Obama says a deal has been reached with Republican and Democratic Congressional leaders and urged members of Congress to get behind the proposed legislation Barack Obama declared on Sunday he had reached agreement with Republican and Democratic Congressional leaders aimed at ending the US debt deadlock that has threatened to throw the US and world economy into chaos. However, in an address from the White House, he added cautiously, “We are not done yet.” Although the Senate is almost certain to pass it, the vote in the House could be a nailbiter, facing opposition from both hardline Republicans and disenchanted, left-wing Democrats who feel Obama has conceded too much. Obama urged members of Congress to get behind the proposed legislation, which will raise the country’s debt ceiling and cut federal spending. With time fast running out, Congress may have left it too late to meet the Tuesday deadline set by the Treasury for raising the debt ceiling above its current $14.3tn limit. The US Treasury had said that if the ceiling was not lifted by 2 August, America would no longer have the cash needed to pay all its bills and faced the prospect of defaulting for the first time in its history. Obama, after weeks of frustrating negotiation in Washington, said: “This process has been messy and taken too long.” The White House hinted yesterday that the deadline could be extended for a few days to allow Congress to get legislation through. The Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, said he was “cautiously optimistic” a deal would be made, a view echoed by his Republican counterpart, Mitch McConnell. The Senate could vote on the proposed legislation Monday. The bill would then have to go to the House, where the vote could be tighter. McConnell has scheduled a meeting with Republican senators for Monday morning to discuss the details of the deal. Speaking minutes before the president, he said: “I think I can say with a high degree of confidence that there is now a framework to review that will ensure significant cuts in Washington spending. And we can assure the American people tonight that the United States of America will not for the first time in our history default on its obligations.” The deal will raise the country’s $14.3tn debt ceiling by about $2.4tn. It sparked an immediate backlash from the left of the Democratic party because it also includes about $2.5tn in spending cuts, much of it almost certain to come from welfare benefits. The left-leaning grassroots organisation MoveOn described it as “grotesquely immoral”. The White House and congressional leaders were anxious to get some sort of compromise under way, fearful that uncertainty could lead to huge market falls today. The Nikkei rose after Obama’s statement. Experts warned that even if a deal was struck, the world’s largest economy was likely to be stripped of its triple-A debt rating by Standard & Poor’s. The head of the world’s largest bond investor – Mohamed El-Erian of Pimco – told US broadcaster ABC: “Things that need to happen are not happening fast enough. If S&P sticks to what it said, it will downgrade.” Julian Jessop, chief international economist at Capital Economics, said: “It looks like they will get a deal done to lift the debt ceiling but it looks like none of the numbers are going to reassure the debt rating agencies. I’m pretty sure America will lose its triple-A rating.” Such a move is likely to prompt a big jump in the cost of borrowing for the US. The Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, praised Obama’s for his role behind-the-scenes in securing the compromise but said that she had not seen the details yet. She was planning a meeting of House Democrats today to discuss the package and warned there should be nothing in it that hits benefits and working-class. “We all may not be able to support it, or none us may be able to support it,” Pelosi warned. Raising the debt ceiling is normally routine but Republican members of Congress, especially a hard core allied to the Tea Party movement, have used it over the last month to hold the White House hostage. David Plouffe, a White House adviser, told ABC yesterday it was not clear if there would be enough House Republicans to get a deal through. The deal is mainly a victory for Republicans whose mission has been to cut the huge federal spending budget and undermine Barack Obama in his bid for re-election next year. The crisis has already hurt Obama, with a poll last week showing his approval ratings drop from 45% to 40%. But the Republicans may be hurt, too, by their association with the Tea Party. The US’s financial reputation has suffered as well, particularly over the last week, and even though a debt ceiling rise is now on the cards, the country could still see its credit rating being downgraded. The deal also postpones a lot of the hard spending decisions by handing over negotiation to a bipartisan Congressional committe to decide. It is due to report by the end of November and will have to weigh cuts in military spending against cuts in benefits. The deal emerged late on Saturday after fractious public exchanges earlier in the day between Republicans and Democrats. Pelosi, in a feisty speech on Saturday, accused the Republican speaker, John Boehner, of having gone over to the “dark side” in courting Republicans allied to the Tea Party. But after a series of negotiations involving Obama, Joe Biden, the vice-president, Reid, McConnell, Boehner and Pelosi, they reached an agreement on the broad principles of a deal. The Senate, which remained in session over the weekend because of the crisis, voted on a mainly procedural issue yesterday to end a Republican filibuster on the subject. In what may be a last act of defiance on this issue, Republican senators mustered enough votes to block the Democratic move. Although that seemed ominous for bipartisan co-operation, Republican senators were on course to vote for the deal. United States US politics Democrats Republicans Obama administration US economy Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Perhaps the weirdest news to come out since Amy Winehouse’s death so far: The Mirror reports that the singer was in the process of adopting a 10-year-old girl from St. Lucia when she died. Making the news even weirder? Dannika Augustine already has a mother and grandmother, but apparently Winehouse…
Continue reading …As Ramadan begins in the Islamic world this week, a remarkable story of forgiveness out of Iran: Ameneh Bahrami halted the “eye for an eye” blinding of Majid Movahedi, who blinded and disfigured her seven years ago when he dumped a bucket of acid on her. Movahedi was minutes away…
Continue reading …Anders Behring Breivik, who admitted killing dozens in Norway last week, will likely not be declared legally insane because he appears to have been in control of his actions, the head of the panel that will review his psychiatric evaluation tells the AP . The July 22 attacks were so carefully…
Continue reading …As expected, the Senate voted today not to move forward with Harry Reid’s debt ceiling proposal in a 50-49 vote. The Wall Street Journal notes that the vote was “anti-climactic,” since the real work on hammering out a deal by the end of the day is happening behind the scenes…
Continue reading …American hikers Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal were arrested in Iran exactly two years ago, but despite hopes for an immediate release after a hearing today , their lawyer now says a verdict will be announced within a week. Today’s was the final court hearing in the case, with the hikers…
Continue reading …
Alcohol and obesity blamed for higher cancer rates in British women compared with their European counterparts British women are nearly a fifth more likely to develop cancer at some point during their lives than their European counterparts, with lifestyle factors such as obesity and alcohol consumption likely to be partly responsible, a cancer charity has said. The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), which campaigns on cancer and lifestyle issues, said data showed women in the UK had a 25.1% chance of developing any type of cancer by the time they reached 75, as against 21.4% of women elsewhere in Europe. The study is based on figures compiled by the International Agency for Research on Cancer , part of the UN’s World Health Organisation (WHO). British men have marginally better cancer rates than those elsewhere in Europe, with a 27.8% chance of being diagnosed by the age of 75 against 29.5% for men elsewhere in Europe. The WCRF, which estimates that about 80,000 UK cancer cases could be prevented each year through physical activity, better diet, lower alcohol use and reduced obesity, said it believed similar lifestyle factors played a role in these statistics. Earlier this year, a study in the Lancet found that British women had the highest average body mass index among 19 western European nations, of 26.9. This figure, which compares weight against height, counts as overweight by WHO guidelines. Various studies have also indicated that British women tend to drink more than those in many other European countries, particularly younger women, where the prevalence of diseases associated with alcohol abuse has soared. Dr Rachel Thompson of the WCRF said alcohol and obesity formed “one of the big public health challenges we face today”. She said: “They are not the only reasons for the differing cancer rates, but there is now very strong evidence that women who drink a lot of alcohol are at increased risk of developing the disease and that excess body fat is also an important risk factor.” Ciarán Devane, chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Support , said the WCRF figures were “very worrying”. He added: “Leading a healthy, active lifestyle and eating a diet of fresh fruit, vegetables and foods that are whole grain and also limiting alcohol intake may reduce the risk of getting cancer and cancer recurrence. However, it’s important to remember that cancer can also be caused by many other factors such as age, lifestyle habits and genetic make up. “The number of people who will get cancer is now well past one in three, and there are many more people with cancer today than there were 10 years ago. By making small adjustments to their diet and lifestyles both British men and women can go a long way to helping us tackle this ever growing issue.”ends Health Cancer Alcohol Obesity Cancer Europe Peter Walker guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Anti-alcohol abuse groups say push to cut excessive drinking risks being compromised by industry’s heavy presence on panel The drinks industry has secured heavy representation on a key government advisory working group on alcohol, putting it in a strong position to influence the coalition’s forthcoming alcohol strategy. Minutes of the Government and Partners Alcohol Working Group, which meets bi-monthly and is chaired by the Home Office director of drugs and alcohol, show that drinks industry membership has massively increased during the last year. Under the Labour government, there were a couple of industry representatives, but the coalition has swelled their numbers to the point where they make up almost half the membership of the committee, excluding the civil servants who represent government departments, such as health and the Treasury. Minutes of meetings before and after the election were obtained by the BBC’s Panorama programme, which on Monday night will show the damage excessive drinking is wreaking on young people and asks why the government has not acted to raise alcohol prices. When the committee met in March 2009 – then called the Alcohol Strategy Delivery Group – eight of the members were non-civil servants and two of them were from the drinks industry – one from Bacardi and the other from retailers Morrisons. Five others came from a health background and the sixth represented local government. But the membership changed under the coalition government. In December 2010, there were 10 members from the drinks industry and seven others. In March this year, there were 10 members from the drinks industry, eight of whom were present, and six others – three of whom were in the room. The minutes of that meeting show that the committee is to have a role in the government’s alcohol strategy. They record that it listened to a presentation from the Department of Health on what it might contain and was asked for views. The revelation of the industry’s central role on a government advisory body follows concern over its representation on the groups that negotiated the public health responsibility deal. In March, six health groups, including the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Physicians, walked out of the deal on alcohol, saying that they were not allowed to discuss the measures that would have most effect in curbing dangerous drinking, such as price rises. The panel’s health representatives said at the time that the government had listened to industry and refused to allow issues that could make a difference, such as price and promotion to children, to be
Continue reading …
Home Office must assess impact of Turkish entry into EU to avoid repeat of 2004 influx of eastern European migrants Home Office ministers need to order an official assessment of the likely scale of legal migration to Britain should Turkey join the European Union, a Commons committee has urged. The home affairs select committee also says that much more must be done to improve security on Turkey’s borders before it should be allowed to join the EU. The land border with Greece is now the main loophole for irregular migration into Europe with 350 migrants trying to cross it every day in 2010 and more than 75% of trafficked heroin into the EU also flows across its borders. The MPs’ report says that the available forecasts for the likely flow of Turkish nationals to other European countries should it join the EU range from 500,000 to 4.4 million up until 2030. One estimate by Oxford University suggests that the figure could be as low as 60,000 to 70,000 a year to Europe as a whole. “Current migration of Turkish nationals to the EU has declined to below 50,000 a year but population trends and the gap in living standards could make easier migration within the EU an attractive option for Turkish citizens,” says the report published on Monday. “Given the UK’s experience after the 2004 enlargement, when many thousands more migrants arrived than expected, the committee is cautious about allowing Turkish citizens full freedom of movement and supports the government’s commitment to applying ‘effective transitional controls as a matter of course’ for all new member states,” says the report. The Home Office says that there are about 150,000 Turkish nationals living in Britain at present, with about 500,000 people of Turkish origin living in the country altogether. But Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and France all have larger Turkish communities which are more likely to attract a new wave of legal migration. Current discussions in Brussels assume that Turkey could join the EU in 2020 but no final decisions have been made and there is significant opposition among some member states. Home Office immigration minister Damian Green, giving evidence to the committee’s inquiry, said it was impossible to make any kind of realistic assessment at the moment on the impact of Turkish accession to the EU on likely migration patterns. He said that “we don’t know any of the basic facts”, including whether a transitional period under which Britain could restrict the flow of Turkish migrant workers will be put in place. Green also pointed out that Turkey traditionally had much stronger links with Germany than Britain and had an economy which was growing at a faster rate than India, meaning many Turks might well stay at home. However, the MPs say that, while the Home Office was no doubt wary of attracting criticism for producing inaccurate estimates in the future, they were concerned that no official impact analysis has yet been carried out: “Accordingly we recommend that the Home Office undertakes this piece of work now and updates it as circumstances change.” Ministers do not want to repeat the experience of 2004 when Poland and other east European states joined and an annual net migration prediction of 13,000 proved well wide of the mark. Immigration and asylum Turkey European Union Europe Alan Travis guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Fishing fleets have thrown away 2.1m tonnes of cod worth £2.7bn to avoid falling foul of EU regulations, says the New Economics Foundation UK fishing crews have thrown away stocks of cod worth about £1bn since 1963 due to the practice of discarding catches which exceed or fall outside quotas, according to a thinktank report. Across all EU fleets, stocks of cod worth £2.7bn were discarded in the North Sea, the Channel and Skagerrak, the strait adjoining Norway, Sweden and the north of Denmark between 1963 and 2008, the New Economics Foundation (NEF) study, Money Overboard, calculated. Using discard data compiled by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and focusing just on cod, one of the best-documented stocks, the NEF calculated that just over 2.1m tonnes of the fish was thrown overboard during the period. The report adds fuel to the bitter debate over the longstanding fisheries practice, particularly prevalent in heavy-regulated EU waters, of throwing overboard a significant proportion of any catch – up to two thirds in some areas – most of which is by this time dead or dying. The fish are discarded for a variety of reasons: they can be species which are not included in the boat’s quota, stocks which exceed a quota, too small, or simply from a species with low commercial value. In March the EU’s fisheries commissioner, Maria Damanaki, began steps to end the practice of discarding , calling for reforms to quota systems to ensure this happened by the start of 2013. The issue was highlighted in the UK by a high-profile campaign and accompanying TV series by the chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall , something Damanaki cited as a key factor in her decision. However, fishing lobby groups have objected strongly to the plan , arguing that already precarious livelihoods will be made untenable if crews are obliged to land large quantities of unpopular, low-value species. A revised EU common fisheries policy (CFP) , unveiled early in July, said discarding would be phased out, with fishing boats obliged to land all stocks of commercial fish they catch, although they will still not be able to sell undersized examples. The reforms are intended to provide an incentive for trawlers to invest in more selective fishing gear. The NEF argues that a full discard ban will be good news for the fishing industry, citing a study published last month by academics at the University of York which found a discard ban by Norway, a non-EU member, during the late 1980s saw reduced profitability for just four years with Norwegian cod fisheries now among the most lucrative in the world. Rupert Crilly, an environmental economics researcher at NEF, and the author of Money Overboard, said that for all the potential benefits of an EU discard ban it was only part of a wider issue, mainly connected to general overfishing. “There needs to be a much more fundamental reform of the CFP, rather than just saying discards need to be banned. It’s a little bit too simplistic. What we’re saying in this report is: this is the value of what we’ve been throwing away, it’s enormous and it needs to stop, but it’s not the only things that needs to change,” he said. It was vital for EU quotas to be set by scientists rather than politicians, and for the approach to be based around the effects on the whole ocean ecosystem rather than on a species-by-species basis. “What we’re arguing is that we need quotas set according to scientific limits. “In the end this would be good news for the economy, the people who own the resource, which is everybody, and the fishing industry itself, which completes depends on stocks being at their best.” Fishing Food European Union Conservation Marine life Food security Wildlife Oceans Europe Peter Walker guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …