Washington weighs up backing huge Daimer Bhasha project as a means of improving battered relations with Pakistan The US is considering financial support for a $12bn dam in Pakistan in an attempt to improve its battered image in the country. The Daimer Bhasha dam would provide enough electricity to end Pakistan’s crippling shortages. It is said its reservoir would hold so much water it could have averted last year’s devastating floods. Washington has not yet made a final decision on partial funding of the dam, but US money would be crucial in securing other international finance, especially from the Asian Development Bank. “Getting involved in a long-term project like this is very compelling for us,” said a senior US official. “This is the project we’re spending our time assessing. “This would demonstrate that Pakistan is the kind of country where you can do large, complex infrastructure projects. It’s not all flood relief and sacks of flour.” At the end of last week, President Asif Ali Zardari met a team from the Asian Development Bank “to start the process of financing Daimer Bhasha dam as the project has been approved at all internal fora of the country”, according to a statement from his office. Although Washington is Pakistan’s biggest international donor by far, the support has done little to improve perceptions of the US, which is seen as the enemy by many Pakistanis – a view exacerbated by continuing drone attacks in tribal areas and the killing of Osama bin Laden earlier this year. The dam, which harks back to similar projects supported by Washington in the 1960s and 1970s, could help reset relations between the two countries. India is likely to object to US support for the dam, as it is located in the disputed Kashmir region. Opposition may also come from critics in the US Congress, who have called for all aid to be cut off after Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan. The dam, on the Indus river, would provide 4,500MW of cheap, green energy, making up for a shortfall causing up to 12 hours of power cuts a day across Pakistan. The reservoir would be 50 miles long. Shakil Durrani, chairman of the water and power development authority, said Islamabad had approved the dam project and he was confident of US backing. “If we had a reservoir the size of Daimer Bhasha the floods last summer would not have occurred,” he said. “This would be the largest project ever undertaken in Pakistan. It is our top priority.” Analyst Mosharraf Zaidi agreed the
Continue reading …Washington weighs up backing huge Daimer Bhasha project as a means of improving battered relations with Pakistan The US is considering financial support for a $12bn dam in Pakistan in an attempt to improve its battered image in the country. The Daimer Bhasha dam would provide enough electricity to end Pakistan’s crippling shortages. It is said its reservoir would hold so much water it could have averted last year’s devastating floods. Washington has not yet made a final decision on partial funding of the dam, but US money would be crucial in securing other international finance, especially from the Asian Development Bank. “Getting involved in a long-term project like this is very compelling for us,” said a senior US official. “This is the project we’re spending our time assessing. “This would demonstrate that Pakistan is the kind of country where you can do large, complex infrastructure projects. It’s not all flood relief and sacks of flour.” At the end of last week, President Asif Ali Zardari met a team from the Asian Development Bank “to start the process of financing Daimer Bhasha dam as the project has been approved at all internal fora of the country”, according to a statement from his office. Although Washington is Pakistan’s biggest international donor by far, the support has done little to improve perceptions of the US, which is seen as the enemy by many Pakistanis – a view exacerbated by continuing drone attacks in tribal areas and the killing of Osama bin Laden earlier this year. The dam, which harks back to similar projects supported by Washington in the 1960s and 1970s, could help reset relations between the two countries. India is likely to object to US support for the dam, as it is located in the disputed Kashmir region. Opposition may also come from critics in the US Congress, who have called for all aid to be cut off after Bin Laden was found hiding in Pakistan. The dam, on the Indus river, would provide 4,500MW of cheap, green energy, making up for a shortfall causing up to 12 hours of power cuts a day across Pakistan. The reservoir would be 50 miles long. Shakil Durrani, chairman of the water and power development authority, said Islamabad had approved the dam project and he was confident of US backing. “If we had a reservoir the size of Daimer Bhasha the floods last summer would not have occurred,” he said. “This would be the largest project ever undertaken in Pakistan. It is our top priority.” Analyst Mosharraf Zaidi agreed the
Continue reading …
Five months before invasion, pair agreed to go ahead if weapons breach was revealed, according to newly released letter Britain and the US were planning to take action against Saddam Hussein without a second UN resolution five months before the invasion of Iraq, a newly released letter from Tony Blair’s office shows. A letter from Blair’s private secretary reveals that “we and the US would take action” without a new resolution by the UN security council if UN weapons inspectors showed Saddam had clearly breached an earlier resolution. In that case, he “would not have a second chance”. That was the only way Britain could persuade the Bush administration to agree to a role for the UN and continuing work by UN weapons inspectors, the letter says. Dated 17 October 2002, it was written by Matthew Rycroft to Mark Sedwill, private secretary to the foreign secretary, Jack Straw. “This letter is sensitive,” Rycroft underlined. “It must be seen only by those with a real need to know its contents, and must not be copied further.” He sent it to a number of other senior officials, including Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain’s ambassador to the UN. There is no indication that it was seen by Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, who at the time was advising that invading Iraq without a fresh UN resolution would be illegal. Rycroft’s letter referred to a Downing Street meeting on the Iraqi crisis attended by Straw, the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, and the chief of the defence staff, Admiral Sir Mike Boyce. Also present were Blair’s chief of staff, Jonathan Powell; his director of government relations, Sally Morgan; his director of communications, Alastair Campbell; and his chief foreign policy adviser, David Manning. The meeting concluded, wrote Rycroft, that “the only way to keep the US on the UN route was for there to be a clear understanding that if [chief UN weapons inspector Hans] Blix reported an Iraqi breach of the first resolution, then Saddam would not have a second chance”. In a devastating passage, Rycroft added: “In other words, if for some reason [such as a French or Russian veto] there were no second resolution agreed … we and the US would take action.” The Downing Street letter is particularly significant considering the government’s repeated emphasis in public at the time on the need for UN approval before any invasion of Iraq. The first resolution referred to in Rycroft’s letter was number 1441, passed unanimously in November 2002. Goldsmith and most of the government’s legal advisers insisted a second UN resolution was needed before military action could lawfully take place. Blair was put in an even more difficult position with Washington as, in the event, Blix never reported an unconditional breach of the first resolution. The Rycroft letter also appears to conflict with Straw’s actions at the time. A statement recently released by the Chilcot inquiry revealed that in October 2002 Straw told his French counterpart, Dominique de Villepin, that US acceptance of the wording of the first UN resolution “implied” a further one was required. The statement was written by Sir Michael Wood, the Foreign Office’s top legal adviser, who also opposed the invasion. It also disclosed that Greenstock had told his US counterpart that Britain would state publicly after the resolution was passed “that there needed to be a second resolution”. The issue is at the heart of the deep and continuing arguments over the legality of the invasion. Goldsmith originally advised Blair and Straw that the first UN resolution did not provide sufficient legal cover for war. Goldsmith said he changed his mind in February 2003 after Bush’s legal advisers told him on a US visit that they had agreed to the wording of 1441 only because it had not crossed their “red line” – the clear message was that, as far as the US was concerned, no new resolution was needed. Philippe Sands, professor of international law at University College London, said: “The letter of 17 October 2002 is consistent with the conclusion that the prime minister wanted to proceed to action with the US on the basis of a single security council resolution, irrespective of what the law required, and ignoring the views at the time of the Foreign Office legal adviser and the attorney general.” According to Wood’s statement to the Chilcot inquiry, Straw told the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, “that we needed a second resolution and that it was extremely unlikely we could find a legal basis without it”. Sands said: “It reflects the widespread view that what became UNSCR 1441 would not authorise military action without a second resolution. His latest statement shoots a very big hole in the arguments of Messrs Goldsmith and Straw, and one wonders why they ultimately failed to reflect its contents in their words and actions.” Tony Blair Iraq war inquiry Foreign policy US foreign policy Iraq Middle East George Bush United States Chris Ames Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Cash for Conservative project fast-tracked to charity which was sole bidder for the work, part of the ‘big society’ agenda The controversial Tory initiative to set up free schools received fast-track public funding after fierce lobbying from Michael Gove’s inner circle of advisers, according to leaked emails. Civil servants were urged that the New Schools Network (NSN) – a charity providing advice and guidance to set up the schools – should be given “cash without delay”, in a disclosure which will heighten concern over the government’s lack of transparency about the wider free schools programme. The charity, which is headed by a former Gove adviser, was subsequently given a £500,000 grant. No other organisation was invited to bid for the work. The award was made after an email from Dominic Cummings, a Tory strategist and confidant of Gove, called for: “MG telling the civil servants to find a way to give NSN cash without delay.” Cummings went on to work for the charity on a freelance basis. Sent after the election last May, his message goes on to say: “Labour has handed hundreds of millions to leftie orgs – if u guys cant navigate this thro the bureauc then not a chance of any new schools starting!!” The existence of the email can be revealed as the first 24 free schools prepare to open their doors to pupils. The first wave of free schools includes one which has the journalist Toby Young as its chair of governors, two Jewish faith schools, a Hindu school and a Sikh school. At least three of the schools – Discovery new school in West Sussex, St Luke’s in north London, and Canary Wharf college – will have a Christian ethos. The Maharishi school in Lancashire, which was founded by the Beatles’ guru Maharish Mahesh Yogi and teaches children to meditate, has become a state school as part of the programme. The schools will be the most prominent part of the Tories’ “big society” vision, although in many cases faith organisations, education companies or existing academy sponsors have taken the lead rather than groups of parents or teachers. The government has declined to reveal the costs of funding individual free schools but estimates the overall budget for buildings at between £110m to £130m. It has also declined requests under the Freedom of Information Act to identify the groups applying to open free schools next year. In the email Cummings sets out a timetable for the creation of free schools. He outlines a list of demands – from a “legislative/regulatory timetable” to a “big early july conference with hundreds coming (paid for by dcsf)”. Legislation to enable the creation of free schools was pushed through parliament last summer under procedures usually reserved for counter-terrorism measures. The government held a free schools conference – which David Cameron addressed by videolink – in January. The message was addressed to Gove; his senior policy adviser Sam Freedman; Rachel Wolf, who heads the NSN; and Gove’s special adviser Henry de Zoete. Lisa Nandy, a Labour member of the education select committee, said: “This is definitive proof that this was a way of diverting taxpayers’ money to pay for a political agenda, at a time when the government was making huge spending cuts. Just shortly after that grant was announced they cancelled Building Schools for the Future – it’s pretty shocking. “This confirms what many suspected, that there is a political agenda behind the decision to hand over the money to the New Schools Network. Gove has serious questions to answer – this message is addressed to him, the money was handed over shortly afterwards in a fog of confusion.” A further leaked email reveals the blurred boundaries which existed between Gove’s team and the New Schools Network. In the email, Wolf is asked by one of Gove’s staff to provide the prime minister with a “line to take” after a Tory councillor in Birmingham raised concerns that a free school in his city had the potential to be “socially divisive and undermine … community cohesion”. Wolf worked as a special adviser to Gove while he was shadow education secretary. On its website, the New Schools Network describes itself as an “independent charity” which has been given a government grant to act as the first point of contact with free school proposers. Nandy said the email indicated that the NSN had been given public money to act as “a propaganda machine for a political agenda”. “What they are asking for is a way to play down the negative impact of free schools. They gave this contract to the New Schools Network to provide independent, impartial advice to people setting up free schools. That should surely include advice on the downside of setting up new schools, not just the positive. They were given taxpayers’ money in order to act as a propaganda machine for a political agenda.” The email from Cummings gives an indication of the attitude towards the civil service by those around Gove. He writes that: “There needs to be an announcement soon about indicative timetables for new schools and what is going to be achieved before august. Forcing the conference in july will force the department to focus on it.” Another leaked email exchange indicates that Cummings was closely involved in government work. This email exchange shows that he was invited to a “prep session” ahead of the spending review last October. According to the emails, this involved “posing challenging questions to SoS [Gove] to ensure that his briefing is adequate and to iron out any detailed narrative.” Wolf said that Cummings started work for the NSN as a volunteer at the end of June, and freelanced for them from July to December last year. She said: “He initially volunteered then we hired him as a freelancer paid by the half day. He did various projects – mostly publications, communications and strategy. He averaged about 10 days a month. “We were always extremely clear about what specific jobs he was doing for us. He had a standard freelance contract like the others we hire. Those jobs were not about Michael [Gove] and politics. We hired him because he’s really, really good and we know that he believes in what we’re doing, and he helped us out a lot. “I’m confident we didn’t do anything that was inappropriate. We’re obviously very mindful of our obligations as a charity.” Wolf said the NSN had not received any government funds since mid-July this year and was being financed entirely by donors. Cummings said the NSN has “unique abilities”, and without it there would not have been any free schools this year. “It was no secret that I thought NSN should be funded as fast as possible so that new schools could open as fast as possible – I said the same thing to senior officials many times.” Free schools Michael Gove Education policy Secondary schools Primary schools Jeevan Vasagar guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …New Pew Poll Says Americans – Even Republicans Want Obama to Fight Back More Against GOP
August 29, 2011 No Comment
Obama’s team still has time to work on his Labor Day speech since many polls have been released the last few weeks which indicate that their strategy of being reasonable to win the hearts of Independents is not working. Historian Rick Perlstein wrote: “How Democrats Win: Defending the Social Safety Net ,” which might be a good place to start (hint, hint). A new Pew Research poll came out last week and I wanted to touch on it. Polling for Obama is down for various reasons. but this poll is very interesting because his base and the mythical Independents are unhappy even if the poll shows that he’s doing much better than Congress. And lookie here. They want to see some Rocky Marciano jump into the political ring. Democrats also want Obama to get tougher in his dealings with congressional Republicans. Currently, 57% of Democrats say Obama should challenge the Republicans more often, while 32% say he is handling relations with the GOP about right. In early April, just 39% of Democrats said Obama should do more to challenge Republicans and 47% said said he was handling things about right. Kevin Drum writes: Independents Finally Getting Fed Up Jon Chait points out that the results of the latest Pew poll are pretty remarkable: People always want leaders to compromise. It’s amazing that a plurality wants Obama to confront the GOP more strongly. Want to see something even more amazing? You’re seeing non-trivial numbers of Republicans say that Obama should stand up to the Republicans. enlarge Credit: Pew Pew Poll: Americans want Obama to fight back against the GOP He’s right. It’s no surprise that liberal Democrats increasingly want Obama to fight back against Republicans, but that’s not the real story here. The biggest shifts in attitude have come from the center. Take a look at the circled parts of the table: the entire middle of the political spectrum — liberal Republicans, independents, and conservative Democrats — is speaking pretty loudly here. They want Obama to fight back harder against the shouters in the tea party wing of the GOP. As Chait points out, Obama is walking a tightrope: if he does get more confrontational, he risks losing ground in the areas where he’s still viewed positively (trustworthy, well-informed, cares about people, etc.). But he better figure out how to walk it. His entire electoral strategy is based on winning the middle, and the middle is getting fed up. You can see the full Pew poll here. It’s interesting reading. Chait, a writer who at times I have been critical of ends his piece with this . The question hanging over Obama’s political strategy has always been the endgame. His obsession with seeming reasonable makes sense if he uses it as an asset to spend down at the end. You do everything to show your willingness to compromise, and when the opposition refuses and refuses, finally you assail them for their fanaticism. It’s harrowing to watch, because we don’t know until the last minute whether we’re witnessing a rope-a-dope strategy, or just a boxer being beaten to a pulp. The poll results all say the same thing. Americans are tired of the rope-a-dope stratagem; being more reasonable and looking for a Grand Bargain that reduces the deficit. They want jobs, preferably ones that have a future, unemployment kept available and they want their social safety nets protected from the Norquist Pillagers. I’ll have more on what he can do later….
Continue reading …
Two weeks ago, when billionaire Warren Buffett called for higher taxes on rich people like him, the liberal media predictably gushed and fawned. Yet when Americans for Better Government revealed last week that Buffett's company Berkshire Hathaway has been in an almost decade-long dispute with the IRS over how much taxes it owes, these same press members couldn't care less: According to Berkshire Hathaway’s own annual report — see Note 15 on pp. 54-56 — the company has been in a years-long dispute over its federal tax bills. According to the report, “We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (‘IRS’) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years at the IRS Appeals Division within the next 12 months. The IRS has completed its examination of our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2005 and 2006 tax years and the proposed adjustments are currently being reviewed by the IRS Appeals Division process. The IRS is currently auditing our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2007 through 2009 tax years.” Americans for Limited Government researcher Richard McCarty, who was alerted to the controversy by a federal government lawyer, said, “The company has been short-changing the tax collection agency for much of the past decade.
Continue reading …
The number of prosecutions under Thai lèse-majesté laws has soared as the new government promises a clampdown The new Thai government has vowed to crack down on websites deemed insulting to the royal family, alarming campaigners who had hoped it might curb a recent surge in the use of lèse-majesté laws. Cases involving the offence – which carries a sentence of up to 15 years in jail – have soared in the last five years. Thailand also blocked or suspended almost 75,000 sites between 2007 and 2010, mostly under the Computer Crimes Act in relation to lèse-majesté. Campaigners hoped the new government would ease restrictions, particularly given the complaints filed against several leaders of the “red shirt” movement whose support brought Puea Thai to power. But following pressure from the ousted Democrats, deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung pledged to set up a “war room” to deal with the issue online, the Bangkok Post reported . “Websites [guilty of lèse-majesté] will not be tolerated by this government. I will take action as quickly as possible,” he said. The issue’s increasing sensitivity comes amid the ill health of the revered 83-year-old king and the bitter political conflict between Thai elites, such as the powerful military, and supporters of Thaksin Shinawatra, ousted as prime minister in a 2006 coup. His sister, Yingluck, now leads the country and Puea Thai is seen as his party. David Streckfuss, the leading expert on the issue and author of Truth on Trial in Thailand, said 30 lèse-majesté charges were sent to the lower courts in 2006, 164 in 2009 and 478 in 2010. Multiple charges are often heard in single cases. The lèse-majesté law says anyone who defames, insults or threatens the king, queen, heir apparent or regent should be punished with three to 15 years in prison, but does not define what constitutes such behaviour. “It has become conflated with any criticism of the institution,” said Streckfuss, who drew a parallel with McCarthyism. “It’s the easiest, most vague and ambiguous shot at people.” Earlier this month 22-year-old student blogger Norawase Yospiyasathien was charged. Other cases causing particular alarm include those of Somsak Jiamteerasakul, a historian who proposed reforms to the monarchy; Thai-born American citizen Joe Gordon, whose blog linked to a banned book on the king; and webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, accused of not deleting user comments deemed to insult the king quickly enough. Chiranuch’s trial under the computer crimes act resumes next month, and police could yet act on a separate complaint under the lèse-majesté law. She faces up to 50 years in jail, though sentences are often reduced after conviction. “We can’t deny any more that there is a problem,” said Chiranuch, who runs the independent Prachathai news site. “There’s strong evidence that, with the political conflict, this law has been abused.” Hundreds of scholars, lawyers, writers and activists have joined calls for reform of the law. They stress they are not questioning the monarchy, but the way the lèse-majesté provision has been used. “[People] are using it as a political tool to destroy their enemies,” Worachet Pakeerut, a law professor at Thammasat University, told Associated Press last month. Proposals include reducing the maximum sentence and allowing only an official royal body to register complaints. At present, anyone can; the royal family itself has never done so. Some advocates of reform point to comments the king made in 2005, saying it would be “problematic” if people were unable to criticise him. “I said [reform] would not be as easy as a change in the government,” said Chiranuch. “It is quite clear the former government have put pressure on the new one by pushing them to promise not to amend the law.” Some believe Chalerm made the announcement so Puea Thai could concentrate on other priorities. Others hope the tough rhetoric might help it avoid tough action. “It may be that Mr Chalerm was merely being overzealous in trying to assure the Puea Thai government’s loyalty to the monarchy, but it is ironic because of the many accusations that the lèse-majesté law was used by the previous government to persecute some of the party’s loyal supporters,” the Bangkok Post noted in an editorial on Sunday. “Brutal shutdown of lèse-majesté sites by the Yingluck administration is not the right way to win the heart and mind and protect the institution,” warned the red-shirt-aligned Ratchaprasong News in a tweet. Thailand Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The number of prosecutions under Thai lèse-majesté laws has soared as the new government promises a clampdown The new Thai government has vowed to crack down on websites deemed insulting to the royal family, alarming campaigners who had hoped it might curb a recent surge in the use of lèse-majesté laws. Cases involving the offence – which carries a sentence of up to 15 years in jail – have soared in the last five years. Thailand also blocked or suspended almost 75,000 sites between 2007 and 2010, mostly under the Computer Crimes Act in relation to lèse-majesté. Campaigners hoped the new government would ease restrictions, particularly given the complaints filed against several leaders of the “red shirt” movement whose support brought Puea Thai to power. But following pressure from the ousted Democrats, deputy prime minister Chalerm Yubamrung pledged to set up a “war room” to deal with the issue online, the Bangkok Post reported . “Websites [guilty of lèse-majesté] will not be tolerated by this government. I will take action as quickly as possible,” he said. The issue’s increasing sensitivity comes amid the ill health of the revered 83-year-old king and the bitter political conflict between Thai elites, such as the powerful military, and supporters of Thaksin Shinawatra, ousted as prime minister in a 2006 coup. His sister, Yingluck, now leads the country and Puea Thai is seen as his party. David Streckfuss, the leading expert on the issue and author of Truth on Trial in Thailand, said 30 lèse-majesté charges were sent to the lower courts in 2006, 164 in 2009 and 478 in 2010. Multiple charges are often heard in single cases. The lèse-majesté law says anyone who defames, insults or threatens the king, queen, heir apparent or regent should be punished with three to 15 years in prison, but does not define what constitutes such behaviour. “It has become conflated with any criticism of the institution,” said Streckfuss, who drew a parallel with McCarthyism. “It’s the easiest, most vague and ambiguous shot at people.” Earlier this month 22-year-old student blogger Norawase Yospiyasathien was charged. Other cases causing particular alarm include those of Somsak Jiamteerasakul, a historian who proposed reforms to the monarchy; Thai-born American citizen Joe Gordon, whose blog linked to a banned book on the king; and webmaster Chiranuch Premchaiporn, accused of not deleting user comments deemed to insult the king quickly enough. Chiranuch’s trial under the computer crimes act resumes next month, and police could yet act on a separate complaint under the lèse-majesté law. She faces up to 50 years in jail, though sentences are often reduced after conviction. “We can’t deny any more that there is a problem,” said Chiranuch, who runs the independent Prachathai news site. “There’s strong evidence that, with the political conflict, this law has been abused.” Hundreds of scholars, lawyers, writers and activists have joined calls for reform of the law. They stress they are not questioning the monarchy, but the way the lèse-majesté provision has been used. “[People] are using it as a political tool to destroy their enemies,” Worachet Pakeerut, a law professor at Thammasat University, told Associated Press last month. Proposals include reducing the maximum sentence and allowing only an official royal body to register complaints. At present, anyone can; the royal family itself has never done so. Some advocates of reform point to comments the king made in 2005, saying it would be “problematic” if people were unable to criticise him. “I said [reform] would not be as easy as a change in the government,” said Chiranuch. “It is quite clear the former government have put pressure on the new one by pushing them to promise not to amend the law.” Some believe Chalerm made the announcement so Puea Thai could concentrate on other priorities. Others hope the tough rhetoric might help it avoid tough action. “It may be that Mr Chalerm was merely being overzealous in trying to assure the Puea Thai government’s loyalty to the monarchy, but it is ironic because of the many accusations that the lèse-majesté law was used by the previous government to persecute some of the party’s loyal supporters,” the Bangkok Post noted in an editorial on Sunday. “Brutal shutdown of lèse-majesté sites by the Yingluck administration is not the right way to win the heart and mind and protect the institution,” warned the red-shirt-aligned Ratchaprasong News in a tweet. Thailand Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Controversy surrounds government plans over independent counselling of women considering terminations The head of the Royal College of General Practitioners has warned that government moves to shake up pre-abortion counselling for women could create new barriers and set the system back 25 years. Clare Gerada defended abortion charities, disputing accusations that they are biased in their counselling and encourage women to have abortions because they are subsequently paid to carry out the terminations. The government has announced a change in the rules to ensure that women are also offered counselling provided independently of the charity-run services, such as the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) and Marie Stopes. MPs who are backed by anti-abortion groups claim the move justifies the argument that there is a conflict of interest in the way services are run. Nadine Dorries, the Conservative MP who is leading the campaign, has confirmed she still intends to make an attempt to amend the health and social care bill when it returns to the Commons next week. She wants to guarantee that counselling is independent of the charities, even though the government insists it can change the rules without legislating. Gerada, who has previously worked in abortion clinics, told the Guardian: “There is no agenda in abortion services, there is no pressure at all to encourage women to have an abortion. They encourage women to make a decision about what they want to do. “The idea that BPAS or Marie Stopes are colluding to make a profit is wrong. “If these independent counsellors include GPs, which I suspect they will, we know what happened before when you had a service that relied on GPs signing the forms. You had delays as some are conscientious objectors. Why fix what’s not broken? It’s worked well for 25 years. “I work [as a GP] in Lambeth. I’ve never heard of abuse in this system. Anything that puts a barrier between a woman to make a choice in timely manner must be a bad thing and will simply reverse the advances of the past 25 years.” If the Speaker chooses to select the controversial amendment, MPs of every party will be given a free vote, as is the tradition with votes on abortion. Other recent attempts to change the abortion laws have been defeated. This time, though, owing to the more nuanced nature of the proposal and a widespread belief that the new intake of Tory MPs are more socially conservative, the outcome is expected to be very close. Frank Field, the Labour MP who tabled the amendments with Dorries, said he had received assurances from health minister Anne Milton that the government would propose in amendments to the bill that local authorities be advised to consider the independence of advice offered in counselling services, allowing a debate in the chamber. Field has asked Milton for assurances that if there is then a move to introduce a mandatory order to offer independent advice, there should be a debate and vote in the Commons. “It is a general principle that advice and services should be separate,” Field said. “I have no evidence of that [biased advice]. But we had no evidence of mis-selling of pensions until people investigated.” He said he was not an anti-abortionist and that he had refused meetings with known anti-abortion groups to discuss the plans. Abortion Health Women Health policy Public services policy Frank Field Polly Curtis Ben Quinn guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
World-famous artist accuses officials of denying people their basic rights and describes Beijing as a ‘city of violence’ Ai Weiwei, the Chinese artist held by the authorities for almost three months earlier this year, has attacked injustice in China in a passionate article fuelled by his own experiences of detention. He accused officials of “deny[ing] us basic rights” and compared migrant workers to slaves, describing Beijing as “a city of violence” and “a constant nightmare”. But one of the most powerful passages describes how people “become like mad” as they are held in isolation and how detainees “truly believe [captors] can do anything to you”. His remarks, in an article about Beijing published on the website of Newsweek magazine , are certain to anger Chinese security officials. They come days after it emerged that China is reportedly planning to give police legal powers to hold some suspects for up to six months without telling their families. Campaigners say the move would legitimise and potentially increase the number of secret detentions. Ai’s own 81-day detention caused an international outcry. It was the most high-profile case in a sweeping crackdown that saw dozens of activists, dissidents and lawyers held earlier this year. State media said he was held for economic crimes and released in June “because of his good attitude in confessing” and a chronic illness. His family and supporters believe he was targeted due to his social and political activism. The 54-year-old artist is not able to give interviews but confirmed that he had written the article. He described it simply as “a piece about the place I live in”. Ai’s bail conditions reportedly prevent him from discussing what happened to him in detention, although a source gave Reuters a detailed account of events, which included more than 50 interrogations . The restrictions are also said to ban him from using social media – although he sent a brief flurry of angry tweets recently about friends who had been enmeshed in his case – but not from writing. “The worst thing about Beijing is that you can never trust the judicial system,” he wrote in the Newsweek article. “It’s like a sandstorm … everything is constantly changing, according to somebody else’s will, somebody else’s power.” He went on: “My ordeal made me understand that on this fabric, there are many hidden spots where they put people without identity … only your family is crying out that you’re missing. But you can’t get answers from the street communities or officials, or even at the highest levels, the court or the police or the head of the nation. My wife has been writing these kinds of petitions every day [while he was held], making phone calls to the police station every day. Where is my husband? “You’re in total isolation. And you don’t know how long you’re going to be there, but you truly believe they can do anything to you. There’s no way to even question it. You’re not protected by anything. Why am I here? Your mind is very uncertain of time. You become like mad. It’s very hard for anyone. Even for people who have strong beliefs.” The artist described the capital as two cities. The first was one of power and money, peopled by officials, coal bosses and the heads of big companies who help to keep “the restaurants and karaoke bars and saunas … very rich”. The second was a place of desperation, he wrote, calling migrant workers the city’s slaves. Ai, who helped to design the “bird’s nest” national stadium for the Olympics – but publicly turned on the games before they began – said none of his art represented the capital. He added: “The Olympics did not bring joy to the people.” He also warned: “Beijing tells foreigners that they can understand the city, that we have the same sort of buildings … “Officials who wear a suit and tie like you say we are the same and we can do business. But they deny us basic rights.” Ai described people giving him quiet support when he went out last week, for example patting him on the shoulder, but only in “a secretive way” because they were not willing to speak out. He said people told him to “either leave, or be patient and watch how they die. I really don’t know what I’m going to do.” China Ai Weiwei Olympics & the media Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …