‘The world needs our leadership and support,’ Lib Dem MEP Chris Davies tells Conservative counterparts Tory MEPs who are threatening to undermine David Cameron over tougher European climate change targets have been warned that their behaviour risks ruining Britain’s reputation as a leading voice in the fight against global warming. Hours before a European Parliament vote in Brussels, Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies said the rebels risked not just damaging the prime minister but also the UK’s green credentials. Aid agencies and green groups have urged Cameron to take on his MEPs before the crucial vote on whether to increase a current EU emissions cuts target of 20% to 30% by 2020. A letter signed by Christian Aid, Oxfam, Greenpeace, WWF and Green Alliance urged the PM to bring Martin Callanan, the Conservatives’ European leader, and fellow MEPs into line with coalition policy. The coalition deal explicitly calls on the EU to aim for a 30% reduction compared with 1990 levels, but Callanan warned that a unilateral EU increase to 30% without Europe’s key global partners also committing to the figure would put European companies at a competitive disadvantage. A Tory No vote would infuriate the energy secretary, Chris Huhne, who has backed the European commission in its efforts to persuade EU ministers to endorse a 30% target. Davies, the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman in the European Parliament, said: “This vote will be a crucial test of Conservative MEPs’ commitment to combat global warming, and the signs are that it is one they will fail. Raising the target to 30% is crucial if low carbon investment is to be stimulated, and the policy of the coalition Government could not be more clear.” “It’s well known that there are climate change deniers in the Conservative ranks in Brussels and it seems now that they have gained the upper hand. “Tory MEPs need to think long and hard about whether they will vote against government policy and undermine David Cameron. The world needs our leadership and support if attempts to secure an international agreement to combat climate change are to have any chance of success.” Recently, 70 leading businesses backed the 30% cuts target, which supporters say will be a more cost-effective way of tackling climate change, stimulating green growth and jobs. The low carbon industry is said already to have provided one million jobs in the UK. Oxfam’s head of UK government relations, Kathleen Spencer Chapman said: “Millions of poor people are already suffering from the impacts of climate change and need Conservative MEPs to fall in behind their own prime minister’s policy on tougher EU emissions cut targets. The prime minister should use his personal influence to get his party’s MEPs behind his government’s welcome support for more ambitious EU climate targets.” Friends of the Earth’s executive director Andy Atkins said: “David Cameron’s pledge to lead the greenest government ever will be seriously undermined if he can’t even get his party’s elected representatives to back official policy on climate change.” Earlier this week, Poland refused to back the commission’s “road map” which sets out long-term moves to a low carbon economy and the case for more stringent emissions cuts. Green politics Climate change European commission European Union David Cameron Conservatives Conservative and Liberal Democrat cabinet Liberal-Conservative coalition Carbon emissions guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Ministers to bring forward announcement about cost in attempt to counter Labour over military bill The government is expected to tell MPs on Thursday that the operation in Libya has cost about £200m in an attempt to head off growing concerns that the military bill is spiralling. Ministers will put down a written ministerial statement to the house, bringing forward the announcement from next week. However, some defence economists have warned the cost could reach £1bn if the campaign lasts into the autumn. Details had been expected in a few days, but the government appears to want to close down the issue as an avenue of attack for the opposition. After a grilling from the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, in the Commons on Tuesday, George Osborne and chief secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, refused to be drawn on the precise amount. At the weekend Alexander said in an interview with Sky News that it could be “hundreds of millions”. Balls pointed out this was markedly different from the line in March that the operation would cost “tens of millions not hundreds of millions”. On Sunday Alexander told Sky News: “The campaign is costing tens of millions, potentially into the hundreds of millions as it goes on, but that money is coming from the reserve that we have set aside, precisely for contingencies such as this.” When the military campaign started, the chancellor said the cost would be “in the order of tens of millions of pounds, not hundreds of millions”. The news came as a minister in Libya’s opposition force, the National Transition Council, wrote an open letter challenging the decision by the UK attorney general, Dominic Grieve, not to release funds to the rebels. Dr Ali Tarhuni, minister for finance and oil in the NTC, said the body would run out of funds in less than a week, according to journalists in Benghazi. Grieve has said Britain cannot release the 1.4bn dinars (approximately £700m) printed by De La Rue – Britain’s banknote printer – which have been impounded in the UK as the revolution has unfolded. Defence policy Libya Middle East Africa Arab and Middle East unrest Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Title: 2+2=? Artist: Bob Seger System Stephen Colbert is airing a 3 part interview series with Jack White this week, and White declared this 1968 single his favorite of Seger’s work. I’m not too surprised that White would choose this song over ‘Like A Rock’ or Old Time Rock And Roll’. Anyway, this anti-war single was not much of a hit outside of Motor City and it’s also my favorite Seger tune.
Continue reading …
enlarge Credit: Corbis Gerry takes a shot. Click here to view this media And 35 years ago today June 22, 1976 sounded something like this: The legendary Swine Flu vaccine hit a snag. It seems it may not have been as good for kids as previously believed. All 50,000 state employees of Massachusetts went on strike , leaving the Governor and the Legislature pretty much to fend for themselves. Air Canada decided to pack it in for good. The Canadian Parliament did vote to end Capital Punishment. Italy was smack in the middle of yet another political crisis. President Ford nominated Talcott Seelye to take over the Ambassadorship to Lebanon, following the assassination of Francis Meloy. The Wayne Hays-Liz Ray Scandal was the gift that kept on giving as House Democrats voted to take away fringe benefits to all members of Congress and to make them cough up more details about just who is jumping on the payroll. Republicans said it didn’t go far enough. One imagines branding, tar, feathers and dunce caps were their idea of appropriate reprimands. And speaking of scandals, Capitol Hill got another dose of rolled eyes as testimony over the West Point cheating fracas indicated the wave of miscreants was more widespread than previously believed. Ol’ Blue Eyes and longtime galpal Barbara Marx decided to make it official. The cost of living went into nosebleed territory, not over Frank but because the economy just insisted on being screwed up. And the sewage came back to Long Island . Some 70 miles of beaches closed as the tides and prevailing winds changed, bringing that remembrance of last weeks bad night out back to haunt everyone within gagging distance. And that’s how it went, June 22, 1976 – from ABC Information Network News and CBS Radio. See what you missed?
Continue reading …
• Former Fifa vice-president’s evidence was ‘self-serving’ • Mohamed bin Hammam ‘intended to influence voting’ Fifa will face renewed pressure to reopen its investigation into the former vice-president Jack Warner after a leaked report from its ethics committee alleged he had been told last week that it was quite likely he was, at the least, “an accessory to corruption”. The full report of the ethics committee also finds that there is “comprehensive, convincing and overwhelming” evidence that the presidential challenger, Mohamed bin Hammam, tried to bribe voters, and that Warner helped facilitate this. The full report of the ethics committee, which suspended Bin Hammam and Warner on the eve of the election while an independent investigation took place, outlines the scale of the evidence against both men. It concludes there is “prima facie” evidence that Bin Hammam and Warner arranged a special meeting of the Caribbean Football Union at which delegates of the member associations were offered cash payments. “The comprehensive, convincing and overwhelming evidence permits to conclude prima facie that the accused [Warner] has initiated and arranged a special meeting of the CFU member associations for Mr Bin Hammam,” said the 17-page report of the committee, headed by the Namibian judge Petrus Damaseb. “Furthermore on the occasion of this meeting it seems Mr Bin Hammam offered, at least indirectly and under the pledge of secrecy, to each of the member associations, an envelope containing $40,000.” Warner is believed to have received the full report last week and on Monday announced he was resigning as Fifa vice-president, with the world game’s governing body saying that all investigations into him had been dropped and the “presumption of innocence maintained”. A parliamentary report into Fifa and the World Cup bidding process is due to be published within the next fortnight. It is expected to repeat calls for transparency and reform. Damian Collins, the MP who is trying to form a global consensus for reform, also sits on the culture, media and sport select committee that will deliver the report. “You’ve got to seriously question the judgment of [the Fifa secretary general] Jérôme Valcke and [the president] Sepp Blatter in their handling of this whole affair,” said Collins, who believes it points to a “cover-up”. “With this information, the idea that they could have approved the statement of Warner’s presumed innocence beggars belief. They just don’t seem to understand why this is an important issue and I don’t see how we can have any confidence in their future leadership.” The leaked Fifa report finds that Warner offers no compelling evidence as to why his accusers, described as “credible”, would lie about the $40,000 (£24,500) payments they claimed they were offered at a special meeting of the CFU at the Regency Hyatt in Trinidad on 10 and 11 May. The ethics committee report rejects the claim by Bin Hammam that he was not able to travel to an earlier meeting of the Concacaf congress in Miami due to visa issues as “incredible”, finding that he instead chose to work with Warner to organise the separate meeting. Warner’s evidence to the 29 May hearing is described as “mere self-serving declarations” and that he “failed to provide the Fifa ethics committee with a plausible explanation”. It describes as “inconceivable” the idea that Warner, a Fifa committee member since 1983, could not have known about the cash payments offered to the 25 delegates. The report states: “The Fifa ethics committee is of the primary opinion that the accused [Warner] had knowledge of the respective payments and condoned them. It seems quite likely that the accused [Warner] contributed himself to the relevant actions, thereby acting as an accessory to corruption.” It adds: “The committee is also of the opinion that the respective money gifts can probably only be explained if they are associated with the Fifa presidential elections of 1 June 2011. Therefore it appears rather compelling to consider the actions of Mr Bin Hammam constitute prima facie an act of bribery, or at least an attempt to commit bribery. “It appears prima facie impossible, in the opinion of the Fifa ethics committee, that the accused [Warner] could have considered the money distributed … as legally or ethically proper and without any connection to the upcoming Fifa presidential election. Consequently, the accused would at least be considered as an accessory to the aforementioned violations.” The ethics committee report goes on to say that the facts “eventually lead to the primary conclusion that Mr Bin Hammam appears to have intended to influence the voting behaviour of the CFU member associations on the occasion of the Fifa presidential elections in his favour.” An ongoing investigation by the former FBI director Louis Freeh is expected to report by mid-July. Warner questioned why Fifa would have dropped the investigation if the evidence against him was so strong. He said: “Let me once again reiterate for the sake of those with hidden agendas; I, Jack Warner, did not partake in the distribution of any cash gifts to my members.” Bin Hammam has indicated to friends that he will continue to fight to clear his name. “There is nothing I can say more than I deny the allegations and insist that I have not done anything wrong during the special congress at Trinidad,” he said in a statement. Fifa failed to respond to a request for comment. In a detailed statement, Warner said he was the victim of an “ongoing malicious agenda”. The statement read: “It is instructive to note that the investigation into these allegations is still ongoing and therefore any suggestion that the report being circulated is the final conclusion of the Fifa ethics committee is both misleading and false. Everyone must therefore be well aware that this document is not the ethics committee final report. “I can only therefore conclude that this development is part of an ongoing malicious agenda to destroy the cohesion which has made the Caribbean Football Union a factor to be reckoned with in Fifa affairs; and thus diminish CFU’s significance in various areas of Fifa decision making. “Yesterday, in announcing my self-determined resignation from the positions I held in world football, Fifa confirmed that its ethics committee procedures of which I was a subject had been discontinued. In its statement, Fifa took pains to emphasise that the presumption of my innocence is maintained. “It is now evident that there are those in a section of the Fifa fraternity who are not only pathologically mendacious, but in the face of Fifa’s stated position and its voluntary recognition of my contribution to world football and by definition to Fifa, will stop at no length to destroy my legacy and destabilise the Caribbean region whose interests I have always vigorously advocated. Despite the attacks of division neither the Caribbean nor I will allow all that we stand for to be destroyed. “I expect that these vicious attacks will continue but I will confront them head on every time they arise. Let me once again reiterate for the sake of those with hidden agendas; I, Jack Warner, did not partake in the distribution of any cash gifts to my members. I hope for the good of the game good sense will prevail or at least I will continue to live in hope.” Jack Warner Fifa Football politics Mohamed bin Hammam Owen Gibson guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
The Curb Your Enthusiasm star says British comedy was his touchstone. Now he’s about to try out his mix of personal pathos and vulgarity on audiences here. He just hopes they get him ‘If you react poorly to something, we will discuss it.” With the roguish affability native to his unscrupulous Curb Your Enthusiasm character – Jeff Greene, manager and accomplice to Larry David – Jeff Garlin addresses the crowd at the Upright Citizens Brigade, Hollywood’s improvisation hotspot. It’s one of a flurry of appearances to fine tune the act for his run of shows at London’s Soho Theatre , and he relishes the ridiculousness of inviting the audience to trash it as he performs. No one takes him up on the offer – they are all enjoying themselves too much. Garlin is noticeably slimmer than his blobular Curb physique, the result of a
Continue reading …The Curb Your Enthusiasm star says British comedy was his touchstone. Now he’s about to try out his mix of personal pathos and vulgarity on audiences here. He just hopes they get him ‘If you react poorly to something, we will discuss it.” With the roguish affability native to his unscrupulous Curb Your Enthusiasm character – Jeff Greene, manager and accomplice to Larry David – Jeff Garlin addresses the crowd at the Upright Citizens Brigade, Hollywood’s improvisation hotspot. It’s one of a flurry of appearances to fine tune the act for his run of shows at London’s Soho Theatre , and he relishes the ridiculousness of inviting the audience to trash it as he performs. No one takes him up on the offer – they are all enjoying themselves too much. Garlin is noticeably slimmer than his blobular Curb physique, the result of a
Continue reading …
Deputy prime minister proposes plan to create 46 million shareholders and allow collective ownership of banks A giveaway of government-owned shares in RBS and Lloyds, worth hundreds of pounds to British taxpayers, is being proposed by the deputy prime minister. Nick Clegg has set out his plan in a letter to the chancellor, George Osborne, in which he says such a move would create 46 million shareholders and allow a form of collective ownership of the banks. Previous sell-offs of shares in state utilities attempted by the Thatcher administration were derided as gimmicks or short-term tax giveaways since the mass of shares were either immediately sold on or resold to the big pension funds within two years. Conservatives are likely to argue that denationalisation of the banks, brought into semi-public ownership in the years following the banking crash in 2007, should either be used to reduce the deficit, provide tax breaks or even restore public spending. In practice, the shares are not likely to be sold in the short term since the banks’ share prices have not yet recovered and they are not ready for sale. Speaking during a trade mission to Brazil accompanied by an array of cabinet ministers, Clegg said: “Psychologically it is immensely important that the British public feel they have not been overlooked or ignored. Their money has been used to the tune of billions and billions and billions to keep the British banking system on life support and they have absolutely no say at all in what happens when normality is restored.” Critics will contend that people will have no more say if they own a tiny individual shareholding than if the government collectively owns a larger share. But Clegg claimed his plan would reduce public mistrust in the financial sector. The mass distribution of shares could mean that everyone on the electoral roll or on the national insurance register would receive an estimated 1,450 shares in RBS and 450 shares in Lloyds. Such parcels would be worth £770 on the basis of current share prices. The Treasury under George Osborne has not yet opposed such a plan, but might be critical if such a move meant its overriding plans to eradicate the deficit in this parliament were undermined. RBS shares closed yesterday at 36.65p. The break-even price – in terms of the original purchase price for the government – is 50.4p. Lloyds shares were at 47p; the break-even price is 73p. No government would countenance selling the shares until they had reached the break-even price unless under huge pressure from banking management. Banking Nick Clegg Royal Bank of Scotland Lloyds Banking Group Economic policy Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Afghanistan withdrawal: Barack Obama says 33,000 troops will leave next year
June 22, 2011 No Comment
President takes gamble on retreat from Afghanistan with address declaring success against al-Qaida and the Taliban Barack Obama has begun the long retreat from Afghanistan in a televised statement to the US, declaring success against al-Qaida and the Taliban and the withdrawal of about a third of US forces next year. Obama said 33,000 US troops would be withdrawn by the summer of 2012 or by September at the latest. The first 5,000 would return next month and another 5,000 by the end of the year. The president said that when he ordered the 33,000 extra troops to Afghanistan in 2009 they had a clear mission: to refocus on al-Qaida; reverse the Taliban’s momentum; and train Afghan security forces to defend their own country. “Tonight, I can tell you that we are fulfilling that commitment,” he said, adding: “We are meeting our goals.” He was careful to avoid repeating George Bush’s ill-fated prediction on Iraq in 2003 of “mission accomplished”. He settled instead for: “We have put al-Qaida on a path to defeat.” Obama claimed al-Qaida was under more pressure than at any time since the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington. Half of their leadership has been killed, along with its leader Osama bin Laden. “This was a victory for all who have served since 9/11,” he said. He addressed criticism that the US should not be spending billions on wars overseas while the country is struggling economically at home and promised to shift from foreign to domestic issues. “America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home,” he said. But US and other Nato military chiefs fear that the president is taking a gamble with the scale of early drawdown, ignoring the advice of US and Nato commanders who warned that withdrawal of anything more than a few thousand in the coming months could endanger substantial gains made over the winter in the battle against the Taliban. US and Nato commanders argued that they could handle the withdrawal of about 5,000, mainly support staff. But 10,000 this year would create logistical problems and interfere with the summer “fighting season”, they warned. The decision is a setback for the US commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus, who urged only a minimal withdrawal, as did defence secretary Robert Gates, who retires next week. Petraeus, who is to return to Washington as head of the CIA, refused to endorse Obama’s decision, according to administration officials quoted by the New York Times. If there are military setbacks over the coming year, Obama will be open to accusations that he was overly hasty and that he put politics ahead of security. Military commanders wanted the number of combat troops held at near to maximum to confront Taliban forces mounting summer offensives this year and next. Although 30,000 US troops are scheduled to be withdrawn, 70,000 will remain in the country. All US combat troops are scheduled to leave by the end of 2014 but a core of trainers and other troops will remain beyond that date. A Nato conference on Afghanistan will be held in Chicago next year. The withdrawal, which comes against a backdrop of rising US public weariness with the longest war in American history, could form part of Obama’s pitch in the 2012 White House election campaign. The president phoned leaders in Afghanistan, Pakistan, France, Germany and Britain to inform them of his decision. David Cameron is expected to make announcements on substantial UK troop withdrawals at the beginning of July. It is likely to represent the biggest troop withdrawal since British forces left Iraq but precise numbers have yet to be reached. In their phone call, Cameron and Obama agreed that good progress was being made by the Afghan army in strengthening security and would be able to manage more of the country on their own. Senior British officials have been in Washington working through the details of the withdrawal with the Americans. Britain has about 9,500 troops in Afghanistan. Other international forces have another 40,000, bringing the total international force to about 150,000. Downing Street said last night: “The prime minister fully agreed with the president’s assessment, noting the good progress being made on security transition. The prime minister and president agreed that in due course the progress on transition would make it possible to sustain pressure on the insurgency while allowing a progressive reduction in [troop] levels. “The prime minister reaffirmed that UK forces will no longer be in a combat role in Afghanistan by 2015 and that decisions on the scale and timing of reductions over the intervening period would be based on conditions on the ground.” One White House official said that there had been no terrorist threat emanating from Afghanistan for the last seven or eight years and the main threat had been from Pakistan. The US and its Nato allies had been able to degrade the ability of al-Qaida to recruit, train and carry out operations and had killed many of its leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The US assessment may turn out to be over-optimistic, given the Taliban’s ability in the past to mount surprise attacks, the corruption in the Afghanistan government, the shakiness of Afghan army and police forces, and the double-games played by the Pakistan intelligence services. John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House, speaking before the announcement, expressed caution about a “precipitous withdrawal”. Downing Street accepted that the UK and US assessment of the threat posed by Afghanistan to security in the west is similar. The prime minister’s spokesman was adamant yesterday that Cameron’s assertion that UK combat operations would end in Afghanistan in 2015 was a deadline that would not be breached. That leaves open the possibility of UK troops remaining to train and mentor Afghan forces. Cameron’s relatively inflexible position is not supported by the Conservative chairman of the defence select committee James Arbuthnot. Arbuthnot said unless there was greater clarity about what UK troops would remain and the degree “of nuance and flexibility, then Britain runs the risk of destabilising local people who won’t be sure whether the coalition is going to desert them”. He added: “If we stick to a completely arbitrary date and withdraw whatever the conditions then that would be a serious betrayal not only of our people but of the Afghan people”. Obama’s speech came as William Hague, the foreign secretary, held talks today with the Afghan president Hamid Karzai in Kabul and visited UK troops in Helmand. In an effort to underline Arab support for the military operation, he was accompanied by his counterpart from the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan. Speaking in the capital, Hague said the UK’s involvement in Afghanistan would continue for “many years” after the withdrawal of combat troops. Afghanistan US military Barack Obama United States Ewen MacAskill Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …