America's Right Turns Its fire On NHS

I don’t believe it the Yankees are criticising our NHS I think that they should get their own house in order before they accuse us what about the untold stories of poor people living in poverty as their record out number ours in the UK.

I do agree that the US they need change just as much as we do but do not use our NHS to promote negative feelings as our NHS workers do a wonderful service. I put the questions to the people of the USA how many of your comrades comes to the UK to use our NHS each year!

The National Health Service has become the butt of increasingly outlandish political attacks in the US as Republicans and conservative campaigners rail against Britain's "socialist" system as part of a tussle to defeat Barack Obama's proposals for broader government involvement in healthcare.

Top-ranking Republicans have joined bloggers and well-funded free market organisations in scorning the NHS for its waiting lists and for "rationing" the availability of expensive treatments.

As myths and half-truths circulate, British diplomats in the US are treading a delicate line in correcting falsehoods while trying to stay out of a vicious domestic dogfight over the future of American health policy.

Slickly produced television advertisements trumpet the alleged failures of the NHS's 61-year tradition of tax-funded healthcare. To the dismay of British healthcare professionals, US critics have accused the service of putting an "Orwellian" financial cap on the value on human life, of allowing elderly people to die untreated and, in one case, for driving a despairing dental patient to mend his teeth with superglue.

Having seen his approval ratings drop, Obama is seeking to counter this conservative onslaught by taking his message to the public, with a "town hall" meeting today at a school in New Hampshire.

Last week, the most senior Republican on the Senate finance committee, Chuck Grassley, took NHS-baiting to a newly emotive level by claiming that his ailing Democratic colleague, Edward Kennedy, would be left to die untreated from a brain tumour in Britain on the grounds that he would be considered too old to deserve treatment.

"I don't know for sure," said Grassley. "But I've heard several senators say that Ted Kennedy with a brain tumour, being 77 years old as opposed to being 37 years old, if he were in England, would not be treated for his disease, because end of life – when you get to be 77, your life is considered less valuable under those systems."

The degree of misinformation is causing dismay in NHS circles. Andrew Dillon, chief executive of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice), pointed out that it was utterly false that Kennedy would be left untreated in Britain: "It is neither true nor is it anything you could extrapolate from anything we've ever recommended to the NHS."

Others in the US have accused Obama of trying to set up "death panels" to decide who should live and who should die, along the lines of Nice, which determines the cost-effectiveness of NHS drugs.

One right-leaning group, Conservatives for Patients' Rights, lists horror stories about British care on its website. An email widely circulated among US voters, of uncertain origin, claims that anyone over 59 in Britain is ineligible for treatment for heart disease.

The British embassy in Washington is quietly trying to counter inaccuracies. A spokesman said: "We're keeping a close eye on things and where there's a factually wrong statement, we will take the opportunity to correct people in private. That said, we don't want to get involved in a domestic debate."

A $1.2m television advertising campaign bankrolled by the conservative Club for Growth displays images of the union flag and Big Ben while intoning a figure of $22,750. A voiceover says: "In England, government health officials have decided that's how much six months of life is worth. If a medical treatment costs more, you're out of luck."

The number is based on a ratio of £30,000 a year used by Nice in its assessment of whether drugs provide value for money. Dillon said this was one of many variables in determining cost-effectiveness of medicines. He said of his body's portrayal in the US: "It's very disappointing and it's not, obviously, the way in which Nice describes itself or the way in which we're perceived in the UK even among those who are disappointed or upset by our decisions."

On Rupert Murdoch's Fox News channel, the conservative commentator Sean Hannity recently alighted upon the case of Gordon Cook, a security manager from Merseyside, who used superglue to stick a loose crown into his gum because he was unable to find an NHS dentist. The cautionary tale, which was based on a Daily Mail report from 2006, prompted Hannity to warn his viewers: "If the Democrats have their way, get your superglue ready."

The broader tone of the US healthcare debate has become increasingly bitter. The former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin last week described president Obama's proposals as "evil", while the radio presenter Rush Limbaugh has compared a logo used for the White House's reform plans to a Nazi swastika. Hecklers have disrupted town hall meetings called to discuss the health reform plans.

David Levinthal, a spokesman for the nonpartisan Centre for Responsive Politics, said the sheer scale of the issue, which will affect the entire trajectory of US medical care, was arousing passions: "It's no surprise you have factions from every political stripe attempting to influence the debate and some of those groups are certainly playing to the deepest fears of Americans. There's been a great deal of documented disinformation propagated throughout the country." Defenders of Britain's system point out that the UK spends less per head on healthcare but has a higher life expectancy than the US. The World Health Organisation ranks Britain's healthcare as 18th in the world, while the US is in 37th place. The British Medical Association said a majority of Britain's doctors have consistently supported public provision of healthcare. A spokeswoman said the association's 140,000 members were sceptical about the US approach to medicine: "Doctors and the public here are appalled that there are so many people on the US who don't have proper access to healthcare. It's something we would find very, very shocking."

Fury As Tories Team Up With Google To Let Patients Read medical Records online

Tory plans to hand medical records over to Google and Microsoft could put personal information at risk, campaigners warned yesterday.

The Conservatives say the internet service will give patients greater freedom over health data, allowing them to check and even edit their NHS record online.

But critics, backed by the British Medical Association, claim the information could be vulnerable to hackers and the plan would make it harder for doctors to access information in an emergency.

Tory vision: NHS patients could soon be accessing their own health data using their personal computers via Google or Microsoft

Critics have questioned how close David Cameron is to Google Former shadow home secretary David Davis, now a privacy campaigner, has said Google was 'the last company' he would trust with sensitive data.

Questions have also been raised over whether Conservative leader David Cameron is too close to the company. His adviser Steve Hilton is married to Rachel Whetstone, Google's vice president of global communications and public affairs.

But the Tories say it would be up to primary care trusts to decide which of the rival systems to use and Google will not be the only option. The company has pledged not to use any information handed to it, for instance to advertise drugs that records show a patient could benefit from.

The Conservatives also say the voluntary plans will be more secure than Labour's centralised scheme, which will be accessible to thousands of NHS workers.

Under the Tory plans only patients and local GPs will be able to see information online.
The Government's Connecting for Health system is four years behind Google has been linked to privacy concerns, such as with their StreetView photo-mapping project schedule and will not be operating until 2012, at a cost of £12.4billion.

Under the Tory online proposal, records will be accessed securely via personal computers in the same way as bank account details.

Patients will be able to note symptoms and side effects and update their records with blood pressure and cholesterol levels.

Tory health spokesman Stephen O'Brien said: 'Giving patients greater control over their health records is crucial if we are to make the NHS more patient-centred. Labour's attitude to our personal data is misguided. They seem to think they own it and have been appallingly careless in looking after it.' The BMA is concerned the system could put patients at risk.

Dr Vivienne Nathanson, the BMA's head of science and ethics, said: 'The security of web-based medical systems is of great concern, as are the implications of data being held by the private sector.

'We are concerned by the suggestion that healthcare staff could be restricted from accessing important clinical information.'

Tory Councillor's Wife Jailed For Drunken Wrong-way 90mph Motorway Suicide Bid

A Tory councillor's wife has been jailed after speeding at 90mph the wrong way down a dual carriageway in a botched suicide attempt.
Dawn Collins, who was more than twice the legal drink-drive limit, hurtled along the fast lane of the A1139 in Peterborough before colliding head-on with another vehicle.
The driver, Robert Hoogstraten, suffered serious injuries in the horrific smash on March 7 this year, and Mrs Collins was left with injuries including a fractured pelvis, knee and elbow.

Suicide attempt: Dawn Collins (left), the wife of Tory councillor Mark Collins, has been jailed for 18 months after drunkenly speeding at 90mph the wrong way down a dual carriageway
Mrs Collins, the wife of Conservative councillor for Peterborough's East ward Mark Collins, was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment at Peterborough Crown Court after pleading guilty to dangerous driving and driving with excess alcohol in her blood.
The court heard how she stormed out of her home in Paston, Peterborough, following an argument with her husband and made the decision to 'end it all'.
Mrs Collins then drove the wrong way round a roundabout linking the A1139 with the A1 before heading on to the fast lane of the Fletton Parkway dual carriageway.
The prosecution described how two drivers were forced to swerve out of the way as Mrs Collins' silver Ford Escort ‘flashed’ straight towards them at 80 to 90mph.
But as motorist Mr Hoogstraten pulled out into the fast lane to overtake a lorry Mrs Collins ploughed into his silver Mazda 6, causing massive damage to both cars.
He was trapped in his car for 90 minutes before being cut out by firefighters and was taken to hospital with a broken hand and severe bruising.

Mr Hoogstraten has also started receiving treatment for heart problems brought about by the impact.

When Mrs Collins was interviewed by police the following month, she claimed she had been travelling in the right direction.

Nicola Devas, mitigating, said Mrs Collins had intended to drive into crash barriers rather than another motorist.

She said: 'She had made a fairly impulsive decision to commit suicide.

'She had no idea that she was on the wrong side of the road.'

Mrs Devas said Mrs Collins had been suffering from 'moderate depression' and was so full of remorse she had vowed never to drink or get behind the wheel of a car again.

Sentencing, Judge Sean Enright said he had reduced the jail sentence from the two-year maximum because of Collins' remorse and guilty plea.

He warned the sentence could have been higher if drink driving legislation allowed for greater penalties.

He said: 'It does not seem to me that the penalty for dangerous driving of only two years is sufficiently great, but there it is.'

Mrs Collins was also banned from driving for seven years.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown Has Expressed Sadness And Anger At The Outcome Of The Trial Of Aung San Suu Kyi

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has expressed sadness and anger at the outcome of the trial of Aung San Suu Kyi and has referred to the trial as a sham. He has also called for further international sanctions against the Burmese regime.

'I am both saddened and angry at the verdict today, 11 August , following the sham trial of Aung San Suu Kyi.

The news - that she has been found guilty and sentenced to three years hard labour but that this has been “mitigated” to a suspended sentence of 1.5 years under house arrest - is further proof that the military regime in Burma is determined to act with total disregard for accepted standards of the rule of law and in defiance of international opinion.

This is a purely political sentence designed to prevent her from taking part in the regime’s planned elections next year. So long as Aung San Suu Kyi and all those political opponents imprisoned in Burma remain in detention and are prevented from playing their full part in the political process, the planned elections in 2010 will have no credibility or legitimacy.
The façade of her prosecution is made more monstrous because its real objective is to sever her bond with the people for whom she is a beacon of hope and resistance.

I have always made clear that the United Kingdom would respond positively to any signs of progress on democratic reform in Burma. But with the generals explicitly rejecting that course today, the international community must take action.

The EU has agreed to impose tough new sanctions targeting the economic interests of the regime.

I also believe that the UN Security Council - whose will has been flouted - must also now respond resolutely and impose a world wide ban on the sale of arms to the regime.
My thoughts today are with Aung San Suu Kyi - the human face of Burma’s tragedy - and with the people of Burma who suffer on a daily basis.'

During an interview with the Radio 4 Today programme this morning, Foreign Office Minister Ivan Lewis referred to the outcome of Aung San Suu Kyi's trial as ' a tragedy for Burmese people', and he backed the Prime Minister's call for sanctions against the regime in Burma.

Notes for Editors

Support the campaign for Aung San Suu Kyi

Find out more about human rights in Burma

The Conservatives Can't Be Trusted On VAT

The Conservatives have denied that they have a secret scheme to increase VAT to 20% if they win the next election.

"There are absolutely no plans for such a rise and there's never been any discussion about it," claimed a Tory spokesperson. But we’ve heard similar denials before: remember the 1992 general election?It was the election the Tories first produced the “tax bombshell” poster (since revived by David Cameron). It was also the election the Conservative manifesto pledged that they had:"no need and no plans to extend VAT".The following year they announced a VAT increase on domestic gas and electricity bills to 8% for 1994 and 17.5% in 1995.

David Cameron no doubt remembers it well – he was a "special adviser" to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury at the time. Who knows, he might have even been in the chamber when the then Leader of the Opposition, John Smith, described that budget:“a shameful budget from a cynical government that has broken its election promises”.In fact the history of VAT is one of Labour reducing it and the Tories increasing it. Not just recently to help reflate the economy, but since the Tories introduced it in 1973. While the subsequent Labour Government reduced it, Thatcher and Major increased VAT twice, more than doubling the rate.During the 1979 election campaign, Lord Howe declared that he had:
“absolutely no intention of doubling VAT”.

They had in fact secretly agreed to increase it from 8 to 15 per cent.The Tories also have a history of extending the scope of VAT including (but not exhaustively): hot takeaway food and drinks; building alterations; civil engineering works; newspaper advertisements; non-residential construction and property development; airport car parking; protective boots and helmets; fuel and power; water and sewerage services to business; travel and car hire insurance; and even incontinence pads.

The party who had “no need and no plans” to increase VAT in 1992, broke that promise, and now has no credibility when it denies plans for VAT increases to 20%. No wonder Stephen Timms MP is skeptical of today’s Tory denials, telling Labour Matters that Cameron needs to come clean on his VAT plans.Labour has never increased the general rate of VAT, although that would change if the VAT rate returned to the 17.5% as planned on New Year’s Day next year. Labour has nothing to be ashamed of it does, though an extension would be welcomed by business. Cameron’s Conservatives, however, have a massive credibility problem when even a denial in their manifesto can’t be believed. VAT is a Tory tax, and a 20% VAT rate is a Tory tax bombshell just waiting to explode.

The Media's All-White Club

There is still a lack of opportunity in the media for young ethnic minority talent. When will the industry enter the 21st century?

In a BBC radio interview broadcast yesterday, Radio 4 controller Mark Damazer denied there was any colour bar preventing black and Asian broadcasters becoming regular presenters on his station.

While his intentions are honest, the reality is that out of 104 regular presenters listed on Radio 4's website just two are Asian, and none are from African or Caribbean backgrounds.
In contrast to the station's reputation as the voice of comfortable Middle England, the latest Rajar figures show that in a typical week one in eight Radio 4 listeners were of a visible ethnic minority compared to a total population of over one in ten.

Damazer did not do himself any favours by rhetorically asking which of his current presenters he should take off air to bring in ethnic minorities, and that his primary concern is "excellence". This completely misses the point. As licence-fee payers, diverse communities are not being served by Radio 4, while the subtext of Damazer's comments tells black and Asian journalists that they are not good enough.

Why does this matter? Well for one, there is simply no reason why ethnic minorities should be directed towards music or more "popular" discussion shows as opposed to high-brow output.
Although Five Live has a good diversity of presenters, there are people in every community with an appetite for more intellectual speech-based programming, which is Radio 4's remit.
Damazer was responding to a story on Operation Black Vote's blog, which criticised Radio 4's lack of diversity. Yet this is a problem right across broadcasting and print, as Media Guardian explores today.

Mainstream newspapers in particular are lagging behind many other industries, such as the City, which realise that in a global economy, failure to reflect society is simply bad for business.
In 2003, equalities chief Trevor Phillips challenged business leaders to thaw their "snowy peaks", referring to the concentration of ethnic minorities at lower grades. Much of the media have snowy lowlands as well. How many Westminster lobby correspondents are from visible minorities in the whole of Fleet Street? Last time I checked there were none, yet politics matters every bit as much to those communities.

The Guardian's Media Monkey column recently reminded us how Michael Grade's career began, when his father told him "get a pencil and paper … go to see Hugh Cudlipp, he's the boss of the Daily Mirror. He'll interview you and give you a job as a sports writer."
Sadly not much has changed since then. Entry into the profession relies heavily on "old boys networks". There are ethnic minorities, for sure, but all too often they are casuals and freelancers, not fully-fledged staff correspondents.

Things are changing, but far too slowly, even though the use of picture bylines for writers of colour gives the impression that newsrooms are more diverse than they actually are.
And while some people, like Ludovic Kennedy, already think there are far too many black and brown faces on TV, he and others may be getting a more colourful picture than is the case, as

Lenny Henry has acknowledged.

There is certainly no shortage of ethnic minorities achieving media degrees, yet too many fail to get into local newspapers, the first rung of the ladder. And regional dailies, so often the springboard to "Fleet Street", also remain stubbornly un-diverse.

Yet there are still many black and Asian journalists approaching newspapers, belying the claim of editors that they would love to hire more ethnic minorities if only they could find them.

Editors are generally less aware of the talent banging on the door because black and Asian budding reporters are more likely to use normal approaches – sending CVs and calling section heads – whereas the more privileged come in via the "who you know" route, including dinner party connections.

And even when journalists do get through the door, their career trajectory is often unclear; promotion all too often based on preferment, not purely on ability.

The recent social mobility report, led by Alan Milburn, found that the biggest decline in social mobility occurred in journalism and accountancy.

Journalists were more likely than politicians to have gone to independent schools. The report added that "the typical journalist or accountant of the future will today be growing up in a family that is better off than three in four of all families in the UK."
It is hardly surprising, then, the hiring practices of editors turns into an exercise in self-replication. Yet Britain's demographics are changing, and the media needs to keep pace with the 21st century.

Which brings me back to Radio 4's controller Damazer. He is right not to compromise on excellence. However, if there is an assumption that such excellence cannot be found among black and Asian journalists, that is utterly wrong. There are many quality broadcasters like Kwame Kwei Armah, Dr Robert Beckford and Henry Bonsu, whose intellectual approach dovetails perfectly with Radio 4.

Since OBV published our story, the BBC circulated an impressive-looking list of 32 black and Asian contributors, including the three I mention above.

Yet the fact remains that they are occasional contributors, presenting one-off programmes or, if they're lucky, a four-part series, often on subjects that could be described as "ethnic interest", from dog-baiting in the Asian community to anniversaries of urban disturbances.

There is a tokenism at play that relegates them to the second tier, while the regular presenters have all the benefits that come with a regular contract – higher income, more security – this club remains largely all-white and upper middle class; a non-entry zone to poor whites or ethnic minorities of any class.

And the proportion of non-white senior managers at the BBC has actually fallen to just 4.3% since the former BBC director-general Greg Dyke famously described the organisation as "hideously white" in 2001.

I am a firm believer in press freedom, but the self-regulatory nature of the media has led to foot-dragging on diversity and equality. There is a need for more programmes that give opportunities to young ethnic minority talent, and many others from all social backgrounds.

And while BECTU's Move On Up, which puts wannabe broadcasters face-to-face with senior industry figures, is a useful scheme that should be extended to the world of print and online journalism, there is a desperate need for an ongoing two-way conversation between decision-makers and black and Asian people in the media.

Because ultimately it is only this dialogue that will start to unpick the regressive assumptions and attitudes about what African, Caribbean and Asian audiences want, and allow us to finally move sections of the media out of the age of Empire, and into the age of hope and genuine equal opportunity.

The Funeral Of Julian Webster

The Funeral of Julian Webster will take place at St Augustine's Church, Birmingham, 7th August 2009 at 12:15pm

Julian Webster was the victim of what we believe to be suspicious unexplained death. This took place at the Pitcher and Piano night club in Manchester after a night out with friends. The Greater Manchester Police (GMP) initially arrested two doormen on suspicion of murder but they were later release on bail.

A memorial services was held by the family and friends of Julian Webster on the 30th May 09 outside the nightclub.

Maxie Hayles chairman of Birmingham Racial Attacks Monitoring Unit (BRAMU) who are providing advocacy and support to the Webster family says

“There are serious questions to be answered in this case. Julian Webster died in extremely suspicious circumstances. It is right that the family should expect the highest degree of professionalism from GMP. Bramu will continue to assist the family in its search for the truth”.

For more information contact;

Carmen McFarlane on 07956 899880

Thanking you in anticipation.

Yours sincerely,



Maxie Hayles
Chairperson
e-mail: maxiehayles@btconnect.com
Mobile: 07956141554

Birmingham City Centre Riots: More Arrests Likely

I have to say that on this occasion that I have to agree with Khalid Mahmood MP when he says that by having a counter demonstration that it does bring trouble with fascist organisations and the best way to deal with them is to bring more legislation in place to stop fascist organsation to sreading their evil ideology.

If anyone required reminding of the true face of fascism they need look no further than events on the streets of Birmingham at the weekend.

The spectacle of far-right activists taking violent hate onto the streets of England's second city under the banner of the "English Defence League" should send a shiver down the spine of all those interested in the defence of true democracy.

But news that one of the central organisers of the demonstration is a British National Party activist also suggests another tactic could be coming into play - one that warrants vigilance and will require a concerted effort to combat.

Only a few months ago, the BNP was reported as having advised members to steer clear of running campaigns and websites under the party's banner.

The spin that accompanied the newspaper article lampooned the party as being embarrassed of cranks usurping its clean-cut image.

This may be true, but the BNP also advised members to set up campaigns which did not bear its name in order to promote its policies illicitly to people who wouldn't normally touch it with a bargepole.

Due to an agenda pursued recklessly by the right-wing media, phrases such as "political correctness gone mad," the demonisation of the democratic system - aided by a raft of self-serving and detached politicians - and the perception that some abstract concept of "Englishness" is under threat have entered the mainstream.

The BNP and its ilk hope to capitalise on this common currency.

Now the same right-wing media outlets that gave the oxygen of publicity to the likes of Migrationwatch and its racially fuelled rantings on Britain being "full up" are giving equal prominence to the Taxpayers Alliance, a thoroughly reactionary grouping backed by big business and headed by a former Westminster councillor who left the Conservative Party because it wasn't right-wing enough.

As the full force of the banking bail-out hits home in the months and years to come, the self-styled Taxpayers Alliance is aiming to set the agenda in much the same way as Migrationwatch has helped drive the government's draconian pronouncements on immigration.

Its demand for year-on-year budget cuts of 3 per cent for the foreseeable future is a recipe for disaster. It would herald poverty, public service cuts and increasing privatisation, with all the suffering that this would bring.

Such cuts, coming hot on the heels of the already very real day-to-day hardship of working people and those without work who are being left to fend for themselves, would mean that the prospect of a perfect storm for the far-right in all its hues would loom even larger on the horizon.

But it is with the people of Britain that hope lies. It is with those who took to the streets of Birmingham who showed those spreading hate that such poison will provoke an instant reaction.

It is with the people whom the BNP is forced to hoodwink to promote its ideas under false banners. And it is via the trade union movement, the left and their alternative answers that the long-term antidote to far-right poison will be administered.

The challenge that we face cannot be underestimated. It will take the maximum unity around a common platform, it will take massive work on the streets and on the internet to reach out to those who currently hear only right-wing voices and it will take continuing pressure on government to force it to see the error of its ways.

There are no easy answers. There will, however, be a clear price for failure.

POLICE say more arrests are likely after 35 people were arrested as riots broke out in Birmingham city centre at the weekend.

Rallies by rival groups spilled over into violence in the main shopping area early on Saturday evening. Bystanders ran for cover as protesters from the recently-formed group, Casuals United, said to consist of many football followers, and Unite Against Fascism clashed in New Street, just before 7pm.

Casuals United had organised a demonstration against Muslim extremism, but anti-fascists then staged a rival rally.

Three people were injured as hundreds of police, some clad in full riot gear, struggled to keep the peace. At one point officers were forced to seal off New Street with a steel barrier.

Witness Emily Bridgewater was shopping when violence broke out. She said: “It kicked off very suddenly and there was stampeding and screaming.

“We ended up being herded into Primark, where they brought the shutters down to protect us. It was very frightening.”

Photographs and video footage from the running battles are being studied by police who may now apply for injunctions to bar some of the troublemakers from the West Midlands.

Chief Insp Mark Payne, of West Midlands Police, said: “To date there have been 35 arrests - the majority for disorder, but this figure may increase as investigations continue into the incident.

“Officers were deployed throughout the city centre to manage two separate protests which took place during the course of the afternoon.

“Isolated incidents of disorder occurred when small groups of protesters broke away and actively sought to engage in criminal behaviour.”

He added: “The events are a very rare occurrence and normal city centre life resumed within a short space of time. I want to reassure all members of the community that the city centre is, and will continue to be a safe place to live, shop and visit.

“It is important to be aware that West Midlands Police have no powers to ban or stop peaceful protests and would not seek to do so. However, if criminal acts or racially aggravated incidents are reported, then police will arrest and prosecute anyone found to be responsible.”

First Hispanic Elected Onto Supreme Court

JUDGE Sonia Sotomayor will become the first Hispanic citizen and the third woman to serve in the 220-year-old US Supreme Court when she is sworn in on Saturday.

Ms Sotomayor, who is the first Democratic nominee in 15 years, was confirmed by a groundbreaking Senate vote on Thursday, despite intense conservative opposition.

Following the 68-31 confirmation vote, US President Barack Obama said: "With this historic vote, the Senate has affirmed that Justice Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation's highest court."

Mr Obama said that the Senate had upheld US ideals of justice, equality and opportunity.

"They're ideals she's fought for throughout her career and the ideals the Senate has upheld today in breaking yet another barrier and moving us yet another step closer to a more perfect union," he declared.

Republican critics decried Mr Obama's call for "empathy" in a justice, arguing that Ms Sotomayor would bring personal whims and prejudices to the bench.

They criticised rulings in which, they said, Ms Sotomayor showed disregard for gun rights, property rights and discrimination claims by white workers.

And they repeatedly cited comments she had made about the role that a judge's background and perspective can play, especially a 2001 speech in which she said that she hoped that a "wise Latina" judge would usually make better decisions than a white man.

The National Rifle Association, which hadn't weighed in on previous Supreme Court nominations, strongly opposed her and threatened to downgrade its ratings of any senator who voted to confirm Ms Sotomayor.

But the National Organisation for Women (NOW) proudly celebrated Ms Sotomayor's "landmark achievement as the first Hispanic justice to sit on the high court and just the third woman justice."

NOW said that "Sotomayor's experience as a member of two groups who often experience discrimination in this country can only help to broaden the court's perspective on inequity and help advance the cause of equality and justice for all."

Clinton Says US Intends Action Over Rebel Backing

Eritrea has brushed off a US threat of sanctions and charged that Washington is fuelling the conflict in neighbouring Somalia by providing the country's government with tons of weapons and training.

On Thursday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Eritrea of supporting the al-Shabab militant group.

Speaking in Kenya, Ms Clinton claimed that the militants were trying to launch worldwide terrorist attacks from Somalia.

She said: "It is long past time for Eritrea to cease its support for al-Shabab - we intend to take action if they do not."

Ms Clinton also said that Washington would boost military supplies and other aid to the Somali government and the African Union peacekeeping force supporting it.

The Obama administration plans to double an initial 40 tons of arms sent to Somalia via other African states.

Eritrea's Information Minister Ali Abdu described the allegations that his country supports al-Shabab as "baseless."

And Mr Abdu insisted that "you can't solve the Somali issue by sending weapons - 40 tons of weapons will produce only hatred."

Document On Alleged Torture ‘Security Risk’

BRITAIN’S NATIONAL security could be put in jeopardy if a document about the alleged torture of a former Guantanamo Bay inmate is made public, a court was told recently.

Lawyers acting on Binyam Mohammed’s behalf are seeking the release of the secret document they say will show Britain knew he was being tortured during his six-and-a-half years in US custody before his release in February.

However, lawyers for Foreign Secretary David Miliband told the High Court in London that relations between Britain and the United States would be strained if the document containing an official summary of Mohammed’s allegations were released.

The lawyers also claimed that the US may even consider withholding intelligence from Britain if the document was made public, a scenario that could potentially put British lives as risk.

Counsel Karen Steyn said the Foreign Secretary’s view was that disclosure of the document “could reasonably be expected to cause considerable damage to the national security of the UK.”

Mohammed, 30 a British resident, was arrested in 2002 in Pakistan following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan. Intelligence officials claimed he was an al-Qaeda-trained bomber heading back to the UK.

Mohammed alleges that over the following two years he was tortured in Pakistan, Morocco and Afghanistan before being transferred to Guantanmo Bay.

In February this year Mohammed was freed and returned to the UK. He is insisting on the release of material which he says show the UK knew he was being mistreated.

Milliband is currently in Washington for talks with US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton. He has previously denied that the US threatened the UK over the release of the material but said intelligence sharing between the governments depended on confidence being maintained

Met Police Authority Backs Head After Allegations By Black Officers

THE METROPOLITAN Police Authority (MPA) has said it is not racist as its chief executive Catherine Crawford faces a racism probe based on allegations black officers have made against her.

Crawford is being investigated for racism over claims she rigorously investigated misconduct claims against black and Asian officers, but not those made against whites.

The inquiry by an independent investigating officer also includes former MPA solicitor, David Riddle.

In a statement, the MPA said it ‘retains full confidence in its chief executive,’ but hastened to add:

‘The MPA is not a racist organisation. We take our legal and moral responsibilities seriously and are proud of our diversity as an organisation, which we believe is a major strength in our work generally and in promoting diversity in the Metropolitan Police in particular.

‘The Authority follows a code of conduct that embraces the best tenets of employment best practice for all of our staff.’

But the MPA said it would not make further comments.

‘All complaints made against members of staff are taken seriously and the Authority has a formal process to deal with them… As this is an ongoing internal staff matter it is not appropriate to comment further,’ the statement said.

The Met Black Police Association (MetBPA) declined to comment last week. However, its general secretary, David McFarlane, told The Voice earlier this year that the association had asked London Mayor Boris Johnson to order an independent investigation into racism allegations it outlined in a letter of complaint submitted to the Mayor’s office on December 23.

The MetBPA had also criticised Johnson, claiming he had not taken steps to adequately investigate their claims.

But the Mayor’s office told The Voice earlier this year that it had followed guidelines to turn the complaint over to the MPA’s complaints’ procedures.

Crawford was also named in a discrimination lawsuit filed by senior Asian officer and MetBPA member, Commander Ali Dizaei, who also heads the National Black Police Association.

David Miliband Urges Labour To Let Non-members Have Say In Candidate Selection

I wonder if David Miliband has completely gone of his trolley to suggest the non party members should have a say in our selection process, he needs to come off his high horse and comeback to reality and start to listen to the grass roots members of the labour Party

Foreign secretary says party needs to change because 'traditional political structures of mainstream political parties are dying'

The foreign secretary, David Miliband, wants Labour to hold US-style primaries. Photograph: Martin Argles

David Miliband today renewed his call for the Labour party to let non-members have a vote in the selection of candidates.

In an article in Tribune, the foreign secretary said the party needed to change because "the traditional political structures of mainstream political parties are dying".

He said Labour should hold US-style primaries when selecting parliamentary candidates, instead of leaving the decision to local party members as it currently does.

The debate about primaries was reignited this week by the Tory primary in Totnes.

The Conservatives, and some MPs from other parties, judged it a success after more than 16,000 voters – almost 25% of the constituency's entire electorate – took part.

There are various models for holding a primary. The Tories have drawn up a shortlist in more than 100 seats and allowed the final selection to be made at a meeting open to both members and non-members.

In Totnes – for the first time in Britain – the party gave every voter in the constituency the chance to take part by sending them a ballot paper with the names of all the candidates on the shortlist.

Miliband advocated a third approach in his article, suggesting Labour should adopt a system of "registered voters" – supporters, but not party members – and allow them to vote for parliamentary candidates, a system common in the US.

This would help the party "tap into the energy in communities, ensuring we reflect the problems of the future, the power structure of the future and the people of the future", he said.

He also suggested pledging that some of the money raised by party fundraising would go to charities or voluntary groups, to show Labour's commitment to corporate social responsibility.

He also advocated developing Labour's relationship with the three million trade unionists affiliated to the party.

Miliband, who has urged Labour to consider primaries before, also suggested the party should learn from some of the techniques adopted by Barack Obama's US presidential election campaign and by the Greek socialist party Pasok, the only European socialist party to do well in the recent European elections.

Obama "removed barriers to participation" by scrapping party membership fees, Miliband said, and Pasok has allowed 900,000 Greeks, out of a population of 11 million, to support the party as members or "friends".

"The party has quotas for male and female representation, open primaries to select party candidates for local elections and has developed 'every day a citizen' - an organisation dedicated to citizen engagement," Miliband wrote.

"Such engaging and deliberative party structures enable Pasok to tap into the energy in communities and multiply the force of a national message through local, authentic and committed advocacy, with resultant electoral success."

Other Labour figures such as the Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, David Lammy, the higher education minister, and Frank Field, have also urged the party to adopt primaries.

But officials are sceptical about the benefits and there are currently no plans to change current selection procedures.

Neither Of These Two Will Lead Labour

In their different ways, Mandelson and Harman have experienced all the oscillations of politics

With Gordon away, Harriet and Peter come out to play. In a series of headline-grabbing interviews, Harman speaks up for women in politics and in the private sector. Making almost as much noise in the summer calm, Mandelson re-frames the debate about Labour's spending plans and suggests sensationally that Brown might take part in televised leaders' debates during the election. Harman was not especially thrilled with Mandelson's ubiquity when she was supposed to be running the country. Friends of Mandelson have suggested that some of Harman's propositions in recent days were barmy.

The duo's hyperactivity has added spice because it is accompanied by speculation that one of them might be the next Labour Party leader. We are possibly witnessing the preliminary skirmishes of a full-throttled leadership contest. Mandelson was given the chance to rule out being leader in a recent BBC interview; he chose not to do so. Harman is the only member of the Cabinet to have won a leadership contest since 1994 when she became deputy leader, emerging triumphantly from a crowded field. She is a formidable campaigner and thick-skinned too, an important quality given the abuse she receives in much of the media.

Related articles

• Harman denies conflict over rape law

The re-emergence of Mandelson is already an astonishing story. If he were to become leader, all three founders of New Labour would have been given their chance, Blair first, then Brown and finally the figure who worked so closely with them in the dark days of the 1980s. His elevation would be vivid proof that the younger generation was not up to the job of leadership and was dependent still on those that formed New Labour in the mid-1990s.

Harman's further rise would also expose the lack of political talent among the younger ones that sit around the cabinet table. Like Mandelson and unlike most of the Cabinet, she was battle-hardened in the 1980s, winning a by-election in 1982 as Labour plumbed the depths of unpopularity. In their very different ways, Mandelson and Harman have experienced all the wild oscillations in politics. Most of the potential leaders from the younger generation were special advisers to Blair or Brown, protected from the frontline, functioning behind the scenes, hidden from the media. They are not well prepared for leadership.

There is, though, one big problem with the engaging vision of a Harman-versus-Mandelson contest. Harman has said publicly and unequivocally that she does not want to be the next Labour leader and will not stand in a contest. I have checked in recent days with her closest allies; they tell me emphatically that this remains the case.

If there is a leadership contest before or after the election, Harman will not stand. There are no get-out clauses, no statements about not being able to envisage circumstances where she would stand. She is not going to do so. I am sorry to disappoint those who believe politicians only utter statements with their own future ambitions in mind, but Harman says what she has said because she believes it.

I am told it is possible Harman may wish to remain as deputy after the election. There will only be a vacancy if she stands down. But when she argues that women might have made a difference to the performance of Lehman Brothers, or that a woman should always be in one of the top two positions in the Labour Party, she is putting a case and not preparing a leadership bid.

Mandelson's situation is more interesting. Tantalisingly for him as things stand, he is much the best-qualified member of the Cabinet to be Labour's next leader. Mandelson understands how to link tactics and strategy to policymaking, not an easy connection to make – as David Cameron is currently demonstrating. Mandelson also has the experience of government and recognises the weaknesses in the Conservative leadership. As a bonus, he understands the rhythms of the media fairly well, although he still makes a surprising number of gaffes.

Brown was indeed planning to announce during his party conference speech that he wanted to take part in televised debates with Cameron during the election. He had hoped to spring a surprise, to get momentum from the challenge. He still might go for it, but Mandelson gave the game away in advance by suggesting such a move was possible; quite a cock-up. On the whole, though, Mandelson's star shines brightly in an otherwise darkish sky.

In what context could he make his move towards the leadership? This is where the difficulties begin. When the new political season kicks off next month, he will be central to Brown's attempt at a comeback. Having made his decision that Labour's best bet is to buttress Brown, Mandelson would undermine his own credibility by knifing the Prime Minister, standing down as a peer, fighting a by-election and then taking part in a leadership contest as a newly-elected MP. Apart from anything else, there is no space between now and the election for such a time-consuming process, with the tottering Government on hold after a traumatic act of regicide as Mandelson becomes an MP in order then to become a candidate. I am exhausted outlining the sequence. It will not happen.

Nor would such a series of events enhance Mandelson's reputation. He has been at his best over the past year as the calm, good-humoured and influential elder statesman, slightly above the fray and yet at the heart of everything. Personally he has enjoyed the best media ever. All would change if he were to change from king-maker to king-seeker. If Labour loses the election, the focus will be on the next generation even if the party does not have a single credible younger candidate yet. In the event of a hung Parliament, there would be enough instability without adding to the frenzy as Mandelson moves to the Commons. The timing, context and sequencing make it impossible for Mandelson to become leader after the election.

If there is a leadership contest next summer neither Harman nor Mandelson will be Brown's successor; neither will even stand in a contest. The closest they will get to No 10 is their temporary occupancy during Brown's summer break. It is Peter's turn next week.

Our Constitution Is Far from Perfect - But Written Codification Is Not The Answer

I read with interest the article published yesterday calling for a codified constitution. It is clear that our current written but uncodified constitution - made up of an array of legislation, case law, and convention - isn’t perfect, far from it. However codification, or an attempt to create a new constitution, is not the way forward.

Whilst an uncodified constitution does not provide an easily accessible document detailing governance of the country and the rights of the individual, it does provide a living constitution. It is a constitution that can adapt and evolve with the ever-changing conditions in which we live. It is a constitution that has allowed, taking only recent examples: our entry to the European Community in 1973; the use of referenda as first seen in 1975; devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; the Human Rights Act in 1998; the removal of most hereditary peers from the Lords (unfortunately 92 remain); freedom of information; and separation of powers, to name but a few examples.

Therefore it is not rigidity or the inability to enact change that is the problem. On the contrary, perhaps the real problem is that the constitution, in its current state, is too flexible. If this is the case then we must seek to ensure safeguards are put in place. But we need not to codify our constitution to achieve this.

Our entry into the European Community in 1973, bringing with it the European Court of Justice (ECJ), has provided a safeguard against infringement of rights since the decision in Factortame. The European Court of Human Rights, deciding on breaches of the Convention of Human Rights, acts as a further safeguard (although I admit its decisions are not binding).

Importantly, the separation of powers provides further safeguards. We have a judiciary, which - thanks to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 - will soon be fully separated from the legislature. It is free from political manipulation and the whims of whatever party governs and ensures that abuses of power do not take place - cases that involved detention of foreign subjects suspected of terrorism is just one example.

However many argue for a codified constitution neither on the basis that the current uncodified constitution is too restrictive, nor that the alternative is too flexible, but on the basis that we need a statement of values. We need to assert positive rights to make us feel British. If only there were a list of positive rights then people would come to understand the constitution, know what they are entitled to, and be able to emulate the citizens of America in their ability to recite their rights.

But we already have such a list. It is the Human Rights Act. Yet despite it clearly laying out a list of positive rights I can probably say with some degree of certainty that outside the bubble in which the legal and political apparatchik spend their time the majority of people cannot name even 5 of those rights.

Some argue that we should codify our constitution to outline basic entitlements, to education and healthcare, for instance. However, this presupposes that the UK is still a unitary state. It forgets that in a system of asymmetrical devolution, Parliament no longer legislates on education and healthcare in Scotland; unless of course we intend to go back on, or weaken, the policy of devolution.

Even if devolution hadn’t occurred and we were still a unitary state, then such entitlements would be meaningless without the right and ability to enforce them. We would need a constitutional court, similar to the Supreme Court in the US to be able to strike down contravening legislation.

Yet this goes against the very safeguards the Labour Government has strengthened since the enactment of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. It would weaken and undermines the separation of power; the second we give judges the power to strike down legislation we would spark a flurry of political interest in their appointment. And we would see situations such as those in the US - fierce political battles of judicial appointments; Conservative judges blocking Labour policy and vice-versa.

Perhaps instead we may just have rights, or entitlements, that aren’t tangibly enforceable? But were this to be the case, those rights may as well be written on the back of a cigarette packet. For what is a right if it cannot be enforced?

The current constitution isn’t ideal, but a codified version is certainly not the answer.

An Economic Update

This week we’ve seen one of the key forward-looking indicators of business confidence – the purchasing managers index for Britain’s services sector – move up to a 17-month high of 53.2 for July (surpassing expectations for an increase to 51.6). Office for National Statistics data shows an 0.5% jump in June’s industrial production (the largest rise in 20 months) and Halifax says British house prices saw a 1.1% monthly rise in July.

Commenting today, Paul Krugman writes:

‘Two months ago I wrote that there were hints of a relatively quick economic turnaround in Britain. Now those hints have gotten much stronger. Basically, aggressive monetary policy and the depreciation of the pound are giving Britain a boost relative to other advanced countries’.

Finally, the Bank of England has decided to to continue with its programme of asset purchases financed by the issuance of central bank reserves and to increase its size by £50 billion to £175 billion (the ‘qe’ programme), commenting:

”On the one hand, there is a considerable stimulus still working through from the easing in monetary and fiscal policy and the past depreciation of sterling. On the other hand, the need for banks to continue repairing their balance sheets is likely to restrict the availability of credit, and past falls in asset prices and high levels of debt may weigh on spending”.

This post was first published on Liam Byrne's blog.