Archive for November, 2008
£6bn HIV plan ’short on detail’
£6bn HIV plan ’short on detail’
There is no evidence that a £6 billion UK drive to tackle the Aids epidemic abroad will meet its early targets, according to a committee of MPs.
The International Development Committee said the strategy was “strong on rhetoric” but lacked vital details.
The government has pledged the cash over seven years and wants to see universal access to HIV prevention and treatment by 2010.
It said it will publish more detailed plans on Monday – World Aids Day.
The MPs have called for a full breakdown of where the money was to be spent.
"It is not yet clear to us whether the £6 billion is new money or simply a redirection of existing commitments"Malcolm Bruce MP
Commons International Development Committee
The strategy was published in June by the Department for International Development (DfID), but MPs said they were still waiting for more information – and evidence that targets would be met.
There are 33 million people living with HIV/Aids in the world, with nearly 6,000 dying each day, and an estimated 7,000 new infections every day.
Much of the fresh effort will be targeted at the epicentre of HIV infection in the world – sub-Saharan Africa.
However, while welcoming this, the committee said it was concerned that important groups, such as those at risk of infection through rape, or vulnerable “marginalised groups” such as prostitutes, drug users and homosexual men, might be overlooked.
‘Not clear’
The committee’s chairman, Liberal Democrat Malcolm Bruce said: “We were shocked to learn that young girls in some countries in Africa are more likely to be raped than to learn how to read and write – sexual violence is a major factor in the spread of HIV.
“We need to know what programmes DfID intends to support to tackle gender-based violence.
“It is not yet clear to us whether the £6 billion is new money or simply a redirection of existing commitments – we have asked the department for a full breakdown of where this sum will come from and how it will be spent on the ground.”
He said that he had seen no evidence yet that the project was on track to meet the 2010 target.
DfID said it was preparing to launch, on World Aids Day itself, a “Monitoring and Evaluation Framework” which should contain more information about how the money is spent.
Questions
International Development minister Ivan Lewis said the UK was “widely acknowledged” as a pioneer in the fight against HIV and Aids.
He said: “Between now and 2015 the UK will invest £6 billion to ensure countries with the least developed health systems can fight and win the battle against Aids.”
The International HIV/AIDS Alliance welcomed the committee report, but Anton Kerr, its senior policy adviser, said that the government’s existing efforts to tackle HIV were helping to “deliver results”, including a 40-fold increase in access to antiretroviral treatments in Africa.
“However, the IDC report does raise questions about how DfID will support the increase to universal access in HIV services for those most vulnerable to HIV – such as men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, vulnerable women and children.
“We look forward to working with DFID to build on the significant achievements that have been made to date. Too much is at stake if we do not build on our achievements and scale up the global response.”<p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 30, 2008
PM had ‘no knowledge’ of arrest
PM had ‘no knowledge’ of arrest
Gordon Brown has insisted ministers were not aware of the arrest of Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green.
The MP was arrested, held for nine hours, and his homes and House of Commons office searched by police probing alleged Home Office leaks.
Opposition MPs have described the move as a “Mayday warning for democracy”, while questioning the government’s role in the matter.
But Mr Brown said he and ministers had “no prior knowledge” of the arrest.
Describing the arrest as “a police matter”, he told Sky News: “I had no prior knowledge, the home secretary had no prior knowledge, I know of no other minister who had any prior knowledge”
I knew about it only after it had happened.”
Alleged Home Office leaks- Home Office knew about licences for 5,000 illegal workers
- Illegal immigrant working in House of Commons
- List of Labour rebels against 42-day detention plan
- Home Secretary’s letter warning recession could lead to rise in crime
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith denied that ministers had been involved in any way in the arrest of Mr Green.
“The Metropolitan Police have been completely clear that that arrest happened without either ministerial involvement or authorisation,” she said.
Both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats condemned Mr Green’s arrest and search of his parliamentary office, by nine members of the Met’s counter-terrorism squad.
Describing the operation as “heavy handed”, Tory leader David Cameron said: “If they wanted to talk to Damian Green why not pick up the telephone and ask to talk to him.”
“[The police] have got questions to answer, frankly, I think government ministers have got questions to answer as well. If they didn’t know, why weren’t they told
“As far as I can see, he made public some information that was in the public interest that the government found uncomfortable.”
‘Tin-pot dictatorship’
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg told the BBC that he was “really shocked” by Mr Green’s arrest.
“This is something you might expect from a tin-pot dictatorship, not in a modern democracy,” he said.
Given the culture of “extraordinary secrecy” in Whitehall, it was getting harder to hold the government to account and opposition MPs had a constitutional duty to keep “ministers on their toes”, he added.
He called on Gordon Brown to “rule out any further use of anti-terrorism powers in cases that have nothing to do with terrorism.”
The Metropolitan Police said the arrest was made under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, rather than anti-terror legislation.
BBC political correspondent Carole Walker said the Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin, was also under pressure to justify why he had allowed police to enter Parliament and search Mr Green’s office.
A spokeswoman for the speaker said: “There is a process to be followed and that was followed.”
Labour concern
There was also concern on the Labour benches.
Former minister Denis MacShane said that the Speaker should make clear that MPs were entitled to hold sensitive material in the same way as lawyers and doctors.
“To send a squad of counter terrorist officers to arrest an MP shows the growing police contempt for Parliament and democratic politics,” he said.
“The police now believe that MPs are so reduced in public status that they are fair game for over-excited officers to order dawn raids, arrests and searches of confidential files held by MPs or those who work for them.
“I am not sure this is good for British democracy.”
According to the Home Office, no ministers were told about the raids in advance.
However, Mr Cameron, London mayor Boris Johnson, and Commons Speaker Michael Martin were all given prior notice.
"The decision to make today’s arrest was taken solely by the MPS without any ministerial knowledge or approval"Metropolitan Police Q&A: Damian Green arrested
Nick Robinson’s view
Former Conservative Home Secretary and Tory leader, Michael Howard, said he would be “astonished” if he had not been told about the police investigation when in office.
“I would have expected to be told. This was an investigation we know initiated by the Home Office. Are we to believe that nobody in the Home Office was told”
He added: “If nobody knew it tells you something about the way government is working at the present time, and about the relations between ministers and senior civil servants.”
Further questioning
Mr Green was not charged with any offence but was released on bail until February, when he could face further questioning.
The Ashford MP, the Tories’ immigration spokesman since 2005, has denied any wrongdoing and said “opposition politicians have a duty to hold the government to account”.
The Met said some counter-terrorism officers were involved in the arrest because they were the most “appropriate” to carry out such an operation.
Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve has released a list of more than 50 questions he said the government had to answer about the arrest, including when ministers and officials were told about it.
“The government’s limp and confused response begs more questions than it answers. Ministers have some very important questions to answer.”
Sir David Normington, the top civil servant at the Home Office, said he had taken the decision to ask for police help in identifying the source of a series of “leaks of sensitive information over an extended period,” because the leaks had “risked undermining the effective operation of my department”.
“The police investigation led to a junior member of the Home Office being arrested on 19 November and subsequently suspended from duty,” said Sir David in a statement.
Home Office leaks
“Yesterday (Thursday), I was informed by the Metropolitan Police at about 1.45pm that a search was about to be conducted of the home and offices of a member of the Opposition front bench. I was subsequently told that an arrest had been made.
“Ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred.”
The leaks thought to be at the centre of the investigation include:
- The November 2007 revelation that the home secretary knew the Security Industry Authority had granted licences to 5,000 illegal workers, but decided not to publicise it.
- The February 2008 news that an illegal immigrant had been employed as a cleaner in the House of Commons.
- A whips’ list of potential Labour rebels in the vote on plans to increase the pre-charge terror detention limit to 42 days.
- A letter from the home secretary warning that a recession could lead to a rise in crime.
The Metropolitan Police confirmed Mr Green was arrested by members of its counter-terrorism command, thought to be Special Branch officers, at his home in Kent and searches were conducted at his homes in London and Kent and at two offices in Kent and London.
It said the investigation was not terrorism related but did fall within the counter-terror unit’s remit and that it was made without the knowledge or approval of ministers.
‘Fair game’
Police say Mr Green was held on suspicion of “conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office” and “aiding and abetting, counselling or procuring misconduct in a public office” – an obscure and little-used offence under common law.
One legal expert said it was doubtful whether any case would be brought against Mr Green.
“In a western democracy, I think it would be very surprising if an elected member of Parliament was put on trial for an offence which arises from him putting in the public domain material that he thinks should be there in the public interest,” said Robert Brown, a partner at the law firm Corker Binning.
<p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 29, 2008
Government to own majority of RBS
Government to own majority of RBS
The government is to own 57.9% of Royal Bank of Scotland after shareholders bought only a tiny proportion of the new shares being offered by the bank.
The small take-up had been expected as the offer price of 65.5p was about 10p higher than the price at which the shares were trading.
The share issue was part of the government’s plan to recapitalise the banking system.
The government will pay about £15bn for the majority stake in the bank
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 28, 2008
House prices fall but pace eases
House prices fall but pace eases
The slump in house prices eased off in November with prices falling by just 0.4%, according to the Nationwide, the UK’s largest building society.
The mortgage lender said the rate of price falls “moderated significantly” when compared with October’s 1.3% fall.
House prices are down 13.9% from November 2007, easing from a 14.6% annual fall in October.
However, Nationwide warned that the poor economy would continue to put pressure on the housing market.
“In spite of the moderation in house price falls recorded in November, with the economy in recession, conditions do not appear very favourable for a swift recovery in the housing market,” Nationwide’s chief economist Fionnuala Earley said.
“With prices falling at their current rate, there is also less incentive for new borrowers to hurry into the market.”
The price of an average house now stands at £158,442, the Nationwide said.
That amounts to a drop of £25,000 in the past year, although the building society says pricesare still £25,000 higher than they were in November 2003.
Downward spiral
The past year has seen the UK property market endure one of its biggest and most sudden slowdowns on record.
It is estimated that the UK house building industry has shrunk by half since the start of the international credit crunch in the summer of last year.
Earlier this week the former head of the HBOS mortgage bank, Sir James Crosby, recommended that the government take direct action to stimulate the flow of mortgage funds to the UK banking industry.
He warned that otherwise new mortgage lending might dwindle to a complete halt.
And that in turn would lead to a further downward spiral of sales and prices which would make the impending economic recession even worse.
In evidence to a Parliamentary committee, the governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, said no issue was more important at the moment than the restoration of general bank lending
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 27, 2008
Thai protesters shut down airport
Thai protesters shut down airport
Flights from Thailand’s international airport have been suspended after hundreds of anti-government protesters stormed the building in Bangkok.
At least 3,000 passengers are said to be stranded at Suvarnabhumi airport.
The airport’s director said he had no option but to halt services after demonstrators overwhelmed police lines, and took over the departure lounge.
It is the latest move in a campaign by the opposition People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to oust the government.
Airport director Serirat Prasutanon said operations had been “totally shut down” since 0400 (2100GMT Wednesday) and that 78 outbound and incoming flights had been affected.
"Anyone who wants to overthrow or resist the government is attempting a rebellion"Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat In pictures: Bangkok clashes Q&A: Bangkok protests
He told the AFP news agency that passengers were unable to leave because PAD demonstrators had blocked the roads leading to the airport.
The BBC’s Jonathan Head in Bangkok says the protesters may be hoping to prevent Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat from returning from the Apec summit in Peru on Wednesday.
Mr Somchai told reporters in Lima: “Anyone who wants to overthrow or resist the government is attempting a rebellion.”
Thinly veiled tactic
It came as demonstrations in central Bangkok turned violent, leaving at least 11 people injured.
Thai TPBS television broadcast pictures of the violence on the main road to the capital’s old airport. The footage showed shots being fired from a truck into crowds after rocks were thrown.
At least two handguns could be seen and people standing with the gunmen raised up a picture of the revered Thai king, whom the PAD claim to be supporting.
A man was also seized by pro-government supporters and what appeared to be a large knife was held to his throat.
TPBS said its cameraman had been threatened at the scene and that PAD personnel attempted to seize his tape.
On Monday, PAD protesters converged on Bangkok’s old Don Muang international airport, from where the cabinet has been operating since its offices were occupied three months ago.
Organisers say the protest is a “final battle” to bring down the government.
Our correspondent says the government appears to have followed a strategy of allowing PAD to attack government buildings while avoiding clashes, in the hope that it will wear the protesters down.
The government has so far resisted calling in the army. Analysts says it is a thinly disguised aim of the PAD to provoke such a move.
Are you in Bangkok Have you been affected by the protests Has the airport closure disrupted your travel plans You can send us your experiences using the form below:<p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 26, 2008
The Green Room
VIEWPOINT
Peter Lilley
The UK’s Climate Change Bill, which commits future governments to cut CO2 emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050, is about to receive Royal Assent but at what cost Peter Lilley MP asks why ministers failed to mention that the legislation could cost each family in the UK up to £10,000.
"Neither Parliament nor most of the media bothered to discuss the cost of one of the most immense projects ever adopted in this country"
"Can you spare £10,000 for a good cause The government thinks you can – despite the recession.
Parliament passed the Climate Change Bill, which is set to receive Royal Assent in the coming days, which will force you to cough up.
This legislation binds future British governments to introduce unilaterally, even if other countries do not follow suit, massive spending programmes which could cost up to £200bn; that’s £10,000 from every family in the country.
I’m not talking about rescuing the banks.That involved loans which we should eventually get back. This is real money in taxes and lost incomes – money you will never see again.
The bank rescue was to save the economy. This is to save the planet.
Costing the Earth
Hold on! I hear you exclaim. No-one asked us if we could afford £10,000. We haven’t heard anything about a £200 billion package. That’s enormous.
That’s right; it is enormous and you didn’t hear anything about it. That is the scandal.
Neither Parliament nor most of the media bothered to discuss the cost of one of the most immense projects ever adopted in this country.Indeed, Parliament wafted it through without even discussing its cost and with only five votes against.
In my experience, our biggest mistakes are made when Parliament and the media are virtually unanimous and MPs switch off their critical faculties in a spasm of moral self-congratulation. That is what happened with this Bill.
We all want to save the planet from overheating, just as we all want to save the financial system from meltdown. We accept that both rescues may cost us a lot.
But a healthy democracy should at least debate the cost, compare it with the likely benefits (or costs of doing nothing) and consider whether we can achieve the same ends at less cost.
Had MPs or commentators bothered to read the government’s own estimates of the potential costs and benefits of the Climate Change Bill – the Impact Assessment – they would have found some extraordinary things.
Admittedly, on this occasion government failed to publish copies of the assessment in the normal way so it took a little effort to obtain. Apparently, I was the only MP to obtain a copy.
False economy
The contents of the Impact Assessment are astounding. Whereas it puts the Bill’s potential cost as up to £205bn, it says the maximum benefits of this massive expenditure is £110bn.
I am all in favour of taking out an insurance policy, as the government describes it, against the threat of global warming.
But would you insure your home with a company if they charged premiums which could be double the value of your houseThere must be a better insurance policy than this.
Moreover, the government admits that their estimate of the “maximum” cost is far from being the real maximum since it omits three huge items.
First, the Impact Assessment admits that it is “unable to capture transition costs which could be 1.3% to 2% of GDP in 2020″.
Second, they make the fantastically optimistic assumption that all businesses will know and instantly adopt the most cost efficient technologies to achieve carbon savings.
Third, the assessment “cannot capture trade and competitiveness impacts”; in particular, the “relatively high risks of the transfer of productive capital to countries without carbon policies”.
In other words, if we pursue the policies in the Climate Change Bill unilaterally, without others doing the same, we could end up driving UK business abroad without reducing carbon emissions because they will still be spewing forth carbon.
Yet this bill legally binds future British governments unilaterally to spend billions of pounds on trying to prevent climate change even if other countries do not follow our lead.
There is a case for Britain taking the lead, but the bill should surely only become binding if a critical mass of other countries follow our lead; we cannot save the planet single-handed.
The bill originally bound governments by law to meet targets for reducing carbon emissions by 26% by 2020 and 60% by 2050.
The new climate minister, Ed Miliband, amended it to raise the final target by a third to 80% – thereby increasing the likely cost by at least a third, although no-one deigned to mention this.He has refused to reveal the extra cost until after the bill becomes law.
These are pretty onerous targets, yet the UN says Britain will fall far short of our existing target to cut 20% off the 1990 level of carbon emissions by 2010.
Climate activists hope that making the new targets legally binding will somehow ensure they will be met. They clearly believe that if only King Canute had passed a law requiring the tide to go out, it would have done so!
The new law will not punish ministers if they fail to achieve these targets. The sole effect of enshrining the targets in statute will be to open government policies to judicial review. Judges will then assess whether current measures will achieve the targets.
I have little faith in any government’s ability to meet those targets cost effectively.But empowering judges to prescribe additional measures costing billions of pounds, without being accountable to the electorate, is a recipe for huge additional costs.
Stern words
The oddest thing about the government’s cost/benefit analysis is that it contradicts the Stern Review.
Sir Nicholas Stern concluded that the cost of preventing climate change would be small relative to the benefits.
Yet the Impact Assessment reveals that the costs could dwarf the potential benefits.
The Stern Review was much criticised for resorting to unprecedented means to inflate the benefits artificially.
In particular, he used an astonishingly low discount rate thereby giving a huge weight to benefits that will not accrue until centuries ahead. In fact, half the benefits he expects will not occur until after the year 2800!
Ministers have admitted to me that their Impact Assessment rejected Stern’s dubious figures and used conventional discount rates.
Yet they still quote Stern’s conclusions to justify their Bill and never mention their own more recent calculations.
What a disgrace that our legislators failed to scrutinise and amend this Bill as rigorously as the US Congress examined the Paulson package before agreeing it.
If the Impact Assessment is right and Stern wrong there is a strong case for spending more of taxpayers’ billions on adapting to climate change and less on trying to prevent it, but we will not have that option."
Peter Lilley is Conservative MP for Hitchin and Harpenden
The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website
Do you agree with Peter Lilley Do the potential costs of the Climate Change Bill outweight the benefits of cutting carbon emissions Have politicians and the media failed to properly scrutinise the proposals Do you think the risks posed by climate change need to be tackled at any cost
Send us your comments using the form below:<p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 25, 2008
Abducted Indian ship crew return
Abducted Indian ship crew return
Some members of the Indian crew of a Japanese ship who were released by Somali pirates after two months in captivity have returned home.
TV pictures showed five crew members arriving in the western Indian city of Mumbai (also known as Bombay).
Somali pirates captured the MV Stolt Valor with 18 Indian crew members on 15 September on board.
The threat posed by pirates off the Somali coast has been causing international concern.
More than 80 ships have been hijacked there this year.
The smiling Indian sailors who arrived at Mumbai’s international airport from Muscat in Oman said they were “greatly relieved” to be back home.
‘Living at gunpoint’
“It was a bad experience. We lived under the gunpoint [of the pirates] all day long. We couldn’t move without our permission. We slept on the bridge of the ship,” one the men told reporters.
The rest of the Indian crew members, including the captain, are returning home on Tuesday.
A campaign was launched by Seema Goyal, wife of the ship’s captain PK Goyal, who pressured the Indian government to secure the release of the crew members.
Indian media reports had suggested a large ransom had been paid by the Japanese ship-owners earlier this month. There has been no confirmation from the owners.
India is now bolstering its naval presence in the Gulf of Aden to tackle piracy off Somalia’s coast.
The Indian navy has already deployed a warship in the area and is planning to send at least one more. Delhi has formally been given permission to act under a UN resolution allowing navies to pursue pirates into Somalia’s territorial waters
Last week, an Indian warship sank a suspected pirate “mother ship” after it came under attack in the Gulf of Aden.
India is among several countries currently patrolling the Gulf of Aden, one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes which connects the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.
In recent weeks, there has been a growing demand for multinational efforts to fight the pirates.
Somalia has not had a functioning national government since 1991 and has suffered continuing civil strife
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 24, 2008
Empty home numbers ‘on increase’
Empty home numbers ‘on increase’
The number of empty homes in England is increasing due to the downturn in the housing market and a sharp rise in repossessions, a charity has warned.
The Empty Homes Agency is urging the public to report homes left vacant for long periods so it can inform councils, which can bring them back into use.
Councils have the power to take them over and rent them out.
There are more than 750,000 empty homes in England, half of which have been unoccupied for more than six months.
In addition to the housing slump, the agency blames the rise on an oversupply of newly-built flats in some city centres and stalled housing regeneration projects.
Social housing
David Ireland, the charity’s chief executive, said: “At the very time people need more homes, record numbers are falling empty.
“There are now enough vacant homes in England to house almost two million people yet far more attention is paid to building new ones.
“Councils have the power to step in and help, but can’t do so unless they know where they are and won’t unless they know people care,” he added.
"If everybody who is affected by this growing problem reported just one empty home it would provide a huge impetus"
David Ireland, Empty Homes Agency
Under the 2004 Housing Act, councils can take over homes left empty without good reason for more than six months and rent them out for social housing.
The agency has set up a website where people can report rundown, empty homes.
It will automatically report the property to the local council which can take action and will provide updates until the property is back in use.
Mr Ireland said: “If everybody who is affected by this growing problem reported just one empty home it would provide a huge impetus and send a huge message to government and councils that action is needed now.”
Figures from the rest of the UK show there are 78,000 vacant homes in Scotland, 50,000 in Northern Ireland and the same number again in Wales
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 23, 2008
Grenade wounds Thai demonstrators
Grenade wounds Thai demonstrators
A grenade blast has wounded eight anti-government protesters camped outside the Thai prime minister’s office in Bangkok, emergency services say.
Demonstrators from the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD) group have occupied the area since August.
The attack comes two days after another grenade attack on the protesters killed one person and injured another 29.
The PAD wants the government to resign, saying it is too close to ousted former PM Thaksin Shinawatra
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 22, 2008
US Lockerbie compensation paid
US Lockerbie compensation paid
The families of the 180 US victims of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, say they have received full compensation from Libya.
In Washington, family members claimed victory in their quest for justice.
Libya paid $1.8bn (£1.2bn) in October into a fund to compensate victims of the 1988 bombing – which killed 270 people – and other attacks.
The payment has cleared the last hurdle to restoring full diplomatic relations between the US and Libya.
“Today is historic because Libya has finally fulfilled 100% justice to the Pan Am 103 families,” said Kara Weipz, whose brother was killed on the flight.
“We are now free to close this chapter in our nightmare.”
Terrorism renounced
Earlier this week, President George W Bush said a “painful chapter” between the two countries was closing.
He made the remarks after speaking on the phone to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.
From the fund, $1.5bn will be used to cover compensation claims for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing as well as the 1986 bombing of a German disco.
The Lockerbie bombing killed all 259 people on board the flight, as well as 11 people on the ground.
Three people died and more than 200 were wounded in the attack in Germany.
Another $300m from the fund will go to Libyan victims of US airstrikes ordered in retaliation for the disco bombing.
Mr Bush has already restored Libyan immunity from terror-related lawsuits and dismissed pending compensation cases in the US.
Libya’s relations with Western countries have opened up since 2003, when Mr Gaddafi renounced international terrorism and efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction, ending decades of isolation.
Last week, a Scottish appeal court rejected a bail application from Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, the Libyan man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation
Add comment November 21, 2008
