Chancellor under pressure from cabinet to abandon plans to impose a �2bn levy on the region's oil and gas companies
George Osborne, the chancellor, is under pressure from within his cabinet to back down on his unexpected plans to impose a �2bn windfall tax on North Sea oil and gas companies.
Fellow ministers are frustrated that they were given no long-term warning by the Treasury of the plan in advance of the budget and that the oil companies were given no chance to be consulted.
It is also being argued that the sudden change in the tax regime ran counter to a series of pledges Osborne gave to the North Sea oil industry in opposition. He told the Aberdeen Press and Journal in 2009 that one of his earliest budget commitments would be to set up a parliament-long stable tax regime for the oil industry.
The Treasury minister Justine Greening went to a bruising meeting with oil companies attended by other government ministers in which she was told that the industry has lost trust in government promises to maintain a stable tax regime in the North Sea. One witness said she was "grilled alive". At a meeting described as cold and pointed, attended by the Scottish secretary, Michael Moore, and the energy secretary, Chris Huhne, she was told she had put 40,000 jobs at risk.
Greening was told by oil companies including Total and Shell that Statoil was suspending a $10bn (�6.2bn) project at the Bressay and Mariner oil fields ? two of the most valuable deposits left in the North Sea ? to review whether the investment is still worthwhile.
The oil companies said they were responsible for a quarter of private sector capital investment in the UK, and were quite prepared to pull the plug on a large part of this investment unless the tax regime were changed. They pointed out that as reserves are slowly depleted, companies need better incentives to pump the remaining, harder-to-reach resources.
There were also claims that senior cabinet ministers with a direct involvement in the industry were not informed more than 48 hours before the budget of the plan to make the tax raid on the profits of the oil industry.
Late representations were made in an attempt to introduce some flexibility based on the price of oil, and ministers opposed to the rise are urging the Treasury to raise the price at which the higher tax kicks in.
Supporters of the chancellor claim the principles were discussed between the Treasury chief secretary, Danny Alexander, the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, Osborne and David Cameron.
Last Wednesday's budget increased by 12 percentage points the tax levied on North Sea companies, on top of corporation tax, in order to raise �2bn a year to pay for a 1p reduction in the duty on petrol and diesel and scrap a further 5p increase due under plans agreed by the last government.
The oil and gas industry's tax bill for the next financial year is expected to be �13.4bn, compared with �8.8bn this year.
In a sign of the problems developing over the issue, Alexander who represents a Scottish constituency, denied the tax raid had been his idea. "We don't expect this tax change to have a significant effect on production and investment and therefore on jobs in the coming years," he said.
The Scottish National party has already described the oil grab as Alexander's political epitaph, but what will worry him more is the lack of support from key cabinet allies and normally loyal Scottish Liberal Democrat MPs, such as Malcolm Bruce.
Bruce accused Alexander of being "economically illiterate for coming up with a "populist move" that could kill off investment in the North Sea.
Calling Ed Balls 'the most annoying person in modern politics' revealed David Cameron's true toffish colours
Politicians have to be good actors, some more than others. It's so they can pretend to be something they're not, or to believe passionately in something they plan to abolish, or to care about people they really despise.
David Cameron and his cronies have to be particularly good. They have to pretend to want to defend the NHS, for example, when in reality they are pursuing a programme of relentless privatisation which will see it steadily dismantled. They pretended that the cuts they are imposing would affect everyone. Remember "We're all in it together" ? as if a cabinet stuffed with 20 millionaires is going to suffer as much as a council cleaner thrown out of work, or people struggling on housing benefit, or those heavily dependent on social services.
However, even the best actors occasionally forget their lines, or their performance stumbles, and the same thing happens to politicians. When politicians let the mask slip we sometimes catch a glimpse of the real person.
Cameron's attack on shadow chancellor Ed Balls is an example. It went beyond the usual slanging match, which is sadly so often the bread and butter of Commons exchanges. Cameron told Balls he was "the most annoying person in modern politics", and added: "I wish the shadow chancellor would occasionally shut up and listen to the answer."
It reveals a lot about Cameron. To me it illustrates his privileged background, his Bullingdon Club attitude towards those who are not top drawer, as those of his ilk like to see themselves.
In truth they believe they are beyond questioning, above criticism. They see their opponents as "oiks", irritants who have to be tolerated while they get on with doing what they have always done ? looking after themselves and their pals.
Cameron's attack on Balls was simply an illustration of the real Cameron. His response to Balls's perfectly justified questions and challenges in the debating chamber betrayed him ? snobbish, haughty, ill-mannered and patronising. So I suppose it served some useful purpose.
If Cameron finds it annoying to be questioned by Balls and other opponents, he should prepare to work himself up into quite a tantrum. The cuts are only just beginning to bite, but I am already meeting people frantic with worry about how they are going to manage, or even survive. In the city where I work, Leeds, I recently visited a day centre for people with mental health problems. The centre is one of three in the area. They are lifelines for their clients, offering them the chance to meet people who understand their problems because they suffer the same ones. For some, the centres are crucial to their survival, staving off depression and worse. All three are to close because of Cameron's cuts.
It is vital that questions and challenges are put across the floor of the Commons on behalf of people like these. I hope they will be put to Cameron ? regularly and often. And let Cameron throw a hissy fit if he finds it annoying.
Hugh Hewitt, Townhall The GOP is crazy to allow its presidential nomination process to be mediated by a left-of-center to hard left MSM. I interviewed John Harris of Politico today, one of the designated "moderators" of the proposed Reagan Library debate, now moved to September, and traditional conservatives and Tea Party activists alike will get no comfort from our conversation.Harris is an experienced and respected journalist, and a genuinely smart and nice guy who always agrees to interviews, but his responses to my questions confirm the blind spot the MSM has with regard to its own...
Scotland Yard could face embarrassing trial in case launched by lawyer who claims email accused him of lying to Parliament
A high court judge has rejected an attempt by the Metropolitan police to halt a libel action brought by a solicitor who acts for several alleged victims of phone hacking by the News of the World.
The ruling by Mr Justice Tugendhat means Scotland Yard could face a potentially embarrassing trial.
Mark Lewis, a consultant to Taylor Hampton solicitors, is suing the Met over an email it sent to the Press Complaints Commission in November 2009.
The email, sent by a lawyer at Scotland Yard in response to a request from the PCC, said that Lewis had "wrongly quoted" a police officer, Mark Maberly, in evidence given by Lewis to a committee of MPs. Lewis alleges that the email in effect accuses him of lying to Parliament.
Lewis had previously told the Commons culture, media & sport select committee in September 2009 that a police officer, Mark Maberly, had told him that "there was evidence about ... something like 6,000 people were involved [in phone hacking]".
The disputed conversation between Lewis and Maberly took place at the time of a court case involving Gordon Taylor, one of Lewis's clients, who successfully took legal action against the News of the World after it admitted Glenn Mulcaire, a private investigator working on its behalf, hacked into his mobile phone.
The legal battle goes to the heart of the phone-hacking affair because it suggests that the Metropolitan police held evidence which suggested thousands of public figures had been targeted by Mulcaire but failed to act on it.
A 2006 investigation into phone hacking resulted in the convictions of Mulcaire and Clive Goodman, a former royal editor at the News of the World, but senior Scotland Yard figures insisted there was nothing to suggest more than a small number of people had their phones hacked.
Lewis's action also threatens to further embarrass the PCC chair, Baroness Buscombe, who has made a statement in open court and paid �20,000 in damages to settle his libel claim.
Lewis began action against the Met, the PCC and Buscombe in April 2010, five months after the PCC chair delivered a speech in which she alluded to the email from the Met, telling an audience of newspaper editors Scotland Yard had confirmed to the PCC that Maberly had been "wrongly quoted".
Rejecting the Met's application for the case to be struck out, Tugendhat said in his ruling that, although the email didn't mention Lewis by name, "The words complained of as against the MPS are capable of bearing the meaning attributed to them [by Lewis]."
Tugendhat also said in his ruling he would allow Lewis to amend his claim to include comments Buscombe made in an Radio 4 interview in February in which she said: "I made a statement which I thought was absolutely the right thing to do at the time ... we don't know yet whether it's wrong. We have no idea."
Lewis said today: "Buscombe was calling me a liar. I think now people are starting to think I might have been the one who is telling the truth."
? To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000. If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly "for publication".
? To get the latest media news to your desktop or mobile, follow MediaGuardian on Twitter and Facebook
A list of authorised tea towel manufacturers (made from cotton woven in Mr Miliband's Doncaster constituency) is included in the email along with a suggestion that organisers put together a "Mili band", complete with a "squeeze box, to play a lament for the squeezed middle-classes".
Tesco said it has already commissioned Ed and Justine bunting, and that it was considering stocking a range of mugs, plates and soap-on-a-ropes to cash in on the event.
Asda, too, has held talks with the Labour Party about manufacturing "Mini Mili Trifles" ? an attempt to outdo Waitrose's Royal Trifle, which has been created by Heston Blumenthal, the celebrity chef. The Asda trifle is expected to contain bananas, a nod to the Miliband family's favourite fruit.
The memo has clear echoes of the instructions sent out to David Miliband supporters, when he was running for the leadership of the party. It told people that at 5.30pm they should vacuum their carpets and, ?put the oven on and get the nibbles in. If there are drinks, get them chilling."
At the time that memo was widely mocked. It was considered by some Labour activists as key reason why Ed triumphed over his over his brother, though the latest revelation is likely to cause embarrassment at Labour Party headquarters.
A spokesman for Mr Miliband refused to comment on the street party email, but added: "Actually, Ed isn't that partial to trifle, though he is very fond of a gooseberry fool."
Hugh Hewitt, Townhall The GOP is crazy to allow its presidential nomination process to be mediated by a left-of-center to hard left MSM. I interviewed John Harris of Politico today, one of the designated "moderators" of the proposed Reagan Library debate, now moved to September, and traditional conservatives and Tea Party activists alike will get no comfort from our conversation.Harris is an experienced and respected journalist, and a genuinely smart and nice guy who always agrees to interviews, but his responses to my questions confirm the blind spot the MSM has with regard to its own...
As Mr Norgrove observes in his interim report, there have been at least seven reviews of family justice since the main legal framework, the Children Act, became law in 1989. Yet the same problems exist today as then. Mercifully, he does not conclude that the solution is the one always offered by the last government: more money. What is proposed instead is significant reform of the complicated system, basing it around a new Family Justice Service, with a chief executive, a management board and a simple structure. Provided this does not cost a fortune to establish and run, it seems a sensible way forward.
Honest to fuck, Joan Acocella on Mark Morris again?
How many times is she going to fawn over him, covering his choreography and dance company to the exclusion of everybody else?
How many times is she going to pack his lunchbox before he heads off to the studio?
Is there no other living choreographer left on the planet worth a look-in and write-up? Or has she decided that her dance column in The New Yorker is now dedicated solely to Curly Locks?
That makes for an awfully restricted beat, as if theater critic John Lahr only bestirred himself when Sarah Ruhl floated her latest paper airplane out the window.
The special pleading on behalf of Morris would make a nun blush.
Explaining the fleshy candor of the Morris approach, she writes:
This accounts, in part, for the very strong feeling of intimacy you get from the Mark Morris Dance Group. Morris shows you the armpits, the inner thighs, the bumpy muscles in the back." He makes men and women do the same steps. (Women, on average, can point their feet better than men.) At times he seems almost to embarrass his dancers, and therefore he puts us on their side.
That "therefore" is sure carrying a load of unexamined freight! It's an "ergo" pulled out of of the air, or her ass.
I mean, is Mark Morris deliberately trying to embarrass his dancers? What kind of choreographer and director would embarrass his own dancers other than a sadist? You would never watch a piece by Paul Taylor and come away thinking he had embarrassed his company dancers. They might dance embarrassing situations or emotions, or make embarrassing gestures, but they would be depicting embarrassment--the dancers themselves are never be embarrassed as dancers on stage. Embarrassing dancers is a form of cruelty.
And what does it mean, "puts us on their side"? Is Morris intentionally embarrassing his dancers so that they can earn our sympathy? What would be the aesthetic point of that? I've seen plays where I felt sympathy for the actors who were working so hard to overcome the weaknesses of the script and/or direction, and it didn't make for a pleasurable, illuminating experience. I also didn't leave the theater believing that the writer or director had embraced human imperfection and was asking us to embrace it too. Choreography that makes the dancers look bad is bad choreography, either a product of free-floating contempt or incompetence, excusing Morris is making excuses that would never be made for Taylor or any other choreographer, apart from maybe Twyla Tharp (whose aggression is right out there in the open, no hyphenated "passive" preceding it).
In fairness, Morris couldn't possibly embarrass his dancers as much as Acocella embarrasses herself:
By now, Morris is the most popular choreographer in New York--maybe the most popular in the country--and a lot of people just want to see what he's been up to lately. It's like Mother making dinner. Maybe all she came up with tonight was meat loaf. It's always nice to have dinner, though.
WASHINGTON ? House Speaker John Boehner signaled Thursday that a compromise is coming with Democrats on immediate cuts in government spending, noting that Democrats control the White House and the other half of Congress. Boehner said Republicans are fighting for the biggest spending cuts they can get.
Boehner said there's no agreement yet on how much he and Democrats are willing to compromise in cutting the day-to-day budgets of federal agencies over the coming six months. The GOP House has voted to cut more than $60 billion from this year's budget, and Democrats have been moving steadily in his direction.
The Ohio Republican has agreed to discuss a compromise in the $33 billion range, which would still be of historic magnitude.
"We are going to fight for all of the spending cuts that we can get," Boehner said. "We control one half of one third of the government here in Washington. We can't impose our will on another body. We can't impose our will on the Senate. All we can do is to fight for all of the spending cuts that we can get an agreement to."
The top congressional Republican spoke as negotiators continued to work on a proposal for around $33 billion in spending cuts over the next six months ? considerably less than tea party activists congregating Thursday for a rally near the Capitol have demanded. Vice President Joe Biden said Wednesday evening that there's been "good progress" in budget talks to prevent a government shutdown.
The tentative split-the-difference plan would end up where GOP leaders started last month as they tried to fulfill a campaign pledge to return spending for agencies' daily operations to levels in place before President Barack Obama took office. That calculation takes into account the fact that the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, is about half over.
The $33 billion figure, confirmed by Biden, is well below the $60 billion-plus in cuts that the House passed last month. But it still represents significant movement by Senate Democrats and the administration after originally backing a freeze at current rates.
"There's no reason why, with all that's going on in the world and with the state of the economy, that we can't avoid a government shutdown," Biden told reporters after a meeting in the Capitol with Senate Democratic leaders.
Under Biden's math, the White House is conceding $73 billion in cuts from Obama's requests, which contained increases never approved by Congress. Republicans originally wanted $100 billion in cuts using the same gauge.
Some tea party-backed GOP lawmakers want the original $100 billion in cuts. With a tea party rally set for Thursday on Capitol Hill, it's unclear how many of the 87 freshmen Republicans elected last fall could live with the arrangement between top Democrats and Boehner, who plans to meet with freshman GOP lawmakers.
Both sides said the figure under consideration is tentative at best and depends on the outcome of numerous policy stands written into the bill. Boehner said "there is no agreement on numbers. Nothing will be agreed to until everything is agreed to."
Some conservatives appear insistent on the full range of spending cuts, but others recognize that compromise is required to win Obama's signature and support from Democrats who control the Senate.
Far bigger fights are ahead on a longer-term GOP budget plan that takes a more comprehensive approach to the budget woes. Also looming is a must-pass bill to allow the government to borrow more money to meet its commitments. Republicans hope to use that measure to force further spending cuts on the president.
"I don't believe that shutting down government is a solution to the problem. Republicans and Democrats need to work out a compromise," said Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H. "Let's get this over with and get on to the budget."
But Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who earlier warned that "It's time to pick a fight," wants party leaders to hang tough.
The legislation would bankroll the day-to-day operating budgets of federal agencies ? including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ? through Sept. 30, the end of the current budget year.
___
Associated Press writer Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.
? Prison officers meet to consider defying strike ban ? G4S also to run 'super-size' jail in �750m contracts win
The military has been put on standby as the prison service braces itself for a day of industrial disruption over the first privatisation of an existing British jail.
The Prison Officers' Association has instructed branches at prisons throughout Britain to hold lunchtime meetings to discuss their mandate to take industrial action in protest, despite a strike ban.
More than 250 staff at Birmingham prison, which is to be run by private security company G4S from October, walked out when the decision was announced on Wednesday. They returned to work in the afternoon. Officials told staff to turn up as normal on Friday for a branch gate meeting.
The justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, said soldiers had been put on standby and told MPs: "If people are so unwise as to take industrial action in prisons, the situation can rapidly become far worse than in a normal strike because we start getting disorder among the prisoners."
Governors said the "unprecedented decision" would have a resounding effect on the prison service.
The POA's general secretary, Steve Gillan, said: "We will not make a kneejerk reaction. We will study what we can do and take direction from our members, but we will not rule out industrial action. The NEC have a strategy and this will be enacted in the forthcoming days." He said that it was for a judge, not ministers or managers, to determine what was illegal industrial action.
Clarke told MPs that after a tendering process begun in 2009 under Jack Straw, then Labour justice minister, G4S were to take over the 1,450-place Victorian prison at Winson Green, Birmingham from October on a 14-year contract.
They are also to run a "super-size" 1,600-place prison, Featherstone 2, on the same site as Featherstone prison, Wolverhampton. G4S said the two contracts were worth �750m over their lifetime.
A third prison, Buckley Hall at Rochdale, is to remain in the public sector while Serco, a rival to G4S, retained the contract for Doncaster prison with a 10% "payment by results" element.
There are 11 privately run prisons in England and Wales. The first, the Wolds in East Yorkshire, opened shortly before Clarke became home secretary in 1992. All were newly built and no publicly run jail has yet transferred to the private sector. The unions fear more of the 140 prisons in England and Wales will follow and the justice secretary strongly hinted at further rounds of competitive tendering.
The decision to train up to 3,000 soldiers in control and restraint techniques and in running prisons was made after ministers studied what happened when the POA went on strike in August 2007. It was 12 hours before a high court injunction halted the action. It happened while Labour had suspended the legal ban on industrial action by prison officers. A reserve power re-imposing the ban was introduced in 2008.
Clarke said the army had not been sent into jails "within living memory" but training of troops, which Labour suspended, had resumed. This is insufficient to cover a national strike but might be enough to run a handful of prisons shut down by the strongest POA branches.
The justice secretary said a high-quality public sector bid had been received for Birmingham but the G4S bid was better and cheaper. He could not rule out redundancies among the 750 staff but said there would be jobs at Featherstone 2.G4S said the two contracts were worth �750m over their lifetime. They now have six of the 13 private prisons in England and Wales.
Bill Gross, Pimco Asset Mgt. That adorable skunk, Pepé Le Pew, is one of my wife Sue’s favorite cartoon characters. There’s something affable, even romantic about him as he seeks to woo his female companions with a French accent and promises of a skunk bungalow and bedrooms full of little Pepés in future years. It’s easy to love a skunk – but only on the silver screen, and if in real life – at a considerable distance.
Washington (CNN) -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Thursday defended the administration's decision to intervene in Libya, arguing that military action was necessary to prevent a humanitarian disaster that could have sparked a refugee crisis while potentially destabilizing Egypt, Tunisia, and the broader Middle East.
Gates, appearing with Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen before a skeptical House Armed Services Committee, insisted that the "time and conditions were ripe for international military action."
Moammar Gadhafi will "kill as many (people) as he must to crush the rebellion," Mullen warned.
Comittee members -- largely from the Republican side of the aisle -- peppered the two men with hostile questions, highlighting persistent doubts about the cost, goal, and legality of the mission.
"With Iraq and Afghanistan already occupying a considerable share of American resources, I sincerely hope that this is not the start of a third elongated conflict, especially in a region where we have other more discernible strategic interests," said California GOP Rep. Buck McKeon, the chairman of the committee.
The testimony by Gates and Mullen came as NATO took sole command of Libyan air operations. CIA operatives, meanwhile, have been working with rebel leaders on the ground in Libya to try to reverse gains by forces loyal to Gadhafi, a U.S. intelligence source said.
CNN reported over the weekend that rebels had driven west through al-Brega, Ras Lanuf and Bin Jawad -- stopping just short of Gadhafi's hometown of Sirte. In the last three days, however, opposition fighters have been pushed back east toward the rebel stronghold of Benghazi.
Gates said Gadhafi's military capabilities had been steadily eroded since the onset of U.N.-sanctioned airstrikes. The dictator's forces, however, still outnumber the rebels by a ratio of approximately ten to one in terms of armor and other ground forces, Mullen noted.
Gates warned that the Libyan rebels still need significant training and assistance.
"It's pretty much a pickup ballgame" right now, he said, noting that the rebel forces remain "disparate" and "scattered." He said other countries could play a larger role in helping the rebels as the U.S. role is reduced.
The United States is transitioning to a "supporting role" that "comports with our interest," he said.
Gates reiterated the administration's promise that no U.S. ground forces would be used in Libya, telling committee members that the rebels had indicated they didn't want such an intervention.
Several Republican committee members questioned whether the administration had adhered to the 1973 War Powers Act when it launched military strikes.
There has been "no consultation at all," said Rep. Walter Jones, R-North Carolina. Congress has "been left out in the cold on this one."
Gates said that President Barack Obama's compliance with the War Powers Act "has been consistent with the actions taken by all of his predecessors -- both Democrats and Republicans" since the law was passed in 1973.
Gates conceded, however, that the requirements of the law have "been an area of contention" between the legislative and executive branches since the measure was passed.
A congressional resolution of support for Libyan intervention would be welcome, he said.
Several Republicans responded by asserting that a vote on such a resolution would likely fail.
"I certainly would not be supporting it," said Rep. Michael Turner, R-Ohio. "This mission is unclear and the goals are unclear."
The rebels are "getting their butts whipped," argued Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Florida. "I don't think (Obama) has the support of this Congress."
"This administration has not been honest with the American people that this (mission) is about regime change," argued Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colorado. "This is just the most muddled definition of an operation probably in U.S. history."
Rep. Chris Gibson, R-New York, complained that the mission's "military and political goals are not harmonized."
Administration officials have repeatedly drawn a distinction between the international military goal of civilian protection and the U.S. political goal of ousting Gadhafi.
Both Democrats and Republicans questioned the identity of the rebel leaders, reflecting a concern about a possible al Qaeda presence within the opposition movement.
"I have a lot of concern about who the rebels are," said Rep. David Loebsack, D-Iowa. "Who are these folks?"
Gates indicated that there are still significant questions regarding the composition and ideological leanings of the opposition.
The U.S. government does not "have much visibility into those who have risen against Gadhafi," he said, noting that there are "multiple agendas" at stake.
But he argued it was unlikely that groups such as al Qaeda or Hezbollah would be able to capitalize on the turmoil. Libyan tribes hostile to the presence of such organizations would play a key role in forming the next government, Gates said.
Committee members also complained about the cost of the military mission, which has been estimated by the administration at $550 million over the past month and $40 million for each month moving ahead.
"We can't pay our bills right now," Jones said. Gadhafi is "absolutely evil," but other countries need to play a larger role, he insisted.
In this picture made available by the U.S. Navy, Wednesday, March 30, 2011, the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Barry (DDG 52) launches a Tomahawk cruise missile from the ships bow, off the Libyan coast, Tuesday, March 29, 2011. Barry is currently supporting Joint Task Force (JTF) Odyssey Dawn.
Associated Press
French Defence Minister Gerard Longuet, second right stands in front of Qatar Air Force Mirage 2000 jet fighters during his visit to the military airbase of Souda on the island of Crete, Greece, on Wednesday, March 30, 2011.
Associated Press
A man holding a placard shouts slogans in support of Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi, at the Pan African Freedom Square, in Uganda capital Kampala Tuesday March 29, 2011. Police in Uganda say they stopped supporters of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi from marching toward and possibly attacking U.S. and other embassies in Kampala. A group of several hundred Africans from countries like Kenya, Somalia, and Tanzania held an anti-U.S. rally where they held signs like "Down with America" and "Down with Obama."
Associated Press
Ugandan protesters shout slogans in support of Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi as they display banners with his image, at the Pan African Freedom Square in Uganda capital Kampala, Tuesday March 29, 2011. Police in Uganda say they stopped supporters of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi from marching toward and possibly attacking U.S. and other embassies in Kampala. A group of several hundred Africans from countries like Kenya, Somalia, and Tanzania held an anti-U.S. rally where they held signs like "Down with America" and "Down with Obama."
A woman shouts slogans in support of Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi as she carries his photo, at the Pan African Freedom Square, in Uganda capital Kampala Tuesday March 29, 2011. Police in Uganda say they stopped supporters of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi from marching toward and possibly attacking U.S. and other embassies in Kampala. A group of several hundred Africans from countries like Kenya, Somalia, and Tanzania held an anti-U.S. rally where they held signs like "Down with America" and "Down with Obama."
Associated Press
A woman shouts slogans in support of Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi as she carries his photo, at the Pan African Freedom Square, in Uganda capital Kampala Tuesday March 29, 2011. Police in Uganda say they stopped supporters of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi from marching toward and possibly attacking U.S. and other embassies in Kampala. A group of several hundred Africans from countries like Kenya, Somalia, and Tanzania held an anti-U.S. rally where they held signs like "Down with America" and "Down with Obama."
The list of countries where Moammar Gadhafi might spend a comfortable life in exile is a lot shorter today than it would have been in years past because of global monetary sanctions and possible trial at the International Criminal Court.
Uganda's deposed dictator, Idi Amin, found refuge first in Libya and eventually in Saudi Arabia in 1980, living in his own villa with female companionship, food and drink.
That kind of good life may not be likely for Gadhafi.
In a twist of fate, Uganda said Wednesday it would accept Libya's leader, the first country to publicly volunteer to give him a home.
Of course, Gadhafi may never leave Libya unless overbearing military power forces him to, although world leaders are hoping the strongman will go, and there are indications that his aides are seeking an exit for a man who has held power for more than 40 years.
The Uganda president's spokesman justified the offer of refuge, saying that Ugandans were given asylum in neighboring countries during the rule of Amin, who killed tens of thousands of his countrymen in the 1970s.
"So we have soft spots for asylum seekers. Gadhafi would be allowed to live here if he chooses to do so," spokesman Tamale Mirundi told The Associated Press.
Other countries on a list of potential landing points are the African nations of Chad, Mali, Niger, Eritrea and Sudan, although the first three are members of the ICC and would, in theory, be obliged to arrest Gadhafi if he is charged.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has a long friendship with Gadhafi and has called for mediation in the conflict, said Wednesday that he has spoken with Gadhafi recently and that the Libyan leader has no plans to seek refuge in another country.
"He has said on different occasions that he isn't going to leave Libya," Chavez said at a news conference in Uruguay, where he was asked whether Venezuela would welcome Gadhafi as an exile. "I think Gadhafi is doing what he has to do, no? Resisting against an imperial attack."
Besides Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua have been openly supportive of Gadhafi, said Mark Palmer, a former U.S. ambassador and an expert on dictators. Because the Libyan leader has a large ego, he is more likely to accept going to one of those countries than a smaller African nation like Eritrea.
Saudi Arabia is an outside possibility, as is Belarus, which is led by Europe's last dictator and was accused of sending weapons to Gadhafi until an international arms embargo kicked in.
Some experts cast doubt on whether Gadhafi would ever leave Libya.
"I don't think Gadhafi's going to go anywhere," said Adam Habib, a political scientist at the University of Johannesburg in South Africa. "I think he's happy to die there."
Italy has been pushing for the African Union to come up with a possible place for exile, but Brahan Khellaf ? the special assistant to AU commissioner for peace and security Ramtane Lamamra ? said Wednesday that the topic of Gadhafi's exile has not been discussed "at all."
Palmer, like many analysts, said he doesn't believe Gadhafi will leave Libya voluntarily and instead must face heavy military pressure and be given a guarantee he won't end up before the International Criminal Court, which opened in 2002.
"He obviously believes he is Libya, and his family is deeply entrenched in the power structure and the wealth of the country. So I'm sure his family is also saying 'Don't go, don't go,'" said Palmer, the author of "Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World's Last Dictators by 2025."
Palmer said that while Gadhafi "richly deserves" to face the ICC, an international guarantee that he won't face the court is a small price to pay to let Libya proceed in peace.
British Prime Minister David Cameron's spokesman, Steve Field, insisted there was no dispute between those nations that hoped Gadhafi would quickly flee into exile and those which have demanded he stand trial. He said Britain believed Gadhafi could face a reckoning for his actions, even if he finds a haven outside Libya.
"I don't actually think that precludes anyone being held accountable by the International Criminal Court," Field told reporters Wednesday.
If Gadhafi is granted exile, he might choose a country that does not recognize the court, which is investigating him for possible crimes against humanity committed in the early days of his crackdown on anti-government rebels. Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo is expected to decide by May whether to indict Gadhafi and other senior members of his regime.
Because the U.N. Security Council ordered the ICC's investigation into Libya, any U.N. member state would be obliged to execute an arrest warrant. However, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir also has been indicted, for crimes including genocide in Darfur, following a Security Council-mandated probe and has traveled to friendly nations several times without arrest.
Gadhafi may also want to take into account the case of former Liberian President Charles Taylor, who went into voluntary exile in Nigeria after being indicted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone in 2003. Taylor was arrested in 2006 while trying to cross from Nigeria to Cameroon shortly after Nigeria agreed, under international pressure, that he should stand trial.
The Sierra Leone court's then-prosecutor, Desmond De Silva, said Taylor's arrest sent a "clear message that no matter how rich, powerful or feared people may be, the law is above them."
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said negotiations on securing Gadhafi's exit were being conducted with "absolute discretion" and that there were options on the table that hadn't yet been formalized. Libya's foreign minister traveled to neighboring Tunisia on Tuesday, then left for London. The purpose of the trips wasn't clear.
"What is indispensable is that there be countries that are willing to welcome Gadhafi and his family, obviously, to end this situation which otherwise could go on for some time," Frattini said Tuesday.
Frattini added that no "safe-conduct pass" would be granted. "No one can think of any commitment to judicial immunity," especially Italy, a founder of the International Criminal Court.
Amin died in Saudi Arabia in 2003. Palmer noted that Amin lived like a member of the Saudi royal family despite the thousands of people he had killed.
???
Associated Press writer Godfrey Olukya in Kampala, Uganda, and Ian James in Caracas, Venezuela, contributed to this report.
Rolling coverage of all the day's political developments as they happen
Here's an afternoon summary.
? David Cameron has indicated that he would be happy for the Scottish authorities to interview Moussa Koussa about the Lockerbie bombing. Speaking at a news conference in Downing Street, he said that Koussa, who defected to the UK from Libya last night, had not been granted immunity. The Lockerbie investigation was still open, he said. "The police and the prosecuting authorities [are] entirely independent of government and they should follow their evidence wherever it leads," Cameron said. "The government will assist them in any way possible. They are in no way way restricted from following their evidence, and that is exactly what they should do." Scottish prosecutors have already been in touch with the Foreign Office to say that they want to interview Koussa. Cameron also said that Koussa's defection provided "a compelling story of the desperation right at the heart of the crumbling and rotten Gaddafi regime." (See 3.50pm and 4.09pm.)
Here's Cameron's answer to the question about Moussa Koussa in full.
The decision by the former Libyan foreign minister to come to London and resign his position is a serious blow to Gaddafi's authority and we should not underestimate that. Let me be clear: Moussa Koussa is not being granted immunity. There is no deal of that kind ... The point I would make about the dreadful events over Lockerbie, that investigation is still open. And the police and the prosecuting authorities [are] entirely independent of government and they should follow their evidence wherever it leads. The government will assist them in any way possible. They are in no way way restricted from following their evidence, and that is exactly what they should do, and we will respond to any requests that they make.
The press conference is now over. I'll sum up in a moment.
The BBC's James Landale asks what Moussa Koussa has said about the state of the regime in Libya.
Cameron says these are "early days". Koussa has been having discussions with Foreign Office officials. But it shows a huge amount of distrust and decay in the Gaddafi regime.
A Turkish journalist asks about arming the rebels in Libya. And is there a common approach to Syria?
Erdogan says no decision has been taken on arming the rebels. Nato is there to protect civilians.
Cameron says the state of emergency in Syria should be lifted.
On Libya, Cameron says he does not want to see it divided. No decision has been taken on arming the rebels. But the coalition should be "helping the democratic forces in Benghazi".
Sky's Jon Craig asks Cameron if Moussa Koussa received any assurances before he came to London. And will he be handed over the the Scottish authorities?
Cameron says Koussa is not being granted immunity. There is no deal of that kind. The prosecuting authorities should follow their evidence "wherever it leads", he says. The government will respond to any request that prosecutors make.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, says he wants to see a solution in Libya "in line with the wishes of the Libyan people". He wants to see a resolution "in the shortest time possible".
Here are David Cameron's exact words on Moussa Koussa.
I've been clear from the start that we want Gaddafi to go and that his henchmen should also come to their senses and abandon this brutal regime. The decision by the former Libyan foreign minister to come to London, to resign his position, is a decision by someone right at the very top and it tells a compelling story of the desperation right at the heart of the crumbling and rotten Gaddafi regime.
David Cameron is speaking now. He says Turkey was one of the first countries he visited as prime minister.
UK/Turkish relations have "never been stronger", he says. Today he has set up a UK/Turkey chief executives forum. He wants to double bilateral trade by 2015.
On Libya, both countries are agreed on the need to enforce the UN resolution. Tukey will have a seat at the international contact group dealing with coalition policy.
Cameron says Moussa Koussa's decision to come to London tells a "compelling" story about the "fear" at the heart of the regime.
Cameron says he will strongly support Turkey's application for EU membership.
David Cameron is running late, but that means that the broadcasters have been able to show us live a press conference a Libyan government spokesman has been giving in Libya. He said that Moussa Koussa asked to leave Libya because he was ill, and that he's old, exhausted and in poor health. The Libyan government hope he recovers soon, the spokesman said. The spokesman said that he was not aware of any other senior Libyan government figures leaving the country.
David Cameron is holding a press conference with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, at 3.30pm. It's going to be a fairly short affair - two questions for British journalists, and two for Turkish journalists - but we'll get some words from Cameron about Moussa Koussa at the very least, and perhaps even some new information. We'll find out soon.
Scottish prosecution authorities have said that they want to interview Moussa Koussa, the Libyan defector, about the Lockerbie bombing. My colleague Severin Carrell has the full details.
Here's an afternoon reading list.
? Emma Thelwell at Channel 4's FactCheck investigates whether the Office for Fair Access can stop universities raising tuition fees to �9,000.
The [Department for Business] spokesman added: "Offa have the power to not approve an access agreement if they do not feel it is sufficiently stretching. Without an access agreement in place the university could not charge more than �6,000."
But how tough is Offa? An Offa spokesman told FactCheck that since it was set up in 2002 it hasn't flexed its muscles once. Not one university's fee proposal has been refused.
And how powerful is Offa? In February The Guardian reported that 13 of the 16 Russell Group universities didn't meet current benchmarks.
There was talk from the coalition of �500,000 fines; but none have been imposed.
? Michael Crick on his Newsnight blog identifies three Tories who may vote for the alternative vote: Michael Gove, Andrew Lansley and David Mowat.
? Jill Rutter at the Institute for Government blog says that since the general election there has been "an unprecedented level of churn" at the top of the civil service.
By the first anniversary of the government, of 16 departments, only six will not have had a change of permanent secretary ? so ministers, all of whom have with under a year's experience in all those departments, will all have someone with less experience at the top.
Brian Clarke, the chair of the Prison Officers Association in Birmingham, has told the BBC that his members will meet tomorrow to discuss strike action following the government's decision to privatise the jail in the city. According to PoliticsHome, this is what he said:
Tomorrow we will be having a meeting of the branch and there will be instructions from our union on actions that will be taken in the coming weeks. The union has a policy, to live mandates from conferences last year and the year before, that should any public sector prison be privatised, then industrial action up to and including strike action will take place.
A spokesman for Ed Balls has been in touch to suggest that, given that I have quoted from the FT's story about Balls changing his stance on the structural deficit (see 11.55am), it would fairer to quote his words in full. (The FT was using quotes from a Balls interview with Mehdi Hasan in the New Statesman.) I'm always happy to put things in context, and so here's the key passage from the interview in the Staggers.
Few would doubt that Balls is master of his Treasury brief, but there has been the odd misstep. In a television interview on 30 January, he denied that under Labour there had been a structural deficit - the part of the deficit that would remain even after the economy had recovered to normal levels of output - in the years preceding the 2008 crash. "Was there a structural deficit? I don't think so," he told the BBC. I point out that, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the UK had the second-highest structural budget deficit of all the G7 economies in 2007. Isn't he walking into the Tories' "deficit denial" trap by making such statements?
Balls chooses his words carefully. "We had a deficit every year under the Labour government because our policy was to balance the current budget but to borrow to invest - up to 3 per cent of GDP." He makes a small concession: "In retrospect, three years on, it was clear once the financial crisis had hit that people reappraised what their view of trend growth was and, in retrospect, of course there was a structural deficit. But there wasn't a structural deficit as judged by policymakers at the time. George Osborne was saying he was going to match Labour spending plans."
It is said that spending got "out of control" under Labour before the crash. Balls is defiant. "Were we acting in an irresponsible way in 2006 and 2007 on public spending? No, we were not. That is my absolute contention. I'm not going to say something that is untrue simply because the Tories want me to say it."
Here's a lunchtime summary.
? William Hague has said that Moussa Koussa, the Libyan foreign minister who has defected to the UK, is not being offered immunity from British or international justice. Several Tory MPs have called for him to be put on trial because of his alleged involvement in Lockerbie. Robert Halfon, MP for Harlow, said: "I believe that this man really should be put in front of a British or international court for war crimes, if it is true that he was behind the Lockerbie bombing." And Patrick Mercer, MP for Newark, said: "What advantage he gives to us and to the rebels must be balanced by what he has done in the past. The fact remains that if this man has carried out crimes or been involved in criminal activity, then he must be brought to justice." Downing Street has said that it is up to prosecutors to decide if they want to charge Koussa. (See 10.39am and 12.24pm.)
? Kenneth Clarke, the justice secretary, has announced that Birmingham prison will be privatised. Although private providers have already been given contracts to run new prisons, HMP Birmingham will be the first to be transferred from public management to private management. It will be taken over by G4S in October. Another prison, Doncaster, which is run by Serco, will operate under a new payment by results system, which will involve Serco being rewarded if it can cut reoffending rates. In a statement to the Commons announcing a total of four new prison contracts, Clarke said they would save �21m by 2014. The Prison Officers Association described the privatisation announcement as a "disgrace". Clarke said military personnel were on stand-by in case prison staff decided to strike.
? Jim Devine, the former Labour MP, has been jailed for 16 months for fiddling his expenses. Passing sentence, Mr Justice Saunders said: "These offences constituted a gross breach of trust which, along with others, has had the effect of causing serious damage to the reputation of parliament." Caroline Davies has the full story.
? A Commons committee has written to News International asking for information about how many police officers were paid for information by the Sun. Keith Vaz, the chairman of the home affairs committee, addressed the letter to Rebekah Brooks, the News International chief executive. In 2003, when she was editing the Sun, Brooks told a committee that the newspaper had paid officers for information. (See 9.34am.)
? Grandparents could get rights of access to their grandchildren when parents divorce under plans published by the Ministry of Justice. A review on family justice by David Norgrove suggests building access rights for grandparents into parenting agreements. "The panel recognises the importance that grandparents play in children's lives, and that this is a relationship that is often highly valued by both children and other family members," the report says. "The importance of this continuing after parents have separated came through strongly in the call for evidence."
? Ed Miliband has said that Labour will be "the first line of defence against the damage being done by a Conservative-led government and their Liberal Democrat allies". He made the claims as he launched Labour's local election campaign. In an earlier interview, he also defended his decision to compare those taking part in the anti-cut demonstration on Saturday to those campaigning against apartheid or for civil rights in the US and dismissed suggestions that Labour councils should raise council tax to protect services. (See 8.57am.)
In the Commons earlier this morning Vince Cable, the business secretary, insisted that there was no higher education funding crisis. It has been claimed that most universities are planning to charge �9,000 in tuition fees and that this will make the loan system unaffordable. But, when Labour's Gareth Thomas put this to him, Cable rejected it. According to PoliticsHome, this is what he said.
There is no hole in finances. If he follows the public announcement that universities have made, he will have seen that, of the 36 that we are aware of, 13 are planning to charge the maximum and many of those will have substantial fee remission under the Oxford model.
Cable also said there was a "wide distribution" of fee arrangements among universities and that only around a quarter of them had announced their plans.
More on Moussa Koussa. At the Downing Street lobby briefing this morning, the prime minister's spokesman sidestepped questions about whether Koussa would face criminal charges over any possible involvement in attacks on Britain.
The way justice is carried out in this country is not a matter for the government; it is a matter for prosecutors. I am not clear that any request has been made [by them for access to Koussa].
The spokesman also said that Koussa's son came with him to the UK.
It's taken me a while to get round to the papers because it's been a busy morning. But here we go. You can read all today's Guardian politics stories here. All the politics stories filed yesterday, including some in today's paper, are here. And, as for the rest of the papers, here are the articles I found particularly interesting.
? Tom Whitehead in the Daily Telegraph says grandparents will get the legal right to access to their grandchildren in divorce cases under plans being announced today.
For the first time, separating parents will be expected to ensure grandparents continue to have a role in the lives of their children after they split up.
Parenting Agreements will be drawn up that explicitly set out contact arrangements for grandparents. These can then be used as evidence in court if a mother or father goes back on the deal.
The recommendation is part of a sweeping review of the family justice regime commissioned by the Government and led by David Norgrove, a former civil servant.
The Government is likely to accept the recommendations after Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, said last year that it was "crazy" that millions of grandparents lost contact after separation and divorce. He said that they played a vital role if relationships broke down.
? George Parker in the Financial Times (subscription) says that, after denying that the last Labour government was running a structural deficit, Ed Balls has now admitted that it was.
Mr Miliband initially feared that Mr Balls's appointment as shadow chancellor would fuel Tory claims that Labour was "in denial" on the deficit.
That view was reinforced in January when Mr Balls was asked by the BBC whether Labour was running a structural deficit ? the part of government borrowing that remains when the economy returns to normality ? before the 2008 crash. "Was there a structural deficit? I don't think so," Mr Balls said. However, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development said the UK had the second highest structural deficit among its members before the crash.
Mr Balls told the New Statesman: "In retrospect, three years on, it was clear once the financial crisis had hit that people reappraised what their view of trend growth was and ? in retrospect ? of course there was a structural deficit."
? Steve Richards in the Independent says the Lib Dems are very influential within government.
If anything the influence of the Liberal Democrats on the Coalition is growing, and exceeds what they might have expected on the basis of their relatively small number of seats. They are, in theory, the rather pathetic, junior partners in a coalition of the radical right. Yet in reality they are important and substantial partners, at times almost co-equals.
By this I do not mean merely that they provide cover for a leap to the right, although that is, to some extent, a consequence of their presence. Their policy contribution is distinctive and significant. Beyond the referendum on electoral reform, Clegg can credibly claim that in several areas his party has helped to make the Coalition more progressive and less reactionary than it might have been.
I make the observation not on the basis of any conversations with "friends of Nick Clegg" who are desperate to avoid meltdown in the local elections and to claim progressive distinction. I have not had such conversations of late. I do so by looking at what is happening in policy terms within the Government. Policies are the most accurate guide ? much more so than private conversations with friends of anyone.
? The Times (paywall) says Downing Street is considering slowing the pace of NHS reforms.
Instead of a swift revolution, in which GPs take control of all local healthcare services within two years, Downing Street is considering a slower pace of change, making 2013 a goal rather than a deadline.
"Are we doing this in one step or a number of steps?" a government source said. "There's no settled course."
Putting the brakes on reform would be a major concession for the Government, which is committed to transferring most of the �110 billion NHS budget to family doctors and increasing competition within the NHS. Measures include allowing private healthcare providers to tender for contracts.
? Robert Winnett and Bruno Waterfield in the Daily Telegraph says British taxpayers contributed more than �300 each on average to the European Union last year.
The British contribution increased from �5.3billion in 2009 to �9.2?billion last year, according to the Office for National Statistics.
The increase is equivalent to the extra money being raised from the increase in National Insurance for higher-rate taxpayers, or the new 50p top rate of income tax. Taxpayers are being forced to contribute more following Tony Blair's decision to reduce the size of this country's rebate.
The Commons standards and privileges committee has published its report on phone hacking. It did not investigate specific allegations; it just looked at the issue of whether the hacking of an MP's phone would constitute a contempt of parliament. It concludes that hacking could potentially be a contempt - but that MPs who think that their phones have been hacked would do better to pursue the matter through the courts. Here's the statement that the committee has issued.
The committee has concluded that a specific act of hacking could potentially be a contempt, if it can be shown to have interfered with the work of the House or to have impeded or obstructed an MP from taking part in such work. It has also concluded that a series of acts of hacking could potentially be a contempt, if it can be shown that the hacking has interfered with the work of the House by creating a climate of insecurity for one or more MPs.
The committee looks forward to publication by the government of a draft privileges bill in the present session of parliament. It proposes that the draft bill should include a definition of what is meant by 'contempt of parliament' and that the bill should codify parliament's powers to impose sanctions, including a power for the House of Commons to fine.
The committee points out that hacking is an offence under the criminal law?although it also notes that the law as it relates to hacking is currently being reviewed by another committee of the House?and that civil law remedies may be available to MPs, just as they are available to others. It suggests that MPs and the House should pursue legal remedies in preference to proceeding against hackers for contempt. And it recommends that only in exceptional circumstances should a hacker who has been brought before a court of law be proceeded against subsequently for contempt.
In the view of the committee, there should be no special provision made in law to provide MPs or parliament with remedies for phone hacking through the courts that are not available to other victims of hacking. The law must apply equally to all.
A colleague has sent me the text of the remarks made by Mr Justice Saunders when he sentenced the former Labour MP Jim Devine to 16 months in jail. Here's the key passage.
I have read a number of references which speak highly of Mr. Devine. He is described as a hard working psychiatric nurse, a committed and dedicated union official, and an MP who worked hard to right wrongs suffered by others and particularly those who were less well off. He has done a great deal of good in his life. I treat Mr Devine as a man of positive good character who has lost his good name as a result of these convictions. That in itself is a significant punishment.
In reaching my decision as to the appropriate sentence in cases such as this, I have had considerable assistance from the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Chaytor. I have also taken into account the relevant Guidelines which are agreed. Mr. Devine's offences are less serious than the offences in the case of Chaytor as the period of time over which the offences were committed is less and the amount dishonestly obtained was less.
Nevertheless Mr. Devine also 'set about defrauding the public purse' in a 'calculated and deliberate way'. He also supported his claims with forged documents. These offences constituted a gross breach of trust which, along with others, has had the effect of causing 'serious damage to the reputation of Parliament'. Mr. Devine made his false claims at a time when he well knew the damage that was being caused to Parliament by the expenses scandal but he carried on regardless. He also does not have the significant mitigation that both Mr. Chaytor and Mr. Illsley had of pleading guilty.
In my judgement the appropriate sentence is one of 16 months imprisonment. Those sentences are to be served concurrently on both counts of which he was convicted.
William Hague is now taking questions at the Foreign Office press conference. Will Moussa Koussa stay in the UK? And will more people defect?
Hague says he will not speculate about future defections. That would not be helpful, he says. He realised the Koussa was dissatisfied when they spoke recently, even though Kousa had to "read out the script" from the regime.
Koussa is in a secure place. He is discussing his options with the British authorities, Hague says.
Michael Gove, the education secretary, has today published information showing how every secondary school in England performs in every GCSE subject. According to the Department for Education's news release, this means 14m "hidden" exam results have been released. Here's the top of the Press Association story about this announcement.
Thousands of pupils missed out on achieving five good GCSEs in traditional subjects last year after schools failed to enter them for the courses. New government figures show that 175 state secondaries did not enter a single pupil for all of the subjects required to attain the new English Baccalaureate. To achieve the English Bacc, introduced by the Government last year, a student must achieve at least a C grade at GCSE in English, maths, science, history or geography, and a foreign language. But national figures have shown that just over a fifth (22%) of teenagers in England took the required subjects last summer, with one in six (15.6%) gaining the award. New data published by the Department for Education today reveal by school the numbers of pupils achieving the English Bacc, and the places where students missed out. Some 24,600 pupils were taking GCSEs last year at the 175 schools where no one gained the Baccalaureate, an analysis of the statistics suggests.
Jim Devine, the former Labour MP, has been jailed for 16 months for fiddling his expenses, the BBC reports.
William Hague is still speaking. He says the report being issued today will be updated every three months so that abuses get highlighted.
Members of the public will be able not just to read the report, but to comment on it online.
The report is more extensive than previous ones. It covers 26 countries in depth, he says.
Hague says he does not accept the argument that democracy is not right for all people. The torrent of optimism flooding the Middle East quashes the idea that Arabs do not democracy.
If the uprisings succeed, there will be the biggest extension of democracy since the fall of the Berlin Wall. If they fail, the human rights situation in the region will get worse.
Hague says that human rights situation in Iran is worse than at any time over the last 10 years.
There was no significant progress on human rights in China in 2010, Hague says.
William Hague is speaking now. He says he is launching the Foreign Office report on human rights. The full report is now on the Foreign Office website.
The government promised a foreign policy that would have support for human rights and poverty reduction at its core, he says. Support for human rights "is part of our national DNA".
The Libyan people have suffered serious human rights abuses for decades. Their plight is now worse than ever, he says. Britain and its allies have intervened in Libya to save lives. It is action that is "legal, necessary and right".
Hague says Moussa Koussa travelled to the UK under his own free will. The government will release further details later. He is one of the most senior members of the regime. His resignation shows that Colonel Gaddafi's regime is "fragmented, under pressure and crumbling from within".
? Moussa Koussa is not being offered any immunity from prosecution, Hague says.
William Hague will be giving a news conference at the Foreign Office shortly. He is launching the government's annual report on human rights, but we expect the questions will focus on Moussa Koussa. Hague will be starting any time now.
Grant Shapps, the housing minister, has announced two initiatives designed to encourage house building. He is getting the public sector to release land for development, starting with the Homes and Communities Agency. And some of it is going to be offered to builders under a Build Now, Pay Later scheme, which will allow them to pay for the land at some point in the future. This will help builders with cash flow problems, he says. According to the Department for Communities news release, the six sites being released for development today could lead to as many as 3,000 homes being built, and up to 18,000 jobs in construction and related industries being supported. This is what Shapps is saying:
Up to 40 per cent of the land ready for development in this country is simply sitting idle in the hands of the public sector. So today I'm giving the green light to the Homes and Communities Agency to lead the way by making six new sites available for development. These will be the first of many sites as all government departments will now be asked to make land available for housebuilding and, crucially, will be held accountable for the homes built and jobs supported through this.
There's a lot of interest in quite what the apparent defection of Moussa Koussa to the UK means for Libya. Jack Straw, the former foreign secretary, described it as a potential tipping point on the Today programme this morning. My colleague Mark Tran has more details on his Libya live blog.
The phone hacking story isn't getting any better for News International. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Commons home affairs committee, has today written to Rebekah Brooks, the News International chief executive, asking her to provide details of how many police officers were paid for information by the Sun. In 2003, when she was editor of the Sun, she told a Commons committee that her paper had paid officers for information, which is against the law.
In his letter, which has been released to the media, Vaz says he wants to know how many officers were paid while she was editor, how much they were paid, and when the practice stopped.
Vaz is raising the issue now because John Yates, the acting deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, told his committee on Tuesday that officers were now carrying out some research into what Brooks said in 2003. (At a culture committee hearing last week, Yates was criticised for the fact that the police did nothing about the revelation in 2003, even though, as Yates put it himself, her comments did relate to "possible offences".) Vaz has also written to Yates asking for information about the research now being undertaken by the police into this affair.
Evan Davis's interview with Ed Miliband isn't going to dominate the headlines today. But Davis had some very sharp questions. Here are the highlights.
? Miliband defended his decision to compare those taking part in the anti-cut demonstration on Saturday to those campaigning against apartheid or for civil rights in the US. This passage from his speech (which, curiously, doesn't seem to be on the Labour party website) has been mocked by David Cameron and others. Miliband said he was not trying to suggest that the government cuts were comparable to apartheid. Instead, he was trying to make a point about the importance of the people exerting power.
The march on Saturday was about politics being practised by people making their voice heard in a peaceful way ... That tradition of politics not just being about what happens at Westminster, or in legislative chambers, but about people themselves making a difference is an important tradition ... If politics is just practised by elites, and is just about you and me and people in Westminster, then actually I think many people will be alienated from that process.
? He said that he and his partner Justine decided to get married after having children. This came out when he was asked what marriage meant to him.
For me, it's a way of of expressing my love and commitment to Justine ... When we had children, we decided it was right to formalise and make that public commitment. But different people make different choices ... I think marriage is a good institution. But in the end stable families come in different forms.
He also insisted that he did not feel under political pressure to marry. "If I had, I would have got married earlier," he said.
? He dismissed suggestions that Labour councils should raise council tax to protect services. The Labour party has today put out a press notice saying that Labour councils charge council taxpayers on average �207 less than Tory councils and �40 less than Lib Dem councils. When asked whether Labour councils should put up council tax to avoid cutting services, he appeared to reject the idea.
At a time when living standards are squeezed, I think it's good that councils are keeping their council tax down.
Miliband also said raising "a small amount of money on the council tax" would not make a huge difference given the overall scale of the spending cuts. He also said that Labour was reviewing its policy on capping council spending.
? He said Labour was in "such different shape" from the 1980s. Labour councils were acting responsibly, he suggested. He was "proud" of what Labour councils were doing; they were making efficiency savings, but they were doing their best to protect services that people value.
? He refused to provide any new information about public spending cuts Labour would be making. He said that the party had already indicated that it would accept some cuts: to the road transport budget, to employer training, to welfare. But, when it was put to him that these cuts came "nowhere near to the �50bn" that would be cut under Labour's plans over this parliament, he said a Labour government would have had a spending review.
? He refused to say when a Labour government would eliminate the deficit. Labour went into the election pledging to halve the deficit over four years. When pressed as to what his plan for the deficit was in the long term, Miliband said: "We've always said that we will look at it parliament by parliament." But he insisted that Labour would promote growth more effectively than the government and that this would help reduce the deficit.
Q: On marriage, did you feel this was something you had to do?
Miliband says it's a way of expressing his love and commitment to Justine. When they had children, they decided it was right to formalise their commitment to each other.
Marriage is a good institution. But stable families come in different forms. His love and commitment to his partner was solid anyway. But he decided to make this commitment.
That's it. The interview's over. I'll post a summary in a moment.
Q: How would you summarise your vision of Labour?
Miliband says his Labour party is one that allows people to get on and do better, and that allows the next generation a better chance. The next generation faces "massive" challenges. Only 9% of people think the next generation will do better than the last.
They are still talking about the economy. He says you cannot necessarily say that the deficit would be higher under Labour at the end of this parliament, because that depends on how you run the economy.
Q: Would you like Labour councils to raise their council tax, so they do not have to cut spending?
Miliband says there is a bigger issue here. It is important to share the burden. After 1945 Britain took a decision about what kind of country it wanted, and then decided how to tackle the deficit.
Q: But today your Labour press release is all about cuts. It also says Labour councils charge less in council tax than Tory ones. Would you like them to raise council tax?
Miliband says raising "a small amount of money" on the council tax would not make much difference.
Q: As for how cuts are being implemented, have you got a view as to how councils should be making cuts?
Miliband says councils should be doing all they can to protect services. Good Labour councils are consulting residents. In Durham the council did this. People said they wanted adult social care protected.
Labour is in a "different shape" from the 1980s. Labour councils are making efficiency savings.
Ed Miliband is now now. Evan Davis is doing the interview. Q: Why did you compare the anti-cuts rally to the anti-apartheid movement?
Miliband says the march on Saturday was about politics being practised by the people. The idea that people can make a difference is important. It is surprising that people are still talking about Miliband's speech, not the cause.
Q: So you were not suggesting that what the government is doing is comparable to apartheid?
Miliband says people often do not think about politics as something that people control. But people do have an influence, as the U-turn over forest privatisations showed. Q: Are your plans for cuts equivalent to two-thirds of the government's?
Miliband says George Osborne said the government's cuts would be �40bn higher than those planned by Labour. Labour would halve the deficit over four years.
The government is not doing enough to promote growth. That is why the government has had to revise its borrowing figures up.
Q: You would cut spending by �50bn in real terms between now and 2013-14. The government would cut by �30bn more. But can you tell us what those �50bn cuts would be?
Miliband says he is not in government. He cannot remember a Conservative opposition answering questions like this.
Q: But you were in government?
Miliband says if Labour had won the election, there would have been a spending review.
Labour has accepted some cuts, like those to the transport budget and some welfare cuts.
Q: But you said there was an alternative. What is it?
Miliband says the alternative involves halving the deficit over four years.
Council leaders say they could have made some cuts. But they are having to cut �1 for every �4 they spend. Q: Under your plans, there would still be a deficit at the end of this parliament? How would you get it down?
Miliband says that goes back to the point about growth. Cuts and taxes are not the only way to tackle a deficit.
Q: What are your plans for the defict in the long term?
Miliband says Labour will look at this parliament by parliament.
Labour is launching its local election campaign this morning and Ed Miliband will be on the Today programme at 8.10am. In advance, the party has put out figures claiming that the average family will lose the equivalent of �182 because of local government spending cuts. "Labour launches our election campaign with a clear pledge to people across the country: we will be your voice in tough times," Miliband says.
But there are plenty of other things happening today too. Here's a full list.
9.30am: Department for Education publishes new figures on school preformance at GCSE.
10am: Vince Cable, the business secretary, gives evidence to a Commons committee about the budget.
10am: Jim Devine, the former Labour MP, is sentenced for fiddling his expenses.
10.30am: William Hague, the foreign secretary, publishes the annual Foreign Office report on human rights.
11am: Ed Miliband launches Labour's local elections campaign at an event in Birmingham.
11am: The Commons standards and privileges committee publishes a report on whether phone hacking constituted a contempt of parliament.
2.45pm: Caroline Spelman, the environment secretary, and Oliver Letwin, the Cabinet Office minister, give evidence to a Commons committee on sustainable development.
3.30pm: David Cameron holds a press conference with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister.
As usual, I'll be covering all the breaking political news. I'll also take a look at the papers (there wasn't time for a round-up yesterday) and bring you the best politics from the web. I'll post a lunchtime summary at around 1pm and an afternoon one at about 4pm.
