America funding technology to break web censorship in repressive regimes, such as China and Iran The United States is playing a game of “cat and mouse” on the web, funding new technology aimed at breaking internet censorship in repressive regimes including China and Iran, officials have said. Michael Posner, the assistant secretary of state for human rights, said that among projects being funded by the US government is a technology that acts as a “slingshot” – identifying censored material and throwing it back on to the web so that users can find it. The project is part of a $30m (£18m) state department project aimed at encouraging civil liberty online. “We’re responding with new tools. This is a cat-and-mouse game. We’re trying to stay one step ahead of the cat,” Posner said. Censored information would be redirected to email, blogs and other online sources, he said. Posner said he would not identify the recipients of funding for “reasons of security”. Posner’s comments come as the US ended two days of talks with Chinese officials amid worsening relations over censorship and crackdowns on dissidents. Chinese authorities block sites including Twitter and Facebook and censor information online. In March, Google accused China of interfering with its email service. Authorities have been censoring references to pro-democracy uprisings in the Arab world and recently blocked search results for “Hillary Clinton” after she gave a speech championing internet freedom. Posner said the US was using $19m to fund technology that would “be redirecting information back in that governments have initially blocked”. In Washington, critics have accused the state department of being slow to spend the money and kowtowing to China. Earlier this year senator Dick Lugar, a Republican on the Senate foreign relations committee, called for another government body to be put in charge of the funds. Rebecca MacKinnon, co-founder of GlobalVoicesOnline.org , a global organisation for bloggers, said that access to information was not the only issue people faced online. In Egypt, for example, censorship had not been a problem but surveillance had been a far bigger issue, she said. When the Egyptian revolution began, the authorities successfully closed the internet. “Circumnavigation tools don’t do much good if the government shuts down the internet,” she said. MacKinnon said other technologies that would help people avoid government scrutiny online and allow them to set up local networks should a regime pull the plug on internet access were just as valuable. In a recent interview with the Atlantic magazine, Clinton said China had a deplorable human rights record and was involved in a “fool’s errand” trying to hold off democratic changes like those sweeping the Middle East. In her speech in February, the US secretary of state called the internet “the public space of the 21st century” and hailed the way the internet had been used to support uprisings in Egypt and protests in Iran. She pledged US support for freedom of expression and association online. “For the United States, the choice is clear. On the spectrum of internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness,” she said. But Clinton criticised WikiLeaks for publishing secret US cables, calling it “an act of theft”. Censorship Internet Web filtering United States US foreign policy China Dominic Rushe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: Daily Kos John Boehner loves Big Oil Jed Lewison: A little over two weeks ago, John Boehner dropped a bit of a bombshell, telling ABC News he was open to ending tax subsidies for big oil. Within 24 hours, his office was already backing off his comments, and as of today, he’s completely reversed course, saying Democratic proposals to repeal tax subsidies for big oil shouldn’t even be on the table . It’s a non-starter for Boehner, who sees ending a subsidy as a tax hike. “Our goal is to increase the supply of American energy to lower costs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create American jobs,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. “This tax hike would make prices at the pump even higher. That simply doesn’t make any sense.” Obviously, it’s absurd to argue that tax subsidies for big oil are lowering gas prices. Does anybody really think that oil companies aren’t already charging as much as they possibly can? Did anyone ever believe that Republicans would abandon Big Oil when it really counted? John Boehner just loves him some oil. DownWithTyranny: Cornered like rats over the last few weeks, Republican congressmen who take legalistic bribes from Big Oil– like John Boehner , Daniel Webster and Paul Ryan — have publicly promised their constituents to make Big Oil pay their fair share. Given the opportunity to do just that by the Democrats in the House, they all danced away from their promises and voted for tens of billions in tax dollar subsidies to go to the most profitable corporations in history. Why? Simple, Big Oil cuts them in on the plunder. They pay “protection money” (billions) to Republican and Blue Dog politicians in return for our tax dollars flowing their way; it’s the scam of the century. Yesterday Greg Sargent reported on a CNN poll showing that the public overwhelmingly (61%) blames high gas prices on Big Oil. 59% of Americans blame Wall Street speculators “a great deal” and another 31% blame Wall Street speculators “somewhat.” These are the Wall Street speculators that were enabled by a Republican filibuster in the Senate that would have brought they outrageous predatory activities under control. You may not hear or read this in the American media– which has interlocking directorships with Big Oil– but yesterday’s Guardian reported on a landmark study that shows efforts being willfully suppressed by Big Oil and their right-wing allies could give us a world in our lifetimes where clean energy meets 80% of our needs. Big Oil gets what it pays for and Americans are slowly wising up to that fact. Blue Dog Democrats that support Big Oil should be primaried. Rep. Paul Ryan will always side with those that pay his bills like Wall Street and Big Oil. Remember, Rep. Joe Barton’s apology to BP because America was shaking them down in his eyes and then it wasn’t an apology? And then we have this: Stewart: GOP called BP fund a ‘shakedown’ before they didn’t Don’t forget Rep. Joe Barton was the same man that also held up a bill that would have helped children of Autism back in 2006 called the Combating Autism Act”
Continue reading …enlarge Credit: Daily Kos John Boehner loves Big Oil Jed Lewison: A little over two weeks ago, John Boehner dropped a bit of a bombshell, telling ABC News he was open to ending tax subsidies for big oil. Within 24 hours, his office was already backing off his comments, and as of today, he’s completely reversed course, saying Democratic proposals to repeal tax subsidies for big oil shouldn’t even be on the table . It’s a non-starter for Boehner, who sees ending a subsidy as a tax hike. “Our goal is to increase the supply of American energy to lower costs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create American jobs,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. “This tax hike would make prices at the pump even higher. That simply doesn’t make any sense.” Obviously, it’s absurd to argue that tax subsidies for big oil are lowering gas prices. Does anybody really think that oil companies aren’t already charging as much as they possibly can? Did anyone ever believe that Republicans would abandon Big Oil when it really counted? John Boehner just loves him some oil. DownWithTyranny: Cornered like rats over the last few weeks, Republican congressmen who take legalistic bribes from Big Oil– like John Boehner , Daniel Webster and Paul Ryan — have publicly promised their constituents to make Big Oil pay their fair share. Given the opportunity to do just that by the Democrats in the House, they all danced away from their promises and voted for tens of billions in tax dollar subsidies to go to the most profitable corporations in history. Why? Simple, Big Oil cuts them in on the plunder. They pay “protection money” (billions) to Republican and Blue Dog politicians in return for our tax dollars flowing their way; it’s the scam of the century. Yesterday Greg Sargent reported on a CNN poll showing that the public overwhelmingly (61%) blames high gas prices on Big Oil. 59% of Americans blame Wall Street speculators “a great deal” and another 31% blame Wall Street speculators “somewhat.” These are the Wall Street speculators that were enabled by a Republican filibuster in the Senate that would have brought they outrageous predatory activities under control. You may not hear or read this in the American media– which has interlocking directorships with Big Oil– but yesterday’s Guardian reported on a landmark study that shows efforts being willfully suppressed by Big Oil and their right-wing allies could give us a world in our lifetimes where clean energy meets 80% of our needs. Big Oil gets what it pays for and Americans are slowly wising up to that fact. Blue Dog Democrats that support Big Oil should be primaried. Rep. Paul Ryan will always side with those that pay his bills like Wall Street and Big Oil. Remember, Rep. Joe Barton’s apology to BP because America was shaking them down in his eyes and then it wasn’t an apology? And then we have this: Stewart: GOP called BP fund a ‘shakedown’ before they didn’t Don’t forget Rep. Joe Barton was the same man that also held up a bill that would have helped children of Autism back in 2006 called the Combating Autism Act”
Continue reading …Without the right policies, the UK will lose green energy jobs, renewable energy industry warns warring ministers A chorus of businesses, politicians and green campaigners have called on the prime minister, David Cameron, to intervene in a deepening row over the government’s climate change targets , as warring departments have put the UK’s future emissions cuts in jeopardy. The call came as the renewable energy industry called on ministers to “put up or shut up”, after Vestas, the world’s leading wind turbine maker, dangled the possibility of creating more than 2,000 green energy manufacturing jobs in the UK – but only if the right policies were set up. The worsening Whitehall row over whether to accept the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change – which would entail a 50% emissions cut by 2027, based on 1990 levels – threatens to derail the government’s promise to be “the greenest ever”, just before the first anniversary of the pledge this weekend. Vince Cable, Lib Dem business secretary, has taken the unusual step of writing to Nick Clegg to call for a lower target . But a lower target would imperil jobs and growth, said Andrew Raingold, executive director of the Aldersgate Group of more than 30 large businesses. “David Cameron should intervene and show clear leadership. Cable’s view that jobs and growth don’t go with green targets is misguided: there is clear evidence to show stronger targets would stimulate jobs.” Huw Irranca-Davies, the shadow energy minister, said: “It needs David Cameron [to decide] – the sooner he does, the better.” These views were echoed by green campaigners. Martyn Williams of Friends of the Earth said: “Clearly, it is the job of the prime minister to settle this disagreement, and whether he accepts the recommended targets will be a test of his commitment.” Greenpeace is planning to send a team of huskies to the House of Commons on Friday, a satirical reminder of Cameron’s trip to the Arctic while in opposition. The carbon budget drawn up by the CCC, setting out the reductions that need to be made in the 2020s to meet the UK’s longer-term targets, was “robust and considered”, said David Kennedy, chief executive of the committee. He refused to be drawn on whether Cameron should intervene, but said: “We have given a very well-evidenced proposal and I am not aware of any other well-evidenced alternative that would be consistent with the Climate Change Act. We urge the government to accept our recommendation.” The renewables industry, which is likely to be the source of many of the promised green jobs, is also deeply concerned about future government policy. Turbine-maker Vestas signed a deal on Wednesday to develop land – the equivalent of 93 football pitches – on which it wants to construct a huge new North Sea turbine production facility at Sheerness in Kent. But it said the project would go ahead only if ministers took decisive action to help. “Before our customers can provide us with the needed order pipeline, they need stability in the market and a long-term political and regulatory certainty that ensures their business case,” said Anders Søe-Jensen, president of Vestas Offshore. “Making that happen lies in the hands of policymakers, so we are looking forward to seeing the UK government providing the best possible terms for the offshore wind market to truly take off and the potential jobs becoming a reality,” he added. The Vestas executive said the timing of a report from the government-established CCC on Monday , which raised questions about the high cost of offshore wind, “could not be worse for us.” Søe-Jensen warned it would be a “shame” if a great new job opportunity at Sheerness was lost. The report suggested that offshore wind might be more expensive than nuclear power, but was rebuffed by the renewables industry, which said the figures did not take account of the very high cost of dealing with nuclear waste. The industry lobby group, RenewableUK , said it was now time for ministers to stop the debate about offshore wind and come down firmly in favour of pressing ahead. “We have an unprecedented situation where some of the best-known companies in the world are queuing up to invest in the UK. The government now needs to seal the deal on offshore: it needs to bag the first 8,000 jobs and hundreds of millions of pounds already pledged, by firmly supporting the technology,” said Maria McCaffery, chief executive of RenewableUK. The same message came from Friends of the Earth. “Uncertainty over energy policy has put companies off investing in the UK for too long,” said Tony Bosworth, FoE’s national climate change campaigner. “To reassure investors, the government must guarantee long-term support for renewable energy and allow the new green bank to borrow money straight away so that it can help clean energy projects such as offshore wind farms to get off the ground now.” Vestas said it was still optimistic that it could obtain the orders from the deep-sea round 3 projects that would allow the Denmark-based company to build vast new turbines, which would be as big as the Gherkin office block in the City of London. Vestas has also built a new research and development centre on the Isle of Wight, but created controversy when it closed a facility for building smaller turbines in the summer of 2009 . The worldwide renewable energy sector has been facing tougher times as politicians worry about bigger budget cutbacks and seek to reduce subsidies to wind and solar, despite a continuing desire to cut carbon emissions and tackle global warming. But there was a boost on Tuesday from Japan, where the prime minister promised to scrap a plan to obtain half its electricity from nuclear power and said it would promote renewable energy as a result of its nuclear crisis. Naoto Kan said Japan needed to “start from scratch” on its long-term energy policy after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was heavily damaged by an earthquake on 11 March, and began leaking radiation. A United Nations report out earlier this week predicted that, if the regulatory and other conditions were right, renewables could provide nearly 80% of the world’s energy needs after 2050. Wind power Energy Renewable energy Energy industry Terry Macalister Fiona Harvey guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Jeff Hall, who led National Socialist Movement in south-west US, may have involved son in supremacist activities A 10-year-old boy charged with murdering his father at their home in California was being exposed to his father’s extreme neo-Nazi ideology of racism and violence at the time he allegedly turned a gun against him. Evidence is mounting that Jeff Hall, 32, a white supremacist who led the National Socialist Movement in the south-west of the US, was involving his son in neo-Nazi activities before his death on 1 May. A possible link between the group’s violent messages and the shooting – an act exceptionally rare for a child as young as 10 – could be an important factor in the boy’s trial. Police were called to the Halls’ home in Riverside, California, outside Los Angeles, shortly after 4am last Sunday, where they found Hall dead on a sofa. He had been shot with the family handgun. Hall used his home as the headquarters of the NSM, one of America’s largest and most influential neo-Nazi groups. A reporter for the New York Times witnessed Hall preaching race hatred at a meeting in front of the boy, his eldest of five children, a day before the shooting. Hall told the newspaper he was teaching the boy how to use a gun as well as night-vision gear and had given him a belt bearing Nazi SS insignia. According to the Southern Poverty Law Centre, which monitors extreme right-wing groups, the NSM has a track record of recruiting very young children into its activities that surpasses that of any other organisation in the US. The party has created a children’s wing called Viking Youth Corps, which is open to boys and girls with the proviso that they must be of European descent and the offspring of NSM members, or have their parents’ consent. The boy, unnamed by authorities due to his age, will be tried in a juvenile court. The local paper, the Press-Enterprise, described him as a “shaggy blond-haired, small, skinny, baby-faced boy”. His defence lawyer indicated that he might pursue a plea of not guilty for reasons of insanity. The boy’s parents had been through a bitter divorce, and Hall and his former wife, Leticia Neal, had accused each other of abusing the child. The family has been monitored by social services since 2003. The NSM was founded in 1994 and has grown in prominence over seven years. It now has about 400 members in 32 states. It advocates open race hatred, calling for the expatriation of all non-whites in America, and preaching antisemitism. Until 2007 its members wore Nazi uniforms with swastika armbands, but now wear black battle dress. Hall, a plumber, was a prominent party member, involved in vigilantism along the Mexican border, organising patrols hunting illegal migrants. His house regularly attracted anti-racist protesters and he had put surveillance cameras on the property’s exterior walls to keep guard on them. Hall’s ashes are expected to be scattered along the Mexican border as a final political statement. Jeff Schoep, NSM leader, described the dead man on the movement’s website as a “dedicated father, his children were his life”. He added: “See you in Valhalla!” California Gun crime United States The far right Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Muammar Gaddafi’s officials admits unseaworthy migrant ships are being allowed to sail as a protest against Nato air strikes The Libyan regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi is allowing thousands of sub-Saharan African migrants on to overcrowded, unseaworthy ships in an apparently calculated attempt to use migration as a weapon to pressure Nato and the EU countries backing Libya’s rebels. Libyan officials admit they are not stopping boats teeming with African migrants embarking on perilous journeys to Europe in protest at air strikes, which they say have destroyed the country’s coastguard. Turning a blind eye to people smuggling has had disastrous humanitarian effects, apparently leading to the deaths of hundreds of boat people during unsuccessful attempts to reach the Italian island of Lampedusa, Malta, and other parts of Europe. Officials are still assessing the death toll from the sinking of an unseaworthy and overcrowded ship that is feared to have claimed hundreds of lives when it went down less than two miles off Tripoli last Friday. Officials said they were doing nothing to encourage the journeys to Italy, but could see no reason to stop them, because doing so would serve the interests of Nato member states bombing Libya. “We say to Europe that we can no longer do what we used to do,” said the prime minister, al-Baghdadi Ali al-Mahmoudi. “And that’s because Nato has ruined our coastal defences.” A senior UN official said there had been reports that some migrants had been ordered at gunpoint to board boats by the Libyan army. Melissa Fleming, chief spokesperson for the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, said the agency had received reports that the Libyan army was organising and directing the exodus with scant regard for human life or for Libya’s international obligations. Fleming said one survivor had told the UN refugee agency that he and others had initially refused to board a ship they believed to be dangerously overcrowded. Libyan soldiers fired their guns into the air to force people to go on board, the survivor said. Others survivors told the UN that some ships were leaving Tripoli only for their captain to disembark once they were at sea and take a pilot boat back to shore. “They [the migrants] are told, ‘here’s the compass, you go that way’,” Fleming said. However, survivors of Friday’s tragedy told the Guardian they did not believe Libyan soldiers or officials had been involved. They said their ordeal started at dawn when smugglers came to their compounds in the capital to collect them. Two Somalis say they were stripped of their valuables by Libyan men who they did not believe were officials. They were then taken to a beach 15 minutes east of the Tripoli port where they were crammed into an 18-metre (59ft) boat. The Guardian also spoke to survivors from Mali and Eritrea, who were among about 200 people who swam to shore or were rescued by the Libyan navy. The nine men said they had not seen Libyan officials until they were rescued. They said they had paid $300-$500 (£180-£305) for the journey, less than half the fee being charged by smugglers a year ago. “There were 885 people on the boat,” said Mohammed Abdul Aziz. “It started swaying and we ran to one side and then we ran to the other. It sunk and broke apart. We did not know where we were going.” Abdulghani Waeis, the chargé d’affairs at the Somali embassy in Tripoli, who is dealing with up to 150 fatalities and about 50 survivors from Friday’s sinking, said: “There were efforts to prevent this last year. But now the Europeans are attacking Libya and you cannot defend those who are attacking you. It is a policy of not defending [the coast] but not pushing them [to sea].” According to UN figures, 12,360 migrants from Libya have arrived in Italy and Malta since March and the figure is rising fast. Five boats carrying a total of 2,400 people, including many women and children, arrived off Lampedusa at the weekend. About 10% of the boat people are believed to have perished during the voyages, either from drowning, exposure or a lack of food and water. Most of the people now leaving Libya are understood to be of sub-Saharan origin, including Somalis and Eritreans who were working in Libya before the war began earlier this year. Under a previous agreement with the EU, Gaddafi prevented them and other economic migrants from countries such as Niger and Chad from trying to travel on to Europe. Italy says about 25,000 illegal immigrants, mostly from Tunisia, have arrived on its territory since the start of the year, while France is leading efforts to suspend the EU’s internal open borders policy to halt migrant flows. Cecilia Malmstrom, EU commissioner for home affairs, has demanded urgent action to address the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Libya. “Reports of men, women and children from sub-Saharan Africa being forced out of the country by the Gaddafi regime are particularly worrying,” she said in a statement. The UN has called on European nations to urgently improve mechanisms for rescue at sea following revelations by the Guardian that 61 African migrants died in March after European military units, including a Nato ship, allegedly ignored their cries for help. Libya Middle East Africa Arab and Middle East unrest Nato Refugees European Union United Nations Italy Europe Martin Chulov Simon Tisdall guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …New York Times reporter Jackie Calmes was with the president in El Paso, Texas, inspiring Latino voters for his 2012 reelection by pushing Congress
Continue reading …Equipment shortages predicted as government pulls funding for four projects considered priorities by research councils Scientists will be forced to share laboratories and find extra money to buy basic equipment as funding cuts hit British research, the Guardian has learned. Senior academics said savage cuts to hardware and facilities budgets would transform scientific research in the UK, with top-end equipment concentrated ever more in elite universities and government centres, and other researchers striking deals to get access to the facilities. The greatest difficulties are expected at cash-strapped, middle-ranking universities, where research and teaching are in danger of decline because there is too little money to replace ageing and broken lab equipment. The full impact of the cuts emerged as the science minister, David Willetts, said the government would not fund four major science projects highlighted as a priority by research councils. They include a national supercomputing service for developing drugs and modelling climate change; an international computer science centre at the Daresbury research and innovation campus in Cheshire; redevelopment of the Institute for Animal Health; and upgrades to facilities at the Rothera research station in Antarctica. The government cut capital budgets at research councils by half last year, a move that will see spending on science infrastructure fall by several hundred million pounds over four years. Universities hope to recoup the costs for some teaching equipment from tuition fees, but are under pressure to form consortiums to share more specialised research tools. Christopher Snowden, the vice chancellor of Surrey University, said the cuts would have a “profound” impact on universities at a time when teaching grants and research funding were under extreme pressure. In evidence given to the Commons science and technology committee, the Royal Astronomical Society warned that bids for small-scale lab equipment and computers were “likely to be seriously affected by the planned cuts”. The committee is expected to criticise the cuts in a report on astronomy and particle physics to be published on Friday. The Medical Research Council has urged scientists to share equipment more, including its PET brain scanner facility at Imperial College, and four high-throughput gene sequencing centres in Oxford, Cambridge, Liverpool and Edinburgh. From this month, scientists can apply for only half the cost of lab equipment valued at between £10,000 and £121,588, and must find the rest of the money from other sources. Research councils can choose to cover the full cost of more expensive equipment but will decide where any facilities are based. Researchers fear the shortfall in funds will hamper research as universities struggle to maintain their own equipment and major facilities face extra demand. Mark Downs, the chief executive of the Society of Biology, said: “Capital expenditure is essential for research. Without it we will fail to get the most out of the money spent on the rest of research. Critically it is also the budget for maintenance of expensive equipment. Cutting the budget by half makes no sense. The research councils largely have their hands tied but government must revisit this critical area.” Universities already share equipment, but at many sites time on facilities is over-subscribed. One researcher in London said smaller research groups would band together to bid for equipment but feared ending up in “unequal partnerships”. The eight research-intensive universities in the north of England, including Manchester, Durham and Sheffield, are meeting on Thursday to discuss the sharing of equipment such as microscopes and imaging instruments. A similar strategy has been adopted by chemistry departments in Scotland, which operate an east coast consortium dominated by Edinburgh and St Andrews, and a west coast collaboration centring on Strathclyde and Glasgow. Similar consortiums may be harder to set up in parts of England, including East Anglia and the west country, where research groups are more dispersed. David Phillips, president of the Royal Society of Chemistry and emeritus professor at Imperial College, said more sharing would undoubtedly cause tension within the scientific community. “All the equipment we have is fully used by our own people. If we are then being asked to provide a service for other departments elsewhere, that is going to put a lot of pressure on. It means having to ration the time available to existing users and that will cause some friction,” he said. “The difficulty for even successful departments is that equipment has a finite lifetime. You might be able to keep going with facilities that are five years old, but if they are a decade old, you are out of date. If there is a 50% cut in funding to replace that equipment, people in the UK are going to miss out. “The inevitable outcome is going to be fewer research departments in the UK. There is a lot of pressure on smaller departments who will see their income under threat, and there comes a point where you have to ask whether they will be viable,” he added. The Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, whose capital budget will fall from £49m in 2010/11 to 25m in 2013/14, said it would reform equipment sharing and might pull out of some facilities to better fund leading centres. “Inevitably there will be some groups who had certain facilities in their labs or on their doorsteps that won’t any more,” said John Fisher, deputy vice-chancellor at Leeds University. “It will be different, but we have to work smarter and more strategically as a country.” The Natural Environment Research Council, a major funder of environmental research, has ringfenced money for three major projects: the Halley Antarctic base, a replacement for the research ship, Discovery, and building work at its Keyworth site. “Aside from these projects, it will be very difficult to support new capital projects in the coming years unless additional funds can be secured,” a spokeswoman said. The extent of the cuts has drawn protests from physicists involved with long-term projects, such as the European Extra-Large Telescope, an observatory to be based in Chile. The Institute of Physics said the lack of capital funds undermined planning and was likely to affect the UK’s ability to take a leading role in the telescope project. The Science and Technology Facilities Council, which funds physics and astronomy, already plans to withdraw from telescopes in the northern hemisphere, a move that will have a damaging effect on UK groups hunting for Earth-like planets beyond our own solar system. Chi Onwurah, the shadow minister for innovation and science, said: “This government does not have a long-term plan to support British science. We are in danger of losing our world beating position in science because of this government’s policies. They claim to recognise the vital part science will play in rebalancing our economy, driving growth and creating jobs. But real terms cuts to research budgets and huge cuts to important capital projects tell a different story.” Science policy Research funding University funding Higher education Ian Sample guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …• Fifa asks FA for report on Lord Triesman’s claims • Governing body expresses ‘extreme concern’ Fifa has expressed “extreme concern” over the allegations of World Cup bidding corruption made by Lord Triesman, and has asked the Football Association to provide a full report. Triesman, the former FA and England 2018 bid chairman, told a parliamentary committee on Tuesday of “improper and unethical” behaviour by four Fifa executives, claiming they asked for favours, including money and a knighthood, when he was lobbying for England’s bid. Two other Fifa members were separately alleged to have been paid $1.5m (£912,200) to vote for Qatar’s 2022 bid. Fifa said in a statement: “In his letter to the FA, the Fifa secretary general [Jérôme Valcke] expresses the extreme concern of Fifa and the Fifa president at the latest allegations questioning the integrity of some Fifa executive committee members in connection with the bidding procedure for the 2018 and 2022 Fifa World Cups. “He adds that to be in a position to examine the situation thoroughly and with clear-sightedness, Fifa asks the FA to submit a complete report from Lord David Triesman, by means of which the latter would relate his declarations fully and provide any and all documentary evidence at his disposal.” The allegations of bribes paid for votes for Qatar were contained in a submission to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee by the Sunday Times. The Fifa statement went on: “The secretary general has also sent a letter to the Sunday Times to ask the newspaper to provide Fifa with any piece of evidence with regard to the statements made to MP John Whittingdale. “The Sunday Times had already provided world’s football governing body with all of the evidence and documentation at its disposal. Nevertheless, Fifa asks the English newspaper to submit as soon as possible any other piece of evidence that it may be in possession of and which has not yet been sent to Fifa. “In particular, reference is made in the letter to the allegations regarding a ‘whistleblower who had worked with the Qatar bid’, who allegedly made some declarations regarding the matter in question.” Fifa The FA World Cup 2018 Lord Triesman Football politics guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The government faces a row as Tory MPs fight to amend the education bill to increase numbers of selective schools Prominent backbench Conservative MPs are pushing to increase the number of academically selective state schools in England. Graham Brady, a former shadow minister for Europe, tabled an amendment to the education bill calling for independent schools to be allowed to select their pupils on ability even if they opted out of the private sector and turned into academies. He later withdrew the amendment, which was signed by 38 MPs, including two from the Labour party – Gisela Stuart and Eric Joyce – during a debate on the bill on Wednesday because the government did not support it. However, he told MPs in the Commons that he would “continue to argue the case”. Selective state schools, or grammars, are a politically fraught topic for the coalition, in particular for the Conservatives. Four years ago, a row broke out after David Willetts, then the Tory’s education spokesman, spoke out against grammar schools, arguing that they entrench disadvantage. David Cameron tried to calm a row that ensued among Conservative MPs in favour of the schools. Cameron argued that the debate was “pointless”. He said history had shown that creating grammar schools was “extremely difficult and … often leads to them being very unpopular, and they are then got rid of”. Brady, Conservative MP for Altrincham and Sale West, resigned from the frontbench over Cameron’s comments. Last year, Brady asked Michael Gove, the education secretary, whether he would allow more selective state schools in areas where parents wantedthem. Gove responded: “My foot is hovering over the pedal. I’ll have to see what my co-driver, Nick Clegg, has to say.” Legislation passed last year in the academies bill allowed grammar schools to become academies and continue to select their pupils on academic ability. Brady told the Commons that this showed that the government had already accepted that selective schools could be academies and that this amendment “merely extended this to independent schools”. He said his amendment would send out “a clear message that what matters in education is quality without dogma getting in the way”. “We would have the same number of selective schools, but they would be able to accept pupils regardless of their parents’ means. This is a simple measure which would open the door to more good schools. It would … welcome [independent schools] into the academy programme and into the state sector.” However, Nick Gibb, the schools minister, said there were no plans to expand the number of selective state schools. Andy Burnham, Labour’s shadow education secretary, described the amendment as an “outrageous expansion of selection”. “This reveals the Tory party’s true instincts on education – an ever more divided and elitist school system,” he said. “We know this is what Michael Gove wants too, but this blatant attempt by his backbenchers reveals that we are in a real battle to protect a fair education system. Labour is fighting for fair admissions for all families, while the Tory party are siding with the few not the many. The Lib Dems need to decide whose side they’re on.” The economic climate has made many parents decide against sending their children to private schools. Seven private schools have so far become academies. The number of private schools considering becoming academies is not known. There are 164 grammar schools in England. Anthony Seldon, master of Wellington College, said that becoming an academy would not be “the move of choice” for many, but that financially they may have no alternative. Gibb told Brady that he understood his “sentiment that there should be more good school places available in the state sector”. “We will talk to any independent schools – whether they are selective or not – about moving into the state sector to increase the number of good places,” Gibb said. “We have no plans to change the fact that [independent schools] are required to open up their admissions.” The education bill, which will now go to the House of Lords, also gives headteachers greater powers to exclude violent and aggressive pupils and ensures heads have the final say on whether to expel a pupil from their school. At the moment, parents are allowed by law to appeal if their child is excluded and, if successful, can overturn a head’s decision. Other reforms contained in the bill give teachers new rights to search pupils for forbidden items, such as pornography, phones, video cameras or anything they believe might cause harm, and removes the requirement for teachers to give a day’s notice of a detention. Meanwhile, ministers will discourage schools from entering their pupils from taking thousands of practical qualifications on Thursday. An independent review of vocational qualifications, published in March, found that up to 400,000 teenagers were wasting their time on publicly-funded college courses that do not lead to jobs or further training. Michael Gove, the education secretary, will respond to the review in a statement to the House of Commons at lunchtime. He will set out plans to stop teachers being able to include their pupils’ results in many vocational qualifications in school league tables. It comes as the chief executive of McDonald’s attacked snobbery towards jobs at the burger chain. Jill McDonald told a meeting of company directors that the US fast-food giant was creating thousands of jobs and helping young people gain qualifications while in work. “There is a lot of snobbery around our jobs,” she told the annual convention of the Institute of Directors. Schools Education policy Michael Gove Private schools Teaching Liberal-Conservative coalition David Cameron Nick Clegg Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …