World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk

Rosetta comet-chasing spacecraft wakes up – live blog
Anti-government protesters clash with riot police in Kiev – video
Oxfam: 85 richest people as wealthy as half of the world's population
Iran halts uranium enrichment under nuclear deal
Jean-Jacques Rousseau: as relevant as ever | Theo Hobson
Have vets really sold out to industrial agri-business?
Dozens wounded in Kiev violence as anti-government protests escalate
Okinawa: plans to move US base suffer setback
Sydney man denies punching coma teenager Alexander McEwen
Markets fall after Chinese growth rate slows to 14-year low of 7.7% - business live
New Zealand: 6.2 magnitude earthquake hits North Island
Chinese dumpling poisoner jailed for life
Pakistani Taliban suicide blast claims more lives near Rawalpindi army HQ
Crowd gathers to remember two Aboriginal men executed in 1842
Ryan Tandy was 'hired muscle' used to intimidate and kidnap man, court hears
Bushfire in Perth's north-eastern suburbs: firefighters contain blaze
NSW government to cancel coal exploration leases after Icac findings
Western Australia's shark cull faces legal challenge from conservationists
Big Day Out: Pearl Jam, Arcade Fire, Snoop Dogg – in pictures
Orangutan made of junk highlights plight of the species
Fighting 'extremism' in Syria is a losing battle | James Harkin
Uganda pins road safety hopes on new traffic authority | Amy Fallon
Horsemeat scandal: Irish PM defends shipping of livestock: From the archive, 20 January 1960
Should Britain help migrants go home?
European Greens consider challenge to UK tax breaks for shale gas drilling

Rosetta comet-chasing spacecraft wakes up – live blog

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:36 AM PST

Stuart Clark is at the European Space Operations Centre, Darmstadt, waiting for the European Space Agency's comet-chasing Rosetta spacecraft to wake up in deep space after nearly three years out of contact with Earth

Stuart Clark

Anti-government protesters clash with riot police in Kiev – video

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:24 AM PST

Anti-government protesters clash with riot police in Ukraine's capital, Kiev, on Sunday night

Oxfam: 85 richest people as wealthy as half of the world's population

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:24 AM PST

As World Economic Forum starts in Davos, development charity claims that growing inequality has been driven by a 'power grab' by wealthy elites

The world's wealthiest people aren't known for travelling by bus, but if they fancied a change of scene then the richest 85 people on the globe – who between them control as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population put together – could squeeze onto a single double-decker.

The extent to which so much global wealth has become corralled by a virtual handful of the so-called 'global elite' is exposed in a new report from Oxfam on Monday. It warned that those richest 85 people across the globe share a combined wealth of £1tn, as much as the poorest 3.5 billion of the world's population.

The wealth of the 1% richest people in the world amounts to $110tn (£60.88tn), or 65 times as much as the poorest half of the world, added the development charity, which fears this concentration of economic resources is threatening political stability and driving up social tensions.

It's a chilling reminder of the depths of wealth inequality as political leaders and top business people head to the snowy peaks of Davos for this week's World Economic Forum. Few, if any, will be arriving on anything as common as a bus, with private jets and helicoptors pressed into service as many of the world's most powerful people convene to discuss the state of the global economy over four hectic days of meetings, seminars and parties in the exclusive ski resort.

Winnie Byanyima, the Oxfam executive director who will attend the Davos meetings, said: "It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world's population – that's three and a half billion people – own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all fit comfortably on a double-decker bus."

Oxfam also argues that this is no accident either, saying growing inequality has been driven by a "power grab" by wealthy elites, who have co-opted the political process to rig the rules of the economic system in their favour.

In the report, entitled Working For The Few (summary here), Oxfam warned that the fight against poverty cannot be won until wealth inequality has been tackled.

"Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table," Byanyima said.

Oxfam called on attendees at this week's World Economic Forum to take a personal pledge to tackle the problem by refraining from dodging taxes or using their wealth to seek political favours.

As well as being morally dubious, economic inequality can also exacerbate other social problems such as gender inequality, Oxfam warned. Davos itself is also struggling in this area, with the number of female delegates actually dropping from 17% in 2013 to 15% this year.

How richest use their wealth to capture opportunites

Polling for Oxfam's report found people in countries around the world - including two-thirds of those questioned in Britain - believe that the rich have too much influence over the direction their country is heading.

Byanyima explained:

"In developed and developing countries alike we are increasingly living in a world where the lowest tax rates, the best health and education and the opportunity to influence are being given not just to the rich but also to their children.

"Without a concerted effort to tackle inequality, the cascade of privilege and of disadvantage will continue down the generations. We will soon live in a world where equality of opportunity is just a dream. In too many countries economic growth already amounts to little more than a 'winner takes all' windfall for the richest."

The Oxfam report found that over the past few decades, the rich have successfully wielded political influence to skew policies in their favour on issues ranging from financial deregulation, tax havens, anti-competitive business practices to lower tax rates on high incomes and cuts in public services for the majority. Since the late 1970s, tax rates for the richest have fallen in 29 out of 30 countries for which data are available, said the report.

This "capture of opportunities" by the rich at the expense of the poor and middle classes has led to a situation where 70% of the world's population live in countries where inequality has increased since the 1980s and 1% of families own 46% of global wealth - almost £70tn.

Opinion polls in Spain, Brazil, India, South Africa, the US, UK and Netherlands found that a majority in each country believe that wealthy people exert too much influence. Concern was strongest in Spain, followed by Brazil and India and least marked in the Netherlands.

In the UK, some 67% agreed that "the rich have too much influence over where this country is headed" - 37% saying that they agreed "strongly" with the statement - against just 10% who disagreed, 2% of them strongly.

The WEF's own Global Risks report recently identified widening income disparities as one of the biggest threats to the world community.

Oxfam is calling on those gathered at WEF to pledge: to support progressive taxation and not dodge their own taxes; refrain from using their wealth to seek political favours that undermine the democratic will of their fellow citizens; make public all investments in companies and trusts for which they are the ultimate beneficial owners; challenge governments to use tax revenue to provide universal healthcare, education and social protection; demand a living wage in all companies they own or control; and challenge other members of the economic elite to join them in these pledges.

• Research Now questioned 1,166 adults in the UK for Oxfam between October 1 and 14 2013.

Graeme Wearden

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Iran halts uranium enrichment under nuclear deal

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:16 AM PST

International inspectors witness the stopping of 20% uranium enrichment

Iran's state TV says the country has halted its most sensitive uranium enrichment work as part of a landmark deal struck with world powers.

The broadcast said Iran halted its 20% uranium enrichment, which is just steps away from bomb-making materials, by cutting the link feeding cascades enriching uranium in Natanz.

"Voluntarily halting the production of 20% uranium enrichment is the major measure that we are undertaking on Monday by noon," Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran's nuclear cheif told the official IRNA news agency, referring to a nuclear deal clinched in November between Iran and world powers.

State media reports said international inspectors were present on Monday when Iran began implementing its obligations under the historic deal reached in Geneva on 24 November. They left to monitor the suspension at Fordo, another uranium enrichment site in central Iran.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: as relevant as ever | Theo Hobson

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:00 AM PST

Jean-Jacques Rousseau – part 1: The philosopher's thought still has the power to challenge our deepest assumptions on identity, religion and the Enlightenment

Jean-Jacques Rousseau is generally seen, especially in Britain, as the worst sort of intellectual: absurdly self-regarding, and dangerously naive, in his fond belief in the natural goodness of humanity, which fed the excesses of the French Revolution, and maybe sowed other totalitarian seeds.

I have come to think he deserves more respect. While recently researching the roots of secular humanism, I found that he stood out from the list of dead white males I was considering. While other thinkers made important contributions to this or that movement, Rousseau made the weather. Also, he is psychologically fascinating – he makes other thinkers of the age seem wooden.

His thought is as relevant as ever, for he confronted deep human needs, such as the need to reconcile personal integrity with social belonging, the need to reconnect with the natural world, the need to escape the hyped-up tinny crap that passes for culture and seek out some sort of authenticity, and above all perhaps, the glorious yet embarrassing need that drives us all, the need to be ourselves. And some of our deepest assumptions seem rooted in his thought, or first expressed there. For example, the assumption that the large-scale systems we inhabit are corrupt, tawdry, destructive, and that we individual people are the poor little pure-as-snow victims. Another example: we are all the authors of our life-stories. We don't notice such patterns of thought until we see them being thought up.

Also, I think that looking at Rousseau's thought can nudge us towards more intelligent discussion of religion and atheism. This is not because I agree with his thinking on religion – I don't. But it helps us to see where our debate stems from. He passionately believed in a God who created the world and who allowed himself to be known – but not through revelation, in the sense of something contained in scripture or church tradition; rather through the compassion that comes naturally to us, and the appetite for rational wonder that he has instilled in his creatures. He thought that this natural moral impulse will flourish as long as false ideas and conventions do not twist it out of shape. There's a major overlap with what we know as atheist thinking here, but in religious, or at least theistic, form. Maybe attending to this can prod us into seeing our own debates afresh.

Rousseau was born in Protestant Geneva in 1712. His father was a watchmaker; his mother died in childbirth. Aged 16 he left his apprenticeship and wandered through Savoy, doing odd jobs. He found a patroness-cum-mistress who was a very liberal Catholic; she helped him find work as a musician. He then moved to Paris in 1741, and did some writing for the Encyclopédie. Then, in 1749, he had an acute experience of vocation. It came as he saw the title of a journal's essay competition: "Has the advance of the sciences and the arts helped to destroy or to purify moral standards?" Suddenly he knew that he hated his culture, and that he was a great thinker. He won the competition, and fame, by arguing that modern culture was, for all its proud enlightenment, a mire of falsity, corruption and inauthenticity. And he showed that he meant it, by refusing the identity of the urbane literary star and choosing to earn a living by copying out musical scores – no schmoozing with influential employers for him. (He also wore conspicuously cheap clothes, like someone choosing to wear nasty old jumpers from charity shops.)

What was his problem? Didn't he believe in rational progress towards a more humane world? Here's the interesting paradox: he did believe in this Enlightenment vision, but with an awkward intensity that made him see its other advocates as complacent, worldly, merely pragmatic. He thought that the humanist vision needed a new basis in a big narrative about the liberation of humanity's innate goodness, a story about how civilisation tends to impair this. This was expressed in various works of the 1750s and then in The Social Contract .

He also found a wider audience as a novelist. But he became no more settled, no less prickly. His novel Emile expressed reformist religious ideas that so angered the authorities that he had to flee – to Germany, then England for a time, where he was hosted by a rather bemused David Hume. He now developed a partly justified persecution complex. He started writing autobiographically: his startlingly frank Confessions occupied his last years. He still failed to enjoy his fame as an author, forever complaining that his ideas were misunderstood and his character maligned. He found some solace in his hobby of botany. He died in 1778.

Oh yes, and all this time – since his move to Paris in the 1740s – he had a partner, or mistress (they finally married in 1768), with whom he had five children. What fortunate children, you might think, to be born to such a great champion of the compassionate human spirit. Think again: they were given away to an orphanage as babies.

Theo Hobson

Have vets really sold out to industrial agri-business?

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 01:00 AM PST

Most of us think of James Herriot when we think of vets. But a new book says this most-esteemed of professions has 'become complicit in supporting a system that is inherently bad for animal welfare'

It was Jean Claude Latife's childhood dream to become a vet. "I simply loved animals. I wanted to help them and make sure they lived the longest time possible," he says. And for 25 years he did just that. But then he also fell in love with the southwest of England. So did his wife and children. He was looking for an easier life and he knew that meant avoiding the night call-outs and heavier work associated with being a regular vet.

Instead he settled for work in an abattoir. This might seem odd: if you love animals, why would you want to usher them to their death? But Latife was adamant (and remains so) that the vet fulfils a vital role at the slaughterhouse. "I was there to stop animals suffering. Maybe I will attend to the last minutes of their life. Unloading, stunning, all these events in the abattoir that I can make less painful for the animals." Everything he did in the abattoir he felt was entirely consistent with the veterinary equivalent of the Hippocratic oath that he had sworn solemnly years before. It includes the line: "My constant endeavour will be to ensure the health and welfare of animals committed to my care."

"Surrounded by death, noise, shit and concrete," Latife quickly realised he also needed to develop a thick skin. The pressure in the abattoir to get orders out was relentless, but he often brought proceedings to a standstill when he saw rule violations. He was there to safeguard animal and public health and he took that seriously. However, his production line colleagues did not take stoppage time sanguinely. Particularly the slaughtermen who were being paid by the kill.

One day, 10 minutes before lunch, he stopped the line again. Two pigs were touching, which is strictly prohibited, as one could contaminate the other. According to Latife he was confronted by two violent slaughtermen, one fresh out of prison, who he alleges was high on drugs, and one with a police record. Rather than his being subjected to the usual verbal taunts and abuse, this time a knife was held to his throat. Latife left and never returned to the abattoir.

Latife's experience was something that really shouldn't happen to a vet. I suspect we still think of a vet as a James Herriot. I know I did. When James "Alf" Wright began writing fictionalised accounts of his work as a vet in Yorkshire during the 40s and 50s someone described it as if "God's own PR company" had been handed the account for the veterinary profession. We were told that vets were heroic, selfless safeguarders of animal rights, preferred real farm work to small animal practice (James never had much time for the hypochondriac lapdog Tricky Woo) and spent a lot of time in mad pursuit of Yorkshire farmers who had little intention of paying their bill. That image of the vet has endured, even though it turns out Herriot is about as relevant to modern practice as Mr Chips is to teaching.

I head to post-Christmas Godalming, where the fields are still full of water, to the offices of Compassion in World Farming (CiWF), the organisation set up by dairy farmer Peter Roberts in 1967 to safeguard the welfare of farm animals. Today it is headed by Philip Lymbery, and he is the definition of sincerity as he talks rapidly, letting at least two cups of coffee go cold. The organisation is vehemently opposed to industrial farming, which it alleges compromises animal welfare. Since Roberts's time the industry has grown massively – around 70bn farm animals are produced worldwide every year, and two-thirds are factory-farmed. And Lymbery is very concerned about the UK veterinary profession's part in this. His book, Farmageddon: The True Cost of Cheap Meat, written with political columnist Isabel Oakeshott, is billed as a wake-up call to the perils of industrial agriculture and devotes a whole chapter to these fears. Animal care: what happened to the vet?

"Vets have become complicit in supporting a system that is inherently bad for animal welfare," Lymbery explains. "These systems include the mass production of broiler chickens, caged production of eggs, the large-scale permanent housing of dairy cows (so-called mega dairies) and highly intensive pig production where mothering pigs are kept in confinement where they can't turn around for weeks at a time."

It is not that he's accusing vets of perpetrating acts of cruelty or negligence, but rather that they see farmers rather than animals as their clients, and in order to keep those clients will put up and shut up rather than properly addressing animal welfare.

"They're working in a system that has an inbuilt flaw," Lymbery says. "For example, so many animals are crammed into one space, causing disease. But instead of the vet saying: 'Use a different agricultural system, a pasture-based one', antibiotics are used prophylactically to tackle the disease and keep the animal alive and growing."

Whichever way you look at it, industrial farming takes an unremittingly pragmatic view of animals. According to Lymbery it treats them solely as units of production, keeping them alive and growing rather than seeing them as individual sentient beings capable of pain and suffering. This leads to a technical interpretation of "welfare".

"The psychological wellbeing of animals is very important," he says. "Chickens must be able to flap their wings; pigs need to root in the ground." These natural behaviours are called the Five Freedoms, and welfare campaigners say they are compromised in industrial systems.

Lymbery hasn't so much had bust-ups with the veterinary establishment ("the high priests of the livestock industry", as he calls them), as fairly low-key disagreements at conferences and award ceremonies, where their paths might cross. Behind the scenes he claims CiWF is actually a refuge for disaffected vets who are upset that their ethics are being compromised or disillusioned by giving out medication instead of treating animals. A number of CiWF's staff, notably the influential director of public affairs Dil Peeling, are former vets. Lymbery says he sees far more engagement and progress on welfare from McDonald's and Waitrose than vets and farmers. He seems exasperated that the veterinary profession isn't taking a stand on industrial systems.

Five years after his ordeal Latife, now a veterinary advisor outside the UK, is still angry and thinks vets here should stand up and be counted. "We need to correct things; we need a revolution in the profession and strong action. Even vets who are in charge of controlling the legislation are under so much pressure that they are complicit rather than speaking out."

"The general public looks on vets as custodians of animal welfare," stresses Lymbery. "They would be intensely disappointed in a profession that accepts and works in and with industrialised systems without criticism."

Meanwhile a recent industry-sector pay review suggested that remuneration is well below that of GPs, and wages all but stagnant and falling for non-farm vets. Through my conversations with working farm vets, I found professionals who were affable though guarded and insistent that they made no concessions on animal welfare. In fact, as predicted, it was difficult to find anyone who would speak out against industrial-farming systems. But whether that's because everyone's happy or everyone's scared stiff of upsetting the apple cart is difficult to determine.

All the vets I spoke to were in clear agreement: the job has changed beyond all recognition over the past two decades. John Blackwell, president elect of the British Veterinary Association (BVA), confirms that the Herriot days are over. Qualifying in 1985, he now works in a mixed practice on the borders of Wales and Shropshire, specialising in farm work. "In the old days every day would be different. A bit like Herriot: you'd wait for the phone to ring and it was firefighting and rescuing animals with pneumonia, for example. Now we've moved away from chocolate-box farms with 30 cows tied by the neck and farmers eking a living. Where I am we're looking after a reduced number of farms holding more stock, say 400 to 500 cattle."

But Blackwell sees the evolution of the vet's relationship with farmers as no bad thing. "Now we're an integrated part of the farm, part of the overall management team, working with nutritional advisors and foot trimmers on a herd healthcare plan, using preventative medicine. We're taking on much more of a consultancy role." It sounds like he's working with a Premiership football team.

Chris Tufnell, council member of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, warns against romanticising animals kept on pasture or "knee-deep in cow shit" on small farms where there are often equally institutionalised welfare issues. What motivates today's vets is the chance to use the breadth of their scientific training. "If some vets coming into the profession have any negative opinion of organic systems, for example, it's likely to be based on the stringent rules about medications you can and can't use to comply with organic. What vets like is that they have clinical freedom to make decisions on an animal's welfare."

Can we count on the next generation to stand by their ethics? Times are tough, and inevitably these highly trained scientists want more bang for their buck. "Are there going to be those pure clinical jobs in the future?" asks Blackwell somewhat rhetorically. "We're going to see more of an integration into allied scientific roles, whether they be in the food sector or the pharmaceutical industry."

That's potentially bad news for those who want vets to remain independent custodians of animal welfare. "Back in the day there were a lot of people who were happy to go into the profession because it was a vocation," says Tufnell. "Today you have to achieve really high academic results, and a lot of graduates want more from their profession. When it comes to paying the bills, you can see why moving into industry might be seen as a better package than a practice working 24/7."

Goodbye James Herriot. We'll miss you.

To order Farmageddon: The True Cost of Cheap Meat by Philip Lymbery (Bloomsbury, £12.99) for £10.39, with free UK p&p, go to theguardian.com/bookshop

Lucy Siegle

Dozens wounded in Kiev violence as anti-government protests escalate

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:58 AM PST

Police – outnumbered by protesters armed with firebombs – respond with stun grenades, teargas and water cannon

The sound of stun grenades continue to ring out and charred vehicles are smouldering in Kiev after a night of fierce clashes between protesters and police.

The leaders of the opposition, including former heavyweight boxer Vitali Klitschko, dismissed the violence as the work of "provocateurs" and were due to hold negotiations with the government later on Monday.

The anti-government protests, which have beset Kiev for two months, escalated into fiery street battles with police on Sunday as thousands of demonstrators threw rocks and firebombs and set police vehicles on fire. Dozens of officers and protesters were injured.

Police responded with stun grenades, teargas and, for the first time in the country's history, water cannon, but were outnumbered by the protesters. Many of the riot police held their shields over their heads to protect themselves from the projectiles thrown by demonstrators on the other side of a cordon of buses.

The violence was a sharp escalation of Ukraine's two-month political crisis, which has brought round-the-clock protest gatherings, but had been largely peaceful. President Viktor Yanukovych last week signed an array of laws severely limiting protests and banning the wearing of helmets and gas masks. Many of the demonstrators wore hardhats and masks in defiance of the new laws.

Klitschko, the leader of the Udar (Punch) opposition party, tried to calm the demonstrators down, but failed and was sprayed by a fire extinguisher in the process. "What you are doing now presets a huge danger," the reigning world heavyweight boxing champion shouted to them.

Klitschko, who said he would participate in presidential elections scheduled for spring 2015, then urged Yanukovych to announce snap presidential elections to relieve tensions. "I'm calling on Yanukovych to find strength and not repeat the fate of Ceaucescu and Gaddafi," he said, referring to the former Romanian and Libyan dictators.

He later travelled to Yanukovych's residence at Mezhyhirya outside Kiev and said the president has agreed to negotiate. Yanukovych said on his website that he had asked a working group, headed by national security council head Andriy Klyuev, to meet opposition representatives to work out a solution to the crisis.

Late last night hundreds of radical activists stormed the police cordon, attacking riot police with sticks and chains in an attempt to push their way towards the Ukrainian parliament, in front of which were parked rows of police buses.

Wearing masks and helmets to disguise their identities and equipped with sticks, chains and shields, the protesters threw stones that they had prised out from the pavement. They burned four police buses and two lorries that were blocking the road, which led to 70 policemen being wounded and 40 hospitalised, the police press service reported. With temperatures hovering at -7C, the police responded with the stun grenades and water cannon. People shouted: "Epiphany!" in response, a reference to the Orthodox Christian holiday, celebrated on Sunday, when many Ukrainians traditionally plunge into ice holes.

The police also fired rubber bullets at the protesters, medical volunteers working at the scene told the Guardian. The official opposition claimed they had nothing to do with the "provocateurs" who fought with police.

A number of western politicians and officials condemned the violence in Kiev. The US embassy said: "We urge calm and call on all sides to cease any acts provoking or resulting in violence."

The Swedish foreign minister, Carl Bildt, posted on Twitter: "I welcome the announcement in Kiev of talks to resolve the political crisis. But a solution is only possible if there is no regime repression."

Oksana Grytsenko

Okinawa: plans to move US base suffer setback

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:56 AM PST

Voters in proposed new location re-elect mayor opposed to base dogged by complaints over pollution, crime and fear of accidents

Attempts to relocate a controversial US marine base on the southern Japanese island of Okinawa received a blow when voters in the base's proposed new location re-elected a mayor who has vowed to block the move.

The victory by Susumu Inamine, who stood on an anti-base platform in the city of Nago, is a serious setback to efforts by the prime minister, Shinzo Abe, to move the Futenma marine corps base from a heavily populated part of the island to a more remote site.

The base's uncertain future has been a thorn in the side of relations between Japan and the US, which appeared to have made a breakthrough last month when Okinawa's governor, Hirokazu Nakaima, ended his opposition to the relocation plan.

But the move is opposed by many Okinawans who want it taken off their island altogether. They complain of noise pollution, crime perpetrated by US servicemen and the risk of aircraft accidents.

Attempts by Abe to garner support with promises of a huge increase in development aid to Okinawa failed to win over voters.

Now, plans to build two new runways on an offshore location in the picturesque Henoko area of Nago will be next to impossible without local consent.

Inamine, who was supported by progressive groups opposed to the US military presence on Okinawa, said his victory proved that the city had rejected the plan, which is supposed to begin with land reclamation off Nago's pristine coastline.

Inamine received 19,839 votes, while his pro-base challenger Bunshin Suematsu, who was backed by Abe's Liberal Democratic party (LDP), got 15,684.

"The plan must go back to square one," Inamine told reporters. "I will reject all procedures that are premised on the landfill project."

The election result leaves the LDP in a difficult position. Further delays will anger the US at a time of rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific, while any attempt to push through construction would provoke more fury in Okinawa.

But the chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, hinted that the latter option had not been ruled out, citing Inamine's "limited authority" and support for relocation from Nakaima.

"The governor approved the landfill project last year and, while explaining and seeking understanding as much as possible, we want to move ahead," Suga told reporters.

The defence minister, Itsunori Onodera, also said construction would go ahead as planned. "We hope to make steady progress on the relocation plan in order to eliminate risks posed by Futenma," he said. "It was a local election and I don't think it will have a direct impact on the relocation issue."

The Futenma question threatens to cast a cloud over US-Japan ties as the allies attempt to address Chinese naval aggression in the region and North Korea's nuclear weapons programme. Senior US officials have voiced irritation that a deal to move the facility, reached in 1996, has made next to no progress. The countries agreed to reduce the US military footprint on the island in the wake of the abduction and rape of a local schoolgirl by three US servicemen a year earlier.

In an attempt to further reduce the burden on Okinawa's civilian population, Washington and Tokyo have agreed to move about 8,000 marines and their dependents to Guam, Hawaii and Australia.

Okinawa, which was invaded by US forces at the end of the war and only reverted to Japanese control in 1972, is home to about half the 47,000 US troops stationed in Japan. Although it accounts for just one percent of Japan's total area, the island hosts about 75% of US bases in Japan. Military facilities take up one-fifth of the island.

"Inamine's victory will give momentum to the anti-base movement and the opposition campaign could spread," Takashi Kawakami, a professor at Takushoku University, told Reuters. "Abe will probably try to forge ahead but there will probably be an opposition movement … and if this is reported daily in the media, Abe's support rates could fall."

Justin McCurry

Sydney man denies punching coma teenager Alexander McEwen

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:37 AM PST

Corey Beard, 21, pleaded not guilty to charges over alleged incident outside a McDonald's in Penrith, Sydney

Markets fall after Chinese growth rate slows to 14-year low of 7.7% - business live

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:36 AM PST

Shanghai stock market closes at lowest level since last July, after China's economy grows by joint-slowest rate since 1999

Graeme Wearden

New Zealand: 6.2 magnitude earthquake hits North Island

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:36 AM PST

Quake centred 10km east of the Wairarapa town of Eketahuna is widely felt in Wellington

Chinese dumpling poisoner jailed for life

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:30 AM PST

At least 10 people fell ill in Japan after food plant worker Lu Yueting contaminated frozen product with pesticide

A Chinese court has sentenced a former food plant worker to life in prison for poisoning frozen dumplings that sickened 10 people in Japan in 2008 and strained relations with Tokyo just months before the Beijing Olympics.

The incident prompted a recall of millions of bags of dumplings, and Chinese food products were taken off shelves in Japan out of concern for safety.

A court in the north-eastern city of Shijiazhuang sentenced Lu Yueting, 39, to life in prison, the official Xinhua news agency said.

Dissatisfied with his wages Lu injected insecticide into several boxes of frozen dumplings to get attention from his managers in late 2007.

The products later were sold in Japan and in the Chinese city of Chengdu, and at least four people fell ill after eating them. Lu was detained in 2010 after more than two years of investigations.

He contaminated the dumplings with methamidophos, a type of pesticide. The incident compounded fears about the safety of Chinese food exports.

Pakistani Taliban suicide blast claims more lives near Rawalpindi army HQ

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:26 AM PST

At least 10 killed in market, security personnel believed to be among them, a day after attack that killed 20 soldiers

Jon Boone

Crowd gathers to remember two Aboriginal men executed in 1842

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:14 AM PST

Pair were hanged for the murder of two whalers, but supporters now see them as key figures in resistance against settlers

Ryan Tandy was 'hired muscle' used to intimidate and kidnap man, court hears

Posted: 20 Jan 2014 12:09 AM PST

Former NRL player accused of acting as standover man at central coast sports club

Bushfire in Perth's north-eastern suburbs: firefighters contain blaze

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:52 PM PST

Emergency warning issued for people in the northern part of Ellenbrook in the City of Swan

NSW government to cancel coal exploration leases after Icac findings

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:52 PM PST

Icac recommended licences be cancelled followed corruption findings against Eddie Obeid, Ian Macdonald and John Maitland

Western Australia's shark cull faces legal challenge from conservationists

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:34 PM PST

Opponents claim the plan to bait and kill sharks breaches state and federal laws, and international agreements

Oliver Milman

Big Day Out: Pearl Jam, Arcade Fire, Snoop Dogg – in pictures

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:12 PM PST

Australia's most famous music festival – which tours the country this month – hit the Gold Coast on Sunday with Snoop Dogg, Arcade Fire and Pearl Jam headlining. Here are some images from the day

Orangutan made of junk highlights plight of the species

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

Sculptor Stephen Melton has carved each life-sized bone out of souvenir tat or timber scavenged from skips

Stretched out mournfully on the floor of a studio in Kent, the skeleton of an orangutan lies surrounded by an eccentric circus parade of small animals: elephants and gazelles, crocodiles and lions.

The sculptor Stephen Melton has carved each life-sized bone out of one of the animals, cheap tourist souvenirs he collected from junk and charity shops in Ramsgate. Big bones like the skull and pelvis were made from timber scavenged from skips; the skull was once a fire door.

"In our children's lifetime there may be no more orangutans in the wild, and even in zoos and wildlife parks they may be extinct in 50 years. "

The workmanship in the souvenir animals is often crude, but the timbers – including ebony, teak, iroko and mahogany – are beautiful.

"There is a bitter irony that presumably these things were brought back as souvenirs by people who were interested in wildlife – with no awareness that they were helping destroy their habitat."

Much of Melton's work is inspired by environmental awareness, including pieces using bronze casts of animals killed on roads or shot for sport.

When he realised the carnage among animals in the pet trade, he asked a local shop if he could have any exotics like snakes and lizards that died in their care, but had to call a halt when they were being delivered to his studio two sacks at a time.

The orangutan will be exhibited for the first time at the Art14 fair at Olympia in London next month.

"They are almost family, so close to humans – if we can't save the orangutan, I do wonder what it says about what we are doing to the world," says Melton.

Maev Kennedy

Fighting 'extremism' in Syria is a losing battle | James Harkin

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

Plotting 'goodies' against Islamist 'baddies' in any context risks fanning the flames of further radicalisation

Moderation, just like extremism, is sometimes in the eye of the beholder. Last month the British and US governments suspended deliveries of "non-lethal aid" – vehicles, communication devices, intelligence assistance – to its preferred group of moderate Syrian rebels, the Free Syrian Army. That was because the FSA was as dead as a dodo and our aid had been confiscated by a newer coalition of rebel groups called the Islamist Front.

This month the same Islamist Front, together with Syria's home-grown al-Qaida affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra – and with the presumed acquiescence or encouragement of Turkey and other Nato countries – helpfully led attacks on the most ruthless al-Qaida group in northern Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (Isis). At least 50 Isis members, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, were summarily executed; some of their families have been kidnapped and brutalised. Meet the new moderates.

Our confused approach to Syria is simply the internationalisation of a familiar problem – our definition of extremism and how to beat it. One result of the London terror attacks in 2005 was a mushrooming of well-meaning, generously endowed initiatives designed to combat extremism. Most went beyond traditional anti-terror techniques to focus on the alleged causes of terrorism, and how to rescue young men on the pathway to radicalisation. More Malcolm Gladwell than Andy McNab; the point was to tip, nudge and channel young men at risk of indoctrination towards more benign alternatives. Then there were all those attempts to "turn" Islamist militants or English Defence League activists. Occasionally came news of a coup – after delicate negotiations a firebrand had jumped ship, leading to a new career in anti-extremism and a round of media congratulation. Like a former drug addict playing the awareness circuit, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (aka Tommy Robinson), with the help of his new friends at the "deradicalisation" thinktank the Quilliam Foundation, is now said to be carving out a new role teaching tolerance to children.

This is nice work if you can get it. But just how helpful is it to label the average EDL supporter or conservative Muslim as a dangerous extremist? To put it another way: do we have a problem with specific acts of violence or intimidation, or with radicalisation per se? If our problem is radicalisation itself, we're in serious trouble. No liberal, democratic state should be in the business of steering people away from radical or fundamentalist beliefs – as long as their plans don't congeal into plans to perpetrate terrorism.

Then there's the question of strategy. Attempts to counter Islamist extremism often take the form of puffing up the importance of allegedly moderate counterweights whose leaders may be corrupt or not representative of anyone but themselves. The UK government's much-criticised preventing violent extremism strategy spent large sums of public money footing the bill for tours by peaceable-sounding Islamic scholars. This was grossly patronising to believers: it is not up to us to tell Muslims how to be Muslim. Neither was it clear what the money was supposed to achieve. A friend of mine who teaches in an inner-city London school scored £5,000 from the Prevent programme because it was there for the taking: with no idea how to spend it she made a comic documentary about jihad and took the whole class to see the Chris Morris satire Four Lions.

If this kind of woolly subsidy existed anywhere else in the public sector it would have been hammered with endless demands for evidence-based assessment of its output – because there is little or no evidence it works. No matter: institutional anti-extremism is better dug in than ever, an enormous intellectual gravy train of research centres and thinktanks for the feeble minded.

But ill-conceived anti-extremism initiatives are not only expensive window-dressing. By dividing the world into goodies and baddies, their effect is to make our preferred moderates look like lackeys or spies, which only fuels resentment and an extremist backlash. Prevent, for example, was hampered by the widespread belief that it was being used as a front for intelligence gathering. The fundamental flaw with technocratic, managerial anti-extremism lies in its misunderstanding of cause and effect – it is dissatisfaction with a shallow, compromised, inauthentic middle ground that itself gives rise to extremism at the margins. By throwing our weight behind handpicked moderates, we're only fanning the flames of further extremism.

The folly of our approach to Syria's rebellion stems from the same root. It confuses our professed mission in the region – to bring freedom and democracy to Syrians – with our grim determination to use proxies to advance our interests. Our new friends in the Islamic Front are mostly conservative Salafi Muslims. There's nothing wrong with that, and they're far from international terrorists: last spring I spent time with one of their battalions in Aleppo and they protected me with their lives. On the other hand they're carrying weapons and they're no angels; they're not averse to a little torture, and some of them seethe with hatred of Syria's minorities.

Wisely they claim to be their own men, but their brigades won't be able to do without foreign support – and the Isis extremists are already making headway by claiming, with some justification, that their attackers are hostage to shady foreign interests. Despite the initial euphoria among Syrian activists and their international allies, the outcome of these punishing battles in northern Syria between our goodies and the extremist baddies is deeply uncertain – and may soon backfire on the cause of anti-extremism.

Modern Islamist terrorism is a posture and a provocation. It thrives on chaos and vacuum but often burns itself out quickly if left alone – few young men want to live the life of a medieval puritan for very long. The best way to beat it is to change the subject – to treat people as free citizens susceptible to a political argument, and not as members of sectional ethnic or sectarian groups whose allegiances are easily bought. By intervening in a panicky way to find allies and claims to representation, institutional anti-extremism tends to aggravate the very problem it sets itself to solve. At this rate of attrition our next Syrian allies are likely to be the al-Qaida groups that don't want to pick a fight with us – whose only quarrel is with our extremist enemies over there.

James Harkin

Uganda pins road safety hopes on new traffic authority | Amy Fallon

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

National road safety agency aims to drive down traffic accidents

On average there are 61 accidents and nine deaths (pdf) every day on Uganda's roads, which are in such a poor state that the locals once fished out of the potholes in protest.

Now, five years after the idea was mooted, the government is in the final stages of setting up a national agency to reduce traffic deaths and improve road safety.

And Uganda is not alone. Across sub-Saharan Africa, which has the highest road fatality rates of any global region (pdf), several countries are setting up road safety agencies, a step the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, has recommended as part of the UN decade of action on road safety.

Traffic accidents are the single biggest killer of young people between the ages of 15 and 29 worldwide. More than 90% of traffic fatalities happen in low- and middle-income countries, which are home to just half of the world's cars.

The World Health Organisation and the World Bank have long maintained (pdf) that dedicated national agencies are the best way to tackle the issue of road safety, which does not fall strictly within the authority of traditional ministries of health, transport or law enforcement.

In Uganda, the new National Road Safety Authority (NRSA) will be responsible for "advocacy, sensitisation, awareness campaigns and lobbying for more funding", says Nathan Tumushabe, secretary of the country's National Road Safety Council, a branch of the transport ministry that will be disbanded once the NRSA is established.

Tumushabe stresses that the body, to be funded by the World Bank for its first two years, will not play a regulatory role or have an enforcement mandate. Its success, he says, will largely depend on political goodwill.

Joseph Magoola, a trauma and injuries scholar at Makerere University in Kampala, says there has been "pressure to have the body created and made operational. However, success depends on the level of co-ordination and participation of other agencies with an interest in road safety.

"Previous efforts to curb the road carnage haven't been successful because the police was working independently," he says. "It's my hope that the agency will not follow a similar path but instead elect to work with the police, ministry of health and ministry of works for a concerted effort to reduce road carnage in Uganda."

The NRSA has at least one good example to follow: Nigeria, which set up its Federal Road Safety Corps 25 years ago in an attempt to reduce carnage on the roads. At the time, there were about 25,000 crashes per year in the country, says Osita Chidoka, head of the corps. By 2012, the figure had dropped by 75%.

The Nigerian agency, which reports to the president's office, won a major international road safety award in 2008. The World Bank's Sub-Saharan Africa Transport Policy Programme has described it as "an inspiration to other countries in several ways", singling it out for its professional management and use of modern technology, among other things.

Chidoka says the FRSC uses a state of the art biometric driver's licence and vehicle number plate identification system as well as a satellite based vehicle-tracking system that enables real-time location of patrol teams and ambulances nationwide. It has also implemented a penalty point electronic ticketing system for traffic offenders.

"We are very proud of our record so far," says Chidoka, who has been in charge for the past six years. "That has meant that we do more to keep up our record and surpass it."

He adds that the achievements of the corps, which has run campaigns promoting seatbelt use and pedestrian safety, were a result of "committed staff who have a career in road safety". There are 20,000 people working for the FRSC, which has funding from the national budget.

About 20 African countries have dedicated road safety authorities, says Tawia Addo-Ashong, programme manager of the World Bank's Global Road Safety Facility, but fewer than five of those nations have fully functioning agencies. Nigeria's FRSC, she adds, was ahead of its time.

"Most other countries still have to create the legislative framework that gives them the mandate to act as a lead road safety agency, and this is a process that takes time," she says, adding that many agencies lack the funding they need to be effective.

Many African governments are co-operating in their efforts to curb road deaths. A Ugandan team visited Ghana in 2009 to learn from the experiences of its National Road Safety Commission. And Sierra Leone recently announced it would adopt the FRSC's approach to road safety management after Nigerian experts visited the country last year.

Chidoka hopes his staff will also travel to Liberia, which has the highest rate of pedestrian deaths in Africa, to help set up a national road safety agency. A trip to Tanzania is also in the pipeline, he says.

"Having counterparts who understand the context and realities of developing countries is very useful," adds Addo-Ashong.

Amy Fallon

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Horsemeat scandal: Irish PM defends shipping of livestock: From the archive, 20 January 1960

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

Mr Lemass says Ireland follows the same rules as the UK when sending live horses to abattoirs abroad

Asked by newspaper men in Dublin last night to make a general statement about the horse export trade, the Prime Minister, Mr Lemass, said: "The Government would much prefer to see the trade in horses converted into trade in horsemeat. We hope this will happen. We have offered to give all reasonable facilities to competent firms. Only one licence for the establishment of a horse abattoir was applied for. The licence was granted but, I understand, no commercial exports have been made. The regulations relating to the shipment of horses in this country are at least as strict as, or stricter than, those of any other country. They are practically identical with British regulations."

No official figures are available to show the extent of the traffic in live horses from Ulster to Dublin for shipment to the Continent, but in Belfast yesterday an assurance was given that it was "only a trickle" compared with the trade in horse-meat between Belfast and London.

The export of live horses from Ulster for slaughter has largely ceased since the establishment seven years ago of the horse abattoir at Saintfield, County Down, by a well-known British knackery firm. About sixty horses a week are slaughtered there for export, and last year three thousand horses were killed there for the London market, nearly all the meat being sold as food for dogs and cats.

Occasionally a dozen or so horses are exported on the hoof from Belfast to England but it is difficult to sort out the animals intended for slaughter from those required for general purposes. The same difficulty arises in putting a figure to the "trickle" across the border.

A demand has been made in both Hampshire and Liverpool for a ban on the import into Britain of all Irish steers and store cattle until Eire stops the export of live cattle for slaughter on the continent.

Mr Neil McNeil, the secretary of the Protection of Livestock for Slaughter Association, who has just returned from Dublin where he has been Investigating the trade, said in Liverpool yesterday that he had heard that the Hampshire branch of the National Farmers' Union had passed a resolution calling for such a ban because of the suffering caused to the horses. His own association also had unanimously decided to "urge all cattle breeders, farmers, meal traders, and other interested bodies to boycott the import of Irish steers and store cattle until this trade is stopped."

Should Britain help migrants go home?

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

Balvinder Saund, an east London councillor, is helping destitute Punjabi migrants return to India. Critics argue she should be helping them put their British dream back on track

Migration: it's all upside if you take your guidance from the right. Easy life, easy benefits, comfy house, jobs galore to pinch from the locals. But it isn't usually like that. The eye-popping cases make the papers for a reason.

The truth is that migration is more often a gamble played for high stakes; a decision only vindicated if the gambler reaches a situation better than that they left behind. When they fall short, and many do, endless problems follow. This is the sorry scenario now being confronted by a group including Balvinder Saund, an east London councillor and a south-east regional official for the Sikh Council UK.

Men and some women from the Punjab have tried to make a life. It hasn't worked out. They're homeless and jobless without much hope of either. Some become suicidal, without family, without support. Often they can't seek official help from destitution, because they have gone underground without ID to escape detection. There are informal sources of help, via community groups and temples, but resources are limited. In the absence of good alternatives, Saund is pointing them towards a £60,000 government pot administered by the Sikh Council UK to help them go home. Assuming the Indian authorities will have them.

"Some just can't find jobs," she says. "Some get exploited by their own people. Some get addicted to drink and drugs, some get ill. They get to the end of their tether. It's heartbreaking, but when they lose hope and want to go, I think the kindest thing is to help them."

It is a controversial response. A delight for the right, and critics argue that instead of helping them go home, she should be helping them put their British dream back on track. But she says the politics are secondary.

Several may eventually go, she says, but it's a limited salvation. The British authorities fund the flight, but often there is a price to pay at the other end. Pity the migrant who returns from whence they came with nothing to show for it: destitute in London and then perhaps the object of derision in Chandigarh, state capital of the Punjab, or Kingston or Dhaka, or Krakow. Reviled by relatives, some of whom may have saved and borrowed to send them here in the first place. Disdain adding to the weight of failure. That can be a slow death in itself.

Hugh Muir

European Greens consider challenge to UK tax breaks for shale gas drilling

Posted: 19 Jan 2014 11:00 PM PST

European Greens threaten legal fight under state aid rules as UK holds out against new renewable energy target for the EU

European Greens are considering a challenge to the UK's tax breaks and incentives for shale gas under state aid rules, as the government holds out against a new renewable energy target for the EU.

Ministers have offered tax breaks to shale gas companies, and incentives to local communities to encourage them to accept drilling in their area. The government believes its plans comply with EU rules restricting state aid to companies.

On Wednesday, the European commission is expected to announce proposals for a new target to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030, compared with 1990 levels, which is broadly accepted by large member states. Britain opposes an accompanying target on increasing the use of renewable energy, from 20% by 2020 to a possible 24-30% within 10 years after that.

The threat to challenge the government's shale gas incentives is retaliation for that, and for Britain's attempts to foil a proposed directive on shale gas that would impose firm regulations on its exploitation.

The Guardian understands several European commissioners are still objecting to the proposed emissions target, favouring a lower goal of 35% cuts by 2020. A compromise may be reached by Wednesday, potentially by introducing greater flexibility on renewable energy.

The UK, France and Germany are in favour of a 40% emissions target, making it more likely that it will be accepted. Member states are also likely to pledge that if other leading economies, such as the US and China, pledge stringent cuts then the goal could be raised to a cut of 50%.

Green MEPs are arguing in favour of much stronger targets. Emissions in the EU are set to be about 25% below 1990 levels in 2020, leaving a further cut of about 15% by 2030.

At stake is the future of world governments' response to climate change, which will be decided at a crunch conference in Paris in 2015, under the United Nations. In the next year, all of the world's leading economies are expected to come up with their pledges on emissions cuts to take effect from 2020 onwards. This is seen as essential to avoiding the worst ravages of climate change, but so far the talks have made slow progress.

A study by several academic research institutions, under the banner of the Stanford Energy Modelling Forum, found that increasing the current target of a 20% emissions cut by 2020, compared with 1990 levels, to a 40% target by 2030 would cost less than 0.7% of economic activity. Leading companies under the umbrella of the Prince of Wales EU Corporate Leaders Group have also endorsed the target.

The UK is holding out against a renewables target, arguing that a mandated emissions reduction is enough. It is understood that the Treasury wants to be able to include nuclear power and fears that a renewable energy target would mean less investment in its favoured alternative, shale gas. Other member states, including Germany, are firmly in favour of an EU-wide target, as the current renewables goal is credited with bringing about strong growth in clean energy across the EU.

The European commission argues that an EU-wide target enables greater flexibility, as some member states, including the UK, can take on a lower share of the target as others, such as Germany, power ahead on renewables. The target would also allow for investment in renewable energy overseas to be counted.

But the government's position has been criticised by campaigners and are understood to have discouraged renewable energy companies. RWE recently announced plans to drastically scale back its investment in clean energy in the UK.

Asad Rehman, international climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: "Genuine commitment on climate would see binding carbon cuts of at least 70% by 2030, as well as mandatory targets on energy efficiency and renewable power. But despite all the rhetoric about the need to slash emissions, the Commission is still dancing to the tune of big polluters and energy-guzzling firms."

Claude Turmes, vice chair of the Green Group of MEPs, said: "It is important that we ensure ambitious and coherent binding targets for greenhouse gas reductions, renewables and energy savings. This would provide much-needed investor certainty, not only in the energy sector but for industrial sectors and innovation across Europe, and give a boost to employment and the economy. The EU should not repeat the mistake made with the lack of ambition in its 2020 greenhouse gas reduction target, as this has undermined the effectiveness of overall climate policy and key instruments like the emissions trading scheme. To this end, we should be aiming for a 60% reduction by 2030, which a number of independent studies have shown is possible."

He added that a renewable energy target was needed to encourage investment in clean technology. "Given the undeniable success of the 2020 renewable energy target, it is imperative that the EU continues the momentum and adopts a binding 2030 target. Failure to do so would cause massive uncertainty at a time when we need to be rapidly moving ahead towards a renewable-energy-based economy."

Fiona Harvey

Aneka Info