Information found at scene shows ‘aspiration’ to attack American trains, says Department for Homeland Security The first intelligence from the treasure trove of computers and hard drives found during the raid on Osama bin Laden’s Pakistani hideaway has prompted a warning that al-Qaida wanted to attack the US rail network. The Department of Homeland Security sent a warning on Thursday to American law enforcement officials that material dating back to February 2010 had detailed an al-Qaida aspiration to derail trains in the US by damaging the rails at a valley or bridge so they would crash, the Associated Press and NBC news reported. Other material suggested a desire to attack mass transit hubs; a fact long known by terror experts. The idea was apparently at the “aspirational” stage and had not developed into anything concrete. The information appears to be the first widely circulated intelligence pulled from the 1 May raid on Bin Laden’s secret compound. After killing Bin Laden, Navy Seals took computers, DVDs and documents from his house. Intelligence experts are combing through the material searching for any signs of current or future al-Qaida activity. Security officials in the Obama administration have repeatedly warned of the ongoing threat posed by al-Qaida in the wake of the death of its leader as well as the prospect that it could be plotting revenge attacks for his demise. One of the reasons behind the decision not to publish a photo of Bin Laden’s body was the idea that it could provoke retaliation from Islamist militant sympathisers. But officials have also stressed that they have no knowledge of any specific imminent plot or threat. “We have no information of any imminent terrorist threat to the US rail sector, but wanted to make our partners aware of the alleged plotting. It is unclear if any further planning has been conducted since February of last year,” said Matthew Chandler, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security. Osama bin Laden Global terrorism al-Qaida United States Paul Harris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Information found at scene shows ‘aspiration’ to attack American trains, says Department for Homeland Security The first intelligence from the treasure trove of computers and hard drives found during the raid on Osama bin Laden’s Pakistani hideaway has prompted a warning that al-Qaida wanted to attack the US rail network. The Department of Homeland Security sent a warning on Thursday to American law enforcement officials that material dating back to February 2010 had detailed an al-Qaida aspiration to derail trains in the US by damaging the rails at a valley or bridge so they would crash, the Associated Press and NBC news reported. Other material suggested a desire to attack mass transit hubs; a fact long known by terror experts. The idea was apparently at the “aspirational” stage and had not developed into anything concrete. The information appears to be the first widely circulated intelligence pulled from the 1 May raid on Bin Laden’s secret compound. After killing Bin Laden, Navy Seals took computers, DVDs and documents from his house. Intelligence experts are combing through the material searching for any signs of current or future al-Qaida activity. Security officials in the Obama administration have repeatedly warned of the ongoing threat posed by al-Qaida in the wake of the death of its leader as well as the prospect that it could be plotting revenge attacks for his demise. One of the reasons behind the decision not to publish a photo of Bin Laden’s body was the idea that it could provoke retaliation from Islamist militant sympathisers. But officials have also stressed that they have no knowledge of any specific imminent plot or threat. “We have no information of any imminent terrorist threat to the US rail sector, but wanted to make our partners aware of the alleged plotting. It is unclear if any further planning has been conducted since February of last year,” said Matthew Chandler, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security. Osama bin Laden Global terrorism al-Qaida United States Paul Harris guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
‘There is comfort in pop fandom – I’m reassured by a new Fall release. Michael Bublé fans can say the same of him’ Like a lot of people, I was thoroughly seduced by the first Fleet Foxes album, to the extent that my initial thought on hearing their new one was: hold on, do I actually need this? They smelt, from the start, like a band that did a particular thing very well. Did that mean they should do it again? Subsequent plays of Helplessness Blues have left me little the wiser. Fleet Foxes are very kind indeed on the ear, so it’s easy to lose yourself in their heartbreaking wistfulness – but it was the first time around, too, and a second dose of this immediately soothing folk-pop feels a little like sucking both thumbs at once. Perhaps they’ll be one of those bands that simply sticks with the style they’ve got and wrings maximum effect out of it. A couple of weeks ago I asked friends on Twitter to name the acts who had gained the most critical acclaim with the least stylistic variety. I got a range of convincing responses, from the Ramones to the White Stripes, which pointed to two ways to keep critics onside without changing your sound too much. One – the most common – is to go the AC/DC route, and spin your consistency as a brand of no-bullshit efficiency or truth-telling. The other is to be so idiosyncratic that you own your own patch of pop from the start, like Stereolab. What was interesting, though, were the answers that got me all defensive. Take the Fall, for example. Once you’ve been initiated, it’s very easy to see the group shift between post-punk, rockabilly, and art rock: play Totally Wired then Free Range and the differences are obvious. Except they’re also not – to the non-fan, the primary texture of the Fall is absolutely changeless. The band is forever a scary man mumbling nonsense over a savage clatter: next to that, the precise nature of said clatter is irrelevant. We like to think that the fan’s perspective is more valid, and it’s certainly more rewarding and interesting to hear from people who’ve dug into a band enough to track its progression. But it’s also the case that the idea of artistic progression flatters the listener: there is a strong element of comfort in pop fandom, not necessarily tied to any smoothness in the sound. Once I’d been buying Fall records for a while I realised I felt reassured – cosy, even – when each new one appeared, and I’d imagine a Michael Bublé fan would say much the same about him. These powerful feelings are obscured when we focus on the differences between records. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with comfort, but it helps if we’re honest about it and don’t dress up habit as discernment. “Same as last time, only better,” is a powerfully attractive proposition: just ask Adele. It’s also a potential trap. When the BBC opened its repeat season of Top of the Pops with a 1960s clip show, a familiar highlight was Status Quo doing Pictures of Matchstick Men. But for all the song’s charm, the main intrigue is trying to spot hints of the band’s future as the ultimate icons of rock consistency. You can hardly imagine these likable hippie chancers evolving, like some terrifying Pokémon of pop, into the Quo’s perpetual boogie machine. But there were flashing glances from Francis Rossi to Rick Parfitt that seemed to say: “Hey, Rick, let’s ditch this psychedelic malarkey and just chug.” Fleet Foxes are as un-Quo a band as you could find, though I already get the sense that if they wanted to make the same record forever, they’d find an uncomplaining fanbase. But Helplessness Blues reminds me more of Portishead’s second album. Both records worked to consolidate a debut that hit big out of nowhere. Both managed to completely satisfy expectations and still leave a niggle of disappointment. Portishead, back then, looked as if they might make a career out of consistency. Instead they vanished for a decade, tore the guts out of their sound, and returned
Continue reading …‘There is comfort in pop fandom – I’m reassured by a new Fall release. Michael Bublé fans can say the same of him’ Like a lot of people, I was thoroughly seduced by the first Fleet Foxes album, to the extent that my initial thought on hearing their new one was: hold on, do I actually need this? They smelt, from the start, like a band that did a particular thing very well. Did that mean they should do it again? Subsequent plays of Helplessness Blues have left me little the wiser. Fleet Foxes are very kind indeed on the ear, so it’s easy to lose yourself in their heartbreaking wistfulness – but it was the first time around, too, and a second dose of this immediately soothing folk-pop feels a little like sucking both thumbs at once. Perhaps they’ll be one of those bands that simply sticks with the style they’ve got and wrings maximum effect out of it. A couple of weeks ago I asked friends on Twitter to name the acts who had gained the most critical acclaim with the least stylistic variety. I got a range of convincing responses, from the Ramones to the White Stripes, which pointed to two ways to keep critics onside without changing your sound too much. One – the most common – is to go the AC/DC route, and spin your consistency as a brand of no-bullshit efficiency or truth-telling. The other is to be so idiosyncratic that you own your own patch of pop from the start, like Stereolab. What was interesting, though, were the answers that got me all defensive. Take the Fall, for example. Once you’ve been initiated, it’s very easy to see the group shift between post-punk, rockabilly, and art rock: play Totally Wired then Free Range and the differences are obvious. Except they’re also not – to the non-fan, the primary texture of the Fall is absolutely changeless. The band is forever a scary man mumbling nonsense over a savage clatter: next to that, the precise nature of said clatter is irrelevant. We like to think that the fan’s perspective is more valid, and it’s certainly more rewarding and interesting to hear from people who’ve dug into a band enough to track its progression. But it’s also the case that the idea of artistic progression flatters the listener: there is a strong element of comfort in pop fandom, not necessarily tied to any smoothness in the sound. Once I’d been buying Fall records for a while I realised I felt reassured – cosy, even – when each new one appeared, and I’d imagine a Michael Bublé fan would say much the same about him. These powerful feelings are obscured when we focus on the differences between records. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with comfort, but it helps if we’re honest about it and don’t dress up habit as discernment. “Same as last time, only better,” is a powerfully attractive proposition: just ask Adele. It’s also a potential trap. When the BBC opened its repeat season of Top of the Pops with a 1960s clip show, a familiar highlight was Status Quo doing Pictures of Matchstick Men. But for all the song’s charm, the main intrigue is trying to spot hints of the band’s future as the ultimate icons of rock consistency. You can hardly imagine these likable hippie chancers evolving, like some terrifying Pokémon of pop, into the Quo’s perpetual boogie machine. But there were flashing glances from Francis Rossi to Rick Parfitt that seemed to say: “Hey, Rick, let’s ditch this psychedelic malarkey and just chug.” Fleet Foxes are as un-Quo a band as you could find, though I already get the sense that if they wanted to make the same record forever, they’d find an uncomplaining fanbase. But Helplessness Blues reminds me more of Portishead’s second album. Both records worked to consolidate a debut that hit big out of nowhere. Both managed to completely satisfy expectations and still leave a niggle of disappointment. Portishead, back then, looked as if they might make a career out of consistency. Instead they vanished for a decade, tore the guts out of their sound, and returned
Continue reading …Once again, Senate ConservaDems prove suckers for Republican voodoo economics
May 5, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media [Video via MoveOn.org ] Dean Baker has a question for Claire McCaskill: Why Does Senator McCaskill Want to Bankrupt Our Children? That is what people should be asking Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill along with her fellow senators who are advocated strict caps on government spending. The idea being pushed by Senator McCaskill, together with Tennessee Senator Bob Corker and several other prominent senators, would limit federal spending to 20.6 percent of GDP. It would require difficult-to-obtain super-majorities to exceed this cap. Spending would be cut across a variety of programs if the cap is not reached. This proposal is hugely deserving of ridicule for a variety of reasons. First, it operates from a blatantly wrong premise — that government spending has grown out of control. Those familiar with arithmetic know that government spending had increased by little as a share of GDP prior to the downturn caused by the collapse of the housing bubble. In 2007, the last year before the onset of the recession, spending as a share of GDP was 19.6 percent. That is 1.1 percentage points less than the 20.7 percent share 30 years earlier in 1977. So the idea that there is a long-term trend of out-of-control spending is simply not true, or what they call outside of Washington, a “lie.” Robert Reich calls it “lipstick on a pig” : Republicans figure that if they can’t sell the pig, they’ll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it’s something else. That’s the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending. If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut. According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the McCaskill/Corker plan would require $800 billion of cuts in 2022 alone. That’s the equivalent of eliminating Medicare entirely, or the entire Department of Defense. Obviously the Defense Department wouldn’t disappear, so what would go? Giant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and much of everything else Americans depend on. It’s the Republican plan with lipstick . It would have the same exact result. But by disguising it with caps and procedures, Republicans can avoid saying what they’re intending to do. Why is it that ConservaDems think that suckering for right-wing voodoo economics is some kind of “bipartisanship,” anyway?
Continue reading …Once again, Senate ConservaDems prove suckers for Republican voodoo economics
May 5, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media [Video via MoveOn.org ] Dean Baker has a question for Claire McCaskill: Why Does Senator McCaskill Want to Bankrupt Our Children? That is what people should be asking Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill along with her fellow senators who are advocated strict caps on government spending. The idea being pushed by Senator McCaskill, together with Tennessee Senator Bob Corker and several other prominent senators, would limit federal spending to 20.6 percent of GDP. It would require difficult-to-obtain super-majorities to exceed this cap. Spending would be cut across a variety of programs if the cap is not reached. This proposal is hugely deserving of ridicule for a variety of reasons. First, it operates from a blatantly wrong premise — that government spending has grown out of control. Those familiar with arithmetic know that government spending had increased by little as a share of GDP prior to the downturn caused by the collapse of the housing bubble. In 2007, the last year before the onset of the recession, spending as a share of GDP was 19.6 percent. That is 1.1 percentage points less than the 20.7 percent share 30 years earlier in 1977. So the idea that there is a long-term trend of out-of-control spending is simply not true, or what they call outside of Washington, a “lie.” Robert Reich calls it “lipstick on a pig” : Republicans figure that if they can’t sell the pig, they’ll just put lipstick on it and find some suckers who will think it’s something else. That’s the proposal emerging in the Senate from Republican Bob Corker of Tennessee and also Democrat Claire McCaskill of Missouri. It would get the deficit down not by raising taxes on the rich but by capping federal spending. If Congress failed to stay under the cap, the budget would be automatically cut. According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the McCaskill/Corker plan would require $800 billion of cuts in 2022 alone. That’s the equivalent of eliminating Medicare entirely, or the entire Department of Defense. Obviously the Defense Department wouldn’t disappear, so what would go? Giant cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and much of everything else Americans depend on. It’s the Republican plan with lipstick . It would have the same exact result. But by disguising it with caps and procedures, Republicans can avoid saying what they’re intending to do. Why is it that ConservaDems think that suckering for right-wing voodoo economics is some kind of “bipartisanship,” anyway?
Continue reading …Introduce him to some playful erotic bondage, advises Pamela Stephenson Connolly I’m a 29-year-old girl who has always been turned on by submissive fantasies – such as being raped, tortured, tied up etc. I know these are common female fantasies, but my problem is I can’t have an orgasm during normal sex. I can’t even get turned on unless I think about submissive situations. My partner wouldn’t understand if I told him what I really crave. Sometimes I think I should just give up on normal relationships and find a partner who’ll be my “master” as opposed to a kind, loving, normal guy who I can enjoy all other aspects of my life with. It’s interesting that you think your current situation is the opposite to what you crave, because this “normal” relationship actually has all the trappings of power-exchange sex. You withhold pleasure from yourself because you don’t allow your partner to understand who you really are sexually, and he – through ignorance – is unwittingly performing a dominant role. People are more multi-faceted than you think, and he may surprise you. Your desires are not unusual. Stop allowing your guilt to maintain this unconscious acting-out of your sadomasochistic desires. Find a gentle, palatable way to gradually introduce him to some playful erotic bondage, domination, or role-playing in a safe, sane and consensual manner. If you tandem “vanilla” fantasies with the submissive ones you will eventually develop more variety, but give yourself permission to accept your sexual style. • Pamela Stephenson Connolly is a clinical psychologist and psychotherapist who specialises in treating sexual disorders. • Send your problem to private.lives@guardian.co.uk Sex Relationships Pamela Stephenson Connolly guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Corn Exchange, Cambridge Dividing 19 years of marriage by $20m alimony, John Cleese’s former wife made $3,650 each day she spent as Mrs C. The divorce has driven Cleese to undertake his first ever UK standup tour. Alyce Faye Eichelberger (for it was she) gets it in the neck for a tart 10 minutes, before spiky cedes to cosy and our host settles into rose-tinted reminiscence of his TV heyday. It’s more This Is Your Life than standup, but Cleese proves a better tour guide than he was a hotelier, leading us along the promenade of wartime Weston-super-Mare and up to the giddy heights of 1960s and 70s entertainment. The funnies here are more likely to be found on grainy old film footage, of Cleese and Marty Feldman on their 1960s sketch show, say, than live onstage. Cleese traces his ascent from stifling lower middle-class, where the apex of ambition was avoidance of embarrassment, to Broadway, where he ended up part of a hit Footlights revue. We see slides of him, Bill Oddie and Tim Brooke-Taylor onstage, screen-grabs of a scene he performed with Peter Sellers, and clips of the Frost Report, Monty Python and Fawlty Towers, with well-oiled anecdotes attached. Ex-wife-bashing aside, there’s no hint of the black humour Cleese claims as his trademark. His drily funny commentary can’t hide a serious-mindedness, and he encourages, rather than undercuts, the reverence in which his once-anarchic comedies are now held. But stateliness is redeemed by Cleese’s affection for his co-stars of yesteryear, and his gratitude that opportunity came his way. It’s a nostalgic evening rather than an especially comical one. While Cleese may be now relatively short on dollars, in showbiz memories he’s still a rich man. Rating: 3/5 Comedy Brian Logan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
IBD, IBS, Colitis, Asthma, & Autoimmune Disease Diet – www.today4health.com Complete cure of bronchial asthma in children is possible A study of 20 years of work Dr Abraham, MBBS, MD Internal Medicine, MF Hom London 3 My cat having an asthma attack (lol) ACP Internist: QD: News Every Day– Asthma rates rising amid … According to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report, asthma’s prevalence increased from 7.3% (20.3 million persons) in 2001 to 8.2% (24.6 million persons) in 2009, a 12.3% increase. Its prevalence among children was 9.6% … Groupon Promotes Charitable Event for Asthma Kids | DailyDeal Media The Community Asthma Programs Asthma Camp has successfully provided this education and support for hundreds of children and families. The week-long summer asthma camp is for nine to 13 year olds with severe asthma to fully participate … Now Trending » Blog Archive » Do You Know About Asthma Do You Know About Asthma . By nt + May 5th, 2011. Do you know about Asthma ? If you look after video, just try this: Source: Do you know about Asthma ? If you look after video, just try this: … Study: Pills as Effective as Inhalers for Asthma – Bob's Blog The new studies were conducted in the U.K. In one, patients with chronic asthma were treated daily with an LTRA or an inhaled steroid to prevent asthma attacks. In another an LTRA or an inhaled long-acting bronchodilator (LABA) was … You Will Read News: Once-a-day asthma pill 'is more effective than … A once-a-day pill may be better than an inhaler at combating asthma , according to researchers. The tablet could revolutionise treatment for the condition, meaning patients are no longer reliant on inhalers, which many find difficult to … Sobreezy says: asthma users can take pills instead of using inhalers http://f24.my/iiVzJ6
Continue reading …
Rolling coverage as results come in from elections to the Scottish parliament, the Welsh and Northern Irish assemblies and 279 English councils 9.52pm: Mike Smithson at PoliticalBetting is running a poll on which AV poll will turn out to be most accurate. He lists four polls, ranging from YouGov putting the no camp on 60% to ICM putting it on 68%. 9.42pm: My colleague Severin Carrell has sent me a note about the boundary changes in Scotland. The Holyrood elections have an extra twist to them: boundary changes last year means that many of the Scottish parliament’s 73 constituencies are more difficult to call, lending this year’s election campaign greater unpredictability. A seat-by-seat analysis by David Denver of Lancaster university last year suggests the Tories gain most: if the 2007 election had been fought on the new boundaries, the Tories could have had 19 seats, not 18, while Labour would fall back one to 45 and the SNP to 46, rather than the 47 they actually won. Denver says 42 seats have seen “major change”, leaving 19 new ones as “hotly contested”. In theory, SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon would very narrowly lose the new seat of Glasgow Southside to Labour, while the SNP would take Aberdeen Central from Labour and their first seat in the Borders: Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale. 9.40pm: To put the figures we get tonight into perspective, here are some other national share of the vote figures. From the 2007 local elections, when the seats up for election today were last contested. This is the estimated national equivalent share of the vote figure. I’ve taken it from the chart on page 6 of this House of Commons research paper (pdf). Conservatives: 40% Labour: 26% Lib Dems: 24% From the 2010 general election. (These are the real GB voting figures for Westminster.) Conservatives: 37% Labour: 30% Lib Dems: 24% From the latest YouGov poll of voting intentions in a general election (pdf). Conservatives: 36% Labour: 40% Lib Dems: 11% 9.17pm: One of the key Labour targets in the north of England is Sheffield. My colleague Martin Wainwright will be at the count. He’s just sent me this. Labour has an easy task on the face of it in Sheffield, where the joy of embarrassing local MP Nick Clegg is a much-touted bonus of knocking out the Lib Dem minority administration. But the party is well aware that they only just managed to end the LD’s overall majority last May, and tough-as-boots Lib Dem leader Paul Scriven also survived Coun Bill Curran’s defection to Labour in September. That left Scriven with 41 members against 40 Labour, two Green and an independent. A third of the seats – 28 – are up for election tonight and there are plenty of close battlegrounds. Curran’s Walkley ward sees Lib Dem cabinet member for housing Penny Baker defend a majority of 36 last time she stood. Her colleagues in Gleadless Valley and East Ecclesfield are defending margins of 51 and 74. Nick Clegg isn’t lying low. Far from it. He voted this morning in his Sheffield Hallam constituency, bright an early, and said that local people understood that the government had a difficult job and was trying to do it “fairly, compassionately and responsibly.” First results at the English Institute of Sport are expected between 1 and 2am and a clear picture by 2.30am. 8.56pm: What are the key councils to watch? The best guide I’ve read is the one produced by Andy Sawford at the Local Government Information Unit. He’s written mini profiles of 50 councils where the results will be particularly interesting. 8.29pm: So, how do we work who’s having a good night? All parties manage expectations before elections and this year, in relation to the English local elections, we’ve seen some really blatant examples of this. This is what the three main parties have been saying. Conservatives “We’ll be pleased if we don’t lose 1,000 seats,” is the offical line from Tory HQ. Maybe I’m too cynical, but I interpreted that as evidence that they are fairly sure they won’t lose 1,000 seats. They are defending more seats than Labour and the Lib Dems combined. But, if the national opinion polls are anything to go by, the story of the night will be the collapse in the Lib Dem vote, and around 75% of the Lib Dem seats up for election are being contested in areas where the Tories are their main rivals. David Cameron could conceivably do quite well from Nick Clegg’s unpopularity (which is another reason why tonight could have an interesting impact on coalition relations). Labour Labour say that, on the basis of the way people have been voting in local council byelections, their share of the vote is 38%, the Conservatives’ 35% and the Lib Dems’ 18%. In these elections – real elections – Labour are ahead, but not by as much as they have been in most recent national opinion polls. They say that on this basis they would expect to gain between 400 and 600 seats. Their problem is that Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher of Plymouth University’s Elections Centre, who are the acknowledged experts on local elections, have also been looking at voting in council byelections and, according to this story in the Sunday Times (paywall), they think the trend suggests Labour could win as many as 1,300 seats. Rallings and Thrasher think the Tories could lose nearly 1,000 seats, and the Lib Dems about 400 seats. I’ve asked Labour to explain why the Rallings and Thrasher extrapolated figures are so different from the Labour party’s, but the officials I spoke to were unable to provide an explanation. Lib Dems “We are going to lose hundreds of seats,” a Lib Dem source told me tonight. That does fit with the Rallings and Thrasher analysis. But the Lib Dems are worried that the media will focus on the number of councils under Lib Dem control, and not on seats. There are a number of councils in the north of England where Labour could win control on the basis of just a handful of seats changing hands, I was told. The Lib Dems will claim that such losses don’t represent a drastic collapse in support. 8.27pm: Before we get going, here are some facts about the seats that are up for election today. English local elections Some 279 English councils are holding elections. In English local government some councils put all seats up for election (“all-out elections”) every four years and some councils hold more frequent elections with just a third of the seats up for grabs each time. Today’s poll is a particularly large one – more than 31 million people in England can participate in council elections – because both types of contest are taking place. To be precise, elections are taking place in 49 unitary authorities, 36 metropolitan districts and 194 non-metropolitan districts. Some 9,396 seats are being contested. That’s 52% of all English council seats. On a party basis, they divide up like this: Conservatives: 5,029 (55% of all Conservative council seats in England) Labour: 1,620 (39%) Lib Dem: 1,867 (52%) Scotland All 129 seats in the Scottish Parliament are being contested. Some 73 constituency MSPs will be elected by first past the post. Another 56 MSPs will be elected by proportional representation from regional lists. The boundaries have changed since the last elections in 2007. These are the “notional” results for 2007, based on what academics believe the results would have been if that election had been fought on the new boundaries. SNP: 46 seats Labour: 45 Conservatives: 19 Lib Dems: 17 Greens: 1 Others: 1 Wales All 60 seats in the Welsh Assembly are being contested. Some 40 constituency AMs will be be elected by first past the post, and another 40 will be elected from lists using PR. In 2007 the results were: Labour: 26 seats Plaid Cymru: 15 Conservatives: 12 Lib Dems: 6 Independent: 1 Northern Ireland All 108 seats in the Northern Ireland Assembly are being contested. Members are elected in 18 six-member constituencies by the single transferable vote PR system. In 2007 the results were: Democratic Unionist Party: 36 Sinn Fein: 28 Ulster Unionist Party: 18 Social Democratic and Labour Party: 16 Alliance: 7 Green: 1 Progressive Unionist Party: 1 Independents: 5 8.00pm: According to the Independent, it’s Super Thursday. There have been parliamentary or assembly elections in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and local elections in England and Northern Ireland. There are local elections in England every year, but this is the biggest set of elections in the four-year local government election cycle and more than 30 million people in England have had the chance to take part. On top of that, we’ve all had the chance to take part in the referendum on the alternative vote. Outside of a general election, an election night doesn’t come much bigger than this. Elections are always exciting because of what they tell you about the state of the parties nationally, and as the results come in over the next 24 hours I’ll be posting furiously about what they have to tell us about Ed Miliband’s attempts to revive the Labour party, about what being in government has done to the standing of David Cameron’s Conservative party and about quite how disastrous it all is for the Liberal Democrats and Nick Clegg. But this time there’s even more than usual at stake. The result of the AV referendum seems likely to kill all prospects of electoral reform for a generation (which could have quite profound consequences for the Lib Dems, as yet probably not fully understood). The character of Westminster coalition seems to have changed fundamentally as a result of the campaign and the way it has been conducted. Wales and Northern Ireland are electing assemblies enjoying more self-confidence and power than they’ve had before. And if, as expected, Alex Salmond wins a second term as Scotland’s first minister, then we’ll have to conclude that his long-term plan to achieve independence by stealth seems to be going reasonably well. The future of the Union hasn’t been much of an issue in the Scottish election campaign, but conceivably tonight’s results could have considerably bearing on it. Here’s a timetable of what’s coming up. Thursday night 10pm: The polls close. Counting starts in most of the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly seats, and in many of the 279 English councils where elections are taking place. 10.30pm: Sky News starts its election programme, Decision Time 2011, with Adam Boulton presenting. 11.35pm: The BBC’s election programme, Vote 2011, starts on BBC 1, with David Dimbleby presenting. Around 12pm: The first Welsh results and English council results are expected. Sunderland is often the first English council to declare. Friday Around 2am: The first Scottish results are expected. A large number of English council results are expected between 2am and 3am. Around 3am: Results should be coming in thick and fast. Sheffield, a key Labour target, is one of the councils expected to declare around about now. 7.30am: Counting starts in the Leicester South byelection. 8am: Counting starts in the Northern Ireland assembly elections. Around 9am: Counting starts in Northern Ireland and in the Leicester South byelection Around 11am: Results start to come in from the small number of Scottish and Welsh constituencies that did not count overnight and from the 160-odd English councils counting on Friday. Around 2pm: Results start to come in from Northern Ireland. Around 2.30pm: The Electoral Commission is expected to announce the turnout in the AV referendum. 4pm: Counting of the votes in the AV referendum starts. The full results are not due in until around 9pm or later, but one side – the no camp, unless the polls are totally wrong – may well get more than 50% of the vote before then. By Friday night almost all the counting will be over. But the final results of the Northern Ireland assembly elections are not expected until Saturday afternoon, and the counting in the Northern Ireland local elections does not start until Monday. I’ll be blogging until around 6am tomorrow. My colleague Hélène Mulholland will then take over as we launch a new blog, and I’ll be back on Friday afternoon in time for the AV results. Local elections Local elections 2011 Welsh Assembly Government Welsh elections 2011 Welsh politics Scottish politics Scottish elections 2011 Elections 2011 Northern Irish politics Local politics Local government Alternative vote AV referendum Labour Liberal Democrats Conservatives Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …