Parishioners of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church in Maryland arrived at services Sunday and got an unexpected sermon: Rev. Mark Lewis informed the congregation that he and other church leaders wanted the entire parish to convert to Catholicism. “We didn’t know for sure how people would react,” says one person who…
Continue reading …US president in dead heat with rival as ABC-Washington Post poll shows public unhappiness with state of economy Barack Obama’s hopes of re-election to the White House next year took a knock on Tuesday with the publication of a poll showing him in a surprise dead heat with one of his Republican rivals, Mitt Romney. The bounce in the polls that Obama received after the death of Osama bin Laden in early May has disappeared. The new poll shows public unhappiness with the slow pace of recovery from recession. Romney’s jump to parity with the president is remarkable given that, until now, there has not been much enthusiasm even among Republicans for him. Only last Thursday did he formally declare that he will be seeking the party’s nomination to take on Obama. During a press conference at the White House with German chancellor Angela Merkel , Obama played down the prospect of a double-dip recession but acknowledged concern about unemployment and petrol prices. The latest unemployment figures show a jump to 9.1% and Obama said he did not know if this was a one-month aberration or reflected a long-term trend. “I’m not concerned about a double-dip recession,” he said. “I am concerned about the fact that the recovery we’re on is not producing jobs as quickly as I want it to happen.” He admitted the economy remained “skittish” and that “recovery was going to be uneven”. Although Obama remains favourite to secure re-election, he could struggle if he goes into next year’s election with unemployment still high. The ABC-Washington Post poll showed Obama and Romney on 47% each among all Americans surveyed, and Romney on 49% and Obama on 46% among registered party members, who are among those most likely to vote. Another poll published by Public Policy Polling shows Romney in the lead in the early key states of the Republican nomination battle. Romney was widely predicted to take New Hampshire and Nevada but struggle in social conservative Iowa and hardline rightwing South Carolina. But the PPP poll shows him on 27% in South Carolina against Sarah Palin’s 18%. Earlier PPP polls showed him with a 6% lead over rivals in Iowa, 15% in Nevada and 23% in New Hampshire. Obama has dropped a long way from the heady days after his 2009 inauguration, when he enjoyed poll approval ratings of 70% to 80%. Over the last year, he has been struggling to get above 50%. The death of Bin Laden gave him a modest bounce, to around 55%. He won in 2008 partly because of a backlash against George Bush and partly because of his rhetorical skills, backed by a strong campaign organisation and high levels of fund-raising. But some of the states he took last time were only by slim margins, and he could struggle to repeat victories in states in the west and midwest and in places such as Virginia. He is already building up his campaign team, setting up organisations in many more states than in 2008, and is hoping to double his campaign funding to a billion dollars. The ABC-Post poll suggests Romney has solidified his position as Republican frontrunner. When Obama was matched against other potential Republican rivals, the president enjoyed a lead. The president was six points ahead of Newt Gingrich among registered voters, nine points head of Tim Pawlenty, 10 points ahead of Jon Huntsman, 11 points ahead of Michelle Bachmann, and 15 points ahead of Palin. As well as unemployment and petrol prices, Americans are expressing concern about the size of the federal deficit, the size of the country’s debt held by China, and continued falling house prices. The poll showed six out of 10 of those surveyed saying they did not believe recovery had yet begun. Sixty-six per cent said they thought the country was going in the wrong direction economically. Barack Obama Mitt Romney US elections 2012 United States US politics US economy Republicans Economics Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rebel leaders in Misrata feel prepared for battle but say they have been told not to cross certain ‘red lines’ Tension between Libyan rebels and Nato commanders is growing over the military tactics being used to put pressure on Colonel Gaddafi’s forces. Rebel leaders in Misrata say they are being urged not to launch further pushes against regime troops to the east of the city, and claim they have been told not to cross certain “red lines”, even though they feel prepared for battle. The frustration on the ground has been heightened by their belief that Gaddafi’s troops are demoralised and depleted after nearly three months of conflict. While coalition officials insist they have not issued any direct orders not to attack, they concede they are worried about civilians being caught up in further chaotic fighting, and do not want rebel troops being accidentally hit in bombing raids by Nato warplanes. These continued on Monday, when Tripoli experienced what was perhaps the heaviest daylight bombardment by Nato since the airstrikes began in March. RAF Typhoon and Tornado jets dropped more than two dozen bombs, targeting the headquarters of the secret police in the heart of the city, and a major military base on its outskirts. The Guardian spoke to rebel commanders from the Black Brigade and the Swehdi Brigade in Misrata, who said they felt constrained from launching pre-emptive assaults. Khalid Alogab, a section commander in the Libyan rebel Black Brigade, said the western alliance had given rebel units firm instructions not to cross into certain areas. “The red line, we cannot cross,” he said. “If we get the order from Nato we can go. We can capture Tarhuga [a town to the east] in two hours.” Alogab said orders had come from Misrata command that the Black Brigade was to stay put, and that the alliance had designated the eastern front as a red line. Salem Shneshah, a Black Brigade medic, added: “We should move, we want to move. But Nato told us we must stay here.” On the far side of Misrata, members of the Swehdi brigade – named after the city’s most famous resistance hero from the last century, Ramadan Swehdi – told a similar story. “Nato say we must be behind the red lines,” said Feraz Swehli, one of Ramadan’s ancestors. Rebel army spokesman Commander Ibrahim Betalmal confirmed that Nato orders, rather than tactical considerations, were preventing his army from pushing forward. “We have been given instructions to stay on the border,” he said. He added: “No doubt Nato will help a great deal in clearing the way forward for us.” Nato says it has not issued formal red lines to the rebels, but acknowledges that there is real danger to their forces if they stray into zones that are being targeted by missile and bombing strikes. The coalition needs to know the areas that are safe to bomb and clear of civilians, said a source. “Nobody wants a return to the kind of confusion there was before. Nato has a very clear duty to ensure that civilians are not caught up in the fighting.” While coalition commanders have great respect for the courage of the rebels, they also fear they remain relatively disorganised. Describing the latest attacks by RAF aircraft in Tripoli, Major General Nick Pope said jets had used guided “paveway” bombs to target a police building from which Gaddafi “was engaged in the brutal repression of the civilian population”. Libya Nato Arab and Middle East unrest Middle East Africa Nick Hopkins guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Jon Stewart was predictably befuddled by the way Weinergate unraveled as he watched his old roommate get “Kanyed” by Andrew Breitbart at his own press conference yesterday, before finally coming clean and admitting the crotch shot in question was, yes, of Weiner’s own crotch. “This is the weirdest f***ing story…
Continue reading …Admission by Theresa May comes during launch of revised Prevent strategy, which will target al-Qaida and its affiliates The home secretary, Theresa May, has conceded that money from the £63 million anti-radicalisation budget has been given to “the very extremist organisations that Prevent should have been confronting”. She said Prevent, originally launched in 2007 to counter the growth of home-grown terrorism, “failed to tackle the extremist ideology that not only undermines the cohesion of our society, but also inspires would be terrorists to seek to bring death and destruction to our towns and cities”. The revised strategy, launched on Tuesday, “must be targeted against those forms of terrorism which pose the greatest risk to our national security”, currently al-Qaida and those they inspire, she said. “In trying to reach out to those at risk of radicalisation, funding sometimes even reached the very extremist organisations that Prevent should have been confronting. “We will not make the same mistakes.” May also said the strategy should “recognise and tackle the insidious impact of non-violent extremism, which can create an atmosphere conducive to terrorism and can popularise views which terrorists exploit”. The home secretary said funding would be removed from organisations that “do not support the values of democracy, human rights, equality before the law, participation in society”. “If they don’t accept these fundamental and universal values, then we will not work with them and we will not fund them,” she said. “Prevent has not been without controversy. In the past, it received allegations that it was a cover for spying. These allegations have been found to be false. But now we will make sure that this is seen and known to be the case. “Let me be clear – we will not fund or work with organisations that do not subscribe to the core values of our society. “Our new Prevent strategy will challenge the extremist ideology, it will help protect sectors and institutions from extremists, and it will stop the radicalisation of vulnerable people. Above all, it will tackle the threat from home-grown terrorism.” The review found 30% of people convicted for al–Qaida-associated terrorist offences in the UK between 1999 and 2009 were known to have attended university or a higher education institution. Another 15% studied or achieved a vocational or further education qualification and about 10% were students at the time when they were charged or the incident for which they were convicted took place, the review said. Terrorism policy UK security and terrorism al-Qaida Global terrorism guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Amina Abdallah Araf al Omari is the among the best known of many thousands of Syrians detained since mid-March “If we want to live in a free country,” Amina Abdallah Araf al Omari wrote on her blog on 27 April, “we must begin by living as though we are already in a free country.” And so the 35-year-old Syrian, an outspoken lesbian, feminist and anti-government protester, continued to post highly critical entries on the blog, A Gay Girl in Damascus, even as the security situation in her home country became ever more precarious, and her own position increasingly at risk. She was teargassed, arrested and detained with other protesters at demonstrations in March and April; at one rally she saw a young man shot dead in front of her. But “for those of us who have taken part in the protests,” she wrote, “there’s no going back. For decades, we were afraid; be too critical of the regime, be seen as stepping out of official views, and one might expect a visit from the security police or a trip to a jail. Be more vocal and publicly call for the overthrow of the government and be prepared for either exile or death. Those of us who criticised things were very careful with our words and the forums we raised criticisms in. Now, though, everything has changed; too many have crossed those lines for there to be a going back.” Late in April, two men from the Syrian security services came to her house late at night to arrest her; her father stood up to them and they left. A week later, however, both she and her father had been forced into separate safe houses, moving from house to house, meeting only in disguise. Her American mother (Araf holds dual citizenship) and other family members had fled to Beirut, but her father, from an old and respected family, was determined to stay in Damascus, and so Araf stayed too, continuing to blog: “Our revolution will win; we will have a free and democratic Syria soon. I know it in my bones.” On Monday evening, Araf was silenced, for now at least. En route to a rendezvous with co-ordinators of the protest movement, she was snatched from a Damascus street by three armed men and bundled into a vehicle. Despite the frantic efforts of her father and wider family, nothing has been heard from her since. Araf’s kidnap, by men her family believe are members of Syria’s security services, makes her one of the best known of many thousands who have been detained since protests bubbled up across the country in mid-March, swelling to become one of the bloodiest and most protracted of the Arab Spring’s popular uprisings. According to Amnesty International , at least 750 people have been killed by the security forces; as many as 10,000 have been picked up by one of the country’s diverse security service groups, many of them held incommunicado. At least 12 people have died in custody, and reports of torture are common. Though Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad , announced an amnesty last week for those detained before 31 May, Amnesty says the releases have been selective and ad hoc, and called for the immediate release of all detainees. Even before the latest unrest, bloggers and others challenging the government had been regularly locked up. Tal al-Mallouhi , a 20-year-old Palestinian-Syrian blogger from Homs, was sentenced to five years in jail in February, accused of spying for the US. Other bloggers and dissidents have faced similar fates. Though she had begun her blog in February principally as a defiant declaration of her sexuality and to explore lesbian and gender issues in Syria, Araf was rapidly swept up in the popular protests, and began writing impassioned, exhilarated, often very moving posts about her country and its longed-for future. “What a time to be in Syria! What a time to be an Arab! What a time to be alive!” she wrote on 24 March. A week later, expressing her dismay at Assad’s refusal to grant expected reforms, she wrote: “Come Friday, when Jumaa prayers are done, we will be out, in every city and every street, calling with one voice: “SOURIYA! AL HOURIYA!” FREEDOM!” The blog also contained extracts from an unpublished autobiography, detailing her teenage years in the US; she also wrote of her love of science fiction and Gil Scott Heron, and posted erotic lesbian poetry. At one point, her father laughingly reveals, she had been “on the list” forof those charged with finding a suitable wife for the man who is now Syria’s president, and who went on to marry a British-Syrian, Asma al Akhras . Why hadn’t he put her forward? “Do you think I hate you? I would not wish to be related to them.” But Araf was also clear about the risks she was running, writing chillingly about the regime’s use of torture in a post entitled “Why we fight” . Torture, she wrote, is “routine and normal”. “It is what all of us expect. It is why we keep our nails as short as possible so they can’t be pulled off. It is why we were slow to come out into the streets … It is why you don’t see so many women in the protests. What do you think happens to women who get picked up?” The following Araf had gained was evident when, within minutes of her disappearance being reported, campaigns were launched on Facebook and elsewhere to free her, with Syrian activists tweeting extracts from her blog. Some hours after reporting her disappearance, Araf’s cousin Rania Ismail, whom she had asked to post to her blog if anything happened to her, wrote a brief update . “I have been on the telephone with both her parents and all that we can say right now is that she is missing … We do not know who took her so we do not know who to ask to get her back. It is possible that they are forcibly deporting her. From other family members who have been imprisoned there, we believe that she is likely to be released fairly soon. If they wanted to kill her, they would have done so. That is what we are all praying for.” Nidaa Hassan is a pseudonym for a journalist in Damascus Syria Middle East Esther Addley Nidaa Hassan guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Polls show that Republican voters aren’t exactly swooning over Rick Santorum’s White House run, but one woman was overcome during his big announcement yesterday . The former senator interrupted his speech after a woman fainted, apparently from the heat, Vanity Fair reports. Santorum walked offstage to help the woman and then…
Continue reading …With its tablet-like controller, the Wii U is a seriously weird piece of kit. But, yet again, once you get your hands on it, a multitude of new gaming experiences tumble out of it. And the machine will have more hardcore appeal, too. When looking at the Nintendo Wii U, it’s important to remember that when the Wii launched in 2006, some people laughed at the console’s intention to “disrupt” gaming. It didn’t look like a disruptive piece of kit – but it was. The proof lies in the fact that Microsoft and Sony subsequently felt obliged to create the Kinect and Move, not to mention the entire generation of people it introduced to video games. But surely it couldn’t pull of the same trick again with Wii U? Oh yes it can. Although there was trepidation mixed in with the excitement when we pitched up at Nintendo’s still half-built booth at E3, on the day before the press conference at which it would launch Wii U, for an ultra-exclusive sneak preview of the new console. Which was conducted in a gloriously cloak-and-dagger manner – a wristband had to be obtained, security insisted we hide our press badge, we were given a lengthy list of questions we couldn’t ask, photography and audio-recording devices were strictly banned, and we had to wait outside a demo room sealed by a blast-door that would tax a professional safe cracker. Upon entering the inner sanctum, Wii U itself, although apparently hooked up to a big screen, initially remained concealed – indeed, the console remained a shadowy presence throughout, partly hidden in a cupboard. What we could see of it resembled a slightly more rounded Wii, but in truth, it looked like a prototype not yet given the benefit of an industrial designer. We were told that none of the games we would be playing were actual games, but rather tech-demos. And our first glimpse of anything running on the console was emphatically that: a lengthy fly-through in an immaculately constructed virtual Japanese garden, from the viewpoint of various birds, designed to show off Wii U’s graphics-processing power. Which was impressive if not jaw-dropping – on a par with the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, running in full HD, with depth of focus and convincingly modelled water and weather effects. We had established that Wii U will be able to run the sort of third-party titles that currently only make it onto the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, but before long, we began to yearn for some signs of Nintendo’s fabled disruptive gameplay. What the hell is that? They weren’t long in coming. With a theatrical flourish, the new controller was produced. On clapping eyes on it, our initial reaction ran thus. What? The hell? Is that? The controller is one of the strangest bits of kit you will ever see. It basically resembles an unholy mating of a tablet PC and a gamepad. It’s huge – you need both hands to grip it – and dominated by a massive, 6.2in touchscreen. It has two analogue sticks, all the buttons you would expect to find on a gamepad (including two triggers on the back plus two bumpers, which weren’t used during the demo), a camera pointing at you and a tiny speaker. It motion-senses like a Wiimote and has a gyro-sensor like the 3DS. The whole shebang basically has most of the elements found in the PlayStation Vita (bar the processor and graphics chips), and is much bigger than Sony’s new handheld. It’s clearly not something you can wave around with abandon like the Wiimote, so we initially found it more than a little confusing. Luckily, the chance to experience some proper gameplay was at hand, and the point of the new controller became clearer. Nintendo had been banging on about how that bizarre piece of design was all about providing new gameplay experiences, and from the off, there was no disputing that it delivers on that count. Mii Chase The first tech-demo we played – although it looked suspiciously like a mini-game that you might find in a Wii U version of Wii Play – was called Mii Chase. On entering the room, we had noticed a collection of Wimotes, which seemed odd, but Mii Chase rammed home the message that part of the point of the new controller is about interplay with the familiar remote control. Mii Chase was an ultra-simple game for up to five people. I would navigate Mario, using the new controller, around a maze-like circular level, while four people equipped with Wiimotes would, after I had been given a head-start, try to chase me down within a certain time. The twist was that they had to share a split-screen on the TV, whereas my screen on the new controller showed a third-person view of my character, plus a top-down map with the whereabouts of my pursuers. In gameplay terms, this was almost laughably simple, yet the whole experience felt fresh and innovative, as well as fun. The need for the pursuers to co-operate generated a raucous atmosphere, yet the private information communicated by the new controller’s screen meant I could stay one step ahead of them. If you think about it, there are an awful lot of Wiis out there, and if people are going to upgrade to Wii U, they’ll be thankful that those Wiimotes, at least, won’t become redundant. So to create gameplay from the interplay between the two types of controller could just be a stroke of genius. Battle Mii Next up was Battle Mii, in a similar vein to Mii Chase, but somewhat more sophisticated. Battle Mii is a first/third-person shooter, with two people (playing as their Miis) on the ground, armed with a gun and three lives each. The person with the new controller pilots a hover-ship (equipped with six lives), using the analogue sticks as if piloting a helicopter in a game, while shooting with one trigger and using the other to zoom. Tilting the controller changed your camera view, so you could use that to aim. Again, the dynamic was Wiimotes versus new controller. There was a Metroid theme to proceedings – the ground-based characters could roll into a ball like Samus – and health and armour power-ups. The gameplay experience was very different according to whether you were on the ground or in the air and, again, Battle Mii felt refreshingly unlike anything we had played before. Shield Pose Shield Pose showed that Wii U isn’t just about the tension between the new controller and Wiimote-wielding adversaries. It used the new controller on its own, and required no pressing of buttons whatsoever. The premise was endearingly madcap: a bunch of pirates on three ships – one central, one to the left and one to the right – plus the moon above were firing arrows at you, and you had to use the new controller as a shield. There was a rhythm element, too: you had to raise the new controller from the horizontal at just the right time (on a musical cue), then lower it, also with the rhythm, to shake the arrows off. The head pirate called which direction the arrows would come from, and after a while you would have to raise the new controller and point it in various directions before shaking off your arrows. Simple, again, but completely original – and there was an endearingly humorous element to the game. More tech-demos Our hands-on finished with two more tech-demos. The first, Panorama View, had nothing obvious to do with anything recognisable as a game, but was startling and impressive. It was simply video footage taken from a car driving down a Kyoto city street. Or rather, stitched-together video from several cameras, as you could use the new controller’s gyro-sensor to move your viewpoint around, as if you were actually in the moving car – looking up, down behind and around. The last demo was blandly entitled HD Experience, but it will excite Nintendo fanboys. It was essentially a cut-scene depicting what a Zelda game would look like on Wii U set in a huge, gothic interior, with Link taking on a giant spider-boss. Nintendo had mapped various functions onto the new controller’s touchscreen, such as toggling the lighting between day and night, and scrolling through different camera angles. There was also a map, and you could press a button to switch images between the new controller’s screen and the TV screen. It demonstrated that the new controller’s touch-screen can operate much like the touch-screen on a 3DS, letting you access inventory and so on. So will Wii U eclipse the Wii? Initial impressions would leave us answering that question with a resounding “Yes”. In typical Nintendo fashion, Wii U is one of those objects that you have to get your hands on before you get what it is trying to achieve. The new controller is such an odd, unlikely-looking thing that it will undoubtedly generate a wave of early cynicism. But the joyously unusual nature of the gameplay experiences that even a couple of hastily assembled tech-demos can engender bodes more than well. And its sensible amount of under-the-bonnet grunt (an area in which the underpowered Wii suffered from its inception) gives it much more hardcore appeal than its predecessor. After the demo was over Nintendo, bless it, treated us to a final element of cloak-and-daggerishness. We were told more facts about Wii U, which had to be read out and transcribed only onto paper. So here they are: the console itself will run in full HD, via HDMI, but the touchscreen isn’t HD. The console has internal Flash memory which can be augmented with “SD Card or USB solutions”. It will play optical disks and downloadable content, and will be backwards-compatible with Wii software. And it will launch some time between 1 April and 31 December 2012. It will be the oddest console ever, and possibly the best, too. Or it may turn out to be a complete cul-de-sac. But one thing is for sure: it won’t just be another generic games console. E3 2011 Games E3 Nintendo Wii PS3 Xbox Microsoft Steve Boxer guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Attempt to overhaul UN sanctions regime hangs on Russia, INdia and China dropping objections, says German diplomat An attempt by western powers to kickstart peace talks with the Taliban by overhauling the United Nations’ sanction regime against the hardline movement and its al-Qaida allies hangs on whether Russia, India and China can be persuaded to drop their objections, a senior diplomat said. Germany’s ambassador to the UN, Peter Wittig, said his country was engaged in “intensive negotiations” with foreign partners over a range of changes to the UN’s “1267 list”, a collection of 450 people deemed to be associated with the Taliban and al-Qaida. Under the proposed plans, two separate lists would be created, one for each militant organisation, giving the Afghan government much greater say over which Taliban would be on the new list, which – like the existing system – would make it hard for named individuals to travel internationally or to have a bank account. Wittig said the split would recognise the “different fields of action” between the two organisations, with the Taliban “restricted basically to Afghanistan” while al-Qaida operates globally. “Separating those two things highlights the significance of the political efforts that are ongoing in Afghanistan,” he said. Wittig said the Afghan government, which supports the changes, would be given greater control over a “more flexible” Taliban list. The negotiations about reform coincide with a request by the Afghan government to remove about 50 of the 138 names currently listed as Taliban. The proposed names are either no longer actively involved in the insurgency or are not regarded as posing a terrorist threat. Particularly significant are five individuals who are members of the High Peace Council, a body established by the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, to lay the grounds for peace talks. Last week the Guardian reported that the UK and US were backing the changes in the hope they would encourage the Taliban to engage in peace talks with Karzai’s government. Wittig, who is also chairman of the UN’s al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions committee, said the proposals – which include “sunset clauses” to prevent individuals languishing on the sanction list indefinitely – remained controversial with some of the 15 members, and unanimous agreement would have to be achieved by 17 June. Russia, which suffered heavy losses during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, is seen as the main block to the proposals. Moscow fears that the Taliban continues to maintain important links with al-Qaida, and is sceptical that the Islamist movement can be incorporated into a political settlement in Afghanistan. Wittig said the Russians were still open to discussions and Afghan officials would be lobbying Moscow to back the changes. It is hoped that the other leading doubters, India and China, will follow Russia’s lead. It is unusual for the committee to consider delisting a large number of people with Taliban associations in one go. A decision on whether to remove them will be required by next Friday and Wittig predicted that it was very unlikely all of them would be struck off. Delisting has long been plagued with difficulties, including the problem of collecting accurate information on many individuals, some of whom are believed to have been dead for many years. “We have to manage expectations,” Wittig said. “Not all of that 50 will be delisted but if we can come up with a couple of names that would send a good signal, I think.” The sanctions, which were first imposed in 1999 when the Taliban was still in power, have long angered former high-ranking officials in the Taliban regime now living peacefully in Kabul. It is hoped that sanctions reform and the delisting will send a signal to insurgent leaders that the Afghan government is serious about allowing fighters to come out of hiding. It could also allow those with continued ties with the movement to travel to a proposed overseas Taliban “office” where it is hoped all sides of the conflict could hold discussions. Taliban Afghanistan Russia Germany United Nations China India Jon Boone guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rolling coverage of all the day’s political developments as they happen 5.56pm: Here’s an afternoon summary. • David Cameron has announced a raft of changes to the health bill . The concessions have been welcomed by the Lib Dems, but some Tories will be concerned that the planned reforms are being emasculated. Cameron also announced that he is setting up “clinical senates”, which will involve groups of doctors and healthcare professionals coming together “to take an overview of the integration of care across a wide area”. This will lay him open to the charge that, having announced plans to remove one tier of bureaucracy in the NHS (by abolishing primary care trusts), he has ended up creating another in its place. (See 2.12pm.) • Oxford academics have overwhelming passed a vote of no confidence in David Willetts, the higher education minister. The motion was passed by 283 votes to 5. There is full coverage on our live blog. • Theresa May, the home secretary, has said that money from the £63m anti-radicalisation Prevent budget has been given to “the very extremist organisations that Prevent should have been confronting”. In a statement to the Commons announcing the government’s new approach, she said: “In trying to reach out to those at risk of radicalisation, funding sometimes even reached the very extremist organisations that Prevent should have been confronting. We will not make the same mistakes. In a world of scarce resources, it is clear that Prevent work must be targeted against those forms of terrorism which pose the greatest risk to our national security.” • William Hague, the foreign secretary, has mildly criticised Formula One for its decision to re-instate the Bahrain Grand Prix. When he was initially asked about this, he replied: “[Formula One] must take responsibility for their own decisions but if such an event is to take place at all then it should be a focus for improvements in Bahrain and be an incentive for all in Bahrain to work together on a national dialogue.” But later, in response to a question from Sir Menzies Campbell, he said Formula One “has not done itself any good by what has been announced”. • Paul Burstow, the health minister, has said that there could be an independent inquiry into the abuse of adults with learning disabilities at the Winterbourne View private hospital . This morning Ed Miliband said that the ongoing reviews into what happened were unsatisfactory and that an independent inquiry was necessary. Later, in the Commons, Burstow said: “For the avoidance of doubt, we have not ruled out an independent inquiry.” That’s it for today. Thanks for the comments. 5.53pm: Theresa May’s statement is now over. I’ll post a summary shortly. 5.46pm: Labour’s Denis MacShane says all government’s get some of these issues wrong. May should not have been so partisan, he says. 5.41pm: Labour’s Tristram Hunt says that for home secretaries to define what is and isn’t Britishness is “treacherous territory”. 5.33pm: Patrick Mercer, a Conservative, asks about Northern Ireland. May says Prevent doesn’t cover Northern Ireland terrorism. 5.32pm: Labour’s George Howarth asks for an assurance that the good Prevent work being carried out abroad won’t be abandoned. May says the government says this activity will continue. But the government will need to make sure that the money is properly spent. 5.27pm: The Home Office press notice about the new Prevent strategy is now available on the Central Office of Information website. 5.25pm: David Blunkett, the Labour former home secretary, says May should not be making political points with this issue. And he asks why Michael Gove is withdrawing citizenship from the curriculum? May says Gove is clear about ensuring that values are taught in schools. 5.24pm: David Davis, the Tory backbencher, says he recently received a letter from a prisoner saying his prison imam told inmates not to believe what the Western media was saying about the death of Osama bin Laden. Will the new Prevent strategy stop teaching like this? May says she wants to see this kind of activity being put to an end. 5.22pm: May is replying to Cooper. She says Cooper accepted the need to review Prevent. But she has also rejected the findings of that review, she says. On Hizb ut-Tahrir, she says the government will keep its status under review. May says it is right for the government to look at the groups being funded. The last government did not do that, she says. 5.17pm: Yvette Cooper , the shadow home secretary, says Theresa May has been engaged in “political point scoring”. She was supposed to be updating the Prevent strategy. But she has done nothing of the kind. The Prevent strategies were launched after 7/7. At the time the government was treading on new ground. It had the support of the opposition. Some of the strategies worked. Some didn’t. May should proceed on the basis of evidence, she says. Cooper says she agrees that extremist groups should not be funded. But the review found that this was not a problem. The universities and the NHS have already rejected the government’s plans. There is a “massive gap” between May’s rhetoric and the reality. Police counter-terrorism budgets are being cut, she says. And the government is watering down control orders (in a bill being debated later tonight). Cooper finishes with a final question. Will May confirm that the government will not meet its promise to ban Hizb ut-Tahrir? 5.14pm: May is still speaking. The Prevent strategy will have three objectives. 1. Tackling the ideology behind extremism. May says she has already stopped 44 individuals coming to the UK. 2. Stopping individuals being drawn into terrorism. May says Prevent is “not about spying on communities”. 3. Working with sectors and institutions where there is a risk of radicalisation. May pays tribute to the Lib Dem peer Lord Carlile of overseeing the review. He supports its findings, she says. May says her plan “will tackle the threat from home-grown terrorism”. 5.09pm: May says Osama bin Laden may be dead, but the threat from al-Qaida is severe. That means an attack on the UK is highly likely. The government must stop people being drawn into terrorist activity in the first place. And the government must have a counter-terrorism strategy to deal with terrorism at home and overseas. Labour’s Prevent strategy was “flawed”, she says. The new strategy will have a number of new principles. It should address all forms of terrorism, including the extreme rightwing. But it must focus on those forms of terrorism that pose the greatest risk. At the moment, al-Qaida poses the greatest risk. The new strategy will also tackle “non-violent extremism”, she says. Integration should go wider than counter-terrorism. The last government only promoted integration in the context of terrorism. Public funding for Prevent will be prioritised and “rigorously” audited. Public money will not be provided to organisations if they do not support the values of human rights and democracy. 5.08pm: Theresa May is starting her statement now. 4.49pm: Theresa May , the home secretary, is about to make a Commons statement about the government’s new Prevent counter-terrorism strategy. Here’s a short background reading list before she starts. • A briefing note from the House of Commons library about the Prevent review (pdf). • David Cameron’s speech on Islamist extremism at the Munich security conference. • Paul Goodman at ConservativeHome on how drawing up the Prevent strategy split the coalition. 4.41pm: William Hague , the foreign secretary, is now updating MPs on events in Libya and other countries in North Africa and the Middle East. You can read his statement in full here. He said he visited Benhazi at the weekend and found “a great sense of optimism amongst ordinary Libyans”. He was asked about Formula One’s decision to re-instate the Bahrain Grand Prix. Hague said Formula One “has not done itself any good” by the decision. 4.30pm: Miliband has attacked the government’s NHS plans as “lunacy”. That’s David Miliband , not Ed. The former foreign secetary intervened in health questions and, according to PoliticsHome, he asked Andrew Lansley to confirm that “that over £20m has been spent in the North East of England sacking PCT staff, that this money has come from funds previously earmarked for hospitals, and that there are going to be at least as many commissioning groups under his proposals as there currently are PCTs employing managers in those roles.” Miliband went on: Doesn’t this show that his plans are lunacy, not reform, and that they should be taken away and put into the dustbin, not given a simple pause? 4.14pm: Earlier, in my reading list (see 2.49pm), I posted a link to a Dan Hodges article that included an attack on Liberal Conspiracy. At Liberal Conspiracy, Dan Paskini has posted a reply. “Rubbishing our leader and behaving like the 1990s Tory Bastard Renactment Society isn’t a contribution on the route to electoral victory,” Paskini says. 4.00pm: Paul Burstow ‘s statement is now over. Here are the main points. • Burstow refused to rule out an independent inquiry into the Winterbourne View scandal. But he stressed that various reviews were already taking place. The Care Quality Commission is inspecting all services run by Castlebeck Care, the firm that runs Winterbourne View. South Gloucestershire council is holding a multi-agency safeguarding review. A criminal investigation is underway. And the Department for Health will examine the role played by all agencies involved. • Mark Goldring, the chief executive of MENCAP, will contribute to the internal Department for Health review of what happened. • Burstow did not rule out demanding resignations once the reviews being carried out are over. 3.57pm: Labour’s Dame Anne Begg asks if “telly care” would help, by allowing people to find out what was happening in homes like Winterbourne View. Burstow says he thinks that there is a role for “telly care”, but that this should not be a substitute for in-person inspections. 3.51pm: Labour’s Gisela Stuart asks if he is prepared to force people to resign if it turns out to be to blame. Burstow says in principle he is prepared to ask people to go. But he will first await the findings of the reviews being carried out into what happened. Accountability and Responsibility are at the heart of the government’s approach, he says. 3.51pm: Margot James, a Conservative, asks how many whistleblower complaints to the CQC have not been followed up? Burstow says he will look into this. 3.48pm: Labour’s Malcolm Wicks says Winterbourne is probably not an isolated example. Could local communities be involved in safeguarding people in these homes, he asks. Burstow says there will never be an inspector in every home at every moment in the day. But he would like people to become involved in the scrutiny of care in their communities. 3.43pm: Labour’s Dennis Skinner says a full inquiry would focus attention on the owners of Winterbourne View. He says that it is ironic that “billionaire Irishmen” were involved in the company owning the hospital at a time when Britain is helping to bail out the Irish economy. 3.41pm: Labour’s Michael Meacher says the Care Quality Commission (CQC) has had to reduce its inspections by 70%. Burstow says the last Labour government changed the rules govering CQC inspections. 3.39pm: Paul Burstow is replying to Thornberry. He repeats his point about the government not ruling out any further inquiry. But the government wants to make a decision based on “the full facts”, which is why it wants to see what the local inquiries throw up. 3.37pm: Emily Thornberry says the events shown on Panorama were “truly shocking”. South Gloucestershire Council is reviewing this case. But there should be an independent inquiry, she says. Did staff shortage at the Care Quality Commission have anything to do with what happened? Thornberry says she is not asking for an inquiry into individuals. She is asking for an inquiry into the failure of the system. 3.35pm: Paul Burstow is still speaking. He says responsibility for care rests with four groups: the providers, the commissioners, the regulators and the individuals involved. The individuals should have known what they were doing was totally unacceptable. 3.33pm: Paul Burstow , the health minister, is responding to the urgent question now. I thought Andrew Lansley was answering – because that’s what David Cameron said when he was asked about it earlier – but Lansley has left it to Burstow, the minister for care. Emily Thornberry, a shadow health minister, asks why the government has rejected Labour’s call for an independent investigation. Burstow says the government has not ruled out an independent investigation at some point. 3.21pm: Andrew Lansley, the health secretary, will be answering an urgent question about the Winterbourne View scandal at 3.30pm. A Panorama documentary broadcast last week showed staff at the centre grossly mistreating patients, who are adults with autism and learning difficulties. There is some footage on the BBC’s website, which also quotes an expert describing the treatment as “torture”. Here’s the statement Lansley issued about this last week. 2.49pm: Here’s an afternoon reading list. • Sturdyblog on why the IMF should not be taken too seriously. Last year, Hungary told the IMF to take its recommendations and shove them where the Strauss-Kahn don’t shine. The IMF insisted on tougher austerity measures, Hungary wanted to tax its banks and the rich. Talks between Hungary and the IMF collapsed and the IMF warned that Hungary would be punished for its folly. The Centre for Economic and Policy Research warned that the IMF’s obsession with austerity was dangerous. A year on, the IMF had to eat its words and commend Hungary for its ongoing recovery, which is going very well – thank you. • Sam Macrory at ePolitix on what John Bercow had to say when he was interviewed on stage by the Independent’s Steve Richards last night. And when offering his views on one particular paper, Mr Speaker was anything but [silent]. The Daily Mail, Bercow-baiters in chief, was dismissed as a “sexist, racist, bigoted, comic cartoon strip”, with Bercow apologising for breaking the trade descriptions act for describing the Mail as a “newspaper.” A red rag to its parliamentary sketch writer Quentin Letts, but honesty-points for the Speaker. • Dan Hodges at LabourUncut says Labour’s “flat earthers” need to get real. I’ve said it before, and I make no apologies for saying it again. The Labour movement is losing its marbles. At the moment, the cult of the flat earther is everywhere. “It’s not true we have a huge funding problem”, said Harriet Harman to Andrew Marr. The local election results were great. There is a progressive majority in this country. Ed’s problem is that not enough people have got to know him. This is not simple denial. Denial is an inability to face the truth. We’re not just ignoring the truth, we are constructing an entire alternate universe. In politics people will always have different perspectives, even those on the same side of the political fence. But for debate to be meaningful, there have to be some basic areas of agreement to act as points of reference, and anchor the dialogue. At the moment, within the Labour party, those points of reference simply do not exist. • Nicholas Watt on his Guardian blog on why Lady Thatcher will not be meeting Sarah Palin. It would appear that the reasons go deeper than Thatcher’s frail health. Her allies believe that Palin is a frivolous figure who is unworthy of an audience with the Iron Lady. This is what one ally tells me: “Lady Thatcher will not be seeing Sarah Palin. That would be belittling for Margaret. Sarah Palin is nuts.” • Sarah Hayward at ProgLoc says that at the moment Labour does not have an answer to the challenges thrown up by localism. 2.45pm: Andrew Lansley is taking questions in the Commons now. At 3.30pm he will be answering an urgent question about the Winterbourne View private hospital scandal. And he’s also issued a press release, accusing Ed Miliband of “misleading the public”. At his news conference this morning Miliband said that at the election Labour said it would “maintain NHS spending in real terms”. But its manifesto only promised to protect “frontline investment” in the NHS. Ed Miliband is misleading the public. The manifesto he wrote does not protect NHS funding in real terms at all – and he knows it. A quick look at their cuts to the NHS in Wales tells you all you need to know: where Labour run the NHS, they run it into the ground. 2.12pm: David Cameron is delivering his NHS speech now. Here are the key points. • Cameron says that he will change the section of the health bill saying that Monitor, the health regulator, should have a duty to “promote competition”. This could be misinterpreted and we don’t want any doubt in anyone’s mind. Monitor will be tasked with creating “a genuine level playing field” between NHS and private providers, he says. Private companies will have to meet the highest standards and they will have to contribute to the costs of training NHS staff. Monitor will also have a new duty to support the integration of services, he says. • GP-led consortia will only take charge of commissioning when they are “good and ready”, he says. • Hospital doctors and nurses will be involved in the commissioning consortia. In fact, Cameron is now describing it as “clinically-led commissioning, not just GP commissioning.” • Clinical senates will be set up. These involve groups of doctors and healthcare professionals coming together “to take an overview of the integration of care across a wide area”. (Cameron did not go into details, but it sounds as if these could end up looking like the primary care trusts that the government is abolishing.) There’s more coverage of the speech, and of the reaction to it, on our NHS reforms live blog. 1.53pm: Labour’s Mary Creagh , the shadow environment secretary, isn’t impressed with the government’s white paper on the natural environment. (See 1pm.) She has put out this response. Today’s natural environment white paper provides few clues about the Conservative-led government’s plans for nature. The white paper fails to set out a clear plan for major challenges such as reforestation or biodiversity loss; nor does it deal with concerns about planning policy. 1.00pm: Here’s a lunchtime summary. • David Cameron has claimed that the government has now persuaded voters to support NHS reform in principle. “Before the pause [in the health bill}, many were claiming the NHS is fine, and telling us not to touch it,” he is saying in a speech he will be making shortly. “Now – whatever their views about how to do it, most agree change is needed. What’s more, a significant number are now more clearly on board with the thrust of what we are proposing.” The speech starts at 1.30pm and we’ll be covering it in detail on the NHS reforms live blog. (See 9.07am.) • Ed Miliband has called for an independent investigation into the treatment of adults with autism and learning difficulties at the Winterbourne View private hospital. A minister will be answering an urgent question on this topic at 3.30pm. (See 11.10am.) • Miliband has also called for a review of the way care homes are regulated. (See 11.10am.) • Lady Neville-Jones, the government’s former security minister, has said that “plenty of Muslim groups” deserve to lose state funding because they support anti-democratic values. As Alan Travis reports, she was speaking ahead of this afternoon’s publication of the government’s revised Prevent counter-terrorism strategy. • The Queen has opened the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff. Referring to the way the assembly has now acquired powers to pass primary legislation, she told the AMs (assembly members): “During the various evolutionary stages of devolution in Wales, the Assembly has earned itself a well-deserved reputation for diligence and competence. You are now entrusted with the authority to make laws in all matters contained within the 20 subjects devolved to the Assembly and, for the first time, you will be passing Assembly Acts.” • Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary, has unveiled plans to spend £7.5m creating 12 large-scale nature improvement areas. The plan is set out in “The Natural Choice”, described by her department as the first white paper on the natural environment in 20 years. • The Department for Health has said that it welcomes “constructive engagement” from other parties on the future of care. It was responding to Ed Miliband’s offer to work with the government to find a cross-party solution to the problem of social care following the publication of Andrew Dilnot’s report on this issue later this year. (See 12.58pm: There will be an urgent question at 3.30pm about the Winterbourne View scandal, according to Sky’s Sophy Ridge. 12.42pm: Downing Street have responded to my question about the polling evidence that supports David Cameron’s claim that public opinion has now come around in favour of NHS reform. (See 9.07am.) An aide referred me to the YouGov@Cambridge (a YouGov division staffed by academics) report out today about public attitudes to health reform (pdf). This does show huge support – 71% in favour, 6% opposed – for the idea that “the way in which the NHS spends its money needs to be reformed, as increased life expectancy and new drugs mean it is becoming more expensive to run”. But there are no figures showing whether support for this proposition has gone up or down since Cameron launched his “listening exercise”. For all I know, YouGov would have got the same response six months ago. The report is worth reading. It shows that when people are asked broadly if they support the government’s reform plans, most say no. Some 41% are opposed, and only 20% are in favour. But when people are asked about specific aspects of the reforms, like GP commissioning, they tend to support them. There is even narrow support – 33% in favour, 29% against – for having a regulator “to ensure that there is competition for provision of NHS services”. 11.42am: Here are the main points from Ed Miliband ‘s press conference. • Miliband called for an independent investigation into the treatment of adults with autism and learning difficulties at the Winterbourne View care home. He said he was “sickened” by last week’s Panorama revelations about the behaviour of staff at the home. Miliband suggested that the government’s response to the programme was inadequate, although, given that the police have arrested some members of staff, it is not clear how Labour’s proposed inquiry would relate to the police investigation. • He said the government should consider changes to the way care homes for the elderly are regulated. In the light of the Southern Cross crisis, there is a case for saying that regulators should consider the financial stability of private firms providing care, not just the quality of the care itself. Miliband said that he wasn’t opposed to the private sector providing care in principle. • He played down concerns about his poor personal ratings in the polls . “I’m not a poll commentator,” he said. He would talk to the voters about what mattered. “I think it’s always true for leaders of the opposition early in their time in office that the public are getting to know them. But I’m very confident,” he said. “In the end you let the people decide.” • He said voters had forgotten how much the NHS had improved under Labour. In 1997 Virginia Bottomley, the Conservative health secretary, wanted to promise a maximum 18-month waiting time. She never achieved that, he said. Labour got the maximum down to 18 weeks, he said. When pressed for further details of how Labour would reform the NHS, Miliband referred to the speech he gave on this subject to the RSA. (There’s more about that speech here, at 12.12pm.) 11.34am: BBC News and Sky have given up on their coverage of the Labour press conference. And Labour’s live feed still isn’t working. It looks as if I should have made the trip to the Royal Festival Hall. I’ll sum up what we’ve learnt shortly. 11.25am: The Q&A is still going on. Q: Are there any circumstances in which you could vote for the health bill? Miliband says the government would be better to “go back to the drawing board”. But he will wait to see what the government proposes. Q: What do you say to people who think you’re a bad opposition? Miliband says he thinks Labour has won back the voters it lost at the last election. But it has got to win back more people, by showing them he has “a compelling view of the future”. There is further to go, he says. Q: Your personal poll ratings are way behind Cameron’s? Are you a drag on Labour’s chances? Miliband says he is “not a poll commentator”. He talks about what matters to the country. Voters have to make up their mind. There is always a phase for new opposition leaders when voters get to know them. In the end voters have to make up their own mind. 11.19am: The Q&A is still going on. Q: What can you do to stop private equity firms “creaming off millions” from firms like Southern Cross? Miliband says Labour allowed independent treatment centres to provide NHS care. But they had to show that they were financially viable. He is “open-minded” about how this issue is addressed. But the government cannot leave this to one side. The government’s response has not been nearly “muscular enough”, he says. Q: What do you have to say about knife crime? Do you think the government is soft on crime? Miliband says he does take this seriously as an issue. Cameron made a series of promises on knife crime. “As far as I can tell, he’s not keeping them.” He says he will support tough community punishments. But he does not support Kenneth Clarke’s plan to halve sentences for offenders who plead guilty early. Q: What do you think about Nick Clegg’s stance on the health bill? Miliband says Clegg is a “Johnny come lately” convert to changing the health bill. Q: Has getting married changed your view of marriage? (This is from the Daily Mail.) Miliband congratulates the Mail on its coverage of the care homes issue. On marriage, he says he will not tell other couples how what they should do. 11.16am: Miliband is taking questions now. Q: How do you respond to the claims that the Labour policy review is chaotic? (Some of these claims were made in this Total Politics article.) Miliband says he is “very proud” of the policy review. Liam Byrne is leading a review reporting to Miliband. And shadow cabinet ministers are conducting their own reviews. A party that loses an election needs to consider its policies, he says. Q: How can you work with David Cameron on care when you have been so critical of him? Miliband says Labour has worked with the government on some issues. Social care is an area where the parties should work together. 11.10am: Here are the key points from Ed Milband ‘s opening speech. • Miliband demanded an independent investigation into the Winterbourne View care home scandal. I was shocked by the scenes from the Winterborne View care home. They sickened me. They shame our country. The Government appears to believe that reviews by the Care Quality Commission and by South Gloucestershire Council are enough. It is not because these bodies were involved in the failure itself. There must be an independent investigation into what happened and what lessons need to be learned and the Government should announce it straight away. • He said the Southern Cross care home crisis suggested that regulators should investigate not just the quality of care, but also the financial stability of private firms providing that care. At Southern Cross, it is plain wrong that financiers creamed off millions, while as we now know the care of tens of thousands of elderly people was being put at risk. They seem to have been treated merely as commodities. As we have seen previously with the banks, there are industries – and health and social care services are one such example – where corporate failure can have consequences far beyond the loss to shareholders and investors. Just as with the banks, in the end the government would have to step in and pick up the tab. We should not jump to the conclusion that all private homes are bad. They are not. But for these industries, effective regulation is critical. Currently regulation looks at the quality of care provided. The Government must now also look at whether the regulation of this sector should be extended to cover the financial stability of organisations which provide these vital services for hundreds of thousands of elderly people. • He offered to hold cross-party talks with the government on the findings of the Dilnot review into the future of care for the elderly being published later this year. We all know that there have been lots of reports into social care over the years. Every serious attempt to solve this pressing challenge has foundered, often on the failure to find a political consensus. The most recent example was the break-up of cross-party talks by the Conservatives when they were in opposition so they could scaremonger about death taxes and benefit changes. I want to make a serious offer to David Cameron today. Let’s engage in cross-party talks around the Dilnot Commission’s recommendations to deliver the care system we need. We will come to those talks with an open mind about the best way forward, not simply advocating what we have proposed in the past. 11.08am: Oh dear. The Labour party’s live feed seems to have crashed. Luckily Sky and BBC News are showing Ed Miliband’s speech. 11.01am: The live feed does seem to be working. According to a number at the bottom of the screen, I’m one of 127 people watching at the moment. 10.51am: 10.51am: Ed Miliband’s press conference will be starting shortly. It’s at the Royal Festival Hall. I normally attend these events in person, but Labour say they will be showing a live feed on their Facebook site and so I’ll take their chances with that. Jim Pickard at the FT’s Westminster blog has more on how Miliband will be calling for cross-party talks on social care. 10.32am: Ed Miliband is going to call for an independent investigation into the Winterbourne View home for disabled adults scandal , according to the BBC’s Norman Smith. 10.25am: You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here. And all the politics stories filed yesterday, including some in today’s paper, are here. As for the rest of the papers, here are some articles and stories that are particularly interesting. • Sean O’Neill in the Times (paywall) says the government will reveal that Labour spent millions of pounds overseas on anti-extremism projects that produced no security benefits. The new Prevent strategy for fighting the al-Qaeda ideology, a copy of which has been seen by The Times, promises to “significantly scale up” work in prisons and with recently released terrorist prisoners. The document, to be published in Parliament this afternoon, says that anti-extremism programmes reached only “a small proportion of the target prison population” and some convicted terrorists have been released without their beliefs being challenged. By contrast, in an echo of the debate over international aid spending, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has been spending Prevent money abroad on English classes for imams and courses to empower Muslim women that have had little or no security value. • Jeremy Laurance in the Independent says that more than 70 per cent of primary care trusts are ignoring guidance from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (Nice) to offer infertile couples three free cycles of IVF. Women unable to conceive naturally are being denied IVF on the NHS because they are too young, too old, too fat, smoke or live in Wales – in flagrant breaches of the guidelines. (That suggests David Cameron’s “universal coverage” pledge isn’t quite as far-reaching as it sounds. See 9.07am.) • Rachel Sylvester in the Times (paywall) says David Cameron is going back on his commitment to localism. Now that he realises that he will be held responsible for the decisions made by local people and institutions, Mr Cameron is slowly but surely seizing back control. Although the coalition agreement declared that “the time has come to disperse power more widely in Britain today”, in reality, a year on, power is being concentrated ever more narrowly at the centre. Even as the Localism Bill goes through Parliament, promising new rights and powers for local communities, the Government in Whitehall is asserting itself with increasing vigour. Yesterday Mr Cameron backed national guidelines for retailers, broadcasters and councils to prevent the sexualisation of children. Today the Home Office publishes plans to tackle extremism that will include controls on universities and Muslim groups. The Department for Environment and Rural Affairs will set out plans to protect designated wildlife sites. Meanwhile, ministers are about to force through a huge housebuilding programme on public sector land. “All political parties are decentralisers in opposition and centralisers in government,” one strategist says. “Once you have power it’s very hard to give it up.” • Jason Groves in the Daily Mail says Andrew Mitchell, the international development secretary, has described Britain as a “development superpower”. Addressing a foreign policy conference in London, Mr Mitchell said: ‘Just as the Americans are a military superpower, we are a development superpower – we are in the lead. ‘My ambition is that over the next four years people will come to think across our country – in all parts of it – of Britain’s fantastic development work around the poorest parts of the world with the same pride and satisfaction that they see in some of our great institutions like the Armed Forces and the monarchy. This is brilliant work that Britain is doing.’ (The Daily Mail isn’t very chuffed about Britain’s new superpower status. “Why on Earth do the Tories think they have the right to squander taxpayers’ money in their misguided zeal to detoxify their brand,” it asks in a leader.) • Andy McSmith in the Independent says that Sarah Palin wants to come to London to meet Margaret Thatcher, but that she is likely to be disappointed. Baroness Thatcher had to stop making public appearances years ago because of ill health and is seldom at home for guests. A reception hosted by David Cameron in Downing Street to celebrate her 85th birthday had to go ahead without her. An aide said: “Nowadays, the Lady rarely meets people at all. If a meeting went ahead it would be very much low-key, and would very much depend on how things were on the day. We don’t make firm appointments for this sort of meeting.” • Roland Watson and Robert Lea in the Times (paywall) say ministers are considering plans that would force unions to minimise disruption to the public during strikes. Ministers are now looking at measures that would require unions to sign up to minimum service agreements of the kind used in Spain. That would require unions to maintain a level of service of about 40 per cent of the normal level, even when they were on strike. One Government source said: “We are looking at how you minimise the impact on the economy and on public services.” • Philip Stephens in the Financial Times (subscription) says George Osborne and Ed Balls are both right about the deficit. How can the chancellor and his shadow both be right? It’s simple. Mr Osborne was correct to judge that the UK needed a tough and credible programme to eliminate the deficit within a reasonable time frame. Mr Balls has been right in arguing it was dangerous to do too much too soon. To put it another way, Mr Osborne has been too intractable and Mr Balls too reluctant to spell out a convincing alternative. The sensible thing for the chancellor to do now would be to dust off the contingency plans drawn up some months ago by Sir Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet secretary. To save face, Mr Osborne can call them something other than plan B. Strange to say, Mr Balls is in no better shape. Much as they may think the government is overdoing it, voters are unlikely to give much credence to Labour as long as Mr Balls implies the deficit can be wished away. The opposition will get a serious hearing only when it admits that it was not an entirely innocent bystander at the scene of this particular economic accident and when it produces its own plan to restore the public finances. 10.12am: Chris Ham, the director of the King’s Fund health thinktank, was on the Today programme this morning talking about David Cameron’s promise to keep NHS waiting times low – a promise that Ed Miliband claims is already being broken. (See 9.07am and 9.33am.) According to PoliticsHome, Ham said that “there is pressure on the NHS and we know that is having some effect on waiting times but there hasn’t been a great deal of change since the election”. The key thing, Ham said, was to establish what Cameron actually meant by his promise. If the prime minister is going to make a commitment to keep waiting times low, the key is what exactly does that mean? The previous government actually quantified its objectives, it said no more than four hours in A&E, a maximum of two days and you should get your operation done within a maximum of 18 weeks. So the question we and others will be asking about the prime minister’s commitment today on that point is: is he committing to the same targets or something else? If you want to know who’s right about waiting times, do read this analysis on the Channel 4 FactCheck blog. It concludes that there has been a “slight upward trend” in waiting times since the election. 9.33am: And here are some extracts from what Ed Miliband is going to say about the NHS at his press conference later this morning. David Cameron is the first PM in history to set out five pledges to protect the NHS from his own policies, yet he has already broken two of them. The number of people waiting 18 weeks for treatment has gone up. He has not protected the health service budget. He has spent a year mismanaging the NHS. The consequence is chaos, confusion and damage to patient care. Hundreds of millions of pounds which should have been used for patient care are being wasted on handing out redundancy notices to staff from PCTs – staff who may now have to be rehired. 9.29am: For the record, here are the latest YouGov GB polling figures. Labour: 43% (up 13 points since the general election) Conservatives: 37% (no change) Lib Dems: 9% (down 15) Labour lead: 6 points Government approval: -24 9.07am: Downing Street have already released some extracts from David Cameron ‘s NHS speech. Yesterday we learnt that Cameron would be making five personal pledges on the issue and here they are in full. We will not endanger universal coverage – we will make sure it remains a National Health Service. We will not break up or hinder efficient and integrated care – we will improve it. We will not lose control of waiting times– we will ensure they are kept low. We will not cut spending on the NHS – we will increase it. And if you’re worried that we are going to sell-off the NHS and create some American-style private system – we will not. We will ensure competition benefits patients. These are my five guarantees. There are some other interesting remarks in the speech too. Cameron acknowledges that “in many ways the NHS is providing some of the best service it ever has”. He says that the listening exercise has produced “an important debate around our country”, including “searching analysis that some newspapers have carried out”. (I presume that means he’s been reading the Guardian’s excellent NHS reforms live blog.) Crucially, he also claims that, as a result of the listening exercise, the government is winning the argument over the need to reform the NHS. Before the pause, many were claiming the NHS is fine, and telling us not to touch it. Now – whatever their views about how to do it, most agree change is needed. What’s more, a significant number are now more clearly on board with the thrust of what we are proposing. In recent weeks, GPs representing 1,100 practices across England, the Association of Surgeons from Great Britain and Ireland and the Royal College of Surgeons have all written letters to national newspapers expressing support for the basis of our plans. Patients groups like Saga and Age UK have also backed key parts of our plans. But is this actually true? Does anyone know of any polling that confirms that “a significant number [of people] are now more clearly on board with the thrust of what we are proposing”? The only evidence I can find to support this is the YouGov tracker poll (pdf) that shows that the Labour lead on the NHS is now only 12 points, compared with 15 points at the beginning of May and 15 points at the end of March. But this is only a very modest improvement. In January the Labour lead on the “which party would handle the NHS best” question was just 10 points. 8.50am: MPs are back today and health is dominating the agenda. Ed Miliband is giving a press conference on health this morning, David Cameron is delivering a speech on the subject this afternoon and Andrew Lansley is taking questions on the Commons. But there are plenty of other things going on too. Here’s the diary for the day. 9am: The cabinet meets. 10.15am: Energy companies give evidence to a Commons committee about the UK’s energy supply, 11am: Ed Miliband gives a press conference about the NHS. I’ll be covering it here minute by minute, and you can can watch it live on Labour’s Facebook page . 11am: Andrew Dilnot, who is chairing the government’s commission on care funding, speaks at a Saga care crisis seminar. 1.30pm: David Cameron delivers a speech on the NHS. My colleague Randeep Ramesh and Rowenna Davis will be covering it in detail on the NHS reforms live blog . 2pm: Oxford academics debate a motion of no confidence in David Willetts , the higher education minister. 2.30pm: Andrew Lansley , the health secretary, takes questions in the Commons. 2.30pm: Liam Fox , the defence secretary, gives evidence to the Commons Scottish affairs committee about the implications of the defence review for Scotland. 3.30pm: William Hague , the foreign secretary, makes a statement in the Commons about Libya. Around 4.30pm: Theresa May , the home secretary, is expected to make a statement about Prevent, the government’s counter-terrorism strategy. As Alan Travis reports , it will say that doctors should to identify people who are “vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism”. Later MPs will debate the terrorism prevention and investigation measures bill. We’re also getting an unusually large number of written ministerial statements today, including ones about the crisis at Southern Cross care homes, the revelations about the way adults with learning disabilities were treated at the Winterbourne View private hospital , the German E coli outbreak, money laundering and a medal for civilians who have been involved in the Afghan war. As usual, I’ll be covering all the breaking political news, as well as looking at the papers and bringing you the best politics from the web. I’ll post a lunchtime summary at around 1pm, and an afternoon one after 4pm. House of Commons Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …