Showing posts with label clash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clash. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

NI leaders clash during TV debate

3 May 2011 Last updated at 23:17 GMT By Gareth Gordon BBC NI political correspondent Leaders debate The leaders clashed on issues ranging from the economy and education The leaders of the five main local parties have made their final pitches for votes in a BBC Northern Ireland TV election special.

There were heated exchanges over the conduct of the Stormont Executive.

The Sinn Fein and DUP leaders accused the SDLP and Ulster Unionist Party of not being team players.

SDLP leader Margaret Ritchie and head of the UUP Tom Elliott responded by criticising a "cosy consensus" between the DUP and Sinn Fein.

Ms Ritchie at one point accused the Alliance leader David Ford of being a "lapdog" for the two biggest parties.

The debate ranged across the economy, education, health, water charges and security matters.

DUP leader Peter Robionson defended his party's decision to rule out both additional water charges and an increase in tuition fees.

He said the DUP was a "low tax party" and it was not justified to ask people to pay more when there were savings the government could make.

However, David Ford, whose Alliance party has backed water charges, said people wanted honesty about the public finances.

Asked whether the other parties were not being honest, Mr Ford said that after the election the others would "make so many U-turns it would be dangerous to cross the road".

'Contradiction' Peter Robsinson and Martin McGuinness Mr Robinson and Mr McGuinness were criticised for their 'cosy' relationship

Martin McGuinness refused to accept there was a contradiction between Sinn Fein's past support of the IRA and its current condemnation of dissident attacks.

Mr McGuinness insisted that he "did not want to live in the past, but in the here and now".

Asked whether he would serve under Mr McGuinness as First Minister, the Ulster Unionist leader Tom Elliott pledged that he would never serve under Sinn Fein as Deputy First Minister.

Both the DUP and Sinn Fein aimed criticism at the Ulster Unionists.

Continue reading the main story
"If Peter Robinson and I can work together it is not too much to expect Tom Elliott and Margaret Ritchie to work with us ”

End Quote Martin Mc Guinness Peter Robinson referred to "Ulster Unionist Conservative cuts" to the Stormont budget, whilst Martin McGuinness refused to withdraw his comment that Michael McGimpsey's decision not to proceed with the Altnagelvin radiotherapy centre had been "sectarian".

During a discussion on jobs creation, Martin McGuinness broadened his assault, arguing that "if Peter Robinson and I can work together it is not too much to expect Tom Elliott and Margaret Ritchie to work with us".

The fault lines between the parties were clearly on display as Ms Ritchie claimed the Deputy First Minister was talking "absolute rubbish" adding that "Marty had a case of Peteritis".

At one point the presenter suggested that Martin McGuinness sounded as if he was encouraging Sinn Fein voters to transfer to the DUP rather than the SDLP. Mr McGuinness said they could vote for whoever they wished.

'Fools'

The Alliance leader David Ford claimed that both the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP had made "fools of themselves" by voting against the budget yet remaining in the Executive.

As the future of the Justice department was discussed, the SDLP leader retorted that Mr Ford was "a little lapdog for the DUP" and "a puppet to the DUP and Sinn Fein".

On education, Martin McGuinness refused to apologise for Caitriona Ruane's handling of academic selection. He insisted that the minister's critics were annoyed because she is a woman, who comes from Mayo and is an Irish speaker.

Tom Elliott called for a two year moratorium during which selection would continue to take place whilst a cross party agreement is sought. Peter Robinson said he is becoming more attracted to the idea of computer adaptive testing.

During the programme the leaders took questions from the audience and the debate ended with each politician making a final direct appeal to voters to back their party.


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Monday, May 2, 2011

Party leaders clash in TV debate

1 May 2011 Last updated at 21:24 GMT By Andrew Black Political reporter, BBC Scotland Party leaders outline their views on an independence referendum

Scotland's main party leaders have refused to say how many public sector jobs may be cut in the coming years, as they faced each other in a TV debate.

The SNP's Alex Salmond, Labour's Iain Gray, Annabel Goldie of the Tories and Lib Dem Tavish Scott clashed just days before the 5 May Holyrood election.

The BBC Scotland debate came on the day economists warned there could be thousands of job losses ahead.

Each leader also spoke about a possible referendum on independence.

The debate, at Perth Concert Hall, also saw the foursome square up on issues including the cost of university education, sectarianism and green energy.

The programme came on the day of a report by the Centre for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR), attached to Glasgow University, which claimed planned 2%-a-year savings put forward in the SNP and Labour manifestos were likely to produce job cuts of 7%.

That represented between 20,000 to 25,000 - outside health - over the next few years.

Amid the tough spending squeeze, the report also said those remaining in government work would see the value of their earnings fall by at least 6% in real terms, as pay is frozen and inflation rises.

Disputing its conclusions, Mr Salmond said: "We've managed to achieve a 2% efficiency target over the last three years in the Scottish government.

"There haven't been a significant number of job losses across the public service in Scotland."

When asked how many jobs may go in the future, the current first minister, who backed a two-year pay freeze, responded: "There's going to be a whole range of factors. It depends on pay settlements, crucially."

Pointing out the willingness of public sector unions to accept a pay freeze for those earning more than £21,000, Mr Salmond added: "If people are able and prepared to make sacrifices - and they are sacrifices - in terms of their pay, then we can maintain employment in the public sector."

Continue reading the main story

Alex Salmond:"Elected for the second time on Thursday."

Iain Gray: "I've spent the six weeks every day saying nothing but 'Jobs, Jobs, Jobs'. I can't think of anything else, but it's probably not the best title for an autobiography, I accept that."

Tavish Scott: "I am an islander, so it would have to be something like 'Island Life Enjoyed'. If you come from Shetland, it is the best part of Scotland and I'll make it on the basis of that."

Asked if he would name it "I agree with Nick", Mr Scott answered: "It certainly won't be that."

Annabel Goldie:"Kicking a Political Posterior can be Fun."

Mr Gray said he did not think a pay freeze running to five years would be acceptable, telling the audience: "For a year or two we do need pay restraint, a pay freeze in the public sector.

"We don't know what the position will be three years down the road - I hope it would not be longer than that."

Outlining his position, the Labour leader said: "A pay freeze for one year or two years, protection for those at the bottom, reductions in the very highest salaries in the public sector - I've said I would lead the way in that by cutting my salary by 5% as first minister."

On the CPPR report, Mr Scott, whose Lib Dem Party wants pay cuts for the highest public sector-earners, said: "I've seen those figures and I hope we can avoid that, because the objective we've surely got is to minimise the difficulties we've got in terms of balancing the budget."

In the face of denials from Mr Salmond, Mr Scott claimed the SNP actually wanted to freeze public sector pay for the next, five-year parliament, to help fund a council tax freeze during the same period and "all the other goodies he has filled his manifesto with".

'I cannot'

Mr Scott said: "The implications for a nurse on £21,000 is that, over those five years, that nurse would be £2,100 worse off under the SNP's policy proposals.

Miss Goldie said: "I'm not going to stand here and say to an audience and say I can protect every public sector job - I cannot.

"We agreed to a public sector pay freeze for two years, because we thought that would protect jobs.

"I can promise, on the basis of my costed manifesto, I'm protecting the NHS budget - that's a huge area of public sector employment, but we've got to see more delivered for less."

The debate also turned to an independence referendum, which the SNP dropped in the last parliament after failing to win enough support from other parties.

Pressed on when a Referendum Bill on independence would be put to Holyrood if the SNP won the election, Mr Salmond said it would come, "within the five-year term".

Mr Salmond said the Scotland Bill, currently going through Westminster, which will beef up the Scottish Parliament's powers, needed the "economic teeth" to support economic recovery, meaning that would push legislation on a referendum "into the second half of the parliament".

Continue reading the main story Iain Gray
To spend the next five years distracted by a plan for independence and by a referendum, so that by the time we would have spent nine years talking about the referendum, we will simply put the recovery at risk”

End Quote Iain Gray Scottish Labour leader The SNP leader went on to say Scotland was "big enough, rich enough and good enough to be independent".

"Even more important than whether you believe in independence or not, is to believe in the right of the Scottish people to decide on independence in a referendum," he said.

Mr Scott would not be drawn on whether the independence question would form a possible deal breaker between his party and the SNP.

He said: "If you want independence, vote SNP because that is what Alex [Salmond] wants.

"He wants independence, I don't, I don't believe in independence. I believe in Scotland as part of the UK."

Miss Goldie said independence was not on her agenda, explaining: "I believe in the UK, I believe in Scotland being a strong and confident country within the UK.

"So, why would I be pursuing an agenda of independence? If you search the Tory manifesto, you won't find an independence bill."

Bringing up Prime Minister David Cameron, Miss Goldie said: "He has made it clear he thinks the country has more pressing priority.

"We are all trying to deal with jobs, dealing with opportunity, dealing with building a future for Scotland, for him, for me, that does not include independence."

Continue reading the main story Annabel Goldie
Why would I be pursuing an agenda of independence? If you search the Tory manifesto, you won't find an independence bill”

End Quote Annabel Goldie Scottish Tory leader Mr Gray responded: "Politics is about priorities and there is a common priority, right across working families right now, and that is to get our economy growing again, to create jobs and above all to create opportunity for our young people.

"I just believe that to spend the next five years distracted by a plan for independence and by a referendum, so that by the time we would have spent nine years talking about the referendum, we will simply put the recovery at risk."

Answering questions from the debate audience, the leaders were also grilled about university student tuition fees - being increased by up to £9,000 a year in England after being backed by the UK government.

Labour, the SNP and the Lib Dems ruled out introducing any fees for Scottish students studying at home, with only the Tories backing a graduate charge, capped at £4,000 annually.

Miss Goldie, said: "I would love to fund free education in Scotland, I would love to do that. Do the finances let us have that option? No."

And pointing a finger to the three other party leaders, she went on: "And don't believe one word you hear from those three parties. You are going to see humble pie eaten big time in the not too distant future from that trio of masqueraders who tell you, you can get everything for free."

On her party's fee policy, Miss Goldie said: "You wouldn't pay it until you've got your degree and you are earning £21,000 when you start paying a percentage over the excess of £21,000. It would be affordable."

Continue reading the main story Tavish Scott
He [Alex Salmond]wants independence, I don't, I don't believe in independence. I believe in Scotland as part of the UK”

End Quote Tavish Scott Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Mr Scott, who said his daughter was in the second year of a university degree and does not pay fees, stated: "I voted against fees in Scotland, we abolished Labour's fees when they were introduced back in 1999.

"We got rid of the graduate endowment, I voted with Alex Salmond on that in the last parliament and we invested more money in universities when I was in the government than ever had been done in the past. So, that is the commitment I made.

"I do genuinely believe it is possible to make sensible, constructive solutions for Scotland that allow universities to be properly funded and students to be adequately supported in the tricky times."

Mr Salmond said categorically he would not introduce tuition fees while hitting out at the coalition: "The problem with what they are doing south of the border is that its disastrous, it's socially divisive, it's inevitably going to put people off from less well-off background going to university.

"I think free education is the very heart of the Scottish tradition in education - that is what made us the country that we are."

Mr Gray said he had put his three daughters through university without fees and it "still costs a lot of money".

"The promise we have made and the promise we will keep is not to introduce tuition fees," he said.

"I think we do have to do some serious talking with the higher education sector about how long students spend at university, about the relationship between school and university, and college and university, and about the courses that we offer.

"I think that is work which should have been done two years ago, but it must be done."

Watch the Scottish leaders' debate again on the BBC iPlayer.


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Rival Yemen forces clash in Sanaa

13 April 2011 Last updated at 12:27 GMT Pictures show the aftermath of clashes in the southern city of Aden

Rival Yemeni forces have clashed in the capital Sanaa, killing two soldiers, as protests continued across the country.

Troops loyal to President Ali Abdullah Saleh clashed with those supporting Gen Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, who has defected to the opposition.

In the southern city of Aden, soldiers opened fire as protesters threw stones and set up roadblocks to stop troops patrolling the streets.

One person was killed and several others wounded, reports say.

Tens of thousands of people are marching in cities across the country, as protesters keep up weeks of pressure aimed at forcing President Saleh out of power after 32 years in office.

'Worrying development'

The clash in Sanaa between rival security forces happened early on Wednesday morning at a checkpoint run by the first army division, which supports the opposition.

The rival sides exchanged fire with machine-guns and rocket-propelled grenades after the pro-opposition soldiers stopped a car carrying pro-government security personnel, who reportedly refused to be searched.

This is a particularly worrying incident as Yemen's capital is guarded by two rival military units, and any confrontation between them could be very difficult to contain, says a BBC correspondent in Sanaa.

More than 100 people have been killed since the start of the protests on 11 February, which were inspired by the popular uprisings that toppled long-time rulers in Tunisia and Egypt.

In addition to democratic and economic reforms, the protesters want to see legal action against Mr Saleh and his sons, who occupy key security and political posts.

On Monday, opposition groups rejected outright a proposal by Gulf Arab countries for Mr Saleh to transfer power to his deputy in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

They now say they will hold talks with Gulf ambassadors to see if a timetable can be agreed and other details ironed out.

Even before the mass protests, Mr Saleh was struggling to quell a separatist rebellion in the south and a Shia Muslim insurgency in the north.

Analysts fear the violence could give the Arabian Peninsula branch of al-Qaeda more room to operate.

Send your pictures and videos to yourpics@bbc.co.uk or text them to 61124 (UK) or +44 7725 100 100 (International). If you have a large file you can upload here.

Read the terms and conditions


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Osborne and deputy clash over AV

13 April 2011 Last updated at 17:16 GMT Ross Hawkins By Ross Hawkins Political correspondent, BBC News George Osborne and Danny Alexander George Osborne and Danny Alexander were both scathing of opposing views on AV Conservative Chancellor George Osborne has clashed with his Liberal Democrat deputy at the Treasury in a row over the alternative vote referendum.

In a newspaper interview Mr Osborne said the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) was receiving taxpayers' money to run some of the referendum ballots but stood to benefit if AV was introduced, and was funding the Yes campaign.

He told the Daily Mail: "That stinks frankly and is exactly the sort of dodgy, behind-the-scenes shenanigans that people don't like about politics."

Asked about his comments, Danny Alexander, the Lib Dem Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said: "I think it is a real shame that this sort of pretty desperate scaremongering is going on. The No campaign clearly are getting very worried about the referendum."

The No campaign has written to the Electoral Commission, and says six Labour and Conservative MPs have written to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, complaining about ERS support for the Yes campaign.

'Comprehensive arrangements'

Those on the No side say the "secrecy and integrity" of the referendum is at threat because the Yes campaign has received £1.1m of funding from the ERS, and the society's commercial offshoot - Electoral Reform Services Ltd (ERSL) - is involved in the verification of returned postal ballots for more than 100 councils.

They say secrecy is at risk because the ERSL will check that only valid ballots have been cast, so information about votes could be passed back to the Yes campaign.

Continue reading the main story

At the moment MPs are elected by the first-past-the-post system, where the candidate getting the most votes in a constituency is elected.

On 5 May all registered UK voters will be able to vote Yes or No on whether to change the way MPs are elected to the Alternative Vote system.

Under the Alternative Vote system, voters rank candidates in their constituency in order of preference.

Anyone getting more than 50% of first-preference votes is elected.

If no-one gets 50% of votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their backers' second choices allocated to those remaining.

This process continues until one candidate has at least 50% of all votes in that round.

They also claim the ERS and its subsidiaries have made £15m in public sector contracts in the past three years.

Lawyers acting for ERSL have written a letter rejecting those claims and saying they may take legal action against the No campaign if necessary.

They say it is "completely misleading" to suggest the firm has made £15m from taxpayers and states changing the voting system to AV would have "absolutely no impact" on its revenues.

ERSL's lawyers say it is "wholly untrue" to suggest it verifies postal ballots, because the votes are returned directly to local authorities and no member of ERSL staff comes into contact with them once they have been sent to voters.

A spokeswoman for the Committee on Standards in Public Life said it had yet to receive any letter, but did not investigate individual cases.

The chief counting officer at the referendum, Jenny Watson, who is also the chairman of the independent elections watchdog the Electoral Commission, said: "We have put in place detailed and comprehensive arrangements for monitoring the performance of counting officers and their suppliers, and I have no reason to believe that there is any risk to the integrity of the administration of the postal voting process."


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Judge warns of human rights clash

21 February 2011 Last updated at 10:22 GMT Lord Woolf Lord Woolf said it would be hard to adhere to two separate conventions on human rights An ex-Law Lord has warned of conflicts between the European Convention on Human Rights and the government's proposed British Bill of Rights.

Lord Woolf said the UK faced a "stark choice" between accepting European court rulings or leaving the system.

The government is looking at a Bill of Rights following rows with Europe over prisoner voting and sex offenders.

It insists this will not undermine the European Convention but Lord Woolf warned of "complication".

The comments by Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice from 2000 to 2005, follow an outcry over the European Court of Human Rights' ruling that serving prisoners should be allowed to vote.

The House of Commons voted to keep the ban on prisoners voting earlier this month - although the vote is not binding.

The UK Supreme Court has also recently ruled that sex offenders in England and Wales can appeal against having to register with the police for life, arguing that this has to be the case under the European Convention on Human Rights.

'Virtually impossible'

At prime minister's questions last week, David Cameron called this decision "offensive" and confirmed that a commission looking into a British Bill of Rights - which was in the coalition agreement - would be set up soon.

On Sunday, Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said the UK government would continue to adhere to rulings from the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights.

But he said he would seek to kick-start reform to balance its relations with national courts when the UK takes over the chairmanship of the Council of Europe in November.

Continue reading the main story
We have a Bill of Rights in this country. It's called the Human Rights Act and is thoroughly British, European and universal in its values”

End Quote Shami Chakrabarti Liberty Lord Woolf told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We have got a stark option: either we accept the European Convention, or we don't accept it and decide to leave the Council of Europe.

"It's very difficult to do what Mr Clarke indicated he would like to do when he's chairman of the relevant body, because there are 47 signatories in Europe which are signatories to the European Convention as well as ourselves. To try and amend that is a virtually impossible task."

He also said: "If you have a further convention - a British convention [the Bill of Rights] - there's going to be a complication in the position, because you're going to have two conventions to which the courts are going to have a regard."

The commission on a British Bill of Rights will be jointly chaired by Mr Clarke and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.

Lord Woolf said: "I don't see any problem about the commission that is being set up and I was very relieved Mr Clarke indicated there would be no question of us withdrawing form the European Council and the European Convention on Human Rights."

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights group Liberty, said: "We have a Bill of Rights in this country. It's called the Human Rights Act and is thoroughly British, European and universal in its values.

"It protects all of us from the whims of politicians and, when the current frenzy of misinformation has died down, voters will worry about MPs who seek to put themselves above the law."


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.