Church ceremonies for same-sex couples unlikely to be given go-ahead owing to traditionalists’ opposition to homosexuality The Church of England has said it would allow civil partnerships in its buildings but only if the General Synod agreed to the move, an unlikely prospect given the staunch opposition of traditionalists to homosexuality. In response to the government’s Equality Office consultation on the subject, the church said the “present objective” was to ensure that amendments to existing legislation continued to provide “unfettered freedom for each religious tradition to resolve these matters in accordance with its own convictions and its own internal procedures of governance”. Some religious groups welcomed last year’s House of Lords decision to lift the ban on religious premises holding civil partnership ceremonies. The amendment to the equality bill, tabled as a free vote by Lord Alli, received overwhelming backing, including from several bishops. But William Fittall, general secretary of the Archbishops’ Council and member of the synod, which would decide whether to allow civil partnerships in churches, wrote: “For most Christian denominations, as well as other faith groups, the issues involved are set to remain sensitive and, to varying degrees, contested.” There would need to be an “opting-in mechanism”, as proposed by the government. He added: “In the case of the Church of England, that would mean that its churches would not be able to become approved premises for the registration of civil partnerships until and unless the General Synod had first decided as a matter of policy that that should be possible.” The church, indeed much of the Anglican communion, has wrestled with the issue of same-sex blessings for decades, leading to factions, splits and power struggles. Senior figures are unenthusiastic, to say the least, about same-sex weddings in Anglican churches. Dr John Sentamu, the archbishop of York, told BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show: “I live in a liberal democracy and I want equality for everybody. I cannot say the Quakers shouldn’t do it. “Nor do I want somebody to tell me the Church of England must do it or the Roman Catholic Church must do it because actually that is not what equality is about.” Earlier this year the Most Rev Peter Smith, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Southwark, attacked the government, saying it was neither “necessary nor desirable” to allow gays and lesbians to have civil partnership ceremonies in religious premises and accused ministers of “considering a fundamental change to the status of marriage”. In spite of assurances from Theresa May, the home secretary, that the rule changes would not be mandatory, Smith said the change was something “never envisaged by the Equality Act or any other legislation passed by parliament”. He added: “Marriage does not belong to the state any more than it belongs to the church … It is a lifelong commitment of a man and a woman to each other, publicly entered into, for their mutual wellbeing and for the procreation and upbringing of children.” In 2008, the Rev Martin Dudley , conducted a same-sex blessing for two gay clergy at a church in the City of London, triggering an outcry from evangelicals and an investigation by the bishop of London. Civil partnerships Anglicanism Gay rights Religion Christianity Marriage Riazat Butt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Metropolitan police officer sacked for Facebook and text abuse of colleagues
June 23, 2011 No Comment
Officer called one colleague a a ‘grass’ on Facebook and sent offensive texts to female colleague he dated previously A policeman has been dismissed without notice for posting offensive messages about a fellow officer on Facebook and harassing a female colleague. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) said the 35-year-old Metropolitan y74police constable, who was based in Islington, north London, posted comments on Facebook on Friday referring to another officer as a “grass” and a “liar” and using deeply offensive language. The IPCC said the officer had also been involved in a brief, casual relationship with a colleague which ended acrimoniously in April last year. It said: “He sent the woman a series of abusive text messages and subjected her to verbal abuse and threats. “On one occasion, when both officers were off duty, a member of the public was so concerned about the male officer’s behaviour that he followed them off a bus and intervened when he saw the male officer smashing up a bin in the street. The male officer then verbally threatened the member of the public.” Both cases were investigated by the Metropolitan police’s professional standards directorate under the management of the IPCC. A report was submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service, which decided there should be no criminal proceedings. The case went before a Metropolitan police gross misconduct hearing which concluded the officer was guilty of “discreditable conduct and failing to meet police conduct standards of respect and courtesy”. IPCC commissioner Rachel Cerfontyne said: “When I read what shocking things this police officer had written on Facebook about his colleague and the appalling way he had behaved, I felt completely dismayed. “He worked in a job that demanded trust and respect and yet acted in a way that resembled a nasty schoolyard bully. I am pleased that the Met’s misconduct panel clearly shared our view that this sort of person does not belong in the police service.” Metropolitan police Facebook London guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Afghan president says Barack Obama’s announcement of pullout of 33,000 US troops is the right decision for both countries Afghanistan’s security forces are growing in stature and can be entrusted with securing the country’s future after the withdrawal of US troops, according to president Hamid Karzai. Responding to Barack Obama’s announcement that a third of US troops in Afghanistan would be withdrawn by September next year, Karzai said the US president had made the right decision and thanked the international troops for their support. “The Afghan people’s trust in the Afghan army and police is growing every day and preservation of this land is the job of Afghans,” Karzai told a news conference. “I welcome the decision of the US president today on pulling out [some of] … its troops from Afghanistan and I consider this a right decision for the interest of both countries.” But the Afghan Taliban said the plan to withdraw 10,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year was only symbolic and that more serious steps would be needed “to stop this pointless bloodshed”. “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan once again wants to make it clear that the solution for the Afghan crisis lies in the full withdrawal of all foreign troops immediately and [while] this does not happen, our armed struggle will increase from day to day,” the Taliban said in an emailed statement. The Nato secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said “the tide is turning” in Afghanistan, with the Taliban under increasing pressure and government security forces getting stronger. In this context, he said, the drawdown of troops was the “natural result”. Rasmussen said Obama’s decision was taken in close consultation with the allies and said the handover to Afghan security was still on track to be completed in 2014. France followed Obama’s televised announcement by issuing its own statement on the future of the 4,000 French troops in Afghanistan. The office of the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, said there would be a progressive withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, who would follow a timetable comparable to that of the staggered pullout of American troops, starting this summer. Sarkozy was one of five leaders Obama called before his speech to inform them of his decision. The French statement said: “Given the progress we have seen [in Afghanistan], France will begin a gradual withdrawal of reinforcement troops sent to Afghanistan, in a proportional manner and in a calendar comparable to the withdrawal of American reinforcements.” French troops have been involved in the US and Nato-led Afghanistan operation since 2001, with 62 soldiers killed, and there has been growing frustration within political circles in the country over the long campaign. The German foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, welcomed Obama’s announcement and expressed his hope Germany’s contingent of 4,900 troops would be reduced before the end of the year. Germany has yet to settle on details of its own pullback but Westerwelle said “the prospect of withdrawal is now becoming concrete”. He described the US president’s speech as a “clear commitment” to the internationally agreed strategy of gradually handing over responsibility for security to Afghan forces and said: “It is also our aim to be able to reduce our own German troop contingent for the first time at the end of this year.” Afghanistan Hamid Karzai Barack Obama US military Taliban United States France Europe Germany Haroon Siddique guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Afghan president says Barack Obama’s announcement of pullout of 33,000 US troops is the right decision for both countries Afghanistan’s security forces are growing in stature and can be entrusted with securing the country’s future after the withdrawal of US troops, according to president Hamid Karzai. Responding to Barack Obama’s announcement that a third of US troops in Afghanistan would be withdrawn by September next year, Karzai said the US president had made the right decision and thanked the international troops for their support. “The Afghan people’s trust in the Afghan army and police is growing every day and preservation of this land is the job of Afghans,” Karzai told a news conference. “I welcome the decision of the US president today on pulling out [some of] … its troops from Afghanistan and I consider this a right decision for the interest of both countries.” But the Afghan Taliban said the plan to withdraw 10,000 US troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year was only symbolic and that more serious steps would be needed “to stop this pointless bloodshed”. “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan once again wants to make it clear that the solution for the Afghan crisis lies in the full withdrawal of all foreign troops immediately and [while] this does not happen, our armed struggle will increase from day to day,” the Taliban said in an emailed statement. The Nato secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said “the tide is turning” in Afghanistan, with the Taliban under increasing pressure and government security forces getting stronger. In this context, he said, the drawdown of troops was the “natural result”. Rasmussen said Obama’s decision was taken in close consultation with the allies and said the handover to Afghan security was still on track to be completed in 2014. France followed Obama’s televised announcement by issuing its own statement on the future of the 4,000 French troops in Afghanistan. The office of the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, said there would be a progressive withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, who would follow a timetable comparable to that of the staggered pullout of American troops, starting this summer. Sarkozy was one of five leaders Obama called before his speech to inform them of his decision. The French statement said: “Given the progress we have seen [in Afghanistan], France will begin a gradual withdrawal of reinforcement troops sent to Afghanistan, in a proportional manner and in a calendar comparable to the withdrawal of American reinforcements.” French troops have been involved in the US and Nato-led Afghanistan operation since 2001, with 62 soldiers killed, and there has been growing frustration within political circles in the country over the long campaign. The German foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, welcomed Obama’s announcement and expressed his hope Germany’s contingent of 4,900 troops would be reduced before the end of the year. Germany has yet to settle on details of its own pullback but Westerwelle said “the prospect of withdrawal is now becoming concrete”. He described the US president’s speech as a “clear commitment” to the internationally agreed strategy of gradually handing over responsibility for security to Afghan forces and said: “It is also our aim to be able to reduce our own German troop contingent for the first time at the end of this year.” Afghanistan Hamid Karzai Barack Obama US military Taliban United States France Europe Germany Haroon Siddique guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Written statement from defence secretary Liam Fox attributes high cost to advanced nature of weapons used in conflict The government has revealed that the cost of the operation in Libya has run to £260m, confirming the figure was higher than had initially been predicted. In a written ministerial statement, the defence secretary, Liam Fox, said costs for the initial operation would be £120m, while the cost of replenishing spent munitions could eventually reach £140m. The high costs – which the Treasury has agreed to meet – were attributed to the advanced nature of the weapons used in Libya. While the opposition backs the operation, it has pressed for details of expenditure to be revealed amid concern that the cost is escalating. Earlier in the year, the chancellor, George Osborne, said in the Commons that the eventual cost would be “in the order of tens of millions of pounds, not hundreds of millions”. But in his statement, Fox said: “The current estimate of the net additional costs of military operations for six months in support of Operation Ellamy – the United Kingdom’s contribution to coalition operations in support of United Nations security council Resolution 1973 – is in the region of £120m. This excludes costs associated with capital munitions expended. “Based upon current consumption rates, we estimate the cost of replenishing munitions may be up to £140m.” Prior to his announcement, he had said people would “have to take into account that we have used more expensive precision weaponry so that we minimise civilian casualties in Libya”. He added: “If we are going to fight operations in the future based on minimising civilian casualties, there is clearly a financial price to pay. “I think that shows that we are on the moral high ground and that we place a higher value on human life than the Gaddafi regime.” Jim Murphy, the shadow defence secretary, backed calls from service chiefs for contingency plans to be drawn up “to ensure that our armed forces are sufficiently equipped and that the conflict is sustainable beyond September”. He also urged Nato allies to do more to help reduce the British contribution. Murphy said: “Thanks to pressure from the opposition, ministers have now published figures revealing that the costs of the operation in Libya are higher than originally estimated. “We back the Nato-led operation, and continue to offer the government our support wherever possible. “We want the government to be clearer on what stresses and strains operations in Libya are making on the core defence budget, and whether our standing commitments are, or will be, affected by the ongoing conflict. “In particular, we will ensure the government keeps to its guarantees that the mission in Afghanistan will not be affected. That is absolutely vital.” In March, Osborne had told the Commons: “The House will understand that it is too early to give a robust estimate of the costs of the operations in Libya, but I can say that they should be modest compared with some other operations, such as Afghanistan. “The Ministry of Defence’s initial view is that they will be in the order of tens of millions of pounds, not hundreds of millions. I can tell the House today that, whatever they turn out to be, the additional costs of operations in Libya will be fully met from the reserve.” The national transitional council in Libya is also struggling to meet the costs of running an alternative government to that of Muammar Gaddafi. This week, Dr Ali Tarhuni, the minister for finance and oil in the council, wrote an open letter to the UK government, calling for the release of 1.4bn dinars (£700m) of Libyan government money (£700m), printed in the UK, that was impounded in Britain when the fighting began. The transitional council is running out of money and would like the government to release the funds, but the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, has said he is legally unable to do so. Foreign policy Liam Fox Jim Murphy House of Commons Libya Middle East Africa United Nations Nato Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Written statement from defence secretary Liam Fox attributes high cost to advanced nature of weapons used in conflict The government has revealed that the cost of the operation in Libya has run to £260m, confirming the figure was higher than had initially been predicted. In a written ministerial statement, the defence secretary, Liam Fox, said costs for the initial operation would be £120m, while the cost of replenishing spent munitions could eventually reach £140m. The high costs – which the Treasury has agreed to meet – were attributed to the advanced nature of the weapons used in Libya. While the opposition backs the operation, it has pressed for details of expenditure to be revealed amid concern that the cost is escalating. Earlier in the year, the chancellor, George Osborne, said in the Commons that the eventual cost would be “in the order of tens of millions of pounds, not hundreds of millions”. But in his statement, Fox said: “The current estimate of the net additional costs of military operations for six months in support of Operation Ellamy – the United Kingdom’s contribution to coalition operations in support of United Nations security council Resolution 1973 – is in the region of £120m. This excludes costs associated with capital munitions expended. “Based upon current consumption rates, we estimate the cost of replenishing munitions may be up to £140m.” Prior to his announcement, he had said people would “have to take into account that we have used more expensive precision weaponry so that we minimise civilian casualties in Libya”. He added: “If we are going to fight operations in the future based on minimising civilian casualties, there is clearly a financial price to pay. “I think that shows that we are on the moral high ground and that we place a higher value on human life than the Gaddafi regime.” Jim Murphy, the shadow defence secretary, backed calls from service chiefs for contingency plans to be drawn up “to ensure that our armed forces are sufficiently equipped and that the conflict is sustainable beyond September”. He also urged Nato allies to do more to help reduce the British contribution. Murphy said: “Thanks to pressure from the opposition, ministers have now published figures revealing that the costs of the operation in Libya are higher than originally estimated. “We back the Nato-led operation, and continue to offer the government our support wherever possible. “We want the government to be clearer on what stresses and strains operations in Libya are making on the core defence budget, and whether our standing commitments are, or will be, affected by the ongoing conflict. “In particular, we will ensure the government keeps to its guarantees that the mission in Afghanistan will not be affected. That is absolutely vital.” In March, Osborne had told the Commons: “The House will understand that it is too early to give a robust estimate of the costs of the operations in Libya, but I can say that they should be modest compared with some other operations, such as Afghanistan. “The Ministry of Defence’s initial view is that they will be in the order of tens of millions of pounds, not hundreds of millions. I can tell the House today that, whatever they turn out to be, the additional costs of operations in Libya will be fully met from the reserve.” The national transitional council in Libya is also struggling to meet the costs of running an alternative government to that of Muammar Gaddafi. This week, Dr Ali Tarhuni, the minister for finance and oil in the council, wrote an open letter to the UK government, calling for the release of 1.4bn dinars (£700m) of Libyan government money (£700m), printed in the UK, that was impounded in Britain when the fighting began. The transitional council is running out of money and would like the government to release the funds, but the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, has said he is legally unable to do so. Foreign policy Liam Fox Jim Murphy House of Commons Libya Middle East Africa United Nations Nato Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Chinese artist’s cousin Zhang Jinsong released but authorities silent on whereabouts of friend, accountant and designer Police have freed Ai Weiwei’s cousin and driver after granting bail to the artist himself. Ai was released on bail on Wednesday night after 81 days of detention “because of his good attitude in confessing his crimes” and a chronic illness, the Xinhua news agency reported. The 54-year-old told the Guardian he was happy to be back with his family but was unable to comment further. He appeared tired and thinner than before his disappearance. Ai’s mother, Gao Ying, said her nephew Zhang Jinsong, who had worked for Ai, returned home in a good mental state but having lost around 9kg. He went missing a few days after his cousin. “They have returned home and the family can see each other. We are all very happy. For anything that happens there must be an ending, and now we are happy with the result of what has happened to us.” Earlier she said she was delighted that Zhang was to be released “since he got into the case because of my son”. The 43-year-old cousin, known to friends as Xiao Pang, travelled and worked closely with Ai . Three other associates who went missing shortly after Ai remain unaccounted for. The Xinhua report on Ai’s release cited police claims that a company controlled by the artist had evaded a huge amount of tax and intentionally destroyed accounting documents. It said the decision to grant bail reflected the fact he had repeatedly said he was willing to pay the taxes. But Ai’s family believe the accusations are retaliation for his social and political activism and that those connected to him – friends and colleagues – have been drawn in. They include Ai’s friend Wen Tao, 38. His girlfriend Shi Jing said his family had received no information about him. “I am always worried about Wen Tao and concerned that he might be persecuted inside there,” said his friend, artist Wu Yuren, who was himself tried but never sentenced for assaulting a police officer in what he said was retaliation for his activism. In his first public comments since his release on bail in April, Wu said: “I am concerned about the direction this country is going towards. Especially for intellectuals and artists, we are all concerned. There is less and less free space.” Hu Mingfen, 55, the accountant for the company that handled Ai’s affairs, and Liu Zhenggang, 49, a designer who worked at Ai’s studio, are also still missing. Asked whether police were holding the three, and if so why, foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said: “China is a country under the rule of law. For the specific situation please consult the competent authorities.” Police have refused to answer queries about them or register them as missing persons. Hong told a news briefing that Ai was “not allowed to leave the place he was living in” without permission, but did not clarify whether that meant his home or Beijing as a whole. Bail restrictions usually prevent a suspect travelling without prior approval. The spokesman confirmed that bail conditions would last for a year but declined to give further details of Ai’s situation, such as restrictions on his speech or whether he was allowed to make or exhibit art. Hong denied that China had bowed to international pressure, telling reporters: “The handling of Ai Weiwei’s case was the handling of a very common economic crime. “China is a country under the rule of law. We hope countries respect its judicial sovereignty without interfering.” He said Ai had been under residential surveillance from the day he vanished, 3 April. The measure does not require police to notify families – as detention would – and gives police six months rather than one before they have to refer the case to prosecutors. It usually equates to house arrest but the regulations do not spell out what constitutes a residence. Ai was held at an unknown location. Human rights groups have warned that in recent months dissidents and activists have been coming under intense pressure even after release from jail or detention. Some have effectively been held incommunicado. Zeng Jinyan, the wife of jailed activist Hu Jia, is understood to have left their young daughter with relatives after police warned that his release from prison on Monday could mean tight restrictions on their movements , probably amounting to house arrest. “Baobao cried her heart out on 19 June when I left for airport,” Zeng wrote in messages on a Chinese microblog service. “She asked if I could work from home and stay with her … I embraced Baobao for such a long time before saying goodbye to her that I can still feel her in my arms now.” China Ai Weiwei Human rights Tania Branigan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Eight new locations announced by Chris Huhne first guide to future of nuclear power in UK since Japan’s Fukushima disaster The government has pushed ahead with plans for new nuclear power plants in the UK, as it confirmed a list of eight sites where the next generation of reactors can be built. The eight sites are: Bradwell, Essex; Hartlepool; Heysham, Lancashire; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Oldbury, south Gloucestershire; Sellafield, Cumbria; Sizewell, Suffolk; and Wylfa, Anglesey. All are adjacent to existing nuclear sites. It is the first major announcement on the future of nuclear power in the UK since the Fukushima disaster in Japan. The energy and climate change secretary, Chris Huhne, had signalled last month that plans for new reactors in the UK were on track after an initial report on Fukushima from nuclear chief inspector Mike Weightman ruled out the need to curtail the operation of stations in the UK. The plans for new nuclear power plants are part of a series of national policy statements on energy that were published on Thursday, following public consultation. They will be debated and voted on in parliament, but ministers are hopeful that, with a pro-nuclear majority in the Commons, they will win. The energy minister, Charles Hendry, said: “These plans set out our energy need to help guide the planning process, so that if acceptable proposals come forward in appropriate places, they will not face unnecessary hold ups.” Nuclear power is one of the issues that divided Conservatives and Liberal Democrats when they entered government, with the coalition deal allowing Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain. Huhne, a Liberal Democrat, has since given his backing to new reactors. Nuclear power Chris Huhne Energy Energy industry Liberal-Conservative coalition guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Eight new locations announced by Chris Huhne first guide to future of nuclear power in UK since Japan’s Fukushima disaster The government has pushed ahead with plans for new nuclear power plants in the UK, as it confirmed a list of eight sites where the next generation of reactors can be built. The eight sites are: Bradwell, Essex; Hartlepool; Heysham, Lancashire; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Oldbury, south Gloucestershire; Sellafield, Cumbria; Sizewell, Suffolk; and Wylfa, Anglesey. All are adjacent to existing nuclear sites. It is the first major announcement on the future of nuclear power in the UK since the Fukushima disaster in Japan. The energy and climate change secretary, Chris Huhne, had signalled last month that plans for new reactors in the UK were on track after an initial report on Fukushima from nuclear chief inspector Mike Weightman ruled out the need to curtail the operation of stations in the UK. The plans for new nuclear power plants are part of a series of national policy statements on energy that were published on Thursday, following public consultation. They will be debated and voted on in parliament, but ministers are hopeful that, with a pro-nuclear majority in the Commons, they will win. The energy minister, Charles Hendry, said: “These plans set out our energy need to help guide the planning process, so that if acceptable proposals come forward in appropriate places, they will not face unnecessary hold ups.” Nuclear power is one of the issues that divided Conservatives and Liberal Democrats when they entered government, with the coalition deal allowing Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain. Huhne, a Liberal Democrat, has since given his backing to new reactors. Nuclear power Chris Huhne Energy Energy industry Liberal-Conservative coalition guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Attack on publisher apparently in retaliation for Sun coverage of LulzSec hacking coverage Hackers attacked servers used by News International to publish some of its digital content at 2am on Thursday morning, apparently in retaliation for coverage in the Sun of the activities of the LulzSec hacking collective. A senior source within News International confirmed to the Guardian that third-party architecture was affected for a couple of hours by a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack, in which hundreds or thousands of machines make repetitive demands on an internet server. The computers used for the attack were mainly based in Russia, but that does not mean that the people behind it were based there. However, the attack did not delay the publication of the newspaper, and only caused delay in some of the digital publication, the source said. “We haven’t linked it to any particular coverage … the infrastructure that was affected isn’t linked to The Sun.” Newspaper groups are on high alert at the moment for DDoS attacks from hacker groups as the issue has risen to prominence following the arrest on Tuesday of a man in Essex who has been charged with offences relating to attacks on websites. Some hackers take offence at what they see as biased coverage. No group appears to have claimed responsibility for this latest attack. Hacking Internet Computing LulzSec News International Newspapers & magazines News Corporation National newspapers Newspapers Charles Arthur guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …