Kidnapped boy Sahil Saeed's fate unclear after reports of rescue

Claims by Pakistani minister that boy was found contradicted by senior police officers

There was confusion today over the fate of Sahil Saeed, the five-year-old British boy kidnapped in Pakistan, after local media reports that he had been found were contradicted by police chiefs.

A Punjab minister, Rana Sanaullah, told Geo TV that Sahil, who was kidnapped from his grandmother's house in Jehlum a week ago, was rescued in Sialkot, a city in the north-east Punjab province of Pakistan.

He said Sahil had been sent back to the UK to be reunited with his father and a man and woman had been arrested on kidnapping charges.

But police chiefs said the boy who was rescued was not Sahil, and the minister was mistaken.

A spokesman at the British high commission in Islamabad said he received "no evidence" this morning that the boy had been found but they were "urgently" checking reports.

Sahil and his father were on the last day of a two-week holiday when robbers broke into his grandmother's house.

The robbers made a ransom demand of £100,000 when they snatched Sahil and were understood to have repeated the demand in phone calls to his father. The Pakistani authorities contacted Interpol for help with the investigation after reports the kidnappers called from international numbers, including a number in Spain.

Pakistani officials have accused members of Sahil's family of being involved in the abduction. They denied the claims.

The five-year-old's father, Raja Naqqash Saeed, returned to the UK yesterday. He left the country in defiance of Pakistani wishes that he remained there as a witness, according to reports.

• Pakistan

Vikram Dodd on report threatening to brand police as racist over stop and search

Vikram Dodd on report threatening to brand police as racist over stop and search

Down boy!

Dangerous dogs are big news right now. But never mind all that stuff about microchips: what's it like to walk one?

The idea of walking a dangerous dog did not immediately appeal to me as an assignment. I walk a non-dangerous dog every day, and even that is sort of a drag. To exchange it for a powerful, snarling beast would just add an additional, unwanted element of anxiety to the outing. As a pet owner, I already apologise enough.

When I say dangerous dog, of course, I don't mean dangerous at all. In fact, I'm not sure what I mean. Even the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act doesn't have a clear idea: dogs outlawed under section 1 of the act don't have to be dangerous, just one of four proscribed breeds; one of those, the pit bull terrier, isn't really a breed, so "pit-bull types" and crossbreeds must be assessed as dangerous (without necessarily being dangerous, remember) on a case-by-case basis by a dog legislation officer. A dog that looks like a pit bull, but is in fact half-labrador and half-boxer, might well qualify.

Section 3 of the Act refers to dogs that are "dangerously out of control in a public place" and could technically apply to any breed – possibly not chihuahuas – but let us, for the sake of settling on a definition, simply change our terms. Let's speak instead of "status dogs", in reference to the large, heavily muscled, big-headed persuasion – usually Staffordshire bull terrier crosses of one sort or another – that are increasingly bred and reared for their threatening bearing, for use as a weapon, or even for dog-fighting. These are, after all, the dogs the government clearly had in mind when it unveiled legislation this week to make microchipping and third-party insurance compulsory; the type home secretary Alan Johnson said were bred "for the sole purpose of intimidating others". That's the sort. Where can I get my hands on one of those?

The Mayhew Animal Home in north London has a Staffy-bulldog cross called Duddly on its website who might fit the bill. Duddly looks deadly: he has the face of a nightclub bouncer and a body like a Victorian ottoman. They are willing to let me take him for a walk, although he will have to be recalled from his foster home.

One corridor of the Mayhew is decorated with pictures of celebrity supporters: Joanna Lumley, Jason Donovan, David Seaman. Chrissie Hynde and Brian Sewell both adopted dogs from the Mayhew; it may well be the only thing they have in common.

I've been to the Mayhew before; it's where I got my dog. It's also where I made my wife take a Staffy-cross bitch I found tied to the railings of the park gates last year – abandoned, pregnant, heavily scarred and mildly insane. Although the Mayhew has space for just 35 dogs, it is contracted to take in all the strays rounded up by Brent council, and around 25 dogs pass through their doors every month, most commonly Staffy crosses. Because the breed now has a reputation as a dangerous dog, Staffies are harder to re-home. The wrong type of people seek them out; the right type don't want them. Their reputation, according to the Mayhew's CEO Caroline Yates, is undeserved. "Twenty years ago they were top of the list for ideal family dogs," she says.

Duddly hasn't arrived yet, so Yates shows me some of the other dogs they have in at the moment, including a pair of Rhodesian Ridgebacks whose owner couldn't cope. They're enormous; a child could ride one like a horse. There has been such a glut of backstreet breeding of Staffies recently, says Yates, that they've begun to lose their status as status dogs. People are seeking out bigger, less familiar breeds, and the unwanted ones are starting to show up in the Mayhew.

Yates welcomes any strengthening of dog legislation, although she thinks the government's proposals come at the problem from the wrong angle. Compulsory microchipping, she says, is "good, but not much use on its own". The microchip identifies the original owner, but most of the strays they take in have been passed from hand to hand before they're abandoned. It's not preventative, and it's no deterrent. She favours licensing, and has little time for the objections of "responsible" dog owners. "Licensing and registration should be a recognition that you are a responsible dog owner," she says.

Finally, Duddly arrives. Unfortunately for my purposes, Duddly is not deadly. He may look the part, but in the flesh, Duddly is cuddly. He doesn't have any unresolved anger, or a killer instinct. He does suffer from separation anxiety, according to the Mayhew's Dan Stibbs, perhaps as a result of his abandonment. Duddly's worst trait is that he hates being left alone. When I bend down to pet him, he licks my face. His breath isn't bad for a dog, but I know that's not much of a compliment.

Which isn't to say that Duddly isn't a bit of a handful. Taking him for a spin round the block is like waterskiing behind a tethered shark. Even our overall route is a compromise between the direction he wants to go in and the one I do. It's alarming to be only nominally in control of something so big and powerful; it reminds me of a time when, in search of a van to move some furniture, I accidentally hired a lorry.

The streets of Harlesden are quiet at midday, but there is no question that Duddly, straining at his lead as I dig in my heels – he has amazing traction – constitutes an intimidating presence. People heading in our direction spontaneously cross the road as we approach. Passing cyclists give us a wide berth. It is empowering, I suppose, to be at the helm of something that alarms people so readily. Certainly my own personal safety was the last thing on my mind, although I couldn't say I had time to stop and enjoy the sense of security. I was too worried about what would happen if I let go of the lead.

"He's really very friendly," I say to one passerby who has chosen to walk down the middle of the road to avoid us. He looks unconvinced. If I were him, I would be too: although Duddly is gentle, sweet-natured and frankly, a little needy, he's also untrained and therefore unpredictable. When he stops in the middle of the pavement and his ears shoot up, my first thought is, "Oh my God, Duddly, what are you going to do?" It turns out he's going to sit down and refuse to move because he's frightened of the traffic cone across the street.

Training a dog like Duddly, who is already two years old, can be difficult. "If you don't put the work in by 16 weeks, it's really hard," says Stibbs. "You can do it, but it's a lot harder."

After a brief but exhausting tour of the local area, it's time to say goodbye to Duddly, whose abandonment the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act – a piece of legislation almost no one has a good word to say about – did so little to prevent. "The law as it stands at the moment hasn't worked," says Yates. In addition to the proposed government reforms, she would like to see the Dangerous Dogs Act amended – with the contentious section 1 repealed – and the introduction of compulsory neutering for all breeds.

"There are too many dogs in this country," she says. "Full stop."

Dog owners respond to the new legislation on dangerous dogs guardian.co.uk/video

• Law
• Pets
• Animals

Muslims right to engage in democracy | Inayat Bunglawala

Groups such as Hizb ut-Tahrir calling for Muslims to not participate in the British political process are woefully misguided

An email from Dr Abdul Wahid, chair of the British branch of the Islamic political party, Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), arrived in my inbox on Tuesday afternoon. Entitled "The price for political participation in the UK", it was centred on a recent Channel 4 Dispatches programme presented by Andrew Gilligan, which hysterically accused an Islamic organisation, the IFE (headquartered in east London) of trying to "infiltrate" the local Labour party with a view to "imposing" Islamic values on the UK. I commented on the programme last week for Cif.

Hizb ut-Tahrir is a small but very active organisation – especially on British campuses. It has long campaigned for UK Muslims to refrain from taking part in democratic politics or joining any of the mainstream political parties, declaring it all to be haraam (forbidden). Judging by the email from Wahid, HT clearly viewed the C4 programme as a welcome opportunity to further promote this message.

His email said that the Dispatches film and the accompanying series of articles by Gilligan for the Daily and Sunday Telegraph should have highlighted "some harsh truths" for those of us who advocate participating in the British political system:

"All of this proves something we have said for years – in order to achieve ANY influence in the political system in the UK, a Muslim is expected to abandon his values and sell his principles, and adopt the western secular values of the corrupt political parties. This should not be a surprise to any observer of British politics. Many mainstream MPs, who might even have started life with good intentions, have been shown to be corrupted by the political process, wrongfully claiming thousands of pounds in expenses … Over the coming weeks Hizb ut-Tahrir will be holding gatherings and discussions in different parts of the country, and we hope to meet in order to discuss things further."

I have met Wahid on several occasions and took part in a debate with him on political participation back in 2005 in the runup to that year's general election. He is like many others in the senior HT leadership in the UK, very well educated and very charming. However, on this issue he and his group are woefully misguided.

No doubt there are a number of obvious failings in liberal democracies, including especially the ability of those with wealth to subvert democracy through buying power and influence.

However, the solution to combating warmongering policies, racism, discrimination, bigotry and the eroding of our civil liberties cannot be to withdraw in disgust due to the actions of some corrupt politicians but to increase our participation and work with other like-minded people to help make our elected officials more accountable to us.

In the larger scheme of things, despite their shortcomings liberal democracies are the best political setup we have yet managed to come up with to try and ensure that – despite all our differences and beliefs – we can all rub along without too much inconvenience.

The Conservative party has a long-standing pledge to ban HT as soon as they attain power, but any ban will, I think, only serve to convince HT members and their sympathisers of the inequity inherent in liberal democracies. It is far better in my view to uphold our freedoms and allow them to engage in their vociferous criticism to their hearts' content. That would be the response of a confident democracy.

In any case, despite over two decades of activity in Britain, HT has failed to make significant inroads into UK Muslim communities who are, with every passing year and notwithstanding Gilligan's fear-mongering, showing every sign that they understand the value and the necessity of democratic engagement.

• Islam
• Channel 4
• Telegraph Media Group
• Conservatives
• General election 2010

Guardian Daily podcast: Authorities say sorry to rapist father’s victims; and rate of extinction of UK species revealed

Social services in Sheffield and Lincolnshire have apologised to a family for failing to protect them from a father who repeatedly raped and abused them for 33 years. Helen Carter reports from Derby on the publication of the executive summary into a serious case review. SocietyGuardian's Patrick Butler gives his view of the case.

Eliza Manningham-Buller, former head of MI5 has claimed she didn't know about the mistreatment of terror suspects by American intelligence agencies. Chris McGreal reports from Washington on the US response, while security editor Richard Norton-Taylor looks at Manningham-Buller's speech at the House of Lords.

A wide-ranging audit of England's wildlife highlights the rate of extinction of British plants and animals. Dr Tom Tew, Natural England's chief scientist, outlines the ways we can best protect our species.

Some police forces face being branded racist by the equalities watchdog because of their excessive use of stop and search powers against people from ethnic minorities. Vikram Dodd has the details.

Great Himalayan Trail: trekking's holy grail

For the first time walkers can take a guided trek traversing the entire length of the Himalayas in Nepal

In pictures: The Great Himalayan Trail

Have you got six months off? Do you fancy a long walk? If so, World Expeditions may have just the holiday for you. They have become the only trekking outfit to offer a guided trip along the first completed section of the Great Himalayan Trail (GHT).

Stretching for 1,700km along the length of Nepal, the GHT will take you a mere 157 days to complete. You'll see eight of the world's 14 peaks over 8,000m, including Everest, and cross passes reaching up to 6,000m, climbing a total of 150,000m. That's a Snowdon every day for half a year. Oh, and it will set you back £20,500.

The GHT isn't the world's longest long-distance footpath. The Continental Divide Trail in the US is 5,000km and the Trans Canada will be three times that. But this steroidal version of the Pennine Way looks like being the most coveted of all. Eventually, the trail's originators hope it will stretch from the mighty 8,000m peak Nanga Parbat in Pakistan, considered the westernmost outlier of the Himalaya, to Namche Barwa in Tibet. It will connect five Asian countries - Bhutan, China, India, Nepal and Pakistan.

That version will stretch for 4,500km, a with a predicted completion date of February 2011. But for now the focus is on Nepal. For as well as being an enormous challenge, the GHT could also prove to be a welcome money-spinner for a country still recovering from 10 years of civil war. Some parts of Nepal have benefited hugely from tourism, like the Everest and Annapurna regions. Those areas without such famous mountains, particularly in remote western Nepal, haven't fared nearly so well.

Last year, I trekked along a section of the GHT through the Mugu district of western Nepal, a remote region peopled by Tibetan traders and animist tribes. Thousands of people were relying on aid from the World Food Programme, flown in by helicopter with the nearest roads a week's walk away. Many young men leave to find work abroad. Tourism, for all its faults, could really make a difference here.

Several adventurous souls have travelled the arc of the Himalaya before, while Richard and Adrian Crane, cousins of television presenter Nicholas Crane, actually ran it in 1983. But the idea of a defined and designated route for trekkers is more recent. In 2006, the Dutch development agency SNV and the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development based in Kathmandu committed to developing the idea, and have brought together government agencies and local people.

But it's the hard work of one man, Australian trekker Robin Boustead, that has moved the project along most. After years of research (read his account here), he completed the trek in two sections, and has drawn an excellent free map of the trail's route as well as writing a guidebook. Every water source, camping ground and elevation has been meticulously logged with GPS, but he says that the route will undoubtedly develop as more people do it and discover better alternatives.

For those without the time – or the knees – to do the whole thing in one go, Boustead has broken the GHT down into nine sections, which you can pick off at your leisure. And if you think 20 grand is a lot of chapatties to spend on an adventure holiday, it's still a lot less than the current price of a trip up Everest – and a lot more exclusive. There have been four thousand ascents of the world's highest mountain, but only one man has done the GHT.

• The full-length Great Himalaya Trail opens in February 2011. Currently, only the Nepal section (1,700km) is available to traverse, as it is the only part that has been walked and mapped thoroughly. It costs £20,500, not including interntaional flights. It takes 157 days to complete, although it can be broken down to seven smaller stages up to 34 days. For more information and bookings call World Expeditions on 0800 0744 135 or visit worldexpeditions.co.uk

• Nepal
• Walking holidays
• Adventure travel
• Nepal

Government locked in row over child killer rights (AFP)

AFP - The government is locked in a battle with the media for refusing to say why a notorious child killer has been sent back to jail, amid warnings he faces a "lynch mob" if his identity is revealed.

Palestinians snub peace talks because of Israeli homes expansion

Mahmoud Abbas 'not ready to negotiate' after Israel announces 1,600 new homes for East Jerusalem

The Palestinians pulled out of a new round of indirect peace talks last night, even before they had begun, as a protest at Israel's decision to announce approval for hundreds of new homes in a Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem.

The decision to pull out, announced in Cairo by Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League, represents a major setback to months of diplomacy by the US administration and comes after the US vice-president, Joe Biden, delivered an unusually strong rebuke to Israel.

Amr Moussa said he had been told by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, that even this low-key process of so-called "proximity talks" could not start unless Israel stopped expanding its settlements.

"The Palestinian side is not ready to negotiate under the present circumstances," Moussa said.

Israeli and Palestinian leaders have not held direct negotiations since Israel's war in Gaza last year. The White House had won agreement on Monday from the two sides to begin the indirect talks, hoping they would lead to face-to-face meetings.

The Palestinians had insisted there would be no direct talks unless Israel halted all settlement expansion, in line with the demands of the US administration and the roadmap, which remains the framework of peace talks.

But Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, leading a rightwing coalition government, offered only a temporary, partial curb to new building.

Then, on Tuesday, hours after Biden met Israeli leaders, the Israeli interior ministry announced approval for 1,600 new apartments in Ramat Shlomo, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish settlement in East Jerusalem. All settlements on occupied land are illegal under international law.

Israel's opposition Kadima party said it is planning a no-confidence vote in the prime minister in parliament for "destroying" the Biden visit.

Yesterday, Biden emerged from talks with Abbas in Ramallah, on the occupied West Bank, and repeated his criticisms of the timing and substance of Israel's announcement. "It is incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them," he said.

"The decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin … profitable negotiations."

Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad said the Palestinians appreciated "the strong statement of condemnation" by the US administration.

Eli Yishai, Israel's interior minister, apologised for the timing of the announcement, admitting that it had caused Biden "real embarrassment".

• Palestinian territories
• Israel
• Mahmoud Abbas
• Binyamin Netanyahu
• Joe Biden

Paris masterpieces to hang around

The National Gallery extends the record-breaking Masterpieces From Paris exhibition by two weeks.
Read more [ABC News Australia]

Govt seeks Afghan push to find political solution to war (AFP)

AFP - The government on Wednesday called on the Afghan government to intensify efforts and find a political solution with the Taliban to bring the conflict there to an end.

In praise of … presidential smoking | Editorial

It's better for Obama to have the odd puff if the alternative is keeping all that stress bottled up inside

The Guardian kicked the habit long ago, banning smoking from the office years before it became the law of the land. So of course we applaud President Lula of Brazil who has given up smoking – 50 years after he started. Apparently it was sheer force of will that did it: no nicotine patches, no gum, no tablets. Good for him. Meanwhile, Lula's counterpart in Washington still struggles against the demon weed. Barack Obama has tried and tried to give up but – as his first presidential medical confirmed last month – success has proved as elusive as his healthcare reform bill. Some will condemn the US president as weak-willed, a poor role model for America's impressionable teens. We take a more charitable view, for we are reminded of the fate of one of Mr Obama's predecessors. Lyndon Johnson resisted temptation and smoked not once during his more than five years in the White House. The instant he left office, however, boarding the plane home to Texas, he pulled out a cigarette. One of his daughters immediately yanked it from his mouth, with a warning that he was killing himself. He snatched it back, saying, "I've raised you girls, I've been President: now it's my time." He then embarked on what historians regard as a "self-destructive spiral", dying four years later. Given that history, perhaps it's better for Obama to have the odd puff if the alternative is keeping all that stress bottled up inside. When it comes to presidents and smoking, we ought to lighten up – and let them light up.

• Smoking
• Barack Obama
• Brazil
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

In praise of … presidential smoking | Editorial

It's better for Obama to have the odd puff if the alternative is keeping all that stress bottled up inside

The Guardian kicked the habit long ago, banning smoking from the office years before it became the law of the land. So of course we applaud President Lula of Brazil who has given up smoking – 50 years after he started. Apparently it was sheer force of will that did it: no nicotine patches, no gum, no tablets. Good for him. Meanwhile, Lula's counterpart in Washington still struggles against the demon weed. Barack Obama has tried and tried to give up but – as his first presidential medical confirmed last month – success has proved as elusive as his healthcare reform bill. Some will condemn the US president as weak-willed, a poor role model for America's impressionable teens. We take a more charitable view, for we are reminded of the fate of one of Mr Obama's predecessors. Lyndon Johnson resisted temptation and smoked not once during his more than five years in the White House. The instant he left office, however, boarding the plane home to Texas, he pulled out a cigarette. One of his daughters immediately yanked it from his mouth, with a warning that he was killing himself. He snatched it back, saying, "I've raised you girls, I've been President: now it's my time." He then embarked on what historians regard as a "self-destructive spiral", dying four years later. Given that history, perhaps it's better for Obama to have the odd puff if the alternative is keeping all that stress bottled up inside. When it comes to presidents and smoking, we ought to lighten up – and let them light up.

• Smoking
• Barack Obama
• Brazil
• United States

Letters: Arms claims put aid workers in danger

Your report on the BBC World Service documentary on aid to Ethiopia 25 years ago (Report, 9 March) quotes a senior BBC source saying the corporation was concerned about the amount of criticism that "a relatively obscure documentary [which] didn't even mention Band Aid" has attracted. In fact, the offending documentary devotes its first five minutes to the Live Aid relief effort, which was directly related to Band Aid. In addition, part of the Band Aid single Do They Know It's Christmas was played.

There was a great deal of pre-publicity about the offending documentary. A BBC News channel presenter said there were allegations that £63m [of aid money] was channelled into fighting. This story was, not surprisingly, picked up by three national newspapers. It is not enough for the BBC merely to defend the documentary. Does it abdicate responsibility for the rest of its output?

The "evidence" on which the documentary's allegations rested included interviews with two former TPLF figures, who are well-known critics of the present Ethiopian president Meles Zenawi. It was Zenawi, one of them claimed, who ensured that just 5% of the 1985 relief effort was spent on feeding famine victims. A CIA report from the time has also been cited as evidence, although the report also included the observation that diverting food aid would have hampered the TPLF's military capabilities. The suggestion that professional aid workers allowed £63m to be misdirected into funding a rebel war is not only unsubstantiated, it is dangerous for our colleagues who are working in the most volatile parts of the world today.

Paul Brannen

Head of advocacy, Christian Aid

• BBC World Service
• Ethiopia
• International aid and development
• CIA

Letters: Frail economy needs another stimulus

The Conservative party's calls for immediate cuts to the economy have been met by a growing chorus of criticism, warning that this risks sending the economy back into recession (Report, 8 March). The government was right to stimulate the economy with a variety of measures last year and so offset some of the worst effects of the recession. Yet, as some of the world's leading economists have pointed out, the fragile nature of the recovery means that fiscal stimulus is still required. However, according to the IMF, Britain is one of only two G20 countries not currently planning any such fiscal stimulus in 2010.

A programme of government investment would not only stimulate the wider economy in the short term, but would increase long-term growth, thereby lowering the debt levels through a higher tax take. To this end, we encourage the chancellor to use the forthcoming budget to announce a second fiscal stimulus – especially in housing and transport, where investment has fallen most, and with a focus on developing a low-carbon economy – which would both help to secure economic recovery and create much needed jobs.

Colin Burgon MP

Alex Smith, Editor, Labourlist

Austin Mitchell MP

Anne Cryer MP

Alexandra Kemp, Chief Executive, West Norfolk Women and Carers' Pensions Network (personal capacity)

Bellavia Ribeiro-Addy, NUS National Officer

Billy Hayes, General Secretary, CWU

Byron Taylor, National Trade Union Liaison Officer, Trade Union & Labour Party Liaison Organisation (TULO)

Cat Smith, Vice Chair, London Young Labour

Chris Edwards, Senior Research Fellow, UEA,

Chris McCafferty MP

Chris McLaughlin, Editor, Tribune

Christopher Cramer, Professor of Political Economy of Development, SOAS

Clifford Singer, Director, The Other TaxPayers' Alliance

Colin Challen MP

Compass Youth Executive

Dave Anderson MP

David Drew MP

Dai Havard MP

Dave Prentis, General Secretary, Unison.

David Hamilton MP

Diane Abbott MP

Denis Murphy MP

Edward O'Hara MP

Ellie Gellard, Labour blogger

Grazia Ietto-Gillies, Emeritus Professor of Applied Economics, Director Centre for International Business Studies, London South Bank University

Glenda Jackson MP

Gerry Doherty, General Secretary, TSSA

Gordon Prentis MP

Prof. George Irvin, Univerity of London, SOAS.

Professor Ian Gough, Professorial Research Fellow, LSE

Hugh Lanning PCS Deputy General Secretary

Hywel Francis MP

Harriet Yeo, Labour Party NEC

Hilary Wainright, Co-Editor, Red Pepper

Ismail Erturk, Senior Lecturer in Banking, Manchester Business School

Janet Dean MP

Jeremy Corbyn MP

Jim Cousins MP

Jim Sheridan MP

Jon Cruddas MP

John Austin MP

John Ross, Editor, Socialist Economic Bulletin

John Weeks, Professor Emeritus of Economics, SOAS, University of London, and former director of the Centre for Development Policy and Research.

Jonathan Rutherford, Professor of Cultural Studies, Middlesex University

Katy Clark MP

Karen Buck MP

Keith Norman, General Secretary, ASLEF

Ken Livingstone

Kevin Maguire, Associate Editor, Mirror

Kelvin Hopkins MP

Martin McIvor, Editor, Renewal

Malcolm Sawyer, Professor of Economics, University of Leeds

Mehdi Hasan, Senior Editor (politics), New Statesman

Michael Connarty MP

Michael Meacher MP

Mick Shaw, President, FBU

Mike Wood MP

Michael Burke, Economist and contributor to Socialist Economic Bulletin

Neal Lawson, Chair, Compass

Neil MacKinnon, Chief Economist, VTB Capital

Paul Kenny, General Secretary, GMB

Paul Truswell MP

Paul Sagar, New Political Economy Network.

Pat Devine, Honorary Research Fellow, University of Manchester

Peter Kilfoyle MP

Peter Willsman Labour Party NEC

Prem Sikka, Professor of Accounting, University of Essex

Richard Ascough, Regional Secretary, South Eastern GMB

Richard Murphy, Director, Tax Research UK

Roger Berry MP

Robin Murray, Fellow, Young Foundation, Author of Danger and Opportunity:Crisis and the New Social Economy

Roger Godsiff MP

Ronnie Campbell MP

Sam Tarry, National Chair, Young Labour

Sunder Katwala, General Secretary, Fabian Society (personal capacity)

Susan Himmelweit, Professor of Economics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Open University

Terry Rooney MP

Tim Roache, GMB Yorkshire Regional Secretary

Tony Juniper, environmentalist

Tony Woodley, Joint General Secretary UNITE

Will Straw, Editor, Left Foot Forward

• Madeleine Bunting is spot on (Comment, 8 March). Why on earth is Labour stumbling into an election playing to Tory rules? Who decided the public were not capable of understanding it will take time – and a strategy of growth and investment – to recover from the disaster brought about by the clowns of finance? Instead we are supposed to choose between competitive cuts manifestos which are financially illiterate. The economy should not be subjected to a choice between losing an arm or a leg when it should be given a hand up.

Ric Carey

Southsea, Hampshire

• Reading Madeleine Bunting's article, I was struck by everyone's reluctance to ask the beneficiaries of the last 10 boom years – those who made money out of property and shares, or saw huge pay increases – to pay something back to help repair the public finances. It's perverse that low-paid workers should have to pick up the tab.

Scott Wilson

St Andrews, Fifeshire

• Economic policy
• Conservatives
• Recession
• IMF
• G20
• Tax and spending
• Budget

Afghanistan: War with an end | Editorial

The conditions exist for a settlement, which would limit Taliban influence to the south, preserve advances and cut corruption

Two thoughtful speeches this week dealt with the challenging legacy of America's war on terror. The first was given in London by Eliza Manningham-Buller, the former head of MI5. She spoke about the use of torture by American intelligence. Britain did not, she said, condone its use or carry it out directly, but nor did this country try as hard as it should have done (or perhaps at all) to discover what its allies were up to. As a result Britain gained information from suspects subjected to extreme and illegal techniques, while claiming that it did not condone the use of them. That is a greater matter for shame and scrutiny than the government seems able to admit, connivance being only one or two steps short of commission.

The second important speech this week was made in Boston by David Miliband, the man who as foreign secretary has had to deal with the consequences of torture and the wars which brought it about. His words repay close analysis, since they stand above the routine, as a signal to the future rather than a justification of the past.

"In 1988, I would never have believed that 2010 years later I would be British foreign secretary explaining a war in Afghanistan," Mr Miliband began. That was a clue to the direction of his thinking. He knows that the Afghan war has gone wrong, cannot be won in military terms and in the form it is being fought is destroying Afghanistan rather than saving it. He could not say this directly, but did so instead by proposing a change of strategy, in which dialogue and serious compromise matter more than fighting.

"Talking to the Taliban" has become an easy slogan for many critics of the war, but it has now also become official British and – in some regards – US policy. "A political solution to all conflicts is the inevitable outcome," the US general Stanley McChrysal said recently. Or as Mr Miliband put it in his speech: "While violence of the most murderous, indiscriminate and terrible kind started this Afghan war, politics will bring it to an end on the back of concerted military and civilian effort."

The foreign secretary does not need to persuade the British public. Six British deaths this month in Sangin alone are miserable evidence of the military struggle, and Mr Miliband is not the only politician who would like to see the fight come to an end. The American surge will not be sustained beyond 2011, as the presidential election comes closer. All this has added urgency to the search for an alternative. Tentative contacts with some Taliban figures, and a sham of an Afghan election to return a discredited president, are not in themselves a political solution.

A precipitate Nato pullout would require a latter-day version of the Soviet government's departing advice to its Afghan ally in 1989: "Forget Communism, abandon socialism, embrace Islam and work with the tribes." It would lead to the swift collapse of the Kabul regime, and chaos afterwards. But fighting on is no better. The answer, as Mr Miliband recognises, is some combination of less fighting and more talking, which could lead to a deal. This deal will not be the same as the "reconciliation" which has always been on offer – allowing Taliban fighters to surrender. The west and Kabul must compromise too. One target of Mr Miliband's speech was President Karzai, who has long since ceased to be anything other than an obstacle to a settlement. As the foreign secretary put it: "Without a genuine effort to understand and ultimately address the wider concerns which fuel the insurgency, it will be hard to convince significant numbers of combatants that their interests will be better served by working with the government than by fighting against it."

The conditions exist for a settlement. It would limit Taliban influence to the south, preserve advances such as female education, cut corruption and the number of foreign troops. Mr Miliband is right to be brave.

• Afghanistan
• Taliban
• David Miliband
• Defence policy
• Foreign policy

Our secret service agents deserve better | Andrew Tyrie

Dame Eliza was right to speak up for the security services, but only an inquiry will raise morale

The comments by former MI5 head Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, that the US hid from Britain's security services the torture they were meting out to detainees, at first blush appear extraordinary. They add to the growing mass of confusing and often contradictory information about Britain's knowledge of the US's mistreatment of prisoners. But she has done the right thing by speaking up, even if her remarks pose as many questions as they answer. Only an inquiry can sort this out.

Dame Manningham-Buller's revelations are bizarre on several counts. First, she said she had expressed surprise in 2002-3 to her staff that the US was able to gain so much information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, but accepted as an explanation for his loquacity that he was proudly describing his achievements. Second, when she and the security services finally recognised that the US was, after all, torturing detainees, she said: "We did lodge a protest."

On the first, it seems odd that it did not occur to the security services that Sheikh Mohammed might have been tortured. By the time of his detention, the Bush administration's coercive interrogation techniques were already the subject of press comment in the US.

As for the protest, the Foreign Office – the BBC has reported – claims it cannot find any details of it. This is consonant with the shoddy record-keeping over the whole rendition issue. We need to know, once the security services did realise the US was using new interrogation tactics, under what guidelines they were operating. The prime minister promised in March 2009 that these would be published. We've still not seen them. Furthermore, it is very unsatisfactory that, having known about mistreatment of detainees and having lodged a protest about such treatment, the government still continues to rely on American assurances about rendition.

We can't carry on like this. The intelligence and security committee does not seem to have fulfilled its parliamentary role. Did the ISC know about the protest to the US? If it did, it has not told parliament. The revelations reinforce concerns about the ISC's ability to do its job properly. Reform of the way the committee's chairman is appointed is essential. A string of appointees has come out of government to chair the committee – only to return to the front bench afterwards. This revolving door should be blocked. The Wright committee's recommendation that the ISC chairman be elected by MPs, subject to a prime ministerial veto, would bolster accountability.

Whether Britain was complicit or merely ignorant about what was going on is not something that can or should be sorted out as a result of a drip-drip of revelations. Our security services, in particular, deserve better.

As Dame Manningham-Buller said herself, revelations like this will imperil morale; after all, the security services don't want to be involved in these practices. They are widely held to be counterproductive for obtaining information. The services also want the public to have confidence in them. Accountability is to their benefit. That is why we do them a disservice if we fail to get to the bottom of this. We can then draw a line under this episode and move on. Reading between the lines, I have the impression that this is what Dame Manningham-Buller wants too.

The quickest and most effective way to do this is in a brief, judge-led inquiry. With David Cameron, Nick Clegg, the government's own independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Lord Carlile, and many MPs all supporting an inquiry, and Lord Goldsmith also calling for an investigation, only ministers are resisting. Let us hope they soon relent.

• Terrorism policy
• UK security and terrorism
• Global terrorism
• Torture
• MI5

IPL gets Bollywood treatment

The IPL, six weeks of razzmatazz and TV with a little sport, is predicted to double last year's takings

It is already big and brash. It is about to get substantially bigger and brasher. At 8pm on Friday, hundreds of millions of people in India, from tea shops in Mumbai slums to plush Delhi suburbs and thousands of villages in between, will sit down to watch the Deccan Chargers play the Kolkata Knight Riders in the opening match of the third season of the Indian Premier League (IPL).

"If you thought the first two seasons were the ultimate cricket-meets-entertainment blockbusters then you haven't seen anything yet," enthused the Financial Express newspaper.

The IPL phenomenon cuts across all barriers of class, caste and income. At the exclusive Tollygunge Club in Kolkata – or Calcutta as it is often still known – staff will take a few hours out while members halt their golf, squash and riding. Both clientele and staff (more surreptitiously) will watch the fast and furious 20-over cricket shown on a big screen on the wall of the main bar. "It doesn't matter who wins. It's the game that counts," said Sajad Mundal, the chief steward. For 10-year-old Anvam Najpal, sipping a soft drink that Mundal had just brought him, the tournament has already started. At his exclusive private school, a mini IPL, with just 10 overs played, is already under way. He is a Deccan Chargers fan. His dad however supports the Delhi Daredevils.

"But we will all watch it together," he said. "Mum's not that interested, but she'll watch it with us. I really like seeing all the different people from all over the world playing together in unity."

Not all are attracted by such lofty ideals, however. For Michael Watson, a chef at the Tollygunge, the biggest pull is cheerleaders, cause of much consternation among purists. "The IPL is fun and entertainment," he said. "I just wish I could get a ticket and a day off."

By the time the first ball has been bowled on Friday night, most viewers will already be riveted to their screens. For this year's IPL, the trademark razzmatazz has been cranked up another notch.The Indian cricketing authorities, which run the six-week tournament, have done deals for a huge range of pre-match spectacles.

Colors, a major local Hindi-language general entertainment channel, is filming a reality show called IPL Rockstar, which will see contestants competing in heats held on a 13-metre (40ft) stage in the cricket grounds while the players warm up.

"The aim is to get that Superbowl-style entertainment atmosphere," said Rajesh Kamat, chief executive of Colors.

Other programmes that Colors plans include an "I'm a cricketing celebrity get me out of here" show: 14 cricketers will confront their "worst fear". There will also be an "IPL Nights" featuring "the hippest parties" and "the hottest fashion shows", where viewers will see their "sporting heroes shake a leg or two on a different pitch altogether".

"Bollywood is a passion and cricket a religion," Kamat said. "We are combining the two. But it is the cricketers that interest us, not the cricket."

This season's IPL, whatever its huge popularity, has not been trouble-free. The announcement of two new teams – the eight current sides are financed by mini-conglomerates of film stars and tycoons – had to be postponed after only three bids were received. Then there is a dispute with television networks that has limited the pre-tournament publicity. And there are threats from militants linked to al-Qaida which were deemed almost serious enough for the dozens of top cricketers from around the world to forgo their lucrative fees. (Last year's tournament was played in South Africa because of security fears.)

However, with so much money and excitement at stake, the IPL has massive momentum. After analysing the potential profits from television rights, sponsorship deals, merchandising and gate receipts, Brand Finance, a firm of international consultants, calculated the league's value this season at more than £2.6bn, twice the 2009 figure.

"The juggernaut is on the road and the revenue-making machine is in full blast," said Unni Krishnan, managing director of Brand Finance, although he warned that the league would need to work hard to stay ahead of competitors emerging around the world.

This season also sees an agreement with Google that means games will be webcast live on YouTube, a historic first. There is also a tie-up with cinema owners around India to allow tens of thousands to watch games in multiplexes and local theatres. In the UK, games will be broadcast by ITV.

Senior Indian cricketing officials have warned against too much commercialisation. "It is paramount that a spectator sport should always be treated as a sport first rather than purely a business venture," said Rajeev Shukla, a member of the league's governing council.

Lalit Modi, the IPL's commissioner, is clear about his ambitions ."We hope to become the dominant sporting league in the world," he said.

Outside the Tollygunge Club a row of rickshaw drivers and Kolkata Knight Riders fans wait for fares.

"The IPL is very good," they chorus. "Very good."

Where will they spend tomorrow night? They point across the traffic to a small tea and roti stall on the pavement opposite. There, among the flickering bulbs and a crowd of clients eating a cheap dinner, perched on a shelf and flickering in the gloom, is that most precious of items: a television.

• IPL
• India
• Cricket

Forbes rich list topped by Mexican mobile phone titan Carlos Slim

Developing nations storm Forbes rich list as America Movil's Carlos Slim beats Microsoft's Bill Gates to top spot

The old order is under threat at the world's billionaires club. Traditionally dominated by Americans and Europeans, the top ranks of the world's richest people have been infiltrated by scores of ultra-rich entrepreneurs from the developing world – capped by the Mexican telecoms tycoon Carlos Slim.

Today, Slim, the titan of mobile phones in Mexico, criticised as a ruthless monopolist, was crowned as the richest person in the world by Forbes magazine, which calculated his net worth at $53.5bn (£35.7bn). Bolstered by a surge in the share price of his America Movil empire, Slim's wealth edged ahead of the $53bn fortune amassed by the Microsoft boss Bill Gates, making the portly cigar-smoking 70-year-old the first non-American to hold the top spot since 1994.

In third place was the legendary Nebraska-based stockpicker Warren Buffett with $47bn, completing a triumvirate that has occupied the top three positions for five successive years. Britain's top entrant into the global rich list, the Duke of Westminster, could only muster 45th position as his vast landownings gave him a net worth of $12bn.

Below the top few individuals, however, the lower ranks of Forbes's closely watched annual list showed a substantial shifting in the sands of wealth, with Asian entrepreneurs catapulted into remarkable riches by a swift bounceback in emerging financial markets. The number of billionaires from Asian and Australasian nations leapt from 130 to 234 last year, with the net worth of the region's super-rich doubling from $357bn to $729bn.

"Asia is leading the comeback," said Forbes's editor-in-chief, Steve Forbes. "There are remarkable changes taking place in the global economy."

He pointed out that as the number of billionaires in the world swelled from 793 to 1,011, the proportion of Americans dropped from 45% to 40%: "The US still dominates but it's lagging. It's not doing as well as the rest of the world in coming back from the financial crisis."

Asia's richest man, Mukesh Ambani, became the fourth-richest person on the planet with $29bn, as his textiles-to-petrol Reliance Industries empire prospered. Pakistan also produced its first billionaire, banking magnate Mian Mhammad Mansha, and the number of Chinese billionaires leapt by 27 to 64.

Among those enjoying an upsurge in fortunes was Robin Li, founder of the Chinese internet search engine Baidu, whose wealth reached $3.5bn as his company prospered on Google's abrupt withdrawal from China, due to censorship concerns. Another Chinese tycoon, property magnate Wu Yajun, has emerged as the world's richest self-made woman with $3.9bn from her Longfor Properties empire, which spans apartments, townhouses, luxury villas and commercial property across China.

The upsurge in the number of super-rich individuals from less affluent nations went beyond Asia. The number of billionaires from Russia almost doubled from 32 to 62. The owner of the Evening Standard, Alexander Lebedev, re-entered the ranks with $2bn, after threatening to sue Forbes a year ago for claiming that losses in the financial crisis had stripped him of his billionaire status. And Alisher Usmanov, a shareholder of Arsenal, often touted as a future buyer of the football club, enjoyed a lucrative year at his metals conglomerate with his net worth surging from $1.7bn to $7.2bn.

Turkey saw its legion of billionaires swell from 12 to 28. And from South America, a commodities tycoon, Eike Batista, became the first Brazilian to make the world's top 10 for wealth. Batista, 52, a college dropout who made his fortune from gold, oil and diamonds, and has been an enthusiastic cheerleader for Rio's 2016 Olympics, is ranked eighth in the world with $27bn.

Economists say that a rapid rise in super-wealthy individuals from the developing world reflects the pace of globalisation, with cross-border stockmarkets allowing international investors to pump funds at the touch of a button into major corporations in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

"It's symptomatic of the spread of globalisation, the spread of market economies and the maturing of financial markets in these countries," said Homi Kharas, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "These are paper billionaires. The values being placed on their companies have shot up and that's a result of stock exchanges in these countries being a bit better developed and being able to gain foreign investment." But, Kharas added, it also points to a widening in inequality between the "haves" and the "have nots" in poorer parts of the world. "In India, for example, you see some particularly conspicuous consumption and when that's juxtaposed against the grinding poverty of the rest of the nation, it surely does have an effect on social stability," he said.

In British terms, little changed among the ranks of the super-rich. Behind the Duke of Westminster came property developers David and Simon Reuben, the Top Shop boss Sir Philip Green and Virgin supremo Sir Richard Branson. Two new British names joined the billionaires' club – financier Alan Howard, who runs the hedge fund Brevan Howard, and China-based property developer Xiu Li Hawken of Renhe Commercial Holdings, who holds British citizenship.

For the newly crowned richest person on the planet, topping the rich list cements a rapid rise to global fame. A spokesman for Carlos Slim offered no comment, although in the past, the Mexican tycoon has disdained such competitions.

However, he is only top thanks to the generosity of a rival – if Bill Gates had not chosen to hand a huge chunk of his wealth to his Gates Foundation to fight disease in the developing world, the software supremo would be worth as much as $80bn.New boy in billionaires' club

An astute reading of imminent danger helped the publicity-shy City financier Alan Howard become one of Britain's newest billionaires, as his Brevan Howard hedge fund liquidated 80% of its investments into cash at an early point in the global financial crisis.

A former Salomon Brothers bond trader, Howard, 45, founded Brevan Howard in 2003 and the firm, based in Marks & Spencer's former headquarters on Baker Street, has grown to become the world's fourth-largest hedge fund with $30bn (£20bn) run by 300 staff.

Following a global macro strategy of betting on international financial trends, Brevan Howard's key fund produced a 21% return in 2008 while most of its rivals suffered. Forbes magazine put Howard's personal fortune at $1.8bn, ranking him 556th among the world's richest people.

In a rare interview with Bloomberg News last year, Howard, who is a diminutive 5ft 5in, admitted he prefers to minimise publicity: "We're a company that prefers to have a low profile. That's just the way we are."

A stalwart supporter of the Tories, Howard is acquainted with top figures including George Osborne and has served on the board of Conservative Friends of Israel. But his spokesman denied persistent reports that he is a donor to the Conservative party.

• Rich lists
• Telecommunications industry
• Mexico
• United States

Forbes rich list topped by Mexican mobile phone titan Carlos Slim

Developing nations storm Forbes rich list as America Movil's Carlos Slim beats Microsoft's Bill Gates to top spot

The old order is under threat at the world's billionaires club. Traditionally dominated by Americans and Europeans, the top ranks of the world's richest people have been infiltrated by scores of ultra-rich entrepreneurs from the developing world – capped by the Mexican telecoms tycoon Carlos Slim.

Today, Slim, the titan of mobile phones in Mexico, criticised as a ruthless monopolist, was crowned as the richest person in the world by Forbes magazine, which calculated his net worth at $53.5bn (£35.7bn). Bolstered by a surge in the share price of his America Movil empire, Slim's wealth edged ahead of the $53bn fortune amassed by the Microsoft boss Bill Gates, making the portly cigar-smoking 70-year-old the first non-American to hold the top spot since 1994.

In third place was the legendary Nebraska-based stockpicker Warren Buffett with $47bn, completing a triumvirate that has occupied the top three positions for five successive years. Britain's top entrant into the global rich list, the Duke of Westminster, could only muster 45th position as his vast landownings gave him a net worth of $12bn.

Below the top few individuals, however, the lower ranks of Forbes's closely watched annual list showed a substantial shifting in the sands of wealth, with Asian entrepreneurs catapulted into remarkable riches by a swift bounceback in emerging financial markets. The number of billionaires from Asian and Australasian nations leapt from 130 to 234 last year, with the net worth of the region's super-rich doubling from $357bn to $729bn.

"Asia is leading the comeback," said Forbes's editor-in-chief, Steve Forbes. "There are remarkable changes taking place in the global economy."

He pointed out that as the number of billionaires in the world swelled from 793 to 1,011, the proportion of Americans dropped from 45% to 40%: "The US still dominates but it's lagging. It's not doing as well as the rest of the world in coming back from the financial crisis."

Asia's richest man, Mukesh Ambani, became the fourth-richest person on the planet with $29bn, as his textiles-to-petrol Reliance Industries empire prospered. Pakistan also produced its first billionaire, banking magnate Mian Mhammad Mansha, and the number of Chinese billionaires leapt by 27 to 64.

Among those enjoying an upsurge in fortunes was Robin Li, founder of the Chinese internet search engine Baidu, whose wealth reached $3.5bn as his company prospered on Google's abrupt withdrawal from China, due to censorship concerns. Another Chinese tycoon, property magnate Wu Yajun, has emerged as the world's richest self-made woman with $3.9bn from her Longfor Properties empire, which spans apartments, townhouses, luxury villas and commercial property across China.

The upsurge in the number of super-rich individuals from less affluent nations went beyond Asia. The number of billionaires from Russia almost doubled from 32 to 62. The owner of the Evening Standard, Alexander Lebedev, re-entered the ranks with $2bn, after threatening to sue Forbes a year ago for claiming that losses in the financial crisis had stripped him of his billionaire status. And Alisher Usmanov, a shareholder of Arsenal, often touted as a future buyer of the football club, enjoyed a lucrative year at his metals conglomerate with his net worth surging from $1.7bn to $7.2bn.

Turkey saw its legion of billionaires swell from 12 to 28. And from South America, a commodities tycoon, Eike Batista, became the first Brazilian to make the world's top 10 for wealth. Batista, 52, a college dropout who made his fortune from gold, oil and diamonds, and has been an enthusiastic cheerleader for Rio's 2016 Olympics, is ranked eighth in the world with $27bn.

Economists say that a rapid rise in super-wealthy individuals from the developing world reflects the pace of globalisation, with cross-border stockmarkets allowing international investors to pump funds at the touch of a button into major corporations in Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

"It's symptomatic of the spread of globalisation, the spread of market economies and the maturing of financial markets in these countries," said Homi Kharas, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "These are paper billionaires. The values being placed on their companies have shot up and that's a result of stock exchanges in these countries being a bit better developed and being able to gain foreign investment." But, Kharas added, it also points to a widening in inequality between the "haves" and the "have nots" in poorer parts of the world. "In India, for example, you see some particularly conspicuous consumption and when that's juxtaposed against the grinding poverty of the rest of the nation, it surely does have an effect on social stability," he said.

In British terms, little changed among the ranks of the super-rich. Behind the Duke of Westminster came property developers David and Simon Reuben, the Top Shop boss Sir Philip Green and Virgin supremo Sir Richard Branson. Two new British names joined the billionaires' club – financier Alan Howard, who runs the hedge fund Brevan Howard, and China-based property developer Xiu Li Hawken of Renhe Commercial Holdings, who holds British citizenship.

For the newly crowned richest person on the planet, topping the rich list cements a rapid rise to global fame. A spokesman for Carlos Slim offered no comment, although in the past, the Mexican tycoon has disdained such competitions.

However, he is only top thanks to the generosity of a rival – if Bill Gates had not chosen to hand a huge chunk of his wealth to his Gates Foundation to fight disease in the developing world, the software supremo would be worth as much as $80bn.

• Rich lists
• Telecommunications industry
• Mexico
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Libel laws: from Victorian businessmen to an international business

Boris Berezovsky case raises concerns about 'libel tourism' in UK, though judges have defended system

English libel laws have grown from defending the reputations of Victorian businessmen to an international business. Berezovsky's latest victory follows a decade of litigation by the Russian businessman. In 2001 the House of Lords ruled that a case he brought against the American publishers of Forbes magazine could be tried in the UK, despite claims by many that the appropriate forum was Russia, where Berezovsky was a national, or the US, where the vast majority of copies were published.

One law lord, Lord Hoffman, dissented in that case, arguing that "Mr Berezovsky has not suffered substantial damage to his reputation in England."

But Hoffman is one of a number of high-profile judges, along with media judge Mr Justice Eady, who have defended the English legal system from claims of libel tourism. They argue that efforts by American legislators to protect Americans from the "chilling" effect of the English law reflect the American belief "that their way is the only way forward for the whole world".

And the claimant-friendly nature of English libel law has continued to attract growing criticism. In 2008 the UN committee on human rights expressed concern about "libel tourism" in the UK, saying it discouraged critical media reporting on matters of serious public interest. A report last month by the Commons committee on culture, media and sport The report considered a number of cases including one brought by Saudi businessman Bin Mahfouz against American author Rachel Ehrenfeld for a book she wrote about the financing of terrorism, despite only 23 copies having been sold in the UK, and a Ukranian businessman Rinat Akhmetov, who sued a Ukranian language website in the English courts for an article read primarily in the Ukraine.

"The UK's reputation as a country which protects free speech and freedom of expression is being damaged by concern over libel tourism," the report said.

• Law
• Boris Berezovsky
• Media law

Britain confronts debt of Greek proportions (AP)

AP - Government debt is growing, as is the deficit. The economy is struggling to get out of recession and there is talk of spending cuts or higher taxes. The unions are on edge. And the currency is plummeting.

All the classroom's a stage, as RSC helps bring Shakespeare to life

Teachers urged to drop 'chalk and talk' technique and let pupils mirror methods of actors by walking around

Eleven-year-olds are to learn Shakespeare using techniques employed by RSC actors, and English teachers will be encouraged to let pupils walk around the classroom rather than reading the plays while sitting at their desks.

Exercises devised by the Royal Shakespeare Company and the Globe theatre in London will see children aged 11 to 14 mirror the methods of professional actors at rehearsal. Written and oral assessments developed alongside the lessons will show how well students have understood the texts.

Following the government's announcement of the new teaching initiative, the RSC's director of education, Jacqui O'Hanlon, said focusing on how actors came to understand the playwright's language had been a vital inspiration.

She said: "Actors have the same nervousness around Shakespeare's language as young people in schools do. We looked at how they get from that to a place of utter conviction, confidence and eloquence in six to eight weeks."

Pupils must study two Shakespeare texts between the ages of 11 and 16, one of them in key stage three before the age of 14.

The schools minister, Diana Johnson, said Shakespeare should be a central part of every young person's education. "Developing a love of Shakespeare at a young age often leads to a lifelong passion for literature and theatre and helps to improve a child's reading and writing."

In one task pupils will work on creating four key physical archetypes, that of king, warrior, lover and joker, before finding which lines of their chosen character go with those traits and the acting them out. Through this they can examine how a character such as Macbeth can switch dramatically within one scene from soldier to kingly figure to trickster.

The tasks also include creating two sets for As You Like It after acting some scenes and analysing the text for inspiration.

O'Hanlon said: "It's really innovative but you're still getting a really rigorous and robust model of understanding. It's miles away from a 'chalk and talk, sit in your desks and read it' world of Shakespeare.

"Within the English curriculum you tend to look at a play text as a piece of literature rather than performance. But you can't possibly understand Shakespeare's words if you're just reading it in your head. He wrote these plays to be spoken and performed. Shakespeare is difficult; it's not a 21st-century text. You've got to use different mechanisms to access it.

"Young people get the most out of Shakespeare when they explore the plays as actors do, when they are up on their feet and confidently exploring the language and characters."

Bill Buckhurst is directing a Macbeth production for teenagers at the Globe

Shakespeare's plays weren't written to be read out loud, they're written to be performed. If you're sitting mumbling the words on a Friday afternoon when you're tired, they won't really mean anything. Getting students to do exercises that mean they have to put some energy behind the words and see how they affect other people, means the text takes on a life.

Hearing the sounds also helps you understand how Shakespeare chooses words that have a real relation to the story he's telling. In Richard III, for example, the first speech is full of sibilants, which makes you think about what kind of character you're dealing with – it can almost sound like the hissing of a snake, appropriate given Richard's slippery nature.

Young people also like knowing this is the sort of work professional actors do – that we're all exploring the plays, coming to them with a certain anxiety.

Actors have to work at Shakespeare too. When I'd just left drama school and went to the RSC I was terrified before the first rehearsal. But I was relieved to find they were all as much in the dark as I was; working it out together was the fun of it.

• English
• William Shakespeare
• Royal Shakespeare Company
• Schools
• Theatre

Genomes of entire family sequenced in world first

Sequencing the genomes of every family member gives researchers a powerful new tool for tracking down the defective genes that cause inherited diseases

An American family has become the first to have the entire genome of each member mapped to identify the causes of rare diseases that affect the children.

The family of four is unusual because the parents are healthy but both son and daughter have two rare inherited medical conditions that cause facial and limb malformations and lung problems.

Mutations in "recessive" genes are responsible for these conditions, meaning that in each case the children must have inherited a defective copy from both their mother and their father to get the disease.

One of the conditions, Miller's syndrome, causes facial and limb abnormalities and affects only around one in a million people. Only a few families in the world have been formally diagnosed with the condition.

The second disease, called primary ciliary dyskinesia, makes the hair-like structures that sweep mucus from the lungs and airways stop working, and affects around one in 10,000 people globally. The chances of one person having both conditions are less than one in a billion.

Scientists at the Institute for Systems Biology in Seattle sequenced the entire genomes of all four family members and used the information to pinpoint four genes that might be responsible for the diseases. Mutations in two of the genes were later confirmed to be the cause of the diseases.

The breakthrough, reported in the journal Science, gives researchers a powerful new tool to track down quickly the defective genes behind almost any disease that is caused to a significant extent by genetic glitches.

"It remains to be seen how far we can push it, but I really don't see any limitation to this. If we look at more and larger families we should be able to home in on the key genes linked to far more complex conditions, such as neurodegenerative diseases and autoimmune diseases," said David Galas, professor of genetics and a senior author on the study.

With many diseases, identifying the defective gene can help doctors make a diagnosis and arrange for appropriate counselling for the patient and other family members.

"The big impact is going to be helping us understand diseases at the molecular level, but that is a longer play," Galas added.

The researchers also report the first measurement of how many new, spontaneous mutations parents pass on to their children. They identified 30 from each parent, meaning that each child inherited 60 new mutations in total. Estimates based on comparisons between human and chimp genomes have previous led scientists to think the figure was higher, at around 75.

Writing in the journal, the scientists explain that in future, everyone is likely to have a full genome sequence in their medical records, making such familial genetic comparisons easier.

Many patients who are referred to a clinical geneticist by their doctor are not diagnosed because scientists only know the genes involved in a fraction of the medical conditions they see.

"What this group has shown is that with one family, you can get almost directly to the important mutation itself. It's a big deal, because if we can collect families affected by a condition, we might be able to get much more rapidly towards understanding their genetic causes," said Matthew Hurles, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute in Cambridge, UK.

In a separate study, a researcher at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, helped discover genetic mutations that cause his own rare medical condition. James Lupski inherited Charcot-Marie-Tooth syndrome, a rare disorder that leads to a loss of sensitivity and muscle in the hands and feet. Neither of his parents have the disease, but three of his siblings do.

Writing in The New England Journal of Medicine, Lupski and his colleagues describe how they compared his genome with those of his other family members and identified two mutant genes that cause the syndrome.

"This is the first time we have tried to identify a disease gene in this way," said Lupski. "We can [now] start to use this technology to interpret the clinical information in the context of the sequence, of the hand of cards you have been dealt."

• Genetics
• Medical research
• Health
• Health & wellbeing

Colleen LaRose: all-American neighbour or terrorist Jihad Jane?

Arrest of 'cat lady', suspected of plot to kill Prophet cartoonist, linked to terror suspects held in Ireland

She lived in Main Street, Pennsburg, which in hindsight is about as rich a paradox as could be. Her apartment on the second floor of a block of flats in the Pennsylvania town was nondescript, except for some wind chimes and a star hanging from the balcony.

But today the world learned of Colleen LaRose's alleged second life, one quite out of keeping with the low-key figure she presented. She was blonde, blue-eyed, 5ft 2ins tall and wholly unassuming, according to a former boyfriend, Kurt Gorman. "She seemed normal to me. She was a good person," he told the Philadelphia Daily News.

But to the FBI agents who had been tracking her every move from at least as early as July last year, she was potentially a dangerous would-be terrorist intent on martyrdom and using the aliases Jihad Jane and Fatima LaRose.

Today, an indictment was unsealed accusing her of plotting to murder a Swedish man in order to frighten "the whole Kufar (nonbeliever) world".

Although the indictment does not name him, her intended victim is reported to have been Lars Vilks, a cartoonist who drew a satirical picture of the head of the prophet Muhammad on top of a dog's body.

US media have reported that LaRose's case is linked to the arrest in Ireland on Tuesday of seven suspected plotters from Algeria, Croatia, Palestine, Libya and the US. Al-Qaida had placed a $100,000 (£67,000) bounty on Vilks's head.

The arrest of LaRose, 46, has been seized on by US national security officials as a warning that terrorist groups want to recruit white Americans to circumvent tight travel controls.

David Kris of the justice department said the allegation "that a woman from suburban America agreed to carry out murder overseas ... underscores the evolving nature of the threat we face".

The US prosecutor for Pennsylvania, Michael Levy, said: "The case demonstrates that terrorists are looking for Americans to join them in their cause, and it shatters any lingering thought that we can spot a terrorist based on appearance."

LaRose was arrested on 15 October as she returned to the US from a trip to Europe, but details have only now been released to allow international agents to track her contacts. She is being held at a federal prison in Philadelphia.

She grew up in Texas but moved to Philadelphia in 2004. Neighbours in Pennsburg told the Los Angeles Times she had a reputation for eccentricity. "She was the weird, weird, weird lady who lived across the hall. We always called her the crazy lady," said Eric Newell, adding that despite that he never thought she was dangerous. His wife, Kristy, said LaRose used to talk a lot to her cats.

Why and when LaRose converted to Islam is not known, but the indictment pinpoints her involvement in jihadist conspiracy to June 2008, when she allegedly posted a comment on YouTube under the alias Jihad Jane, saying she was "desperate to do something somehow to help" the suffering Muslim people.

The charges detail how over the next few months she came into contact through the internet with five separate unnamed but known jihadists in Europe and south Asia. The first connection was allegedly in December 2008 with a south Asian resident who wanted to "wage jihad and become a 'shaheed' (martyr)".

LaRose replied she too wanted to martyr herself, the indictment says. On 20 February last year she sent an email saying that her physical appearance would allow her to "blend in with many people", which "may be a way to achieve what is in my heart", the indictment says.

The following month one of her contacts suggests she "can get access to many places due to ur nationality". LaRose is also alleged to have used the internet to recruit women with passports and easy travel access around Europe in support of violent jihad.

The FBI questioned her about soliciting funds for terrorism and posting on terrorist websites under the username Jihad Jane in July last year. But LaRose showed considerable naivety.

On 23 August she suddenly disappeared from her apartment, to her boyfriend's amazement. "I came home and she's gone," he said, adding that she stole his passport, for which she has also been charged.

That day she travelled to Europe and by September, the indictment says, she was actively searching for her Swedish target, becoming a "citizen" of the artist's cyber community. On 30 September she sent an email saying it was "an honour & great pleasure to die or kill" and pledging that "only death will stop me here that i am so close to the target!"

It is not clear why, but she did not go through with the attack and returned to the US on 15 October, when she was arrested.

If convicted she faces life in prison and fines of up to $1m.

News of the existence of "Jihad Jane" comes at a time of mounting anxiety in the US about the incidence of American citizens engaging in jihadist activities. It is a phenomenon of homegrown terrorism that has previously been considered rare in the country.

In December last year FBI agents and their Pakistani colleagues interrogated five young American Muslims who were suspected of being on their way to Afghanistan to fight with the Taliban, against US-led forces. The five, aged 19 to 25, had formed a close-knit social group in the Alexandria area of Virginia. They had all disappeared from their family homes in late November, reportedly leaving behind a video featuring war scenes and statements about the defence of Muslims.

Earlier in December, another US citizen, David Headley, was charged with helping to plan the Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people in 2008. Headley, 49, who lived in Chicago, is accused of conspiracy to bomb public places in India, to murder and maim people, and to provide material support to a foreign terrorist group. Headley was born in Washington DC to a Pakistani diplomat based at the country's embassy and an American mother. He adopted his mother's surname in 2006, which investigators claim allowed him to move more easily across borders.

• Global terrorism
• Sweden
• FBI
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Colleen LaRose: all-American neighbour or Jihad Jane?

Arrest of 'cat lady', suspected of plot to kill Prophet cartoonist, linked to terror suspects held in Ireland

She lived in Main Street, Pennsburg, which in hindsight is about as rich a paradox as could be. Her apartment on the second floor of a block of flats in the Pennsylvania town was nondescript, except for some wind chimes and a star hanging from the balcony.

But today the world learned of Colleen LaRose's alleged second life, one quite out of keeping with the low-key figure she presented. She was blonde, blue-eyed, 5ft 2ins tall and wholly unassuming, according to a former boyfriend, Kurt Gorman. "She seemed normal to me. She was a good person," he told the Philadelphia Daily News.

But to the FBI agents who had been tracking her every move from at least as early as July last year, she was potentially a dangerous would-be terrorist intent on martyrdom and using the aliases Jihad Jane and Fatima LaRose.

Today, an indictment was unsealed accusing her of plotting to murder a Swedish man in order to frighten "the whole Kufar (nonbeliever) world".

Although the indictment does not name him, her intended victim is reported to have been Lars Vilks, a cartoonist who drew a satirical picture of the head of the prophet Muhammad on top of a dog's body.

US media have reported that LaRose's case is linked to the arrest in Ireland on Tuesday of seven suspected plotters from Algeria, Croatia, Palestine, Libya and the US. Al-Qaida had placed a $100,000 (£67,000) bounty on Vilks's head.

The arrest of LaRose, 46, has been seized on by US national security officials as a warning that terrorist groups want to recruit white Americans to circumvent tight travel controls.

David Kris of the justice department said the allegation "that a woman from suburban America agreed to carry out murder overseas ... underscores the evolving nature of the threat we face".

The US prosecutor for Pennsylvania, Michael Levy, said: "The case demonstrates that terrorists are looking for Americans to join them in their cause, and it shatters any lingering thought that we can spot a terrorist based on appearance."

LaRose was arrested on 15 October as she returned to the US from a trip to Europe, but details have only now been released to allow international agents to track her contacts. She is being held at a federal prison in Philadelphia.

She grew up in Texas but moved to Philadelphia in 2004. Neighbours in Pennsburg told the Los Angeles Times she had a reputation for eccentricity. "She was the weird, weird, weird lady who lived across the hall. We always called her the crazy lady," said Eric Newell, adding that despite that he never thought she was dangerous. His wife, Kristy, said LaRose used to talk a lot to her cats.

Why and when LaRose converted to Islam is not known, but the indictment pinpoints her involvement in jihadist conspiracy to June 2008, when she allegedly posted a comment on YouTube under the alias Jihad Jane, saying she was "desperate to do something somehow to help" the suffering Muslim people.

The charges detail how over the next few months she came into contact through the internet with five separate unnamed but known jihadists in Europe and south Asia. The first connection was allegedly in December 2008 with a south Asian resident who wanted to "wage jihad and become a 'shaheed' (martyr)".

LaRose replied she too wanted to martyr herself, the indictment says. On 20 February last year she sent an email saying that her physical appearance would allow her to "blend in with many people", which "may be a way to achieve what is in my heart", the indictment says.

The following month one of her contacts suggests she "can get access to many places due to ur nationality". LaRose is also alleged to have used the internet to recruit women with passports and easy travel access around Europe in support of violent jihad.

The FBI questioned her about soliciting funds for terrorism and posting on terrorist websites under the username Jihad Jane in July last year. But LaRose showed considerable naivety.

On 23 August she suddenly disappeared from her apartment, to her boyfriend's amazement. "I came home and she's gone," he said, adding that she stole his passport, for which she has also been charged.

That day she travelled to Europe and by September, the indictment says, she was actively searching for her Swedish target, becoming a "citizen" of the artist's cyber community. On 30 September she sent an email saying it was "an honour & great pleasure to die or kill" and pledging that "only death will stop me here that i am so close to the target!"

It is not clear why, but she did not go through with the attack and returned to the US on 15 October, when she was arrested.

If convicted she faces life in prison and fines of up to $1m.

News of the existence of "Jihad Jane" comes at a time of mounting anxiety in the US about the incidence of American citizens engaging in jihadist activities. It is a phenomenon of homegrown terrorism that has previously been considered rare in the country.

In December last year FBI agents and their Pakistani colleagues interrogated five young American Muslims who were suspected of being on their way to Afghanistan to fight with the Taliban, against US-led forces. The five, aged 19 to 25, had formed a close-knit social group in the Alexandria area of Virginia. They had all disappeared from their family homes in late November, reportedly leaving behind a video featuring war scenes and statements about the defence of Muslims.

Earlier in December, another US citizen, David Headley, was charged with helping to plan the Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people in 2008. Headley, 49, who lived in Chicago, is accused of conspiracy to bomb public places in India, to murder and maim people, and to provide material support to a foreign terrorist group. Headley was born in Washington DC to a Pakistani diplomat based at the country's embassy and an American mother. He adopted his mother's surname in 2006, which investigators claim allowed him to move more easily across borders.

• Global terrorism
• Sweden
• FBI
• United States

Michael Tomasky: Fun with maps

I've been looking for this for a few days, and finally I found it. It's a study, by the Urban Institute, of number of uninsured by congressional district.

Open it up and have a look, especially Exhibit 1 on page 4 of the pdf (the map in green).

Now open up another tab and get this map up on that screen. This is the ever-handy map of presidential results by congressional district.

Toggling back and forth between these two you can see the percentage of uninsured in every district, the person who represents that district, how much he/she won by, how long he/she has served, and whether McCain or Obama carried his/her district.

That last data point helps us answer the question, is the member under unique political pressure? But remember, it does not dispositively answer it. For that, you should take care to compare the Congress member's margin of victory versus McCain's in that district.

So for example, let's look at old Bart Stupak, 1st district of Michigan. Obama won the district 50-49. But Stupak won it 65-33 and has served for nearly 20 years.

Meanwhile, over to the green map: somewhere between 25% and 34% of his non-elderly constituents have no private insurance (non-elderly because all seniors have Medicare). So Stupak has, oh, roughly 140,000 adult constituents with no private insurance who may be denied the chance of getting coverage because he needs to make his point about abortions, very few of which ever get reported by women to their insurance companies anyway.

Isn't this fun?! Go enjoy.

Housekeeping note: This is the last pre-vacation post. I'll be gone for a week but: a, I have a print column coming up in Friday's paper, it seems; b, I will scribble as developments warrant; c, if the House votes, obviously I'll haul myself out of the Closerie de Lilas and make a beeline for the laptop.

I'm actually stopping off in London before I head over to Elitism Central. But this time, friends, I have a conference to attend, and, this time, I'm not traveling alone. Perhaps we can partake of the cup on my next trip. Bon courage for now.

• US Congress
• US healthcare

UN orders review of glaciers report

Moves aims to restore public confidence in science of global warming after mistake over melting rates of glaciers

The UN called in the world's top scientists today to review a report by its climate body, four months after public confidence in the science of global warming was shaken by the discovery of a mistake about the melting rates of Himalayan glaciers.

In an announcement at the UN in New York Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, and Rajendra Pachauri, the much-criticised head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said the InterAcademy Council, which represents 15 national academies of science, would conduct the independent review.

The announcement follows months of controversy which, while not altering the scientific consensus on climate change, has given fresh ammunition to opponents of action on global warming.

Pachauri has faced calls for his resignation, a controversy he acknowledged obliquely today. "We have received some criticism. We are receptive and sensitive to that and we are doing something about it," he said.

The review, which is to complete its work by August, will not undertake a dissection of the 2007 report, which has been pored over by climate sceptics, or re-examine the scientific consensus that human activity is causing climate change, said Robert Dijksgraaf, the head of the InterAcademy Council.

"It will definitely not go over vast amounts of data," he told reporters. "Our goal will be to assure nations around the world that they will receive sound scientific advice on climate science."

Instead, he said it would focus on putting in place better quality control procedures for the next report, which is due in 2014.

These would include guidelines for dealing with material that has not undergone peer review such as the item on Himalayan glaciers.

One focus of the review would be the role played by Pachauri who has been criticised for his handling of the error when it first came to light.

Djiksgraaf also said the panel, likely to be made up of 10 experts, would also look at procedures for making corrections in a timely and transparent manner.

The report has been pored over by climate sceptics for errors since last November when it emerged that the IPCC had stated, wrongly, that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035. As Pachauri and Ban noted today, the solid body of the 3,000 page report remained unchallenged.

The discovery of the error goes to the core of criticism of Pachauri whose first response to questions about the accuracy of the IPCC's prediction on the melting of the Himalayan glaciers was to dismiss it as "voodoo science".

Pachauri had also rankled critics by refusing to apologise for the mistakes.

But a spokesman for Pachauri today said the IPCC had initiated the independent review, and had pressed the UN to call in the scientists.

In his brief comments, Pachauri said the work of the IPCC, which shared a Nobel prize with Al Gore in 2007, remained the gold standard of climate science. "We believe the conclusions of that report are really beyond any reasonable doubt," Pachauri said.

Environmental and science organisations supported the UN's decision.

"This is the right move," said Peter Frumhoff, the science director for the Union of Concerned Scientist and a lead author on the IPCC report.

"If this independent review is carried out with rigour and transparency, it will help strengthen the IPCC's commitment to robust scientific assessments and restore public confidence that has been shaken by an aggressive campaign to sow confusion about climate science."

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
• Climate change
• Rajendra Pachauri
• Climate change
• United Nations

No fridge is better than no house | Jennifer Abel

That a woman was made homeless for not having enough electricity reveals America's modern-day sumptuary laws

If you see a woman drowning the decent thing to do is toss her a life buoy, or at least leave her the hell alone; sitting on her head to push her deeper under water is wholly unacceptable behaviour. Unless you live in America and work for some local-level housing authority, in which case it's part of your job.

Being poor sucks in any country but especially in the US, which is so proud of being the Richest Nation on Earth that it makes sure everyone lives up to that whether they can afford to or not. Consider the case of Avondale, Arizona resident Christine Stevens, who has been in deep water (financially speaking) since losing her bank job in January 2009. She decided to discontinue her electricity service and make do with solar panels – Arizona has no shortage of sunshine, after all – and using an ice box in lieu of a refrigerator.

But such frugality defies Avondale city codes, which require a refrigerator, heating and cooling system, and electricity enough for all. So Stevens' house was condemned, and Stevens kicked out. "We explained to her that the panels weren't enough to sustain a quality of life there," Avondale's code enforcement manager said. Stevens is back in her home now, after spending 11 nights sleeping in her car, but could still lose the property.

When you're worried about someone's quality of life, adding them to the ranks of the homeless might not be the best way to improve it, but it's close enough for government work. Sometimes more drastic measures are needed, like the ones taken by city officials in Mountain View, California: they kicked an old lady named Loretta Pangrac out of her house, demolished it, and billed her almost $20,000 for their troubles.

Pangrac's roof was in bad shape and she couldn't afford to repair it, so the whole house was condemned as a dangerous "public nuisance" – even though Pangrac was the only member of the public actually endangered by it. To recoup their self-imposed costs, city officials placed a lien against the property. Even without the lien, it's doubtful Pangrac could sell the vacant lot for enough to buy another house. She suggested living in a trailer on her land, but of course that would violate city ordinances. Laws against trailers are commonplace, since citizens living in trailers because they can afford no better tarnish the reputation of the Richest Nation on Earth and the municipalities therein.

When I was a kid, sitting through history classes and learning how lucky I was to live in a free country rather than some uptight dictatorship or constipated nanny state, I remember being especially offended by the monarchies of yore with their snobbish "sumptuary laws". What kind of government would tell me I can't wear purple because my ancestors were peasants rather than aristocrats? But old-time sumptuary laws forbidding poor people from living like their "betters" are still preferable to America's modern version, requiring people to live like their "betters" whether they can afford to or not.

Housing codes were passed with good intentions – of course we don't want people living in substandard housing – but what the enforcers don't understand (or refuse to admit) is that for some people, the choice isn't between "good housing" and "bad housing" but "bad housing" or "no housing at all". Living in a house without a refrigerator is better than living in a refrigerator box, but America's modern-day sumptuary laws won't let poor people like Christine Stevens make that choice for themselves.

• US economy
• Homelessness
• United States

No fridge is better than no house | Jennifer Abel

That a woman was made homeless for not having enough electricity reveals America's modern-day sumptuary laws

If you see a woman drowning the decent thing to do is toss her a life buoy, or at least leave her the hell alone; sitting on her head to push her deeper under water is wholly unacceptable behaviour. Unless you live in America and work for some local-level housing authority, in which case it's part of your job.

Being poor sucks in any country but especially in the US, which is so proud of being the Richest Nation on Earth that it makes sure everyone lives up to that whether they can afford to or not. Consider the case of Avondale, Arizona resident Christine Stevens, who has been in deep water (financially speaking) since losing her bank job in January 2009. She decided to discontinue her electricity service and make do with solar panels – Arizona has no shortage of sunshine, after all – and using an ice box in lieu of a refrigerator.

But such frugality defies Avondale city codes, which require a refrigerator, heating and cooling system, and electricity enough for all. So Stevens' house was condemned, and Stevens kicked out. "We explained to her that the panels weren't enough to sustain a quality of life there," Avondale's code enforcement manager said. Stevens is back in her home now, after spending 11 nights sleeping in her car, but could still lose the property.

When you're worried about someone's quality of life, adding them to the ranks of the homeless might not be the best way to improve it, but it's close enough for government work. Sometimes more drastic measures are needed, like the ones taken by city officials in Mountain View, California: they kicked an old lady named Loretta Pangrac out of her house, demolished it, and billed her almost $20,000 for their troubles.

Pangrac's roof was in bad shape and she couldn't afford to repair it, so the whole house was condemned as a dangerous "public nuisance" – even though Pangrac was the only member of the public actually endangered by it. To recoup their self-imposed costs, city officials placed a lien against the property. Even without the lien, it's doubtful Pangrac could sell the vacant lot for enough to buy another house. She suggested living in a trailer on her land, but of course that would violate city ordinances. Laws against trailers are commonplace, since citizens living in trailers because they can afford no better tarnish the reputation of the Richest Nation on Earth and the municipalities therein.

When I was a kid, sitting through history classes and learning how lucky I was to live in a free country rather than some uptight dictatorship or constipated nanny state, I remember being especially offended by the monarchies of yore with their snobbish "sumptuary laws". What kind of government would tell me I can't wear purple because my ancestors were peasants rather than aristocrats? But old-time sumptuary laws forbidding poor people from living like their "betters" are still preferable to America's modern version, requiring people to live like their "betters" whether they can afford to or not.

Housing codes were passed with good intentions – of course we don't want people living in substandard housing – but what the enforcers don't understand (or refuse to admit) is that for some people, the choice isn't between "good housing" and "bad housing" but "bad housing" or "no housing at all". Living in a house without a refrigerator is better than living in a refrigerator box, but America's modern-day sumptuary laws won't let poor people like Christine Stevens make that choice for themselves.

• US economy
• Homelessness
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Corey Haim: death of former child star and 1980s teen idol

The Lost Boys actor has been found dead at the age of 38 from a rumoured overdose in Los Angeles

The life and career of the former child star and 1980s teen idol Corey Haim might be seen as a succession of cliches. From the early, hugely promising screen appearances to the swift rise as a teen pin-up in movies such as The Lost Boys, he suffered the predictable dip into paparazzi fodder and later into anonymity when his pretty teenage looks faded. There were the inevitable battles with drugs and rehab and a career renaissance of sorts via reality TV.

And today it emerged that he had ticked off another tragic cliche when he was found dead at the age of 38 from a rumoured overdose in Los Angeles.

Haim, from Toronto, was very much a product of the 1980s, but he also suffered from that decade. Once his early potential and looks were spotted, he quickly became sucked into the trashy 1980s film factory that was more interested in quantity than quality. For every Ferris Bueller's Day Off, there were at least 10 Dream a Little Dreams and, unfortunately for Haim, he starred in the latter.

The shame of it is that Haim really could act, unlike his frequent co-star and best friend Corey Feldman, whose repertoire spanned "sullen" to "a little more sullen". He hit his high point at 14 with The Lost Boys, the movie that propelled him to stardom. However, it also propelled him straight into License to Drive, which is not what one would call an 80s classic, and this set the tone for the rest of his career.

In recent years Haim tried to find a new path in a reality show with Feldman called, inevitably, the Two Coreys, the premise of which was that unstable recovering addict Haim would stay with the now happily married Feldman, but the results were depressing and pathetic. As an ending, his death is as unsurprising as it is sad.

• Canada
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Corey Haim: death of former child star and 1980s teen idol

The Lost Boys actor has been found dead at the age of 38 from a rumoured overdose in Los Angeles

The life and career of the former child star and 1980s teen idol Corey Haim might be seen as a succession of cliches. From the early, hugely promising screen appearances to the swift rise as a teen pin-up in movies such as The Lost Boys, he suffered the predictable dip into paparazzi fodder and later into anonymity when his pretty teenage looks faded. There were the inevitable battles with drugs and rehab and a career renaissance of sorts via reality TV.

And today it emerged that he had ticked off another tragic cliche when he was found dead at the age of 38 from a rumoured overdose in Los Angeles.

Haim, from Toronto, was very much a product of the 1980s, but he also suffered from that decade. Once his early potential and looks were spotted, he quickly became sucked into the trashy 1980s film factory that was more interested in quantity than quality. For every Ferris Bueller's Day Off, there were at least 10 Dream a Little Dreams and, unfortunately for Haim, he starred in the latter.

The shame of it is that Haim really could act, unlike his frequent co-star and best friend Corey Feldman, whose repertoire spanned "sullen" to "a little more sullen". He hit his high point at 14 with The Lost Boys, the movie that propelled him to stardom. However, it also propelled him straight into License to Drive, which is not what one would call an 80s classic, and this set the tone for the rest of his career.

In recent years Haim tried to find a new path in a reality show with Feldman called, inevitably, the Two Coreys, the premise of which was that unstable recovering addict Haim would stay with the now happily married Feldman, but the results were depressing and pathetic. As an ending, his death is as unsurprising as it is sad.

• Canada
• United States

Beyond the voodoo void of finance | William Brittain-Catlin

The moral gulf between citizens and banks must be replaced with an ethic of responsibility

If the second worst financial crisis in history signalled the implosion of offshore capitalism – that remote, distant and out-of-control economic system that crashed and burned in 2008 – what kind of capitalism is replacing the old, bankrupt model? To see what is on the horizon, one need only look to the United States, where the Obama administration is engaged in the task of building a new, onshore capitalism.

Barack Obama wanted the US to find its home in the world and within itself after the fractious and divisive Bush years – and this applied as much to foreign policy as on the home front, with healthcare reform, for instance. It is the case too, in the reforms to the banking and financial system that the administration is pushing through Congress.

To be sure these reforms, like the onshore nation that Obama wants to build around them, are in essence no less capitalistic than what came before. But there is a wide margin of difference: that to function properly and equitably the national economy must establish a connected, human relationship between its citizens and their financial system.

The duty of individuals and companies to pay their taxes and for the government to crack down on tax havens is the capstone of the onshore nation. There can be no doubt that the Obama administration has shown great leadership and perseverance on this count, though there is still much work to be done in imposing higher standards of information-sharing on the recalcitrant tax haven world.

In banking, the reduction of the scope and scale of the largest operators is integral to the task of building a reformed onshore capitalism. Outlawing deposit-taking banks from using their own capital to trade in risky hedge funds and private equity deals, and imposing limits on the liabilities held by any single banking group, are measures by which the activities of banks can be grounded onshore, where they belong.

The requirement for banks to pay a fair insurance to cover the onshore nation's cost of bailing them out when they hit the rocks of reckless finance, begins to address the moral gulf between banks and citizens and seeks to replace it with an ethic of responsibility.

Indeed, for the banking sector to face up to the destructive power that the industry can wreak on society, the processes of winding up and selling off the remains of failed banks are in future to be made so painful that investors and management will think hard before leaping into the void of voodoo finance.

As for hedge funds – a handful of whom are busy speculating on Greece's debt crisis – they will have restrictions imposed on their short-selling of stocks in order to rein in their inbuilt tendency to create profit from disorder.

And the onshore nation will take very seriously its responsibility to protect citizens from financial institutions that attempt to hoodwink people into buying risky financial products they do not need, and mortgages whose inequitable terms and conditions deliberately go unexplained. Awareness of and proper inclusion in the financial system should be core objectives of the onshore nation.

What underlines all these policies is a focus on bringing finance – that once bright star that ignited and burst into flames – back down to earth and humanising it, giving it an approachable human dimension and scale. The complex, risky, fast and large-scale structures of the old model are to be replaced by a new model of finance; at once simpler, slower, smaller and safer.

But the onshore nation cannot be an island on its own in the world: to be so is self-defeating, for those who wish to practice the economics of destruction will always find some offshore base from which to operate, however inconvenient. Already the flag of realpolitik is being waved by nations eager to preserve their own advantage in the financial and economic sphere. The broad political momentum to change the way global finance operates, something felt so keenly in the early days of the recession, seems far away now.

This, of course, is welcome news to Republican senators, the big banks and their lobbyists in the finance industry – all of whom are gaining ground on an agenda that looks back nostalgically to the glory days of offshore capitalism. They want nothing more than to push the default button back to sometime just before the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

Even so, on a deep level, the human values underpinning the onshore nation point to a commonwealth of citizens having autonomy in the economic sphere. A better world to come onshore is remote, but the faint outline of its contours are just about visible in the US.

• Barack Obama
• Banking
• Lehman Brothers
• Financial crisis
• United States

Read more [Guardian America]

Beyond the voodoo void of finance | William Brittain-Catlin

The moral gulf between citizens and banks must be replaced with an ethic of responsibility

If the second worst financial crisis in history signalled the implosion of offshore capitalism – that remote, distant and out-of-control economic system that crashed and burned in 2008 – what kind of capitalism is replacing the old, bankrupt model? To see what is on the horizon, one need only look to the United States, where the Obama administration is engaged in the task of building a new, onshore capitalism.

Barack Obama wanted the US to find its home in the world and within itself after the fractious and divisive Bush years – and this applied as much to foreign policy as on the home front, with healthcare reform, for instance. It is the case too, in the reforms to the banking and financial system that the administration is pushing through Congress.

To be sure these reforms, like the onshore nation that Obama wants to build around them, are in essence no less capitalistic than what came before. But there is a wide margin of difference: that to function properly and equitably the national economy must establish a connected, human relationship between its citizens and their financial system.

The duty of individuals and companies to pay their taxes and for the government to crack down on tax havens is the capstone of the onshore nation. There can be no doubt that the Obama administration has shown great leadership and perseverance on this count, though there is still much work to be done in imposing higher standards of information-sharing on the recalcitrant tax haven world.

In banking, the reduction of the scope and scale of the largest operators is integral to the task of building a reformed onshore capitalism. Outlawing deposit-taking banks from using their own capital to trade in risky hedge funds and private equity deals, and imposing limits on the liabilities held by any single banking group, are measures by which the activities of banks can be grounded onshore, where they belong.

The requirement for banks to pay a fair insurance to cover the onshore nation's cost of bailing them out when they hit the rocks of reckless finance, begins to address the moral gulf between banks and citizens and seeks to replace it with an ethic of responsibility.

Indeed, for the banking sector to face up to the destructive power that the industry can wreak on society, the processes of winding up and selling off the remains of failed banks are in future to be made so painful that investors and management will think hard before leaping into the void of voodoo finance.

As for hedge funds – a handful of whom are busy speculating on Greece's debt crisis – they will have restrictions imposed on their short-selling of stocks in order to rein in their inbuilt tendency to create profit from disorder.

And the onshore nation will take very seriously its responsibility to protect citizens from financial institutions that attempt to hoodwink people into buying risky financial products they do not need, and mortgages whose inequitable terms and conditions deliberately go unexplained. Awareness of and proper inclusion in the financial system should be core objectives of the onshore nation.

What underlines all these policies is a focus on bringing finance – that once bright star that ignited and burst into flames – back down to earth and humanising it, giving it an approachable human dimension and scale. The complex, risky, fast and large-scale structures of the old model are to be replaced by a new model of finance; at once simpler, slower, smaller and safer.

But the onshore nation cannot be an island on its own in the world: to be so is self-defeating, for those who wish to practice the economics of destruction will always find some offshore base from which to operate, however inconvenient. Already the flag of realpolitik is being waved by nations eager to preserve their own advantage in the financial and economic sphere. The broad political momentum to change the way global finance operates, something felt so keenly in the early days of the recession, seems far away now.

This, of course, is welcome news to Republican senators, the big banks and their lobbyists in the finance industry – all of whom are gaining ground on an agenda that looks back nostalgically to the glory days of offshore capitalism. They want nothing more than to push the default button back to sometime just before the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

Even so, on a deep level, the human values underpinning the onshore nation point to a commonwealth of citizens having autonomy in the economic sphere. A better world to come onshore is remote, but the faint outline of its contours are just about visible in the US.

• Barack Obama
• Banking
• Lehman Brothers
• Financial crisis
• United States

Police forces face threat of 'racist' label over stop and searches

Equalities watchdog warns of enforcement action against forces that excessively target people from ethnic minorities

The official equalities watchdog will threaten to brand as racist police forces which are deemed to have used stop and search powers excessively against people from ethnic minorities, the Guardian has learned.

Police forces will be told they face enforcement action unless they give meaningful promises to change, says a report for the Equality and Human Rights Commission expected to be released later this month.

It presents a prima facie case that the police are still failing in their duties under racial equality laws and finds that an officer's power to stop and search, based on having a reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminality, is disproportionately used against Afro-Caribbean and Asian Britons.

For some forces the "disproportionality" is more than 10 times. The report presses the police to defend themselves against the allegation they are breaking the law by highlighting the fact that some forces use the power considerably more than other forces policing the same types of area.

The force identified as the biggest offender and placed under the most pressure by the report is the Metropolitan police, found to be responsible for 120,000 "excessive" stops against those from ethnic minority backgrounds in 2008/9.

A comparison of how frequently the power is used found that the Met uses it up to five times as much as other forces policing urban areas.

The Met carries out 71 stops for every 1,000 people, but the West Midlands force, policing areas with similar issues, carries out just 13 stops per 1,000.

Broken down by race, in one year the Met stopped 195 per 1,000 Afro-Caribbean people, and 78 per 1,000 Asian people. The figure for white people is 49.

The report argues that because so much of the British Afro-Caribbean population live in London, and because the Met uses stop and search so regularly, it skews the national figures.

A draft of the report concludes: "The evidence points to racial discrimination being a significant reason why black and Asian people are more likely to be stop and searched than white people. It implies that stop and search powers are being used in a discriminatory and unlawful way." It finds little merit in arguments advanced to justify excessive use of stop and search against ethnic minority Britons and questions how frequently some forces use the power.

It says the way the power is used has a "small" impact in tackling crime while inflicting damage on community relations.

Within the commission there has been debate about how strong the conclusion should be and how tough the action should be against the police.

The report covers only stop and searches carried out when an officer has a reasonable suspicion of an individual's involvement in criminality, which are covered by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.

It does not cover stops where no reasonable suspicion is needed, such as under section 60 of the Public Order Act, where some studies have found ethnic minority people are targeted even more, nor does it cover stops under counter-terrorism powers, though notes concern about those.

Last week the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Lord Carlile, said counter-terrorism stops should be ended because they barely make a dent against extremists but fuel resentment against the police.

Away from London, the Dorset and Hampshire forces are over 10 times more likely to stop black people than white people. South Yorkshire and Thames Valley are the most likely to stop British Asians compared with white people.

The report does praise some sections of the police and identifies that some forces have seemingly wiped out racial discrimination in the way they use stop and search powers.

It also cites the example of one force, Cleveland, which in a decade slashed its use of stop and search to one-fifth of its previous level, and achieved falling crime rates and one of highest levels of public confidence in the country.

The Stoke division of Staffordshire police managed to cut its rate of "disproportionality" to one-third of its previous level after enacting reforms and saw its crime rate fall.

In a parliamentary briefing in January 2010 the commission said there were approximately a million stops and searches every year.

It said: "This specifically must not be based on generalisations, for example, on grounds of race or appearance, or people's past record, but only on suspicious behaviour or matching a specific witness description."

• Police
• Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)
• Race issues

Lady Ashton defends start in EU role

British peer blames plight on Brussels turf wars over shape and powers of a new European diplomatic service

Britain's new EU foreign and security policy chief, Lady Ashton, used the platform of the European parliament today to hit back at the chorus of criticism that has enveloped her first three months in the job.

In a combative performance outlining early views on how to make EU foreign policy more effective, the Labour peer signalled the start of "assertive leadership" and blamed the turf wars raging in Brussels over the shape and powers of a new European diplomatic service for her plight.

She also risked reviving a bitter UK-French feud over defence, promising to review calls for a permanent EU military planning headquarters based in Brussels. The British are strongly opposed to such an HQ, believing it would undermine Nato and dilute the Atlantic alliance while the French have long lobbied for a new Brussels office as a means of boosting independent European defence capacities.

Smarting from the whispering campaign against her being conducted in EU capitals for weeks, Ashton briefly switched into French and German, speaking a sentence of each, in an attempt to assuage those unhappy with her lack of language skills. She listed every place she had visited in recent weeks, from New York to Sarajevo to Moscow, to dampen criticism of her schedule and complaints about meetings she has missed.

"My difficulty is that I haven't yet learned to time travel," she quipped in an attempt to silence the doubters.

She brushed aside taunts that her private office is top-heavy with British officials. "I will appoint on merit – nothing else," she said. "There are no favourites here."

Ashton is charged with building and leading a new European diplomatic machine, the External Action Service. The service, the EU's most ambitious new structure in many years, is the focus of an intense power struggle in Brussels between the European commission and European governments.

While Ashton is seeking to tip the balance of power towards the governments, senior players in the parliament today supported José Manuel Barroso, the commission president.

Ashton described the new service as "a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build something that finally brings together all the instruments of our engagement in support of a single political strategy. If we pull together, we can safeguard our interests. If not, others will make decisions for us. It really is that simple."

She repeated remarks from the foreign secretary, David Miliband, last week that demand for European foreign policymaking was outstripping supply and criticised vested interests and bureaucratic blocking tactics in Brussels. "There is a tendency to put process ahead of outcomes in Europe," she said. "Any time you create something new, there will be resistance. Some prefer to minimise perceived losses rather than maximise collective gains."

Ashton said her aim was to concentrate on the aims and then work out how to achieve them as well as fashioning "joined-up" policies from the disparate and often rival parts of the EU machine.

On the issue of a new defence planning HQ, Ashton called for a "serious debate … the question is whether we need something else."

Her remarks today followed talks in Paris last Friday with Hervé Morin, the French defence minister and a trenchant critic of Ashton's performance as EU foreign policy head. Her comments prompted accusations that she was "a handmaiden" for European military and political integration.

Geoffrey Van Orden, the Conservative MEP, alleged she was plotting a policy shift that would "ratchet up" EU military integration at the expense of Nato. She denied the charge.

The EU now uses Nato's Shape HQ and national centres for planning and co-ordinating military missions abroad.

A Brussels-based dedicated HQ, said the French defence ministry afterwards, would be a "capacity, desired by a majority of member states, [and] would improve the EU's responsiveness in the launch of operations and would also be a factor for making cost savings".

• European Union
• Lady Ashton
• European commission