Fancy dinner and a photo with David Cameron?
That was what was on offer recently for wealthy business figures at an event in China – as long as they stumped up about £12,000.
Mr Cameron featured on social media adverts for the Shanghai International Ball and Leaders’ Forum, which took place earlier this week.
A photograph of the former prime minister was accompanied by a price in Chinese renminbi.
Continue reading Chinese business chiefs pay £12,000 for dinner with David Cameron
It is a struggle many former smokers experience.
Have a few drinks and, before you know it, you’re puffing away again.
Now it seems ex-Prime Minister David Cameron – who has previously spoken of his battle to give up nicotine – is also no stranger to this predicament.
Britain may broadcast the financial secrets of Russia’s ruling elite as part of the information war against the Putin regime, the Foreign Secretary has indicated.
Philip Hammond said he was interested by the idea of publicising the wealth of the Russian president’s inner circle in order to embarrass them in front of their people, as part of the response to the ongoing incursion into eastern Ukraine.
The Foreign Secretary warned that Putin is rapidly modernising his armed forces, and warned Russia’s bid to destabilise eastern Europe poses “the greatest single threat” to British national security.
Mr Hammond said that Britain must now “accept” that efforts to offer Russia its “rightful place” in the post-Cold War order had been “rebuffed”.
It marks a change in tone from the British government: David Cameron has repeated said that the door is open to Russia to normalise relations if it ended the assault on Ukraine.
He warned that Russia’s rapid rearmament is a “significant cause for concern,” and confirmed that British intelligence agencies are now recruiting Russian speakers.
British diplomats in Russia and Ukraine have regularly released photographs of Russian-supplied heavy weaponry as part of an information war, highlighting the Kremlin’s role in the conflict.
The EU has applied asset freezes and visa bans to 151 Russian and Ukrainian people and 37 companies regarded as complicit in the seizure of Crimea and the invasion of east Ukraine.
The wealth of Putin’s court is opaque, but undoubtedly runs into tens of billions of dollars held in offshore accounts and property in London and New York. Many of his closest associates made their fortunes during the chaotic mass privatisations of state assets during the 1990s. Official statements of Putin’s wealth – a £96,000 a year salary, a flat and three cars – are frequently met with derision.
Asked if there was a case for the “interesting” financial arrangements of members of Putin’s inner circle to be published by the British government, Mr Hammond replied: “There might be.”
“When we talk about having further steps that we can take, increasing the pressure on Russia, one the headings that we regularly review is strategic communication: how can we message the Russian people and to people that Russia is seeking to influence about what is really going on?
“It is an interesting thought and I will make sure the Strat Comms people are thinking precisely about that.”
Mr Cameron has suggested the BBC budget should be increased to help its Russian and Ukrainian language services counter Russian television propaganda.
Mr Hammond said the “generous” attempts to integrate Russia into the post-Cold War world had failed.
Putin feels the collapse of the USSR was a humiliation, and accuses the West of seeking to neuter Russia and encroach upon its borders – provoking the incursion into Ukraine.
Mr Hammond told the Royal United Services Institute: “In the case of Russia, for two decades since the end of the Cold War, we and our allies sought to draw our old adversary into the rules-based international system. We worked in a spirit of openness, generosity and partnership, to help Russia take its rightful place, as we saw it, as a major power contributing to global stability and order. We now have to accept that those efforts have been rebuffed.
“We are now faced with a Russian leader bent not on joining the international rules-based system which which keeps the peace between nations, but on subverting it,” he said.
“President Putin’s actions – illegally annexing Crimea and now using Russian troops to destabilise eastern Ukraine – fundamentally undermine the security of sovereign nations of Eastern Europe.”
“The rapid pace with which Russia is seeking to modernise her military forces and weapons combined with the increasingly aggressive stance of the Russian military including Russian aircraft around the sovereign airspace of Nato states are all significant causes of concern.
“So we are in familiar territory for anyone over the age of about 50, with Russia’s behaviour a stark reminder that it has the potential to pose the single greatest threat to our security.”
“Continuing to gather intelligence on their capabilities and intentions will remain a vital part of our intelligence effort for the foreseeable future. It is no coincidence that all the agencies are recruiting Russian speakers again.”
Putin’s money men
The wealth of Putin’s inner circle runs to tens of billions of pounds.
Vladimir Yakunin
Head of Russian Railways, the country’s biggest employer, since 2005. He has been part of Putin’s St Petersburg circle since the 1990s, and is dogged by claims from opposition activists over his wealth. He accompanies Mr Putin on overseas visit, and was in charge of construction during the Sochi Winter Olympics. He has been hit with US sanctions. His network is unknown but his official salary is $15 million.
Gennady Timchenko
Founder of Gunvor, the Swiss-based oil trader, he sold his stake just before being hit by US sanctions. His net worth is reckoned to be $14.5 billion, according to Forbes. Putin is said by the US to have “investments in Gunvor and may have access to Gunvor funds”. The company strongly denies that claim, and has not been subject to foreign sanctions.
Yuri Kovalchuk
Once dubbed one of Putin’s “cashiers”. He is the largest shareholder of Bank Rossiya, called by the US the “personal bank for senior officials” of Russia. He is a member of the Ozero Dacha, a community of lakeside homes of Putin and his allies. His wealth is estimated to be $1.4 billion. He is hit by US and EU sanctions.
Arkady and Boris Rotenburg
Arkady is Putin’s old judo partner, and is subject to EU sanctions.. The brothers have interests in pipelines, road construction and banking, and are presidents of Dinamo Moscow hockey and football clubs respectively. They received billions of dollars of contracts for the Sochi games. Their personal wealth is said to be $2.5 billion.
President of Rosneft, the state oil company, and the former deputy prime minister. His salary was $50 million last year. He is one of the most powerful figures in the administration, and is said to “economic interests” with Putin.
Infowars
Tweets issued by the British embassy in Ukraine highlight how heavy weaponry used by separatists in the east of the country are Russian-supplied – and have highlighted the impact of sanctions on the Russian economy.
The White House said on Monday that it was a mistake not to send President Barack Obama or another high-profile representative to a massive anti-terror rally in France the day before.
“I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone of a higher profile to be there,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said at his regular media briefing.
Obama was widely criticized for not attending Sunday’s rally, which condemned last Wednesday’s jihadist attack against the Paris headquarters of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical magazine. Twelve people were killed in the initial attack including police officers and several of the magazine’s staffers.
Many other prominent world leaders attended the march, including British Prime Minister David Cameron, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Jordanian King Abdullah II, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
Anadolu Agency/Contributor/Getty ImagesWorld leaders gathered in Paris in a show of unity. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (second from left), Malian President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita (third from left), French President Francois Hollande (third from right), and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (second from right).
More than 3.7 people marched throughout France, according to the government’s estimate. Organizers described the demonstration as the largest in French history.
Some have suggested that, if Obama could not be there, he should have at least sent his vice president, secretary of state, or attorney general. The front page of Monday’s New York Daily News declared that Obama and other senior officials “let the world down” by skipping the rally. Attorney General Eric Holder was in Paris at the time for meetings, but he did not attend the march.
Earnest also argued that logistical and security concerns also presented “challenges” for Obama to attend.
“Had the circumstances been a little bit different, I think the president himself would have liked to have had the opportunity to be there,” he said. “The planning for which only began on Friday night, and 36 hours later it had begun. What’s also clear is that the security requirements around a presidential-level visit — or even a vice presidential-level visit — are onerous and significant.”
AP Photo/Peter DejongThousands of people gather at Republique square in Paris, France, Sunday, Jan. 11, 2015.
Barack Obama is so close to David Cameron that the US President calls him “bro”, the Prime Minister has revealed.
Speaking to The Mail on Sunday, Mr Cameron described the famously “special” relationship between Washington and Westminster as “stronger than it has ever been, privately and in public,” and that during phone calls Obama refers to him as “bro”.
For those less well-versed in youth vernacular, the Urban Dictionary helpfully defines the term as describing “an alpha male idiot” or “obnoxious partying males often seen at college parties”.
“Bro” may also describe a type of bra designed specifically for men.
However, perhaps it should be assumed Obama uses it as a term of endearment, to mean close pals or “brothers”.
Either way, it can be seen as a step forward from George W Bush’s condescending idiom: “Yo, Blair.”
As if we needed any more proof of the blossoming bromance, here are some pictures of the transatlantic “bros” looking all buddied-up.
The United Kingdom will push the European Union this weekend to consider the most punitive sanctions yet against Russia for its involvement in escalating the crisis in Ukraine.
According to Bloomberg, the U.K. plans to propose blocking Russia from the SWIFT banking transaction system, a move analysts say would effectively cut off Russian businesses from the rest of the world’s financial system.
U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron will put forward the proposal during a meeting with E.U. leaders in Brussels on Saturday.
“This would be a major escalation of the sanctions. Most international payments flow through SWIFT. Banning Russian banks and companies from SWIFT would effectively cut off Russian businesses from the rest of world,” said Bruce Johnston, a London-based analyst at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.
“It would also have a major impact on European businesses who need to paid by Russians, and want to consume Russian energy.”
The move would have a significant effect on Russia’s banking sector, as many financial institutions across the world use the system. According to SWIFT’s website, it transmitted more than 21 million financial messages per day in July.
It helped process payments among more than 10,500 financial institutions and corporations across 215 different countries.
Mark Dubowitz, the executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, compared the potential move to one leveled on Iranian institutions in 2012.
“SWIFT is the electronic bloodstream of the global financial system,” he told Business Insider in an email. “Cancelling Putin’s credit card could have far reaching consequences for the Russian economy as Iran discovered when scores of its financial institutions were expelled from SWIFT in 2012.”
David Cameron will propose blocking Russia from the SWIFT network.
The U.S. and E.U. have imposed multiple rounds of sanctions on Russia over the conflict in Ukraine. Most recently last month, they leveled targeted sanctions on Russia’s energy, arms, and finance sectors. But so far, the sanctions have not changed the calculus of Russia or President Vladimir Putin.
This week, the conflict has sharply escalated, as Ukraine, NATO, and the West said Russia sent troops across the border to fight with pro-Russian separatist rebels in eastern regions of the country.
This week, the rebels have opened a new front in the cities of Amvrosiivka and Starobeshevo. One fear is that Russia is attempting to create a land link between Russia and the strategic peninsula of Crimea, which Russia annexed with special forces troops in March.
Poroshenko said Russian troops are leading a separatist counteroffensive in the east, bringing in tanks and firing artillery from inside Ukrainian territory.
President Barack Obama and European leaders have agreed on the need for new “costs” in the wake of the latest escalation, but officials in both areas are questioning the legitimacy of the strategy.
In the U.S., multiple Republican lawmakers have called on Obama to provide military assistance to Ukraine, saying a political resolution to the conflict is not possible if Russia continues to pursue its goals through military means.
In Europe, geopolitical expert Ian Bremmer of the Eurasia Group told Business Insider he expected there to be high-profile breaks among leaders on the sanctions strategy.
“It’s hard to see the west holding off for much longer in not calling Russian forces an invasion. That leads to more ‘level 3’ (sector wide) sanctions on Russia, yes, but we’ll now see a real fragmentation of European leaders publicly calling the policy a failure and looking to break from further coordination,” Bremmer said.
“After all, many Europeans have been deeply skeptical of Russian sanctions from the beginning, and to the extent that the purpose of sanctions was to prevent an invasion. That’s clearly failed.”
Senior Obama administration officials declined to comment about possible new sanctions on Russia during a conference call with reporters Friday about new sanctions leveled on individuals and businesses in relation to Iran’s nuclear program.
An administration official did not immediately respond to a subsequent request for comment.
A member of the public who caused a security alert when he bumped into David Cameron in Leeds has said he had “no idea” it was the prime minister.
Dean Farley said he was only aware that he had collided with Mr Cameron an hour after he had been arrested by police.
He insisted he was “not particularly political” and was just going out on his daily lunchtime jog to the gym when he ran into a “bunch of men in suits”.
Mr Cameron has downplayed the incident, now the subject of a police review.
Mr Cameron was quickly driven away from the scene after the encounter outside the Civic Hall in Leeds.
West Yorkshire Police said “nothing sinister” had taken place but the Metropolitan Police, which provides personal security for the prime minister, said there would be a review of the incident.
The prime minister was in Leeds to launch government plans to upgrade rail links in the north of England.
A member of Mr Cameron’s security team intervened as a man appeared to dart towards the prime minister. Officers then bundled the man away as the prime minister got into a waiting vehicle.
Mr Farley later revealed himself to be the man at the centre of the incident, saying he was not a protester and was totally unaware the prime minister was visiting the city.
“I didn’t see David Cameron. I didn’t know it was David Cameron until they let me out of the police van an hour later,” Mr Farley, who was eventually released without charge, said.
The 28-year old said he was on the way to his local gym for a session with his personal trainer when he crossed the road outside the council building.
“All I saw were a group of men in suits who came out of the Civic Hall.”
He added: “It begs the question – how good is Cameron’s security if I managed to run between it before they stopped me?”
Mr Farley, who was carrying a towel but no ID at the time, said it had been “harrowing” to find himself “harangued and manhandled” by police and not being told why he had been arrested.
“I’m quite shook up. I was almost in shock, like I’d been in an accident or something.”
The media reaction to the incident had been “insane”, he said, adding that many of his friends wanted to buy him a drink and he could see the “funny side”.
“I kind of wish I had been protesting something or I had had something to say”, he added.
‘No threats’
Following the incident, Chief Inspector Derek Hughes of West Yorkshire Police said: ”Around midday, a 28-year-old local man was briefly arrested after he came close to the prime minister’s group who had just left the Civic Hall in Leeds.
”No threats were made, and after the man’s details were checked, he was de-arrested and allowed on his way.”
The BBC’s Tom Symonds said a member of Mr Cameron’s party told him the prime minister stepped back as the man ran towards him and was not in contact with him.
The prime minister’s close security is generally provided by officers from SO1 Specialist Protection, part of the Metropolitan Police’s Protection Command.
Labour MP Keith Vaz said he would be “astonished” if there was not a review of procedures.
“It could have ended in a completely different scenario,” he told Sky News, adding that Mr Farley’s actions had caused a “great deal of concern”.
But former Met officer Peter Power said that although “questions would be asked” about the incident, it was “not catastrophic” and was unlikely to lead to major changes.
He told BBC News that the fact that the man had been taken away so quickly showed the police response “worked reasonably well”.
But former Deputy Prime Minister Lord Prescott, who punched a protester during the 2001 general election campaign after being hit by an egg, said the episode proved that security around top politicians needed to be “tightened up”.
And speaking during a parliamentary statement on last week’s EU summit, Mr Cameron jokingly made reference to the so-called “Prescott punch”.
“I was actually in a meeting in Leeds speaking to a group of city leaders and other politicians and John Prescott was in the room as I gave the speech,” he told MPs.
“And as I left the room I thought the moment of maximum danger had probably passed but clearly that wasn’t the case.”
Mr Cameron said he wanted to put on record the “debt” he owed to those who protect him on a daily basis, saying they did a “very good job”.
It comes less than a week after a man threw a bag of marbles at the glass screen which separates the public from MPs in the House of Commons.
That incident took place during Prime Minister’s Questions.
David Cameron has angrily insisted the UK will not pay £1.7bn being demanded by the European Union by next month.
“If people think I am paying that bill on 1 December, they have another thing coming,” the prime minister said in Brussels. “It is not going to happen.”
He said the demand was “totally unacceptable” and no way for the EU to behave – and he wanted to examine how they arrived at the amount.
EU finance ministers have agreed to the UK’s request for emergency talks.
The demand from Brussels would add about a fifth to the UK’s annual net EU contribution of £8.6bn.
Mr Cameron said he was “downright angry” and said the British public would find the “vast” sum “totally unacceptable”.
“It is an unacceptable way for this organisation to work – to suddenly present a bill like this for such a vast sum of money with so little time to pay it,” he said.
“It is an unacceptable way to treat a country which is one of the biggest contributors to the EU.”
He added: “We are not going suddenly to get out our cheque book and write a cheque for 2bn euros. It is not going to happen.”
He sounded like a prime minister unleashed; by turns scornful and furious, lectern thumping, downright angry.
It seemed he was doing exactly what UKIP leader Nigel Farage demanded – refusing the European Commission any money at all.
But David Cameron was well in control.
He said he would not pay on 1 December, but did not rule out paying later.
He accepted the principle of a fluctuating EU budget that meant bills went up as well as down.
After that performance he cannot, and surely will not, pay what the Commission demands.
But by how far can he negotiate down the bill? Half of £1.7bn, a quarter, a third; all represent big money.
Were he to refuse to pay whatever the Commission finally demands, could he still persuade EU leaders in vital, future negotiations?
For a party leader battling Mr Farage, the pictures on the TV news tonight will be perfect.
If his diplomats can’t do a decent deal, they will come back to haunt him.
Mr Cameron said his position was backed by several other European leaders whose countries are also being tapped for more money, claiming his Italian counterpart Matteo Renzi had described the demands as a “lethal weapon”.
He said that he first heard about the EU’s demands on Thursday but acknowledged that the Treasury knew about it last week.
But addressing who had known the details first, he said “you didn’t need to have a Cluedo set to know someone has been clubbed with the lead piping in the library”.
There has been anger across the political spectrum in the UK at the EU’s demand for additional money, which comes just weeks before the vital Rochester and Strood by-election, where UKIP is trying to take the seat from the Conservatives.
The surcharge follows an annual review of the economic performance of EU member states since 1995, which showed Britain has done better than previously thought. Elements of the black economy – such as drugs and prostitution – have also been included in the calculations for the first time.
George Osborne: ”It’s unacceptable to be presented with a multi-billion pound demand with six weeks to pay”
The UK and the Netherlands are among those being asked to pay more, while France and Germany are both set to receive rebates. The UK is being asked to pay the most.
Several Conservative MPs have said the UK should refuse to pay the sum, describing it as “illegal”.
EU diplomats told Reuters that finance ministers would meet to discuss the issue, while Downing Street is pressing for “a full political-level discussion” well before 1 December.
It is not clear whether there will be a separate meeting or whether the issue will be discussed at a scheduled meeting of EU finance ministers next month.
Labour said Mr Cameron had failed to explain how long it had known about the EU proposals, suggesting he had delayed making it public over fears about how it would go down with voters.
Shadow chancellor Ed Balls said it was wrong that an “unfair” bill had been “sprung upon” the UK but suggested that the Treasury should have acted sooner.
“The prime minister says he wants a meeting of finance ministers next month. He should have done this last week,” Mr Balls told the BBC News Channel.
He added: “I want this bill to come down and a deal should be struck.”
The UK Independence Party likened the EU to a “thirsty vampire” and said the demand strengthened its case for exiting the EU.
Analysis by economics editor Robert Peston
Now to be absolutely clear, none of this is a surprise to the Treasury or chancellor. British officials have known for some time that the inflammatory demand from Brussels was coming.
What did catch them by surprise was what it sees as a deliberate leak by EU officials of the news last night – which they see as an attempt to embarrass David Cameron, as he meets other EU leaders to discuss, among other things, his controversial hopes of being able to restrict migration of EU nationals to Britain.
UKIP leader Nigel Farage said the UK already paid £55m a day to be a member of the EU and suggested it would have no option but to pay the supplement.
“To be asked for a whole load more and be given a few days in which to pay it, is pretty outrageous and I think people will be very very angry,” he said.
“And it just leaves Mr Cameron in a hopeless position. Remember one of his big claims is that he cut the EU budget. The result of that cut is that our contribution had gone up a little bit and now it has gone up a lot.”
UKIP leader Nigel Farage says David Cameron is in a “hopeless position”
The additional payment was requested after the European Commission’s statistics agency, Eurostat, reviewed the economic performances of member states since 1995, and readjusted the contributions made by each state over the past four years based on their pace of growth.
The BBC’s head of statistics Anthony Reuben said prostitution, drugs and tobacco smuggling were not included in national income before 2002 when they should have been, under accounting rules.
In contrast, prostitution was included in Germany’s own national accounts and given EU budget contributions are based on national income, this partly explains why the UK has been underpaying and Germany overpaying, he added.
The UK has received rebates in the past as a result of this process.
The Commons European Scrutiny Committee is to investigate the proposed increase in the UK contribution to the EU’s budget.
Committee chairman Sir William Cash said: “I expect a Treasury minister to appear before the Committee early next week.”
Internet users who ‘threaten’ national security, by causing economic or environmental damage, could face a life sentence under new government plans to crack down on internet crime. Campaigners say the move will target whistleblowers.
The government proposal claims the laws are needed to deal with “catastrophic” cyber-attacks that“result in loss of life, serious illness and injury, or serious damage to national security, or a significant risk thereof.”
Proposals would update the existing Computer Misuse Act 1990, and would give judges the power to hand down harsher penalties on hackers. The laws would also incorporate internet users spying on the activities of UK businesses.
“Serious and organized crime blights lives and causes misery across the UK. It is a threat to our national security and costs hard-working taxpayers at least £24bn a year,” a Home Office spokesperson said.
“Through this bill we will ensure that in the event of such a serious attack those responsible would face the justice they deserve.”
Tough sentencing plans come after a report published earlier this week said more than half of Britons had been victims of cybercrime, including instances of theft and identity fraud, but less than a third of those affected actually reported them to the authorities.
In July this year, Prime Minister David Cameron pledged more than £1bn to the UK defense industry, with a ‘significant’ percentage going to projects designed to curb cybercrimes and terrorism.
However, digital rights activists have hit out at the government’s measures, claiming they would be arbitrary in practice and affect the wrong people in the long term.
Executive director of the Open Rights Group (ORG) Jim Killock said the legislation was drawn up too broadly and ran the risk of deterring whistleblowers.
“As the internet affects more areas of our lives, computer legislation drafted in one context may be more widely applied than originally intended,” he said.
“We would hope that an increase in penalties under the Computer Misuse Act would be matched with additional protections – for example, through a public interest defense.”
Last week, the Joint Committee of Human Rights also raised concerns that the additional laws were too broad and could criminalize non-threatening web activity, adding that “vagueness” could not be allowed in defining criminal offences.
The UK government has come under fire in recent months for proposing restrictions and greater surveillance measures on web activity, particularly to monitor potential terrorists online.
Thursday night, a small British nationalist party won its first seat in the UK’s parliament.
In the tiny seaside town of Clacton, UKIP (The UK Independence Party) — a rising anti-EU party — scored a decisive win.
And although this was just one election, the vote will send shockwaves across Europe: The message is out — the eurosceptics are on the march.
For those willing to look, the signs of growing hostility to the European project have been easy to spot. In the previous European parliament elections, hardcore eurosceptic parties captured 100 of the 751 seats, while almost a third were taken by other anti-establishment parties.
Notable among these are Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Front, which won 24.95% of the vote in France (up from 6.3% in 2009), and Nigel Farage’s UKIP, which took 27.5% of the UK vote, giving it 23 MEPs and forcing Labour and the Conservatives into a humiliating scrap for second place.
Scotland just held a referendum, pushed by nationalists there, on whether to leave the UK (and by default Europe). The nationalists got 45% of the vote.
In Greece, the radical left coalition SYRIZA came on top of the polls with a 26.6% share of the total, on promises to campaign against harsh government spending cuts being imposed on the country by “the Troika” — a group consisting of the European Commission, the IMF, and the European Central Bank.
Below are the results in full:
Rising anti-European sentiment has been attributed to the ongoing eurozone economic crisis, which has left up to a quarter of the working-age populations of countries like Greece and Spain out of work and caused the region’s economy as a whole to flat-line.
The insistence on harsh economic reforms without compensating aid to those in need has compounded a sense that European policymakers are indifferent, or even hostile, to the hardships faced by huge swathes of the people within the monetary union.
This has provided fertile ground for parties at the extremes of the political spectrum to build their support bases.
So far, voters have been willing to vent their frustration with policymakers through the European parliament, while (with the notable exception of Greece) mainstream parties continue to dominate at a national level. The significance of the UKIP vote is that it could mark the moment where this all changes.
Once dubbed a party of “fruitcakes, loonies, and closet racists” by UK prime minister David Cameron, UKIP has become Britain’s third-largest party, with the latest polls projecting a 15% share of national support. Similarly Le Pen’s National Front is now viewed favorably by over 20% of French voters, according to pollster TNS:
In the past, surges in support for these xenophobic, anti-immigration parties have failed to translate into tangible results at the ballot box.
Not anymore, it seems.
UKIP’s victory in Clacton might have stolen the headlines, but its loss by a mere 617 votes in a second by-election in the supposed safe Labour seat of Heywood and Middleton will set off the loudest alarms in Westminster — and beyond.
It demonstrates a capacity to challenge both Conservatives and Labour alike in their heartlands. It could have been two seats.
One or two seats out of 650 in the House of Commons doesn’t seem like much. But remember that Cameron’s regime is already a coalition with the centrist Liberal Democrats. He needs every seat he can get, and UKIP just stole one of his bargaining chips.
Pro-UKIP sentiment has already forced Cameron into promising an in/out referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union in the next parliament, a vote that he is far from certain of winning.
That promise hasn’t halted the rise of the eurosceptics by bringing them back into the Conservative fold. It seems to have only made them stronger instead.
The rest of Europe has every reason to be worried.
All are suspected of being part of, or supporting, the banned Islamic extremist group Al-Muhajiroun, the Met says
Radical preacher Anjem Choudary is understood to be one of nine men arrested today as part of an investigation into Islamist terrorism.
The men, who were all seized in London, were arrested on suspicion of being members of, or supporting, a banned organisation, the Metropolitan Police said.
Al-Muhajiroun is understood to be the banned organisation in question.
Counter-terrorism police searched 18 addresses across London, and one in Stoke on Trent.
More addresses are expected to be targeted throughout the day.
Scotland Yard said the men, who are aged between 22 and 51, were arrested as “part of an ongoing investigation into Islamist related terrorism and are not in response to any immediate public safety risk”.
The arrests come as Britain stands on the brink of war with the Islamic State.
David Cameron is set to recall Parliament tomorrow before Britain joins international airstrikes in Iraq.
David Cameron held open the door for sweeping constitutional reform of the UK, pledging greater powers for English MPs over English legislation after Scotland voted decisively to remain part of the United Kingdom.
The No campaign won a more comprehensive victory than the opinion polls had suggested, by a margin of 55.3 to 44.7 per cent . But the impact of the vote will trigger a major constitutional upheaval for the whole of the UK.
After an army of “silent” No voters defeated an unprecedented challenge to the 307-year union a relieved Mr Cameron declared Scottish independence was now off the table “for a generation”, possibly a lifetime.
But while Alex Salmond’s dream of independence was defeated on Thursday night, the UK prime minister acknowledged Scots had made clear they wanted to exercise more powers closer to home.
That in turn is expected to lead to a new constitutional settlement for the entire UK, with more power for English MPs over their own affairs and a transfer of money and power from Westminster to big cities.
Addressing the nation outside Downing Street, Mr Cameron said “the settled will of the Scottish people” was to stay inside the UK and that he would “honour in full” a pledge to deliver new powers over tax and welfare for the Scottish parliament.
But he said new powers for Scotland had to be accompanied by a deal that gave English MPs more of a say over their own affairs. “The question of English votes for English laws requires a decisive answer,” he said. The “millions of voices of England must now be heard”.
Investors reacted with relief, with bank shares up sharply after the market opened. Royal Bank of Scotland shares were up 3.5 per cent at 366p, Lloyds Banking Group shares rose 1.5 per cent to 772p and Standard Life shares were up 1.7 per cent at 424p. The FTSE 100 was up 0.6 per cent to 6,858.
Earlier Mr Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National party, conceded defeat in a rousing and at times defiant speech to supporters. Hailing the turnout of 86 per cent and the estimated 1.6m voters who had backed independence, Mr Salmond said Scotland would expect the recent pledges of further devolution to be “honoured in rapid course”.
“I don’t think that we’ll ever go back to business as usual in politics again. We have seen a scare and a fear at the heart of the Westminster establishment as they realise the mass movement of people that was going forward in Scotland.”
He also held out the prospect of Scotland attaining independence in the future. Scotland had by a majority decided not “at this stage” to become an independent country, Mr Salmond said.
Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign, said many pro-union supporters had been cowed into silence and that this was their victory: “The silent have spoken,” he said. “Some people have felt unable to speak except through the ballot box.”
Sterling initially gained in reaction to the result, rising 0.3 per cent higher to $1.6442, but later falling back against the dollar.
Yes supporters held their heads in their hands as it became increasingly clear through the night that Mr Salmond’s passionate campaign had failed to convince wavering Scots to break their links with the rest of the UK.
Mr Salmond secured victory in Glasgow – the city voted Yes by 53 to 47 per cent – and also won in Dundee. But the margins of victory were not as great as he had hoped and those victories were offset by heavy defeats elsewhere in the country. The No campaign won Edinburgh, by 61 to 39 per cent.
Overall, the referendum turnout of 84.6 per cent is approaching a record for the era of universal suffrage. Wales saw similar levels in the general elections of 1950 and 1951 but for Scotland and the UK as a whole, the last time this figure was surpassed was the general election of January 1910, when 86.8 per cent of an all-male electorate voted.
The Queen, who was said by aides to be following the referendum “very, very closely” at her Scottish residence Balmoral, is expected to make a written statement on Friday on the implications of the vote for the UK.
Business leaders welcomed the result of the referendum, while also voicing concern over continuing political uncertainty.
“There can be no doubt that many businesses will breathe a sigh of relief that the prospect of a contentious currency debate and prolonged economic negotiations have been avoided, and yet we know that significant changes are still on the cards,” said Simon Walker, director-general of the Institute of Directors in London.
“As negotiations commence on a future settlement for Scotland, the focus must be on ensuring that any new powers are used to boost Scotland’s economic competitiveness, unleash enterprise and attract further investment.”
RBS confirmed it would not be moving its headquarters south to England in the wake of the poll. The bank had warned if the Yes vote won, it would look at it shifting its domicile.
“The announcement we made about moving our registered head office to England was part of a contingency plan to ensure certainty and stability for our customers, staff and shareholders should there be a Yes vote,” the bank said.
“That contingency plan is no longer required. Following the result it is business as usual for all our customers across the UK and RBS.”
James Sproule, chief economist and director of policy at the CBI, the employers’ federation, said: “My immediate reaction is pleased and relieved. I didn’t think [independence] was going to be a good deal for the Scottish people or Scottish business.”
Hundreds of Yes supporters accepted defeat in central Glasgow as their ranks began to thin in George Square, the main gathering point, as dawn approached.
One kilted man with blue face paint held his head in his hands for several minutes, motionless. A red-headed girl was in tears. Others kicked the chunks of glass that littered the ground in disgust.
Walking home after a night on George Square, Robert Lindsay, a Yes supporting pensioner, said: “I’m pretty down but a lot of people have been mobilised and politicised by this. There were a lot of us.”
A visibly angry David Cameron has vowed to hunt down those responsible for the sickening murder of aid worker David Haines, and said the UK would do “whatever it takes” to combat the menace posed by the organisation.
Speaking after a meeting of the Cobra emergency committee at 10 Downing Street, Cameron said that the murder of aid worker Haines showed that Islamic State militants – who he pointedly referred to as ISIL, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, possibly as a result of pleas by influential British Muslims – were “monsters, not Muslims”.
“We will hunt down those responsible and bring them to justice, whatever it takes,” the prime minister said. “We cannot ignore this threat to our security and that of our allies.”
Cameron vowed to continue arming and helping the Kurdish peshmerga – referred to in the video released by Haines’s murderers – and said the military would continue to provide help to the US, though he ruled out “boots on the ground” for now.
“David Haines was an aid worker,” said Cameron. “He went into harm’s way, not to harm people but to help his fellow human beings in the hour of their direst need, from the Balkans to the Middle East. David Haines was a British hero.
The fact that an aid worker was taken, held and brutally murdered at the hand of Islamic State sums up what this organisation stands for. They boast of their brutality. They claim to do this in the name of Islam. That is nonsense– Islam is a religion of peace.”
Cameron set out a list of five steps which would now be taken to combat Islamic State, including reinforcing counterterrorism in Britain:
“People across this country will have been sickened by the fact that it could have been a British citizen – a British citizen! – who could have carried out this unspeakable act. It is the very opposite of everything our country stands for.
“It falls to the government and to each and every one of us to drain this poison from our society and to take on this warped ideology that is radicalising some of our young people.”
Sir John Major has warned that a “Yes” vote in the Scottish independence referendum would be “disastrous” for the rest of the UK.
The former Prime Minister told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme that Britain would lose its place “at the top table” if Scotland votes for independence.
The Conservative Party politician said that people have not grasped the implications of independence.
Major, writing in The Times, also said Scotland and the rest of the UK need one another.
“I believe Scotland and the whole of the UK as a whole would be damaged,”
“We need one another and, if separated, would all face unwelcome and unanticipated change.
“The UK would be weaker in every international body and, most damagingly, within the European Union. Our chance of reforming the EU would be diminished, and the risk of our exit from it enhanced.”
The comments come after David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg said they would miss Prime Minister’s Questions so they can campaign in Scotland ahead of the vote on 18 September.
“There is a lot that divides us – but there’s one thing on which we agree passionately: the UK is better together,” the party leaders said in a joint statement.
The visit follows a poll from YouGov for The Sunday Times that put the number of Scots intending to vote “Yes” ahead of the “No” campaign for the first time (51% vs 49%).
The leader of the Scottish National Party Alex Salmond claimed that the Better Together campaign was “spiralling into self-destruction” after the poll was published.
The referendum vote has also seen influential newspaper proprietor Rupert Murdoch sharing his views on the debate.
He took to social media site Twitter to tell his followers that “Scots [are] better people than to be dependants of London”, but suggested a “Yes” vote would be a “hard choice with real pain for some time”.
51% of Scots intend to vote for Scotland to become an independent country, according to YouGov poll
The pro-independence ‘Yes’ campaign has pulled ahead for the first time in polls on the Scottish independence vote.
Some 51% of Scots intend to vote for Scotland to become an independent country in the September 18 referendum, with the ‘Yes’ campaign having overturned a 22-point lead for the pro-unionist ‘No’ campaign.
Of those polled, 49% said that did not want Scotland to become and independent country.
The YouGov poll conducted for the Sunday Times excluded undecided and abstaining voters.
The momentum seems to be with the ‘Yes’ campaign, led by the Scottish National Party’s first minister Alex Salmond, to break Scotland’s 300-year union with England.
A Buckingham palace source told the Times that the Queen does not support Scottish independence, and that “there is now a great deal of concern” over prospect of the dissolution of the union, with the monarch asking for daily updates on the progress of the campaign.
Secessionist campaigners urged their side to remain focussed.
“While this poll puts us marginally ahead, other polls show that we still have more progress to make if we are to win,” said ‘Yes’ campaign chief executive Blair Jenkins.
Polls show a tight race
Alistair Darling, leader of the Better Together campaign said that the polls show that the vote “will go down to the wire”.
“It is not the Battle of Britain,” he added, “It is the battle for Scotland, for Scotland’s children and grandchildren and the generations to come. This is a battle we will win,” he said.
Responding to the poll, chancellor George Osborne said that in the next few days new plans will be revealed to hand more powers to the Scottish parliament.
He told the BBC: “You will see in the next few days a plan of action to give more powers to Scotland, more tax powers, more spending powers, more powers over the welfare state.”
“That will be put into effect the moment there is a ‘No’ vote in the referendum.”
However, a poll conducted for the ‘Yes’ Scotland campaign put the pro-unionists ahead by 52% to 48% when undecided voters were excluded.
A Downing Street source told the BBC that Prime Minister David Cameron believed that there was “only one poll that matters” and that he would “strain every sinew” to make the case for the Union.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and the main pro-Russian rebel leader said they would both order ceasefires on Friday, provided that an agreement is signed on a new peace plan to end the five month war in Ukraine’s east.
The first apparent breakthrough of its kind in the war comes after a week in which the pro-Moscow separatists scored major victories with what NATO says is the open support of thousands of Russian troops.
Speaking on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Wales, Poroshenko said the ceasefire would be conditional on a planned meeting going ahead in Minsk on Friday of envoys from Ukraine, Russia and Europe’s OSCE security watchdog.
“At 1400 local time (7.00 a.m. EDT on Friday), provided the (Minsk) meeting takes place, I will call on the General Staff to set up a bilateral ceasefire and we hope that the implementation of the peace plan will begin tomorrow,” Poroshenko told reporters.
Rebel leader Alexander Zakharchenko said in a statement that the separatists would also order a ceasefire, from one hour later, provided that Kiev’s representatives signed up to a peace plan at the Minsk meeting.
The announcements come a day after Russia’s President Vladimir Putin put forward a seven-point peace plan, which would end the fighting in Ukraine’s east while leaving rebels in control of territory.
So far there has been no sign of a halt in fighting in the east, where rebels have rapidly advanced in the past week, backed by what Kiev and NATO say is the support of thousands of Russian troops with artillery and tanks.
Moscow denies its troops are there, in the face of what the West says is overwhelming evidence.
Reuters journalists heard explosions and saw columns of smoke on the eastern outskirts of Mariupol, a government-held port of 500,000 people that is the next big city in the path of the rebel advance. A Ukrainian military source said troops were bracing for a potential attack on the city.
Reuters reporters also heard government shells rain down overnight on a residential district Donetsk, capital of one of the rebels’ two self-proclaimed independent states.
Poroshenko won support from Western leaders at the NATO summit. The West has backed Kiev by imposing economic sanctions on Moscow, but has also made clear it will not fight to protect the country, where pro-Russian rebels rose up in two provinces after Moscow annexed the Crimea peninsula in March.
The Ukrainian president was invited to meet U.S. President Barack Obama, Germany’s Angela Merkel, France’s Francois Hollande and other Western leaders at a summit of NATO in Wales hosted by Britain’s David Cameron.
“To the east, Russia has ripped up the rule book with its illegal, self-declared annexation of Crimea and its troops on Ukrainian soil threatening and undermining a sovereign nation state,” Obama and Cameron wrote in a joint newspaper editorial.
Hollande brought the biggest surprise on the eve of the summit: postponing the delivery of a helicopter carrier warship to Russia, a measure he had long resisted. Moscow accused him of caving in to U.S. political pressure.
“France’s reputation as a reliable partner that carries out its contractual obligations has been thrown into the furnace of American political ambitions,” Russian Foreign Ministry deputy spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote on Facebook.
CONFLICTING SIGNALS
The past few days have seen conflicting signals from both Moscow and Kiev. Putin made a number of belligerent statements over the past week before unveiling his peace proposal on Wednesday and discussing it by telephone with Poroshenko.
The Ukrainian leader hinted at a possible ceasefire on his website on Wednesday, but that wording was later dropped. His prime minister, Arseny Yatseniuk, derided Putin’s peace proposal as a “deception” and said Putin’s real aim was to “destroy Ukraine and restore the Soviet Union”.
Ukraine has previously refused to discuss any political deal with the rebels, calling them international terrorists and proxies of Moscow. But with the hope evaporating in the past week of a swift victory over the rebels, Poroshenko may have been convinced that it is now time to hear the Kremlin’s offer.
This week the rebels dropped a demand for full independence and said they would accept some kind of special status in Ukraine. That lifts one of the main obstacles to peace talks.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Washington of trying to undermine the nascent peace process.
“The surge in anti-Russian rhetoric that we have seen exactly when there is a very active effort to seek a political solution shows that the party of war in Kiev has active external support, in this case from the United States,” he said.
Putin’s peace offer would leave rebels in control of territory that accounts for a tenth of Ukraine’s population and an even larger chunk of its industry.
It would also require Ukraine to remain unaligned. Kiev said last week it would try to join NATO, although full membership in the Western military alliance is still an unlikely prospect, since several members oppose it.
On the ground, there has so far been no sign yet of any ceasefire. Government forces shelled the southern outskirts of the rebel bastion of Donetsk overnight.
Water supplies in the city, which had a pre-war population of nearly 1 million people, stopped working overnight. Local authorities said an electric plant used for pumping had been damaged and they would try to supply water in tankers.
BOMB SHELTER
Houses in Donetsk’s leafy Petrovka district were pockmarked with shrapnel. Residents had sought refuge in a bomb shelter.
“I don’t think they can reach any agreements now. Each side comes up with conditions unacceptable for the other. And so we get shelled,” said Lena, a resident who declined to give her surname.
Government troops had been on the offensive since Poroshenko was elected in June, squeezing the rebels into two provincial capitals, Donetsk and Luhansk.
But last week the rebels turned the tide with a dramatic advance that scattered government troops on a new front along the coast of the Sea of Azov that separates the rebellious provinces from Crimea, which Russia seized and annexed in March.
The front line has drawn closer to Mariupol, where government forces and local residents have been digging trenches to hold off an assault. The second biggest city in rebellious Donetsk province, Mariupol has been in government hands since June when separatists were driven out with the help of patrols of local metalworkers.
A NATO officer said there was no sign that Russia had drawn down its forces in Ukraine after Putin’s peace offer. The officer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said NATO believed there were several thousand Russian troops in Ukraine, with hundreds of tanks and armored vehicles, which he said represented “no significant change”.
NATO leaders are expected to take new steps at their summit to defend alliance members near Ukraine, including setting up a rapid reaction force. But the alliance has made clear it will not fight to defend non-member Ukraine itself. Western countries are relying instead on economic sanctions to pressurize Moscow.
The European Union is considering new sanctions this week which could tighten financial restrictions on Russian companies. Russia has responded to sanctions by banning imports of most Western food.
World News - Breaking International News Headlines and Leaks 