the values of his properties, a judge has ruled.
Judge Arthur Engoron also banned him from serving as a company director or taking out loans from banks in the state for three years.
The New York real estate mogul escaped having some of his companies dissolved, which could have meant bankruptcy.
Speaking from his Florida estate, Mr Trump said he would appeal the ruling.
"A crooked New York state judge just ruled I have to pay a fine for $355m for having built a perfect company," the former president said from Mar-a-Lago on Friday, calling the ruling a political witch hunt.
"It's a very sad day for - in my opinion - the country."
In the ruling on Friday, Judge Engoron referred to previous allegations of wrongdoing in justifying the large amounts he ordered the defendants to pay, writing that they "are likely to continue their fraudulent ways" unless he imposed a "significant" penalty.
He made specific reference to the Trump Organization's conviction in a criminal tax fraud case in 2022, where a jury found it had enriched its top executives with off-the books benefits for more than a decade.
"Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological," Judge Engoron wrote in an at times scathing 92-page decision.
Later he said: "The frauds found here leap off the page and shock the conscience."
Still, Mr Trump's empire was spared from one of the worst potential outcomes - the cancellation of its business licences, known as the corporate death penalty.
Instead, the judge ordered two tiers of oversight - an independent monitor to report to the court for up to three years and a separate independent director of compliance to be installed.
The judge is also requiring Mr Trump pay interest on the profits he made by committing the fraud (known as "prejudgment interest"), which could bring the final amount penalty total to around $450m.
Along with what Mr Trump has been ordered to pay, his two adult sons and co-defendants, Donald Jr and Eric, must each pay $4m. They are barred for two years from doing business in New York, while another co-defendant, Allen Weisselberg, the former chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, has been ordered to pay $1m.
Additionally, Mr Trump, his company, and its affiliates cannot apply for loans in New York for three years.
Both of Mr Trump's sons denounced the ruling on social media, with Donald Jr claiming the judgment was politically motivated and Eric calling the judge "a cruel man".
In her civil case, New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, had accused all four defendants and the wider Trump Organization of massively inflating property values and lying on financial statements so they could borrow large sums of money at favourable interest rates. She had asked for a fine of $370m.
Speaking on Friday, she said: "There cannot be different rules for different people in this country, and former presidents are no exception."
"Donald Trump may have authored the art of the deal, but he perfected the art of the steal," she told a news conference.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Letitia James says 'no one above law' after Trump ruling
In September, Judge Engoron ruled Mr Trump was liable for business fraud, finding he had misrepresented his wealth by hundreds of millions of dollars.
In one instance, the judge found Mr Trump's financial statements had wrongly claimed that his Trump Tower penthouse was almost three times its actual size.
The subsequent 43-day trial that took place late last year and included testimony from 40 witnesses, focused mostly on determining penalties against Mr Trump.
Judge Engoron's ruling lays out in detail his reasoning, often diving deep into finance and accounting practices and directly addressing testimony from experts and witnesses.
"In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements," he wrote. "When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants' fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility."
Judge Engoron may have made a thorough record expecting that Mr Trump would appeal, legal experts told the BBC.
Mr Trump vehemently denied wrongdoing throughout the trial. In a six-minute speech during closing arguments in January, Mr Trump declared himself an "innocent man" and called the case a "fraud on me".
And the former president said repeatedly that he paid his lenders, which meant there was no crime.
While in his ruling Judge Engoron acknowledged that no banks were hurt, he added that "the next group of lenders to receive bogus statements might not be so lucky".
The latest penalty comes on top of the $83.3m Mr Trump owes writer E Jean Carroll in a separate defamation case. But while the amount is high, it is not expected to bankrupt a man whose total net worth has been estimated at $2.6bn.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68320290
|
news_world-us-canada-68320290
|
|
Two teenagers charged over shooting at Kansas City Super Bowl parade - BBC News
|
2024-02-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One woman died and more than 20 others were injured when gunfire erupted at the Kansas City parade.
|
US & Canada
|
Fans embrace shortly after gunshots rang out after a Super Bowl victory rally in Kansas City, Missouri
Two teenagers have been charged over a shooting at a Super Bowl victory parade in Kansas City that left one person dead and 22 others injured.
The two suspects, both aged under 18, are being held on gun and resisting arrest charges, a court statement said.
Police earlier said the shooting was the result of an argument and was not connected to terrorism.
A third person who was detained after the shooting has been released.
A statement from the Jackson County Family Court on Friday said that additional charges were "expected in the future as the investigation by the Kansas City Police Department continues".
The names of the juvenile suspects have not been released. Juvenile court cases are kept private under Missouri law, and hearings are not open to the public.
Kansas City Police have continued to appeal for information about the shooting, which occurred near the city's Union Station just after a parade and rally for the Super Bowl champions.
On Thursday, Kansas City Police Chief Stacey Graves said the injured victims ranged in age from eight to 47 years old and that at least half were under 16.
The deceased victim was identified as Lisa Lopez-Galvan, 43, a local DJ.
Her son was shot in the leg but has been discharged from hospital. Two other family members were also injured in the shooting, according to the radio station.
Ms Lopez-Galvan was hailed as a community leader who used her media profile to fundraise for Latino community events and organisations, toy drives for children with cancer and college scholarships.
An online fundraiser in support of the DJ's family raised more than $230,000 (£180,000) - including $100,000 from Taylor Swift.
Further details have also emerged about the reaction of the crowd and the Kansas City Chiefs players, who were celebrating their second straight NFL championship.
The parents of a 13-year-old who got separated from his father during chaos following the shooting praised a player who helped shelter their son.
Zach Cotton got separated from his father inside Union Station and found himself behind the station, near where buses were waiting to pick up players after the victory rally.
Chiefs' running back Clyde Edwards-Helaire and other members of the team sheltered the teenager before he was reunited with his family.
Responding to a thank you note posted by Zach's mother on Facebook, Mr Edwards-Helaire wrote: "Sorry the family and all of Chiefs Kingdom had to experience this. Just wanted to thank Zach for trusting me and knowing I'll protect him."
Another teenager, Gabe Wallace, told the Kansas City Star that he and others were comforted by the Chiefs' head coach in the panic after the shots rang out.
"Andy Reid was trying to comfort me, which was nice," Gabe said. "He was kind of hugging me, just like, 'Are you OK, man? Are you OK? Just please breathe.' He was being real nice and everything."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68320303
|
news_world-us-canada-68320303
|
|
Scott Benton: Lobbying scandal MP loses suspension appeal - BBC News
|
2024-02-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The decision could pave the way for a by-election in MP Scott Benton's Blackpool South constituency.
|
Lancashire
|
Scott Benton is now an independent MP
Rishi Sunak faces the prospect of another difficult by-election after an independent panel upheld a 35-day suspension of MP Scott Benton.
The Blackpool South MP, who was caught in a lobbying scandal, has lost his appeal against the move.
MPs will vote on triggering a recall petition that could force a new poll.
Mr Benton was caught breaching Commons rules by offering to lobby ministers and table parliamentary questions on behalf of gambling investors.
He was elected as a Conservative in 2019 with a 3,690 majority but currently sits as an independent.
Mr Benton said he was "deeply disappointed" by the decision and claimed there had been a "lack of integrity" throughout the process, which was "prone to regular leaks at every stage".
The MP appealed against both the finding and the suspension, but a report by an independent panel upheld the Standards Committee's original decision, saying there had been "no procedural flaw" in the process.
The panel also described Mr Benton's arguments as "misconceived or erroneous", finding the sanction was "neither unreasonable nor disproportionate".
The finding means MPs will vote on whether to implement the recommended suspension which, if supported, would trigger a recall petition and a potential by-election in Mr Benton's seat.
Mr Benton was the subject of a Times newspaper investigation
It raises the prospect of another challenging poll for Mr Sunak after losses in Wellingborough and Kingswood last week.
Voters will have six weeks to register their support for Mr Benton's removal - 10% is the threshold needed to trigger a by-election.
Labour has urged Mr Benton to resign as an MP completely.
Jonathan Ashworth, shadow paymaster general, said: "Scott Benton should do the decent thing and resign, saving the people of Blackpool South a lengthy recall petition that would leave them without the representation they deserve.
"This is yet another by-election caused by Tory scandal. Britain deserves better than this carousel of Conservative chaos."
A Blackpool South by-election would be the fourth this year, while defeat would be the 11th time the government had lost a seat since the start of the current Parliament in 2019.Any poll would be unlikely to occur until the end of April or the beginning of May.
Mr Benton had claimed the investigation by the Commons Standards Commissioner was "materially flawed", alleging the commissioner "drastically over-reached" and "arrived at conclusions which were unsupported by any adequate evidence".
In a new statement, he said: "I am deeply disappointed by the decision of the appeal panel to uphold the Standards Committee's unjust findings against me.
"The entire process has been prone to regular leaks at every stage, with journalists knowing the details throughout.
"This lack of integrity throughout the process has formed an inescapable appearance of bias."
He said he had continued to work for his constituents throughout the process.
"My record of activity, both in Blackpool, and in Westminster, where I am among the most frequent contributors to Parliament, speaks for itself," he said.
"Since being elected in 2019, I have helped to deliver over £400m in additional government funding for projects in Blackpool - one of the highest amounts in the country."
Alistair McCapra, chief executive of lobbying trade association the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, welcomed the panel's decision, saying the footage of Mr Benton recorded by the Times had been "clear and damning".
He said: "We need a radical shift in the culture around lobbying in this country and effective and clear rules to support that change.
"Until then we will continue to see unethical, disingenuous and underhand attempts to influence policy and there is good evidence to show the continued damage to public trust in politics associated with it."
A Conservative seat from 1945 until 1997, Blackpool South went red between 1997 and 2019.
Scott Benton then snatched the seaside seat from long-serving Labour MP Gordon Marsden. But now it could be up for grabs again - with a majority of 3,690.
Given recent by-election results in less favourable conditions for the Labour Party, they must fancy their chances if one is called here.
The path to power for Labour at the next general election could be through winning back seats like these, so the party will mount a strong campaign, with its candidate Chris Webb already primed.
Residents here have been hit by the long-term decline of seaside towns, and many in 2019 were enthused by Boris Johnson's Levelling Up policies and the hope that his government could help turn the tide.
Now Rishi Sunak could face a strong electoral test in a battleground seat - and it might be tougher than a stick of rock.
Why not follow BBC Lancashire on Facebook, X and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-68348594
|
news_uk-england-lancashire-68348594
|
|
Super Bowl parade shooting: Two men charged with murder - BBC News
|
2024-02-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The two men charged are in addition to the two teens who were arrested last week for their alleged involvement.
|
US & Canada
|
One person was killed and 22 others were injured during the 14 February shooting in Kansas City.
Two men have been charged with murder for last week's deadly shooting at the Super Bowl victory parade in Kansas City.
A woman died and 22 others were injured during the shooting, which police said stemmed from the two men arguing.
The charged men - identified as Dominic Miller and Lyndell Mays - were both shot and wounded during the incident.
Two teenagers were charged with resisting arrest and gun violations last week.
Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker of Jackson County said at a press conference on Tuesday that the two men had been charged with second-degree murder, two counts of armed criminal action and unlawful use of a weapon.
Mr Mays was the one who got into an argument at the event and drew a handgun, Ms Peters Baker alleged.
Other people then drew guns during the incident, officials said. That included Mr Miller, who prosecutors believe is the one who shot and killed Lisa Lopez Galvan, 43, during the incident.
Both men are being held on a $1m (£792,000) bond. The two were initially taken to a hospital to be treated for their injuries after the shooting. They remain in hospital, where they are recovering.
Ms Lopez Galvan's family said in a statement that they were thankful for the arrest of the two suspects.
"Though it does not bring back our beloved Lisa, it is comforting to know that the Jackson County Prosecutor's Office and the KCPD made it a top priority to seek justice for Lisa, the other shooting victims, those who had to witness this tragedy unfold and the Kansas City community," the statement said.
Their charges are in addition to the two teenagers who were charged last week.
"These are adults," Ms Peters Baker said, clarifying confusion about the new charges. "There are two juveniles that has been reported already pretty broadly by the news media. Those are being handled by a different office at this point in time."
Court documents released on Tuesday allege that the incident stemmed from a verbal altercation between Mr Mays and four people who asked "what he was looking at".
Surveillance footage of the shooting shows that Mr Mays approached the other group aggressively and pointed at them "in an angry manner" before drawing his weapon.
He later told police he "hesitated shooting because he knew there were kids there", but began firing after he heard someone in the rival group say he would "get him".
Mr Miller initially told police he was trying to flee when he was struck by gunfire, but later recanted when faced with video evidence. He admitted to shooting four or five times. One of the bullets fired by his gun struck Ms Lopez Galvan.
The investigation into the shooting remains ongoing. Ms Peters Baker said that further charges may follow.
"We seek to hold every shooter accountable for their actions on that day - every single one," she said. "So while we're not there yet on every single individual, we're going to get there."
The 22 people wounded in the incident ranged in age from eight to 47, according to Kansas City police.
The shooting was one of several to take place at sports celebrations across the US in recent memory.
In June last year, a shooting at a celebration for the Denver Nuggets NBA team left 10 people wounded, including one of two people charged in relation to the incident
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68355095
|
news_world-us-canada-68355095
|
|
Post Office scandal: Kemi Badenoch hits back at ex-chairman - BBC News
|
2024-02-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Business secretary says claims made by Henry Staunton over his dismissal are a "misrepresentation".
|
Business
|
Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch has hit back at claims made by former Post Office chairman Henry Staunton about the reasons for his departure.
Mr Staunton told the Sunday Times that when he was sacked Ms Badenoch had told him: "Someone's got to take the rap."
But Ms Badenoch said the comments were a "disgraceful misrepresentation" of their conversation.
Mr Staunton also said he was told to delay payouts to Post Office scandal victims, which the government denies.
Hundreds of subpostmasters were prosecuted because of glitches in the Horizon IT system between 1999 and 2015 in what has been called the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK history.
Mr Staunton was appointed Post Office chairman in December 2022, but left the post last month after Ms Badenoch said "new leadership" was needed to tackle the scandal.
Speaking to the Sunday Times, Mr Staunton said he first heard about his sacking when he was called by Sky News. He then spoke to Ms Badenoch on the phone.
Mr Staunton also told the paper that shortly after joining the Post Office he was told by a senior civil servant to slow down the rate of compensation payments, apparently to help the government's finances.
"Early on, I was told by a fairly senior person to stall on spend on compensation and on the replacement of Horizon, and to limp, in quotation marks - I did a file note on it - limp into the election," he told the paper.
"It was not an anti-postmaster thing, it was just straight financials. I didn't ask, because I said: 'I'm having no part of it - I'm not here to limp into the election, it's not the right thing to do by postmasters'."
Henry Staunton stood down as Post Office chairman last month
In a lengthy post on X, formerly Twitter, Ms Badenoch said Mr Staunton's comments were a "disgraceful misrepresentation of my conversation with him and the reasons for his dismissal".
"Far from 'taking the rap', I dismissed Staunton due to very serious allegations about his conduct while chair of the Post Office, including blocking an investigation into that conduct.
"Henry Staunton had a lack of grip getting justice for postmasters. The serious concerns over his conduct were the reasons I asked him to step down," she added.
She said that her conversation with him was carried out with officials and they took a "complete record". A statement will be made on Monday "telling the truth", she added.
Earlier a spokesman for the government had said it "utterly" refuted the claims made by Mr Staunton over stalling compensation payments.
"The government has sped up compensation to victims, and consistently encouraged postmasters to come forward with their claims," the spokesman said.
"To suggest any actions or conversations happened to the contrary is incorrect. In fact, upon appointment, Mr Staunton was set concrete objectives, in writing, to focus on reaching settlements with claimants - clear evidence of the government's intent."
A spokesperson for Mr Staunton told the BBC his client would be making no further comment but that he stood by the accusations made in the Sunday Times.
They also said there was no investigation into Mr Staunton.
Shadow business secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: "The Horizon scandal is widely accepted to be one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British history.
"Under no circumstances should compensation to victims be delayed and to do so for party political purposes would be a further insult to subpostmasters.
"The Labour Party has called for all subpostmasters to be exonerated and compensation paid swiftly so that victims can begin to draw this awful chapter to a close."
Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey said Mr Staunton's claims were "deeply disturbing" and called for ministers to explain to Parliament "exactly what has happened at the earliest opportunity".
The slow pace of overturning convictions and making compensation payments has led some to call for a mass exoneration of those affected.
Mr Staunton told the Sunday Times that Post Office chief executive Nick Read had written to the Justice Secretary Alex Chalk with legal opinion from the Post Office's solicitors, Peters & Peters, that in more than 300 cases convictions were supported by evidence not related to the Horizon software.
"Basically it was trying to undermine the exoneration argument," Mr Staunton said. "It was 'most people haven't come forward because they are guilty as charged' - i.e. think very carefully about exoneration."
A spokesperson for the Post Office said it was "very aware of the terrible impact from this appalling scandal and miscarriage of justice".
"We refute both the assertions put to us and the words and phrases allegedly used, and are focused on supporting the government's plans for faster justice and redress for victims, as well as helping the Inquiry get to the truth of what happened," they said.
The spokesperson added: "In no sense did the Post Office seek to persuade government against mass exoneration. We remain firmly committed to supporting faster justice and redress for victims".
Are you affected by the issues raised in this story? Share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.
Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68330465
|
news_business-68330465
|
|
Sinéad O'Connor nominated for Rock & Roll Hall of Fame - BBC News
|
2024-02-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Other nominees include Mariah Carey, Oasis, Ozzy Osborne and Cher, who has previously vowed not to accept.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Sinéad O'Connor has been nominated for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame alongside Cher, Mariah Carey and Oasis.
The Irish singer, who died in July 2023 at the age of 56, shot to fame in 1990 with her song Nothing Compares To U.
Fifteen acts have been nominated, they will be narrowed down to a smaller number who will be inducted into the Hall.
The finalists are chosen by 1,000 industry experts and a public vote. The winners will be announced in April.
The ceremony will take place later this year at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio.
Artists become eligible for induction 25 years after the release of their first record.
Mariah Carey is nominated for the first time
Ozzy Osbourne is already in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame for his career with Black Sabbath, but this nomination is for his solo work.
If successful this year, he will become the 27th multiple inductee and join an elite group of artists including all four members of The Beatles, Stevie Nicks and Tina Turner.
Osbourne said he was "deeply honoured" and the nomination was something he "could never have imagined".
Eric Clapton is the only musician to be inducted three times, for his solo career and his work with Cream and The Yardbirds.
Cher has previously been snubbed by the Hall of Fame
Cher, who had never previously been nominated, spoke about the perceived snub last year. The star said she would not join even if they paid her "a million dollars".
"I'm never going to change my mind. They can just go you-know-what themselves," she added.
Oasis have been nominated for the first time but it is unlikely that Liam and Noel Gallagher will attend the ceremony together and perform if inducted.
The band broke up in 2009 following a series of arguments.
But Noel Gallagher told the BBC last year that he would "never say never" to a reunion.
John Sykes, chairman of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Foundation, said: "This remarkable list of nominees reflects the diverse artists and music that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame honours and celebrates."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68267253
|
news_entertainment-arts-68267253
|
|
Kuenssberg: Are the politics of climate change going out of fashion? - BBC News
|
2024-02-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Debate is shifting to cost concerns as net zero targets fast approach, says Laura Kuenssberg.
|
UK Politics
|
What's in vogue? Not just Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer in this month's glossy mag, or news that "discreet chic" is back and flamboyant "statement gowns" are out!
Politics has fashions too - what's in and out. It's not so long ago that world leaders were jostling to be pictured with celebs like Leonardo diCaprio, Stella McCartney or Emma Watson at the huge COP26 climate conference in Glasgow where Boris Johnson played host.
Then, it was hip to be green - being at COP in 2021 was the political equivalent of the fashion week front row. But with Labour shrinking away from its big £28bn commitments this week, and the Conservatives shifting tack and rumoured to be dropping the so-called "boiler tax", there's no doubt trends have changed.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak took the first steps back in September. He didn't junk the government's green commitments but slowed the pace of existing plans.
Some Conservatives were delighted at he was heeding some voters' concerns about the cost of going green, most notably extending the ultra low emissions zone to outer London. Other Tories were infuriated it sent the message that the environment was less important, and that irritation has festered since then, with former minister Chris Skidmore quitting as an MP.
This week however it's been the Labour leadership's turn, finally getting rid of its vow to spend £28bn a year to help the country go green.
Without adding to the vast acreage of coverage about this decision, it shows above all that Labour wants to reassure voters it would be careful with their cash over anything else.
It's worth noting this week was the deadline for Labour's top team to give their manifesto plans to shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves.
The decision was finally made, after weeks of Tory taunting, when the sums actually had to add up. Alongside its manifesto, Labour will publish a "grey book" that will set out its exact spending plans.
So close to an election the view at the top is that every line of those calculations has to be accurate.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. After weeks of speculation, the Labour leader says the party is dropping its spending commitment.
The leaderships of both main parties have moved, but there isn't agreement among their ranks either. On the right of the Conservatives, there's pressure on No 10 now to ditch the so called "boiler tax" - planned fines payable by boiler makers if they fail to hit targets for selling new heat pumps.
Former cabinet minister Robert Jenrick is one of those thundering about the risks of "dangerous green fantasy economics". But there's a pull from the other direction too.
The previously mentioned Chris Skidmore suggested that "if the UK does not step up, or turns its face against net zero opportunities, it would be an economic disaster".
In turn, Sir Keir Starmer's been accused by Labour former minister Barry Gardiner of being "economically illiterate and environmentally irresponsible".
Another of his MPs, Clive Lewis, responded to this announcement by tweeting a meme of Homer Simpson shrinking backwards into a hedge to describe how he'll feel on the doorstep talking to voters this weekend.
Others are frankly relieved the big number has gone, with one insider telling me it was "not our finest hour in terms of handling but we will look back and be really grateful that we did it".
While the parties' political attitudes have been shifting what has not budged at all is the obligations they face - not because of star-studded celeb pressure or activists gluing themselves to roads.
This is because, just before she left office, Theresa May changed the law in an absolutely profound way by introducing legislation that would force the UK to hit net zero by 2050.
In 2020 that was followed by another target to cut emissions by nearly 70% by 2030.
At the time the former PM pushed it through at breakneck speed 2050 seemed very far away. The practicalities of how such an ambition would be achieved were so vague that MPs (mostly) happily signed up.
One of those involved in the decision told me this week: "We thought it was the right thing to do but we understood we didn't have all the answers. It was a bit like when JFK said we are going to land a man on the moon at the end of the decade. He had no idea how he'd do it but it was a clear ambition."
Despite shifting political passions that clear ambition and obligation has already had a major effect on what the government is actually doing.
One climate leader points to the package for cleaner steel at Port Talbot, or new laws on electric vehicles, for example, but adds that the government is "green hushing" - taking action but playing it down because "they don't want any coverage of it".
There is a definite sense in industry that politicians are yet to understand fully the scale of the changes that have to be made to reboot the energy system - the "transition".
Endless shifts in specifics of policies, or arguments about headline numbers risk missing the big picture. But with both the Conservatives and Labour grappling with the realities of what the big long-term commitments to net zero might really mean, perhaps what we are seeing is a new phase in this argument.
Polling consistently shows that action on climate change is near the top of voters' concerns - at number three on research group More In Common's list behind the cost of living and the health service, and not just among those on the left or the under-40s.
Was the climate in vogue when Rishi Sunak went to the COP27 climate conference in Egypt shortly after becoming prime minister?
But as we move closer to the 2050 and 2030 targets the practical realities of the move to a greener economy will hit closer to home.
As one of the architects of the 2050 law, a former senior Conservative figure, said now "we've got to the point where it is starting to affect individual families it was always going to become politically contentious".
The public wants action generically, but might not like the effect of them - or as it was put to me: "Voters are allowed to be hypocrites - they can say 'I want you to do more' but then when you do, they say 'oh I didn't mean that'."
You can be horrified by what's happening to the planet round the world, but not be too eager to pay thousands for a new boiler at home.
There's a tension between how fast our two main parties are willing to move to tackle climate change and the rules and targets they set themselves.
But there is impatience in industry over how the appetite to act goes in and out of fashion, because much of the money to green the economy will come from them.
Maybe our conversations about the climate are becoming less about emotion and more about the economy. The problem is real. Now the political arguments are here to stay.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68261445
|
news_uk-politics-68261445
|
|
Laura Kuenssberg: Rachel Reeves could be our next chancellor - but what's she really like? - BBC News
|
2024-03-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Laura Kuenssberg speaks to Reeves' friends, colleagues, and opponents to explore the kind of politician she is.
|
UK Politics
|
Rachel Reeves often spent school holidays with her grandparents in the Northamptonshire town of Kettering.
She'd be taken to do the rounds of other relatives, who would press the odd 20p piece into her and her sister Ellie's palms for holiday treats. At the end of their week, they were taken to the local toy shop to choose their goodies, her sister Ellie tells me.
Like most of us as kids, Ellie would spend all of her cash. But the young Rachel would only allow herself something small - and save most of the money.
Decades later, Rachel Reeves, now Labour's shadow chancellor (Ellie is also a Labour MP), wants you to believe that kind of restraint defines her.
An MP since 2010, she has been talked about as a possible chancellor for years in Westminster's gossip factory. And while the election is miles away, and a lot could still change, right now she appears on track to become the most powerful woman in the country as chancellor.
Yet pollsters report the public doesn't know much about her. People rarely mention her spontaneously in focus groups - and one recent snapshot from the polling group More in Common suggests only 10% of the public really know what she stands for.
So I've spoken to 20 different sources - her friends, colleagues, and opponents - to explore the kind of politician she is, and how she would handle the difficulties and dilemmas she might face both now and in the coming years.
The universal verdict on Reeves is that she could not be any more serious about power, or any more determined to win.
Growing up in south London, her mum showed her how to manage the family's finances sitting at the kitchen table - Reeves has said that "we weren't poor but we didn't have money to spare".
Motivated by her own experience of public services - huge classes and not enough text books at school - she started banging on doors for Labour as a teenager in the run-up to the 1997 election and caught the politics bug, working for a decade as an economist before being elected in 2010 as the MP for Leeds West.
Colleagues describe her brain power and hunger for work - she "messages at all times of day and night", says one.
Another says Reeves "is normally the cleverest person in the room", and that she does not blag.
Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you.
One fellow shadow minister says she "chews through calls and briefings", adding: "I have never, ever, ever, seen her unprepared."
Her public persona does not reveal her humour and human side, her colleagues say. She laughs loudly in Westminster's corridors and loves a glass of wine, they say. She belts out show tunes during campaign trips and listens to Beyonce when she runs.
She also fiercely protects time for her young family, they say - like many working parents, she crammed in making a costume for World Book Day last weekend, which she joked with colleagues about later.
But one of her friends says politically she is "hard as nails". Another member of the Labour front bench told me: "She is a normal, likeable, relatable person but you wouldn't want to get on the wrong side of her politically because she would probably eat you for breakfast."
Insiders say Sir Keir Starmer, left, and Rachel Reeves, right, have developed a good friendship
Reeves and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer didn't know each other particularly well before he hired her as shadow chancellor after the party's defeat in the 2021 Hartlepool by-election. But insiders say they have developed a good working relationship and friendship - "he thinks like a lawyer, she thinks like an economist" but "they are both good at cutting out the crap", another source says.
Starmer respects her views but "it is very clear who is the boss", another colleague says. And while Reeves might be very controlled in public, those who know her well say sometimes she might give away a little frustration.
"The Rachel Reeves eye roll is legendary," says one person, referring back to this moment years ago as evidence.
Reeves certainly faces serious dilemmas both now and if Labour wins.
In the aftermath of the Budget she has a big question to answer about where Labour will find the extra cash it wants to spend.
Conservatives have adopted some of Labour's tax raising plans - cracking down on non-doms and extending the windfall tax on gas and oil companies. Labour concedes there is a £2bn "hole" in their plans. The Conservatives contest it's double that.
And longer term, if Labour wins, she has said herself that the party will inherit the worst economic situation since the aftermath of World War Two.
One union leader said: "She is staring into the most difficult job imaginable."
There is massive pressure both from inside and outside Labour over how she should approach that.
She has resolved to accept the same ground rules as the Conservatives: that the government should not borrow any more cash to pay for everyday spending on schools and hospitals, and to show that the government is chipping away at the country's debt within five years of winning power.
After the economic disasters of the pandemic and the effect of the war in Ukraine, public money is very, very tight.
Reeves wants to stick to strict spending plans, not spending money that, in the words of one colleague, "doesn't exist". It's not a surprise - she has a proper pedigree in economics and her first boss was Andrew Bailey, now the governor of the Bank of England.
Her approach won't please everyone in the party, as one observer explains.
Her tight grip on the books means it's hard to make big, expensive promises that might go down well with some voters - or at the very least, show that they're different to the Conservatives.
Voters are often unconvinced that there is much that separates the parties, as we heard a few weeks ago. Some in the party are anxious about this and accuse Reeves and other shadow ministers of sounding "robotic", like "automatons".
It's her economic judgement, but it's also a political judgement - she is all too aware the Conservatives want to run a campaign claiming Labour will raise taxes and raise spending. "She knows the Tories are desperate for an election fight about income taxes," says one shadow minister. "She won't give them that."
Another senior figure says the political logic is crystal clear - to give the Tories as "small a target as possible".
Right on cue, one of her Conservative opponents tells me: "I think she is uninspiring but she is doing exactly what she should be doing to win an election, which is being dishonest with the public about what they will do if they win - which is spend more and tax more."
Whether you buy her arguments or not, she has wrenched back economic credibility for Labour, which is polling ahead of the government on the economy. This is no mean feat, as one of her friends says. "Our position is unrecognisable - I don't think she gets enough credit."
But both Labour and the government have also been criticised for a "conspiracy of silence" about how tightly they might squeeze spending if they win the election. Reeves has put huge efforts into wooing the City - but there is more work to do to convince people that Labour has a clear, credible economic plan.
"She makes all the right noises and clearly knows what she is talking about," says one City insider, but there is a desire to hear more, to know more, about what kind of economy she really wants to create, and question marks over whether Labour is really ready.
One of the party's own business supporters tells me that Labour needs "more resource and heft for thinking."
They hope for more boldness, referencing New Labour's plan to give the Bank of England independence in 1997, cooked up by Ed Balls and Gordon Brown. "Where's the 2024 equivalent of Ed Balls?" they ask.
But given Labour has been ahead in the polls for such a long time, perhaps there is not much political incentive for the party to change its approach. We'll see tomorrow if Reeves is willing to be more forthcoming in our studio.
Despite the difficulties and dilemmas, her friends and colleagues agree she is not someone who budges easily. She is not in politics for the grandstanding, but to get things done according to her beliefs.
Those beliefs are "hard to pin down to one faction or tribe", a fellow front bencher says. During the Corbyn years she focused on her committee work. She neither became public critic number one nor sat alongside Jeremy Corbyn on the front bench, as Keir Starmer did.
One friend says: "She is not remotely interested in the posings of opposition, the clicks and likes, and people who want to display their credentials and display their politics."
But she is, of course, a politician. One colleague notes that she "understands 'small p' politics very well, always dropping little texts, knowing what matters to different colleagues". Unusually in this world, she doesn't seem to have enemies - at least not yet.
In December, Reeves spoke at the funeral of Alistair Darling, the former chancellor who took her under his wing when she became an MP. She spoke fondly of having lasagne and red wine with him and his wife, and of his counsel - he found himself in charge during a massive crisis when families and the country were having a hard time making ends meet.
The Budget last week was the first occasion as shadow chancellor when she wasn't able to seek his advice. But in her eulogy, she quoted his previous words to her: "Make the sums add up, don't fall into any political traps, but remember to offer hope."
It is abundantly clear how Labour and Rachel Reeves are trying to follow the first two mantras - less clear so far on what "hope" actually means to them.
A colleague of Reeves told me that when she and her team attend one of their many "business breakfasts" there are always lavish pastries left over. Rather than abandon them, Reeves gets her team to take the leftovers back to the office - having asked permission of their hosts first, of course.
She may not be saving her holiday money at the toy shop any longer - but for Rachel Reeves, perhaps restraint really does come first.
What questions would you like to ask Labour's shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves and Health Secretary Victoria Atkins this Sunday?
In some cases your question will be published, displaying your name, age and location as you provide it, unless you state otherwise. Your contact details will never be published. Please ensure you have read our terms & conditions and privacy policy.
Use this form to ask your question:
If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or send them via email to YourQuestions@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any question you send in.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68521722
|
news_uk-politics-68521722
|
|
Tibet boarding schools: China accused of trying to silence language - BBC News
|
2024-03-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mandarin is being taught to Tibetans as their main language, threatening the future of their culture.
|
China
|
Fewer Tibetans are learning their own language as more people are taught Mandarin Chinese
Tibetan educational sociologist Gyal Lo can speak Mandarin Chinese fluently - but he would rather not.
He has spent the last few years telling the world about Beijing's sweeping educational reforms in Tibetan areas, and would prefer not to use the language of people he identifies as colonial oppressors.
China has expanded the use of boarding schools - for children as young as four - and replaced Tibetan as the main language of tuition with Chinese.
Beijing says these reforms give Tibetan children the best possible preparation for their adult lives, in a country where the main language of communication is Mandarin Chinese.
But Dr Gyal Lo disagrees - he believes Beijing's real aim is to undermine the Tibetan identity, by targeting the very youngest in society.
"They've designed the curriculum that produces a population that will not be able to practise their own language and culture in the future," he said.
"China is using education as a tool to minimise Tibetans' social capacity. No one will be able to resist their rule."
Dr Gyal Lo fled China in 2020 and now lives in Canada
Overseas human rights organisations have for decades been highlighting alleged abuses carried out by China in Tibet - but not much over recent years.
The focus has shifted to Beijing's treatment of Muslim Uyghurs, in China's north-western region of Xinjiang, and the pro-democracy protest movement in Hong Kong.
But activists say Chinese officials have been busy in Tibet too.
Over recent years, the Chinese government has closed village schools - and private ones teaching Tibetan - and expanded the use of boarding schools.
These have been in operation for many decades in a number of Chinese regions that are thinly populated - but in Tibetan areas, they appear to have become the main means of education.
Campaigners estimate that 80% of Tibetan children - perhaps one million pupils - are now taught in boarding schools, from pre-school-age onwards.
You can listen to the radio documentary, Educating Tibet, on BBC World Service Assignment here.
In a statement to the BBC, the Chinese embassy in London said this policy was necessary.
"Due to a highly scattered population, children have to travel long distances to get to school, which is very inconvenient," it said.
"If schools were to be built in every place the students live, it would be very difficult to ensure adequate teachers and quality of teaching. That is why local governments set up boarding schools."
But opponents say this kind of schooling creates psychological trauma for children who are forcibly separated from their families, who are pressured to send their children away.
"The most challenging aspect of my life was missing my family," said one Tibetan teenager, who attended a boarding school for several years, until she was 10.
She has since fled Tibet and now lives in India. The BBC spoke to her after making contact through a campaign group.
"There were many other children who missed their families and cried too," she said. "Some of the younger ones often woke up in the middle of the night crying, and would run to the school gate."
Boarding schools, like this one in Nyingchi Prefecture, are now thought to be the main means of education in Tibet
The BBC spoke to other Tibetan exiles who had heard similar complaints from their relatives still living back home.
Dr Gyal Lo has his own story, about two of his grandnieces, who were sent away to boarding school when they were just four and six.
After observing them at a family dinner, he realised that they felt awkward speaking their mother tongue.
"The way they were sitting there made me think they weren't comfortable sharing the same identity as their family members. They were like guests," he said.
It prompted the sociologist, who was then working at the Northwest University for Nationalities in Lanzhou, to visit 50 Tibetan boarding schools to see if other children were the same. They were.
Dr Gyal Lo compares these boarding schools to those that were once operated in the United States, Canada and Australia.
Native children were taken away from their families in a process of assimilation that has now been discredited.
"These kids are completely cut off from their cultural roots, and the emotional connection between their parents, their families and their community," he said.
The second major change to the education system concerns the Tibetan language, a rich oral and written tradition going back more than one thousand years.
China has replaced Tibetan as the main language of tuition with Mandarin Chinese.
Campaigners say Chinese is now valued above other languages in Tibetan schools
The Chinese embassy said ethnic minorities in China had "the freedom to use and develop their own spoken and written languages".
But the student the BBC spoke to said only Chinese was encouraged at her school.
"All the classes were taught in Chinese, except for the Tibetan language class. Our school had a big library, but I didn't see any Tibetan books there," she said.
This policy appears to run contrary to international human rights law, according to Professor Alexandra Xanthaki, a UN special rapporteur on cultural rights.
She said parents had the right to send their children to a school that used the language of their choice.
"This means that just one or two hours where it's being taught as a foreign language is not enough," she said.
There were protests against China's Tibet policy outside the UN human rights session in Geneva last month
Just over a year ago, Prof Xanthaki and two other UN rapporteurs wrote a letter to China detailing a series of complaints about its educational reforms in Tibet.
The letter suggested China was trying to "homogenise" ethnic minorities, so they would become more Chinese, with Mandarin seen as the vehicle to achieve that goal.
Dr Gyal Lo remembers an argument he had with the vice-president of a university in Yunnan province, where he went to work after Lanzhou. It illustrates how Chinese is valued above other languages.
"He came to my office one day and said, 'you're producing Tibetan articles, but not Chinese articles'," recalled the sociologist.
"It made me uncomfortable and angry. I told him I don't want produce Chinese articles." The administrator turned red and stormed out.
Shortly after that incident, in 2020, Dr Gyal Lo fled China and now lives in Canada, from where he campaigns to highlight the educational changes taking place in Tibet.
Beijing is vigorously resisting the narrative put forward by activists like him. It has launched a propaganda campaign to convince the world that its reforms are beneficial.
It has also tried to discredit those who say otherwise. Prof Xanthaki was accused by China of spreading fake news. Dr Gyal Lo has been targeted too. His authority to speak on this issue has been questioned in Chinese state media.
Despite that, he remains undeterred, if pessimistic about the future for Tibetan language and culture, and the region's young people.
"Our children are becoming an alienated generation. Many will not be able to fit in either Chinese society or Tibetan society."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-68492043
|
news_world-asia-china-68492043
|
|
Jeremy Hunt's Budget was more radical than it looked - BBC News
|
2024-03-10
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
It lacked pre-election fireworks, but there was a radical thread that could have long-term consequences.
|
Business
|
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (L) and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt (R) have tea and biscuits on their post-Budget visit
Rishi Sunak started the week giving a speech on a construction site in Swindon, with diggers and cranes in the background.
So far, so typical for a prime minister in Budget week - all that was missing was for Mr Sunak to pop on a hard hat.
The diggers were knocking down the town's Honda factory, 35 years after Margaret Thatcher lured the Japanese car giant to the UK. There are hopes that the redevelopment of the site will lead to thousands of new jobs, but it is still unclear what they might be.
There are parallels with this week's Budget. Is this the start of a period of more economic growth and confident renewal? Or have several years of acute uncertainty left the economic picture permanently diminished?
The chancellor is relying on voters seeing their glasses as half-full, rather than half-empty.
Will workers celebrate paying less tax than they thought they were going to six months ago? Or decry the fact they are paying more than they were told five years ago?
While the Budget lacked pre-election fireworks, there was a quietly radical thread that could have long-term consequences.
By 2027, because of cuts to National Insurance (NI) and the decision to freeze income tax thresholds, for every £1 NI cut, £1.90 will be raised in taxes.
This "fiscal drag" will mean over three million more higher-rate taxpayers, and nearly four million more low earners paying tax. On current trends, a recipient of the full basic state pension alone is also on course to have to pay tax, and perhaps fill out a tax return in 2026/27.
The government is shifting the tax burden away from workers towards all forms of income including savings and pensions.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has cast this as a strategy that could lead to the abolition of National Insurance. Mr Sunak is selling this as a simplification of the tax system, and the end of the "double taxation" of work.
Presumably, this forms the cornerstone of a manifesto promise to "end the jobs tax", and would be paid for from further extensions of the freeze on income tax thresholds.
The thinking is that these incentivise work. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which monitors the government's spending plans and performance, said levels of inactivity were back at post-pandemic levels and were holding back growth.
This is another example of the government appearing to prioritise policies that "score" with the OBR. Its chair Richard Hughes protested this week when I asked him whether he was in fact running the country. "Our only power is to forecast," he said.
According to the OBR's calculations this week's 2% NI cut and last November's 2% cut in the Autumn Statement do not offset the extra income tax being paid as a result of the tax thresholds being frozen.
But the fact that taxes on income overall are being raised means pensioners will see higher tax bills as their income increases. There is a backlash against this, but it is due to their income rising, with the state pension set to increase by 8.5% from April.
Overall this is not a tax cut, with fiscal drag equating to the biggest single tax rise in 45 years and since Mrs Thatcher's Chancellor Geoffrey Howe nearly doubled the rate of VAT in 1979.
"U-turn" does not capture the galactic extent of the Conservative change in direction
Here is what is very curious. The Conservative strategy on tax has completely turned on its head.
Not far from the old Honda factory in Swindon, David Cameron launched his 2015 election manifesto with a commitment to raise income tax thresholds above inflation to take people out of the income tax system, and to prevent many upper-middle earners paying higher-rate tax.
It was the absolute cornerstone of Conservative tax strategy in 2017, too.
What we see now is pretty much the entire reversal of that. "U-turn" does not really capture the galactic extent of this change in direction. In 2010, there were three million higher taxpayers, by 2029 there will be 7.3 million.
Then there is another reversal - on how to fund rising public service costs. It was only three years ago that Mr Sunak was making the argument for raising spending on the NHS and social care by increasing National Insurance to 13.25%. The policy now is to decrease National Insurance to 8% and the adult social care plan is officially on ice.
Clearly, this is after a pandemic and energy crisis, and probably partly reflects the wild political ride - including four chancellors and three prime ministers in the same period of time.
Details are sparse on the precise trade-offs for unprotected areas such as councils, courts, prisons and social care. The chancellor said this was because plans are undecided and reliant on a government spending review which he has now said will not be done until after the general election.
Labour and the Tories have been accused of a "conspiracy of silence" over tough post election choices
Labour are also as yet unwilling to go into much detail, but leader Keir Starmer was in a hard hat meeting apprentices on a different building site in London this week, vowing to "build more houses".
An influential think tank, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, points to what it calls a "conspiracy of silence" about the tough decisions required after the election.
At the moment, Labour's promise is to fund services from higher growth, but the central plank of its growth plan, spending an extra £28bn per year on green investment, has been parked.
So the Budget may or may not herald a turnaround in the economy. But it was the confirmation of a considerable turn in economic policy, especially on who pays taxes in times of need.
From now until the election there will not be a building site in a swing seat not visited by the main party leaders dressed up in hard hats and protective goggles, as they seek to persuade the public they can rebuild the economy out of recession. But both are yet to finish construction of their long term plans to return Britain's economy to sustained growth.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68516710
|
news_business-68516710
|
|
Israel reveals Eurovision song after weeks of wrangling - BBC News
|
2024-03-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The lyrics have been revised, after Israel's initial entry was rejected for its perceived political overtones.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Eden Golan will represent Israel at the song contest in Sweden this May
Israel has unveiled its revised entry for the Eurovision Song Contest, after the original version was rejected for its perceived political overtones.
Eden Golan will now sing Hurricane, a rewritten version of October Rain, which was thought to reference the 7 October Hamas attacks on Israel.
The soaring, impassioned piano ballad premiered on Israeli TV on Sunday.
The lyrics now told the story of a woman experiencing a personal crisis, said Israel's public broadcaster, Kan.
The European Broadcasting Union (EBU), which organises Eurovision, rejected October Rain last month.
Lyrics such as "There's no air left to breathe," and "They were all good children, each one of them," were seen as references to the victims of Hamas's deadly attack, which triggered Israel's current ground offensive in Gaza.
Kan initially refused to change the song, saying it would prefer to withdraw from the contest - but Israel's President, Isaac Herzog, later called for "necessary adjustments" to ensure the country could participate.
The broadcaster said: "The president emphasised that at this time in particular, when those who hate us seek to push aside and boycott the state of Israel from every stage, Israel must sound its voice with pride and its head high and raise its flag in every world forum, especially this year."
Musically, Hurricane is the same song as October Rain - but the lyrics are now more general, with phrases such as "Every day, I'm losing my mind" and "I'm still broken from this hurricane."
As expected, the phrase "October rain" has been excised completely.
This YouTube post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on YouTube The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. Skip youtube video by Eurovision Song Contest This article contains content provided by Google YouTube. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Google’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts.
Another significant change is the word "flowers" has been replaced by "powers". According to the Israel Hayom newspaper, the former is often used to denote Israel's war fatalities.
The spoken-word section, which Golan delivers in Hebrew, has also been altered. The original references to poisoned air and dead children have been switched for the more generic: "No need for big words, only prayers. Even if it's hard to see, you always leave me one small light."
As the song was revealed, Golan, 20, addressed the difficulty of representing Israel at such a politically sensitive time.
"I ended up in a not simple year," she told the Times of Israel.
"But on the other hand, I even more so want to represent the country this year, because of its meaning - it has a totally different significance.
"And we can bring everything we're feeling, and everything the country is going through, in those three minutes. To speak through the song to the world."
Israel has won Euorvision four times since its first appearance, in 1973. Last year, it was represented by pop sensation Noa Kirel, whose acrobatic dance number Unicorn placed third.
But the country has faced serious opposition to its participation in this year's contest, due to concerns over the humanitarian cost of the war in Gaza.
Last week, Belgium's French-speaking Culture Minister, Benedicte Linard, called for Israel to be banned as long as the war continued.
"Just like Russia has been excluded from competitions and Eurovision following its invasion of Ukraine, Israel should be excluded until it puts an end to its flagrant violations of international law, which are causing thousands of victims, especially children," she wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Israel insists its ground offensive is in line with international law. Its military has repeatedly said it goes out of its way to try to avoid harming civilians.
Ms Linard also told parliament on Wednesday she would ask public broadcaster Radio-télévision belge de la Communauté française (RTBF), which is organising Belgium's entry to Eurovision, to voice the concerns to the EBU.
Her Flemish counterpart, Benjamin Dalle, said an Israeli suspension would be appropriate while so many Palestinian civilians were suffering, according to Flemish broadcaster VRT.
Musicians in several countries have also called for Israel to be suspended from the contest. Before he was selected to represent the UK, Olly Alexander also endorsed a statement accusing Israel of genocide.
An Israeli official later told the UK's Daily Telegraph newspaper the arguments were "absurd" and accused Alexander and his fellow signatories of "anti-Israel bias".
Israel launched an air and ground campaign in Gaza after Hamas's 7 October attacks, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 253 taken hostage.
More than 30,800 people have been killed in Gaza since then, the territory's Hamas-run Health Ministry says.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68533031
|
news_entertainment-arts-68533031
|
|
Geoff Norcott: Should my son bother going to uni? - BBC News
|
2024-03-11
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The comedian and former teacher says he has become sceptical about the value of university degrees.
|
UK
|
Comedian and former teacher Geoff Norcott wonders if he should encourage his son to go to university or learn a trade instead.
Students today contend with tuition fees, the rising cost of living and can't always breeze into well-paid graduate jobs.
Geoff travelled around the country for a BBC Two documentary to find out if university is worth all the time and money.
In 1998, I graduated with a 2:1 in English Literature from Goldsmiths College in London. My mum, who'd been brought up in care and was struggling to pay the bills on our council property, sat wiping away tears as I collected that coveted scroll.
So why is it that, only one generation on, I'm highly sceptical as to whether a university education would be the right thing for my son?
It's surprising I now feel this way, considering I was a teacher during the early noughties and fully invested in Tony Blair's idea of encouraging every living thing to get a degree. He talked about "higher standards for all" and wanting 50% of young people to go to uni. Governments since then have also continued on that road.
Blair declared education to be his top three priorities. At the time, I'd have suggested they should've also formed numbers four, five and six and been tattooed on his forearm. So where has my antipathy (and I'm not alone) towards degrees and universities suddenly come from?
On one level, it's a consequence of knowing degrees have become much more common. UK graduate levels have risen from around 4% in the early 1960s to nearly 40% today (according to the House of Commons Library).
Scarcity has value, we all know why diamonds cost more than pebbles.
I met a vice chancellor who countered this, informing me that dynamic, developed countries aim even higher than the UK's current rates.
Maybe, as someone who's learned his job telling jokes to rowdy stags and hens, I'm naturally dubious about the need for formal qualifications. But the feeling persists that, where once a degree would guarantee a good job, now it has become an expensive entry requirement to any job at all.
Comedian and former teacher Geoff Norcott has a tough decision to make - start a university fund for his son to follow in his footsteps and attend university or buy himself a new car.
There's a strong argument for following a subject you're passionate about and experiencing uni life, but it's hard to get past the hugely increased cost. In 1998, Labour introduced "top-up" tuition fees of £1,000 across the UK (they were abolished in Scotland shortly afterwards).
The annual charges rose through the early noughties, but the biggest jump to £9,000 was in 2012 under the coalition government.
The current rate is a little higher - it can be up to £9,250. A huge difference to the free education I enjoyed - in my day tuition was free and you could apply for financial help with your living expenses.
You could argue that by injecting cash into the system, the fees helped raise the standard of university teaching and facilities. Or it could be more proof, if it were needed, that things have got generally worse for students since the mid-90s and the release of Now That's What I Call Music 37.
Additionally, most students in the UK have to take out eye-watering maintenance loans, which haven't kept pace with the recent cost-of-living crisis. So, since I went to uni, the overall cost of getting a degree has gone up while, some perceive, its value has gone down.
According to a YouGov poll in 2022, a staggering 69% of graduates, in England and Wales, felt their degree wasn't worth it.
Of course this is only one survey, but I don't need a PHD in business studies to tell me these metrics are moving in the wrong direction.
In recent years students have been particularly unlucky, losing a huge part of their face-to-face education to a pandemic and long-running strikes. In one 14-day staff walkout an estimated 575,000 teaching hours were lost.
Some students sympathise with the claims of lecturers and their unions, that staff are not paid enough and sometimes have to work zero-hours contracts. But it's often young people, already paying huge sums for an education, who end up as collateral.
Geoff with some students protesting in Brighton
During the pandemic, many universities had to teach their students remotely and in-person lectures did not return for some time. It can't feel like value for money when your lecturer starts buffering halfway through a class.
My fears that the general value of degrees are sliding hasn't been helped by the phenomenon of "grade inflation".
The rate of students getting firsts across the UK almost doubled between 2010 and 2020, figures from the Office for Students suggest.
It would be lovely to believe our brightest students have become twice as intelligent, but I also wonder if the "businessification" of higher education, where some might argue students are regarded as customers, puts more pressure on the universities to give them what they want.
One lecturer, who wanted to remain anonymous, told me in the programme that they had been told several times in different ways "don't fail any students this year".
I wonder, if I was at uni today, I may well look at a 2:2 and respond like a coercive mob boss. "A two-two you say? Well I've got 50 grand here which says otherwise."
Grade inflation has started to fall slightly in recent years - and universities say they are beginning to tackle the issue. They are also helping to bolster local economies, one councillor told me, with the sheer numbers of students and support staff on campuses - plus university research projects helping to start new businesses.
The stats still suggest graduates will benefit from a net-financial gain across their career, but that's an average which skews heavily towards certain universities and professions.
Indeed, a male doing creative arts is likely to earn more by starting work straight from school (which poses difficult questions about all that time I spent trying to decipher James Joyce).
There are other ways of making money. Of my childhood friends, many of the wealthiest now have their name on the side of a van. Maybe trades should be the way forward?
It's a hunch I got to stress-test when I spent the day with some chirpy, aspirational plumbers from Hull. They take on apprentices straight from school and teach them skills on the job - the new starters even get paid.
Geoff joined plumbers in Hull for the day
I ended up wondering if I should go even harder influencing my son to join their profession, or start putting the Super Mario movie on repeat in the hope he becomes a plumber, or at the very least starts eating more mushrooms.
In a world where AI seems capable of doing most things, it may be that plumbing is the one job technology could never supersede (computers would be hard pushed to understand the irrational nature of a leak in a Victorian semi or the bodge-jobs successive generations of dads have inflicted along the way).
While the university experience will always have value - and degrees will remain the obvious choice for certain professions - maybe it's time to strip away sentiment and ask whether we're advising young people to apply because it's the right option for them, or because we like the idea of them striding across that stage and holding that piece of paper.
The photo will always look great, but the value of the scroll they're holding might have changed more than we like to admit.
• None How much does university cost and does it boost earnings?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68484598
|
news_uk-68484598
|
|
Tate Britain unveils new counterpoint to offensive Rex Whistler mural - BBC News
|
2024-03-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Viva Voce, a film by Keith Piper, will be shown alongside the racist Rex Whistler 1920s painting.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
The mural's room had been a fine restaurant for almost a century
The Tate Britain has unveiled a new work that seeks to contextualise a 1927 mural that has been sealed off from the public since 2020 for its use of racist imagery.
Viva Voce, a film by Keith Piper, has been installed next to Rex Whistler's painting, which includes depictions of black slaves on a leash and caricatures of Chinese figures.
The Tate said the film, which imagines an academic challenging Whistler about his mural, explores "the social and political context of 1920s Britain".
The 20-minute video piece also considers the time and place in which Whistler was working, discussing his social circle and their consumption of black jazz music.
It also includes archival footage of black soldiers during the First World War; and the notorious "Races in Residence" pavilion at the 1924 British Empire Exhibition.
The latter saw almost 300 people from colonised countries living on the exhibition grounds and providing demonstrations of native crafts - as though they were curiosities on display.
Piper is a multi-media artist and academic, who was part of the British Black Arts movement in the early 1980s.
He said it was important to interrogate the Whistler mural to understand how these images came to be created.
"As a teacher, I speak to young artists all the time, questioning them about their practice," he said.
"I want to give a sense of how and why the mural exists," he added.
The new film is displayed as a two-screen video piece
Speaking to The Guardian, he defended Tate Britain's decision to keep the mural rather than remove it.
"I know there is an argument among young people now that these images re-traumatise, but I think we either look or forget," he said.
"We are very good at forgetting nowadays and things that are out of sight go out of mind. To keep a clear sense of history we need to see these things.
Rex Whistler's mural, titled The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meat, was previously housed in a restaurant at Tate Britain.
In 2020, the Tate's ethics committee said they "were unequivocal in their view that the imagery of the work is offensive".
The room was subsequently shuttered during the pandemic and has not reopened since.
In 2022, it was announced the gallery would be commissioning an installation to "be exhibited alongside and in dialogue with the mural, reframing the way the space is experienced".
They said the work "should not be altered or removed", but noted the "uncomfortable juxtaposition of the mural and an eating space".
Tate Britain's director, Alex Farquhar son, said in 2022 the mural presented a "unique challenge".
He added: "The mural is part of our institutional and cultural history and we must take responsibility for it, but this new approach will also enable us to reflect the values and commitments we hold today and to bring new voices and ideas to the fore."
Zarina Muhammad and Gabrielle de la Puente, who make up art criticism duo The White Pube, previously told the BBC: "The mural does not need to be kept to be remembered; the mural certainly does not need to be continuously restored with millions of pounds worth of funding in order for us to discuss the problems within its imagery.
"We can still talk about the horrible things it stands for even after it is destroyed, and destruction isn't an end point. So it should go. Tate should stop defending it."
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68546969
|
news_entertainment-arts-68546969
|
|
Ghislaine Maxwell appeals sex abuse conviction - BBC News
|
2024-03-12
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The convicted sex offender's lawyers argue she is covered by a deal made with prosecutors in 2008.
|
US & Canada
|
Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell have argued that she should be set free under the terms of a previous deal with federal prosecutors.
She was sentenced to 20 years in prison in June 2022.
Her lawyer, Diane Fabi Samson, told a court in New York on Tuesday that the British socialite was covered by a previous deal with prosecutors.
But US government attorneys say that deal, which saw her boyfriend Epstein serve a light sentence for sex crimes, should not allow Maxwell to walk free.
Maxwell's appeal does not relate to the facts laid out at her trial but instead on the legal issues surrounding the agreement struck nearly 20 years ago.
The crimes of Epstein, who mixed with some of the world's most famous people, were first reported in the media in 2005.
In 2008, he made a deal with federal prosecutors that allowed him to plead guilty to state charges in Florida of soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution and served 13 months in prison.
As part of his plea agreement, which was later criticised by a Justice Department internal report, prosecutors agreed not to pursue his alleged co-conspirators.
Following numerous lawsuits, Epstein was arrested again in 2019 in a federal case in New York. He was found dead in his jail cell before he could be tried on sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide.
During Tuesday's hearing, Ms Fabi Samson called the Florida plea deal "weird" and "unusual" but argued that it should have halted any further action against Maxwell.
Prosecutors, however, have called the defence arguments "cursory and undeveloped" and say that the deal has no bearing on Maxwell's case.
During the hearing they argued that the agreement was limited to the Florida district where Epstein pleaded guilty. Maxwell was convicted in New York, where Tuesday's appeal hearing was held.
Throughout the course of Maxwell's 2022 trial, four women testified that they had been abused as minors at Epstein's homes in Florida, New York, New Mexico and the Virgin Islands.
They recounted how Maxwell had talked them into giving Epstein massages which turned sexual, luring them with gifts and promises about how Epstein could use his money and connections to help them.
During her trial, a judge rejected attempts to throw out the case, including an argument by Maxwell's lawyers that a juror had failed to inform the court that he had been abused as a child.
The judge also rejected arguments that Maxwell had not been allowed to prepare adequately for her trial, and that prosecutors had waited too long to bring their case against her.
The appeals court judgement will be handed down at a later date.
Outside the court, Maxwell's lawyers told the reporters that they were "cautiously optimistic" about their prospects of winning the appeal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Victims: 'We still want answers from Maxwell'
• None 'We still want answers from Ghislaine Maxwell'
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68515516
|
news_world-us-canada-68515516
|
|
Covid inquiry: Drakeford likens Johnson to absent football manager - BBC News
|
2024-03-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The outgoing first minister criticised the former prime minister's leadership during the pandemic.
|
Wales politics
|
The First Minister Mark Drakeford said Boris Johnson said "we must carry on, we must tell people this is a mild illness, they're not to get anxious about it"
Boris Johnson was like an "absent" football manager during Covid, an inquiry has heard.
First Minister Mark Drakeford criticised the former prime minister's leadership during the pandemic.
He also said Mr Johnson made comments "designed to minimise the seriousness" of Covid at the beginning.
Mr Drakeford's comments came on the penultimate day of the UK inquiry's Welsh module in Cardiff as he gave a whole day of evidence.
In a written statement to the inquiry, Mr Drakeford described Michael Gove, who was minister for the Cabinet Office during the early part of the pandemic as "a centre forward without a team behind him, and where the manager was largely absent".
At the inquiry, Mr Drakeford said: "The absent manager was the prime minister because he was never in these meetings or at the table, and while Mr Gove was a senior minister… he has influence rather than the determinative impact which a message from the prime minister would have."
Mark Drakeford was giving evidence on the 11th day of the Welsh module of the Covid Inquiry
He added he would have liked to have seen Mr Johnson chairing Cobra meetings sooner in the pandemic.
He said it would not necessarily change actions taken, but would have "sent a stronger signal about the seriousness with which the gathering storm was being taken".
But it was put to Mr Drakeford that his own absences from the first three Cobra meetings indicated a similar lack of serious approach being taken in Wales
He argued that at that stage it was a "health dominated" matter, requiring health advisors and decision-makers.
He also said Mr Johnson "deliberately" made it unclear lockdown rules only applied to England.
He told the inquiry the heads of the devolved nations had told the then-prime minister he needed to be clear in a press conference that changes to rules in the pandemic only applied to England.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Mark Drakeford becomes emotional as he describes not seeing his 90-year-old mother during lockdown
"[We said] he must make clear that what he is about to say does not apply to Scotland or Wales or Northern Ireland, and he gives assurance in the Cobra meeting that he will do his very best to make sure that he does that.
"He then heads to the cameras, and provides a script which the only time he refers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is when he says early in the press conference 'as the prime minister of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland'.
"It is a very clear indication to people that what he's about to say applied to the whole of the United Kingdom, and he never once says that is not the case."
Mr Drakeford described this as a "bleak moment" and "deliberate".
The first minister also referenced a message the then-UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, had sent to Michael Gove which incorrectly stated public health was not devolved.
He added this showed a "lack of clarity" over the legislative basis for powers that would be needed to deal with the pandemic.
The outgoing first minister was grilled over Wales' strategy and actions during the pandemic
"My belief right up until 20 March [three days before the first lockdown], is that the essential decisions would remain in the hands of the UK government and that devolved governments would be implementers of those decisions," he said.
He added it was "pretty alarming" this was still being resolved on 20 March.
Mr Drakeford told the inquiry mass gatherings were allowed during the early stages of the pandemic because Dominic Cummings refused to stop them.
He said large events, such as the Cheltenham Festival, were allowed to run at the start of the pandemic despite him arguing "mass gatherings should not go ahead" because Boris Johnson's former advisor dismissed the idea.
He added he made the argument in a Cobra meeting on 12 March, weeks before the first lockdown.
"In this discussion, the prime minister did go around the room, he took views from anybody who wanted to contribute and in that discussion I was arguing for a four-nation agreement that mass gatherings would not go ahead.
"The reason I have such a vivid memory of it is that having gone around the table the prime minister summed up against that course of action by saying: 'Dom says no'. That was his final contribution.
"I did not know who Dom was at this point," Mr Drakeford added.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. First Minister Mark Drakeford says he only used WhatsApp 11 times during the whole of the pandemic
He described the introduction of international travel lists in the summer of 2021 as "chaotic and shambolic" because of the "pace at which changes are made".
Mr Drakeford told the inquiry he asked for decisions on travel be taken on a UK-wide basis and not without the agreement of devolved administrations.
"In this area, the Welsh government only had theoretical powers of agency because most people who travel abroad from Wales don't do so from Wales and back to Wales," he said.
"So, in effect, we simply had to do whatever the UK government decided."
Mr Drakeford also told the inquiry he regretted everything that had led to loss of life in care homes during Covid.
He said there were not enough Covid tests to do "all we'd like to have done with them".
"Of course, there are instances where coronavirus is seeded into care homes by people being discharged from hospital, but the primary reason why coronavirus ends up in a care home is because of the necessary ingress into care homes of people who are there to care for people there.
"As coronavirus rises in the community, the risk that it will be carried into a care home in that way increases."
He dismissed calls for a UK-wide response in the event of a future pandemic.
"I don't think the evidence suggests to me that the decisions made in London would have been better decisions as far as Wales is concerned," he said.
"I definitely don't agree that better decisions would have been made from Whitehall than in Wales."
He added he would have welcomed a "strengthened ability to co-ordinate" between the four nations.
The Welsh module of the UK Covid Inquiry concludes on Thursday.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-68546344
|
news_uk-wales-politics-68546344
|
|
Labour targets Tories over 'ambition' to scrap National Insurance - BBC News
|
2024-03-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Labour spies an electoral opportunity in Chancellor Jeremy Hunt's "ambition" to scrap NI altogether.
|
UK Politics
|
Labour believes it has found a new dividing line with the Conservatives at the next general election - National Insurance.
Both the Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and the shadow work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall road-tested it today, when they denounced the Conservatives' long-term aim of abolishing National Insurance Contributions.
The party did not oppose new cuts to National Insurance in last week's Budget.
But the Labour leadership believes they have found a way to turn the tables on the Conservatives when it comes to economic competence.
Labour is still licking its wounds over its £28bn green prosperity plan - a pledge that was diluted last month under sustained attack over how it would be funded.
So, Labour has been quick to attach a price tag - a whopping £46bn - to the Conservatives' "ambition" to do away with National Insurance.
This was branded by Sir Keir as an "unfunded pledge".
This is despite Chancellor Jeremy Hunt making clear it would only happen when fiscal and economic conditions allow - and that it could not happen overnight.
But as Liz Kendall put it in a speech - ostensibly about pensions - on Wednesday morning: "If Labour made a commitment 100 times smaller than this we would rightly be asked to spell out - where is the money coming from?"
"Will it be paid for by higher borrowing? Or spending cuts to vital public services?"
At PMQs, Sir Keir suggested it would come at the expense of health expenditure or pensions.
Challenging the prime minister in the Commons, he said that 80% of National Insurance is spent on social security and pensions, and 20% on the NHS.
So, if pensions or NHS were not to be cut, the government would have to raise other taxes or borrow money.
Soon after, Labour released a dossier claiming that a "pensions bombshell" was in the offing - echoing the successful Conservative warning of a Labour "tax bombshell" at the 1992 election.
What is driving all this is not just a desire for revenge over the beaten and battered £28bn green investment pledge.
Labour held post-Budget focus groups last weekend, and they found that those questions resonated with key voters.
Certainly, national insurance contributions can determine how much state pension you qualify for.
So if National Insurance were to go, there was a worry amongst these voters about how pensions would be paid for - a concern Labour has been keen to amplify.
But on health spending, previous attempts to 'hypothecate' - or earmark - NICs for specific public services have been abandoned.
For example, the health and social care levy on National Insurance - proposed by Rishi Sunak as Chancellor - was scrapped by Liz Truss and never re-introduced.
So worries about National Insurance cuts being linked to NHS cuts are misplaced.
Jeremy Hunt has accused Labour of "scaremongering" and has said on X: "The value of NICs receipts do not determine the NHS budget, or the value of pensions."
And appearing before the Commons Treasury Committee, the chancellor said complete abolition would not happen in the next Parliament.
He stressed it was "a long-term ambition" of the Conservatives.
And the Treasury has added that this won't be done in a way which would harm pensioners, compromise public services or increase taxation of workers.
Nonetheless, confusion and concern over the government's intentions aren't necessarily unhelpful for Labour.
Liz Kendall has declared Labour is now the party for pensioners.
That claim may be a little premature.
But it is certainly Labour's aim to peel pensioners away from the Conservatives - more than 60% of over-65s backed the Tories in 2019 - and whether by post or at a polling station, they are more likely to cast their ballot than younger people.
Some recent polls have suggested there is now a much narrower gap between the parties, in part due to some previous Conservative voters peeling off to Reform.
Labour are going to point out that cuts to NICs, unlike income tax reductions or higher tax thresholds, don't benefit pensioners.
And Labour will stick to the government's triple lock on pensions - ensuring the state pension rises with the highest of three measures: inflation, earnings, or 2.5%.
So there will be a political dividing line on NICs at the next election.
But it isn't pre-determined that the government loses the argument.
Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has at least set out a trajectory for lower NICs.
These reductions are cheaper than income tax cuts.
But he has also argued that it is right to target reductions at those who are in work rather than retired - as this is an incentive to get 50 and 60-somethings back in to the workforce.
That in turn could help boost the nation's income and productivity.
And in the Commons at PMQs, Mr Sunak took Labour's attack on the NICs policy as an admission that a Starmer government wouldn't cut the tax burden.
But some Conservative MPs believe people neither understand nor give the government credit for changes in NICs - unlike a cut in headline income tax rates.
So Labour hopes that Conservative concerns and voters' confusion could pay them political dividends.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68554473
|
news_uk-politics-68554473
|
|
Aya Nakamura: Paris Olympics culture row erupts as far right rages at French singer - BBC News
|
2024-03-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
She is the world's most listened-to French female singer, but should Aya Nakamura perform at the Games?
|
Europe
|
Aya Nakamura came to France as a child and mixes upbeat Afropop, R&B and Parisian street slang
She may be the most listened-to French female singer in the world, but is Aya Nakamura the right fit for the Paris Olympics?
President Emmanuel Macron's reported idea that the 28-year-old Franco-Malian singer perform at the opening ceremony in July has sparked an almighty row in France about identity and language.
On one side are ranged her supporters, who say there could be no better way of showcasing the vibrancy of modern-day Francophone culture - a culture that revels in its diversity.
On the other are the detractors, who say her music owes more to Africa and the United States than it does to France - and that her use of the French language only debases it.
The arguments, over an invitation that it is still only hypothetical, spilled onto social media, after her name was booed at an election rally of the far-right Reconquest party.
A small far-right group called Les Natifs (Natives) posted a picture of themselves online with a banner reading: "No way Aya. This is Paris, not the market at Bamako."
This prompted a response from the singer on Twitter/X: "You may be racist but you're not deaf. That's what hurts you. I'm the number one subject of state in debates ect (sic), but what do I owe you? Nothing."
Ministers, fellow musicians and the Olympics organisers have rushed to Nakamura's defence, accusing her opponents of rejecting her because of her foreign origin.
Beware of pretexts for using pure racism to attack someone. Targeting an artist for what she is, is unacceptable, it's a crime
Nakamura was born in Bamako in 1995 under the name Aya Danioko, in a family of griots - traditional musicians and story-tellers. A few years later they came to the high-immigration Paris suburb of Aulnay-sous-Bois, where she went to school.
She changed her name to Nakamura after a character in the TV series Heroes, and in 2014 launched her career. With four albums to her name and a host of singles, she is regularly referred to as one of the most important figures on the French music scene.
Most importantly, Nakamura sells abroad. Where so many other French singers, of all kinds, have had to content themselves over the years with solely French-speaking audiences, Aya Nakamura has performed the rare feat of breaking through across the globe.
For President Macron, this is the strongest argument for inviting her to the Olympics.
According to the unconfirmed reports, she would sing a chanson of the late Édith Piaf - thus updating a French classic and showing it off before a modern, multi-ethnic worldwide audience.
Curiously though, a majority of the French public appears to disagree.
An Odoxa poll taken after the story broke found that, though Nakamura is extremely well-known with 80% recognition, only 30% of those asked had a good opinion of her.
Some 73% of those who knew her music said they did not like it, and a clear majority of 63% said she should not sing at the Olympics opening.
The most vocal criticism has come from Marion Maréchal of the Reconquest party, who said: "Like her or not, the fact is - this singer doesn't sing in French."
Interviewed on French television, Ms Maréchal said the decision to invite Nakamura, assuming there has been one, was political. "They have deliberately chosen to show a multicultural France … [But Nakamura] does not represent the French language."
In evidence she quoted the lyrics of Nakamura's most popular song Djadja, whose video has been watched online hundreds of millions of times.
Aya Nakamura is 28 and already has four albums to her name
About a man who spreads sexual lies about the singer, the song's chorus in French goes: "Y a pas moyen, Djadja. J'suis pas ta catin, Djadja, genre, en catchana baby, tu dead ça"
Which roughly translates as: "No way, liar-boy. I'm not your whore, like [sexual reference] baby, good job!"
Paul Verlaine it ain't, which is presumably why a majority of the French public appears to agree with Ms Maréchal that Nakamura would be unsuitable as a standard-bearer of French language and culture.
The counter-arguments are first that Nakamura would not be singing her own composition, but Édith Piaf.
But more important is the fact that Nakamura has been successful in France, a positive sign of integration, and she has influence with young people all over the world.
Her language may be innovative. But at its core it is, after all, French.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68552093
|
news_world-europe-68552093
|
|
Ghislaine Maxwell appeals sex abuse conviction - BBC News
|
2024-03-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The convicted sex offender's lawyers argue she is covered by a deal made with prosecutors in 2008.
|
US & Canada
|
Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell have argued that she should be set free under the terms of a previous deal with federal prosecutors.
She was sentenced to 20 years in prison in June 2022.
Her lawyer, Diane Fabi Samson, told a court in New York on Tuesday that the British socialite was covered by a previous deal with prosecutors.
But US government attorneys say that deal, which saw her boyfriend Epstein serve a light sentence for sex crimes, should not allow Maxwell to walk free.
Maxwell's appeal does not relate to the facts laid out at her trial but instead on the legal issues surrounding the agreement struck nearly 20 years ago.
The crimes of Epstein, who mixed with some of the world's most famous people, were first reported in the media in 2005.
In 2008, he made a deal with federal prosecutors that allowed him to plead guilty to state charges in Florida of soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution and served 13 months in prison.
As part of his plea agreement, which was later criticised by a Justice Department internal report, prosecutors agreed not to pursue his alleged co-conspirators.
Following numerous lawsuits, Epstein was arrested again in 2019 in a federal case in New York. He was found dead in his jail cell before he could be tried on sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide.
During Tuesday's hearing, Ms Fabi Samson called the Florida plea deal "weird" and "unusual" but argued that it should have halted any further action against Maxwell.
Prosecutors, however, have called the defence arguments "cursory and undeveloped" and say that the deal has no bearing on Maxwell's case.
During the hearing they argued that the agreement was limited to the Florida district where Epstein pleaded guilty. Maxwell was convicted in New York, where Tuesday's appeal hearing was held.
Throughout the course of Maxwell's 2022 trial, four women testified that they had been abused as minors at Epstein's homes in Florida, New York, New Mexico and the Virgin Islands.
They recounted how Maxwell had talked them into giving Epstein massages which turned sexual, luring them with gifts and promises about how Epstein could use his money and connections to help them.
During her trial, a judge rejected attempts to throw out the case, including an argument by Maxwell's lawyers that a juror had failed to inform the court that he had been abused as a child.
The judge also rejected arguments that Maxwell had not been allowed to prepare adequately for her trial, and that prosecutors had waited too long to bring their case against her.
The appeals court judgement will be handed down at a later date.
Outside the court, Maxwell's lawyers told the reporters that they were "cautiously optimistic" about their prospects of winning the appeal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Victims: 'We still want answers from Maxwell'
• None 'We still want answers from Ghislaine Maxwell'
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68515516
|
news_world-us-canada-68515516
|
|
Arsenal beat Porto: David Raya delivers when it matters most on crucial Champions League night - BBC Sport
|
2024-03-13
|
None
|
Arsenal goalkeeper David Raya proved his doubters wrong as Gunners progress in Champions League, says BBC Sport's Phil McNulty.
| null |
Arsenal beat Porto: David Raya delivers when it matters most on crucial Champions League night Last updated on .From the section European Football
David Raya is the first goalkeeper to make at least two saves in a Champions League shootout since Petr Cech for Chelsea in the 2012 final David Raya settled all lingering arguments about manager Mikel Arteta's judgement and his status as Arsenal's first-choice goalkeeper amid the sound and fury of a dramatic Champions League win over Porto at Emirates Stadium. Raya's uncertain start as replacement for Aaron Ramsdale prompted suggestions that Arteta had attempted to fix something that was not actually broken by bringing in the Spaniard from Brentford to replace the Arsenal fans' favourite who was good enough to play for England. And in the spirit of full disclosure, and before the reminders arrive and large portions of humble pie are thrown in this direction, one of the biggest doubters is right here and must admit to being wrong after witnessing Raya's finest night since arriving at Arsenal. Raya delivered when it mattered most, offering further confirmation of his steady improvement and reliability, with two penalty shootout saves from Wendell and Galeno as Arsenal reached a Champions League quarter-final for the first time in 14 years with a 4-2 win in the shootout after a 1-0 win on the night.
• None 'Where we want to be' - Arsenal end 14-year wait
• None Full reaction and analysis to the Gunners' win on our bespoke club page It was a tense, nervous, ill-tempered night which will serve as an ideal crash course in the Champions League as Arsenal leapt a psychological barrier into the last eight after losing at this last-16 stage in their past seven ventures into the competition. Raya was also vital with the tie balanced on a knife-edge before his contribution in the shootout, saving well from Evanilson and Francisco Conceicao when Porto broke out of their defensive shell. Unlike some others, no names of course, Arteta says he never doubted Raya but the magnitude of a decision which brought such understandable scrutiny was clear. "I was convinced," said Arteta. "You see him in the first days with what he had to go through and the composure. You see the body language and the decisions he takes. That's a key quality for a goalkeeper." It was when it came to penalties that Raya made the saves that mattered, turning Wendell's second penalty for Porto on to the post before kicking the rebound clear with his heel then confirming the win with a flying save from Galeno. Cue wild scenes of celebration around the Emirates and one last outbreak of angst between Arteta, who was relatively composed throughout, and his fiery Porto counterpart Sergio Conceicao, who cut an angry, agitated figure for most of a nerve-riddled night. It was a discourse that carried on after the game with Conceicao claiming Arteta "insulted his family" in Spanish during the game. It should be recorded this allegation was denied by the Arsenal manager. Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta says win over Porto to reach Champions League quarter-finals was 'magic' Leandro Trossard's smooth strike four minutes before the break, fashioned by glorious sleight of foot and a perfect pass from Arsenal captain Martin Odegaard, put Arsenal level in the tie but this streetwise, battle-hardened Porto side were going nowhere. Odegaard thought he had put Arsenal in front in the second half but his strike was ruled out after French referee Clement Turpin adjudged that Kai Havertz had fouled Pepe. It was a case of Arsenal feeling they had been robbed by Turpin. It was no surprise that Pepe, dear 41-year-old Pepe, greeted the decision with a knowing smile. The evergreen defender is still in astonishing condition, a consummate reader of the game who knows all the tricks - and not all of them good. Pepe received a yellow card for a foul on Havertz in the second half. It was followed by the trademark look of complete effrontery at the perceived injustice of it all, even though there was none. It is also impossible not to marvel at how a player of such advanced years, with so many miles on the clock, can still look so comfortable at this level. It was all part of a night that will prove crucial to Arsenal's Champions League education with a side containing so many players still new to the demands of this tournament. Odegaard reflects on Arsenal's win over Porto on penalties in Champions League This was not an evening for the fluency Arsenal have so readily displayed in their advance to the Premier League summit. Porto have been around the block too often to allow Arsenal to dictate in their normal fashion. This was a stilted affair with many stoppages which made it a game where patience was required, frustrations had to be overcome, and the guard always had to be up against a potential Portuguese sucker punch. Arsenal were nowhere near their best but victory is all and this was mission accomplished as they now move alongside illustrious names such as holders Manchester City, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Barcelona in the latter stages. The Gunners perhaps did not show enough to justify a rating as Champions League "dark horses" just yet but if they can escape one of the giants in the quarter-final draw, and some of those are pitted together, then who knows? What is certain is that Arsenal will carry huge momentum and optimism forward, not only into the Champions League quarter-final, but also their next game, the colossal Premier League encounter with Manchester City at Etihad Stadium on 31 March. And for that a lot of thanks must go to the maligned - wrongly in the case of this observer - Raya.
• None Our coverage of the Gunners is bigger and better than ever before - here's everything you need to know to make sure you never miss a moment
• None Everything Arsenal - go straight to all the best content
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68551085
|
rt_football_68551085
|
|
Politicians flounder as they wrestle with race rows - BBC News
|
2024-03-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Recent weeks have tested the ability of politics to respond to giant concepts for the 2020s.
|
UK Politics
|
Four people, over the last four weeks or so, who tell us something about money, power, individuals and institutions.
And also tell us something about language and labels.
It is a month to the day since the Labour Party disowned its then-candidate Azhar Ali in the Rochdale by election, over alleged antisemitism he apologised for.
Turmoil about what to do; a party grappling with what should be the appropriate response.
Senior figures sent out to do interviews with a line to take that crumbled not long later. The party accused of condemnation in words, but not in actions. Until that is, they chose to act.
Then there was the row about Lee Anderson. The now-Reform UK MP and former Conservative deputy chairman and a debate with language and labels at its core.
Mr Anderson's remarks about the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim, were branded "unacceptable" by the prime minister. Others, including Mr Khan, said they were racist and Islamophobic.
Hamas's horrific attacks in Israel in October, and Israel's subsequent war in Gaza has undoubtedly sharpened some of these debates.
But they can't all be traced back to recent events in the Middle East.
Here we have a hugely successful businessman from humble beginnings.
A man of Irish heritage who has talked of the abuse he suffered as a child because of where he was from.
A man with a diverse workforce who has become one of the Conservative Party's biggest donors under the country's first British Asian Prime Minister.
A man now condemned by that prime minister for uttering racist remarks.
And it is to Mr Sunak in particular that Mr Hester has been drawn, as opposed to the Conservative Party in general. For years, he said, he voted for the Green Party.
The government's line - having spent a day not calling the alleged remarks racist - is, actually, they were.
But Mr Sunak believes his "remorse should be accepted," as he put it at Prime Minister's Questions.
In other words, an instinct for tolerance should extend to those who have articulated apparent intolerance.
And there is a distinction, they argue, between a racist remark and being a racist person.
It taps into another keenly contested contemporary concept - the idea of being "cancelled".
The argument, from some, that those who preach tolerance seek to ban or remove some people from the public stage altogether.
It is into this territory that the ongoing discussion about Mr Hester's donations - and whether they should be returned - plays out, with the Conservatives determined to hold onto the money.
And then there is Diane Abbott. A pioneer MP, the first black woman elected to the Commons, who endures a vast amount of vile abuse which has been turbo-charged in the era of social media.
It is nearly a year since she was slung out of the Parliamentary Labour Party over remarks Sir Keir Starmer called antisemitic - and for which she apologised.
The Labour Party has spent 11 months investigating a letter to a newspaper she wrote that ran to a handful of sentences.
An alleged victim of racism, accused of racism herself.
What all of this amounts to is a case study in how society in the 2020s is wrestling with these giant concepts: belonging, identity, lived experience, heritage, language, labels, offence.
And how are we collectively wrestling with all of this?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68552490
|
news_uk-politics-68552490
|
|
Covid inquiry: Drakeford likens Johnson to absent football manager - BBC News
|
2024-03-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The outgoing first minister criticised the former prime minister's leadership during the pandemic.
|
Wales politics
|
The First Minister Mark Drakeford said Boris Johnson said "we must carry on, we must tell people this is a mild illness, they're not to get anxious about it"
Boris Johnson was like an "absent" football manager during Covid, an inquiry has heard.
First Minister Mark Drakeford criticised the former prime minister's leadership during the pandemic.
He also said Mr Johnson made comments "designed to minimise the seriousness" of Covid at the beginning.
Mr Drakeford's comments came on the penultimate day of the UK inquiry's Welsh module in Cardiff as he gave a whole day of evidence.
In a written statement to the inquiry, Mr Drakeford described Michael Gove, who was minister for the Cabinet Office during the early part of the pandemic as "a centre forward without a team behind him, and where the manager was largely absent".
At the inquiry, Mr Drakeford said: "The absent manager was the prime minister because he was never in these meetings or at the table, and while Mr Gove was a senior minister… he has influence rather than the determinative impact which a message from the prime minister would have."
Mark Drakeford was giving evidence on the 11th day of the Welsh module of the Covid Inquiry
He added he would have liked to have seen Mr Johnson chairing Cobra meetings sooner in the pandemic.
He said it would not necessarily change actions taken, but would have "sent a stronger signal about the seriousness with which the gathering storm was being taken".
But it was put to Mr Drakeford that his own absences from the first three Cobra meetings indicated a similar lack of serious approach being taken in Wales
He argued that at that stage it was a "health dominated" matter, requiring health advisors and decision-makers.
He also said Mr Johnson "deliberately" made it unclear lockdown rules only applied to England.
He told the inquiry the heads of the devolved nations had told the then-prime minister he needed to be clear in a press conference that changes to rules in the pandemic only applied to England.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Mark Drakeford becomes emotional as he describes not seeing his 90-year-old mother during lockdown
"[We said] he must make clear that what he is about to say does not apply to Scotland or Wales or Northern Ireland, and he gives assurance in the Cobra meeting that he will do his very best to make sure that he does that.
"He then heads to the cameras, and provides a script which the only time he refers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is when he says early in the press conference 'as the prime minister of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland'.
"It is a very clear indication to people that what he's about to say applied to the whole of the United Kingdom, and he never once says that is not the case."
Mr Drakeford described this as a "bleak moment" and "deliberate".
The first minister also referenced a message the then-UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, had sent to Michael Gove which incorrectly stated public health was not devolved.
He added this showed a "lack of clarity" over the legislative basis for powers that would be needed to deal with the pandemic.
The outgoing first minister was grilled over Wales' strategy and actions during the pandemic
"My belief right up until 20 March [three days before the first lockdown], is that the essential decisions would remain in the hands of the UK government and that devolved governments would be implementers of those decisions," he said.
He added it was "pretty alarming" this was still being resolved on 20 March.
Mr Drakeford told the inquiry mass gatherings were allowed during the early stages of the pandemic because Dominic Cummings refused to stop them.
He said large events, such as the Cheltenham Festival, were allowed to run at the start of the pandemic despite him arguing "mass gatherings should not go ahead" because Boris Johnson's former advisor dismissed the idea.
He added he made the argument in a Cobra meeting on 12 March, weeks before the first lockdown.
"In this discussion, the prime minister did go around the room, he took views from anybody who wanted to contribute and in that discussion I was arguing for a four-nation agreement that mass gatherings would not go ahead.
"The reason I have such a vivid memory of it is that having gone around the table the prime minister summed up against that course of action by saying: 'Dom says no'. That was his final contribution.
"I did not know who Dom was at this point," Mr Drakeford added.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. First Minister Mark Drakeford says he only used WhatsApp 11 times during the whole of the pandemic
He described the introduction of international travel lists in the summer of 2021 as "chaotic and shambolic" because of the "pace at which changes are made".
Mr Drakeford told the inquiry he asked for decisions on travel be taken on a UK-wide basis and not without the agreement of devolved administrations.
"In this area, the Welsh government only had theoretical powers of agency because most people who travel abroad from Wales don't do so from Wales and back to Wales," he said.
"So, in effect, we simply had to do whatever the UK government decided."
Mr Drakeford also told the inquiry he regretted everything that had led to loss of life in care homes during Covid.
He said there were not enough Covid tests to do "all we'd like to have done with them".
"Of course, there are instances where coronavirus is seeded into care homes by people being discharged from hospital, but the primary reason why coronavirus ends up in a care home is because of the necessary ingress into care homes of people who are there to care for people there.
"As coronavirus rises in the community, the risk that it will be carried into a care home in that way increases."
He dismissed calls for a UK-wide response in the event of a future pandemic.
"I don't think the evidence suggests to me that the decisions made in London would have been better decisions as far as Wales is concerned," he said.
"I definitely don't agree that better decisions would have been made from Whitehall than in Wales."
He added he would have welcomed a "strengthened ability to co-ordinate" between the four nations.
The Welsh module of the UK Covid Inquiry concludes on Thursday.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-68546344
|
news_uk-wales-politics-68546344
|
|
Aya Nakamura: Paris Olympics culture row erupts as far right rages at French singer - BBC News
|
2024-03-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
She is the world's most listened-to French female singer, but should Aya Nakamura perform at the Games?
|
Europe
|
Aya Nakamura came to France as a child and mixes upbeat Afropop, R&B and Parisian street slang
She may be the most listened-to French female singer in the world, but is Aya Nakamura the right fit for the Paris Olympics?
President Emmanuel Macron's reported idea that the 28-year-old Franco-Malian singer perform at the opening ceremony in July has sparked an almighty row in France about identity and language.
On one side are ranged her supporters, who say there could be no better way of showcasing the vibrancy of modern-day Francophone culture - a culture that revels in its diversity.
On the other are the detractors, who say her music owes more to Africa and the United States than it does to France - and that her use of the French language only debases it.
The arguments, over an invitation that it is still only hypothetical, spilled onto social media, after her name was booed at an election rally of the far-right Reconquest party.
A small far-right group called Les Natifs (Natives) posted a picture of themselves online with a banner reading: "No way Aya. This is Paris, not the market at Bamako."
This prompted a response from the singer on Twitter/X: "You may be racist but you're not deaf. That's what hurts you. I'm the number one subject of state in debates ect (sic), but what do I owe you? Nothing."
Ministers, fellow musicians and the Olympics organisers have rushed to Nakamura's defence, accusing her opponents of rejecting her because of her foreign origin.
Beware of pretexts for using pure racism to attack someone. Targeting an artist for what she is, is unacceptable, it's a crime
Nakamura was born in Bamako in 1995 under the name Aya Danioko, in a family of griots - traditional musicians and story-tellers. A few years later they came to the high-immigration Paris suburb of Aulnay-sous-Bois, where she went to school.
She changed her name to Nakamura after a character in the TV series Heroes, and in 2014 launched her career. With four albums to her name and a host of singles, she is regularly referred to as one of the most important figures on the French music scene.
Most importantly, Nakamura sells abroad. Where so many other French singers, of all kinds, have had to content themselves over the years with solely French-speaking audiences, Aya Nakamura has performed the rare feat of breaking through across the globe.
For President Macron, this is the strongest argument for inviting her to the Olympics.
According to the unconfirmed reports, she would sing a chanson of the late Édith Piaf - thus updating a French classic and showing it off before a modern, multi-ethnic worldwide audience.
Curiously though, a majority of the French public appears to disagree.
An Odoxa poll taken after the story broke found that, though Nakamura is extremely well-known with 80% recognition, only 30% of those asked had a good opinion of her.
Some 73% of those who knew her music said they did not like it, and a clear majority of 63% said she should not sing at the Olympics opening.
The most vocal criticism has come from Marion Maréchal of the Reconquest party, who said: "Like her or not, the fact is - this singer doesn't sing in French."
Interviewed on French television, Ms Maréchal said the decision to invite Nakamura, assuming there has been one, was political. "They have deliberately chosen to show a multicultural France … [But Nakamura] does not represent the French language."
In evidence she quoted the lyrics of Nakamura's most popular song Djadja, whose video has been watched online hundreds of millions of times.
Aya Nakamura is 28 and already has four albums to her name
About a man who spreads sexual lies about the singer, the song's chorus in French goes: "Y a pas moyen, Djadja. J'suis pas ta catin, Djadja, genre, en catchana baby, tu dead ça"
Which roughly translates as: "No way, liar-boy. I'm not your whore, like [sexual reference] baby, good job!"
Paul Verlaine it ain't, which is presumably why a majority of the French public appears to agree with Ms Maréchal that Nakamura would be unsuitable as a standard-bearer of French language and culture.
The counter-arguments are first that Nakamura would not be singing her own composition, but Édith Piaf.
But more important is the fact that Nakamura has been successful in France, a positive sign of integration, and she has influence with young people all over the world.
Her language may be innovative. But at its core it is, after all, French.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68552093
|
news_world-europe-68552093
|
|
James Crumbley: Father of Michigan school gunman convicted of manslaughter - BBC News
|
2024-03-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
For the first time parents are convicted of manslaughter over their child's role in a shooting in the US.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Moment father of school gunman is convicted of manslaughter
The father of a Michigan school shooter who killed four students has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
The trial heard James Crumbley, 47, ignored his 15-year-old son Ethan's mental health needs, buying him the gun he used in the November 2021 attack.
He and his wife - who was convicted on the same charges - now both face a maximum of 15 years in prison.
The case is thought to mark the first time the parents of a mass shooter have been held criminally liable.
The couple are scheduled to be sentenced on 9 April.
The jury deliberated for just over a day after a nearly week-long trial. James Crumbley was in court on Thursday evening for the verdict and appeared to show little reaction as it was read out.
Their son killed fellow students Tate Myre, 16; Hana St Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17, and Justin Shilling, 17, with a semi-automatic handgun at Oxford High School. Seven others were also injured in the shooting.
He is serving a sentence of life in prison without parole.
Steve and Ai St Juliana lost their 14-year-old daughter Hana, who they said was kind and always checked in on others
Steve St Juliana, Hana's father, said on Thursday evening that the prosecution of the Crumbleys was "just the beginning steps" when it came to dealing with gun violence in the US.
"Our children are dying on a daily basis in mass murders and we do very little about this," he added.
"We can put people on the Moon, we can build skyscrapers, huge monuments like the Hoover Dam and we can't keep our kids safe in schools."
In a statement, attorney Ven Johnson said that James and Jennifer Crumbley played a "causal role" in the deaths of the four students.
"This guilty verdict...won't bring back the lives of these four students, but it represents one more step towards holding everyone responsible under the law," Mr Johnson said.
Earlier this week in her closing arguments to the jury of six men and six women, prosecutor Karen McDonald called the attack "preventable and foreseeable".
She added that James Crumbley's actions had been "rare and egregious".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
He did not take even the slightest measures to ensure his son was not a threat after giving him a semi-automatic pistol as a gift just days before the shooting, said the prosecutor.
Prosecutors also said the Crumbleys had not done enough to address their son's declining mental health.
On the morning of the shooting, the two parents cut short a school meeting about a disturbing drawing their son had made to go to work and had declined to take him home.
School officials sent him back to class without checking his backpack, which contained a gun.
When Crumbley heard about the shooting, he rushed home from his job as a DoorDash delivery driver, looking for the weapon, the trial heard.
Crumbley's defence lawyer, Mariell Lehman, argued that "James had no idea that his son was having a hard time".
Crumbley did not testify, unlike his wife, who took the stand during her trial and tried to blame her husband.
Prosecutors said the Crumbleys had also failed to ensure the weapon was safely stored.
"Parents and gun owners have a responsibility to prevent children from accessing deadly weapons," said Nick Suplina, with the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, in a statement, adding the verdict "further underscores this critical duty of responsible gun ownership".
The Crumbleys were charged by police within days of the killings.
Initially, the parents were supposed to be tried together but in November sought separate trials.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68572112
|
news_world-us-canada-68572112
|
|
Politicians flounder as they wrestle with race rows - BBC News
|
2024-03-14
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Recent weeks have tested the ability of politics to respond to giant concepts for the 2020s.
|
UK Politics
|
Four people, over the last four weeks or so, who tell us something about money, power, individuals and institutions.
And also tell us something about language and labels.
It is a month to the day since the Labour Party disowned its then-candidate Azhar Ali in the Rochdale by election, over alleged antisemitism he apologised for.
Turmoil about what to do; a party grappling with what should be the appropriate response.
Senior figures sent out to do interviews with a line to take that crumbled not long later. The party accused of condemnation in words, but not in actions. Until that is, they chose to act.
Then there was the row about Lee Anderson. The now-Reform UK MP and former Conservative deputy chairman and a debate with language and labels at its core.
Mr Anderson's remarks about the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim, were branded "unacceptable" by the prime minister. Others, including Mr Khan, said they were racist and Islamophobic.
Hamas's horrific attacks in Israel in October, and Israel's subsequent war in Gaza has undoubtedly sharpened some of these debates.
But they can't all be traced back to recent events in the Middle East.
Here we have a hugely successful businessman from humble beginnings.
A man of Irish heritage who has talked of the abuse he suffered as a child because of where he was from.
A man with a diverse workforce who has become one of the Conservative Party's biggest donors under the country's first British Asian Prime Minister.
A man now condemned by that prime minister for uttering racist remarks.
And it is to Mr Sunak in particular that Mr Hester has been drawn, as opposed to the Conservative Party in general. For years, he said, he voted for the Green Party.
The government's line - having spent a day not calling the alleged remarks racist - is, actually, they were.
But Mr Sunak believes his "remorse should be accepted," as he put it at Prime Minister's Questions.
In other words, an instinct for tolerance should extend to those who have articulated apparent intolerance.
And there is a distinction, they argue, between a racist remark and being a racist person.
It taps into another keenly contested contemporary concept - the idea of being "cancelled".
The argument, from some, that those who preach tolerance seek to ban or remove some people from the public stage altogether.
It is into this territory that the ongoing discussion about Mr Hester's donations - and whether they should be returned - plays out, with the Conservatives determined to hold onto the money.
And then there is Diane Abbott. A pioneer MP, the first black woman elected to the Commons, who endures a vast amount of vile abuse which has been turbo-charged in the era of social media.
It is nearly a year since she was slung out of the Parliamentary Labour Party over remarks Sir Keir Starmer called antisemitic - and for which she apologised.
The Labour Party has spent 11 months investigating a letter to a newspaper she wrote that ran to a handful of sentences.
An alleged victim of racism, accused of racism herself.
What all of this amounts to is a case study in how society in the 2020s is wrestling with these giant concepts: belonging, identity, lived experience, heritage, language, labels, offence.
And how are we collectively wrestling with all of this?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68552490
|
news_uk-politics-68552490
|
|
Team-mate relationships in women's football 'challenging but not inappropriate' - Asante - BBC Sport
|
2024-03-15
|
None
|
Former footballer Anita Asante says relationships between team-mates can be "challenging but they are not inappropriate."
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Women's Football
Relationships between team-mates can be "challenging but not inappropriate," says ex-England defender Anita Asante.
Chelsea boss Emma Hayes said on Thursday that player-coach relationships and player-to-player relationships are inappropriate.
Hayes also said relationships between team-mates can be hard for a coach to navigate.
"I just don't think it [player-to-player relationships] has any relevance to this issue at hand," Asante said.
Leicester City boss Willie Kirk is being investigated by the club following an allegation of a player-coach relationship.
It is understood a complaint has been lodged with the club about an alleged current relationship between Kirk and a player. BBC Sport has approached Kirk for comment regarding the allegation.
Hayes said on Thursday that "player-coach relationships are inappropriate, player-to-player relationships are inappropriate".
"We have to look it at in the context of where the game has come from," Hayes said.
"We're in a professional era now where the expectation in place for players and coaches is such that all of our focus and attention has got to be on having the top standards."
Asante, 38, played at the top of the women's game for 19 years before announcing her retirement at the end of the 2021-22 season.
"I can imagine in terms of the context she [Hayes] is saying, yes those relationships can be challenging but they are not inappropriate, they are just challenging," Asante, who is a coach with England women's Under-23 team, told BBC 5 Live.
"But of course that's a conversation probably to be had at some point because of course it can be challenging."
Everton boss Brian Sorensen said he had never experienced a problem with player-to-player relationships.
"I can understand why it could become a problem because as I said before, the game has become so much more professional," he said.
"I don't think it's in the same ball park as the other [player-coach relationships]."
Liverpool manager Matt Beard added: "I personally don't see it [player-to-player relationships] being a problem.
"I think one in five people meet their long-term partner in work environments. I think the key thing is, if there is a relationship, that it doesn't affect your day-to-day job. I've got no issues with it."
There are several high-profile players in relationships in the Women's Super League (WSL).
Chelsea duo Jess Carter and Ann-Katrin Berger are a couple, as are Arsenal's Vivianne Miedema and Beth Mead.
Chelsea striker and Matildas captain Sam Kerr is engaged to West Ham midfielder Kristie Mewis while Tottenham players Amy Turner and Angharad James became the WSL's first married couple in June 2023.
On her return from an anterior cruciate ligament injury, Mead spoke about how the support of team-mate and partner Miedema, who suffered the same injury a month later, was vital.
"We're competitive people, we always have been and throughout the process we pushed each other and we've helped each other in different moments," said Mead.
"I think it has pushed us in getting back quicker than we possibly could have or we could have slacked off in certain instances so when you've got that competition between each other, it's always been good but it's not been without its arguments and its ups and downs."
• None Where and how to watch the WSL this weekend
Former England and Great Britain hockey captain and Olympic gold and bronze medallist Kate Richardson-Walsh posted on social media about relationships between players and staff.
Walsh began a relationship with international team-mate Helen Richardson in 2008. They married in 2013 and both changed their last names afterwards.
The pair won Great Britain's first women's hockey gold medal at an Olympics at the Rio Games in 2016.
"Definitely not 'inappropriate' and certainly not being 'phased out'," Richardson-Walsh wrote of player-to-player relationships.
"And, for the record, relationships between staff and players are inappropriate. They are an abuse of power."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68575203
|
rt_football_68575203
|
|
Buses in west of Scotland set to be brought under local control - BBC News
|
2024-03-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
A franchise system would mean fares, routes and ticketing are controlled by a local public body.
|
Glasgow & West Scotland
|
Bus services in the west of Scotland are set to be brought back under local control under radical plans.
The current deregulated network could be replaced with a franchise system like the ones in London and Manchester.
This means fares, routes and ticketing would be controlled by a local public body such as Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).
However, SPT has said it could take seven years to set up and would need at least £45m in extra funding every year.
In the meantime, Bus Service Improvement Partnerships (BSIPs) will be introduced, where contracts are put in place with bus firms to run services.
These allow a local transport authority like SPT to impose a minimum frequency for services and a cap on fares.
But they cannot set routes or the actual fares.
SPT predict this will require at least 200 more buses across the region and a multi-million pound subsidy.
The authority predicts they could be put in place within 12 months.
Reform recommendations were approved at an SPT meeting earlier. It said it would consult widely on the recommendations over the next few months.
Under the planned franchise system, bus firms would have to bid for contracts within an approved network.
A public body, such as SPT, would set the precise routes, the timetable, the frequency and take in fares.
It means that routes with lower patronage are subsidised by busier, more popular routes.
But bus operator McGills has warned that introducing a franchise system will create a "funding black hole for taxpayers".
Deregulation, which was introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1986, was meant to drive down fares and improve services amid competition, but has led to complaints about fewer services, punctuality and higher costs.
Critics say bus firms cherry-pick the profitable routes, and leave the rest.
According to SPT, bus use in the region has plummeted by a third in the past decade - equating to 70 million fewer bus journeys.
And despite the fact that the bus network is shrinking, with fewer bus routes being served, fares have risen much faster than the cost of living.
SPT's chairman, Councillor Stephen Dornan, said it was a "bold and ambitious plan" which "sets a strong approach to tackle a declining bus market".
"It gives us opportunities to build for growth, and deliver a network that is attractive, accessible, and affordable to both passengers in our communities who rely on the bus to get around and those who we need to get 'on board' by offering an attractive alternative to the private car," he said.
"However, any franchising option will take time and investment to establish so we need to look at doing something now to halt the declining bus market.
"BSIPs, which also require suitable investment, offer the best opportunity for a significant, interim improvement while we work to establish the world-class local bus franchise model the people of the west of Scotland deserve."
He called for extra funding from the Scottish government.
A franchise system is in place in London and Manchester and is also being introduced in Liverpool.
SPT has warned it could between five and seven years for a franchise system like the Bee Network in Manchester to be in operation. The initial set-up costs will be £15m.
But Andy Burnham, mayor of Greater Manchester, told BBC Scotland News it makes services accountable to people.
"If the bus sails right past, or doesn't turn up at all, there's nothing you can do to get come-back against those operators, and hold them to account for the travelling public," he said. "That's what deregulation means.
"Now there is something I can do.
"They may suffer financial penalties if they don't turn up on time, and that's a world of difference."
Mr Burnham argues that another benefit is that money spent by passengers - the so-called "fare box" - comes back to the network, not the bus companies, if more people use the bus.
"We take the upside of that, and we use that upside to keep the fares low," he said.
"And because the fares are going lower, even more people might use it and you create a virtuous circle, rather than a spiral of decline that we've had in this city for four decades prior to the Bee Network.
"The evidence from Greater Manchester is clear - putting buses back under public control improve services. It makes you able to recycle the proceeds into keeping fares low and, critically, it makes the people the bosses of the buses."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Campaigners say bringing the city's buses back under public control will boost the economy
Bus operator McGills has previously warned that bus franchising could create a £100m annual black hole for Scottish taxpayers and said it would take legal action if it went ahead.
On Friday its chief executive Ralph Roberts said: "The bus users of Strathclyde consistently tell us that their number one issue in using buses is congestion, which affects service reliability, journey times and cost of travel.
"The biggest priority for SPT should be to push local authorities to manage their infrastructure under the powers they already have which will allow bus users to make more consistent, quicker and cheaper journeys."
Andrew Carter, chief executive of the economic think tank Centre for Cities, said bus franchising could improve access to Glasgow city centre for about 300,000 people.
"It will lead to better routes, better pricing and simpler fares for passengers," he said. "It's one step towards reversing decline in bus travel and getting the economy firing again."
He added that Greater Manchester had seen an 8% increase in bus passenger numbers.
Transport Scotland said all local transport authorities were now able to consider partnership working, franchising and local authority-run services which sit alongside their ability to subsidise services.
A spokesman said: "We welcome SPT's decision to explore all available bus powers as part of their Strathclyde Regional Bus Strategy.
"It is the decision for each local transport authority to determine which powers are suitable to improve services in their specific area."
A sub-standard bus network makes life very difficult for many.
Getting to work, the shops or college becomes a daily grind.
It limits choices for many workers, and think tanks warn it harms Glasgow's economy.
Now SPT has put a nail into the coffin of bus deregulation, a system that's been in place, for better or worse, for almost 40 years.
Other transport authorities across Scotland have the power to follow suit, and it's likely some will.
But there's a long road ahead- with consultations galore - before the bus network changes.
Stand by for a long argument about money.
Where will the millions of pounds in extra funding for SPT come from?
Can bus routes that were lost in recent years be reinstated?
How, in short, can the service be improved so passengers return in large numbers?
Operators argue that buses need priority on the roads to speed up journeys and attract passengers.
Will that become part of the plan?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68576448
|
news_uk-scotland-68576448
|
|
Dunfermline Athletic 3-1 Dundee United: Kane Ritchie-Hosler double helps stun Championship leaders - BBC Sport
|
2024-03-15
|
None
|
Dunfermline Athletic stun Scottish Championship leaders Dundee United with a convincing 3-1 victory.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Scottish Championship
He set up fellow midfielder Matty Todd to slot home the 11th-minute opener.
Ritchie-Hosler then fired the Pars further ahead either side of the break, both set up by striker Alex Jakubiak.
United got back into the game when Kyle Benedictus deflected a low Glenn Middleton cross into his own net, but they rarely looked like saving a point.
Jim Goodwin's team stay one point clear of Raith Rovers, but the Kirkcaldy side can go top when they play their game in hand away to Queen's Park on Saturday.
Dunfermline move above Queen's Park into sixth place in the table, one point behind Airdrieonians but having played two more games.
Dunfermline Athletic manager James McPake: "It feels great, particularly at home with the big crowd, and a BBC Scotland TV game. It is the favourites coming to your place and you want to win your home games.
"Excuses have been made that we have injuries. Tonight, when we've got players back and we can make changes, we're a much better team."
Dundee United manager Jim Goodwin: "We didn't start the game well enough, it's as simple as that. The first 45 minutes is one of our worst performances, there's no doubt about it. We didn't offer anything going forward.
"We didn't carry a threat at all in the final third and we weren't at the races in the first half. Dunfermline looked as if they were a little bit more energetic than us, picking up a lot of second balls. I can have no arguments about the result."
• None Attempt saved. Owen Moffat (Dunfermline Athletic) right footed shot from outside the box is saved in the bottom left corner.
• None Attempt missed. Tony Watt (Dundee United) header from the centre of the box misses to the left.
• None Attempt missed. Miller Thomson (Dundee United) left footed shot from the right side of the box.
• None Attempt blocked. Ewan Otoo (Dunfermline Athletic) left footed shot from outside the box is blocked.
• None Attempt blocked. Owen Moffat (Dunfermline Athletic) left footed shot from the left side of the box is blocked.
• None Attempt blocked. Tony Watt (Dundee United) left footed shot from outside the box is blocked.
• None Attempt blocked. Owen Moffat (Dunfermline Athletic) left footed shot from the left side of the box is blocked. Navigate to the next page Navigate to the last page
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68474818
|
rt_football_68474818
|
|
James Crumbley: Father of Michigan school gunman convicted of manslaughter - BBC News
|
2024-03-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
For the first time parents are convicted of manslaughter over their child's role in a shooting in the US.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Moment father of school gunman is convicted of manslaughter
The father of a Michigan school shooter who killed four students has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
The trial heard James Crumbley, 47, ignored his 15-year-old son Ethan's mental health needs, buying him the gun he used in the November 2021 attack.
He and his wife - who was convicted on the same charges - now both face a maximum of 15 years in prison.
The case is thought to mark the first time the parents of a mass shooter have been held criminally liable.
The couple are scheduled to be sentenced on 9 April.
The jury deliberated for just over a day after a nearly week-long trial. James Crumbley was in court on Thursday evening for the verdict and appeared to show little reaction as it was read out.
Their son killed fellow students Tate Myre, 16; Hana St Juliana, 14; Madisyn Baldwin, 17, and Justin Shilling, 17, with a semi-automatic handgun at Oxford High School. Seven others were also injured in the shooting.
He is serving a sentence of life in prison without parole.
Steve and Ai St Juliana lost their 14-year-old daughter Hana, who they said was kind and always checked in on others
Steve St Juliana, Hana's father, said on Thursday evening that the prosecution of the Crumbleys was "just the beginning steps" when it came to dealing with gun violence in the US.
"Our children are dying on a daily basis in mass murders and we do very little about this," he added.
"We can put people on the Moon, we can build skyscrapers, huge monuments like the Hoover Dam and we can't keep our kids safe in schools."
In a statement, attorney Ven Johnson said that James and Jennifer Crumbley played a "causal role" in the deaths of the four students.
"This guilty verdict...won't bring back the lives of these four students, but it represents one more step towards holding everyone responsible under the law," Mr Johnson said.
Earlier this week in her closing arguments to the jury of six men and six women, prosecutor Karen McDonald called the attack "preventable and foreseeable".
She added that James Crumbley's actions had been "rare and egregious".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
He did not take even the slightest measures to ensure his son was not a threat after giving him a semi-automatic pistol as a gift just days before the shooting, said the prosecutor.
Prosecutors also said the Crumbleys had not done enough to address their son's declining mental health.
On the morning of the shooting, the two parents cut short a school meeting about a disturbing drawing their son had made to go to work and had declined to take him home.
School officials sent him back to class without checking his backpack, which contained a gun.
When Crumbley heard about the shooting, he rushed home from his job as a DoorDash delivery driver, looking for the weapon, the trial heard.
Crumbley's defence lawyer, Mariell Lehman, argued that "James had no idea that his son was having a hard time".
Crumbley did not testify, unlike his wife, who took the stand during her trial and tried to blame her husband.
Prosecutors said the Crumbleys had also failed to ensure the weapon was safely stored.
"Parents and gun owners have a responsibility to prevent children from accessing deadly weapons," said Nick Suplina, with the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, in a statement, adding the verdict "further underscores this critical duty of responsible gun ownership".
The Crumbleys were charged by police within days of the killings.
Initially, the parents were supposed to be tried together but in November sought separate trials.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68572112
|
news_world-us-canada-68572112
|
|
Politicians flounder as they wrestle with race rows - BBC News
|
2024-03-15
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Recent weeks have tested the ability of politics to respond to giant concepts for the 2020s.
|
UK Politics
|
Four people, over the last four weeks or so, who tell us something about money, power, individuals and institutions.
And also tell us something about language and labels.
It is a month to the day since the Labour Party disowned its then-candidate Azhar Ali in the Rochdale by election, over alleged antisemitism he apologised for.
Turmoil about what to do; a party grappling with what should be the appropriate response.
Senior figures sent out to do interviews with a line to take that crumbled not long later. The party accused of condemnation in words, but not in actions. Until that is, they chose to act.
Then there was the row about Lee Anderson. The now-Reform UK MP and former Conservative deputy chairman and a debate with language and labels at its core.
Mr Anderson's remarks about the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim, were branded "unacceptable" by the prime minister. Others, including Mr Khan, said they were racist and Islamophobic.
Hamas's horrific attacks in Israel in October, and Israel's subsequent war in Gaza has undoubtedly sharpened some of these debates.
But they can't all be traced back to recent events in the Middle East.
Here we have a hugely successful businessman from humble beginnings.
A man of Irish heritage who has talked of the abuse he suffered as a child because of where he was from.
A man with a diverse workforce who has become one of the Conservative Party's biggest donors under the country's first British Asian Prime Minister.
A man now condemned by that prime minister for uttering racist remarks.
And it is to Mr Sunak in particular that Mr Hester has been drawn, as opposed to the Conservative Party in general. For years, he said, he voted for the Green Party.
The government's line - having spent a day not calling the alleged remarks racist - is, actually, they were.
But Mr Sunak believes his "remorse should be accepted," as he put it at Prime Minister's Questions.
In other words, an instinct for tolerance should extend to those who have articulated apparent intolerance.
And there is a distinction, they argue, between a racist remark and being a racist person.
It taps into another keenly contested contemporary concept - the idea of being "cancelled".
The argument, from some, that those who preach tolerance seek to ban or remove some people from the public stage altogether.
It is into this territory that the ongoing discussion about Mr Hester's donations - and whether they should be returned - plays out, with the Conservatives determined to hold onto the money.
And then there is Diane Abbott. A pioneer MP, the first black woman elected to the Commons, who endures a vast amount of vile abuse which has been turbo-charged in the era of social media.
It is nearly a year since she was slung out of the Parliamentary Labour Party over remarks Sir Keir Starmer called antisemitic - and for which she apologised.
The Labour Party has spent 11 months investigating a letter to a newspaper she wrote that ran to a handful of sentences.
An alleged victim of racism, accused of racism herself.
What all of this amounts to is a case study in how society in the 2020s is wrestling with these giant concepts: belonging, identity, lived experience, heritage, language, labels, offence.
And how are we collectively wrestling with all of this?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68552490
|
news_uk-politics-68552490
|
|
Macron switches from dove to hawk on Russia's invasion of Ukraine - BBC News
|
2024-03-16
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The French president has dramatically changed from an appeaser to an arch resister of Vladimir Putin.
|
Europe
|
Emmanuel Macron (right) now insists that Ukraine's security is Europe's security
What came over Emmanuel Macron to turn him from appeaser to warmonger in the matter of Russia and Ukraine?
That - crudely put - is the question being asked in chancelleries across Europe, as the French president warms to his new role as the continent's resister-in-chief to Vladimir Putin.
Certain countries - the Baltics, Poland - welcome President Macron's apparent conversion to their "realistic" assessment of the Moscow threat.
Others - notably Chancellor Olaf Scholz's Germany - are aghast at this new-found va-t-en-guerre (gung-ho) French spirit.
All are confused and uncertain. How genuine is the new Macron line? Is his recent refusal to rule out sending troops to Ukraine just another of his surprises - testimony to his insatiable need to cut a diplomatic dash?
And how much of his new positioning is purely politics?
European elections are approaching, and the hard-right of Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella looks set to trounce the Macronites.
So is Emmanuel Macron using Ukraine to create a fault line between his side and the opposition, setting a contrast between his own lucid belligerence and Ms Le Pen's turbid complicity with Moscow in the past?
France has sent weaponry and trained Ukrainian troops - but Mr Macron insists more must be done
In a live interview on French television on Thursday evening, the president implicitly acknowledged that these critical questions were being asked.
But in true Macron fashion, he set out not to mollify but to assert. Far from muting his new-found alarmism, he explained it.
Not remotely embarrassed about his "conversion" from dove to hawk, the president's view was that the one inevitably had to precede the other.
Only after all efforts to reach out to an adversary have been exhausted, he argued, is it possible to say conclusively that that adversary is beyond the pale.
Furthermore - the second part of his self-justification - he argued that the Russians have now pushed their aggression to a whole new level.
The Kremlin, he said, had in recent months "got noticeably harder-line" - placing the Russian economy on a permanent war-footing; stepping up repression of internal opposition; escalating cyber-attacks on France and other countries.
With Ukraine looking increasingly beleaguered, and the United States no longer dependable as an ally, Europe was entering a new world, he said: "A world where what we thought was unthinkable actually happens."
This is why, according to the new Macron doctrine, France and Europe needed to be preparing a sursaut - a mental leap out of the cosy certainties of the dying era and into the harsh realities of the new one.
In deliberately Churchillian tones, he believes that in order to keep the peace, Europe needs to be ready for war.
Emmanuel Macron has even suggested France may need to put boots on the ground in Ukraine
As always with Emmanuel Macron, the logic is impeccable; the arguments unbreakable.
But as always with Emmanuel Macron there is also the question: he may convince, but can he persuade?
Because the French head of state's abiding difficulty is not, obviously, lack of brainpower - but the ability to convert that brilliance into a different talent: leadership. A capacity for getting others to follow.
And on this issue, it is far from clear that the others will fall in line.
The most glaring sign is the rift that separates the French leader from the man who is supposed to be his closest ally in Europe, Germany's Olaf Scholz.
In traditional Franco-German style, both sides are now publicly patching up and putting on the mandatory common front. Hence the Macron visit to Berlin on Friday.
But no amount of man-hugs can conceal the fundamental discord: France accusing Germany of foot-dragging on help for Ukraine, and wilful blindness in clinging to the permanence of the US security umbrella; Germany accusing France of reckless belligerence, hypocrisy (its arms deliveries are in fact way behind Germany's), and Macronic grandstanding.
Emmanuel Macron travelled to Berlin on Friday for talks with Chancellor Olaf Scholz about Russia's invasion of Ukraine
But domestically too, support for Emmanuel Macron on Ukraine is softer than he likes to think.
Polls show that a big majority - about 68% - oppose his line on sending Western troops. More generally, while most people are clearly opposed to Russia, the Ifop polling company reports a "progressive erosion of support for the Ukrainian cause".
And if there is indeed an electoral subtext to his new hard line on Moscow - intended to expose the far right's ambiguities - then it does not seem to be working. Opinion surveys show support for Le Pen's National Rally (RN) only strengthening.
In transforming into Europe's leading anti-appeaser, President Macron is once again staking out new ground.
He is taking the lead, and pushing Europeans to think hard about their security, and about the sacrifices that may soon become necessary.
All this is no doubt welcome.
His difficulty is that too many people react badly to him.
They resent his self-belief, and feel he too readily confuses what is right for Europe and the world with what is actually just right for France - or himself.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68575251
|
news_world-europe-68575251
|
|
Michael Gove: What are the hurdles facing his plans on extremism? - BBC News
|
2024-03-16
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mr Gove says he was driven to action because the UK's values are "under challenge" from extremists.
|
UK
|
Michael Gove says the activities of some groups will be assessed against the new definition
Michael Gove once made the front page of the Scottish Sun newspaper for being pictured at a nightclub at 02:30 in the morning.
A related image comes to mind when trying to sum up what the communities secretary is trying to achieve with his redefinition of extremism in British public life.
Think of him as the nightclub bouncer: Mr Gove's announcement on Thursday aims to establish a strict door policy for who gets access to government. If your name is on that list, you're not getting in. Anyone labelled as an extremist will be barred from meeting ministers, helping to shape public policy or seeking public funds.
Mr Gove told MPs he was driven to action because the UK's values were "under challenge" from extremist groups, which were radicalising young people.
But this is not a new plan.
For 20 years, a succession of governments have tried to define and, at times, ban extremism. Tony Blair was the first, after the 2005 terrorist bombings of London. David Cameron twice promised an extremism ban.
Each time, the government has faced the same intellectual and legal problem: nobody agrees what the word means.
Terrorism is very clearly defined in British law as the use or threat of violence to intimidate government or society to follow a particular course in the name of an ideological cause.
But extremism is not a crime. And one politician's extremism is another activist's legitimate cause. Think of the Suffragettes a century ago (although some were involved in a bombing campaign) or radical climate change protesters blocking roads today.
"Most extremist materials and activities are not illegal and do not meet the terrorism or the national security threshold," Mr Gove admitted in his Commons speech.
The most we have had as an official working definition of extremism dates from 2011, when David Cameron's government declared it meant, among other things, "vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values".
What's a fundamental British value? Does everyone even know what they might be, never mind agree on them? This is the problem that policymakers and government lawyers have struggled with.
Mr Cameron had to abandon a proposal in 2015 to ban the Muslim Brotherhood, the most important international Islamist network - when officials looked for the evidence linking the Brotherhood and its British offshoots to violence they didn't find it. And so it could not be banned under terrorism laws.
Nine years on, Mr Gove's argument is that his new definition of extremism is more workable than the 2011 version because it doesn't criminalise groups involved in activities he says are driving division in society, but rather allows ministers and policy-makers to say they won't engage with them.
He listed five groups he said were cause for concern, including a small far-right group that calls for the expulsion of ethnic minorities and Islamist organisations that he says want to tear down democracy.
It's not clear what his list will really lead to - other than accusations thrown back at him that he is driving the wedge.
Mr Gove's plan has no effect on the right to free speech and protest
For a start, none of the groups he has so far named are at the centre of policy-making. As no new crime is being created, police will be under no obligation to round up suspected extremists.
For weeks the government has been lobbied to use new extremism powers to stop the Gaza protests. But Mr Gove's plan has no effect on the right to free speech and protest. Demonstrations can only be banned if police chiefs have credible evidence they are likely to lead to uncontainable disorder.
Other public bodies are under no obligation to adopt the definition - not least universities.
This brings us to one of the first potentially unintended consequences.
Last year, the government placed a new legal duty on universities to protect free speech. Mr Gove could today label a group as extremist but under this plan, be unable to stop its members promoting their views to students on campus.
Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism laws, has identified other problems.
"A bank might decide we're going to get rid of you as a customer, because we don't want to have extremists on our books," he says.
A genuinely hateful person who is a foreign national, and who crosses the threshold for ejection from the UK, might also be able to use the label to their advantage, warns Mr Hall. They might try to challenge their removal to a despotic regime saying their naming-and-shaming in the UK means they could be tortured back home - something our law absolutely forbids.
"What happens if a group is not labelled?" he asks. "Does that mean that that group, even though they may have some quite unacceptable ideas, can run around saying [they've'] been cleared by the government?"
Mr Gove says his aim is to protect democracy, but even some in his own party are unconvinced this will work.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. PM: 'There are forces here at home trying to tear us apart'
MP Miriam Cates has warned it could have a "chilling effect" on gender-critical feminists who want to reverse law that allows people to change sex on their birth certificate.
Mr Gove says "gender-critical campaigners, those with conservative religious beliefs, trans activists, environmental protest groups, or those exercising their proper right to free speech" are not his target.
And it is true that he has long campaigned, as a journalist and a politician, for what he regards as a tougher response to the threat of terrorism.
His views that some lawful Islamist groups may pose a threat to society are hotly contested, but he is not alone in his thinking.
It is a racing certainty that now the policy has been made real it will be challenged in the courts. One of the Muslim groups he named on Thursday, MEND, is already preparing a case.
But it could take nine months or longer for any group that's labelled extremist to get a judgment that forces government to rethink the plan.
That would take it beyond the general election, and if the polls are correct, it would no longer be Mr Gove's problem.
But his critics will say he benefitted from pre-election headlines in a policy area that has been contested for 20 years.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68582156
|
news_uk-68582156
|
|
Macron switches from dove to hawk on Russia's invasion of Ukraine - BBC News
|
2024-03-17
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The French president has dramatically changed from an appeaser to an arch resister of Vladimir Putin.
|
Europe
|
Emmanuel Macron (right) now insists that Ukraine's security is Europe's security
What came over Emmanuel Macron to turn him from appeaser to warmonger in the matter of Russia and Ukraine?
That - crudely put - is the question being asked in chancelleries across Europe, as the French president warms to his new role as the continent's resister-in-chief to Vladimir Putin.
Certain countries - the Baltics, Poland - welcome President Macron's apparent conversion to their "realistic" assessment of the Moscow threat.
Others - notably Chancellor Olaf Scholz's Germany - are aghast at this new-found va-t-en-guerre (gung-ho) French spirit.
All are confused and uncertain. How genuine is the new Macron line? Is his recent refusal to rule out sending troops to Ukraine just another of his surprises - testimony to his insatiable need to cut a diplomatic dash?
And how much of his new positioning is purely politics?
European elections are approaching, and the hard-right of Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella looks set to trounce the Macronites.
So is Emmanuel Macron using Ukraine to create a fault line between his side and the opposition, setting a contrast between his own lucid belligerence and Ms Le Pen's turbid complicity with Moscow in the past?
France has sent weaponry and trained Ukrainian troops - but Mr Macron insists more must be done
In a live interview on French television on Thursday evening, the president implicitly acknowledged that these critical questions were being asked.
But in true Macron fashion, he set out not to mollify but to assert. Far from muting his new-found alarmism, he explained it.
Not remotely embarrassed about his "conversion" from dove to hawk, the president's view was that the one inevitably had to precede the other.
Only after all efforts to reach out to an adversary have been exhausted, he argued, is it possible to say conclusively that that adversary is beyond the pale.
Furthermore - the second part of his self-justification - he argued that the Russians have now pushed their aggression to a whole new level.
The Kremlin, he said, had in recent months "got noticeably harder-line" - placing the Russian economy on a permanent war-footing; stepping up repression of internal opposition; escalating cyber-attacks on France and other countries.
With Ukraine looking increasingly beleaguered, and the United States no longer dependable as an ally, Europe was entering a new world, he said: "A world where what we thought was unthinkable actually happens."
This is why, according to the new Macron doctrine, France and Europe needed to be preparing a sursaut - a mental leap out of the cosy certainties of the dying era and into the harsh realities of the new one.
In deliberately Churchillian tones, he believes that in order to keep the peace, Europe needs to be ready for war.
Emmanuel Macron has even suggested France may need to put boots on the ground in Ukraine
As always with Emmanuel Macron, the logic is impeccable; the arguments unbreakable.
But as always with Emmanuel Macron there is also the question: he may convince, but can he persuade?
Because the French head of state's abiding difficulty is not, obviously, lack of brainpower - but the ability to convert that brilliance into a different talent: leadership. A capacity for getting others to follow.
And on this issue, it is far from clear that the others will fall in line.
The most glaring sign is the rift that separates the French leader from the man who is supposed to be his closest ally in Europe, Germany's Olaf Scholz.
In traditional Franco-German style, both sides are now publicly patching up and putting on the mandatory common front. Hence the Macron visit to Berlin on Friday.
But no amount of man-hugs can conceal the fundamental discord: France accusing Germany of foot-dragging on help for Ukraine, and wilful blindness in clinging to the permanence of the US security umbrella; Germany accusing France of reckless belligerence, hypocrisy (its arms deliveries are in fact way behind Germany's), and Macronic grandstanding.
Emmanuel Macron travelled to Berlin on Friday for talks with Chancellor Olaf Scholz about Russia's invasion of Ukraine
But domestically too, support for Emmanuel Macron on Ukraine is softer than he likes to think.
Polls show that a big majority - about 68% - oppose his line on sending Western troops. More generally, while most people are clearly opposed to Russia, the Ifop polling company reports a "progressive erosion of support for the Ukrainian cause".
And if there is indeed an electoral subtext to his new hard line on Moscow - intended to expose the far right's ambiguities - then it does not seem to be working. Opinion surveys show support for Le Pen's National Rally (RN) only strengthening.
In transforming into Europe's leading anti-appeaser, President Macron is once again staking out new ground.
He is taking the lead, and pushing Europeans to think hard about their security, and about the sacrifices that may soon become necessary.
All this is no doubt welcome.
His difficulty is that too many people react badly to him.
They resent his self-belief, and feel he too readily confuses what is right for Europe and the world with what is actually just right for France - or himself.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68575251
|
news_world-europe-68575251
|
|
Cabinet minister Mark Harper denies Tories have a problem with race - BBC News
|
2024-03-17
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mark Harper says the party welcome members "whatever their race" as a row over comments by a donor continues.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
A senior cabinet minister has denied the Conservative Party has a problem with race after accepting at least £10m from a donor who is accused of racism.
Transport Secretary Mark Harper told the BBC he was in "the most ethnically diverse cabinet there has ever been".
Mr Harper said his party welcomes members "whatever their race".
Donor Frank Hester apologised after reportedly saying ex-Labour MP Diane Abbott made him want to "hate all black women" and that she "should be shot".
The party has refused repeated calls to return Mr Hester's money, despite labelling his alleged comments as "racist" and "wrong".
Mr Harper also refused to comment on reports the Conservatives have accepted a further £5m from Mr Hester, which would take his total donations to the party to £15m in under a year.
He told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme he was not involved in party finance but "if in the future there's a future donation, that will be declared in the usual way".
When asked by Laura Kuenssberg if the Tory party has "a problem with race", Mr Harper said: "Absolutely not.
"As the prime minister said this week, we are a party proudly led by the first Britain Asian prime minister."
He said the current cabinet is "the most ethnically diverse cabinet there has ever been".
"We are a party that welcomes people from across the UK whatever their background, whatever their race, if they share our values and approach to politics," he added.
Mr Harper argued that "we should accept" Mr Hester's apology.
But former Downing Street advisor Samuel Kasumu said he was disappointed in Mr Harper's argument.
Having the "most diverse cabinet in history "was not a "get out of jail free card" on race issues, Mr Kasumu said.
The former advisor to Boris Johnson has been a frequent critic of Conservative Party's approach to race since leaving government in a row over a racism report.
Paraphrasing Martin Luther King, Mr Kasumu said: "It is not the colour of your skin that matters when it comes to tackling racism, discrimination and bringing communities together - it has to be the content of your character and your willingness to lead."
Mr Kasumu added "some of our most divisive politicians are people like Suella Braverman", the former home secretary who is of Indian descent.
On Sunday, Baroness Warsi - the Conservative's first Muslim chairperson - said her party had become known as "the institutionally xenophobic and racist party".
Speaking on Politics North, Baroness Warsi, who chaired the Conservative Party between 2010 and 2012, said: "We should not be a party that takes money from people who have the kind of views that [Mr Hester] is alleged to have had."
The Guardian reports that Mr Hester made remarks about Ms Abbott while criticising a female executive at another organisation during a meeting at his company's headquarters in 2019.
The newspaper reported that he went on to say: "It's like trying not to be racist but you see Diane Abbott on the TV, and you're just like I hate, you just want to hate all black women because she's there, and I don't hate all black women at all, but I think she should be shot."
The BBC has not heard a recording, or been able to independently verify the alleged remarks.
Mr Hester, an IT executive, apologised for making "rude" comments about Ms Abbott but said his remarks "had nothing to do with her gender nor colour of skin".
In a social media post, Mr Hester later said he "abhors racism", which he described as a "poison that has no place in public life".
The Guardian's investigation has led to a week of political backlash against Mr Hester, forcing Ms Abbott into the centre of a debate around racism in politics.
In an article Ms Abbott, who now sits as an independent MP, hit out at racism within both the Conservatives and Labour.
She argued the government's Rwanda deportation scheme showed they intend to play "the race card" as the next election approaches. Ms Abbott also criticised Labour, saying "racism in politics is not just a matter for any one political party".
The Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington was suspended by Labour in April last year after writing in the Observer that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people were not subject to racism "all their lives". She later withdrew her remarks and apologised "for any anguish caused".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Abbott stood up in an effort to catch the Speaker's attention 46 times
Former Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman told the programme that Mr Harper's comments proved there was still "a problem".
"You have to recognise that even though there's been an advance of black people and women into politics there is still an even greater backlash and that's what people are facing," she said.
"The danger to tackling discrimination is complacency."
Ms Harman added the reason the Tories were "hesitant" to criticise Mr Hester and hand back his donations was "because they've accepted such a huge amount of money".
But she said Labour "absolutely have further to go" on tackling racism.
Ms Harman said: "Who can say there is no problem? We've got to recognise it's been an evil terrible problem."
Shadow cabinet minister Jonathan Ashworth said that the Labour Party "must not be complacent about racism - we must challenge it".
"We must challenge Islamophobia and antisemitism if we see that in our party as we do when we see it in society at large," he added.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68590969
|
news_uk-politics-68590969
|
|
Local elections: 'I got my first death threat before I was elected' - BBC News
|
2024-03-17
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
With £31m committed to improving politicians' safety, how bad is the abuse our local leaders face?
|
England
|
There are fears rising levels of abuse could put people off entering politics
They are responsible for planning, potholes and policing. But our local politicians are facing unprecedented levels of abuse and harassment. The government has committed £31m to improving safety and security for all elected representatives. So, with local elections coming, what is it like on the front line of local democracy?
Before she was even elected, Heather Williams had received her first death threat.
"I had people saying things like 'you're scum', 'you should be shot'," Mrs Williams, 35, remembered.
"I had someone say that I should have been sterilised at birth."
After winning her seat on South Cambridgeshire District Council in 2018, the abuse got even worse.
"I had threats of violence and sexual violence towards me," she said.
Conservative Heather Williams said she feared the abuse she faced were attempts to make her views "extinct"
While out campaigning, one man tried to return a leaflet. While that was not unusual, what followed was "absolutely terrifying".
"I went to take the leaflet back and then he was like 'you're lucky I've not got a gun or I'd pin you up against this wall and I'd shoot you," she told the BBC.
She now leads the Conservative group on the council and has "security protocols" in place for her and her primary-school-aged daughter.
According to the Local Government Association (LGA), in 2023, 82% of councillors felt at risk at least some of the time while fulfilling their role, up from 73% the previous year.
Mrs Williams believes politicians have been "dehumanised" and added that abusers "don't actually remember that you're a human being with feelings and a family".
At times, she said it felt like the abuse was aimed at the "eradication of my values and beliefs", although she stated she was too "stubborn" to leave politics.
Festus Akinbusoye said he had faced harassment, stalking and "vile racial abuse"
Festus Akinbusoye admitted the "extremely soul destroying" abuse he faced made him question whether he wanted to remain as Bedfordshire's Conservative police and crime commissioner but he "won't allow anyone to bully me out".
Nothing prepared him, he said, for "the harassment, the stalking, the vile racial abuse".
Mr Akinbusoye, 45, said he still has flashbacks to the "frightening" phone call he received from the chief constable asking where he and his children were, one day towards the end of 2022.
The force was concerned for their safety after it received a report of abuse.
In January, Panache Muir, 31, from Stilton near Peterborough, pleaded guilty to racially aggravated stalking of Mr Akinbusoye, causing serious alarm or distress. A sentencing hearing is due on 19 April.
"Unfortunately, there are people who think that because you are a public figure or an elected person, you are fair game," Mr Akinbusoye said.
He has spent "thousands" on security, drives different routes home and remains anxious about cars following him on Bedfordshire's roads.
"At what point does scrutiny and accountability of someone in public office become harassment?" he said.
"Where do you draw that line, when you just relentlessly pursue someone again and again and again?"
The government said the £31m it has committed would allow "all elected representatives and candidates" to have a dedicated named police contact to liaise with about security. It would also "expand cyber security advice to locally elected representatives".
Labour councillor Elisa Meschini described how her support for a congestion charge in Cambridge "opened the floodgates"
"I feel far worse about my family than I do about me," said Elisa Meschini, the 41-year-old Labour deputy leader of Cambridgeshire County Council.
Her partner – "who isn't political and doesn't want to be political" – has seen some of the abusive material she has been sent.
"Some of the stuff that has been left outside my door, he should not have had to look at – never mind knowing that it has been done in the first place," she said.
Ms Meschini said she did not receive much abuse until the summer of 2022, when she began putting forward the arguments for a congestion charge in Cambridge. That "opened the floodgates".
She recalled one image that she said was shared with the caption "councillors who don't listen deserve this to be done to them", alongside "a picture of Mussolini, being shot, in the public square".
Ms Meschini, who is Italian, challenged the person responsible for it, who told her "it's just a joke", she said.
She felt the "online world isn't regulated as much as it should be" and was a "free for all".
She said the thought of one person doing "something that's really terrible", after reading hate "spewed by thousands of people on social media", kept her up at night.
The Online Safety Act, which became law in October, aims to bring "a new era of internet safety", according to the government.
The LGA welcomed some of its measures but said it could have gone further.
Peter McDonald, a Liberal Democrat in South Cambridgeshire, said the "majority" of people were "civil"
South Cambridgeshire Liberal Democrat, Peter McDonald, 62, said councillors needed to be "completely embedded in our communities" but that also made them vulnerable.
Most people, he said, were "very civil" and "really appreciative".
But "very few people – mostly men" had been "taking up the cudgels against me for anything from a pothole or a planning permission to an industrial development".
"We live in an area with a lot of change and a lot of development and people can get very worked up about that," he said.
While much of this was on social media, in one phone conversation he recalled the caller "said they would 'sort me out'".
"I asked them 'what did that mean?' and the telephone line went quiet. It was over a planning issue."
Mr McDonald said he hoped more awareness of the role of local government and education about how to interact online might help reduce the amount of abuse.
But he recognised that some people "would never in a million years" go into politics because they were "not going to subject myself to that".
BBC Politics East will be broadcast on Sunday 17 March at 10:00 GMT on BBC One in the East of England, and will be available after broadcast on BBC iPlayer.
If you've been affected by any of the issues in this article, help and support is available via the BBC Action Line
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook and Instagram. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk or get in touch via WhatsApp on 0800 169 1830
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68562310
|
news_uk-england-68562310
|
|
Tiger Woods comparisons 'inevitable' for Scottie Scheffler after Players Championship win - BBC Sport
|
2024-03-18
|
https://www.facebook.com/BBCSport/
|
Players Championship winner Scottie Scheffler is not close to the longevity of Tiger Woods' dominance but they can be mentioned in same breath, writes Iain Carter.
|
Golf
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Players Championship: Scottie Scheffler reacts to winning the title at Sawgrass
Scottie Scheffler gave a knowing smile when an inevitable comparison with Tiger Woods was made in the immediate aftermath of his historic Players Championship victory at Sawgrass. Such is the current dominance enjoyed by the man who became the first to defend the PGA Tour's flagship title, some are starting to equate him with the 15-time major champion. Scheffler's mind went back to Woods' tournament, the Genesis Invitational at Riviera, last month. "I think that's a funny question," he smiled. "I'm not going to remember the exact numbers, but we were playing at 'Riv' this year, and I hit my tee ball and this guy yells out, 'Congrats on being number one Scottie. Eleven more years to go. Eleven more years to go'." And, of course, the fan was right. Scheffler is miles away from coming close to the longevity of dominance achieved by Woods in his pomp. But right here, right now, there is an argument to mention the two players in the same breath. "Any time you can be compared to Tiger is really special, but, I mean, the guy stands alone in our game. He really does," Scheffler added. "This is my eighth tournament win now out here, I've tied him in Players Championships. Outside of that, I have got 14 more majors and 70-some PGA Tour events to catch up. "So I think I'm going to stick to my routine and just continue to plot along, try and stay as even-keeled as I can." That said, we cannot disregard the level of play that Scheffler is achieving at the moment. Sunday's win was his second big title in as many weeks in Florida. The last man to do that double in the Sunshine State was Woods in 2001. And Scheffler did it in style with an imperious bogey-free final round of 64 to fend off two reigning major champions in Brian Harman and Wyndham Clark. The Olympic gold medallist Xander Schauffele also tied for second a single shot behind. It was a welcome star-studded leaderboard and just what the beleaguered PGA Tour needed at its flagship championship to showcase its best talent. For Scheffler it was the narrowest of wins, but it was champion stuff that was in keeping with the way the tall American dominates so many aspects of the game. This season he tops the PGA Tour charts in scoring average, birdie average, strokes gained, greens in regulation and approach shots to the putting surfaces. He does not need to putt the lights out to win. When he does - as he did at Bay Hill the week prior - he wins big. Five shots was the margin of victory at the Arnold Palmer Invitational. At Sawgrass he was 37th in strokes gained on the greens, which was decent. Indeed, his work with English coach Phil Kenyon and the switch to a mallet-style putter is paying off nicely. But the rest of his game is what sets him apart. Last week he was number one in strokes gained off the tee, tee to green and in driving accuracy. He has the ball on a rope with such reliable and powerful ball striking.
Scheffler was hitting balls on the driving range in case of a play-off when he learned of his victory
Statistically he was top 10 around the green and from bunkers - not that he has to rely very often on those departments. And for greens in regulation he tied third in the putting statistics. It is a formidable armoury that is allied to an exemplary mental approach. A painful and niggling neck problem that emerged in the second round of the Players only served to increase his determination to become the first to defend the title. "That's probably why I kept playing," he said of the moment he received treatment five holes into his round on Friday. He still felt he could win and he did not want to spurn the opportunity. Nevertheless, he needed to make up five shots in the final round, a feat only previously achieved twice at Sawgrass - by Justin Leonard and Henrik Stenson - in Players history. This is where his unflappable temperament came to the fore. Scheffler is blessed with a real sense of perspective allied to a fierce competitive spirit. He does not get carried away, which is why his rivals should continue to fear him as the golf year heads towards major season starting with the Masters in April. "I try not to place too much emphasis on results, good or bad," he said, refusing to look further than his next PGA Tour stop in Texas later this month. "I think you can take some positives in the momentum, but I'm going to go home, get some rest and continue my prep work for Houston." This is someone who used to wear the same brand of clothing as Woods out of fandom. He has long since been paid handsomely to do that. And he is starting to match the 82-time PGA Tour winner in the way he sits at the top of the world rankings. Admittedly they are somewhat compromised by the absence of points being awarded to LIV events, but the gap between Scheffler and number two Rory McIlroy [4.4 points average] is greater than the margin between the Northern Irishman and Collin Morikawa, who is 18th in the standings. It is a commanding position. Then again, Woods' lead over Phil Mickelson was once greater than that between the world number two and anyone else in the standings. So let us not get too carried away. As Scheffler said: "Yeah, we all idolise Tiger. He's been our guy. Watching what he did in special moments over the years is crazy to watch." What we can say, though, is that Scheffler's Sawgrass exploits over the past two editions, and his current overall statistics, are also of the rarest quality.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/68596175
|
rt_golf_68596175
|
|
Cabinet minister Mark Harper denies Tories have a problem with race - BBC News
|
2024-03-18
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mark Harper says the party welcome members "whatever their race" as a row over comments by a donor continues.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
A senior cabinet minister has denied the Conservative Party has a problem with race after accepting at least £10m from a donor who is accused of racism.
Transport Secretary Mark Harper told the BBC he was in "the most ethnically diverse cabinet there has ever been".
Mr Harper said his party welcomes members "whatever their race".
Donor Frank Hester apologised after reportedly saying ex-Labour MP Diane Abbott made him want to "hate all black women" and that she "should be shot".
The party has refused repeated calls to return Mr Hester's money, despite labelling his alleged comments as "racist" and "wrong".
Mr Harper also refused to comment on reports the Conservatives have accepted a further £5m from Mr Hester, which would take his total donations to the party to £15m in under a year.
He told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme he was not involved in party finance but "if in the future there's a future donation, that will be declared in the usual way".
When asked by Laura Kuenssberg if the Tory party has "a problem with race", Mr Harper said: "Absolutely not.
"As the prime minister said this week, we are a party proudly led by the first Britain Asian prime minister."
He said the current cabinet is "the most ethnically diverse cabinet there has ever been".
"We are a party that welcomes people from across the UK whatever their background, whatever their race, if they share our values and approach to politics," he added.
Mr Harper argued that "we should accept" Mr Hester's apology.
But former Downing Street advisor Samuel Kasumu said he was disappointed in Mr Harper's argument.
Having the "most diverse cabinet in history "was not a "get out of jail free card" on race issues, Mr Kasumu said.
The former advisor to Boris Johnson has been a frequent critic of Conservative Party's approach to race since leaving government in a row over a racism report.
Paraphrasing Martin Luther King, Mr Kasumu said: "It is not the colour of your skin that matters when it comes to tackling racism, discrimination and bringing communities together - it has to be the content of your character and your willingness to lead."
Mr Kasumu added "some of our most divisive politicians are people like Suella Braverman", the former home secretary who is of Indian descent.
On Sunday, Baroness Warsi - the Conservative's first Muslim chairperson - said her party had become known as "the institutionally xenophobic and racist party".
Speaking on Politics North, Baroness Warsi, who chaired the Conservative Party between 2010 and 2012, said: "We should not be a party that takes money from people who have the kind of views that [Mr Hester] is alleged to have had."
The Guardian reports that Mr Hester made remarks about Ms Abbott while criticising a female executive at another organisation during a meeting at his company's headquarters in 2019.
The newspaper reported that he went on to say: "It's like trying not to be racist but you see Diane Abbott on the TV, and you're just like I hate, you just want to hate all black women because she's there, and I don't hate all black women at all, but I think she should be shot."
The BBC has not heard a recording, or been able to independently verify the alleged remarks.
Mr Hester, an IT executive, apologised for making "rude" comments about Ms Abbott but said his remarks "had nothing to do with her gender nor colour of skin".
In a social media post, Mr Hester later said he "abhors racism", which he described as a "poison that has no place in public life".
The Guardian's investigation has led to a week of political backlash against Mr Hester, forcing Ms Abbott into the centre of a debate around racism in politics.
In an article Ms Abbott, who now sits as an independent MP, hit out at racism within both the Conservatives and Labour.
She argued the government's Rwanda deportation scheme showed they intend to play "the race card" as the next election approaches. Ms Abbott also criticised Labour, saying "racism in politics is not just a matter for any one political party".
The Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington was suspended by Labour in April last year after writing in the Observer that Irish, Jewish and Traveller people were not subject to racism "all their lives". She later withdrew her remarks and apologised "for any anguish caused".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Abbott stood up in an effort to catch the Speaker's attention 46 times
Former Labour deputy leader Harriet Harman told the programme that Mr Harper's comments proved there was still "a problem".
"You have to recognise that even though there's been an advance of black people and women into politics there is still an even greater backlash and that's what people are facing," she said.
"The danger to tackling discrimination is complacency."
Ms Harman added the reason the Tories were "hesitant" to criticise Mr Hester and hand back his donations was "because they've accepted such a huge amount of money".
But she said Labour "absolutely have further to go" on tackling racism.
Ms Harman said: "Who can say there is no problem? We've got to recognise it's been an evil terrible problem."
Shadow cabinet minister Jonathan Ashworth said that the Labour Party "must not be complacent about racism - we must challenge it".
"We must challenge Islamophobia and antisemitism if we see that in our party as we do when we see it in society at large," he added.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68590969
|
news_uk-politics-68590969
|
|
Politicians flounder as they wrestle with race rows - BBC News
|
2024-03-18
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Recent weeks have tested the ability of politics to respond to giant concepts for the 2020s.
|
UK Politics
|
Four people, over the last four weeks or so, who tell us something about money, power, individuals and institutions.
And also tell us something about language and labels.
It is a month to the day since the Labour Party disowned its then-candidate Azhar Ali in the Rochdale by election, over alleged antisemitism he apologised for.
Turmoil about what to do; a party grappling with what should be the appropriate response.
Senior figures sent out to do interviews with a line to take that crumbled not long later. The party accused of condemnation in words, but not in actions. Until that is, they chose to act.
Then there was the row about Lee Anderson. The now-Reform UK MP and former Conservative deputy chairman and a debate with language and labels at its core.
Mr Anderson's remarks about the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, who is Muslim, were branded "unacceptable" by the prime minister. Others, including Mr Khan, said they were racist and Islamophobic.
Hamas's horrific attacks in Israel in October, and Israel's subsequent war in Gaza has undoubtedly sharpened some of these debates.
But they can't all be traced back to recent events in the Middle East.
Here we have a hugely successful businessman from humble beginnings.
A man of Irish heritage who has talked of the abuse he suffered as a child because of where he was from.
A man with a diverse workforce who has become one of the Conservative Party's biggest donors under the country's first British Asian Prime Minister.
A man now condemned by that prime minister for uttering racist remarks.
And it is to Mr Sunak in particular that Mr Hester has been drawn, as opposed to the Conservative Party in general. For years, he said, he voted for the Green Party.
The government's line - having spent a day not calling the alleged remarks racist - is, actually, they were.
But Mr Sunak believes his "remorse should be accepted," as he put it at Prime Minister's Questions.
In other words, an instinct for tolerance should extend to those who have articulated apparent intolerance.
And there is a distinction, they argue, between a racist remark and being a racist person.
It taps into another keenly contested contemporary concept - the idea of being "cancelled".
The argument, from some, that those who preach tolerance seek to ban or remove some people from the public stage altogether.
It is into this territory that the ongoing discussion about Mr Hester's donations - and whether they should be returned - plays out, with the Conservatives determined to hold onto the money.
And then there is Diane Abbott. A pioneer MP, the first black woman elected to the Commons, who endures a vast amount of vile abuse which has been turbo-charged in the era of social media.
It is nearly a year since she was slung out of the Parliamentary Labour Party over remarks Sir Keir Starmer called antisemitic - and for which she apologised.
The Labour Party has spent 11 months investigating a letter to a newspaper she wrote that ran to a handful of sentences.
An alleged victim of racism, accused of racism herself.
What all of this amounts to is a case study in how society in the 2020s is wrestling with these giant concepts: belonging, identity, lived experience, heritage, language, labels, offence.
And how are we collectively wrestling with all of this?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68552490
|
news_uk-politics-68552490
|
|
David Sullivan: West Ham owner opposes introduction of independent football regulator - BBC Sport
|
2024-03-19
|
None
|
West Ham owner David Sullivan believes the Premier League "may cease" to be the top division in the world if an independent regulator is introduced.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Football
West Ham United owner David Sullivan says the Premier League "may cease" to be the world's top division if an independent regulator is introduced.
Such a regulator would be brought in if the Football Governance Bill - which had its first reading in Parliament on Tuesday - is made law.
The UK government announced its plans to appoint a regulator following a fan-led review into football in 2022.
But Sullivan said a regulator is only needed "when things are going badly".
One of the key roles of the regulator would be to find an agreement between the Premier League and the English Football League (EFL) over financial distributions.
With no agreement in sight, the EFL has said action from an independent regulator is "more important than ever".
"The Premier League is the top league in the world," Sullivan told BBC Sport.
"It is a big export - other countries want to buy it off us and we do very well in Europe generally.
"Anything to water down our income will make us less competitive. We may cease to be the top league so they may ruin an asset that we have."
However, EFL chairman Rick Parry said: "Nothing is going to change the competitiveness of the Premier League.
"The gap [in terms of wages paid] is just getting bigger and bigger between the Premier League and the rest [of Europe], so the idea that the Premier League is going to be unduly constrained or no longer competitive, I just don't even see how that argument gets to first base."
The fan-led review, which followed on from the failed launch of a European Super League in 2021, made 10 recommendations to government on how to improve football.
Powers handed to the regulator will centre around three main objectives: improving financial sustainability of clubs, ensuring financial resilience across the leagues and safeguarding English football's heritage.
Sullivan, who initially bought a stake in West Ham in 2010, said the government's track record with regulators is "appalling".
"You tend to put a regulator in when things are going very badly and something has to be done to sort it out. We have the best football in the world," he added.
What does the bill say?
New club owners and directors will face stronger tests to help prevent the possibility of them putting clubs out of business, as was the case with Bury and Macclesfield, while a licensing system covering clubs from the National League up to the Premier League has been proposed.
As part of their licence, clubs will be required to consult their fans on key off-field decisions, such as club heritage and its strategic direction.
The regulator may also step in if the Premier League and the EFL reach no agreement over how Premier League money is distributed across the football pyramid in England.
So far, the two parties have failed to agree on a 'new deal' and the regulator will have new backstop powers to resolve that issue.
The government has long warned the football authorities that an independent football regulator would have such powers to intervene.
"You have two problems - what we give and who funds it?" Sullivan said.
"There is a big argument between the bottom 10, who want the top clubs to pay a lot more, and the top clubs want everyone to pay the same.
"Whatever we give won't be enough for them [the EFL]. Tesco don't give the small supermarket chain a subsidy."
The Premier League does provide funding to some clubs in the Championship via parachute payments, which were introduced in 2006-07 to limit the financial damage a relegated team might endure when dropping down.
Those payments to each of the three relegated clubs are issued in declining instalments over three seasons.
Sullivan feels parachute payments are "not big enough" to help support clubs who suffer relegation, and says dropping out of the top flight would be "horrendous" for West Ham after 12 successive seasons in the Premier League.
"We don't think that parachute payments are the right mechanism. They obviously indicate there's a problem but they tackle the symptoms," EFL chief Parry said.
"We don't want clubs facing financial catastrophe - either on the way up or on the way down. "What we've always said is we want to address the cliff edge - the gap between the Premier League and the Championship. For the non-parachute clubs, that £100m-plus. That's the gap that is unbridgeable and challenging.
"We've always said we think that gap should be halved, and if we halve that, then we don't need the parachute payments."
• None Our coverage of your Premier League club is bigger and better than ever before - follow your team and sign up for notifications in the BBC Sport app to make sure you never miss a moment
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68610772
|
rt_football_68610772
|
|
Mike Lynch: Autonomy founder's fraud trial begins in US - BBC News
|
2024-03-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Autonomy founder Mike Lynch is accused of fraudulently inflating the value of his software firm.
|
Business
|
Mike Lynch arriving at federal court in San Francisco on Monday
British tech entrepreneur Mike Lynch is appearing in court in the US, as his trial on fraud charges gets under way.
Once dubbed "Britain's Bill Gates", Mr Lynch is accused of overinflating the value of his software firm when he sold it to Hewlett-Packard (HP) in 2011.
The 58-year-old, who faces 16 charges, faces up to 25 years in prison if convicted. He denies the claims.
He was extradited to the US last year, after a UK judge ruled in favour of HP in a similar civil fraud case.
In opening arguments, Mr Lynch's attorney Reid Weingarten said the tycoon was preparing to take the stand at trial, as he seeks to defend a record that has been severely battered since the sale of the firm Autonomy for more than $11bn (£8.6bn).
At the time, the deal ranked as the largest-ever takeover of a British technology business.
But just a year later, HP wrote down the value of Autonomy by $8.8bn and claimed it had been duped into overpaying for the company.
Mr Weingarten told the jury that Mr Lynch had focused on technology, leaving the finances to others.
"Mike had many sleepless nights worrying about Autonomy, but not about accounting," Mr Weingarten said, according to the Reuters news agency.
It grew to become one of the UK's top 100 public companies, known for software that could extract useful information from "unstructured" sources such as phone calls, emails or video.
US prosecutors in San Francisco say Mr Lynch backdated agreements to mislead about the company's sales; concealed the firm's loss-making business reselling hardware; and intimidated or paid off people who raised concerns, among other claims.
In court filings, his attorneys have argued that the "real reason for the write-down" was a failure by HP to manage the merger.
"Then, with its stock price crumbling under the weight of its own mismanagement, circled the wagons to protect its new leaders and wantonly accused" Mr Lynch of fraud, they wrote.
Mr Lynch, a former UK government adviser who sat on the boards of the BBC and the British Library, vigorously fought attempts by US prosecutors to bring him to trial in America, which is known for its punitive approach to white-collar crime.
In 2019, Autonomy's former chief financial officer Sushovan Hussain was jailed for five years and fined millions of dollars on 16 counts of fraud, securities fraud and other charges.
In 2022, HP won a civil fraud case against Mr Lynch and Hussain heard by London's High Court. It is now seeking a reported $4bn.
In that case, Mr Lynch and Hussain argued that HP's claim was "'manufactured' to cover and justify a change of corporate mind, and to cast them as scapegoats for what in reality is buyer's remorse coupled with management failings".
As well as Mr Lynch, Autonomy's former finance executive Stephen Chamberlain is also on trial.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68599243
|
news_business-68599243
|
|
Deliveroo rider bites off Aldershot customer's thumb - BBC News
|
2024-03-19
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Jenniffer Rocha, who was delivering a pizza, attacked the customer near his home in Aldershot.
|
Hampshire & Isle of Wight
|
Jenniffer Rocha was delivering a pizza when she severed Stephen Jenkinson's thumb
A food delivery driver who bit off a customer's thumb has pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm.
Jenniffer Rocha, 35, attacked the customer in December 2022 near his home in Aldershot in Hampshire.
She was not employed by Deliveroo, but had been working as a "substitute" rider using someone else's account.
The judge at Winchester Crown Court described it as a "serious offence", which could result in a prison sentence.
Deliveroo said it was an "awful incident", adding it had ended the rider's account.
Rocha is due to be sentenced on 3 May.
Warning: This story contains a graphic image and details that some readers may find upsetting
A plumber by trade, Mr Jenkinson is unable to work because of his injury
Stephen Jenkinson, 36, had ordered a pizza from the food delivery app on 14 December 2022.
But Rocha arrived at the wrong location, down the street from Mr Jenkinson's house.
When he went to get his food, he forgot his phone and a brief argument ensued about the delivery code number he needed to provide.
Mr Jenkinson said he was then attacked.
He raised his hand to Rocha's motorcycle helmet and she bit his thumb.
"All I remember, I was shaking her helmet trying to get her off," he told the BBC.
She eventually let go, at which point Mr Jenkinson lifted up his arm and "sprayed her with blood".
Mr Jenkinson's thumb was severed just above the knuckle.
"The force with which she must have been biting, she'd clean taken it off," he said, adding it was as if he had "gone through a chainsaw".
Mr Jenkinson's thumb is severed just above the knuckle
He said the case raised questions about Deliveroo's responsibility for scrutinising its delivery drivers.
It comes as new figures released to BBC News indicate that, across the UK, three vehicles used for food delivery are seized every week by police because they are uninsured for business use.
Deliveroo, like many food delivery apps, does not employ any drivers or riders directly.
They are classed as independent contractors and can appoint "substitutes" to deliver on their behalf.
It is the responsibility of the main account holder to check that the substitute is legally allowed to work.
Rocha was in the UK legally and had the right to work here.
Deliveroo said its riders were covered by the company's own free insurance.
But because Rocha was working as a substitute for another driver, Deliveroo cannot be held legally responsible.
Solicitors representing Mr Jenkinson said her insurance policy did not cover injury caused by a criminal act.
"At the moment, I'm getting nothing from Deliveroo," said Mr Jenkinson.
A plumber by training, Mr Jenkinson said he had been unable to work since the attack.
After months of reconstructive surgery, part of his big toe was grafted onto the stump of his missing thumb.
He has had to relearn basic tasks such as doing up buttons or tying shoelaces - and said he still had no sensation in it.
"Financially, I'm ruined. I'm unemployed. I'm in a massive amount of debt and I don't see the light at the end of the tunnel," he said.
His relationship with his girlfriend, the mother of their newborn daughter, also broke down following the incident.
"I have to live with this for the rest of my life," Mr Jenkinson said.
"I want to use this story to help others, to say 'this has to change'," he added.
Mr Jenkinson's lawyer, Alex Barley from Slater Heelis, said: "Companies operating in the gig economy should be held to account for the actions of the people they rely on for their significant profits.
"The practice of substitution should be stopped and the companies should be required to carry out necessary checks on all people working for them".
In a statement Deliveroo said its riders were self employed - a fact which had been "confirmed by UK courts on multiple occasions".
"Substitution is and always has been a common feature of self employment - it is not specific to Deliveroo, nor our sector," it added.
Follow BBC South on Facebook, X, or Instagram. Send your story ideas to south.newsonline@bbc.co.uk or via WhatsApp on 0808 100 2240.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68558464
|
news_uk-68558464
|
|
PM's speech shows impact of Israel-Gaza war on UK politics - BBC News
|
2024-03-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The prime minister's Friday statement addressed 'extremism' on the streets of the country.
|
UK Politics
|
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak gave an address outside 10 Downing Street on Friday, where he said the country's democracy was under threat, and condemned Islamist and far-right extremists
Prime Ministerial addresses from the lectern outside 10 Downing Street are rare.
Sufficiently so that when reporters were tipped off Rishi Sunak would be saying something from there, heart rates quickened a little as our first reaction was 'Is he calling an election?'.
No, it was quickly made clear that was not the case.
Instead - against the clearly audible backdrop of a protester shouting the odds in Whitehall - the prime minister fleshed out an argument he has been rehearsing throughout this week.
It goes like this - the fundamentals of the right to protest and the operational independence of the police are sacrosanct.
But what he believes to be a bending of long-standing norms need bending back to normality, and that deserves the lectern to be set up outside No10.
He told the audience the other side of the TV cameras and radio microphones that Intimidation, extremism, and the projection of offensive slogans onto parliamentary buildings had gone too far.
George Galloway, who has often spoken out in support of the Palestinians during Israel's war in Gaza, was comfortably elected as the new MP for Rochdale this week
As, he added, did the election of George Galloway.
Little wonder that prompted the opprobrium to fly in return from Mr Galloway.
The prime minister, he claimed, was "diminished and degraded".
Did Mr Sunak's argument have the gravity the location of its delivery implied?
His critics, within his own party and beyond, thought not.
"He says stuff but doesn't announce anything," said one unconvinced Tory.
Others, loyal to him, quickly offered their support on social media.
Not for the first time, the Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was in broad agreement with Rishi Sunak.
"The Prime Minister is right to advocate unity and to condemn the unacceptable and intimidatory behaviour that we have seen recently," he said.
"It is an important task of leadership to defend our values and the common bonds that hold us together."
The outrages by Hamas in Israel last autumn and Israel's attacks on Gaza since continue to shape the contours of our public conversation for more than 10 consecutive days.
Few, if anyone, is immune, whether by accident or design. The prime minister, the Labour leader, the Scottish National Party, the Speaker of the House of Commons, Rochdale.
And George Galloway will arrive in Westminster on Monday morning.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68455310
|
news_uk-politics-68455310
|
|
RFK Jr: How anti-vaccine misinformation has shaped his 'truth-teller' candidacy - BBC News
|
2024-03-02
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Mr Kennedy, who is running for US president, is seen by supporters as a truth-teller, but often spreads falsehoods.
|
World
|
America faces an election rematch in November that few voters are motivated by. As a result, independent candidates could have a bigger impact on this year's result than they have in decades, and none is making bigger waves than Robert F Kennedy Jr.
His supporters see him as a courageous truth-teller, battling nefarious corporate powers. Yet the vaccine sceptic has a history of straying from the truth and spreading health information scientists say is false. Rachel Schraer investigates these two very different images.
"Robert F Kennedy Junior called me and he said that he needed my help," says the scientist, whose vaccine against rotavirus is estimated to save some two thousand lives a day in the developing world.
Mr Kennedy, a member of the famous political dynasty and nephew of former president John F Kennedy, told Prof Offit he was looking for information. He wanted to reassure parents who were worried about the effects of a mercury-based preservative called thimerosal, found in some vaccines.
Prof Offit confesses he was excited to be able to talk a Kennedy through the studies, which showed children exposed to thimerosal (not found in most US vaccines anyway since 2001) were no worse off than those who hadn't had exposure.
But a year or so later, Mr Kennedy wrote an article published in Rolling Stone magazine which repeated baseless claims that thimerosal was causing health problems. It also wrongly claimed the vaccine that Prof Offit was working on at the time contained this preservative, suggesting this had driven him to misrepresent the risks. The article was later retracted due to a large number of inaccuracies.
Despite these wrong claims, Mr Kennedy - now a presidential candidate - appeared on Joe Rogan's podcast last summer repeating his version of the story.
We contacted Mr Kennedy's team but they did not comment on this specific allegation.
You can listen to Trending: "The anti-vax candidate?" on BBC Sounds.
And yet, honesty is one of the main reasons RFK Jr's supporters from across the political spectrum have told the BBC they want him to be the next US president.
A January Gallup poll suggested he was the only candidate with a more than 50% favourability rating among the public. That may not mean anything for how people will actually vote, though, with the two major party candidates still expected to draw the vast majority of votes.
The worry for both Democrats and Republicans, however, is that RFK Jr might siphon off votes in November that might have otherwise gone to their candidates - set to be Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
Jay Scott, one supporter, described him as a "courageous truth-teller".
Another, Michigan-based independent voter Bryce Lipscombe told me: "I just trust the man who has sued a bunch of these government agencies and won, who has actually proven that corruption exists."
Many supporters from across the political spectrum said they liked the fact Mr Kennedy was promising to tackle the influence of big business on government, including pharmaceutical companies and the oil and gas industry,
They said they found his policies on immigration and drug legalisation to be sensible. And they pointed to his record as an environmental lawyer of suing companies that pollute, with some notable successes including cleaning up the Hudson River in New York.
Mr Kennedy appeared to speak especially to people who were unhappy with - or suspicious of - the US government and the rest of the world's response to the Covid pandemic.
Mr Kennedy's supporters point to genuine failings by public institutions on issues from the opioid crisis to the Iraq war as reasons they've lost trust in the two main parties.
But this doesn't change the fact there are also countless examples of Mr Kennedy spreading conspiracy theories, making false or misleading statements, and sticking by his positions regardless of the evidence presented to the contrary.
"Whenever presented with copious evidence and scientific studies that vaccines do not cause autism… or whatever health condition he attributes to them, it is never enough," said Dr David Gorski, professor of surgery at Wayne State University and managing editor of the site Science Based Medicine. "He always moves the goalposts, demanding still more evidence."
When contacted for comment, Mr Kennedy's team maintained that: "Proper safety studies have never been conducted on vaccines: long-term, all-cause mortality studies comparing fully-vaccinated children to never-vaccinated children.
Many Kennedy supporters echo this argument but Dr Gorski says it "just plain not true".
He explains that for decades countless groups of independent scientists have looked at the effect of vaccines on a huge range of specific health outcomes and found the benefits far outweigh any risks.
For Prof Offit, this tactic represents what he sees as the impossibility of debating him.
"What do you do with people like Robert Kennedy Junior?" he asks. "When he raises the question: 'Could this vaccine do harm?', and then excellent studies are done showing that it doesn't. And he just refuses to believe them, because he just claims conspiracy at every turn."
But the lack of people willing to debate Mr Kennedy has been held up as just another example - including the past removal of some of his social media accounts - of him being silenced and censored.
This "censorship" is part of the reason Mr Kennedy says he is running for president in the first place.
He was also part of a legal case against the BBC and other news media organisations claiming they and social media platforms colluded to censor him and others so they couldn't compete with them.
For New York magazine correspondent, Olivia Nuzzi, who has interviewed Mr Kennedy and followed his campaign, some of his supporters' deep mistrust of mainstream institutions, from scientists to the media, presents an "impossible" problem for those seeking to fact-check his claims. "It's like two different universes of facts," she says.
Those who distrust powerful institutions are "willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt who they perceive to be righteously challenging that power," she says, and are, "not interested in arguments from people that they perceive to be doing the bidding of those institutions".
Many of RFK Jr's supporters are impatient with discussion of his stance on vaccines. Some think it's an attempt by the media to smear him. For others it is simply less important than other issues like the border, surveillance and the economy, including tackling the influence of powerful corporations.
But it seems crucial in the question of his relationship to the truth.
"If you're going to speak truth to power," Prof Offit says, "You should at least tell the truth."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-68447223
|
news_world-68447223
|
|
Appeals court split on strict Texas immigration law - BBC News
|
2024-03-20
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The hearing came as Mexico's president called the border legislation dehumanising.
|
US & Canada
|
SB4 would give police officers in Texas broad powers to arrest migrants
An appeals court has appeared divided on whether to reject a controversial Texas immigration law in a case that is being closely watched nationwide.
The legislation would let police in Texas arrest and prosecute anyone they think has entered the country illegally, but challengers say the measure usurps federal authority.
The law, known as SB4, briefly came into force on Tuesday for a few hours.
But it was blocked again amid a legal back and forth between the courts.
A New Orleans-based fifth circuit appeals panel of three judges heard arguments in the case on Wednesday morning.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: 'It's not easy' - Migrants at US border react to strict Texas law
They appeared split on the constitutionality of the law and whether it interferes with federal powers as President Joe Biden's administration has argued.
They issued no immediate ruling, and it is unclear when they will do so.
If they opt to let the law go into effect, the justice department is requesting that its effective date be delayed to allow time to seek emergency action from the Supreme Court.
SB4 was due to come into effect on 5 March, but the Biden administration sued in January.
Migrant arrivals at the southern US border have risen to record highs during this administration, making it a top concern among American voters in the run-up to November's presidential election.
If the courts uphold Texas' new law, other US states could follow.
In court on Wednesday, US Judge Priscilla Richman seemed sceptical of allowing the law to take effect while it remains on appeal, due to its novelty.
"This is not a power that has been exercised historically by states," Ms Richman, a George W Bush appointee, said.
She expressed concern over how SB4 might interfere with federal immigration officials' work.
Aaron Nielson, a lawyer for the state, responded: "Texas has a right to defend itself."
Judge Andrew Oldham, a Donald Trump appointee, expressed uncertainty over whether the entirety of the law was invalid, which is required to fully block it.
Mexico has criticised the new law as anti-immigrant and said it would refuse to accept anyone deported by Texas authorities.
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador on Wednesday called the law "draconian" and dehumanising.
Should SB4 come back into effect, it would mark a significant shift in how immigration enforcement is handled, as courts have previously ruled that only the federal government can enforce the country's immigration laws - not individual US states.
Crossing the US border illegally is already a federal crime, but violations are usually handled as civil cases by the immigration court system.
Under SB4, anyone illegally entering or re-entering Texas would face up to 20 years in prison.
It is not clear if any migrants were detained while the law was in effect.
Historically, the federal government has created laws and regulations on immigration, even though the US Constitution does not explicitly grant it those powers.
A Gallup poll released in February suggested that nearly one-third of Americans believe immigration was the single greatest problem the country faced ahead of the government, the economy and inflation.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68613083
|
news_world-us-canada-68613083
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.