Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Today’s developments as Dr Freddy Patel begins the third day of his evidence at the inquest into the death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests 11.14am: Back to the hearing: Ryder: The diagnosis that you made was what we may call a default diagnosis? Patel: Yes. Ryder: In other words, you couldn’t work out what it was and so the only other possibility you had was coronary artery disease? Patel: That’s right. To some extent. 11.04am: A quick but important diversion. There has been a major development in an unrelated case concerning the Metropolitan police’s G20 policing operation. In a landmark judgment, the high court has ruled that the Met’s kettle of 4-5,000 climate change protesters during the demonstration was unlawful. The kettle occurred on Bishopsgate, around the same time but in a different part of the City of London to where Tomlinson was struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by Harwood. You can read my colleague Vikram Dodd’s take on the case here . The ruling – a major setback for the Met’s controversial public order unit, CO11 – also found that the use of punches, slaps and baton shields against innocent protesters were unlawful. This video captures the incident in full . It was obtained by the Guardian at the time, and later watched on Youtube more than 500,000 times. 10.54am: It has been revealed that a third pathologist disagreed with Dr Patel . We have heard already that two other pathologists, Dr Nat Cary and Dr Kenneth Shorrock, disagreed with Patel’s natural causes findings, and concluded instead that Tomlinson died of internal bleeding in the abdomen. Ryder has now revealed that a third pathologist, Dr Ben Swift, who examined the body along with Dr Shorrock, also diverged from his conclusions. Swift discovered evidence of bleeding in the “mesentery” (fatty tissue in the abdomen), while Patel conceded he did not find this. Swift’s report stated that he “cannot exclude the the possibility” of a ruptured blood vessel elsewhere in the abdomen. Patel said he would have found any such rupture during his post mortem. 10.33am: Ryder is again asking Patel about the three litres of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen. We know that this is likely to be at the centre of the jury’s deliberations. After two other pathologists concluded that the newspaper seller had died of internal bleeding, Patel returned to his notes and altered them, stating that the three litres were not pure blood but mainly bodily fluid. However, Patel has stated that this fluid initially led him, too, to believe that Tomlinson may have died of internal bleeding, and he tried to find a possible cause of of that bleeding. He did not believe that some of the internal damage he found was sufficient to explain the bleeding. When he could not find the source, through a “process of elimination” he concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack. 10.22am: Dr Freddy Patel is back on the stand . He is being questioned by Matthew Ryder QC , the barrister representing Tomlinson’s family. The last exchange yesterday concerned how Tomlinson’s right arm was trapped between his body and the ground after he was pushed by PC Simon Harwood. Ryder has suggested this may have damaged Tomlinson’s liver. Patel has denied this , stating it would have left a mark on the outside of the body. The jury has been shown the video above which, if you look closely, shows Tomlinson’s arm trapped in the aftermath of the fall. 10.10am: The pathologist Dr Freddy Patel is about to begin the third day of his evidence at the Ian Tomlinson inquest. Patel is the pathologist who concluded that Tomlinson died of a heart attack due to natural causes on 1 April 2009, less than three minutes after being being struck with a baton and pushed to the ground by a police officer at the G20 protests in London. Two other pathologists concluded that the 47-year-old died of internal bleeding. Yesterday, Patel said there was a “compelling association” between Tomlinson being pushed to the ground and the subsequent heart attack, but no physical evidence of a causal link. He also told the inquest how, a year after the post mortem, he altered his description of fluid found in Tomlinson’s abdomen after discovering other experts had concluded he died of internal bleeding. You can read yesterday’s liveblog for the details. Ian Tomlinson Dr Freddy Patel Police Paul Lewis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Rolling coverage of all the day’s political developments as they happen. 10.14am: The BBC has now posted a full story about Vince Cable’s comments on David Cameron’s speech. Cable told Laura Kuenssberg that Cameron’s choice of language was “very unwise”. I’ve already posted most of the quotes (see 10.03am) but here’s one more direct quote from Cable. The reference to the tens of thousands of immigrants rather than hundreds of thousands is not part of the coalition agreement, it is Tory party policy only. 10.03am: Here are some more quotes from Vince Cable’s interview with the BBC. Commenting on David Cameron’s speech, he said: I do understand there is an election coming but talk of mass immigration risks inflaming extremism to which he and I are both strongly opposed …. Much of the remaining immigration from outside the EU is crucial to British recovery and growth. That is why the cabinet collectively agreed to support British business and British universities by exempting overseas students and essential staff from the cap on non EU immigration. Cable also said that Cameron was making “very unwise comments”. 9.59am: Vince Cable also said that Cameron’s speech “risked inflaming extremism”, the BBC reports. 9.49am: Vince Cable has described Cameron’s speech as “very unwise”, the BBC reports. He has also said that getting net immigration down to tens of thousands a year, instead of letting it remain in the hundreds of thousands, is Tory policy and not coalition policy. This sounds like one of the most serious public Lib Dem/Conservative rifts we’ve seen from within the cabinet since the election. I’ll post the full quotes as soon as I get them. 9.32am: Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the home affairs committee, has also been commenting on David Cameron’s speech. He said the prime minister was wrong to say that immigration caused “discomfort and disjointedness” in some communities. According to PoliticsHome , this is what Vaz told Radio 5 Live. I think that those who have come to this country, those first generation immigrants do want to integrate and, if you look at the major towns and cities in this country, there is a desire for people to be involved. I think we’ve got a better record of toleration and integration than any country in Europe … The large number of eastern Europeans that came to Britain since the enlargement of the EU have actually integrated quite well, I think. 9.09am: Here’s some of the reaction we’ve already had to Cameron’s immigration speech. I’ve taken the quotes from the Press Association and PoliticsHome. From Tom Brake, co-chair of the Lib Dem backbench committee on home affairs, justice and equalities I am certainly not worried about the prime minister talking about [immigration]. I’m certainly not worried about the Liberal Democrats talking about it. It is an issue people are worried about but at the same time we have a responsibility to ensure that people understand the benefits … I don’t think [Cameron is proposing BNP policies]. I think the Government and the Liberal Democrats recognise the benefits of immigration to the UK economy but we are realistic that there is abuse of the system going on and that is why the Liberal Democrats supported, before the election, the setting up of a UK Border force to ensure that our borders are more secure. From Nigel Farage, Ukip’s leader Sadly there isn’t much [Cameron] can do about it because the elephant in the room is the European Union and we have a total open border with all of them. We cannot have our own immigration policy and be part of the European Union. From Simon Darby, a BNP spokesman It’s cynical opportunism, isn’t it? It’s almost like a ceremonial adoption of our policy about two weeks before any major vote. In other words, [Cameron] knows what ordinary British people are thinking. He completely ignores that until two weeks before a major poll and then all of a sudden starts pressing a few buttons to try and make people believe he’s actually doing something about immigration. It’s a farce, it’s a con, and if we had copyright on our manifesto we’d have our lawyers round his office within hours. From Sir Andrew Green, chair of MigrationWatch [The speech is] music in my ears and it’s music I think in the ears of most people in this country … I think the importance of this speech is that [Cameron has] again nailed his colours to the mast – he has said he understands what the public feel; he’s going to have a serious shot at dealing with it. 8.38am: David Cameron is delivering two speeches today. There will be one about local elections and the alternative vote referendum at some point mid-afternoon. But, before that, he will make a speech about immigration. The text has already been released – you can read it here on our website – and Nicholas Watt has written it up for the paper. Here’s an extract from his story. David Cameron will warn that immigrants unable to speak English or unwilling to integrate have created a “kind of discomfort and disjointedness” which has disrupted communities across Britain. In his most outspoken speech on immigration since becoming prime minister, Cameron will blame Labour for allowing immigration to become “too high” and for adopting an approach that allowed the British National party to flourish … Cameron will say this has placed serious pressure on schools, housing and the NHS, and has also created social pressures. “Real communities are bound by common experiences forged by friendship and conversation, knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time,” he will say. “So real integration takes time. That’s why, when there have been significant numbers of new people arriving in neighbourhoods, perhaps not able to speak the same language as those living there, on occasions not really wanting or even willing to integrate, that has created a kind of discomfort and disjointedness in some neighbourhoods. This has been the experience for many people in our country – and I believe it is untruthful and unfair not to speak about it and address it.” Otherwise, it’s relatively quiet. William Hague is discussing Libya at a Nato meeting, and Paul Burstow, the health minister, is speaking to the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services. But reaction to the Cameron speech should keep us busy. I’ll also take a look at the papers – I didn’t have time yesterday, but I don’t think we missed much – and I’ll bring you the best politics from the web. As usual, I’ll post a lunchtime summary at around 1pm and an afternoon one at about 4pm. David Cameron Immigration and asylum Electoral reform Local elections 2011 Conservatives Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
James Weatherup in custody as further searches of paper’s offices are expected The police investigation into phone hacking at the News of the World has taken a dramatic turn with the surprise arrest of James Weatherup, a senior journalist at the paper. Weatherup, who has not previously been named in connection with the scandal, was arrested early on Thursday. He is currently in custody at a police station in outer London. The arrest is expected to trigger further searches of the News of the World offices in Wapping shortly. It is thought that police felt the paper had failed to be fully co-operative during searches last week and are determined to be more robust today. As news editor at the News of the World between 2004 and 2006, Weatherup was one of the inner circle of executives under the then editor, Andy Coulson, who later became David Cameron’s director of communications until earlier this year. As the third news editor at the paper under Coulson, Weatherup was one of a handful of senior employees who would take part in private discussions of major news stories with other senior members of the paper. Weatherup subsequently returned to being a senior reporter on the newspaper, but continued to hold his job title. He is a close colleague of Ian Edmondson, who was also arrested last week and in connection with the investigation. Edmondson, the paper’s former assistant editor (news), was dismissed in January. News International had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication. More details soon … •
Continue reading …Forget its fey image in Europe – in South America, and Paraguay in particular, it is the sound of the plains, hot nights and cold beer In Europe the harp has angelic associations. It is seen – unjustly – as a gentle, even fey, instrument. Images of Celtic mists and soft sunsets adorn the covers of a thousand classical CDs. In South America things are different. There the harp is a cowboy instrument, playing the tunes of the people, fast and furious. It can be as strident as a steel guitar and as rhythmic as a drum kit, with a bright, sharp, rising twang that makes you want to dance. Many South American countries claim a share of the tradition, but Paraguay is its true home and this week, in a series of short concerts in London to mark 200 years of the country’s independence from Spain, the young Paraguayan harpist and composer Blas Flor showed its power. The harp was brought to Latin America by Spanish colonists, at a time when it was still an active part of everyday music-making in Europe, a common folk instrument rather as the guitar is today. Adopted and adapted by the indigenous population, who have cherished it ever since, the Paraguayan harp is portable, its strings close together, played with fingernails like a guitar. Much Paraguayan harp music accompanies songs in the local language Guarani, but new composers are changing traditions and expanding its use. For enthusiasts of the obscure there is now even such a thing as Paraguayan electro rock. Some folk traditions are a chore to listen to, simple and unmusical. The harp in South America is different: it is the sound of wide open plains, hot nights and cold beer. Paraguay guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Is sticky toffee pudding the perfect marriage of stodge and sweetness, and what do you dollop on top? STP, as it’s known to aficionados (ie me) sounds like the ultimate school dinner staple; stodgy, gooey and unapologetically sweet, it’s just the thing to set you up for a game of lacrosse, a page of trig, and a whole trunk full of itching powder, apple pie beds and other such jolly wheezes. But you won’t find Enid Blyton’s schoolgirls tucking into sticky toffee pud after lights out, or Billy Bunter scoffing the stuff from his tuck box, because, as every food nerd will tell you, it was invented in the 1970s by Francis Coulson of the Lake District’s Sharrow Bay Hotel. Mr Coulson may well have been even better at publicity than he was at puddings, however, because according to Simon Hopkinson , the late and “legendary” chef once admitted to him that he’d adapted the idea from one Mrs Martin of Lancashire. Some years later, this good lady’s son contacted Hopkinson to tell him she’d been given the recipe by a Canadian friend, which makes sticky toffee pudding about as British as flipper pie – a fact to bear in mind next time it comes up at a pub quiz (as long as you don’t mind being the kind of contestant who quibbles with the official answers). No matter, wherever it comes from, I’m glad it made the trip. Although it’s often lumped in with similarly lumpen dishes involving syrup and treacle, STP is actually much more like a giant muffin than a sponge pudding, made with a distinctly liquid batter, rather than a creamed mix of butter, sugar, eggs and flour. The genius of the dish is, I think, the dates, which add a rich, sticky sweetness without making it any heavier than such puddings should be. The “original” Coulson’s recipe , as recorded by Gary Rhodes (who, in an audacious attempt at thickening the plot, bills it as “a good old English pudding which is made all over the country”), uses chopped dates, softened in boiling water, and folded into creamed butter and sugar, along with eggs, self-raising flour, and vanilla essence. It has a fluffy but moist texture, and I like the large pieces of date. I find the accompanying sauce, made from a mixture of double cream, treacle and demerara sugar far too rich for the pudding – it’s blandly creamy, rather than stickily toffeeish. The updated original Stolen or not, I prefer Coulson’s to Hopkinson’s updated version of Mrs Martin’s original recipes, which blends the dates to a purée, and mixes everything together in one go instead of carefully folding the dates into the other ingredients. He’s presumably right about the fact that any benefit this gives is destroyed by the addition of hot water, but it can’t be denied that Coulson’s recipe rises higher than his, and the squidgy chopped dates give it a more interesting texture. The maverick Ever-modish, young Jamie Oliver makes his STP with yoghurt, which keeps it moist, but weighs the batter down – and his cornucopia of sweet spices give the whole thing a gingerbread flavour. He also, for reasons unexplained, adds 2 tbsp of Ovaltine to the batter, which gives the cake a rich, dark colour, but makes it taste like bedtime. I do like his sauce though: rather than just cream, he’s made a proper toffee sauce by melting butter and light muscovado sugar together, and then stirred in a mere 140ml double cream. It’s more assertively flavoured, and light enough to allow the addition of further dairy products on the plate – after all, what’s a slab of hot STP without a scoop of ice cream? The bizarre If the yoghurt and malted chocolate drink was weird, Tamasin Day-Lewis’ version , in her compendium All You Can Eat, is downright wrongheaded – although, to be fair, she credits it to Joyce Molyneaux of the Carved Angel. On the basis that the original, with “its cascade of toffee sauce … and the sweetest fruit of all, dates” is “tooth-achingly sweet”, Molyneaux has used dried apricots instead: “their acidic sharpness more than stands up to and contrasts with the velvety thick toffee sauce”. I find the contrast jarring – the fruit seems almost sharp, and, although I can’t deny that steaming it, rather than baking it, makes it very moist, I’m not convinced that losing the crisp top and fluffy middle makes this worthwhile. Variations Delia not only grills her puddings briefly after baking, which gives them a deliciously crunchy top, but adds pecans: I like the texture of the nuts, but I can’t really taste them, so I substitute walnuts instead – this is one dish sweet enough to stand up to their bitterness. I prefer Jamie’s toffee sauce to any of the butterscotchy varieties which appear to have been inspired by Francis Coulson’s “original” version, but it strikes me that I’m missing a trick by simply pouring it over the pudding – it would be nice to have that sweet stickiness throughout. After doing a little research online , I borrow an idea from Mani Niall’s book, Sweet, and put half the sauce into the bottom of the dish before adding the batter. His tip about briefly freezing the sauce to firm it up while you make the rest of the pudding is inspired. Spice-wise, I’ve restricted myself to a sober pinch of cloves, to complement the dates without overpowering them. Perfect sticky toffee pudding A good sticky toffee pudding should be more than simple sugar hit – add nuts, for texture, and cloves, for a hint of spice, and this is one transatlantic migrant which will have no problem getting its visa renewed. Serves 6 175g medjool dates, stoned and roughly chopped 1 tsp bicarbonate of soda 300ml boiling water 50g unsalted butter, softened 80g golden caster sugar 80g dark muscovado sugar 2 eggs, beaten 175g flour 1 tsp baking powder Pinch of ground cloves 75g walnuts For the sauce: 115g unsalted butter 75g golden caster sugar 40g dark muscovado sugar 140ml double cream 1. Pre-heat the oven to 180C. Butter a baking dish approximately 24cm x 24cm. 2. Make the sauce by putting all the ingredients into a pan with a pinch of salt and heating slowly until the butter has melted, then turn up the heat and bring to the boil. Boil for about 4 minutes, until the sauce has thickened enough to coat the back of a spoon. Pour half the sauce into the base of the dish and then put it in the freezer while you make the rest of the pudding. 3. Put the dates and bicarbonate of soda in a heatproof dish and cover with the boiling water. Leave to soften while you prepare the rest of the pudding. 4. Beat together the butter and sugar until fluffy, and then beat in the eggs, a little at a time. Stir in the flour, baking powder, cloves and a pinch of salt until well combined, and then add the dates and their soaking water, and the walnuts, and mix well. 5. Take the dish out of the freezer and pour the batter on top of the toffee sauce. Put into the oven for 30 minutes, until firm to the touch, and then take out of the oven. 6. Heat the grill to medium, and poke a few small holes evenly over the surface with a skewer or fork, and then pour over the rest of the sauce. Put briefly under the grill, keeping an eye on it as it can easily burn. Serve with vanilla ice cream. Is sticky toffee pudding the perfect marriage of stodge and sweetness, or does the name promise more than the dish delivers? What do you like to add to yours – and do you like it with custard, ice cream, or (shock horror), a dollop of yoghurt? Food & drink Felicity Cloake guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …