World

Earthquake rattles southern Mexico

A magnitude 5.7-earthquake shook southern Mexico near the Oaxaca coast Monday, setting off evacuation alarms and swaying buildings as far away as Mexico City.
Read more [CBC World News]

Ex-Sri Lankan army chief arrested

Sri Lanka's defeated presidential candidate was arrested Monday and will face a court martial, accused of planning to overthrow the government when he was head of the army.
Read more [CBC World News]

Jackson's doctor pleads not guilty to manslaughter

Dr. Conrad Murray, who was caring for Michael Jackson at the time of the pop star's death, has pleaded not guilty after being charged Monday with involuntary manslaughter.
Read more [CBC World News]

Yarl's Wood women on hunger strike 'locked up and denied treatment'

As their protest runs into a fourth day, some are said to be fainting or injured. But the Home Office denies wrongdoing

An immigration removal centre was reported to be in a state of chaos yesterday, as at least 50 women entered the fourth day of a hunger strike in protest against their detention and conditions, with ­several reportedly fainting in corridors and almost 20 locked outdoors wearing few clothes.

Yarl's Wood detention centre in Bedfordshire, which houses 405 women and children, was in lockdown, leaving women in communal spaces without food, water or toilet facilities.

Several women who tried to escape through a window were then locked outside, according to one detainee, including one whose finger was almost severed as she escaped but who had not received medical treatment.

"We have been on hunger strike since Friday protesting about the length of time we have spent in detention here," said Aisha, who has been in Yarl's Wood for three months. "We have been locked in the hallway all day – five ladies have fainted because they have not eaten since Friday. No one has come to give them any medical attention.

"I had an asthma attack, but no one would come to give me my inhaler. I'm very weak. But we will stay on hunger strike for as long as it takes."

Campaigners condemned the response of the authorities at the centre, accusing them of using a "kettling" technique to trap the women.

"The women are currently trapped in an airless hallway," said Cristel Amiss, of Black Women's Rape Action Project. "Women should be allowed back into their rooms immediately; there should be an immediate investigation."

The Home Office confirmed the disturbance, saying that 40 women were involved, and insisted the measures were temporary until the women could be reintegrated into the centre.

"The wellbeing of detainees is of ­paramount concern, which is why healthcare staff are at the scene to monitor developments," said David Wood, strategic director at the UK Border Agency. "The detainees will be integrated back into the centre at the earliest opportunity."

The hunger strike is the latest in a series of protests at the facility, which has attracted controversy for detaining women for long periods.

Campaigners say many of the women being detained are also victims of abuse and rape and should not be held while awaiting deportation decisions.

"Over 70% of women in Yarl's Wood are rape survivors, many are sick and vulnerable," said Amiss.

"Why are they being punished for raising serious injustices?"

The Home Office denied its practices in detaining immigrants were unfair.

"All detainees are treated with dignity and respect, with access to legal advice and health care facilities," said Wood.

• Immigration and asylum
• Protest

Murtha death adds to Obama's woes

• Democrats fear Republicans will win seat held since 1974
• President's poll ratings fall further amid health care impasse

The Democratic party faces another election test after the death yesterday of John Murtha, a congressman dubbed by his colleagues the "king of pork".

Murtha, aged 77, had been in the House of Representatives since being elected to his Pennsylvania district in 1974.

The fear in the party is that Republicans will notch up another victory when a special election is held, probably May.

The Democrats have been panicking since losing Ted Kennedy's Massachusetts Senate seat to the Republicans last month.

Murtha's nickname referred to so-called pork barrel politics – bringing government spending to bear in a representative's own district.

His death came on a day that saw Barack Obama's poll ratings fall further. A Marist poll found that only 44% of voters surveyed approved of his job performance, down 2% on December. More alarming for Democratic strategists, 57% of independents disapprove of his performance.

Murtha's death will have a neglible impact on the arithmetic of the House, where the Democrats have an overwhelming majority, unlike in the Senate. But another defeat in the spring would add to the sense of panic among Democrats in the run-up to the Congressional mid-term elections in November.

Murtha's office said he had died in hospital after complications following gallbladder surgery. He had been in hospital for several months.

His election in 1974 marked him out as the first of those to have served in Vietnam to make it into Congress.

He was popular on the left as one of the first senior Democrats in 2005 to turn against the Iraq war. But he was also one of the leading exponents of 'pork-barrel' politics, a practice that has long been reviled outside Washington and is one of the reasons for the present levels of disenchantment.

Murtha, as chairman of the House defence appropriations sub-committee, added 'earmarks', special spending projects to help his district, to defence bills, hence the King of Pork.

Scandal hovered over him throughout much of his career.

Murtha faced a tough race for re-election in 2008 after sabotaging his own campaign by referring to some of voters in Pennsylvania as "racist".

One of the reasons for the turnaround in Democratic fortunes is opposition to Barack Obama's health reform plan.

The president will make a fresh push this month to get his troubled health reform package through Congress by meeting both Democrats and Republicans, hoping to find common ground.

The half-day discussion at Blair House, opposite the White House, will be broadcast live on television to counter public criticism that too many deals in Washington are made behind closed doors.

Obama announced the meeting during a CBS television interview on Sunday evening. "I want to consult closely with our Republican colleagues … to ask them to put their ideas on the table. I want to come back and have a large meeting, Republicans and Democrats, to go through systematically all the best ideas that are out there and move it forward," he said.

The Republican leader in the House of Representatives, John Boehner, welcomed the move as "a real, bipartisan conversation", but added: "The problem with the Democrats' healthcare bills is not that the American people don't understand them; the American people do understand them and they don't like them."

The Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, welcomed the meeting, but suggested he was unlikely to compromise, calling for the Democrats' bill to be shelved.

The move buys the Democrats a few more weeks while they debate among themselves whether to push forward with the bill or abandon it. The version of the bill passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve would extend health care to 30 million more Americans.

• United States
• Democrats
• Barack Obama
• US politics
• Obama administration

Doctor charged over Jackson's death

Conrad Murray freed on $75,000 bail after pleading not guilty to involuntary manslaughter

Michael Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, was charged with involuntary manslaughter in Los Angeles yesterday in relation to the singer's death last year from a cocktail of drugs.

Murray, aged 57, pleaded not guilty just hours after being charged, and was released on bail of $75,000 (£48,000), and is due to reappear before the court on 5 April. The charge carries a jail term of four years.

The doctor has been under investigation almost since the singer's body was found at his home in Los Angeles in June last year.

Some Jackson fans shouted "murderer" as Murray entered the courthouse.

The doctor was appointed by Jackson appointed the doctor in May on a promise of $150,000 a month to help the singer through a series of comeback shows in London. Murray prescribed drugs to help the singer sleep, but insists there was nothing illegal in this.

The single charge against him claims he administered the powerful general anaesthetic propofol and two other sedatives "without due caution and circumspection" and "did unlawfully, and without malice, kill Michael Joseph Jackson".

Murray flew from his home in Houston to Los Angeles last week for negotiations between prosecutors and his lawyers on his surrender.

A coroner's report in August said Jackson had died from a cocktail of drugs, including propofol, which Murray has admitted administering. Propofol is often used as an anaesthetic in surgery, but was used on Jackson to help him sleep. The doctor administered the drug on the morning Jackson died, and then left the room. On his return, the singer had died.

The case will centre in the main on the use of propofol to help Jackson sleep, but also how long Murray stayed by his side immediately afterwards, while the drug took effect. Murray said he had left Jackson for two minutes to go to the bathroom.

Legal specialists said it could be a complicated and protracted case, with medical experts called by both sides to discuss the ethics of administering propofol.

Jackson's parents, Kathryn and Joe, were in court yesterday, along with his siblings LaToya, Jermaine, Tito, Jackie and Randy. Brian Oxman, Joe Jackson's lawyer, said some family members were disappointed that the doctor was charged only with involuntary manslaughter.

The Los Angeles district attorney's office said the deputy district attorney, David Walgreen, who is handling the attempt to extradite Roman Polanski in a child-sex case, will try the case. The district attorney's office credited the Los Angeles police and coroner's office for building the case against Murray. "Both agencies worked diligently and exhaustively to collect the evidence leading to the filing of the case," a statement said.

Bottles of propofol were in Murray's medicine bag and on the bedside table of Jackson's home.

Murray was employed by Jackson as he prepared for a series of 50 concerts aimed at reviving his career. The singer's career had been in steady decline after a series of allegations of child molestation that led to his arrest in 2003.

Jackson left an estate worth hundreds of millions and his death saw a new burst in sales of the star's music. A documentary film, Michael Jackson's This Is It, compiled from footage from rehearsals, earned nearly $260m.

• Michael Jackson
• United States

Haiti aid groups aim to vaccinate 140,000

Aid groups planned to launch an emergency vaccination campaign in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, on Monday in a bid to ward off measles, diphtheria and tetanus.
Read more [CBC World News]

Ontario man killed in Connecticut explosion

An Ontario man was among the five people killed in Sunday's explosion at a power plant under construction in Middleton, Conn.
Read more [CBC World News]

Afghanistan death toll exceeds Falklands as three UK soldiers die

Royal Scots Borderers and counter-IED task force soldier killed by blasts as Ministry of Defence warns of more casualties

Three British soldiers have been killed in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan in the last 24 hours, taking the total of fatalities in the conflict above the death toll of the Falklands war in 1982.

Two soldiers, from The Royal Scots Borderers, 1st Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland, part of the 3 Rifles Battle Group, died in an explosion near Sangin on Sunday evening. The third soldier to be killed was from 36 Engineer regiment, part of the counter-IED taskforce. He died on Monday morning in an explosion as he led a team conducting route clearance operations in the Nad-e-Ali district.

A total of 256 British servicemen and women have now died since operations in Afghanistan began in October 2001.

Lieutenant Colonel David Wakefield, spokesman for British forces in Helmand, said: "It is my sad duty to inform you that a soldier from 36 Engineer Regiment, part of the counter-IED taskforce, was killed by an explosion this morning in Nad-e-Ali district. He was leading a team conducting route clearance operations at the time, making the way ahead safe for others to follow. His indomitable courage and fortitude, the hallmark of his profession, will not be forgotten."

None of the soldiers was due to be involved in Operation Moshtarak, the biggest offensive against insurgents in central Helmand, which is about to be launched, the Ministry of Defence said.

Simon Weston, a Welsh Guardsman who suffered serious burns when his troopship, Sir Galahad, was bombed in the Falklands war, said: "For the Afghanistan death toll to reach that of the Falklands strikes me as very sad. It has taken a long time to get to this figure – over two years – and has been very dramatic for our boys and girls and the allies over there."

He said: "But you now have to ask yourself, how many more are going to die? Is it going to exceed the figure of Northern Ireland even?"

He said the troops should not be pulled out of Afghanistan if it meant a return to the Taliban's hardline regime. "We can't let the Taliban back in to conduct themselves the way they did before."

The defence secretary, Bob Ainsworth, said: "We should not forget that each and every death of a member of our armed forces is a tragedy of equal proportion.

"We have seen an intense, hard and bloody period in Afghanistan but, as we prepare to consolidate our progress with the launch of Operation Moshtarak, it is imperative that we hold our resolve."

Ainsworth added: "Our presence in Afghanistan is vital in preventing it from once again becoming a haven for terrorists who would seek to threaten the UK."

Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, chief of defence staff, said: "Sad milestones such as this naturally attract attention in the UK,but in theatre our people continue resolutely and courageously assisting Afghans to build their future."

US and British military commanders have been briefing openly about Operation Moshtarak in the hope that Taliban fighters will either lay down their arms or flee. Taliban fighters have said they intended to defend the town of Marja, the first target for US and Afghan forces.

General Abdul Rahim Wardak, the Afghan defence minister, said in a statement: "On behalf of the Afghan government, the ANSF and the Afghan people, I would like to offer our sincere condolences to the families and friends of all those who have died. Their sacrifice was not in vain."

• Military
• Afghanistan

Letters: Banks, tax havens and corruption

I was both fascinated and disgusted by reports about BAE (6 February) but was not sure what shocked me most. Was it the bribery? Or the fact that BAE was and is peddling the tools of death? Or the fact that some of the systems they sold went to poor countries who had absolutely no need for such hi-tech equipment.

However, one aspect of your report especially clicked with me: that much of the illicit cash had been passing through intermediaries and bank accounts in various tax havens. If you want to tackle corruption, both in commercial fields and in governmental fields (eg the ministers of poorer countries skimming off money), then you need transparency, something which is made impossible by the existence of tax havens and offshore facilities.

Last year I seem to remember Gordon Brown and Barack Obama pledging to close down tax havens, and so I would be interested to know what progress they have made – especially progress regarding "home-grown" tax havens such as Delaware and the Channel Islands.

Action against these would be a significant coup both in the battle against corruption and the need to stop banks and other commercial organisations hiding their dealings in secretive locations.

Alan Searle

Cologne, Germany

• Some of the evidence heard at the US Senate investigation into overseas corruption (Report, 5 February) was cartoonish in its sleaziness, eg the gushing email from a US lawyer acting for Teodorin Obiang, son of Equatorial Guinea's president, which read: "Thank you very much for inviting me to the Kandy Halloween party at The Playboy Mansion and getting me the VIP treatment. I had an awesome time. I met many beautiful women, and I have the photos, email addresses and phone numbers to prove it."

But in spite of the entertainment value of these leaks, the issue at stake is intensely serious. Corruption and state looting, facilitated by irresponsible western banks, lawyers and other professionals, is condemning citizens of developing countries to abject poverty.

Global Witness has been campaigning for reform of banking regulation to prevent banks facilitating corruption, including through the introduction of proper safeguards and monitoring. Our report, The Secret Life of a Shopaholic, revealed how US banks allowed Obiang to bring $75m into the country between 2005 and 2007. Thankfully, the US authorities have started to act: we welcome their proactive response and look forward to hearing the outcome of the Senate investigation.

Shamefully, the UK government is yet to show willing, despite the demonstrated complicity of British banks in corruption. Rather than half-heartedly chiding bailed-out bankers on the size of their bonuses, the UK government should commit to urgently re-evaluate our financial system to ensure we are not providing a safe house for corrupt funds.

Anthea Lawson

Senior campaigner, Global Witness

• The BAE files
• BAE Systems
• Arms trade
• United States
• Serious Fraud Office
• Tax avoidance
• Banking

Ukraine: Unhappy return

The presidential election in Ukraine was free, mostly fair, and the Russians kept their hands off the whole proceedings. In those important respects, the orange revolution that shook the nation five years ago has left its mark. But unfortunately for those who like happy endings, the wrong person won. Viktor Yanukovych, whose rigged election in 2004 triggered the mass protests in Kiev, is heading back to power as the duly and fairly elected president. The villain of the piece five years ago is the orange revolution's chief beneficiary.

Yanukovych's victory has set off much ­wailing and gnashing of teeth. But just as the expectations western governments had of the peaceful uprising five years ago were too great, so too today would it be an ­overreaction to say that the orange movement has been squeezed dry. The mass protests against post-Soviet authoritarianism were a genuine cry for cleaner government. And the result today is that Ukraine is the only country in the post‑Soviet space to hold free elections. It also has media free from state control (but not from the ­oligarchs who now own them); there is today a strong civic society, and a ­strengthened, though still ­fragile, sense of national identity. What failed the orange ­movement was the ­leadership it threw up.

For much of the last five years, the two leading lights of the orange movement, the out-going president Viktor Yushchenko and his prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, have been at loggerheads. Nothing, not even the humiliating 5.5% he received in the first round of voting, could deter the outward-bound Yushchenko from continuing his vendetta against his colleague, signing an amendment to the electoral law that was designed to disfavour her.

Theirs was not the only personal vendetta. Another candidate, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who won 7% in the first round, also urged his ­supporters to tick the vote-against-all box on the ballot sheet. Other nationalist candidates also refused to back Tymoshenko in the ­second round. It was, after all, under her watch as prime minister that the economy crashed by 15%. The result was that a million Ukrainians actively refused to back any candidate, nearly double the margin by which Tymoshenko lost. The person whom Tymoshenko fought hardest to bring on board ran a campaign which was independent of both leading candidates. ­Serhiy Tigipko came third in the first round and is now in a position to demand political favours from the new president. Disillusionment within the orange camp, not the malign hand of the ­Kremlin, has caused this defeat.

If and when Tymoshenko concedes defeat (and last night she came under pressure from international monitors), Yanukovych's first task will be to restore the economy, which is facing serious fiscal shortages. The currency has halved in value in two years. Much will depend on the quality of the people around the new president, and his ability to resist cronyism and corruption. Yanukovych will also attempt to bridge Ukraine's deep ethnic divisions. He is the choice of the Russian-speaking east and south, although his relations with Russian separatists in Crimea is cool. But the acid test of his presidency will be whether he can get the support of the Ukrainian-­speaking centre and west of the country.

The country is now set for a more pragmatic president, whose first foreign trip will be to Brussels rather than Moscow. This in itself will be progress. In his last months, the outgoing president Viktor Yushchenko began reinventing history, picking ever more controversial figures from history as Ukrainian heroes. His latest Hero of Ukraine was Stepan Bandera, a west Ukrainian nationalist and Nazi collaborator who was poisoned by the KGB after the war. Modern Ukraine does not need to delve into its harsh history for role models. It does, however, need a leader who can address the country's many present problems.

• Ukraine
• Russia

Sarah Palin's old-fashioned Palm Pilot

Sarah Palin had the notes for her speech in the palm of her hand - literally

We have all had occasion to write on our hand, either because no paper was available or because we knew we'd probably forget the bit of ­paper along with the thing we'd written on it (although if your memory's in that sort of shape, you probably won't be able to find a pen).

There is a big difference, however, between scrawling "bin liners" on the back of your hand before you go to the shops and reading off your palm on tele­vision, as ­Sarah Palin did during the Tea Party Convention at the weekend. Photographs of her speaking show one hand clearly decorated with crib notes. Close-ups ­reveal she'd written ­"Energy" and "Budget cuts". Then she had clearly crossed out "Budget" and written "Tax". ­Under that were the words "Lift American spirits". That last one is a bit cryptic, although it could be a ­reminder to shoplift a specific brand of cigarette later.

Palin didn't make use of what people are already calling the ­Hillbilly Palm ­Pilot during her speech, but she did make the mistake of waving it around as she ­criticised President Obama for using a teleprompter. She then rather obviously paused to consult it during a subsequent Q&A session.

She appears, however, to be an untutored cheat, incapable of reading surreptitiously and wholly unaware that you should always write your answers on the inside of the wrist below the sleeve line, or neatly along the sides of your fingers.

But she should have realised that this type of note-taking leaves no room for crossing-out; unless you're ambidextrous, you can't carry over to the other hand.

• Sarah Palin
• United States

Response: The military do more than fight – they protect our global interests

Aircraft carriers are floating pieces of British real estate, proclaiming us as a serious nation

Simon Jenkins's assertion that "the general is right and the admiral is wrong" misinterprets Britain's security needs (Naval nostalgia and edgy kit are no basis for sane defence, 20 January). The general, Sir David Richards, had "implicitly dismissed the navy and air force as strategically obsolete," wrote Jenkins. "He said they were obsessed with 'exotic capability that is rendered irrelevant by advances in technology'."

Everyone I meet across government and industry – including serving members of all three forces – agrees that, while Afghanistan is the priority, it's not the only game in town. Last week's green paper makes that point very clearly.

Afghanistan is a very small place relative to the rest of the world. The broader question is how do we protect our interests worldwide: you will always need to get your troops to wherever they do their jobs. You need to provide them with air cover and a base that can move, get them ashore quickly and resupply them for long periods.

Therefore ships – specifically aircraft carriers and amphibious ships – should not be seen as merely naval assets purely designed for state-on-state warfare. They are national assets capable of undertaking numerous roles simultaneously. "Big decks" give the nation strategic flexibility. They are floating pieces of UK real estate – airfields that you can move at will. They proclaim us as a serious nation that is confident and prepared to protect and promote its global interests.

Why wouldn't the army or the RAF want an asset which can carry Chinooks, attack helicopters, drones, humanitarian aid and thousands of troops at the same time? Call them cities of the sea, whatever you want, but they do not spend their time "cruising the world" on "goodwill visits", as suggested by Jenkins.

The military are, post-9/11, more than simply war-fighters. They provide "soft power" – the ability to influence events to our advantage from a diplomatic and economic perspective, and in this respect both the RN and the RAF provide far more flexibility and diplomatic options than do boots on the ground alone. Remember, Mr Jenkins, that we still have 14 overseas territories, global companies operating in far-flung parts of the world, globally competitive industries, and 92% of our trade coming by sea. How do you protect these interests with purely land-focused forces?

Jenkins says: "[Admiral Sir Mark] Stanhope's language shows how far his reach exceeds his budgetary grasp." Rubbish. The carrier programme is a £5bn acquisition for two ships that will serve 50 years – a mere £50m per ship, per year. I understand an average battalion has running costs of approximately £100m per annum. By any measure, both are cost-effective for what the UK gets in return.

I ask Jenkins this: as a nation do we want to pull up the drawbridge and withdraw to Fortress Britain; will it do any good anyway in this globalised world? Or are we confident in our abilities, visionary in our approach to diplomacy and commerce, and strong enough to back up "soft" power with the ultimate sanction of "hard" power? My gut feeling is that most people in this country still want Britain to be "Great".

• Military
• Defence policy
• Afghanistan

From the archive: American Diary: Tootsie and Gandhi

Originally published on 9 February 1983

It is Friday night in Philadelphia. The streets are uncomfortably quiet for a New Yorker. A car or two, a man stretched out on the sidewalk fast asleep beneath the watching eye of a bored policeman, ("He's here every night"), hardly a passer-by.

On the corner of Market and 12th Streets there is an unexpected crowd of people queueing for the cinema. But what really astonishes the New Yorker is the film for which they are lining up. Across the road, Dustin Hoffman's Tootsie is showing to a deserted house. Here there is Gandhi.

In Manhattan, Tootsie is the hit of the moment. In movie guides it is referred to as "a pungent commentary on contemporary sexual confusion," of which more later. In the little restaurants around Central Park, over glasses of chilled Chablis, it is the subject of long, serious discussions about its political relevance. Those who talk confidently of Dustin Hoffman's inevitable Oscar are puzzled by the Golden Globe nomination for Ben Kingsley as Gandhi (all too often referred to as Ben Who as What?).

The insularity of even educated Americans has often been remarked upon. It takes a film like this to bring it home. India might never have existed; Gandhi is yet more alien than E.T.

It cannot be said often enough that there is no way to absorb the misery of the Third World in newspapers whose fat advertising is a celebration of the American feast. It is often said that Americans no longer care; it is more likely that they cannot hear.

And thus we have Tootsie lauded as a social event and political breakthrough. The "suffering" of women, their bottoms caressed, their very names lost in a morass of "honey," "sweetie" and "tootsie" – this is ­suffering to be grasped easily against the din of advertising for Beefsteak Charlie's or the newest television commercial slogan.

And in this land of more, Tootsie is important not because it is charming and funny but because it exposes the horror of exploitation, namely of beautiful and educated women wondering not whether they will have dinner today, but with whom they will have it.

The joke is, of course, that Dustin Hoffman's character is the only interesting woman in the film. It may be the best of Hollywood but it is still Hollywood, that hold-out of pashas and concubines. It is a film conceived by men, concerned with men's feelings about women and thus designed to make men feel better. It is women through the distanced eyes of a small club of brilliant men – charming, safe and therefore infinitely discussable.

• United States
• Dustin Hoffman
• India

Earlier springs could destroy delicate balance of UK wildlife, study shows

Global warming could be changing seasonal timing with profound consequences, according to analysis of 726 species of plants and animals

As snow flurries continued to cause disruption across the country today, spring may feel further away than ever. But recent winters have been ending earlier than ever before, according to a new assessment of Britain's wildlife that reveals global warming could be disrupting the delicate balance of nature.

The analysis confirms that spring and summer are occurring earlier, but also shows that this trend appears to be accelerating. The shift could pose problems for animals, birds and fish that rely on springtime flowering of plants to supply food for their young.

Stephen Thackeray, a biologist at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Lancaster, who co-led the research said: "This is about the desynchronisation of events during the year. Animals and birds time their reproduction to coincide with periods when there will be an abundance of food. If changes mean there is not enough food available then this could have negative consequences for their offspring."

The new study compiled 25,000 records of springtime trends for 726 species of plants, animals, plankton, insects, amphibians, birds and fish across land, sea and freshwater habitats. It analysed them for changes in the timing of lifecycle events, such as egg laying, first flights and flowering, a science known as phenology.

The results showed that more than 80% of trends between 1976 and 2005 indicated earlier seasonal events. On average, the study showed the seasonal timing of reproduction and population growth shifted forward by eleven days over the period, and that the change has accelerated recently.

Thackeray said: "This is the first time that data have been analysed with enough consistency to allow a meaningful comparison of patterns of changing seasonal timing in the UK among such a diverse range of plants and animals."

The study used records drawn from the work of thousands of volunteers who, as part of the UK phenology network, have made painstaking observations of the behaviour of wildlife in gardens and public spaces. It also relies on professional scientists, who have analysed habitats such as the plankton content of water drawn from lakes and coastal waters.

The research, published in the journal Global Change Biology, found large differences between species in the rate at which seasonal events have altered. Changes have been most rapid for many organisms at the bottom of food chains, such as plants and the animals that eat them. Predators have shown slower overall changes in the seasonal timing of their lifecycle events. This could spell problems, as the seasonal timing of reproduction is often matched to the time of year when food supply increases, so that offspring receive food needed to survive. A key question, the scientists say, is whether animals higher up the food chain can adapt to the faster rates of change in the plants and animals they feed on.

Sarah Wanless, who also co-led the research, said: "It is important to realise that this analysis doesn't identify which predator-prey relationships are most at risk from disruption due to changes in timing. What is does do is highlight that the recorded changes need urgent investigation, particularly for species with high economic or conservation importance."

Not all of the species showed a shift to earlier lifecycle events. Some, such as seabirds, now lay their eggs later in the year than they did before. But the scientists said the overall results show that climate warming is having an impact, and that the effect could get worse as temperatures continue to rise.

Richard Smithers of the Woodland Trust said: "Phenology is the canary in the cage. The results of this new study make real our changing climate and its potential to have profound consequences for the complex web of life."

Thackeray said it was difficult to generalise about how the changing climate has affected individual species across Britain, because most of the observations were for specific locations. One study found that oak trees were producing leaves 0.9 days earlier each year, while another found blue tits had changed their time of egg laying by 0.3 days a year. Other research found that hazel flowered a day earlier, and orange tip butterflies took their first flights 0.7 days earlier.

The study involved scientists from 12 UK research institutions, including Butterfly Conservation, Freshwater Biological Association, People's Trust for Endangered Species and the National Pollen and Aerobiology Research Unit at the University of Worcester.

Many of the organisations have now started follow-on research to see which species could be negatively affected by the change in timings and what could be done to help.

Writing in the journal, the scientists warn: "If current patterns and rates of phenological change are indicative of future trends, future climate warming may exacerbate trophic mismatching, further disrupting the functioning, persistence and resilience of major ecosystems and having a major impact on ecosystem services."

• Wildlife
• Climate change
• Biodiversity
• Animals
• Birds
• Insects
• Conservation
• Marine life
• Plants

Europe loses seat at top table

In Washington they're not sure who's in charge. In Brussels they're squabbling. Ian Traynor reports on the EU's crisis of confidence

Sitting in parkland in the shadow of the European parliament, the Bibliothèque Solvay is that rare thing in Brussels's dismal European quarter – a pretty building.

But when heads of government or state from 27 countries meet here on Thursday under their new president, Herman Van Rompuy of Belgium, they will have little time for the art nouveau fittings or for the old books lining the wood-panelled walls of the 1902 library.

The first EU summit under Van Rompuy's stewardship sees Europe slumped in a mood of unusually persistent gloom. Van Rompuy, Gordon Brown, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and the rest are in charge of a Europe engulfed by a sense of defeatism and decline and exhausted by nine long years of trying to construct a new European regime. The reasons for the ennui are clear. According to senior officials, analysts, and diplomats in Brussels, Paris, London and Berlin, Europe suddenly seems to matter a lot less in the world. Additionally, its leaders appear unsure of how to tackle their single currency's biggest ever crisis, and are engaged in petty power struggles and point-scoring over how to use the EU's new rulebook – the Lisbon treaty.

"There are a lot of blame games," said a senior European diplomat. "A lot of handwringing and bitching. No one is coming through to lead. It's not a pretty picture at all and it looks pathetic to the rest of the world."

Since EU leaders last met in Brussels before Christmas, the mood has soured. For the Europeans who claimed for two years to be leading the world on climate change, the global warming summit in Copenhagen was the gamechanger, a moment when the global balance of power tilted and relegated the EU to the second division.

"What we saw in Copenhagen is that Europe does not count," Daniel Gros, director of the Centre for European Policy Studies, told a conference of Brussels thinktanks.

"For good or for ill," a senior European official told the Guardian, "the message that Copenhagen sent is that Europe is not at the table. The fact of the matter is that Europe's leaders were taking a coffee and [Barack] Obama visited them at the coffee break. But he negotiated with others."

The Europeans are struggling to recover from that blow.

For the past 18 months, the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, has been warning that Europe faces being sidelined in a "G2" world run by the US and China unless the EU steps up.

Miliband's worst fears materialised when Obama held his press conference at the end of Copenhagen and deleted Europe from the script.

"If the G2 world was approaching, suddenly there it was," said the diplomat. "A seminal and symbolic moment."

In the library on Thursday, Van Rompuy is to hold a postmortem. What went wrong and what are we going to do about it, he will ask his fellow national and EU leaders. The way they have written the script, Van Rompuy himself, as the first permanent president of the European council, is part of the solution. Most others are not so sure.

The former Belgian prime minister's rise is the product of the Lisbon treaty, which in turn is a wordier and more complex version of the ill-fated European constitution which had to be binned because of voter rejection in France and the Netherlands.

The treaty came into force in December and is supposed to cure Europe's malaise by streamlining decision-taking, simplifying procedures, boosting common foreign policy, and supplying strong and coherent leadership.

It is early days, but the new regime has started not with a bang but with a whimper. Where there was to be coherence, there is confusion. Where there was to be clear leadership, there are turf wars and rival presidents.

Obama announced last week he was too busy for a slated summit with the Europeans in Madrid in May. When Mongolia's leader, Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj, visited Brussels last week he was nonplussed by the plethora of "European presidents" whom protocol prescribed he must meet (there are currently four).

The US state department made plain that one reason for Obama's absence is that, under Lisbon, it was not clear with whom the Americans should be dealing.

Matthias Matthijs, a Washington-based academic who is visiting professor at Johns Hopkins University's Bologna Centre, said the post-Lisbon fiasco over who is in charge may take a year to sort out. "There is a sense in Washington that Europe needs to get its act together," he said. "It's another missed opportunity for Europe. They do not have anyone to put on the world stage."

That person is supposed to be Van Rompuy or Catherine Ashton, the new EU foreign policy chief also created by the Lisbon treaty.

But no one appears to have told the Spanish prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, who took on the rotating six-month presidency of the EU last month determined not to forfeit any of its perks and privileges to Van Rompuy who, under the Lisbon terms, chairs all summits of EU leaders.

The Spanish government website bragged that the Obama summit in Madrid in May would be a highlight of its presidency, though it forgot to consult the Americans. In addition, in the next four months alone, the Spanish have scheduled themselves to host as many as 10 EU summits with other parts of the world.

This appetite for summitry sits oddly with perceptions of European weakness. But it is of a piece with the European insistence on disproportionate attendance at the big global pow-wows.

In the three G20 summits of the past 18 months called to tackle the financial crisis, Europeans have taken up eight of the 20 places, seeming to confuse status and numbers with power. There is one place each for the Americans and Chinese, while the Europeans were represented by the Germans, British, French and Italians, plus José Manuel Barroso, president of the European commission, plus whoever had the rotating EU presidency (the Swedes or the Czechs). Then the Spanish and the Dutch, neither formal members of the G20, clamoured for invitations and were given seats.

"It's ridiculous," said Antonio Missiroli of the European Policy Centre in Brussels. "One third of the G20, a half of the G8, almost one half of the UN security council. There are too many Europeans."

Amid this crowded field of leaders, leadership itself is at a premium. Increasingly in Europe, particularly as a result of the Lisbon treaty and the uninspiring choice of Van Rompuy and Ashton as the EU's summit and foreign policy chiefs, power lies in national capitals.

Diplomats and analysts complain that those national leaders are not up to the task of pooling authority and projecting power effectively on the world stage – another purported aim of the Lisbon regime.

Of the figures who matter most, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has been invisible since winning a second term last autumn. Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi raises only smirks. Gordon Brown is credited with trying hard on the world financial crisis but is seen as a lame duck, while it is feared across the EU that David Cameron and William Hague, by contrast, will conspire to subvert rather than project European leadership. The sole figure to command respect for his political will and energy is Nicolas Sarkozy of France. But he is also viewed warily as too mercurial.

Cameron shock

EU diplomats expect a prime minister Cameron to try to boost the "special relationship" with the White House at the expense of European power. They add he could be in for a shock since the Obama administration could tell Cameron that the best thing he could do to support America is to get more engaged in strengthening the EU.

Günter Verheugen, Germany's outgoing European commissioner, painted a picture this week of tired strategic division, confusion, and hesitancy at the heart of Europe.

"Within the EU there is no idea of where they're going. There's no agreement on what the borders of the EU should look like one day and no agreement on how to define our role in the world," he told Der Spiegel news magazine. "We want the Americans to take us seriously as partners. But first we need to work on our capacity for partnership … The Americans expect more global engagement from us, but we're not ready for that."

On Afghanistan or Iran, say senior diplomats, the Europeans are at odds and almost certain to frustrate any hopes in Washington of common, tough, and risky policies.

The backdrop to the black mood in Brussels is economic. The fallout from the banking collapse in the form of colossal public debt levels and budget deficits is tying the hands of governments. The short-term troubles are coupled with the longer-term scenario of shrinking and ageing populations, a Europe condemned to genteel and geriatric decline while the emerging economies boom.

Hopeful noises

"We face fiscal challenges never seen before, of an unprecedented magnitude," said Jean Pisani-Ferry, director of the Bruegel economics thinktank.

Optimism is rare. It exists, but tends to be the preserve of outsiders watching the EU. To discern more hopeful noises, you have to cross the Atlantic.

US economists and Nobel laureates Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz appear sanguine about Europe, with Krugman arguing recently in the New York Times that the European welfare state and social market economy have survived the financial crisis well and represent a more successful and enviable model than America's.

Steven Hill, a director at the Washington-based New America Foundation, has just published a book, Europe's Promise, which argues that "the European way is the best hope in an insecure age".

He dismissed talk of the EU being "marginalised" in a G2 world. On the contrary, he emphasised that the Obama White House was under pressure from the EU on climate change and financial regulation. "This, of course, is the exact opposite of the view that 'Europe is irrelevant'. Europe is actually hyper-relevant," he said. "Obama knows that Europe is leading in these ways, and he would like to follow to some extent, but he is having a hard time delivering."

Such views appear Panglossian to the gloom-mongers of the continent. According to French political philosopher Pierre Manent, Europe is a fair-weather union which "vanishes into the horizon" in a crisis. "We only look to Europe when everything is going well," while the "outside world views the EU as a union of decadent imperialists who make a virtue of their powerlessness," he said in a recent lecture.

On Thursday, Van Rompuy hopes to reverse this drift towards perceived impotence by locking the leaders in the library and knocking heads together.

He hopes that the humiliation at Copenhagen and other setbacks can serve as a wake-up call.

Additional reporting by Ewen MacAskill in Washington and Lizzy Davies in Paris

The battling bosses

Laying claim to the championship title of European president is a bit like sorting out who rules as world heavyweight boxer, quips a senior European diplomat.

In the ring, there's the WBA and the WBC, the IBA or the WBO, all laying claim to be honouring the true heavyweight champion of the world and usually begging to differ.

In the EU, thanks to the Lisbon Treaty, we now have the European council president, Herman Van Rompuy of Belgium, as well as the European commission president, José Manuel Barroso of Portugal, starting a second five-year term. Then there is the residual rotating six-month EU presidency, held since last month by José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, prime minister of Spain. And finally, there is Jerzy Buzek, a former Polish prime minister who is president or speaker of the European parliament.

The early impact of the Lisbon regime has been embarrassing, generating lots of heat and little light. Rather than a seamless transition to a new and simple regime of identifiable power vested in one person, there is bickering, brinkmanship and unclear lines of authority.

Famously, if apocryphally, Henry Kissinger said he did not know who to call if calling "Europe". The Lisbon Treaty was supposed to settle that. Instead, the answer remains as clear as mud.

Van Rompuy answers to EU heads of government and organises and chairs all their summits. His first, especially convened by him, is in Brussels on Thursday. But he is being undermined by Zapatero, who wants to make the most of his six months as EU president. He has called 10 bilateral EU summits with other parts of the world, to be held in Spain, although they are now all supposed to be under Van Rompuy.

Barroso, head of the commission, or EU executive, and the Belgian are also said to be squabbling over powers, budgets, and assets.

The optimists say the new regime will take a while to bed down, but will then function smoothly and more effectively. The pessimists say the new regime took so long to agree – almost nine ill-starred years – that it is already past its sell-by date, but that no one has the stomach to suggest anything better.

The outcome is there is no heavyweight champion at all. Europe is punching well below its weight.

Ian Traynor Brussels

• European Union
• Euro

UN sanctions urged over Iran's uranium plans

United Nations members are calling for new sanctions against Iran after it made formal notification that it would enrich uranium to higher levels.
Read more [CBC World News]

Tehran's nuclear glue | Meir Javedanfar

Efforts to boost uranium stockpiles are aimed at internal and external challenges to the regime

Iran's nuclear programme was started under the Shah. He wanted the bomb to transform Iran into a Middle East superpower. For many Iranians, however, the real need for nuclear armament was most keenly felt after Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and civilians during the eight-year war between the two countries in the 1980s. Iranians felt helpless, at the mercy of the Butcher of Baghdad and without any way to deter him – with barely a whimper of criticism heard from the west against his abuses of international law. As someone who lived then in Iran, I remember those days vividly. One of my Muslim friends however, saw me, his Jewish neighbour, as his protector. Why? As far as he was concerned, Saddam did not care about killing Muslims. But Saddam would think twice before risking the death of thousands of Jews by dropping chemical weapons on Tehran, my friend reasoned, because Israel could obliterate him in response. The sense of irony and pride that my Shia Muslim friend felt protected because my family were living near him in a Tehran neighbourhood has never left me.

Today, numerous Iranians are all for nuclear technology in order to produce electricity to meet their country's 8% annual increase in demand for energy. Although their country has abundant gas and oil supplies, they would prefer to export it and use the income to develop their country's infrastructure.

But do not imagine that thinking underpins the Iranian leadership's latest call, on Sunday, to accelerate enrichment of its uranium stockpile. Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's main motivation for following the current nuclear policy is to keep Iran isolated. The thinking among Tehran ultra-conservatives is that by raising the ire of the west and keeping Iran isolated from the rest of the international community, it will be easier for them to crack down against opposition at home. Khamenei's second priority is his hope that, once Iran becomes a nuclear power, nobody would dare attempt regime change from the outside.

With the leadership sensing mounting pressure, more than ever it wants to pursue the nuclear programme. To Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this programme is one of the only examples of progress made under the revolution. As the 31st anniversary approaches, and Iranians look at their country, they see that in a majority of cases it has gone backwards. It is a poorer country. Corruption is more common. Increasing numbers of educated Iranians prefer to leave their country. They carry the third most worthless currency in the world, while getting foreign visas with an Iranian passport has become an even more miserable experience. The nuclear programme remains the one area where the government believes it can show progress. With everything else in such a sorry state, trumpeting its success has become an important tool in claiming support and legitimacy.

There is also the question of longevity of the revolution. Iran's refusal to accept the terms of the recent deal offered by the international community – which called for Iran to first ship 75% of its ­uranium abroad, and then to receive it back in the form of nuclear fuel – has more to do with domestic politics. Khamenei is worried that such a deal would boost Obama's image in Iran.

The reality of a black US president with the middle name Hossein has ­neutralised years of claims by the post-revolution Iranian government that America is a racist, anti-Islamic state. Unhelpfully for Khamenei, the name Obama can also be pronounced as oo–ba–ma, meaning "he is with us" in Farsi. All these factors have endeared the US more than ever to the people of Iran. The last thing Khamenei wants is to boost America's image by reaching a deal; in doing so his regime could lose the anti-American glue that it ­increasingly relies on to hold it together.

Sunday's announcement is unlikely to be the last; many more such ­provocative policies should be expected from Tehran in the coming months. The more threatened the regime feels ­internally the more it will try to provoke the west.

Although the west, especially Israel, has every right to feel threatened, it would also do well to remember that it faces a weakened regime, which is losing legitimacy every day, and is beset with infighting on an unprecedented scale.

The response, where possible, should be measured. Although sanctions seem inevitable, they should target the regime. And if President Obama is ­looking for a double blow, he should also remove sanctions against the sale of commercial aircraft to Iran, which are making life very difficult for ­Iranians. Improving the image of the west among ordinary people, while singling out the rulers, is a double punch which the regime could find extremely difficult to recover from. Perhaps more so than a military attack.

• Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
• Nuclear weapons
• Iran
• Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

U.S. Congressman Murtha dies at 77

U.S. Democratic Representative John Murtha, a retired Marine Corps officer who became the first Vietnam War combat veteran elected to Congress and was later an outspoken and influential critic of the Iraq War, died Monday. He was 77.
Read more [CBC World News]

U.S. engineer jailed 15 years for spying for China

A Chinese-born engineer was sentenced Monday to more than 15 years in prison for hoarding sensitive information about the U.S. space shuttle that prosecutors say he intended to share with China.
Read more [CBC World News]

Cabinet did not need to hear legal doubts over Iraq invasion, says Straw

Chilcot inquiry told that the 'problem of leaks' was used to stop attorney general Lord Goldsmith addressing ministers

Jack Straw made clear in evidence to the Iraq inquiry today that he believed there was absolutely no need for the cabinet to be told of the attorney general's doubts about the legality of the invasion.

The inquiry has heard that a week before the invasion, on 13 March 2003, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, told Straw that he might need to tell the cabinet that "the legal issues were finely balanced", documents released by the inquiry today reveal. Straw, then foreign secretary, advised him not to do so, warning of "the problem of leaks from the cabinet"; the inquiry has heard it was never told of Goldsmith's doubts.

Summoned back to the inquiry today, Straw said the cabinet knew there was an intense debate about the legal and moral issues. His appearance coincided with a US TV interview with Tony Blair, in which he attacked the hunt for a "conspiracy" and a "scandal" over his decision to commit British troops to the war.

Straw told the inquiry that the cabinet included a number of "strong-minded people", among them Gordon Brown, John Prescott, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke and Margaret Beckett: "None of them were wilting violets; their judgment was that it was not necessary to go into the process by which Peter Goldsmith came to his view. I don't recall cabinet as a whole receiving legal advice on the matter," Straw told the inquiry. "All [the cabinet] wanted to know was: is it lawful or is it not lawful?" What was required in the end was "essentially a yes or no decision" from the attorney general, he added.

The inquiry has heard how Sir Michael Wood, the FO's legal adviser, and his deputy, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, said an attack was unlawful without a fresh UN resolution. In a memo, Wood warned Straw: "Force without security council authority would amount to a crime of aggression." Straw, now justice secretary, replied: "I note your advice but I do not accept it."

Goldsmith was persuaded that an invasion was lawful only after discussions with Straw and with Bush administration lawyers, the inquiry has heard. That was even though the US interpretation of international law was different from the British interpretation, it was told.

Straw said today he took the view a new UN resolution was unnecessary because of his intimate knowledge of diplomatic negotiations leading up to the last resolution, 1441, unanimously agreed in November 2002. The Bush administration had made clear, Straw said, it would not go back to the UN for a decision. The president had decided to invade "come what may" by early 2003, the inquiry heard.

Panel member Sir Lawrence Freedman told Straw he "might want to check" notes of his conversations with then US secretary of state Colin Powell to confirm this account. Freedman indicated that documents seen by the inquiry – but not made public – showed that Bush planned to attack Iraq even if chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix said Saddam Hussein was complying with resolution 1441.

In sometimes testy exchanges over why the US insisted on an invasion in March 2003, and why the Blair government went along with it,, Straw made clear it was political. "A big problem with the US was from the neocons," he said, referring in particular to the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.

Asked whether Iraq was the UK's "choice of targets" because it was America's, Straw said it was the target of both. He denied writing a last-minute letter to Blair suggesting alternatives to invading.

On Fox news today, asked why the UK had had a succession of such probes into the invasion, Blair said: "Partly because we have this curious habit – I don't think this is confined to Britain actually – where people find it hard to come to the point where they say: we disagree; you're a reasonable person, I'm a reasonable person but we disagree.

"There's always got to be a scandal as to why you hold your view. There's got to be some conspiracy behind it, some great deceit that's gone on, and people just find it hard to understand that it's possible for people to have different points of view and hold them … for genuine reasons. There's a continual desire to sort of uncover some great conspiracy, when actually there's a decision at the heart of it."

• Iraq war inquiry
• Iraq
• Politics and Iraq
• George Bush
• Jack Straw
• Tony Blair

Balloon boy's father released from jail

Richard Heene, the man who pleaded guilty in the balloon boy hoax, has been released from a Colorado jail to serve the rest of his sentence in a work-release program.
Read more [CBC World News]

British soldier killed in Afghanistan

The latest fatality means the UK death toll in Afghanistan exceeds that of the Falklands war

A British soldier was killed by an explosion in Afghanistan today as the UK death toll exceeded that of the Falklands war.

Comrades said the soldier, from 36 Engineer regiment, part of the counter-IED Task Force, died as he led a team conducting route clearance operations in the Nad-e-Ali District, in central Helmand province.

Lieutenant Colonel David Wakefield, spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said: "His indomitable courage and fortitude, the hallmark of his profession, will not be forgotten."

Next of kin have been informed.

The MoD would not confirm whether the soldier was involved in Operation Moshtarak, a major offensive against insurgents in central Helmand set to begin in the coming days.

L Col Wakefield added: "He was leading a team conducting route clearance operations at the time, making the way ahead safe for others to follow."

Earlier today, it was confirmed two soldiers from the Royal Scots Borderers, 1st Battalion The Royal Regiment of Scotland, were killed by an explosion in Sangin in Helmand province last night.

A total of 256 British servicemen and women have now died since operations in Afghanistan began in October 2001.

• Military
• Afghanistan
• Defence policy

Inside Cuba's dance factory

Cuba has produced some of the world's most explosive dancers – but its cultural isolation comes at a cost. On the eve of two major UK tours, Judith Mackrell visits Havana

Virtually blind and wearing Jackie Onassis sunglasses that might have been bought when Jackie O was still alive, Alicia Alonso has her ballerina face painted on every morning: a wide slash of scarlet lipstick, thick found-ation, flaring black eyebrows. She may be approaching her 90th birthday, but she is still the head of the Ballet ­Nacional de Cuba, still the island's ­revolutionary prima ballerina assoluta. Talking to me in her private office in Havana, she combines diva glamour with political rhetoric; spreading her arms wide at one point, she insists: "Art is the lungs of the ­people. It is the expression of our ­humanity." It's a ­gesture that would carry to the back of an opera house.

Ever since she gave up her inter-­national career to found the Ballet ­Nacional in 1959, Alonso has been proselytising for her art form. Fidel Castro, determined to acquire a people's ballet to match Russia's Bolshoi and the Kirov, gave her the funding to expand what was a private company into a state ­ensemble. She has kept it alive for 50 years despite chronic money problems and a scarcity of essential supplies, and in the process acquired a near-sacred standing in Cuba. You almost believe her when she says, serenely: "I'll still be running this company in a hundred years' time."

Certainly the impact Alonso has made on Cuban dance will gain her a kind of immortality. The ballet school she opened with her former husband Fernando is now world-famous, gathering its students from the island's rural poor and urban delinquent; Carlos Acosta was enrolled by his father to keep him off the streets. The training it gives is also world-class, producing dancers who can pirouette and jump with explosive attack, but whose musicality embraces a shimmering languor.

The audiences they dance for are special, too. Low ticket prices and a lack of cultural competition have elevated ballet to a national entertainment. Local dancers acquire celebrity status, and the few foreign companies that visit are mobbed. When the Royal Ballet danced in Havana last July, fans slept on the street outside the Gran Teatro for a week, to be sure of getting tickets. Yet behind this apparent success story lies a harsher reality. Cuba has been stranded in a political, economic and cultural limbo for decades, imposing stifling constraints on its artists. Collectively, Cuban dancers may possess astounding potential, yet they face few choicesin their careers.

Stuck in a 50-year time-warp

This spring, Britain will be getting a concentrated taste of Cuba's dynamic rhythm and heat, as both the Ballet ­Nacional and the state-run Danza ­Contemporanea de Cuba (DCC) begin UK tours. Also founded in 1959, Danza Contemporanea now numbers 47 ­dancers – almost double the size of the UK's Rambert Dance Company. Its signature style is a bewitching hybrid, blending the blunt attack of American modern dance with the long, lean ­extensions and graceful arms of ballet, as well as the percussive syncopation and rippling spines of Caribbean dance.

Spanish choreographer Rafael Bonachela, who was recently invited to create a work for DCC, says he was awed by the dancers' talent. "If I audition for my own company, I might see 800 dancers, but few are as good as these. They're taught to really push themselves and they have this very old-fashioned, hardcore technique that you don't often see." Yet Bonachela's voice has the guilty inflection typical of most visitors to Cuba, as he acknowledges that DCC's unique qualities are, in part, a reflection of their long and enforced segregation from the rest of the dance world. The time–warp effects of the 50-year US embargo, and of Castro's rule, may be fascinating to observe: a world free of Starbucks and the evils of global capitalism. But for Cubans, the reality has been grim. For all their justified pride in Cuba's health service and education system, many Cubans long for Starbucks, or at least what it symbolises – access to basic goods and, above all, the freedom to travel. As Bonachela says: "Cuba is a waiting island."

At the Ballet Nacional, dancers do have certain privileges, including the chance to tour abroad. But it's evident from talking to them that this exposure to the wider world has sharpened their dissatisfaction, as they realise how far ballet has moved on, and how limited their own repertory is. It's not just that Alonso's taste dominates the company, a taste inevitably rooted in an older aesthetic; there is also little money to acquire new work from elsewhere.

For some dancers, the situation feels impossible. Carlos Acosta, who left Cuba for good in 1993, believed he had no choice: "Your career is so short – you have to do everything you can to find new challenges." But others find it harder to leave, like dancer Javier Torres, who professes enormous loyalty to his home company: "It has taken me to a very high level." Even so, an expression of longing crosses his face when he ­describes watching the Royal Ballet dance Chroma, the fiercely modern Wayne McGregor ballet they brought to Havana last year. "My body is hungry to dance that," he says simply.

Cuba's lead ballerina Viengsay Valdés shares his sense of conflict. "We have this special musicality and physicality in our blood," she says, "but we need to be able to dance Forsythe, Kylián or MacMillan to widen our minds and souls." Like others of her generation (she is 32), she would like to see Acosta return to the company to succeed Alonso. But while Acosta, nearly 37, is certainly planning to spend more time in Cuba, and will be dancing with the Ballet Nacional next month, he says he is unwilling to take on the company. "It's Alicia and Fernando's creation," he says. "I would like to help in any way I could, but I want to start my own company." What he ­envisages would certainly be an asset to Cuba – a company embracing an international range of choreographers and styles. But unless the political situation changes dramatically, Acosta rules out a permanent residency. "I would need to be touring and having co-productions with places like Sadler's Wells. I couldn't be based only in Cuba."

At Danza Contemporanea, the sense of frustration takes a different slant. Here, the dancers are exposed to a greater variety of work, due to the ­enthusiasm and persistence of their ­director, Miguel Iglesias. Ten years ago, he discovered the existence of small pockets of foreign money, available to help him augment his repertory. Since then, he has acquired works by Bonachela, Mats Ek and Dutch choreo-grapher Jan Linkens; his future wish list includes the radical conceptual dance artist Jérôme Bel. Iglesias's ­ambition and eclectic tastes have had a galvanising effect on his dancers, ­inspiring and informing a new generation of Cuban choreographers.

One of them, George Cespédes, says that dancing in foreign work has been a crucial part of his education. Still, at the age of 27, he feels thwarted by the fact that he is performing and creating inside a company that is 50 years old. The experimental work that interests him doesn't sit naturally with the beautiful but institutionalised technique that dominates any DCC dancer's ­training. "[That technique] feels like a dinosaur to me," he says. "I can admire it, but it isn't any use to my body any more." Were he anywhere else in the developed world, Cespedés would form his own company. But in Cuba there is minimal funding for individual projects; given that most of the island's small dance budget goes to the Ballet Nacional, there is precious little even for the state-supported DCC. Its tiny office barely has a functioning computer.

Exiles from paradise island

Scouting for foreign money now takes up most of Iglesias's energy. "I've had to become a full-time whore," he grins cheerfully. His dancers are on a subsistence wage so low it forces many to leave. Bonachela describes his shock on meeting one ex-DCC dancer performing cabaret in Australia. "He's incredibly talented. But back in Cuba he had to live with his parents, miles outside ­Havana. Every morning he got up at five o'clock to hitch a ride into work. He was exhausted the whole time."

And yet for all the dancers who give up and go, the island seems to create more. Renowned Cuban ballet teacher Loipa Araujo says: "I don't know anywhere that has more dance students. We find them in the smallest places and we develop them. They are our hope for the future." Bonachela agrees: "In some ways it's a paradise island. Perhaps it's the hardships, but the ­people have so much spirit and ­passion." Even Cespedés admits there is some truth in this. "If you're given everything, you don't know what to choose. Here we are given very little, but we're so hungry we eat it all up." He extends his arms and suddenly I see Alicia Alonso, talking about her own lifelong crusade for ballet. In Cuba, they talk about art as if it were food and water, and they mean every word.

• Dance
• Carlos Acosta
• Cuba
• Cuba

France moves to boost national pride

The French flag will be hoisted at every school in France and the national anthem sung by students at least once a year as part of government efforts to instil in citizens a sense of pride in being French, Prime Minister François Fillon announced.
Read more [CBC World News]

The privilege of a short memory | Michael White

The ancient and important right of parliamentary privilege has become a grey area - some legislative clarification is needed

Like most people nowadays David Cameron has a short memory, which he combines with a good sense of self-preservation. Today the ­Conservative leader toned down pre-briefed remarks saying that the attempted use of parliamentary privilege by three Labour MPs (and a Tory peer) facing expenses-related charges is a "disgusting sight".

His retreat from an ill-judged soundbite was sensible. Well within his own career, Tory MP Neil Hamilton won the support of the government, which young Cameron served, to amend the 1995 Defamation Act so he could sue the Guardian in the cash-­for-­questions affair. The paper's defence rested on being able to cite things the MP had done in parliament, which it was unable to do because they were privileged. Freed to sue by the new law, Hamilton duly did so and lost.

As Harriet Harman, whose memory is also selective on the point, was quick to observe, Cameron and his senior colleagues also voted against a clause in last summer's bill to establish Ipsa – parliament's independent financial watchdog – which would have clarified any doubts that MPs are as liable for theft, fraud and other crimes as anyone else.

There were good reasons for doing so, as veteran Labour MPs such as Margaret Beckett and John Reid, who also voted no, will readily confirm. The clerk of the house, Malcolm Jack, warned them that allowing courts jurisdiction over what MPs – or peers – say in parliament might prove a thin end of a dangerous wedge. Harman missed that bit.

Parliamentary privilege, the unqualified right of an MP to speak freely in the Commons without fear of interference by any court in the land, is enshrined in the Bill of Rights of 1689. It ended almost a century of battles – political, legal and military – between parliament and the autocratic ambitions of the royal house of Stuart, which repeatedly sought to control MPs. Parliament won and the victory still matters. So recent attempt to squash the Guardian's interest in the Trafigura scandal by lawyers deploying a super-injunction against any public comment ultimately foundered on the untrammelled right of MPs to table questions – and have them reported (though the assistance of post-Stuart Twitter technology helped).

In 2008, Damian Green's case against the Metropolitan police's raid on his office was another echo of privilege battles – the legislature's resistance to arbitrary executive power, Charles I's doomed attempt to jail the parliamentary opposition leaders. Back in 1939, pro-Churchill Tory MP Duncan Sandys, who had refused to reveal the source of his leaks on military unpreparedness (echoes of Afghanistan?), was spared from prosecution by privilege. Every decade throws up examples.

As society changes, doubts routinely emerge, for instance over MPs' electronic communications. That was why the Nicholls report of 1999 recommended clarifying what veteran Tory Sir George Young calls the "grey areas" of privilege to make it clear beyond doubt that MPs cannot hide behind the ancient political right to escape mere criminal charges and – post-Damian Green – to protect correspondence.

Harman argued today that any MP or peer deploying that defence will lose in court. More cautiously, the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, says it must be tested in court. Ministers, Labour and Tory, should all know by now that they can never be sure which way the courts will jump. A spot of legislative clarification may be prudent in the new parliament to protect the people's backbench representatives from judges – and the new government.

• MPs' expenses
• David Cameron
• Trafigura
• Damian Green
• Harriet Harman
• Labour
• Conservatives

New Orleans savours Saints' victory

Hoarse, hungover and happy, New Orleans residents woke up Monday wondering whether the Saints' unlikely Super Bowl victory really happened.
Read more [CBC World News]

After 1929 a generation leapt leftward. Not today. Socialism has been buried | Geoffrey Wheatcroft

Europe has witnessed a tectonic shift to the right since the war. No wonder the Tories might feel short of breathing space

Looking back over the last 50 or 60 years, what have been the most ­important changes, and the most surprising? The fact that Europe has been at peace, outside the ­Balkans, since 1945 would have been a surprise and relief to those ­living in the shadow of the two great wars. On the other hand, enlightened ­people would have been shocked by the ­recrudescence of religion as a ­public force, from ­militant Islam to American evangelicalism.

But for Europeans, the most ­remarkable development of all has surely been the decline and fall of socialism. This has been disguised, or confused. It has been truly said that the story of the past generation is that the right has won politically and the left has won culturally. That great truth has been variously illustrated by the German election in September, the New Left Review, and the latest social ­attitudes survey in the UK.

Halfway through the past century socialism in one form or another seemed irresistible. Stalin was in the Kremlin and Attlee in Downing Street, with flourishing socialist parties throughout western Europe. Since then there has been a tectonic shift to the right, and those who deny this are whistling in the dark. We are sometimes told that Britain remains a fundamentally social ­democratic country. Maybe it's literal-minded to ask, but in that case, how come Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were prime ministers for 21 of the last 31 years? If either of those is a social ­democrat, I'm a Maoist.

Following the implosion of Soviet Communism, the Italian left barely exists any more, the French Socialists are in disarray, and the Social ­Democrats were the big losers in the German ­election, having fallen in 15 years from 40% to 23% of the vote. Perry Anderson remarks on this decline of centre-left parties in the last chapter of his book, The New Old World, adding grimly: "The pit of contempt into which New Labour has fallen, in the closing stages of the tawdriest regime in postwar ­British history, is an extreme case."

Of late, David Cameron has been derided for making such a hash of things. It's quite true that he twists and turns and backtracks in a way that raises real questions about his judgment. Cameron may be a pretty face; a pity that lower down he often doesn't seem to know his arse from his elbow. All the same, you can see his problem.

We have had 13 years of a so-called Labour government which accepted the whole Thatcherite economic settlement, has seen an increase in social and ­economic inequality; worshipped wealth and fawned on high finance at home and abroad; passed a vast array of repressive laws; betrayed all its ­promises on the single currency – and in the end did more damage to the ­European Union than Thatcher did; allowed Rupert ­Murdoch to dictate its foreign policy; and took Britain – with flagrant dishonesty – into a needless, illegal and murderous war in order to support the most reactionary American president of modern times. After all that, you can understand why the Tories might feel short of breathing space.

Some have grasped this. As the 21st century began, the New Left Review ­celebrated its 40th anniversary (the "new" in new left is by now an archaic relic, as in New College or Wiener ­Neustadt). Perry Anderson wrote then that: "The only starting point for a ­realistic Left today is a lucid ­registration of historical defeat. Capital has ­comprehensively beaten back all threats to its rule, the bases of whose power – above all, the pressures of competition – were persistently underestimated by the socialist movement."

Ten years on, the Review marks its 50th birthday – or quinquagenery, as that journal says in its gritty plebeian way – with another morose editorial. Susan Watkins concedes that ­Anderson's words still stand – and this despite the severest economic crisis in 80 years. The Wall Street crash of 1929 and ensuing slump drove a whole generation leftward. What is so striking is that this has not happened again, and how little damage the latest financial crisis has made to the repute of the existing order.

She also ruefully admits that the record of the Review – and that of much of the left – on ecological questions was "erratic to say the least", as it was on other social issues, including "what was once the Woman Question" – and she should know. But hasn't that changed, and haven't we become a more liberal society in these 50 years?

To be sure, but "liberal" does not mean "left". The latest survey from the National Centre for Social Research showed that, for one example among many, the proportion of British people who thought that homosexual relations were wrong had fallen to 36% from 62% in 1983. And yet those who supported redistribution from rich to poor had also fallen, from 51% in 1994 to 38%, and for the first time only a minority even of Labour voters believed in redistribution.

Just so in Europe. If the Social ­Democrats were the big losers in the last German election, there was a far better showing by the Free Democrats (FPD), who increased their vote by 5% and replaced the Social Democrats as Angela Merkel's coalition partners. The FPD are a traditional liberal party of low taxes and small government, so that may be called a victory for the right. And Guido Westerwelle of the FPD, now the foreign minister, is the first openly gay leader of an important European party. The political-cultural distinction could not be better epitomised.

Maybe it wasn't so hard to see this coming. Nearly 50 years ago, one of the New Left's oracles denounced mass culture as "a consequence of a basically capitalist organisation, and I at least know no better reason for capitalism to be ended". That was Raymond ­Williams, making the usual intellectual-leftist assumption that the lower classes were driven by false consciousness or ­downright stupidity to consume pop music and movies.

But he also saw that the liveliest revolt of the moment, "particularly among the new young generation, is precisely in these cultural terms". A couple of years ­earlier a member of that ­generation had already observed that "such issues as capital punishment, ­homosexuality, Sunday opening of ­public houses, and ugly new buildings in London have generated far more warmth among intellectuals than almost any purely political question". That was the young David Marquand reporting on ­undergraduate opinion at Oxford ­University – in 1958.

Ten years on, Harold Wilson's Labour government had taken office, and a last attempt at social-democratic economic planning had met with total failure, while Wilson railed at the unions and applauded the US war in Vietnam. And what is it for which the years 1964-1970 are now gratefully remembered? Capital punishment was indeed abolished, and homosexuality was decriminalised.

On the Fogey Right, they lament the good old days, whispering the last enchantments of the 1950s, when ­murderers were hanged and queers were locked up. There will be ­mercifully no return to that. But does anyone on the left honestly think there will be a return either to the days of hope of 1945, when a Labour government could be swept to power promising the ­socialist millennium?

• Labour
• David Cameron
• Tony Blair
• Margaret Thatcher
• Germany
• Angela Merkel
• Rupert Murdoch
• Conservatives

Cost of insuring European national debts hits new high

Worries after G7 failed to produce plan for Greece as Spanish ministers meet investors in London

The cost of insuring against a potential default on western Europe's debt hit a new record as officials failed for a third consecutive day to reassure investors about the ability of southern European countries to pay their bills.

European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet said at the weekend he was confident Greece was able to cut its deficit below 3% by 2012. But that did not stop the Markit Itraxx SovX index of western European sovereign debt reaching a record of 112.5 basis points – meaning investors have to pay €112,500 (£98,000) to insure €10m of debt.

Greece's credit default swaps, which are used by investors to protect against a default, are now trading at 428 basis points, a level more associated with a small, emerging market than a large European economy, while Spain's rose to a record of 173.

"Many were disappointed that the weekend G7 meeting didn't produce a firm plan on how to tackle the Greece situation," said Gavan Nolan, a credit analyst at Markit. "Fears of a contagion effect haven't abated, and Portugal, Spain and Ireland all gave up ground."

The Spanish government is now on a mission to reassure investors it can cut its budget deficit to 3% by 2013, from more than 11% this year. Governments are keen to convince the markets that they have their deficits under control as the higher the risk perceived by investors, the more it costs in interest payments.

"Spain is a solid economy – we will make the adjustments that are necessary, we're fully committed," Spain's secretary of state José Manuel Campa told a packed room of investors and credit rating agency analysts in London .

Elsewhere in town, the economy minister and the country's vice president, Elena Salgado, was lobbying influential leaders to persuade them that Spain's troubles could not be compared to Greece, as the economy was much larger and less vulnerable. The Spanish road-show will continue in Paris tomorrow.

Economy officials of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero's socialist government have been forced to come to London more often to meet investors, although some of them are blaming speculators and hedge funds for triggering the recent turmoil.

More detail about how the country plans to cut its deficit, and the announcement that net borrowing will fall by a third this year to €76.8bn added credibility to Spain's cause.

"This was an excellent presentation, it's a good start," said Neil Williams, fixed income chief economist at Hermes Fund Managers. "But the situation needs more action, and not just for Spain."

The bond market could tag Spain as "damned if they do, and damned if they don't", where attempts at reform are resisted by social unrest, but investors punish inaction, leading to higher yields and fiscal strains. "The credit rating agencies will be breathing down their necks," Williams said.

Despite the continued volatility in the derivatives market (where the credit protection instruments are traded) bond and stock markets calmed down today. Spain's stock market Ibex index gained 1% and the interest rate premium that investors demand on Spanish bonds, over German bonds, remained at about 1%.

"The markets overreacted completely, they got carried away and they got tired of themselves," another investor said.

Bankers at the presentation said Spain would have no problem raising funds as most of its debt is held in Europe, with the French government the largest client. Asked whether a contingency plan was being prepared in case the market deteriorated, Treasury director Soledad Núñez declined to comment, but said she was "working on" keeping her investors.

• European Union
• Greece
• Spain
• Euro
• Financial crisis
• European Central Bank

Michael Jackson's doctor charged with involuntary manslaughter

Houston cardiologist Conrad Murray would face up to four years in prison if convicted

Michael Jackson's doctor has tonight been charged with involuntary manslaughter over the pop singer's death.

Dr Conrad Murray, a Houston cardiologist, was with Jackson when the star died on 25 June last year. He faces up to four years in prison if convicted.

Murray's lawyer, Ed Chernoff, says Murray will plead not guilty.

Jackson hired Murray to be his personal physician as he prepared for a strenuous series of comeback performances in London.

Officials say the singer died in Los Angeles after Murray administered the powerful general anaesthetic propofol and two other sedatives to try to help Jackson, a chronic insomniac, to get to sleep.

Murray tonight pleaded not guilty to the charge.

• Michael Jackson
• United States

France to issue citizens' handbooks to every child

• PM unveils new measures following identity debate
• All schools will be ordered to fly the French flag

French children are to be given a "citizen's handbook" to teach them to be better republicans, as part of national identity measures announced by the government today.

Schools will be ordered to fly the French flag and to have a copy of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen in every classroom.

The measures, announced by the French prime minister, François Fillon, are the first to emerge from the country's controversial debate on national identity.

Under new rules, immigrants who come to live in France, who since 2007 have had to sign a contract of welcome and integration, will have to take part in a more solemn ceremony to become French citizens. They will also be expected to demonstrate a better command of the French language and a greater knowledge of the "values of the republic". All candidates will be required to sign a "charter" outlining their rights and responsibilities.

Lessons for immigrant parents, ­currently being tested in 12 regions, will be introduced across the country from September.

"The emphasis will be put on the respect for the values of the republic … notably the principle of equality between men and women … and the level of knowledge of the French language," said Fillon.

His comments came less than a week after France's immigration minister, Eric Besson – a Socialist party defector personally appointed by President Nicolas Sarkozy to manage the national identity debate – refused to grant nationality to a Moroccan man who allegedly obliges his wife to wear the burka. The French government is also considering a ban on burkas and full veils in public places.

The carnet du citoyen, a form of citizen's manual, will "follow pupils' civic education from primary to lycée … to better prepare them for the exercise of their future responsibilities" as citizens.

"The Tricolor must be affixed to every school and the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, which constitutes our republican reference, must be present in each class," said Fillon.

A "committee of personalities", made up of MPs, intellectuals and historians, will be set up to "follow the application of the measures decided today and to propose new ones", he added.

He said the government would announce further measures in the coming months and that Sarkozy would make a statement in April.

The debate on national identity, which Fillon described as a "popular success", has been fiercely criticised as xenophobic. Critics say it is playing to voters on the extreme right of the political spectrum in the runup to regional elections next month. However, Fillon said it would continue throughout the rest of the government's term, which ends in 2012.

More than 58,000 French people have contributed on a site set up to encourage ideas and comments.

"The subject has been dodged for too long. The question of national identity needs to be debated in the long time and in a natural, calm and non-partisan way because nothing is worse than silence. Nothing is worse and damaging than things unspoken and stigmas that we know have always played into the hands of extremists," said Fillon.

• France
• Race issues

Sri Lankan general held in crackdown

Defeated presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka to face coup attempt charge as row over election result takes dramatic turn

The defeated candidate in last month's tense presidential election in Sri Lanka, General Sarath Fonseka, was arrested today at his office in Colombo and is to be charged with attempting a military coup to overthrow the government.

The sudden arrest of the 59-year-old former chief of Sri Lankan armed forces and the architect of their bloody but successful campaign against the Tamil Tigers last year, sparked fears of a widespread crackdown on opponents of the incumbent president, Mahindra Rajapakse.

A government spokesman confirmed that Fonseka had been arrested, saying he had been detained for "committing military offences".

Later government minister Keheliya Rambukwella said Fonseka would be tried in a military court on charges of conspiring against the president and planning a coup while army chief.

"When he was the army commander and chief of defence staff and member of the security council, he had direct contact with opposition political parties, which under the military law can amount to conspiracy," Rambukwella said.

"He's been plotting against the president while in the military ... with the idea of overthrowing the government," he added.

Fonseka's wife is reported to have confirmed the detention of her husband following an increase in the number of security forces deployed outside the hotel he used as an office during the day.

Allies of Fonseka described his arrest during the course of a p­lanning meeting with political allies. Rauff Hakeem, leader of the Muslim Congress party, told Reuters that the general had been "dragged away in a very disgraceful manner in front of our own eyes".

Fonseka appears to have resisted arrest. Mano Ganeshan, an opposition member of parliament, said the general was "forcibly carried away" after having objected to being arrested by military police rather than civilian officials.

"He was humiliated and disgraced in the way he was handled. We were just flabbergasted," Ganeshan said.

Fonseka, who has repeatedly alleged that the elections were fraudulently won by Rajapakse, was planning to campaign in parliamentary polls due to be held by April.

Speculation about the detention of the general had mounted over the weekend with Sri Lankan newspapers reporting on Sunday that Rajapakse had sought legal advice from government lawyers about trying his political rival in a military court.

Hours before his arrest, Fonseka, who himself has been accused of a range of human rights abuses during the fighting against the Tamil Tigers last year, had said he was prepared to give evidence at international tribunals investigating the 25-year-long civil war. "I am definitely going to reveal what I know, what I was told and what I heard. Anyone who has committed war crimes should be brought into the courts," the BBC reported him as saying.

• Sri Lanka

FSA warns against heavy-handed EU regulation of hedge funds

Financial Services Authority says toned-down European Union directive on hedge funds and private equity firms still 'risky'

The chief City regulator added its weight today to growing concerns that EU plans for regulating the hedge fund industry will prove chaotic and excessively costly to implement.

The Financial Services Authority said a proposed directive still carried "significant risks", even though some stricter rules were toned down during negotiations between member states.

The comments followed warnings by a group of City lawyers that the directive could lead to "systemic failure" in European markets if it were passed in its current form.

In a sustained attack on the directive, the financial markets law committee said the directive would "create significant legal uncertainty leading potentially to systemic failure and widespread market disruption, unless they are appropriately amended".

Ministers are expected to intensify their lobbying efforts in Brussels to head off what are widely seen as heavy-handed rules governing the behaviour of hedge funds, private equity firms and other alternative investment businesses.

The City minister, Lord Myners, recently held talks with his opposite number in the Spanish government, which holds the EU presidency. He is understood to be concerned that hedge funds and private equity firms, many of them based in London, will relocate from the EU if the rules are implemented without reforms.

Dan Waters, sector leader for asset management at the FSA, said at the EDHEC-Risk Summit: "I would not underestimate the significant risks that still exist in this draft directive. It could still go badly wrong in some important areas."

Several reports by the FSA have highlighted concerns that a tight legal framework governing all types of alternative investment businesses will be open to challenge. It has put forward proposals for a principles-based approach to regulation, mimicking the model used by the FSA.

Waters' comments came as members of the European parliament prepared to debate more than 2,000 amendments to the proposed directive on hedge funds and private equity firms. The directive was sponsored by the French and German governments in the wake of the financial crisis.

Sharon Bowles, chair of the European parliament's economic and monetary affairs committee, will oversee the debate, which is expected to start on 22 February before a vote in April.

She is understood to favour a principle-based approach to regulation.

Waters said the parliament's version of the directive contained dangers, despite the huge number of amendments. "The parliamentary text is very far away from an acceptable position from the UK's point of view," he said.

He also said changes put forward last week by the EU's Spanish presidency, which include reintroducing limits on hedge fund marketing, were unjustified. "We are not on safe ground yet. It is incumbent upon regulators and investors to stay very active in this debate."

The directive also covers managers of a wide range of alternative investment funds including private equity and real estate.

• Europe
• Hedge funds
• Private equity
• Financial Services Authority (FSA)
• Regulators
• Paul Myners
• Financial crisis
• European Union

Toyota denies Prius braking problem is safety issue

Company suggests 'driver error' may be to blame as damage to firm's value is put at $4bn

Toyota denied today that brake problems on its Prius hybrid cars were a safety issue in Britain despite speculation in Japan that the crisis could deepen tomorrow if the company recalls 270,000 vehicles in the US and Japan.

In a defiant move, executives assured the Department for Transport's Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (Vosa) that the latest problem to affect its cars, in which a software glitch in the third generation Prius affects the brakes on rough and slippery surfaces, does not endanger drivers.

It claimed the problem might be caused by "driver error", but Vosa reserved the right to insist on a recall if it concludes the problem poses a danger. One Prius driver said his car surged into the wrong lane at a roundabout when he pressed the brake, forcing him to swerve violently to avoid oncoming traffic.

More than 8m Toyotas are already being recalled worldwide after it emerged last month that an accelerator problem was causing cars to speed out of control. Hundreds of thousands more could be taken off the roads if the Prius problem is considered worthy of a recall. Today, damage to the manufacturer's value was calculated at around $4bn (£2.56bn) by Brand Finance, which publishes an annual ranking of the world's most valuable brands.

There have been at least 100 complaints about the Prius braking system in the US. Toyota said it sold 6,689 of the potentially affected third generation Prius cars in the UK between August and the end of January. It could not say how many complaints it had received so far in the UK.

"Customers have reported that under certain braking conditions, such as when hitting a bump, pothole or driving on a low-grip surface, they notice a change in the brake feel," it said. "This change in brake feel is due to the specific set-up of the anti-lock braking system. Prius's braking ability is not compromised and Toyota does not believe this is a safety issue."

Vosa said: "They have assured is it is not a safety issue with the Prius. We are continuing to monitor the situation. We will take necessary action if we believe it is a safety issue."

Toyota warned the government about a possible problem with the Prius on 1 February, the same day it registered a recall on more than 180,000 other cars in the UK because of the accelerator problem.

In a message to customers, Toyota did not rule out a recall of the Prius and said it would make an announcement to customers shortly. Any recall is likely to start in Japan and the US before being introduced, if necessary, to about 60 other territories where the market-leading petrol and electric hybrid has been sold, Toyota sources in Japan were reported as saying.

Among those who have complained is a London-based banker who claimed the brakes on his Prius went wrong in October and have continued to do so intermittently.

"One night I was coming down from a moderate hill to a roundabout and as I was turning left the car surged forward," said the banker, who asked not to be named. "It made me out of control and I ended up on the other side of the road. I had to swerve very quickly and if there had been a car coming in the opposite direction I would definitely have hit it."

Writing on the Toyota Owners Club forum, he said: "We all know that all the Prius in the world are made exclusively in Japan. So if America and Japan have the problem then the rest of the world has the same problem too. It is as if we are not important, as if our lives are more expendable than the Americans or the Japanese."

Toyota GB said: "This is something we can't comment on until we see the vehicle. We have not seen any evidence of brakes failing. There could be driver error."

• Toyota
• Automotive industry
• Japan
• Motoring

India to rule on GM aubergines

• Minister to make key decision on major crop
• Broad alliance takes on Monsanto subsidiary

A fierce row over the future of the humble aubergine, staple ingredient of fiery brinjal curries for tens of millions of Indians, will reach a climax on Wednesday with a key government decision on the possible future commercial cultivation of genetically-modified strains of the plant. If permission is given, the aubergine will become the first GM foodstuff to be grown in India.

The decision will be taken by the environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, who pledged last year to end the heated argument over whether aubergines modified with a gene from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis should be distributed to Indian farmers.

An alliance of voices ranging from environmentalists to leftwing politicians and Hindu extremists have called on Ramesh to deny permission for the commercial cultivation of the Bt Brinjal strain, named after the bacteria and the local word for aubergine.

"It will open the gate," said Leo Saldanha, an environmental campaigner in the southern city of Bengalooru. "It raises huge legal and cultural issues."

The decision Ramesh takes will reveal how far "India was willing to allow the farmer to be subordinated to corporate interests", he said.

Ramesh told one of the many rowdy meetings he has attended as part of a public consultation exercise that trying to reconcile the opposing camps had "turned [his] hair grey".

Aubergine is a major crop in India, where it has been cultivated for thousands of years. Though not native it is seen as an integral part of culture and diet, particularly of the poor.

Backers claim the modified aubergines would cut crop losses due to insect damage by more than half and drastically reduce pesticide use. They argue also that extensive animal testing has shown that the bacterium introduced into the aubergine, though toxic to boring insects, would not be harmful to humans.

Campaigners question the evidence, and argue that commercial interests have overly influenced the regulatory process. They say the 2,000-odd varieties of aubergine cultivated in India would be threatened if Bt Brinjal was introduced. "It is a hugely important decision, not just for India, for the whole world," said Dr Shiva Vandana, director of a network of groups campaigning against GM foods in India, and a key figure in the development of international biosafety treaties. "The question is whether or not public opinion will be listened to."

The seeds have been developed by Indian scientists but will be marketed by the Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company, an Indian firm partly owned by the US multinational Monsanto - the cause of much criticism and controversy.

The southern state of Kerala, run by an alliance of opposition leftwing parties, has already banned GM crops on the grounds that they are a threat to biodiversity.

Last week, the state's Marxist chief minister, VS Achuthanandan, claimed GM foods would lead to the "colonisation of the food sector.

"We shouldn't be a part of a system that will destroy traditional seeds and crops and allow [multinational corporations] to infringe on the agriculture sector," he said.

Hindu nationalists from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) have also taken up the aubergine's cause. Mohan Bhagwat, a senior RSS official, told a public meeting in Bengalooru last weekend that Bt Brinjal was "untested" and "dangerous" andits introduction would only benefit "the multinationals". He likened the new aubergines to "terrorist infiltrators" sent by foreign powers to destabilise India.

Government scientists have, however, told ministers that Bt Brinjal poses no threat. "Our experts examined the science behind Bt Brinjal and concluded that it is absolutely safe. The only thing that hasn't been done is human testing," Dr Maharaj Kishan Bhan, a senior research scientist at the ministry of science and technology said. "You can take a philosophical view that all GM foods are bad ‑ but from a scientific point of view I would say it is fine."

• India
• GM
• Food
• Farming
• Pesticides