ITEM: A spokesman for George Osborne's deputy assistant sommelier denies the Chancellor is blasé about the impact of government cuts on society's most vulnerable.

ITEM: Tony Blair denies plagiarising passages of his memoirs from the film The Queen. ‘I am not a plagiarist,' said the former Prime Minister, ‘and if anyone says I am I will fight on the beaches, I shall fight on the landing grounds, I will fight in the fields and in the streets, I will fight in the hills; I will never surrender.'

ITEM: On the eve of the Liberal Democrat party conference, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has given an exclusive interview to The Times about how his government is hammering the poor and the vulnerable. Fortunately for Clegg the article is behind The Times's paywall and so only a small number of people are able to witness his depravity for themselves. By neat coincidence, the number of people who have paid to have online access to The Times (27,500) is the same as the number of voters the Lib Dems can rely on at the next election.

ITEM: Susan Boyle is to sing for the Pope during the Pontiff's state visit to Britain. In tribute to the work of many of the Catholic Church's priests, she will perform a version of Nino Tempo's (Hooked On) Young Stuff.

ITEM: In his 12th unmanned drone strike this month, the current holder of the Nobel Peace Prize killed 12 people and injured many more. His officials ‘declined to comment on the identity of those killed and wounded'. Oh, and he's flogging $60 billion worth of weaponry to Saudi Arabia.

Related posts:

1. Lazyblogging
2. Lazyblogging
3. Lazyblogging

Or so they say. That being the case, what foul kind of collective evil did we commit to deserve Phil Woolas?

Related posts:

1. What the undeserving poor deserve
2. The Sharpener – Politicians: emoting for England
3. Karma

This is a test post from , a fancy photo sharing thing.

Related posts:

1. Flickr
2. This is another test

This is a test post from , a fancy photo sharing thing.

Related posts:

1. Flickr
2. This is another test

ITEM: That strange sound you can hear is the female population of Britain ovulating at the thought of Chris Moyles being back on the market. Get in there quick, ladies.

ITEM: Isn't the world a nicer place with The Times behind its paywall? If nothing else now only a few thousand hardcore masochists are having their mornings spoiled (either directly or indirectly) by David Aaronovitch's brainfaeces. Once Rupert Murdoch finishes shovelling the rest of his offal behind the paywall we can get on with finally founding Utopia. In fact, in the last few weeks I've been conducting an experiment by erecting my own mental paywall. The results have been astounding. Imagine a world without Richard Littlejohn, Nick Robinson, Victoria Derbyshire, Jon Sopel, Nicky Campbell, Justin Webb, Stephen Nolan, John Rentoul, Guido Fawkes banging on incessantly about gays, Adam Boulton, Peter Allen, John Humphrys, Kay Burley, Nick Cohen and Richard Bacon. I've been there. It's beautiful.

ITEM: The man who killed the otter with his spade at the end of Ring of Bright Water is to advise David Cameron on animal welfare issues.

ITEM: Dear media dickheads, if you'd spend five minutes with a Shakespeare study guide (obviously I'm not expecting you to read and understand the actual plays), you'd know a winter of discontent is a good thing. Try and find another tired cliche to milk to death, eh?

ITEM: What should a Strictly Come Dancing widower do on the long Saturday evenings between now and Christmas? The drop in the stairwell isn't deep enough to hang myself.

Related posts:

1. Lazyblogging
2. Lazyblogging
3. Lazyblogging

Jesus Christ, was any of it real?

Sometimes, Blair explains, deception is justified for reasons that any Metternich would understand... like pretending a non-existent friendship, buying ice creams for himself and Gordon Brown from a van in order to seem "together and normal", and then being told not to put a chocolate flake in his cone because he might appear "greedy". Blair, we discover, does not like his soft ice cream without an accompanying chocolate bar, and boldly he describes himself putting truth before appearances, in that respect at least.

I remember smiling at the sight of Blair buying Brown an ice cream during that election campaign, the two laughing together in a seemingly spontaneous, unguarded moment. Unredeemingly cynical as I am, I took at it face value – evidence that Blair had an element of knowing humour to his makeup. At last, you thought, a small and rare flower blooms from the dark, stinking cow turd of his diseased sociopathy. Who guessed that Blair had got the flower arrangers in?

(Via Jamie)

Related posts:

1. BREAKING NEWS: Blair anointed Left Footer
2. The Sun: the cream of British journalism
3. It's not only the cream that floats

They're at it again in Londonderry, where The Sentinel reports that Sinn Féin MLA Raymond McCartney "has attacked the Ordnance Survey of Ireland for its preference for ‘Londonderry' over ‘Derry.'"  That would be the same place that will be the UK City of Culture in 2013...  From The Sentinel report

"I have raised this matter directly with Ordnance Survey Ireland and the Minister to which they are responsible, Eamon Ryan TD and made it quite clear that I find it offensive to see a map produced by the National Mapping Agency which ignores the aspirations of the vast majority of Derry citizens who are proud of their Irish identity."

[He does know it remains an aspiration because it hasn't been achieved? - Ed]  Presumably...  at least, I think he knows he's still in the UK... 

Cameron and Clegg are reunited

Cameron: Good to have you back, Cleggster! It's been a real drag having to make my own coffee . . .

Clegg: I've missed you too, Daddy.

Cameron: So how was Liverpool? Never been there myself, but I've heard it's a dump. Ozzy went there once and couldn't understand a word anyone said.

Clegg: Actually, I never really left my hotel . . .

Cameron: Best way, old chap. Doesn't do to hang out with the hoi polloi when you're in government . . .

Clegg: To be honest, I didn't even really bother meeting any party delegates . . .

Cameron: God no! They are the worst! Jumped-up political arrivistes who think they've got the right to tell you what to do.

Clegg: My lot weren't too bad this year. They are so thrilled by the idea people are listening to them . . .

Cameron: . . . Sorry, I didn't catch that . . .

Clegg: . . . that they don't really care what we do.

Cameron: So they are as intoxicated by power as you?

Clegg: Precisely. They weren't even bothered when Chris Huhne told them he was having second thoughts about nuclear power.

Huhne: Oi. That's not quite fair. What I actually said was that nuclear power stations run on environmentally friendly, organic-enriched uranium are OK with me . . .

Cable: I rather felt my searing attack on the bankers hit the mark . . .

Osborne: Like anyone cares what you say . . .

Simon Hughes: I just want to say once again how very much I'm rock-solidly behind the coalition.

Osborne: You are way behind everyone that matters, pal.

Cameron: Now, now. Don't be mean. Simon is doing a very important job. He's making the Cleggster look good.

Clegg: So you think I'm looking good? Oh thank you, Daddy!

Cameron: I didn't exactly say that . . . But tell me, how did your electoral reform stuff go down?

Clegg: Oh, who cares about electoral reform when all we have is now! Five years close to your dreamy eyes and snake hips is worth a lifetime of electoral annihilation . . .

Cameron: Talking of which . . . Do run along while I watch the Labour party choose a new leader.

Public spending crisis seems to offer Tory-run councils an ideological opportunity to change the face of local government

Suffolk's "virtual" council is not a new idea. It's been a municipal fantasy for the Tories for three decades, ever since Margaret Thatcher's local government minister, the late Nicholas Ridley, outlined his minimalist vision of a local authority that employed practically no one.

Ridley's 1980s riff on the Tory theme of the small state was the small council, staffed by a tiny band of administrators, who met once a year to agree contracts with the private companies who would provide refuse collection, schools, social work and other core services.

His vision never came to pass, despite the efforts of an enthusiastic minority of councils. There's been tinkering with contracting out - always opposed by the unions, and held back by EU employment law - but no fundamental reshaping on the radical scale now envisaged in Suffolk.

What has changed is the sheer size of the public spending cuts forced on local councils, and the speed at which they must be achieved. Local authorities facing drastic budget reductions of up to 30% over the next three years have realised that the sums won't add up simply by trimming here or there.

As a result many town halls - of all political hues - are considering the kinds of profound changes that before the age of austerity would have never got beyond the pages of the thinktank pamphlet: outsourcing services on a grand scale, selling off municipal assets, merging education departments with neighbouring councils, clubbing together to share everything from chief executives to "back-office" payroll services, floating off staff into so-called John Lewis-style worker co-operatives.

These changes are a mixture of inspiration and desperation. Some may lead to better, cheaper services. Others could lead to catastrophe. The consequences of this rapid, largely unstrategic shakeup - its effect on democratic accountability, its economic impact on areas where the council is the largest local employer - are unclear.

Some experts say restructuring on this scale is hard enough at the best of times. Service transformation, the argument goes, happens most effectively when there is money to oil the wheels of change. Blair could have done it in the age of plenty seven years ago; now the piggy bank is empty. Councils are not yet allowed to raise money on the capital markets, and are prevented from putting up council tax.

Change on this scale is hugely expensive. Redundancy payouts in local government - while not as generous as in the civil service - are typically equivalent to two years' salary. In theory outsourcing transfers costs and risk to the private sector. Done badly, councils end up paying more, locked into costly, underperforming long-term contracts, or trapped in legal challenges brought by trade unions.

Nor is there any guarantee that the private companies and charities will be queuing up to take the contracts. Transferred council workers by law keep their council terms and conditions and must be offered "broadly comparable" pensions - requirements that often end up as outsourcing dealbreakers.

For Tory-run councils, such as Suffolk, the public spending crisis seems to offer an ideological opportunity to change the face of local government. Making it a reality will not be easy.

Patrick Butler is the Guardian's head of society, health and education

Tory-led council to follow in footsteps of Barnet and Suffolk in the face of budget cuts

From November, Brighton and Hove city council will also start offloading services, but it appears to be taking a much more nuanced approach than Barnet council or Suffolk county council to the problem of how to manage its budget cuts.

The Tory-led council approved proposals in April that will see it focus on being an "intelligent commissioner" rather than automatically provide services itself.

It says that even without central government funding cuts, it must save £45m by 2013-14.

"This new structure aims to deliver quality and innovation that squeezes out cost, duplication and looks for opportunities to collaborate with others both inside and outside the council and the city to share costs," a council spokesman said.

Outsourcing is due to start in November and the intention is that the restructuring will be complete by next June. But the authority is clear that many services will still be provided in-house.

There is also an emphasis on social enterprises and voluntary organisations. The decision to outsource will only be taken if a service can be provided more efficiently and effectively, ideally by the voluntary sector. While some services may be transferred to the private sector, the council wants the reorganisation to enable the third sector to have more influence over local services, including by running more of them.

"Our aim is to deliver efficient and effective services that are designed around residents' needs. As part of this we will utilise joint working with a range of partners where it's identified as providing a better customer experience and improved efficiency. Where it is appropriate we will harness the expertise held by the city's vibrant civic society under the new structure," the spokesman said.

"Previous periods of public service financial restraint have impacted disproportionately across communities. At times those with the greatest needs have lost out relative to others. The active promotion of individuals and communities in the commissioning process, and in community engagement and civic life more generally is designed to strengthen the voices, improve outcomes for and empower some of the city's most disadvantaged residents and communities," the council said in cabinet papers.

By "commissioning at the local level" and through "the active promotion of the city's third sector", the council believes it will "maximise the chances of addressing inequality" in everything it commissions.

But the Green party's 13 councillors have withdrawn support for the restructuring. "We accept chief executive John Barradell's good intentions in wishing to reorganise the way the council works," said Bill Randall, Green party convenor at the council. "However, we believe the proposals would provide a platform for service cuts and the privatisation of services at a time when a Conservative government is cutting budgets and services with relish and beyond necessity."

The authority will scrap its existing six directorates (such as adult services, children & young people) and replace them with a "strategic leadership board". Four new strategic directors have just been appointed, who will implement the new strategy. They replace five departmental directors.

A "strategic commissioning unit" will be created, responsible for commissioning all local services from adult and children's services, to community safety, transport, economic development, housing, planning and regeneration, schools, skills and learning, and waste. The unit will decide whether services should be provided inhouse or transferred to the voluntary or private sectors.

Once commissioned, services will be run by "delivery units", who have direct responsibility for providing that service to the authority's customers, residents, businesses and visitors. The delivery units could comprise inhouse, private sector or voluntary teams.

But Randall said this new structure would erode democratic accountability and the quality of local services.

"We fear the outsourcing of services would remove them far from the democratic control of elected councillors, result in poorer public services and lead to reduced working conditions and pay for employees."

The party must rekindle the sense that it knows what it fights for - but be ready for coalition

Since the identity of Labour's new leader will not be known until Saturday afternoon, the winner is going to have to finalise this most important of all speeches at top speed for the conference in Manchester. So here, in the hope that it may help, is my draft of what it should say.

'Conference, I have been leader of the opposition for just three days. I accepted the job enthusiastically, but I do not want it for a moment longer than necessary. Every day from now on I will be focused on leading Labour out of opposition and back into government. That must be your priority too. I intend to be the next Labour prime minister. But that won't happen unless Labour continues to think of itself as a party of government - and acts like one.

"That does not mean being uncritical about Labour's record in government for the past 13 years. Labour made many mistakes. They must be faced and the lessons learned. We allowed the financial sector and the super-rich too much free rein. We did not reform the public services determinedly enough. We were too centralist and insufficiently localist. We hugged the United States too close and missed opportunities in Europe. We were too authoritarian and not pluralist enough - not least in the way we ran our party. We demanded and offered too little.

"But this does not mean trashing Labour's record either. Most Britons became more prosperous under Labour. The financial crisis, when it exploded, was not caused by Labour's spending on schools and hospitals but by reckless short-termism in the financial sector - and the public knows it. The public services that the Conservatives abandoned were rebuilt with many successes. Human rights and equality were transformed for the better. Labour's record in the Balkans and on overseas aid shamed that of its Tory predecessors and of many European governments of left and right. Labour brought devolution irrevocably into British government and proportional representation irrevocably into electoral politics.

"Nevertheless, Labour will never return to government on the basis of the past. It will only do so when voters trust us to deliver the things they want in the future. There are huge distinctive goals to pursue. We must stand for a rebalanced and less monopolistic capitalist economy, with government unafraid to invest in essential infrastructure and unashamed, where necessary, of giving special help to UK industries. We must transform corporate governance, giving employees partnership rights and a consultative role in company management, on German lines. We must rid ourselves of the instinct to centralise and control from the top, and must foster a rebirth of democratic local government delivering the major public services, including public housing, in line with local wishes. We must insist that there is immense scope for subjects such as energy, environmental protection, defence and higher education to be dealt with better on the European level.

"John Maynard Keynes once wrote that a progressive party must stand at one and the same time for economic efficiency, social justice and individual liberty. That's where I want Labour to stand. Oh, and, like Keynes, I will fight for Britain's brilliant arts sector too. But the Cameron-Clegg coalition cannot make these claims. Economic efficiency? Not when their actions fall so far short of their woolly words on the banks or on tax avoidance. Individual liberty? Yes, I accept we have something to learn from them there. But only Labour can be trusted to put social justice at the front and centre of its offer to the country. There will be no more Labour deficit denial on my watch. But the scale and pace of the coalition's spending cuts, and the imbalance between cuts, taxes and growth, are grotesquely out of proportion to the problem. They strike at the life-chances of the most vulnerable. A progressive government does not penalise the victims. You cannot slash the welfare programmes on which the needy depend and then talk of preserving fairness.

"Labour will fight the coalition every step of the way on its deficit reduction strategy. But we cannot lazily assume that power will fall into our laps at the end of it, just because we are doing better in the polls right now. Labour has absolutely no divine right to govern. Our party lost the 2010 general election very badly. We like to call ourselves the people's party. But at present we are the people's party no longer. Less than one in five of the British electorate voted Labour this year. We lost nearly a million votes compared with 2005 and five million compared with 1997. Perhaps we have deserted the people a bit too. No MP who lived through the expenses scandal can dispute that. Either way, though, we need to be humble and realistic. We on the left have always liked to see ourselves as representing the many against the few, the masses against the bosses, the people against the privileged. This is an ennobling tradition which gives our party and movement unique pride and passion. But we are simply not the party of a majority today.

'In that case we need to ask ourselves whether it is either morally or democratically acceptable for a party which captures little more than a third of the votes cast in an election to command well over half of the seats in parliament - as happened to us in 2005 and as some in this hall still hoped - against the evidence - might happen in 2010. I believe that such a system is wrong and has to be replaced. I stand for electoral reform. Under my leadership this party will co-operate actively with all those who share similar goals. As far as I am concerned, the campaign to win a yes vote in the referendum on the fairer AV system next spring starts now. David Cameron will not be standing shoulder to shoulder with Nick Clegg on this issue. But I will.

"And so, while we must strive to win every vote, we also need to recognise that there are signs this hung parliament may be the shape of things to come. I want the Cameron-Clegg coalition out. Yet when that moment comes we must be better prepared to be a party of coalition than we were this time. I want us to be a party that others can do business with. I want us to win next year's Scotland and Wales elections outright, but I hope my colleagues there will be open to coalition talks, ruling nothing out, if we fall short. The same applies even more to the next general election. This party must rekindle the sense that it knows what it fights for and loves what it knows. When we fight, we fight to win. But let the voters and the other parties be clear. After an unfortunate self-inflicted absence, Labour is rejoining the real world."

Labour leadership candidate Ed Balls says Irish austerity measures have failed, as the republic teeters on brink of double-dip recession

Ireland's beleaguered economy was held up by Labour as a stark warning to the UK of austerity overkill after the Irish government announced that national output had taken a fresh dive in the second quarter of 2010. The crisis-hit economy shrank by 1.2%, raising the possibility that Ireland could now be facing three consecutive years of recession.

The gloomy data showed that the erstwhile "Celtic Tiger" - which showed its first growth since 2007 in the first quarter of this year - is now on the brink of a double-dip recession.

The Labour leadership candidate Ed Balls seized on the figures to argue that austerity measures designed to cut Ireland's debts had backfired. He warned that plans by the UK's coalition government to adopt its own programme of cuts would be damaging to the economy, risking lower growth and higher unemployment.

He said: "These figures are a stark warning to governments across Europe including our own. That is not a credible economic strategy because lower growth and fewer people in work and paying taxes ultimately leads to a bigger deficit, not a smaller one."

News of the relapse rattled the financial markets and put additional pressure on Dublin's unpopular coalition government, which had previously insisted that its tough budget cuts were helping to stabilise the economy.

Ireland has been hailed by Britain's coalition government for its decision to tackle the double-digit budget deficit left by the collapse of its property bubble with immediate and deep cuts. But interest rates on Ireland's 10-year bonds have now risen above 6.7% for the first time since the euro's launch in 1999 and Irish debt is now trading 4.25 percentage points above equivalent German bonds - also a record during the euro era.

The Irish finance minister, Brian Lenihan, who has spent recent days battling with the prime minister, Brian Cowen, and fending off attacks on their performance, insisted there were positive underlying signals from the data, especially a slowing in the decline of consumption and investment in line with projections.

"I agree that these are not encouraging figures but we have moved from a position of a very sharp steep decline to a position where we've stabilised," he said. But his attempt to describe the figures as a turning point was derided by rival parties.

Exports continued to grow during the quarter, but construction dropped 28% and with house prices falling, banks reluctant to lend and unemployment at 13%, the economy remains in deep trouble.

Ben May, of Capital Economics, said: "The Irish are walking a tightrope and it is not clear they can manage to keep austerity measures in place without slipping back into a prolonged period of low or no growth."

Investors refused to back a bond sale designed to raise EUR500m (£425m). Only EUR400m of the total was bought and the premium that investors demand to buy 10-year Irish bonds over German bunds rose 17 basis points to a record 417.

"This level of yields is not viable," said Ioannis Sockos, a rate strategist at BNP Paribas. "This reflects the situation in the banking sector and the growth outlook."

The Irish government has emerged from the financial crisis weighed down by massive debts from a banking and property collapse. A vehicle designed to ring-fence many of the worst debts holds billions of euros of bad loans to the country's three largest banks and loans to several of its biggest property developers.

Lenihan plans to split up Anglo Irish Bank, which lost EUR20bn, by next month. Standard & Poor's downgraded Ireland's credit rating in August to its weakest since 1995, saying the Dublin-based Anglo Irish might require as much as EUR35bn of aid.

Fears that austerity measures adopted across the eurozone were about to put a brake on growth were heightened by the latest purchasing managers' index (PMI), which showed a slump in manufacturing and services output.

Markit, which carried out the survey, said its PMI data for September pointed to strong economic growth of 0.6% in the third quarter but down from the 1% pace in April-June that surprised markets when reported last month.

The survey of about 2,000 eurozone businesses, ranging from banks to restaurants, fell to 53.6 in September from 55.9 in August, its lowest reading since February.

Speaking on the recent report by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary, Deputy Chief Constable David Griffin, said:

"I welcome the HMIC report into police performance in tackling antisocial behaviour. As a force we have studied both the report produced for public consumption and the more detailed force feedback report presented to us and are now digesting the findings and looking at ways to further improve the way in which we deal with the issue locally.

"Here at Humberside antisocial behaviour is a force priority and we are committed to tackling it.

"The HMIC report recognises the excellent progress the force, working with all our partners, is making in dealing with antisocial behaviour. It commends our Neighbourhood Policing Teams for their good knowledge and awareness of the issues, offenders and victims in their area and the way they take ownership of local issues.

"We have a strong focus on performance and detailed analysis of antisocial behaviour with the identification of hotspot areas and in terms of victim satisfaction, Humberside Police is performing better than the national average on each of the four questions posed to the public.

"However, we are aware there is still much to be done to make sure we, along with our partners, protect our communities, the vulnerable, provide support and treat antisocial behaviour incidents and their victims with the same level of care as those suffering a crime.

"We must ensure that tackling antisocial behaviour is at the very heart of delivering outstanding policing.

"Humberside Police is committed to providing an excellent consistent standard of Neighbourhood Policing across the force area, which is visible, accessible and responsive. We are also committed to protecting individuals and communities and we are particularly determined to help those who are vulnerable. In order to achieve these priorities we have developed a clear strategy for effectively tackling antisocial behaviour in partnership with other key agencies."

I have been called for Jury Service this week and next.  I'm curious to know whether other people have had a similar experience to mine?

On Monday I had to report to Grimsby Crown Court at 9.00am.  All of the new jurors were there and we had a short induction for about an hour, and then we were told we had to wait untill we were needed.  We waited until lunch time and then we were told to go home and ring the court for instructions after 5.00pm.

On Tuesday I reported to the court at 1030.  Once again we were told to wait until we were needed.  At lunch time we were sent home and told to ring after 5.00pm for instructions.

On Wednesday - same again!

Thursday was slightly different.  I had a meeting arranged for 9.30am, so I went to discuss provision of play equipment in the ward with council officers.  I was a bit apprehensive as I arrived at the court a few minutes late, but sure enough the other jurors were still waiting.  At lunchtime we were told to go home, but we were informed that we would not be needed on Friday because no trials are held on Fridays, but to ring after 5.00pm on Friday for next week's instructions - a pty they couldn't have told me sooner as I have kept Friday free to do jury service!

Each day this week the court service has paid between 15 and 18 jurors to hang around and do nothing as well as disrupting their normal lives - in my case preventing me from representing the people of N E Lincolnshire, and in other cases disrupting their work and family lives.

What a waste of time and money!

This is repeated every day in courts all over the country, and must waste £millions.  Surely someone can devise a better system than this!

I'm sure that most people do not object to carrying out this important job, but why do we have to waste so much time and money in the process?

Maybe someone can explain it to me.

"Everybody is saying when will David be allowed to come back, but the truth is he doesn't want to be a minister again. He's lost the hunger."

A new campaign that will alert people to the early signs of cancer and encourage them to get checked out will be launched in January next year, Liberal Democrat Care Services Minister Paul Burstow announced today.

The campaign will consist of 59 local campaigns focussing on the three big killers - breast, bowel and lung cancer. Local areas have been given a share of £9 million for their campaigns.

At the same time as running these local projects, the Department of Health will be trialling, in two regions, centrally-led campaign activity to raise awareness of bowel cancer symptoms and to encourage early presentation. Subject to evaluation, the campaign will be introduced nationally.

Examples of local activity include:

Ø     NHS Leeds aims to reduce mortality from lung cancer in people aged over 50 through social marketing and community engagement. For example, they plan to advertise on bus routes in key areas and provide community health professionals with branded items directing people to new services, such as chest X-Ray.

Ø     NHS Brighton and Hove whose one and five year survival rates for colorectal cancer are well below the national average, will raise awareness among a target audience of the fact that a change on bowel habits is a sign of colorectal cancer.

Ø     NHS Liverpool has cancer mortality rates (under 75) 38 per cent higher than the English average and significant variations exist across the city; lung, colorectal and breast cancer account for nearly half of all cancer deaths in Liverpool. The aim of the project is to increase earlier presentation of the signs and symptoms of these cancers among prioritised groups through the application of social marketing principles.

Being diagnosed at an early stage of the disease increases the chance of being successfully treated. Estimates show that 10,000 lives could be saved in England each year if survival rates matched the best in Europe.

The Government believes that much of this gap in survival rates could be filled if we could get cancers diagnosed earlier. For example, more than 90 per cent of people diagnosed with bowel cancer at the early stage survive for at least 5 years compared with only 6.6 per cent of those diagnosed at the late stage.

Paul Burstow said: "Cancer affects us all. We all have a story of someone we love battling the disease. Our aim is simple - we want to save many more lives and achieve cancer survival rates among the best in the world.

"In England we are lagging behind European countries when it comes to the common but big killer cancers such as breast, bowel and lung.

"The NHS is spending at European levels but still not delivering European cancer survival rates. We know that generally the earlier cancer is diagnosed, the better the outlook. That's why our campaign will help people to be more alert to the early signs and symptoms of cancer and encourage them to seek medical advice as soon as possible.

"We want to concentrate on what is most important to patients and their families - cancer outcomes. Alongside the Cancer Drug Fund and review of the Cancer Reform Strategy this will help achieve that."

Deborah Alsina, Chief Executive, Bowel Cancer UK; and Mark Flannagan, Chief Executive, Beating Bowel Cancer said: "We warmly welcome today's announcement by the government of funding for new campaigns to support early diagnosis of bowel cancer at both national and PCT level.

"Bowel cancer is the UK's second biggest cancer killer, yet it is highly treatable if diagnosed early. Currently over half of bowel cancer patients are diagnosed with advanced cancer, often because they are unaware of the symptoms and present to their GP too late. By increasing awareness of the disease and encouraging people to act on their symptoms, these regional and national campaigns have the potential to save thousands of lives."

Cancer Research UK's executive director of communications and information Sarah Lyness said: "We've made great strides in improving cancer survival with rates doubling over the last 40 years. But we often diagnose cancer late in this country so we welcome this campaign to raise awareness of the signs of key cancers and to encourage people to seek help if they notice unusual changes.

"Encouraging people to seek help from their doctor if they suspect cancer is the crucial first step in getting a speedy cancer diagnosis. GPs also need to recognise symptoms and refer for diagnosis appropriately and treatment must follow as quickly as possible. We hope this campaign will encourage people to get that little niggle checked out. It could save their life."

"Our aim is to insulate young girls from cultural pollution and teach them various ancient Indian traditions," a VHP official said. He said TV was destroying Indian values and affecting young girls adversely. "The Vahini's members discuss ways to protect Indian culture from the Western onslaught."

The Labour leadership ballot is all over bar the counting and Saturday's announcement(the best bit) but I've just remembered a 2008 interview in which Unite co-leader Derek "Del" Simpson dismissed David Miliband as "smug" and declared: "We might be better off with Cameron."

That's nonsense, of course, and Del knew that then and knows it now. He was angry at attempts to oust Gordon Brown and expressing it mischievously if forcefully. I've known Simpson since exposing a ballot-rigging scandal eight years ago, the disclosure of which helped him win his own union election, so I've watched him often wind people up.

But Simpson's statement underlined why the bigger unions were prepared to throw their resources behind Ed Miliband. Not because they love Mili Minor. They don't. The intention was to stop Mili Major. In fewer than 48 hours we'll learn if the union plan worked.

Plan to sell off libraries and axe wardens for elderly needs 'cost and benefits analysis'

Barnet council's attempt to reinvent itself as Britain's first "easyCouncil," modelled on budget airline services, has run into trouble after an independent audit revealed that more than two years after the project began the leadership has failed to draw up a proper business plan.

External auditors Grant Thornton warned that the project lacks an adequate analysis of the costs and benefits of cutting and privatising key services, and they questioned the council's mandate to undertake the radical no-frills reform.

Barnet is considering selling off libraries, removing 24-hour wardens from sheltered housing and outsourcing parts of its planning services, crematoriums and environmental health department to save as much as £15m a year. The plans have met fierce opposition.

"Further work is required to develop the programme vision and the organisational blueprint," the auditors said, in their review of Barnet's governance of the project. "High level cost and benefits ... expected from the programme ... are to be finalised." A business case was "critical" to the project's success, they said, and ordered the council to produce one immediately.

The project is intended to lead a new wave of low-cost Conservative-controlled municipalities, and tonight Tory-controlled Suffolk county council was set to approve a plan to outsource all but a handful of its services. Brighton and Hove city council, also Conservative led, is planning to farm out services to the private sector from November. Councils across England and Wales face budget cuts of up to 30%.

The audit in Barnet represents the sternest challenge yet to its Future Shape plan for council reform, which began in May 2008 with a proposal to strip back council staff to a core of 200, from 3,500, and to commission services from the private and charitable sector instead. As the plan developed, council leaders compared it to low-cost airlines, offering a basic service and asking residents to pay for extras.

"EasyCouncil was a nice shiny label, but there wasn't a lot of substance," said Alison Moore, leader of the Labour group. "The Conservatives have persisted with Future Shape on a wish and a prayer without even working out what the real purpose and value of it is. This year Future Shape will cost council taxpayers £1.5m, and at a time when residents are facing huge cuts to their services it is not acceptable to be wasting money in this way."

She said the £3m savings the council claimed it would make this year "were just a finger in the wind".

The council accepts the recommendations but insists governance of the so-called Future Shape programme is "generally robust", as the report states. "The Future Shape report from October 2009 set out the council's strategic vision," said Robert Rams, cabinet member with responsibility for the programme. "Since then it has moved into an operational phase, with the council developing its capacity to manage the programme. Moving forward we will be developing a more detailed business plan."

Mike Freer, the former council leader who championed the reform, has since been elected to parliament and the leadership of the project passed to Rams, a less senior figure. Labour believes this may indicate a lack of belief in a project.

Barnet's plan to remove 24-hour wardens from all council sheltered housing complexes was blocked following a high court challenge from pensioner groups after a judge ruled the council had failed to account for the impact on the disabled.

The council is considering closing some of its 16 libraries and relocating them with other services. A council paper this month discussed selling off libraries, because like allotments and sports clubs, they are now a "lifestyle choice" and said there is "a genuine case with safeguards to make disposals". The paper admits such a sell-off would invite "public opprobrium".

Ken Livingston tipped for a comeback challenge against Boris Johnson, with result to be announced before new Labour leader is confirmed

The Labour party is preparing to unveil the candidate it hopes will wrest back the London mayoralty from Boris Johnson in 2012, with Ken Livingstone tipped for a comeback challenge against his Tory rival.

The decision to stage the mayoral selection vote at the same time as the Labour leadership contest means that the result of the two-horse race between Livingstone and Oona King, the former MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, will be announced before the new Labour party leader is confirmed this Saturday.

Ballots closed on Wednesday in a race which will be decided in a two-part electoral college, with one made up of London's 35,000 party members and 38 London MPs, and the other comprising of the 400,000 voters belonging to the 14 unions and organisations affiliated to the London Labour party.

The selected candidate, who will be announced at 10am on Friday, will address the Labour party conference in Manchester next Wednesday.

King has fought a strong campaign as the party's "change" candidate after throwing her hat in the ring in May, but her campaign team privately accept that the odds of winning against Livingstone, a veteran of London politics who began building his comeback within days of being defeated by Johnson, are slim.

Livingstone, seen as a totemic figure for the left in London, has previously claimed his decision to stand had deterred others from coming forward.

A poll conducted by three London media organisations this week showed 9% of Londoners would prefer King as their next mayor, with Livingstone on 27% and Johnson on 45%.

Tony Travers, a London government expert, said: "The Labour party is going to find it hard not to choose Ken Livingstone as the candidate - as long as he puts himself forward - partly because the Labour membership likes him, and partly because other candidates are afraid of him."

Livingstone has been a frequent visitor at City Hall since losing office, turning up to watch Johnson grilled by the London assembly. He has gained the backing of a few more London MPs than King, as well as a the bulk of councillors and trade unions, and seven out of the eight Labour members on the London assembly.

King, 42, has delivered a determined performance in a number of hustings with Livingstone over the summer in a campaign focused on tackling crime in the capital, and addressing the needs of London's youth.

She has presented herself as the youthful, unifying candidate for the future, and promised she would free City Hall from cronyism, in a sideswipe to the accusations that have beleaguered Livingstone and his successor.

Despite boosting her profile, King suggested she was braced for defeat earlier this week when she gave an interview saying she was considering standing again for the 2016 election if defeated.

Speaking on the eve of the result, King said: "Win or lose on Friday, I won't forget the issues that matter to Londoners -- the issues Labour must grasp to win back the confidence of the capital. I'm glad to have fought a campaign over the summer that's focussed relentlessly on London's future.

"Nothing guarantees Labour's place there -- it has to be won, and won with ideas, vision, and a better, progressive and more serious alternative to Boris Johnson and his coalition's cuts."

Livingstone, who was the first mayor of London, and held office between 2000 and 2008 under a Labour government, has cast his campaign as replay of the 1980s, when he battled Margaret Thatcher's Tories as the leader of the Greater London Council, until it was wound up in 1986.

He has urged Londoners to "punish" Johnson for the spending cuts being introduced by the coalition government, and has drawn on his long political experience to promise to use "every lever available" to protect Londoners from the cuts. The former mayor has suggested an 80% rate of income tax on bankers earning more than £1 million, and said they should be forced to pay for their role in the financial crisis.

His campaign has seen him display some of his trademark outspokenness, notably when he blamed the media for fuelling violent crime on London's streets, prompting Kit Malthouse, the deputy mayor for policing, to call on him to apologise to the families of the murdered teenagers for suggesting their deaths should not be reported prominently.

A spokesman for Livingstone said the campaign had taken "nothing for granted". "We believe we have run a good campaign and we have had a positive response from party members, trade unionists and Londoners, particularly for Ken's commitment to take on Boris Johnson and the government over their savage cuts."

The result will allow the candidate 20 months to prepare for the campaign to unseat Johnson, who announced earlier this month that he intends to stand again in 2012.

The Liberal Democrats have yet to begin the formal search for a candidate.

Former mayor's political comeback gathers pace but Tories confident Boris Johnson will see off 2012 challenge

When the history of the Labour party is written, it will be known as the "other election". As the five aspirants to the Labour leadership slugged it out in halls and television studios, the contest that time forgot rumbled on, barely registering in the public consciousness.

But on Saturday, if the bookies and most informed opinion have it right, it will herald the re-emergence of one of Labour's totemic figures. By 11am, the smart money says, Ken Livingstone should be wearing the mantle of Labour's London mayoral candidate for the 2012 election.

Victory over Oona King would set him directly on another collision course with Boris Johnson, the Tory who wrested City Hall from Livingstone and Labour in 2008 and a man who, two years into the job, remains popular enough to face the contest with considerable optimism. "We beat him before and we would do it again," one senior Tory source said yesterday. "It will be a good-natured fight, but at the end of the day we feel Boris has a good record to run on. Ken, by contrast, has a hell of a lot of baggage."

That he will be able to carry it into another battle marks an extraordinary comeback, for in 2008 most dismissed the possibility that he would return to prominence. By the time of the defeat he had already run London for three terms, two as mayor (one, 14 years before, was as leader of the Greater London council at the time of its abolition).

Another fact became important as he jousted with King at a series of election hustings. At the time of his defeat to Johnson last time, he was 62. She cast herself as the person to take Labour in London into a fresh new era. Though the result is closely guarded, the indications are that most Labour members have opted for Livingstone's experience.

Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics, said a Livingstone win would be one for students of political science. "If he wins, it will be a triumph for his limpet-like capacity to win elections within the Labour party and to be a representative of a version of the Labour party which many activists like. Many, indeed, like it a lot more than the version they have been offered by David or Ed Miliband," Travers said.

That does not, however, mean he will have an easy time against Johnson. Travers said: "He faces the difficulty that Boris didn't turn out to be as he predicted he would be back in 2008. He will have to say that this is Boris, king of the cuts, and he has already been seeking to do that. He will also have to chip away at Boris's character in some way. The problem is people just can't bring themselves to hate Boris."

The references to Livingstone's age have resulted in tense relations between the King camp and that of Livingstone. But Travers says if she loses she can go out with her head held high.

"She has established herself again as a serious figure in the Labour party," he said. "And there will be a good few thinking that if they went with her, she would have been more likely to win votes in outer London than Ken is. It will also be the case that Labour lost its chance to demonstrate that it is moving forward and can find new candidates."

There was a clear split throughout the campaign. Livingstone established a healthy lead among the party's leaders in London and the unions, who gave him most of the £35,000 he raised. He claimed support from 17 London MPs, 301 councillors, seven out of the eight members of the London Assembly, and both of London Labour's MEPs. King won the backing of two unions, including the shopworkers' union, Usdaw, which gave her £5,000, but she was looking primarily to ordinary party members to overwhelm Livingstone with a popular vote.

Mike Smithson, the editor of the politicalbetting.com website, said it was a good plan, in theory. The reality likely to be different. "It's 1-20 for Ken," Smithson said. "You bet £20, you win £1. Oona is 7-1. That's how the punters see it. He is such a player that it is hard to bet against him."

Today's unveiling of the 100-turbine Thanet windfarm was unspectacular, but it marks an important milestone for the UK

It is a very rare thing for the UK to claim pre-eminence in the much-touted global green economy, so the assembled local dignitaries, industry folk and one cabinet minister were not letting the dismal maritime backdrop put a downer on proceedings.

The official opening of the Thanet windfarm off the coast of Kent - the biggest offshore project in the world - means that Britain generates more power from offshore wind than the rest of the world put together.

Launching the project on P&O;'s Pride of Burgandy ferry, the energy and climate change minister Lib Dem Chris Huhne promised that Britain would shed its traditional "dunce" status on renewable energy.

"We have enough energy to power all the homes in Scotland, but we need a lot more than that," he told reporters as the ferry drifted close to the slowly rotating blades, "British consumers should be able to rely on a secure, low-cost source of energy in the future, and I'm sure offshore wind will be part of that." Behind him though the enormous grey turbines threatened to merge with the grey cloudy backdrop and grey seas.

The eight lines of turbines, running north-west to south-east, cover a total area of 35sq km off Foreness Point near Margate. With 100 turbines, each 115 metres high with 44-metre blades, it can generate 300 megawatts (MW) of power - enough for 200,000 homes.

The project also takes the UK past a small but important milestone (although one Germany passed more than a decade ago) of having generated 5,000MW (5 gigawatts) from all renewable energy. The UK is still woefully short of its target of generating 15% of energy from renewables by 2020.

Thanet will not keep the "world's biggest" accolade for long though. Guests were already speculating about the next major offshore launch they might be invited to. Just up the coast is the Greater Gabbard offshore project with its 140 turbines, which will be followed by the even bigger London Array scheme in the Thames Estuary. When completed, this could generate 1000MW.

Renewables UK, the industry lobby group, declared that the Thanet development meant that renewable energy had now become "absolutely mainstream" in the UK. It added that targets to more than triple electricity from clean sources by the end of this decade were now "realistic and achievable".

However, there were calls for greater government support for the industry after it emerged that only 20% of the nearly £900m investment had gone to UK firms.

Chris Huhne, the energy and climate change secretary, said the coalition government was talking to major manufacturers including GE, Siemens and Mitsubishi, and wanted to create more energy apprenticeships.

"Clearly an important objective is to move from this frankly atrocious record on renewables we inherited [from the last government]," he said. "We're looking to make sure more and more of that [investment] is provided in the UK. We'll do what we can to make sure we're attractive to investors."

Øystein Løseth, the president and chief executive of Vattenfall, the Swedish energy company behind the Thanet windfarm, said: "I'm sure when the UK develops there will be many more suppliers in the UK that can deliver. It has just started and it will take some time to build up the suppliers."

In a separate boost for green energy, the Scottish first minister Alex Salmond dramatically increased his renewable energy target for Scotland to 80% of the country's electricity.

Salmond said the surge in investment in offshore wind farms and a steep increase in consents for new onshore wind power and hydro projects meant Scotland was capable of far exceeding its existing target of generating 50% of its electricity from renewables by 2020.

It is understood that the Scottish government is also close to setting up a new green energy investment bank, worth at least £360m, which will fund projects such as new docks and maintenance yards at key ports, chiefly on the North Sea.

Salmond expects that Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne will release £180m in carbon tax credits raised in Scotland but may be held back by the Treasury when he announces the comprehensive spending review. The European Investment bank and private funding organisations are likely to match that figure.

Analysts estimate that up to £200bn in new investment is needed to build the offshore windfarms planned around the Scottish coast, as well as the new docks, construction yards, grid substations and maintenance facilities needed to support the industry.

Salmond told the Guardian he believed at least two but as many as six major offshore windfarms would be operating in Scottish waters by 2020, with schemes in the Moray Firth and Solway Firth the most likely to be built first.

The opening of Thanet was an important milestone for the UK, which has watched European rivals in Germany, Denmark, Spain and other countries take the lead in the more mature renewable energy markets of onshore wind and solar power. Now only Luxemborg and Malta have a lower share of all energy from renewable sources.

The previous Labour government signed up to an EU target of 15% of all energy from renewables by 2020, implying about 40% of electricity would have to come from wind, solar, geothermal, tides and biomass - the lion's share coming from wind.

Critics are concerned that continuing problems with delays for planning permission for wind turbines, and the "intermittent" nature of wind meaning it needs backup at less windy times, the UK will struggle to meet these targets.

However Renewables UK said another 2.5GW of wind power was being constructed and a further 6,000MW of turbines had planning consent.

South Devon's acoustic bluegrass band Raven's Return are playing a free gig at Newton Abbot's Courtenay Centre on Sunday, October 31. We caught up with them to find out what it was about picking and plucking traditional instruments in an Americana-stylee that's such fun.

Who are you and how did you get together?
We are Alv, Geep, Clem and Brobo. We got together in the common cause of having fun playing good music for our own personal delight.

How would you describe the band's sound?
Our sound is based around Bluegrass, Folk and Americana played acousticaly with traditional instruments. We record everything as we perform it and as close as possible to how we hear it as we play it. There is no overdubbing and minimal manipulation of the sound.

You're doing a free gig at the Courtney Centre in Newton Abbot on Sunday, October 31. How did this come about?
Clem struck on the idea of rounding off our 2010 season of local gigs with a free show in aid of Newton Abbot Community Centre who have been very generous to us with respect to rehearsal time and space. We're hoping to raise awareness of Ravens Return and the Courtenay Centre and maybe a few quid if anybody cares to donate! Also, its a great opportunity for us to play to a wider audience.

There's a lot of talk about the growth of music festivals. Did you play at any and what is it about live music that so good?
We've performed at several venues this year including as part of the Newton Abbot festival fringe, which was a great experiment for us. Performing is becoming more important for Ravens Return and our music, so playing at more local festivals will definitely be a goal for us in 2011. The great thing about playing to an audience is the feedback you get when they like it. It's the biggest buzz.

How long have you been together and what are the pressures on a band?
As a four-piece we are under a year old, but the original members have been playing for almost two years. We have enormous fun and the only real pressures are those applied from within as we strive to be the best we can be and build an audience for our music.

o Catch Ravens' Return at the Courenay Centre on Sunday, October 31. Doors open at 7.30pm. Free entry