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
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Donald Tusk calls Jeremy Hunt's Soviet jibe unwise and insulting - BBC News
|
2018-10-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The EU Council president criticises the foreign secretary for likening the EU to the Soviet Union.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt's jibe likening the EU to the Soviet Union was "as unwise as it is insulting", the president of the European Council says.
Donald Tusk called for "respect", saying as someone who spent half his life in the Soviet bloc: "I know what I am talking about."
Asked if Mr Hunt, who made the comments at the Tory conference, should resign, he replied: "That's not my problem."
He also said a Canada-style free trade deal with the EU remained on the table.
Addressing Conservatives at the party conference in Birmingham, Mr Hunt accused the EU of seeking to punish the UK in order to "keep the club together".
His speech recalled a visit to Latvia earlier this summer and the role that the UK and others played in helping it transition from Soviet rule to becoming a modern democracy and market economy.
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream?" he asked.
"The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving."
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
He has since faced calls to apologise from several EU ambassadors.
At a press briefing in Brussels, Mr Tusk - the former prime minister of Poland - said: "In respecting our partners, we expect the same in return.
"Comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is as unwise as it is insulting.
"The Soviet Union was about prisons and gulags, borders and walls, violence against citizens and neighbours.
"The European Union is about freedom and human rights, prosperity and peace, life without fear, it is about democracy and pluralism - a continent without internal borders and walls.
"As the president of the European Council and someone who spent half his life in the Soviet bloc, I know what I am talking about."
At last month's EU summit in Salzburg, Mr Tusk rejected Theresa May's Brexit proposals and sparked anger among some Tories with an Instagram post apparently poking fun at the prime minister and suggesting she was "cherry picking".
The day after the summit Mrs May called for "respect" from the EU towards the UK side.
Mr Tusk - after his criticism of Mr Hunt's comments and his own call for respect to be shown - added: "Telling the truth, even if difficult and unpleasant, is the best way of showing respect for partners, that's how it was in Salzburg and that's also how it will work in the coming days."
He added: "Emotional arguments that stress the issue of dignity sound attractive but they do not facilitate agreement."
The UK is due to leave the EU in March, but the two sides have not yet reached a deal on how this will work.
Mr Tusk said that now the Conservative Party conference had ended, "we should get down to business".
And in a remark that was welcomed by some Eurosceptics who want to scrap Mrs May's proposed trade plans, he said the EU remained open to a "Canada plus plus plus" deal - a reference to the EU's free trade deal with Canada.
This would be "much further reaching on trade, on internal security and on foreign policy co-operation" than Canada's arrangement, he said.
Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said: "This shows clearly that No 10's claim that 'there is no alternative to Chequers' is just wrong."
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Boris Johnson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
But Mrs May has said a deal like Canada's would not prevent a visible, physical border being needed in Northern Ireland - a key commitment of both sides - because of the extra checks that would be needed on goods.
The EU has proposed a "backstop" plan to keep the border open - under which Northern Ireland would remain aligned to some EU rules.
But this has been rejected by Mrs May who says the arrangement would carve up the UK and create a new border in the Irish sea.
Irish PM Mr Varadkar said that it could take longer than the length of the post-Brexit transition period, due to run to 31 December 2020, to agree a final EU-UK trade deal.
"What I do know is that we need a backstop, a protocol on Ireland and N Ireland as part of a withdrawal agreement," he said.
However, he added: "I think we are entering a critical and decisive stage of these negotiations and there is a good opportunity to clinch a deal over the next couple of weeks."
UK ministers have suggested new proposals for a border backstop are being prepared.
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said UK officials were understood to be working on plans for a "hybrid backstop" with light-touch regulatory checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the possibility of some kind of democratic oversight from Stormont and a temporary extension of the customs union to the whole of the UK in the event that a free trade deal has not been completed.
There is no official confirmation of the plans or when the proposals will be presented to the EU, she added.
The deputy leader of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, Nigel Dodds, told the BBC his party could not accept a "separate hybrid model" in which Northern Ireland is in the EU single market but out of its customs union.
And asked about the prospect of "light touch regulatory checks" between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Mr Dodds asked why such techniques could not be used on the land frontier in Ireland.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45750023
|
news_uk-politics-45750023
|
|
Universal credit has to go, says John McDonnell - BBC News
|
2018-10-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The government's flagship welfare programme looks likely to be scrapped if Labour win power.
|
UK Politics
|
The government's flagship welfare policy faces being scrapped by Labour because it is "just not sustainable", the shadow chancellor has said.
John McDonnell said universal credit, which merges six working-age benefits into one payment, "will have to go".
Labour announced at its party conference last month that it would review the system, which is being rolled out across the UK.
The Tories said Labour had not offered a credible alternative.
Universal credit is aimed at making the system simpler so people who are able to work are rewarded for doing so.
But it has been criticised for running over budget and causing delays to people's payments.
Labour has previously pledged to pause the rollout of the scheme to fix what it says are flaws in the system.
At the Labour conference, Mr McDonnell told a fringe event that the "message we're getting back" from the consultation was that it should be scrapped.
He went further on Sky News' Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme, saying he had been listening to people's views and the government's arguments, but "the reforms haven't worked".
"I think we're at that stage now that it's not sustainable any more. It's not a system that can work.
"It's not a system that's providing the safety net that people expect when they need support.
"I think we are moving to a position now where it is just not sustainable.
"I think we are moving towards a conclusion now that you can't save the thing, it's got to go."
Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show, Conservative Party chairman Brandon Lewis defended the scheme, describing it as "the right way to go".
He did not deny a report in the Times that Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey privately warned cabinet colleagues that half of lone parents and about two-thirds of working-age couples with children would lose the equivalent of £2,400 a year under the new benefit.
Responding to Mr McDonnell's comments, a Conservative spokesman said it was an unfunded spending pledge to scrap the payment, adding: "By scrapping universal credit, a programme which has helped deliver record employment, Labour would return to the record of previous Labour governments, every one of which left more people out of work.
"Conservatives on the other hand believe in social mobility and supporting aspiration and people into employment."
In a separate interview with the BBC's Sunday Politics London, Mr McDonnell said Labour would consider reducing the working week to four days.
Asked whether Labour agreed with union leaders' proposals for a four-day week, Mr McDonnell said the party would be exploring "a whole range of issues about automation", and as part of that "we'll look at the working week because I think people are working too long".
The shadow chancellor said the TUC report stressed the need for workers to benefit from automation in the future and "that might be reducing hours of work - we are a long-hour economy."
Asked if it would be in a future Labour manifesto, he replied: "We'll see how it goes."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45777815
|
news_uk-politics-45777815
|
|
London university calls for £100m slavery reparation - BBC News
|
2018-10-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
UK universities which gained from slave trade are asked to pay into fund for ethnic minority students.
|
Family & Education
|
Universities in the UK which benefited in previous centuries from the slave trade should contribute to a £100m fund to support ethnic minority students, says a university leader.
Geoff Thompson, chair of governors of the University of East London, says it would be "ethical and right" for universities to contribute.
He says it would help young people who otherwise could not afford to graduate.
Last month, Glasgow University revealed it had received slave-related funding.
Glasgow University discovered that up to £198m in today's value had been donated in the 19th Century by people who had profited from the slave trade.
In response it announced a "reparative justice programme", including creating a centre for the study of slavery and a memorial to the enslaved.
But Mr Thompson says there should be a collective university fund to support today's black and ethnic minority students through university.
The University of East London has been sending Freedom of Information requests to other UK universities to see if their institutions had received money from the slave trade between the 16th and 19th Century - with the findings to be gathered next month.
He said in the wake of the Windrush scandal, it was "prescient, ethical and right" to "seize this historic opportunity to invest in those who cannot afford or cannot see themselves graduating with a life-changing qualification".
Mr Thompson says that even if universities are too recent to have been open during the slavery era, many might be a continuation of older institutions that could have benefited from profits from slavery.
"Every university has historians, archivists and researchers who can help institutions inform them about their past," said Mr Thompson.
"It is about how seriously we take the past to inform our future, and what we can do to help change lives."
In the United States there have been arguments over how to reconcile universities with historic links to slavery and slave-owning.
Georgetown University has given extra support in its admissions process to the descendants of a group of slaves sold by the university in the 19th Century.
Harvard University put up a plaque in commemoration of slaves who had lived and worked at the university.
The university also ended the use of "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-45979234
|
news_education-45979234
|
|
Simon Mayo and Jo Whiley Radio 2 Drivetime show to end - BBC News
|
2018-10-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Simon Mayo is leaving Radio 2 altogether after a huge listener backlash to the new Drivetime show.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
The Radio 2 Drivetime show with Simon Mayo and Jo Whiley is to end after just a few months on air.
Mayo is leaving BBC Radio 2 altogether but will continue to present his 5 Live film show with Mark Kermode.
Whiley will remain on the station but move to the 7-9pm slot, which means Drive will get a brand new presenter.
Mayo has fronted Drivetime for eight years, but the station added Whiley as a co-host in May - a move which led to a huge backlash from the audience.
BBC News understands Mayo will not be moving to a rival broadcaster, despite some media reports suggesting he was leaving to host a breakfast show on a commercial station.
Whiley's addition to Drivetime came after Radio 2 was criticised for its lack of female presenters.
Mayo wrote on Twitter on Monday morning: "I'll continue with the (flagship) film show on 5 Live with Mark Kermode and, beyond that, other radio adventures beckon!
"But for now it's just the sadness of leaving. Radio 2 has been a wonderful place for me - my happiest radio I think. Our listeners are really quite extraordinary."
He added: "Maybe it needs to be said, maybe not but so there is no room for argument I'll be clear.
"I've loved working with the exceptional Jo Whiley and when the show was 'reconfigured ' she was my first and only choice.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Simon Mayo This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
"Some of the abuse she has had here has been appalling. Support for a show is one thing, assaulting the dignity of a warm-hearted and loyal friend is another.
"So by all means discuss what's happening here, but let's keep some civility. Thank you. Here endeth the lesson."
Zoe Ball will take over from Chris Evans in January
Before Jo Whiley joined Drivetime, Radio 2's daytime schedule was made up entirely of white men over 50.
While many critics acknowledged the station desperately needed more women, most argued Whiley was not the right person for the job, citing the lack of chemistry she and Mayo had.
Listeners also did not respond well - hundreds have contacted BBC News to voice their unhappiness with Drivetime in recent months.
So this was perhaps inevitable, but the timing of this announcement is interesting. It's worth noting that the latest radio listening figures (RAJARs) are due to be published later this week, which may have shown a dramatic drop-off in listeners since Whiley joined the show.
It has not yet been announced who will take over Drivetime, but the station may now take the opportunity to get more women into the daytime schedule.
As a result, we could see someone like Sara Cox, who lost out to Zoe Ball on becoming the new breakfast presenter, taking over the slot.
Whiley said: "I'm incredibly sad that Simon has decided to leave Radio 2. He's a brilliant broadcaster, a great friend and I really will miss working with him.
"However, I'm very much looking forward to hosting a new show for a new year which will have music at the very heart of it as well as guests and live sessions. Dream show, actually. Can't wait!"
Whiley's new 7-9pm weekday show will see Radio 2's evening specialist shows move slots.
A Radio 2 spokesperson said: "The Cerys Matthews Blues Show (Mon), Jamie Cullum (Tues), The Folk Show with Mark Radcliffe (Weds) and Bob Harris Country (Thurs) will all move from 8pm-9pm to 9pm-10pm.
"Radio 2 remains committed to featuring the broadcast range of music across the network."
They added that announcements about shows currently in the 9pm-10pm slot would be made in due course.
Lewis Carnie, Head of Radio 2 said: "Simon is a fantastic broadcaster, and I'd like to thank him for entertaining millions of Radio 2 listeners with his wit and warmth over the years.
"With Simon leaving, we've taken this opportunity to take a fresh look at the schedule, and create a show for Jo which will focus on her passion for music."
Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45938829
|
news_entertainment-arts-45938829
|
|
Ryanair flight: 'Racial abuse passenger' referred to police - BBC News
|
2018-10-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A man was filmed shouting abuse at a black woman in an incident that has been referred to police.
|
UK
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The incident was captured by passenger David Lawrence, who spoke to BBC Radio 5 Live about what happened
Ryanair has been criticised for apparently failing to remove a passenger from a flight after racial abuse of a woman in her 70s.
The incident, on a flight from Barcelona to Stansted on Friday, was recorded by a fellow passenger and shared on social media.
Many people said Ryanair should have removed the man from the flight and threatened to boycott the airline.
Ryanair said it "will not tolerate unruly behaviour like this".
It has referred the matter to Essex Police.
In the film - viewed on Facebook more than 1.8 million times - the man can be heard being racially abusive to the woman and threatening to "push" her to another seat.
He also shouts at her: "Don't talk to me in a foreign language, you stupid ugly cow."
After a flight attendant intervenes, the woman says she wants to sit with her daughter and tells the man he "stinks". She says of the passenger: "Kick him out".
Her daughter has told The Huffington Post the row started because her mother, 77, has arthritis and it took some time for her to move out of the way for the man to get into his seat.
David Lawrence, who filmed what happened, told BBC Radio 5 Live: "Everything was calm, we were getting ready to take off. And then a man came on board and arrived at his seat, then spoke very harshly to a woman sitting in the aisle seat.
"That was what got my attention as it was very loud and very aggressive. He started to shout at the woman, saying 'get out of the way', 'move your feet', 'you shouldn't be sitting here'."
Ryanair said it "would be taking the matter further"
Mr Lawrence said no attendants initially came over. The woman's daughter, who had been sitting elsewhere, arrived and "an argument started", he said.
"He pushed past the woman and went to his seat," he said, adding that what's seen in the video then unfolded - describing it as the "most disgusting exchange of racial slurs and foul language".
The woman's daughter said she had taken her mother, a Windrush Generation migrant who came to the UK from Jamaica in the 1960s, on holiday to mark a year since the death of her husband.
She told The Huffington Post: "I know that if I was behaving like he was - or any other black person for that matter - police would have been called and we would have been kicked off the flight."
She added: "Mum's really feeling upset and very stressed about this situation, on top of the grief she's already experiencing. As for me, I'm upset about the whole thing too - the fact that the passenger wasn't taken off the plane and how the situation was dealt with."
One young man, seated in the row behind the people filmed in the video, intervened by telling the man who was shouting to stop. He has been praised for his actions.
A Ryanair attendant says to the man: "Don't be so rude, you have to calm down." He then tells the older man he is going to refer the incident to his supervisor, to which the man replies: "I'm alright."
"I am so shocked," Mr Lawrence said. "There was no response [from most other passengers]. No-one said anything. The young man who actually intervened... he was compelled to step forward."
Mr Lawrence said it was a "horrible, horrible situation" and that he was "shocked" that Ryanair "allowed something like this just to go unchecked".
Shadow transport minister Karl Turner was among those to tweet about the incident, saying he would raise "the tendency of airlines to ignore this kind of behaviour".
He also said "he should have been removed from the flight and handed over to the police".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Karl Turner MP This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Critics of the incident and how it was handled said the man should have been removed - rather than the woman herself moving seats.
Ryanair told the BBC: "We operate strict guidelines for disruptive passengers and we will not tolerate unruly behaviour like this.
"We will be taking this matter further and disruptive or abusive behaviour like this will result in passengers being banned from travel."
Essex Police said on Sunday: "This incident, which we were made aware of this morning, is believed to have taken place on a plane at Barcelona Airport.
"Essex Police takes prejudice-based crime seriously and we want all incidents to be reported. We are working closely with Ryanair and the Spanish authorities on the investigation."
It asked anyone with information to call 101 or Crimestoppers, anonymously, on 0800 555 111.
The Department for Transport said "everyone should be able to enjoy a safe and calm journey without their flight being spoilt by a disruptive minority".
The DfT said it would work with airlines and airports "to look at what more can be done to deal with disruptive passengers".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45932027
|
news_uk-45932027
|
|
Samantha Eastwood: Man admits murdering midwife after affair - BBC News
|
2018-10-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Samantha Eastwood was found in a shallow grave after being killed by the brother-in-law of her ex-fiancé.
|
Stoke & Staffordshire
|
Samantha Eastwood was missing for over a week before her body was found in a shallow grave
The body of Samantha Eastwood, 28, was found in a shallow grave in Caverswall, Staffordshire, in August, eight days after she went missing.
Michael Stirling, 32, the brother-in-law of her ex-fiance John Peake, pleaded guilty to her murder when he appeared at Northampton Crown Court.
He was remanded in custody and will be sentenced at Stafford Crown Court on 3 December.
Ms Eastwood was last seen in uniform leaving work at Royal Stoke University Hospital on the morning of 27 July.
Her body was discovered on 5 August wrapped in a duvet cover with tape covering her eyes and mouth, a previous hearing was told.
Staffordshire Police said a post-mortem examination has taken place, but further tests are required to confirm her cause of death.
After Stirling entered his plea, his defence barrister Charles Miskin QC said the murder "was not a premeditated act".
"The context of the killing was a background of growing tension arising from a longstanding, but not particularly intense, affair," he added.
Mr Miskin said that on the afternoon of the killing "various things were said" between the two.
"There was an argument in that context and that led to him being very angry," he added.
"After a struggle and while she was on the floor, he put his hands over her throat, her mouth and nose, and as a result of that she died.
"During his intense rage, he originally intended to cause her really serious bodily harm, but matters escalated and he carried out the intention to kill her."
Tributes to the midwife had been left outside Royal Stoke University Hospital, where she worked
Mr Miskin said Stirling "panicked afterwards and buried her in an area of which he had some knowledge".
"He entirely accepts that he tried, wholly dishonestly, to mislead others in the afternoon after the killing.
"He is absolutely horrified about what happened and is deeply sorry, not for himself, but for all the others who are victims of this crime."
Prosecutor Jonas Hankin QC said that two days before the murder Stirling had researched methods on how to "kill oneself".
He told the court Stirling had a history of mental health problems as recently as 2015.
Stirling, of Gratton Road, Bucknall, Stoke-on-Trent, admitted murdering Ms Eastwood between 26 July and 5 August at Baddeley Green, Stoke-on-Trent.
Ms Eastwood's mother, sister and ex-fiancé John Peake watched from the public gallery as he entered his plea via video-link.
Samantha Eastwood's body was found in a shallow grave in Caverswall, eight days after she went missing
Det Insp Dan Ison said Stirling's guilty plea had "saved a lot of heartache for the family".
"Obviously Michael Stirling was known to the family and he's lied to them and lied to police.
"They haven't known, on occasion, who to believe."
Police previously said two other men aged 28 and 60 who were arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender over the death are to face no further action.
Since the midwife's death, well-wishers have raised more than £15,800 to help her family with funeral costs.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-45937829
|
news_uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-45937829
|
|
UK government 'must act on Northern Ireland abortion' - BBC News
|
2018-10-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Three Tory MPs say their party must step in, as current laws violate women's human rights.
|
Northern Ireland
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Denise had to give birth to her dead baby, because she was not able to have an abortion
The UK government must "wake up" and decriminalise abortion in Northern Ireland, Tory MPs have told the BBC.
Anna Soubry, Nicky Morgan and Heidi Allen said Westminster must step in to protect women's human rights.
Northern Ireland's Assembly - which legislates on healthcare - collapsed 21 months ago, and a new poll suggests two-thirds of Northern Ireland citizens would support Westminster intervening.
The UK government said it was for Northern Ireland politicians to decide.
Currently abortion is illegal in Northern Ireland unless there is a serious risk to a woman's life or health.
Conservative MP Anna Soubry told the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme that she wanted her party "to wake up to this and take responsibility.
"Real people are suffering in a way that is absolutely intolerable in this day and age," she added.
Healthcare is a devolved issue - which means the Northern Ireland Assembly forms its own laws.
But it collapsed in January 2017 after a row between the ruling parties, meaning no decisions can currently be made.
"There is no Assembly and no likelihood of an Assembly," Ms Soubry said.
Many in favour of decriminalisation believe that because human rights is not a devolved issue, Westminster has a duty to intervene.
A new poll of 1,000 people by Amnesty International - seen by the Victoria Derbyshire programme - suggests 65% of people in Northern Ireland believe access to abortion should be decriminalised "by removing the criminal penalty for women who have abortions".
Some 66% of those polled said they wanted the UK government to intervene.
Pro and anti-abortion campaigners in Belfast are handing out leaflets to campaign for and against UK government intervention
Conservative MP Heidi Allen told the programme: "This issue is bigger and too urgent to wait for devolved power to be resumed in Northern Ireland.
"The day the UN confirmed that women's human rights were being violated was the day the argument that we could wait expired."
Fellow Tory MP Nicky Morgan said "I do believe that there is every justification for the Westminster Parliament to be involved in changing the law.
"I shall support colleagues across the House of Commons in making the case for change."
Later this month the Labour MP Diana Johnson will put forward a bill in Parliament which proposes removing the piece of law that makes abortion a crime in Northern Ireland.
It has been co-signed by Anna Soubry and has the support of other Conservative MPs.
Ms Johnson told the Victoria Derbyshire programme her proposal would allow abortion to be decriminalised and "still respect devolution", as the Northern Ireland Assembly could decide "the terms of the abortions... when it comes back".
The UK government said in a statement: "As abortion is devolved in Northern Ireland, it is only right that any future reform is for locally elected politicians to consider in a restored Northern Ireland Assembly.
"That is why the Secretary of State [Karen Bradley's] absolute priority remains the restoration of devolved government in Northern Ireland.
"The government has put in place arrangements to allow women normally resident in Northern Ireland to have access to safe abortion services in England."
Watch the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme on weekdays between 09:00 and 11:00 BST on BBC Two and the BBC News channel in the UK and on iPlayer afterwards.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45719000
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-45719000
|
|
Donald Tusk calls Jeremy Hunt's Soviet jibe unwise and insulting - BBC News
|
2018-10-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The EU Council president criticises the foreign secretary for likening the EU to the Soviet Union.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt's jibe likening the EU to the Soviet Union was "as unwise as it is insulting", the president of the European Council says.
Donald Tusk called for "respect", saying as someone who spent half his life in the Soviet bloc: "I know what I am talking about."
Asked if Mr Hunt, who made the comments at the Tory conference, should resign, he replied: "That's not my problem."
He also said a Canada-style free trade deal with the EU remained on the table.
Addressing Conservatives at the party conference in Birmingham, Mr Hunt accused the EU of seeking to punish the UK in order to "keep the club together".
His speech recalled a visit to Latvia earlier this summer and the role that the UK and others played in helping it transition from Soviet rule to becoming a modern democracy and market economy.
"What happened to the confidence and ideals of the European dream?" he asked.
"The EU was set up to protect freedom. It was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving."
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
He has since faced calls to apologise from several EU ambassadors.
At a press briefing in Brussels, Mr Tusk - the former prime minister of Poland - said: "In respecting our partners, we expect the same in return.
"Comparing the EU to the Soviet Union is as unwise as it is insulting.
"The Soviet Union was about prisons and gulags, borders and walls, violence against citizens and neighbours.
"The European Union is about freedom and human rights, prosperity and peace, life without fear, it is about democracy and pluralism - a continent without internal borders and walls.
"As the president of the European Council and someone who spent half his life in the Soviet bloc, I know what I am talking about."
At last month's EU summit in Salzburg, Mr Tusk rejected Theresa May's Brexit proposals and sparked anger among some Tories with an Instagram post apparently poking fun at the prime minister and suggesting she was "cherry picking".
The day after the summit Mrs May called for "respect" from the EU towards the UK side.
Mr Tusk - after his criticism of Mr Hunt's comments and his own call for respect to be shown - added: "Telling the truth, even if difficult and unpleasant, is the best way of showing respect for partners, that's how it was in Salzburg and that's also how it will work in the coming days."
He added: "Emotional arguments that stress the issue of dignity sound attractive but they do not facilitate agreement."
The UK is due to leave the EU in March, but the two sides have not yet reached a deal on how this will work.
Mr Tusk said that now the Conservative Party conference had ended, "we should get down to business".
And in a remark that was welcomed by some Eurosceptics who want to scrap Mrs May's proposed trade plans, he said the EU remained open to a "Canada plus plus plus" deal - a reference to the EU's free trade deal with Canada.
This would be "much further reaching on trade, on internal security and on foreign policy co-operation" than Canada's arrangement, he said.
Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said: "This shows clearly that No 10's claim that 'there is no alternative to Chequers' is just wrong."
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Boris Johnson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
But Mrs May has said a deal like Canada's would not prevent a visible, physical border being needed in Northern Ireland - a key commitment of both sides - because of the extra checks that would be needed on goods.
The EU has proposed a "backstop" plan to keep the border open - under which Northern Ireland would remain aligned to some EU rules.
But this has been rejected by Mrs May who says the arrangement would carve up the UK and create a new border in the Irish sea.
Irish PM Mr Varadkar said that it could take longer than the length of the post-Brexit transition period, due to run to 31 December 2020, to agree a final EU-UK trade deal.
"What I do know is that we need a backstop, a protocol on Ireland and N Ireland as part of a withdrawal agreement," he said.
However, he added: "I think we are entering a critical and decisive stage of these negotiations and there is a good opportunity to clinch a deal over the next couple of weeks."
UK ministers have suggested new proposals for a border backstop are being prepared.
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said UK officials were understood to be working on plans for a "hybrid backstop" with light-touch regulatory checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the possibility of some kind of democratic oversight from Stormont and a temporary extension of the customs union to the whole of the UK in the event that a free trade deal has not been completed.
There is no official confirmation of the plans or when the proposals will be presented to the EU, she added.
The deputy leader of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, Nigel Dodds, told the BBC his party could not accept a "separate hybrid model" in which Northern Ireland is in the EU single market but out of its customs union.
And asked about the prospect of "light touch regulatory checks" between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Mr Dodds asked why such techniques could not be used on the land frontier in Ireland.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45750023
|
news_uk-politics-45750023
|
|
Teacher Eleanor Wilson 'sickened' by plane sex claims - BBC News
|
2018-10-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Eleanor Wilson tells a jury a pupil's claim the pair had sex in a toilet "came from his imagination".
|
Bristol
|
Eleanor Wilson faces four counts of sexual activity with a child under 18 while in a position of trust
A schoolteacher told police that claims she had sex with a teenage pupil in an aeroplane toilet made her "feel sick".
Eleanor Wilson is accused of having sex with the boy on the way back from a school trip in 2015.
She described the allegations against her as sounding "like a porn film" and said the claims had come from the boy's imagination, Bristol Crown Court heard.
Ms Wilson, 29, denies four counts of sexual activity with a child under 18 while in a position of trust.
The pupil and the school concerned cannot be identified for legal reasons.
Ms Wilson said during a police interview that having sex with the teenager was "the last thing on my mind".
"I value my job," she added and said that she would not have wanted to risk her position by going to prison, the court heard.
"It just sounds like a porn film. It's come from his imagination. The other staff there would say that wasn't happening. It makes me feel sick, the idea of it."
Ms Wilson, of Dursley, Gloucestershire, admitted meeting up with the boy and texting him after the school trip, explaining "the lines were blurred".
In police interviews, she said she later told him she was pregnant by her boyfriend Andrew Hall, and was planning to have an abortion because she "felt lonely and upset".
Ms Wilson agreed she had told the teenager to keep their meetings a secret, but added she only saw him "as a mate", and did not have feelings for him.
Giving evidence in court for the first time, Ms Wilson said there was "no truth whatsoever" in allegations she had a sexual relationship with a teenage boy, who she described as "quite a charming, cheeky chap".
She told jurors that during the flight she was regularly checking on several students who were suffering from food poisoning.
Ms Wilson, who now works as a civil servant, said her former boyfriend Mr Hall was "very controlling" and "at times abusive" and by August 2015 she was unhappy with their relationship.
She told the jury she phoned the pupil after an argument she had had with Mr Hall while they were on holiday.
"I called him because I didn't have anyone else. He knew it was bad and he wouldn't judge what I said. He knew me," she said.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-45746393
|
news_uk-england-bristol-45746393
|
|
May's end of austerity claim 'not credible', says Labour - BBC News
|
2018-10-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Labour says an end to government cuts is about as likely as the PM winning Strictly Come Dancing.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Theresa May's claim that austerity is coming to an end is as likely as her winning Strictly Come Dancing, Labour has said.
The prime minister told the Conservative Party conference that, after a decade of economic sacrifices, the end was in sight.
But shadow chancellor John McDonnell said the words "lacked credibility".
He said children's services faced a £2bn budget shortfall while councils had a £4bn hole in their finances.
In her leader's speech in Birmingham, the prime minister said people needed to know that their "hard work had paid off" after a decade of budget cuts, wage freezes and below-inflation pay rises in the public sector.
She also signalled that there could be a loosening of the purse strings in next year's Spending Review, with more support for the NHS and other frontline services.
"The British people need to know... that we get it," she said.
"Because you made sacrifices, there are better days ahead. A decade after the financial crash people need to know that the austerity it led to is over."
But Mr McDonnell said the PM's claims "did not hold water", citing statistics from the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, which he said indicated 75% of this year's welfare cuts had yet to happen.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Moves like May: The prime minister's dances
"If they were serious about ending austerity, Philip Hammond would get up today and immediately cancel the cuts that are coming to hit us in the next four years," said Mr McDonnell.
"Councils have predicted a £4bn hole in their budgets next year and we have a record number of children coming into care because of the withdrawal of services from families. None of that has been cancelled.
"We are also told that an ending of austerity is completely dependent on her securing her own Brexit deal which is clearly not going to happen."
Referring to Mrs May's unexpected start to her conference speech, when she shimmied on to the stage to Abba's Dancing Queen, he said her economic arguments were about as credible as "if she was about to win Strictly".
Mrs May's austerity pledge, as well as her announcement of an end to the borrowing cap for local councils wanting to build new homes, was welcomed by Tory MPs who want her to stake out a much bolder vision for the UK after it leaves the EU in March.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Grant Shapps MP This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Nick Boles MP This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
But the BBC's economics editor Kamal Ahmed said the announcements made Chancellor Philip Hammond's job harder ahead of his Budget later this month.
He said the chancellor was always wary of announcing the end of austerity, given the fragility of economic growth and the fact that many cuts, such as to benefits, have yet to work through the system.
The government has committed to finding an extra £20bn for the NHS by 2023 but not yet said where the money will come from, although ministers have indicated it will be partly funded by tax rises.
In her speech, Mrs May scotched speculation that fuel duty could go up for the first time in nearly a decade, saying she was extending the duty freeze for a ninth year in a row, a move costing the Exchequer £800m.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45740427
|
news_uk-politics-45740427
|
|
Theresa May: Tories must be a party for everyone - BBC News
|
2018-10-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Theresa May pledges to boost council house-building and says austerity is ending, in her big speech.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Theresa May has told the Conservatives they must be the "party for everyone" and said austerity was ending in her party conference speech in Birmingham.
The prime minister said that a decade on from the financial crash, "there are better days ahead", signalling an increase in public spending.
She also defended her under-fire Brexit strategy, saying she was "standing up for Britain".
And she announced new borrowing powers for councils to build more homes.
A cap on the amount councils can borrow to fund new developments "doesn't make sense" and would be scrapped, she said.
Other promises included a "step change" in how cancer is diagnosed with a strategy aimed at increasing early detection rates, plus another freeze in fuel duty.
The prime minister - whose dancing in Kenya made headlines in August - danced on to the stage to the sounds of Abba, and immediately sought to make light of last year's difficult speech.
She joked that if she had a cough this time, it was only because she had been up all night gluing the letters on to the backdrop.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Theresa May opened her conference speech to the music of Abba's Dancing Queen
The Tory conference has been dominated by Brexit, with former foreign secretary Boris Johnson launching a fresh broadside against her Chequers plan - it is known by the country residence where it was agreed in July - for trade with the EU.
And as she prepared to deliver the speech, Conservative MP James Duddridge announced he had submitted a letter to the backbench 1922 Committee calling for a leadership contest.
In her speech there was no mention of "Chequers" specifically - with Mrs May describing her plan as a "free trade deal that provides for frictionless trade in goods".
Defending it, she warned delegates that pursuing "our own visions of the perfect Brexit" could lead to "no Brexit at all".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Theresa May: "A second referendum would be a politicians’ vote”
On austerity, Mrs May said people needed to know "that the end is in sight".
The Tories could not just "clean up a mess" they should "steer a course to a better future", she said.
"Sound finances are essential, but they are not the limit of our ambition. Because you made sacrifices, there are better days ahead."
At next year's Spending Review she said "debt as a share of the economy will continue to go down, support for public services will go up".
"Because, a decade after the financial crash, people need to know that the austerity it led to is over and that their hard work has paid off."
In her speech, Mrs May said the Tories must be "a party not for the few, not even for the many but for everyone who is willing to work hard and do their best".
"Our best days lie ahead of us", she said, adding: "Don't let anyone tell you we don't have what it takes."
She also condemned the personal abuse of politicians, speaking up for Labour's Diane Abbott and calling for an end to "the bitterness and bile which is poisoning our politics".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Mrs May made repeated attacks on Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's politics, criticising his opposition to military action and claiming he would raise taxes "higher and higher".
But the Tories needed to "do more than criticise" Labour, she said, vowing to "make markets work in the interests of ordinary people again".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Delegates cheer as Boris Johnson urges them to "chuck Chequers"
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. What have been the big issues for Tory members?
She said she wanted to help people on low incomes, ruling out any increase in fuel duty in the Budget on 29 October.
With the complexities of Brexit, the divisions in her party, the calamity of last year's conference speech, the antics of the former foreign secretary, and of course, her own fragilities, Theresa May has struggled to find her voice - and that's got nothing to do with running out of Strepsils.
Well today she found it, and in the words of one of her cabinet colleagues, not a particularly close ally, said "she found her mojo". From the moment she danced on to the stage (who would have thought we'd ever see that), she looked comfortable in her own skin, actually happy to be there.
It sounds strange, but it is so rare to see her overtly enjoying her job. On so many occasions the public has seen a politician who seems constricted, conflicted, and ill-at-ease. For voters, frankly, if she doesn't look like she is enjoying being prime minister, why should any of us be happy about the fact she's doing it. Read Laura's full blog.
Philip Hammond is always wary of announcing the "end of austerity", given the fragility of economic growth and the fact that many cuts, such as to benefits, have yet to work through the system.
People are still feeling the pain. He is keener to emphasise that the effort expended bringing the public finances back towards balance - where the government raises in revenues the same at it spends on services - will not be put at risk with some form of "spending splurge".
The PM just made that task harder. Read Kamal's full blog.
Lifting the cap on how much English local authorities can borrow to build traditional council houses could have a significant impact on the supply of homes for social rent.
Currently, town halls have a housing debt of about £26bn, the value of their existing stock acting as collateral. Doing away with the cap would conservatively allow an extra £10-15bn of borrowing. This money could be used to build an extra 15-20,000 new council homes a year over ten years.
Given that the latest annual figure for completed social rent homes is less than 6,000, this might well quadruple supply in the medium term. Even that increase would not get close to meeting demand for social housing, however.
The extra borrowing will count against the government's balance sheet and may well mean some tough decisions on cuts to budgets elsewhere, although there are arguments that the money could be seen as an investment rather than a subsidy because the new housing would provide a reliable income stream. Since 2012, council housing in England has realised a net rental surplus.
The extra borrowing would be ring-fenced for housing but it is unclear whether all of the new stock would be for social rent. Some shared-ownership homes might be included, for example.
Although the extra borrowing freedom could come into force after early as next year, with planning and land acquisition to be sorted out, it is unlikely the boost to social housing supply will come to pass for some years.
The pledge to create a new cancer strategy is not surprising - it was already one of the priority areas for the 10-year plan NHS England boss Simon Stevens has been asked to draw up in return for the £20bn funding rise the health service has been promised by 2023.
Her high profile promise was to increase early detection - defined as at stages one and two - from 50% to 75% by 2028.
Progress is already being made towards this. The existing cancer strategy has already made that a priority and in the last four years there has been an 11% improvement, meaning the NHS is already well on course to achieve this target.
Beyond that, there were few details on what it would mean for services so it looks like we will have to wait until the 10-year NHS plan is published, expected to be November, before we know more.
In response, Labour's shadow chancellor John McDonnell said Mrs May's claim on austerity was a "con" unless the chancellor takes immediate action.
He said: "If the prime minister wants to back up her words with action, Philip Hammond should announce immediately that the cuts scheduled for the next four years will be cancelled."
The SNP's Ian Blackford said Mrs May had "danced around the key issues - the disastrous impact of Tory austerity and a Tory hard Brexit".
"There is a massive gulf between her rhetoric and the reality of what is now facing the UK," he added.
Lib Dem leader Sir Vince Cable said: "As somebody who takes dancing seriously, I was delighted to see Theresa May show that she is developing her new hobby. But she was dancing on the head of a pin, confronted by an audience full of people plotting to oust her."
The Local Government Association, which has been calling for an end to the cap on borrowing for house-building, welcomed the council spending announcement.
"Many of the projects that are already under way could quickly be scaled up," Conservative councillor David Simmonds, the body's deputy chairman, said.
"Councils have been asking for this for a long time and clearly the announcement today is something that means we can get on with the job."
The CBI - which criticised Mrs May's immigration plans on Tuesday - welcomed her call to "back business" and urged MPs to support her Brexit plan to get a deal "over the line".
• None No tax rises on petrol, says May
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45725615
|
news_uk-politics-45725615
|
|
London university calls for £100m slavery reparation - BBC News
|
2018-10-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
UK universities which gained from slave trade are asked to pay into fund for ethnic minority students.
|
Family & Education
|
Universities in the UK which benefited in previous centuries from the slave trade should contribute to a £100m fund to support ethnic minority students, says a university leader.
Geoff Thompson, chair of governors of the University of East London, says it would be "ethical and right" for universities to contribute.
He says it would help young people who otherwise could not afford to graduate.
Last month, Glasgow University revealed it had received slave-related funding.
Glasgow University discovered that up to £198m in today's value had been donated in the 19th Century by people who had profited from the slave trade.
In response it announced a "reparative justice programme", including creating a centre for the study of slavery and a memorial to the enslaved.
But Mr Thompson says there should be a collective university fund to support today's black and ethnic minority students through university.
The University of East London has been sending Freedom of Information requests to other UK universities to see if their institutions had received money from the slave trade between the 16th and 19th Century - with the findings to be gathered next month.
He said in the wake of the Windrush scandal, it was "prescient, ethical and right" to "seize this historic opportunity to invest in those who cannot afford or cannot see themselves graduating with a life-changing qualification".
Mr Thompson says that even if universities are too recent to have been open during the slavery era, many might be a continuation of older institutions that could have benefited from profits from slavery.
"Every university has historians, archivists and researchers who can help institutions inform them about their past," said Mr Thompson.
"It is about how seriously we take the past to inform our future, and what we can do to help change lives."
In the United States there have been arguments over how to reconcile universities with historic links to slavery and slave-owning.
Georgetown University has given extra support in its admissions process to the descendants of a group of slaves sold by the university in the 19th Century.
Harvard University put up a plaque in commemoration of slaves who had lived and worked at the university.
The university also ended the use of "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-45979234
|
news_education-45979234
|
|
Who are the justices on the US Supreme Court? - BBC News
|
2018-10-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One of the Supreme Court's conservative justices, Clarence Thomas, faces a backlash for luxury trips.
|
US & Canada
|
The Justices of the US Supreme Court in October 2022
The US Supreme Court is in the spotlight again this week after one of its conservative justices, Clarence Thomas, came under fire for accepting luxury vacations from a billionaire Republican donor.
Earlier this week, a ProPublica report revealed Mr Thomas failed to disclose trips he took with real estate mogul Harlan Crow almost every year over the course of two decades, despite being required to file annual disclosures of gifts.
In a statement on Friday, Mr Thomas said that he had been told by colleagues and others that "this sort of personal hospitality" did not need to be formally disclosed.
Mr Thomas is one of nine justices on the Supreme Court serving lifetime appointments after being nominated by the president and approved by the Senate.
Here is a look at the conservative justice and his eight colleagues who sit on the bench, including the Supreme Court's most recent member, Ketanji Brown Jackson, a liberal chosen by President Joe Biden last year.
Jackson's appointment has not altered the 6-3 conservative majority on the court.
On the court since: 23 October 1991
How he got to the court: Thomas was born in a small town in Georgia, and was one of the few African-Americans in attendance during a short stint in seminary and then at Holy Cross College. But unlike Justice Sotomayor, those experiences made him distrustful of affirmative action policies. After finishing Yale Law, he worked in Missouri government and in Washington DC before being named chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, an agency that responds to discrimination claims in the workplace. After a bruising confirmation hearing - in which a former employee accused him of sexual harassment - Thomas was narrowly confirmed to Supreme Court, at the relatively young age of 43.
Who is he as a justice? Thomas' originalism is exacting, including a disregard for stare decisis, respect for prior court rulings and precedence. Thomas has also not asked a question during oral arguments in nine years. He has previously said he doesn't care for the question-heavy arguments, sometimes already drafting opinions based on written briefs before any lawyer gets up to argue. Thomas often files entirely separate dissents rarely joined by others, but Coyle says he is influential in other ways, including during conferences only justices attend, and in "difficult decisions" in areas that don't get a lot of press - like intellectual property and tax law. Thomas replaced the first African-American justice on the court - Thurgood Marshall.
On the court since: 3 October 2022
How she got to the court: The first black woman to sit on the court in its 233-year history is also the first justice since 1967 to come to the court with extensive experience as a criminal defence attorney. Before the US Supreme Court, the Washington DC native served on the influential US court of Appeals for the DC circuit. She has two degrees from Harvard University and once served as editor of the Harvard Law Review. Ms Jackson has said she has a "methodology" to deciding cases but not an overarching philosophy. Some conservatives have accused her of being "soft" on criminals, pointing to her experience as a public defender and willingness as a federal judge to issue prison sentences below federal guidelines.
Her confirmation came after President Biden pledged during his presidential campaign to appoint a black woman to the top court.
On the court since: 31 January 2006
How he got to the court: Alito grew up in New Jersey in an Italian immigrant family. While at Princeton University, he was involved in conservative and libertarian groups, as well as the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps. After Yale law school, he was a prosecutor in New Jersey and served in the Reagan administration in the justice department, including as assistant to the solicitor general, where he argued before the Supreme Court. President George HW Bush named him to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1990, where he stayed until his nomination to The Supreme Court.
Who is he as a justice? Alito is a conservative justice, but one who does not hew as often to originalism as fellow conservatives Scalia and Thomas. He is not always talkative in oral arguments but his questions are sharp, aiming to pick apart an argument's logic. Alito has a low public profile despite being a large part of the court's rightward shift on business, campaign finance and racial issues over the past decade.
The former prosecutor has been "very pro-government" in criminal cases, Coyle says, and has shown less willingness than his conservative colleagues to protect free speech in cases where it is harmful or hateful.
On the court since: 7 August 2010
How she got to the court: Kagan grew up in New York City. At the age of 12, she convinced her rabbi to hold the synagogue's first formal bat mitzvah, the rite of passage for young women. After law school at Harvard, she clerked for Justice Thurgood Marshall. After a successful stint as the first female dean of Harvard Law School, she was briefly US solicitor general - the federal government's top representative at the US Supreme Court, before being nominated by President Barack Obama for the high court.
Who is she as a justice? Kagan is the first justice in decades not to previously serve as a judge. She is part of the court's left-leaning wing, but has been the author of many of recent unanimous or near unanimous decisions. Her writing is often easy for a layperson to understand without sacrificing legal analysis, and she is an aggressive questioner during oral arguments. Kagan first took her seat at the bench at the age of 50 and could potentially be a force on the court for decades.
Lithwick says Kagan is "much more inscrutable" on issues than other recent additions to the court. "She's very close to the vest," she says.
On the court since: 29 September 2005
How he got to the court: Born in New York and raised in Indiana, Roberts attended a boarding school as a teenager but also spent summers working in a steel mill. After considering becoming a historian at Harvard, he went to law school there instead, eventually clerking for then-Associate Justice Rehnquist. He spent many years as a lawyer in the Reagan administration then entered private practice, arguing before the high court and serving as one of several legal advisers to George W Bush in the Florida presidential recount case. Originally nominated to fill the spot left by retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Roberts was re-nominated for the chief justice position after Chief Justice Rehnquist died between terms, and his nomination was fast-tracked.
Who is he as a justice: A conservative justice, Roberts is the third-youngest Chief Justice in the court's history, confirmed at 50 years old. Last year's term saw more than half its cases decided unanimously, something many court watchers cite as the outcome of Roberts' desire to foster agreement through narrower rulings. He also notably wrote the 5-4 opinion that shot down a major challenge to President Barack Obama's healthcare law.
"I think he cares deeply about how the 'Roberts court' looks," Lithwick says, and knows he can move the court slowly over decades.
"He doesn't want huge swings, except in areas he feels very strongly about," Coyle says, like government's role in racial issues, campaign finance's relation to free speech and the structure of constitution. Roberts also looks to keep decorum on the bench during oral arguments.
On the court since: 8 August 2009
How she got to the court: Sotomayor was born to Puerto Rican parents in the Bronx. As a student at Princeton University, she fought for hiring more Latino professors and admitting more Latino students. After Yale Law school, she became a prosecutor in New York and was later named to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The federal appeals courts are often the final step before the Supreme Court for cases. In the second circuit, Sotomayor authored more than 150 majority opinions - including a few that were ultimately overruled by the higher court.
Who is she as a justice? Sotomayor is the first Hispanic justice. She's also been one of the most public facing - her memoir appeared on the New York Times' best-selling list, she appeared twice on Sesame Street, once to adjudicate a dispute between Goldilocks and Baby Bear, and she helped drop the ball in Times Square on New Year's Eve 2013. "She's trying really hard to demystify the court, showing 'You can be a justice too'," Lithwick says.
Her former experience as a prosecutor and trial judge often leads her to challenge lawyers on the facts of a case, says Marcia Coyle, the chief Washington correspondent for the National Law Journal. "She knows how criminal trials operate," Coyle says.
On the court since: 10 April 2017
How he got to the court: At 49, Gorsuch was the youngest nominee in a quarter of a century when he was approved in 2017. The Colorado native, whose legal pedigree includes Harvard and Oxford, was first nominated to the 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals by former President George W Bush in 2006. He began his law career clerking for Supreme Court Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy, and worked in a private law practice in Washington for a decade and served as the principal deputy assistant associate attorney general at the Justice Department under the Bush administration. Judge Gorsuch graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where former President Barack Obama was a classmate, and earned a doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford University.
Who is he as a justice? Gorsuch succeeded the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and was welcomed by conservatives who consider him to espouse a similarly strict interpretation of law. In his first year on the court he has cemented the 5-4 conservative advantage, and that's been seen in a series of rulings on contentious issues such as the Trump travel ban, trade union fees and gerrymandering.
On the court since: 6 October 2018
How he got to the court: Kavanaugh served on the influential Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit and was formerly a White House aide under George W Bush. He previously worked for Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel who investigated Democratic President Bill Clinton in the 1990s. His confirmation process was one of the most controversial in recent years amid allegations of sexual misconduct in the 1980s, which he denied. After a hearing in which one of his accusers gave a dramatic testimony of the alleged incident and Kavanaugh fiercely defended his record, he was approved by the Senate by 50-48. Born in Washington, DC in 1965, Kavanaugh studied at Georgetown Preparatory School an all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland, and graduated from Yale College and Yale Law School.
Who is he as a justice? He succeeded Anthony Kennedy, who was the Supreme Court's swing vote, often casting the deciding opinion in 5-4 cases, consolidating a conservative majority at the top court. Some Democrats fiercely opposed to his name for his views on delicate issues such as abortion. His views on the environment and gun rights have also raised concerns among environmentalists and gun control activists.
On the court since: 27 October 2020
How she got to the court: Born in New Orleans of Irish and French ancestry, Barrett was the eldest of seven children in a devoutly Catholic family and is now herself a mother of seven. She was the student body vice-president at her all-girls Catholic high school. After graduating first in her class at Notre Dame Law School, in Indiana, she clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia, a conservative icon, and later worked on George W Bush's election lawsuit in 2000. Barrett also became a distinguished law professor at her alma mater. She was picked for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017 by President Donald Trump and was nominated to the high court less than three years later.
Who is she as a justice? Often considered a protege of Justice Scalia, Barrett is a proponent of textualism, the view that judges should apply the law as written and interpret the US Constitution as it was originally intended. In her acceptance speech at the White House, Barrett said: "Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they may hold."
She has said her Catholic faith does not influence her rulings. Past legal opinions and remarks on abortion and gay marriage have made her popular with the religious right, but have earned her vehement opposition from the left. She drew scrutiny for her reported leadership role, with the title of "handmaid", in the People of Praise, a tight-knit, Christian faith-based group.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33103973
|
news_magazine-33103973
|
|
Scientists condemn professor's 'morally reprehensible' talk - BBC News
|
2018-10-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Italian researcher Alessandro Strumia is heavily criticised for claiming physics was "built by men".
|
Science & Environment
|
Cern, home to the Large Hadron Collider, was quick to condemn the talk
More than 1,600 scientists have so far signed a statement condemning the remarks of the Italian researcher who stated that physics was "built by men".
Prof Alessandro Strumia presented an analysis to an audience of predominantly young female physicists which he claimed "proved" women were less capable at the subject than men.
The statement at particlesforjustice.org says Prof Strumia's talk was "fundamentally unsound" and was "followed by open discrimination and personal attacks".
In response, Prof Strumia told BBC News that the high-energy physics community was about 100 times bigger than the number that have so far signed the statement.
He said that the signatories "mostly come from those countries more affected by political correctness, which I indicated as the problem. This is what leads to academicians that want (to get) others fired for having 'morally reprehensible' ideas".
The Pisa University-affiliated researcher made his comments - first reported by the BBC - during a workshop at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) - the lab on the Franco-Swiss border that discovered the Higgs Boson.
Cern has since suspended his participation from any activities at the lab.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by CERNpress This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Physicists from across the world are continuing to add their names to the statement.
"Strumia's arguments are morally reprehensible," it reads. "Belittling the ability and legitimacy of scientists of colour and white women scientists using such flimsy pretexts is disgraceful, and it reveals a deep contempt for more than half of humanity that clearly comes from some source other than scientific logic."
The workshop at which Prof Strumia was speaking was aimed at helping women to become particle physicists.
But the audience of early career researchers was upset and angered by his analysis of published research papers from an online library. He told them that his analysis showed that physics was not sexist against women.
Professor Donna Strickland became the first woman in 55 years to win the Nobel prize in Physics earlier this week
He produced a series of graphs which, he claimed, demonstrated that women were hired over men whose research had been cited more highly in publications - an indication of higher quality.
Prof Strumia also presented data that he claimed showed that male and female researchers were equally cited at the start of their careers before men then overtook women as their careers progressed.
In addition, he highlighted behavioural research that he said indicated that the "assumption that men and women have identical brains is an ideology".
The statement at particlesforjustice.org forensically examines each of the claims and dismisses them.
"Strumia claimed to be proving that there is no discrimination against women, [but] his arguments were rooted in a circumscribed, biased reading of the data available, to the point of promoting a perspective that is biased against women," it states.
"The origin and validity of the data he presented have not yet been corroborated, but even if we take it at face value in all cases there are obvious alternative explanations that … are directly in contradiction with his conclusions."
Professor Strumia denied that his use of data was biased.
He told the BBC: "The data about citations and hirings show that women are not discriminated (against) in fundamental physics. We reward merit, irrespective of gender."
The University of Pisa has said that it is considering a disciplinary review of his actions.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/45766576
|
news_45766576
|
|
Teacher Eleanor Wilson 'sickened' by plane sex claims - BBC News
|
2018-10-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Eleanor Wilson tells a jury a pupil's claim the pair had sex in a toilet "came from his imagination".
|
Bristol
|
Eleanor Wilson faces four counts of sexual activity with a child under 18 while in a position of trust
A schoolteacher told police that claims she had sex with a teenage pupil in an aeroplane toilet made her "feel sick".
Eleanor Wilson is accused of having sex with the boy on the way back from a school trip in 2015.
She described the allegations against her as sounding "like a porn film" and said the claims had come from the boy's imagination, Bristol Crown Court heard.
Ms Wilson, 29, denies four counts of sexual activity with a child under 18 while in a position of trust.
The pupil and the school concerned cannot be identified for legal reasons.
Ms Wilson said during a police interview that having sex with the teenager was "the last thing on my mind".
"I value my job," she added and said that she would not have wanted to risk her position by going to prison, the court heard.
"It just sounds like a porn film. It's come from his imagination. The other staff there would say that wasn't happening. It makes me feel sick, the idea of it."
Ms Wilson, of Dursley, Gloucestershire, admitted meeting up with the boy and texting him after the school trip, explaining "the lines were blurred".
In police interviews, she said she later told him she was pregnant by her boyfriend Andrew Hall, and was planning to have an abortion because she "felt lonely and upset".
Ms Wilson agreed she had told the teenager to keep their meetings a secret, but added she only saw him "as a mate", and did not have feelings for him.
Giving evidence in court for the first time, Ms Wilson said there was "no truth whatsoever" in allegations she had a sexual relationship with a teenage boy, who she described as "quite a charming, cheeky chap".
She told jurors that during the flight she was regularly checking on several students who were suffering from food poisoning.
Ms Wilson, who now works as a civil servant, said her former boyfriend Mr Hall was "very controlling" and "at times abusive" and by August 2015 she was unhappy with their relationship.
She told the jury she phoned the pupil after an argument she had had with Mr Hall while they were on holiday.
"I called him because I didn't have anyone else. He knew it was bad and he wouldn't judge what I said. He knew me," she said.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-45746393
|
news_uk-england-bristol-45746393
|
|
Brexit, the Irish border and the 'battle for the union' - BBC News
|
2018-10-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Do growing Brexit tensions mean a fight for the union?
|
Northern Ireland
|
The 310-mile long border separating Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and how it should look after Brexit has become a crucial issue
With fewer than 200 days until the UK is due to leave the EU, the battle over Brexit is reaching dizzying heights of drama.
But perhaps an unintended consequence of the debate is the growing battle over something else - the union.
In particular, the sum of the UK and all its parts.
With the Irish border the main sticking point in the talks, focus has turned to Northern Ireland's future.
On Monday, the DUP's deputy leader Nigel Dodds told the BBC that Brexit negotiations were "turning into a battle for the union".
His party is at the heart of the disquiet over the so-called backstop (that's the insurance policy the EU wants, to ensure there's no hard Irish border if the UK and EU can't find another solution).
The DUP's "blood red" line: No to anything that sees only Northern Ireland remaining aligned in some way to EU rules, and no to extra regulatory checks only in Northern Ireland.
It fears anything that splits Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK could pose a range of problems, including precipitating the eventual break-up of the union.
Alex Kane, a former director of communications for the Ulster Unionist Party, believes the pro-union argument would probably win a border poll if one was held, but he's critical of the DUP and unionism more widely for throwing out rhetoric - but not acting on it.
DUP leader Arlene Foster met the EU's chief negotiator Michel Barnier last week - and has since said it appears more likely that Brexit will lead to a no deal outcome
"It's not enough to just say 'the battle for the union' is on," he says.
"You have to have a strategy, you have to be willing to engage. If you mention the phrase border poll to unionists, a lot of the time they dismiss it and say it won't happen."
But writer and former Labour special adviser, Kevin Meagher, says Brexit has been an "accelerant" in pushing forward the possibility of Irish reunification which he insists is almost an inevitability.
"Unionists find themselves riding two horses: standing true to what they believe in, but having to internalise that a united Ireland is a real prospect now," he says.
The power to call a border poll rests with the Secretary of State Karen Bradley, who could do so at any time if it appears "likely" to her that a majority would vote in favour of it, but earlier this year she said the conditions had not been met.
Kevin Meagher says Brexit makes it much more likely to happen, and that there are other contributing factors too:
The prime minister has always insisted she is a defender of the union and that the "precious bond" between the UK's four nations is of great importance to her.
Kevin Meagher thinks that when it comes to the final roll of the Brexit dice, Theresa May might have to upset her unionist allies.
"Some of those forces are alive already, given Scotland's previous independence vote.
"Brexit quickens the pace around these problems, but Theresa May's got to try and get the best deal, and by upsetting the DUP she can probably get a reasonable deal for rest of the UK."
Senior Scottish Conservatives David Mundell and Ruth Davidson have threatened to resign if Theresa May backs a deal that gives NI special arrangements
It's not just the DUP that the prime minister risks upsetting.
On Sunday, just as talks between EU and UK negotiators ground to a halt over the Irish border issue, senior Scottish Conservatives threatened mutiny if any Brexit deal included special arrangements for Northern Ireland.
Their fear is that any new controls that separate Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK could fuel the case for Scottish independence - another potential fracture in the union.
But where does Sinn Féin - the largest nationalist party in Stormont and who also holds seats in the Irish Parliament - figure into all of this?
The party's leadership have stressed that they want to see a border poll by 2022, although they acknowledge it would be much more complicated in the context of a hard Brexit or 'no deal' scenario.
The party's Máirtín Ó Muilleoir said fighting against a hard Brexit is a bigger priority for Sinn Féin right now, than achieving a united Ireland - but acknowledged Brexit had strengthened his party's argument for one.
Alex Kane thinks the prospect of Irish unity is "once in a lifetime", arguing that Sinn Féin knows it has an opportunity now that may not come around again for a very long time if it is not successful.
And Kevin Meagher's view is that a united Ireland has moved from being an aspiration for nationalists to an "evidence-based proposition" now.
"Brexit is massively destabilising for the British state, it would be like taking a fillet to the UK," he says.
"A hard Brexit would be the worst of all worlds for unionism - with all roads ultimately leading to one point: a border poll."
While the Stormont parties may be at odds and internal spats within the Conservatives and Labour rage on, much of what happens next with the union rests on what Theresa May does next.
But could she become the British prime minister who ends up breaking up the UK?
Kevin Meagher says she's in an incredibly difficult position, adding: "Trying to judge her place in history, I don't envy her, I don't think anybody does."
While in Alex Kane's view, the prime minister has a stark choice: "A deal in the best interests of the UK or the interests of one party."
Mrs May does not have much time left to decide.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-45864218
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-45864218
|
|
Samantha Eastwood: Man admits murdering midwife after affair - BBC News
|
2018-10-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Samantha Eastwood was found in a shallow grave after being killed by the brother-in-law of her ex-fiancé.
|
Stoke & Staffordshire
|
Samantha Eastwood was missing for over a week before her body was found in a shallow grave
The body of Samantha Eastwood, 28, was found in a shallow grave in Caverswall, Staffordshire, in August, eight days after she went missing.
Michael Stirling, 32, the brother-in-law of her ex-fiance John Peake, pleaded guilty to her murder when he appeared at Northampton Crown Court.
He was remanded in custody and will be sentenced at Stafford Crown Court on 3 December.
Ms Eastwood was last seen in uniform leaving work at Royal Stoke University Hospital on the morning of 27 July.
Her body was discovered on 5 August wrapped in a duvet cover with tape covering her eyes and mouth, a previous hearing was told.
Staffordshire Police said a post-mortem examination has taken place, but further tests are required to confirm her cause of death.
After Stirling entered his plea, his defence barrister Charles Miskin QC said the murder "was not a premeditated act".
"The context of the killing was a background of growing tension arising from a longstanding, but not particularly intense, affair," he added.
Mr Miskin said that on the afternoon of the killing "various things were said" between the two.
"There was an argument in that context and that led to him being very angry," he added.
"After a struggle and while she was on the floor, he put his hands over her throat, her mouth and nose, and as a result of that she died.
"During his intense rage, he originally intended to cause her really serious bodily harm, but matters escalated and he carried out the intention to kill her."
Tributes to the midwife had been left outside Royal Stoke University Hospital, where she worked
Mr Miskin said Stirling "panicked afterwards and buried her in an area of which he had some knowledge".
"He entirely accepts that he tried, wholly dishonestly, to mislead others in the afternoon after the killing.
"He is absolutely horrified about what happened and is deeply sorry, not for himself, but for all the others who are victims of this crime."
Prosecutor Jonas Hankin QC said that two days before the murder Stirling had researched methods on how to "kill oneself".
He told the court Stirling had a history of mental health problems as recently as 2015.
Stirling, of Gratton Road, Bucknall, Stoke-on-Trent, admitted murdering Ms Eastwood between 26 July and 5 August at Baddeley Green, Stoke-on-Trent.
Ms Eastwood's mother, sister and ex-fiancé John Peake watched from the public gallery as he entered his plea via video-link.
Samantha Eastwood's body was found in a shallow grave in Caverswall, eight days after she went missing
Det Insp Dan Ison said Stirling's guilty plea had "saved a lot of heartache for the family".
"Obviously Michael Stirling was known to the family and he's lied to them and lied to police.
"They haven't known, on occasion, who to believe."
Police previously said two other men aged 28 and 60 who were arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender over the death are to face no further action.
Since the midwife's death, well-wishers have raised more than £15,800 to help her family with funeral costs.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-45937829
|
news_uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-45937829
|
|
On business, Philip Hammond is no Boris Johnson - BBC News
|
2018-10-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Chancellor thinks the Tories need to be relentlessly pro-business - whatever the former Foreign Secretary says.
|
Business
|
The Chancellor of the Exchequer will do something relatively rare on Monday: take to a public platform to argue about the economy and business.
As I have written in the past, Philip Hammond's approach has been simple as the Brexit arguments swirl with ever greater degrees of ill-temper: make like a submarine.
Quietly, often with the support of the Business Secretary, Greg Clark, the Chancellor has been pushing the government towards the closest relationship possible with the European Union.
Businesses that have the most entwined export relationships with the EU say anything else would be economically calamitous. Mr Hammond agrees.
But he has rejected chances of regular interviews or public platforms to make his case. Why?
To understand that you have to go back to the World Economic Forum in Switzerland last January.
In front of an audience of British business leaders, the Chancellor spoke of wanting "very modest" changes for business once the UK had left the EU. He thought the comments relatively obvious and anodyne.
They blew up into a row that kept the newspapers in headlines for two days as pro-Brexit Conservatives attacked him for arguing for the softest of soft Brexits - and Mr Hammond decided that the mute button would henceforth be his political weapon of choice.
On Monday the Chancellor speaks at the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham.
Given that each appearance is punctuated by long periods under the waves, those close to Mr Hammond know that each "surfacing" is closely watched.
His speeches are not just economic; they are political. And the politics of his speech are all to do with the former foreign secretary and his reported use of an expletive, when asked about business objections to Brexit.
CBI chief Carolyn Fairbairn has rejected claims made about the lobby group by former Brexit minister Steve Baker
Boris Johnson appears to have been particularly riled by the CBI, the business lobbying group.
His sentiments were backed on Sunday by Steve Baker, the former Brexit minister, who said the CBI was "a grave menace to the political stability and economic prospects of the UK".
Mr Baker said the CBI had undue political influence, particularly over relationships with the EU, which brought this tart response from its director-general.
"CBI represents 190k businesses and has had record numbers joining since ref [referendum]," Carolyn Fairbairn tweeted. "We speak for a wider range of firms than anyone else. Shooting messengers gets country nowhere."
Mr Hammond wants to make it clear he has far more sympathy with Ms Fairbairn than he does with Mr Baker or Mr Johnson.
He will say business must be at the heart of Conservative party policy. Without their support, Brexit will be all the more difficult, he believes.
The Chancellor knows he has a difficult hand, with an economy that many of the statistics show has suffered since the referendum.
A multi-billion pound promise of more money for the NHS which has brought forth requests for more funding from other government departments that run the police and the armed forces.
They are requests Mr Hammond would like to resist while the nation's debts still stand at £1.8trn, or more than 80% of our national income.
And Brexit, which the Treasury feels has very little economic upside.
He will have to nod to all these issues in his speech.
But it is clear that he wants one message to be heard. If it is not relentlessly pro-businesses, the Conservative party will only add to its problems.
The last thing it needs is a war with companies that deploy billions of pounds of investment in Britain and around the world.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45701803
|
news_business-45701803
|
|
Why you have (probably) already bought your last car - BBC News
|
2018-10-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A growing number of tech analysts are predicting that in less than 20 years we'll all have stopped owning cars.
|
Business
|
Driverless taxis - the transport of the future?
I'm guessing you are scoffing in disbelief at the very suggestion of this article, but bear with me.
A growing number of tech analysts are predicting that in less than 20 years we'll all have stopped owning cars, and, what's more, the internal combustion engine will have been consigned to the dustbin of history.
Yes, it's a big claim and you are right to be sceptical, but the argument that a unique convergence of new technology is poised to revolutionise personal transportation is more persuasive than you might think.
The central idea is pretty simple: Self-driving electric vehicles organised into an Uber-style network will be able to offer such cheap transport that you'll very quickly - we're talking perhaps a decade - decide you don't need a car any more.
And if you're thinking this timescale is wildly optimistic, just recall how rapidly cars replaced horses.
Take a look at this picture of 5th Avenue in New York in 1900. Can you spot the car?
Now look at this picture from 1913. Yes, this time where's the horse?
In 1908 the first Model T Ford rolled off the production line; by 1930 the equestrian age was, to all intents and purposes, over - and all thanks to the disruptive power of an earlier tech innovation - the internal combustion engine.
So how will this latest transportation revolution unfold?
First off, consider how Uber and other networked taxi companies have already changed the way we move around. In most major cities an Uber driver - or one of its rivals - is usually just a couple of minutes away, and charges less than established taxis, let's say £10.
The company's exponential growth is evidence of how powerful the Uber business model is.
Now take out the driver. You've probably cut costs by at least 50%.
Uber has been experimenting with driverless cars
So if we're trying to work out when this revolution will begin in earnest the key date will be when self-driving vehicle technology is available and - crucially - has regulatory backing.
That could well be sooner than you think. The UK has said it hopes to authorise the first fully autonomous cars as early as 2021.
And, say enthusiasts for autonomy, it will only take one city to prove the technology is safe and useful and the rest of the world will very quickly rush to catch up.
So self-driving cars have cut our £10 journey to £5.
Now imagine the current mostly fossil fuel-powered taxi fleet is replaced with electric cars.
At the moment electric vehicles are more expensive than similar models with internal combustion engines, but offer significantly lower lifetime costs.
They are more reliable, for a start. The typical electric car has around 20 moving parts compared to the 2,000 or so in an internal combustion engine.
As a result electric vehicles also tend to last much longer. Most electric car manufacturers expect their vehicles to keep on going for at least 500,000 miles.
These factors aren't that important for most consumers - after all, the average driver in England does less than 10,000 miles a year and our cars are parked 95% of the time. However, they are huge issues if you're using a vehicle pretty much continuously, as would be the case with a self-driving taxi.
The end of the road for the internal combustion engine?
Add in the low cost of recharging batteries compared to refuelling and you've got another dramatic reduction in costs.
And it's worth noting that the cost of electric vehicles is likely to continue to fall, and rapidly. As they become mainstream, returns to scale will drive down costs. That's the logic behind Tesla's $5bn (£3.8bn) battery plant, the so-called "Gigafactory".
How does this affect our £10 journey?
It brings another dramatic reduction. Fully autonomous electric taxi networks could offer rides at as little as 10% of current rates.
At least that's what tech prophet Tony Seba reckons. He and his team at the think-tank RethinkX have done more than anyone else to think through how this revolution might rip through the personal transportation market.
We've now cut our £10 fare to just £1.
Mr Seba calls the idea of a robo-taxi network "transport as a service", and estimates it could save the average American as much as $6,000 (£4,560) a year. That's the equivalent of a 10% pay rise.
And don't forget, when the revolution comes you won't be behind the wheel so now you'll be working or relaxing as you travel - another big benefit.
You still think that car parked outside your flat is worth having?
What's more, once this new model of getting around takes hold the benefits are likely to be reinforcing. The more vehicles in the network, the better the service offered to consumers; the more miles self-driving cars do, the more efficient and safer they'll get; the more electric vehicles manufactured, the cheaper each one will be.
Don't worry about running out of charge
Don't worry that rural areas will be left out. A vehicle could be parked in every village waiting for your order to come.
And range anxiety - the fear that you might run out of electricity - won't be a problem either. Should the battery run low the network will send a fully charged car to meet you so you can continue your journey.
You've probably seen headlines about accidents involving self-driving cars but the truth is they will be far safer than ones driven by you and me - they won't get regulatory approval if they are not. That means tens of thousands of lives - perhaps hundreds of thousands - will be saved as accident rates plummet.
That will generate yet another cost saving for our fleets of robo-taxis. The price of insurance will tumble, while at the same time those of us who insist on continuing to drive our own vehicles will face higher charges.
According to the tech visionaries it won't be long before the whole market tilts irreversibly away from car ownership and the trusty old internal combustion engine.
RethinkX, for example, reckons that within 10 years of self-driving cars getting regulatory approval 95% of passenger miles will be in these electric robo-taxis.
Will cars parked outside houses soon be a thing of the past?
The logical next step will be for human beings to be banned from driving cars at all because they pose such a risk to other road users.
Take a moment to think about the wide-reaching effects this revolution will have, aside from just changing how we get around. There will be downsides: millions of car industry workers and taxi drivers will be looking for new jobs, for a start.
But think of the hundreds of billions of dollars consumers will save, and which can now be spent elsewhere in the economy.
Meanwhile, the numbers of cars will plummet. RethinkX estimates that the number of vehicles on US roads will fall from nearly 250 million to just 45 million over a 10-year period. That will free up huge amounts of space in our towns and cities.
And, please take note: I haven't mentioned the enormous environmental benefits of converting the world's cars to electricity.
That's because the logic of this upheaval isn't driven by new rules on pollution or worries about global warming but by the most powerful incentive in any economy - cold hard cash.
That said, there's no question that a wholesale switch away from fossil fuels will slow climate change and massively reduce air pollution.
In short, let the revolution begin!
But seriously, I've deliberately put these arguments forcefully to prompt debate and we want to hear what you think.
You can comment below, or tweet me @BBCJustinR.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45786690
|
news_business-45786690
|
|
Scientists condemn professor's 'morally reprehensible' talk - BBC News
|
2018-10-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Italian researcher Alessandro Strumia is heavily criticised for claiming physics was "built by men".
|
Science & Environment
|
Cern, home to the Large Hadron Collider, was quick to condemn the talk
More than 1,600 scientists have so far signed a statement condemning the remarks of the Italian researcher who stated that physics was "built by men".
Prof Alessandro Strumia presented an analysis to an audience of predominantly young female physicists which he claimed "proved" women were less capable at the subject than men.
The statement at particlesforjustice.org says Prof Strumia's talk was "fundamentally unsound" and was "followed by open discrimination and personal attacks".
In response, Prof Strumia told BBC News that the high-energy physics community was about 100 times bigger than the number that have so far signed the statement.
He said that the signatories "mostly come from those countries more affected by political correctness, which I indicated as the problem. This is what leads to academicians that want (to get) others fired for having 'morally reprehensible' ideas".
The Pisa University-affiliated researcher made his comments - first reported by the BBC - during a workshop at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) - the lab on the Franco-Swiss border that discovered the Higgs Boson.
Cern has since suspended his participation from any activities at the lab.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by CERNpress This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Physicists from across the world are continuing to add their names to the statement.
"Strumia's arguments are morally reprehensible," it reads. "Belittling the ability and legitimacy of scientists of colour and white women scientists using such flimsy pretexts is disgraceful, and it reveals a deep contempt for more than half of humanity that clearly comes from some source other than scientific logic."
The workshop at which Prof Strumia was speaking was aimed at helping women to become particle physicists.
But the audience of early career researchers was upset and angered by his analysis of published research papers from an online library. He told them that his analysis showed that physics was not sexist against women.
Professor Donna Strickland became the first woman in 55 years to win the Nobel prize in Physics earlier this week
He produced a series of graphs which, he claimed, demonstrated that women were hired over men whose research had been cited more highly in publications - an indication of higher quality.
Prof Strumia also presented data that he claimed showed that male and female researchers were equally cited at the start of their careers before men then overtook women as their careers progressed.
In addition, he highlighted behavioural research that he said indicated that the "assumption that men and women have identical brains is an ideology".
The statement at particlesforjustice.org forensically examines each of the claims and dismisses them.
"Strumia claimed to be proving that there is no discrimination against women, [but] his arguments were rooted in a circumscribed, biased reading of the data available, to the point of promoting a perspective that is biased against women," it states.
"The origin and validity of the data he presented have not yet been corroborated, but even if we take it at face value in all cases there are obvious alternative explanations that … are directly in contradiction with his conclusions."
Professor Strumia denied that his use of data was biased.
He told the BBC: "The data about citations and hirings show that women are not discriminated (against) in fundamental physics. We reward merit, irrespective of gender."
The University of Pisa has said that it is considering a disciplinary review of his actions.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/45766576
|
news_45766576
|
|
Heterosexual couple win civil partnership case - BBC News
|
2018-10-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Laws allowing only same-sex couples the right are discriminatory, the Supreme Court says.
|
UK
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan said they were elated at the court's ruling
A heterosexual couple have won their legal bid for the right to have a civil partnership instead of a marriage.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favour of Rebecca Steinfeld, 37, and Charles Keidan, 41, from London.
The court said the Civil Partnership Act 2004 - which only applies to same-sex couples - is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Ms Steinfeld said she hoped the government does the "right thing" and extends civil partnerships to all.
"We are feeling elated," she told the BBC outside court. "But at the same time we are feeling frustrated the government has wasted taxpayers' money in fighting what the judges' have called a blatant inequality."
The judgement does not oblige government to change the law, although it does make it more likely that the government will now act, the BBC's legal correspondent Clive Coleman explained.
In a civil partnership, a couple is entitled to the same legal treatment in terms of inheritance, tax, pensions and next-of-kin arrangements as marriage.
The couple, who met in 2010 and have two children, said the "legacy of marriage" which "treated women as property for centuries" was not an option for them.
"We want to raise our children as equal partners and feel that a civil partnership - a modern, symmetrical institution - sets the best example for them," they explained.
Since March 2014, same sex-couples can choose whether to enter a civil partnership or to marry. This has not been possible for mixed-sex couples, which led Ms Steinfeld and Mr Keidan to argue that the law was discriminatory.
This ruling overturns a previous judgement made by the Court of Appeal, which rejected the couple's claim, in February of last year.
The judges ruled that current UK law was "incompatible" with human rights laws on discrimination and the right to a private and family life.
Announcing the court's decision, Lord Kerr said the government did not seek to justify the difference in treatment between same-sex and different sex couples.
"To the contrary, it accepts that the difference cannot be justified," he said.
LGBT and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell called the ruling a "victory for love and equality".
"It was never fair that same-sex couples had two options, civil partnerships and civil marriages, whereas opposite-sex partners had only one option, marriage," he said.
Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan appealed to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal rejected their claim in February 2017
It is an irony that the way in which relationship equality for same sex couples came about in the 21st century had the effect of creating inequality between them and different sex couples.
The Civil Partnership Act 2004 created civil partnerships but defined them as a 'relationship between two people of the same sex'.
When the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 legalised same sex marriage, gay couples had two options as to how to formalise their relationship in law - marriage or civil partnership - whereas heterosexual couples could only marry.
The Supreme Court has found that inequality to amount to discrimination and a breach of the right to a family life.
The government accepted the inequality between same sex and different sex couples, but argued that it needed to have time to assemble sufficient information to allow a confident decision to be made about the future of civil partnerships.
Lord Kerr gave that argument short shrift, saying: "What it (the government) seeks is tolerance of the discrimination while it sorts out how to deal with it. That cannot be characterised as a legitimate aim."
The couple will later go to Whitehall to deliver a letter to Equalities Minister Penny Mordaunt.
Martin Loat, chairman of the Equal Civil Partnerships campaign, said: "There is only one possible way forward - giving everyone the right to a civil partnership - and we urge the government to seize this opportunity to announce it will end this injustice now."
More than 130,000 people have signed an online petition in support of civil partnerships for everyone.
The couple's barrister Karon Monaghan QC told the court her clients had "deep-rooted and genuine ideological objections to marriage" and are "not alone" in their views.
There are around 63,000 couples in civil partnerships in the UK and some 3.3 million co-habiting couples.
• None 'Why we want a civil partnership'
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44627990
|
news_uk-44627990
|
|
DFE caught adding tuition fees to school funding claims - BBC News
|
2018-10-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The government rejected complaints over school budgets. But its response included the cost of tuition fees.
|
Family & Education
|
Head teachers were given figures on spending that have turned out to include students' tuition fees
If you're a student paying tuition fees, you might be surprised to find that the cost of going to university is being included as "spending" in the government's defence of its record on school funding.
But when ministers faced accusations of under-funding schools in England, a figure they quoted widely as evidence of high spending has been found to include billions of pounds of university fees being paid by students, rather than only government spending.
School leaders have described this discovery as "shocking and disturbing".
Last week, more than a thousand head teachers marched on Downing Street, protesting about school funding shortages.
The Department for Education rejected their claims, saying not only were record amounts going into schools but the "OECD has recently confirmed that the UK is the third highest spender on education in the world".
The claim for world-beating spending was used repeatedly by the DfE, it was published on the department's website and the Minister for School Standards, Nick Gibb, used the same argument on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, in a debate over school budgets.
"We are spending record amounts on our school funding. We are the third highest spender on education in the OECD," said Mr Gibb.
It sounds impressive. But the third-place ranking from the OECD, an international economics organisation, is not just a schools figure or even about government spending.
It shows the proportion of gross domestic product (GDP), the value of goods and services produced, spent on all educational institutions, including universities as well as schools - and it's for 2015 and not 2018.
What really might be unexpected is that it includes personal spending - and that means that all the billions paid by students on their tuition fees are part of this total.
The UK in this measure of spending as a proportion of GDP is in third place, behind Norway and New Zealand, and ahead of Colombia and Chile.
The OECD makes comparisons at a UK level, rather than the four separate education systems in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
And the figure for the UK is mostly driven by changes in England - with the high ranking reflecting that school budgets had mostly been protected between 2010 and 2015 - combined with the introduction of some of the world's highest tuition fees.
The high placing of Colombia and Chile in 2015 also reflects the relative costs of higher education.
Of course, the DfE's claim that the UK is the "third highest spender on education in the world" is not incorrect.
It does not anywhere explicitly say it is about the government funding of schools that was under discussion.
The ONS is investigating whether the public cost of student finance should show up in the deficit
But would parents listening to arguments about school spending really expect this?
The DfE accepts that the third-highest spending claim includes tuition fees but says the statement remains "accurate".
A spokesman points to other OECD figures, also for 2015, showing the UK has above-average spending on primary and secondary schools.
But Jules White, the head teacher who organised last week's protest on funding, said the use of "erroneous figures" was "both shocking and disturbing".
He said there was independent evidence to show schools were struggling with cuts - but he accused the Department for Education of using "partial and distorted information".
But Geoff Barton, leader of the ASCL head teachers' union, said: "It is disingenuous if the government is conflating school and university funding.
"Instead of mounting increasingly spurious attempts to undermine the evidence, the government should focus on providing schools and colleges with the investment they so clearly need."
But there is another twist in the tail from this - which could see billions being added to the chancellor's deficit figures.
While ministers and head teachers are arguing over school funding, there is a separate debate about measuring the real cost of the student finance system.
The review of tuition fees in England, commissioned by the prime minister, is currently having to wait until a decision is reached on how to classify student fees in the public accounts.
Schools have been warning of funding shortages
The Office for National Statistics is investigating whether the money lent to students every year for tuition fees - much of which will never be repaid - should appear as a cost in the public finances.
Last year, the ONS said £17bn was lent to students, with about £3bn received in repayments.
Two parliamentary committees have heavily criticised the way the cost of student finance is invisible in terms of public spending.
They have suggested that the borrowing and lending associated with tuition fees should show up in the national balance sheet, with accusations that the current system is a "fiscal illusion".
But the Department for Education seems to have pre-empted this - wrapping tuition fees into its definition of education spending.
Has it inadvertently signalled to the ONS that it agrees that lending for fees should be counted alongside public spending?
The chancellor might be surprised at such an intervention that could add billions to the deficit.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-45706603
|
news_education-45706603
|
|
Will they, won't they and then how will they? - BBC News
|
2018-11-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Talk of a second vote in Parliament if MPs reject the Brexit agreement is being discussed in Downing Street but "not with any enthusiasm".
|
UK Politics
|
One cabinet minister, in particular, has been saying privately to me for two years, and probably to anyone else that would listen, that the deal with the EU will only be done at the eleventh minute, in the eleventh hour, on the eleventh day, at the so on and so on and so on and so on - you get the picture.
That's, according to them, how the EU always works, and it is only at that last dreaded moment that there will be enough urgency for everyone around the table to forget their differences and get the thing done.
If you follow along with that analogy, tonight's change of plan is playing out exactly according to that script.
Some may even argue that resistance from EU countries like France and Spain, especially over fishing rights, will only help the Prime Minister in her attempt to sell the deal once (if) it's signed off. Look Brexiteers, look how hard I had to fight! I have annoyed the French - hurrah!
(As my Brussels colleagues point out too, these jitters play well in other European countries too where leaders often succumb to the same temptation as UK politicians - complaining sometimes, loudly, about the strictures of the EU that, claims that can help them out politically at home).
There are real issues at stake, over Gibraltar, over fish, over the EU's distaste for the UK's preferred model of the "common rule book" - it comes down to the same argument about the UK being a friend with benefits, and not enough of the obligations that comes along with the goodies.
But the sense tonight, which of course could change very quickly, from Number 10 at least, is that these are last minute squeals rather than brand new problems that could see the whole thing implode.
Even so, Theresa May will fight anything that makes it harder for the package to get through Parliament. And if we stick to that cabinet minister's script for a moment, the bigger challenge than herding the continental cats, will be getting enough MPs on board.
Goodness knows, with dozens of Tory MPs on the record saying they will vote against the deal, the opposition parties lining up to condemn it, it is extremely hard right now to see the deal passing through.
Senior figures in Number 10 believe it is still possible, with a change in dynamic once the thing is signed, and no doubt, enormous political pressure from inside and outside the Tory Party brought on their MPs.
Cabinet ministers are split on whether it can happen. Two in the last day or so have told me the deal might just about make it in the final vote, pencilled in for somewhere around the 10th, 11th or 12th of December. That might sound crazy now, but I also can't emphasise enough how we cannot right now imagine ourselves in the minds of MPs in a fortnight's time.
But in that same twenty four hours two cabinet ministers have said the total opposite privately that there is simply no way it can pass.
And another member of Cabinet, admittedly not the deal's most ardent fan, suggested that Number 10 have become blinkered to reality saying, it's like Downing Street is "a couple stuck in a bad marriage".
"They are the only people who can't see that it isn't working and they should just admit it and split up. When they do they say to everyone they know, 'why didn't you tell us?'
That means that government figures are discussing the possibility of a second vote on the deal.
Not another referendum, but having another go in Parliament. There is discussion about this in Number 10, I'm told, and one minister told me "we are looking at this as a possible way out".
The thinking is that it would be easier in particular for Labour MPs to come on board. In other words, protest first time round, but then come on side to choose a deal, rather than no deal, when a similar question is put.
But despite chatter about this being some kind of preferred option for the government, because the turmoil the deal's rejection might unleash could be the "proof" required to get it through a second time, I'm told categorically that "no one is looking at this with any enthusiasm".
Deluded or not, there is still a hope, if not a conviction in some parts of government, that the deal might (just) be able to pass.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46298450
|
news_uk-politics-46298450
|
|
Facebook appeals against Cambridge Analytica fine - BBC News
|
2018-11-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The social network says the UK's data watchdog £500,000 penalty was unjustified.
|
Technology
|
Facebook has appealed against a fine imposed on it by the UK's data watchdog after the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The social network says that because the regulator found no evidence that UK users' personal data had been shared inappropriately, the £500,000 penalty was unjustified.
Last month, the watchdog said Facebook's failure to make suitable checks on apps and developers amounted to a "serious breach of the law".
It has acknowledged the appeal.
This was the last day on which the US firm could challenge the Information Commissioner's ruling.
The affair stems from the discovery that an academic at the University of Cambridge - Dr Aleksandr Kogan - used a personality quiz to harvest up to 87 million Facebook users' details.
Some of this was subsequently shared with the political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, which used it to target political advertising in the US.
It was initially reported that about 1.1 million UK-based users had had their details exposed.
But Cambridge Analytica said it had only ever licensed data belonging to about 30 million people, and a probe by the Information Commissioner's Office found no evidence that UK citizens were among them.
Even so, the ICO imposed the maximum penalty possible on Facebook on the basis that UK members had been put at risk and the tech firm had not done enough to address this after learning of the problem.
"The ICO's investigation stemmed from concerns that UK citizens' data may have been impacted by Cambridge Analytica, yet they now have confirmed that they have found no evidence to suggest that information of Facebook users in the UK was ever shared by Dr Kogan with Cambridge Analytica, or used by its affiliates in the Brexit referendum," said a statement from Facebook's lawyer Anna Benckert.
"Therefore, the core of the ICO's argument no longer relates to the events involving Cambridge Analytica. Instead, their reasoning challenges some of the basic principles of how people should be allowed to share information online, with implications which go far beyond just Facebook, which is why we have chosen to appeal.
"For example, under the ICO's theory people should not be allowed to forward an email or message without having agreement from each person on the original thread.
"These are things done by millions of people every day on services across the internet, which is why we believe the ICO's decision raises important questions of principle for everyone online which should be considered by an impartial court based on all the relevant evidence."
An independent body, known as a General Regulatory Chamber tribunal, will consider the challenge.
If it is unhappy with the decision, Facebook can subsequently take the case to the Court of Appeal.
"Any organisation issued with a monetary penalty notice by the Information Commissioner has the right to appeal the decision to the First-tier Tribunal," said a spokesman for the ICO.
"The progression of any appeal is a matter for the tribunal. We have not yet been notified by the tribunal that an appeal has been received."
The appeal risks dragging out an affair that has undermined the public and politicians' trust in Facebook.
However, the BBC understands that the US firm was concerned that the ICO's ruling would form the basis for decisions taken by other regulators, which could prove more damaging still.
The ICO has itself noted that the £500,000 fine would be "significantly higher" had the EU's General Data Protection Regulation been in force earlier.
The move has not, however, changed chief executive Mark Zuckerberg's mind about rejecting an invitation to be cross-examined by MPs.
The stakes are high for both Facebook's chief and the UK's Information Commissioner
Facebook's decision to appeal against this fine is a move that Sir Humphrey, the civil servant in Yes Minister, would describe as "brave".
At a time when the social media firm is under fire and accused of using dodgy tactics to combat its critics, picking a fight with the UK regulator over an issue which was beginning to fade into the background seems reckless.
After all, the social media giant admits that it got a whole lot of things wrong in the Cambridge Analytica affair, in particular allowing the data of friends of people who took part in a personality quiz to be scraped.
But Facebook feels that the Information Commissioner's Office moved the goalposts halfway through its investigation, deciding that one million UK users had suffered harm and then finding that the researcher Dr Aleksandr Kogan did not pass their data on to Cambridge Analytica.
Some data protection experts think the company has a point.
Mark Zuckerberg and his company appear determined to fight back against what they see as a flawed process but the appeal is a gamble.
The stakes are also high for the Information Commissioner Elizabeth Denham. She made the unusual decision to go public with her intention to impose a fine before receiving representations from the company.
If Facebook's appeal succeeds, her authority as a regulator will be seriously undermined.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-46292818
|
news_technology-46292818
|
|
Badger culling has 'modest' effect in cutting cattle TB - BBC News
|
2018-11-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
An independent scientific review says badger culling can have a modest effect in reducing cattle TB.
|
Science & Environment
|
Culling badgers has a "modest" effect in slowing the spread of TB say experts
An independent scientific review has said that badger culling can have a "modest" effect in reducing cattle TB.
But it adds that the policy would lead to more than 40,000 badgers being culled a year.
The report says that such high levels of culling may not be publicly acceptable.
The authors urge the government to accelerate the development of non-lethal controls, such as vaccination.
The findings were published in a review led by Prof Sir Charles Godfray of Oxford University.
But one expert said the report had little to say about the effectiveness of the current badger culls.
The report was commissioned by Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, in February.
He asked an independent group of scientists to review Defra's strategy for controlling the spread of tuberculosis (TB) in cattle. According to Prof Godfray he was "explicitly asked" not to look at the effectiveness of the current culls.
Instead Prof Godfray and his team drew on the results of the Randomised Badger Control Trials carried out between 1998 and 2007.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The science behind the badger cull was established in 1990s
These showed that culling tended to increase TB in badgers because of increased movement.
It did, however, find that a reduction of between 12% and 16% in the rate of new cases of cattle TB was theoretically possible, but with significant caveats: the culling had to be carried out over a large area with natural boundaries for between eight to twelve days each year for four years and that more than 70% of badgers had to be killed.
Since culling began in 2013, scientists and campaigners have expressed concerns that the culls that have been rolled out by Defra have not been in accordance with the strict criteria set out by the expert group because they have proved too expensive or too difficult.
They say that improperly conducted trials could actually increase cattle TB rates.
But Prof Godfray notes that, in principle, culling is one of the tools ministers have at their disposal and it should be up to them whether its marginal benefit was worthwhile.
"We conclude that culling does have an effect on the disease. The phrase we use is 'a real but modest effect'," he said.
"If nothing else is involved then one would obviously cull, because if one does not cull one is throwing away one of the tools. But of course there are many other factors involved."
Another argument Prof Godfray puts forward in favour of culling is that it makes affected farmers more amenable to carry out unpopular and costly disease control measures on their farms and in transporting their cattle.
"It is likely that the farming industry would be more willing to accept other interventions that could negatively affect dairy and beef profitability if they believed that the threat of transmission from badgers was being robustly addressed," he said.
The report warns however that continued culling "would not be acceptable to some (possibly large) sections of the public, and the costs of policing could be substantial" and says that a shift away from culling is "highly desirable".
Specifically, it emphasises the need for a proper evaluation of badger vaccination.
Cattle herds are checked for the presence of TB with a skin test
Prof Godfray's report also states that infections from cattle to cattle is higher than had been thought, possibly because the current so called skin test used to test for the disease is less reliable than experts once believed. It therefore urges that Defra adopts more sensitive tests.
The farming minister welcomed the report and said that Defra would give its response by next summer.
''We welcome this review of the government's 25-year Bovine TB strategy and I extend my thanks to Sir Charles Godfray and his team for their hard work in producing the report.
"Sir Charles' report is an important contribution that will inform next steps in the strategy to achieve officially TB free status for England by 2038.''
Prof Rosie Woodroffe of the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) said that the report had many good ideas but said nothing about the effectiveness of the current badger culls.
"The report contains little critical evaluation of whether the current farmer-led culls are effectively reducing cattle TB," she said.
"It reports results from the first two years of monitoring without mentioning any of the caveats included by the original authors. It makes no mention of more recent data, which have suggested incidence might be falling in two areas but rising in a third."
Prof Lord John Krebs from Oxford University, who led the Randomised Badger Control Trials, said that the report indicated that Defra and farmers need to do more if cattle TB is to be stamped out.
"Currently, much of the spread of TB in cattle arises from a combination of disappointingly low uptake of measures to prevent cattle coming into contact with badgers, trading of infected cattle, and the low sensitivity of the standard skin test for TB, which means that there is likely to be a hidden reservoir of infection in many cattle herds in high risk areas," he said.
"Unless the government and the farming industry tackle these problems now, TB will not be eradicated or controlled."
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46187230
|
news_science-environment-46187230
|
|
Tory rebellion over fixed-odds betting terminals - BBC News
|
2018-11-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
More than 20 Conservative MPs join opposition parties demanding a crackdown be brought forward.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The government is facing a rebellion over the timing of its crackdown on fixed-odds gambling machines.
Ministers have promised to cut the machines' maximum stake from £100 to £2 in October 2019 - but some MPs are calling for it to happen sooner.
More than 20 Conservatives have joined opposition politicians in trying to bring the change forward to April 2019.
They backed an amendment to the Finance Bill, which was tabled on Monday evening.
The government said it had consulted widely and considered "all of the evidence" before making its decision on a timeframe.
It has denied that MPs were led to believe the cut in the maximum stake would come into force in April - but the timing, announced in last month's Budget, has been criticised, with sports minister Tracey Crouch resigning in protest.
In her resignation letter, Ms Crouch suggested MPs who supported the betting industry had been "more persuasive in their arguments" to senior ministers - and it was this that had convinced them to opt for the later date.
Scheduling the change for October means it will happen at the same time as increases in the amount of tax charged to gambling firms who are based abroad but operate in the UK.
The government says doing it this way means the public finances will not be hit by a fall in the amount of tax coming in.
Fixed-odds betting terminals generate £1.8bn in revenue a year for the betting industry, according to the Gambling Commission, and bring in taxes of £400m for the government.
The Finance Bill is the legislation that puts the proposals outlined in the Budget into law.
Senior Tories Iain Duncan Smith, David Davis and Justine Greening backed the amendment on Monday evening, along with four DUP MPs.
Currently, people can bet as much as £100 every 20 seconds on electronic casino games such as roulette.
Anti-gambling campaigners say the machines let players lose money too quickly, leading to addiction and social, mental and financial problems.
But bookmakers have warned the cut in stakes could lead to thousands of outlets closing.
Labour's Carolyn Harris, who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on fixed-odds betting terminals, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the MPs were trying to "force the government into doing the right thing".
The Welsh Labour deputy leader said there was a "very realistic chance" that MPs would back bringing in the cut to April 2019 when they discuss the Finance Bill.
"There's a huge feeling in the House that this is the wrong decision and we need to implement it as a matter of urgency," she added.
The government said it was making "a significant change that will help stop extreme losses and protect the most vulnerable in our society".
The amendment will be voted on next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46184298
|
news_uk-politics-46184298
|
|
Murder victim's family leave UK and say London 'too dangerous' - BBC News
|
2018-11-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The sister of a man murdered in the capital says "terrible things can happen in the blink of an eye".
|
London
|
Beniamin Pieknyi died from blood loss after being stabbed in the chest
The family of a Romanian man stabbed to death weeks after moving to England have said they see London as a dangerous place where "terrible things can happen in the blink of an eye".
Beniamin Pieknyi, 21, was walking through a shopping centre when he was chased and stabbed in March.
His brother and sister lived with him but have since returned to Romania.
On Monday, Mayor Sadiq Khan warned it could take a generation to turn the tide of violent crime in the capital.
Vladyslav Yakymchuk, 23, who pleaded guilty to the murder was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 24 years on Wednesday.
It comes at a time when five people have been stabbed to death in London in less than a week.
Beniamin Pieknyi (right) had been living in Milton Keynes with his brother Mihael and sister Iulia
Beniamin Pieknyi had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Born and raised in Lupeni, Romania, he moved to Milton Keynes at the start of this year to live with his brother Mihael and sister Iulia as he wanted to settle and work in Britain.
Yet the family have now returned to Romania amid fear and distress over what happened to him.
"I've come to realise that terrible things can happen in the blink of an eye, and if you say the wrong thing to the wrong person you could end up dead," Iulia Pieknyi said.
The 21-year-old worked at a takeaway with his brother. On 20 March, he worked a half day so he could travel to Stratford, in the east London borough of Newham, to meet up with his friend Alexander Suciu.
His brother Mihael Pieknyi worked until midnight that day. After his shift he and a friend bought a box of beer to share with his brother when he got back from London.
However, he never heard from him.
"I thought this was odd. I waited all night and heard nothing until I got a call from his friend's sister," Mr Pieknyi said.
"She was crying and told me Beniamin 'was no more'."
Vladyslav Yakymchuk was arrested in Harrods and pleaded guilty to murder
His brother had become the latest victim in a series of separate violent deaths across London in early 2018.
CCTV from the Stratford Centre before the attack showed Yakymchuk - along with Alexis Varela, 19, Moses Kasule, 20, Kevin Duarte, 19, and 18-year-old Mario Zvavamwe - hassling other members of the public.
The Met Police said the group had a history of hanging around the shopping centre, which is less than a mile from several of the main venues of the London 2012 Olympics, and were known to cause trouble and "harass innocent people".
On the day Beniamin Pieknyi was killed, the group could be heard shouting and goading "this is our area".
An argument ensued after Duarte hit Alexander Suciu on the head. The row escalated into a fight, with Kasule kicking Mr Pieknyi to the ground.
Yakymchuk took Mr Suciu's glasses, while Kasule threw punches at him. The brawl was broken up by a security guard who attempted to escort the pair away.
Yards away from the shopping centre's exit, Mr Pieknyi was cornered and stabbed by Yakymchuk in the chest.
Beniamin Pieknyi died at the scene of the attack at the Stratford Centre on 20 March
The 21-year-old's body was flown back to Romania, where his funeral was held on 27 May.
"It took a while to accept the truth and when I did, my entire life crumbled around me," Iulia Pieknyi said.
"I had no drive anymore - my work, my house were not important anymore."
In a victim impact statement, Mr Pieknyi's aunt Cristina Pieknyi described her nephew as a "very quiet boy, hardworking and someone who liked to help people".
She has been representing the family at the Old Bailey because the rest of the family could not afford to attend.
"They have spent all of their savings on the repatriation and funeral costs," she said.
Mihael Pieknyi and his family are still coming to terms with his brother's murder.
"We are in shock. My mother doesn't sleep and my sister, Iulia, does not want to come back and live in this country," Mr Pieknyi said.
"To us as a family, London is seen as a dangerous place because of what happened to my brother."
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46083736
|
news_uk-england-london-46083736
|
|
Theresa May's Brexit message: 'This is all there is' - BBC News
|
2018-11-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Selling the prime minister's deal as a grown-up compromise will be harder than talks with the EU.
|
UK Politics
|
The talking in Brussels is done. After nearly two years of negotiations, arguments - and the inevitable moments where it felt like the process would explode - there is, now, a deal.
It's a compromise. It was always going to be. It's not a happy compromise either. People on both sides of the Brexit argument are already screaming their protests.
And although the prime minister must be relieved, she didn't exactly say that she was pleased about the deal when I asked her at a news conference this lunchtime.
Instead, she said she was sure the country's best days are ahead.
But however she really feels about it - and with this prime minister it is hard to tell - her strategy for the next couple of weeks is crystal clear. Her case? This is all there is.
With the explicit backing of almost every European leader who has opened their mouth today, this is the "only deal", the "best possible deal", "the max".
The message to MPs from Theresa May and her counterparts: don't kid yourselves if you think something else might magically appear if you vote it down.
And the message to the public? Just let me get on with it, then we can all stop talking about Brexit - please.
Again today she used the platform to "talk directly to the British public", to explain how her (now rather pink) red lines, on "money, laws and borders", have been followed.
It's her Brexit with caveats, with a lot to be sorted out about the future, in the future. You can remind yourself what's actually in the deal here.
And No 10 is all too aware that dozens and dozens of their own MPs hate it. Theresa May has reached her imperfect compromise at a moment when in Parliament both sides are hardening against the idea of compromising at all.
For two years Theresa May has survived by tacking one way, then another. But now the deal is on paper, in black and white, that approach can't go on.
A senior government figure said privately that No 10 was past the point of trying to please everyone. And of course, everyone in government is all too aware that it is likely that the deal will be rejected by Parliament in any case.
But the only potential route through for the prime minister is through the middle, to look like, as one senior Whitehall official describes it, "the adult in a world of children".
However the prime minister looks, however she sounds in the next fortnight, the levels of unhappiness at home are so profound that her pleas may fall on deaf ears.
If the deal falls, she - and her government - may fall with it. Scrape it through then she'll have pulled off a feat far harder than getting the actual deal done.
PS: Here's a great explanation from my colleague Ben Wright about what might happen if the vote, which we expect on 12 December, doesn't pass the deal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Radio 4 The World at One asks: What will happen if Parliament rejects the Brexit plan?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46337053
|
news_uk-politics-46337053
|
|
Analysis: Macron's blunt Brexit warning to UK over fishing - BBC News
|
2018-11-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The French president gives the UK a reminder of the difficulties ahead in Brexit negotiations.
|
UK
|
EU leaders who gathered in Brussels put on a united front to back Theresa May's argument that the withdrawal agreement they endorsed was the "best and only" Brexit deal available.
But there was no sense of celebration, and there were plenty of signs of how tough negotiations on the future EU-UK relationship are likely to be.
Alongside the withdrawal agreement, and the political declaration on future ties, the remaining 27 EU leaders published a separate statement (without the UK) that vowed to protect their own interests, on a range of issues from fishing to fair competition to the rights of citizens.
"The European Council," it said, "will demonstrate particular vigilance as regards safeguarding the rights and interests of citizens, the necessity to maintain ambitious level playing field conditions, and to protect fishing enterprises and coastal communities."
It emphasised in particular that a fisheries agreement that builds on "existing reciprocal access and quota shares" is a matter of priority.
The statement was a clear sign that the UK will not have things all its own way, when it comes to balancing the competing demands of access to EU markets for UK fish produce, and access to UK fishing waters for EU boats.
Several EU leaders highlighted fishing as a particularly sensitive issue. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said talks on fisheries were "undoubtedly going to be an area where negotiations are going to be tough".
But the bluntest warning came from the French President Emmanuel Macron, who suggested that if the UK was unwilling to compromise in negotiations on fishing, which would need to make rapid progress, then talks on a wider trade deal would be slow.
"We as 27 have a clear position on fair competition, on fish, and on the subject of the EU's regulatory autonomy, and that forms part of our position for the future relationship talks," he said.
The president implied that without sufficient progress on trade, the backstop plan to avoid a hard border in Ireland would have to be implemented, including a temporary customs union for the whole of the UK.
"It is a lever because it is in our mutual interest to have this future relationship," Mr Macron said.
"I can't imagine that the desire of Theresa May or her supporters is to remain for the long term in a customs union, but (instead) to define a proper future relationship that resolves this problem."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Disputes over fishing aren't new. This was Reality Check's take earlier this year.
It is a warning that the prime minister could have done without, as she seeks to appeal to the British public for support for her deal in advance of a vote in Parliament next month.
But it is also a reminder - if any were needed - that other countries have domestic political concerns that will have to be taken into account.
If anything, the negotiations on the future relationship - which can only begin formally after the UK has left the EU - will be even harder than the 18 months of negotiations that produced the withdrawal agreement which has just been endorsed.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46336962
|
news_uk-46336962
|
|
Will they, won't they and then how will they? - BBC News
|
2018-11-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Talk of a second vote in Parliament if MPs reject the Brexit agreement is being discussed in Downing Street but "not with any enthusiasm".
|
UK Politics
|
One cabinet minister, in particular, has been saying privately to me for two years, and probably to anyone else that would listen, that the deal with the EU will only be done at the eleventh minute, in the eleventh hour, on the eleventh day, at the so on and so on and so on and so on - you get the picture.
That's, according to them, how the EU always works, and it is only at that last dreaded moment that there will be enough urgency for everyone around the table to forget their differences and get the thing done.
If you follow along with that analogy, tonight's change of plan is playing out exactly according to that script.
Some may even argue that resistance from EU countries like France and Spain, especially over fishing rights, will only help the Prime Minister in her attempt to sell the deal once (if) it's signed off. Look Brexiteers, look how hard I had to fight! I have annoyed the French - hurrah!
(As my Brussels colleagues point out too, these jitters play well in other European countries too where leaders often succumb to the same temptation as UK politicians - complaining sometimes, loudly, about the strictures of the EU that, claims that can help them out politically at home).
There are real issues at stake, over Gibraltar, over fish, over the EU's distaste for the UK's preferred model of the "common rule book" - it comes down to the same argument about the UK being a friend with benefits, and not enough of the obligations that comes along with the goodies.
But the sense tonight, which of course could change very quickly, from Number 10 at least, is that these are last minute squeals rather than brand new problems that could see the whole thing implode.
Even so, Theresa May will fight anything that makes it harder for the package to get through Parliament. And if we stick to that cabinet minister's script for a moment, the bigger challenge than herding the continental cats, will be getting enough MPs on board.
Goodness knows, with dozens of Tory MPs on the record saying they will vote against the deal, the opposition parties lining up to condemn it, it is extremely hard right now to see the deal passing through.
Senior figures in Number 10 believe it is still possible, with a change in dynamic once the thing is signed, and no doubt, enormous political pressure from inside and outside the Tory Party brought on their MPs.
Cabinet ministers are split on whether it can happen. Two in the last day or so have told me the deal might just about make it in the final vote, pencilled in for somewhere around the 10th, 11th or 12th of December. That might sound crazy now, but I also can't emphasise enough how we cannot right now imagine ourselves in the minds of MPs in a fortnight's time.
But in that same twenty four hours two cabinet ministers have said the total opposite privately that there is simply no way it can pass.
And another member of Cabinet, admittedly not the deal's most ardent fan, suggested that Number 10 have become blinkered to reality saying, it's like Downing Street is "a couple stuck in a bad marriage".
"They are the only people who can't see that it isn't working and they should just admit it and split up. When they do they say to everyone they know, 'why didn't you tell us?'
That means that government figures are discussing the possibility of a second vote on the deal.
Not another referendum, but having another go in Parliament. There is discussion about this in Number 10, I'm told, and one minister told me "we are looking at this as a possible way out".
The thinking is that it would be easier in particular for Labour MPs to come on board. In other words, protest first time round, but then come on side to choose a deal, rather than no deal, when a similar question is put.
But despite chatter about this being some kind of preferred option for the government, because the turmoil the deal's rejection might unleash could be the "proof" required to get it through a second time, I'm told categorically that "no one is looking at this with any enthusiasm".
Deluded or not, there is still a hope, if not a conviction in some parts of government, that the deal might (just) be able to pass.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46298450
|
news_uk-politics-46298450
|
|
Pro-betting MPs 'more persuasive' than me - Tracey Crouch - BBC News
|
2018-11-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ms Crouch resigned as sports minister over "delays" to a crackdown on fixed-odds betting machines.
|
UK Politics
|
Ex-sports minister Tracey Crouch has said MPs interested in the betting industry are behind "delays" to new laws on fixed-odds betting machines.
Ms Crouch resigned from her post after Chancellor Philip Hammond said the cut in stakes from £100 to £2 would come into force in October 2019.
Ms Crouch said it was a "fact" that some MPs are "very interested in the bookmaking industry".
She added: "Clearly they were more persuasive in their arguments."
Currently, people can bet up to £100 every 20 seconds on electronic casino games such as roulette.
Ms Crouch said she had been working under the assumption that the new maximum stake of £2 every 20 seconds would be introduced in April 2019.
In her first interview since resigning, Ms Crouch told BBC Radio 5 Live: "There have been conversations that have taken place with many members of Parliament with different interests and, as I say, on this occasion, clearly I wasn't as persuasive as some of my other colleagues."
Ms Crouch was asked about a newspaper report suggesting she believed a meeting between Conservative MP Philip Davies and Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Secretary Jeremy Wright was key to the delay.
She refused to confirm the details of the report, saying: "All meetings are registered. I'm sure it will all come out anyway."
She added Mr Davies was "very vocal in Parliament on behalf of the betting industry".
Anti-gambling campaigners say the machines let players lose money too quickly, leading to addiction and social, mental and financial problems.
Fixed-odds betting terminals generate £1.8bn in revenue a year for the betting industry, according to the Gambling Commission, and taxes of £400m for the government.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Ms Crouch also voiced her disappointment that the proposed sale of Wembley Stadium had not materialised.
Shahid Khan, who owns Premier League club Fulham and NFL side the Jacksonville Jaguars, withdrew a £600m offer due to a lack of support from FA council members.
Ms Crouch said she hoped the deal could be resurrected to provide "opportunities to get a significant investment" into grassroots football.
She added the sale of the England national team stadium could also bring about the possibility of an NFL franchise in London and therefore a "£100m per annum economic boost".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46089086
|
news_uk-politics-46089086
|
|
Azaan Kaleem death: Mother cannot forgive killers for laughing at trial - BBC News
|
2018-11-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Roseann Taylor says the defendants had "no remorse" over stabbing Azaan Kaleem.
|
Beds, Herts & Bucks
|
Roseann Taylor said she wanted to donate her son's organs, but could not because his body was "evidence"
The mother of a teenager who was stabbed to death said she cannot forgive his killers after they "laughed and joked" at their trial.
Azaan Kaleem, 18, was with his girlfriend in Luton in March when a group of strangers "piled out of a car" and stabbed him. He died in hospital.
Four men were convicted over his death on Thursday at the Old Bailey.
Roseann Taylor, who switched off her son's life support, said: "They had no remorse or regard for what they did."
Mr Kaleem, who was Ms Taylor's only child, was "viciously attacked" after a disagreement.
Ms Taylor said Azaan was sweet-natured and would walk away from an argument
Two men aged 18 and 19, who cannot be named, and Harrison Searle, 18, of Derwent Road, Luton, were convicted of murder.
Reece Bliss-McGrath, 20, of Exton Avenue, Luton, was found guilty of manslaughter. All four will be sentenced next month.
Ms Taylor sat through their four-week trial, in which CCTV footage of the fatal attack was repeatedly played.
"What I saw was like a pack of animals - rounding up, seeking something, finding it and stalking it - and that's what they did to my son.
Azaan Kaleem died in hospital, his mother by his side
Ms Taylor said she had hoped to find her son sitting on the kerb in Hartsfield Road
"I had to watch the CCTV of my son being murdered and all the while I was keeping my composure, the defendants laughed and joked and had fun.
"Azaan was just a person to them, he was just a name."
She said she got a call about the attack in Hartsfield Road and had hoped her "accident-prone" son would be [sitting] on the kerb, moaning about his latest scrape.
Instead, he was prone on the pavement, surrounded by paramedics. He had been attacked at 17:20, in full daylight.
"I was blocked by a police officer," she said.
"That was soul-destroying - to know your child is lying on the floor and you know it's serious and you can't get to them."
Azaan Kaleem's killers are due to be sentenced in December
Asked about her last memory of her son, she said: "Switching his machine off.
"It was horrific. To stand behind your child and stroke their hair, and kiss their forehead and wait while a policeman has to watch for his heart to stop beating.
"They [the killers] even stole that moment, because it wasn't private.
"I wanted Azaan's organs to be given away because he was a healthy 18-year-old, and I wanted to give the gift of life to someone else.
"But Azaan became evidence we weren't allowed to do that."
She added: "It's changed my life for ever. No-one will ever call me mum again.
"I will get there one day, I will forgive them, but not yet."
• None Four guilty over fatal stabbing of teen
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46085077
|
news_uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46085077
|
|
Rebel Wilson responds to backlash over 'plus-sized' claims - BBC News
|
2018-11-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Australian actress had claimed to be the "first-ever plus-sized girl" to be a romcom lead.
|
Newsbeat
|
Rebel Wilson says she "never wants to disrespect anyone" after there was backlash over comments she made about plus-sized women in film.
The Australian actress told chat show host Ellen Degeneres: "I'm proud to be the first ever plus-sized girl to be the star of a romantic comedy."
Viewers pointed out that Queen Latifah and Mo'Nique had led romcoms before.
Mo'Nique tweeted Rebel: "Let's please not allow this business to erase our talent".
Rebel replied saying: "It was never my intention to erase anyone else's achievements".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Mo'Nique Worldwide This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
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 TheEllenShow 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.
Rebel Wilson had been talking about her film Isn't It Romantic on The Ellen Show last week when she made the comments about being plus-sized.
She got a big cheer from the studio audience - but people on Twitter were quick to point out that she hadn't mentioned other plus-sized women who had led romcoms.
The 2006 film The Last Holiday starred Queen Latifah while Phat Girlz, also from 2006, starred Mo'Nique.
Some people online also mentioned the fact that both films were led by women of colour.
Mo'Nique and Queen Latifah both starred in the film Bessie
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 3 by Claire Willett This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Rebel initially replied saying "there's a slight grey area" and questioned whether they were plus-sized when they filmed the movies.
She also said "it was questionable" whether those films were classed as studio romcoms.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 4 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 5 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
After Mo'Nique and writer Claire Willett both tweeted Rebel, she said she would address the argument "when promoting the film in proper forums".
She added: "I'm all about supporting plus size women and I work so hard to do so."
The actress produced the film Isn't It Romantic, which she stars in alongside Liam Hemsworth and Priyanka Chopra.
She plays a woman who gets trapped in a romcom in the movie, which comes out next year.
Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 every weekday on BBC Radio 1 and 1Xtra - if you miss us you can listen back here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-46089764
|
news_newsbeat-46089764
|
|
Theresa May's Brexit message: 'This is all there is' - BBC News
|
2018-11-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Selling the prime minister's deal as a grown-up compromise will be harder than talks with the EU.
|
UK Politics
|
The talking in Brussels is done. After nearly two years of negotiations, arguments - and the inevitable moments where it felt like the process would explode - there is, now, a deal.
It's a compromise. It was always going to be. It's not a happy compromise either. People on both sides of the Brexit argument are already screaming their protests.
And although the prime minister must be relieved, she didn't exactly say that she was pleased about the deal when I asked her at a news conference this lunchtime.
Instead, she said she was sure the country's best days are ahead.
But however she really feels about it - and with this prime minister it is hard to tell - her strategy for the next couple of weeks is crystal clear. Her case? This is all there is.
With the explicit backing of almost every European leader who has opened their mouth today, this is the "only deal", the "best possible deal", "the max".
The message to MPs from Theresa May and her counterparts: don't kid yourselves if you think something else might magically appear if you vote it down.
And the message to the public? Just let me get on with it, then we can all stop talking about Brexit - please.
Again today she used the platform to "talk directly to the British public", to explain how her (now rather pink) red lines, on "money, laws and borders", have been followed.
It's her Brexit with caveats, with a lot to be sorted out about the future, in the future. You can remind yourself what's actually in the deal here.
And No 10 is all too aware that dozens and dozens of their own MPs hate it. Theresa May has reached her imperfect compromise at a moment when in Parliament both sides are hardening against the idea of compromising at all.
For two years Theresa May has survived by tacking one way, then another. But now the deal is on paper, in black and white, that approach can't go on.
A senior government figure said privately that No 10 was past the point of trying to please everyone. And of course, everyone in government is all too aware that it is likely that the deal will be rejected by Parliament in any case.
But the only potential route through for the prime minister is through the middle, to look like, as one senior Whitehall official describes it, "the adult in a world of children".
However the prime minister looks, however she sounds in the next fortnight, the levels of unhappiness at home are so profound that her pleas may fall on deaf ears.
If the deal falls, she - and her government - may fall with it. Scrape it through then she'll have pulled off a feat far harder than getting the actual deal done.
PS: Here's a great explanation from my colleague Ben Wright about what might happen if the vote, which we expect on 12 December, doesn't pass the deal.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Radio 4 The World at One asks: What will happen if Parliament rejects the Brexit plan?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46337053
|
news_uk-politics-46337053
|
|
Analysis: Macron's blunt Brexit warning to UK over fishing - BBC News
|
2018-11-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The French president gives the UK a reminder of the difficulties ahead in Brexit negotiations.
|
UK
|
EU leaders who gathered in Brussels put on a united front to back Theresa May's argument that the withdrawal agreement they endorsed was the "best and only" Brexit deal available.
But there was no sense of celebration, and there were plenty of signs of how tough negotiations on the future EU-UK relationship are likely to be.
Alongside the withdrawal agreement, and the political declaration on future ties, the remaining 27 EU leaders published a separate statement (without the UK) that vowed to protect their own interests, on a range of issues from fishing to fair competition to the rights of citizens.
"The European Council," it said, "will demonstrate particular vigilance as regards safeguarding the rights and interests of citizens, the necessity to maintain ambitious level playing field conditions, and to protect fishing enterprises and coastal communities."
It emphasised in particular that a fisheries agreement that builds on "existing reciprocal access and quota shares" is a matter of priority.
The statement was a clear sign that the UK will not have things all its own way, when it comes to balancing the competing demands of access to EU markets for UK fish produce, and access to UK fishing waters for EU boats.
Several EU leaders highlighted fishing as a particularly sensitive issue. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said talks on fisheries were "undoubtedly going to be an area where negotiations are going to be tough".
But the bluntest warning came from the French President Emmanuel Macron, who suggested that if the UK was unwilling to compromise in negotiations on fishing, which would need to make rapid progress, then talks on a wider trade deal would be slow.
"We as 27 have a clear position on fair competition, on fish, and on the subject of the EU's regulatory autonomy, and that forms part of our position for the future relationship talks," he said.
The president implied that without sufficient progress on trade, the backstop plan to avoid a hard border in Ireland would have to be implemented, including a temporary customs union for the whole of the UK.
"It is a lever because it is in our mutual interest to have this future relationship," Mr Macron said.
"I can't imagine that the desire of Theresa May or her supporters is to remain for the long term in a customs union, but (instead) to define a proper future relationship that resolves this problem."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Disputes over fishing aren't new. This was Reality Check's take earlier this year.
It is a warning that the prime minister could have done without, as she seeks to appeal to the British public for support for her deal in advance of a vote in Parliament next month.
But it is also a reminder - if any were needed - that other countries have domestic political concerns that will have to be taken into account.
If anything, the negotiations on the future relationship - which can only begin formally after the UK has left the EU - will be even harder than the 18 months of negotiations that produced the withdrawal agreement which has just been endorsed.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46336962
|
news_uk-46336962
|
|
Safety concerns raised over breast implants - BBC News
|
2018-11-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Some makers of textured implants did not carry out adequate tests, an investigation finds.
|
Health
|
Implants can be "textured" or "smooth"
An investigation has raised safety concerns about the most commonly used type of silicone breast implant in the UK.
Women in France are now being advised not to use "textured" silicone implants while authorities investigate links with a rare form of cancer.
British women are still having the implants put in and there has been no warning from the UK regulator to stop.
It says it will take action when it sees there is a problem.
A Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) spokesman said: "We know that there are ongoing concerns about the safety of silicone breast implants - we're keeping a very close eye on that."
Manufacturers say the safety of the implants is supported by extensive testing and studies, as well as more than a decade of use in America and Europe.
Janet Trelawny had breast cancer over 20 years ago. Her breasts were removed and replaced with textured implants.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Now, she has been diagnosed with breast implant associated lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).
It is not breast cancer but a type of cancer of the immune system.
In most cases, it is found in the scar tissue and fluid near the implant. But in some, it can spread throughout the body.
She said: "It's frightening to think that something that I'd done because I've had a cancer previously has then caused me to get cancer again.
"I was absolutely mortified. I'm frightened that this can happen and I had no idea."
Janet is waiting for further biopsy results and has been told she will need to have chemotherapy to treat her cancer.
The French have been investigating breast implants since 2011, when they started receiving reports of BIA-ALCL.
The risks of developing it after an implant vary around the world but are thought to be very small.
As of September 2018, the MHRA has received 57 reports of ALCL in patients with breast implants, 45 of which meet specific diagnostic criteria.
That puts the estimated risk of BIA-ALCL at about one per 24,000 implants.
BIA-ALCL appears to have occurred with textured implants made by every manufacturer, according to the British Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Aesthetic Surgeons (BAAPS).
Breast implants come with different fillings and different surfaces - smooth and textured.
In the UK, 99% of breast implants used are textured, according to BAAPS.
Dr Suzanne Turner, an expert in breast implant associated lymphoma at Cambridge University, said: "It is a concern, absolutely, particularly now that we're seeing breast implant associated lymphoma developing in these ladies.
"So, the risk is small but it's a risk that we should know about and be informed of."
The investigation discovered that some manufacturers did not carry out adequate tests before selling textured implants to the public.
These tests are called biocompatibility tests and they assess how the body responds to a product.
The manufacturers argued the tests were unnecessary but the French regulator said: "Almost all of the arguments put forward by the manufacturers were considered to be unacceptable for justifying the lack of biocompatibility tests."
Some manufacturers now say that they have completed the necessary biocompatibility tests.
But the secrecy around the regulatory system does not allow us to see what was done.
The investigation has also found out that manufacturers in Europe and America have under-reported problems with breast implants.
Some haven't told regulators when the implants rupture, because they say it's a routine event.
Nobody knows the scale of the risks, because the implants haven't been adequately tracked when they've been put into people and problems may take years to develop.
A register for breast implants was set up in 2016 but at the moment it's still voluntary.
Carl Heneghan, professor of evidence based medicine at Oxford University, says campaigners have been asking for a register for 25 years.
"Every implant should be in a register because that's what defines patient safety. In the absence of that, we're in the dark."
• None The therapy tested on pigs and corpses
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46329824
|
news_health-46329824
|
|
Rebel Wilson responds to backlash over 'plus-sized' claims - BBC News
|
2018-11-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Australian actress had claimed to be the "first-ever plus-sized girl" to be a romcom lead.
|
Newsbeat
|
Rebel Wilson says she "never wants to disrespect anyone" after there was backlash over comments she made about plus-sized women in film.
The Australian actress told chat show host Ellen Degeneres: "I'm proud to be the first ever plus-sized girl to be the star of a romantic comedy."
Viewers pointed out that Queen Latifah and Mo'Nique had led romcoms before.
Mo'Nique tweeted Rebel: "Let's please not allow this business to erase our talent".
Rebel replied saying: "It was never my intention to erase anyone else's achievements".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Mo'Nique Worldwide This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
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 TheEllenShow 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.
Rebel Wilson had been talking about her film Isn't It Romantic on The Ellen Show last week when she made the comments about being plus-sized.
She got a big cheer from the studio audience - but people on Twitter were quick to point out that she hadn't mentioned other plus-sized women who had led romcoms.
The 2006 film The Last Holiday starred Queen Latifah while Phat Girlz, also from 2006, starred Mo'Nique.
Some people online also mentioned the fact that both films were led by women of colour.
Mo'Nique and Queen Latifah both starred in the film Bessie
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 3 by Claire Willett This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Rebel initially replied saying "there's a slight grey area" and questioned whether they were plus-sized when they filmed the movies.
She also said "it was questionable" whether those films were classed as studio romcoms.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 4 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 5 by Rebel Wilson This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
After Mo'Nique and writer Claire Willett both tweeted Rebel, she said she would address the argument "when promoting the film in proper forums".
She added: "I'm all about supporting plus size women and I work so hard to do so."
The actress produced the film Isn't It Romantic, which she stars in alongside Liam Hemsworth and Priyanka Chopra.
She plays a woman who gets trapped in a romcom in the movie, which comes out next year.
Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 every weekday on BBC Radio 1 and 1Xtra - if you miss us you can listen back here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-46089764
|
news_newsbeat-46089764
|
|
Azaan Kaleem death: Mother cannot forgive killers for laughing at trial - BBC News
|
2018-11-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Roseann Taylor says the defendants had "no remorse" over stabbing Azaan Kaleem.
|
Beds, Herts & Bucks
|
Roseann Taylor said she wanted to donate her son's organs, but could not because his body was "evidence"
The mother of a teenager who was stabbed to death said she cannot forgive his killers after they "laughed and joked" at their trial.
Azaan Kaleem, 18, was with his girlfriend in Luton in March when a group of strangers "piled out of a car" and stabbed him. He died in hospital.
Four men were convicted over his death on Thursday at the Old Bailey.
Roseann Taylor, who switched off her son's life support, said: "They had no remorse or regard for what they did."
Mr Kaleem, who was Ms Taylor's only child, was "viciously attacked" after a disagreement.
Ms Taylor said Azaan was sweet-natured and would walk away from an argument
Two men aged 18 and 19, who cannot be named, and Harrison Searle, 18, of Derwent Road, Luton, were convicted of murder.
Reece Bliss-McGrath, 20, of Exton Avenue, Luton, was found guilty of manslaughter. All four will be sentenced next month.
Ms Taylor sat through their four-week trial, in which CCTV footage of the fatal attack was repeatedly played.
"What I saw was like a pack of animals - rounding up, seeking something, finding it and stalking it - and that's what they did to my son.
Azaan Kaleem died in hospital, his mother by his side
Ms Taylor said she had hoped to find her son sitting on the kerb in Hartsfield Road
"I had to watch the CCTV of my son being murdered and all the while I was keeping my composure, the defendants laughed and joked and had fun.
"Azaan was just a person to them, he was just a name."
She said she got a call about the attack in Hartsfield Road and had hoped her "accident-prone" son would be [sitting] on the kerb, moaning about his latest scrape.
Instead, he was prone on the pavement, surrounded by paramedics. He had been attacked at 17:20, in full daylight.
"I was blocked by a police officer," she said.
"That was soul-destroying - to know your child is lying on the floor and you know it's serious and you can't get to them."
Azaan Kaleem's killers are due to be sentenced in December
Asked about her last memory of her son, she said: "Switching his machine off.
"It was horrific. To stand behind your child and stroke their hair, and kiss their forehead and wait while a policeman has to watch for his heart to stop beating.
"They [the killers] even stole that moment, because it wasn't private.
"I wanted Azaan's organs to be given away because he was a healthy 18-year-old, and I wanted to give the gift of life to someone else.
"But Azaan became evidence we weren't allowed to do that."
She added: "It's changed my life for ever. No-one will ever call me mum again.
"I will get there one day, I will forgive them, but not yet."
• None Four guilty over fatal stabbing of teen
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46085077
|
news_uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-46085077
|
|
Safety concerns raised over breast implants - BBC News
|
2018-11-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Some makers of textured implants did not carry out adequate tests, an investigation finds.
|
Health
|
Implants can be "textured" or "smooth"
An investigation has raised safety concerns about the most commonly used type of silicone breast implant in the UK.
Women in France are now being advised not to use "textured" silicone implants while authorities investigate links with a rare form of cancer.
British women are still having the implants put in and there has been no warning from the UK regulator to stop.
It says it will take action when it sees there is a problem.
A Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) spokesman said: "We know that there are ongoing concerns about the safety of silicone breast implants - we're keeping a very close eye on that."
Manufacturers say the safety of the implants is supported by extensive testing and studies, as well as more than a decade of use in America and Europe.
Janet Trelawny had breast cancer over 20 years ago. Her breasts were removed and replaced with textured implants.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Now, she has been diagnosed with breast implant associated lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).
It is not breast cancer but a type of cancer of the immune system.
In most cases, it is found in the scar tissue and fluid near the implant. But in some, it can spread throughout the body.
She said: "It's frightening to think that something that I'd done because I've had a cancer previously has then caused me to get cancer again.
"I was absolutely mortified. I'm frightened that this can happen and I had no idea."
Janet is waiting for further biopsy results and has been told she will need to have chemotherapy to treat her cancer.
The French have been investigating breast implants since 2011, when they started receiving reports of BIA-ALCL.
The risks of developing it after an implant vary around the world but are thought to be very small.
As of September 2018, the MHRA has received 57 reports of ALCL in patients with breast implants, 45 of which meet specific diagnostic criteria.
That puts the estimated risk of BIA-ALCL at about one per 24,000 implants.
BIA-ALCL appears to have occurred with textured implants made by every manufacturer, according to the British Association of Plastic and Reconstructive Aesthetic Surgeons (BAAPS).
Breast implants come with different fillings and different surfaces - smooth and textured.
In the UK, 99% of breast implants used are textured, according to BAAPS.
Dr Suzanne Turner, an expert in breast implant associated lymphoma at Cambridge University, said: "It is a concern, absolutely, particularly now that we're seeing breast implant associated lymphoma developing in these ladies.
"So, the risk is small but it's a risk that we should know about and be informed of."
The investigation discovered that some manufacturers did not carry out adequate tests before selling textured implants to the public.
These tests are called biocompatibility tests and they assess how the body responds to a product.
The manufacturers argued the tests were unnecessary but the French regulator said: "Almost all of the arguments put forward by the manufacturers were considered to be unacceptable for justifying the lack of biocompatibility tests."
Some manufacturers now say that they have completed the necessary biocompatibility tests.
But the secrecy around the regulatory system does not allow us to see what was done.
The investigation has also found out that manufacturers in Europe and America have under-reported problems with breast implants.
Some haven't told regulators when the implants rupture, because they say it's a routine event.
Nobody knows the scale of the risks, because the implants haven't been adequately tracked when they've been put into people and problems may take years to develop.
A register for breast implants was set up in 2016 but at the moment it's still voluntary.
Carl Heneghan, professor of evidence based medicine at Oxford University, says campaigners have been asking for a register for 25 years.
"Every implant should be in a register because that's what defines patient safety. In the absence of that, we're in the dark."
• None The therapy tested on pigs and corpses
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46329824
|
news_health-46329824
|
|
Reality Check: Is Trump right about the Brexit deal? - BBC News
|
2018-11-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Donald Trump says the Brexit deal may affect the UK's trade with the US.
|
UK Politics
|
"Sounds like a great deal for the EU," is a pretty broad statement.
But President Trump was talking in particular about the prospects for future trade agreements.
"Right now, if you look at the (Brexit) deal," he said, "they (the UK) may not be able to trade with us, and that wouldn't be a good thing."
Of course, that shouldn't be taken literally - it doesn't mean no trade at all.
But as long as the UK remains in a transition period after Brexit, or in a temporary customs union, it will not be able to implement its own free trade deals, cutting or removing tariffs on goods, with the United States or any other third country.
That much is clear, but trade deals aren't just about tariffs. They are also about rules and regulations (known as non-tariff barriers) which are often more important.
And from an "America-first" perspective, it's fair to assume that the president thinks Theresa May's Brexit deal makes it more likely that the UK will stay fairly close to the EU in the long term, by following the same (or very similar) regulations in various sectors of the economy.
That is a key point. Because the closer the UK stays to the EU's common rules and standards, the more difficult it will be for it to move closer to the rules and standards followed in the United States.
We're talking here not just about examples which come up regularly, such as chlorine-washed chicken or hormone-treated beef (broadly speaking, both are allowed in the US and not in the EU), but also about industries such as chemicals and pharmaceuticals.
Many big businesses in the UK want to stay close to all those EU rules (its regulatory framework) because the EU is a huge consumer market right on their doorstep.
And they tend to follow the EU rules for their global operations because that simply makes things easier.
The numbers are also instructive here. Last year the UK exported £274bn of goods and services to the rest of the EU and imported £341bn. The figures for trade with the United States were £112bn of exports and £70bn of imports.
So, the EU will remain the UK's most important trading partner for some time to come. And if the president was hoping Brexit would mean a more decisive break between the UK and the EU, he may be disappointed. Hence, "a great deal for the EU".
There is genuine competition in this field between the United States and the European Union.
The EU may not be a military or diplomatic superpower, but it is a regulatory superpower.
That means one of the big choices the UK will have to make in its negotiations on post-Brexit trade agreements is which regulatory and legal orbit it chooses to operate in.
It's not an absolute "either-or" decision, but the UK will have to lean one way or the other.
The non-binding political declaration on future UK-EU trade, approved by EU leaders on Sunday, makes this clear.
The EU is insisting on various "level playing field" conditions to ensure that the UK cannot gain a competitive advantage by continuing to have privileged access to the EU market without following its rules.
The political declaration says the level playing field should cover "state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change and relevant tax matters", and a separate statement issued by the leaders of the EU27 emphasises that they will "demonstrate particular vigilance" to ensure that these conditions are followed to the letter.
The declaration also recognises that the UK will develop an independent trade policy in the future. But it stresses that if the goal is to have frictionless trade with the EU, that will depend on how closely aligned the UK remains with the single market and the customs union.
We're back to the unresolved argument about the right balance between economic access and sovereignty.
So where does that leave the UK's future trade relationship with the US? Downing Street points out that there have already been five working-group meetings to discuss the matter.
But this may not be quite the Brexit that Donald Trump had in mind.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46360310
|
news_uk-politics-46360310
|
|
Analysis: Macron's blunt Brexit warning to UK over fishing - BBC News
|
2018-11-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The French president gives the UK a reminder of the difficulties ahead in Brexit negotiations.
|
UK
|
EU leaders who gathered in Brussels put on a united front to back Theresa May's argument that the withdrawal agreement they endorsed was the "best and only" Brexit deal available.
But there was no sense of celebration, and there were plenty of signs of how tough negotiations on the future EU-UK relationship are likely to be.
Alongside the withdrawal agreement, and the political declaration on future ties, the remaining 27 EU leaders published a separate statement (without the UK) that vowed to protect their own interests, on a range of issues from fishing to fair competition to the rights of citizens.
"The European Council," it said, "will demonstrate particular vigilance as regards safeguarding the rights and interests of citizens, the necessity to maintain ambitious level playing field conditions, and to protect fishing enterprises and coastal communities."
It emphasised in particular that a fisheries agreement that builds on "existing reciprocal access and quota shares" is a matter of priority.
The statement was a clear sign that the UK will not have things all its own way, when it comes to balancing the competing demands of access to EU markets for UK fish produce, and access to UK fishing waters for EU boats.
Several EU leaders highlighted fishing as a particularly sensitive issue. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said talks on fisheries were "undoubtedly going to be an area where negotiations are going to be tough".
But the bluntest warning came from the French President Emmanuel Macron, who suggested that if the UK was unwilling to compromise in negotiations on fishing, which would need to make rapid progress, then talks on a wider trade deal would be slow.
"We as 27 have a clear position on fair competition, on fish, and on the subject of the EU's regulatory autonomy, and that forms part of our position for the future relationship talks," he said.
The president implied that without sufficient progress on trade, the backstop plan to avoid a hard border in Ireland would have to be implemented, including a temporary customs union for the whole of the UK.
"It is a lever because it is in our mutual interest to have this future relationship," Mr Macron said.
"I can't imagine that the desire of Theresa May or her supporters is to remain for the long term in a customs union, but (instead) to define a proper future relationship that resolves this problem."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Disputes over fishing aren't new. This was Reality Check's take earlier this year.
It is a warning that the prime minister could have done without, as she seeks to appeal to the British public for support for her deal in advance of a vote in Parliament next month.
But it is also a reminder - if any were needed - that other countries have domestic political concerns that will have to be taken into account.
If anything, the negotiations on the future relationship - which can only begin formally after the UK has left the EU - will be even harder than the 18 months of negotiations that produced the withdrawal agreement which has just been endorsed.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46336962
|
news_uk-46336962
|
|
Man City 3-1 Man Utd: Hosts claim deserved derby victory & go back top - BBC Sport
|
2018-11-11
|
[]
|
Jose Mourinho says Manchester City's preparations for their derby victory were helped by playing in two "friendly" matches during the past week.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Premier League
Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho said Manchester City's preparations for their derby victory were helped by playing in two "friendly" matches during the past week.
City returned to the top of the Premier League as goals from David Silva, Sergio Aguero and Ilkay Gundogan earned the champions three points at Etihad Stadium.
But Mourinho said the hosts had an advantage as their past two games - home thrashings of Southampton and Shakhtar Donetsk in which they won by an aggregate 12-1 - were significantly more straightforward than his team's most recent matches.
This was United's third away game in succession, following back-to-back wins at Bournemouth last weekend and Juventus on Wednesday.
"It's a heavy result for the effort of a team that had three away matches in the same week, with a super difficult match of a high, demanding level in Juventus against a team that had two friendly matches at home against Southampton and Shakhtar," Mourinho told BBC Radio 5 live.
"The physical fatigue and the mental fatigue leads to mistakes. They were tired physically and mentally. You need to be in football or another high-level sport to know what that is. The concentration of the big matches, they dry you. You are dry inside. To be ready again for another big match is not easy."
City's victory was rarely in doubt after Silva bundled home an early goal to give them a narrow interval advantage.
They got the second their superiority deserved with Aguero's rasping, rising finish past David de Gea three minutes into the second half following an exchange of passes with Riyad Mahrez.
Mourinho's side, without injured Paul Pogba, barely mounted a serious threat but were given hope of earning an unlikely point just before the hour when Romelu Lukaku was hauled down by Ederson seconds after he had come on as substitute. Anthony Martial sent the Brazilian keeper the wrong way from the spot.
It briefly revived memories of last season's dramatic derby here when United came from two goals down to win, but City never looked like losing control and wrapped up the win two minutes from time when substitute Gundogan took advantage of static United defending to beat De Gea from close range following a 44-pass move.
"We deserved the victory," City manager Pep Guardiola told BBC Sport. "The first half we played a little bit with fear and we didn't want to lose the ball. We didn't want to attack and they defended well.
"In the second half the game was a bit open so we had to find more space and we made a good performance against a top, top team."
• None 'Mourinho deluded if he can't see gulf in class between Man City & outclassed Man Utd'
• None Did Man City score 'the perfect goal'? Reaction to move that took up 2.13% of match
Manchester City's answer to Liverpool briefly returning to the head of the Premier League table earlier in the day was emphatic because this win was as comfortable as the scoreline suggests, arguably even more so.
Liverpool and Chelsea remain unbeaten in the Premier League, Jurgen Klopp's side beating Fulham 2-0 and Maurizio Sarri's side slipping as they were held to a 0-0 draw by Everton at Stamford Bridge.
They remain very much in the title shake-up, as do fourth-placed Tottenham.
The problem for the chasing pack appears to be that Manchester City are operating on a different level to everyone else.
United were probably feeling pleased with themselves that somehow, despite barely laying a glove on City, they were actually still in contention for a point until Gundogan's late goal ended all the arguments.
And it was a goal that summed up City under Guardiola.
The finish looked simple enough as Gundogan slipped in past some static United defenders to score with ease but it crowned a 44-pass sequence, the most before a goal since Juan Mata scored for Manchester United against Southampton in September 2015.
City are two points clear of Liverpool but have a goal difference of +31 as opposed to +18 and this was another of their most difficult fixtures negotiated with their usual flair.
Manchester City's latest win was built on the foundations of three established members of their recent glories.
Aguero may have gone from brunette to striking blonde but under the new hairstyle remained the same lethal striker who has been the centrepiece of so many of their successes.
It was classic Aguero when he scored City's crucial second three minutes after the break, exchanging passes with Mahrez before lashing home a near-post finish that carried so much power, De Gea barely had time to react.
It was his 151st goal in 218 Premier League games and his 208th goal in 307 games in all competitions for City. These statistics emphasise his status as one of the modern game's great strikers.
David Silva, at 32 now an elder statesman at City, set them on their way with the early opener and showed his usual knack of finding space in crowded areas and ability to dictate tempo even at the most frenetic times.
At the heart of it all was the unsung Fernandinho, the 33-year-old Brazilian patrolling midfield with class and quality, working effectively in the shadows.
Guardiola knows his worth - and will also know he will be very difficult to replace when the time comes.
Mourinho has bemoaned his team's slow starts this season and appears at a loss to discover the cure. And it is now too late to salvage any title aspirations.
They had survived a couple of narrow escapes before Silva scored after 12 minutes to put them on the back foot once more and to give City the sort of control and impetus they relish.
United clearly missed the injured Pogba, who helped turn this derby around last season, but this was still a performance lacking in invention and serious attacking threat.
And while Gundogan's goal crowned a glorious move, Mourinho will have looked on in anguish as United defenders stood around like statues.
United are now 12 points adrift of City. They can forget the Premier League title for another season.
'Ours was a performance with mistakes' - what they said
Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola speaking to Match of the Day: "We wanted to play good in front of our fans and we know how important it is to play in this game. We did well [in the second half] and that goal from Sergio Aguero helped us a lot after half-time."
Manchester United boss Jose Mourinho to Sky Sports: "We were in the game until the 80th-something minute and the third goal killed the spirit and morale of the team.
"One thinking is a bad performance and one thinking is a performance with mistakes. I think ours was a performance with mistakes.
"We are outside the top four, how can we speak about the title? Let's fight to close the gap to jump into the top four. If we jump into the top four then let's see the difference."
A start to forget for United - the best of the stats
• None It is the first time since 1990-91 that Manchester United have lost as many as four of their opening 12 games in a top-flight season.
• None This is the first time since 1977-78 that United have a negative goal difference after 12 games of a top-flight season.
• None It is the first time in English top-flight history that three clubs have remained unbeaten in their opening 12 games of the season (Manchester City, Liverpool and Chelsea).
• None Only Fulham (0) have kept fewer clean sheets than Manchester United (1) in the Premier League this season.
• None Man City's Sergio Aguero has scored eight Premier League goals against Manchester United - only Alan Shearer (10) has more against the Red Devils in the competition.
• None There were just 30 seconds between Lukaku coming on as a substitute for Man Utd, and winning the penalty that made it 2-1.
• None David Silva has scored in three consecutive home games in all competitions for Man City for the first time.
• None This was Jose Mourinho's 300th Premier League game as manager - despite defeat today, he's won more games than any other manager in their first 300 in the competition (189).
Manchester City travel to West Ham on Saturday, 24 November (15:00 GMT) in the Premier League, while Manchester United host Crystal Palace on the same day (also 15:00).
• None Goal! Manchester City 3, Manchester United 1. Ilkay Gündogan (Manchester City) left footed shot from very close range to the centre of the goal. Assisted by Bernardo Silva with a cross.
• None Attempt blocked. Juan Mata (Manchester United) right footed shot from the left side of the box is blocked. Assisted by Nemanja Matic.
• None Attempt missed. Ilkay Gündogan (Manchester City) right footed shot from outside the box misses to the right. Assisted by Raheem Sterling.
• None Attempt missed. Leroy Sané (Manchester City) left footed shot from outside the box is high and wide to the left. Assisted by Raheem Sterling following a fast break.
• None Attempt blocked. Nemanja Matic (Manchester United) right footed shot from the centre of the box is blocked.
• None Alexis Sánchez (Manchester United) wins a free kick on the right wing. Navigate to the next page Navigate to the last page
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46087586
|
rt_football_46087586
|
|
'Why I never want babies' - BBC News
|
2018-11-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Jang Yun-hwa is one of a rising number of South Korean women choosing not to marry, have children, or even have relationships with men.
|
Stories
|
An increasing number of South Korean women are choosing not to marry, not to have children, and not even to have relationships with men. With the lowest fertility rate in the world, the country's population will start shrinking unless something changes.
"I have no plans to have children, ever," says 24-year-old Jang Yun-hwa, as we chat in a hipsterish cafe in the middle of Seoul.
"I don't want the physical pain of childbirth. And it would be detrimental to my career."
Like many young adults in South Korea's hyper-competitive job market, Yun-hwa, a web comic artist, has worked hard to get where she is and isn't ready to let all that hard graft go to waste.
"Rather than be part of a family, I'd like to be independent and live alone and achieve my dreams," she says.
Yun-hwa isn't the only young Korean woman who sees career and family as mutually exclusive.
There are laws designed to prevent women being discriminated against for getting pregnant, or for just being of an age where that's a possibility - but in practice, unions say, they're not enforced.
The story of Choi Moon-jeong, who lives in one of Seoul's western suburbs, is a powerful illustration of the problem. When she told her boss she was expecting a child, she was shocked by his reaction.
"My boss said, 'Once you have a child your child is going to be your priority and the company will come second, so can you still work?'" Moon-jeong says.
"And he kept repeating this question."
Moon-jeong was working as a tax accountant at the time. As the busiest time of the year approached, her boss piled even more work on her - and when she complained, he said she lacked dedication. Eventually the tensions came to a head.
"He was yelling at me. I was sitting in my chair and, with all the stress, my body started convulsing and I couldn't open my eyes," says Moon-jeong, her open, freckly face crumpling into a frown.
"My co-worker called a paramedic and I was taken to hospital."
At the hospital the doctors told her that stress was bringing about signs of miscarriage.
Listen to Simon Maybin's report Not making babies in South Korea on Assignment, on the BBC World Service
When Moon-jeong returned to work after a week in hospital, her pregnancy saved, she felt her boss was doing everything he could to force her out of her job.
She says this kind of experience isn't uncommon.
"I think there are many cases where women get concerned when they're pregnant and you have to think very hard before announcing your pregnancy," she says.
"Many people around me have no children and plan to have no children."
A culture of hard work, long hours and dedication to one's job are often credited for South Korea's remarkable transformation over the last 50 years, from developing country to one of the world's biggest economies.
But Yun-hwa says the role women played in this transformation often seems to be overlooked.
"The economic success of Korea also very much depended on the low-wage factory workers, which were mostly female," she says.
"And also the care service that women had to provide in the family in order for men to go out and just focus on work."
Now women are increasingly doing jobs previously done by men - in management and the professions. But despite these rapid social and economic changes, attitudes to gender have been slow to shift.
"In this country, women are expected to be the cheerleaders of the men," says Yun-hwa.
More than that, she says, there's a tendency for married women to take the role of care-provider in the families they marry into.
"There's a lot of instances when even if a woman has a job, when she marries and has children, the child-rearing part is almost completely her responsibility," she says. "And she's also asked to take care of her in-laws if they get sick."
The average South Korean man spends 45 minutes a day on unpaid work like childcare, according to figures from the OECD, while women spend five times that.
"My personality isn't fit for that sort of supportive role," says Yun-hwa. "I'm busy with my own life."
It's not just that she is not interested in marriage, though. She doesn't even want boyfriends. One reason for that is the risk of becoming a victim of revenge porn, which she says is a "big issue" in Korea. But she's also concerned about domestic violence.
The Korean Institute of Criminology published the results of a survey last year in which 80% of men questioned admitted to having been abusive towards romantic partners.
When I ask Yun-hwa how men see women in South Korea, she has a one-word answer: "Slave."
It's clear to see how this feeds into South Korea's baby shortage. The marriage rate in South Korea is at its lowest since records began - 5.5 per 1,000 people, compared with 9.2 in 1970 - and very few children are born outside marriage.
Only Singapore, Hong Kong and Moldova have a fertility rate (the number of children per woman) as low as South Korea's. All are on 1.2, according to World Bank figures, while the replacement rate - the number needed for a population to remain level - is 2.1.
Another factor putting people off starting a family is the cost. While state education is free, the competitive nature of schooling means parents are expected to fork out for extra tuition just so their child can keep up.
All these ingredients have combined to produce a new social phenomenon in South Korea: the Sampo Generation. The word "sampo" means to give up three things - relationships, marriage and children.
Defiantly independent, Yun-hwa says she hasn't given those three things up - she's chosen not to pursue them. She won't say whether she intends to be celibate, or to pursue relationships with women.
Speak to South Koreans from older generations about the low fertility rate and the contrast in attitude is sharp. They see people like Yun-hwa as too individualistic and selfish.
I start chatting to two women in their 60s enjoying the stream-side park that runs through central Seoul. One tells me she has three daughters in their 40s, but none has had children.
"I try to instil patriotism and duty to the country with the kids, and of course I would love to see them continuing the line," she says. "But their decision is not to do that."
"There should be that sense of duty to the country," her friend chips in. "We're very worried about the low fertility rate here."
Yun-hwa and her contemporaries, the children of a globalised world, aren't persuaded by such arguments.
When I put it to her that if she and her contemporaries don't have children her country's culture will die, she tells me that it's time for the male-dominated culture to go.
"Must die," she says, breaking into English. "Must die!"
Join the conversation - find us on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Twitter.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-45201725
|
news_stories-45201725
|
|
Airbnb removes Israeli West Bank settlement listings - BBC News
|
2018-11-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The US firm says it will take home rentals in Israeli settlements on occupied land off its website.
|
Business
|
Airbnb says it will remove from its listings all homes in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
The US firm said it had made the decision because settlements were at the "core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians".
The move has been welcomed by Palestinians but Israel has called it "shameful" and threatened legal action.
The West Bank settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.
Airbnb has previously been criticised by Palestinian officials and human rights campaigners for allowing listings of homes to rent in Israeli settlements.
A statement from the company said: "US law permits companies like Airbnb to engage in business in these territories.
"At the same time, many in the global community have stated that companies should not do business here because they believe companies should not profit on lands where people have been displaced."
The Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim in the occupied West Bank
Following an evaluation, it said: "We concluded that we should remove listings in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank that are at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians."
Saeb Erekat, secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said it was "crucial for Airbnb to follow the position of international law that Israel is the occupying power and that Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including occupied east Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute war crimes".
But Israeli Tourism Minister Yariv Levin said Airbnb's decision was "the most wretched of wretched capitulations to the boycott efforts".
He said Israel would respond by backing lawsuits by settlement listers against Airbnb in US courts.
The Yesha Council, which represents Israeli settlers, accused Airbnb of becoming "a political site" and said the decision was "the result of either anti-Semitism or capitulation to terrorism, or both".
The decision was announced the day before Human Rights Watch was set to publish a report examining Airbnb's business in the settlements.
The organisation praised Airbnb's decision on Twitter, hailing it as "a breakthrough".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Human Rights Watch This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
The issue of settlements is one of the most contentious areas of dispute between Israel and the Palestinians.
More than 600,000 Jews live in about 140 settlements built since Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war.
The Palestinians see them as a major obstacle to peace and a barrier to a hoped-for Palestinian state on land which they occupy.
Israel says such an argument is a pretext for avoiding direct peace talks, and that the fate of settlements should be negotiated in accordance with peace accords signed with the Palestinians in 1993.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46269704
|
news_business-46269704
|
|
Tory rebellion over fixed-odds betting terminals - BBC News
|
2018-11-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
More than 20 Conservative MPs join opposition parties demanding a crackdown be brought forward.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The government is facing a rebellion over the timing of its crackdown on fixed-odds gambling machines.
Ministers have promised to cut the machines' maximum stake from £100 to £2 in October 2019 - but some MPs are calling for it to happen sooner.
More than 20 Conservatives have joined opposition politicians in trying to bring the change forward to April 2019.
They backed an amendment to the Finance Bill, which was tabled on Monday evening.
The government said it had consulted widely and considered "all of the evidence" before making its decision on a timeframe.
It has denied that MPs were led to believe the cut in the maximum stake would come into force in April - but the timing, announced in last month's Budget, has been criticised, with sports minister Tracey Crouch resigning in protest.
In her resignation letter, Ms Crouch suggested MPs who supported the betting industry had been "more persuasive in their arguments" to senior ministers - and it was this that had convinced them to opt for the later date.
Scheduling the change for October means it will happen at the same time as increases in the amount of tax charged to gambling firms who are based abroad but operate in the UK.
The government says doing it this way means the public finances will not be hit by a fall in the amount of tax coming in.
Fixed-odds betting terminals generate £1.8bn in revenue a year for the betting industry, according to the Gambling Commission, and bring in taxes of £400m for the government.
The Finance Bill is the legislation that puts the proposals outlined in the Budget into law.
Senior Tories Iain Duncan Smith, David Davis and Justine Greening backed the amendment on Monday evening, along with four DUP MPs.
Currently, people can bet as much as £100 every 20 seconds on electronic casino games such as roulette.
Anti-gambling campaigners say the machines let players lose money too quickly, leading to addiction and social, mental and financial problems.
But bookmakers have warned the cut in stakes could lead to thousands of outlets closing.
Labour's Carolyn Harris, who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on fixed-odds betting terminals, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the MPs were trying to "force the government into doing the right thing".
The Welsh Labour deputy leader said there was a "very realistic chance" that MPs would back bringing in the cut to April 2019 when they discuss the Finance Bill.
"There's a huge feeling in the House that this is the wrong decision and we need to implement it as a matter of urgency," she added.
The government said it was making "a significant change that will help stop extreme losses and protect the most vulnerable in our society".
The amendment will be voted on next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46184298
|
news_uk-politics-46184298
|
|
Brexit: Cabinet ministers 'voiced doubts over PM's plan at start' - BBC News
|
2018-11-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Cabinet sources say multiple members of Theresa May's ministerial team spoke out against her plan.
|
UK Politics
|
Cabinet ministers in discussion at Chequers in July, when the Brexit plan was agreed
Multiple cabinet ministers expressed significant doubts about the prime minister's preferred Brexit plan from the start, the BBC has learned.
Parts of Theresa May's plan were described as "worrying", "disappointing" and "concerning" by members of her top team back in July.
Mrs May is struggling to broker an agreement on Brexit with ministers.
Two ministers have told the BBC they believe there is little chance the deal would get Parliament's backing.
One of them said it was "self-harming" for the PM to keep pursuing the same strategy.
Mrs May is trying to arrange an agreement in cabinet on the current negotiations in time for a hoped-for summit in Brussels later this month.
Her preferred plan for future relations with the EU after Brexit were agreed at Chequers - the prime minister's country retreat - in July, in a marathon cabinet meeting lasting nearly 12 hours.
Afterwards, Mrs May said the cabinet had reached a "collective" agreement, although former Brexit secretary David Davis and ex-foreign secretary Boris Johnson resigned from the Cabinet in protest at the plans 48 hours later.
Mrs May speaks during the meeting at Chequers in July
And, according to the BBC's political editor Laura Kuenssberg, cabinet sources have now revealed there were widespread doubts about various aspects from many other ministers from the start, including from some former Remain supporters.
For many of those present, she said that the Chequers deal was an undesirable compromise, rather than a set of proposals to which they were signing up with enthusiasm.
One cabinet minister said the group endorsed the proposal "with a very heavy heart".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. There would be "no problem" if the UK asked the EU for a timed extension to the Brexit date Article 50 author Lord Kerr tells Radio 4's World at One
Trade Secretary Liam Fox expressed strong doubts about elements of the plan for trading arrangements as they could harm the ability of the UK to do trade deals after Brexit.
Home Secretary Sajid Javid, who backed Remain, is understood to have had some similar views, describing the proposal for a common rule book with the EU for parts of the economy as "very worrying" and suggesting that there should be a review of the arrangements after five years.
The leader of the House of Lords, Baroness Evans, is understood to have agreed, telling her colleagues that she found it difficult to accept some aspects of the proposals, and might struggle to explain them in Parliament.
Penny Mordaunt and Esther McVey - Brexiteers who have both been reluctant to give public support for the plan - are said to have expressed significant unhappiness and questioned whether Brexiteer MPs would be able to support such a deal in Parliament.
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
Meanwhile, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling is said to have warned his colleagues that as many as 40 Eurosceptic MPs might "go on strike".
Sources close to him would not confirm that, but said he had been "extremely cautious from the start" about the Chequers proposal.
And as has previously emerged, the leader of the Commons, Andrea Leadsom, said that she "hated" the proposals and called on the prime minister to treat those who had voted for Brexit with respect.
Chancellor Philip Hammond told his colleagues that the government was living on "borrowed time" because some businesses were hesitating over whether to invest in the UK.
He argued for the Chequers approach to bring clarity as soon as possible. But he is understood to have questioned whether such a deal could actually be achieved, warning that the UK would have to persuade EU member states to defy the European Commission which is running the negotiation.
And the Defence Secretary, Gavin Williamson - also a former Remainer - said there were many concerns with the paper and it must be made clear it was as far as the government would be willing to compromise.
Several ministers on both sides of the argument are understood to have called on the prime minister to be honest with the public about the shift in position towards a closer arrangement with the EU.
Mrs May is trying to arrange an agreement in cabinet on the current negotiations in time for a hoped-for summit in Brussels later this month.
A Number 10 spokesman said: "Everyone has to move a little to get a deal that works for everyone on both sides of the argument."
But Shadow Brexit Secretary Sir Keir Starmer said it appeared Mrs May had proceeded without the "solid backing" of her cabinet, having also declined to get Parliament's support for her negotiating objectives.
Sir Keir also said the option of a fresh referendum was still "on the table", despite Labour's leader Jeremy Corbyn saying at the weekend that Brexit could not be stopped.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. "All options are on the table" if there is a no deal Brexit, Starmer tells Today
In his column for the Daily Telegraph on Monday, Boris Johnson called the prime minister's deal "a recipe for continued strife, both in the Tory Party and the country".
And former cabinet minister John Whittingdale cast doubt on whether Mrs May could stay in office if Parliament rejected any deal she reached with the EU.
"I think if the PM's Brexit plan doesn't get through Parliament, I think it's quite difficult to see how the prime minister can continue because she has staked her credibility," he told BBC Radio 4's Westminster Hour.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46175150
|
news_uk-46175150
|
|
Why May's Brexit deal may be impossible - BBC News
|
2018-11-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg weighs up the opposition within the cabinet to Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit plan.
|
UK
|
Opponents of the prime minister's Brexit deal are found outside and inside her cabinet
It is no secret that Theresa May is struggling to get her cabinet on board.
Seven days ago it felt that the ingredients for concluding this vital stage of the Brexit deal were there, waiting perhaps for the political moment to feel right.
But a week on, tortured negotiations continue both between the UK and the EU, and between Downing Street and those who gather at Number 10 for the weekly cabinet meeting. And perhaps you shouldn't be surprised at how reluctant the cabinet is to sign up.
The simple explanation of why they aren't all gladly rushing to back exactly what the prime minister has been planning? Many of them didn't like it much from the start, and some of them don't believe it has a chance of passing Parliament now.
This is not just about the problems of the Irish border, but about the prime minister's overall preferred plan for Brexit, brokered in the heat of the summer at her Chequers country retreat.
There's no secret that the proposals were unpopular with the big Brexiteers. The dramatic departures of David Davis and Boris Johnson saw to that.
But what is only now clear from cabinet sources is just how widespread the discontent was - expressed not just by Eurosceptics but by former Remainers too.
And the frustrations from months ago are unquestionably part of the reason why there is such a stalemate now. Two cabinet ministers last night told the BBC there was little chance that the deal as currently planned would get through parliament. One of them said it was "self-harming" for the prime minister to keep pursuing the same strategy.
Sources have described how multiple cabinet ministers expressed significant doubts from the start.
Elements of the so-called Chequers proposals were described as "worrying", "disappointing", and "concerning" by different members of the prime minister's top team, as the press waited in sweltering heat outside at the end of the grand estate's very, very long drive, across the other side of what actually was, joking apart, a field of wheat.
Theresa May outlines her Brexit plan at Chequers
And what's really notable is how some former Remainers - including Home Secretary Sajid Javid and Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson - were candid about their fears too. This was not just an exercise in Brexiteers sounding off, but ministers from across the Tory party pointing to deficiencies in the proposed deal.
Chancellor Philip Hammond has questioned whether the EU will agree the deal
I've also been told that several ministers, on both sides of the argument, are understood to have called on the prime minister to be honest with the public about the shift in position towards a closer arrangement with the EU.
Months on, I've lost count of the number of times ministers and advisers in government have expressed frustration at how they perceive Theresa May has failed to do that.
Even for some of her backers, her strongest selling point should be being upfront about the fact she is trying hard to find a middle course, not to be the ideologue making crazy promises.
But around Westminster, there is deep frustration on the Tory backbenches that she rarely seems willing to make that case, always sticking to a few tight lines that concede only the bare minimum about what she is trying to do.
Of course, the Chequers meeting did ultimately give the prime minister's plan its backing. Ministers like the chancellor and the business secretary were clear that the risk of no deal was simply not worth taking.
But from what sources have described it is extremely clear that for many of those present, the Chequers proposals were a deeply undesirable compromise, rather than a plan they were agreeing to with any enthusiasm. One senior minister told me most of those present signed up "with a very heavy heart".
A Number 10 spokesman said: "Everyone has to move a little to get a deal that works for everyone on both sides of the argument." But the roots of the current impasse at home surely lie in much of the cabinet's view at that time.
If they didn't like it much then, why would they like it much now, let alone help the prime minister fight for it?
With the EU reluctant to budge, and Parliament deeply unconvinced, what was a deeply unappetising compromise may yet prove an impossible one.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46175403
|
news_uk-46175403
|
|
Man City 3-1 Man Utd: Hosts claim deserved derby victory & go back top - BBC Sport
|
2018-11-12
|
[]
|
Jose Mourinho says Manchester City's preparations for their derby victory were helped by playing in two "friendly" matches during the past week.
| null |
Last updated on .From the section Premier League
Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho said Manchester City's preparations for their derby victory were helped by playing in two "friendly" matches during the past week.
City returned to the top of the Premier League as goals from David Silva, Sergio Aguero and Ilkay Gundogan earned the champions three points at Etihad Stadium.
But Mourinho said the hosts had an advantage as their past two games - home thrashings of Southampton and Shakhtar Donetsk in which they won by an aggregate 12-1 - were significantly more straightforward than his team's most recent matches.
This was United's third away game in succession, following back-to-back wins at Bournemouth last weekend and Juventus on Wednesday.
"It's a heavy result for the effort of a team that had three away matches in the same week, with a super difficult match of a high, demanding level in Juventus against a team that had two friendly matches at home against Southampton and Shakhtar," Mourinho told BBC Radio 5 live.
"The physical fatigue and the mental fatigue leads to mistakes. They were tired physically and mentally. You need to be in football or another high-level sport to know what that is. The concentration of the big matches, they dry you. You are dry inside. To be ready again for another big match is not easy."
City's victory was rarely in doubt after Silva bundled home an early goal to give them a narrow interval advantage.
They got the second their superiority deserved with Aguero's rasping, rising finish past David de Gea three minutes into the second half following an exchange of passes with Riyad Mahrez.
Mourinho's side, without injured Paul Pogba, barely mounted a serious threat but were given hope of earning an unlikely point just before the hour when Romelu Lukaku was hauled down by Ederson seconds after he had come on as substitute. Anthony Martial sent the Brazilian keeper the wrong way from the spot.
It briefly revived memories of last season's dramatic derby here when United came from two goals down to win, but City never looked like losing control and wrapped up the win two minutes from time when substitute Gundogan took advantage of static United defending to beat De Gea from close range following a 44-pass move.
"We deserved the victory," City manager Pep Guardiola told BBC Sport. "The first half we played a little bit with fear and we didn't want to lose the ball. We didn't want to attack and they defended well.
"In the second half the game was a bit open so we had to find more space and we made a good performance against a top, top team."
• None 'Mourinho deluded if he can't see gulf in class between Man City & outclassed Man Utd'
• None Did Man City score 'the perfect goal'? Reaction to move that took up 2.13% of match
Manchester City's answer to Liverpool briefly returning to the head of the Premier League table earlier in the day was emphatic because this win was as comfortable as the scoreline suggests, arguably even more so.
Liverpool and Chelsea remain unbeaten in the Premier League, Jurgen Klopp's side beating Fulham 2-0 and Maurizio Sarri's side slipping as they were held to a 0-0 draw by Everton at Stamford Bridge.
They remain very much in the title shake-up, as do fourth-placed Tottenham.
The problem for the chasing pack appears to be that Manchester City are operating on a different level to everyone else.
United were probably feeling pleased with themselves that somehow, despite barely laying a glove on City, they were actually still in contention for a point until Gundogan's late goal ended all the arguments.
And it was a goal that summed up City under Guardiola.
The finish looked simple enough as Gundogan slipped in past some static United defenders to score with ease but it crowned a 44-pass sequence, the most before a goal since Juan Mata scored for Manchester United against Southampton in September 2015.
City are two points clear of Liverpool but have a goal difference of +31 as opposed to +18 and this was another of their most difficult fixtures negotiated with their usual flair.
Manchester City's latest win was built on the foundations of three established members of their recent glories.
Aguero may have gone from brunette to striking blonde but under the new hairstyle remained the same lethal striker who has been the centrepiece of so many of their successes.
It was classic Aguero when he scored City's crucial second three minutes after the break, exchanging passes with Mahrez before lashing home a near-post finish that carried so much power, De Gea barely had time to react.
It was his 151st goal in 218 Premier League games and his 208th goal in 307 games in all competitions for City. These statistics emphasise his status as one of the modern game's great strikers.
David Silva, at 32 now an elder statesman at City, set them on their way with the early opener and showed his usual knack of finding space in crowded areas and ability to dictate tempo even at the most frenetic times.
At the heart of it all was the unsung Fernandinho, the 33-year-old Brazilian patrolling midfield with class and quality, working effectively in the shadows.
Guardiola knows his worth - and will also know he will be very difficult to replace when the time comes.
Mourinho has bemoaned his team's slow starts this season and appears at a loss to discover the cure. And it is now too late to salvage any title aspirations.
They had survived a couple of narrow escapes before Silva scored after 12 minutes to put them on the back foot once more and to give City the sort of control and impetus they relish.
United clearly missed the injured Pogba, who helped turn this derby around last season, but this was still a performance lacking in invention and serious attacking threat.
And while Gundogan's goal crowned a glorious move, Mourinho will have looked on in anguish as United defenders stood around like statues.
United are now 12 points adrift of City. They can forget the Premier League title for another season.
'Ours was a performance with mistakes' - what they said
Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola speaking to Match of the Day: "We wanted to play good in front of our fans and we know how important it is to play in this game. We did well [in the second half] and that goal from Sergio Aguero helped us a lot after half-time."
Manchester United boss Jose Mourinho to Sky Sports: "We were in the game until the 80th-something minute and the third goal killed the spirit and morale of the team.
"One thinking is a bad performance and one thinking is a performance with mistakes. I think ours was a performance with mistakes.
"We are outside the top four, how can we speak about the title? Let's fight to close the gap to jump into the top four. If we jump into the top four then let's see the difference."
A start to forget for United - the best of the stats
• None It is the first time since 1990-91 that Manchester United have lost as many as four of their opening 12 games in a top-flight season.
• None This is the first time since 1977-78 that United have a negative goal difference after 12 games of a top-flight season.
• None It is the first time in English top-flight history that three clubs have remained unbeaten in their opening 12 games of the season (Manchester City, Liverpool and Chelsea).
• None Only Fulham (0) have kept fewer clean sheets than Manchester United (1) in the Premier League this season.
• None Man City's Sergio Aguero has scored eight Premier League goals against Manchester United - only Alan Shearer (10) has more against the Red Devils in the competition.
• None There were just 30 seconds between Lukaku coming on as a substitute for Man Utd, and winning the penalty that made it 2-1.
• None David Silva has scored in three consecutive home games in all competitions for Man City for the first time.
• None This was Jose Mourinho's 300th Premier League game as manager - despite defeat today, he's won more games than any other manager in their first 300 in the competition (189).
Manchester City travel to West Ham on Saturday, 24 November (15:00 GMT) in the Premier League, while Manchester United host Crystal Palace on the same day (also 15:00).
• None Goal! Manchester City 3, Manchester United 1. Ilkay Gündogan (Manchester City) left footed shot from very close range to the centre of the goal. Assisted by Bernardo Silva with a cross.
• None Attempt blocked. Juan Mata (Manchester United) right footed shot from the left side of the box is blocked. Assisted by Nemanja Matic.
• None Attempt missed. Ilkay Gündogan (Manchester City) right footed shot from outside the box misses to the right. Assisted by Raheem Sterling.
• None Attempt missed. Leroy Sané (Manchester City) left footed shot from outside the box is high and wide to the left. Assisted by Raheem Sterling following a fast break.
• None Attempt blocked. Nemanja Matic (Manchester United) right footed shot from the centre of the box is blocked.
• None Alexis Sánchez (Manchester United) wins a free kick on the right wing. Navigate to the next page Navigate to the last page
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46087586
|
rt_football_46087586
|
|
Airbnb removes Israeli West Bank settlement listings - BBC News
|
2018-11-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The US firm says it will take home rentals in Israeli settlements on occupied land off its website.
|
Business
|
Airbnb says it will remove from its listings all homes in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
The US firm said it had made the decision because settlements were at the "core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians".
The move has been welcomed by Palestinians but Israel has called it "shameful" and threatened legal action.
The West Bank settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.
Airbnb has previously been criticised by Palestinian officials and human rights campaigners for allowing listings of homes to rent in Israeli settlements.
A statement from the company said: "US law permits companies like Airbnb to engage in business in these territories.
"At the same time, many in the global community have stated that companies should not do business here because they believe companies should not profit on lands where people have been displaced."
The Israeli settlement of Maale Adumim in the occupied West Bank
Following an evaluation, it said: "We concluded that we should remove listings in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank that are at the core of the dispute between Israelis and Palestinians."
Saeb Erekat, secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), said it was "crucial for Airbnb to follow the position of international law that Israel is the occupying power and that Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including occupied east Jerusalem, are illegal and constitute war crimes".
But Israeli Tourism Minister Yariv Levin said Airbnb's decision was "the most wretched of wretched capitulations to the boycott efforts".
He said Israel would respond by backing lawsuits by settlement listers against Airbnb in US courts.
The Yesha Council, which represents Israeli settlers, accused Airbnb of becoming "a political site" and said the decision was "the result of either anti-Semitism or capitulation to terrorism, or both".
The decision was announced the day before Human Rights Watch was set to publish a report examining Airbnb's business in the settlements.
The organisation praised Airbnb's decision on Twitter, hailing it as "a breakthrough".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Human Rights Watch This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
The issue of settlements is one of the most contentious areas of dispute between Israel and the Palestinians.
More than 600,000 Jews live in about 140 settlements built since Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war.
The Palestinians see them as a major obstacle to peace and a barrier to a hoped-for Palestinian state on land which they occupy.
Israel says such an argument is a pretext for avoiding direct peace talks, and that the fate of settlements should be negotiated in accordance with peace accords signed with the Palestinians in 1993.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46269704
|
news_business-46269704
|
|
Brexit blind dates: Prof Lord Winston and Aisleyne Horgan-Wallace - BBC News
|
2018-11-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
She nicknamed the fertility expert "Lord Embryo" but did they get on talking Brexit over dinner?
|
UK
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch the best bits of Prof Winston and Aisleyne's date
What happens when two strong-minded individuals from opposite sides of the Brexit debate sit down for dinner? To find out, the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme has organised a series of blind dates.
Labour peer and fertility expert Prof Lord Winston believes the UK would be much better remaining in the EU.
They went into the meal without knowing whom they would be meeting.
Who are you? I'm Aisleyne. I work on TV but my main income is as a property developer.
What are your views on Brexit? We need to be able to stand alone. We need to shut the borders because we're bursting at the seams financially and we need to fix our problems at home before we fix anyone else's problems. [Being in the EU] is like having a broken leg and trying to carry another person with a broken leg to the hospital. It's just not going to work.
What was your initial impression of Prof Lord Winston? I thought: "What a dapper gentleman, looking like Super Mario."
Aisleyne and Robert met for the first time
How was your date? It was a pleasure to spend time with someone that's so educated and for me to still be able to hold a decent conversation and not feel out of my depth. I'm just in awe of him and all the work he's done with embryos - I saved him in my phone as "Lord Embryo".
What did you talk about? The fact that he said all of his learned colleagues at [the hospital where he works] were already leaving the UK. That worried me a bit because I didn't think that was happening. I don't know if he was saying it for effect but he doesn't strike me as the type of person to lie.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. "You're getting angry with me". Aisleyne and Robert discuss trade
Any common ground? Just the fact that we both loved [hip hop artists] Tupac and Biggie - and our fascination behind reproduction.
Anything you didn't enjoy? When he thought I was patronising him [when saying: "Thank you for your service," after he explained his work in the NHS]. He said: "Don't patronise me," but it was really just a compliment, because I'd never want to hurt anyone's feelings.
Did he convince you of anything? I still believe that we can stand alone and we do need to fix our problems but he has made me think that it needs to be a little bit more tailored. Before, I thought: "[Let's just have a] hard Brexit," but he has made me realise the intricacies.
Did you convince him of anything? Just that I was fabulous - I think he really did stop and listen to what I had to say, which was a huge compliment.
Robert tried to ring his son, a Big Brother viewer, during the date
Would you see him again? Yes - he took me to the House of Lords [since the blind date]. It was just fascinating. It was really eye-opening to see how the other half work. I just think he's an absolute delight and what a pleasure to now be friends with him - he's a really great person.
Describe him in three words: Genius, kind, learned.
Marks out of 10 for the date: I really want to say 10. I left feeling like I wanted to know more. I left feeling like I could hold a conversation with a lord.
Watch the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme on weekdays between 10:00 and 11:00 GMT on BBC Two and the BBC News channel.
And find out what happened when broadcaster June Sarpong met ex-Stig Perry McCarthy on Wednesday's Brexit blind date.
Who are you? Robert Winston, professor of science and society at Imperial College in London, where I work on reproductive medicine.
What are your views on Brexit? I voted Remain. I see myself as a European. I've always felt that. Recognising what had happened to Europe, really from 1618 onwards, the time of the Thirty Years' War, it seemed to me obvious that we actually need some form of better coalition between European countries. I think one of the very real reasons for wanting to be part of the union is to have a peaceful Europe, which has been highly successful. What was remarkable in the Brexit debate was this was seldom actually recognised.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
How was your date? The food was OK. The soup was good but you can't really talk and eat soup.
What did you talk about? The NHS, trade, Theresa May.
Any common ground? Not much.
What did you disagree about? Everything - one of the things that is always a problem in arguments, and I hear it in the House of Lords in debates, is when someone says: "I believe that so-and-so should happen'. The trouble is when you are arguing with or against belief, there is an emotional compound to it. That is a big problem when you are looking mathematically and rationally and in a dispassionate way. That's the problem with Brexit - it has polarised communities and individuals in a way I don't think anyone expected.
What did you learn about your date? I learned a whole lot of things. I didn't know about her background, I didn't know who she was - I didn't know who I was meeting.
Would you see her again? We are going to meet in five years' time, we've agreed - that's a firm commitment. And I took her to the House of Lords so she can see Parliament in action.
Find out what happened when Love Island's Zara went on a date with Lord Mayor of Sheffield Magid Magid.
Follow the Victoria Derbyshire programme on Facebook and Twitter - and see more of our stories here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46222586
|
news_uk-46222586
|
|
Samantha Eastwood: Life sentence for midwife murderer - BBC News
|
2018-12-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Michael Stirling killed Samantha Eastwood and left her in a shallow grave with tape around her head.
|
Stoke & Staffordshire
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The "callous" killer who murdered midwife Samantha Eastwood comforted her sister just hours after burying her body in a shallow grave.
Michael Stirling, 32, admitted killing Ms Eastwood, from Stoke-on-Trent, with whom he had been having a three-year-long affair.
He buried the 28-year-old with tape around her eyes and head at Caverswall, Staffordshire, in August.
Stirling was sentenced to life with a minimum term of almost 17 years.
Ms Eastwood was smothered and strangled at her home hours after finishing a nightshift at Royal Stoke University Hospital on 27 July.
Her body was discovered beside a country lane eight days later, wrapped in a duvet cover, with tape covering her eyes and mouth.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Married Stirling, who is the brother-in-law of Ms Eastwood's ex-fiancé John Peake, joined in the search to find his victim.
The landscape gardener comforted her family and sent messages from her phone so people would think she was still alive.
Police compared him to murderer Ian Huntley - who was convicted of the 2002 murders of two 10-year-old girls in Soham, Cambridgeshire - who took part in several public appeals for information after the killings.
Samantha Eastwood was missing for more than a week before her body was found in a shallow grave
Stirling's lawyer, Charles Miskin QC, said on the day of Ms Eastwood's death she had been in the bedroom with her killer.
According to the police, the lovers would meet regularly after she finished her nightshifts at the hospital.
There was an argument between the pair about the future of their relationship and "he then lost all his self-control", Mr Miskin added.
Judge Mrs Justice Sue Carr said after Stirling had strangled her, he "picked her up but she was dead".
She continued: "You did not want to leave her with her eyes and mouth open and wanted her face to be protected from the consequences of burial so you covered her face, eyes and mouth with tape.
"You put her body into the back of your van and drove off.
"With chilling sang-froid, you texted your wife an affectionate message saying that you would meet her at your parents' house, as you duly did, enjoying a family meal. Your wife describes you as fine and cheerful. Samantha's body lay all the while in your van parked opposite."
Stirling went to his parents' house for dinner with Ms Eastwood's body in his van
In sentencing, the judge said Stirling had "lied over and over again".
In a victim impact statement read to the court, Ms Eastwood's sister, Gemma, said Stirling gave her a hug the day after her sibling went missing.
He had gone to Ms Eastwood's home on the pretence of helping the family - in fact, he had buried her just hours earlier.
Gemma Eastwood said that moment would "forever haunt her".
Miss Eastwood's sister Gemma Eastwood said she had "lost my best friend and sister"
Police described Stirling as "cold", "callous" and "remorseless" in murdering the woman he had conducted a "full-on and intimate" affair with.
Telephone records showed that during July, Stirling had bombarded Ms Eastwood with 128 phone calls. She had called him 25 times.
Det Insp Dan Ison, who led the investigation, said the day after the killing, the murderer used Ms Eastwood's phone to message family members, giving them false hope she was still alive.
In the exchange of text messages that morning, Gemma Eastwood texted to her sister asking her to get in touch.
Stirling replied, posing as her sister, asking to be "left alone".
He continued to exchange messages with Gemma, claiming her sister was having "a massive breakdown about stuff" and resisting her increasingly desperate appeals for her to talk with her.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The judge described the texting as an act of "breath-taking cruelty".
Stirling was arrested and released by police before Ms Eastwood remains were found.
Officers discovered his phone and his van had been in the same area twice late at night on the day of her disappearance.
He was undone six days later when he returned to the burial site by bicycle while he was under surveillance.
Speaking outside court, Gemma Eastwood said: "No matter the outcome, nothing could bring my sister back.
"I have lost my best friend and sister, my mum has lost a kind, caring and loving daughter, our lives will never be the same."
27 July - 07:45 - Samantha Eastwood last seen alive, leaving the Royal Stoke University Hospital
27 July - about 19:20 - Colleagues become concerned when she doesn't turn up for work
30 July - Police launch appeal for information after her disappearance
1 August - Police release CCTV of Ms Eastwood leaving work with a female colleague, before driving off alone
3 August - Her sister, Gemma Eastwood, makes a tearful appeal, saying her family needs her home "where she belongs"
4 August - Search by police sees officers combing rural areas of Staffordshire and cordoning off parts of Caverswall village
4 August - Later the same day, detectives reveal they have found a body and arrested a 32-year-old man on suspicion of murder
8 August - Michael Stirling, 32, of Gratton Road, Stoke-on-Trent, appears at Stafford Crown Court where it's revealed Ms Eastwood was found in a shallow grave
22 October - Stirling pleads guilty to murdering the midwife after a "longstanding" affair
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-46424611
|
news_uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-46424611
|
|
Brexit: Still time to persuade MPs to back deal, says Matt Hancock - BBC News
|
2018-12-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ministers tour UK to sell PM's deal ahead of vote as Brexiteers say compromise bid is "meaningless".
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Brexit: Can Theresa May win over MPs?
Ministers are trying to rally support for the PM's Brexit deal across the UK but a bid to find a compromise has been dismissed by the DUP and Brexiteers.
With Theresa May widely expected to lose Tuesday's Commons vote, No 10 has dismissed calls for it to be delayed.
Health Secretary Matt Hancock said with two days of debate remaining, there was still time to win over MPs.
But a Tory backbench amendment aimed at easing concerns about the controversial "backstop" has met with criticism.
Downing Street has said the vote is still due to take place on Tuesday, despite dozens of Tories threatening to reject the deal, along with the DUP, whose support keeps Mrs May's government in power.
But a senior minister has told the BBC "the only political common sense is to delay" it.
The minister, who preferred not to be named, said: "We need to find a solution and we can't find one by Tuesday."
Matt Hancock, Chancellor Philip Hammond, Cabinet Office Minister David Lidington and Scottish Secretary David Mundell are among those trying to sell it to the public in visits across the UK.
Amid calls from some Tory and Labour MPs for the UK to pursue an even closer Norway-style relationship with the EU, Mr Lidington said it was wrong to assume there was a "magic alternative" waiting in the wings which retained the existing benefits of membership without the obligations.
"If it is not this deal which the rest of the EU says they are not willing to renegotiate, then either you crash out of the EU without any deal, without any transitional period or you revisit the referendum result of 2016 and you stay in the European Union," he said.
The withdrawal deal negotiated between the UK and EU has been endorsed by EU leaders but must also be backed by Parliament if it is to come into force.
Many MPs have expressed concerns about the backstop, aimed at preventing a "hard border" between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, which will remain in the EU, if no trade deal is ready before the end of the post-Brexit transition period.
It would mean Northern Ireland staying aligned to some EU rules, which many MPs say is unacceptable. The UK would also not be able to leave the backstop without EU agreement.
Jeremy Corbyn told Euronews that in a Labour Brexit deal "there certainly wouldn't be a backstop from which you can't escape".
"We will have to come to an agreement on a customs union, a specific customs union with the European Union that does give us the opportunity to have a say in it all, but also guarantees that level of trade," the Labour leader said.
Downing Street has dismissed reports the vote could be delayed. And Mr Hancock told the BBC that "the best thing for the country" was for MPs to back Mrs May's deal.
"My view is we should continue the debate," he said. "We've had three days, there's two days more. I think we should make the argument, make the case and persuade people - that's what you have Parliamentary debate for."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Jo Johnson and Stephen Kinnock argue for and against an alternative Brexit option
Speaking to BBC Radio 5 live, Education Secretary Damian Hinds acknowledged the government had "a big job on" to win Tuesday's vote, but appealed to MPs to back the deal "in the national interest". And Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liz Truss said while the deal on offer was "not perfect" - it delivered on what people voted for.
The prime minister has suggested that MPs could be "given a role" in deciding whether to activate the backstop, and on Thursday night, a Tory backbench amendment was laid down intended to do that.
The amendment - which is understood to have government support - would also give the devolved administrations, particularly the Northern Ireland Assembly, although it is currently suspended, more say in the process.
It would also press the UK and EU to agree a future trade deal within a year of the implementation period ending.
Former Northern Ireland minister Hugo Swire tabled the amendment along with Bob Neill and Richard Graham.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Tory MP Lee Rowley explains why he will be voting against Theresa May's withdrawal deal
Mr Swire told the BBC that many Tory MPs would like to see the backstop "disappear altogether or be time limited" but the European Commission had said it would not reopen negotiations on the withdrawal agreement, so the amendment was "about the nearest we feel we can probe".
He said it was aimed at "people like me, who would like to be able to support this deal but find they are unable to".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
But Conservative Brexiteer Steve Baker dismissed the amendment: "Giving Parliament the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea is desperate and will persuade very few."
And fellow backbencher Peter Bone told the BBC the amendment was "absolutely meaningless".
DUP leader Arlene Foster tweeted: "Domestic legislative tinkering won't cut it. The legally binding international withdrawal treaty would remain fundamentally flawed, as evidenced by the attorney general's legal advice."
Meanwhile, former cabinet minister Justine Greening has told the BBC's Political Thinking podcast that a Conservative Party "that seems consumed by Brexit" would lose the support of "Middle England".
"One of the problems for the Conservative Party is it's now 31 years since we last won a landslide and we need to realise as a party if things don't change, that'll be our last landslide," she said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46477036
|
news_uk-politics-46477036
|
|
Obituary: Paddy Ashdown - BBC News
|
2018-12-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Former Royal Marine who led the Liberal Democrats and spearheaded a peace initiative in the former Yugoslavia.
|
UK Politics
|
Paddy Ashdown was the action man of British politics.
A former Royal Marine officer, he was the first elected leader of the Liberal Democrats, a party then badly in need of some military-style discipline.
He led his party to its best election result for half a century but his combative style of leadership did not always sit easily with some activists.
His mixture of military and diplomatic experience meant he was well-suited for the role he later undertook in the former Yugoslavia.
Jeremy John Durham Ashdown was born in Delhi, India, on 27 February 1941, into an Irish family with a long record of service in the administration of the sub-continent. He boasted Irish nationalist leader Daniel O'Connell among his ancestors.
His father was an officer in the Indian Army who later faced a court martial for refusing to abandon his troops during the retreat to Dunkirk. The charges were eventually thrown out.
One of his earliest memories was seeing dead bodies in the streets, the result of conflict between Hindus and Muslims.
He saw active service with the Royal Marines in the Far East and Persian Gulf
The young Ashdown spent his childhood years on a farm his father had purchased in County Down, Northern Ireland, before attending Bedford School, in England, where his Irish brogue led to the nickname Paddy.
He did not always find school easy, with one report describing him as vain and a poor team-player. There was a sexual relationship with a female maths teacher which he described in his memoir, A Fortunate Life, as "a rite of passage".
He quit before taking his A-levels and joined the Royal Marines in 1959.
Ashdown saw active service in Borneo and the Persian Gulf before joining the elite Special Boat Service, the seagoing equivalent of the SAS.
In 1967, he went to Hong Kong where he learned Mandarin and qualified as an interpreter, before returning to Northern Ireland where he commanded a commando company in Belfast at a time when the Troubles were raging.
Ashdown quit the Royal Marines in 1972 and joined the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) where he worked with diplomatic cover in Geneva liaising with a number of United Nations departments.
Although he was a Labour supporter he had shown little interest in politics so there was surprise when he decided to quit his comfortable life in Switzerland and become an active member of the Liberal party.
"Most of my friends thought I was utterly bonkers," he later recalled, claiming he made the decision after being horrified at the state of the UK following the period of industrial unrest and fuel shortages in the mid-70s.
In 1976, he was selected as the Liberal candidate in his wife's home constituency of Yeovil which had been held by right-wing Tory MP John Peyton for more than two decades.
With what became a trademark energetic campaigning style, he set out to squeeze the Labour vote and, in the 1979 general election, took his party to second place, although still more than 10,000 votes behind Peyton.
Having given up a lucrative post with the foreign office, Ashdown took a job with a subsidiary of the Westland Helicopter company, based in Yeovil.
He then moved on to work with Tescan, a processor of sheepskins, but found himself out of work when the firm closed in 1981.
As the personnel manager, he had to make his team redundant, something he described as "the worst day of my life". He was on the dole for six months before obtaining a job as a youth worker with Dorset County Council.
His continuing campaigning in Yeovil paid off in the 1983 election when John Peyton decided to stand down; he won the seat with just over 50% of the popular vote.
He joined Neil Kinnock on a picket line at GCHQ
It was the era of the SDP-Liberal Alliance and Ashdown quickly found himself appointed as the Liberal spokesman on trade and industry.
He was a prominent campaigner against the stationing of American cruise missiles on British soil, describing them as "the weapon we have to stop".
Ashdown also spoke out against Margaret Thatcher's decision to allow the US to use bases in Britain to bomb Libya and was one of the harshest critics of the government's decision to ban workers at GCHQ from being members of a trade union.
He had become a popular figure in Yeovil, where he increased his majority over the Conservatives in 1987. He had gained a reputation as someone not afraid to speak his mind, but who did not suffer fools gladly.
In 1988, the SDP and Liberal Party formally merged as the Social and Liberal Democrats, later shortened to the Liberal Democrats.
When former Liberal leader David Steel declined to stand for the leadership of the new party, Ashdown comfortably saw off Alan Beith, the only other candidate.
He inherited a party licking its wounds after the arguments that had accompanied its formation and leading figures from both the Liberal and SDP camps walking away in protest at the merger.
He comfortably won the ballot to become leader of the Liberal Democrats
Ashdown threw himself into getting his party into shape for the 1992 election and it was to his credit that, despite all the problems, the new party suffered a net loss of just two seats.
His career, and his marriage, also survived press revelations of an affair with his secretary, five years previously, leading to one Sun headline dubbing him Paddy Pantsdown.
A year later, Ashdown began negotiations with Labour leader John Smith over closer co-operation between the two parties. After Smith's death, he continued the talks with Tony Blair. It was the end of his party's historic stance of "equidistance" between Conservatives and Labour.
He developed a close rapport with Blair. One colleague said the two of them would "sit at the cabinet table and fix their gaze on each other - they worked exceptionally closely together".
The relationship was remarkably candid with Ashdown once telling Blair that "some folk think you are a smarmy git".
Despite early signs that Labour were on course to win the 1997 election, Ashdown still hoped that he could offer the support of the Liberal Democrats in return for Labour agreeing to voting reform.
Although Blair was sympathetic, the Labour landslide of 1997 removed any need for Lib Dem support and the majority of Blair's new cabinet, sitting on a secure majority, were not in favour of moving to some form of PR.
Ashdown was also disappointed that Blair refused to share the Lib Dem leader's enthusiasm for joining the euro.
In the election, the Liberal Democrats increased their number of MPs from 18 to 46, as the Conservative vote crumbled. But it remained the third party in UK politics.
Ashdown stood down as Lib Dem leader in 1999 and was replaced by Charles Kennedy. Two years later, he quit the Commons and entered the Lords as Baron Ashdown of Norton-sub Hamdon.
Retirement was far from his mind and, in 2002, his military and diplomatic experience saw him appointed as High Representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina.
He had been a continuing advocate of intervention in the strife that followed the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia and he made a number of positive contributions to creating a stable framework of government.
"Bosnia is under my skin," he said. "It's the place you cannot leave behind."
He appeared as a prosecution witness in the trial of the former Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic, although his claim that he had watched Serbian shells falling on villages in Kosovo was disputed by the defence.
He was considered for the post of UN representative to Afghanistan in 2008 after he had called for a high-level co-ordinator to lead the foreign mission to the country, but ruled himself out of contention.
Lord Ashdown campaigned with then-leader Nick Clegg ahead of the 2015 general election
He remained active in the Liberal Democrats. He often appeared as a pundit on radio and television and chaired the party's election campaign in 2015.
Appearing on the BBC election results programme, he took issue with the Exit Poll which suggested the Lib Dems would end the night with 10 seats. Ashdown promised to "eat his hat" if the Exit Poll proved right. In the event, the party won just eight.
Ashdown campaigned vigorously against Brexit and waved away sympathy after the diagnosis of bladder cancer. "I've fought a lot of battles in my life," he said.
He was a politician of great drive and energy, although some complained that he was not the most subtle or diplomatic of figures.
"It's not my job to be popular," he said. "I'm goal-driven, my job is to get results."
He relished the cut and thrust of political life and its potential for throwing up the unexpected.
"If you make a mistake you usually pay the price very quickly," he said. "It is what makes it more exciting and more terrifying than active service."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33440958
|
news_uk-politics-33440958
|
|
Samantha Eastwood: Life sentence for midwife murderer - BBC News
|
2018-12-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Michael Stirling killed Samantha Eastwood and left her in a shallow grave with tape around her head.
|
Stoke & Staffordshire
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The "callous" killer who murdered midwife Samantha Eastwood comforted her sister just hours after burying her body in a shallow grave.
Michael Stirling, 32, admitted killing Ms Eastwood, from Stoke-on-Trent, with whom he had been having a three-year-long affair.
He buried the 28-year-old with tape around her eyes and head at Caverswall, Staffordshire, in August.
Stirling was sentenced to life with a minimum term of almost 17 years.
Ms Eastwood was smothered and strangled at her home hours after finishing a nightshift at Royal Stoke University Hospital on 27 July.
Her body was discovered beside a country lane eight days later, wrapped in a duvet cover, with tape covering her eyes and mouth.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Married Stirling, who is the brother-in-law of Ms Eastwood's ex-fiancé John Peake, joined in the search to find his victim.
The landscape gardener comforted her family and sent messages from her phone so people would think she was still alive.
Police compared him to murderer Ian Huntley - who was convicted of the 2002 murders of two 10-year-old girls in Soham, Cambridgeshire - who took part in several public appeals for information after the killings.
Samantha Eastwood was missing for more than a week before her body was found in a shallow grave
Stirling's lawyer, Charles Miskin QC, said on the day of Ms Eastwood's death she had been in the bedroom with her killer.
According to the police, the lovers would meet regularly after she finished her nightshifts at the hospital.
There was an argument between the pair about the future of their relationship and "he then lost all his self-control", Mr Miskin added.
Judge Mrs Justice Sue Carr said after Stirling had strangled her, he "picked her up but she was dead".
She continued: "You did not want to leave her with her eyes and mouth open and wanted her face to be protected from the consequences of burial so you covered her face, eyes and mouth with tape.
"You put her body into the back of your van and drove off.
"With chilling sang-froid, you texted your wife an affectionate message saying that you would meet her at your parents' house, as you duly did, enjoying a family meal. Your wife describes you as fine and cheerful. Samantha's body lay all the while in your van parked opposite."
Stirling went to his parents' house for dinner with Ms Eastwood's body in his van
In sentencing, the judge said Stirling had "lied over and over again".
In a victim impact statement read to the court, Ms Eastwood's sister, Gemma, said Stirling gave her a hug the day after her sibling went missing.
He had gone to Ms Eastwood's home on the pretence of helping the family - in fact, he had buried her just hours earlier.
Gemma Eastwood said that moment would "forever haunt her".
Miss Eastwood's sister Gemma Eastwood said she had "lost my best friend and sister"
Police described Stirling as "cold", "callous" and "remorseless" in murdering the woman he had conducted a "full-on and intimate" affair with.
Telephone records showed that during July, Stirling had bombarded Ms Eastwood with 128 phone calls. She had called him 25 times.
Det Insp Dan Ison, who led the investigation, said the day after the killing, the murderer used Ms Eastwood's phone to message family members, giving them false hope she was still alive.
In the exchange of text messages that morning, Gemma Eastwood texted to her sister asking her to get in touch.
Stirling replied, posing as her sister, asking to be "left alone".
He continued to exchange messages with Gemma, claiming her sister was having "a massive breakdown about stuff" and resisting her increasingly desperate appeals for her to talk with her.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
The judge described the texting as an act of "breath-taking cruelty".
Stirling was arrested and released by police before Ms Eastwood remains were found.
Officers discovered his phone and his van had been in the same area twice late at night on the day of her disappearance.
He was undone six days later when he returned to the burial site by bicycle while he was under surveillance.
Speaking outside court, Gemma Eastwood said: "No matter the outcome, nothing could bring my sister back.
"I have lost my best friend and sister, my mum has lost a kind, caring and loving daughter, our lives will never be the same."
27 July - 07:45 - Samantha Eastwood last seen alive, leaving the Royal Stoke University Hospital
27 July - about 19:20 - Colleagues become concerned when she doesn't turn up for work
30 July - Police launch appeal for information after her disappearance
1 August - Police release CCTV of Ms Eastwood leaving work with a female colleague, before driving off alone
3 August - Her sister, Gemma Eastwood, makes a tearful appeal, saying her family needs her home "where she belongs"
4 August - Search by police sees officers combing rural areas of Staffordshire and cordoning off parts of Caverswall village
4 August - Later the same day, detectives reveal they have found a body and arrested a 32-year-old man on suspicion of murder
8 August - Michael Stirling, 32, of Gratton Road, Stoke-on-Trent, appears at Stafford Crown Court where it's revealed Ms Eastwood was found in a shallow grave
22 October - Stirling pleads guilty to murdering the midwife after a "longstanding" affair
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-46424611
|
news_uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-46424611
|
|
After Mattis, Trump's foreign policy worries allies - BBC News
|
2018-12-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
There seems to be little evidence of any foreign policy strategy being followed in the White House.
|
US & Canada
|
Is this, at last, the true face of the Trump administration's foreign policy?
US ground troops withdrawn from Syria at short notice; the long-heralded departure of James Mattis - a much respected defence secretary - who can clearly no longer tolerate the president's mercurial approach to security and defence.
Now there are reports (as yet unconfirmed) about a partial US pull-out from Afghanistan, where American forces provide the backbone of the train-and-assist effort that is helping the Afghan security forces in their faltering efforts to contain the Taliban insurgency.
In one sense, none of this should be a surprise. US President Donald Trump has long railed against the wars bequeathed to America by his predecessors.
Many analysts question the value of the US troop presence in Syria, just as they point to the inherent problems in seeking to bolster an Afghan government riven by corruption, factional infighting and so on.
But to cite the deficiencies of these deployments and to question where they are going or what value they bring is one thing. Simply to up sticks and depart is quite another.
Withdrawal, just as much as intervention, requires a game plan, a strategy or framework into which Washington's own actions are placed. And the simple fact is that President Donald Trump does not seem to do strategy.
How, for example, does the US withdrawal from Syria fit into any coherent plan either to stabilise the country or to contain the sizeable elements of the Islamic State (IS) group that still remain? How does it help the US to counteract Russia and Iran's rising influence in the region? And what signal does it send to America's allies about its commitment to their security?
James Mattis (right) resigned a day after President Trump said he was withdrawing troops from Syria
The departure of Defence Secretary Jim Mattis raises many similar questions.
Yes, he resigned, but he had clearly fallen out of favour with Mr Trump weeks ago.
He had fought a hard and pragmatic campaign against the president's disdain for Washington's Nato allies. Indeed, despite the rhetoric coming from the White House, US deployments of troops and equipment to Europe have increased significantly on Mr Trump's watch.
Mr Trump's Syria withdrawal, of course, leaves Washington's Kurdish allies in a predicament - potentially caught between three fires: that of the Turks who are threatening a further encroachment into northern Syria; the remnants of IS; and the Bashar al-Assad government which also has scores to settle.
Many US experts see in Mr Trump's actions a betrayal which will long resonate in the region and beyond.
But it is the strategy question that is fundamental. The world is certainly changing.
China, a major new power, is rising. Russia, a resurgent player, seeks to return to the world stage and has chosen the Middle East as the first region in which it seeks to flex its muscles.
From their rise, other less powerful countries are taking an example, arguing that a market economy can co-exist with an authoritarian form of government.
In many cases, this is bolstered by a rising tide of populism.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Is this the end for Islamic State?
And this extends into the West, afflicting once settled Scandinavia, countries on the main European landmass, and across the Atlantic to the US itself.
The linkage of market economics and liberal democracy that seemed to triumph at the end of the Cold War is now on the back foot, having to defend itself from a variety of challenges.
America's allies are looking to Washington more than ever for a far-sighted strategy that can help all of them to resist these new challenges.
But no coherent strategy is offered. The president tweets, ignores the expert voices in his own administration - and policy changes.
But what is to be left behind in Syria, Afghanistan or anywhere else where President Trump's fleeting gaze lands?
Let's be clear. The arguments for a continued US presence in Syria or indeed even ultimately in Afghanistan are complex, difficult and by no means always convincing.
President Trump's predecessors made many errors along the way. These were situations that went badly wrong. But a precipitous withdrawal may only make matters worse.
To the dismay of its friends and allies, the US seems to have no grand strategy for the Middle East.
The current balance of power means that it has fewer levers to pull and certainly cannot enforce any settlement in Syria on its own.
But Mr Trump appears to be washing his hands and handing the whole job over to Russia, Turkey and Iran.
This absence of a strategic approach is reflected in so many other areas too.
On climate change and arms control, Mr Trump is at variance with Washington's closest friends.
He is ambivalent towards Russia, and his efforts to engage the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un amount to little more than mutual flattery and studied obfuscation of the real issues.
After Mr Trump's first year in office, I went to Washington to make a programme looking at what had changed in defence and wider security policy over the past 12 months.
Surprisingly, the answer then was very little. Block out the "noise" - the tweets and pronouncements from the White House press room - and it was the Pentagon that seemed to be steering a familiar course.
Now though, things have undoubtedly changed. That helmsman - Jim Mattis - is departing.
President Trump seems to be charting his own erratic course through an ocean of reefs, rocks and monsters without any strategic map to guide him.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46645718
|
news_world-us-canada-46645718
|
|
Japan and the whale - BBC News
|
2018-12-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
It is probably the one issue that brings more international condemnation on Japan than any other. The BBC's Rupert Wingfield- Hayes asks why Japan keeps on whaling?
|
Asia
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Is Japan losing the taste for whale meat?
Hunting whales is irrelevant to feeding Japan's population, draws global condemnation and is certainly not economic. So why does Japan still do it?
The answer from the Japanese government is that whaling is an ancient part of Japanese culture, that fishermen have caught whales for centuries, and that Japan will never allow foreigners to tell its people what they can and cannot eat.
One Japanese official once said to me: "Japanese people never eat rabbits, but we don't tell British people that they shouldn't". I pointed out that rabbits are not exactly an endangered species.
Wada is one of five ports allowed to whale under Japan's coastal whaling program
There is a long history to anti-whaling protests
Still, there is some merit to the government's argument.
A number of coastal communities in Japan have indeed hunted whales for centuries, and continue to do so. Taiji in Wakayama prefecture is well known, many would say infamous, for its annual dolphin hunts. There are other places, in Chiba Prefecture and in Ishinomaki in northern Japan, that also do coastal whaling.
Food festivals have been organised to get the public to eat more whale - even in curry
So, yes, coastal whaling is part of Japanese culture, like Norway and Iceland and the Inuit of northern Canada. But only Japan continues to sail a fleet of ships half way across the globe to hunt whales in the Antarctic and maintains a large factory ship that can process hundreds of whales at sea.
Nothing about these Antarctic whaling expeditions is historic. Japan's first whaling voyage to the Antarctic took place in the mid-1930s but the really huge hunts didn't get going until after World War Two.
Japan lay in ruins, its population starving. With the encouragement of General Douglas MacArthur, Japan converted two huge US Navy tankers into factory ships and set sail for the Southern Ocean.
From the late 1940s to the mid-1960s whale meat was the single biggest source of meat in Japan. At its peak in 1964 Japan killed more than 24,000 whales in one year, most of them enormous fin whales and sperm whales.
Today Japan can afford to import meat from Australia and America. There is no deep-sea commercial whaling in Japan. The fleet that is now hunting in Antarctic waters is paid for by Japanese taxpayers to carry out what the Japanese government describes as "scientific research".
Japan's other justification is that it needs to kill hundreds of whales each year to study them. But the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has systematically dismantled that argument. In 2014 it ruled that there was no scientific case for Japan's programme of "lethal research" in the Southern Ocean, and ordered Tokyo to stop.
For a year Japan stopped. But last year it sent its fleet to sea again insisting, to widespread disbelief, that its new, smaller, Antarctic whaling programme satisfies the ICJ's requirements.
Junko Sakuma used to work for Greenpeace in Japan. For the last 10 years she has been researching Japan's whaling industry.
"There is no benefit to Japan from whaling...but nobody knows how to quit," she tells me at Tokyo's famously chaotic Tsukiji fish market, the biggest in the world renowned for its pre-dawn tuna auctions.
Of the thousands of fish wholesalers in Tsukiji only two still deal in whale meat.
At one stand we find a few large hunks of minke whale meat, deep red and oozing blood. At the next there are two long slabs of lighter-coloured fin whale meat, an endangered species, its trading banned by CITES.
Business is bad, complains the stall owner. Last year Japan caught no whales in the Antarctic, so there is less minke whale meat available, he says.
If there is a whale meat shortage, the price should be soaring. But according to Junko it is not.
"The fact is, most Japanese people do not eat whale meat," she says. "Consumption has been falling for years," and adds that "even as the amount of whale meat decreases, the price doesn't go up".
According to Junko's research, the average consumption of whale meat by Japanese people in 2015 was just 30g (one ounce) per person.
Iceland also whales, but sends some of the meat to Japan
If eating whale is such an integral part of Japanese culture, why are so few eating it?
I turn to my old friend Etsuo Kato. Over the 20 years we have known each other he has, on occasion, tried to persuade me to eat whale meat with him. Kato-San grew up in Kita-Kyushu in western Japan, close to the big whaling port at Shimonoseki.
We are sitting in a cosy restaurant in Tokyo's notorious red light district, Kabukicho. Above us hangs a very large, and rather ancient, mummified whale penis. On the wall are picture of whales.
The first plate to arrive is whale sashimi - it is raw. The owner points to the different delicacies; steak, heart, tongue and even raw whale skin.
My stomach turns, but I steel myself. Gingerly, I put a bit of raw whale steak into my mouth. It has a strong gamey flavour, chewy and fibrous. Next, I try the tongue. It is salty and fishy. Kato-San points to the heart. I politely decline.
"When I was a child I ate this every day," he says. "Meat meant whale meat. I didn't know what beef was, or pork. Steak was whale steak, bacon meant whale bacon."
But if Japan stopped whale hunting you would be sad?
He looks at me smiling and gently shaking his head.
"I don't need whale hunting" he says. "Once you have eaten beef there is no need to eat whale meat."
The other customers in the restaurant are all middle-aged salary men. Eating a bit of whale meat is nostalgic, remembering school meals 50 years ago.
Japan's only whaling factory ship is ageing and some analysts suggest the country may be reluctant to fund a replacement
Confrontations on the high seas are used by both sides to drum up support
So I come back again to my original question: why does Japan still do it?
Recently I was at a private briefing with a high-ranking member of the Japanese government. Japan had just announced it was going to resuming whaling. I outlined to him why I thought it made no sense, and asked him to respond. His answer was astonishingly frank.
"I agree with you," he said. "Antarctic whaling is not part of Japanese culture. It is terrible for our international image and there is no commercial demand for the meat. I think in another 10 years there will be no deep sea whaling in Japan."
"So why not stop now?" asked another journalist.
"There are some important political reasons why it is difficult to stop now." he said. He would say no more.
But Junko Sakuma thinks the answer lies in the fact that Japan's whaling is government-run, a large bureaucracy with research budgets, annual plans, promotions and pensions.
"If the number of staff in a bureaucrat's office decreases while they are in charge, they feel tremendous shame," she says.
"Which means most of the bureaucrats will fight to keep the whaling section in their ministry at all costs. And that is true with the politicians as well. If the issue is closely related to their constituency, they will promise to bring back commercial whaling. It is a way of keeping their seats."
It may seem incredibly banal. But Japan's determination to continue whaling may come down to a handful of MPs from whaling constituencies and a few hundred bureaucrats who don't want to see their budgets cut.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-35397749
|
news_world-asia-35397749
|
|
Japan says it's time to allow sustainable whaling - BBC News
|
2018-12-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Japan is trying to convince the world the time has come to make commercial whaling legal again.
|
Asia
|
Whales are known to be intelligent and sociable animals
Few conservation issues generate as emotional a response as whaling. Are we now about to see countries killing whales for profit again?
Commercial whaling has been effectively banned for more than 30 years, after some whales were driven almost to extinction.
But the International Whaling Committee (IWC) is currently meeting in Brazil and next week will give its verdict on a proposal from Japan to end the ban.
Yes, they do - but it's complicated.
IWC members agreed to a moratorium on hunting in 1986, to allow whale stocks to recover.
Pro-whaling nations expected the moratorium to be temporary, until consensus could be reached on sustainable catch quotas.
Japan used a clause allowing scientific whaling to continue its hunt
Instead, it became a quasi-permanent ban, to the delight of conservationists but the dismay of whaling nations like Japan, Norway and Iceland who argue that whaling is part of their culture and should continue in a sustainable way.
Among other things, it says it's investigating stock levels and to see whether the whales are endangered or not.
Critics say this is just a cover so they can kill whales for food. And in fact, the meat from the whales killed for research usually does end up for sale.
Hideki Moronuki, Japan's senior fisheries negotiator and commissioner for the IWC, told the BBC that Japan wants the IWC to get back to its original purpose - both conserving whales but also "the sustainable use of whales".
Whaling in the 19th and early 20th Century brought the giant mammals to the brink of extinction.
By the 1960s improved catch methods and giant factory ships made it obvious that whale hunting could not go unchecked. Hence the moratorium.
Today, whale stocks are carefully monitored, and while most species are still endangered, others - like the minke whale which Japan primarily hunts - are not.
So Japan, the current chair of the IWC, is suggesting a package of measures, including setting up a Sustainable Whaling Committee and setting sustainable catch limits "for abundant whale stocks/species".
As an incentive to anti-whaling nations, the proposals would also make it easier to establish new whale sanctuaries.
Anti whaling activists are of course up in arms about the proposal.
Many whales are endangered, minke whales however are not
"These graceful giants face so many threats in our degraded oceans such as entanglement, plastic and noise pollution, and climate change, the last thing they need is to be put back in the whalers' crosshairs," says Kitty Block, president of Humane Society International.
There's also the argument that whales are very intelligent animals with highly developed social structures. Killing them causes them fear, panic and pain.
The old way of whaling with a plain harpoon meant a slow and agonising death.
Modern hunters though aim to kill the animal instantly, usually with an exploding harpoon, but conservations argue it can still take very long for a whale to die.
Traditional whaling often resulted in a drawn-out death for the animal
Two years ago the Australian government released graphic footage from 2008 showing a Japanese research ship harpooning a whale which activist group Sea Shepherd said took more than 20 minutes to die.
"And that's not to mention that they are killing them with their family members, with their pods having to witness their family members screaming out in pain," says Jeff Hansen, managing director of Sea Shepherd in Australia.
Those in favour of whaling say such cases are exceptions - accidents that also happen in any abattoir.
Yet their main point is that they argue that opposition to sustainable whaling of non-endangered stocks is deeply hypocritical.
Sustainable whaling is no less moral that commercial farming, say pro-whaling groups
Industrial meat production keeps pigs, cows and chicken in grim captivity from birth to slaughterhouse, but this seldom stops shoppers from reaching for a nice cut of pork or beef.
There is also the hunter's defence that killing a wild animal is more ethical than raising an animal in captivity with the sole purpose of eating it.
Lars Walloe, former head of Norway's delegation to the IWC, told the BBC whaling is the same as killing "other large mammals in the forest, like deer, elk, moose".
"We kill them for meat and we don't see the difference between killing a minke whale and a moose as long as it's done humanely."
Leading anti-whaling nations like Australia have already said they would band together to reject any attempts to undermine the current ban.
Australia has long been Japan's major opponent when it comes to whaling and wants to strengthen the IWC's protection of whales. It would face fierce opposition at home if it changed its mind.
Canberra took the issue to the International Court of Justice, which in 2014 ruled against Japan, saying it was not necessary to kill whales in order to study them.
Scientific whaling is widely seen as a poor disguise
But that was in reference to one specific scientific programme - so Japan simply changed said programme and resumed whaling.
Japanese officials, however, have told the BBC they hope the new proposal will be considered and adopted. "This issue should be resolved based on science and international law, but not with emotion," urges Hideki Moronuki.
Donald R Rothwell, professor of international law at Australia National University, told the BBC an end to the moratorium might not ultimately have much impact.
"If Japan would offer to end its scientific programme, a future commercial whaling quota would likely see very little change in the actual number of whales killed," he said.
Under the scientific programme, Japan takes around 300 to 400 animals each year and a commercial quota could limit them to a similar number.
Currently, some of the whales are hunted in a whale sanctuary in the Antarctic. Japan argues the sanctuary is to protect against commercial whaling but that scientific whaling does not break any rules.
Whales caught by Japan for research do often end up on the plate
If in future, Japan was to whale under an IWC quota for commercial purpose, it would be bound by the sanctuary rules.
And if Japan were simply to leave the IWC, it would still be bound by international laws that bind countries to "co-operate on whale conservation".
But ultimately, there's a good chance the contentious issue will gradually die down by itself.
Japanese demand for whale meat has long been on the decline.
The industry already survives on state subsidies so eventually, changing tastes might mean commercial whaling is undone by plain commercial arithmetic.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45364696
|
news_world-asia-45364696
|
|
Brexit: May is making new enemies, not finding fans - BBC News
|
2018-12-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The PM's attempts to convince backbenchers to support her deal is proving fairly fruitless.
|
UK Politics
|
Theresa May is holding meetings with MPs to try to win their backing over her deal
This is not - I repeat NOT - a re-run of the referendum.
Theresa May will never convince purists on either side of the Brexit debate that they are wrong to believe it's right to leave, or heresy to argue to stay.
What she needs to do is get enough of her colleagues to accept they can't have everything they desire, but that there is enough in her compromise to say yes to an arrangement that fulfils the Tories' political promises.
So far, however, her arguments don't seem to be holding much sway. The tally of Tory MPs who've declared they're willing to vote against is rising - irrespective of whether the public detests or ignores the circus.
With less than a week to go, despite the prime minister's private meetings with dozens of backbenchers, they are not emerging convinced.
If anything, her compromise seems to be making new enemies, not finding new fans.
And fresh from a trio of defeats, Mrs May seems to be arguing the case with diminishing authority.
A tentative hunt for changes that could peel rebels away seems fruitless so far.
Just when the prime minister needs goodwill, respect and trust, it is in very short supply.
One senior Tory told me: "She doesn't listen to anyone, so why should we."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46461634
|
news_uk-politics-46461634
|
|
Christmas cheer at Lady Lumley's School after ban lifted - BBC News
|
2018-12-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Pupils were previously told Christmas was cancelled unless they could argue a case for it.
|
York & North Yorkshire
|
The school's RE teacher said the true meaning of Christmas had been buried under "an avalanche of commercialisation"
A school that threatened to ban Christmas has been persuaded to reinstate it by "thoughtful" pupils.
Lady Lumley's School in Pickering, North Yorkshire, previously told pupils it would ban all festive activities.
RE teacher Chris Paul said "an avalanche of commercialisation" had robbed the season of its meaning.
But after hundreds of emails and letters "making a strong case" for jingling the bells and bringing back the baubles, the school relented.
Mrs Paul had challenged pupils to consider the true meaning of Christmas and come up with answers to persuade her to change her mind.
Since throwing down the challenge, the school said it had received more than 500 emails and letters.
Head teacher Richard Bramley said: "Those students who really thought about the situation and challenged the decision appropriately created the change and brought back Christmas.
"I hope they and everyone else has a good Christmas."
Some parents criticised the school for going too far and "stealing Christmas"
He said the challenge was to make students consider the way in which society celebrates Christmas and think about the social problems that arise around this time.
"Students were asked to challenge the status quo; to ask 'why should we do things just because we have always done them?' and... to question whether non-religious people should celebrate a religious festival?"
Previously Mrs Paul told pupils there would be "no cards, no parties, no gifts and no Christmas tree".
"Christmas is a day celebrating the birth of Jesus and should be a time of good will to all, yet it can be a very stressful, expensive, argumentative and lonely time," she said.
However, she added: "If the arguments are good enough, we might see fairy lights in Lady Lumley's once more."
• None 'Oh, and we got rid of Christmas'
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-46444498
|
news_uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-46444498
|
|
After Mattis, Trump's foreign policy worries allies - BBC News
|
2018-12-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
There seems to be little evidence of any foreign policy strategy being followed in the White House.
|
US & Canada
|
Is this, at last, the true face of the Trump administration's foreign policy?
US ground troops withdrawn from Syria at short notice; the long-heralded departure of James Mattis - a much respected defence secretary - who can clearly no longer tolerate the president's mercurial approach to security and defence.
Now there are reports (as yet unconfirmed) about a partial US pull-out from Afghanistan, where American forces provide the backbone of the train-and-assist effort that is helping the Afghan security forces in their faltering efforts to contain the Taliban insurgency.
In one sense, none of this should be a surprise. US President Donald Trump has long railed against the wars bequeathed to America by his predecessors.
Many analysts question the value of the US troop presence in Syria, just as they point to the inherent problems in seeking to bolster an Afghan government riven by corruption, factional infighting and so on.
But to cite the deficiencies of these deployments and to question where they are going or what value they bring is one thing. Simply to up sticks and depart is quite another.
Withdrawal, just as much as intervention, requires a game plan, a strategy or framework into which Washington's own actions are placed. And the simple fact is that President Donald Trump does not seem to do strategy.
How, for example, does the US withdrawal from Syria fit into any coherent plan either to stabilise the country or to contain the sizeable elements of the Islamic State (IS) group that still remain? How does it help the US to counteract Russia and Iran's rising influence in the region? And what signal does it send to America's allies about its commitment to their security?
James Mattis (right) resigned a day after President Trump said he was withdrawing troops from Syria
The departure of Defence Secretary Jim Mattis raises many similar questions.
Yes, he resigned, but he had clearly fallen out of favour with Mr Trump weeks ago.
He had fought a hard and pragmatic campaign against the president's disdain for Washington's Nato allies. Indeed, despite the rhetoric coming from the White House, US deployments of troops and equipment to Europe have increased significantly on Mr Trump's watch.
Mr Trump's Syria withdrawal, of course, leaves Washington's Kurdish allies in a predicament - potentially caught between three fires: that of the Turks who are threatening a further encroachment into northern Syria; the remnants of IS; and the Bashar al-Assad government which also has scores to settle.
Many US experts see in Mr Trump's actions a betrayal which will long resonate in the region and beyond.
But it is the strategy question that is fundamental. The world is certainly changing.
China, a major new power, is rising. Russia, a resurgent player, seeks to return to the world stage and has chosen the Middle East as the first region in which it seeks to flex its muscles.
From their rise, other less powerful countries are taking an example, arguing that a market economy can co-exist with an authoritarian form of government.
In many cases, this is bolstered by a rising tide of populism.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Is this the end for Islamic State?
And this extends into the West, afflicting once settled Scandinavia, countries on the main European landmass, and across the Atlantic to the US itself.
The linkage of market economics and liberal democracy that seemed to triumph at the end of the Cold War is now on the back foot, having to defend itself from a variety of challenges.
America's allies are looking to Washington more than ever for a far-sighted strategy that can help all of them to resist these new challenges.
But no coherent strategy is offered. The president tweets, ignores the expert voices in his own administration - and policy changes.
But what is to be left behind in Syria, Afghanistan or anywhere else where President Trump's fleeting gaze lands?
Let's be clear. The arguments for a continued US presence in Syria or indeed even ultimately in Afghanistan are complex, difficult and by no means always convincing.
President Trump's predecessors made many errors along the way. These were situations that went badly wrong. But a precipitous withdrawal may only make matters worse.
To the dismay of its friends and allies, the US seems to have no grand strategy for the Middle East.
The current balance of power means that it has fewer levers to pull and certainly cannot enforce any settlement in Syria on its own.
But Mr Trump appears to be washing his hands and handing the whole job over to Russia, Turkey and Iran.
This absence of a strategic approach is reflected in so many other areas too.
On climate change and arms control, Mr Trump is at variance with Washington's closest friends.
He is ambivalent towards Russia, and his efforts to engage the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un amount to little more than mutual flattery and studied obfuscation of the real issues.
After Mr Trump's first year in office, I went to Washington to make a programme looking at what had changed in defence and wider security policy over the past 12 months.
Surprisingly, the answer then was very little. Block out the "noise" - the tweets and pronouncements from the White House press room - and it was the Pentagon that seemed to be steering a familiar course.
Now though, things have undoubtedly changed. That helmsman - Jim Mattis - is departing.
President Trump seems to be charting his own erratic course through an ocean of reefs, rocks and monsters without any strategic map to guide him.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46645718
|
news_world-us-canada-46645718
|
|
Paisley faces luxury Maldives holiday questions - BBC News
|
2018-12-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The DUP MP did not declare a holiday to the Maldives in 2016, BBC Spotlight reports.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Mr Paisley was recently suspended from the House of Commons for 30 days for "serious misconduct"
DUP MP Ian Paisley was given a complimentary holiday at a luxury Maldives resort months after advocating on behalf of its government.
BBC Spotlight obtained new evidence which suggested the visit was requested by the Maldivian government and facilitated by the resort owner, who had political links.
The programme examined whether the MP should have declared the trip in 2016.
He said he paid for part of the holiday and the rest was paid for by a friend.
The North Antrim MP did not reveal the identity of this friend. He said the friend was unconnected with his work and has received no benefit as a result of his work.
A DUP spokesman said: "The party officers will want to consider these very serious matters being mindful of the high standards we require of elected representatives."
Mr Paisley was recently suspended from the House of Commons for 30 days for "serious misconduct" for failing to declare two family holidays to Sri Lanka in 2013.
Ian Paisley, his wife and his two sons received full-board five-night stay at the luxury resort in October and November 2016, eight months after he was part of a controversial parliamentary visit to the islands.
Gavin Millar QC, an expert on parliamentary rules, said the Nolan principles on standards in public life placed an onus on Mr Paisley to be transparent about why he had not registered the trip to the Maldives.
"MPs should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands," said Mr Millar.
"Now his decision in this case, his decision was not to register the benefit, after the trip in late 2016, and he has an obligation to give reasons for that decision.
"Unless he can come up with some wider public interest argument for not saying more, he should be saying significantly more about any considerations that are relevant to the motive of that source in paying that money."
Mr Paisley has been contacted by Spotlight about Mr Millar's comments but has not responded.
In a statement to Spotlight on Tuesday, Mr Paisley said: "I have responded in clear and categoric terms to your questions.
"For the record, the government of the Maldives did not organise or pay for my family vacation in 2016, which I do not intend to go into with you. I'm satisfied the vacation did not have to be recorded on the register."
Ian Paisley visited the Maldives in February 2016 with two other MPs from an All-Party Parliamentary Group.
At the time, the Maldives government, headed by President Abdulla Yameen, was being criticised by organisations including the United Nations and the Commonwealth for human rights abuses.
Mr Paisley, however, appeared to advocate on behalf of the regime, speaking out against economic sanctions.
With the other two MPs, he also visited the prison where opposition leader Mohamed Nasheed had been held, and described the conditions as quite luxurious.
BBC Spotlight reporter Lyndsey Telford travelled to the Maldives as part of her investigation
Later that year Mr Paisley travelled to the Maldives again for a holiday with his wife and two children.
Spotlight's evidence, including an image which appears to be from the resort's internal records provided to the programme by an anonymous source, suggests that full board and transfers were provided complimentarily at the request of Mr Yameen's government and facilitated by the resort owner, Hussain Hilmy.
Mr Hilmy is a former minister in the Maldives government and has held a number of other important public posts.
Gavin Millar QC said that if, as Spotlight's documentary evidence suggests, the benefit was requested by the government and facilitated by Mr Hilmy, Mr Paisley should not have accepted it.
"But having accepted it, he certainly should have registered it undoubtedly.
"There are very strict rules about lobbying and creating an interest for yourself that may be perceived as lobbying. The moment you know these facts, that are disclosed in this document, the perception is that this is a reward for him having advocated for the Maldives government."
Ian Paisley has denied that the trip was connected with the government of the Maldives.
Last week, Ian Paisley told Spotlight that he had discussed the holiday in the Maldives with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Kathryn Stone during her investigation into his Sri Lanka holidays.
Mr Paisley claimed that as a consequence of that conversation, he had satisfied himself he did not need to register the holiday.
Ian Paisley told Spotlight he had evidence which "categorically disproves that the trip was connected to the government"
After Spotlight contacted the commissioner's office, Mr Paisley got in touch with Spotlight again to clarify that he had not spoken to the commissioner as he had claimed.
He said he had in fact spoken to the parliamentary registrar who administers the register of members' interests.
Mr Millar QC said the registrar's role was limited.
"The one thing they can give you as an MP is a clear account of what the rules require and what they don't require," eh said.
"But I understand that is as far as they will go. They will not give a licence to an MP not to declare in a particular situation nor will they say you must declare in a particular situation.
The Maldives is a republic that lies south-west of the Indian sub-continent. It is made up of a chain of nearly 1,200 islands, most of them uninhabited.
Its political history has been unsettled since the electoral defeat of long-serving President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in 2008.
"That's not how the code works. The way the code works is that it is ultimately always a matter for the MP."
Ian Paisley also told Spotlight he had evidence which, he said, "categorically disproves that the trip was connected to the government".
Two emails, which he had arranged from contacts linked to the regime and the resort.
The first was from Ahmed Shiaan, who was the Maldivian Ambassador to the UK at the time of the visit.
He said the holiday had not been arranged by the Embassy or paid for by the government of the Maldives.
Ian Paisley also sent Spotlight an email from the resort's commercial operating officer, Andrew Ashmore, who said invoices for the stay had been settled and paid for privately although he could not say by whom.
Political rivals have been quick to criticise Mr Paisley.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Colum Eastwood This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Sinn Féin has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards asking her to investigate the allegations.
North Antrim MLA Philip McGuigan said there are "serious questions to answer" about Mr Paisley's relation with the government of the Maldives.
Alliance leader Naomi Long said Mr Paisley had left himself open to criticism by not revealing his friend's identity.
"If this wasn't related to parliamentary duties the easiest way to clarify that is by saying who gave the gift and why," she told BBC's Good Morning Ulster programme.
SDLP leader Colum Eastwood went further, calling for the North Antrim MP to resign.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Colum Eastwood This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
"It really is time for Ian Paisley to resign," tweeted Mr Eastwood. "If he doesn't, then the onus is on Arlene Foster to remove him from the DUP."
Mr Eastwood later tweeted: "I've written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards asking her to investigate Spotlight's allegations on Ian Paisley."
TUV leader Jim Allister said Mr Paisley now should "refer himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, so that a considered verdict can be delivered".
The UUP leader, Robin Swann, called on the commissioner to launch an investigation "urgently".
When the Daily Telegraph published revelations about his holidays to Sri Lanka in 2017, Mr Paisley initially said that the articles were "devoid of logic" and threatened legal action.
He also referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
The Commissioner, Kathryn Stone, found that Mr Paisley had failed to properly declare two holidays and engaged in paid advocacy for the Sri Lankan government.
Her findings were supported by parliament which suspended Mr Paisley from the House of Commons for 30 days.
However, a petition to trigger a by-election in his North Antrim constituency fell short by 444 votes, an outcome described by Mr Paisley as a "miracle".
On his return to the House of Commons following his suspension, he said: "A smaller man than me would have crumbled."
Mr Paisley has been MP for North Antrim since 2010, succeeding his father Ian Paisley, a former first minister of Northern Ireland and Democratic Unionist leader, who had held the seat since 1970.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46530569
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-46530569
|
|
Obituary: Paddy Ashdown - BBC News
|
2018-12-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Former Royal Marine who led the Liberal Democrats and spearheaded a peace initiative in the former Yugoslavia.
|
UK Politics
|
Paddy Ashdown was the action man of British politics.
A former Royal Marine officer, he was the first elected leader of the Liberal Democrats, a party then badly in need of some military-style discipline.
He led his party to its best election result for half a century but his combative style of leadership did not always sit easily with some activists.
His mixture of military and diplomatic experience meant he was well-suited for the role he later undertook in the former Yugoslavia.
Jeremy John Durham Ashdown was born in Delhi, India, on 27 February 1941, into an Irish family with a long record of service in the administration of the sub-continent. He boasted Irish nationalist leader Daniel O'Connell among his ancestors.
His father was an officer in the Indian Army who later faced a court martial for refusing to abandon his troops during the retreat to Dunkirk. The charges were eventually thrown out.
One of his earliest memories was seeing dead bodies in the streets, the result of conflict between Hindus and Muslims.
He saw active service with the Royal Marines in the Far East and Persian Gulf
The young Ashdown spent his childhood years on a farm his father had purchased in County Down, Northern Ireland, before attending Bedford School, in England, where his Irish brogue led to the nickname Paddy.
He did not always find school easy, with one report describing him as vain and a poor team-player. There was a sexual relationship with a female maths teacher which he described in his memoir, A Fortunate Life, as "a rite of passage".
He quit before taking his A-levels and joined the Royal Marines in 1959.
Ashdown saw active service in Borneo and the Persian Gulf before joining the elite Special Boat Service, the seagoing equivalent of the SAS.
In 1967, he went to Hong Kong where he learned Mandarin and qualified as an interpreter, before returning to Northern Ireland where he commanded a commando company in Belfast at a time when the Troubles were raging.
Ashdown quit the Royal Marines in 1972 and joined the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) where he worked with diplomatic cover in Geneva liaising with a number of United Nations departments.
Although he was a Labour supporter he had shown little interest in politics so there was surprise when he decided to quit his comfortable life in Switzerland and become an active member of the Liberal party.
"Most of my friends thought I was utterly bonkers," he later recalled, claiming he made the decision after being horrified at the state of the UK following the period of industrial unrest and fuel shortages in the mid-70s.
In 1976, he was selected as the Liberal candidate in his wife's home constituency of Yeovil which had been held by right-wing Tory MP John Peyton for more than two decades.
With what became a trademark energetic campaigning style, he set out to squeeze the Labour vote and, in the 1979 general election, took his party to second place, although still more than 10,000 votes behind Peyton.
Having given up a lucrative post with the foreign office, Ashdown took a job with a subsidiary of the Westland Helicopter company, based in Yeovil.
He then moved on to work with Tescan, a processor of sheepskins, but found himself out of work when the firm closed in 1981.
As the personnel manager, he had to make his team redundant, something he described as "the worst day of my life". He was on the dole for six months before obtaining a job as a youth worker with Dorset County Council.
His continuing campaigning in Yeovil paid off in the 1983 election when John Peyton decided to stand down; he won the seat with just over 50% of the popular vote.
He joined Neil Kinnock on a picket line at GCHQ
It was the era of the SDP-Liberal Alliance and Ashdown quickly found himself appointed as the Liberal spokesman on trade and industry.
He was a prominent campaigner against the stationing of American cruise missiles on British soil, describing them as "the weapon we have to stop".
Ashdown also spoke out against Margaret Thatcher's decision to allow the US to use bases in Britain to bomb Libya and was one of the harshest critics of the government's decision to ban workers at GCHQ from being members of a trade union.
He had become a popular figure in Yeovil, where he increased his majority over the Conservatives in 1987. He had gained a reputation as someone not afraid to speak his mind, but who did not suffer fools gladly.
In 1988, the SDP and Liberal Party formally merged as the Social and Liberal Democrats, later shortened to the Liberal Democrats.
When former Liberal leader David Steel declined to stand for the leadership of the new party, Ashdown comfortably saw off Alan Beith, the only other candidate.
He inherited a party licking its wounds after the arguments that had accompanied its formation and leading figures from both the Liberal and SDP camps walking away in protest at the merger.
He comfortably won the ballot to become leader of the Liberal Democrats
Ashdown threw himself into getting his party into shape for the 1992 election and it was to his credit that, despite all the problems, the new party suffered a net loss of just two seats.
His career, and his marriage, also survived press revelations of an affair with his secretary, five years previously, leading to one Sun headline dubbing him Paddy Pantsdown.
A year later, Ashdown began negotiations with Labour leader John Smith over closer co-operation between the two parties. After Smith's death, he continued the talks with Tony Blair. It was the end of his party's historic stance of "equidistance" between Conservatives and Labour.
He developed a close rapport with Blair. One colleague said the two of them would "sit at the cabinet table and fix their gaze on each other - they worked exceptionally closely together".
The relationship was remarkably candid with Ashdown once telling Blair that "some folk think you are a smarmy git".
Despite early signs that Labour were on course to win the 1997 election, Ashdown still hoped that he could offer the support of the Liberal Democrats in return for Labour agreeing to voting reform.
Although Blair was sympathetic, the Labour landslide of 1997 removed any need for Lib Dem support and the majority of Blair's new cabinet, sitting on a secure majority, were not in favour of moving to some form of PR.
Ashdown was also disappointed that Blair refused to share the Lib Dem leader's enthusiasm for joining the euro.
In the election, the Liberal Democrats increased their number of MPs from 18 to 46, as the Conservative vote crumbled. But it remained the third party in UK politics.
Ashdown stood down as Lib Dem leader in 1999 and was replaced by Charles Kennedy. Two years later, he quit the Commons and entered the Lords as Baron Ashdown of Norton-sub Hamdon.
Retirement was far from his mind and, in 2002, his military and diplomatic experience saw him appointed as High Representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina.
He had been a continuing advocate of intervention in the strife that followed the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia and he made a number of positive contributions to creating a stable framework of government.
"Bosnia is under my skin," he said. "It's the place you cannot leave behind."
He appeared as a prosecution witness in the trial of the former Serbian leader, Slobodan Milosevic, although his claim that he had watched Serbian shells falling on villages in Kosovo was disputed by the defence.
He was considered for the post of UN representative to Afghanistan in 2008 after he had called for a high-level co-ordinator to lead the foreign mission to the country, but ruled himself out of contention.
Lord Ashdown campaigned with then-leader Nick Clegg ahead of the 2015 general election
He remained active in the Liberal Democrats. He often appeared as a pundit on radio and television and chaired the party's election campaign in 2015.
Appearing on the BBC election results programme, he took issue with the Exit Poll which suggested the Lib Dems would end the night with 10 seats. Ashdown promised to "eat his hat" if the Exit Poll proved right. In the event, the party won just eight.
Ashdown campaigned vigorously against Brexit and waved away sympathy after the diagnosis of bladder cancer. "I've fought a lot of battles in my life," he said.
He was a politician of great drive and energy, although some complained that he was not the most subtle or diplomatic of figures.
"It's not my job to be popular," he said. "I'm goal-driven, my job is to get results."
He relished the cut and thrust of political life and its potential for throwing up the unexpected.
"If you make a mistake you usually pay the price very quickly," he said. "It is what makes it more exciting and more terrifying than active service."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33440958
|
news_uk-politics-33440958
|
|
Brexit: Will more Remainers voice their fears? - BBC News
|
2018-12-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As another minister resigns, it is becoming increasingly difficult for Theresa May's Brexit deal.
|
UK Politics
|
Theresa May is currently in Argentina for the G20 meeting of world leaders
She might be 7,000 miles away, but Theresa May's colleagues at home - including those she promoted - have the capacity to ruin her night.
Just as she was sitting down to at a glittering evening with her fellow world leaders, news broke that Sam Gyimah had just become the latest minister to quit over Brexit.
He had a specific reason to leave. As a science minister, he was frustrated with arguments between the UK and the EU over the satellite programme Galileo.
It's only today that the prime minister confirmed that the UK was giving up on those talks.
But it is his overall verdict on Mrs May's Brexit compromise that will really hurt.
Mr Gymiah was a Remainer, but an early backer of the prime minister and part of her leadership campaign back in 2018.
However, his words are strong - this is not just a minor grump.
He slams her agreement with the EU overall, judging that it is not in the national interest and sets up the country for failure, leaving us poorer, weaker, and less secure.
He even says the idea of another referendum should not be dismissed, even if that means the legal process of departure, Article 50, has to be extended.
Mr Gyimah said he would be voting against Mrs May's Breit deal
There is some comfort overnight for Mrs May from Michael Gove, who as one of the leading voices in the Leave campaign is, belatedly perhaps, urging his Brexiteer colleagues to get onboard.
In an article for the Daily Mail, Mr Gove warns that if they vote down the PM's compromise, Brexit itself is under threat.
But this latest resignation is another sign of how hard it will be for the prime minister to pass the vote that could define her future.
And perhaps while Brexiteer anger about the deal has been raging for weeks, more former Remainers are yet to voice their fears.
One former minister suggested that ministers with doubts, of which there are many, may now be deciding to call time, saying, "they are not prepared to go over the cliff for a rotten deal that will be voted down anyway".
It's not certain that will happen. But Mr Gyimah is one fewer vote for Mrs May's compromise deal, when she desperately needs every single one.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46408741
|
news_uk-politics-46408741
|
|
Uber loses latest legal bid over driver rights - BBC News
|
2018-12-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Court of Appeal upholds a ruling that Uber drivers should be classed as workers, not self-employed.
|
Business
|
The case centres around former Uber drivers James Farrar (left) and Yaseen Aslam
Uber has lost an appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be treated as workers rather than self-employed.
In 2016 a tribunal ruled drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam were Uber staff and entitled to holiday pay, paid rest breaks and the minimum wage.
That ruling has now been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
But Uber pointed out that one of the three judges backed its case and said it would appeal to the Supreme Court.
Mr Farrar, who is chairman of the United Private Hire Drivers branch of the IWGB union, said: "I am delighted today's ruling brings us closer to the ending Uber's abuse of precarious workers made possible by tactics of contract trickery, psychological manipulation and old-fashioned bullying."
He added that he was dismayed that implementation of worker status for drivers was being further delayed while Uber seeks yet another appeal.
"This is nothing more than a cynical ploy to delay inevitable changes to its business model while it pursues a record breaking $120bn stock market flotation," Mr Farrar said.
"It's time for Uber to come clean with all its stakeholders and abide by the decision of the courts."
The GMB union said that Uber should "just accept the verdict", after losing three times in a row.
Prior to this, the Employment Tribunal ruled in November 2017 that it was upholding its original decision.
Uber drivers on strike in London in October demanding employment rights, an end to unfair dismissals, a rise in fares and a reduction of commission
"This is the perfect early Christmas present for GMB's Uber members, but this case is about the wider 'gig economy' too," said the GMB's general secretary Tim Roache.
"Employers are on notice that they can't just run rough shod over working people to put more on the bottom line for shareholders."
Uber has been granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The firm said it was encouraged that one of the appeal judges said that Uber's argument was "neither unrealistic nor artificial", but in accordance with a well-recognised business model in the private hire car industry.
"Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades, long before our app existed," an Uber spokesperson said.
"Drivers who use the Uber app make more than the London Living Wage and want to keep the freedom to choose if, when and where they drive.
"If drivers were classified as workers they would inevitably lose some of the freedom and flexibility that comes with being their own boss."
However, law firm Gowling WLG expects the Supreme Court to uphold the decision.
"Yet another court confirms that the more a brand seeks to control the activities of the people that deliver that brand's services to the public, the less likely those people are to be self-employed," said Jonathan Chamberlain, partner at Gowling.
"The law will probably always remain uncertain in this area, despite the governments promise of reform, but the direction of travel is clear. I expect the Supreme Court to uphold this judgement, but we shall see."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46617584
|
news_business-46617584
|
|
Brexit referendum 'plausible' if MPs can't decide - Amber Rudd - BBC News
|
2018-12-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
There would be a case for another referendum if Parliament is deadlocked, Amber Rudd says.
|
UK Politics
|
Another Brexit referendum will become a "plausible" way forward if there is deadlock in Parliament, Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd has said.
She told ITV's Peston show while she did not personally support another vote, the case for one would grow if MPs could not agree another solution.
She said she hoped MPs would back Theresa May's deal with the EU next month but it would be "very difficult".
The PM says the UK must be ready to leave without a deal if it is rejected.
Mrs May has repeatedly ruled out holding another referendum, saying it was the government's duty to implement the result of the 2016 Brexit vote.
A Downing Street source said the government was "very clear we are 100% opposed" to another referendum.
The UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March 2019 but an agreement on the terms of its withdrawal and a declaration on future relations will only come into force if the UK and EU Parliaments approve it.
The Commons vote was due to be held earlier this month but the PM postponed it once it became clear it would be defeated by a large margin.
She has since sought to gain further assurances from EU leaders to allay MPs' concerns.
Ms Rudd told Robert Peston she could not be sure MPs would back the deal. She suggested arguments for another referendum would come into play if they did not and if they rejected other options.
"I have said I don't want a People's Vote or referendum in general but if parliament absolutely failed to reach a consensus I could see there would be a plausible argument for it," she said.
"Parliament has to reach a majority on how it is going to leave the EU. If it fails to do so, I can see the argument for taking it back to the people again as much as it would distress many of my colleagues."
If Mrs May's deal is rejected, the default position is for the UK to leave in March unless the government seeks to extend the Article 50 negotiating process or Parliament intervenes to stop it happening.
Ms Rudd, who has likened the idea of a no-deal exit to a car crash, said it was imperative that MPs "find a way of getting a deal through Parliament".
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
To that end, she said she backed the idea of testing the will of Parliament through a series of "indicative" votes on "Plan B" options should MPs reject the PM's agreement.
"It would flush out where... the majority is," she said. "So people who hold onto the idea of one option or another would see there is no majority and so they will need to move to their next preference.
"We will hopefully be able to find where the compromise and the consensus is."
Speaking on the same programme, Labour's shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said talk of another referendum was "hypothetical" at this stage and would represent a "failure" by Parliament.
She accused the prime minister of trying to scare MPs into backing her deal by delaying the vote on it to the latest possible date.
Earlier on Wednesday, the European Commission announced a series of temporary measures designed to reduce the economic impact if the UK was to leave without a comprehensive legally-binding agreement.
But it made clear that it could not counter all the problems it expects.
The Republic of Ireland has given more details of its own no-deal contingency planning, saying the risk of the UK leaving without an agreement was "very real".
It warns of potentially "severe macroeconomic, trade and sectoral impacts" for Ireland as well as "significant gaps" in policing and judicial co-operation.
In such a scenario, it said its priorities would be to uphold the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland, ensure there is no return of physical checks on the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland and ensure the "best possible outcome" in terms of trade.
The UK has allocated a further £2bn in funding to government departments to prepare for the possibility and has urged businesses to put their own no-deal plans in motion.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46626967
|
news_uk-politics-46626967
|
|
Paisley faces luxury Maldives holiday questions - BBC News
|
2018-12-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The DUP MP did not declare a holiday to the Maldives in 2016, BBC Spotlight reports.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Mr Paisley was recently suspended from the House of Commons for 30 days for "serious misconduct"
DUP MP Ian Paisley was given a complimentary holiday at a luxury Maldives resort months after advocating on behalf of its government.
BBC Spotlight obtained new evidence which suggested the visit was requested by the Maldivian government and facilitated by the resort owner, who had political links.
The programme examined whether the MP should have declared the trip in 2016.
He said he paid for part of the holiday and the rest was paid for by a friend.
The North Antrim MP did not reveal the identity of this friend. He said the friend was unconnected with his work and has received no benefit as a result of his work.
A DUP spokesman said: "The party officers will want to consider these very serious matters being mindful of the high standards we require of elected representatives."
Mr Paisley was recently suspended from the House of Commons for 30 days for "serious misconduct" for failing to declare two family holidays to Sri Lanka in 2013.
Ian Paisley, his wife and his two sons received full-board five-night stay at the luxury resort in October and November 2016, eight months after he was part of a controversial parliamentary visit to the islands.
Gavin Millar QC, an expert on parliamentary rules, said the Nolan principles on standards in public life placed an onus on Mr Paisley to be transparent about why he had not registered the trip to the Maldives.
"MPs should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands," said Mr Millar.
"Now his decision in this case, his decision was not to register the benefit, after the trip in late 2016, and he has an obligation to give reasons for that decision.
"Unless he can come up with some wider public interest argument for not saying more, he should be saying significantly more about any considerations that are relevant to the motive of that source in paying that money."
Mr Paisley has been contacted by Spotlight about Mr Millar's comments but has not responded.
In a statement to Spotlight on Tuesday, Mr Paisley said: "I have responded in clear and categoric terms to your questions.
"For the record, the government of the Maldives did not organise or pay for my family vacation in 2016, which I do not intend to go into with you. I'm satisfied the vacation did not have to be recorded on the register."
Ian Paisley visited the Maldives in February 2016 with two other MPs from an All-Party Parliamentary Group.
At the time, the Maldives government, headed by President Abdulla Yameen, was being criticised by organisations including the United Nations and the Commonwealth for human rights abuses.
Mr Paisley, however, appeared to advocate on behalf of the regime, speaking out against economic sanctions.
With the other two MPs, he also visited the prison where opposition leader Mohamed Nasheed had been held, and described the conditions as quite luxurious.
BBC Spotlight reporter Lyndsey Telford travelled to the Maldives as part of her investigation
Later that year Mr Paisley travelled to the Maldives again for a holiday with his wife and two children.
Spotlight's evidence, including an image which appears to be from the resort's internal records provided to the programme by an anonymous source, suggests that full board and transfers were provided complimentarily at the request of Mr Yameen's government and facilitated by the resort owner, Hussain Hilmy.
Mr Hilmy is a former minister in the Maldives government and has held a number of other important public posts.
Gavin Millar QC said that if, as Spotlight's documentary evidence suggests, the benefit was requested by the government and facilitated by Mr Hilmy, Mr Paisley should not have accepted it.
"But having accepted it, he certainly should have registered it undoubtedly.
"There are very strict rules about lobbying and creating an interest for yourself that may be perceived as lobbying. The moment you know these facts, that are disclosed in this document, the perception is that this is a reward for him having advocated for the Maldives government."
Ian Paisley has denied that the trip was connected with the government of the Maldives.
Last week, Ian Paisley told Spotlight that he had discussed the holiday in the Maldives with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Kathryn Stone during her investigation into his Sri Lanka holidays.
Mr Paisley claimed that as a consequence of that conversation, he had satisfied himself he did not need to register the holiday.
Ian Paisley told Spotlight he had evidence which "categorically disproves that the trip was connected to the government"
After Spotlight contacted the commissioner's office, Mr Paisley got in touch with Spotlight again to clarify that he had not spoken to the commissioner as he had claimed.
He said he had in fact spoken to the parliamentary registrar who administers the register of members' interests.
Mr Millar QC said the registrar's role was limited.
"The one thing they can give you as an MP is a clear account of what the rules require and what they don't require," eh said.
"But I understand that is as far as they will go. They will not give a licence to an MP not to declare in a particular situation nor will they say you must declare in a particular situation.
The Maldives is a republic that lies south-west of the Indian sub-continent. It is made up of a chain of nearly 1,200 islands, most of them uninhabited.
Its political history has been unsettled since the electoral defeat of long-serving President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in 2008.
"That's not how the code works. The way the code works is that it is ultimately always a matter for the MP."
Ian Paisley also told Spotlight he had evidence which, he said, "categorically disproves that the trip was connected to the government".
Two emails, which he had arranged from contacts linked to the regime and the resort.
The first was from Ahmed Shiaan, who was the Maldivian Ambassador to the UK at the time of the visit.
He said the holiday had not been arranged by the Embassy or paid for by the government of the Maldives.
Ian Paisley also sent Spotlight an email from the resort's commercial operating officer, Andrew Ashmore, who said invoices for the stay had been settled and paid for privately although he could not say by whom.
Political rivals have been quick to criticise Mr Paisley.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Colum Eastwood This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Sinn Féin has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards asking her to investigate the allegations.
North Antrim MLA Philip McGuigan said there are "serious questions to answer" about Mr Paisley's relation with the government of the Maldives.
Alliance leader Naomi Long said Mr Paisley had left himself open to criticism by not revealing his friend's identity.
"If this wasn't related to parliamentary duties the easiest way to clarify that is by saying who gave the gift and why," she told BBC's Good Morning Ulster programme.
SDLP leader Colum Eastwood went further, calling for the North Antrim MP to resign.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Colum Eastwood This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
"It really is time for Ian Paisley to resign," tweeted Mr Eastwood. "If he doesn't, then the onus is on Arlene Foster to remove him from the DUP."
Mr Eastwood later tweeted: "I've written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards asking her to investigate Spotlight's allegations on Ian Paisley."
TUV leader Jim Allister said Mr Paisley now should "refer himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, so that a considered verdict can be delivered".
The UUP leader, Robin Swann, called on the commissioner to launch an investigation "urgently".
When the Daily Telegraph published revelations about his holidays to Sri Lanka in 2017, Mr Paisley initially said that the articles were "devoid of logic" and threatened legal action.
He also referred himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.
The Commissioner, Kathryn Stone, found that Mr Paisley had failed to properly declare two holidays and engaged in paid advocacy for the Sri Lankan government.
Her findings were supported by parliament which suspended Mr Paisley from the House of Commons for 30 days.
However, a petition to trigger a by-election in his North Antrim constituency fell short by 444 votes, an outcome described by Mr Paisley as a "miracle".
On his return to the House of Commons following his suspension, he said: "A smaller man than me would have crumbled."
Mr Paisley has been MP for North Antrim since 2010, succeeding his father Ian Paisley, a former first minister of Northern Ireland and Democratic Unionist leader, who had held the seat since 1970.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46530569
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-46530569
|
|
Dartmouth Fatstock: Sexism row over men-only awards dinner - BBC News
|
2018-12-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A farming show is told to "move with the 21st Century" and let women attend its prize-giving dinner.
|
Devon
|
Women are awarded prizes at a ceremony in the afternoon but not at the evening dinner
Women in farming have called on a men-only awards dinner "to get with the times" and allow them to attend.
The Dartmouth Fatstock Show in Devon, which sees farmers compete for the best cattle, sheep and poultry, has run for more than 100 years.
Show chairman, Phil Bond, said the men-only evening dinner was "a tradition and how it has always been done".
Farmer Chloe Quantick said: "They need to stop being a bit sexist and let us in there."
The current system sees prizes distributed to men and women at an afternoon ceremony, before the men's awards are presented for a second time at a hotel dinner.
This year's event took place on Tuesday.
Debbie Morris was told a man would have to represent her at the show when she was mayor of Dartmouth
The show committee recently held a vote and decided to maintain the exclusion of women - one farmer resigned in protest and said his pleas for change were "shouted down".
Mr Bond said: "That's the tradition, that's the way it always has been done. I've got the support and the backing from the committee to carry on.
"If in the future that changes as a democracy or as a vote within the committee that will carry on."
He said he believed "ladies are really not bothered" and he would rather keep out of the "petty argument of it all".
The Dartmouth Young Farmers Association currently has more female than male members, and there are four women on the show committee of 17.
Jessica Perry, a committee member, said the female ban was "very outdated now".
"It would be nice if we could move with the 21st Century," she said. "But that's something that as a group and as a committee the Fatstock show will have to discuss and hopefully move with the times."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Fatstock show chairman Phil Bond says women are 'not bothered' about a men-only dinner
Ms Quantick, who won two championships at this year's show, said: "I think they should get with modern times and let the women come.
"They need to stop being a bit sexist and let us in there, because we can have a good laugh just as much as men can, so in my opinion we should be allowed to go."
Debbie Morris said there was no exception to the rule even when she was mayor of Dartmouth, when she was told a male representative would have to attend in her place.
She described it as an "old tradition" and said: "They like to have a raucous evening. Perhaps they feel the ladies wouldn't approve."
• None Is time up on men-only business events?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-46524148
|
news_uk-england-devon-46524148
|
|
Andrea Leadsom and Amber Rudd suggest rival Brexit 'Plan Bs' - BBC News
|
2018-12-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Andrea Leadsom and Amber Rudd are at odds over what should happen if MPs reject Theresa May's deal.
|
UK Politics
|
Cabinet colleagues Andrea Leadsom and Amber Rudd have set out rival plans if Theresa May can't get her Brexit deal through Parliament.
The two ministers stressed that their top priority was securing Parliamentary backing for the prime minister's deal.
But Ms Rudd said a referendum was a "plausible" way forward if MPs were deadlocked.
Mrs Leadsom said a new referendum would be "unacceptable" and argued instead for a "managed no deal".
Asked if a second referendum was plausible if Parliament remains gridlocked, the prime minister's official spokesman said: "No."
Mrs May had "been very clear on the dangers of calling a second referendum" and Amber Rudd had been "clear" that the priority was to get the prime minister's deal through Parliament, he added.
Asked about Mrs Leadsom's comments on a managed no-deal Brexit, the spokesman said: "The Leader of the House was clear this is not government policy.
"This is not something that is available. The EU has been very clear that there is no withdrawal agreement available that does not include a backstop."
Speaking at a press conference in Downing Street, with the Polish prime minister, Mrs May said all cabinet ministers were "working to ensure that the deal is able to be agreed by, and get through, Parliament".
Mrs May also spoke Polish during the press conference:
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. "My message to Polish people is clear"
Explaining what she meant by a "managed no deal", Mrs Leadsom told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "A managed no deal does not necessarily mean there is no withdrawal agreement at all."
The Commons leader, who was a Leave campaigner in the 2016 EU referendum, said it could be a stripped-down agreement incorporating some of the EU's no-deal preparations.
"What I am looking at is trying to find an alternative so that in the event that we cannot agree to this deal that there could be a further deal that looks at a more minimalist approach but enables us to leave with some kind of implementation period.
"That avoids a cliff edge, that avoids uncertainty for businesses and travellers and so on."
Asked about Amber Rudd's suggestion that a referendum was a "plausible" alternative, she said: "It's not government policy.
"I myself think it would undermine the biggest democratic exercise ever, where we had a clear majority to leave the European Union.
"To have a second referendum would unfortunately be going back to people and telling them they have got it wrong and they needed to try again.
"I think it would be unacceptable."
The UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March 2019 but an agreement on the terms of its withdrawal and a declaration on future relations will only come into force if the UK and EU Parliaments approve it.
The Commons vote was due to be held earlier this month but the PM postponed it once it became clear it would be defeated by a large margin.
She has since sought to gain further assurances from EU leaders to allay MPs' concerns.
MPs will start debating her Brexit bill again on Wednesday, 9 January. There will be five days of debate before the vote takes place.
If Mrs May's deal is rejected, the default position is for the UK to leave in March unless the government seeks to extend the Article 50 negotiating process or Parliament intervenes to stop it happening.
Ms Rudd, who campaigned for Remain in 2016, said she was not sure MPs would back Mrs May's deal and suggested arguments for another referendum would come into play if they did not and if they rejected other options.
"I have said I don't want a People's Vote or referendum in general but if parliament absolutely failed to reach a consensus I could see there would be a plausible argument for it," the work and pensions secretary told ITV's Robert Peston show.
"Parliament has to reach a majority on how it is going to leave the EU. If it fails to do so, I can see the argument for taking it back to the people again as much as it would distress many of my colleagues."
On page three of the Ministerial Code, is the section entitled "collective responsibility".
Page 19 offers something approaching a definition: "Ministers should ensure that their statements are consistent with collective Government policy. Ministers should take special care in referring to subjects which are the responsibility of other Ministers."
Or: row in private, be loyal in public.
Let's be clear: those cabinet ministers offering a commentary on other options preface their remarks by insisting they back the prime minister's deal.
But imagine, in calmer times, ministers did this before a budget, or floated an alternative to Universal Credit for instance.
It would be a suggestion probably accompanied by the sack.
But these, you'll have spotted dear reader, are not the calmest of times.
And so cabinet ministers can get away with a whole lot more freelancing.
But it is not entirely unhelpful to Downing Street: if this aeration of alternatives helps expose their lack of support, it allows the prime minister to make the case her deal is the only game in town.
Amber Rudd - who went head-to-head with Mrs Leadsom in a televised debate during the 2016 referendum - has likened the idea of a no-deal exit to a car crash. She said it was imperative that MPs "find a way of getting a deal through Parliament".
To that end, she said she backed the idea of testing the will of Parliament through a series of "indicative" votes on "Plan B" options should MPs reject the PM's agreement.
"It would flush out where... the majority is," she said. "So people who hold on to the idea of one option or another would see there is no majority and so they will need to move to their next preference.
"We will hopefully be able to find where the compromise and the consensus is."
Speaking on the same programme, Labour's shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said talk of another referendum was "hypothetical" at this stage and would represent a "failure" by Parliament.
She accused the prime minister of trying to scare MPs into backing her deal by delaying the vote on it to the latest possible date.
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
Earlier on Wednesday, the European Commission announced a series of temporary measures designed to reduce the economic impact if the UK was to leave without a comprehensive legally-binding agreement.
But it made clear that it could not counter all the problems it expects.
The Republic of Ireland has given more details of its own no-deal contingency planning, saying the risk of the UK leaving without an agreement was "very real".
It warns of potentially "severe macroeconomic, trade and sectoral impacts" for Ireland as well as "significant gaps" in policing and judicial co-operation.
In such a scenario, it said its priorities would be to uphold the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland, ensure there is no return of physical checks on the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland and ensure the "best possible outcome" in terms of trade.
The UK has allocated a further £2bn in funding to government departments to prepare for the possibility and has urged businesses to put their own no-deal plans in motion.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46631581
|
news_uk-politics-46631581
|
|
Brexit referendum 'plausible' if MPs can't decide - Amber Rudd - BBC News
|
2018-12-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
There would be a case for another referendum if Parliament is deadlocked, Amber Rudd says.
|
UK Politics
|
Another Brexit referendum will become a "plausible" way forward if there is deadlock in Parliament, Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd has said.
She told ITV's Peston show while she did not personally support another vote, the case for one would grow if MPs could not agree another solution.
She said she hoped MPs would back Theresa May's deal with the EU next month but it would be "very difficult".
The PM says the UK must be ready to leave without a deal if it is rejected.
Mrs May has repeatedly ruled out holding another referendum, saying it was the government's duty to implement the result of the 2016 Brexit vote.
A Downing Street source said the government was "very clear we are 100% opposed" to another referendum.
The UK is due to leave the EU on 29 March 2019 but an agreement on the terms of its withdrawal and a declaration on future relations will only come into force if the UK and EU Parliaments approve it.
The Commons vote was due to be held earlier this month but the PM postponed it once it became clear it would be defeated by a large margin.
She has since sought to gain further assurances from EU leaders to allay MPs' concerns.
Ms Rudd told Robert Peston she could not be sure MPs would back the deal. She suggested arguments for another referendum would come into play if they did not and if they rejected other options.
"I have said I don't want a People's Vote or referendum in general but if parliament absolutely failed to reach a consensus I could see there would be a plausible argument for it," she said.
"Parliament has to reach a majority on how it is going to leave the EU. If it fails to do so, I can see the argument for taking it back to the people again as much as it would distress many of my colleagues."
If Mrs May's deal is rejected, the default position is for the UK to leave in March unless the government seeks to extend the Article 50 negotiating process or Parliament intervenes to stop it happening.
Ms Rudd, who has likened the idea of a no-deal exit to a car crash, said it was imperative that MPs "find a way of getting a deal through Parliament".
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
To that end, she said she backed the idea of testing the will of Parliament through a series of "indicative" votes on "Plan B" options should MPs reject the PM's agreement.
"It would flush out where... the majority is," she said. "So people who hold onto the idea of one option or another would see there is no majority and so they will need to move to their next preference.
"We will hopefully be able to find where the compromise and the consensus is."
Speaking on the same programme, Labour's shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said talk of another referendum was "hypothetical" at this stage and would represent a "failure" by Parliament.
She accused the prime minister of trying to scare MPs into backing her deal by delaying the vote on it to the latest possible date.
Earlier on Wednesday, the European Commission announced a series of temporary measures designed to reduce the economic impact if the UK was to leave without a comprehensive legally-binding agreement.
But it made clear that it could not counter all the problems it expects.
The Republic of Ireland has given more details of its own no-deal contingency planning, saying the risk of the UK leaving without an agreement was "very real".
It warns of potentially "severe macroeconomic, trade and sectoral impacts" for Ireland as well as "significant gaps" in policing and judicial co-operation.
In such a scenario, it said its priorities would be to uphold the Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland, ensure there is no return of physical checks on the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland and ensure the "best possible outcome" in terms of trade.
The UK has allocated a further £2bn in funding to government departments to prepare for the possibility and has urged businesses to put their own no-deal plans in motion.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46626967
|
news_uk-politics-46626967
|
|
Brexit: Should Theresa May stick with her plan? - BBC News
|
2019-01-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
If Theresa May wasn't going to budge, what was the point of implying that she might?
|
UK Politics
|
On the face of it, there is nothing remotely surprising about Theresa May telling her Cabinet colleagues last night that she wants to have another go at trying to sort out the backstop.
The political implication of that is that she still thinks it is better at this stage for her to pursue a strategy that might just about conceivably see, in the end after a lot more wrangling, a version of her deal squeak through the House of Commons with support from her own MPs and having kissed and made up with the DUP.
Right now that seems a long way off of course, and it might prove impossible.
But the view at the top of government is that, on balance, this is the better choice. There are plenty of MPs and some in government on the other side of this argument who think it is not much short of insane to keep going with a strategy that has been so roundly kicked out by the Commons. You hear a lot of quoting of Einstein, who claimed the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. (Although as so often there is a row over whether he actually said that at all)
And while it's scoffed at, some people in government believe in the end the EU might budge and that Ireland might be persuaded to look at a separate agreement to sort out the backstop. (Don't all scream at once, I know how far off that looks at the moment).
Remember, Theresa May just isn't the kind of politician who was ever going to tear up her Plan A overnight, however irritating it might be to some of her own ministers like the one who told me last week she would have to budge at "five past seven".
This doesn't of course mean in theory that the cross-party process is over. There are more talks between various MPs and senior ministers today.
But one senior MP involved in the process believes the problem is that by suggesting compromise in the Commons in the wake of defeat last week, then telling ministers Plan B is basically Plan A last night, the PM has "burned up the goodwill".
If she wasn't going to budge, what was the point of implying that she might?
In theory the point was, of course, that it's highly likely she will in the end need to compromise, and that every vote will count.
But one source joked that she won't do it until "she's in a half-Nelson" - the reality is by then, those MPs who were willing to help last week may have concluded, as some already have, that if she won't budge, Parliament will simply grab hold of the process when it comes to the vote next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46944059
|
news_uk-politics-46944059
|
|
'My mum killed my dad with a hammer but I want her freed' - BBC News
|
2019-01-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Sally Challen was jailed for murder in 2011 but a new law means an appeal next month could succeed.
|
Family & Education
|
Sally Challen and Richard Challen during their 31-year marriage
Sally Challen was jailed for the murder of her husband in 2011 but her solicitors believe a new law, recognising psychological manipulation as a form of domestic abuse, could be a defence in an appeal hearing next month. Her son David explains why he's backing the appeal and hopes to see his mother freed.
Sally's last words to David were supposed to be heartfelt but undramatic. "You know I love you, don't you?" she said, fixing his gaze through an open car door, as she dropped him off at work.
A day earlier, she had killed her long-time husband, and father of David, in a frenzied hammer attack. But as he headed to his job, David knew nothing of Richard Challen's gruesome death.
After that drop-off, she had planned to swiftly end her own life - jumping from the top floor of a nearby car park. When she realised the car park was closed, she pressed on regardless, driving to Beachy Head in East Sussex. There she planned to jump to her death off the chalky precipice.
From the clifftop, Sally called her cousin to admit the killing. She repeated the admission to a suicide team and a chaplain, who had been called to help her.
It took them two hours to talk her down from the edge.
She was charged with her husband's murder, convicted and jailed for life.
However, eight years on, lawyers acting for Sally Challen are hoping to make legal history, and David is working to help them. They hope to use a law passed in 2015, which recognises psychological manipulation, or coercive control, as a form of domestic abuse, to secure her release.
David Challen says his mother suffered years of abuse at the hands of his father
Just as physical violence in a relationship has been recognised as a mitigating factor in a killing, her lawyers say her history of psychological abuse by Richard provides a defence of provocation.
The circumstances around the killing itself give a taste of the sort of coercive control Richard exerted over his wife.
In the wealthy suburban village of Claygate, Surrey, one wet Saturday morning in August 2010, Sally visited the house she had, until recently, shared with Richard, her husband of 31 years.
He lived there alone since she had walked out on the relationship the previous November, after discovering he had been visiting prostitutes.
David and his elder brother James, who prefers to avoid media attention, say their father inflicted years of psychological abuse on their mother. Having left Richard, the sons were adamant their mother should stay away from him.
However, unknown to them, she had secretly begun seeing Richard again, hoping to patch up their marriage.
What actually happened in the family home that morning was far removed from reconciliation.
On this particular morning, she drove the short distance from her new home. In the car with her was a handbag and, stashed inside it, a hammer.
Richard had wanted her to approve a post-nuptial agreement that would cut her rights to the £1m family home and impose stringent conditions, such as not interrupting him and not talking to other people when they were together in restaurants.
There was no food in the house and Richard was hungry, so he asked her to go out and buy something for his lunch.
As she headed back from the shops, Sally suspected Richard had had an ulterior motive for getting her out of the house. So, on her return she picked up his phone, rang the last number he had dialled and found it answered by a woman.
In the family kitchen, Sally fried bacon and eggs on the hob. Richard sat with his back to her at the table.
She served him, and, as he ate, she pulled the hammer from her bag and hit Richard 20 times over the head.
She then wrapped his body in curtains and blankets, left a note saying: "I love you, Sally," and left.
She bought herself some cigarettes, drank some wine and composed a suicide note. But she decided to delay killing herself until she had seen David who, at 23, still lived with her.
The next day, David remembers, his mother dropped him at work and, as he stepped out of the car, she made her heartfelt pledge of love.
Later that day, David was summoned by his manager.
"Then came round the corner, my cousin, followed by a police officer, uniformed, and rushed to me, grabbed me on both shoulders and said, 'your father's dead'."
Charged with her husband's murder, 10 months later Sally stood in the dock of Guildford Crown Court. Her hair was a mess and her fingers stained yellow from smoking. David remembers the proceedings being hard to watch.
"Anyone standing up who had anything worth saying was not saying enough, or not feeling as if they had enough time, or not being asked the right questions. She was being painted as vengeful and jealous."
Here was a woman who counted her husband's Viagra and monitored his phone calls, the prosecution said.
In court, Sally hardly spoke. But there was video evidence in which she admitted to the killing and testimony from the Beachy Head suicide prevention team. They recounted her confessing: "I killed him with a hammer. I hit him lots of times... If I can't have him, no-one can."
Convicted of murder and jailed for life, all hope appeared to have expired for Sally. Then, in 2015, a law came into force that recognised psychological manipulation, or coercive control, as a form of domestic abuse.
In March 2018, Sally Challen won leave to appeal against her conviction.
Her solicitor, Harriet Wistrich, of the feminist campaigning organisation Justice for Women, says the new law should be accepted as "new evidence" in the case.
"We're arguing, for the first time, that the framework for understanding domestic abuse that's set out in coercive and controlling behaviour which became law in 2015, provides a way of understanding Sally's actions which would support a defence of provocation."
She believes this is the first time coercive control has been used as a defence in a murder appeal: "Our argument is that if this evidence is allowed as fresh evidence it renders the murder conviction unsafe therefore that murder conviction should be quashed."
She says that the appeal court could reduce the conviction to manslaughter or order a retrial.
The fact that the family want to see her freed - and none of Richard's friends or relatives has come forward to say otherwise - is significant, she believes. But she fears the fact Sally brought the hammer with her "with a conditional intent to use it", suggests some premeditation. This could mean the murder conviction will stand, says Ms Wistrich.
Both grown-up sons back the legal challenge, with David clear that his father's treatment of his mother is a textbook example of coercive control.
"It was tick, tick, tick - everything: financial abuse, psychological manipulation, controlling her freedom of movement, just controlling every facet of her mind... It was almost like she was a robot and he punched in the commands of what she had to do."
Sally and Richard on their wedding day in 1979
Sally Jenney was 15 when she met Richard, five years her senior, in 1971. They were married in 1979. Sally had nothing but wide-eyed love for Richard, David says, but his father felt otherwise.
"Seeing women, cheating on her, brothels."
And when she challenged him, David remembers his father questioned her sanity: "'Sally, you are mad'. It was a mantra."
There were petty rules. In restaurants she was not allowed to speak to other people.
"He didn't like her having any independence in terms of friends, it was only friends together. It was total control."
If she displeased him, Richard would restrict her car use to work travel only, and all household spending came out of her earnings. Neighbours have said he treated her as if she belonged to him.
And Sally was subjected to constant criticism.
"My father would refer to my mother as 'saddlebags', 'thunder thighs', really critiques of her weight... and that was something me and my brother witnessed and heard all the time. Not just in our own company but with other friends as well... It was just not right."
At the original trial, it was suggested Sally attacked Richard in a rage, after realising he had called a girlfriend that morning. But David says he believes his mother's claim that she was unaware of her actions when she killed Richard.
"She took that hammer and she killed my father. I recognise what happened but we have to recognise what psychological control does. I don't know why she took that hammer. She doesn't understand why," he says.
David says his mother still loves Richard, something he and his brother "can't understand".
"We don't know what to do with that... my father's not alive any more and he still has power over her."
David says he hopes the appeal "will acknowledge my mother's mental abuse, will acknowledge what she suffered throughout her life".
"The cause is not that she's a jealous wife," he adds. "She has been manipulated psychologically all her life, tied down by this man, my father. She deserves her right to freedom. She deserves for her abuse to be recognised."
David says the only way to help his mother is to let her be free
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-46111655
|
news_education-46111655
|
|
Brexit deal: Meetings aren't a Plan B - BBC News
|
2019-01-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The PM has promised meetings and conversations - but can Theresa May bring her critics on board?
|
UK Politics
|
Meetings, on their own, are not a Plan B. Conversations, are not by themselves, compromises.
To get any deal done where there are such clashing views all around, it requires give and take. It feels like a political lifetime since there has been a fundamental dispute in the cabinet, in the Tory party and across Parliament. Theresa May has stubbornly, although understandably, tried to plot a middle course.
But that has failed so spectacularly at this stage. Ultimately she may well be left with the same dilemma of which way to tack.
It's clear, wide open, in public, that the cabinet is at odds with each other. Just listen to David Gauke and Liam Fox on whether a customs union could be a compromise for example.
The answer for her is not suddenly going to emerge from a unified tier of her top team. There are perhaps five or six of the cabinet who would be happy to see that kind of relationship as a way to bring Labour on board.
But there is a group of around the same size who would rather see what they describe as a "managed no deal".
You may well wonder if that isn't a contradiction in terms.
But the principle would be that the UK would pay the divorce bill already agreed and over a two-year period construct a series of side deals on specific issues, rather than try to come up with a whole new comprehensive plan.
There are already intense arguments about whether that's remotely realistic. But the overall point is that the prime minister cannot just therefore look to her top colleagues for an immediate solution.
Before she decides which way to tack, or how far to budge, she may need to ask herself if the talks she wants to hold with other political parties are occasions when she is really open to ideas - or just ways of managing the political situation.
One cabinet minister involved in the talks suggested that many MPs still needed to understand how the agreement they have reached with the EU worked. And that as "project reality" dawned, there could still be a way through of salvaging Mrs May's deal in something like its current form.
And certainly there wasn't much in the PM's lectern statement to suggest she is suddenly ready to move very much. One former minister described it as "still flicking the V at the 48% - she's deluded, she never changes her mind and cannot conceive that others might".
If all that the prime minister intends to do is massage a few egos with these talks, it seems unlikely that she'll find a quick route to success. And Labour may well stay outside the process.
Many members of the public might be furious that Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn won't play nice during a time of crisis. He's always said he believes in dialogue, but when it really matters, he says no. But inside the Labour movement there are others who might accuse of him of helping to make Brexit happen if he takes part. Like so many facets of this process, it's not a straightforward political calculation.
But across Parliament, for a very long time now, even some MPs who were on the prime minister's side to start with have been intensely frustrated that she hasn't listened. It will take a lot more than a cup of tea in Downing Street to bring her many critics on board.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46900738
|
news_uk-politics-46900738
|
|
Saturn's spectacular rings are 'very young' - BBC News
|
2019-01-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One of the most distinctive features in the Solar System is no more than 100 million years old.
|
Science & Environment
|
The end phases of the mission should yield new information about Saturn's interior
We're looking at Saturn at a very special time in the history of the Solar System, according to scientists.
They've confirmed the planet's iconic rings are very young - no more than 100 million years old, when dinosaurs still walked the Earth.
The insight comes from the final measurements acquired by the American Cassini probe.
The satellite sent back its last data just before diving to destruction in the giant world's atmosphere in 2017.
"Previous estimates of the age of Saturn's rings required a lot of modelling and were far more uncertain. But we now have direct measurements that allows us to constrain the age very well," Luciano Iess from Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, told BBC News.
The professor's team has published an account of its work with Cassini in Science magazine.
Cassini has been circling around Saturn for 13 years On the icy moon Enceladus it discovered... an ocean of water hidden beneath the surface eight times as deep as the oceans on Earth. suggests conditions could be right for micro-organisms to live there. which is the size of the planet Mercury Cassini flew over seas and lakes of methane and discovered they are up to 170 metres deep. On Saturn itself, above the north pole Cassini took photos of a hexagonal hurricane 32,000km across. Scientists have puzzled over how this giant storm spins. Four times as strong as a hurricane on Earth! Back out on the edge of one of Saturn's rings among the clouds of ice particles Cassini even captured the birth of a possible new moon. It's been named Peggy and is just 1km wide. Cassini was flown directly towards the planet until it burnt up in Saturn's atmosphere.
There has long been a debate about the age of Saturn's rings. Some had argued these gorgeous loops of icy particles most likely formed along with the planet itself, some 4.5 billion years ago.
Others had suggested they were a recent phenomenon - perhaps the crushed up remains of a moon or a passing comet that was involved in a collision.
Artwork: Cassini plunged between the rings and the planet's cloudtops
The US-European Cassini mission promised to resolve the argument in its last months at the gas giant.
The satellite's end days saw it fly repeatedly through the gap between the rings and the planet's cloudtops.
Cassini essentially weighed the rings, and found their mass to be 20 times smaller than previous estimates: something on the order of 15,400,000,000,000,000 tonnes, or about two-fifths the mass of Mimas - the Saturn moon that looks like the "Death Star" weapon in the Star Wars movies.
Mimas: The "Star Wars" moon is a favourite among Saturn fans
Knowing the mass was a key piece in the puzzle for researchers.
From Cassini's other instruments, they already knew the proportion of dust in the rings and the rate at which this dust was being added. Having a definitive mass for the rings then made it possible to work out an age.
Prof Iess's team says this could be as young as 10 million years but is no older than 100 million years. In terms of the full age of the Solar System, this is "yesterday".
The calculation agrees with one made by a different group which last month examined how fast the ring particles were falling on to Saturn - a rate that was described as being equivalent to an Olympic-sized swimming pool every half-hour.
This flow, when all factors were considered, would probably see the rings disappear altogether in "at most 100 million years", said Dr Tom Stallard from Leicester University, UK.
"The rings we see today are actually not that impressive compared with how they would have looked 50-100 million years ago," he told BBC News.
"Back then they would have been even bigger and even brighter. So, whatever produced them must have made for an incredible display if you'd been an astronomer 100 million years ago."
Cassini's investigations cannot shed much light on the nature of the event that gave rise to the rings, but it would have been cataclysmic in scale.
It was conceivable, said Dr Stallard, that the geology of the moons around Saturn could hold important clues. Just as rock and ice cores drilled on Earth reveal debris from ancient meteorite and comet impacts, so it's possible the moons of Saturn could record evidence of the ring-forming event in their deeper layers.
Maybe we'll get to drill into the likes of Mimas and Enceladus... one day.
Jonathan.Amos-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk and follow me on Twitter: @BBCAmos
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46911945
|
news_science-environment-46911945
|
|
Why is the government cooling on nuclear? - BBC News
|
2019-01-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The collapse of plans for a new nuclear plant in Anglesey is just the latest blow to the industry.
|
Business
|
The previous power station at Wylfa was closed in 2015
There was a time - not so long ago - that government ministers talked enthusiastically about a new nuclear age. A fleet of brand new reactors producing reliable, low carbon electricity for decades to come. Not only that, but the government wouldn't be taking any of the risks associated with financing and building them.
Hinkley, Moorside, Wylfa, Oldbury, Bradwell and Sizewell were identified as the sites for the most significant national wave of new nuclear power construction anywhere in the world.
Of those six, only one is under construction, three have been abandoned, and two face an uphill battle to get the green light.
Under those circumstances, you might think the government would be embarrassed that its energy policy was in disarray. But it's not.
The collapse of the Wylfa and Oldbury projects today (following the abandonment of Moorside) is evidence of some new economic realities that have seen government enthusiasm for new nuclear fade.
The first and most obvious is the cost of building the darn things.
At £20bn Hinkley Point is the most expensive UK construction project to date - HS2 will beat it.
The good news is that the UK government isn't paying a penny of it.
The bad news is that the electricity it will one day produce will be expensive.
EDF, the French contractor that's paying for its construction, could only raise the money to do it by extracting a guarantee from the UK government that it would receive more than double the current going rate - for 35 years.
That's one way to finance it. Let EDF raise the money and take the risk but ultimately foist the cost onto future generations of energy customers.
One of the reasons Hinkley is so expensive is that EDF needed to go out and borrow huge sums for a risky project at interest rates of over 9%. In fact, of the total £20bn bill for Hinkley, well over half of it was the cost of raising the money over the lifetime of the project.
There are cheaper ways to finance a project like this.
The government can borrow money much more cheaply than anyone else. Right now it could get a £20bn 10-year loan at 1.3% and use that money to build the thing itself. There are financial and political problems with that.
First, it adds to the public debt - which successive recent governments have been keen to reduce.
Second, if there are massive cost overruns (and that is almost a rule with nuclear projects), the government foots the spiralling bill, taking commensurate political flak.
Third, if the government is suddenly in the business of building nuclear power stations, why not other things - in fact why not nationalise the infrastructure we have already got? That is not comfortable territory for a Conservative government.
There is a another way. Pay-as-you-go. Rather than lumber future generations with more expensive energy, get current consumers to pay a little extra on their bills (amount decided by the regulator) during the construction. This removes the need for massive borrowing and means you don't have to offer a juicy price guarantee to the contractor at the end as a reward for taking the operational and financial risk.
This is the model the government now prefers and is testing on the Thames Tideway project. If Sizewell and Bradwell are ever built - this is how they will be financed.
I say "if" because the truth is, the sums for new nuclear have been made very tough by the sharp falls in the cost of renewables. In 2015, the cost of offshore wind was over £140 per megawatt hour. That makes Hinkley Point look cheap at £92.50. The price of offshore wind is now £57.50.
But hang on, says the nuclear industry. The wind doesn't always blow. When it doesn't, you will have to fire up gas or even coal stations to fill the gaps in the depths of winter. You are jeopardising our chances of meeting CO2 emissions targets and threatening security of energy supply.
The government accepts some of this, and that is why Business Secretary Greg Clark said today that he is still open to new nuclear projects. But the government's preferred direction is towards smaller reactors of the type being developed by Rolls Royce, in which the government will contribute research backing, in the hope it becomes a major new export industry.
The UK government is not alone in cooling on big nuclear. One of the reasons that Wylfa, Oldbury and Moorside collapsed was because the Japanese government could not get sufficiently behind the Hitachi and Toshiba projects. After the Fukushima disaster, backing nuclear power - particularly foreign nuclear power - is a pretty tough sell back home.
Whatever it does, the government doesn't feel the need to do anything very quickly. The National Infrastructure Commission has said it doesn't need to make a decision for several years yet, and the National Grid says spare energy capacity is increasing rather than decreasing. Government sources say the resilience of the system to last year's "Beast from the East" also reassured officials.
All this makes life difficult for EDF, which wants to build the follow-up to Hinkley Point at Sizewell. They will argue strenuously that only by adding a second, do you realise the economies of scale. Same design + same process + same skilled workforce + different funding model = quicker and cheaper project. Also, the more you rely on wind, the more exposed you are to its intermittence. The only way to make sure you have a secure, low carbon, reliable "base load" is to double-down on nuclear.
That argument may yet still work but it is now much, much harder to win.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46906245
|
news_business-46906245
|
|
Brexit: What's happening with the PM's conundrum? - BBC News
|
2019-01-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Is there anything that will convince scores of MPs to change their minds about Theresa May's Brexit deal?
|
UK Politics
|
On the face of it, it seems like very, very little has changed about the prime minister's conundrum.
One source joked to me that I could just re-open my notebook from the last day before the Christmas break and carry on as if the past fortnight hadn't happened.
The prime minister is still pushing for extra promises from the EU about making the controversial Irish backstop temporary and a bigger role for Parliament and potentially for the Northern Ireland Assembly (which, remember, hasn't sat for a very long time now).
But there is precious little sign of anything that might be described as hefty enough to convince scores of MPs to change their minds and swing in behind her deal.
It is likely that something will emerge, a form of words, a stronger commitment to the hoped for start date for the long-term trade deal perhaps.
But the EU is in no mood for something big that could reopen the withdrawal agreement.
And MPs are very far away from changing their minds. Theresa May's opponents have not come back to work ready to make nice and back the deal after all.
More MPs are poised to vote against Mrs May's deal next week than the number committed to backing it.
And there is no sign of any further compromise from the EU that's significant enough to shift them - yet.
But something has changed since the last time the prime minister called the vote, before dramatically calling it off, and it's nothing to do with the assurances she may or may not get from Brussels.
In the wake of that change of heart, dozens of backbenchers tried to push her out of office with a no-confidence vote.
She survived it but more than 100 of her own side voted against her - a kick to her authority then but might it help her now?
Remember, under the rules of a Tory leadership contest, a confidence vote can't be held for another year if the leader manages to stay on.
That's why one cabinet minister told me this means "everything has changed" - if the vote is lost next week, Tory MPs at least can't force another challenge, so in theory she is safe from her own party.
Last time round, if the prime minister had ploughed ahead with the vote, she faced the very real prospect of a heavy defeat that would have triggered a leadership contest she could have lost.
The argument goes, therefore, that now she has the insurance policy of being safe from that kind of challenge, Parliament could be asked to "vote, vote and then vote again", and eventually a version of her deal will pass.
That theory makes other assumptions, of course - that the prime minister could survive a vote of confidence if the Labour Party was to force one if she loses the vote next week, and, more to the point, that the deal would look any more tempting on repeated attempts to ram it through.
But while we have been here before, not so long ago, the circumstances are not exactly the same.
• None PM 'working to get more EU assurances'
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46788350
|
news_uk-politics-46788350
|
|
Is Theresa May any closer to unblocking her Brexit deal? - BBC News
|
2019-01-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Is the prime minister any closer to getting MPs' backing for the UK's deal for exiting the EU?
|
UK Politics
|
There is a growing feeling it may take more than one go to get the deal through Parliament
When Theresa May pulled the "meaningful vote" on Brexit last month, the day before MPs were about to pass their verdict on her deal, Downing Street hoped two things would happen.
First, that the EU would offer some form of legal guarantee that the Northern Irish backstop - the arrangements for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland - would be temporary.
This, in turn, would bring the DUP on board - and unlock further support from previously hostile Conservative backbenchers.
Second, that some sceptical MPs, once away from the febrile atmosphere at Westminster, would quietly reflect over Christmas that the deal wasn't as bad as all that, as it at least guarantees that the UK will leave the EU at the end of March.
So perhaps any rebellion would diminish, if not evaporate.
But neither hope has - yet - been realised, with the vote now less than two weeks away.
So as things stand, the prime minister is once again facing defeat.
But her difficulties could run even deeper than assumed.
It was undoubtedly disappointing for Downing Street that the DUP's Westminster leader Nigel Dodds declared that the Withdrawal Agreement "flies in the face" of the government's commitments on Northern Ireland following his meetings with Theresa May and the Conservative chief whip Julian Smith this week.
The government quite simply couldn't tell him that that the EU, at this stage, was willing to go any further than offering "reassurances" and "clarifications" on the temporary nature of the backstop, rather than legal guarantees.
But even if the EU does move significantly in the next ten days, the prime minister could still be facing defeat.
What the DUP's Brexit spokesman Sammy Wilson said on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Friday was significant.
He said he was "alarmed" that the Northern Irish backstop could become the "settled arrangement" on Brexit.
Let's unpick this for a moment - because it goes to the core of Theresa May's difficulties.
The DUP want to make sure the backstop is temporary and that the UK, including Northern Ireland, can exit from it without EU approval.
The European Commission has said the deal can't be re-negotiated but the talking continues
If the EU can guarantee this, it's possible the DUP's MPs may grit their teeth and back - or abstain on - the deal, as would some long-standing Leave campaigners on the Conservative benches.
But, as I understand it, up to 40 Conservative MPs still wouldn't back the deal because they, like Sammy Wilson, are worried about what the "settled arrangement" on Brexit might look like.
They believe that the way the government will avoid a hard border in Ireland - and avoid triggering the backstop - is by agreeing a permanent trade deal that actually looks a lot like the backstop in any case.
That is, the whole of the UK, not just Northern Ireland, would mirror some EU regulations on goods and stay close to the EU's customs arrangements.
This would, they fear, then constrain the UK's ability to do future trade deals with the rest of the world.
This suspicion is fuelled by the following words in the political declaration document - the blueprint for the post-Brexit relationship with the EU:
"The economic partnership should ensure….ambitious customs arrangements that.. build and improve on the single customs territory provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement."
Downing Street officials have pointed out - until they are almost blue in the face - that the political declaration also specifically mentions an "independent trade policy" for the UK.
But this doesn't appear to have neutralised some backbench concerns.
The prime minister will launch a "charm offensive" with Conservative MPs next week to try to allay any suspicions - though whether they will be charmed or offended is still an open question.
Such is the lack of trust amongst a small but potentially crucial contingent of her MPs, I am told that in order for them to vote for her deal, she would need to convince them that she wouldn't handle the future trade negotiations after Brexit.
Despite Chief Whip Julian Smith's efforts, many Tory MPs remained opposed to the deal
And/or give them a firm date for her departure from office.
Downing Street - and more widely, the government's - tactic is to raise the possibility of No Brexit unless long-standing Leave campaigners hold their noses and vote for her deal.
This process has already begun. But expect it to be ramped up next week.
The PM's allies will argue that unless the deal is settled soon, then opponents of Brexit and supporters of a new referendum will try to amend forthcoming non-Brexit legislation to make it contingent on a public vote taking place.
And MPs who don't want a referendum but do want Theresa May's deal fundamentally renegotiated will be told that would mean extending Article 50 and therefore, in No 10's eyes, breaking faith with leave-supporting voters.
So far these arguments don't seem to have worked.
Some of her MPs will doubtlessly be poring over a YouGov survey published today. This was commissioned by London's Queen Mary University and Sussex University as part of a wider project into party members' attitudes and views.
It suggested more than half of Conservative members - 53% - believe Mrs May's deal doesn't respect the result of the referendum. And 59% of them oppose her deal, while 38% support it.
No 10 would argue that there is private polling which suggests her deal is more popular with the wider public.
The You Gov survey itself suggests that 46% of likely Conservative voters (as opposed to members) back the deal, with a smaller number - 38% -opposing.
There is another potential fly in the ointment for the prime minister - although here, adversity could be turned to advantage.
It is assumed that the Lords will insert an amendment in to legislation on trade which would require the prime minister to negotiate a customs union with the EU.
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
The government, in the normal run of things, would then vote this change down when the legislation returns to the Commons.
But with Labour formally backing a customs union - and some Conservative MPs who backed Remain in the referendum also very warm to the idea - government sources are concerned that the Commons might not overturn it.
So the argument that is likely to be made by government whips to the Brexiteer opponents of Theresa May's deal is this: Unless they grab the prime minister's deal before the trade legislation comes to the Commons, they might be landed with a customs union.
And this wouldn't just constrain, but prevent, future independent trade deals.
It may look chaotic but one government insider says the key is making steady progress
But the most likely option for at least reducing the size of any defeat on the deal is further movement from Brussels.
The prime minister is talking the EU Commission President Jean Claude Juncker later and I am told she will be talking to other EU 27 leaders over the next ten days.
There is a feeling in Whitehall that it may take more than one attempt to get the deal through parliament.
One government insider likened the prime minister's situation to a game of American football.
Things can look chaotic at any given moment but as long as you don't give the ball away to your opponents you can move incrementally towards your goal.
But she has already had to make one backward pass - delaying the vote on her deal - and may need some trick play to get her deal over the line.
As MPs return to parliament next week, the prospect of a prime ministerial victory appears some way off.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46761290
|
news_uk-politics-46761290
|
|
Brexit: Should Theresa May stick with her plan? - BBC News
|
2019-01-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
If Theresa May wasn't going to budge, what was the point of implying that she might?
|
UK Politics
|
On the face of it, there is nothing remotely surprising about Theresa May telling her Cabinet colleagues last night that she wants to have another go at trying to sort out the backstop.
The political implication of that is that she still thinks it is better at this stage for her to pursue a strategy that might just about conceivably see, in the end after a lot more wrangling, a version of her deal squeak through the House of Commons with support from her own MPs and having kissed and made up with the DUP.
Right now that seems a long way off of course, and it might prove impossible.
But the view at the top of government is that, on balance, this is the better choice. There are plenty of MPs and some in government on the other side of this argument who think it is not much short of insane to keep going with a strategy that has been so roundly kicked out by the Commons. You hear a lot of quoting of Einstein, who claimed the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. (Although as so often there is a row over whether he actually said that at all)
And while it's scoffed at, some people in government believe in the end the EU might budge and that Ireland might be persuaded to look at a separate agreement to sort out the backstop. (Don't all scream at once, I know how far off that looks at the moment).
Remember, Theresa May just isn't the kind of politician who was ever going to tear up her Plan A overnight, however irritating it might be to some of her own ministers like the one who told me last week she would have to budge at "five past seven".
This doesn't of course mean in theory that the cross-party process is over. There are more talks between various MPs and senior ministers today.
But one senior MP involved in the process believes the problem is that by suggesting compromise in the Commons in the wake of defeat last week, then telling ministers Plan B is basically Plan A last night, the PM has "burned up the goodwill".
If she wasn't going to budge, what was the point of implying that she might?
In theory the point was, of course, that it's highly likely she will in the end need to compromise, and that every vote will count.
But one source joked that she won't do it until "she's in a half-Nelson" - the reality is by then, those MPs who were willing to help last week may have concluded, as some already have, that if she won't budge, Parliament will simply grab hold of the process when it comes to the vote next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46944059
|
news_uk-politics-46944059
|
|
Brexit letters: Has anything changed? - BBC News
|
2019-01-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
EU leaders send reassurances to the prime minister about Northern Ireland.
|
UK Politics
|
"You say we haven't achieved anything," the prime minister said in answer to a reporter's question in Stoke. "We have achieved this exchange of letters..."
She said the letters gave further assurances about the UK and the EU not wanting to use the Irish backstop.
For her critics, it was an underwhelming moment. But what does the exchange - between Theresa May and the presidents of the European Council and the European Commission - actually say?
Well, the tone is certainly constructive and genuinely so - an effort on both sides to offer reassurance of good faith, for public consumption. The letters contain carefully worded arguments (hardly a surprise here) that both sides have had to compromise and that both sides are sensitive to the concerns of the other.
But when it comes to the core issue - getting the Brexit deal approved in the UK Parliament - the letters are unlikely to change anything.
The fact that the part of the deal focusing on the future relationship with the EU was not legally binding, the prime minister's letter suggested, had left MPs "concerned" that no-one could guarantee where negotiations might finally end up.
For many Tory opponents of the prime minister's deal, the key phrase appears early in the EU's response.
"As you know," the letter says, "we are not in a position to agree to anything that changes or is inconsistent with the withdrawal agreement."
The legal underpinning of the backstop proposal, in other words, will not change.
There are plenty of words in the EU letter about how the backstop has only ever been designed as a temporary measure "which would represent a sub-optimal trading arrangement for both sides".
The EU would "use its best endeavours" (a phrase we've heard before and which carries some legal weight) to ensure that "the backstop would only be in place (if at all) for as long as strictly necessary".
This isn't just telling the UK what it wants to hear. The EU really doesn't like the backstop and it was a significant compromise for it to accept it.
But the letter doesn't really go any further than the language that can already be found in the withdrawal agreement itself and in the conclusions of an EU summit last month.
What the EU letter does offer is extra reassurance that it will push on with plans to finalise a new trade deal, which would remove the need for any backstop, as quickly as possible.
And it emphasises that those summit conclusions do carry some legal weight.
There are other titbits in the text, designed to answer some of the concerns set out by the prime minister.
The EU letter confirms that the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration are "part of the same negotiation package" and can be published side by side in the EU's Official Journal "in order to underline the close relationship between the two texts".
It also highlights an important point that is set out in the withdrawal agreement - that any new laws that the EU proposes, under the terms of the backstop, for Northern Ireland require the agreement of the UK.
But the UK wouldn't have the power of veto (it couldn't block all changes automatically) and it couldn't stop the EU from making amendments to existing laws.
In any case, many opponents of Mrs May's deal are unimpressed.
"Despite a letter of supposed reassurance from the European Union, there are no 'legally binding assurances', as the prime minister talked about in December," said the Democratic Unionist Party MP Nigel Dodds. "In fact, there is nothing new. Nothing has changed."
And that leads to a key question - what else is the EU really prepared to offer if, or once, the deal gets rejected in a first vote in Parliament?
At the moment, with the stakes higher than ever, we're stuck at a point that has bedevilled relations between the EU and the UK for decades - the maximum the EU is prepared to offer is less than the minimum that many Tory Eurosceptics are prepared to accept.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46865654
|
news_uk-politics-46865654
|
|
Paddy Ashdown's funeral held in Somerset - BBC News
|
2019-01-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hundreds of people watched the service on TV screens at a hall near the church in his home village.
|
Somerset
|
Paddy Ashdown was knighted in 2000, and entered the House of Lords a year later as Baron Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon
Former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown has been remembered at a private funeral in Somerset.
Lord Ashdown died aged 77 in December after a short illness. He was diagnosed with bladder cancer in October.
The former Yeovil MP's funeral, held in his home village of Norton-sub-Hamdon, was attended by family, friends and former prime minister Sir John Major.
Hundreds of people watched the service on TV screens in the village hall.
Paddy Ashdown led the Liberal Democrats between 1988 and 1999 before standing down from Parliament in 2001 to become the United Nations' high representative in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The funeral was attended by close friends and family
Christened Jeremy, he was given the nickname Paddy when he went to school in England after spending his childhood years in Northern Ireland.
"Locally, you wouldn't get away with any other name," the Rev Peter Thomas told about 40 mourners at St Mary's Church.
"God also knew him as Paddy, not Jeremy, and probably didn't call him Lord," he joked.
One of the speakers at the service, Myles Wickstead, said Lord Ashdown "espoused the values of openness and tolerance, and he found them in this village which he loved".
"He was never happier than when at the Lord Nelson on a Friday night, indulging in a mixture of arguments, fun, gossip, banter and, of course, drink.
"Our community and our country now are poorer that Paddy has gone," he added.
After his death, politicians from all parties paid tribute to him, with Prime Minister Theresa May saying he "served his country with passion and distinction".
About 200 people packed the nearby village hall to see the funeral relayed on screens
A private service was held in Norton-sub-Hamdon for Paddy Ashdown's family and friends earlier today.
But just a few hundred metres away, some 200 people packed into the village hall where the service was screened for local residents.
They watched moving tributes from Paddy Ashdown's son and daughter, and his sister Alison who recalled how he sent her reassuring messages in the final weeks of his life.
There were also nods to his military history as the hymn I Vow To Thee My Country was sung.
References to Paddy's persistent means of persuading his political allies and foes raised several laughs in the room.
Many people who lived locally and knew Paddy spoke about his genuine nature and described him not as Lord Ashdown or a great statesman, but rather as "one of us".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-46822389
|
news_uk-england-somerset-46822389
|
|
Nottinghamshire Police chief's husband in racism probe - BBC News
|
2019-01-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The man is questioned over claims he racially abused a waitress at a force's Christmas party.
|
England
|
The racial slur was allegedly used during a Christmas party held at the Cutler's Hall in Sheffield
The husband of a senior police officer responsible for tackling hate crimes has been questioned over allegations he racially abused a woman.
Ex-police officer Ian Barber allegedly used a racial slur to a waitress at a police Christmas party in Sheffield.
Mr Barber is married to Rachel Barber, deputy chief constable of Nottinghamshire Police and the force's lead on hate crimes.
South Yorkshire Police said an investigation was ongoing.
The incident is alleged to have happened at a Christmas party for senior officers from South Yorkshire Police at Cutler's Hall in Sheffield on 15 December.
Mr Barber and his wife are both former officers with the force.
BBC News has been told Mr Barber twice clashed with members of the waiting staff at the venue during the course of the evening.
He is alleged to have used a racially abusive comment during the course of the second argument.
A senior officer from South Yorkshire Police, Assistant Chief Constable Tim Forber, is said to have intervened and asked Mr Barber to leave.
Both Ian and Rachel Barber have served with South Yorkshire Police
In a statement, South Yorkshire Police said an investigation had been launched and "inquiries remain ongoing".
The force added: "A member of staff reported they were subject to a racially abusive comment, as soon as this was highlighted to those at the event, a man, who was a guest at the event and is not a SYP employee, was asked to leave immediately.
"A man has since voluntarily attended a police station in relation to this matter."
Nottinghamshire Police said it would be "inappropriate for us to comment" as there was a live police investigation under way.
The venue also declined to comment.
BBC News has not been able to contact either Mr or Mrs Barber for comment as they are understood to be on holiday.
Intimidating behaviour and unwanted sexual advances are also seen as misogyny hate crime
She said, in 2016, "behaviour which intimidates, threatens, humiliates or targets women is completely unacceptable".
She added that the force would "seek prosecutions where these are appropriate".
Nottinghamshire Police expanded its hate crime categories to include misogynistic incidents that year and have piloted it since.
It means abuse or harassment which might not be a crime can be reported to and investigated by the police, and support for the victim put in place.
Follow BBC East Midlands on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46909915
|
news_uk-england-46909915
|
|
Saturn's spectacular rings are 'very young' - BBC News
|
2019-01-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
One of the most distinctive features in the Solar System is no more than 100 million years old.
|
Science & Environment
|
The end phases of the mission should yield new information about Saturn's interior
We're looking at Saturn at a very special time in the history of the Solar System, according to scientists.
They've confirmed the planet's iconic rings are very young - no more than 100 million years old, when dinosaurs still walked the Earth.
The insight comes from the final measurements acquired by the American Cassini probe.
The satellite sent back its last data just before diving to destruction in the giant world's atmosphere in 2017.
"Previous estimates of the age of Saturn's rings required a lot of modelling and were far more uncertain. But we now have direct measurements that allows us to constrain the age very well," Luciano Iess from Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, told BBC News.
The professor's team has published an account of its work with Cassini in Science magazine.
Cassini has been circling around Saturn for 13 years On the icy moon Enceladus it discovered... an ocean of water hidden beneath the surface eight times as deep as the oceans on Earth. suggests conditions could be right for micro-organisms to live there. which is the size of the planet Mercury Cassini flew over seas and lakes of methane and discovered they are up to 170 metres deep. On Saturn itself, above the north pole Cassini took photos of a hexagonal hurricane 32,000km across. Scientists have puzzled over how this giant storm spins. Four times as strong as a hurricane on Earth! Back out on the edge of one of Saturn's rings among the clouds of ice particles Cassini even captured the birth of a possible new moon. It's been named Peggy and is just 1km wide. Cassini was flown directly towards the planet until it burnt up in Saturn's atmosphere.
There has long been a debate about the age of Saturn's rings. Some had argued these gorgeous loops of icy particles most likely formed along with the planet itself, some 4.5 billion years ago.
Others had suggested they were a recent phenomenon - perhaps the crushed up remains of a moon or a passing comet that was involved in a collision.
Artwork: Cassini plunged between the rings and the planet's cloudtops
The US-European Cassini mission promised to resolve the argument in its last months at the gas giant.
The satellite's end days saw it fly repeatedly through the gap between the rings and the planet's cloudtops.
Cassini essentially weighed the rings, and found their mass to be 20 times smaller than previous estimates: something on the order of 15,400,000,000,000,000 tonnes, or about two-fifths the mass of Mimas - the Saturn moon that looks like the "Death Star" weapon in the Star Wars movies.
Mimas: The "Star Wars" moon is a favourite among Saturn fans
Knowing the mass was a key piece in the puzzle for researchers.
From Cassini's other instruments, they already knew the proportion of dust in the rings and the rate at which this dust was being added. Having a definitive mass for the rings then made it possible to work out an age.
Prof Iess's team says this could be as young as 10 million years but is no older than 100 million years. In terms of the full age of the Solar System, this is "yesterday".
The calculation agrees with one made by a different group which last month examined how fast the ring particles were falling on to Saturn - a rate that was described as being equivalent to an Olympic-sized swimming pool every half-hour.
This flow, when all factors were considered, would probably see the rings disappear altogether in "at most 100 million years", said Dr Tom Stallard from Leicester University, UK.
"The rings we see today are actually not that impressive compared with how they would have looked 50-100 million years ago," he told BBC News.
"Back then they would have been even bigger and even brighter. So, whatever produced them must have made for an incredible display if you'd been an astronomer 100 million years ago."
Cassini's investigations cannot shed much light on the nature of the event that gave rise to the rings, but it would have been cataclysmic in scale.
It was conceivable, said Dr Stallard, that the geology of the moons around Saturn could hold important clues. Just as rock and ice cores drilled on Earth reveal debris from ancient meteorite and comet impacts, so it's possible the moons of Saturn could record evidence of the ring-forming event in their deeper layers.
Maybe we'll get to drill into the likes of Mimas and Enceladus... one day.
Jonathan.Amos-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk and follow me on Twitter: @BBCAmos
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46911945
|
news_science-environment-46911945
|
|
Brexit: No change to backstop, Ireland insists - BBC News
|
2019-01-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The comments come ahead of a crunch week for Theresa May as MPs vote on her deal again.
|
UK Politics
|
Protests against the potential return of a hard border have been taking place on the island of Ireland
The backstop element of the Brexit plan is "not going to change", Ireland's deputy prime minister has said.
The proposal - aimed at preventing a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland - played a major part in Theresa May's deal being voted down by a historic margin last week.
But Simon Coveney told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show that the EU would not ratify a deal without it.
Mr Hancock also denied reports that the government was "specifically" planning for martial law if the UK left without a deal - but he did not rule it out.
He said that the government "looks at all the options in all circumstances," but when pressed by Andrew Marr, the health secretary added: "It remains on the statute book, but it isn't the focus of our attention."
Martial law involves the suspension of normal law, and temporary rule by the military. It can include measures such as curfews and travel restrictions.
The UK is set to leave the EU on 29 March, with or without a deal. If a hard border comes about, people and goods passing between Ireland and the UK will need to be checked.
Meanwhile, a leaked diplomatic note seen by the Guardian claims that the president of the European Commission, Jean Claude Juncker, has told Mrs May that to revisit the backstop issue she would need to agree a permanent customs union with the EU.
A customs union would mean that no tariffs would be put on goods travelling between the UK and the 27 member states of the EU, but that the UK could not negotiate its own trade agreements with other countries.
The comments come ahead of a crunch week in Parliament.
Mrs May will return to the Commons on Tuesday for a vote on her deal, which includes the withdrawal agreement - the so-called "divorce deal" on how the UK leaves the EU - and the political declaration - a statement on the future relationship.
It was voted down by 432 to 202 votes last week, with hard-line Brexiteers in her own party and members of Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party - on whom Mrs May relies for votes in Parliament - citing the backstop as their main reason for voting against it.
A number of MPs have been tabling amendments in a bid to force the government to change direction.
One amendment, put forward by Labour's Yvette Cooper, seeks to introduce a bill that would allow the government to extend Article 50 - the mechanism by which the UK leaves the EU - by up to nine months in order to get a deal agreed in Westminster.
Yvette Cooper has the support of a number of MPs, including Conservative Remainers
Also appearing on Andrew Marr, Ms Cooper said she was not seeking to "block Brexit" and said the bill would be amendable - meaning MPs could vote on how long any extension would be.
She appealed for the support of the prime minister and MPs, as well as for the backing of her own party leader Jeremy Corbyn, saying: "We can't keep waiting for other people to sort this out."
"We can't carry on with a kind of game of chicken," she said.
"In the end, someone has to take some responsibility and say, 'if the prime minister runs out of time, she may need some more time'.
"That is not about blocking Brexit, that is about being responsible and making sure you can get a Brexit deal."
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
The UK is allowed to scrap Article 50 altogether - and halt Brexit - but to extend it, it would need the approval of the EU.
Mr Coveney said Ireland "won't be an obstacle" if the UK wanted to go down the route of extending Article 50, adding: "Ireland wants to help in this process."
"Britain and Ireland are two islands next to each other," he said. "We have to work out these things together and stop talking about games of chicken."
But Mr Hancock said delaying Brexit would not help solve the arguments between MPs.
"You can't just vote for delay," he said. "You've got to vote positively for a deal".
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by BBC Politics This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’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.
Other amendments being put forward ahead of Tuesday's vote include a plan for putting a time limit on the backstop and another for scrapping it altogether.
These are in answer to critics who dislike the backstop because they believe it keeps the UK too closely aligned to the EU and fear that it could become permanent.
However, Mr Coveney said: "The European Parliament will not ratify a Withdrawal Agreement that doesn't have a backstop in it. It's as simple as that.
"The backstop is already a compromise. It is a series of compromises. It was designed around British red lines."
The former chief constable of the police in Northern Ireland (PSNI) echoed previous warnings that the return of a hard border between the two countries would become a target for dissident republicans.
Speaking to RTE, Sir Hugh Orde said there would be no way to avoid security patrols if the UK left without a deal, and security officers would be "at risk".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Reality Check unpacks the basics of the backstop.
Across Sunday's newspapers and political TV programmes, politicians clashed over whether leaving the EU without a deal should remain an option for the government or not.
Leader of the House Andrea Leadsom wrote in the Sunday Times that trying to rule out a no deal was a "thinly veiled attempt to stop Brexit".
But despite his colleague's words, defence minister Tobias Ellwood wrote: "It is simply wrong for government and business to invest any more time and money in a no deal outcome that will make us poorer, weaker and smaller in the eyes of the world.
"It is now time to rule out the very possibility of no deal."
Mr Ellwood also said members of his own party seeking to "crash out" without a deal "risk inflaming a dangerous battle for the soul of the Conservative Party" - saying it could determine the outcome of the next election.
But Education Secretary Damian Hinds told Sky News no deal needed to remain on the table, although it would "not be a good outcome".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. What happens in the event of no deal?
In other developments, the government is going to consult Parliament on whether to work extra hours and lose their February half-term break in order to get Brexit delivered by 29 March.
BBC political correspondent Iain Watson said the government's demand was a way of Mrs May sending a signal to MPs that she intends to stick to the planned March departure.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47019977
|
news_uk-politics-47019977
|
|
Can you ever be best friends with an ex? - BBC Three
|
2019-01-27
|
[]
| null |
I always thought break-ups were simple affairs. There’s no point getting sentimental about someone once it’s over. Much better to take a practical approach: delete their number, block their social media accounts and purge their leftover belongings from your home.
Unlike my other exes, I didn’t meet B on an app or anonymously at a bar. He was my best friend. We grew up together in Sydney and had one of those freakishly close relationships that only really develop during childhood. We shared everything: from school gossip to family problems. He was the first person I came out to, and I was his.
We started going out in our mid-twenties when he moved back to Sydney after several years away. The relationship was, well, complicated. Every conversation seemed to turn into an argument.
I wish I could say there were good parts but the truth is, it was ugly from the start. Things that we wouldn’t have thought twice about as friends, such as innocent teasing or being late to dinner, became a source of bitterness. I was vile, and he was vile back. And because we were already so close, we knew where to land our verbal punches.
We lasted about 18 months. One day, after a particularly nasty fight, something between us broke for good. We both felt it.
“So I guess that’s it?” I said. “Yeah,” he said. “I guess it is.”
He moved out a few days later. We'd been living together for about four months and he didn’t give me any warning. One day he was there, and the next he wasn’t. That hurt. I had secretly wanted him out for months, but once he was gone the flat felt empty.
We didn’t speak for six months. It was easier to convince myself that he was a bad person, that I’d had him wrong from the start, than deal with the tangle of feelings in my head.
And for a short while, it worked.
But then I got an email with just one word: “Coffee?” It was the shortest olive branch I’ve ever seen, but a peace offering nonetheless. “When?” I wrote back.
We met – and within the first 30 seconds of seeing him, I realised that I wasn’t in love with him any more. When we were going out I either wanted to pounce on him or punch him, but my feelings had mellowed.
That meeting made me realise how much I missed him – not as a partner, but as a friend. Although we avoided certain topics, such as dating other people, there was an easy comfort in the way we chatted. For better or for worse, I wanted him in my life and he felt the same. We agreed to give it a go.
Over the next few months, we met up regularly.
Sometimes we ran out of things to talk about and there were awkward silences. Sometimes it was tense, especially when we tried to talk about issues we had faced in the relationship. Emotional landmines were stepped on, by accident and on purpose. We both had to learn to hold our tongues.
When he first told me he was dating somebody else, I felt sick to my stomach even though I was doing the same.
Sometimes we’d go for a nice dinner and laugh like old times and I’d go home wondering if I was falling back in love with him.
But that’s all part of the process. We were working out where our boundaries were by a process of trial and error. So we sucked it up and stuck it out for the long game.
Eventually, the tension eased - we relaxed, and let our guard down. Our conversations started to flow more naturally and we started to talk about dating other people. When he first told me he was dating somebody else, I felt sick to my stomach even though I was doing the same. But with time, I got used to it and now it feels totally normal.
We’re still very close. I’ve stopped seeing him as my ex and started thinking of him like a brother. He has the keys to my flat and comes and goes as he pleases. We even bought a dog together – he keeps her during the week and I look after her on the weekends and when he’s away for work.
One of my friends calls it “a relationship minus sex”. And I’m sure to some people that’s what it looks like. But we’ve worked hard on our friendship, and I’m confident that it works for us.
People say that you can’t be friends with your ex as though it were a universal truth. But just because it’s difficult doesn’t make it impossible. We deal with difficult relationships all the time – at work, with our friends and with our families. Why should an ex be any different?
Sure, not every relationship is worth the effort. I have friends who would rather wax their scrotum than go for lunch with their exes. But some people are worth investing in – and for me, B was one of them.
No: “It does nothing but prolong the pain of the break-up”
As if you can be friends with an ex you were once in love with! When it comes to the type of love that shook you to your very core, whether it ended on good terms or broke your heart, friendship is not an option. I learnt this the hard way.
I met my ex – the great love who shoved my heart in a blender – at university. He was instantly attractive in that maddeningly generic way: tall, dark and handsome. We were a one-night stand that somehow turned into a friendship, that somehow turned into a relationship.
We were together on and off for three years after we graduated, with weekends of coupled-up bliss spent holed-up in his London flat, punctuated by fierce arguments about commitment. Our break-up was as convoluted and protracted as our time together: full of false starts and regretful make-ups.
That said, when we ended our romantic entanglement, we agreed that the friendship that had initially kick-started our relationship was worth saving. Which is why we all but pinky-swore to remain BFFs for life - promising to still talk, still meet up and still be part of each other’s lives. Our so-called terms included telling each other when a future romantic exploit was growing into something serious.
Despite seeing other people, my heart did acrobatics every time we did a ‘catch-up’ brunch.
I should have known it was doomed from the outset. Plus everyone – from parents to friends – told me we were heading for disaster.
Shortly after our break-up, I went into hospital for a jaw operation. My ex visited me, and brought flowers. This moved me – but not in the way you should be when a mate brings you flowers. My heart jumped the way it does when that person you fancy does something nice for you.
My heart continued to behave in strange ways throughout our ‘friendship’ - if he texted me late at night, if we met up for coffee and if he lingered on a hug. And without realising it, I was soon analysing his every move as if he was still a romantic prospect. I was jealous when he mentioned girls, I was hopeful when he called.
It's because so much of our relationship remained unchanged. Navigating the shift from couple to mates was weirdly easy because the only thing we had stopped doing was anything physical – besides those lingering hugs. We still shared a Netflix account, we still messaged each other all day every day, we still spoke for hours on the phone. I had started dating other people, and true to our promise, I could only assume he may have been doing the same – but with no serious prospects.
Yet despite seeing other people, my heart did acrobatics every time we did a ‘catch-up’ brunch. My emotions were running a marathon the entire time we were pretending to be ‘just friends’. And, ultimately, that is what we were doing: pretending. Though I never voiced this to him, I can’t help but look back and think my feelings were glaringly apparent.
Of course, this all came crashing down six months into our friendship. I was at a house party, and a mutual friend asked if I had met my ex’s new girlfriend. I stammered through a response, saying I had no idea. He was surprised: “Oh really? They’re pretty serious – I thought you guys were really good friends now?”
No, we’re not, I ruminated teary and drunk. He is not my best friend whose new relationship I am thrilled about. He is my ex-boyfriend who has a new girlfriend I knew nothing about. I am not thrilled for him, like a good mate should be - I am devastated, like a woman who is still in love with him.
I ended our friendship the next day. He was upset and admitted that he had kept the relationship a secret, despite the fact it had become serious, because he had wanted to keep our friendship going. That was touching, yet further proof of how toxic our faux friendship had become.
However, ending it was also one of the best decisions of my life. The connection I had with my ex was too deep, too problematic and too fraught with romantic tension to ever be a friendship. What our abortive attempt at being pals taught me was that trying to transform a relationship like that into a smooth-sailing, supportive friendship, is impossible - it does nothing but draw out and prolong the pain of breaking up. It’s tempting to make a friendship with your ex the success story of your failed relationship, but often leaving it as what it was is more respectful to the time you shared.
Today, my ex is a person I only text on his birthday. He does the same with me. It’s a mature gesture, but that's as far as it needs to go. Because our relationship belongs to a specific time of our lives – in the past – and I've learnt that it doesn’t fit anywhere else. Understanding that is the first step to getting over someone. Because, if you loved them like that, you were never truly just friends, so why on Earth would you start now?
Eating With My Ex is available to watch now on BBC iPlayer
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/9df1c10a-ef2d-4629-a825-117d040b4f97
|
ree_article_9df1c10a-ef2d-4629-a825-117d040b4f97
|
||
Brexit letters: Has anything changed? - BBC News
|
2019-01-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
EU leaders send reassurances to the prime minister about Northern Ireland.
|
UK Politics
|
"You say we haven't achieved anything," the prime minister said in answer to a reporter's question in Stoke. "We have achieved this exchange of letters..."
She said the letters gave further assurances about the UK and the EU not wanting to use the Irish backstop.
For her critics, it was an underwhelming moment. But what does the exchange - between Theresa May and the presidents of the European Council and the European Commission - actually say?
Well, the tone is certainly constructive and genuinely so - an effort on both sides to offer reassurance of good faith, for public consumption. The letters contain carefully worded arguments (hardly a surprise here) that both sides have had to compromise and that both sides are sensitive to the concerns of the other.
But when it comes to the core issue - getting the Brexit deal approved in the UK Parliament - the letters are unlikely to change anything.
The fact that the part of the deal focusing on the future relationship with the EU was not legally binding, the prime minister's letter suggested, had left MPs "concerned" that no-one could guarantee where negotiations might finally end up.
For many Tory opponents of the prime minister's deal, the key phrase appears early in the EU's response.
"As you know," the letter says, "we are not in a position to agree to anything that changes or is inconsistent with the withdrawal agreement."
The legal underpinning of the backstop proposal, in other words, will not change.
There are plenty of words in the EU letter about how the backstop has only ever been designed as a temporary measure "which would represent a sub-optimal trading arrangement for both sides".
The EU would "use its best endeavours" (a phrase we've heard before and which carries some legal weight) to ensure that "the backstop would only be in place (if at all) for as long as strictly necessary".
This isn't just telling the UK what it wants to hear. The EU really doesn't like the backstop and it was a significant compromise for it to accept it.
But the letter doesn't really go any further than the language that can already be found in the withdrawal agreement itself and in the conclusions of an EU summit last month.
What the EU letter does offer is extra reassurance that it will push on with plans to finalise a new trade deal, which would remove the need for any backstop, as quickly as possible.
And it emphasises that those summit conclusions do carry some legal weight.
There are other titbits in the text, designed to answer some of the concerns set out by the prime minister.
The EU letter confirms that the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration are "part of the same negotiation package" and can be published side by side in the EU's Official Journal "in order to underline the close relationship between the two texts".
It also highlights an important point that is set out in the withdrawal agreement - that any new laws that the EU proposes, under the terms of the backstop, for Northern Ireland require the agreement of the UK.
But the UK wouldn't have the power of veto (it couldn't block all changes automatically) and it couldn't stop the EU from making amendments to existing laws.
In any case, many opponents of Mrs May's deal are unimpressed.
"Despite a letter of supposed reassurance from the European Union, there are no 'legally binding assurances', as the prime minister talked about in December," said the Democratic Unionist Party MP Nigel Dodds. "In fact, there is nothing new. Nothing has changed."
And that leads to a key question - what else is the EU really prepared to offer if, or once, the deal gets rejected in a first vote in Parliament?
At the moment, with the stakes higher than ever, we're stuck at a point that has bedevilled relations between the EU and the UK for decades - the maximum the EU is prepared to offer is less than the minimum that many Tory Eurosceptics are prepared to accept.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46865654
|
news_uk-politics-46865654
|
|
Justine Greening wanted to scrap tuition fees - BBC News
|
2019-01-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The former education secretary wanted a graduate contribution scheme to fund England's universities.
|
Family & Education
|
Justine Greening's radical plan for fees ended when she was "reshuffled" out of her job
Justine Greening says she had plans to scrap tuition fees, before she lost the job of education secretary a year ago.
She says she wanted a graduate contribution scheme to fund England's universities where "you wouldn't have a loan, you wouldn't have tuition fees".
Ms Greening says she was worried that tuition fees of £9,250 per year could start to put off poorer students.
The government said its review of fees would make sure there was "value for money for both students and taxpayers".
Ms Greening, education secretary until last January's reshuffle, says she had concerns that excessively high fees and levels of debt could become a barrier to social mobility.
She says she had been working on a radically different system which would have removed fees - but instead the prime minister launched a review of student finance, chaired by financier Philip Augar.
Ms Greening is scathing about the review, which is expected to report back next month.
She says its public remit is confused - without any "clear objectives of the problem it was trying to fix".
And she says its private purpose was to buy time and only "tweak" a few of the most politically toxic aspects of the current system.
Even if, as suggested, it lowers tuition fees to £6,500, she says it will still be a temporary sticking plaster.
"What happens if they creep back up to £9,000? Would they re-reduce them again?" says Ms Greening.
"We need a long-term sustainable approach, not a short-term fix that may unravel and then be taken over by the next short-term fix."
Ms Greening, hailed as the first Conservative education secretary to have attended a comprehensive school, said she realised there had to be a different approach after hearing what students were saying about fees during the 2017 general election.
It was a campaign in which Labour promised to scrap fees entirely and the Conservatives saw big swings against them in university seats.
"There was a real desire within the DfE to take a fresh look at some of these issues - and to challenge ourselves with being ahead of the curve, even if the rest of government had little interest in broader reform," she said.
"I felt that we should be looking and asking ourselves some tough questions - about what it might look like."
Theresa May commissioned the review to find better value for money for students
In the months before her departure from office, she said the "basic architecture" of an alternative funding system was worked up.
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities.
She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
It would remove negative perceptions over high fees and £50,000 average debts on graduation - and would prevent a cap on the number of places.
Ms Greening says poorer students had so far not been significantly deterred by fees, but it was "getting to the point where it felt that they were too high".
She argues her graduate contribution proposals would be more progressive - as higher earners would pay more.
"There could be someone going off into the City and paying off their loan and avoiding all the interest with one bonus cheque - compared to a nurse," she says, who could be paying it off for 30 years.
The graduate contribution would keep the principle of students paying towards higher education.
"Most students recognise they should make a contribution, because they're getting an opportunity," she says.
But it would mean ditching the idea of a higher education marketplace in fees, which was at the heart of the reforms that created the tuition fee system.
"You have to confront the fact - did universities compete on price? No," she says.
But her plans for such a massive change went nowhere.
"We were working up this proposal before the reshuffle," she says.
"Of course, it had tons of work to be done, all sorts to refine and understand the trade-offs," but she believed it to be a "more sensible approach".
Instead she was replaced as education secretary and a review of student finance was announced.
She has since set up the "Social Mobility Pledge", working to improve opportunities in the workplace, and is on the front lines of arguments over Brexit - supporting calls for a second referendum.
Looking at policy over tuition fees, she says the divisions over Brexit show how ineffective the party political system has become at reaching long-term decisions.
"I don't think Britain or British politics will ever be the same again.
"I think it's a sea change. It's a call to action to genuinely create a different country to tackle some of the problems that sat behind a lot of the Brexit vote.
"And I think for British politics, we've got to ask ourselves some difficult questions about why party politics seemingly cannot rise to the challenge of delivering on long-term problems."
A Department for Education spokesman said: "Students rightly expect value for money from their degree, which is why the government is conducting a major review of post-18 education and funding - to ensure we have a system that is joined up, accessible to all and provides value for money for both students and taxpayers.
"Work on the review is still ongoing, and more information will be available in due course."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-46959296
|
news_education-46959296
|
|
Hammersmith stabbing: 39 attempted murder arrests - BBC News
|
2019-01-01
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
They were arrested at a party in west London after a man suffered life-threatening wounds.
|
London
|
Eyewitnesses reported seeing about 50 police officers at the scene in Hammersmith
Thirty-nine people at a house party were arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after a man was stabbed in west London.
The man, thought to be in his mid-30s, was found with life-threatening wounds when police were called to Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, at 01:00 GMT.
The Metropolitan Police said the victim was chased by men and women following "a minor argument" in a shop.
The arrested people have since been released from custody, officers said.
The suspects were seen going into a property where there was a party.
Officers tried to speak to those in the flat, but when they failed to co-operate 39 people were arrested.
One witness said the group were "lined up and interrogated" for about an hour in the street.
The injured man was treated at the scene by officers and paramedics. He is critically ill in hospital.
Supt Mark Lawrence said: "Whilst it is unusual for so many people to be arrested in the early stages of an investigation such as this, due to a lack of co-operation and the necessity of securing essential evidence following a serious assault this action was appropriate."
A tattoo parlour, the Southern Belle pub and a Sainsbury's Local supermarket are all within a police cordon, according to BBC Radio London's Greg McKenzie who has been reporting from the scene.
Blood was seen on the pavement within one of the three taped off areas. Two knives were found nearby, said police.
A tattoo parlour, a pub and a supermarket are all within the cordon in west London
One woman said she saw a group of people running before hearing someone shouting: "Get him."
"All of a sudden, all of them in a rush together ran in that door [to the flat] together," she added.
The witness, who did not want to be identified, said she saw the victim being treated by paramedics. She indicated he had been stabbed in the chest.
A neighbour of the flat in Greyhound Road, where the arrests are thought to have been made, said the party had seemed "quite relaxed and chilled".
"We just heard normal talking. It sounded like squealing girls like you get on a night out," she added.
Another neighbour, Mason El Hage, 22, said: "I have never seen something like that in my life. It was very extreme in terms of the amount of people involved," he said.
The graphic designer said he initially thought it was a drugs raid after he heard noise and dogs barking at about 01:30 GMT.
"After that, three riot vans rocked up and about 50 police officers marched down the road, went into the house next door and brought around 30 to 40 people outside," he said.
"They lined them up and interrogated them for about an hour."
Mr El Hage said the group, including young men and women, were arrested in "single file" in a "very, very swift operation".
Four of them, all males, have been released on bail.
Everyone else in the group - 20 males and 15 females, all aged between 16 and 22 - has been released while investigations continue.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46719897
|
news_uk-england-london-46719897
|
|
Asylum seekers, migrants or refugees: Which word is correct? - BBC News
|
2019-01-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
How we talk about people moving from country to country and why it matters.
|
Newsbeat
|
The way we all talk about people moving to a different country can be confusing.
You'll have heard the different terms: migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants.
There has been a small spike in the number of people crossing the English Channel to get to the UK in the last few months, causing the debate to resurface.
Many of those trying to reach Britain are from Iran and Pakistan.
But is there a correct way to describe them?
Dr. Charlotte Taylor is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Migration at the University of Sussex.
She writes about how the media use language to describe people crossing borders.
We got her help to explain more about some of the terms we keep hearing.
The term you might hear most often.
This is a person who moves from one place to another, in order to find work or better living conditions.
So if you live in the UK and decide to head off to work in Spain for a few months this summer, you could be described as a migrant.
Charlotte Taylor says a migrant can be a safe term: "It is at the moment, but it won't necessarily continue to be a safe term. They change over time".
Where it gets a bit more tricky is political migration.
This can be when someone moves to get away from a certain regime.
Charlotte does have concerns about words used around migration such as "wave, flow, flooded by".
She believes this type of language can mean people in a country where migrants are regularly arriving can see them as "products not people".
Then Prime Minister David Cameron was criticised in 2015 for talking about "a swarm of people coming across the Mediterranean, seeking a better life, wanting to come to Britain".
This is when a person comes to live permanently in a foreign country. They don't have to have been forced from or pushed out of their own country, it can be a choice.
There is something very different about an illegal and legal immigrant, however valid the reasons for movement.
One has been allowed to come to a country through approved documents - an illegal immigrant has not.
Charlotte Taylor says media in the UK often discuss immigration and not emigration, which is when people leave their home country.
"Emigration has nearly dropped out of conversation," she says.
She thinks, despite an improvement in tone over the last 30 years, it's partly down to some hostility towards immigration.
"They are now seen as really separate processes. People don't recognise the similarities."
A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"It's a very different kind of status," says Dr. Charlotte Taylor.
"As soon as you acknowledge someone is a refugee you acknowledge they have a certain set of rights.
"They have been driven by circumstances beyond their control."
This person could be a combination of all of the above, although they are asking for international protection in another country.
The Home Secretary Sajid Javid questioned whether people in boats travelling from France to the UK were genuine asylum seekers earlier this month.
Some political opponents and campaigners said his comments were "deeply concerning".
Mr Javid's argument was that some of the people were coming from France - which is deemed a safe country - rather than their place of origin.
Asylum seeker is the term Charlotte feels comfortable with using for people coming on these small, often unsafe, boats across The Channel.
"If someone is seeking asylum, they are seeking asylum.
"I was very surprised to see that distinction between genuine and non-genuine asylum. It may be rejected but the seeking [part] is a fact."
EU rules allow a country such as the UK to return an adult asylum seeker to the first European country they reached.
Asylum seekers often say they want to come to the UK because they want to speak English, and because they have family connections in the country.
Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 every weekday on BBC Radio 1 and 1Xtra - if you miss us you can listen back here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-46747502
|
news_newsbeat-46747502
|
|
Was this woman wrongly convicted of murder? - BBC News
|
2019-01-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Why did Emma-Jayne Magson stab the man she loved - and should she have been convicted of murder?
|
Leicester
|
Emma-Jayne Magson stabbed her partner with a steak knife then left him to bleed to death. Yet her family believes her murder conviction was a miscarriage of justice. Why?
"I've done what my Dad did to you."
Joanne Smith felt her heart sink as she read the text message from her daughter Emma-Jayne Magson.
Two decades earlier Joanne had been stabbed by her partner, and now Emma had fatally stabbed her own partner, 26-year-old James Knight.
Emma and James had both been out drinking that night and were thrown out of a taxi because they were rowing. The argument continued in the street and back at Emma's home.
At some point Emma picked up a steak knife and plunged it into James's chest, puncturing his heart.
James then somehow ended up in the street outside his brother's house, where Emma was seen sitting on top of him. When James's brother and a neighbour tried to help she failed to say she had stabbed him, so they unwittingly left him to die.
Despite all of this, Justice for Women, an organisation helping 25-year-old Emma, believes she is one of many women who may have been wrongly convicted of murder after fighting back against abusive partners.
The organisation is the same one helping Sally Challen appeal against a murder conviction for bludgeoning her "controlling" husband to death with a hammer.
"If I honestly thought hand on heart Emma really meant to do that [kill James], I would never stand by Emma," says her mother.
"But I just know Emma. I know she loves James. And that's so frustrating for me because I know how much she loves him; even to this day she loves him."
So how did Emma come to kill James Knight?
Emma's older sister, Charlotte, was kept at the family home after she died
Emma was only eight months old when her father attacked her mother in front of her and her older sister, Charlotte, in 1993.
"He locked me in a flat and stabbed me," recalls Joanne. "They were both in my arms. He went for my throat but as I ran he slashed my legs."
Despite Emma being too young to remember what happened, Joanne says the stabbing had a lasting impact on her.
"We moved around, we went into a safe house," says Joanne. "There were scars on my legs and I had to learn to walk again."
Joanne says Emma had a close relationship with her older sister.
"It was just them," says Joanne. "They had a bedroom together; they did everything together."
Then Charlotte died, aged nine, following a complication from an operation.
Joanne sounds regretful when explaining what she did next - her grief-stricken decision to bring Charlotte's body back to the family home for two weeks. Emma was seven years old at the time.
"Charlotte was in my bedroom for a week, in my bed," says Joanne. "For the first week she was in my room then I brought her downstairs in an open casket.
"I don't think I considered anybody but myself."
Joanne said her daughter started "acting out" for attention as a teenager
While Emma had been quiet as a child she started rebelling as a teenager.
"As she got to about 13 she started drinking, acting out really, mainly for attention," says Joanne.
Joanne had left Emma's father but says there was violence in a subsequent relationship, and the pattern repeated when Emma got into relationships herself.
One of Emma's partners "fractured her skull and put her in hospital and she had a leak on the brain".
Emma had a daughter, who is now four years old, when she was 21. Joanne says the birth was "traumatic" and she suffered from post-natal depression.
James Knight had two daughters from his previous relationship
Emma met James a year after her daughter was born, in the autumn of 2015.
They got together at about the time James's relationship ended with the mother of his two children. James had been staying with one of his brothers in Sylvan Street in Leicester, while Emma lived a few doors down with her daughter.
John Skinner, who was friends with James and worked with him as a binman, described him as "a family man" who had lots of friends.
"James had a very good group of friends... he was popular in and amongst his mates and at work.
"Whenever he wasn't working with me people always wanted to work with him because they knew you could have a laugh and he would get the work done."
John says the relationship with Emma appeared to begin well.
"When they first got together James looked really happy and bubbly and like he was moving on with his life and he just seemed really happy and settled."
He became aware of arguments creeping in but thought this was normal for a couple getting settled.
"I've seen them have an argument once where it got quite heated but in my opinion they both gave as good as they got," says John.
"I've never seen either of them be violent towards each other."
Joanne felt her daughter changed as the relationship went on.
"James wanted her to stay in the home, and James didn't want her to wear makeup," she says.
John (left) saw Emma and James argue but thought "they both gave as good as they got"
In the murder trial, the prosecution described their relationship as "volatile".
She "always had bruises", her mother says, but would explain them away as "play fighting".
James's mother, Trish Knight, maintains her son was not violent.
"James has no history of violence towards women," she says.
"James was with his previous girlfriend for nine years, who he has got two children with, and there was no violence in that relationship."
The BBC contacted James's former partner but she did not want to contribute to this piece.
She told The Sun he was "a real romantic" at the start of the relationship and "an amazing dad" to their daughters.
However, she discovered James was smoking cannabis and taking steroids towards the end of their relationship.
"It was a far cry from the man I fell in love with," she told The Sun.
"It caused row after row and no matter how much I begged him to stop, he didn't listen."
John (right) said James was popular in and outside of work
James's mother still insists he would never have hit anyone.
"James could shout, and James had hit a wall. If James lost his temper he would hit a wall rather than hit somebody," says Trish.
"He did get a lot bigger, obviously, you could tell there was something going off," says John.
"Obviously he was always obsessed with looking good... he used to go to the gym after work.
"If you do the job and you work hard it keeps you fit in itself but he went that extra mile."
Emma already had a daughter, who is now four years old
Emma miscarried their baby in the middle of March 2016.
Miscarriages are known to trigger mental health problems, but Emma's family say the loss was even more traumatic because half of the baby was left inside her despite a hospital procedure intended to remove it. She then returned to hospital for a further procedure to have the remains removed.
Emma telephoned her mum to say James blamed her for losing the baby.
"A nurse had to have a word with them in the hospital because he was calling her a slag, saying she was with black men, that's why she lost it," says Joanne.
James's mum said he had been "thrilled" about the prospect of becoming a father again, and she never heard him blame Emma for the miscarriage.
"He was upset," Trish says.
"I think he was angry it had happened to them."
Emma claimed she "didn't mean to harm" James
Emma decided to go on a night out with a friend on Saturday 26 March 2016, the Easter bank holiday weekend.
That night, Emma met up with James at a bar in Leicester city centre.
Louise Bullivant, her new solicitor, says door staff at the pub asked James to leave because they were concerned about his behaviour.
"There was an incident between James and door staff which resulted in him being asked to leave and Emma decided to leave with him," she says.
"There's no doubt that they had both been drinking."
They argued in a taxi and the driver asked them to get out, meaning they had to walk home. During the journey, CCTV captured James grabbing Emma around her shoulder and neck and pushing her to the ground.
A statement from Emma was read out in court, in which she claimed she stabbed James in self-defence.
"Once in the kitchen, he grabbed me around my throat and pushed me back," it said.
"I was right next to the sink and reached out to grab something. I picked up the first thing which came to hand which was a steak knife; the knife was in my hand and I hit out once.
"I didn't mean to harm him, I just wanted to get him off'."
"I think something triggered; I think she had had enough," says Joanne.
James's mum says nobody really knows what happened.
"There were only two people who were there that night and one of them can't give his version of events," says Trish.
Emma said she stabbed James in the kitchen of her house in Sylvan Street, Leicester
James did not die immediately. In fact, he somehow ended up outside his brother Kevin's house a few doors away, lying face down in the street, at about 02:30.
Kevin and a neighbour, Michal Ladic, came out to help but Emma did not tell either of them she had stabbed James.
"He was still alive when I came to them," says Michal.
"I wanted to turn him around but she was sitting on him. He was face down, topless, she was sitting on him.
"I asked if he was all right and she said he was just drunk."
In his evidence at the trial, Kevin said Emma told him James was drunk and had been beaten up by bouncers earlier on.
When asked what impression he got from Emma, Kevin said: "That everything will be fine in the morning - he just needs to sleep it off."
Kevin helped lift James into Emma's house and placed him on the floor of the front room. Kevin did not realise his brother had been stabbed and left, telling him: "I will see you tomorrow."
Emma rang 999 and asked for an ambulance, but again did not mention James had been stabbed.
When asked what had happened she said: "Um, I don't know, my boyfriend's here and he's making weird noises. I don't know what's going on."
Later in the call she said: "It looks like he's had a fight with someone."
When the operator explained the ambulance might take a while, she replied: "No, that's fine, don't worry about it."
The prosecution claimed Emma deceived people into not saving James's life, and described her as "cold, brutal and manipulative".
However, her mother believes she simply didn't realise James was dying.
"I don't think she knew how serious it was in that moment," says Joanne.
James was known as "King James" and Emma got a tattoo in tribute to him after his death
Kevin was awoken by Emma banging on his door, screaming that James was dead, about 40 minutes after he had seen them both outside his house.
Kevin went to Emma's house and Michal was already there trying to save his life, having heard Emma's screams.
"We didn't know he had been stabbed," says Michal.
"The body was so clean, nothing on him, and only when I gave him mouth-to-mouth and the second breath raised his chest and that wound opened and my eyes popped out. I just took the phone from Kev and told the operator that he was stabbed in the heart.
"Then I was trying to do the CPR for another 15 minutes and she was getting in my way, like 'I want him back, I just want him to wake up'.
"I remember telling Kev to drag her off him, and he did it, he took her off so I could carry on with the mouth-to-mouth and CPR."
Emma's grandmother says she saw marks around Emma's neck
Emma phoned her grandmother, who got a taxi straight there.
"The ambulance had taken James away," says Lynda Allen.
"There were police everywhere. Eventually, they let me go through and she walked down the road to me. All she had got on was a little nightdress, no shoes, nothing.
"She put her head on my shoulder, crying."
Lynda noticed marks around her neck, which were also noted when Emma was later examined in police custody.
Emma was not initially arrested as police did not realise she was responsible for stabbing James.
She was allowed to go to her mother's house, where she told her mother she thought she had killed James, who told police. Emma was then arrested and taken away after being allowed to say goodbye to her daughter.
Emma decided not to give evidence at her trial
Unusually for someone accused of murder, Emma remained on bail throughout her trial at Leicester Crown Court.
Her new solicitor believes this "says a great deal about the court's approach to the evidence".
Emma decided not to give evidence herself, but her legal team argued she had acted in self-defence, did not intend to kill or harm James, and had suffered a loss of control.
Her family believe she was scared and did not understand what was happening during the trial.
"How can I put it without sounding nasty?" says her grandmother.
"Emma's very slow on the uptake. If you said something to Emma and she didn't understand it, where it's quite simple to me and you, I would have to sit and explain everything to her.
"I don't understand the law but I would have thought there would be somebody there to talk things through with her that she didn't understand."
Emma's new solicitor believes if she had been supported by an intermediary, such as a trained social worker, she might have followed the trial better and participated effectively.
Emma was found guilty of murder in November 2016 and given a life sentence with a minimum term of 17 years.
Joanne takes Emma's daughter to visit her in prison every week
After the trial ended, Emma's mother was approached by a police officer who told her to contact Justice for Women.
The group helped Emma get a new legal team, which is trying to appeal against the murder conviction using psychiatric evidence.
The original psychiatrist instructed by the defence team had diagnosed Emma as having an emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD), but for some reason this was not used as evidence at her trial.
Emma's new legal team went back to this psychiatrist for a further assessment, and also instructed a clinical psychologist who diagnosed Emma as having a pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS).
Even the psychiatric expert originally instructed by the prosecution now agrees that Emma was suffering from a recognised medical condition at the time of the killing.
"He says he has revised his view and now supports a diagnosis of EUPD and PDD-NOS," says Emma's solicitor.
A petition was launched demanding "justice for James", saying that Emma should stay in prison and "do her time".
However, Court of Appeal judges in London have found Emma has an "arguable" case and granted permission to appeal.
Emma speaks to her young daughter on the phone every day, and she visits the prison every week.
"They are so close," says Joanne.
"She's going to see her mum today and she said 'I'm going to my mum's house, I can't wait. I love my mum's house'.
Trish says her son James had no history of abuse in his relationships
For James's young daughters, their weekly visits are to his grave.
"They ask if Daddy is watching them," says Trish.
"One of his daughters when she's old enough wants to go in the sky to see Daddy."
Joanne empathises with James's mum, but maintains Emma should not have been convicted of murder.
"I've lost a child so I know what James's mum is going through. I understand, I really do," she says.
"I just hope Emma can come out and be a mum to her daughter and get on with her life.
"She will never forget James ever, she won't. I know that she loves James and I know that if she could take that night back she would. 100% she would."
On 22 November the Court of Appeal granted permission for Emma-Jayne Magson to appeal against her murder conviction. Her legal team is waiting for a date for the next hearing.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-45733551
|
news_uk-england-leicestershire-45733551
|
|
Is Theresa May any closer to unblocking her Brexit deal? - BBC News
|
2019-01-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Is the prime minister any closer to getting MPs' backing for the UK's deal for exiting the EU?
|
UK Politics
|
There is a growing feeling it may take more than one go to get the deal through Parliament
When Theresa May pulled the "meaningful vote" on Brexit last month, the day before MPs were about to pass their verdict on her deal, Downing Street hoped two things would happen.
First, that the EU would offer some form of legal guarantee that the Northern Irish backstop - the arrangements for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland - would be temporary.
This, in turn, would bring the DUP on board - and unlock further support from previously hostile Conservative backbenchers.
Second, that some sceptical MPs, once away from the febrile atmosphere at Westminster, would quietly reflect over Christmas that the deal wasn't as bad as all that, as it at least guarantees that the UK will leave the EU at the end of March.
So perhaps any rebellion would diminish, if not evaporate.
But neither hope has - yet - been realised, with the vote now less than two weeks away.
So as things stand, the prime minister is once again facing defeat.
But her difficulties could run even deeper than assumed.
It was undoubtedly disappointing for Downing Street that the DUP's Westminster leader Nigel Dodds declared that the Withdrawal Agreement "flies in the face" of the government's commitments on Northern Ireland following his meetings with Theresa May and the Conservative chief whip Julian Smith this week.
The government quite simply couldn't tell him that that the EU, at this stage, was willing to go any further than offering "reassurances" and "clarifications" on the temporary nature of the backstop, rather than legal guarantees.
But even if the EU does move significantly in the next ten days, the prime minister could still be facing defeat.
What the DUP's Brexit spokesman Sammy Wilson said on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Friday was significant.
He said he was "alarmed" that the Northern Irish backstop could become the "settled arrangement" on Brexit.
Let's unpick this for a moment - because it goes to the core of Theresa May's difficulties.
The DUP want to make sure the backstop is temporary and that the UK, including Northern Ireland, can exit from it without EU approval.
The European Commission has said the deal can't be re-negotiated but the talking continues
If the EU can guarantee this, it's possible the DUP's MPs may grit their teeth and back - or abstain on - the deal, as would some long-standing Leave campaigners on the Conservative benches.
But, as I understand it, up to 40 Conservative MPs still wouldn't back the deal because they, like Sammy Wilson, are worried about what the "settled arrangement" on Brexit might look like.
They believe that the way the government will avoid a hard border in Ireland - and avoid triggering the backstop - is by agreeing a permanent trade deal that actually looks a lot like the backstop in any case.
That is, the whole of the UK, not just Northern Ireland, would mirror some EU regulations on goods and stay close to the EU's customs arrangements.
This would, they fear, then constrain the UK's ability to do future trade deals with the rest of the world.
This suspicion is fuelled by the following words in the political declaration document - the blueprint for the post-Brexit relationship with the EU:
"The economic partnership should ensure….ambitious customs arrangements that.. build and improve on the single customs territory provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement."
Downing Street officials have pointed out - until they are almost blue in the face - that the political declaration also specifically mentions an "independent trade policy" for the UK.
But this doesn't appear to have neutralised some backbench concerns.
The prime minister will launch a "charm offensive" with Conservative MPs next week to try to allay any suspicions - though whether they will be charmed or offended is still an open question.
Such is the lack of trust amongst a small but potentially crucial contingent of her MPs, I am told that in order for them to vote for her deal, she would need to convince them that she wouldn't handle the future trade negotiations after Brexit.
Despite Chief Whip Julian Smith's efforts, many Tory MPs remained opposed to the deal
And/or give them a firm date for her departure from office.
Downing Street - and more widely, the government's - tactic is to raise the possibility of No Brexit unless long-standing Leave campaigners hold their noses and vote for her deal.
This process has already begun. But expect it to be ramped up next week.
The PM's allies will argue that unless the deal is settled soon, then opponents of Brexit and supporters of a new referendum will try to amend forthcoming non-Brexit legislation to make it contingent on a public vote taking place.
And MPs who don't want a referendum but do want Theresa May's deal fundamentally renegotiated will be told that would mean extending Article 50 and therefore, in No 10's eyes, breaking faith with leave-supporting voters.
So far these arguments don't seem to have worked.
Some of her MPs will doubtlessly be poring over a YouGov survey published today. This was commissioned by London's Queen Mary University and Sussex University as part of a wider project into party members' attitudes and views.
It suggested more than half of Conservative members - 53% - believe Mrs May's deal doesn't respect the result of the referendum. And 59% of them oppose her deal, while 38% support it.
No 10 would argue that there is private polling which suggests her deal is more popular with the wider public.
The You Gov survey itself suggests that 46% of likely Conservative voters (as opposed to members) back the deal, with a smaller number - 38% -opposing.
There is another potential fly in the ointment for the prime minister - although here, adversity could be turned to advantage.
It is assumed that the Lords will insert an amendment in to legislation on trade which would require the prime minister to negotiate a customs union with the EU.
Enter the word or phrase you are looking for
The government, in the normal run of things, would then vote this change down when the legislation returns to the Commons.
But with Labour formally backing a customs union - and some Conservative MPs who backed Remain in the referendum also very warm to the idea - government sources are concerned that the Commons might not overturn it.
So the argument that is likely to be made by government whips to the Brexiteer opponents of Theresa May's deal is this: Unless they grab the prime minister's deal before the trade legislation comes to the Commons, they might be landed with a customs union.
And this wouldn't just constrain, but prevent, future independent trade deals.
It may look chaotic but one government insider says the key is making steady progress
But the most likely option for at least reducing the size of any defeat on the deal is further movement from Brussels.
The prime minister is talking the EU Commission President Jean Claude Juncker later and I am told she will be talking to other EU 27 leaders over the next ten days.
There is a feeling in Whitehall that it may take more than one attempt to get the deal through parliament.
One government insider likened the prime minister's situation to a game of American football.
Things can look chaotic at any given moment but as long as you don't give the ball away to your opponents you can move incrementally towards your goal.
But she has already had to make one backward pass - delaying the vote on her deal - and may need some trick play to get her deal over the line.
As MPs return to parliament next week, the prospect of a prime ministerial victory appears some way off.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46761290
|
news_uk-politics-46761290
|
|
Brexit deal: Meetings aren't a Plan B - BBC News
|
2019-01-16
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The PM has promised meetings and conversations - but can Theresa May bring her critics on board?
|
UK Politics
|
Meetings, on their own, are not a Plan B. Conversations, are not by themselves, compromises.
To get any deal done where there are such clashing views all around, it requires give and take. It feels like a political lifetime since there has been a fundamental dispute in the cabinet, in the Tory party and across Parliament. Theresa May has stubbornly, although understandably, tried to plot a middle course.
But that has failed so spectacularly at this stage. Ultimately she may well be left with the same dilemma of which way to tack.
It's clear, wide open, in public, that the cabinet is at odds with each other. Just listen to David Gauke and Liam Fox on whether a customs union could be a compromise for example.
The answer for her is not suddenly going to emerge from a unified tier of her top team. There are perhaps five or six of the cabinet who would be happy to see that kind of relationship as a way to bring Labour on board.
But there is a group of around the same size who would rather see what they describe as a "managed no deal".
You may well wonder if that isn't a contradiction in terms.
But the principle would be that the UK would pay the divorce bill already agreed and over a two-year period construct a series of side deals on specific issues, rather than try to come up with a whole new comprehensive plan.
There are already intense arguments about whether that's remotely realistic. But the overall point is that the prime minister cannot just therefore look to her top colleagues for an immediate solution.
Before she decides which way to tack, or how far to budge, she may need to ask herself if the talks she wants to hold with other political parties are occasions when she is really open to ideas - or just ways of managing the political situation.
One cabinet minister involved in the talks suggested that many MPs still needed to understand how the agreement they have reached with the EU worked. And that as "project reality" dawned, there could still be a way through of salvaging Mrs May's deal in something like its current form.
And certainly there wasn't much in the PM's lectern statement to suggest she is suddenly ready to move very much. One former minister described it as "still flicking the V at the 48% - she's deluded, she never changes her mind and cannot conceive that others might".
If all that the prime minister intends to do is massage a few egos with these talks, it seems unlikely that she'll find a quick route to success. And Labour may well stay outside the process.
Many members of the public might be furious that Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn won't play nice during a time of crisis. He's always said he believes in dialogue, but when it really matters, he says no. But inside the Labour movement there are others who might accuse of him of helping to make Brexit happen if he takes part. Like so many facets of this process, it's not a straightforward political calculation.
But across Parliament, for a very long time now, even some MPs who were on the prime minister's side to start with have been intensely frustrated that she hasn't listened. It will take a lot more than a cup of tea in Downing Street to bring her many critics on board.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46900738
|
news_uk-politics-46900738
|
|
Asylum seekers, migrants or refugees: Which word is correct? - BBC News
|
2019-01-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
How we talk about people moving from country to country and why it matters.
|
Newsbeat
|
The way we all talk about people moving to a different country can be confusing.
You'll have heard the different terms: migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants.
There has been a small spike in the number of people crossing the English Channel to get to the UK in the last few months, causing the debate to resurface.
Many of those trying to reach Britain are from Iran and Pakistan.
But is there a correct way to describe them?
Dr. Charlotte Taylor is a senior lecturer at the Centre for Migration at the University of Sussex.
She writes about how the media use language to describe people crossing borders.
We got her help to explain more about some of the terms we keep hearing.
The term you might hear most often.
This is a person who moves from one place to another, in order to find work or better living conditions.
So if you live in the UK and decide to head off to work in Spain for a few months this summer, you could be described as a migrant.
Charlotte Taylor says a migrant can be a safe term: "It is at the moment, but it won't necessarily continue to be a safe term. They change over time".
Where it gets a bit more tricky is political migration.
This can be when someone moves to get away from a certain regime.
Charlotte does have concerns about words used around migration such as "wave, flow, flooded by".
She believes this type of language can mean people in a country where migrants are regularly arriving can see them as "products not people".
Then Prime Minister David Cameron was criticised in 2015 for talking about "a swarm of people coming across the Mediterranean, seeking a better life, wanting to come to Britain".
This is when a person comes to live permanently in a foreign country. They don't have to have been forced from or pushed out of their own country, it can be a choice.
There is something very different about an illegal and legal immigrant, however valid the reasons for movement.
One has been allowed to come to a country through approved documents - an illegal immigrant has not.
Charlotte Taylor says media in the UK often discuss immigration and not emigration, which is when people leave their home country.
"Emigration has nearly dropped out of conversation," she says.
She thinks, despite an improvement in tone over the last 30 years, it's partly down to some hostility towards immigration.
"They are now seen as really separate processes. People don't recognise the similarities."
A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"It's a very different kind of status," says Dr. Charlotte Taylor.
"As soon as you acknowledge someone is a refugee you acknowledge they have a certain set of rights.
"They have been driven by circumstances beyond their control."
This person could be a combination of all of the above, although they are asking for international protection in another country.
The Home Secretary Sajid Javid questioned whether people in boats travelling from France to the UK were genuine asylum seekers earlier this month.
Some political opponents and campaigners said his comments were "deeply concerning".
Mr Javid's argument was that some of the people were coming from France - which is deemed a safe country - rather than their place of origin.
Asylum seeker is the term Charlotte feels comfortable with using for people coming on these small, often unsafe, boats across The Channel.
"If someone is seeking asylum, they are seeking asylum.
"I was very surprised to see that distinction between genuine and non-genuine asylum. It may be rejected but the seeking [part] is a fact."
EU rules allow a country such as the UK to return an adult asylum seeker to the first European country they reached.
Asylum seekers often say they want to come to the UK because they want to speak English, and because they have family connections in the country.
Listen to Newsbeat live at 12:45 and 17:45 every weekday on BBC Radio 1 and 1Xtra - if you miss us you can listen back here.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-46747502
|
news_newsbeat-46747502
|
|
Hoda Muthana: Trump says IS woman barred from US return - BBC News
|
2019-02-21
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Hoda Muthana, who was born in the US, regrets her actions and wants to return, her lawyer says.
|
US & Canada
|
US President Donald Trump says a woman who left the US to become a propagandist for the Islamic State (IS) group will not be allowed to return.
On Twitter, he said he had instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the country".
Mr Pompeo had earlier stated that the 24-year-old was not a US citizen and would not be admitted.
However, her family and her lawyer maintain that she has US citizenship.
Ms Muthana, who grew up in Alabama, travelled to Syria to join IS when she was 20. She had told her family she was going to a university event in Turkey.
The case has similarities to that of UK-born teenager Shamima Begum who has been stripped of her British citizenship.
Ms Begum fled London to join IS in 2015 but has now said she wants to return to the UK.
President Trump recently told the UK and other European countries to take back and put on trial Islamic State (IS) fighters captured in the final battle against the group.
He warned that the alternative was that US-led Kurdish forces would have to release them.
Ms Muthana's family lawyer, Hassan Shibly, said it was "preposterous" that Mr Trump would call for European states to take back their citizens and "now is trying to play games when it comes to American citizens".
"The Trump administration continues its attempts to wrongfully strip citizens of their citizenship," he told ABC News.
"Hoda Muthana had a valid US passport and is a citizen. She was born in Hackensack, NJ in October 1994, months after her father stopped being [a] diplomat."
Lawyer Hassan Shibly insists Hoda Muthana has a right to return to the US
In later comments to AFP news agency he said his client wanted due process and was willing to go to prison if convicted.
"We cannot get to a point where we simply strip citizenship from those who break the law. That's not what America is about," he said.
However, Mr Pompeo said Ms Muthana "does not have any legal basis, no valid US passport, no right to a passport, nor any visa to travel to the United States".
"Hoda Muthana is not a US citizen and will not be admitted into the United States," his statement added.
Ms Muthana has said she applied for and received a US passport before leaving for Turkey, the New York Times reported. After arriving in Syria she posted a picture on Twitter of herself and three other women burning Western passports, including a US one.
In later social media posts she urged militants to kill Americans.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Shamima Begum: "I got tricked and I was hoping someone would have sympathy with me"
Analysts say the US government's argument appears to hinge on the fact that her father was a Yemeni diplomat. Children born in the US to foreign diplomats are not automatically considered US citizens because they are not under US jurisdiction.
However, her lawyer argues her father was no longer a diplomat by the time she was born.
Ms Muthana, who has an 18-month-old son, has said she deeply regrets joining IS and has apologised for social media posts in which she promoted the group and its aims.
In an interview with ABC News she said: "I wish I could take it completely off the net, completely out of people's memory... I regret it... I hope America doesn't think I'm a threat to them and I hope they can accept me and I'm just a normal human being who's been manipulated once and hopefully never again."
She reportedly surrendered to Kurdish forces and is in a Kurdish-run refugee camp in northern Syria.
• None Is this the end for Islamic State?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47313657
|
news_world-us-canada-47313657
|
|
Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán's trial: From shocking to bizarre - BBC News
|
2019-02-13
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Gold-plated rifles and a fatal handshake snub - what we've been told about Joaquín Guzmán so far.
|
US & Canada
|
The trial of accused druglord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman is nearing its end after eight weeks of evidence from the prosecution
The trial of Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán has provided shocking revelations about the Mexican drug lord's life.
Below are some of the most disturbing testimonies by witnesses in the high-profile trial in New York as well as some allegations which are plain bizarre.
A trusted hitman for El Chapo kept a "murder room" in his mansion on the US border, which featured a drain on the floor to more easily clean up after slayings.
Edgar Galvan testified in January that Antonio "Jaguar" Marrufo had a room with white tiles that was sound-proofed "so no noise comes out".
"In that house, no-one comes out," Galvan told jurors.
Galvan said his role in the organisation was to smuggle weapons into the US, so that Marrufo could use them to "clear" the region of rivals.
At the time, he was living in El Paso, Texas, while Marrufo was living in Ciudad Juarez, just across the US-Mexico border.
But both men are now in jail on firearms and gun charges.
Documents unsealed just two days before jury deliberations offered disturbing new accusations against El Chapo from Alex Cifuentes, a Colombian drug lord who has described himself as El Chapo's "right-hand man".
Cifuentes, who prosecutors say spent two years hiding from authorities with El Chapo in the Mexican mountains, claims that El Chapo would drug and rape girls as young as 13 years old, according to the New York Times.
A woman named Comadre Maria would routinely send El Chapo photographs of young girls that he and his associates could pick from.
This same woman was involved as an intermediary for El Chapo's dealings with Mexico's president, Cifuentes alleged during the trial.
For $5,000 (£3,800), Cifuentes claims Comadre Maria would send the selected girls up to Mr Guzman's mountain camps, where they would be drugged with "a powdery substance" and raped.
The documents allege that El Chapo called the youngest girls "his vitamins" and said raping them gave him "life".
Mr Guzman's lawyer said his client denies these allegations and added that the claims had been "too prejudicial and unreliable to be admitted at trial".
El Chapo's wife, Emma Coronel, sat quietly through a session where the FBI shared her husband's texts to his lovers
Cifuentes claims former Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, who served from 2012-18, accepted a $100m (£77m) bribe from El Chapo.
He alleges Mr Pena Nieto contacted El Chapo after taking office in 2012, asking for $250m in return for ending a manhunt for the drug cartel kingpin. El Chapo instead offered him $100m, which the new president allegedly accepted.
Mr Pena Nieto has not publicly commented on the allegations.
"El Chapo" used his slew of mistresses to help further his narcotics operation - and his text history proves it, the FBI alleges.
Thanks to the Flexi-spy software Guzmán used to spy on his wife, Emma Coronel, and the women with whom he had affairs, the FBI was able to present his texts in court.
Guzmán and Ms Coronel fawned over their daughters in many texts, as parents do, but some had a distinctly "El Chapo" sensibility.
In one sent on the twins' six-month birthday, the New York Daily News reported, he said: "Our [daughter] is fearless, I'm going to give her an AK-47 so she can hang with me."
Another damaging series of texts relayed how El Chapo fled a villa during a raid by US and Mexican officials.
"I had to run out at three in the afternoon," Guzmán told his wife. "I saw them pounding on the door next door, but I was able to jump out."
He then reportedly asked her to bring him new clothes, shoes and black moustache dye.
Guzmán tracked around 50 people through phones and computers, according to the drug lord's ex-techie, Cristian Rodriguez.
Mr Rodriguez told the court "El Chapo" frequently turned on his lovers' microphones after ending calls with them "to see what they would say about him", the Daily News reported.
One of those lovers was Agustina Cabanillas Acosta, who allegedly helped "El Chapo" make deals across the region.
In between sweet nothings, they discussed drug shipments and "non-stop" sales.
The alleged kingpin also reportedly paid for Ms Acosta's liposuction.
Ms Acosta, meanwhile, was well aware of her lover's snooping - "I'm way smarter than him," she reportedly texted her friends.
Lucero Guadalupe Sanchez Lopez, girlfriend (2nd left) of accused Mexican drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman (2nd right), testifies as his wife Emma Coronel (right) looks on
In the most gruesome testimony to date, witness Isaias Valdez Rios described seeing "El Chapo" brutally beat at least three men before shooting them.
In one incident, Mr Valdez Rios said two people originally from Sinaloa who had joined the rival Los Zetas cartel were deemed traitors and rounded up by Guzmán's hitmen.
For more than three hours the drug lord brutally beat them, Guzmán's former bodyguard said.
"They were completely like rag dolls - their bones were totally broken. They could not move. And Joaquin was still hitting them with the branch and his weapon too," Mr Valdez Rios said.
The two men were later driven to an area where they could see a large bonfire.
There, the jury was told, "El Chapo" cursed each one before shooting them in the head with his rifle.
The leader of the Sinaloa cartel ordered that they be thrown in the bonfire, telling his men that he did not want any bones to remain, Mr Valdez Rios said.
He said the third man murdered by "El Chapo" was a member of the rival Arellano Felix cartel.
"He had burns made with an iron on his back, his shirt was stuck to his skin. He had burns made with a car lighter all over his body. His feet were burned," Mr Valdez Rios told the court.
The man was then locked in a wooden structure for days. Then he was brought blindfolded to a graveyard, his hands and legs bound.
"El Chapo" started to interrogate him, and while he was responding, shot him with his handgun.
The man was still gasping for air - but he was dumped in a hole and buried alive, Mr Valdez Rios said.
The secrets of the drug lord's daring escape from a Mexican maximum security prison in 2015 were revealed by a former cartel associate.
Testifying in court, Damaso Lopez said his boss' wife and sons had been involved from the start to get El Chapo out of Altiplano prison.
He mentioned secret meetings in 2014, where Emma Coronel delivered detailed instructions from her husband to the plotters.
"A tunnel had to be built and they [plotters] should start to work," Ms Coronel said.
"El Chapo" used a specially adapted motorcycle to ride through the tunnel
The kingpin's sons later bought a property near the prison, and the digging started.
A GPS watch was smuggled into the prison, giving the plotters exact co-ordinates where the drug lord's prison cell was.
The one-mile (1.6km) tunnel took months to complete, and "El Chapo" had complained that digging was too loud and he could hear the "noise" from his cell, Mr Lopez said.
He added that the concrete below his boss' cell "had been very difficult to break through".
Despite all the problems, "El Chapo" escaped in July 2015, riding on a specially adapted small motorcycle through the tunnel.
Yet another mistress, Lucero Guadalupe Sanchez Lopez, revealed to the court details of the drug lord's 2014 escape from Mexican marines.
When the marines burst into his safehouse, Ms Lopez said the alleged drug lord took off running - stark naked.
They used an escape tunnel under a bathtub to flee, trudging through mud for an hour before surfacing, according to the New York Post.
As the mistress began to cry while testifying, the drug lord's wife, Ms Coronel, reportedly cackled in the gallery.
Just days after his affair with Ms Lopez, "El Chapo" would be captured by authorities - once again naked - in bed with Ms Coronel.
She and her husband were both in matching burgundy-coloured jackets during Ms Lopez's testimony, in an attempt to show their solidarity, reports the BBC's Tara McKelvey from court.
The drug lord's reputed extravagance extended even to his extensive collection of weaponry, the trial has heard.
Among his prized possessions were a diamond-encrusted, monogrammed pistol and a gold-plated AK-47.
Much of the evidence against the suspected narco chief has come from the prosecution's star witness, Jesús Zambada.
Mr Zambada testified that the alleged drug kingpin had the brother of another cartel leader killed because he did not shake Guzmán's hand.
Rodolfo Fuentes had met Guzmán to make peace in a cartel and gang war, the court heard.
"When [Rodolfo] left, Chapo gave him his hand and said, 'See you later, friend,' and Rodolfo just left him standing there with his hand extended," Mr Zambada said.
Mr Fuentes and his wife were shot and killed outside a cinema soon afterwards.
Former Sinaloa lieutenant Miguel Angel Martinez also testified for the government, telling the jury he once asked "El Chapo" why he killed people.
"And he answered me: 'Either your mom's going to cry or their mom's going to cry.'"
A former cartel leader told the court how "El Chapo" once had his own cousin killed after the man lied about being out of town.
Juan Guzman had told the drug boss he would be travelling, only to be spotted at a park in the city.
"My compadre became angry, because he had lied to him," ex-cartel capo Damaso Lopez Nunez said.
To make an example out of Juan, "El Chapo" allegedly ordered him to be interrogated and assassinated. Juan's secretary, who was with him at the time, was also killed.
The drug boss' mistress Ms Lopez later told the court she remembered being with him when the news of Juan's death arrived.
"He said from that point on, whoever betrayed him, they would die," Ms Lopez said. "Whether they were family or women, they were going to die."
Assistant US Attorney Adam Fels said in his opening argument that "El Chapo" had sent "more than a line of cocaine for every single person in the United States" - in just four of his shipments.
That amounts to over 328 million lines of cocaine, said the prosecutor.
Mr Zambada said that once, in 1994, Guzmán gave the order to sink a boat carrying 20 tonnes of cocaine to evade authorities.
Drug kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán is escorted into a helicopter at Mexico City"s airport following his recapture during an intense military operation in Los Mochis, in Sinaloa State
The court also heard that Guzmán once used a bazooka for target practice - to relax on a family holiday.
Mr Zambada said "El Chapo" took the anti-tank rocket launcher with him on a trip with relatives in 2005.
He decided to "test out" the weapon after the group had finished target practice with assault rifles, according to the witness.
Some of the biggest news from testimony was how the Sinaloa cartel allegedly paid off a host of top Mexican officials to ensure their drug business ran smoothly.
Mr Zambada said the traffickers had $50m (£39m) in protection money for former Mexican Secretary of Public Security García Luna, so that corrupt officers would be appointed to head police operations.
Mr Zambada said he gave the money to Mr Luna in briefcases full of cash. Mr Luna has denied the allegations.
When former Mexico City Mayor Gabriel Regino was in line to become the next secretary of security, Mr Zambada says the cartel bribed him, too.
Mr Regino, who is now a professor, has also denied the claims.
"El Chapo" (right) is the highest-ranking alleged drug lord to face trial in the US so far
A 6in (15cm) figurine of a folk hero dubbed the narco-saint has been spotted on a shelf in a conference room used by the defendant's lawyers at the court, the New York Post reported.
The statue of Jesús Malverde, which has him seated on a purple throne with bags of cash, appeared on Wednesday, one of Guzmán's lawyers told the newspaper.
Jesús Malverde has been celebrated as a Robin Hood-type hero who, legend says, stole from the rich and gave to the poor in the early 1900s.
Mr Martinez told the court Guzmán was so wealthy, he had a private zoo on top of his numerous properties - including a $10m (£8) beach house as well as a yacht he named after himself ("Chapito").
Built in the early '90s, El Chapo's zoo reportedly had lions, tigers, and crocodiles, as well as a little train to ferry guests through it.
The property also had a house, pool and tennis courts nearby, Mr Martinez said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46282173
|
news_world-us-canada-46282173
|
|
Brexit: Donald Tusk's planned outburst - BBC News
|
2019-02-07
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The European Council president completely condemns a chunk of the British cabinet with his speech in Brussels.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Donald Tusk: "Special place in hell" for those without Brexit plan
The softly-spoken politician who holds the authority of all EU countries has just completely condemned a chunk of the British cabinet, wondering aloud: "What that special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit, without even a sketch of a plan how to carry it out safely".
Sure, for a long time the EU has been frustrated with how the UK has approached all of this.
And sure, plenty of voters in the UK are annoyed too at how politicians have been handling these negotiations.
But it is quite something for Donald Tusk to have gone in like this, studs up, even though he sometimes reminisces about his time as a football hooligan in his youth.
Be clear, he was not intending to talk about voters who wanted to Leave, but politicians who were involved in the campaign.
He also had pretty stern remarks for those who'd been on the other side of the argument, accusing those who still want the UK to stay in the EU of having "no political force, and no effective leadership".
Mr Tusk will be all too aware that he will provoke tempers at home, even laughing about it as he left the stage with the Taoiseach, the Irish leader, Leo Varadkar.
But if you strip away the planned flash of temper, also in his remarks was an invitation to the prime minister to come forward with a different version of the backstop - a "believable guarantee", a promise that a "common solution is possible".
That is, on the face of it, in tone at least, more of an opening to the UK to put something new on the table than we have seen from the EU side.
Certainly, Theresa May's most pressing job is to put something that could work on the table in Belfast, and in Brussels, and to do it fast.
But don't forget, also at her back, she has Brexiteers whom she needs to manage, whose expectations she needs to contain, whose votes she desperately needs.
And at a time when cool tempers and compromise are absolutely needed, Mr Tusk's remarks are likely to whip up the mood instead.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47147258
|
news_uk-politics-47147258
|
|
Katie Price banned from driving for three months - BBC News
|
2019-02-25
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The TV star says she drank three or four "pornstar martinis" before getting in her pink Range Rover.
|
London
|
Katie Price was found guilty of being in charge of a vehicle while over the limit
TV star Katie Price has been convicted of being nearly twice the legal limit while in charge of her pink Range Rover.
The 40-year-old argued she was not in control of the 4X4 when she was arrested in a drunken state in the back seat in Greenwich in the early hours of 10 October.
She said that a mystery man had driven but Judge Nigel Dean found she was not a "credible" witness.
She was banned for three months.
A charge of drink-driving was dropped due to insufficient evidence.
The three-month driving ban adds to another from earlier this year for driving while disqualified, Bexley Magistrates' Court heard.
Along with a £1,500 fine, Price was also ordered to pay costs and a victim surcharge to bring her total bill to £2,425.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The ups and downs of Katie Price's life
The court heard PCs Benjamin Jones and Balvinder Mann first saw the Range Rover veer off the road and hit a grass verge at 00:40 BST, before seeing it stationary about 15 minutes later.
PC Jones told magistrates Price, of Horsham, West Sussex, was in a "very" drunken state in the back while her friend Kris Boyson was in the passenger seat.
"Her eyes were blurred and her speech was a bit slurred," he said.
The officer said the bumper was hanging off, pieces of shrubbery were attached to the vehicle and there also "appeared to be sick on the outside".
Price told the court she had drunk between three and four "pornstar martini" cocktails at Mr Boyson's 30th birthday party in a restaurant.
She said she allowed one of his friends to drive the car back towards Mr Boyson's house near Bluewater - and did not remember any crash.
"I was really drunk. I'm such a lightweight," she said.
Both Price and Mr Boyson claimed the unnamed driver had fled following an argument, the court heard.
PC Jones said the pair claimed the driver had the key but the car's engine later turned on.
Both officers were unable to ascertain who had been driving at the time.
Prosecutor Sonya Saul told the court Price was taken for a breathalyser test at a police station.
She had 69 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath. The legal limit is 35 microgrammes.
Speaking outside court after the sentencing, Price told reporters: "It got proven today there was no evidence at all of me drink-driving so I rest my case on that."
"I get my driving licence back on 24 May which means I can go car shopping - let's ban the pink car."
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47358022
|
news_uk-england-london-47358022
|
|
Brexit: Greg Clark, Amber Rudd and David Gauke issue delay warning - BBC News
|
2019-02-22
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Greg Clark, Amber Rudd and David Gauke say extending Article 50 is better than "crashing out" of the EU.
|
UK Politics
|
Brexit should be delayed if Parliament does not approve a deal in the coming days, three cabinet ministers have warned publicly for the first time.
Ahead of crucial votes in the Commons, Greg Clark, Amber Rudd and David Gauke told the Daily Mail they would be prepared to defy Theresa May and vote for a delay.
Downing Street said the trio's views on no deal were "scarcely a secret".
Conservative Brexiteer Andrew Bridgen called on them to resign.
"They are rejecting government policy and they are threatening to vote against government policy next week," the MP told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"In that case, they should do the honourable thing and resign from the government immediately."
Number 10 said in a statement: "The PM is working hard to ensure we get a deal with the EU that allows us to deliver on the result of the referendum.
"That is where the cabinet's energy should be focused."
Earlier, Mrs May's spokeswoman said the PM would have another "period of engagement" on Brexit at an EU-League of Arab States summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt - including a meeting with European Council president Donald Tusk.
The UK remains on course to leave the European Union on 29 March.
But the government has repeatedly refused to rule out the possibility of the UK leaving without a formal deal, in the event that Mrs May cannot get MPs to approve the deal she negotiated with Brussels in time.
MPs are due to debate Brexit again next Wednesday and are expected to consider an amendment tabled by former Tory minister Sir Oliver Letwin and Labour's Yvette Cooper.
That would give Parliament the opportunity to delay Brexit and prevent a no-deal situation if there is no agreement with the EU by the middle of March.
Mr Clark, Ms Rudd and Mr Gauke argue if a deal is not endorsed by MPs imminently "it would be better to seek to extend Article 50 and delay our date of departure rather than crash out of the European Union on March 29".
Mr Clark, the business secretary, along with Ms Rudd, the work and pensions secretary, and the justice secretary, Mr Gauke, said there had been "months of uncertainty".
They wrote: "It is time MPs recognised the need to get a deal, accepted that this is the only deal on offer, and supported it."
But they also warned Brexiteers in the European Research Group (ERG) that Parliament will block the UK leaving without a deal, stating that if there is a delay "they will have no-one to blame but themselves".
They said: "Beyond the next few days, there simply will not be time to agree a deal and complete all the necessary legislation before March 29."
Their article comes after the BBC was told dozens of normally loyal Conservatives could back plans to stop the UK leaving the EU without a deal if a reworked version of Mrs May's plan does not pass.
Mark Francois, Tory MP and vice-chairman of the ERG, told the BBC that "the prime minister will want to know why three members of her cabinet have decided to publicly decry government policy" and added that he thought it was "interesting that the chancellor has not signed the letter".
However Tory MP Nick Boles, who voted Remain but supports Mrs May's deal, said they were "courageous and principled" for speaking out to try to avoid a no-deal Brexit.
Anna Soubry, who quit the Conservatives this week over Brexit to join the Independent Group, said the move was a sign of the "complete chaos that's now existing at the top of government".
The MP, who supports another EU referendum, said the trio had to go to the press because "they can't win the argument in a deeply divided cabinet".
Meanwhile, Labour MPs Phil Wilson and Peter Kyle are planning to put forward an amendment that would allow Mrs May's deal to pass in the Commons, as long as it is then put to the public in another vote.
Mr Wilson told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that his amendment had the support of shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer and shadow chancellor John McDonnell, and he hoped to secure the backing of the rest of the Labour front bench.
It is a pretty incredible intervention by these three cabinet ministers.
Time and time again Theresa May has said the UK is leaving the EU on 29 March, in just five weeks' time.
It's a very different message from these three. They've all made it very clear they wouldn't accept a no deal scenario.
Now publicly, for the first time, they've said Brexit would have to be delayed if Parliament doesn't back a deal next week.
In their article in the Daily Mail they've got a pretty stark warning to their colleagues.
This is happening because, on Wednesday, there will be an attempt by MPs to seize control of that Brexit process.
These three are suggesting that they will be prepared to resign in order to back that move.
This is piling the pressure on Mrs May to get the changes to the deal, to bring it back early next week, but it's also piling the pressure on their colleagues to get behind the deal.
Don't be in any doubt, what they are saying is not government policy.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47336501
|
news_uk-politics-47336501
|
|
Amber Peat inquest: Mother gave 'little consideration' for welfare - BBC News
|
2019-02-22
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
Amber Peat, 13, was found dead three days after she walked out of her home following an argument.
|
Nottingham
|
Amber Peat was found hanged after going missing from her home in Mansfield
The mother and stepfather of a 13-year-old girl who hanged herself gave "very little, if any, consideration" to her welfare, a coroner has said.
Amber Peat's mum and stepdad also demonstrated little "emotional warmth" towards her, Coroner Laurinda Bower added.
Returning a narrative conclusion, she said agencies missed 11 opportunities which may have prevented Amber's death.
Amber's mother, Kelly Peat, said she had been "the best parent" she could.
Ms Bower considered whether to return a conclusion of suicide but she could not be sure Amber intended to die.
"Considering Amber's age, her emotional immaturity and her undoubted vulnerability, and the absence of any professional ever having properly assessed Amber's risk of self-harm or suicide, I am not able to determine, on the balance of probabilities, Amber's intention at the time of her death," she said.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The couple appeared at a press conference in the days following Amber's disappearance
Amber Peat was found hanged in a hedgerow in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, on 2 June 2015.
Three days earlier, on 30 May, she had walked out of her home following an argument with her family about chores.
She had previously run away from home and also expressed a wish to die.
Amber Peat "always had a sad face", according to a former class teacher
The inquest heard how Mrs Peat became engaged to Amber's stepfather, Daniel Peat, just 12 weeks after splitting up with Amber's biological father.
Amber also had to move house and schools during this time, which was "further complicated" by the fact Amber was due to take her SAT examinations.
"There appears to have been very little, if any, consideration of the welfare of Amber and this is a theme to which I shall return," the coroner said.
In her narrative conclusion, the coroner said education, health and social care agencies all missed opportunities to assess Amber and her family.
"Had those agencies responded to safeguarding concerns in an appropriate manner it is possible Amber would not have died when she did," the coroner said.
Amber's mother Kelly Peat was at the inquest to hear the verdict
The inquest heard evidence from several of Amber's teachers who had concerns about her life at home.
Amber told one teacher how her stepfather had punished her by making her wear baggy grey jogging bottoms to school and carry her belongings in a plastic bag.
Mr and Mrs Peat accepted Amber had gone to school wearing the jogging bottoms and carrying a plastic bag, but said she must have lied when she blamed her stepfather for it.
However, the coroner found that Amber had been telling the truth.
"I find as a fact that Amber was made to wear the jogging bottoms to school and to use a carrier bag as punishment by Mr Peat in the full knowledge that she would be humiliated," the coroner said.
"This was perhaps borne out of the frustration that he was feeling towards Amber rejecting his attempts to discipline her."
Amber's body was found in Westfield Lane, about a mile from her home in Bosworth Street
The inquest heard evidence from a police officer who said Mrs Peat was "not particularly emotional, as in upset", when her daughter went missing.
The coroner also noted a lack of emotion from Mr and Mrs Peat when they gave evidence at the inquest.
"On more than one occasion, professionals told me how they had witnessed Mr and Mrs Peat demonstrate a lack of emotional warmth towards Amber at times when one would expect emotion to be present, such as Amber returning home after being missing," the coroner said.
"Indeed, when they gave evidence to this inquest there was a distinct lack of emotional warmth towards Amber, more so from Mr Peat than Mrs Peat."
Paralegal Amy Robinson read a statement out on behalf of Amber's mother
A statement on behalf of Mrs Peat was read out by a lawyer following the inquest.
"Like all parents, Kelly knows she is not perfect but she has been, and continues to be, the best parent she can for her children," the statement said.
"Kelly wonders whether things could have been different had Amber and her family received more support and advice for Amber's behaviour.
"She proactively sought help on numerous occasions with Amber, and tried to work with the agencies as much as possible."
The statement said Mrs Peat had been "subjected to intense media and public scrutiny" since Amber's death.
"Some of the things that have been said have been very hurtful, not only to Kelly but her family too and they have had a huge impact on their well-being," the statement said.
Amber's mother "feels strongly that Amber would not have meant to deliberately harm herself"
The statement said Mrs Peat "will always wonder" why Amber did what she did.
"She and her family find it impossible to believe that Amber purposely set out to take her own life," the statement said.
"Kelly feels strongly that Amber would not have meant to deliberately harm herself or mean for this to happen."
A serious case review was launched following Amber's death and is still to be published.
Chris Few, chairman of Nottinghamshire Safeguarding Children Board, said they "owe it to Amber to learn from what happened".
"Before we publish the serious case review, it is important for all those involved to take some time to reflect on and consider the coroner's findings and to identify whether there is any further action needed," he said.
Follow BBC East Midlands on Facebook, on Twitter, or on Instagram. Send your story ideas to eastmidsnews@bbc.co.uk.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-47329736
|
news_uk-england-nottinghamshire-47329736
|
|
Thousand fewer UK students at Oxbridge - BBC News
|
2019-02-26
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
While arguments continue about fair access, the number of UK students at Oxbridge has been falling.
|
Family & Education
|
Oxford versus Cambridge: The competition for places for UK students has become even tougher
There are more than a thousand fewer UK undergraduate students at Oxford and Cambridge universities than a decade ago, official figures show.
Student figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency and from the universities show 7% fewer UK undergraduates at Oxford and 5% fewer at Cambridge, compared with 2007-08.
Overseas undergraduate students rose by 51% at Oxford and 65% at Cambridge.
Oxford says it recruits the "best talent from around the world".
Students from outside the EU pay higher fees and the more prestigious a university and course the greater the cost will likely be - more than £30,000 a year in some cases.
But a spokeswoman for Oxford said its overseas student intake had not been influenced by "the fees they may bring with them".
There is intense competition for Oxford and Cambridge places and there has been much controversy about fair access and social mobility.
While such arguments have continued about widening opportunities, the total number of UK students being awarded places at Oxbridge has been reducing.
There were about 1,200 fewer UK undergraduates in 2017-18 compared with a decade before - with about 11,300 in Oxford and 12,150 in Cambridge taking undergraduate degree courses, even though more have applied for places.
The figures show there were about 720 fewer UK undergraduate students at Oxford University in 2017-18 compared with 2007-08.
At Cambridge, the numbers have fallen by about 480 students across the decade.
But the numbers of overseas students, both EU and non-EU, have climbed sharply, according to the data from Hesa, the official statistics body for higher education.
In postgraduate courses at Cambridge, there are now more overseas students than UK.
Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of the Sutton Trust social mobility charity, said the figures showed the need for the universities to put "widening access at the heart of their admissions policies".
"Oxford and Cambridge attract many international students, but they must ensure that their student body is balanced.
"This means letting in UK and international students based on ability and not on ability to pay," said Sir Peter.
A University of Oxford spokeswoman said the same entry standards applied to all students, UK or overseas, based on "academic talent and ability alone" - and UK applicants had a higher rate of success than those from overseas.
She said: "Places to study are won by demonstrating academic potential through open competition, following the same rigorous application and admission process."
A spokesman for the University of Cambridge said: "Applications from international students for undergraduate courses have increased by 56% over the period, which means UK students find themselves in a competitive field."
Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said the reduction in UK student numbers at Oxford and Cambridge was the "sad but inevitable consequence" of the universities becoming more international but not adding places.
"In those circumstances, something has to give and it seems to be places for home students," he says.
Mr Hillman says if the universities do not want to "squeeze out" UK students they need to "bite the bullet and accept more expansion".
The Hesa figures also show how other leading universities have been expanding their undergraduate intake much more than Oxford and Cambridge.
University College London has expanded by 65%, Bristol by 41% and Exeter by 74%.
The Office for Students (OFS), the regulator for higher education, wants more young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to go to university.
But the watchdog says this could require a significant increase in places.
If all young people went to university at the rate of the richest 20%, says the OFS, it would mean having to double the number of places in Russell Group universities.
The Hesa figures also show an even more dramatic drop in adult and continuing education.
In Cambridge, if people taking certificate and diploma courses were included alongside those on undergraduate degree courses, the overall fall in UK students would be about 29% over the decade.
Both Oxford and Cambridge have run extensive outreach projects to attract a wider range of students.
An Oxford spokeswoman said the university was committed to becoming "more open and diverse", with more ethnic minority and students from deprived areas.
"Sustaining excellence requires diversity, and our commitment to achieving this balance, and making Oxford more reflective of modern society, includes reaching out to and selecting, the best talent from all over the world," she said.
A University of Cambridge spokesman said that despite the pressure on places, including from overseas, the university has widened access, including accepting rising numbers of state school pupils.
"The university has made significant progress in all its widening participation measures over the same period. The university accepts students on merit, regardless of their background," he said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47296931
|
news_education-47296931
|
|
Katie Price banned from driving for three months - BBC News
|
2019-02-26
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The TV star says she drank three or four "pornstar martinis" before getting in her pink Range Rover.
|
London
|
Katie Price was found guilty of being in charge of a vehicle while over the limit
TV star Katie Price has been convicted of being nearly twice the legal limit while in charge of her pink Range Rover.
The 40-year-old argued she was not in control of the 4X4 when she was arrested in a drunken state in the back seat in Greenwich in the early hours of 10 October.
She said that a mystery man had driven but Judge Nigel Dean found she was not a "credible" witness.
She was banned for three months.
A charge of drink-driving was dropped due to insufficient evidence.
The three-month driving ban adds to another from earlier this year for driving while disqualified, Bexley Magistrates' Court heard.
Along with a £1,500 fine, Price was also ordered to pay costs and a victim surcharge to bring her total bill to £2,425.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The ups and downs of Katie Price's life
The court heard PCs Benjamin Jones and Balvinder Mann first saw the Range Rover veer off the road and hit a grass verge at 00:40 BST, before seeing it stationary about 15 minutes later.
PC Jones told magistrates Price, of Horsham, West Sussex, was in a "very" drunken state in the back while her friend Kris Boyson was in the passenger seat.
"Her eyes were blurred and her speech was a bit slurred," he said.
The officer said the bumper was hanging off, pieces of shrubbery were attached to the vehicle and there also "appeared to be sick on the outside".
Price told the court she had drunk between three and four "pornstar martini" cocktails at Mr Boyson's 30th birthday party in a restaurant.
She said she allowed one of his friends to drive the car back towards Mr Boyson's house near Bluewater - and did not remember any crash.
"I was really drunk. I'm such a lightweight," she said.
Both Price and Mr Boyson claimed the unnamed driver had fled following an argument, the court heard.
PC Jones said the pair claimed the driver had the key but the car's engine later turned on.
Both officers were unable to ascertain who had been driving at the time.
Prosecutor Sonya Saul told the court Price was taken for a breathalyser test at a police station.
She had 69 microgrammes of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath. The legal limit is 35 microgrammes.
Speaking outside court after the sentencing, Price told reporters: "It got proven today there was no evidence at all of me drink-driving so I rest my case on that."
"I get my driving licence back on 24 May which means I can go car shopping - let's ban the pink car."
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47358022
|
news_uk-england-london-47358022
|
|
Facebook and Google news should be regulated, Cairncross Review says - BBC News
|
2019-02-18
|
https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews
|
The landmark review also recommended the BBC should do more to share its technical and digital expertise.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Dame Frances Cairncross explains the findings of her review into the future of the UK news industry
A regulator should oversee tech giants like Google and Facebook to ensure their news content is trustworthy, a government-backed report has suggested.
The Cairncross Review into the future of UK news said such sites should help users identify fake news and "nudge people towards news of high quality".
The review also said Ofcom should assess the BBC's impact on online news on other providers.
In addition, the report called for a new Institute for Public Interest News.
Such a body, it said, could work in a similar way to the Arts Council, channelling public and private funding to "those parts of the industry it deemed most worthy of support".
The report said Facebook and Google need to give more prominence to public interest news
The independent review, undertaken by former journalist Dame Frances Cairncross, was tasked with investigating the sustainability of high-quality journalism.
Its recommendations include measures to tackle "the uneven balance of power" between news publishers and online platforms that distribute their content.
Services such as Facebook, Google and Apple should continue their attempts to help readers understand how reliable a story is, and the process that decides which stories are shown should be more transparent, it says.
"Their efforts should be placed under regulatory scrutiny - this task is too important to leave entirely to the judgment of commercial entities," according to the report.
Could a digital regulator stop the spread of so-called 'fake news'?
A regulator would initially only assess how well these sites are performing - but if this doesn't work, the report warns "it may be necessary to impose stricter provisions".
Yet the report falls short of requiring Facebook, Google and other tech giants to pay for the news they distribute via their platforms.
Dame Frances told the BBC's media editor Amol Rajan that "draconian and risky" measures could result in firms such as Google withdrawing their news services altogether.
"There are a number of ways we have suggested technology companies could behave differently and could be made to behave differently," she said.
"But they are mostly ways that don't immediately involve legislation."
The review was not asked to comment specifically on the BBC but concluded that curtailing the corporation's news offering would be counter-productive after hearing arguments from other publishers that the BBC reporting on so-called "soft content" online was crowding out other news providers.
The review noted that the BBC Charter states the corporation should endeavour to reach all demographics, and that stories of this type are essential to appeal to an increasingly elusive younger audience.
The BBC also argues that "soft content" stories may attract users who might then click onwards to a public-interest news story.
The review said the BBC was delivering high quality journalism but suggested it "could do more and think more carefully about how its news provision can act as a complement, rather than a substitute, for private news provision".
Dame Frances also recommended an exploration of the market impact of BBC News, conducted by broadcasting regulator Ofcom, to find whether it is 'striking the right balance' and driving traffic to other, commercial providers.
The BBC should do more to share its technical and digital expertise for the benefit of local publishers, the report concluded.
The review suggests it would 'make little sense to curtail the BBC'
Shadow Culture Secretary Tom Watson urged the government to tackle Google and Facebook's "duopoly" in the digital advertising market, and said Dame Frances was "barking up the wrong tree" in recommending an inquiry into the BBC's online news output.
Meanwhile, former director general of the BBC Greg Dyke defended the role of the corporation.
He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It seems to me that at a time when large American media companies - the likes of Netflix and the rest of it - are going to come to dominate in the world, for the BBC to be cutting back on anything will be a mistake.
"The importance of the BBC is going to grow in the next 10 years, not decline."
Frances Cairncross earned widespread respect as a journalist for her hard-headed and pragmatic approach to economics.
That pragmatism is the very reason the government commissioned her to look at the future of high-quality news - and also the reason many in local and regional media will be disappointed by her recommendations.
What is most notable about her review is what it doesn't do.
This is because the practicalities of doing these things are difficult, and experience shows that the likes of Google will simply pull out of markets that don't suit them.
There are concrete measures that could boost local news, from tax relief to an extension of the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
And Dame Frances certainly seemed cognisant of the argument that BBC News has over-reached, to the extent that it is harming the commercial sector. But this is a matter for Ofcom.
Ultimately, as this report acknowledges, when it comes to news, convenience is king. The speed, versatility and zero cost of so much news now means that, even if it is of poor quality, a generation of consumers has fallen out of the habit of paying for news.
But quality costs. If quality news has a future, consumers will have to pay. That's the main lesson of this report.
The report recommends "new codes of conduct" whose implementation would be supervised by a regulator "with powers to insist on compliance".
The Barnsley Chronicle goes to press in September 2017
One local newspaper editor welcomed the report's recommendations but said it "comes too late for so many once proud and important community newspapers".
The Yorkshire Post's James Mitchinson said: "The various fiscal reviews and recommendations... must come quickly... if we are to turn the Cairncross Review into something which we look back upon as being instrumental in preserving what we do for generations to come."
Culture Secretary Jeremy Wright said some of its suggestions could be acted upon "immediately", while others would need "further careful consideration".
Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47202553
|
news_entertainment-arts-47202553
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.