Latest news and comment from Britain | guardian.co.uk

---

• Councils plan for exodus of poor families
• Dyke: BBC at fault for decline in reputation
• Court battle looms over high-speed rail link
• The experts are clear on how David Kelly died | Vikram Dodd
• Compare the memoir: insurance meerkat's life story on sale
• Co-operative Group considers sale of life assurance business
• Freed submarine heads back to base
• Tony Blair's sister-in-law converts to Islam
• Brixton: regeneration or gentrification? | Philip Dayle
• WikiLeaks Iraq war logs: Nick Clegg calls for investigation of abuse claims
• Three killed in helicopter crash
• No, we don't 'understand' surveillance reversal | Wendy M Grossman
• George Osborne 'exaggerated debt crisis risk' says Nobel laureate
• Couples bid to overturn gay marriage law
• Fable III's epic cast takes video games to a new level
• Exodus over women bishops: what will Rowan Williams do next?
• Out of the madness of 7/7 emerge lessons in how to face terrorism | Henry Porter
• Two reported dead as helicopter crashes in Northern Ireland
• Royal Mail privatisation threatens rural post offices, warn opponents
• Ed Miliband: 'David Cameron wants a return to the days of Tory arrogance'
• Councils 'walk away' from provision of pest control services
• Lies, paranoia and jealousy on the internet's social networks inspire Hollywood
• Lara Stone and Georgia Jagger make gap teeth the new face of fashion
• Baroness Warsi told by David Cameron not to appear at Islamic conference
• Gordon Ramsay: the culinary hot ticket is beginning to cool down
• Bob Guccione's journey from birthday card to birthday suit | Tom Lamont
• Friendly fire sniper could face manslaughter charge
• Thanks to the cuts, we'd all be better off in prison | Secret diary of a civil servant
• Talking to the Enemy by Scott Atran – review

Councils plan for exodus of poor families Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT • Benefit cuts force officials to book up B&B accommodation • More than 200,000 may leave capital in 'social cleansing' Ministers were accused last night of deliberately driving poor people out of wealthy inner cities as London councils revealed they were preparing a mass exodus of low-income families from the capital because of coalition benefit cuts. Representatives of London boroughs told a meeting of MPs last week that councils have already block-booked bed and breakfasts and other private accommodation outside the capital – from Hastings, on the south coast, to Reading to the west and Luton to the north – to house those who will be priced out of the London market. Councils in the capital are warning that 82,000 families – more than 200,000 people – face losing their homes because private landlords, enjoying a healthy rental market buoyed by young professionals who cannot afford to buy, will not cut their rents to the level of caps imposed by ministers. The controversy follows comment last week by Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, who said the unemployed should "get on the bus" and look for work. Another unnamed minister said the benefit changes would usher in a phenomenon similar to the Highland Clearances in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, when landlords evicted thousands of tenants from their homes in the north of Scotland. In a sign that housing benefit cuts are fast becoming the most sensitive political issue for the coalition, Jon Cruddas, the Labour MP for Dagenham, last night accused the government of deliberate social engineering. "It is an exercise in social and economic cleansing," he said, claiming that families would be thrown into turmoil, with children having to move school and those in work having to travel long distances to their jobs. "It is tantamount to cleansing the poor out of rich areas – a brutal and shocking piece of social engineering," Cruddas added. The National Housing Federation's chief executive, David Orr, described the housing benefit cuts as "truly shocking". He said: "Unless ministers urgently reconsider these punitive cuts, we could see more people sleeping rough than at any stage during the last 30 years." The issue is fuelling tension inside the coalition. Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrat deputy leader, said last night he would table amendments to change housing benefit rules. He said: "I would fully expect to be one of those putting forward proposals for changes in the housing benefit rules, particularly for London." Under a clampdown on housing benefit, the chancellor, George Osborne, announced that housing benefit will be capped from April next year at £400 a week for a four-bedroom house, £340 for a three-bedroom property, £290 for two bedrooms and £250 for a one-bedroom property. In addition, from October 2011 payments will be capped at 30% of average local rents. At a meeting of the Commons work and pensions select committee last Wednesday, the day Osborne announced £81bn of cuts in the spending review, MPs were told by London council chiefs that the housing benefit cuts could have devastating results. Nigel Minto, head of sustainable communities at London Councils, who works closely with the capital's housing directors, told the committee that since June London councils had been "procuring bed and breakfast accommodation" in outer London and beyond. The committee was told similar problems would occur in other cities with high-priced property such as Brighton and Oxford. Jeremy Swain, chief executive of the homelessness charity Thames Reach, said he was particularly worried about the impact on numbers sleeping rough in London. "We have reduced rough sleeping dramatically and we have a target of zero rough sleeping in London by 2012. For the first time I'm thinking that we will not achieve that," he said. Karen Buck, shadow minister for work and pensions, said: "The sheer scale and extremity of the coalition proposals means almost a million households are affected across the country." In today's Observer, Labour leader Ed Miliband says last week's spending review took Britain back to the 80s. "This was the week that took the compassion out of David Cameron's claim to compassionate Conservatism," he writes, accusing the Tories of displaying "arrogant ideological swagger". But last night Cameron insisted the cuts were tough but fair. "Departments have to make savings. I don't underestimate how difficult this will be. But we are doing what we are doing because it is the right thing to do – right by our economy, right for our country." A DWP spokesperson said: "The current way that it [housing benefit] is administered is unfair. It's not right that some families on benefits have been able to live in homes that most working families could not afford. However, we are absolutely committed to supporting the most vulnerable families and have tripled our discretionary housing payments to provide a safety net for those who need it." Welfare Housing benefit Housing Spending review 2010 Toby Helm Anushka Asthana guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Dyke: BBC at fault for decline in reputation Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:04 PM PDT Former director general says he is partly to blame following rows over top salaries and David Kelly affair Greg Dyke, the former director general of the BBC, believes the public service broadcaster has damaged its standing at home and abroad with a series of self-inflicted wounds. As the corporation faces grave financial challenges following the comprehensive spending review, Dyke – who stepped down in 2004, amid the furore caused by the Hutton inquiry into the death of government weapons inspector David Kelly – accepted some of the blame in an interview with the Observer. He said the BBC's fraught relations with government and the huge sums it has paid to top management and stars such as Jonathan Ross and Graham Norton had dented confidence in a media network that should be the envy of the world. "The great strength of the BBC was how highly it was valued by the public; and government should recognise what a huge asset it is. But the problem with salaries started around 2005 and 2006 and was allowed to go on too long." Dyke, who is chairman of the British Film Institute and chaired a recent Conservative-commissioned report into the British media, argues that those on the highest salaries ought to have accepted reduced terms. "The management should have started calling people up a lot earlier and telling them: 'If you don't like it, I am afraid you will have to go.' But they let it go on for a long time." In the week the BBC learned that it will have to finance the World Service from its licence fee income, Dyke argues that BBC executives have not only failed to address the issue of inflated fees, but have also mishandled the departure of Mark Byford, who is stepping down as deputy director general. "Mark has been made to carry the can," he said. "He is a good bloke and they could really have played it better by letting him go with more dignity. They have dropped him in it. And he was someone who did care about the BBC and who was respected." Byford was appointed as Dyke's deputy in 2004 and became a key figure after the death of Kelly, who was exposed as the source of a controversial Radio 4 news story alleging that the case for the war on Iraq had been "sexed up". Following Dyke's resignation, Byford made a public apology on behalf of the BBC. "This was a mistake and it was also probably the most embarrassing moment in the history of the BBC. Standing there next to the acting BBC chairman, Richard Ryder, and apologising for almost everything. It looked terrible," said Dyke. But now, following the release of medical documents relating to Kelly's death, Dyke admits he could have done more to handle the conflict between the BBC and Blair's government. "We should have set up an inquiry ourselves," he said. "Alastair Campbell just went in hard, because he is a thug and those were his tactics. But we could have kicked it into the long grass for a while. It might have worked." Since it became clear that Iraq held no secret weapons, Dyke has said the contentious BBC story was valid: "We know now that whatever you think about it journalistically, that government WMD report was not an intelligence report at all. It was put together as an argument as to why we should go to war." Dyke said that he recalls every moment of the weekend of Kelly's death, and his decision, at the bereaved family's request, to hold back confirmation that Kelly had spoken to BBC journalists. "My wife was convinced that the security services had killed Dr Kelly. But I think the minute Lord Hutton ruled that the medical reports should be kept for 70 years, it was obvious there would be conspiracy theories. "Why did he do that? Maybe this will be the end of the Kelly affair, but it is interesting that it has come back again," said Dyke. "I am not a conspiracy theorist; I think Dr Kelly killed himself, but I met some Australian spies once who were pretty convinced that MI6 had killed him." Greg Dyke will be speaking about his career at the Penfolds' Vintage Years event on 2 November at The Hospital Club, London, at 7pm. The event is sponsored by the makers of the vintage Australian wine, Penfolds Grange. Greg Dyke BBC David Kelly Vanessa Thorpe guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Court battle looms over high-speed rail link Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:06 PM PDT Campaigners demand judicial review for planned fast route to Birmingham and the north that they say will mar the Chilterns and ruin wildlife havens The case for a high-speed railway linking London with the north looks set to end up in court amid fears over its impact on some of England's finest countryside. High Speed 2, which would link London and Birmingham and then Manchester, Leeds and potentially Glasgow or Edinburgh, was backed by the previous government as a vital contribution to the UK's low-carbon future. The project, which will cost more than £20bn, has been embraced by the coalition government. The prime minister, David Cameron, recently suggested that "getting people off roads and on to fast railways is good for the environment". Protesters argue, however, that the environmental impact as a whole will be negative. They want a judicial review on the grounds the government has failed to properly assess the impact on places such as the Chilterns in Buckinghamshire, an area of outstanding natural beauty. The law firm Public Interest Lawyers has advised that they have a strong case for bringing a judicial review, and a fundraising exercise to commence legal action has now begun. Analysis, shared with Buckinghamshire County Council, suggests the new link would use twice the amount of energy of the West Coast main line and as much as three times the amount if the trains were to run at their maximum projected speed of 250mph. The project's green credentials have been largely abandoned by coalition ministers amid concerns they can no longer be corroborated. HS2 Ltd, the company overseeing the project, now claims only that overall carbon emissions will be "neutral". "The case for HS2 is largely built on capturing the internal aviation market, but 80% of all journeys between Manchester and London already involve the train," said Steve Rodrick, chief officer of the Chilterns Conservation Board. "These trains will use double, possibly triple, the energy of normal trains. Where's that energy going to come from? You either have to bank on nuclear coming on stream or, more likely, power stations running on fossil fuels, which will involve significant carbon emissions." The extension of the route to Scotland would see journeys slashed, but only to three-and-a-half hours, meaning air travel would still be competitive in terms of journey time and price, Rodrick added. Unlike HS1, which runs through Kent, HS2 will not follow existing motorways and train lines but an almost direct line through the Chilterns, necessary for the trains to operate at maximum speed. "What they are proposing is a virgin route," said Peter Raine, former chief executive of Kent Wildlife Trust who advised on HS1. "You end up taking away habitat, ancient woodland that is 400 years old." The proposed route runs through three sites of scientific special interest, including a wetland nature reserve that is home to migrating birds. "People think it will be a normal railway," said Joe Rukin, of the campaign group Stop HS2. "But you're looking at something that is 25m (82ft) wide – almost six lanes of road – with a 25m no-vegetation zone either side, because the speed of the trains creates a wind vortex that will pick up any vegetation and drag it along. That makes it 75m wide. Wembley is only 69m wide." Marilyn Fletcher, of the Chiltern Countryside Group, said there were concerns about the impact on the River Misbourne, a chalk stream rich in wildlife. "The tunnel will go underneath it," she said. "If the river runs dry on account of the tunnelling it would affect protected species dependent on the river – great crested newt, otters, water vole, kingfisher and the brown trout. Ancient buildings – such as Hyde Farm and Chapel Farm near Hyde Heath – will also be destroyed." John Bercow, Buckingham's MP and speaker of the House of Commons, said the scheme failed to bring "any identifiable benefit to Bucks" and questioned the pro-line arguments by ministers. "They keep moving the goalposts from the business case to the national interest," Bercow said. "It just won't do." Cheryl Gillan, secretary of state for Wales, who represents Chesham and Amersham, has written to the transport secretary, Philip Hammond, urging him to publish a full assessment of the project's environmental impact on the Chilterns. She has asked the Environment Agency for a similar report. Campaigners are furious that the government will not publish the assessment before consultation begins early next year, saying the delay makes it difficult to put their case. Work is scheduled to start on the project, to which the government last week committed £750m, in 2015. A department for transport spokesperson said: "The government has been clear that it will publish the full appraisal of sustainability to inform the consultation early next year. However, this cannot be finalised until a final decision on the detailed route to be taken to consultation has been made." Rail transport Travel and transport Energy Jamie Doward guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

The experts are clear on how David Kelly died | Vikram Dodd Posted: 24 Oct 2010 09:00 AM PDT Not a single forensic pathologist has challenged the conclusions of the Hutton inquiry And so it goes on. Despite the release on Friday of the postmortem and toxicology reports into the death of the weapons inspector Dr David Kelly, the claims will continue. The Hutton inquiry into the factors leading to Kelly's death heard expert evidence and then concluded the weapons inspector had committed suicide. Not one single party to the inquiry, which was more thorough than any inquest would have been, offered any evidence to the contrary. The inquiry into the death in 2003 was vitriolic at times, and ended up with the BBC and Kelly family joining together in a savage battle against the government. I sat through Hutton's inquiry, and have sat through many inquests. Despite Hutton's baffling conclusion that the government bore no blame for pressurising Kelly, his was a more rigorous inquiry into the death than an inquest. But none of this has satisfied those determined to suggest something more malign was behind Kelly's demise. Over the years, as new claims have emerged, I have gone back to a group of experts who would be best placed to spot anything untoward, namely forensic pathologists. They are the experts in determining causes of death. What is striking is their consistency in saying the scientific evidence points to Hutton's inquiry having reached the right conclusion. The Hutton inquiry found that Kelly, 59, died after cutting an artery in his left wrist, had taken an overdose of Coproxamol painkillers and had heart disease which left his coronary arteries "significantly narrowed". The doubters, who some call conspiracy theorists, have failed in all the years to produce one single fact to support their claims. Experts in forensic pathology say that the doubts raised, including those by doctors, were based on partial knowledge or misconceptions. The critics have claimed that bleeding to death after cutting the ulnar artery was unlikely, and that evidence of large-scale blood loss at the scene was absent. Dr Andrew Falzon, a consultant forensic pathologist with the Forensic Science Service, said Kelly's heart disease and overdose of Coproxamol meant a smaller loss of blood could kill him than that required to kill a healthy person: "You are going to succumb to a smaller volume of blood loss than if you were a 20-year-old with a healthy heart. "The heart vessel is already deprived of oxygen because of the blockage of the vessels. With the loss of blood [caused by cutting the ulnar artery], there is less oxygen to the heart. Throw in the toxic level of drug, that makes the heart more sensitive to cardiac arrhythmia [an electrical disturbance] which causes sudden death. "I'm sure bleeding from the ulnar artery can kill you." Falzon also said the views of those not trained in forensic pathology, even if they are medically trained, needed to be treated with caution: "People who are not trained to look at causes of death will perceive things differently. It's hard for them to believe certain things can happen." Professor Peter Vanezis, senior consultant in forensic medicine to the armed forces, said: "These people are more clinicians and are obviously surprised that a person can kill themselves like that." Vanezis said the lack of large amounts of blood in the wood where Kelly was discovered could also be easily explained: "It was outside – it could have gone into the soil." Dr Andrew Davison, a forensic pathologist at Cardiff University, agreed: "You only have so much blood going around. If you have a heart condition you can't afford to lose as much blood as a healthy person." Professor Derrick Pounder, head of forensic medicine and forensic pathologist at the University of Dundee, said: "It may be that there are several factors in a death. In this case, we know he had taken more than a therapeutic dose of drugs, and that he had some pre-existing heart disease. We have three factors in the death that are known to the public. The cause of death is likely an interplay between the three." Professor Chris Milroy, now working in Canada, was a pathology professor at Sheffield University. He said: "I've seen nothing yet that proves anything other than Dr Kelly took his own life in the way the Hutton inquiry concluded, by cutting his wrists and taking an overdose." Kelly's heart condition made him unable to withstand loss of blood to the extent that a fit person could. The death was "multifactoral": due to the cut to his wrist, a toxic dose of drugs and heart disease. The Dextropropoxyphene he took was itself toxic to the heart. Milroy added: "It is difficult to estimate blood loss from looking at the scene." Paramedics have claimed there was a lack of blood at the scene where Kelly's body was discovered. Professor Guy Rutty, of Leicester University, said: "The blood could have gone straight into the ground." Both said paramedics were trained in saving lives, not in the forensic examination of scenes of death, which required a wholly different set of skills and expertise. The forensic pathologist who examined Kelly's body, Dr Nicholas Hunt, gave the formal cause of death as: "Haemorrhage due to incised wounds of the left wrist", in conjunction with "Coproxamol ingestion and coronary artery atherosclerosis". No expert in the field of forensic pathology has to date come forward to doubt that claim. Not one. David Kelly Forensic science Hutton report Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Compare the memoir: insurance meerkat's life story on sale Posted: 24 Oct 2010 08:49 AM PDT Aleksandr Orlov book 'to inspire the next generation of young businesskats' enters bestseller chart before release The preternatural decadence of Keith Richards, the confessional wit of Stephen Fry and the sexual candour of Tony Blair may have met their match in a small creature with a thick Russian accent and an infuriating line in catchphrases. Step forward Aleksandr Orlov: self-made insurance flogger and now meerkat-of-letters. The dapper Orlov – whose relentless pushing of the Compare the Market insurance website amuses and annoys in almost equal measure – has become the latest "celebrity" to unloose a memoir on the world. And while the autobiography is not published until Friday, it is already selling remarkably well. A Simples Life was this afternoon sitting at 92 in Amazon's 100 bestselling books, just above Derren Brown's Confessions of a Conjuror. According to the blurb, the tome will set its readers' whiskers aquiver with tales of how Orlov and his trusty sidekick conquered the world. "My story of struggles, successes and Sergei is the greatest, most thrillsy book ever written by a meerkat in the bath," explains Orlov. "With this book, I am hope to inspire the next generation of young businesskats. And with royalties I am hope to re-marble roof on Orlov family mansion. Please enjoyment." Quite who the book is aimed at remains something of a mystery, but the meerkat and his broken English are not without their fans: Orlov has 41,411 Twitter followers and 762,480 Facebook adherents. The best clues as to what sort of person might be tempted to fork out £9.99 for the fictional life story of an anthropomorphic, CGI mongoose-cousin are to be found on the Amazon website. Under the "Customers who bought this item also bought …" section are: Meery Meerkats Christmas Cards Pack, Grow Your Own Meerkat sponge, a 5.7cm standing Meerkat model and, most baffling of all, The Devil Rides Out by Paul O'Grady. Although A Simples Life is still lagging dozens of places behind Life: Keith Richards, The Fry Chronicles, and Blair's A Journey, its publishers are confident that their meerkat will hold his own when he goes paw-to-toe with the heavyweights in a few days' time. "As we contemplate further economic downturn and unprecedented public sector cuts sometimes the only salve is outright escapism," said Andrew Goodfellow, senior publishing director for Ebury Press. "In Aleksandr Orlov you have an fantastical but utterly convincing comic hero whose struggles we can all identify with. His ability to achieve his hopes and dreams despite himself are something to raise an unfettered smile whether you are eight or 80." Although some have accused the advertising icon of crude stereotyping, one Russian may have his own, rather more personal reasons for ruing the day Orlov put pen to paper. Publication is likely to make life still more difficult for Arsenal's diminutive Russian play-maker, Andrei Arshavin, whose team mates are rumoured to call him Meerkat because of apparent similarities between his accent and that of his made-up countryman. Orlov himself could not be reached for comment. Biography Insurance Sam Jones guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Co-operative Group considers sale of life assurance business Posted: 24 Oct 2010 08:30 AM PDT Co-op Group appoints Deutsche Bank as advisor on review of its insurance arm, which has policies worth around £18bn The Co-operative Group is considering the sale of its life assurance business, which has nearly three million customers in the UK, with policies worth around £18bn. The diverse group, whose interests range from supermarkets to banking, has appointed Deutsche Bank as an advisor on a strategic review of the insurance arm. It is understood the mutually owned group has received a number of expressions of interest since issuing an information memorandum, with would-be bidders including Resolution and Phoenix, the investment firms keen to consolidate the insurance industry. However, the Co-op has not entered into serious sale talks and has not ruled our retaining the unit. The insurance arm is housed within Co-operative Financial Services, which was created by a merger with the Britannia building society last year to form a business that now offers current accounts, mortgages, pensions and life insurance. The financial services business saw profits rise by 50% to top £75m in the first half of the year, but the figures were accompanied with a downbeat economic forecast from the group's chief executive. Peter Marks said conditions would not improve until 2011 "at the earliest". Co-op's travel arm has been the hardest hit, with profits falling by more than two-thirds to £400,000 in the first half following the volcanic eruption in Iceland. Group-wide pre-tax profits fell by 30% to £169.2m. Co-op has launched the review of its insurance business at a time when the insurance industry is a regular subject of takeover speculation. The Royal Bank of Scotland has begun vetting potential advisers over the potential sale of Direct Line, while RSA has bid for Aviva's UK, Irish and Canadian general insurance operations and Prudential scrapped a $35.5bn (£22.6bn) acquisition of AIA in Asia. The group has made some aggressive corporate moves in recent years, led by the Britannia merger and the £1.6bn takeover of Somerfield, a move that reinforced the Co-op's position as the UK's fifth largest grocery retailer with 3,000 stores in £7bn in annual sales. Although the newly acquired stores have missed sales targets, the group has countered criticism of the deal by boosting profits through accelerating cost cuts. Earlier this month Co-op merged its travel and foreign exchange business with Thomas Cook as the under-performing division was hit by weak consumer sentiment and tough competition as rivals scrambled to woo holidaymakers with cheap deals. Co-operative Group Insurance industry Banking Mergers and acquisitions Prudential Dan Milmo guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Freed submarine heads back to base Posted: 24 Oct 2010 06:42 AM PDT Nuclear-powered HMS Astute will undergo more checks after running aground off Isle of Skye, says MoD A nuclear-powered submarine that ran aground off the coast of Skye is making its way back to base for further checks today. HMS Astute became stuck during sea trials on Friday in a channel between the island and the Scottish mainland. The vessel remained there from 8am until around 6pm, when the tide turned and it was freed by a tug. The Ministry of Defence said checks on the sub's rudder, which is thought to have become stuck on a shingle bank, were carried out in deeper water. Astute – which is the UK's most powerful attack submarine – will now return to base at Faslane on the Clyde for further checks. An MoD spokesman said: "Surveys of Astute have now been completed and she will proceed to Faslane under her own power. She is being escorted by tugs and HMS Shoreham." The Royal Navy launched a service inquiry into why the 100-metre-long submarine ran aground in the channel between Skye and the Kyle of Lochalsh. The vessel is understood to have strayed several hundred yards outside the safe sea lane marked on admiralty charts. The MoD said the investigation into the incident would be "full and thorough" and would consider whether any crew were negligent. The submarine's skipper, Commander Andy Coles, could find himself facing a court martial. An MoD spokesman said it would be "inappropriate" to comment on the possibility of disciplinary action until the investigation was complete. It is believed a crew transfer from the shore to the submarine was being carried out when the incident happened. There were no reports of any injuries and the MoD said it was not a "nuclear incident". Military Scotland guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Tony Blair's sister-in-law converts to Islam Posted: 24 Oct 2010 06:25 AM PDT Iran trip prompted journalist Lauren Booth to become a Muslim and wear a hijab Tony Blair's sister-in-law has converted to Islam after having what she describes as a "holy experience" during a visit to Iran. Journalist and broadcaster Lauren Booth, 43 – Cherie Blair's sister – now wears a hijab whenever she leaves her home, prays five times a day and visits her local mosque whenever she can. She decided to become a Muslim six weeks ago after visiting the shrine of Fatima al-Masumeh in the city of Qom. "It was a Tuesday evening and I sat down and felt this shot of spiritual morphine, just absolute bliss and joy," she said in an interview today. When she returned to Britain, she decided to convert immediately. Booth – who works for Press TV, the English-language Iranian news channel – has stopped eating pork and reads the Qur'an every day. She is currently on page 60. Booth has stopped drinking alcohol and says she has not wanted to drink since converting. Before her spiritual awakening in Iran, she had been "sympathetic" to Islam and has spent considerable time working in Palestine, she said, adding that she hoped her conversion would help Blair change his presumptions about Islam. Tony Blair Islam Religion Iran Middle East Television industry Helen Carter guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Brixton: regeneration or gentrification? | Philip Dayle Posted: 24 Oct 2010 05:00 AM PDT It's ironic: Brixton, like Harlem in New York, is feted as a cultural hub just as its identity as a black neighbourhood dissolves I have always felt that Brixton, London is the centre of the world for people of colour. Now that London's Heritage Lottery Fund and Lord Mayor have unveiled a plan to build the UK's black cultural archives there at a cost of £5m, I have even more reason to think so. A collage of ethnicities form on Brixton's high street in the middle of any given day. As a newly-minted immigrant from Jamaica, it was here that I first saw a woman in a hijab driving a doubledecker bus. This is the site of Amy Winehouse's tryst in her song "Me and Mr Jones". Brixton: a veritable metropolis for south London's outer boroughs and neighbouring inner cities. Brixton bears the weight of a chequered history – notoriously, for race-related riots in the 1980s. The names of streets – Coldharbour Lane, Electric Avenue, Acre Lane, to name a few – carry an edginess that captures the stories of generations of Brixtonians. The themes have remained consistent through the years: from Coldharbour Lane describing basic accommodation offered to rough travellers in the 1800s; to Electric Avenue conveying the excitement of being the first street to be lit by electricity in London. This is an area that is defined by progressive change alongside material deprivation. If that vibe is endemic, it is perhaps not surprising that Brixton became a popular home for the first set of African and Caribbean immigrants who sailed to the UK on the Empire Windrush in 1940s, as well as for succeeding generations. Over the years, it has borne all the contradictions of immigrant communities – unemployment and high levels of crime, with wells of creative brilliance. For many outside looking in, Brixton seems like the unpredictable distant cousin.    The BBC reported this summer that Prince Charles and Camilla visited Brixton market – recently named a listed building of historical interest. The royal couple would have missed a face of the neighbourhood that would not be evident in a midday visit during the business day. They wouldn't have seen the clumps of suited City types who barrel into the subway in the morning, to return at night; and the spattering of early evening joggers darting pass couples walking ornamental dogs on their way to Brockwell park. Predominantly white and middle-class, the newest residents are the face of a resurgent Brixton, who are mostly taking advantage of the area's proximity to the city. As property prices soared in London's last boom, many homeowners in the area sold and moved further south into the suburbs. The pattern of homeownership has changed dramatically – in favour of the more affluent.   Comparisons with New York City's Harlem are, therefore, appropriate. Both Harlem and Brixton are alike for their large black populations and historical significance. They both have seen periods as a sought-after cultural centre, as well as decades of social and economic decline. The decision by President Clinton to make Harlem the home for his post-presidency office and foundation, and the attendant rise in property values in the area – pricing out many of the neighbourhood's longstanding African American residents – has become emblematic of the gentrification debate. Does it matter when increased commercial activity leads to radical changes in the ethnic and cultural makeup of communities?    I moved out of Brixton last week, further south into a neighbouring suburb. The recession, and redundancy, made it prudent for me to find a flat elsewhere. One morning about a month ago, as I raced toward the underground – the smell of incense wafting in the air and a street preacher blaring the news of the next coming of Jesus Christ – I looked up to see a fully operational Starbucks coffee shop. It had sprung up so quickly: people were milling around inside as if it had always been there. If there was ever any doubt that Brixton's gentrification is well-advanced, the argument had just closed. I smiled wistfully and descended into the subway.   It would be ironic if Brixton's recognition as an iconic black space in Britain comes just at the point when there is a mass exodus of its black residents. London Race issues New York Property United States Immigration and asylum Philip Dayle guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

WikiLeaks Iraq war logs: Nick Clegg calls for investigation of abuse claims Posted: 24 Oct 2010 04:45 AM PDT Any suggestions that the rules of war have been broken or torture condoned are 'extremely serious', says deputy PM Allegations of killings, torture and abuse in Iraq contained in leaked US military logs "need to be looked at", Nick Clegg said today. The deputy prime minister said any suggestion that the rules of war had been broken or torture had been condoned were "extremely serious". The almost 400,000 secret US army field reports show two cases of alleged involvement of British troops in the abuse of detainees. Clegg did not rule out the possibility of an inquiry into the actions of British forces in Iraq, but said it was up to the US administration to answer for the actions of its forces. His comments contrasted with a statement from the Ministry of Defence yesterday, which warned that the posting of classified US military logs on the WikiLeaks website could endanger the lives of British forces. Clegg told BBC1's The Andrew Marr Show: "We can bemoan how these leaks occurred, but I think the nature of the allegations made are extraordinarily serious. They are distressing to read about and they are very serious. I am assuming the US administration will want to provide its own answer. It's not for us to tell them how to do that." Asked if there should be an inquiry into the role of British troops, he said: "I think anything that suggests that basic rules of war, conflict and engagement have been broken or that torture has been in any way condoned are extremely serious and need to be looked at." He added: "People will want to hear what the answer is to what are very, very serious allegations of a nature which I think everybody will find quite shocking." Vince Cable, the business secretary, also said allegations of abuse should be investigated and criticised the way in which they were leaked. He told Sky News Sunday Live: "The Liberal Democrats were strong opponents of the Iraq war and we do feel vindicated by what's happening." He added: "I think there have been several investigations already but I think, clearly, if there have been abuses taking place they need to be investigated – that's obvious enough." British involvement in the alleged torture and unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians may also be the subject of legal action. Lawyers said the reports embroiled British as well as US forces in an alleged culture of abuse and extrajudicial killings in Iraq. Phil Shiner, of Public Interest Lawyers, appearing alongside the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at a press conference in London yesterday, said some of the deaths documented in the reports may have involved British forces and could now go through the UK courts. The Iraq war logs, Shiner said, indicated that British as well as US commanders were likely to have ignored evidence of torture by the Iraqi authorities, contrary to international law. "Some of these deaths will be in circumstances where the UK have a very clear legal responsibility. This may be because the Iraqis died while under the effective control of UK forces – under arrest, in vehicles, helicopters or detention facilities," he said. The Ministry of Defence said the publication of the records was reckless and put the lives of British military personnel in danger, adding that it investigated any allegations made against British troops. It said: "There is no place for mistreatment of detainees. Any civilian casualty is a matter of deep regret and we take any incidents extremely seriously." As Assange defended the decision to disclose the documents – saying it was of "immense importance" to reveal the truth about the conflict – the UN warned that if the logs pointed to clear violations of the UN convention against torture, Barack Obama's administration had a clear obligation to investigate them. Manfred Novak, the UN special rapporteur on torture, said: "President Obama came to power with a moral agenda, saying we don't want to be seen to be a nation responsible for major human rights violations." A failure to investigate credible claims of complicity in torture, Novak suggested, would be a failure of the Obama government to recognise US obligations under international law. The US defence department condemned the WikiLeaks release, describing the documents as raw observations by tactical units, which were only snapshots of tragic, mundane events. Assange said the snapshots of everyday events offered a glimpse at the "human scale" of the conflict. He told the news conference his motive for the disclosure was "about the truth". Iraq Body Count, a private British-based group that has tracked the number of Iraqi civilians killed since the war began in 2003, said its analysis of the logs had raised its total of civilian deaths from 107,369 to more than 122,000. IBC, which worked with WikiLeaks, said the war logs showed there were more than 109,000 violent deaths between 2004 and the end of 2009. They included 66,081 civilians, 23,984 people classed as "enemy", 15,196 members of the Iraqi security forces, and 3,771 coalition troops. John Sloboda of IBC said: "They [the documents] show the relentless grind of daily killings in almost every town or village in every province." WikiLeaks yesterday promised to publish 15,000 more documents about the war in Afghanistan. Iraq: The war logs Iraq Nick Clegg Defence policy Military WikiLeaks Jonathan Haynes Mark Townsend Jamie Doward Paul Harris guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Three killed in helicopter crash Posted: 24 Oct 2010 03:22 AM PDT Pilot and two passengers from south-east England were in Northern Ireland for day of shooting Three men from south-east England died in a helicopter crash in the scenic Mourne mountain range in Northern Ireland, police confirmed today. The dead are understood to have been the pilot and two passengers who were in the province for a day of shooting in Co Fermanagh. The Police Service of Northern Ireland said it was liaising with the Metropolitan police about contacting the bereaved families. Air accident investigators spent the day at the crash scene, near an isolated beauty spot between the village of Hilltown and Rostrevor town. The eight-seater Agusta helicopter, which is believed to have taken off from Enniskillen, crashed at about 4pm on Saturday in an area known locally as Leitrim Lodge, a popular picnic area for visitors to the Mournes. Mountain rescue teams, the ambulance service and fire and rescue all attended the scene after locals reported that a helicopter was seen in distress. The South Down MP Margaret Ritchie said she was "very saddened" to hear of the crash and the deaths. "The majestic beauty of the Mournes contrasts with the starkness of this tragedy. On behalf of the people of South Down and those I represent, I offer my deepest and most heartfelt sympathies to the families of the bereaved at this most tragic time," the MP said. Michelle Gildernew, the Sinn Fein MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone, which covers Enniskillen, said: "This is a shocking and tragic accident and my sympathies go out at this time to the families of those who have lost their lives." The Mournes area is internationally renowned for its picturesque scenery. CS Lewis modelled the fictional kingdom of Narnia on his childhood recollections of trips there. The mountain range, set on the coastline of south Co Down overlooking the Irish Sea, is designated as an area of outstanding natural beauty. The highest mountain, Slieve Donard, is nearly 3,000ft high. Locals reported yesterday that the weather around the Mournes was fine with plenty of visibility. The helicopter crash is the latest in a series of accidents that have caused multiple deaths in the area. In June last year three men were killed when their light aircraft crashed into a field near a private landing strip at Kilkeel, Co Down. Jim Wells, a Democratic Unionist assembly member who lives in the Mournes, said he saw the helicopter prior to it crashing. "The one thing I did notice was there was a very unusual noise coming from the engine. I don't know if that is in any way related to the tragedy but certainly it would seem that about half an hour later the helicopter came down at the other end of the Mournes," he said. Northern Ireland Air transport Henry McDonald guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

No, we don't 'understand' surveillance reversal | Wendy M Grossman Posted: 24 Oct 2010 03:00 AM PDT The revival of a surveillance programme by the coalition makes its promises to safeguard personal privacy sound hollow "They were only political promises," says Bernard Woolley, attempting to comfort Jim Hacker in the 1984 Party Games episode of Yes, Minister. "It's like your manifesto promises. People understand." Do we really? Do we really "understand" all that calmly why a £2bn interception modernisation programme is to be revived? This is the plan to store all the nation's telecommunications traffic data in a sort of giant shed where it can be sifted, mined and surveilled by law enforcement. Here's the money quote from the government's strategic defence and security review: "… introduce a programme to preserve the ability of the security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies to obtain communication data and to intercept communications within the appropriate legal framework. This programme is required to keep up with changing technology and to maintain capabilities that are vital to the work these agencies do to protect the public." The next paragraph nods to being "compatible with the government's approach to information storage and civil liberties". To be sure. There are three categories of objection to IMP: technical, civil libertarian and financial. The first is simple: when you create a giant database on a national scale you create a single point of vulnerability. At the same moment that both UK and US top-level security people are warning of the escalation of organised cyberattacks and the need to build more resilient infrastructures, the review proposes the opposite. The technical and civil liberties objections have been carefully and thoroughly laid out by, among others, the distinguished American scientists Whitfield Diffie and Susan Landau in their book Privacy on the Line: The Politics of Wiretapping and Encryption, which documents the concomitant growth of surveillance and telecommunications. What IMP (and the also-proposed installation of deep packet inspection equipment at ISPs) enables is not just wiretapping but very specifically warrantless wiretapping. These points have been made over and over again, not least by the security engineer Ross Anderson, who's had a lot to say about this latest revival. It's the financial arguments that should be really exercising people right now. Spending £2bn over 10 years on IMP (see the LSE's detailed analysis) makes no contribution to social welfare and no investment that might pay off in terms of new jobs and new industries in the future. Is IMP really worth £2bn more than science research, education, public transport, or libraries? Suppose instead the money were spent on researching and building more decentralised structures that would be harder to attack. Wouldn't that be a better idea than enabling surveillance that 99% of the time will be directed at the innocent, creating huge amounts of useless data that will have to be sifted through to get at anything that will be useful in terms of intelligence? I know Nick Clegg knows better; only last March he spoke forcefully at the 20th birthday party for Privacy International about the importance of safeguarding personal privacy. But the Conservatives, too, were elected on the promise of turning back surveillance. Do we "understand" this reversal? Not so much. Surveillance Privacy Wendy M Grossman guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

George Osborne 'exaggerated debt crisis risk' says Nobel laureate Posted: 24 Oct 2010 02:04 AM PDT Economist Christopher Pissarides says chancellor's swingeing cuts package is taking unnecessary risks with economy George Osborne was accused today by Britain's new Nobel prize-winning economist of having "exaggerated" the risk of a Greek-style debt crisis. Professor Christopher Pissarides said that the prospects of a sovereign debt crisis hitting Britain - used by the chancellor to justify his spending cuts - were "minimal". In an article for the Sunday Mirror, he warned that Osborne's swingeing cuts package, announced last week in the Commons, was taking "unnecessary risks" with the economy. The chancellor has said drastic action to tackle the deficit was necessary to avoid a Greek-style collapse in investor confidence, leaving Britain facing punitive interest rates to finance its borrowing. However, Pissarides said he believed that the chancellor had overstated the dangers. "It is important to avoid this 'sovereign risk'. But in my view Britain is a long way from such a threat, and the chancellor has exaggerated the sovereign risks that are threatening the country," he said. Osborne should have been more concerned about the current weakness of the UK economy, he said. "Unemployment is high and job vacancies few. By taking the action that the chancellor outlined in his statement, this situation might well become worse," he said. "These risks were not necessary at this point. He could have outlined a clear deficit-reduction plan over the next five years, postponing more of the cuts, until recovery became less fragile. "The 'sovereign risk' would have been minimal." His comments were echoed by Labour leaders Ed Miliband who accused the government of driving through big cuts for ideological reasons. "Of course the deficit is high and needs to be brought down. Our approach, based on halving it over four years, would bring it down every year," he said in an article for the Observer. "But the idea that we are about to go bankrupt is pure political spin to justify a familiar ideological project of a smaller state." In his latest podcast on the No 10 website, David Cameron acknowledged that the country faced a "hard road", but insisted that the measures to tackle the deficit were essential. "I don't underestimate how difficult this will be. But we are doing what we are doing because it is the right thing to do – right by our economy, right for our country," he said. "We had to bring some responsibility back to public spending because if we didn't, Britain was looking down the barrel of economic ruin." The prime minister said he was committed to ensuring the cuts were administered in a way that was "fair" while at the same time focusing what resources were available on boosting entrepreneurship and wealth creation. "We didn't just do the right thing, we did it the right way. We've gone about these spending cuts in a way that is fair and in a way that promotes economic growth and new jobs," he said. "Fair because if you look at the figures, you'll see the highest earners aren't just paying more in cash, they are paying more as a percentage of their income. As we promised, those with broader shoulders are bearing a greater burden." His comments reflect the acute sensitivity within the coalition to accusations that Osborne's spending review, announced on Wednesday, would hit the poor hardest. Analysis by the respected Institute for Fiscal Studies found that – apart from the richest 2%, who would be caught by tax rises announced under Labour – the burden of cuts would fall disproportionately on the poorest. Spending review 2010 George Osborne Tax and spending Economic policy guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Couples bid to overturn gay marriage law Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:34 PM PDT Peter Tatchell plans legal challenge in campaign by gay and mixed-sex couples calling for the same type of union A campaign to overturn the bans on gay marriage and heterosexual civil partnerships is to begin next month when eight couples will file applications at British register offices for ceremonies they are presently not allowed to hold. Four same-sex couples will apply for civil marriage and four heterosexual couples for civil partnerships. Each week, up to 14 December, one of the eight couples will make an application. The campaign's co-ordinator, Peter Tatchell, said there was growing political party support for an end to the bans as well as public support for same-sex couples. "Our aim is to overturn both the ban on same-sex marriage and the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships. "If they are refused, as we expect they will be, we plan to mount a legal challenge. We believe these bans violate the Human Rights Act and are open to challenge in the high court," said Tatchell, of the lesbian and gay rights campaign group, OutRage! "Civil marriages and civil partnerships should be open to everyone without discrimination." The Rev Sharon Ferguson, 52, and her partner, Franka Strietzel, 49, will be the first couple to lodge an application, at Greenwich register office in London. "A civil partnership doesn't feel comfortable for me; it doesn't fit. We want a marriage – that is the institution we believe was divined by God and for me that is important, and I don't see why we should be denied it because of our gender," said the Metropolitan church minister. "We have a double system and we shouldn't have. That isn't equality. Love is love at the end of the day and that should be honoured." A Populus opinion poll in June 2009 found that 61% of the public believed that, "gay couples should have an equal right to get married, not just to have civil partnerships". Gay rights Peter Tatchell Marriage Tracy McVeigh guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Fable III's epic cast takes video games to a new level Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:15 PM PDT Zoë Wanamaker and Stephen Fry among household names whose voiceovers appear on new British game Ben Kingsley, Michael Fassbender, Zoë Wanamaker, Bernard Hill, Simon Pegg, John Cleese and Stephen Fry are all on the cast list and the 20-track original score is performed by a national symphony orchestra. It sounds like the cinematic event of the year, yet this epic tale will never be seen on stage or screen. Instead, the ensemble cast of more than 80 actors and voice talents makes up the characters of Fable III – one of the most eagerly awaited video games of the year in an industry that is gradually acquiring some cachet among the stars. Securing the Oscar-winner Kingsley in his first video game voiceover role was perhaps the biggest coup, although the publishers have yet to reveal whether they needed a blockbuster-sized budget to bring the cast together. "I'd say it was less than you would pay for an animated film," said Georg Backer, audio producer at game makers Lionheart Studios, and the man responsible for bringing the acting talent to the studio. "A lot has been spent but sales expectations are high. It took six months from start to finish and by the end more than 470,000 words had been spoken. We had a list of people who we thought would be perfect for the roles, and went to the agents to sell the story to them. Fable III is quintessentially British with its issues of monarchy, taxation, rebellion and charming humour so it was much easier to sell this to British talent." Kingsley, who plays Sabine, the leader of the mountain-dwellers, said: "This is my first experience voicing a video game, so what drew me to it was the team, how committed they are, how well organised everything is and how beautiful the game is." The Observer's video games editor, Giles Richards, said work by Peter Molyneux, the creative director at Fable's publishers Microsoft Games Studios, could be placed alongside modern film auteurs such as Michael Haneke. "The world that he has created is so rich, so believable and so gloriously detailed it's hard not to be enthralled by it. But it's also cinematic, epic and homely all at once – little wonder that Brit acting talent would want to be involved. The roles fit our actors as Ealing once did: clever, witty and idiosyncratic, they recognise in Molyneux an auteur at the height of his game," he said. Simon Pegg, who plays a soldier always looking for a fight, said it was a unique project to work on. "One of the things that is missing from a lot of video games is good writing and good voice work. I think this one has a wonderful mythology and it's witty and it's engrossing," he explained. By Friday advanced sales for Fable III, released in the US on Tuesday and in Europe on Friday, had catapulted it to the top of Amazon.com's games chart. In the past year, more A-listers have lent their voices to the games industry with Mickey Rourke leading the way. As the voice of Richard "Demo Dick" Marcinko in last year's Rogue Warrior, Rourke said he was exploring a whole new realm of entertainment. Games as big as Fable III now have launch days on a par with Hollywood blockbusters as the internet buzzes with chat. "The first Fable game was the reason I bought my Xbox," one blogger said. "It was and continues to be a groundbreaking. series." Games Stephen Fry Simon Pegg Game culture Paul Gallagher guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Exodus over women bishops: what will Rowan Williams do next? Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:14 PM PDT The Archbishop of Canterbury says the problem is not whether or not to have women bishops, but what to do with those Anglicans who disapprove but don't want to leave the church News that fewer than 50 Anglicans are converting to Roman Catholicism has set cassocks twitching, leading to talk of an exodus and an earthquake in the Church of England and what the ramifications are for the archbishop of Canterbury, who is only ever described as besieged, beleaguered, embattled or all three. The reality, for the seasoned observer anyway, is less exciting. True, the defections are significant. They indicate enthusiasm, however modest in the first instance, for a Vatican initiative unveiled last year – an enclave within the Roman Catholic church for those wishing to convert while retaining some Anglican traditions. They should also mark the beginning of the end of an agonising, inexorable and voluble struggle over the ordination of women to the priesthood. There are clergy and parishioners in the Church of England who want nothing to do with ordained women and the men who have ordained them and they have sought spiritual leadership from flying bishops, men who have neither ordained women nor been "tainted" by their ministry. But these arrangements will come to an end when, in around five years' time, women finally break through the stained-glass ceiling to don a mitre. The legislation allowing them to become bishops is crawling through a consultation and revision process. But opponents claim it offers no protection from female leadership and it is this perceived omission that led the Bishop of Fulham to be first to leap into the Tiber, declaring the Church of England's governing body to be "vindictive, vicious and fascist". It is worth pointing out the sky has not fallen in because of the departure of more than 500 clergy since the 1990s, when women entered the priesthood, receiving payouts totalling £27.4m. Some of them even returned to the fold. In 2008, around 1,300 clergy threatened to leave if the general synod removed legal obstacles barring the ordination of women as bishops. Earlier this year, one traditionalist estimated the figure would be around 200. This time, however, there is no financial compensation for exiting clergy and Catholic pensions and stipends are far less generous than Anglican ones. Nobody knows how the new enclave will work or what it will offer in terms of housing. There could also be protracted disputes over property ownership. Unsurprisingly, given the levels of uncertainty surrounding the Vatican offer, the number of serving clergy who have thus far announced their intention to convert is two. Against a backdrop of fighting talk there is activity elsewhere, as there are more traditionalists who wish to stay in the Church of England than leave it. They are trying their utmost to find a way of avoiding female leadership by launching splinter groups and wooing bishops for support. Failing that, they want to scupper the legislation by voting against it in 2012. In all affairs Anglican, the most intriguing aspect is what Rowan Williams, pictured, will do next. He spent the last week in India, marvelling at the country's ability to embrace religious pluralism and giving remarkably candid interviews to the local press. He regrets the Bishop of Fulham is leaving the Church of England – and the language he chose to announce his resignation. But in his mind, there is still something to play for. He told the Hindu: "That's been the most difficult question: not whether or not we have women bishops but what will be the provisions made for the minority. This last summer, the synod declined to accept the suggestions made by the archbishops and I understand their reasons. But it's left us with quite a lot of work to try and do our best for that group as well as honouring the calling of women to the Episcopate. We are still trying to find a fair accommodation for people of his [the bishop's] conviction." With members of general synod and beyond rattling their sabres in the run-up to the crucial vote in 2012, ordinary churchgoers will no doubt continue to be perplexed, if not annoyed, by the energy, intellect and resources devoted to a single issue. Anglicanism Rowan Williams Catholicism Christianity Religion Riazat Butt guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Out of the madness of 7/7 emerge lessons in how to face terrorism | Henry Porter Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:08 PM PDT The modest stories of bravery deserve the respect of politicians passing laws purporting to protect us On the day of the 7 July bombings, I came across a man on London's Edgware Road whom I recognised as a Muslim fundamentalist from a stall near Marble Arch, where he regularly handed out leaflets. It was about three hours after the bomb had exploded on a train near Edgware tube station and he was making an impromptu speech to a knot of passersby about the CIA plot to blow up the Twin Towers and other such lunacies. He was a small, energetic character who was more than happy to argue with anyone on the subject of Muslim persecution in his distinct northern accent. The only thing that stopped him in his flow that morning was when two senior police officers pushed through the little crowd to make sure we weren't threatening him in any way, a moment which I wrote later seemed a reassuring sign that whatever our reaction to the bombings our society would continue to allow free speech. I saw him several times more at his usual pitch. Then he disappeared. It turned out he was Mohammed Hamid, a key figure in the lives of the men who tried to blow themselves up two weeks later on 21 July. In 2008, he was jailed indefinitely. The bumptious guy I had argued with in the street was the head of a network that spotted and groomed potential terrorists. He had urged men to carry out even bigger attacks and at his trial he was reported as saying that 7/7 was "not even a breakfast for me". That sounded very much like Mohammed. Only with the inquest into the deaths of the 52 victims have we really understood the full horror that occurred in London that day, and even after all this time it gives me pause to think what one human being is prepared to do another or, in Mohammed's case, advocate being done, in the name of a cause that he could only express in a stream of slogans and fantasy. The picture emerging is not entirely heroic. Some passengers stopped to take pictures of the dead and wounded. At Aldgate, where Shehzad Tanweer detonated a bomb on the Circle Line, firemen were incredibly slow to enter the tunnel. Michael Henning, then a broker from Kensington, recalled his anger at seeing three groups of fire fighters standing idle. He said: "There were people who may have survived if they had got urgent medical response there... some of them died in agony for 20, 30, 40 minutes: at least they should have had the dignity of having some morphine." But the accounts of the reactions of Dr Gerardine Quaghebeur, a passenger on that train, and a man named Steven Desborough are extraordinary. They stayed behind in the filth and darkness to look after, among others, a 24-year-old woman named Carrie Taylor, who died from dreadful injuries before she was taken out of the tunnel. And there is the off-duty police officer Elizabeth Kenworthy, who is credited with saving the lives of Andrew Brown and Martine Wiltshire by applying tourniquets to their leg injuries. Ms Wiltshire lost both legs; Mr Brown lost one. But they survived because Ms Kenworthy did all she could for them, while setting aside her own shock and suppressing the instinct to flee. The inquest evidence is more impressive than anything that came out of the more recent subterranean drama – the release of the trapped Chilean miners – and I found myself wishing that the 21/7 bombers and Mohammed Hamid had been compelled to listen to the witnesses appearing at the coroner's court last week, because this kind of violence can only be carried out by people who have no imagination or whose feelings have been cauterised by fanaticism, neither of which may be an irredeemable condition. Five years on, the victims and helpers show the most remarkable fortitude in the way they have repaired their lives and got on with the business of living. They have struggled while, as a society, we have wrestled with the problem of how to defend ourselves against the moral corruption so exuberantly voiced by Mohammed Hamid that day. The immediate reaction of the Blair government was in many ways understandable: detention without trial, control orders, stop-and-search powers, mass surveillance and intrusion and the banning of fundamentalist organisations. But gradually it has become clear that we went too far, which is why the home secretary Theresa May ordered a review of all terror legislation in July, promising to put right failures and "restore ancient civil liberties". This was good news, but the longer new ministers are in power the more protective they are likely to feel and the more inclined they are to heed the warnings of the intelligence services and police, which have noticeably increased over the last month. It is also known that the Crown Prosecution Service opposes the lifting of 28-day detention without charge and control orders and has been lobbying for the retention of both; a similar case has been made by the police and the security service. Ahead of the terror laws review by the former DPP, Lord Macdonald, an indication of the government's mood came in the strategic defence and security review published last week, where, in an obscure passage, it was announced that the Home Office was reviving a plan to track the email, text, internet and mobile phone details of everyone. The pretext for this is the terrorist threat, but it flies against the coalition agreement, which in section 10 promises "an ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason". Presumably the coalition calculated that in the week of the comprehensive spending review this would not be noticed or that the details of the inquest would silence objections. Whatever the reason, this is unacceptable in a democracy. What is interesting is that in the Labour party there are signs of an equal and opposite reaction. The longer politicians are out of power the more perspective they seem to gain. Ed Miliband has murmured his regret about steps taken against liberty under Tony Blair, while the former counterterrorism minister Tony McNulty used the pretext of the inquest to recommend an end to control orders and the reduction of the maximum period a person can be held without charge from 28 to 14 days, which is proof, if nothing else, that wisdom is sometimes granted to those in opposition. "The balance between protecting the public and upholding Britain's liberal traditions," as he put it, is still one of the hardest things to get right. Five years on, I would like to hear the thoughts of such heroic individuals as Mr Henning, Dr Quaghebeur, Mr Desborough, Mr Brown, Ms Wiltshire and Ms Kenworthy. I was above ground that day talking to a fantasist; they were below dealing with reality of a terrorist attack. 7 July London attacks Terrorism policy UK Civil liberties Police UK security and terrorism Henry Porter guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Two reported dead as helicopter crashes in Northern Ireland Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT Helicopter comes down at beauty spot in the Mourne mountains in rain and mist Several people were feared dead in a helicopter crash in Northern Ireland last night. Jim Wells, a member of the Stormont assembly, said he believed there had been a number of fatalities in the air accident in the Mourne mountains. It is understood that at least two people died in the incident. Wells said that the crash happened in an area of the Co Down beauty spot known locally as Leitrim Lodge, between the villages of Hilltown and Rostrevor. Eyewitnesses reported that an aircraft had appeared to be in distress on Saturday. Last night the Police Service of Northern Ireland confirmed that the aircraft involved in the accident had been a helicopter. Local MP and SDLP leader Margaret Ritchie said there had been heavy rain and mist in the Mournes on Saturday. "This is a terrible reality, almost too difficult to comprehend and we can only imagine it is all too real and awful for the families bereaved," she said. "I'm in no doubt that the people of South Down will stand in solidarity with those that have lost loved ones and the survivors of this most terrible tragedy." The PSNI is leading a search operation assisted by the Mourne mountain rescue team. A police spokesperson said that the Air Accident Investigation Authority had been informed. Northern Ireland Air transport Henry McDonald guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Royal Mail privatisation threatens rural post offices, warn opponents Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT John Denham joins critics of plans to privatise the Royal Mail, saying radical changes could spell disaster for country branches Thousands of rural and urban post offices will be under threat of closure as a result of government plans to privatise Royal Mail, John Denham, the shadow business secretary, will warn this week. The Labour MP will say that the Post Office network depends on Royal Mail for 30% of its income, which is currently guaranteed as a result of a £150m public subsidy each year and an agreement known as the Inter Business Arrangement. But Denham will tell MPs that there is no guarantee this will continue once Royal Mail becomes a separate entity. "The business that Royal Mail brings to the Post Office is vital to the future of local post offices but the privatisation bill does not set out any mechanism for guaranteeing this. And the Inter Business Agreement which brings Royal Mail business to the Post Office could end the moment Royal Mail is sold," he said. "The Post Office minister, Ed Davey, confirmed in a briefing with MPs on the bill on 20 October that the government would have nothing to do with the IBA and it would be entirely down to relations between the Post Office and Royal Mail. "A supermarket chain could turn to a privatised Royal Mail and say we could provide 'post offices' to Royal Mail more cheaply than Post Office Ltd by excluding as many loss-making areas as possible. This would be a disaster for rural and non-profitable urban post offices." Currently the Post Office is wholly owned by Royal Mail, but the two will be separated as a result of the Postal Services Bill. Gregg McClymont, Labour MP for Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East, attended the meeting with Davey. He said the minister had expressed confidence that Royal Mail would maintain the contract with post offices without government intervention. "I am surprised at his confidence that the IBA will continue because there are major questions about the relationship between the Post Office and Royal Mail under the new system," McClymont said. "My fear is that they are rushing this through without anyone having the chance to stop and think of the post offices." The MP said Davey had promised there would be no "programme of closures" but argued that post offices would not survive without the guaranteed business. "The market rules they are creating will lead to the post office closures," he added. George Thomson, general secretary of the National Federation of SubPostmasters, said he feared that most post offices would be unable to continue without a 10-year IBA. Any less than that would be "catastrophic", with a deal of half that length meaning "falling off a cliff" in five years. "The majority of postmasters would go out of business," he said. However, others argued that Royal Mail would never break its tie with the Post Office, because of the strength and popularity of the brand. A Royal Mail source said: "It is unthinkable that there won't always be a very strong relationship between the post offices and Royal Mail – both are of crucial importance to each other." Royal Mail Postal service Privatisation Economic policy John Denham Anushka Asthana guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Ed Miliband: 'David Cameron wants a return to the days of Tory arrogance' Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT For Thatcher, inflation was the only yardstick. Now the coalition is obsessed with the deficit This was the week that took the compassion out of David Cameron's claim to compassionate Conservatism. In fact, it was a week that had a feel that my generation and his remember: back to the 1980s. First, the old argument that there is no alternative has reappeared. No cut is too deep, no reduction in spending too large. If we don't act as the government says, they claim Britain will go the way of Greece. No matter that in every major respect – size of debt ratio, history of debt default, levels of growth – the government took over an economy totally different from Greece. In fact, Britain entered the recession with the second lowest level of debt in the G7, the economy was growing strongly when we left office, and the fiscal deficit was actually £10bn lower than forecast in the March budget. Of course the deficit is high and needs to be brought down. Our approach, based on halving it over four years, would bring it down every year. But the idea that we are about to go bankrupt is pure political spin to justify a familiar ideological project of a smaller state. Second, just as in the 1980s, the government has reduced its economic policy to one objective. For the early 80s monetarist claim about inflation being the only measure of economic success, now read the 2010s claim that the deficit is the only thing that matters. Any plan for deficit reduction must be part of a plan for economic growth. But all the government offers are cuts which will put half a million public servants out of work and the same number at risk in the private sector, as firms that rely on government contracts feel the squeeze. Beyond the immediate threats to employment, where is the long-term plan for growth and the jobs of the future? Last week we discovered that 190,000 students who want to go into higher education were turned away. Employment programmes for the young unemployed are being cut, as is support for new industries. Just as the Tories created a lost generation in the 1980s, so we see the same risk today. Third, what about fairness? The Institute for Fiscal Studies blows apart the government's claims and says that the changes being made are regressive: hitting poorer households on average more than richer ones. It is not just the poor who have been targeted. Families with kids are amongst the biggest losers, and despite being lower paid women lose more than men. What about the apparent rays of light? We should welcome an idea like the pupil premium in education, but overall there will be sharp cuts in spending on nine out of ten secondary school pupils. And some things being done are way beyond what was attempted in the 1980s. What does it mean to cut a local authority budget by a quarter? This scale of reduction will go deep into the heart of services that people rely on: the local library, meals on wheels or the local leisure centre. The arrogant ideological swagger of the 1980s is back, too. The Conservative MPs waving their order papers with apparent joy at the largest spending cuts in a generation. The belief that statistics about fairness can be manipulated without people wising up. And the claim to certainty about our economic prospects in an uncertain world. But the deepest problem is the pessimism that pervades David Cameron's political project. He has made deficit reduction the judge and jury of everything he stands for. Not building a good economy, not creating a society where people's kids get on, not championing a better environment. We could have had a different spending review. We could have ensured that we raised more money from the banks that caused the crisis than from cuts in child benefit. With a more measured pace of deficit reduction, there would still have been difficult decisions and cuts. But we would have done more to support the economy, defend frontline services and protect those in need. Will they get away with the gamble? I don't believe people are up for a dangerous and reckless gamble with our economic future. It is up to people of all political persuasions who fear for Britain's society and our economy to stand up and commit to protect not just our values and ideals but the basics of our social and economic fabric. Ed Miliband is leader of the Labour party Spending review 2010 Tax and spending Margaret Thatcher Recession Economics Ed Miliband guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Councils 'walk away' from provision of pest control services Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT Environmental health fears rise as growing number of authorities fail to offer services crucial to fighting pests and pest-related diseases One in 10 councils no longer offers pest control services, a tenfold increase over seven years. The rise has sparked fears that rodent and bed bug populations are being allowed to grow unchecked. The Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (CIEH) today warns that an increasing number of councils are "walking away" from the control of rats, mice and insect pests. A survey conducted by the institute's National Pest Advisory Panel shows that 26 councils in England, Wales and Northern Ireland did not provide pest control services last year, and of those that did 29% relied on private contractors for their services. The institute's last survey, conducted in 2002, revealed that just three councils – 1% of the total number – failed to provide such services. Environmental health experts said this came at a time when they were increasingly in demand. "Action in the UK against our most significant pests is declining when factors such as irresponsibly discarded litter, international travel and climate change are increasing our risk of exposure to pests and pest-related diseases," said Tim Everett, CIEH director of professional services. In the last seven years there has been a 38% increase in bed bug infestations, according to the CIEH. There are also concerns that the UK's rat population is growing rapidly in several cities. Local government Waste Local politics Jamie Doward guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Lies, paranoia and jealousy on the internet's social networks inspire Hollywood Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT From the Facebook film to movies about internet predators and treachery among friends, cinema is waking up to the importance of this new aspect of many people's lives When a schoolgirl from Michigan contacts a New York photographer through Facebook to ask if she can use one of the photographs on his site to make a painting, it sounds like a sweet and simple request. In the hands of the producers of Catfish, however, the story unspools in quite another direction. This documentary-thriller, which opens in Britain in December, is the latest in a string of US films to focus on the sinister possibilities of internet communication. Together, they explore the dramatic opportunities of a medium that has all the appearance of intimacy but which by-passes the intuitive safeguards of face-to-face human contact. Made by Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman, Catfish has been dubbed "the best Hitchcock film Hitchcock never directed" by the Financial Times and uses the techniques of reality TV to draw audiences into a web of deceit. Is the young girl from Michigan the artistic prodigy she claims to be? What are her motives and why will her enigmatic elder sister only communicate online? These key questions about identity and misrepresentation are echoed in the screenplays of the films Trust, starring Clive Owen, and Chatroom, starring Aaron Johnson. Both plots pivot on the gullibility of those vulnerable people who go online searching for companionship. In Trust, directed by former Friends star David Schwimmer, Owen plays the father of a girl who is targeted on the internet by a sexual predator. Speaking at the Toronto Film Festival last month, the actor admitted he found the storyline troubling. "It's a very tough subject and as a parent myself it was very close to me," he said. "A large portion of the film is how a family is ripped apart really, the huge sense of loss and pain, I thought it was a very tough, brutal look. It's not a cliché version where everybody comes together and we all love each other and stagger through it, it ruptures them and tests them. As a parent I found the idea of that very, very upsetting and that's why I wanted to do the film and explore the real horror and pain of that." The online world is just as dangerous in Enda Walsh's screen adaptation of his play Chatroom. Here, the plot revolves around five teenagers who use the internet to escape from their real-life problems. One of them, the disturbed William, played by Johnson, emerges as the natural leader of the group but begins to play a devious virtual game. When Hollywood wakes up to the latest idea, whether it is to revisit the legends of the ancient world, to feast on teenage vampire horror or to dramatise the pitfalls of the internet, all the film-makers turn together, like a shoal of fish, to face the new direction. So Friday also saw the British release of the internet-based comedy Easy A, starring Emma Stone. This is a critically acclaimed high-school take on the perils of online fibbing and it tells of 18-year-old Olive, played by Stone, who is persuaded by a friend to make herself more interesting by inventing a secret lover. The pretence quickly backfires and Olive becomes an outcast in her own school. The story, written by Bert Royal, is recounted in flashback on a webcam and the internet becomes both a useful tool for storytelling and a potentially dangerous amplification of the daily deceits of adolescence. The film is also a clever reworking of Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, the 19th-century novel about rumour and shame that, in a neat twist, is also being studied in class by the young cast of Easy A. This new appetite for using the internet as a plot device is clearly a response to the growing significance of social networking sites. Mike Goodridge, editor of Screen International, sees it as an obvious move. "It is only natural, bearing in mind the key demographic for social networking is also the demographic that film-makers need to reach," he said. "It started out with the use of the web in film as a symbol of modern paranoia, like in the 1995 thriller The Net, but filmmakers have now had to respond to the fact it is a big part of lots of lives." He also points out that a successful French film has already covered much of the same territory as Easy A. The 2008 teen comedy, LOL, takes the text and chatroom acronym for "laughing out loud" as its title and tells of the tribulations of a girl whose boyfriend decides to provoke her by letting her know he cheated on her over the summer. "This film was a huge success in France," said Goodridge. "It is good about the way that kids use text and the net to communicate to each other about everything." The box-office popularity of the acclaimed The Social Network, released here this month, is added proof that the film industry is alive to the significance of the virtual world that many potential cinemagoers inhabit. In the hands of director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, the breakdown in the working relationship between two fledgling businessmen, Facebook founders Mark Zuckerberg and Eduardo Saverin, assumes the proportions of a modern tragedy, a kind of computer-age version of the 1956 oil saga, Giant. Sorkin takes us back to the – fictitious – moment in 2003 when a recently jilted Harvard University student, Zuckerberg, has the idea of rating the attractiveness of female undergraduates online on an interactive page he calls FaceMash. Using a computer algorithm supplied by his best friend, Saverin, Zuckerberg manages to crash parts of Harvard's computer network due to the popularity of the site. Identical twin members of the university rowing team, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, and their business partner, Divya Narendra, then approach Zuckerberg to help them create a site they call Harvard Connection. Legal wrangles and alleged treachery then chart the journey that will take this site on to becoming, first, TheFacebook and finally Facebook, with its 500 million users across the globe. Gavin Smith, editor of the New York magazine Film Comment, sees the movie as part of a somewhat belated response to the spread of social networking and really just a new setting for central elements in any human drama: friendship, betrayal, hope and disappointment. "If you look at it this way, this film is really just an online updated version of The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre," he said this weekend. The Social Network is so far from a celebration of the virtual world that many in the computer industry have reacted with irritation. For some technology enthusiasts and computer geeks, the film is an unwarranted attack on the values of those who enjoy talking to each other online and making the most of the connections the world wide web affords. In the Guardian Andrew Clark also argued that the film's documentary style was deliberately misleading. "There's something insidious about this genre of scriptwriting," he wrote, adding that he was not convinced that "a 26-year-old businessman really deserves to have his name dragged through the mud in a murky mixture of fact and imagination for the general entertainment of the movie-viewing public? … I'm not sure whether Mark Zuckerberg is a punk, a genius or both. But I won't be seeing The Social Network to find out." Controversy has also dogged the release of Catfish, which has provoked similar claims that the film uses documentary techniques to entice its audience. Schulman and Joost say they began to film Schulman's real-life brother, Nev, who is at the centre of the film, and had no idea the project would turn into a disconcerting journey into the darker side of the web. The September edition of Time magazine carried an article by Mary Pols that warned readers away from the notion that this presented the typical face of social networking. The renowned critic Roger Ebert, reviewer for the Chicago Sun-Times, has defended the film, however, by underlining his belief that "everyone in the film is exactly as the film portrays them". Perhaps the most up-to-date take on the web as a potentially deceptive form of communication comes at the end of Easy A, probably the film that has received the widest critical acclaim of the bunch. In the final scenes, as Emma Stone's Olive makes unsuccessful attempts to untangle the web of lies she has spun among her friends and enemies at school, she realises that privacy may be the best policy. Before the credits roll, she tells her webcam that she likes her potential boyfriend, Todd, and that maybe she will lose her virginity to him one day – but it will be no one's business but her own. Social networking Mark Zuckerberg Facebook Vanessa Thorpe guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Lara Stone and Georgia Jagger make gap teeth the new face of fashion Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:07 PM PDT Popularity of models has made unusual looks the new perfection Call it the flight from perfection. The gap-toothed smile flashed by some of today's top models is leading to a Stateside boom in quirky dental treatment in place of the perfect, straight white smiles for which young Americans have historically endured years of treatment. The popularity of models such as Jess Hart, Lara Stone and Georgia Jagger has increased demand for cosmetic orthodontic procedures. Some models are having brackets inserted between their front teeth to widen the gap and improve their careers and American dentists report that veneers with slight staining, grooves and overlaps are growing in popularity. Last week the New York Times reported that demand is growing for customised imperfect veneers despite the cost of up to $2,500. Standard veneers cost around $700. "The white standard got too white," one Manhattan dentist told the paper. "The perfection standard got too perfect." The gap-toothed pout has been one of fashion's most sought-after accessories for the past two seasons, kicked off by Australian model Jessica Hart's appearance in the 2009 Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue and culminating with supermodel, and the current face of Calvin Klein, Lara Stone becoming the poster girl for the diastema. British consumers may soon be imitating their American counterparts. Mick Jagger's daughter Georgia – gap to the fore – is on the cover of the latest edition of British Vogue and appears in ad campaigns for Versace and Hudson jeans. Unusual beauty has become a major trend in the fashion industry, while recent catwalk shows and ad campaigns have also focused on unconventional looks. Redheads are enjoying a renaissance in fashion. Top British brand Mulberry's last show featured models all clad in copper wigs, inspired, says the company's creative director, Emma Hill, by Finnish model Julia Johansen. The high-street brand Jigsaw featured two flame-haired girls – Jessie Good and Poppy Delevigne – in its autumn ad campaign. Good is the daughter of Jigsaw's co-founder Belle Robinson and has just been signed to top model agency Storm. "She's the only redhead in our family – poor old Jessie hated being a redhead as a child," says Robinson. "She didn't look like anyone else in her family and she didn't look like her friends. But she has the most incredible hair, and slowly but surely she began to love it herself. Redheads are being embraced in a major way because nine times out of 10 it's their natural hair colouring, so there's a purity to them." The fascination with natural looks has been evident in recent fashion shows. At the autumn/winter 2010 Prada show, girls wore unglamorous, librarian-style glasses. Strong, natural-looking eyebrows were seen on Chloe's catwalk. The models at Marc by Marc Jacobs all had morning-after make-up that looked rough and lived in, and messy hair was seen at Narciso Rodriguez's New York show. "There is something in the air now which is seeing people move away from the stylised looks we are used to seeing on the red carpet and towards the more natural," said hair stylist Guido Palau after Jacobs's show. Liz Hambleton, beauty director of Grazia, agreed: "I think we're maxed out on perfection and looking for something a little more real at the moment. A gappy tooth, tons of freckles, huge geek chic glasses all give someone so much more personality than a glossy blow-out and a fake tan. I'm more interested in looking at the Lara Stones and Karen Elsons of this world than Cheryl Cole." "I think that odd beauties really show off the current clothes well," said Harriet Quick, fashion features director at Vogue. "At the moment fashion is rethinking classics and is focused on making real clothes. These girls make you look twice and see fashion in a surprising new light." "It goes back to that Parisian beauty mantra of not looking done but actually being extremely done," said Hambleton. "It's about spending time and, yes, money cultivating great skin and hair in order to avoid having to style it and wear make-up. A great skincare regime makes the difference between wearing foundation or not." Fashion Beauty Alice Fisher guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Baroness Warsi told by David Cameron not to appear at Islamic conference Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:06 PM PDT Conservative leader's stance exposes coalition government differences on tackling Islamist extremists The Conservative party chair, Baroness Warsi, has been banned by David Cameron from attending a major Islamic conference today, igniting a bitter internal row over how the government tackles Islamist extremism. Warsi, Britain's first female Muslim cabinet minister, was told by the prime minister to cancel her appearance at the Global Peace and Unity Event, which is being billed as the largest multicultural gathering in Europe. The London-based conference is aimed at improving community relations, yet critics have pointed out that a number of speakers who are due to appear have justified suicide attacks and promoted al-Qaida, homophobia and terrorism. An influential voice among the international Muslim community, Warsi believes that confronting extremists at public events is a more effective way to tackle fundamentalism than a refusal to engage with them. A Whitehall source said: "She had hoped to attend, but there is a conflict of opinion on how extremists should be dealt with and the prime minister, supported by Theresa May [the home secretary], were adamant no Tories should attend." Paul Goodman, the former Tory communities minister, said: "The aim of the organisers is to exploit politicians by using their presence to gain muscle, influence and credibility among British Muslims. Politicians shouldn't play their game." Argument over the most effective strategy to challenge extremism has also led to a schism between the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives in the coalition government. While Cameron has prohibited Tories from attending the event at the Excel Centre in Docklands, the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, has firmly opposed a boycott by politicians, agreeing with Warsi that extremists should be publicly confronted. A compromise agreement means that Andrew Stunell, the Liberal Democrat communities minister, will today deliver an aggressive speech against those who espouse fundamentalism. "He will make clear that the coalition government will not tolerate extremism, hatred and intolerance in any form," said a spokesman for the Department for Communities and Local Government. It is also understood that Clegg will send a message to the conference reiterating the need to tackle extremism head-on. Other political speakers include the shadow justice secretary, Sadiq Khan, a campaign adviser to the Labour leader, Ed Miliband. The conference, which is expected to draw up to 60,000 visitors, is likely to witness clashes between moderate Muslims and extremists. One influential Muslim scholar, Tahir ul-Qadri from Pakistan, will denounce those in the audience who subscribe to terrorism as "disbelievers". Qadri, whose spokesman confirmed that he had hired a large security team after receiving death threats, expects a hostile reception from elements of the crowd. The spokesman added: "We want to bring a moderate view of Islam to a new audience, not just preach to the converted." The conference has been organised by Britain's most popular Muslim television station, the Islam Channel, which earlier this year was accused by a Muslim thinktank, the Quilliam Foundation, of promoting extremist groups. The Quilliam report added that the channel's chief executive and principal conference organiser, Mohammed Ali Harrath, has a conviction in Tunisia for terrorism-related offences. Harrath insists that his Tunisian organisation is a non-violent political party. Critics say there are more hardline speakers at the event than in previous years. Controversial figures include a former Pakistani government minister, Muhammad Ijaz-ul-Haq, who has been quoted as saying that the award of a knighthood to the author Salman Rushdie in 2007 justifies suicide attacks. Another is Sheikh Shady al-Suleiman, from Sydney, who was in charge of youth events at an Australian mosque when it invited Anwar al-Awlaki, a radical al-Qaida preacher linked to two of the 9/11 hijackers and the Detroit plane bomber, to speak. Al-Suleiman has also supported the stoning of adulterers. Speakers also include Abdur Rashid Turabi, head of Pakistan's extremist Jamaat-e-Islami party, whose former leader, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, said he saluted a suicide bomber for killing five American soldiers and earlier this month had his UK visa revoked by the Home Office. Sheikh Yasir Qadhi, who has said that homosexuality is an "aberration against God", is also due to attend. Conservatives Islam Sayeeda Warsi David Cameron Terrorism policy Religion Mark Townsend guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Gordon Ramsay: the culinary hot ticket is beginning to cool down Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:06 PM PDT Family dissension, declining restaurant ratings, and a lack of enthusiasm for his latest television offerings add up to trouble for the celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay has been no stranger to bad news in the last couple of years. His restaurant empire has faltered; he has been accused of torrid sexual wrongdoings; former proteges have turned against him. Through it all, the two central relationships in his life have appeared to stand firm: that to his wife, Tana, and to his father-in-law and business partner, Chris Hutcheson. Last week, however, the second of these was shown to be less resilient than was thought when it was announced that Hutcheson had left his position as CEO of Gordon Ramsay Holdings Ltd. It isn't yet clear what caused the rupture (all we know is that it followed a blazing row) but the implications for Ramsay cannot be anything other than extremely worrying. More than any other setback to have befallen the Glasgow-born chef in recent times, this one surely casts severe doubts over his future. It isn't much of a secret that Hutcheson has been integral to Ramsay's meteoric rise over the last 12 years, acting as his adviser, role model and even surrogate father, and effectively overseeing the day-to-day running of the business while Ramsay was busy turning himself into a TV celebrity. It could be argued that Ramsay is now big enough (and rich enough) to flourish without his former mentor. After all, after a rocky patch following the credit crunch his business is no longer in the red financially (it posted impressive profits of £4.2m in the 11 months leading up to August) and he'll no doubt be able to find someone else to run it for him. Moreover, his fame won't disappear overnight. The truth, though, is a bit more complex. Ramsay's success has always rested on a delicate balance between three things: his reputation as a chef; his acumen (aided by Hutcheson) as a businessman; and his fame as a TV personality. The three have reinforced each other in a sort of virtuous circle; remove any one from the equation, and it's hard to see how the other two would survive. Ramsay's greatest current difficultly, arguably, is that, although he is still doing well in purely financial terms, the other two prongs of his success – his culinary reputation and fame – are beginning to look somewhat tarnished. The reputation of his restaurants is no longer what it was. Back in the early 2000s his flagship Royal Hospital Road restaurant was rightly seen as the most exciting place to eat in London, if not Britain. In the newly published 2011 Harden's guide to London's restaurants, it is ranked just 17th. In addition to his own (much neglected) skills in the kitchen, Ramsay's other great strength has always been his ability to discover and nurture talent. But his two most brilliant proteges – Marcus Waering and Angela Hartnett – are no longer with him. Restaurant empires are ultimately propped up by the chefs, and Ramsay's, these days, seems worryingly lacking in this respect. And while he remains very much a presence on our TV screens, there is evidence that here, too, the Ramsay shtick is starting to wear thin. People have grown tired of his all-swearing, tough-guy persona. But his attempts to convince us that, beneath the bluster, he is really a kind soul – the subtext of his voyage of discovery round India in Gordon's Great Escape this year – have so far proved unconvincing. Nor does his latest series, Ramsay's Best Restaurant, based on a segment from his magazine show The F-Word, seem set to revive his reputation: in both critical and audience terms, it has so far met with an unenthusiastic response.The one thing we can be certain of about Ramsay is that his will to succeed is incredible, and it is much too early to write him off. But without Hutcheson these will be severely testing times for him both professionally and personally. Those close to him may have to get used to a lot more swearing. Gordon Ramsay Celebrity Food & drink Restaurants Television William Skidelsky guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Bob Guccione's journey from birthday card to birthday suit | Tom Lamont Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:06 PM PDT The publisher of Penthouse, who died last week, was a pioneer of printed pornography "We're going rabbit hunting," was publisher Bob Guccione's bold pronouncement when he launched Penthouse in the UK in 1965, a bid to challenge Playboy's dominance of the mucky-magazine market. Guccione (pictured below) never quite managed to do for the Bunny – when he died last week, his publishing empire had been almost a decade in ruin – but he estimated Penthouse made more than £2bn over its 30 years on newsagent shelves, with scoops and shocks along the way. An itinerant life took Guccione from his native Brooklyn to Europe and North Africa, careers as a priest and a birthday card illustrator abandoned, before at 35 he settled as a journalist and publisher in London. Penthouse's guiding principle was to let readers "see [the model] as if she doesn't know she's being seen". A hit in both the UK and US (where it was launched in 1969), Penthouse sales peaked in 1979, shifting 4.7m copies, and in infamy in 1984, when Miss America was stripped of her crown for posing nude in its pages. By the late 1990s circulation was in decline. The rise in online porn didn't help, but Guccione's financial collapse is credited to his ill-conceived pursuits outside publishing. Two failed casino launches and a bizarre attempt to invent a new type of nuclear reactor wiped out millions, but it was the 1979 film Caligula, which he produced with a screenplay by Gore Vidal and the participation of such actors as Sir John Gielgud, which was the final nail. His legacy records him as a pioneer of printed pornography – one who shifted the boundaries of his industry, in questionable taste, and succeeded (to borrow his phrase) in "objectifying every body-part of a woman save for her tonsils". Bob Guccione Pornography Tom Lamont guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Friendly fire sniper could face manslaughter charge Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:04 PM PDT Mother of Lance Corporal Michael Pritchard learns charges are being prepared folowing death of her son Manslaughter charges are being drawn up in connection with the death of a Royal Military Police officer in Afghanistan in a "friendly fire" incident, the Observer has learned. Lance Corporal Michael Pritchard, 22, was shot dead by a British army sniper in Helmand last December while at an observation post. A military investigation has revealed that "Pritch", as he was known to his colleagues, had been watched by members of an army patrol base for an hour before he was shot, apparently after being mistaken for a member of the Taliban. Last week the Observer reported that Michael's mother, Helen Perry, had concerns about the way the investigation into her son's death was being conducted. Mrs Perry questioned the length of time it had taken and expressed dismay that she had learned her son had been killed by a sniper only five months after the incident, when an army padre had mentioned it at a reunion ceremony. The Ministry of Defence has now confirmed to Mrs Perry that a soldier is to be referred to the Service Prosecuting Authority for manslaughter by gross negligence. The authority will then decide whether the soldier should be charged, opening the way to a court martial. Mrs Perry said she felt shocked that a soldier might face charges in relation to her son's death, but added: "When you've been fighting for the truth a long time, there's a great release when you are told it might finally come." Mrs Perry said said she hoped her campaign would help prevent similar incidents in the future and ensure that bereaved families are given greater access to information about how their loved ones died at an earlier stage. "I am grateful that we are progressing in this investigation and want to thank the press and the media for their continued support," she said. "All I want is the truth and an honest account of what happened to my son. He was serving his Queen and country and deserves to be honoured with the truth." John Cooper, QC, who is representing Michael's family, said he hoped any prosecution would not undermine a need to understand the wider failings that led up to the lance corporal's death. "Whereas the family welcomes any inquiry into potential criminality they do not want such an inquiry to be used as a whitewash for wider systemic failure," Cooper said. "They are acutely aware of the potential that one person could used as a scapegoat for wider failings." Court martial proceedings would delay an inquest into Michael's death, which is due next year. The coroner has promised to share all evidence submitted to the inquest with Michael's family. Military Afghanistan Taliban Jamie Doward guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Thanks to the cuts, we'd all be better off in prison | Secret diary of a civil servant Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:04 PM PDT The spending review is an ambitious plan that has no hopes of being realised It was a unique week in Whitehall and civil servants are shattered. Last-minute changes to the spending review kept Treasury staff up most of Tuesday night. Officials and ministers have been working flat out for weeks. Now there is relief and catharsis. It has been exhausting carrying all these numbers around in our heads, anxious about what people will think when they see them. Now everyone knows our terrible secret and it feels good finally to share it. The spending review is a hugely ambitious plan. But that is all it is. In Westminster, we are worried. We know it will be almost impossible to deliver many of the savings that have been promised. There is too much reliance on "efficiencies" becoming real cash savings. As every good civil servant knows, efficiencies are projections and promises – they don't yet exist in real life. There is a vain hope that police budget efficiencies will prevent thousands of policemen being sacked, NHS efficiencies will prevent thousands of nurses and doctors being sacked, local government efficiencies will paper over the widening cracks, and shared services will reduce the overall cost of government. Sadly, the more likely scenario is some savings and a lot of sackings. The most amusing target of all – 3,000 fewer prisoners by 2014 – has caused much laughter at the Ministry of Justice, especially when prisoner numbers are at a record high, having doubled over the last 15 years. It is a fantasy number, unless the Treasury has calculated that cuts to police officers and courts services will mean fewer criminals being caught and convicted. Public services are interconnected. Without a proper strategy, cutting one just passes the costs on to others. Local authority cuts mean less housing and services. Together with huge welfare cuts, this puts pressure on the police to sort out the homeless and the hungry and increases demand on the NHS. Local authority cuts mean reduced social care services which means more pressure on the NHS. All this increases demand on the saddest social safety net of all. The one place where you always get free food and a bed – a prison. Civil servants in key government departments will be instrumental in the attempt to realise these reforms and inefficiencies. Only they can really make them happen. But instead of motivating their civil servants with a powerful vision of the joint task ahead, ministers have told their staff that at least a third of them will no longer be required. This is a bold, selfless move that may prove to be a disastrous blunder. Sweden, cited as a successful example of fiscal consolidation, avoided big changes to central government because it knew the dangers of reducing and weakening the team at the centre. Many departments have already started messy redundancy programmes that are consuming precious time and energy. This is a long process. As it progresses, civil servants will be distracted from their day jobs as they undergo lengthy assessments. When it is over, ministers will be frustrated at how much this affects their ability to do their job well. They won't have everything they want, as fast as they want, in the way they want. The people just won't be there to do it for them. The government is desperate now to stop talking about cuts and set out plans for boosting economic growth. There is great expectation – as expanding the economy is the answer to all our problems. Currently, there is a problem with the plans for economic growth – there are no serious concrete plans for economic growth. This is a laissez-faire government that believes government should sit back and watch as the "big society" takes care of itself. guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Talking to the Enemy by Scott Atran – review Posted: 23 Oct 2010 04:04 PM PDT Rather than being brainwashed by militant recruiters, terrorists tend to be ordinary people driven by their peer group, argues anthropologist Scott Atran The story of the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005 has been told many times. We know, for example, that Shehzad Tanweer, an 18-year-old from Leeds, was unable to detonate his device and telephoned his three co-conspirators even though he knew that they were almost certainly dead. He then went on to kill himself and 13 others on the top deck of a bus. We know also that the bombers were in a "euphoric" and "celebratory" mood, hugging each other before going on their separate, final journeys, as Joseph Martoccia, a Cambridge businessman who came across the men gathered in a huddle in a busy corridor at King's Cross station, recently told the inquest into the attacks. But the details continue to fascinate, such as the fact that Mohammad Sidique Khan, the leader of the plotters, postponed the bombings by a day to take his pregnant wife to hospital. Insights like this raise an obvious question: what makes apparently ordinary men (and some women) commit such atrocious acts? Scott Atran, an American anthropologist, believes he has some of the answers. Terrorists, he tells us, are social beings influenced by social connections and values familiar to all of us. They are members of school clubs, sports teams or community organisations; they are proud fathers and difficult teenagers. They do not, Atran maintains, die for a cause; they die for each other. Back in 2002 or 2003, this would have been radical stuff. Atran has been one of the leading proponents of a social science-based approach to militancy for many years and his approach was long considered very much left field. Countering terrorism was seen as the work of the "counter-terrorist community" and the last thing needed was woolly-haired, woolly thinking, wool-shirted academics banging on about group dynamics or the ordinariness of killers. In those early years, the focus was on al-Qaida master terrorists and recruiters sent from overseas, or "sleeper cells" implanted by al-Qaida which could be activated when needed on orders from Osama bin Laden. The idea that young Britons themselves could be a threat was barely imagined. According to Stella Rimington, former head of MI5, the threat came from "networks of individuals … that blend into society … who live normal, routine lives until called upon for specific tasks by another part of the network." She might as well have been describing aliens. A year later, in Operation Crevice, a network of young British Muslims, most of Pakistani origin, was broken up. They had visited training camps in Pakistan but only after being radicalised in the UK. The process that had led them to contemplate violence against, among other targets, the "slags" dancing at the Ministry of Sound nightclub, was not the result of "brainwashing" by militant "recruiters". Other dynamics were at work. They had "blended into society" and "lived normal, routine lives", as Rimington had said, for the simple reason that they were normal members of society. The question as to what had turned them into potential killers remained unanswered. By 2005 and 2006, the work of people such as Atran had became much more influential. One key text cited by MI5 analysts in conversations I had with them after the London bombings was the work of the social scientist Quintan Wiktorowicz, who, like Atran, favoured an explanation of extremist violence which depended less on asking "who?" the terrorists were, or even "why?" individuals become radicalised, and more on asking "how?" Similar thinking came from Marc Sageman, a clinical psychologist and former CIA officer, who argued provocatively that "jihad" was leaderless. For all these analysts, it was the process of radicalisation itself that was important. Terrorists are not mad – there is no evidence of higher levels of psychological illness among them – nor poor – the link with poverty is indirect, if there is one at all – nor do they necessarily feel humiliated. Atran draws on his own research to show how personal humiliation, such as that suffered daily by Palestinians at Israeli checkpoints, in fact decreases the likelihood that any individual will act violently. On the other hand, the perception that others with whom one feels a common bond are being humiliated can be a powerful driver for action, Atran says. It is in the existence of a sense of community, whether that be a group of local friends or the ummah (the global nation of Muslim believers), that he believes the roots of violence can be found. Atran deploys his formidable knowledge of social anthropology to dissect the various dynamics that have helped form human individuals into groups, warbands, hunting parties or armies over the millennia. Although this historical background is mostly fascinating, even more impressive is Atran's field research, in places ranging from Palestine and Spain to Tétouan in northern Morocco and remote Indonesian islands. It is this research that underpins his vision of radical Islamic militancy as an adaptive social movement. The 2002 Bali bombs, he writes, "were largely planned and executed through local networks of friends, of kin, neighbours and schoolmates who radicalised one another until all were eager and able to kill perfect strangers for an abstract cause". Terrorist networks, he points out, are "generally no different than the ordinary kinds of social networks that guide people's career paths. It's the terrorist career itself that is the most remarkable, not the mostly normal individuals who become terrorists." Take Jemaah Islamiyah, the organisation behind the Bali bombings. Atran shows how the few in the broad organisation who had contact with the likes of Bin Laden were barely involved in planning the bombings and demonstrates, through painstaking reconstruction of the timeline of the attacks, that key decisions on targeting and timing were reached at a very low level and often in a chaotic and disorganised way. The picture of Islamic militancy as composed of nodes of personal associations coalescing to form groups that are self-radicalising, self-sustaining and self-motivating is further reinforced by Atran's meticulous work on the Madrid bombings of 2004. He lays out the exact role and relations of the small group of key conspirators, their wider circle of associates and the appalling failures of the Spanish police to stop them. Perhaps to compensate for their incompetence, Spanish authorities insisted that the plotters had been carefully managed by some "terror central organisation". In fact, it was because the plot was so anarchic, fluid and improbable that it succeeded in evading detection. Atran lists four key elements of the "organised anarchy" that he suggests typifies modern violent Islamic activism: goals are constantly ambiguous and inconsistent; modes of action are decided pragmatically on the basis of trial and error or based on the residue of learning from accidents of past experience; the boundaries of the group constantly change; and the degree of involvement of members varies over time. The result is not a hierarchic, centrally commanded terrorist organisation but a decentralised and constantly evolving network based on contingent adaptations to unpredictable events. In the world of al-Qaida studies, this is still a relatively extreme position. But Atran's suggested vision of militancy is a very useful addition to other, more mainstream understandings of what "al-Qaida" might be. Back in 2002 I wrote that there were three al-Qaidas: a hardcore leadership element, a network of affiliated groups and an ideology. The 7/7 plots showed elements of all three as well as a fourth which is indeed much closer to Atran's vision. This is the "social movement" of Islamic radicalism and is a direct consequence of the propagation of the al-Qaida ideology and the subculture that goes with it over the decade since the 9/11 attacks. It is, as Atran suggests, chaotic, adaptive, unstructured and unpredictable. It is much, much harder to combat as a result. Jason Burke's books include Al-Qaeda: The True Story of Radical Islam (Penguin) Society UK security and terrorism Global terrorism al-Qaida Jason Burke guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

You are subscribed to email updates from Latest news and comment from Britain | guardian.co.uk To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610