Disgraced royal correspondent Clive Goodman’s letter says phone hacking was ‘widely discussed’ at NoW meetings Rupert Murdoch, James Murdoch and their former editor Andy Coulson all face embarrassing new allegations of dishonesty and cover-up after the publication of an explosive letter written by the News of the World’s disgraced royal correspondent, Clive Goodman. In the letter, which was written four years ago but published only on Tuesday, Goodman claims that phone hacking was “widely discussed” at editorial meetings at the paper until Coulson himself banned further references to it; that Coulson offered to let him keep his job if he agreed not to implicate the paper in hacking when he came to court; and that his own hacking was carried out with “the full knowledge and support” of other senior journalists, whom he named. The claims are acutely troubling for the prime minister, David Cameron, who hired Coulson as his media adviser on the basis that he knew nothing about phone hacking. And they confront Rupert and James Murdoch with the humiliating prospect of being recalled to parliament to justify the evidence which they gave last month on the aftermath of Goodman’s allegations. In a separate letter, one of the Murdochs’ own law firms claim that parts of that evidence were variously “hard to credit”, “self-serving” and “inaccurate and misleading”. Goodman’s claims also raise serious questions about Rupert Murdoch’s close friend and adviser, Les Hinton, who was sent a copy of the letter but failed to pass it to police and who then led a cast of senior Murdoch personnel in telling parliament that they believed Andy Coulson knew nothing about the interception of the voicemail of public figures and that Goodman was the only journalist involved. The letters from Goodman and from the leading London law firm Harbottle and Lewis are among a cache of paperwork published by the House of Commons culture, media and sport select committee. One committee member, the Labour MP Tom Watson, said Goodman’s letter was “absolutely devastating”. He said: “Clive Goodman’s letter is the most significant piece of evidence that has been revealed so far. It completely removes News International’s defence. This is one of the largest cover-ups I have seen in my lifetime.” Goodman’s letter is dated 2 March 2007, soon after he was released from a four-month prison sentence. It is addressed to News International’s director of human resources, Daniel Cloke, and registers his appeal against the decision of the company’s then chairman, Les Hinton, to sack him for gross misconduct after he admitted intercepting the voicemail of three members of the royal household. Goodman lists five grounds for his appeal. He argues that the decision is perverse because he acted “with the full knowledge and support” of named senior journalists and that payments for the private investigator who assisted him, Glenn Mulcaire, were arranged by another senior journalist. The names of the journalists have been redacted from the published letter at the request of Scotland Yard, who are investigating the affair. Goodman then claims that other members of staff at the News of the World were also hacking phones. Crucially, he adds: “This practice was widely discussed in the daily editorial conference, until explicit reference to it was banned by the editor.” He reveals that the paper continued to consult him on stories even though they knew he was going to plead guilty to phone hacking and that the paper’s then lawyer, Tom Crone, knew all the details of the case against him. In a particularly embarrassing allegation, he adds: “Tom Crone and the editor promised on many occasions that I could come back to a job at the newspaper if I did not implicate the paper or any of its staff in my mitigation plea. I did not, and I expect the paper to honour its promise to me.” In the event, he lost his appeal. But the claim that the paper induced him to mislead the court is one that may cause further problems for News International. Two versions of Goodman’s letter were provided to the committee. One which was supplied by Harbottle and Lewis has been redacted to remove the names of journalists, at the request of police. The other, which was supplied by News International, has been redacted to remove not only the names but also all references to hacking being discussed in Coulson’s editorial meetings and to Coulson’s offer to keep Goodman on staff if he agreed not to implicate the paper. The company also faces a new claim that it misled parliament. In earlier evidence to the select committee, in answer to questions about whether it had bought Goodman’s silence, it had said he was paid off with a period of notice plus compensation of no more than £60,000. The new paperwork, however, reveals that Goodman was paid a full year’s salary, worth £90,502.08, plus a further £140,000 in compensation, plus £13,000 to cover his lawyer’s bill. Tom Watson said: “It’s hush money. I think they tried to buy his silence.” Murdoch’s executives have always denied this. When Goodman’s letter reached News International four years ago, it set off a chain reaction which now threatens embarrassment for Rupert and James Murdoch personally. The company resisted Goodman’s appeal, and he requested disclosure of emails sent to and from six named senior journalists on the paper. The company collected 2,500 emails and sent them to Harbottle and Lewis, a leading media law firm, and asked them to examine them. Harbottle and Lewis then produced a letter, which has previously been published by the select committee in unredacted form: “I can confirm that we did not find anything in those emails which appeared to us to be reasonable evidence that Clive Goodman’s illegal actions were known about and supported by both or either of Andy Coulson, the editor, and Neil Wallis, the deputy editor, and/or that Ian Edmondson, the news editor, and others were carrying out similar illegal procedures.” In their evidence to the select committee last month, the Murdochs presented this letter as evidence that the company had been given a clean bill of health. However, the Metropolitan police have since said that the emails contained evidence of “alleged payments by corrupt journalists to corrupt police officers”. And the former director of public prosecutions, Ken Macdonald, who examined a small sample of the emails, said they contained evidence of indirect hacking, breaches of national security and serious crime. In a lengthy reply, Harbottle and Lewis say they were never asked to investigate whether crimes generally had been committed at the News of the World but had been instructed only to say whether the emails contained evidence that Goodman had hacked phones with “the full knowledge and support” of the named senior journalists. They reveals that their letter was the result of a detailed negotiation with News International’s senior lawyer, Jon Chapman, and they refused to include a line which he suggested, that, having seen a copy of Goodman’s letter of 2 March, “we did not find anything that we consider to be directly relevant to the grounds of appeal put forward by him”. In a lengthy criticism of the Murdochs’ evidence to the select committee last month, Harbottle and Lewis say they find it “hard to credit” James Murdoch’s repeated claim that News International “rested on” their letter as part of their grounds for believing that Clive Goodman was a “rogue reporter”. They say News International’s view of their role is “self-serving” and that Rupert Murdoch’s claim that they were hired “to find out what the hell was going on” was “inaccurate and misleading”, although they add that he may have been confused or misinformed about their role. They write: “There was absolutely no question of the firm being asked to provide News International with a clean bill of health which it could deploy years later in wholly different contexts for wholly different purposes … The firm was not being asked to provide some sort of “good conduct certificate” which News International could show to parliament … Nor was it being given a general retainer, as Mr Rupert Murdoch asserted it was, ‘to find out what the hell was going on’.” The law firm’s challenge to the Murdochs’ evidence follows an earlier claim made jointly by the paper’s former editor and former lawyer that a different element of James Murdoch’s evidence to the committee was “mistaken”. He had told the committee that he had paid more than £1m to settle a legal action brought by Gordon Taylor of the Professional Footballers Association without knowing that Taylor’s lawyers had obtained an email from a junior reporter to the paper’s chief reporter, Neville Thurlbeck, containing 35 transcripts of voicemail messages. The News of the World’s former lawyer, Tom Crone, and the former editor, Colin Myler, last month challenged this. In letters published by the committee, Crone repeats his position. He says this email was “the sole reason” for settling Gordon Taylor’s case. He says he took it with him to a meeting with James Murdoch in June 2008 when he explained the need to settle: “I have no doubt that I informed Mr Murdoch of its existence, of what it was and where it came from.” Colin Myler, in a separate letter also published on Tuesday, endorses Crone’s account. Their evidence raises questions about James Murdoch’s failure to tell the police or his shareholders about the evidence of crime contained in the email. Tom Watson said that both Murdochs should be recalled to the committee to explain their evidence. The former chairman of News International, Les Hinton, who resigned last month, may join them. Four days after Clive Goodman sent his letter, Hinton gave evidence to the select committee in which he made no reference to any of the allegations contained in the letter but told MPs that “I believe absolutely that Andy (Coulson) did not have knowledge of what was going on” and that he had carried out a full, rigorous internal inquiry and that he believed Clive Goodman was the only person involved. Phone hacking Clive Goodman News of the World Rupert Murdoch Andy Coulson James Murdoch Newspapers & magazines National newspapers Newspapers Nick Davies guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Six hours of TV a day can cut life expectancy by nearly five years, research shows Watching too much television could shorten your life, a study suggests. Research carried out in Australia, and published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, showed that every hour of TV watched after the age of 25 may shorten lifespan by 22 minutes. According to one of the report’s authors, Dr Lennert Veerman, from the School of Population Health at the University of Queensland, it puts long hours spent in front of the box “in the same ballpark as smoking and obesity”. “While smoking rates are declining, watching TV is not, which has implications at a population level,” he said. Last year, another Australian study found an hour of TV a day led to an 8% increase in the risk of premature death. “We’ve taken that study and translated it into what it means for life expectancy in Australia given how much TV we watch,” said Veerman. Australians watch about two hours of TV a day. As a result their life expectancy at birth is reduced by 1.8 years for men and 1.5 years for women, according to the study. Britons watch more than three hours of TV a day, according to the Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board. Too much sitting, as distinct from too little exercise, is associated with higher mortality risk, particularly from cardiovascular disease. “Logically we know that physical activity is good for health and so it’s not so strange that the reverse is not so good,” said Veerman. The report was based on an observational survey conducted in 1999-2000 with more than 11,000 participants aged 25 and over. Participants reported the amount of time they spent watching TV or videos in the previous week, when it was their main activity (ie, not doing the cooking or the ironing at the same time). The report also showed that a person who watches an average of six hours of TV a day would live on average 4.8 years less than someone who watches none. Television Television Australia Television industry Health guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Train firms allowed to hit commuters with fare increases of 3% on top of the retail price index figure Rail passengers will be hit by an 8% fare increase next year, after the retail prices index remained unchanged. July’s RPI figure stayed at 5%, the Office for National Statistics announced. Under the government’s austerity drive rail prices will rise by the RPI figure plus 3% until 2014, meaning sharp price increases for passengers. The 8% rise can be used by rail companies as an average increase, meaning some journeys could face even larger increases. Rail minister Theresa Villiers told BBC Breakfast on Tuesday that longer trains would be provided in the future and that if costs could be reduced then above-inflation fees would end. Passengers were unimpressed by the impending increase in ticket prices. “This could drive people off the railways,” said Sharmaine Mackin, 25, who travelled from Bracknell, in Berkshire, to London Waterloo on Tuesday morning. “An 8% rise is not good news. I think the fares are already too high.” Her sentiments were echoed by other rail users. One woman, a secretary in her 40s who commutes between London and Farnborough in Hampshire, described the 8% rise as “disgusting”. She added: “I’m already paying more than £2,000 a year for my season ticket. That’s a lot of money.” A 60-year-old commuter from Farnham in Surrey, who uses South West Trains’ services, said a rise to his season ticket would make it “absurdly expensive”. “We already pay far more than rail travellers do in Europe,” he said. “My journey has improved over the years but this rise is not justified.” A 28-year-old woman engineer from Gravesend in Kent said: “Trains are so overcrowded that I can’t see how they can put up the fares.” Villiers told BBC Breakfast she could guarantee that longer trains would be provided in future, as part of a national upgrade that includes 2,700 new rail carriages. “We’re guaranteeing that there will be longer trains, we’re guaranteeing that into our major cities there’s going to be more space and more seats for passengers,” she said. The rail minister added that if costs could come down, then above-inflation fare increases would end. Passengers face the average rise of 3% above inflation for the next three years. The transport secretary, Philip Hammond, said: “We are now embarked on one of the biggest programmes of rail investment for 100 years, delivering more than 2,700 new rail carriages, a £900m programme to electrify more lines and the vital Crossrail and Thameslink projects in London. “Due to the scale of the deficit, these investments would simply have not been possible without the difficult decision we have made to increase rail fares. I know this decision has not been popular, but I hope passengers will appreciate the improvements it allows us to make.” He went on: “However, it’s absolutely clear that in the longer term the only solution is to bring the overall cost of the railways down. We have already begun work on this with the [Sir Roy] McNulty Review [of rail costs] and we are determined to succeed. “Better value for money on the railway will deliver a better deal for taxpayers and farepayers alike and will allow us to put the era of above inflation rises in regulated fares behind us.” On Monday Villiers said: “The scale of the deficit means that the government has had to take some very difficult decisions on future rail fares, but the long-term solution is to get the cost of running the railways down.” While the RPI remained at the same figure, the wider consumer prices index rate of inflation increased to 4.4% in July, from 4.2% in June, triggering a letter of explanation from the Bank of England governor, Sir Mervyn King, to the chancellor, George Osborne. Rail transport Transport Rail travel London Consumer affairs Theresa Villiers Adam Gabbatt guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Home secretary says it is time to consider whether police need power ‘to impose a general curfew in a particular area’ in the aftermath of last week’s riots New police powers to clear the streets and create “no-go” areas for the public are being considered, the home secretary, Theresa May says. She said it was now time to consider whether the police needed a power “to impose a general curfew in a particular area” in the aftermath of last week’s riots. The home secretary said the government was also considering tougher powers to impose curfews on individual teenagers under the age of 16. In a speech in London May said the power to declare a general curfew was needed because existing dispersal powers only allow the police to declare a “no go” area with advance notification. “In the fast-moving situation we have seen in the last week we need to make sure the police have all the powers that are necessary,” said May. The home secretary also defended her decision not to delay the appointment of the new Metropolitan police commissioner to enable a foreign national such as Bill Bratton to apply for the job. May is also writing to Sir Denis O’Connor, the chief inspector of constabulary, saying that forces should be given clearer guidance on tactics, pre-emptive action, the number of officers trained in public order policing, the need for forces to assist others, and the appropriate arrest policy. O’Connor warned earlier this year that more than two in five forces were unprepared to help police major protests. May rejected calls from senior officers to reconsider the government’s 20% cuts to police budgets in the wake of the riots, saying the disturbances of the past 10 days showed the reforms were now more urgent than ever. “I am clear that, even at the end of this spending period, forces will still have the resources to deploy officers in the same numbers we have seen in the last week,” she said. “It’s clear to me that we can improve the visibility and availability of the police to the public. “It’s more important than ever that we do so, because we are asking the police to fight crime on a tighter budget.” UK riots Theresa May Police Metropolitan police London Crime Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Anti-corruption activist Anna Hazare held by police after announcing plans to go on indefinite hunger strike Indian police have detained the country’s most prominent anti-corruption campaigner, hours before he was due to begin an indefinite hunger strike to demand tough new laws against graft. The arrest of 74-year-old Anna Hazare prompted outrage, with opposition politicians accusing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s beleaguered administration, currently in the middle of its second term, of repeating draconian crackdowns of the 1970s. A series of impromptu demonstrations were organised across the country in support of Hazare. More than 250 campaigners associated with him, including other well-known anti-corruption activists, were also detained by police. There were reports of protests in western Punjab, in eastern Orissa, in the far south, in northern Himachel Pradesh and in Ralegan Siddhi, Hazare’s home village in central Maharashtra state. Singh’s government has been on the defensive in recent months after a series of corruption scams which, combined with rampant food inflation, have sparked public anger and sent poll ratings plummeting. The campaign of Hazare, a controversial but respected figure , has rattled officials and politicians. Negotiations had been continuing over his planned public “fast unto death” for several weeks. Thousands of demonstrators were expected to converge on the capital to join the former army soldier and activist. “When you have a crowd of 10,000 people, can anyone guarantee there will be no disruption? … The police is doing its duty. We should allow them to do it,” argued the information and broadcasting minister, Ambika Soni, in an interview with CNN-IBN television. Dressed in his trademark plain white shirt, white cap and spectacles in the style of independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, Hazare was driven away in a white car by plainclothes police, waving to hundreds of supporters. A police spokesman said the veteran campaigner and four others had been placed under “preventive arrest”. No charges have yet been filed. Hazare recently called for a “second freedom struggle” in India, which threw off British imperial rule in 1947. “This is a fight for change. Unless there is change, there is no freedom, there is no actual democracy, there is no true republic, there is no true people’s rule. The protests should not stop. The time has come for no jail in the country to have a free space,” he said in a message broadcast on YouTube . Both houses of parliament were adjourned after the opposition protested at the arrests. Though politicians from all political parties have been implicated in corruption scams, many figures associated with the biggest and most high-profile cases of graft are from the ruling Congress party. Opposition figures likened the crackdown to the 1975 “Emergency”, when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi arrested thousands of opposition members in order to stay in power. Manish Tewari, a Congress party spokesman, said Hazare was surrounded by “armchair fascists, overground Maoists, closet anarchists”. A crackdown earlier this year on a fasting yoga guru who had rallied tens of thousands of people in the capital managed to break up his anti-corruption protests successfully. Hazare’s first hunger strike in April won concessions from the government that promised a parliamentary bill creating a special ombudsman with power to investigate and punish corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and judges. But the changes proposed by the legislation presented in early August were criticised by activists as insufficient. They accused the government of backtracking. India Jason Burke guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Culture secretary says fund will ensure that 90% of hard-to-reach communities could have superfast broadband by 2015 Millions of Britons living in rural areas are set to benefit from faster internet speeds after the government allocated £362m to improve broadband connections in England, Scotland and Wales. Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, said on Tuesday that the fund would ensure that 90% of hard-to-reach communities with “painfully slow” internet speeds could have access to superfast broadband by 2015. Remote villages in areas of regions such as Cumbria and the Scottish Highlands where it is currently hard to load a simple web page, should be able to download or stream high-quality movies within four years. English counties will get £294m and Scotland £68.8m to bring high-speed internet to areas not catered for by the private sector. The allocations come out of the £530m “digital Britain” fund commitment by the chancellor, George Osborne, earlier this year. “I am absolutely determined that the UK will have the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015 – one that we all benefit from,” Hunt said. “Fast broadband is absolutely vital to our economic growth, to delivering public services effectively, and to conducting our everyday lives. “But some areas of the UK are missing out, with many rural and hard-to-reach communities suffering painfully slow internet connections or no coverage at all. We are not prepared to let some parts of our country get left behind in the digital age.” English councils and private enterprises will be put in charge of delivering the broadband rollout, with delivery plans and match-funding expected to be drawn up to set timetables. The Scottish government will determine how to allocate the money in Scotland. Hunt added: “The government is investing £530m of public money to help bring broadband to every home and business in the UK. We are doing our part – it is now up to local authorities and the Scottish government to do their bit, to get on board and work with us to secure the social and economic future of their communities.” “I urge all those suffering the frustration of slow internet connections to make it clear to your local elected representatives that you expect them to do what is needed to access this investment and to deliver broadband to your community.” Funding allocated by county in England Bedfordshire (Bedford, Central Bedfordshire, Luton): £1,060,000 Berkshire (Bracknell Forest, Reading, Slough, West Berkshire, Windsor and Maidenhead, Wokingham): £1,430,000 Buckinghamshire (Buckinghamshire, Milton Keynes): £2,100,000 Cambridgeshire (Cambridgeshire, Peterborough): £6,750,000 Cheshire (Cheshire East, Cheshire West and Chester, Halton, Warrington): £3,240,000 Cumbria (Cumbria): £17,130,000 Derbyshire (Derbyshire, Derby): £7,390,000 Devon and Somerset (Devon, Plymouth, Torbay, Somerset, North Somerset): £31,320,000 Dorset (Dorset, Bournemouth, Poole): £9,440,000 Durham (County Durham, Gateshead): £7,790,000 East Sussex (East Sussex, Brighton and Hove): £10,640,000 Essex (Essex, Southend-on-Sea, Thurrock): £6,460,000 Gloucestershire (Gloucestershire): £8,070,000 Greater Manchester (Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside, Trafford, Wigan): £990,000 Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Portsmouth, Southampton): £8,420,000 Herefordshire (County of Herefordshire): £6,350,000 Hertfordshire (Hertfordshire): £1,110,000 Humber (City Of Kingston upon Hull, East Riding of Yorkshire, North East Lincolnshire, North Lincolnshire): £8,540,000 (subject to revision) Kent (Kent, Medway): £9,870,000 Lancashire (Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool): £10,830,000 Leicestershire and Rutland (Leicestershire, Leicester, Rutland): £3,880,000 Lincolnshire (Lincolnshire): £14,310,000 Merseyside (Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton, Wirral): £5,460,000 Norfolk (Norfolk): £15,440,000 Northamptonshire (Northamptonshire): £4,080,000 Northumberland (Northumberland): £7,030,000 North Yorkshire (North Yorkshire, York): £17,840,000 Nottinghamshire (Nottinghamshire, Nottingham): £4,250,000 Oxfordshire (Oxfordshire): £3,860,000 Shropshire (Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin): £8,210,000 Staffordshire (Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent): £7,440,000 Suffolk (Suffolk): £11,680,000 Surrey (Surrey): £1,310,000 Tees Valley (Darlington, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland, Stockton-on-Tees): £770,000 Tyne and Wear (Newcastle upon Tyne, North Tyneside, South Tyneside, Sunderland): £3,420,000 Warwickshire (Warwickshire, Coventry, Solihull): £4,070,000 West of England (Bath and North East Somerset, City of Bristol, South Gloucestershire): £1,430,000 West Midlands (Birmingham, Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall, Wolverhampton): £630,000 West Sussex (West Sussex): £6,260,000 West Yorkshire (Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds, Wakefield): £6,340,000 Wiltshire (Wiltshire, Swindon): £4,900,000 Worcestershire (Worcestershire): £3,350,000 •
Continue reading …
• Rail passengers face 8% increase • Bank charges add to cost of living • High-street bargains harder to find • RPI stuck at 5% Rail passengers in Britain will face inflation-busting fare increases of 8% on average next year after the latest figures for the cost of living showed upward pressure on prices despite the weakness in the economy. Data from the Office for National Statistics showed that the government’s preferred measure of inflation – the Consumer Prices Index – rose from 4.2% to 4.4% in July as banks increased charges on their customers and bargains in the summer sales were harder to find. Many shops were forced to slash prices in June in a response to the weakness in consumer demand, resulting in much smaller price falls for clothing and footwear and furniture in July than usual. Clothing and footwear prices were 3.1% higher in July than a year earlier – the highest rate since the current series of figures began in 1997. The Retail Prices Index – an alternative measure of the cost of living that acts as the benchmark for rail fare increases – was unchanged last month at 5%. Under the formula used by the government, train operating companies can increase fares by three percentage points above the July RPI inflation rate. The news on the cost of living came as a mild shock to the City, which had been expecting a more modest increase in CPI inflation to 4.3%. The failure of the Bank of England to meet the government’s 2% inflation target for more than 18 months means that Sir Mervyn King has to write an explanatory letter to the chancellor, George Osborne. James Knightley, economist at ING, said: “UK inflation numbers have come in a little higher than expected due to the fact summer discounting started earlier this year than normal – presumably down to the weakness in the economy. “This lead June’s inflation numbers to undershoot expectations, but we get a corresponding bounce back for July. Clothing and footwear inflation jumped from 1.5% to 3.1%YoY, which is the fastest rate since the series started back in January 1997. Furniture rose for similar reasons while there were also increases for financial services.” King said last week that the Bank expects inflation to climb further over the coming months as consumers are hit by rising domestic energy bills, but the Bank then expects price pressures to ease over the winter. City analysts see no possibility that Threadneedle Street will raise interest rates in response to the pick-up in inflation, and believe official borrowing costs are on hold until deep into 2012. Chris Williamson, economist at Markit, said: “The latest uptick in inflation is unlikely to add significantly to the case for higher interest rates among MPC members. Instead, policymakers are likely to continue to focus on the activity data, which are showing worrying signs of weakness.” Inflation Economics Bank of England Mervyn King Rail transport Interest rates Larry Elliott guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Rolling coverage as Nick Clegg and Theresa May set out their plans in the aftermath of last week’s riots 9.08am: Clegg is now making a series of announcements. • The Cabinet Office will commission research into the riots and the their causes. (Clegg actually mentioned this in his speech on Saturday – see 8.48am – but no one noticed.) • An inquiry will be set up. Clegg did not actually call it an inquiry – he said it was a communites and victims panel – but that that’s what it is. It will be chaired by someone independent and it will be able to make recommendations. It will sit for about six to nine months and it will report to all three party leaders. But it won’t be set up under the Public Inquiries Act, which means it won’t have the power to force witnesses to give evidence. • A community payback scheme will be set up in every area affected by the riots. See 8.38am for more. • Extra money will be provided to ensure that all victims who want the chance to confront the offenders who attacked them will get the chance to do so. • From March 2012 every offender who leaves jail will go straight into the work programme, the government scheme designed to find work for the unemployed. They will be met at the prison gates, Clegg says. 9.04am: Nick Clegg is speaking at his press conference now. He says he has visited areas affected by the rioting. Some of the response has been “heroic”, he says. Among the optimism, he cites Manchester, where more people were involved in the clean-up operation than in the rioting. Hope and optimism and more powerful than fear and pessimism, he says. Clegg says that as more information comes out about the court cases, some myths are being dispelled. For example, the news coverage suggested many rioters were very young. But only 21% of those in court are under 18. And the papers suggested many women were involved. But more than 90% of those in court have been male. 8.57am: My colleague Alan Travis has sent me a line about what we can expect from Theresa May’s police reform speech at 10am. May has written to Sir Denis O’Connor, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary asking him to provide clearer guidance to forces on handling riots and public disorder. This is expected to include an massive expansion in police riot training as well as clear guidance on robust tactics to restore order. The home secretary will say that public order policing is becoming more unpredictable and faster moving and police tactics have to be as adaptable as possible to the circumstances to keep the peace for all. She will also argue that the last 10 days make the case for police reform even more urgent than ever and she will reject demands for a pause or U-turn on police budgets. She will describe policing as a noble profession and say that we owe all police officers a debt of gratitude for returning order to the streets last week. “So when we ask questions about the success of a policing operation or ask how we can make the police more effective, more efficient or more accountable to the public – this is not an attack on the men and women of the police,” she will say. “One thing is clear: the experience of the last 10 days makes the case for police reform more urgent than ever,” she is to argue, adding that the introdcution of police and crime commissioners is even more important when the police are being asked to fight crime on a tighter budget. May will make clear that taking Britain out of the economic danger zone by reducing the budget deficit however still remains a higher priority and scaling back police cuts is not an option. 8.48am: Yesterday, in my blog about the Cameron and Miliband speeches, I said that Nick Clegg had failed, so far, to say anything particularly distinctive on the riots. That is true in the sense that he hasn’t said anything that has fully grabbed the attention of the media. But that doesn’t mean he has been silent. He made a speech on the subject on Saturday that is on the Lib Dem website. Mostly it was very sensible. Clegg made a liberal case for a tough stance on law and order (“As a liberal, I see violence and disorder of this kind as an attack on liberty, on the freedom for individuals to live and trade in peace in their own communities”), he said the government was commissioning independent research into the riots because it was important to understand what happened, and he said it was important for the government to give everyone opportunities and a stake in society. But there’s one line in the speech that Clegg may regret. While of course we have had to act swiftly and decisively, we have resisted the temptation to engage in overnight policy or instant announcements. With Cameron banging on about water cannon and rubber bullets, Grant Shapps suggesting that it should be easier to evict tenants from social housing if they have been involved in rioting and Iain Duncan Smith floating the idea of taking benefits away from convicted rioters who do not go to jail, this is probably a line that Clegg will not want to repeat today. 8.38am: Yesterday D avid Cameron and Ed Miliband delivered lengthy speeches about the riots and their causes . Today we’re going to hear from Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, and Theresa May, the home secretary. I’ll be blogging both events live, as well as covering any reaction. Clegg is up first, at 9am. As Polly Curtis reports in the Guardian today , he will announce plans for a “riot payback scheme”. He is giving a press conference, rather than a full speech, but the Cabinet Office have already released some of his comments in advance. Crime and lawlessness deprive ordinary, decent people of their freedom. Violence and disorder are an attack on liberty, on the freedom of individuals to live and work in peace in their own communities. I am passionately convinced that swift, strong justice needs to be done when people break the laws and moral rules of society. I want offenders to be punished – and to change their ways.Victims of crime are only truly protected if punishment leads to criminals not committing crime again. Criminals must be punished and then made to change their ways. That’s why those people who behaved so despicably last week should have to look their victims in the eye. They should have to see for themselves the consequences of their actions and they should be put to work cleaning up the damage and destruction they have caused so they don’t do it again. We want people to be punished for their wrongdoing. We also want them to stop doing wrong. We want their future behaviour to change. We need punishment that sticks And then May is speaking at 10am. She is giving a speech on police reform, and then taking questions. As Alan Travis and Allegra Stratton report , she will give details of the government’s “security fightback”, including plans for thousands more police officers to undergo riot training. UK riots Theresa May Nick Clegg Crime Police UK criminal justice Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
• German growth at 0.1% for last quarter • First quarter growth revised down to 1.3% • Full eurozone figures due later on Tuesday The German economy has come to a near-standstill in the last quarter as the global slowdown hit Europe’s biggest player. In the latest blow to the eurozone, Germany grew by just 0.1% between April and June. Economists had expected growth of 0.5% during the quarter. Germany’s Federal Statistics also revised down the growth in the first quarter of 2011, to 1.3% from its initial estimate of 1.5%. With France’s economy failing to grow during the quarter , Germany’s GDP data shows that the eurozone economy has worsened as its debt crisis entered a new, dangerous phase. The German slowdown was blamed on a fall in domestic consumption and construction work during the quarter. It is a blow to Angela Merkel as she prepares to meet France’s Nicolas Sarkozy to discuss the euro debt crisis . Spanish GDP grew by 0.2% during the quarter, down from 0.3% in the first three months of 2011. GDP data for the whole eurozone will be released later on Tuesday, and City analysts warned that the region could have stagnated, or even contracted. Carsten Brzeski of ING said that the data was a “growth normalisation” rather than a “disappointment” on its own, as Germany should still grow by at least 3% this year. He warned, though, that the German economic recovery is clearly slowing. “Looking ahead, the million-dollar question is whether a solid second quarter is the beginning of the end of the German Wirtschaftswunder [economic miracle] and whether recent market turmoil could push the economy back into recession,” said Brzeski. “While German politicians are currently racking their brains on the pros and cons of common eurobonds, the luxury of having an economy running at ‘wonder’ speed is fading away.” Stock markets across Europe fell in early trading, with the FTSE 100 dropping 43 points to 5307. The euro lost ground against the dollar, as traders reacted to the news that Europe’s core had reached near-stagnation. “Following on the back of weak GDP data announced by France this will further undermine any efforts to resolve the eurozone debt crisis,” said Max Johnson, a broker at forex specialist, Currency Solutions. But he added: “Looking around the global economy, at least there will be few, if any, cases of schadenfreude.” Europe Germany Europe European debt crisis Graeme Wearden guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Clegg to say people convicted of rioting crimes should have to ‘look their victims in the eye’, while No 10 plans a ‘public engagement exercise’ to establish causes of disturbances Nick Clegg is announcing separate plans for a “riot payback scheme”, which would see people convicted of looting or violence in last week’s disturbances being made to do community service or take part in restorative justice programmes in the areas where crimes were committed. He will say that people convicted of crimes last week should have to “look their victims in the eye”. Clegg could also give details of plans for a commission of inquiry into the causes of the riots after it emerged that No 10 has conceded to Labour demands for a formal commission to investigate the causes of last week’s riots after behind-the-scenes cross-party talks co-ordinated by the Liberal Democrats. The Ministry of Justice is to ask the probation service to instigate the schemes in the cities where the riots took place. Offenders would take part in activities to help repair the damage done or to face their victims and apologise under the restorative justice principle. The deputy PM will tell a press conference in London: “I want offenders to be punished – and to change their ways. Victims of crime are only truly protected if punishment leads to criminals not committing crime again. Criminals must be punished and then made to change their ways. “That’s why those people who behaved so despicably last week should have to look their victims in the eye. They should have to see for themselves the consequences of their actions and they should be put to work cleaning up the damage and destruction they have caused so they don’t do it again. “We want people to be punished for their wrongdoing. We also want them to stop doing wrong. We want their future behaviour to change. We need punishment that sticks.” Clegg is said to be close to “brokering” a deal between the Conservatives and Labour into setting up a commission that would go into every neighbourhood affected by the disturbances to ask community members why the outbursts of violence occurred. David Cameron had previously ruled out a full public inquiry in the short term, claiming that the parliamentary select committee inquiries were adequate but the government has now signalled its intention for a “public engagement exercise”, with an independent chair, to establish the causes of the riots and looting. A Downing Street source said: “We are coming to the view that there is a case for community engagement about what happened and why. It would involve getting someone to go into the communities and find out why this all happened. It would be likely that it would be chaired by someone outside government. We’re coming to the view that some sort of engagement exercise would be useful.” The No10 source said it would not operate under the Inquiries Act and its precise nature had not been confirmed. Labour sources confirmed they were in talks with ministers about the plans and a Liberal Democrat source said Clegg was “brokering” the deal on how the commission would be established. Clegg has been privately considering such an inquiry since last week and his party has already commissioned its own research into the problems. On Monday Ed Miliband set out his demands for a commission of inquiry in a speech at Haverstock school, the comprehensive he attended in north London, which is situated close to some of the scenes of last week’s violence. He argued against an inquiry run by MPs, civil servants or the judiciary calling for the prime minister to “have the humility” to listen to the communities affected. “You should have nothing to fear from the truth,” he said. He added that if the government didn’t move to establish such an inquiry, the Labour party would. UK riots Nick Clegg Crime Police Polly Curtis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …