The USA women’s World Cup soccer team returned from Germany, after Sunday’s loss in the title game to Japan. Players met the media outside the W hotel in New York Monday. (July 18)
Continue reading …
Concern about termination services is rising, with fewer doctors willing to perform the procedure, DoH says Pregnant women could find it harder in future to obtain an abortion because of the growing number of doctors who are opposed to carrying out terminations. A survey of medical students has found that almost half believe doctors should be allowed to refuse to perform any procedure to which they object on moral, cultural or religious grounds, such as prescribing contraception or treating someone who is drunk or high on drugs. Abortion provoked the strongest feelings among the 733 medical students surveyed, according to the study in the Journal of Medical Ethics. “The survey revealed that almost a third of students would not perform an abortion for a congenitally malformed foetus after 24 weeks, a quarter would not perform an abortion for failed contraception before 24 weeks and a fifth would not perform an abortion on a minor who was the victim of rape,” said researcher Dr Sophie Strickland. “In light of increasing demand for abortions, these results may have implications for women’s access to abortion services in the future,” she added. Concern about termination services is rising, with fewer doctors willing to perform the procedure, according to the Department of Health. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has voiced concern about the “slow but growing problem of trainees opting out of training in the termination of pregnancy and is therefore concerned about the abortion service of the future”. Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service , said: “Abortion is taught increasingly infrequently in medical school, and students may not be required to engage much with the reasons why a woman may find herself with an unwanted pregnancy and the distress this may cause. All of us involved in women’s reproductive healthcare need to ensure that young doctors understand why women need abortions, and that this is a profession to be proud of.” Some 45.2% of those surveyed believed doctors should have the right to refuse to treat someone when doing so clashed with their personal beliefs, but 40.6% disagreed. “Once qualified as doctors, if all these respondents acted on their conscience and refused to perform certain procedures, it may become impossible for conscientious objectors to be accommodated in medicine,” said Strickland. Backing for a doctor’s right to refuse to perform any procedure was highest among Muslim medical students, at 76.2%. Some 54.5% of Jewish students also thought doctors should have the right to refuse, as did 51.2% of Protestants and 46.3% of Catholics. Guidance drawn up by the General Medical Council (GMC), which regulates doctors, advises doctors to refer a patient to a colleague if they object to a certain procedure or treatment. “However, we also make clear that doctors have an overriding duty to provide care for patients who are in need of medical treatment, whatever the cause of that medical need. It is not acceptable to opt out of treating a particular patient or group of patients because of personal beliefs or views about them, for example if they misuse drugs or alcohol,” said Dr Peter Rubin, the GMC’s chair. The British Medical Association said that while doctors and medical students can refuse to participate in treatments they are uncomfortable with, patients must not be harmed or affected by their decision. They must also give patients enough information so they can seek treatment elsewhere within the NHS, according to a spokesman for the doctors’ union’s medical ethics committee. The Department of Health said: “Patients’ clinical needs always come first, and practising doctors understand this. It is unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of religion or belief and the law does not entitle people to apply such beliefs in a way which impinges upon other people, even if they claim that their religion or belief requires them to act in this way. “All patients have a right to a comprehensive and fair NHS. The NHS constitution, white paper and the Equality Act provide the legal framework and principles that underpin the way the NHS should provide its services and support its staff.” Abortion NHS Health Women Denis Campbell guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Guardian/ICM poll shows Conservatives ahead and small rise in Ed Miliband’s personal rating – but slight slump for Labour The phone-hacking crisis has so far done little to shift attitudes to political leaders and their parties, a Guardian/ICM poll suggests. A small recovery in Ed Miliband’s personal rating has not been matched by a rise in Labour support. Instead, the Liberal Democrats appeared to have gained most, with party support up four points to 16%. That is the highest in an ICM poll since March, and also higher than in recent polls, whose different methodology typically shows a higher Labour and low Lib Dem share than the long-running Guardian/ICM series. This month’s rise in Lib Dem support has come at Labour’s expense, with the party dropping three points to 36%. This move, not yet confirmed by other polls, has the effect of giving the Conservatives, unchanged on 37%, a one-point lead. Only one other poll this year, also from ICM in March, has shown the Conservatives ahead. Other smaller parties are on a combined 11%. David Cameron remains more popular than either the coalition government or other leading politicians, although more people think he is doing a bad job than a good one. Among voters, 43% say good job – up one point on last month – and 48% say bad job – also up one. That gives him a net negative rating of -5. For Miliband, 31% say good job – up three points on June – and 47% say bad job – down two. That is a net negative rating of -16, improved from -21 last month. His position has strengthened among Labour supporters in particular. Now 58% say he is doing a good job compared with 45% last month. The Lib Dems’ rise in vote share is not matched by any improvement in Nick Clegg’s overall personal rating. While 33% say good job – down one – 54% say bad job, which is unchanged. That gives the Lib Dem leader a net negative rating of -21. But among Lib Dem supporters and past voters, there are signs of recovery. In this month’s poll 62% of people who backed the Lib Dems at the 2010 general election say they would do so again now – much higher than the 45% or so typical in recent ICM polls. Clegg’s personal rating has also risen among Lib Dems: he has a net score of +3, against -18 last month. Further polls will be needed before this shift can be confirmed as a trend and not an aberration. Meanwhile 34% of all voters say George Osborne, the chancellor, is doing a good job – unchanged – and 44% a bad one – down two. That is a net negative of -10. A decade ago, the Guardian asked people to rank professions by their status and reputation. A repeat of the exercise this month suggests little has changed. Journalists emerged bottom in both polls, with an average score of just 4.72 out of 10. That is a slight decline on 2001. Doctors come out top, on 8.05 out of 10, followed by nurses and teachers. Politicians come second last, just ahead of journalists: but hacking and the expenses scandal seems to have done little to lower their ranking further. ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1003 adults aged 18+ by telephone on 15-17 July 2011. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults. ICM is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. Conservatives Ed Miliband Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg David Cameron Labour Voter apathy Phone hacking Julian Glover guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rick Santorum Responds to Dan Savage Wanting to Perform Violent Hate Sex on Him
July 18, 2011 No Comment
As NewsBusters previously reported , sex advice columnist Dan Savage on HBO's “Real Time” Friday said he wanted to perform violent hate sex on Rick Santorum. On Monday, the former Pennsylvania Senator responded on WOR radio's Steve Malzberg show ( audio available here , relevant section at 5:00, partial transcript and commentary follow): STEVE MALZBERG, HOST: What’s your reaction to this filth? RICK SANTORUM: It’s just that. It’s filth. It’s, you know, this man has, has gone out there and tried to destroy my integrity. I mean, you’ve heard the whole issue of the Google issue. That’s Dan Savage. You know, it’s, it’s the lowest, you know, debasement of public discourse. It’s, it’s offensive beyond, you know, anything that any public figure or anybody in America should tolerate, and the mainstream media laughs about it. They, they, they kid about it. They write about it. They say, “Oh, Santorum’s got a Google problem.” For those unfamiliar, Savage initiated a campaign in 2003 to associate Santorum's name with a sexual act. As the gay activist alluded to on “Real Time” Friday, a santorum in perverted parlance now despicably refers to “the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.” That's the kind of animal Savage is. Let's continue: SANTORUM: And then when you see this kind of even over the top, you know, not even, beyond that, the Google is worse than, than what he said there. They, they laugh about that, too. Why? Because it’s a liberal beating up on a conservative. And that’s okay. Whether it’s Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann, it’s the Left making fun of someone who believes in the values that built America. It believes in traditional marriage. How outrageous. How bigoted. How hateful that you actually believe that, that, you know, raising children and, and, and families with mothers and fathers is something to be encouraged. That you’re, that, that, just because you hold those opinions, you are subject to the worst form of, of, of, of vulgarity on the internet, on television, and everywhere else, and they get away with, not only do they get away with the mainstream media, but they are applauded by the mainstream media. They are made, they are celebrated by, as you mentioned, in New York, by taking on these, these people who believe in these outmoded virtues, and, the bottom line is I stand and I wear it as a badge of honor that someone as vulgar and as, and as disgusting and as hate-filled as Dan Savage sees me as public enemy number one. To me, that tells me I must be doing something right. MALZBERG: Well, listen, God bless you, and you know you have friends here, and this man, again, I, I, I would like to see the organizers of the Gay Pride Parade to denounce him. Readers are advised that the man saying this vile stuff on national television – who also said he wished Republicans “were all f–king dead” – was the Grand Marshall of last month's Gay Pride Parade in New York City. They should be so proud. But I again digress: SANTORUM: They won’t denounce. They will applaud him for taking on, you know, someone who stands in their way. And this is all, this isn’t about power, Steve. This is about using, this is about (?), this is about intimidation. To ultimately see this is about intimidating anybody who stands up against them. You stand up against them, they will intimidate you, they will, they will use vile things, and the media will applaud them, and you will be ostracized in society. That’s their objective. It is, it is, it is nothing short of that. And so I would just encourage those who don’t want to see that trend to continue, if you can help us out, I would appreciate it, because I tell you what, they will keep it up, they will keep trying to marginalize and ostracize anybody who stands up against them and the media will applaud them. I would appreciate your help. You can go to ricksantorum.com if you want to help us. After saying goodbye to his guest, Malzberg gave his own opinion on this issue: MALZBERG: I mean, when I saw that, and I saw that on, on, on NewsBusters.org. I mean, I don’t watch – I don’t even have HBO. I wouldn’t give these people a dime. I stopped subscribing to HBO when they ran that series. It was after the Sopranos. It was after Curb Your Enthusiasm. It was, and it was, well, I think, I guess Curb is still on, but, it was when they made that military series about us fighting in the War, and it turned my stomach. I said, “That’s it – no more HBO.” So I dumped HBO, and boy oh boy, am I glad I did. To pay Bill Maher’s salary? How does he get away with this? How does the media allow this? How? I mean, to say that they, to have a show. To me, this is worse than what he got canned on ABC for saying when he reportedly got canned for saying that, as we played the other day, that our, it’s cowardly for us to lob rockets out of planes, but it’s not cowardly, and I’m paraphrasing, for the terrorists to stay on the plane. In other words, our troops are cowards but the terrorists were brave. That’s how I interpreted it. And he got canned. This, making jokes about having someone, I don’t know. It’s, and then the attack on Santorum. Can you imagine a conservative attacking a liberal presidential candidate in that manner? I’d like to blank the blank out of him. Are you kidding me? But, Santorum has it read properly. He’s right on target. This is, this is what they do, and the people who run the Gay Pride Parade, and anybody who participated in the Gay Pride Parade in New York City, if they don’t come out and denounce this in my view animal, Dan Savage, then they approve of him, and there’s no difference between them. As KSFO's Brian Sussman told me Monday morning, if he or any conservative radio host made this kind of a comment about any liberal, he not only would be immediately fired, it would be the end of his career. But so-called comedian Marc Maron and Savage can make such vile comments about conservative presidential candidates on national television, and neither them nor anyone associated with the show got admonished in any way. Exactly how did we get here as a nation where such invective is accepted and applauded by one side of the media while meeting with the harshest consequences on the other? As I wrote in my reports about Friday's “Real Time,” it may have contained the most vile political discussions ever aired on national television. Given the absence of announcements by HBO addressing what occurred on their program, it appears the powers that be at the cable network are just fine with this kind of discourse being aired by them. Makes you wonder how much worse it's going to get before they step in and stop it – or is there no such point?
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media While discussing the latest developments in the Rupertgate scandal and the arrest of Rebekah Brooks , Howard Kurtz seemed to have some trouble believing Murdoch biographer Michael Wolff when he said the Wall Street Journal was just another example of Rupert Murdoch only giving interviews to outlets that he owns and directing them on what questions to ask and how to frame their reporting — that is until he explained that he’s seen it first hand. KURTZ: Michael Wolfe, let’s talk about Murdoch’s role himself, he has the full page ad showing the apology. He went to visit the family of the murdered girl who’s phone was hacked into, one of the most horrifying abuses in this whole thing. But then he talks to the Wall Street Journal and here he is defending James, “I think he acted as fast as he could, the moment he could.” It doesn’t seem like he’s doing the full contrition route yet. WOLFF: One of the curious things about Rupert Murdoch is that when he gives an interview, he only gives it to news outlets he owns. And those are always very funny interviews because he is essentially telling his reporters what questions to ask and how to cast his response. KURTZ: Wait. How do you know he’s telling his reporters what questions to ask? That’s not entirely fair. The Wall Street Journal is a pretty good newspaper. WOLFF: Because I’ve sat with him in the… when he’s done this. I know who calls before. It is absolutely the Murdoch playbook, you call ahead, you set it up, you tell them what questions to ask; in the middle of the interview, he often does this. KURTZ: So what does all this get him when he does an interview with an outlet he controls? WOLFF: I don’t know what it gets him. It gets him further into a deeper hole.
Continue reading …
New Unite leader hits out at £361,000 severence payment given to predecessor and vows to end such large payoffs Britain’s largest trade union, Unite, is facing a “golden goodbye” pay row after its former leader was paid more than £500,000 last year, including a £361,000 severance payment. Derek Simpson, 66, who stepped down as joint general secretary last year, received the payout as his successor was attacking the government for overseeing “obscene” remuneration at state-owned companies such as Royal Bank of Scotland. According to Unite’s annual return for 2010, Simpson received £510,659, the bulk comprising of £361,347 in severance pay. He also received £97,677 in gross salary, and more than £51,000 in housing benefit and car allowances. Simpson’s colleague and joint general secretary, Tony Woodley, did not receive a payoff and was paid a total of £136,289. He is still employed by Unite on £20,000 a year. Simpson and Woodley’s successor, Len McCluskey, said he was shocked by the payment. But he stressed that Simpson’s payoff was drawn up under the financial system used by the Amicus union, which merged with the T&G in 2007 to form Unite. The Amicus and T&G finance functions were not combined until late last year. “It was absolutely unbeknownst to me or the Unite executive,” said McCluskey. “It occurred under a different regime with a union that no longer exists and operated under different governance.” At a meeting on Monday, Unite’s executive requested a legal opinion on the settlement, although it is understood that the payoff follows precedent for previous Amicus leaders. McCluskey said there would be no similar payments under his regime, but the union was powerless to intervene in Simpson’s case. “It is inappropriate but there is little that I can do about it. There will be no such agreements in Unite going forward.” Technically, it is not within our jurisdiction. This is a decision taken by a previous union and therefore we can do nothing other than pass comment and make certain that Unite does not engage in such practices.” McCluskey is a critic of bankers’ bonuses and in January said: “As ordinary workers cope with fuel and food price rises, these obscene and unfair rewards are a reminder that in Cameron’s Britain, we really are not all in this together.” He admitted that the revelation could damage Unite’s standing in the debate over public spending cuts. “There is no doubt that it will not be viewed in a favourable light by our members or potential members. “We have to get the message across that this happened in a previous union. This is a new union with a new vision and new, democratic ways of operating. And we are committed to working in a proactive way with working people.” Unite’s return shows that the union has 1.5 million members, of whom only 1.2 million pay subscriptions. Woodley’s concern over faltering membership has seen him take a new full-time post as the executive officer for organising. This week McCluskey announced plans to launch a cut-price “community membership” for students and the unemployed in a riposte to David Cameron’s big society policies. According to the return, Unite generated an income of £141.6m last year but spent £171.9m, pushing the union into a deficit of £30.2m. Simpson could not be reached for comment. His last year in office was dominated by the battle between British Airways and its cabin crew, which saw 22 days of strikes and cost the carrier £150m. Simpson infuriated BA at one point in negotiations by sending out live twitter updates. At the time Woodley described the tweets as “unfortunate, to say the least”. Unite Pay Banking David Cameron Conservatives Dan Milmo guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …New Unite leader hits out at £361,000 severence payment given to predecessor and vows to end such large payoffs Britain’s largest trade union, Unite, is facing a “golden goodbye” pay row after its former leader was paid more than £500,000 last year, including a £361,000 severance payment. Derek Simpson, 66, who stepped down as joint general secretary last year, received the payout as his successor was attacking the government for overseeing “obscene” remuneration at state-owned companies such as Royal Bank of Scotland. According to Unite’s annual return for 2010, Simpson received £510,659, the bulk comprising of £361,347 in severance pay. He also received £97,677 in gross salary, and more than £51,000 in housing benefit and car allowances. Simpson’s colleague and joint general secretary, Tony Woodley, did not receive a payoff and was paid a total of £136,289. He is still employed by Unite on £20,000 a year. Simpson and Woodley’s successor, Len McCluskey, said he was shocked by the payment. But he stressed that Simpson’s payoff was drawn up under the financial system used by the Amicus union, which merged with the T&G in 2007 to form Unite. The Amicus and T&G finance functions were not combined until late last year. “It was absolutely unbeknownst to me or the Unite executive,” said McCluskey. “It occurred under a different regime with a union that no longer exists and operated under different governance.” At a meeting on Monday, Unite’s executive requested a legal opinion on the settlement, although it is understood that the payoff follows precedent for previous Amicus leaders. McCluskey said there would be no similar payments under his regime, but the union was powerless to intervene in Simpson’s case. “It is inappropriate but there is little that I can do about it. There will be no such agreements in Unite going forward.” Technically, it is not within our jurisdiction. This is a decision taken by a previous union and therefore we can do nothing other than pass comment and make certain that Unite does not engage in such practices.” McCluskey is a critic of bankers’ bonuses and in January said: “As ordinary workers cope with fuel and food price rises, these obscene and unfair rewards are a reminder that in Cameron’s Britain, we really are not all in this together.” He admitted that the revelation could damage Unite’s standing in the debate over public spending cuts. “There is no doubt that it will not be viewed in a favourable light by our members or potential members. “We have to get the message across that this happened in a previous union. This is a new union with a new vision and new, democratic ways of operating. And we are committed to working in a proactive way with working people.” Unite’s return shows that the union has 1.5 million members, of whom only 1.2 million pay subscriptions. Woodley’s concern over faltering membership has seen him take a new full-time post as the executive officer for organising. This week McCluskey announced plans to launch a cut-price “community membership” for students and the unemployed in a riposte to David Cameron’s big society policies. According to the return, Unite generated an income of £141.6m last year but spent £171.9m, pushing the union into a deficit of £30.2m. Simpson could not be reached for comment. His last year in office was dominated by the battle between British Airways and its cabin crew, which saw 22 days of strikes and cost the carrier £150m. Simpson infuriated BA at one point in negotiations by sending out live twitter updates. At the time Woodley described the tweets as “unfortunate, to say the least”. Unite Pay Banking David Cameron Conservatives Dan Milmo guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Probing Bachmann, Palin, and Gingrich, NBC’s Investigative Unit Ignores Obama’s ATF Debacle
July 18, 2011 No CommentThe NBC News Investigative Unit has devoted considerable resources to uncovering “scandals” ranging from Marcus Bachmann's health clinic to Newt Gingrich's credit line at Tiffany to the Sarah Palin document dump, but continues to ignore a botched Justice Department operation that contributed to the death of a U.S. border agent. Examining the trove of reports filed by NBC News national investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff over the last few months reveals a fixation on investigations involving Republican politicians and an aversion to probes concerning the Obama administration, even as other media outlets expose the controversial ATF practice of letting guns purchased in America slip across the U.S.-Mexico border in hopes the trail would lead federal agents to drug kingpins. Just days before Rep. Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) investigation into operation “Fast and Furious” went unreported on the NBC “Nightly News, ” Isikoff flew to Juneau, Alaska to aimlessly scour newly-released emails during Sarah Palin's time as governor. Even MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews described Isikoff as “feverishly pouring over those documents.” As it turned out, the documents produced no scandals, forcing Isikoff to admit his Al Capone's vault moment: “So far, I don't think anybody's found any bombshells here.” So uninteresting, the Palin investigation never even made it into the correspondent's online archive, dubbed the “Isikoff Files.” Visit msnbc.com for breaking news , world news , and news about the economy Something else that won't be found in Isikoff's tome of probes is a thorough investigation into the role the ATF's gun-walking practices played in the slaying of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry, who was killed in a firefight with Mexican drug cartel members in December. As CBS reported, two of the guns found at the crime scene were part of thousands the ATF allegedly allowed gunrunners to purchase and smuggle into Mexico. While a flawed Obama administration operation that reportedly contributed to the death of a U.S. border agent failed to interest NBC's Investigative Unit, the $137,000 in Medicaid funds paid to Michele Bachmann's husband's health clinic deserved coverage simply because Bachmann “has forcefully denounced the Medicaid program for swelling the 'welfare rolls'.” Apparently Isikoff thinks it's scandalous that instead of depriving poor people of health care, Marcus Bachmann accepted government funds. When news broke that Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich's credit line at Tiffany and Co. was actually $1 million, not the initially reported $500,000, Isikoff drilled down on the former House Speaker's spending habits. “For Newt Gingrich, there is no end to the bad news,” read Isikoff's lede in a June 22 story that was clearly more deserving of the intrepid correspondent's time than the ATF's perilous gun-smuggling operation that is the subject of a congressional investigation. The latest development that NBC's Investigative Unit has failed to follow up on is that the Justice Department, in response to the backlash over operation “Fast and Furious,” announced on July 11 that gun shop owners in four southwestern states were now required to report frequent purchasers of automatic weapons to federal authorities. In April, NBC's Chris Hansen mentioned the ATF operation in passing and toward the end of an undercover investigation, during which the “Dateline” correspondent spoke with people caught up in the Mexican drug war. “The ATF told us it's investigating,” Hansen reported tersely. To rummage through the “Isikoff Files” for yourself, click here . To comb over all of the NBC Investigative Unit's reports, click here . –Alex Fitzsimmons is a News Analysis intern at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
Continue reading …
Concluding instalment in Hogwarts franchise postponed to make way for Beginning of the Great Revival: The Founding of a Party The wizard Harry Potter is being forced to make his farewell as a pirate in Beijing because China is holding back the official version of the concluding episode in the Hogwarts franchise in favour of an epic celebrating the 90-year-old Communist party. Counterfeit DVD hawkers are selling poor-quality copies of the Deathly Hallows 2 in the capital days after its release in foreign markets. The original will not be screened for a fortnight, at least partly due to the priority put on the big-budget political epic Beginning of the Great Revival: The Founding of a Party, which brings together more than 150 Chinese stars, including Hollywood icon Chow Yun-fat, in a two-hour tale of the Communist party’s roots. With its depiction of the romances and idealism of a young Mao, the story aims to attract a new audience to the party, which marked its 90th anniversary on 1 July. With enormous political prestige at stake, China’s film authorities have gone out of their way to ensure success for the movie, which premiered last month. The biggest potential foreign rivals have reportedly been delayed to allow a clearer run at the box office. Deathly Hallows will be released on 4 August; Transformers: Dark of the Moon on Thursday , three weeks after its release in the US. To protect the domestic film industry, only 20 foreign films are approved for release in China each year. Film industry observers say it is customary for the authorities to give preferential treatment to Chinese revolutionary and historical films. “This practice is long-standing. Unlike the US, films are not treated just as consumer products in China. More importance is given to their role in shaping opinion and educating the public,” said Li Hongyu, a film journalist for the South Weekend newspaper. “But the situation is better than it was 10 years ago. At least the Communist party no longer requires its members to go to the cinema for certain movies.” Harry Potter fans have joked that their best option was to help the Communist party achieve its goal – purportedly 800 million yuan (£77.5m) – ahead of time. “The fans of Transformers and Harry Potter should join forces and encourage their dads, mums, uncles, aunts, grandfathers, grandmothers, etc to see The Beginning of the Great Revival. Then we won’t wait until August,” blogged Gudushizhe88 on the Baidu Tieba web forum. The official Xinhua news agency says the historical extravaganza earned $46m during its first three weeks – not far from the record pace the authorities had aimed for. Critics insist this is due to block-ticket buying by state-run firms and local governments, such as the northern city of Changchun, which reportedly bought tickets for 100,000 party members. The true figures may never be known. Popular websites have been ordered to disable their ratings and comments sections. Some netizens have posted photographs of doctored tickets for different films – such as Kung Fu Panda 2, Fast Five and the latest Pirates of the Caribbean – that were sold in the name of “Great Revival” in an apparent attempt to manipulate audience numbers. China Film Group, which produced the movie, denied that cinemas had been pressured to bump up the box office numbers. Even if official sleight of hand conjures up impressive box office figures for the communist epic, the marketing magic of Harry Potter could yet prevail – at least on the black market. “Harry Potter brand new. Good copies. Just 10 yuan,” said an illegal hawker outside Beijing’s Silk Market as he pulled out a large bundle of pirated movies, including the latest Pirates of the Caribbean, Cars 2 and The Mechanic. Great Revival was not among them. Additional reporting by Cecily Huang China Harry Potter Science fiction and fantasy Jonathan Watts guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Cuts will lead to smallest British army in more than a century but armed forces will see modest spending increases from 2015 After months of fierce debate, the Treasury and Ministry of Defence have promised Britain’s armed forces modest spending increases in the future in return for deep cuts in the army to help plug a budget black hole estimated to be £43bn. Liam Fox, the defence secretary, announced long-awaited cuts, in addition to those made in last year’s defence review, which will lead to the smallest British army in more than a century and the closure of a number of RAF bases. The army will shrink from its present size of about 101,000 to 82,000 by 2020. The defence review had already cut the army by 7,000 by 2015 when British troops will no longer have a combat role in Afghanistan. Though Fox did not say so in his statement to MPs, defence officials made clear that the fresh round of cuts would mean the end of a number of infantry battalions, probably including some whose soldiers have fought recently in Afghanistan. Partly to compensate for the loss of regular soldiers, Fox said he wanted to increase substantially the number of fully-trained reserves of all three branches of the armed forces – the navy, army and air force. He said he wanted to bring Britain more into line with other countries including the US. One of the reserves’ priority tasks would be “homeland security”. Defence officials indicated that the aim was to increase the number of fully trained reservists from a little more than 20,000 to 35,000 by 2015. Beefing up the reserves would cost an estimated £1.5bn. However, Fox made clear his aim was for a “total force of around 120,000 broadly in the ratio 70:30 regular to reserve”. The Treasury said the armed forces will benefit from a 1% real terms increase – that is, taking inflation into account – in their equipment budget from 2015 to 2020 at a cost of £3bn. It is rare for government departments to be offered such increases in advance but the prime minister has backed pleas from defence chiefs for increases in real terms in their budget once the current four-year spending review period is over. The £3bn will pay for 14 new Chinook helicopters, three new US Rivet spy planes, upgrading the army’s ageing fleet of Warrior armoured vehicles, and more unmanned drones for the RAF. The gap between the actual defence budget and weapons programmes promised by previous governments has been estimated at £38bn. Defence officials said on Monday that Bernard Gray, the new head of MoD procurement, had identified an additional £5bn worth of underfunded liabilities. The army will be centred around multi-role brigades, with 19 Light Brigade based in Northern Ireland broken up with some of its constituent parts – including The Black Watch – assigned to other brigades. RAF Leuchars will close, leaving RAF Lossiemouth as the only remaining air force base in Scotland. Leuchars will become an army barracks housing some of the 20,000 British troops who are due to leave Germany by 2020, Fox announced. Most of the changes will take place after 2015, when the next general election is due, Fox said. He described it as “an incredibly complex decision and it has inevitably been a balancing act”. The shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, described the government’s announcement as “strategic shrinkage by stealth”. He told Fox: “The army has been slashed to cover up the funding gaps left by the rushed defence review.” Fox had announced cuts to the army of 19,000 – just under a fifth of the entire force – in just 10 months, he said. When in opposition, the Conservatives had promised thousands of extra troops, Murphy said. General Sir David Richards, chief of the defence staff, said in a statement: “If we get it right, this will result in a modern, hard-hitting joint force still capable of operating at the divisional level across the full spectrum of conflict. It will deliver armed forces of which we can all be proud.” The National Audit Office, parliament’s financial watchdog, for the fifth year running, said it could not approve the MoD’s accounts. It said £5.3bn worth of assets could not be accounted for, including more than 4,000 Bowman radio sets used for secure communications. Fox’s statement came as the MoD announced that a British soldier from 1st Battalion The Rifles was killed in an explosion in Nahr-e Saraj district of Helmand province in Afghanistan. The soldier’s death took the number of British troops killed in Afghanistan since 2001 to 377. Defence policy Liam Fox Tax and spending Military Richard Norton-Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …