David Cameron’s dramatic promise to lead the greenest ever government has been followed by U-turns and delayed policies Business leaders, investors and campaigners have delivered a thumbs down to the government’s record on green issues, less than a year after David Cameron announced his aspiration to lead ” the greenest government ever “. One investor said the coalition’s actions threatened to “choke off the lifeblood of the green economy” and another said he was “bitterly disappointed” by the coalition’s performance. Penny Shepherd, chief executive of UKSIF , the UK’s leading organisation representing financiers specialising in green investments, warned that the chancellor, George Osborne, had not lived up to his promise of “greening” the Treasury. “Until the Treasury is firmly and visibly behind the low carbon transition, and the shift to a green economy and green financial services, then the rest of government will inevitably struggle,” she said. The comments – after a series of U-turns and watered-down or delayed green policies – come as the government braces itself for a report next week from the CBI which is expected to criticise its record on supporting green business. Five years ago this week, Cameron’s photogenic husky ride across the snowy Norwegian island of Spitzbergen was intended to give voters a glimpse of a different kind of Tory leader and was part of his strategy of detoxifying the brand. And just three days after forming the coalition he declared that he would be the “fourth minister” at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, adding: “I mean that from the bottom of my heart.” In that speech he said that the government would back green industries to drive economic growth, adding that the UK needed to “make sure we have our share of the industries of the future”. Now, though, many of the business leaders and investors whom the government is relying on to deliver that growth are becoming increasingly frustrated. Mark Shorrock, founder of Low Carbon Group, which invests in solar, tidal and wind power, said: “The government has been shortsighted on green issues, and is threatening to choke off the lifeblood of the green economy.” Green entrepreneurs were also critical. Jeremy Leggett, founder of Solarcentury, said: “I am bitterly disappointed. I was impressed by the promise to be the greenest government ever. The coalition could have created a really convincing narrative of genuine job creation but they have failed to do so.” Shepherd said: “One area of particular concern has been the changes to feed-in tariffs [subsidies for renewable energy]. It wasn’t the proposal itself, but the sudden revision that sent out the wrong signal – investors need confidence that policy will remain stable.” A recent report from respected US thinktank the Pew Environment Group appears to bear out these views. From being third in the world in green investment, the UK has tumbled to 13th place , well behind developing countries such as China, India and Brazil in the race to create green jobs and become a leader in green technology. Last year, only £2bn was invested in alternative energy and clean technology in the UK, compared with £7bn in 2009. Germany spent £26bn and the US £21bn last year. Jonathon Porritt, whose Sustainable Development Commission was axed within months of the coalition coming to power, described government performance on green issues as “really thin”. “All the possible good things are in the future. If you have to rely on [the Natural environment] white paper as an example of what is good, that’s pretty desperate. What is a white paper – just paper,” he said. The coalition’s own MPs have also expressed concern on key policies. Tim Yeo, the Conservative former minister and chair of the cross-party environmental audit committee, said: “They are making progress but there is a very long way to go. The changes to feed-in tariffs unsettled investors, undoubtedly. I think David Cameron remains committed, but there is a lot of sucking and seeing to do.” But the government strongly rejected the criticism. One Whitehall insider said: “Investors are reacting positively and recognise we’re acting for the long term.” He pointed to a survey of more than 300 UK clean technology companies, from the government-funded Carbon Trust, that found increasing confidence about their growth prospects, with more than three-quarters looking to recruit in the next 12 months and 37% planning to expand into new export markets in the next two years. Benj Sykes, director of innovations at the Carbon Trust , said: “Our research shows that cleantech innovators are feeling optimistic about their prospects and have ambitious plans for the future. However, access to finance, along with a stable policy environment, will make or break these growth prospects.” Bob Wigley, the ex-investment banker and chairman of Yell, who drew up the blueprint for the green investment bank, told the Guardian that even in its watered down form it was a significant achievement: “I think the chancellor deserves credit for finding £3bn during this challenging period of austerity to fund a green investment bank. I guess we all look forward to hearing the detail of its mandate. But assuming the right mandate, funding and governance structure, it could be one of the coalition’s really substantive legacies, and another world-leading project that other countries will want to emulate.” Renewable UK, the trade body for the wind industry, also said it was “encouraged” by the government’s support for offshore wind. “We are hoping that the positive commitments that have been made are followed up with the right level of financial support,” a spokesman. His views have been echoed in a series of reports from parliamentary committees, which have criticised the government over the green investment bank, flood defences and air pollution. David Cameron Liberal-Conservative coalition Fiona Harvey Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …David Cameron’s dramatic promise to lead the greenest ever government has been followed by U-turns and delayed policies Business leaders, investors and campaigners have delivered a thumbs down to the government’s record on green issues, less than a year after David Cameron announced his aspiration to lead ” the greenest government ever “. One investor said the coalition’s actions threatened to “choke off the lifeblood of the green economy” and another said he was “bitterly disappointed” by the coalition’s performance. Penny Shepherd, chief executive of UKSIF , the UK’s leading organisation representing financiers specialising in green investments, warned that the chancellor, George Osborne, had not lived up to his promise of “greening” the Treasury. “Until the Treasury is firmly and visibly behind the low carbon transition, and the shift to a green economy and green financial services, then the rest of government will inevitably struggle,” she said. The comments – after a series of U-turns and watered-down or delayed green policies – come as the government braces itself for a report next week from the CBI which is expected to criticise its record on supporting green business. Five years ago this week, Cameron’s photogenic husky ride across the snowy Norwegian island of Spitzbergen was intended to give voters a glimpse of a different kind of Tory leader and was part of his strategy of detoxifying the brand. And just three days after forming the coalition he declared that he would be the “fourth minister” at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, adding: “I mean that from the bottom of my heart.” In that speech he said that the government would back green industries to drive economic growth, adding that the UK needed to “make sure we have our share of the industries of the future”. Now, though, many of the business leaders and investors whom the government is relying on to deliver that growth are becoming increasingly frustrated. Mark Shorrock, founder of Low Carbon Group, which invests in solar, tidal and wind power, said: “The government has been shortsighted on green issues, and is threatening to choke off the lifeblood of the green economy.” Green entrepreneurs were also critical. Jeremy Leggett, founder of Solarcentury, said: “I am bitterly disappointed. I was impressed by the promise to be the greenest government ever. The coalition could have created a really convincing narrative of genuine job creation but they have failed to do so.” Shepherd said: “One area of particular concern has been the changes to feed-in tariffs [subsidies for renewable energy]. It wasn’t the proposal itself, but the sudden revision that sent out the wrong signal – investors need confidence that policy will remain stable.” A recent report from respected US thinktank the Pew Environment Group appears to bear out these views. From being third in the world in green investment, the UK has tumbled to 13th place , well behind developing countries such as China, India and Brazil in the race to create green jobs and become a leader in green technology. Last year, only £2bn was invested in alternative energy and clean technology in the UK, compared with £7bn in 2009. Germany spent £26bn and the US £21bn last year. Jonathon Porritt, whose Sustainable Development Commission was axed within months of the coalition coming to power, described government performance on green issues as “really thin”. “All the possible good things are in the future. If you have to rely on [the Natural environment] white paper as an example of what is good, that’s pretty desperate. What is a white paper – just paper,” he said. The coalition’s own MPs have also expressed concern on key policies. Tim Yeo, the Conservative former minister and chair of the cross-party environmental audit committee, said: “They are making progress but there is a very long way to go. The changes to feed-in tariffs unsettled investors, undoubtedly. I think David Cameron remains committed, but there is a lot of sucking and seeing to do.” But the government strongly rejected the criticism. One Whitehall insider said: “Investors are reacting positively and recognise we’re acting for the long term.” He pointed to a survey of more than 300 UK clean technology companies, from the government-funded Carbon Trust, that found increasing confidence about their growth prospects, with more than three-quarters looking to recruit in the next 12 months and 37% planning to expand into new export markets in the next two years. Benj Sykes, director of innovations at the Carbon Trust , said: “Our research shows that cleantech innovators are feeling optimistic about their prospects and have ambitious plans for the future. However, access to finance, along with a stable policy environment, will make or break these growth prospects.” Bob Wigley, the ex-investment banker and chairman of Yell, who drew up the blueprint for the green investment bank, told the Guardian that even in its watered down form it was a significant achievement: “I think the chancellor deserves credit for finding £3bn during this challenging period of austerity to fund a green investment bank. I guess we all look forward to hearing the detail of its mandate. But assuming the right mandate, funding and governance structure, it could be one of the coalition’s really substantive legacies, and another world-leading project that other countries will want to emulate.” Renewable UK, the trade body for the wind industry, also said it was “encouraged” by the government’s support for offshore wind. “We are hoping that the positive commitments that have been made are followed up with the right level of financial support,” a spokesman. His views have been echoed in a series of reports from parliamentary committees, which have criticised the government over the green investment bank, flood defences and air pollution. David Cameron Liberal-Conservative coalition Fiona Harvey Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …David Cameron’s dramatic promise to lead the greenest ever government has been followed by U-turns and delayed policies Business leaders, investors and campaigners have delivered a thumbs down to the government’s record on green issues, less than a year after David Cameron announced his aspiration to lead ” the greenest government ever “. One investor said the coalition’s actions threatened to “choke off the lifeblood of the green economy” and another said he was “bitterly disappointed” by the coalition’s performance. Penny Shepherd, chief executive of UKSIF , the UK’s leading organisation representing financiers specialising in green investments, warned that the chancellor, George Osborne, had not lived up to his promise of “greening” the Treasury. “Until the Treasury is firmly and visibly behind the low carbon transition, and the shift to a green economy and green financial services, then the rest of government will inevitably struggle,” she said. The comments – after a series of U-turns and watered-down or delayed green policies – come as the government braces itself for a report next week from the CBI which is expected to criticise its record on supporting green business. Five years ago this week, Cameron’s photogenic husky ride across the snowy Norwegian island of Spitzbergen was intended to give voters a glimpse of a different kind of Tory leader and was part of his strategy of detoxifying the brand. And just three days after forming the coalition he declared that he would be the “fourth minister” at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, adding: “I mean that from the bottom of my heart.” In that speech he said that the government would back green industries to drive economic growth, adding that the UK needed to “make sure we have our share of the industries of the future”. Now, though, many of the business leaders and investors whom the government is relying on to deliver that growth are becoming increasingly frustrated. Mark Shorrock, founder of Low Carbon Group, which invests in solar, tidal and wind power, said: “The government has been shortsighted on green issues, and is threatening to choke off the lifeblood of the green economy.” Green entrepreneurs were also critical. Jeremy Leggett, founder of Solarcentury, said: “I am bitterly disappointed. I was impressed by the promise to be the greenest government ever. The coalition could have created a really convincing narrative of genuine job creation but they have failed to do so.” Shepherd said: “One area of particular concern has been the changes to feed-in tariffs [subsidies for renewable energy]. It wasn’t the proposal itself, but the sudden revision that sent out the wrong signal – investors need confidence that policy will remain stable.” A recent report from respected US thinktank the Pew Environment Group appears to bear out these views. From being third in the world in green investment, the UK has tumbled to 13th place , well behind developing countries such as China, India and Brazil in the race to create green jobs and become a leader in green technology. Last year, only £2bn was invested in alternative energy and clean technology in the UK, compared with £7bn in 2009. Germany spent £26bn and the US £21bn last year. Jonathon Porritt, whose Sustainable Development Commission was axed within months of the coalition coming to power, described government performance on green issues as “really thin”. “All the possible good things are in the future. If you have to rely on [the Natural environment] white paper as an example of what is good, that’s pretty desperate. What is a white paper – just paper,” he said. The coalition’s own MPs have also expressed concern on key policies. Tim Yeo, the Conservative former minister and chair of the cross-party environmental audit committee, said: “They are making progress but there is a very long way to go. The changes to feed-in tariffs unsettled investors, undoubtedly. I think David Cameron remains committed, but there is a lot of sucking and seeing to do.” But the government strongly rejected the criticism. One Whitehall insider said: “Investors are reacting positively and recognise we’re acting for the long term.” He pointed to a survey of more than 300 UK clean technology companies, from the government-funded Carbon Trust, that found increasing confidence about their growth prospects, with more than three-quarters looking to recruit in the next 12 months and 37% planning to expand into new export markets in the next two years. Benj Sykes, director of innovations at the Carbon Trust , said: “Our research shows that cleantech innovators are feeling optimistic about their prospects and have ambitious plans for the future. However, access to finance, along with a stable policy environment, will make or break these growth prospects.” Bob Wigley, the ex-investment banker and chairman of Yell, who drew up the blueprint for the green investment bank, told the Guardian that even in its watered down form it was a significant achievement: “I think the chancellor deserves credit for finding £3bn during this challenging period of austerity to fund a green investment bank. I guess we all look forward to hearing the detail of its mandate. But assuming the right mandate, funding and governance structure, it could be one of the coalition’s really substantive legacies, and another world-leading project that other countries will want to emulate.” Renewable UK, the trade body for the wind industry, also said it was “encouraged” by the government’s support for offshore wind. “We are hoping that the positive commitments that have been made are followed up with the right level of financial support,” a spokesman. His views have been echoed in a series of reports from parliamentary committees, which have criticised the government over the green investment bank, flood defences and air pollution. David Cameron Liberal-Conservative coalition Fiona Harvey Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Homeless Woman Charged With Stealing $16K For Sending Her Son To A Better School
April 22, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media I realize that the school choice folks are all for private schools and charter schools and the like. I also support school choice, but not in the same way. In my school choice realm, homeless moms who are looking for a way to have their kid get a decent education in a safer neighborhood would actually be able to make that choice. So when you hear the term “school choice” from me, consider my definition. I’m not sure why this is becoming something fashionable to do, but it seems like a complete waste of taxpayers’ money to charge a homeless mom of a six-year old boy with grand theft. What’s the point, exactly? If she can’t pay for a home, how will she be able to pay back $16,000? Nevertheless, that is what just happened in Norwalk, Connecticut . Not only is she charged with grand larceny, but the babysitter who was in fact a babysitter (that at least is undisputed) whose address she used was evicted from the public housing development where she lived for allowing the child’s mother to use her address to get the boy into school. The police investigation into the residency began in January after Norwalk Housing Authority attorney Donna Lattarulo filed a complaint alleging McDowell registered her son at Brookside, but actually lived in an apartment on Priscilla Street in Bridgeport. As part of the evidence presented in the complaint, police received an affidavit of residency signed by McDowell and dated last September attesting that she lived in the Roodner Court public housing complex on Ely Ave. When she was interviewed by police in the case, McDowell admitted to living in Bridgeport at the time she registered her son in Norwalk schools. She said she knew a man who owned a home on Priscilla Street and he allowed her to sleep at the home at night, but she had to leave the home during the day until he returned from work. She also acknowledged that she stays from time to time at the Norwalk Emergency Shelter when she has nowhere else to stay. McDowell also admitted that Marques was her son’s babysitter from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. after the boy got out of school. Read more . So what’s the point of doing this? To teach any other homeless person of color with little means and a child to educate that they’d better not be sending their kids to a different district where they might actually get an education that helps them to read and write so they can actually better themselves? Seriously, I am not playing bleeding-heart liberal here. I do not understand the logic in telling a homeless person they’re a criminal because they used an address of a person where their child probably spent more time in one place than anywhere else. I do not understand kicking someone when they’re already down. Even if there is more to this story than has been reported, what exactly IS the message? How is society better served by telling this mother who already has absolutely nothing but a child she is trying to look after that she’s a criminal for doing it? Perhaps one of you can explain this, because to me it looks and feels like straight-up racism. Check out some of these reactions: McDowell’s arrest marks the first time Norwalk Board of Education Vice Chairman Glenn Iannaccone has heard of someone facing criminal charges for sending their child to Norwalk schools. “This is the first time I have heard something like this where there has been an arrest. Other allegations like this have been handled by the central office. I’m not sure if the police have been involved, ” Iannaccone said. Norwalk Board of Education Chairman Jack Chiaramonte expressed surprise at McDowell’s arrest and the investigation that led to it. “I don’t get that at all,” Chiaramonte said. “Usually when they find a kid out of district, they send him back. I have never heard of people being arrested for it, but I am not sure of the law. For my understanding, whenever we find someone from another district we send them back.” Mayor Richard Moccia said that he was aware that an investigation was proceeding in the case and that an arrest was possible. ” This now sends a message to other parents that may have been living in other towns and registering their kids with phony addresses ,” he said. While Moccia said it was sad the case involves a woman who appears to be homeless, he pointed out that if she had been living at the Norwalk shelter and registered her child there she would not be facing charges now. Funny how the “message” seems to be sent to people least able to defend themselves , isn’t it? If nothing exposes the fallacy of the right-wing “school choice” non-choice, let this case open some eyes. School choice is only for kids of parents who want to send their kids out of school districts, not to a different public school district. And because public school districts are locally managed, if that locality doesn’t want kids of poor homeless moms of color there, well…all they have to do is get the investigator to follow them long enough to get the goods and BAM. No child left behind. Yeah, right.
Continue reading …
• Tourists throng streets to see ‘nailings’ • Catholic church rejects practice of self harm At least 24 Filipinos were nailed to crosses to re-enact Jesus Christ’s suffering in a Good Friday rite rejected by Catholic church leaders but witnessed by throngs of believers and thousands of tourists. Ruben Enaje, a 50-year-old sign painter, screamed in pain as villagers dressed as Roman centurions hammered four-inch stainless steel nails through his palms and set him aloft on a cross under a brutal sun in San Pedro Cutud in Pampanga. It was Enaje’s 25th crucifixion. He says surviving nearly unscathed when he fell from a three-story building in 1985 prompted him to observe the rite. “Not a bone in my body was broken when I fell from that building,” Enaje said. “It was a miracle.” Ahead of the cross nailings, throngs of penitents walked several miles through village streets and beat their bare backs with sharp bamboo sticks and pieces of wood, sometimes splashing spectators with blood. Some participants opened cuts in the penitents’ backs using broken glass to ensure the ritual was sufficiently bloody. The gory spectacle reflects Philippines’ unique brand of Catholicism, which merges church traditions with folk superstitions. Many of the mostly impoverished penitents undergo the ritual to atone for sins, pray for the sick or a better life and give thanks for what they believe were God-given miracles. The most number of crucifixions were staged beside a rice field in San Pedro Cutud, where 15 men were nailed to crosses, three at a time on a dusty mound as more than 30,000 people, including touristswatched and took pictures. An ambulance stood by and more than 20 tourists fainted or became dizzy in the heat, officials said. Foreigners have been banned from taking part after an Australian comic was nailed to a cross under a false name a few years ago near Pampanga. Authorities also believe that a Japanese man sought to be crucified as part of a porn film in 1996, tourism officer Ching Pangilinan said. “They made a mockery of a local tradition.” Church leaders in the Philippines, Asia’s largest predominantly Roman Catholic nation, have frowned on the Easter week rituals, saying Filipinos can show their deep faith without hurting themselves. Archbishop Angel Lagdameo said crucifixions and self-flagellations are an “imperfect imitation with doubtful theological and social significance.” Pampanga Bishop Pablo Virgilio David said the bloody rites reflect the church’s failure to educate Filipinos about Christian tenets. Christianity Philippines Religion guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Bozell on ‘Fox & Friends’: Media Blamed Bush for Rising Gas Prices, Fail to Blame Obama for Similar Hike in Costs
April 22, 2011 No Comment
NewsBusters publisher and Media Research Center president Brent Bozell appeared on the April 22 “Fox & Friends” to discuss the media's double standard on rising gas prices. In short, in 2006, the media blamed then-President Bush, but in 2011, anyone but Obama seems to be at fault as far as the media are concerned. For the full video of the segment, watch the video embed posted after the page break:
Continue reading …
Libya rebels seize tallest buildings, favoured by pro-Gaddafi snipers Rebels in the besieged city of Misrata have won a significant victory by retaking several key buildings that had been occupied by Muammar Gaddafi’s forces for over a month. The Tameen office block, the city’s tallest building, with a view across Misrata, was captured after relentless pounding by rebel forces. Numerous snipers were either killed or captured. Several other buildings nearby were also cleared, leaving the rebels in control of the northern end of Tripoli Street, the city’s main thoroughfare, which Gaddafi’s forces have been desperate to capture. The snipers had caused havoc in the city after they were sent in on 19 March, picking off civilians and rebels at will, as well as firing missiles from the roof of the buildings into civilian areas. On Friday morning, rebel forces were moving freely around the area near the Tameen building, which is littered with abandoned tanks, burnt cars and spent ammunition. Firefighters were cleaning the streets. “In this area, all the families had to leave because of the threat of the snipers,” said Hadi Tantoun, a journalist and rebel. “Capturing this building was very important.” The snipers had been cut off from the rest of Gaddafi’s forces for a week or more, unable to receive supplies. Entering the Tameen building through the pitch-black reception, strewn with debris, it was possible to get a glimpse of how they had been living. Mattresses and blankets indicated that several snipers had been sleeping in the stairwell on the first floor, relatively safe in the centre of the building. Their cooking pots still stood in the atrium area nearby. The once-smart offices on the sides of the building, whose tenants were mostly insurance agents, had been trashed by the snipers, with files on the floor and upturned sofas. In some offices, cabinets had been pushed against windows for protection. Many glass panes had been shattered by rebel fire. “Every night we attacked them with our RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades] and Kalashnikovs,” said Abdula Hafid, 24, a member of the “City Centre” rebel cell that finally liberated the building. “They killed a lot of civilians.” On higher floors there were empty tins of tuna and tomato paste, blankets, mattresses and sandals, and a few discarded green uniforms. According to rebel fighters, the few dozen snipers that still occupied the building this week had changed into civilian clothes before trying to escape down Tripoli Street on Thursday, towards their main base in the vegetable market. A sniper’s chair had been placed under a small window, which offered a view down the main street. Dozens of spent bullet shells and cigarettes littered the floor around the chair. In an office that had belonged to an architect there were graffiti written in green ink – Gaddafi’s colour – in Arabic. It read: “If we survive, we are warning you gays and dogs. We will not forgive anybody from Misrata. We will fuck your daughters and your wives.” One of the rebels had already penned a riposte: “Misrata is strong. We will win in the end.” On the top floor, several Gaddafi soldiers had been sleeping on dirty mattresses next to the elevator works. A torn photograph of a woman – a wife of one of the snipers perhaps – lay on the floor. On the roof there were thousands of spent bullet shells, and numerous discarded cases of anti-tank missiles that had been fired into the city. Up here the snipers would have had a clear view of the city, and everything that moved down below. They would have seen the destruction in the area nearby – buildings pockmarked by gunfire, featuring gaping holes where shells had struck, blackened by smoke. Glass and tyres and twisted metal on the streets. At the foot of the building lay the body of a sniper, covered with a blanket. It had been burned. One of the rebels said that if Gaddafi’s forces could not get their dead back to base, they set them on fire. A few civilians ventured cautiously on to Tripoli Street, which housed some of the city’s best coffee shops, several banks, and the Italian-built hotel where Mussolini once stayed. A rebel with a loudhailer warned them not to try to enter any of the shops: “This is not your property. Even if it is government property, it is for all the people”. He then cleared the area, saying it was still dangerous. The rebels had learned their lesson on Thursday night. After taking over the Tameen building, they dropped their guard while celebrating. Several fighters were killed, prompting scenes of grief at the main hospital, where brothers, fathers and colleagues of the victims wept and swore to avenge them. Libya Middle East Muammar Gaddafi Arab and Middle East unrest Xan Rice guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Troubled families come together and fight on the Jeremy Kyle Show. It has been described as ‘human bear-baiting’, but the programme itself makes great claims about the good it does. So what happens when
Continue reading …
Troubled families come together and fight on the Jeremy Kyle Show. It has been described as ‘human bear-baiting’, but the programme itself makes great claims about the good it does. So what happens when
Continue reading …
The pope answers questions on Italian TV, but cannot explain the devastation caused by the tsunami Pope Benedict ventured where no pope has gone before on Friday when he answered questions on an Italian television programme – and was stumped by the first. A Japanese girl asked the pope, who, she said, “speaks with God”, why she was having to suffer so much as a result of the earthquake and tsunami that had struck her country. “I am very frightened because the house where I felt safe really shook a lot and many children my age have died. I cannot go to play in the park. I want to know: why do I have to be so afraid? Why do children have to be so sad?” said seven-year-old Elena. Benedict admitted: “I also have the same questions: why is it this way? Why do you have to suffer so much while others live in ease? “And we do not have the answers, but we know that Jesus suffered as you do, an innocent, and that the true God who is revealed in Jesus is by your side.” Whether Elena was satisfied with that answer was unclear. But the studio audience gave the pope a hearty round of applause. The Japanese girl’s question was one of seven fielded by Benedict in an unprecedented exercise. His predecessor, John Paul II, once made a surprise call to a television programme on the 20th anniversary of his papacy. And Benedict himself broke new ground with a Thought for the Day broadcast by BBC Radio 4 last Christmas Eve. But no pope has ever before submitted himself to questioning on television, or indeed radio, in the way Benedict did for a special Good Friday programme on the first channel of the state-owned RAI network. The presenter, Rosario Carello, initially addressed the pope as “holy father” and told him his presence on the programme “fills us with joy”. But thereafter, the reverential tone Italian broadcasters usually employ for papal occasions was wholly lacking. The atmosphere was briskly professional as the show cut between the pope’s answers – pre-recorded in his study in the Vatican – and comments from a panel of three studio guests who also replied to other questions from viewers. The pope’s fellow guests added to the air of informality: one was a poet and columnist in an open-necked shirt; another, the founder of a charity for young runaways who sported a leather jacket and spiky hair. The usually retiring Benedict’s participation was the latest sign of an apparently growing willingness to co-operate with the media. Carello told viewers the pope had initially agreed to answer only three questions, but so many were submitted that the programme-makers asked – and Benedict agreed – that the number be doubled. Then, he said, they received a question from a Muslim woman in the Ivory Coast that was so topical and moving that they were loth not to include it. So the number was raised to seven. Bintu, who greeted the pope in Arabic, asked him for his advice on how to put an end to the violence in her country. Benedict said he was “saddened that I can do so little”, but said he had asked a senior Vatican official to try to mediate. Most of the other questions were about issues of Catholic faith, including one from an Italian woman who wanted to know if her son, who had been in a vegetative coma for two years, still had a soul. “Certainly,” the pope replied. He urged her to keep up her vigil at his side, saying that her “presence enters into the depths of that hidden soul”. Pope Benedict XVI Italy Japan disaster Television Japan Religion Catholicism Christianity Europe John Hooper guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …