Australia’s PM Julia Gillard faces tough fight to convince public before parliamentary vote Australia has unveiled its most sweeping economic reform in decades, including a plan to tax carbon emissions from the country’s worst polluters. As the largest emissions trading scheme outside Europe, it revives hopes of stronger global climate action. The country’s prime minister, Julia Gillard, said 500 companies, including steel and aluminium manufacturers, would pay a A$23 (£15.40) per tonne carbon tax from next year, rising by 2.5% a year and moving to a market-based trading scheme in 2015. “It’s time to get on with this, we are going to get this done,” Gillard said after a tough battle to win political support for ae scheme that has polarised voters and business. A parliamentary vote on the scheme is expected before the end of the year. Australia is the developed world’s worst per-capita greenhouse gas emitter because of its heavy reliance on cheap coal for power generation. Emissions are likely to rise in the booming economy without a carbon tax, the government says. The stakes are high for Gillard’s Labor party, which relies on the support of Greens and independents for a one-seat lower house majority. Her popularity has slumped to record lows over the scheme. Gillard will now try to convince voters opposed to the plan before the parliamentary vote, and try to deflect a campaign against it by the hardest-hit businesses. “It is absolutely critical that the government sells this very effectively,” said Tony Wood, director of the energy programme at the Grattan Institute policy thinktank. Australian retail and clean energy stocks were expected to be among the plan’s winners, and airlines and miners among the losers, but analysts said financial markets overall were likely to take the policy in their stride. The scheme aims to cut national emissions by 5% of 2000 levels by 2020, which would mean a cut of about 160m tonnes. The package already has the broad support of the Greens and independents, although crossbenchers said they had yet to support extra measures to protect jobs in the steel and coal industries. Parliament has rejected two previous attempts to tax carbon emissions in 2009 and any fresh rebuff in the next vote, expected around October, would seriously threaten Gillard’s government. A vigorous campaign by the conservative opposition and business groups could erode public support and frighten political backers before elections due by 2013. “This tax is going to go up and up and up as time goes by. I think this package is going to compound the trust problem that has dogged the prime minister. This package certainly sets up the next election to be a referendum on the carbon tax,” said the conservative opposition leader, Tony Abbott. Abbott has seized upon voter fears of a new tax and higher costs from a scheme that aims to transform how the nation generates and uses energy across the economy. To neutralise opposition, Gillard said more than A$24bn to be raised from pollution permit sales over the next three years would go to households through generous tax cuts worth more than A$15bn. Australia’s scheme will cover 60% of carbon pollution apart from exempted agricultural and light vehicle emissions, with treasury models showing it would boost the consumer price index by 0.7% in its first year. It could also aid global efforts to fight carbon pollution, which have largely stalled since the US president, Barack Obama, last year ruled out a federal climate bill in his present term. Outside the EU, only New Zealand has a national carbon scheme. “Other countries will look at one of the most carbon polluting economies on the planet that has made one huge stride forward towards putting a price on carbon,” said John Connor, chief executive of The Climate Institute. Australia said it hoped to link its scheme, which would cost A$4.4bn to implement after household and industry compensation, to other international carbon markets and land abatement schemes when its emissions market was running. Europe’s system, which covers the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, has forced power producers to pay for carbon emissions, driving cuts where power plants were forced to switch to cleaner natural gas or biomass. Australia Climate change Carbon emissions Pollution Emissions trading Mining Mining Coal Energy Fossil fuels guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Australia’s PM Julia Gillard faces tough fight to convince public before parliamentary vote Australia has unveiled its most sweeping economic reform in decades, including a plan to tax carbon emissions from the country’s worst polluters. As the largest emissions trading scheme outside Europe, it revives hopes of stronger global climate action. The country’s prime minister, Julia Gillard, said 500 companies, including steel and aluminium manufacturers, would pay a A$23 (£15.40) per tonne carbon tax from next year, rising by 2.5% a year and moving to a market-based trading scheme in 2015. “It’s time to get on with this, we are going to get this done,” Gillard said after a tough battle to win political support for ae scheme that has polarised voters and business. A parliamentary vote on the scheme is expected before the end of the year. Australia is the developed world’s worst per-capita greenhouse gas emitter because of its heavy reliance on cheap coal for power generation. Emissions are likely to rise in the booming economy without a carbon tax, the government says. The stakes are high for Gillard’s Labor party, which relies on the support of Greens and independents for a one-seat lower house majority. Her popularity has slumped to record lows over the scheme. Gillard will now try to convince voters opposed to the plan before the parliamentary vote, and try to deflect a campaign against it by the hardest-hit businesses. “It is absolutely critical that the government sells this very effectively,” said Tony Wood, director of the energy programme at the Grattan Institute policy thinktank. Australian retail and clean energy stocks were expected to be among the plan’s winners, and airlines and miners among the losers, but analysts said financial markets overall were likely to take the policy in their stride. The scheme aims to cut national emissions by 5% of 2000 levels by 2020, which would mean a cut of about 160m tonnes. The package already has the broad support of the Greens and independents, although crossbenchers said they had yet to support extra measures to protect jobs in the steel and coal industries. Parliament has rejected two previous attempts to tax carbon emissions in 2009 and any fresh rebuff in the next vote, expected around October, would seriously threaten Gillard’s government. A vigorous campaign by the conservative opposition and business groups could erode public support and frighten political backers before elections due by 2013. “This tax is going to go up and up and up as time goes by. I think this package is going to compound the trust problem that has dogged the prime minister. This package certainly sets up the next election to be a referendum on the carbon tax,” said the conservative opposition leader, Tony Abbott. Abbott has seized upon voter fears of a new tax and higher costs from a scheme that aims to transform how the nation generates and uses energy across the economy. To neutralise opposition, Gillard said more than A$24bn to be raised from pollution permit sales over the next three years would go to households through generous tax cuts worth more than A$15bn. Australia’s scheme will cover 60% of carbon pollution apart from exempted agricultural and light vehicle emissions, with treasury models showing it would boost the consumer price index by 0.7% in its first year. It could also aid global efforts to fight carbon pollution, which have largely stalled since the US president, Barack Obama, last year ruled out a federal climate bill in his present term. Outside the EU, only New Zealand has a national carbon scheme. “Other countries will look at one of the most carbon polluting economies on the planet that has made one huge stride forward towards putting a price on carbon,” said John Connor, chief executive of The Climate Institute. Australia said it hoped to link its scheme, which would cost A$4.4bn to implement after household and industry compensation, to other international carbon markets and land abatement schemes when its emissions market was running. Europe’s system, which covers the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, has forced power producers to pay for carbon emissions, driving cuts where power plants were forced to switch to cleaner natural gas or biomass. Australia Climate change Carbon emissions Pollution Emissions trading Mining Mining Coal Energy Fossil fuels guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Australia’s PM Julia Gillard faces tough fight to convince public before parliamentary vote Australia has unveiled its most sweeping economic reform in decades, including a plan to tax carbon emissions from the country’s worst polluters. As the largest emissions trading scheme outside Europe, it revives hopes of stronger global climate action. The country’s prime minister, Julia Gillard, said 500 companies, including steel and aluminium manufacturers, would pay a A$23 (£15.40) per tonne carbon tax from next year, rising by 2.5% a year and moving to a market-based trading scheme in 2015. “It’s time to get on with this, we are going to get this done,” Gillard said after a tough battle to win political support for ae scheme that has polarised voters and business. A parliamentary vote on the scheme is expected before the end of the year. Australia is the developed world’s worst per-capita greenhouse gas emitter because of its heavy reliance on cheap coal for power generation. Emissions are likely to rise in the booming economy without a carbon tax, the government says. The stakes are high for Gillard’s Labor party, which relies on the support of Greens and independents for a one-seat lower house majority. Her popularity has slumped to record lows over the scheme. Gillard will now try to convince voters opposed to the plan before the parliamentary vote, and try to deflect a campaign against it by the hardest-hit businesses. “It is absolutely critical that the government sells this very effectively,” said Tony Wood, director of the energy programme at the Grattan Institute policy thinktank. Australian retail and clean energy stocks were expected to be among the plan’s winners, and airlines and miners among the losers, but analysts said financial markets overall were likely to take the policy in their stride. The scheme aims to cut national emissions by 5% of 2000 levels by 2020, which would mean a cut of about 160m tonnes. The package already has the broad support of the Greens and independents, although crossbenchers said they had yet to support extra measures to protect jobs in the steel and coal industries. Parliament has rejected two previous attempts to tax carbon emissions in 2009 and any fresh rebuff in the next vote, expected around October, would seriously threaten Gillard’s government. A vigorous campaign by the conservative opposition and business groups could erode public support and frighten political backers before elections due by 2013. “This tax is going to go up and up and up as time goes by. I think this package is going to compound the trust problem that has dogged the prime minister. This package certainly sets up the next election to be a referendum on the carbon tax,” said the conservative opposition leader, Tony Abbott. Abbott has seized upon voter fears of a new tax and higher costs from a scheme that aims to transform how the nation generates and uses energy across the economy. To neutralise opposition, Gillard said more than A$24bn to be raised from pollution permit sales over the next three years would go to households through generous tax cuts worth more than A$15bn. Australia’s scheme will cover 60% of carbon pollution apart from exempted agricultural and light vehicle emissions, with treasury models showing it would boost the consumer price index by 0.7% in its first year. It could also aid global efforts to fight carbon pollution, which have largely stalled since the US president, Barack Obama, last year ruled out a federal climate bill in his present term. Outside the EU, only New Zealand has a national carbon scheme. “Other countries will look at one of the most carbon polluting economies on the planet that has made one huge stride forward towards putting a price on carbon,” said John Connor, chief executive of The Climate Institute. Australia said it hoped to link its scheme, which would cost A$4.4bn to implement after household and industry compensation, to other international carbon markets and land abatement schemes when its emissions market was running. Europe’s system, which covers the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, has forced power producers to pay for carbon emissions, driving cuts where power plants were forced to switch to cleaner natural gas or biomass. Australia Climate change Carbon emissions Pollution Emissions trading Mining Mining Coal Energy Fossil fuels guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
• Hit F5 to refresh or turn on the automatic widget below • Email your thoughts to alan.gardner.casual@guardian.co.uk • Check out Heikki Kovalainen’s interactive guide to Silverstone 12.59pm: Right, the entourages are scurrying off the track – we are about to go! go! go! 12.56pm: I’m intimately acquainted with the Silverstone track due to my experience playing TOCA Touring Cars on the PlayStation in the late 1990s – but, they’ve made some recent alterations, so Heikki Kovalainen’s interactive guide is a recommended read. 12.45pm: BBC shenanigans thus far: Water skiing with Button and Hamilton (Button twisted his knee and almost jeopardised his race); interviewing Prince Harry – who is about eight feet taller than Bernie Ecclestone; talking to Patrick Stewart, who claims if you were going to be run over by anyone “the world champion [Vettel] would be a good place to start”. Ah, the glitz and glamour. Anyway, according to Di Resta and Button, half the track is soaked and the other half isn’t – I wonder if anyone will go with two wet tyres and two dry? They’re about to play the national anthem, which is my cue to go refuel on the black stuff (nothing like a cup of petrol to open your eyes in the morning). The race starts in 15 minutes. Don’t go away! 12.38pm: Today’s pole sitter/No2 driver (and last year’s winner). 12.34pm: Weather report, with Twitter’s Giles Richards : Proper raining at copse now woohoo! #f1 #britishgp #motorsport #silverstone Good news for the McLarens, that. Like proper Brits, they’re only truly comfortable in wet, miserable conditions. 12.31pm: The final word on off-throttle blown diffusers, from Mark Webber: “It’s nonsense. Nobody really understands it. We don’t know what’s going on. It’s very boring for the fans. I am sure only 0.1 percent of the fans [and journalists] understand what’s going on.” I think that settles it, don’t you? Preamble: Morning all, welcome to lap-by-lap, brrrrm-by-brrrrm, crash-by-etcandsoon coverage of the British Grand Prix at Silverstone. Mark Webber is on pole, as part of a Red and Bullish front row that includes the reigning champion, current drivers’ standings leader and all-round F1 uber-driver, Sebastian Vettel. Chances of a British race winner look on the skinny decaf side, with Jenson Button’s McLaren parked fifth on the grid, five places ahead of his team-mate, Anger Management’s Lewis Hamilton. Rumours that Hamilton blew his top in the paddock this morning after being charged 85p for a can of coke are as yet unconfirmed. For today’s Plucky Brit In With An Outside Chance Of Podium Glory (aka. The Johnny Herbert Award), keep an eye out on Force India’s Paul di Resta, who starts in sixth. Now, shall we do this? British Grand Prix Formula One Motor sport Alan Gardner guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Crowd of up to 100 people attack police patrols with petrol bombs and missiles in Ballyclare Six police officers were injured overnight in rioting between Ulster loyalists and the security forces, in the run-up to the climax of marching season. The officers were hurt during disorder on the Doagh Road and Grange Estate areas of in Ballyclare, Co Antrim, where a crowd of up to 100 people attacked patrols with petrol bombs and missiles. At one point a hijacked bus was driven into a police vehicle. There were also reports of disorder in Carrickfergus, Newtownabbey and Magherafelt. In the early hours of Sunday police were called to the Leckagh Drive area of Magherafelt to trouble involving up to 50 people close to a loyalist bonfire. Police were attacked by missiles as they tried to remove a barricade. A 27-year-old man was arrested in connection with the trouble. A number of Catholic homes were also targeted in attacks described by police as sectarian. A number of roads in Carrickfergus remained blocked by burnt-out vehicles. The Democratic Unionist Assembly member for the area, David Hilditch, who is based in Carrickfergus, said the trouble involved “cars, works vans, the hijacking of a bus and damage to people’s personal property”. He said he was aware of at least five vehicles burned out in Carrickfergus. It is understod the violence was linked to a police attempt to limit the number of loyalist and pro-paramilitary flags being erected around the Ballyclare area. The violence has erupted at a time of concerns over the most controversial parade of the marching season, which passes by the nationalist Ardoyne area of north Belfast on 12 July – the most sacred day in the Orange Order’s calendar. A nationalist resident group in Ardoyne, which is not linked to Sinn Féin, has vowed to hold a counter-march on the same day. Last year 80 police officers were injured when nationalist youths attacked the security forces after the march. The Guardian has learned that both main loyalist paramilitary factions – the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force – do not plan to police their supporters involved in the parade that passes Ardoyne. In previous years UVF and UDA ex-prisoners flanked the march in an attempt to prevent younger loyalists from getting involved in violent clashes with Ardoyne republicans. One senior loyalist source said the two organisations were not prepared to put their members on the line this year because of a breakdown in communication between some local republicans and the loyalist community. Northern Ireland Henry McDonald guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Liberal Media Puzzle: Why Would Those ‘Progressive, Nondogmatic’ Unitarians Be Shrinking?
July 10, 2011 No Comment
The religion section in Saturday's Washington Post spotlighted a Daniel Burke story from the Religion News Service . While reports on orthodox religions often wonder whether followers won't leave “in droves” because a church won't bend to the popular will, Burke explores why the Unitarian Universalists can't keep adherents when it tries not to have any identifiable creed at all. That's intriguing, except Burke seems to accept that the UUs don't have a “dogmatic” faith, when it appears that its inability to actually talk about God for fear offending people might be a dogma all its own, an anti-dogmatic dogma. Here's how Burke began: A recent Sunday service at the First Unitarian Church of Baltimore ended with an apology. Laurel Mendes, a neo-pagan lay member who led the service, feared that a reference to God in the hymn “Once to Every Soul and Nation” might have upset the humanists in the pews. So, Mendes explained to the congregation that religious doctrine had been duly scrubbed from hymns in the Sunday program. “I didn’t want to make anyone uncomfortable by reciting something that might be considered a profession of faith,” Mendes, 52, said after the service. “We did say ‘God,’ which you don’t often hear in our most politically correct hymns.” Welcome to a typical Sunday in the anything-but-typical Unitarian Universalist Association, a liberal religious movement with a proud history of welcoming all seekers of truth — as long as it’s spelled with a lowercase “t.” Dramatic readings from the biography of 20th-century labor leader John L. Lewis? Sure. An altar crowded with Christian, Buddhist, Islamic and Jewish symbols? Absolutely. God-talk? Umm, well . . . The other question a religion reporter might ask is: Can you call it a “religion” if the “religion” shuns “God talk”? Isn't that just a large discussion group with an avoidance strategy? The failure of the Unitarian Universalist Association to grow is a serious challenge to the liberal-media notion that orthodoxy and popularity should be opposites in the modern world.
Continue reading …
Argentinian singer’s concert promoter was apparently the target of well-planned operation, say officials One of Latin America’s most admired folk singers, Facundo Cabral, was killed in an ambush by gunmen in Guatemala on Saturday. The interior minister, Carlos Menocal, said the Argentinian singer and novelist was on his way to Guatemala’s main airport when three carloads of gunmen surrounded Cabral’s vehicle and opened fire. The minister said early investigations indicated the bullets were meant for the driver, Cabral’s Nicaraguan concert promoter Henry Farinas, who was wounded. Cabral, 74, rose to fame in the early 1970s, one of a generation of singers who mixed political protest with literary lyrics and created deep bonds with an audience struggling through an era of revolution and repression across Latin America. The Guatemalan president, Álvaro Colom, said he had called his Argentinian counterpart, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, to tell her of the killing. “It seemed to hit her hard and she asked me to keep her informed about how the investigation is developing,” he told Argentina’s Radio 10. Colom later laid the blame at “people involved in organised crime. They are not street killers. It’s a well-planned operation.” Officials said they were not sure of the motive. Cabral’s vehicle was trailed by another carrying four bodyguards, who opened fire and tried to chase the attackers, Menocal said. Officials later found one of the vehicles apparently used in the attack alongside a road towards El Salvador. Menocal said flak jackets, pistols and the magazine of a Kalashnikov assault rifle were found inside. Menocal said Cabral had initially planned to take a hotel shuttle to the airport, but accepted a ride from Farinas. Cabral became internationally known in 1970 through his song “No soy de aqui ni alla” – I’m Not From Here Nor There – which was recorded hundreds of times in many languages. By the time Argentina fell under military rule in 1976, Cabral was identified as a protest singer, and he fled to Mexico where he kept recording, writing books and giving concerts. His concerts were a mix of philosophy and folklore, spoken-word poems and music reflecting his roots in the gaucho culture of rural Argentina. On stage, he celebrated the wisdom of Mahatma Gandhi and Mother Teresa, the humanism of Walt Whitman and the observations of Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. “Facundo Cabral was our last troubadour. As much a philosopher-poet as a singer, he was a living testament to the search for what unites us in culture and society,” said the Argentinian singer Isabel de Sebastian. “After his concerts, you’d feel that our life in common was richer, more mysterious, more profound.” He lived mostly on the road, in hotels and with friends, telling interviewers that he owned no home. He was particularly proud that Unesco declared him to be an “international messenger of peace” in 1996. By the end, he often used a cane and had trouble with his vision, but refused to slow down. “I always ask God, ‘Why have you given me so much?’ You’ve given me misery, hunger, happiness, struggle, enlightenment … I’ve seen everything. I know there’s cancer, syphilis and springtime, and fried apple dumplings,” Cabral said at 71, during an Associated Press interview in Miami. He never thought of retiring: “I can’t stop, I wouldn’t be able to,” he said. “I breathe on the road … on stage I’m 50 years younger, it pleases me to excite people with life.” Cabral gave his last concert on Thursday in Quetzaltenango. Guatemala Argentina guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Nicole Kidman, Tom Hanks and Jennifer Lopez – with mum in tow – among celebrities at Bafta dinner attended by royal couple It was the night when Hollywood royalty came to meet British royalty – and there was no question who were the more starstruck. On the last night of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s tour of north America, the big question was who would bother to turn out – in evening dress on a hot night an at ageing art nouveau theatre in a rundown part of central Los Angeles– for a dinner to promote British film talent, with the off-chance of meeting the royal couple. The answer, of course, was practically everyone in town. Barbra Streisand was there, Tom Hanks was there, Nicole Kidman was there, Jennifer Lopez was there – and brought her mum along – Jack Black was there, James Gandolfini of Sopranos fame was there, Quentin Tarantino was said to be there – and that was before you got to the famous Brits in Hollywood: Stephen Fry, Dominic Cooper, Russell T Davies, Cat Deeley, er, Gordon Ramsay and, double er, Piers Morgan. Some studios – Disney among them – had forked out $25,000 (£15,000) each for one of the 10-seater tables, and the guest list also included a great many middle-aged, anonymous men in black tie, accompanied by some of the most expensively made-up women in the world, who looked as if they might once have been in something. The Guardian diffidently approached one to ask whether she was one of the talented young Brits. “No, I am the partner of the caterer,” she replied. For such an array of talent there was even a red carpet to walk down, past a row of journalists, cameramen and photographers. For the young British talent, who were at the heart of the evening – 42 young actors, directors and video games developers highlighted as “Brits to watch” and given the opportunity to bond and make contacts around the laden tables – it may have been the first red carpet they have had a chance to stroll in California. Bafta, the British Academy of Film and Television Arts, sponsors many of them and Prince William is the Bafta president. Understandably, the Brits were the ones keenest to stop and talk to the British media. Thus, Katie Sole, film producer: “I think it’s great, really inspiring that they [the royal couple] want to be here. I was brought up in Ascot so I know what it means.” And Nigel Lythgoe, Bafta’s director in Los Angeles, now better known in the US as the suave “Nasty Nigel” of Pop Idol: “As a Brit, you can’t just call up and say I’m in Los Angeles, can I come and see you? It just doesn’t happen like that. “This is under one roof all the top echelon of executives in film and television and these 42 young Brits are going to be exposed to them. We are going to show their work on video, we’re going to let them sit at the tables, it’s just wonderful.” As for the duchess, his verdict was inevitable: “She has what Simon Cowell would say is the X Factor.” Of course he would. Nearby, Stephen Fry, whose ubiquity meant he had already met the royal couple at one reception, was avuncularly philosophising on their presence. “You don’t have to believe in monarchy in the medieval sense to realise what a tremendous advantage they give. You would have to be tremendously mean-spirited to say anything bad about them. The best hot-dog stall in town, Pinks, has even produced a Royal Frankfurter – two dogs in one bun – to greet their arrival. If you brought back Clark Gable and Marilyn Monroe to life you could not have had more excitement.” That might have been so, but the crowd across the road, although noisy, was small, only a couple of hundred, others perhaps put off by having to wait for many hours on a dull, dusty side road in the heat – unlike the stars, who came in the cool of the evening, and the royal couple, who arrived after the duke had spent a successful afternoon playing polo at Santa Barbara. The crowd whooped as the stars paraded, the women pausing to pose and be photographed in their evening wear. Only Nicole Kidman could be persuaded to say something cogent: “I think they are lovely … amazing. They make me smile. I just got off the phone with my mother and my mum said: ‘I am so glad you are going to be there – we are Australian.’” A more minor star, Jason Bateman, said: “It is certainly exciting that royalty has come to our city, to our weird little industry. I am assuming they are movie buffs. The only good thing about being famous is you get the chance to meet someone you may admire and they may actually want to talk to you too. They are real movie stars – we are just faking it and getting paid for it; they are the real deal.” And then the real deal arrived in a small motorcade to huge cheers and cries of “we love you”. The remaining lingering stars were ushered inside for a reception, where they were told by Duncan Kenworthy, Bafta’s Los Angeles president: “Please don’t all rush over, be cool in this coolest of towns. Trust me, they will try and chat to all of you. “You can call them whatever you want: sir, madam, Will and Kate. They are very relaxed, as I am sure you will be.” The movie crowd took no notice, chatting among themselves and happily ignoring the video of the young British talent in action being played on screens on the stage. The gossiping only stopped as the prince stepped forward, essaying a joke: “I would like to thank Colin Firth for my perfect opening line: ‘I have a voice’,” he started diffidently, proving that at least one member of the royal family has seen The King’s Speech. Down in the gold and dark red plush of the Belasco Theater’s auditorium, where the tables were set out, the young British talent was interspersed with the old Hollywood talent that may one day notice them. On a centre table, Fry sat near to Hanks with Gandolfini opposite, but the royals made a beeline straight for the latter, famous for his role as Tony Soprano, who favoured them with his wry Mafia grin. At the top table, Kidman and Streisand were waiting – the latter the only star too grand not to have bothered walking the red carpet. Both found themselves ignored as the royals sat down, gazing only at each other before belatedly acknowledging the stars sitting opposite. Streisand was hidden from them behind a large table lamp, around which her hand came flapping urgently in greeting. Sometimes even the greatest stars can’t resist getting in on a piece of the action. William and Catherine visit more humble folk today – an inner-city arts project and a centre for injured former servicemen – before flying home by a scheduled flight, although it is a safe bet that they will not be travelling cabin class. Their trip to Canada, with its brief stopover in Los Angeles – a celebrity-obsessed city that William’s mother, Diana, never got to – has been a clear success. Large and enthusiastic crowds greeted them across Canada and the couple engaged with those they met with ease and charm. They did not put a foot wrong, no gaffes, no tantrums, just smiles – and their success means they will be asked to do it again, and again. It may postpone, if not change, the ultimate fate of the monarchy, but they have sprinkled a little stardust over the battered old institution. As Licia Corbella, a columnist on the Calgary Herald, wrote this week: “It is undeniable that they are breathing new life into a monarchy grown stodgy and seemingly irrelevant to younger generations. It doesn’t hurt either that they both look hot in jeans and cowboy duds.” Well, up to a point: the duchess’s costume count had reached 23 by yesterday. Prince William The Duchess of Cambridge Monarchy Celebrity United States Stephen Bates guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Sand is trucked in to build up a coastline suffering erosion from storms, rising sea levels and development The high cost and exclusive nature of Italy’s best beaches cause regular disputes, but accelerating coastal erosion means some of them are now disappearing altogether. Italian actors, intellectuals and the titled rich setting off for the beach this summer have been shocked to find that one of their favourite spots has all but vanished, thanks to encroaching development and violent winter storms linked to climate change. Traditionally, the cultural and political elites have soaked up the summer sun at Capocotta beach near Rome, which has a reputation for bohemian flamboyance and boasts Italy’s only official nudist shoreline. But the golden dunes and beach huts have been swept away, leaving the literati fighting over a few inches of sand and how to rebuild. “I realised something was happening three years ago when a beach kiosk from further down the sands floated past us in a storm,” said Paolo Moscia, a lifeguard at the nudist section at Capocotta, which has drawn a mixture of gay bathers, ministers, musicians and hip film directors since Allen Ginsberg hung out there in the 1950s, and wild high-society drug parties gave birth to la dolce vita . This year regulars arrived to find that their section was reduced to a trickle of sand and storms had engulfed 30 metres of beach, leaving the wooden restaurant renowned for its oysters and grilled squid close to toppling off the dunes into the waves. Moscia pointed at swimmers beyond the breakers. “This time last year people were strolling on the sand out there,” he says. “If nothing is done, we won’t be here in two years.” Experts blame development along Italy’s rivers and the building of hydro-electric dams, which have slowed down the erosion of river banks and the flow out to sea of the tonnes of sediment and sand needed to replenish beaches after storms. “The Tiber sent 400,000 cubic metres of sand a year into the Mediterranean 25 years ago. Now it’s down to 80,000 cubic metres,” said Angelo Bonelli, head of the Italian Green party. Francesco Lalli, a senior researcher at Italy’s environmental research centre, Ispra, said Italy’s beaches lost five million cubic metres of sand between 1950 and 2000. The losses caused by overbuilding are levelling out, he said, adding that there is now a suspicion that the storms chewing away at the beaches are more violent because of climate change. “Plus, we are seeing the initial effects of rising sea levels,” he warned. North of Rome, L’Ultima Spiaggia beach has fared no better than Capocotta. A long-time favourite of Italy’s leftwing cultural elite, including the former prime minister Romano Prodi, the beach is tucked into the lower reaches of Tuscany. It is a retreat for philosophers, aristocrats and anti-Berlusconi politicians who convene every summer to eat wild boar and attend cultural conferences in nearby Capalbio, a medieval hilltown nicknamed “Little Athens”. After storms left just a shallow layer of sand this spring, 15 metres have now been restored, thanks only to four truckloads of sand dumped by the local authority. But, according to the environmental centre Ispra, more than 1,000km of coastline is now eroding steadily. Since the economic boom of the 1950s, working-class bathers from nearby Rome have flocked to the beach clubs of Ostia, near Rome. But they, too, are now watching their beaches slip away, prompting the regional authority to pump in sand scooped up from the seabed, part of a ¤26m scheme to bring 350,000 cubic metres of sand ashore to fill the gaps on almost 400km of coastline. For patrons of the Sporting Beach Club in Ostia, where forlorn lines of changing rooms that once stood 150 metres back from the sea are now buffeted by waves, the new sand cannot arrive soon enough. “My parents came here before me and I am sticking it out,” said Ivana Paolini, 55, “but it’s tough when you have to swim out to sea past concrete pillars holding up the changing rooms.” An expert at the environmental group Legambiente said beach clubs were partly to blame for losing the sand on which they charge sunbathers for the privilege of stretching out. “The dunes which advanced to replace lost sand are being concreted over by the clubs,” said Giorgio Zampetti. “By building beach clubs to profit from the sand, people are ensuring that sand will vanish.” Italy Europe Climate change Sea level Oceans Beach holidays Tom Kington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Bob Woodward thinks the world doesn't hold the United States in very high regard anymore. Appearing on the syndicated “Chris Matthews Show” this weekend, the Washington Post's most recognizable journalist said, “I’m not sure the United States has been looked at as the grown-up nation for a long time…You travel around the world a little bit, and, and there’s, there’s not even tough love for the United States” (video follows with transcript and commentary): BOB WOODWARD, WASHINGTON POST: But on your question about grown-up, I’m not sure the United States has been looked at as the grown-up nation for a long time. I think, I think there’s a lot of negativity out there. You travel around the world a little bit, and, and there’s, there’s not even tough love for the United States. In the circles someone like Woodward travels in, is there ever a high regard for America? Was there respect for this country amongst his peers when he was reporting on Watergate almost 40 years ago? It really is nothing new that America's journalists hold her in such disregard. They've been doing it for decades. But not all of them. The Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page wasn't necessarily willing to sell America short alongside Woodward: CLARENCE PAGE, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: And yet look how calm Wall Street has been. I mean, there, it’s, there’s a sense on Wall Street that there are a lot of theatrics going on here, but that the United States is not going to default. Indeed. Maybe one of the greatest measures of the respect the world has for a nation is their willingness to invest in its debt. With all the financial distress and calamities that have befallen the globe in recent years, America's Treasury paper continues to be the universal safe haven of choice: Above is a five year chart of our 10-year Treasury note. The vertical axis is interest rate, the horizontal one years. For those unfamiliar, bonds and notes trade in an inverse relationship to interest rates. This means the lower the rate, the higher the price. As is plainly evident, since the financial world turned on its ear in 2007, international investors have continually poured more and more money into our debt. Contrary to Woodward's world view, this means that people with real money – maybe not the folks he hangs out with – do indeed see America as the grown-up. If they didn't, they'd be piling out of our debt with both hands.
Continue reading …