Preview: Politics news, UK and world political comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
 Politics news, UK and world political comment and analysis | guardian.co.ukLatest news and features from guardian.co.uk, the world's leading liberal voiceLast Build Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:25:40 GMT Copyright: Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. 2012
Lib Dems to seek emergency NHS motion Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:36:46 GMT2012-02-09T13:02:50Z Opponents of the bill, who helped persuade the government to pause its progress last spring, call for another voteLiberal Democrat activists will seek to table an emergency motion at the party's spring conference opposing the government's health reforms, but face an uphill battle to get the issue on to the floor of the conference.The opponents of the health bill, instrumental in getting the party leadership to call for a pause last spring, are waiting to see the state of the bill before tabling a motion to the conference, so the precise wording and tactics remain fluid.Charles West, one of the leading opponents of the bill, said it would be going through its report stage in the Lords at the time of conference and it was likely that some of the most controversial measures on competition would only just have been reached by the time of the conference. He said the picture was changing day by day.Up until now Lib Dem activists have focused on specific amendments to the bill, but the dominant mood among the bill's opponents is that the whole piece of legislation should be shelved, or large tracts dropped.Under the party's rules, the largely elected federal conference committee decides if an emergency motion is within the rules and a genuine emergency issue. If it is approved, the motion then goes into a conference delegate ballot along with other emergency motions to decide if it should be made a priority issue for debate. An emergency motion has to cover a topic that has occurred after the deadline for the submission of a normal motion.If the conference committee rule it is not a genuine emergency issue, an appeal can be made, and if that fails, the issue can only be debated if two-thirds of the accredited delegates vote at the start of the conference to suspend standing orders for the motion to be discussed.At the party's main annual conference in the autumn, a move to suspend standing orders to debate a motion on health was easily won – but not by the required two-thirds majority of those voting.The party's conference last spring led to a motion critical of the health reforms being passed, and that in turn led to the pause on the health reforms that gave David Cameron and Nick Clegg time to talk to health professionals and re-engage them with the proposals.Health activists in the party are also considering, if they fail to get a motion on to the floor of the conference, calling a special conference – something that can be sought if 250 conference delegates demand it. But the cost of calling such a conference at a time when the party is short of cash would make the move questionable. A final option canvassed by a small minority would be to call an unofficial conference in protest at the way in which such a major issue as health was being kept from the conference.Party officials point out that the conference is designed to look at policies on a rolling basis and is not supposed to address every issue in politics every year.NHSLiberal DemocratsHealth policyHealthPublic services policyPatrick Wintourguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]A vote on NHS reforms at the Lib Dem conference last spring led to a pause that allowed David Cameron and Nick Clegg to talk to health professionals. Photograph: Paul Grover/Rex FeaturesA vote on NHS reforms at the Lib Dem conference last spring led to a pause that allowed David Cameron and Nick Clegg to talk to health professionals. Photograph: Paul Grover/Rex Features
Unions threaten fresh strikes over pensions Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:57:00 GMT2012-02-09T18:59:01Z Warning of industrial action comes as David Cameron says public sector workers need to show 'flexible ethic' on retirementThe government is facing the threat of renewed industrial action over its controversial pension reforms after unions representing hundreds of thousands of NHS workers, civil servants, firefighters and teachers raised the prospect of widespread strikes.Leaders of more than 700,000 public sector workers warned of co-ordinated strikes on 28 March over proposals to raise pension contributions, lower pensions and raise retirement ages.Unite said it planned to ballot its 100,000 members in the NHS with a recommendation that they reject the proposals, complaining there had been no substantive changes from what was on the table last year when up to 2 million public sector workers staged a one-day strike.The executive of the National Union of Teachers (NUT) said it would propose to members that further action was necessary, while leaders of the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) decided to ballot 250,000 civil servants on continuing its campaign of opposition.The executive of the Fire Brigades Union, which was not involved in last year's action, recommended a "rapid move" to prepare for a strike ballot among its 45,000 members after describing the government's proposals following lengthy talks as unacceptable.The move came as David Cameron said public sector workers needed to show the same ethic as private sector employees in working longer to avoid an "apartheid" pension system in Britain.During a visit to Sweden to attend the Northern Future Forum the prime minister said: "We do have one problem with the public sector pensions system where you have got a lot of resistance to changing public sector pensions, some of which have very low retirement ages."We think we are making some progress, otherwise we could end up with quite an apartheid system where people in the private sector have this flexible ethic – they go on working, they change the way they work – but in the public sector, we have quite a cut-off and a very expensive public sector pensions system."He made clear his enthusiasm for a Norwegian pension reform that automatically links provision to the rise in life expectancy.Norway has a flexible state pension system that allows people to choose the age at which they start to claim it – with higher payments going to those who choose to work the longest, up to the age of 75. The level of payments is automatically adjusted according to changes in life expectancy.Speaking at the annual summit, which brought the UK together with governments from eight Nordic and Baltic countries, Cameron said: "I love the idea."But union leaders reacted angrily to the comments."It's unfortunate that our prime minister feels it's acceptable to use the language of political oppression to describe the livelihoods of millions of public servants," a PCS spokesman said."Private sector workers have not chosen in an ethical way to have their pensions slashed – it's been forced on them by profit-hungry executives and shareholders. We want fair pensions for everyone."Christine Blower, the NUT general secretary, said the 300,000-strong membership did not accept the government's push to get teachers to "pay more, work longer and get less" ."The executive of the NUT will be proposing to its members that further strike action is necessary. Prior to any calling of strike action we will be consulting our members on both further action and an endorsement of the ongoing campaign."The other key theme of the forum surrounded discussions securing promotion for women.Cameron warned that Britain's economic recovery was being held back by the lack of women in boardrooms.He said he would like to get more women into the boardroom "preferably without having quotas" but did say that quotas were a possibility "if we cannot get there by other means".Public sector pensionsPublic services policyPensionsRetirement agePublic sector payDavid CameronPublic sector careersWork & careersTrade unionsMark SerwotkaHélèn[...]
Livingstone defends 'homophobic' remark Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:44:17 GMT2012-02-09T13:51:38Z Comment that party had been 'riddled' with suppressed homosexuality was a backhanded compliment, says candidateKen Livingstone, the Labour candidate for London mayor, has defended his claim that the Conservative party and other institutions had been "riddled" with suppressed homosexuality.Livingstone was under pressure to apologise on Thursday over comments in an interview with the New Statesman, which two Tory MPs claimed were offensive.But the Labour candidate stood by his comments, saying he had actually been paying a "slightly backhanded compliment" to the Conservatives.Livingstone was taken to task on LBC Radio after telling the New Statesman in an interview with Jemima Khan that the public "should be allowed to know everything, except the nature of private relationships. Unless there is hypocrisy, like some Tory MPs denouncing homosexuality while they are indulging in it."Well, the Labour ones have all come out," he added. "As soon as [Tony] Blair got in, if you came out as lesbian or gay you immediately got a job. It was wonderful … you just knew the Tory party was riddled with it, like everywhere else is."Brian Paddick, the Liberal Democrat mayoral candidate, condemned the use of the word riddled as "clearly homophobic", while two Tory MPs, Angie Bray and Mike Fray, have written to the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, to urge him to ensure Livingstone retracts his "offensive" remarks.Livingstone told the LBC presenter Nick Ferrari that he and his Tory rival Boris Johnson both outpolled their parties "because we say what we think" .The interview with Khan had been lighthearted and the comments shouldn't be taken as a "serious detailed strategy for the whole nation", said Livingstone.He had actually been trying to say that there had been progress in Conservative party circles on the equality front, he told Ferrari. "The Tory party was horrendously homophobic," he said. "They introduced Clause 28. If any MP was exposed as gay, they were forced to resign. Now they've come along, they caught up with the Labour party and there's no harm being gay in the Tory party."Paddick, a former senior Metropolitan police officer who is gay, said: "He is a political opportunist who likes to be controversial in order to draw attention to himself. I think his true feelings towards LGBT people have seeped out. Both Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson are prone to careless, thoughtless and insulting gaffes. It's just not funny any more. London deserves better."Bray, the Conservative MP for Ealing Central and Acton and a former member of the London assembly, said: "These are the sort of offensive remarks we hear all too often from Labour's candidate for mayor."Livingstone told Ferrari: "Not a single one of these MPs who have now got themselves worked up into a hysteria complained when Boris Johnson wrote saying he couldn't see the difference between a man marrying a man and a man marrying a dog – a bit over the top, a bit offensive – but not a single one of those MPs complained. Let's get talking about lesbian and gay rights – anything but fares or police cuts!"Livingstone told Khan: "I can't understand why anyone would want to live the life of a politician if you can't say pretty much what you think. You are not in it for the money, there's unremitting pressure on your life, you give up so much of your privacy. It can only be because of the things you want to do and the things you want to say."Labour officials said the suggestion that Livingstone's use of the word riddled was homophobic was inherently ridiculous since he was "perhaps the most avowedly pro-gay politician in the history of the world".Ken LivingstoneGay rightsLondon mayoral election 2012London politicsLondonLabourConservativesHélène MulhollandPatrick Wintourguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Ken Livingstone at the Pride parade in London in 2007. Photograph: Paul Bro[...]
When peers turned on the prime minister Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:20:25 GMT2012-02-09T22:20:25Z Lord Forsyth, who used to be in the Tory cabinet, thinks David Cameron has cooked up a plot to discredit the LordsThe House of Lords discussed one of its favourite subjects: itself. The peers sometimes remind me of Miss Piggy. "That's enough of me talking about MOI! Now, it's your turn to tell me what you think about MOI!"The topic was the quantity of peers. David Cameron is cutting the number of MPs. Naturally MPs oppose this, since they fear they might be among the one in 13 who will lose their jobs.But lords are against the increase in the number of peers, not least because it will leave less speaking time, and make it harder to reach the bar when it's busy. They are not nimbys but nit-picquers – "Not in the places I can quaff."Lord Dubs, a Labour peer, asked whether the government intended to increase the number of peers while waiting for its long-term reform plans to come into effect. (Not that they ever will, if most peers have anything to do with it.)Lord Strathclyde, the leader of the house, said the government wanted a house that reflected the proportion of votes at the last general election.Lord Dubs came back with a trick answer: "Oh." After the chortling died down, he pointed out that the leader of the house had said before that the government had no plans to pack it with at least 60 government supporters. That, he'd said, would look absurd. He asked the government to think again about this "stupid" idea.Lord Strathclyde looked regretful. Sadly, he said, since the last election there had been a number of deaths.(As I looked down it struck me that perhaps not all of them had been cleared away.)Lord Kakkar, a surgeon and cross-bencher, asked who the house thought had a more mature understanding of the Lords: the president of the Lib Dems, Tim Farron, who had (bizarrely) likened it to the tyrannical Syrian regime, or Nick Clegg, his party leader, "who has described your lordships as 'an affront to liberal democracy'."This drew delighted laughter. Any attack on the Lib Dems draws delighted laughter, even from some Lib Dems.Lord Strathclyde pointed out that it was Tony Blair who had first called the peers "an affront to democracy". He suggested that Farron should come up the corridor from the Commons to the Lords, where he would see the "real world".No, surely even the peers don't think they live in the real world! It turns out they don't. A check of my recorder tells me he said "the real work", which is a very different thing. After all, there was plenty of work in Narnia.Lord Forsyth, who used to be in the Tory cabinet, thought it was all a plot by David Cameron to discredit the Lords so he could get his reforms through. You have to know that there are some Tory rightwingers who believe that Cameron is a dangerous lefty.Lord Strathclyde thought that the peers were "really good value", which made them sound like multipacks of toilet paper at Tesco.The cynics may include the leader of the house. Lord Maclennan asked what No 10 was planning. "I do know," said Lord Strathclyde gravely, "that the prime minister isn't telling anybody anything." He sounded almost plaintive, like Kermit addressing Miss Piggy.House of CommonsHouse of LordsDavid CameronSimon Hoggartguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Some Tory rightwingers think David Cameron is 'a dangerous lefty'. Photograph: Martin Argles for the GuardianSome Tory rightwingers think David Cameron is 'a dangerous lefty'. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian
Indian ministers resign over porn scandal – video Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:10:00 GMT2012-02-09T22:15:17Z Three ministers from Karnataka resign after footage emerged purporting to show them watching pornography on a mobile phone during a meeting Three ministers from the Indian state of Karnataka have resigned over a porn scandal. Footage purports to show the three men, C C Patil, Laxman Savadi and Krishna Palemar, watching pornographic material on a mobile phone during a meeting. Photograph: guardian.co.uk
Ministers drop plans to make it easier not to register to vote Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:43:36 GMT2012-02-09T21:43:36Z Proposals to change voter registration process withdrawn after criticism that voting isn't a consumer choice but civic dutyMinisters have retreated over widely criticised plans to make it easier not to register to vote, saying they recognised it was a civic duty to register and they would consider introducing fines for failing to return a voter registration form.There had been warnings that the original Cabinet Office proposals would result in a big fall in the number of registered voters, especially among existing under-represented groups such as ethnic minorities, those on low incomes and people renting their homes. The government is switching from household to individual registration, partly to reduce corruption.Ministers have bowed to criticisms from the Electoral Commission, Labour party and the all-party political and constitutional affairs select committee.In probably the biggest initiative, ministers will also consider introducing a civil penalty for failing to return an electoral registration, but rule out making such a failure a criminal offence.The government will now delay the canvass to 2014, instead of 2013 to try to ensure the register is as up to date as possible in 2015. In 2014 all electoral registers will be cross matched against trusted public data sources.Citizens whose entries on the register can be individually matched mainly by loooking at Department for Work and Pensions data will be confirmed as entries on the register and need take no further action. Those individuals whose information cannot be matched will be invited to register individually.Ministers have also agreed to water down its plans to make it easier to opt out of registering to vote, and will instead look at introducing some form of civil penalty for not registering.The white paper proposed that an individual would be able to respond to an invitation to register by indicating 'up front' that they did not wish to receive further invitations to register until the following canvass period, probably ten years later.Agreeing to reconsider the issue, ministers said they were now looking at two issues. Instead of being able to opt out on a registration form, an individual would need to complete a separate application.Tristam Hunt a Labour member of the political and constitutional reform select committe said :"Finally the government has listened to the Labour party's concerns that this plans could have pushed millions off the electoral register. Having a proper household canvass and blocking the opt out are good moves. It is saying voting is a civic duty not a consumer choice. This is the biggest change to voting since the universal franchise. It is worth getting it right."Voter apathyPatrick Wintourguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Ministers were warned their plans would push 'millions off the electoral register'. Photograph: Christopher ThomondMinisters were warned their plans would push 'millions off the electoral register'. Photograph: Christopher Thomond
Kipper Williams on QE – and the England manager's job Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:31:26 GMT2012-02-09T21:31:26Z Kipper Williams: Sir Mervyn for England? Kipper Williams QE 10.02.12 Photograph: Guardian
Letters: Boris's attack on the Irish is out of touch Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:00:05 GMT2012-02-09T21:00:05Z (image) Over the years a range of individuals and organisations have worked positively in London to tackle myths, ignorance and prejudice about the Irish community. Yet in this week's New Statesman, Boris Johnson attacks a major, mainstream, Irish community event, the annual St Patrick's Day dinner, as "lefty crap", falsely claiming it was "£20,000 on a dinner at the Dorchester for Sinn Féin". The fact is that the annual St Patrick's Day event was a self-financing community event attended by a wide range of Irish actors, politicians from many parties, community figures and celebrities, including Bob Geldof, the Irish ambassador, TV and radio presenter Dermot O'Leary and actress Pauline McLynn. When Boris Johnson cancelled the annual St Patrick's Day dinner in 2009 there was widespread disbelief about his decision. His remarks this week reveal what lay behind that decision. Many Londoners will be disturbed by the mayor of London's contemptuous remarks about a community which has given, and continues to give, so much to our capital city. These views belong to a time we all hoped had been consigned to the long and distant past. guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Letters: Harry and Fabio: a tale of two football managers Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:00:03 GMT2012-02-09T21:00:03Z Why was Harry Redknapp charged (An investigation that cost millions, and finally failed to score, 9 February)? As a mere foot soldier in the PAYE army of taxpayers I followed his trial with growing confusion. Thousands of UK citizens put money into bank accounts abroad and employ specialist accountants and lawyers to keep them legitimate. They are always pursuing "tax efficiency" and the lawyers ensure they are never "tax evaders". They don't even have to go offshore. The UK government provides such facilities in the Channel Islands and Isle of Man, and billions are stashed there. I guess the jury asked the question: given all this evidence, why pick on Harry?William CouparBrighton• Fabio Capello was right to resign over John Terry (Report, 9 January) and the FA wrong to strip him of the England captaincy (Report, 4 February). Terry has, like anyone else, a fundamental human right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty of any offence. Furthermore, the FA was, again, wrong not to involve Capello, the England coach, in its deliberations regarding Terry's future. Another example of the FA's ineptitude. Capello is to be congratulated on his principled stance.Professor Ian BlackshawInternational Sports Law CentreThe Hague, The Netherlands• If it is necessary and just for cabinet minister Chris Huhne to resign due to a pending court case, why is John Terry even still on the pitch? Surely parity dictates he hangs up his boots, not just his captain's armband, until after the verdict?David CollinsKidderminster, Worcestershire• It is interesting to note Rednapp adopted the "I am but a child" defence, synonymous with Bleak House's odious character Skimpole, in a time when Dickens's birth is being commemorated.Mike WilsonMirfield, West Yorkshire• So now we are about to replace a man who could not speak English with a man who cannot read and write English? And Harry is not too good with figures either!Ted WilsonStockport, Greater Manchester• I am sure the mindless England football team will understand "illiterate 'Arry" when he gets the manager's job.Geoff HollyWidnes, Cheshire• I'm not in the least interested in sport but even so I see something very wrong with having an England team managed by a foreigner. When that foreigner earns £6m a year and doesn't even have the good manners to learn the language of his team, I am (almost) speechless.Sara NeillTunbridge Wells, Kent• Five and a half pages about a football manager (Reports, 9 February). Someone's taken their eye off the ball.Les FarrisSouth Petheton, Somerset• My newsagent has mistakenly delivered a copy of your Capello/Redknapp special edition. What do I do to get a copy of the normal paper?Meg IrvingLondon• One thing I admire about the English FA is its ability to break the mould. We broke it on appointing mediocre English managers to the job of national manager. Remember Graham Taylor? And Terry Venables? Well the boy done good in a way (semi-final of Euro '96 but out on penalties). And then there was Keegan, and Hoddle. They came and went, all four, in a short space of time. Then we appointed a big foreign name, Eriksson, who had actually won a few trophies. But then we decided to re-instate the mould and went for McClaren. Enough said. So we broke the mould again and went for another big foreign name in Capello. Now it's time to glue the mould back together again. Gosh there's loads to choose from. There's Harry Redknapp, who has won the FA cup. Wow! And then there's Hodgson, who has done er .. .and there's also Pardew, who has done ... well, loads really.Of course there's Mourinho, a man who has won the league in three different countries twice in each, and won the European Champions' League with two different clubs. And don't forget Wenger, with seven trophies in his tenure at Arsenal. And Ancelotti, who won the double in his first [...]
These empty apprenticeship schemes are failing our young | Polly Toynbee Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:00:01 GMT2012-02-09T21:00:01Z Apprenticeships touted as solutions to the grave crisis of youth unemployment are not remotely up to the jobApprenticeship – the word warms the cockles of politicians' hearts. David Cameron and Nick Clegg boast frequently of increasing apprenticeships by a remarkable 60%.It's National Apprenticeship Week – but the coalition should perhaps have quietly dropped it, along with so much support for the young. The new apprenticeships they claim are almost a lie, at least nowhere near the truth. As youth unemployment climbs – now at 22.3% – the number of apprenticeships for 16 to 18 year-olds fell in the last three months.Cameron and Clegg certainly know the truth about their "60% increase". They may get lost in thickets of vocational initials – BTecs, HNDs, GNVQs – while knowing every detail about whether an A* will help Oxbridge select the very best. But they love the word "apprenticeship", with its sepia image of a young man at a lathe under the watchful eye of a master craftsman, the sealing wax on his seven-year articles ensuring lifelong, worthwhile work. However, most "modern apprenticeships", as in secondary modern, are a world away from medieval guilds. The last government devalued the word, but this government trashed it when it took Labour's Train to Gain scheme for older employees, cut the funds and rebadged it as "apprenticeships". That created an instant 257% increase in "apprenticeships" as short courses for over-25s, most already working at Asda, Morrisons or McDonald's. Worthwhile maybe, but not "apprenticeships", wasting scarce state funds on company training.Here's an enjoyable statistic: in the last year "apprenticeships" for the over- 60s rose by 878%. Cuts in the training/apprenticeship budget are disguised by plentiful announcements of little pots of money for small new schemes: Cameron did it again this week with £6m for high-quality apprenticeships. The worst scandal is that so many "apprenticeships" are 12-week courses from private training companies, with no jobs at the end. That revelation forced the government to promise all future apprenticeships for 16 to 18 year-olds must last a year – but not for 19 to 24 year-olds.Britain is the only country that outsources apprenticeships: elsewhere they are a bond between employers and trainees. Take the retail apprenticeship, a weak, lowly esteemed course in generic basics. Professor Lorna Unwin of the Institute for Education says German retail apprentices learn the detail of, say, delicatessen, or electrical sales. "They learn all about the products they sell, along with maths and literacy. It's a regulated occupation, where you can only be apprenticed under a meister for at least two and often four years. No wonder Comet goes to the wall when staff have no idea what they're selling." That applies to low-grade social care courses: in Nordic countries nursery nursing is mostly graduate level. That goes to the heart of the matter, a reflection on a whole society's deep values.It's been a week of bad news for the young. David Miliband's commission on youth unemployment, for the charities' organisation Acevo, laid out the frightening future. In temperate language – Acevo is non-political, and charities want grants – it shows how the damage done to the lost generation who never found work in the 80s will be dwarfed by what is happening now.One in five has no job, with 600 hotspots where twice as many chase nonexistent work. Keeping them out of work costs £4.8bn a year, £28bn over the next decade, "a timebomb under the nation's finances". Quarter of a million have been out of work for a year. Training schemes and exploitative, unpaid work barely scratch the surface. The problem is deep and structural: there is too little demand for underqualified young employees, with too many out[...]
Letters: Mirror, mirror on the wall ... Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:59:02 GMT2012-02-09T20:59:02Z You report (Coalition: no alternative to NHS reforms, 9 February) that Nick Clegg has agreed with David Cameron that they must work together to push through the Tories' health and social care bill, in the face of ever-mounting opposition from professional bodies and the public. And it was only a few days ago that Nick Clegg was leading his troops through the lobbies in support of the Conservatives' welfare reform bill, which the Guardian has demonstrated to be a barrage of serious attacks on the vulnerable.No matter how much Martin Kettle argues in the same paper that the Lib Dems "have priorities that are distinctly different from those of their Conservative partners" (Lib Dems can again enjoy the reflection in the mirror), their actual behaviour in government is of a party morally and practically embedded in a Conservative party. Embedded, in fact, in a Conservative party dedicated to the destruction of the NHS, the grave weakening of the welfare state, the wrecking of local accountability for education, planning and much else, and a pre-Suez view of Britain's place in the world. Lib Dem priorities, whatever they may be, have totally failed to divert the Tory juggernaut, and that is their tragedy – and ours.Pete RuhemannReading • At the Madeley byelection mentioned by Martin Kettle the Lib Dems had factors in our favour. We ran a campaign with no dirty tricks, as, to their credit, did the other parties. We had an excellent candidate and the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition at Newcastle has a good story to tell. For six years we have run a council that has improved services and cut costs. Unlike Westminster we have stuck to the letter of our coalition agreement, often through difficult negotiations. Lib Dems at Westminster should take their lead from us and throw out the NHS bill, which is in conflict with their coalition agreement.Cllr David BecketCampaign manager, Madeley byelection • I wasn't surprised to hear that a Liberal Left group has formed to mobilise against the drift to the right by the Liberal Democrats (Lib Dem group launches in protest against Tory-led coalition, 9 February), although it doesn't fill me with optimism as I've always been sceptical about how left-leaning any Lib Dem is. Perhaps the solution is for the remaining Labour politicians that care about social justice to join with the Green party to form a new party that fights for both people and planet. I don't know anybody who is interested in redistribution that still believes this can be delivered by Labour, while most who agree with the Green party's stance on environmental issues and protecting the vulnerable refuse to vote for them on the belief that they won't get in. Something has to give.Mark MurtonWallington, Surrey• The Social Liberal Forum welcomes the launch of Liberal Left. However, Richard Grayson is incorrect to describe the Social Liberal Forum's position as "equidistant" between Conservatives and Labour. The Lib Dem party needs to do more to re-establish its own identity as an independent, progressive, liberal force in British politics. The Social Liberal Forum will continue to fight for policies that aim to narrow the gap between rich and poor and to oppose any kind of pre-election deal with any party.Dr David Hall-MatthewsChair, Social Liberal Forum• Your suggestion that the Lib Dems should support the new constituency map if they get a half-baked promise from Cameron to look at Lord's reform is totally inadequate to the constitutional situation (Editorial, 8 February). It is inevitable that Scotland will either become independent or almost so. In either case there will be major implications for the UK, and if devo max is the outcome the UK will become a de facto federal state. The proposal to reduce the number of MPs while allowing continui[...]
Health bill in fresh trouble as first signs of cabinet dissent emerge Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:46:39 GMT2012-02-09T20:47:52Z Plans being laid for call at Liberal Democrat spring conference for bill to be scrappedThe government's beleaguered health bill has run into fresh trouble after it emerged that plans are being laid for a call for it to be scrapped at the Liberal Democrat spring conference.It is also expected that the influential Conservative Home website, seen as the voice of the party grassroots, will publish an editorial on Friday calling for the bill to be dropped altogether. It is understood that Conservative Home has been urged to make the call by three cabinet members who believe David Cameron is not listening on the issue. One source said: "We have almost been instructed to write this." It is extraordinary that cabinet members feel so frustrated at the political deadlock that they have resorted to urging Conservative Home to raise the flag of rebellion.It has been widely canvassed within the government that non-contentious parts of the bill covering public health, social care and GP commissioning could be retained, while controversial parts dealing with an extension of the private sector could be abandoned altogether, something that would be a humiliation for the health secretary, Andrew Lansley.Stephen Dorrell, Conservative chairman of the health select committee, has been one of many Tory MPs pointing out that many of the changes could have been implemented without the need for legislation or such controversy.The shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham, has offered to strike a deal to bring in wider GP commissioning. Labour tabled a vote on Thursday to force the government to publish a report assessing the threats posed by proposed changes to NHS finances and patient care.Senior Lib Dems have acknowledged that they are in a terrible place over the bill, but in discussions at the beginning of the week with Cameron, Nick Clegg agreed to let the bill continue in the Lords.There is frustration in Downing Street that the support of health professionals has been lost after they were laboriously courted and consulted during the pause last year, agreed after the Lib Dems' spring conference voted to oppose large tracts of the bill. The current move is being organised by the same group of party activists.The Lib Dem leadership managed to keep a second health rebellion off the agenda of the autumn conference, but will face intense grassroots pressure if it tries to prevent debate again.An emergency motion can be kept off the floor of the conference if it is not deemed an emergency by the federal conference committee, or it is not selected for debate in a ballot of delegates.It is being argued by diehards in the cabinet that the struggle to get the legislation on the statute book will last only a few more months and after that it will be shown that the warnings of the protesters were ridiculously overblown. Cameron is trying to resell the package as a way of reducing bureaucracy in the NHS.In an effort to keep up the pressure, the shadow cabinet agreed to hold an opposition day debate later this month on making the risk assessment public, in what Burnham said would be a defining moment in the campaign to get the bill axed.Critics believe the risk register, which Lansley has repeatedly refused to publish, contains damning warnings about rising costs and confusion. Concern has been heightened after it emerged on Wednesday that a risk assessment by the London NHS warned some organisations could fail financially and care, including maternity and children's services and public health, could suffer. Such is the anger about the register that nine Liberal Democrats are already among 50 MPs who have signed an early day motion also calling for it to be published – and Labour believes more Lib Dems will support its move.To put further pressure on the coal[...]
From boardroom to bathroom – David Cameron floats policy ideas on women Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:05:29 GMT2012-02-09T20:29:05Z Prime minister says he wants to see pensions matched to life expectancy, more females on boards and tax cuts for people who use cleanersDavid Cameron has said he is interested in introducing automatic rises in the pension age to match life expectancy in the UK.Speaking on Thursday at a summit in Sweden with Nordic leaders, mainly outside the eurozone, he also said he would look at quotas for women in the boardroom if numbers failed to improve.He also expressed interest in the idea of tax breaks for people who hire cleaning or other household services, as a way of generating extra jobs and freeing more women so they could join the workforce.But a Downing Street spokesman insisted Cameron was only exchanging policy ideas, and said nothing was going to rushed into hard policy overnight.Discussing the need for workers to stay in the labour force for longer, Cameron said: "I don't think anyone is saying you must work until you are 75. I think what we are all saying is that we need to have greater flexibility."He said he was interested in a scheme run in Norway whereby the state pension age rose automatically as people lived longer; it allowed for more flexible retirement arrangements.Norwegians can choose the age at which they start to claim their pension. Higher payments go to those who choose to wait the longest, up to the age of 75.The Swedish prime minister, Frank Reinfeldt, said the fact that average global life expectancy had risen from about 46 years in 1950, to nearly 70 today, and 80 in the EU, had altered the premise for pension systems.The Swedish government allows people to deduct from their tax bill half the cost of household services such as cleaning, cooking, lawn-mowing, snow-shovelling and babysitting.The concession is said to have created more than 5,000 jobs and has been praised for reducing the black economy, though has proved controversial.Social democrats have claimed that a relatively small group of wealthy Swedes, earning more than 50,000 kronor (£4,423) a month were far more likely to make use of the subsidised services than lower paid households. And mainly immigrant labour had benefited, they say.Of the nine countries at the summit, seven were outside the eurozone. After the meeting Cameron said he had been inspired by the measures in those countries that were designed to boost women's participation in the labour force.He said he did not rule out introducing quotas for women in boardrooms but his preference was to see indicative targets. He said there was overwhelming evidence that companies were better run if men and women worked alongside each other."So the real nub of the issue is how do we accelerate, how to we fast-forward to having at least 30% of boards made up by women? That's where you get down to quotas, which I don't think you should ever rule out. If you can't get there in other ways, then maybe you have to have quotas." But he later clarified he wanted to "go as far as we can on this agenda without taking that step".Reinfeldt claimed at the summit that a male atmosphere created more risk and a greater risk of corruption. "To say the least, more women in the financial sector would be very good in bringing down the risk level."His remarks took him close to the view of some feminists who claim the financial crash would never have happened had Lehman Brothers been Lehman Sisters.He also singled out Iceland as a country that had managed to keep people in the workforce longer; the country's prime minister, Johanna Sigurdardottir, was still working at the age of 69, and the nation's average retirement age was 67.Britain is working to implement the recommendations of a February 2011 report by Mervyn Davies concerned with increasing numbers of women on company boards.Women[...]
News of the World sources back up Guido Fawkes claims about photographs Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:07:36 GMT2012-02-09T19:28:20Z Politics blog said paper paid £20,000 for pictures of William Hague's special adviser in gay bar, but never used themSources who worked at the News of the World have confirmed an allegation, made at the Leveson inquiry by maverick blogger Paul Staines, that the paper paid him £20,000 to buy up a photograph of a special adviser to the foreign secretary, William Hague, which they subsequently never published.Staines's claim is potentially explosive because the now-disgraced former News of the World editor, Andy Coulson, was acting at the time as the Cameron government's press adviser, and is likely to have been involved in what proved to be a successful battle to save Hague's job.The photograph was bought at the height of a controversy about Hague sharing a hotel room during campaigns with a 25-year-old special adviser. Hague was forced to issue a detailed statement denying he had had a gay relationship, and the recently appointed adviser, Chris Myers, resigned.Staines, who runs a gossip site under the name Guido Fawkes, told Lord Justice Leveson in sworn testimony: "We also had pictures of the special adviser in a gay bar … We took the photos to the News of the World. They bought them for £20,000 and never published them. I don't know very much but I know you don't pay £20,000 for photos not to publish."He went on: "The News of the World was in regular contact with Downing Street, and perhaps to curry favour or for whatever reasons, they chose to buy up those pictures and take them off the market."News International, the owners of the defunct tabloid, declined to comment on the allegations, saying they were not prepared to disclose details of payments made.But two former executives at the paper confirmed the deal, on condition of anonymity. They said the purchase was negotiated via the paper's political staff, and authorised by the editor, Colin Myler.One source claimed Myler bought the picture in order to "keep it off the market for a week" because he was planning to expose allegations of spot-fixing at Pakistan cricket matches, and wanted it to dominate the headlines that week.But, according to Staines's testimony, he sold the photograph the week after the cricket story, which ran on Sunday 29 August 2010, along with printouts of on-line chat from a website.The following week, after a statement by Hague describing his happy marriage and denying any gay relationships, every Sunday paper bar one carried news stories about the issue, with speculation about the foreign secretary's future. The sole exception was the News of the World.Leveson inquiryGuido FawkesAndy CoulsonWilliam HagueNews of the WorldNewspapers & magazinesDavid LeighJames Ballguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Political blogger Paul Staines, who writes a political blog under the name Guido Fawkes. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the GuardianPolitical blogger Paul Staines, who writes a political blog under the name Guido Fawkes. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the Guardian
NHS reforms live blog - Thursday 9 February Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:02:36 GMT2012-02-09T19:04:20Z Live coverage of the health and social care bill10.00am: Good morning and welcome to today's live blog on the government's NHS reforms.The government loses a vote in the House of Lords over the issue of mental health. While the coalition says it will push ahead with the reforms publicly, a minister tells the Guardian that the government is in "a rubbish place politically".Many commentators are now openly saying that not only is the wrong man in the job but significantly, as Steve Richards in the Independent puts it, "the reforms are the problem".All this points to an interesting month ahead with the bill back next week. Meanwhile the editor of Health Service Journal, Alastair McLellan, has tweeted that civil servants are already discussing a Plan B should the bill fall. Interesting times...11.24am: It's proving to be a fast moving day. • Given last night's defeat in the Lords, the King's Fund has produced a useful report showing that people with long-term conditions, such as diabetes or heart disease, are two to three times more likely to experience mental health problems than the general population. Why is this important for the NHS? Well at least 60% of patients in the NHS have long term conditions.• Of all the accusations leveled at the health bill, the most telling blow is that the proposals are too market-friendly. Well the FT, the in house paper of capitalism, says The case for a tactical retreat is now overwhelming.• Never let it said that the government won't stand behind Andrew Lansley. Richard Holden, the press officer charged with defending the bill, tweets Savings on #NHS bueracracy are re-invested in NHS frontline services - Inc £180m saved scrapping unnecessary quangos. Follow @RicHolden and see where he gets the numbers from here11.40am: The government's response to its loss last night in the Lords over the bill seems to have peeved campaigners. Mental health services are difficult, expensive services to commission. They lie at bottom of some the most stubborn difficult areas for the NHS to tackle. No wonder ministers run away when they may be a legal duty placed upon them to do something about them. But the government's insouciance risks angering a mental health groups - a sector it spent a lot of time wooing in opposition.As Paul Jenkins, CEO of the charity Rethink puts it on his blog this morning:If (ministers) share a fundamental passion to see parity of esteem then there can be no clearer symbol than to place it as a duty on the face of this legislation.In the next couple of weeks there is a duty on all of us in the field of mental health; people affected by mental illness, professionals, voluntary organisations and NHS bodies, to demonstrate the strength of feeling on this issue.It would be a travesty for this amendment to be overturned in the Commons for the sake of political expediency and for MPs to vote against a change which directly affects at least one in four of us.11.46am: My colleague Patrick Wintour reports more bad news for Andrew Lansley with Lib Dem refuseniks mobilising before the party's spring conference in early March.Liberal Democrat activists are to try to table an emergency motion at the party's spring conference opposing the government's health reforms, but face an uphill battle to get the issue on to the floor of the conference.Given that Lib Dem disquiet about the bill runs right through the party - all the way to ministers, any anti-bill votes at the conference could doom the legislation which is will still be on the floor of the House of Lords.Read the full story here.12.10pm: Denis Campbell has news of more doctors springing into action, coordinated by that physician and indefatigable GP[...]
Ed Miliband advocates reform of prime minister's questions Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:47:35 GMT2012-02-09T18:47:35Z (image) Labour leader says weekly session is a terrible advert for politics, and promises to alter it if he gets into power The Labour leader, Ed Miliband, will change prime minister's questions if he gets into power, he said at a charity event in London. Describing the weekly verbal joust in the House of Commons as a terrible advert for politics, he said it encouraged a view that politicians were a "bunch of school kids who want to shout at each other". And while admitting he was unsure how to alter it, he insisted he would definitely do so if he could. He said: "I find the Westminster village gets much more excited about it than the population, I believe. "I don't know how to change it so I'm not going to make false promises about changing it but I would love to change it if I could." guardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Ed Miliband said PMQs encouraged a view that politicians were a 'bunch of school kids who want to shout at each other'. Photograph: PAEd Miliband said PMQs encouraged a view that politicians were a 'bunch of school kids who want to shout at each other'. Photograph: PA
David and the Nordic goliaths Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:47:02 GMT2012-02-09T18:47:02Z David Cameron's trip to Sweden highlights Conservative interest in policies of countries formerly considered darlings of the leftIt used to be a leftie joke that the quickest way to crash a thinktank website was to post a research paper entitled The Swedish Model because not every net surfer would recognise another tribute to Scandinavian social democracy by its title alone. Nowadays it's a Tory joke too, except they call it The Nordic Model.Less than a month after hosting a British-Nordic summit in Downing St which would have baffled previous Conservative prime ministers, David Cameron was in Sweden on Thursday. He attended a Nordic-Baltic summit between Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway and their ex-Soviet Baltic neighbours Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Cameron was there to forge alliances with the EU's fiscally prudent, euro-wary Lutheran north, but also to learn.What happened to make the Nordic parliamentary monarchies, Sweden in particular, a place of pilgrimage for the right? Its attractions are more obvious for social democrats who have long revered the high-tax, high-welfare system by which the Swedish centre-left have dominated their country's politics for most of the past century – and still do.Nick Pearce, head of the left-leaning Institute of Public Policy Research thinktank, rattles off the attractions: universal affordable childcare and entrenched ("use it or lose it") paternity leave which both facilitate high female employment and the buoyant tax base that funds it; social equality and a tax credit system whereby an active state nurtures the individual over the family unit and prevents huge wealth gaps.Those should create high cultural barriers for Tories: Pippi Longstocking, the Swedish Peter Pan, is a fictional nine-year-old girl who is immensely strong and lives alone – hardly a Daily Mail archetype. But there is enough diversity among the Scandanavians (Norway and Denmark still have centre-left governments) to attract Cameron as well as respectful attention at Davos summits where the resilient bounce back from the 2008-09 recession has been noted.Norway may have its sovereign oil fund, but both Sweden with its 90s bank bust and Finland ("we have only wood and people") have had to fight back from recession and lost markets. More than the French or Germans, they are open-market economies. It helps Tories relax knowing that of the Nordic seven only two – Finland and Estonia – are full eurozone members.Cameron's buddy is Fredrik Reinfeldt, leader of the Moderates (conservatives, as UK fans of upmarket Nordic TV dramas know), who ended another 18-year rule by the social democrats in 2006 by offering to reform the state, not dismantle it. He was 41. Against Brussels advice in 2010 he cut taxes for the working poor, declaring "we are the new workers' party", and won again.That allows cheerleaders for the Swedish model – like Spectator editor, Fraser Nelson, a hyperactive free market evangelist whose wife is Swedish – to urge supply-side tax cuts on No 10, as well as tilt Michael Gove towards his Swedish free schools model. Iain Duncan Smith has long been a visitor in search of welfare reform ideas. In "detoxing" the Tory brand, Cameron took advice from Reinfeldt.When it comes to policy hunts, intellectual fashion usually plays a part. Tony Blair once dragged a Swedish private-hospital boss before a Labour conference to sell foundation hospitals. But New Labour's instinct was to look to Australia or the US for health or welfare reform, to Germany for industrial insights. Thatcherites even admired market reform in New Zealand as well as the US.Under George Bush, Will[...]
Donald Trump accuses Alex Salmond of wanting to destroy Scottish coast Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:23:10 GMT2012-02-09T18:23:10Z Billionaire attempts to derail wind farm plans with letter to first minister – and by ceasing work on Aberdeenshire golf resortDonald Trump has written to Scotland's first minister, Alex Salmond, accusing him of being "hell-bent on destroying Scotland's coastline" with wind turbines.Trump, who opposes plans for an offshore wind farm to be built near the site of his luxury golf resort in Aberdeenshire, called the turbines "ugly monstrosities" and "horrendous machines".A planning application for an 11-turbine wind farm off Aberdeen Bay was submitted to Marine Scotland last summer. A decision is expected to be made later this year.The billionaire businessman has halted work on his resort until the decision is made by the Scottish government.In his letter to Salmond, he says: "With the reckless installation of these monsters, you will single-handedly have done more damage to Scotland than virtually any event in Scottish history."Trump also said he would never be "on board" with the project, which he called "insanity".He added: "As a matter of fact, I have just authorised my staff to allocate a substantial amount of money to launch an international campaign to fight your plan to surround Scotland's coast with many thousands of wind turbines."He added: "Please understand that I am doing this to save Scotland."Trump announced a postponement on work at the resort last month. The Trump Organisation said any future work, including the building of a hotel, would now depend on the Scottish ministers' decision on the application for the European Offshore Wind Deployment Centre.The proposal is a £150m joint venture by utility company Vattenfall, engineering firm Technip and Aberdeen Renewable Energy Group.A Scottish government spokeswoman said: "Scottish waters are estimated to have as much as a quarter of Europe's potential offshore wind energy. A recent study suggests that harnessing just a third of the practical resource off our coast by 2050 would enable us to generate enough electricity to power Scotland seven times over."An independent Scotland will be able to take full responsibility for this renewables revolution, along with the investment and thousands of jobs it brings."Willie Rennie, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, said Scotland would not be bullied. "First Mr Trump accuses Scotland of being the laughing stock of the world," Rennie said. "Now he threatens to launch an international campaign. What Mr Trump needs to understand is that Scotland will live up to our responsibilities to tackle climate change."This letter is a rather desperate attempt by a rich man who is used to getting his own way. But his latest tizzy is embarrassing. Instead of the world laughing at Scotland, Scotland is laughing at Mr Trump."Mr Trump's dislike for turbines several miles from his golf course should not derail Scotland's ambition."I would urge the first minister to listen to Mr Trump but no more and no less than anyone else. We won't be bullied by Mr Trump and his millions."Donald TrumpScotlandAlex SalmondWind powerEnergyRenewable energyguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Donald Trump last year at the Menie estate, Aberdeenshire, where he has been building a luxury golf resort. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the GuardianDonald Trump last year at the Menie estate, Aberdeenshire, where he has been building a luxury golf resort. Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian
UK and Jordan agree to make deal on Abu Qatada case Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:45:34 GMT2012-02-09T19:38:28Z David Cameron and King Abdullah want 'effective solution' after deportation of radical Islamist cleric blocked by European courtDavid Cameron and King Abdullah of Jordan have agreed on the importance of finding an effective resolution to the Abu Qatada case, Downing Street has said.The prime minister told King Abdullah on Thursday of the "frustrating and difficult" position Britain was in with its efforts to deport the Islamist radical to Jordan.The UK is unable to return Qatada to Jordan because of a ruling by the European court of human rights (ECHR) that he must not be sent back if it could lead to him being tried with evidence obtained under torture.An immigration judge ruled this week that Qatada – once described as "Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe" by a Spanish judge – should be released on bail after more than six years in custody fighting deportation.With Home Office minister James Brokenshire due to visit the Jordanian capital, Amman, next week, Cameron spoke to King Abdullah by telephone during a visit to Sweden.A Downing Street spokesman said: "They discussed the ECHR ruling on Abu Qatada and the prime minister explained the frustrating and difficult position that the ruling had created for the UK."The prime minister complimented the king on the close and effective collaboration between Britain and Jordan on this case over a number of years, and noted that the court had endorsed the UK-Jordanian MoU [memorandum of understanding] on deportation with assurances."They both welcomed close and detailed co-operation since the ruling between the Jordanian government, and the UK Home Office and the Foreign Office."They agreed on the importance of finding an effective solution to this case, in the interests of both Britain and Jordan."Qatada, also known as Omar Othman, 51, was convicted in his absence in Jordan of involvement with terror attacks in 1998 and has featured in hate sermons found on videos in the flat of one of the September 11 bombers.Since 2001 he has challenged, and ultimately thwarted, every attempt by the government to detain and deport him.The ECHR ruled last month that sending Qatada back to face terror charges without assurances about the conduct of a trial would be a "flagrant denial of justice".The ruling was the first time the Strasbourg-based court has found an extradition would be in violation of article six of the European convention on human rights, the right to a fair trial, which is enshrined in UK law under the Human Rights Act.Abu QatadaDavid CameronKing AbdullahJordanguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Abu Qatada will be under a 22-hour curfew enforced by an electronic tag after his release on bail. Photograph: Jonathan Evans/Rex FeaturesAbu Qatada will be under a 22-hour curfew enforced by an electronic tag after his release on bail. Photograph: Jonathan Evans/Rex Features
The Liberal Left – less Cameron and Clegg, more Gladstone and Beveridge | Linda Jack Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:30:01 GMT2012-02-09T17:30:01Z As Liberal Democrats, we oppose the coalition and want to build a viable centre-left alternative ahead of the next electionThe freshly painted walls of the new Liberal Democrat HQ in Great George Street are emblazoned with the words: "The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity."These words, from our party constitution, are familiar to all Liberal Democrats. They are a constant reminder of why we are in the party. For those of us who have formed Liberal Left it is these words that appear to ring hollow within the coalition and have led us to believe the drift of the party rightwards must be resisted.Some have criticised the development of such a group within the party. But as the Liberal Democrats have become a serious party of government it is important that members feel able to exercise influence, and that is where a pressure group such as Liberal Left can be effective. We are seeking to organise opinion that is currently angry but unco-ordinated, and unable to make its voice heard as strongly as is necessary.We see ourselves as a pressure group that shares the objectives of the majority of our party, but believes we need to go further in two areas. The first of these is challenging the leadership position on economic and fiscal policy. The second is building good relations across the left between Liberal Democrats, Labour, the Greens and the non-party liberal left. Even Vince Cable has called for the building of a progressive left.We are opposed to the coalition, but recognise the reality that we are unlikely to be able to persuade our leadership to withdraw, and so pulling out of the coalition is not on our current agenda. Our focus is building a viable centre-left alternative to the current coalition, in preparation for the next election.As a party of the centre-left we were never going to be easy bedfellows with a party of the right, but we are dismayed at just how far our leadership seems to have snuggled up, particularly on policies that fly in the face of our manifesto and our values.On tuition fees, academies and free schools (party policies the leadership always opposed) and NHS reform, the leadership has failed to recognise, or chosen to ignore, the strength of feeling in the party. They seem to be as comfortable with so much coalition policy as a cold hand in a warm glove – while many backbenchers find themselves holding their noses in order to go through the lobbies with the Tories.At the moment, many party members are furious about the leadership's support for some of the most pernicious aspects of the welfare reform bill – not just because of its impact on the most vulnerable in our society, but also because parliamentarians have flown in the face of party policy passed as recently as last September. And coming down the track are legal aid and changes to employment legislation – both areas of deep concern to many party members.We are and always have been a radical party. The party of great social reformers – Gladstone and Beveridge, Lloyd George and Keynes. Liberal Left provides a forum for those Liberal Democrats who want to stay and fight to return our party to its radical roots, who want to build a better, fairer, more equal Britain for all our citizens.• This article was commissioned after a suggestion from Pagey. If there's a subject you'd like to see covered on Comment is free, please [...]
Bank of England launches QE3 onto a still-stormy sea Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:24:00 GMT2012-02-09T17:54:31Z A new £50bn round of quantitative easing suggests the Bank remains concerned about the economic climateBad news for savers. Tough times ahead for pension funds. Precious little joy for everybody else. That was the subtext to the Bank of England's announcement on Thursday that it needed to conjure up a bit more money creation to steer the economy away from the rocks of a double-dip recession.Clearly, Threadneedle Street believes 2012 is going to be a rotten year. It has doubts about whether the rally in the eurozone is for real. It knows that tight credit conditions are throttling private-sector growth. It senses that it will take time for falling inflation to end the squeeze on real incomes. And it is aware that the big public spending cuts are still to come.As a result, what the Bank announced on Thursday was a damage-limitation exercise. Faced with what it called "headwinds", the Bank decided it had no alternative but to pump an additional £50bn into the economy over the next three months. That will take the total purchases of UK government bonds to £325bn, or about one third of the liquid gilts market.This is the insurance policy against a messy Greek default that has knock-on effects across the rest of the single currency zone, depressed consumer spending, an investment strike by companies hoarding their cash, and the biggest programme of spending cuts in living memory. True, the recent surveys have painted a more positive picture but the Bank is worried it might be a suckers' rally. Next week's quarterly inflation report will flesh out the reasons for today's move, but is likely to show the economy flatlining this year and inflation dropping like a stone.The Bank's decision, while not a surprise, is not without its risks. Inflation remains more than double the government's 2% inflation target, and while Threadneedle Street has sought to quantify the impact of quantitative easing, it does not – and cannot – know for sure what the inflationary implications of such a big monetary boost will be. The expectation is that inflation will fall like a stone this year, the result of a bombed-out economy and no repetition of last year's rise in commodity prices. As things stand, that looks a reasonable call.Perhaps a more immediate concern is that QE is not really getting to the parts of the economy that need it, and, in its third incarnation, is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Ed Balls made the point that the Bank was doing its best to avert the risk of a fresh recession but could only do so much. At the very least, there is a case for looking at the mix between monetary and fiscal policy, so that borrowing costs and QE take less of the strain.It might also be the time to think about QE more creatively, perhaps to fund a nationwide green new deal or a national investment bank. The fact that output is still 4% below its pre-recession peak, despite an unprecedented monetary boost since 2008, is an indication that QE has proved to be a blunt instrument.Quantitative easingEconomicsBank of EnglandGreen shootsEconomic policyEconomic growth (GDP)Larry Elliottguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]The Bank of England has added another £50bn to its quantitative easing programme. Photograph: Toby Melville/ReutersThe Bank of England has added another £50bn to its quantitative easing programme. Photograph: Toby Melville/Reuters
What quantitative easing means for annuities Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:35:48 GMT2012-02-09T15:35:48Z Anyone using their pension fund to buy an income for retirement stands to get a lot less for their moneyThe Bank of England's decision to go ahead with more quantitative easing is bad news for anyone approaching retirement, as it means already tumbling annuity rates are set to fall further – so anyone using their pension fund to buy an income for retirement stands to get less for their money.What is an annuity?An annuity is a contract bought from an insurance company which offers to pay an income each year. Unless you have a final salary pension, where you will be paid an amount of your earnings every year after you retire, you will reach retirement with a pension fund that you need to use to provide you with such an income.Although you can make withdrawals from that fund to pay for your living costs, most retirees will want a guaranteed income for the rest of their life, and will use an annuity to provide one.What is the annuity rate?This is how much the insurer will offer you as an income. In January 2012 the average annuity rate stood at 5.6%, according to moneyfacts.co.uk. This means if you used a pension fund of £100,000 to buy an annuity you would have been offered a pay out of £5,600 a year on average. A few years ago you would have received much more.How much more?Figures from pensions provider Hargreaves Lansdown show annuity rates have plummeted since July 2008. Back then a 65-year-old man with £100,000 to invest could have bought an annuity that would pay him £7,855 a year for the rest of his life.Why have rates fallen?Annuity rates are related to life expectancy: if an insurer thinks it will be paying you an income for 30 years after retiring it isn't going to commit to paying as much each year as it would if it thought you'd only be around for 20 years. As people live longer, annuity rates fall. They are also related to gilt yields, which are the returns on government bonds.And what does this have to do with quantitative easing?The extra money printed by the Bank of England will be used to buy gilts, which will push up their prices. This means the return on them – the yield – will fall as a percentage of the price. According to Hargreaves Lansdown: "All other things being equal, lower long-term yields from gilts and corporate bonds will feed through into lower annuity rates."The last round of quantitative easing in March 2009 conincided with a drop in gilt yields and a fall in annuity rates. Hargreaves Lansdown's figures show that the top rate for a 65-year-old male's level annuity dropped fairly immediately from 7.214% on 5 March to 7.093% on 12 March, then to 7.043% on 26 March. In cash terms, income from a £100,000 fund over that time fell from £7,214 to £7,093, then to £7,043.Gilt yields did bounce back before being pushed down again as the European debt crisis took hold. Investors have also moved into UK government bonds seeing it as a safe haven, again pushing up prices as a result.How many people will be affected by falling rates?In 2012 as many as 806,000 people could reach retirement age and start searching for an annuity, which is almost double the usual number, says Malcolm McLean, a consultant at Barnett Waddingham. This is a result of the baby boomers reaching pension age. McLean says the amount people get for their money could fall quickly: "When bad news comes they are pretty quick at adjusting rates downwards."So should people wait to buy an annuity?That's a high risk strategy. "Quantitative may have an affect, but [...]
David Candler obituary Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:12:57 GMT2012-02-09T15:12:57Z My dad, David Candler, who has died of a heart attack aged 71, was press officer for Harold Wilson from 1968 until 1970. He was charged with representing Labour party interests as the government pushed through policies, including a new economic policy, which caused party division. He improved liaison between the party and the prime minister, though he found his role in keeping Wilson close to party policy a greater challenge.David was a Labour party member from his teenage years until his death. Despite this, he was a critic of many aspects of party policy. When many of his contemporaries left and joined the SDP in the 1980s, David would not, believing that Labour was still the best vehicle to bring about equality. Instead, he was active in the Labour Solidarity Campaign, established in 1981 to bring the party back to electability.David was born in Horsforth, Leeds, into a family steeped in Labour and trade unionism. His father, Horace, worked as an official at the Tailors and Garment Workers' Union. His mother, Emily (nee Loughlin), was the youngest of five sisters, one of whom, Anne, became the general secretary of that union, and the first woman to preside over the TUC conference.David was educated at St Albans boys' grammar school in Hertfordshire. His career in journalism and PR started on the Luton News, and quickly took him to Labour party head office, from where he was headhunted to work directly for Wilson. He joined the Greater London council in 1975, starting off in the Docklands development team, and remained with the council until its abolition in 1986. The original plan for the redevelopment of London's docks had housing at its heart, rather than the offices of Canary Wharf.The remainder of David's career was spent mainly in local government – an interest that he combined with one in European integration. He returned to Westminster in 1989 as adviser to Robin Corbett, Labour's spokesman during the introduction of the Tories' broadcasting bill.After I and my brother and sister had grown up, David and my mum, Sarah, moved from London to Worcester in 1997. In 2003 David was elected to Worcester city council, stepping down in May 2011 "to make room for the younger generation". He remained active in a plethora of local bodies. He collapsed on his way to a meeting of Worcester Community Trust, of which he was a founder trustee.David dedicated his work to democratic socialism, but his heart was for family, and for music, for which he had a remarkable ear. He had great wit and authenticity and was truly an independent spirit. He is survived by Sarah, his three children, Daniel, me and Rachel, and three grandchildren, Katie, Ethan and Dylan.LabourPolitics pastguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]David Candler declined to decamp to the SDP in the early 1980s, believing that the Labour party remained the best vehicle to bring about equalityDavid Candler declined to decamp to the SDP in the early 1980s, believing that the Labour party remained the best vehicle to bring about equality
Politics Weekly podcast: the future of the NHS Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:32:00 GMT2012-02-09T14:32:37Z The government's health and social care bill has reached the report stage in the House of Lords and is likely to be passed into legislation in the coming weeks. But with so many amendments, and months of wrangling in both houses, what will the reforms mean for the NHS? In the studio, we have Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee, our social affairs editor Randeep Ramesh, and Stephen Thornton of the Health Foundation who is also on the board of Monitor, the regulator at the heart of the government's proposed reforms. This week Ed Miliband put in a strong performance in the Commons as he taunted the prime minister about the fate of his health secretary. Having promised that there would be "no top-down reorganisation of the NHS", the prime minister was on the back foot, but assured the house that Andrew Lansley's career was on surer footing than Miliband's own. (A less than ringing endorsement, some critics noted). The bill has been wrestled with for more than 18 months and comes with over a thousand amendments. Now the race is on to get it onto the statute books in time for the Queen's speech - expected in May. But with 50,000 people petitioning against it and campaigns from GPs, nurses and other health workers, the government has its work cut out. Leave your thoughts below. If Andrew Lansley 'succeeds in deflecting criticism of the NHS changes until 2015, he will have done Cameron a service'. Photograph: Katie Collins/PA Wire/Press Association Images
Children taken into care: why are the figures rising? Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:11:00 GMT2012-02-09T17:20:59Z Record numbers of families are having court cases brought against them to remove their children because of factors like abuse and negelect. We look at the data and ask why are the figures so high? • Get the dataToday the number of applications for children to be taken into care has hit a record high according to the Children and Family Court Advisory Service (Cafcass).An application comes from the local authority when a child or children are thought to be in such serious danger that a court order is needed to remove them from their family. A single application can be made for one or more children in a household. The local authority application goes through to Cafcass and the courts. If you compare the applications to previous years you can see that 2011/2012 is already clearly higher than any time in the last 4 years in England:In total, between April 2011 and January 2012 Cafcass, recieved 8,403 new applications. What can these figures tell us about the way the 1989 Children Act is being applied?An answer to this comes from Anthony Douglas, Chief Executive of Cafcass: Agencies are working more quickly to ensure that children are removed from deeply damaging households where many have been for some time and are showing a lower tolerance for poor parenting. What we are seeing is an elimination of drift in neglect cases and a greater recognition of the appalling impact of neglect can have on children. Nearly every child involved needs love, care and therapy, either back home or elsewhere. All agencies need to factor in these much larger increases into their planning systems, resource allocations, workforce development strategies and service contracts, so that the most vulnerable children in the country continue to receive strong public services.So quicker assessment and better awareness in care professionals of the damaging effects of leaving a case goes some way to explaining the increase in applications. Another view is expressed by the Guardian's Patrick Butler who considers the "Baby P effect", but he also echoes Douglas' point about the reasons children go back into care:Most children who go into care do so as a result of concerns that they are being neglected, not that they are at risk of physical violence or sexual abuse. The increase in applications, say professionals, reflects a greater appreciation of the impact on children of parental neglect, emotional abuse and domestic violence. We have gathered statistics from the Department for Education showing regional breakdowns of children at many more stages in the care process in a Google spreadsheet, along with the latest Cafcass figures. What do you think? What have we learnt since the Children Act and what do these figures tell us about society at large?Data summary Download the data• DATA: download the full spreadsheetMore dataData journalism and data visualisations from the GuardianWorld government data• Search the world's government data with our gatewayDevelopment and aid data• Search the world's global development data with our gatewayCan you do something with this data?• Flickr Please post your visualisations and mash-ups on our Flickr group• Contact us at data@guardian.co.uk• Get the A-Z of data• More at the Datastore directory• Follow us on Twitter• Like us on FacebookChild protectionSocial careChildrenGovernment dataBaby PLisa Evansguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited o[...]
Politics live blog: Thursday 9 February 2012 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:05:00 GMT2012-02-09T16:30:00Z Rolling coverage of all the day's political developments as they happen8.40am: Yesterday, after David Cameron made his announcement about buying a new C-17 military transport plane, FranzSherbet in the comments suggested that Cameron was imitating Borgen. I've only made it to episode five, so I missed the reference, but I have seen the "quotas for women in the boardroom" episode which Cameron seems to be re-enacting at the Nordic/Baltic summit in Sweden today.Officially it's known as the Northern Future Forum. Before it started, Cameron and the leaders of the eight other countries attending (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden) published a joint letter. This is what they had to say about women in the boardroom.A generation ago working women were not the norm everywhere. Since then a quiet revolution has taken place. Within the EU women now make up nearly half of the workforce and are also becoming increasingly better educated than men. Women account for almost 60 % of university degrees in the US and Europe. But despite this progress, women's potential on the labour market is far from fulfilled. Only 31 % of European entrepreneurs are women. Women also continue to be under-represented in senior positions. Today, according to the European Commission, only one out of 10 board members of the largest companies listed on the national stock exchange of EU Member States is a woman. The disparity is widest at the very top, where only 3% of the largest companies have a woman directing the highest decision-making body. Progress is slow even if research shows that there is a positive correlation between women in leadership and business performance. At our meeting in Stockholm we will listen to each-others' experiences and discuss different solutions for how to support more women to become entrepreneurs and take up leading business positions. One thing is obvious, if we were more successful in unlocking women's full potential on the labour market, we would add billions of GDP across Europe. Our view is simple: we can't afford not to. At the summit Cameron has also been saying this morning that he is sorry to see Fabio Capello quit as England manager. I'll post his comments in full shortly. I'm not sure how much we will get from the summit today, but I'll be reporting all I can. There is a press conference due this afternoon.Otherwise, it's a thin day (although the Leveson inquiry should be sparky.) Here's the agenda.9am: Sir Michael Wilshaw, the new Ofsted chief inspector, gives his first major speech since taking up the post. 9.30am: The Leveson inquiry resumes. Today's witnesses include Sir Paul McCartney's ex-wife Heather Mills, the Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, publicist Max Clifford, and former News of the World head of news Ian Edmondson.12.15pm: Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, launches four-year VisitBritain global advertising campaign. 3pm: Lady Royall, the Labour leader in the Lords, delivers a speech to the Centre for Opposition Studies. As Patrick Wintour reports today, she told the Guardian in an interview that getting Cameron's chances of getting his next legislative programme through the Lords later this year are "zero to slim" if he presses ahead with a bill introducing an elected second chamber.Ed Miliband is also making a speech on "fairness in tough times" today, but it's at 6pm, which will be out of my tim[...]
Mark Thompson's mea culpa on women at the BBC 'misses the point' Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:26:21 GMT2012-02-09T14:20:59Z Tory MP Nadine Dorries says corporation needs to address the under-representation of all women – not just the oldConservative MP Nadine Dorries has welcomed BBC director Mark Thompson's admission that the BBC should do more for older women – but said he "slightly misses the point".Dorries, who will be discussing the issue with Thompson later this month in a meeting brokered by culture minister Ed Vaizey, said the corporation had to address the under-representation of all women, both young and old, on and off screen.Dorries added that Thompson's page-long mea culpa printed in the Daily Mail on Thursday was a "step in the right direction" and was "very humble and gracious of him"."But it slightly misses the point," said Dorries. "The issue is about the BBC's attitude towards women, role models and women in high profile jobs in general."If he is humble enough to do this then let's say sorry for everything. It's no good just picking up the particular area of older women."Dorries said there were too few women in senior positions at the BBC as well as on air. "Across the whole of the UK on BBC breakfast radio there is only one female breakfast presenter. Every other single breakfast show is presented by a man," she added."Young people going to work in cars, young girls and young women – what kind of role model is that for them? The secondary act, the supporting role, is quite often that of a woman, the ego massaging role to the male presenter. Again, what kind of message is that?"Dorries added: "I am the last person in the world to advocate quotas, but what I would say is if he [Thompson] is going to write an article like this it would be so much better if he got round the table with his controllers today and said we are not doing enough to put women in all key positions in the BBC."Dorries is due to meet Thompson on 27 February where the issue of the representation of women on screen and behind the scenes will be discussed.The meeting was arranged by Vaisey following a Commons debate on gender balance in broadcasting which was proposed by Dorries and supported by Lib Dem MP Tessa Munt.• To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".• To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and FacebookMark ThompsonEqualityGenderBBCNadine DorriesJohn Plunkettguardian.co.uk © 2012 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds [...]Girl power … MP Nadine Dorries wants Mark Thompson to look at the role of all women at the BBC. Photograph: Richard Saker for the GuardianGirl power … MP Nadine Dorries wants Mark Thompson to look at the role of all women at the BBC. Photograph: Richard Saker for the Guardian
Ofsted chief: a quarter of 'outstanding' schools may be downgraded Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:25:00 GMT2012-02-09T13:25:36Z Sir Michael Wilshaw says unless schools have outstanding teaching, they could be stripped of that rating overallA quarter of schools rated as outstanding may be downgraded from this autumn, the chief inspector of England's schools has warned.In his first speech as head of Ofsted, Sir Michael Wilshaw said that unless schools had outstanding teaching, they could be stripped of an overall outstanding rating.Just over 1,000 schools were rated outstanding at their last inspection, but failed to achieve a verdict of outstanding on the quality of teaching. Half of outstanding secondaries and a fifth of primaries come into this category. Wilshaw, who is well-known for having turned around failing schools in challenging parts of London, said inspectors would start to re-inspect these schools from this autumn.He will be acting on the advice of Michael Gove, the education secretary, who said in September he was concerned so many schools were judged outstanding when their teaching obtained a rating of good.Wilshaw warned that teachers of outstanding schools were expected to share their expertise with underperforming schools and should not be doing this unless their teaching was of the highest quality.Headteachers of high-performing schools should consider themselves to be "conscripts … sort of part of a national service" and join inspectors on several visits to other schools a year, he said."It is important that outstanding schools should not luxuriate in their own outstandingness," Wilshaw said. "There is a moral imperative and duty to support others that are doing less well. That's why I want leaders of our outstanding institutions to involve themselves in the inspection process. Ofsted needs you. Your country needs you."Wilshaw has previously said he wants the rating of satisfactory to be replaced by "requires improvement". If schools given this rating do not improve after two inspections, they will go into the emergency category of special measures. This means their headteacher could be forced out and the school could be strongly encouraged to become an academy.Underperforming schools existed in both the most prosperous and the poorest parts of the country, Wilshaw said. Some 300 schools in well-off neighbourhoods had been judged satisfactory for several years, including faith schools in Oxfordshire and Surrey, he said.Up to 6,000 schools were labelled satisfactory in their last inspection and half of those had failed to be upgraded over six or more years, Wilshaw said.The reforms, which are expected to come in this autumn, would "focus minds and ensure headteachers make more effort". We have got to move to a no-excuses culture. We haven't addressed that yawning divide between the best and the worst and that is why I am very concerned that Ofsted should raise the bar."Union leaders said that in recent months government rhetoric against their profession had reached record levels and Wilshaw's comments were further evidence of this.Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said Wilshaw's words were "yet more aggressive rhetoric from a chief inspector who has obviously warmed to the task of attacking the teaching profession from any angle". She said constant changes to inspections were unsettling for teachers and Wilshaw's reforms were about turning as many schools into academ[...]
Are bankers' bonuses like 'penis extensions'? Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:18:36 GMT2012-02-09T13:18:36Z Ken Livingstone told the New Statesman that during his time as London mayor his frequent dealings with bank chiefs led him to think that "bankers' bonuses are like penis extensions, among a small league of men – mine is bigger than yours". Do you agree?
Bank of England injects £50bn into ailing economy Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:33:00 GMT2012-02-09T13:25:17Z Decision to extend quantitative easing programme to £325bn had been widely predicted after UK economy shrank last yearThe Bank of England will inject billions more of electronic cash into Britain's flagging economy, extending its quantitative easing programme by £50bn.Economists had widely expected the Bank to resume QE after the UK economy slipped into contraction at the end of last year. Bank policymakers had warned that they saw inflation undershooting its target at the end of the year and hinted that more money-printing was on the cards.At the end of its monthly meeting on Thursday, the Bank's monetary policy committee also left interest rates at a record low of 0.5%.Most economists had expected an additional £50bn in QE, though some had forecast up to £75bn and a handful had forecast none at all.The latest move comes on top of the £275bn of QE announced since the scheme was launched during the recession in 2009.The decision comes despite business surveys last week suggesting a fresh fall into recession could be averted. Those reports showed a stronger-than-expected start to the year for the dominant services sector as well as for manufacturers.Official data earlier on Thursday showed manufacturing output rose five times faster than expected in December, but the wider industrial sector fared worse than first thought over the fourth quarter.Analysts now await the Bank's quarterly set of economic forecasts, to be published next Wednesday in the inflation report, for clues as to whether there will be any more QE later in the year."Recent survey data and today's industrial production figures are encouraging, but the UK data isn't all pointing in one direction," said James Knightley at ING Financial Markets, forecasting that weak consumer spending will see the economy stagnate in 2012."With inflation plunging due to weak corporate pricing power, falling commodity prices and last year's VAT hike dropping out of the annual comparison, the Bank of England has considerable room to step up its quantitative easing efforts even further."The Bank justified the latest decision to inject fresh money by arguing that the UK recovery slowed during 2011 and that inflation was on track to undershoot its government-set target.In a statement, the monetary policy committee said: "Some recent business surveys have painted a more positive picture and asset prices have risen. But the pace of expansion in the United Kingdom's main export markets has also slowed and concerns remain about the indebtedness and competitiveness of some euro-area countries."In the light of its most recent economic projections, the committee judged that the weak near-term growth outlook and associated downward pressure from economic slack meant that, without further monetary stimulus, it was more likely than not that inflation would undershoot the 2% target in the medium term."The Bank argues that the scheme, under which it prints fresh money and buys government bonds with it, has boosted output and helped keep a lid on borrowing costs and inflation. But critics say it has done little to help businesses and households and has damaged pensioners' finances by artificially depressing annuity rates.TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said resuming quantitative easing was the right thing t[...]
|
|||||||||||||||||||
http://www.guardian.co.uk/rssfeed/0,15065,19,00.xml
Copyright 2006-2012 Feedage.com LLC
Privacy policy - Sitemap - Press - Terms of Service - Copyright information
Contact Us - About Us - Feedage - Search Engine Consulting
Language Detection Powered by
Privacy policy - Sitemap - Press - Terms of Service - Copyright information
Contact Us - About Us - Feedage - Search Engine Consulting
Language Detection Powered by