Using mobile phone abroad to become cheaper under EU laws to allow customers to switch provider for overseas calls Mobile telecommunications firms will be forced to reduce the amount they charge for overseas data roaming to a maximum 80p (90 cents) per megabyte from July 2012, under EU proposals announced today. Customers will also be able to switch to other providers for their overseas roaming, leading to greater competition and potentially even lower charges, according to EU telecoms commissioner Neelie Kroes. Kroes announced that the cap on the cost to consumers of overseas calls and texts, introduced last week , will be lowered in each of the following three years. From July 2012 prices will drop for calls made from phones across Europe to 28p (32 cents) a minute; 25p (28 cents) from July 2013; and 21p (24 cents) from July 2014. But consumer groups have warned that the costs to networks of introducing the first ever cap on data roaming could be passed on to customers through price rises elsewhere. They also argue that the cap should be introduced immediately rather than in a year’s time, and that 90 cents per MB is still too high – though the EU has announced further plans for this to be reduced to 45p (50 cents) per megabyte from July 2014. Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumers’ Organisation , said: “It’s reassuring that the commission is tackling the market’s structural problems by introducing decoupling of roaming from domestic telecom subscriptions, and at last acting on the increasingly important issue of data roaming. The current cap of 90 cents per MB is a slow start. Consumers should not be ripped off for surfing the net abroad.” At present, mobile data roaming costs vary hugely between provider. O2, for example, charges £3.07 per MB when roaming in Europe and £6 per MB for the rest of the world, whilst Vodafone charges £1 per MB up to 5MB, then £5 for every additional MB after that in Europe. Goyens said the European telecommunications market was currently “a closed shop” and was urgently in need of more competition to force down pricing. Data-roaming bills were automatically limited to €50 per month excluding VAT (unless the customer chose another limit – higher or lower) on 1 July 2010 – but according to the latest EU Barometer survey, only 19% of people who use internet-related services on their mobile phones when abroad think the costs of data-roaming are fair. Brian Boroff from mobile price comparison site Mobilife.com said consumers could see prices for other services rise. “We are glad to see clarity on costs for EU roaming as this has been a huge area of confusion for many years. However, for the mobile operators this move will erode profits for the networks and therefore we may see costs rises elsewhere, such as the recent price hikes we have seen from Orange and Vodafone and a possible rise on phone usage costs outside inclusive allowance of minutes and texts.” Orange and Vodafone have both recently raised the prices on their pay as you go tariffs, but said this was as a result of Ofcom’s recent cap on mobile termination rates , rather than the latest EU announcements. Today’s announcement has no requirement for networks to reduce the cost of data roaming outside of the EU , with costs for downloading data further afield costing consumers $20-30 per MB outside the EU – though consumers can acccess Wi-fi rather than 3G to escape roaming fees. Michael Phillips, product director, Broadbandchoices.co.uk said exorbitant roaming costs apply equally to tablet users “iPads are incredibly useful to take away on holiday but even simple tasks like checking your email can become expensive if you are using your domestic iPad tariff to surf while on holiday abroad,” he said. “iPad roaming costs aren’t necessarily the same as those applied to regular mobile broadband packages, so we strongly urge consumers to check small print, set a usage cap, and use Wi-fi when they can. This can help avoid ‘bill shock’.” He added that consumers should also turn off data roaming when they do not need it, while abroad, though this may not always work. Travellers with iPhones and O2 contracts have recently warned that they have been billed even when turning off data roaming on their phones. Internet, phones & broadband Household bills Mobile phones Smartphones Telecommunications industry Telecoms Consumer affairs Mark King guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Elaine McDonald loses overnight carer ruling as critics fear councils ‘warehousing’ people at home to cut costs A former prima ballerina left disabled after a stroke has lost her supreme court battle for an overnight carer to give her “dignity and independence”. Justices at the highest court in the land dismissed an appeal by 67-year-old Elaine McDonald in a majority ruling. Last October, McDonald, who was once a star of Scottish Ballet and received the OBE in 1983, lost her case at the appeal court in London and suffered a further defeat on Wednesday. She was left with reduced mobility after a stroke in September 1999 and needs to use a wheelchair outdoors. She had argued that the care package she received from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, to cover her assessed needs during the day and night, should include assistance at night to use a commode. John Wadham, group director (legal) at the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said: “We are disappointed with today’s ruling which is a significant setback for people who receive care in their home. “Ms McDonald is not incontinent. However, this judgment means she will be treated as such. “Local authorities will now have greater discretion in deciding how to meet a person’s home care needs and will find it easier to justify withdrawing care. “This means that older people’s human rights to privacy, autonomy and dignity will often be put at serious risk. “The court has missed a significant opportunity to interpret the law to protect some of the most vulnerable people in society. “The commission’s inquiry into care in the home has already highlighted some of the problems with the current system of home care. This judgment will only fuel those problems.” McDonald said she is not incontinent and has a horror of using incontinence pads, which she considered an “affront to her dignity”. Her plea was for help to use a commode at night. She had challenged the borough’s decision to reduce the amount allocated to her weekly care. Age UK believes McDonald’s human rights have been breached and that there could be “extremely adverse and devastating consequences for many thousands of older people if other councils take similar decisions to save money”. After the supreme court ruling, Michelle Mitchell, charity director at Age UK said: “Today’s decision is shameful. Older people have a fundamental right to dignity and forcing someone to sleep in their own urine and faeces could not be more undignified. “This judgment opens the door to warehousing older people in their own homes without regard to their quality of life. “Care should not be just about keeping people safe. It must enable them to live dignified and fulfilled lives.” Alex Rook, of Irwin Mitchell solicitors, who represented Age UK, said: “The submissions Age UK made to the supreme court in this case sought to ensure that local authorities follow the correct assessment procedures to establish an older person’s needs and to then put in place a lawful package of care. “While Age UK is acutely aware of the current difficult economic climate, the right balance must be struck between the rights of the individual and the interests of the community, and Age UK continues to find it difficult to understand how it can be rational or reasonable to expect an older continent person to use incontinence pads rather than to assist them to access a toilet.” Social care Carers Disability Long-term care Local government Welfare Human rights Human Rights Act Court of appeal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
With pressure building on Rebekah Brooks and News International, follow all the latest developments in the phone-hacking scandal including PMQs and the emergency debate in the Commons 12.07pm: Miliband says Cameron should appoint a senior figure, potentially an judge, to lead an inquiry. It should have the power to take evidence on oath. And it should cover the police, as well as the media. Cameron says he does not want to jeopardise the police investigation. But it may be possible to make a start on some aspects. Sometimes inquiries are set out too quickly, he says. Miliband says it is important that work starts now. Cameron launched the Gibson inquiry into collusion in torture even though criminal cases were pending. Miliband turns to the BSkyB bid. The public will react “with disbelief” if this deal goes ahead when News International is the subject of a major criminal investigation. Cameron says that although the Gibson inquiry has been set up, it has not started work. “But, believe me, I want us to get on with this issue,” he says. On BSkyB, he says the government has followed the correct legal processes. Jeremy Hunt his handling the matter in a quasi-judicial role. Only yesterday Miliband himself said that plurality issues were separate from News International ethics. 12.04pm: Ed Miliband says the whole country has been appalled by the disclosures about phone hacking. The idea that anyone could hack into Milly Dowler’s phone is “immoral and a disgrace”. Will Cameron support the call for a full inquiry to take place, as soon as practical. Yes, says Cameron. • Government agrees to hold an inquiry. Cameron says there may be a need for more than one inquiry. There is a major police investigation underway, he says. It does not involve police officers from the original investigation “that so clearly did not get to the truth”. We need to find out why the original inquiry did not get to the bottom of what happened, he says. There also needs to be an inquiry into the media. It may be possible to start some of this before the police inquiry is over. Cameron says he is willing to discuss this with Miliband and other party leaders. 12.02pm: Cameron is taking questions now. The first two have been about banks and international aid. 11.58am: I’ve just received this statement from Sir Paul Stephenson , the Metropolitan police commissioner In view of the widespread media coverage and public interest, I am taking the unusual step of issuing this statement. As you know Operation WEETING – the investigation into phone hacking -commenced on 26 January. I can confirm that on 20 June 2011 the MPS washanded a number of documents by News International, through theirbarrister, Lord Macdonald QC. Our initial assessment shows that these documents include information relating to alleged inappropriate payments to a small number of MPS officers. Discussions were held with the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) at the time and they are content that this matter should continue to be investigated through Operation ELVEDEN under the direction of DAC Sue Akers, in partnership with our Directorate of Professional Standards. At this time we have not seen any evidence requiring a referral to the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) in respect of any senior officer. Whilst I am deeply concerned by recent developments surrounding phone hacking they are a product of the meticulous and thorough work of Operation WEETING, which will continue. Operation ELVEDEN will be equally thorough and robust. Anyone identified of wrongdoing can expect the full weight of disciplinary measures and if appropriate action through the criminal courts. • The Metropolitan police admits a “small number” of officers seem to have taken money from the News of the World. But senior officers were not involved, it says. 11.54am: The Tory MP David Davis, the former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Fowler and Alastair Campbell have all just told the Daily Politics show that they think News Corporation’s bid for BSkyB should be put on hold. 11.50am: PMQs is coming up soon. I’ll be focusing on the phone hacking exchanges. 11.50am: According to colleagues, Lloyds are also pulling advertising from this week’s News of the World. 11.24am: PMQs is coming soon. First, here’s a mid-morning summary. • Simon Greenberg, News International’s director of corporate affairs, has said that the company is “close” to finding out who authorised Glenn Mulcaire to target Milly Dowler’s phone. According to PoliticsHome, Greenberg said on Radio 5 Live that it was “clear” that Rebekah Brooks did not sanction this. The BBC’s Nick Robinson has posted more on this on his blog. • Halifax has pulled adverstising from the News of the World. “In recognising and responding to consumer reaction, Halifax has cancelled an advertisement in this Sunday’s News of the World,” a spokesowoman said. “This was a tactical decision in the short term whilst we carefully consider our longer term position and its implications.” Other firms, including Renault and Mumsnet, are considering doing the same. • Andy Coulson, David Cameron’s former communications chief, has become a central focus the News of the World controversy. This follows the company’s decision to reveal that it has found emails that appear to show that Coulson authorised payments to the police. The Times – a News International paper that has until now had tended not to report the story prominently – put this on its front page today. This has prompted speculation about whether News International is sacrificing Coulson to put protect Rebekah Brooks. (See 9.00am, 9.13am and 10.35am.) • Downing Street has said that it welcomes the fact that MPs will debate calls for a public inquiry into the affair this afternoon. But MPs will not actually get the chance to vote for a public inquiry, and it is not clear yet whether Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, who will be speaking for the government in the debate, will give a commitment to set one up. • Downing Street has said that David Cameron “stands by” the statement he made about Coulson when Coulson quit his Number 10 job in January . At the time Cameron said Coulson could be “extremely proud” of what he had done for Cameron. 11.18am: The broadcasters are reporting that Sue Akers, the Metropolitan police officer in charge of the phone hacking inquiry, will give evidence to the Commons home affairs committee next week. Actually, Keith Vaz, the committee chairman, announced this yesterday. Andy Hayman and Peter Clarke, the two officers in charge of the original investigation, will also be appearing. The session will start at 12pm on Tuesday. 11.10am: There is also a call for an anti-Murdoch demonstration at Westminster at 1pm. 11.07am: And while we’re on the subject of campaigns, it’s worth mentioning the Media Standards Trust, who have launched a petition calling for a public inquiry into the phone hacking affair. 11.03am: Melissa Harrison has written a piece for Comment is free about how she launched a Twitter campaign to encourage people to urge firms to pull their advertising from the News of the World. 10.55am: The Tweetminster post I mentioned at 10.49am was a reference to a post that has just gone up on Nick Robinson’s blog. News International executives believe that they have uncovered evidence of who at the News of the World commissioned and sanctioned the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone. The evidence is said to have emerged in a document trawl carried out in the immediate aftermath of the revelation by the Guardian of the hacking of the murdered girl’s phone. I am told that the evidential jigsaw is not yet complete but executives believe they know who was responsible. Robinson says the new evidence does not contradict Rebekah Brooks’s statement yesterday that it was “inconceivable” that she know about what was going on. 10.51am: Talking of Glenn Mulcaire, BBC News have just broadcast a doorstep interview with him this morning. It must be the worst doorstep I’ve ever seen. This is all Mulcaire said. I made a statement yesterday and due to legal constraints unfortunately at this stage I can make no more comment. Thank you very much. Never mind. In case you missed it, here’s the statement he put out yesterday. I want to apologise to anybody who was hurt or upset by what I have done. I’ve been to court. I’ve pleaded guilty. And I’ve gone to prison and been punished. I still face the possibility of further criminal prosecution. Working for the News of the World was never easy. There was relentless pressure. There was a constant demand for results. I knew what we did pushed the limits ethically. But, at the time, I didn’t understand that I had broken the law at all. 10.49am: The BBC believes that News International now know who commissioned Glenn Mulcaire to target Milly Dowler’s phone, according to a tweet from Tweetminster. 10.35am: Anyone who watches cop programmes knows that when gang solidarity starts to break down, the police are almost home and dry. That’s what’s so interesting about the Times story focusing on Andy Coulson and News of the World payments to police. (See 9.00am.) The Telegraph’s Benedict Brogan has got a nice take on this on his daily email morning briefing. The problem with a strategy of throwing former colleagues to the wolves is that you soon run out of colleagues. And it might encourage them to say more than they might have otherwise. The buck hasn’t stopped yet, it’s still moving. All those politicians who invested themselves personally in the NI combine must be feeling queasy this morning. 10.30am: My colleague Nick Davies, who has led the Guardian’s phone hacking investigation, has produced a comprehensive list on our data blog of all the people we now know to have been targeted by the News of the World. 10.17am: Here are what the papers are saying about the phone hacking affair in their editorial columns today. • The Times (paywall) says that it has decided to break its silence on the phone hacking scandal engulfing its sister paper, the News of the World. It says there is “much we still need to know” about the precise exten of phone hacking. But it says this is a watershed moment for British journalism. There is no doubt but that journalists are now in their version of the MPs’ expenses scandal. If there is proven to be truth in the allegations that journalists on the News of the World hacked into the voicemail of the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, there will not be a journalist in the country who, after the warranted anger, will not feel shamed and depressed. There is a lot that is not yet known about this case but this much we do know: this is beyond reprehensible … We will, no doubt, learn more, and none of it is likely to be edifying. Whatever else emerges, this is a watershed moment for British journalism. What happened needs to be investigated and, in the public interest and the interests of journalism itself, brought to light. It ought to go without saying that nothing of this nature can ever happen again. But then it ought to have gone without saying that nothing of this nature could ever have happened in the first place. This is why it is so important that the truth be known. • The Financial Times (subscription) says Rebekah Brooks should go. Mr Murdoch must set aside personal loyalties and remove those executives with any involvement in the affair – whether through their role as editors or at a corporate level. That includes those responsible for handling the company’s response. For a start, Rebekah Brooks, the chief executive of News Corp’s UK operations, should go. Assuming the allegations are correct, as the editor of the News of the World when Ms Dowler’s phone was hacked, her position is untenable. Although she has pleaded ignorance, the final responsibility was hers. • The Independent also says Brooks should go. The alleged hacking of the Dowler phones took place when Rebekah Brooks was editor of the News of the World. Ms Brooks has since been promoted by Rupert Murdoch to chief executive of News International. Andy Coulson resigned as editor of the same newspaper in 2007 when a journalist he employed was convicted of hacking Prince William’s voice messages. It is therefore hard to see how Ms Brooks can remain in her present position, even if it is true that she was unaware of the hacking of the Dowler phones (as she claimed yesterday) when she was editor. • The Guardian says Jeremy Hunt should suspend his decision about whether to allow News Corporation to buy BSkyB. The problem is that a significant majority of people in this country are opposed to the merger: it simply doesn’t pass the commonsense “bad smell” test. So Mr Hunt should simply put the decision on ice. He should say that it is inconceivable that he should currently approve the creation of a giant media entity in this country while there are so many unanswered questions about the criminal behaviour of its employees and about the governance of the company. The people at the head of News International are the same people who paid hush money to conceal evidence of criminality within their own company and who led a news organisation which – according to the PCC chair, Peta Buscombe – lied to the regulator. • The Daily Mirror says that the News Corporation takeover of BSkyB should be put on hold. It criticises David Cameron and Ed Miliband for being too close to Murdoch. [Cameron's] close ties to News International at the very highest level are well documented and that cosy relationship undoubtedly smoothed a path for the controversial takeover. Equally, how can Ed Miliband, the Leader of the Labour Party, describing the behaviour as “immoral” and “sick”, try to nudge News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks towards the exit door, then pretend its grotesque actions should have no bearing over it controlling what we watch on TV … To enhance the power and influence over our lives of a company at the heart of a remarkable storm – particularly when further incredible revelations await – would be wrong, illogical and contrary to the public interest At the very least the deal must be put on ice – and should weak Ministers bleat they’re impotent, then they should rush legislation through Parliament to acquire powers to do the right thing. • The Daily Mail says the affair reflects badly on the police, David Cameron, the Press Complaints Commission and Jeremy Hunt. The police, sadly, come out of this terribly. Afraid of upsetting a powerful newspaper group, which employed several ex-senior officers as writers, they botched their first hacking investigation and cursorily refused a second one when further evidence was produced … This is the same David Cameron who, of course, in a disastrous misjudgment, made the disgraced NotW editor Andy Coulson his press officer. And then there is the newspaper industry itself. That the Press Complaints Commission has been dilatory is now all too painfully apparent. Bereft of any investigatory powers, it accepted — perhaps naively — News International’s lies and, together with the newspaper industry, must learn huge lessons … And finally we come to the sorry figure of Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, the man who, in a decision that will shame him and the Tory Party for years, refused to refer News International’s hugely contentious takeover of BskyB to the Competition Commission. How sick that now looks. There are no editorials on the subject in the Daily Telegraph, the Sun and the Daily Express. 10.05am: Crispin Blunt , the justice minister, has just told BBC News that Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, will be speaking for the government in the debate this afternoon. He will set out the government’s position on the call for an inquiry, Blunt says. But it is difficult for the government to do anything while criminal investigations are ongoing, Blunt adds. 9.56am: How is the Sun covering today’s story? “Loyally” is the word, I think. Here’s a flavour of their story. FORMER News of the World Editor Rebekah Brooks yesterday said she was “sickened” by allegations that a private eye hired by the paper hacked tragic Milly Dowler’s phone. The News International boss vowed the “strongest possible action” if it was proved rogue operator Glenn Mulcaire had intercepted the 13-year-old’s voicemail while she was missing. She branded the claims “almost too horrific to believe” as senior executives at the media company met police conducting a criminal investigation into phone hacking. Denis MacShane MP says it’s a collector’s item. 9.44am: And while we’re on the subject of campaigns, Sunny Hundal at Liberal Conspiracy is inviting readers to contact firms that advertise in the News of the World demanding that they withdraw their advertising. He says that firms that have not pulled out by lunchtime will be “named and shamed” (my phrase) in the Commons this afternoon. 9.34am: Avaaz, an online campaigning organisation, is inviting people to sign an online petition saying News Corporation should not be allowed to buy BSkyB until the Competition Commission has investigated and an inquiry into the phone hacking affair has been carried out. Avaaz collected more than 40,000 names on a petition submitted to the last News Corp/BSkyB consultation. More than 60,000 names have already signed the latest one, which will be open until the consultation closes on Friday. 9.21am: Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian’s editor-in-chief, has just told BBC News that Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, should delay the decision on whether to allow News Corporation to buy the whole of BSkyB. The latest consultation on the plan closes at midday on Friday, and Hunt was expected to approve the deal before the end of the month. But he should announce a pause, Rusbridger said, and challenge News International to seek a judicial review of his decision if they dare. (Hunt gave details about what stage the bid has reached in a statement to the Commons last week.) Rusbridger also said that, if David Cameron were to announce an inquiry, that would “calm a lot of nerves”, and that Press Complaints Commission needed to be reformed. 9.13am: Labour’s Tom Watson has just told BBC News that he thought the “Coulson authorised payments to the police” story running on the BBC last night and prominently in the Times today (see 9.00am) was a distraction exercise. This is desperation from News International. They are trying to protect Rebekah Brooks, who rightly faces the ire of the nation today. Watson also said that the Press Complaints Commission was “probably finished” and that the inquiry into the affair would have to be judge-led. This last point is important. It now seems inevitable that, at some point, there will be an inquiry into press standards. But there’s a huge difference between a commission meeting in private, and a judge-led inquiry with the power to subpoeana witnesses and force them to give evidence on oath in public. Listen carefully for what ministers have to say about this. They will be under pressure (not least from certain figures in the newspaper industry, I suspect) to go for the minimum option. 9.00am: The Times has got the News of the World story on its front page (paywall ) – but it’s focusing on payments to the police, not phone hacking. The News of the World gave the Metropolitan police information some time ago about payments being made to police officers at the time when Andy Coulson was editing the paper, but this information has only just become public. On the Today programme Simon Greenberg, News International’s head of corporate affairs, said the information was released because Vanity Fair were researching an article that was going to allege, wrongly, that the company had emails detailing the payments and that it hadn’t handed them over to the police. But, as Nick Robinson argued on Today, focusing on payments to the police may help the company because it focuses media attention on Coulson, and therefore David Cameron’s decision to hire him as his communications chief in Downing Street. 8.48am: Huffington Post have launched in the UK today. They’ve chosen a good day to jump in. Their phone hacking coverage includes a blog from the Guardian’s own Roy Greenslade, who says that if the advertising boycott of News of the World escalates, Rebekah Brooks will be forced to quit. As many of us have been saying for years, that hacking – which is, of course, an illegal act – took place as a matter of course at the behest of the Wapping newsroom. It was used to discover private information about anyone – actors, PR agents, secretaries, footballers, TV presenters and people caught up in murder investigations – deemed likely to provide sales-winning copy for the newspaper … Commerce was behind the hacking. Commerce will decide [Brooks's] fate. 8.32am: On the Today programme Graham Foulkes, whose son died in the 7/7 bombings, said that he would like to have a meeting with Rupert Murdoch to discuss the news that the relatives of 7/7 victims were targeted by the News of the World. “I would very much like to meet him face to face and have a very in-depth discussion with him about responsibility and the power that he has and how it should be used appropriately,” Foulkes said. As PoliticsHome reports, Foulkes said the thought that journalists were listening to the private conversations he was having at the time was “horrendous”. After the explosions in London nobody from the authorities contacted us or any of the families at all for quite some days so we were in a very dark place there, and we were using the phone and frantically trying to get information about David and where he’d been and if he was in hospital or whatever, and talking very intimately about very personal issues. The thought that these guys may have been listening to that is just horrendous … It kind of fills you with horror really because we were in a very dark place, and you think that its about as dark as it can get, and then you realise that there’s somebody out there that can make it even darker. Later on the programme Simon Greenberg, director of corporate affairs at News International, said that Foulkes’s call for a personal meeting with Murdoch was “something that we would consider”. 8.16am: The News of the World phone-hacking crisis is intensifying, and today may well turn out to be a crucial day for the paper – and perhaps even for the future of the British newspaper industry. New revelations about the behaviour of the paper are coming thick and fast. The Guardian leads on the news that relatives of victims of the 7 July 2005 attacks were targeted by the paper, the BBC says that News International has uncovered emails showing that payments were made to the police by the paper when Andy Coulson was editor , apparently with Coulson’s approval, and the Independent says that Rebekah Brooks personally commissioned a search for information by one of the investigators subsequently used to trace the family of Milly Dowler. And in the Commons today we’ve got PMQs, followed by a three-hour emergency debate on the phone hacking affair. By the end of the day we will have a much better idea as to if – or, rather, when (because it seems inevitable) – there will be an inquiry into the phone-hacking affair. It’s possible, too, that we may see Rebekah Brooks resigning – the pressure on her is enormous – but as I write this morning she seems determined to cling on. PMQs will be at 12pm and the debate should start at about 1.45pm (because we’re expecting a statement from Cameron on Afghanistan). MPs won’t actually be asked to vote to set up an inquiry. There was a suggestion last night that there could be a vote on a substantive motion calling for an inquiry, but Chris Bryant, the Labour MP who used an unusual parliamentary procedure to persuade the Speaker to allow the debate, told me this morning that a substantive motion of that kind was not allowed under the rules. Instead MPs will just debate a motion saying “that this house has considered the matter of whether there should be a public inquiry into the phone hacking at the News of the World; and the conduct of the Metropolitan Police Service between 2006 and 2011″. Members of the public are not allowed to participate in Commons debates. But the Labour MP Tom Watson will be speaking and, on Twitter , he’s inviting people to suggest ideas for his speech. Do get in touch with him if you want to have your say. Today I will be focusing almost exclusively on phone hacking and PMQs. Other political stories will probably only get a brief mention. News of the World Phone hacking PMQs Newspapers Privacy & the media Rebekah Brooks News International News Corporation House of Commons David Cameron Ed Miliband Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Join me online here from 10am Wednesday to discuss my reasons for supporting the technology, but not the industry My position on nuclear power has not done me any favours within the green movement. But it’s the result of a recognition of some harsh realities, and the urgent need to resolve what would otherwise be irreconcilable conflicts. I’ve argued that the nuclear power plants we shut down will be replaced either with fossil fuels or with the renewables that would otherwise have replaced fossil fuels, exposing us and the planet to much greater risk. I’ve discovered that the dangers of nuclear power have been exaggerated , often with the help of wildly inaccurate junk science. I’ve argued that the moral burden cuts both ways : the dangers of exaggerating the risks of nuclear power are at least as great as the dangers of downplaying it. I’ve explained the tough constraints we face, as electricity production must rise if we’re to decarbonise heating and transport. I’ve shown that the choice between renewables and nuclear is a false one : we appear to need both. And that, contrary to popular belief, it is the cheapest of our low-carbon options in the UK. I’ve argued that there is no inconsistency between opposing the machinations and corruption of the nuclear industry and supporting the technology. • Post your questions from 10am Wednesday morning (UK time), when George Monbiot will be here to debate the nuclear issue for two hours Nuclear power Energy Renewable energy Energy industry Energy Green economy George Monbiot guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Moody’s slashed Portugal’s credit rating by four notches from Baa1 to Ba2 with a negative outlook after markets closed on Tuesday Fears that the eurozone crisis was entering a new stage intensified on Wednesday after Portugal’s credit rating was slashed to junk, with European bank shares falling sharply and some government bonds coming under renewed pressure. Portuguese bank shares tumbled in early trading, while the yield – or interest rate – demanded by traders to hold the country’s debt jumped sharply. UK banks also lost ground, pulling the FTSE 100 down. UK government bonds, known as gilts, benefited, however, as investors looked for a safe haven. The euro lost value against the dollar, dropping nearly one cent to $1.438. Traders were alarmed by Moody’s warning that Portugal – like Greece – will need a second bailout , as it became the first credit ratings agency to cut the country’s debt to junk status. “This will weaken hopes that the recently agreed aid for Portugal will put a line under the nation’s woes and could trigger worries that Portugal could follow Greece down the path of possible default,” said Jane Foley, senior currency strategist at Rabobank, who also stated that the eurozone sovereign debt crisis was “back in full swing”. The yield on the Portuguese 10-year government bond climbed to 12.719% from 12.185% on Tuesday. The yield on the two-year bond leapt by nearly 1.5 percentage points to 14.8%. Irish, Spanish and Greek bond yields were also up. The downgrade is likely to push up Portugal’s borrowing costs when it attempts to auction up to €1bn (£900m) of three-month Treasury bills later on Wednesday. Shares in Portuguese banks Banco BPI dropped 4.7% while Millennium BCP were down 3.8% and Banco Espírito Santo lost 3.6%. In London, the FTSE 100 index traded some 18 points lower at 6006.87, a fall of 0.3%. Royal Bank of Scotland dropped by 1.8% to 38.4p. Moody’s slashed Portugal’s rating by four notches from Baa1 to Ba2 with a negative outlook after markets closed on Tuesday. It is the first agency to rate Portugal below investment grade: S&P has a BBB- rating with a negative outlook, while Fitch has a BBB- rating, on watch for a downgrade. Analysts predicted that credit rating agencies will now turn their attention to Ireland. “For a long time in this crisis S&P were the first mover when it came to downgrading European sovereigns, but it appears that Moody’s are now beating them to the punch,” said Gary Jenkins, head of fixed income research at Evolution Securities. “Maybe S&P have hurt their toe? Anyhow considering the rationale for the Portuguese downgrade we are wondering who is going to be the first to cast their beady eye over Ireland’s rating.” Major eurozone banks are meeting in Paris on Wednesday to try to finalise a plan for investor participation in a second Greek bailout . Michael Hewson of CMC Markets warned that traders are also concerned about Italy, where “services are showing signs of contraction, in the face of some budget tightening and political uncertainty”. European debt crisis European banks Europe Portugal Bonds Ratings agencies Julia Kollewe guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Boat carrying migrants to Saudi Arabia reported to have sunk, with three people rescued Nearly 200 African migrants are feared drowned after a boat carrying them to Saudi Arabia caught fire off Sudan’s north-eastern coast, a semi-official Sudanese news agency has reported. The Sudan Media Centre said three migrants were rescued. The boat had set off from Red Sea state in Sudan and sailed for four hours in Sudanese territorial waters before the blaze broke out, according to the news agency. Local authorities were still searching for possible survivors, it said. The report could not be independently confirmed. The report said the owners of the boat, all Yemenis, were arrested after it sank south of Sawaken, at the southern tip of Red Sea state. A second attempt to smuggle 247 migrants, mostly from Chad, Nigeria, Somalia and Eritrea, was uncovered in the same state, the report said, without elaborating. Several other incidents of illegal migrants drowning off the coast of Sudan on their way to nearby countries have been reported in past years, but the numbers have generally been smaller.. Early in June, a ship carrying 850 migrants fleeing the conflict with Libya capsized off Tunisia , and 150 of the passengers drowned. Sudan Africa Saudi Arabia Middle East Refugees guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Ed Miliband hails end to decades-long tradition of elections as ‘excellent result for the party’ Labour MPs have backed Ed Miliband’s plans to abolish elections to the shadow cabinet, leaving the party leader free to appoint his own senior team. The reform, ending a decades-long Labour tradition under which shadow cabinet members are elected by fellow Labour MPs, was approved by 196 of 257 MPs eligible to vote. “This is an excellent result for the party,” Miliband said after the vote, which must still be approved by Labour’s national executive committee later this month and ratified at Labour’s annual conference in the autumn. “We have an important job to do in holding the government to account and preparing for the next election,” he said. “To do that job properly we need to spend our time talking to the public and not ourselves.” The rule will apply only while the party is in opposition, not in government. A senior Labour source told the Press Association that the vote was “an important step forward” for Labour. “It is important that we no longer have the distraction of internal elections whilst we have a job to do of holding the government to account and preparing ourselves for the next election,” the source said. “It is important that we are talking to the public and not ourselves.” Currently, although membership of the shadow cabinet is determined by a ballot of Labour MPs, the leader is able to allocate portfolios. If approved, Miliband will be free to shape his shadow cabinet as he chooses. However, a source close to Labour sought to play down expectations of an immediate reshuffle. Aides had acknowledged ahead of the vote that there would be a “significant” opposition. But few opposing voices were said to have been raised when the parliamentary Labour party met on Monday to discuss the change, despite the proposal being rejected by a margin of two to one in a vote last year. Labour Barry Neild guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Victims’ Commissioner said families often talked about the legal process being as traumatic as the crime itself The families of murder victims receive worse treatment from the courts than the rich and wealthy who want to protect their privacy and they need a statutory ‘victims’ law’ to protect their rights. The call from the government-appointed Victims’ Commissioner, Louise Casey, comes six months after she conducted the largest survey of bereaved families. Casey said the criminal justice system left “families trembling in its wake” with many of the stories she heard just “jaw droppingly awful” and the survey demonstrated that families that had had no involvement with the police and courts actually coped better with their bereavement. She said that families often talked about the legal process being almost as traumatic as the crime itself: “We ask people not to go out and take the law into their own hands. We ask that people come to court and give evidence so that nasty people can be locked up. In return the criminal justice system needs to do better,” said Casey. She said that she sometimes wondered that if murder victims’ families had more money and weren’t facing an untold bill because of their devastation, “would we treat them in the same way?” Casey said the treatment of Milly Dowler’s family in the Levi Bellfield court case had thrown the spotlight “on this rather odd scenario where in one court we have rich people pursuing their civil injunctions … whereas down the road in the criminal court a family is being stripped in no uncertain terms of some of the moments with their family.” The Victims’ commissioner says in her ground-breaking report published on Wednesday that families were often treated as a legal inconvenience. “Families deserve to bury the body of their child without defence lawyers asking for autopsy after autopsy. They deserve not to have to sit next to the defendant’s family in court listening to them laughing, or being intimidated by them. They deserve to be told that their husband’s killer is going to be released before they bump into him in the supermarket. They deserved to be treated with some humanity in the witness box.” The proposed victims’ law would include: • a criminal practice direction to ensure families were treated with dignity and respect during court cases; • judges should clear the court when particularly distressing evidence is about to be heard or at least the families given due warning; • the right to information from the crown prosecution service, including meeting the prosecuting lawyer; • the right to sentencing remarks from the judge in writing and trial transcripts; • release of the body back to the family within 28 days;• courts to have a family meeting to ensure that their needs during the trial are met. The survey of the 400 bereaved families showed that more than 60% faced financial difficulties after the case with each family facing an average bill of £37,000 for funerals, court travel costs and cleaning up crime scenes. Casey said that more than 80% of families suffered symptoms of trauma after going to court and the same proportion had to wait more than a month to bury their loved ones. A quarter stopped working permanently. The justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, agreed that more could be done to get families the help they needed and tominimise the impact of bereavement. “We are working on our review of all victim support arrangements – this will include consideration of victims’ services, entitlements and redress, designed to ensure that our time, money and best efforts are targeted at those in greatest need. As part of this review, we have been in constant dialogue with the Victims’ Commissioner, victims and victim support organisations,” he said. ends Crime Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Victims’ Commissioner said families often talked about the legal process being as traumatic as the crime itself The families of murder victims receive worse treatment from the courts than the rich and wealthy who want to protect their privacy and they need a statutory ‘victims’ law’ to protect their rights. The call from the government-appointed Victims’ Commissioner, Louise Casey, comes six months after she conducted the largest survey of bereaved families. Casey said the criminal justice system left “families trembling in its wake” with many of the stories she heard just “jaw droppingly awful” and the survey demonstrated that families that had had no involvement with the police and courts actually coped better with their bereavement. She said that families often talked about the legal process being almost as traumatic as the crime itself: “We ask people not to go out and take the law into their own hands. We ask that people come to court and give evidence so that nasty people can be locked up. In return the criminal justice system needs to do better,” said Casey. She said that she sometimes wondered that if murder victims’ families had more money and weren’t facing an untold bill because of their devastation, “would we treat them in the same way?” Casey said the treatment of Milly Dowler’s family in the Levi Bellfield court case had thrown the spotlight “on this rather odd scenario where in one court we have rich people pursuing their civil injunctions … whereas down the road in the criminal court a family is being stripped in no uncertain terms of some of the moments with their family.” The Victims’ commissioner says in her ground-breaking report published on Wednesday that families were often treated as a legal inconvenience. “Families deserve to bury the body of their child without defence lawyers asking for autopsy after autopsy. They deserve not to have to sit next to the defendant’s family in court listening to them laughing, or being intimidated by them. They deserve to be told that their husband’s killer is going to be released before they bump into him in the supermarket. They deserved to be treated with some humanity in the witness box.” The proposed victims’ law would include: • a criminal practice direction to ensure families were treated with dignity and respect during court cases; • judges should clear the court when particularly distressing evidence is about to be heard or at least the families given due warning; • the right to information from the crown prosecution service, including meeting the prosecuting lawyer; • the right to sentencing remarks from the judge in writing and trial transcripts; • release of the body back to the family within 28 days;• courts to have a family meeting to ensure that their needs during the trial are met. The survey of the 400 bereaved families showed that more than 60% faced financial difficulties after the case with each family facing an average bill of £37,000 for funerals, court travel costs and cleaning up crime scenes. Casey said that more than 80% of families suffered symptoms of trauma after going to court and the same proportion had to wait more than a month to bury their loved ones. A quarter stopped working permanently. The justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, agreed that more could be done to get families the help they needed and tominimise the impact of bereavement. “We are working on our review of all victim support arrangements – this will include consideration of victims’ services, entitlements and redress, designed to ensure that our time, money and best efforts are targeted at those in greatest need. As part of this review, we have been in constant dialogue with the Victims’ Commissioner, victims and victim support organisations,” he said. ends Crime Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …