In November 2009, there were only 720 mountain gorillas left in the world, according to UNEP. Their habitat is threatened by agricultural expansion, mining activities and the exploitation of natural resources, armed conflicts and hunting.

The main focus of the Year of the Gorilla had been on encouraging locals who share gorilla habitat involved to improve protection within their communities. That included supporting the enforcement of wildlife law, preventing illegal logging and reducing the use of firewood and charcoal which are often used for inefficient home stoves at the detriment to the environment.

More: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34052&Cr=gorilla&Cr1=

Human numbers have been rising ever since the end of the Black Death in the Middle Ages. We currently pack in an extra 78 million people every year. The current population is 6.8 billion, and we're expected to stampede through the 7 billion mark in 2012. According to the UN, the world population in 2050 will be 9.1 billion - a rise of over 6.6 billion in the 100 years since 1950.

The question is, can the Earth cope with that many people? Warnings that humans are overcrowding the planet have been sounding for centuries. Up until now, human progress and scientific ingenuity have staved off global catastrophe. Despite famines, most people have been fed and, taken as a whole, health and living standards have improved. And if the climate really is doomed, the consequences haven't derailed us. At least not yet.

But now, a decade into what most scientists believe is a crunch century for the environment, some campaigners are desperately trying to put population growth back on the global agenda. Their argument is simple: there are too many of us. Continued growth, they say, is at the root of every environmental challenge we face, from cutting CO2 emissions to sharing the world's limited fresh water. If we don't do something soon, the natural resources we all depend on will vanish.

More: http://www.bbcfocusmagazine.com/feature/environment/population-overload#comment-875

Conservation experts have already signalled that the world is in the grip of the "sixth great extinction" of species, driven by the destruction of natural habitats, hunting, the spread of alien predators and disease, and climate change.

However until recently it has been hoped that the rate at which new species were evolving could keep pace with the loss of diversity of life.

Speaking in advance of two reports next week on the state of wildlife in Britain and Europe, Simon Stuart, chair of the Species Survival Commission for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature - the body which officially declares species threatened and extinct - said that point had now "almost certainly" been crossed.

"Measuring the rate at which new species evolve is difficult, but there's no question that the current extinction rates are faster than that; I think it's inevitable," said Stuart.

The IUCN created shock waves with its major assessment of the world's biodiversity in 2004, which calculated that the rate of extinction had reached 100-1,000 times that suggested by the fossil records before humans.

lots more...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/07/extinction-species-evolve

In a population-based study of women in the U.K., death from any cause was 12% lower among oral contraceptive users than among those who never took birth control pills, Philip C. Hannaford, MD, of the University of Aberdeen in Scotland, and colleagues reported online in BMJ.

"This is very reassuring and enables us to say with confidence to women that if they chose to use the pill as their contraceptive, they are highly unlikely to do long-term damage to themselves," Hannaford said in an e-mail to MedPage Today.

Previous studies have shown no increased risk of mortality with oral contraceptive use, but the researchers said they didn't have a long enough follow-up.

So they assessed data from the Royal College of General Practitioners' Oral Contraceptive Study, a prospective cohort study that began in 1968. It contains mortality data from general practitioners and National Health Service central registries on 46,112 women who were followed for 39 years.

A total of 1,747 deaths occurred in patients who never used oral contraceptives, and 2,864 occurred among those who had. The researchers noted that they were able to include three times as many deaths in their assessment as previous studies.

Women used birth control pills for a mean of 44 months.

Those who did use had a significantly lower rate of death from any cause (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.93).

They also had significantly lower rates of death from all cancers, the researchers said. There were lower rates of large bowel/rectum, uterine, and ovarian cancers, and from all gynecological cancers combined as well.

Investigators also found lower rates of death from circulatory disease, ischemic heart disease, and other disease among women who'd used birth control pills.

"We do know that pill users have a lower risk of death from some cancers which persists for many years after stopping, [which] could account for the lower risk of cancer deaths in pill users," Hannaford said.

"It is difficult, however, to see how the pill might reduce the risk of circulatory disease in the long-term, other than by another mechanism such as screening or monitoring."

Yet women on the pill did have higher rates of violent deaths. The researchers said they had no explanation for this association.

In more detailed analyses, the researchers did see higher rates of mortality among contraceptive users in certain subgroups.

For example, mortality was increased in the youngest age group. Women under 30 who took the pill had almost a threefold greater rate of death from any cause than never-users (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.17 to 6.94).

After age 50, however, the rate of death among ever-users was significantly lower than it was among never-users.

There was also an increased risk of death from any cause among ever-users under 45 who had stopped taking oral contraceptives about six years previously. But the same risk wasn't seen in those with more distant use.

Finally, the researchers found no association between overall mortality and duration of oral contraceptive use.

One caveat is that the study may have been limited by "healthy survivorship," as the cohort was healthier than the national average.

"It isn't clear whether the lower longer-term risk of death in ever-users was a true effect of the pill or rather some difference in the characteristics of women choosing to use the pill," Hannaford said.

"For example, they might be monitored for side effects of the pill and may be more likely to be screened for disease than non-users."

Also, the researchers didn't assess risk of death according to the type of hormone used.

Hannaford cautioned that contraceptive choices should be based on contraceptive effectiveness, acceptability, and ease of use, among other factors — not possible reductions in disease later in life.

"I would never recommend that someone use the pill simply to reduce their risk of disease later in life," he said. "However, . . . if the choice is the pill, this decision does not increase a woman's risk of long-term death. Indeed it may even have some benefits."

http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/GeneralOBGYN/18971

Last night bloggers, prospective bloggers and a surprising amount of journalists packed into Pica Pica to watch a presentation, by @JamesCuff on blogging and then meet and chat with other like-minded individuals with a few drinks after, organised by YourCardiff.

The event was surprisingly busy, I don't think anyone organising it expected it to be that full – I arrived slightly late due to work and was crammed at the back, unable to hear much. The chat afterwards was very interesting, lots of journalists telling me all sorts. Can't remember what was said in confidence and what wasn't so I think it's best not to say anything.

All in all a great night and I'm very much looking forward to the next one. Hannah Waldram, the Guardian beatblogger videoed a short interview with myself and other bloggers/journalists which may be on the Guardian Cardiff site later. I apologise for being slightly drunk.

Picture courtesy of WelshIcons' Dom who was resident photographer for the night.

So it is with a government running a county. If you allow your spending to exceed your income each month, each month your debt increases. If you do this for short period when your tax income is temporarily depressed by a poor economy, that can make sense. When the economy recovers revenues bounce back and you can get your finances back into order. The trouble with the UK today is two fold. We went into the recession spending and borrowing too much, before we lost tax revenue. We also relied on massive tax revenues from banking and other City activities, and from buying and selling expensive properties. Some of this income has gone for ever, now the bubble has been punctured.

In Parliament we keep returning to this central problem. All parties now agree the deficit needs to be at least halved. That means an astonishing £90 billion a year less spending, if you do it all by cutting spending. No previous government has ever attempted anything like that. The remaining argument is over how soon you start. As my advice to an overborrowed constituent implies, I think the sooner the better. The sooner you start the less damage you do in the longer run. Every extra pound the public sector spends today is another pound we the taxpayers have to pay back soon. In the meantime it is another pound we have to pay interest on. If you tried to do it by increasing tax rates you could end up with less revenue, as people and businesses moved elsewhere.

There is no such thing as government money. There is just taxpayers' money. Every penny the government borrows, they expect you and me to repay. Their debt is our debt. The advice I have been giving to the odd constituent I now have give to Parliament as a whole. If they carry on like this we all end up in deep debt, debt we did not want and debt we cannot afford.

The good news is much of the extra spending being undertaken is money not well spent. I do not wish to see Wokingham losing teachers, nurses, police and doctors from the payroll, and there is no need for that to happen if we act now. What I do want to see is less bureaucracy, fewer high paid quango heads and quangos, the end to unwanted South east regional government, the end to ID cards, and expensive centralised computer schemes. It is quite easy to do more for less in the public sector, and that is what all of us working in it have to do. The private sector in a cruel recession has had to work share, keep pay down, remove bonuses, cancel prestige projects and favoured new schemes, and work smarter. Now it is our turn in the public sector to do the same.

Bogdanor recalls

Before 1914, Major-General Henry Wilson, Director of Military Operations at the War Office, sought to sabotage the Liberal Government’s policy of Irish Home Rule by providing the Conservative Opposition with details of confidential ministerial discussions. Some serving officers declared that they would refuse to obey orders if the Government sought to move against illegal arms depots in Ulster

Wilson's latest biographer Prof Keith Jeffrey of Queen’s records that he resumed his championship of the Unionist cause after the war when..

he became an MP and was chief security adviser to the new Northern Ireland government. As such, he became a target for nationalist Irish militants, being identified with the security policies of the Belfast regime, though wrongly with Protestant sectarian attacks on Catholics. He is remembered today in unionist Northern Ireland as a kind of founding martyr for the state.

Brown’s claims of ever rising Defence budgets may be controversial but the verdict of Bogdanor ( who was Cameron’s political tutor at Oxford btw) is definitive.

Lord Guthrie’s remark that “not fully funding the Army ... undoubtedly cost the lives of soldiers”, blaming Gordon Brown for loss of life because of decisions made when he was Chancellor, hardly falls within that category ( of criticising in calm and measured tones). It is unseemly to use the deaths of soldiers in Afghanistan as the basis for a personal attack upon the Prime Minister.

"This review is a missed opportunity to kick the BNP's politics of hate out of our schools. Membership of the BNP is completely incompatible with delivering education to children. Schools should be at the forefront of promoting racial equality, not places where BNP members can spread their message of hate to impressionable young people.

"The review is limited by not properly considering the wider schools workforce. Support staff play a significant role in delivering education to children. Young people at school can have a close, one on one relationship, with support staff. Support staff are also in charge of break times, and places such as libraries, where they could allow racist bullying to take place, if they were members of the BNP.

"Research suggests that support staff more closely reflect the community they serve, compared to teachers. They could therefore play an important role in community cohesion. This review promises a yearly check on the guidance set out. UNISON will be pressing for the full ban on BNP members working in schools to be imposed next year. It is vital that there is no place in our schools for racism."

11am LeftWatch: Three unions have given £25 million to Labour - and have now secured more than 100 parliamentary candidacies

10.30pm WATCH: Jeremy Hunt talks about the Conservatives' Technology Manifesto

ToryDiary: Should David Cameron be more angry about Labour failures and failings?

Also on ToryDiary: Coulson and Hilton join forces as Tory machine prepares for final lap

Yousuf Miah on Platform: The system of student visas needs a complete overhaul

LeftWatch: Treasury Minister claims there would be "no new tax rises" if Labour were re-elected

Seats and Candidates: Victoria Ayling in Great Grimsby ditches the Soap Box in favour of a Fish Box

Glyn Gaskarth in Local Government: A strategy for reducing the power of quangos

Also in Local Government: Who would Lib Dem councillors favour in a hung Parliament?

WATCH: Sajid Javid, the recently selected candidate for Bromsgrove, introduces himself and sets out his stall to the electorate

David Cameron to meet Nicolas Sarkozy in London today

"French President Nicolas Sarkozy will hold separate talks in London later with Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Conservative leader David Cameron... Mr Sarkozy is expected to examine the Tory leader's position on key issues in the event of a change of UK government in the general election. European defence is likely to be high on the agenda during their talks. The French president and the Conservative leader last met in 2008." - BBC

"Mr Sarkozy's officials and senior party colleagues are keen to establish a dialogue with Mr Cameron's team to find out where they stand on financial regulation, defence and the EU, and to explore the potential for co-operation. A speech by Mr Cameron late last year, in which he abandoned a promised referendum on the Lisbon treaty and relegated as a priority his demand for a repatriation of powers from the EU, has helped ease, though not erase, French fears that Mr Cameron is a Eurosceptic ideologue bent on picking a fight with the EU." - FT

YouGov daily tracker has 3% Tory lead - The Sun | Last night's ToryDiary

Theresa Villiers: Labour have betrayed our vision of high speed rail

"The owners of 440 homes face having their properties demolished to make way for the first stage of a 250mph rail line from London to Birmingham and northern England... Lord Adonis unveiled a detailed blueprint for the line as far as Birmingham and then outlined proposals for two lines further north... But Theresa Villiers, his Tory shadow, poured scorn on the plans. "Labour have betrayed the vision we set out three years ago for high speed rail. In leaving out Heathrow and setting out plans that give no firm guarantees north of the Midlands, Labour's plans are flawed both by lack of ambition and undermined by their inability to grasp the basic truth that high speed rail should an alternative to a third runway not an addition to it," she said. " - Daily Telegraph

> Theresa Villiers MP on Platform yesterday: Conservatives started - and continue to lead - the debate on high speed rail on which Labour's vision is misguided and unambitious

Tories promise superfast broadband

"The Conservatives have launched a technology manifesto that aims to increase broadband speeds and improve access to government data as the government's digital economy bill moves quickly through parliament. The manifesto pulls together a number of technology proposals that the Conservatives have floated in the runup to the general election, including promising superfast broadband connections of 100Mbps to most Britons and opening up data on contracts and public sector salaries." - The Guardian

> Stephan Shakespeare on CentreRight yesterday welcomed the commitment to a Right to Government Data in the Conservatives' technology manifesto

Tories insist that City has faith in Osborne - City AM

Tories boycott "blatantly political" Commons inquiry into Ashcroft peerage

"A Westminster inquiry into the row over Lord Ashcroft's peerage was thrown into turmoil when the Tory MPs on the committee walked out and said they were boycotting it permanently. In what is understood to be an unprecedented move, Conservative members have withdrawn from the public administration select committee, some following discussions with the party whips." - The Guardian

Black Tory candidate Loanna Morrison defends saying that "Britain is full"

"I was just articulating what a lot of people have been telling me on the doorstep, a lot of them minorities," she says of the piece which ran on the website Conservativehome. "People say the country just doesn't need any more immigrants. White voters tell me I can say the things they can't. I tell them that I am as annoyed as anyone else." - The Guardian

> Loanna Morrison on Platform: And very simple it is too:

"The real pension problem in the UK is in the private sector where employers are no longer providing pensions to almost two thirds of their staff...That is why the pension reform we need is compulsory employer contributions to pensions for all staff, which will start with auto-enrolment in 2012 as the first step towards winning decent pensions for all".

Just what every business needs - even higher employment costs.  

Elsewhere,  Brendan Barber, for it is he, reckons that gold-plated public sector pensions are a myth, and points to 'just' 1.8% of civil service pensioners and 'just' 2.5% of NHS pensioners having pensions of £40,000 or more.  So one in 25 in the case of the latter are trousering / handbagging double the median wage. 

Though Cowards Flinch - Boycott; the saga continues: But what really matters is not whether Griffin flounders on Dale's questions or not. It's about the long-run effect of having Griffin feature in a mainstream publication. Long after the specific questions that Dale asks are forgotten, people will remember that Griffin was interviewed by an (allegedly) respectable, mainstream publication. It will help to normalise Griffin and his party. It will encourage him to be seen as a legitimate politician with legitimate views to be considered a reasonable political option by reasonable people.

Iain Dale has a clearly stated (and quite notorious) policy of not linking to blogs/bloggers that are critical of him. He has stated quite clearly in the past that he refuses to do so because he does not wish to legitimise them.

But he will give a platform to Nick Griffin, a known racist and fascist, and now appears to be claiming that this doesn't legitimise him or his party.

(Nick Griffin may hate people who are coloured/foreign/different, but at least he hasn't criticised Iain; that would be beyond the pale!)

All we're left with is the depressing situation of Iain Dale doing this for political reasons, or (far more likely in my honestly-held opinion) to sell more copies of Total Politics, because shoving it down the throats of elected representatives as junk mail and counting this as 'circulation' isn't making enough money or shifting enough units to please advertisers.

-

UPDATE - I should point out that I already boycott the Total Politics poll of weblogs, because it is flawed from the ground up (the two main points being it is rigged in favour of Iain Dale and his mates to begin with, and the votes are counted by a known cheat).

The foreign secretary is wrong: Britain's soft power in the Middle East has much greater influence than its show of force in Iraq

There is a common ritual that I, like most Britons, have regularly encountered when riding a taxi in Damascus, Amman or Cairo over the past seven years. Talkative and curious, most cabbies will immediately ask where you are from and, on hearing London, raise the usual questions about Tony Blair and Iraq.

Seven years after the invasion, British citizens are still taken to task for their government's actions in 2003. It is therefore hard to take seriously David Miliband's claim earlier this week that the Iraq war has boosted Britain's reputation in the Arab world.

Called before the Chilcot inquiry, the foreign secretary stated:

"People in the region do respect those who are willing to see through what they say [they will do]. Even people who disagreed with it say to me, 'You've sent a message that when you say something, you mean it' ... In the Arab world today, I don't believe that the Iraq decisions have undermined our relationships or our ability to do business. Some of our ambassadors say we are in a stronger position."

Though diplomats in Israel and Kuwait might support the foreign secretary's view that Britain's reputation was enhanced by Iraq, the reality on the Arab street is quite different. Militarily and diplomatically, London appears weak and tied to Washington, while economically it lags behind European competitors for influence in the region. The UK's main area of success and influence is actually in the cultural sphere, where institutions like the British Council provide a degree of soft power. But military misadventures like Iraq, far from enhancing Britain's reputation in the Arab world, serve to undermine the soft power that these institutions have spent decades acquiring.

The Iraq war did no favours for Britain's military reputation in the region. The operations of the first Gulf war in 1990-91 and the bombing of Iraq in 1998 had already built the image that Britain's armed forces were an extension of US forces, and the blind loyalty shown by Blair in 2003 only cemented this view. Marc Lynch has shown how, since 1998, millions of Arab viewers of al-Jazeera have watched Iraqis killed by Britain - which became a daily occurrence in 2003. On top of this, allegations of prisoner abuse by British soldiers were widely reported, as were claims about the under-funding of UK troops. Far from enhancing respect for the military, the Iraq war has allowed the Arab media to portray it as subservient, abusive and weak.

Subservience to the US has also characterised the Arabs' perception of British diplomacy since 2003. The initial refusal to seek a ceasefire during the 2006 Lebanon war and a similar reluctance in Gaza are two prominent examples. Even recent diplomatic shifts, such as Miliband's commendable lobbying for the relabelling of goods produced in Israeli settlements, or his visit to previously pariah Syria, are interpreted as reflecting the new priorities of the Obama administration rather than independent British initiatives. This perceived diplomatic dependence on America is emphasised by other actors' comparative freedom in the region, notably France, which has re-engaged under President Nicolas Sarkozy, deepened its ties with Syria and Lebanon and opened a military base in the UAE.

Economically, Britain's influence is similarly limited. While Lord Davies, the minister for trade, investment and small business was in the UAE this week trumpeting the increased trade between Britain and the Middle East, Britain lags behind Germany, Italy and France, which take a far greater share of the Arab market.

One field where Britain still excels is arms sales, particularly to Turkey, Israel, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. However, far from using this trade to leverage influence, Britain seems more eager to appease its customers. This was seen in the dropping of corruption charges in the BAE-Saudi scandal, and the continued sale of arms to Israel after the 2008-09 Gaza war.

Yet in spite of perceived military and diplomatic subservience and economic impotence, Britain does maintain an influential cultural presence in the Arab world. While critics may attack organisations such as the British Council as a waste of taxpayers' money or "cultural imperialism", arguably their many educational, cultural and developmental projects enhance Britain's reputation far more effectively than the billions spent on the Iraq war. The British Council itself recognised this fact in 2007, substantially expanding its presence in the Arab and Muslim world.

Though the Arab press often hails the role of the British Council in supporting local projects, its reputation can be easily tarnished by the government's foreign policy. In 2006, for example, when Britain was alleged to have a role in Israel's capture of a Palestinian militant, the British Council in Gaza was attacked. Moreover, Britain is not alone in promoting cultural ties and soft power in the Arab World. France's Institut Francais and Germany's Goethe-Institut have expanded their impressive operations in the Middle East recently, without fearing a backlash against their government's policies in the region.

As Chilcot continues and the British establishment tries to understand what went wrong in 2003, perhaps it should take the opportunity to reassess how Britain projects its power and influence in the Arab world. David Miliband is deluded. Displays of hard power on the coat-tails of the US won't enhance Britain's reputation. Military misadventures like Iraq only serve to undermine the soft cultural power that is far more effective in promoting a positive picture of Britain in the Middle East.

Transport for London insist the Tube service will improve in spite of impending staff cuts, but even if they're right how long can it last? Plus, the "cycle revolution", a Spitalfields blog and ten years of the London Eye

Cynicism is a dreadful thing. But when you receive a press release from a major public sector employer proclaiming a "vision for the future," promising greater efficiency and containing a pledge on staffing that is hedged like the maze at Hampton Court, the jaded eye skips instinctively down the page to find where the job cuts have been hidden.

Actually, that's a bit unfair on Transport for London. The message it issued to the media yesterday wisely acknowledged upfront that "job reductions" are "proposed" on London Underground and commits to none being compulsory; wisely, because we all knew this was coming. Even so, there are seven paragraphs of softening up before the crunch number is declared: "a net reduction of around 700-800 posts."

Two questions. The first is "what does it mean?" Mayor Johnson's opponents have zoomed in on the staffing of Tube station ticket offices where 450 posts could go: so much for Boris's election pledge to "defend local ticket offices" (see page 9) against a closure programme drawn up by his predecessor (see page 2). TfL points to increased Oyster use and purchase points and, in response to safety concerns, a larger police presence in trains and stations.

Expect lively exchanges on this theme at Mayor's Question Time next Wednesday, where Boris will surely contend that even with the recession and the unending wrangles over the cost of the upgrades, the Underground is getting better all the time. But cuts are cuts are cuts, which brings us to the second question, one certain to be asked by LU employees and passengers alike: "Where will it end?"

Anniversary Eye
The capital's big wheel is ten years old. Time flies - or maybe in this case it rotates. On Tuesday the Guardian's Jonathan Glancey looked back to the impact of its birth:

Every view in and through Westminster, and along the Thames, was changed. Suddenly, this spidery and beautifully resolved ferris wheel crowned Victorian terraces, filled unexpected views along avenues of plane trees and sat like a tiara atop government offices.

Perhaps its best aspect is that it also offers awe-inspiring and uninterrupted views over London. From up top on a clear day, the entire city can be peered down upon and encompassed. The patterns of London's growth can be seen spreading into subtopia and the green belt like rings marking the age of venerable trees.

Now read on.

On yer bikes
As I write this sentence, some that I wrote yesterday have just gone live at Comment Is Free. They form a piece about the Mayor's policies for encouraging cycling and responses to these from London cyclists. The usual stage army of Boris trolls has invaded the comment thread, wasting the site's space and their own time (I rarely pay them any attention and when I do they just send me to sleep).

My argument is that although "the cycling Mayor' has taken steps to nurture recent increases in bicycle journeys in the capital, any "cycle revolution" truly worthy of the term will require much bolder measures. Read the article here. Should you feel moved to help combat the woeful standard of the early contributions "below the line," please be my guest. You might be interested to know that the article is informed by the far higher standard of comment posted here and here.

London blogosphere
Pausing only to re-alert you to the Guardian's lengthening, elections-minded list of Top London Bloggers, I urge you to discover Spitalfields Life. It's a blog that provides portraits of its neighbourhood, both literary and photographic. Try this, on local barbers:

Starting in Brick Lane, Sarah and I wove our way through the sidestreets on our bizarre pilgrimage, drifting down through Whitechapel and further South as far as Commercial Rd in the unrelenting damp. We visited big salons and tiny salons, full salons and empty salons, sleek new salons and crumby old parlours. And every one secured a different place in my heart because each possessed a different poetry, a poetry that celebrates human life and hopes, equally containing the mundane need to be tidy alongside the aspiration to be be your best. The humble barber shop is an oasis of peace and reflection, where cares are shorn away to allow a fresh start. This is where men go to get renewed.

Such journeys of discovery are published daily. Join them here.

Coming up
On Sunday London celebrates St Patrick's Day. Meanwhile, the month-long Open Jewish Culture festival continues. I have learned that on Tuesday evening there will be a talk on investigative journalism in London, but don't ask me to reveal my source. Thanks for reading and keep in touch.

Anna Arrowsmith's previous profession is not my cup of tea, says Lib Dem leader, hailing her as no cardboard cut-out Westminster politician

A former porn director who has been selected as a parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrats would be a passionate campaigner for her local area, Nick Clegg said today.

Clegg said Anna Arrowsmith's previous profession was "not exactly my cup of tea", and she was certainly no "cardboard cut-out Westminster politician".

But he said it was important that "people like her" who care about their local areas put themselves forward.

Clegg was speaking ahead of the Lib Dems' spring conference, which begins in Birmingham tonight as the party seeks to rally activists ahead of the general election.

He told GMTV he had "just read the reports" about Arrowsmith, who is managing director of adult entertainment company Easy on the Eye Productions and will stand for election in Gravesham, Kent.

The prospective parliamentary candidate, who works under the pseudonym Anna Span, started shooting porn films after graduating 12 years ago.

Since then she has directed more than 250 raunchy scenes, and written and photographed a book to guide couples in how to make homemade porn.

Clegg told GMTV: "It's not exactly my cup of tea what she's been doing before she has put herself forward in parliament but I also think it's really important that people like her who really care a lot about her local area are encouraged to come into politics. You can't accuse her of being a cardboard cut-out Westminster politician."

Asked if he had an issue with somebody involved in the pornography industry representing his party, he said: "I don't know exactly what she's been doing in the past. She's not done anything illegal and she cares passionately about her area. She has been chosen to be the candidate for that area. Let's see. I think all the indications are that she's going to be a really, really strong voice for that local area."

Yesterday, the 38-year-old, who is married and lives with her husband Tim and their dogs in Groombridge, near Tunbridge Wells, insisted she was ready to win the seat at the general election, which is currently held by Adam Holloway for the Conservatives.

Arrowsmith faces a tough fight in a constituency, where the Lib Dems trailed in third place on just 10.7% of the vote in 2005 and where political watchers expect a tough two-way fight in a seat where Labour had just 654 fewer votes than the Conservatives at the last poll.

Arrowsmith, who has an MA in philosophy, said she was spurred into standing for election by the MPs' expenses scandal and a belief that women are under-represented in parliament.

She said: "If people don't know what I do for a living then they would never know. The local party and the local people who I have so far met have seen that I'm very driven."

She added: "When people get to see me, they will realise that I'm used to project managing and that I'm driven to achieve change rather than just promising it."

Named best director at the 2008 and 2009 UK Adult Film and Television Awards, she describes herself as a keen campaigner for women's rights and anti-censorship issues and says she has spent 12 years trying to make the adult industry more female-friendly.

Her first commercially-released programme was on Television X, titled Eat Me/Keep Me, which led to further X-rated shows and her becoming chair of the Adult Industry Trade Association.

Clegg has pledged to double the number of Lib Dem MPs within two general elections. The party currently has 63 MPs.

Clegg, who will address Lib Dems at the conference rally this evening and make a keynote speech on Sunday, said today there would be "no backroom deals" with the other political parties ahead of the general election.

With recent polls suggesting the country is heading for a hung parliament at the election, expected to take place on 6 May, Clegg repeated the four tests he would set for Labour and the Conservatives if they were to seek his party's support.

He said whichever party had the clearer mandate from the voters would have the "moral right" to govern, "either on its own or with others".

"There are no backroom deals between the political parties," he said.

"If a party has got more support and has got a clearer mandate from the British people than any other party, even if they don't have an absolute majority, then I think we live in a democracy, that party has got the moral right to seek to govern, either on its own or with others.

"I've been much clearer than Gordon Brown or David Cameron in saying that, as far as the Liberal Democrats are concerned, in terms of us exercising our influence we will focus on the really big things that matter to us."

The four big issues for the Lib Dems are fairer taxes, so people do not pay tax on the first £10,000 they earn; Better schools, with more one-to-one tuition and smaller class sizes; making sure that our economy is no longer "held hostage" by the banks; and clean, fair politics in the wake of the expenses scandal, including giving people the right to sack their MPs if they have been shown to be corrupt.

The Lib Dem leader said his party was delivering a "copper-bottomed guarantee" that whatever happens in the election, "the one thing you can predict is that the Liberal Democrats will deliver those four steps to a fairer Britain".

Michael Moore, Liberal Democrat spokesman on international development, will be live online on the Katine Chronicles blog at 11am (GMT) on Tuesday, 16 March, to answer your questions about aid and development. Post a question

Find out more about the Liberal Democrats' policies

International development faces serious challenges, whoever wins the next election. With domestic spending cuts a real possibility, protest at continued historically high spending on aid is inevitable. It is likely the aid budget will face a very tough fight.

Last year, the Liberal Democrats set out their thoughts on international development in a policy paper, which outlined support for the aid target of 0.7% of GDP, a call for renewed efforts to reach the Millennium Development Goals and an acknowledgement that aid sometimes fails and that perhaps financial aid is not the most effective way of delivering support.

At 11am (GMT) on Tuesday, 16 March, the Lib Dems' spokesman on international development, Michael Moore, will be live online for one hour to answer your questions about the party's policies and the wider issues of aid and development.

Read the party's policy paper and Anne Perkins' report on the Lib Dems' policies and then post a question. You can post a question now or come back on Tuesday.

If you have problems posting, email Katine.editor@guardian.co.uk.

On Tuesday, 16 March, the Liberal Democrat spokesman on international development, Michael Moore, will be live online to answer readers' questions. Here, Anne Perkins outlines the party's policies on aid and poverty alleviation

International development faces serious challenges, whoever wins the next election. When domestic spending on health and education is likely to face real cuts, protest at continued historically high spending on aid is inevitable. And when there is a lively debate about how well aid works, it is likely the aid budget will face a very tough fight.

It is five years since the Liberal Democrats last drew up a full policy paper on international development. At their conference last autumn they confirmed their support for the aid target of 0.7% of GDP, and called for renewed effort to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). They also launched a new policy paper and a policy working group to bring their ideas up to date.

The paper highlights the failure of rich countries to match Gleneagles promises, the impact of rising food prices and the pressure on land caused by the new demand for biofuels, the impact of global recession and the failure to stay on track to achieve the MDGs by 2015.

But the Liberal Democrats are also trying to develop policy that reflects the new debate about whether aid works, and how best to make it effective. It takes the twin principles of a national moral obligation to seek to alleviate poverty, and of making poverty relief the primary objective of all aid policy.

The areas where current aid policy fails, the policy paper suggests, are where the people themselves are not properly consulted. The exclusion of developing countries from G20 meetings is taken as an example, and it raises questions (but not answers) about the controversial nature of the aid effectiveness policies adopted since meetings in Paris and Accra. It calls for aid policies that encourage accountability between governments and their voters rather than governments and their donors.

The MDGs are set to become a paradigm for all that is bad about aid policy: top down policy making that distorts local priorities and disregards local needs. The Lib Dems suggest developing "participatory data gathering", perhaps using mobile phone technology, so that aid programmes can become more tailored to delivering what is actually needed.

They also argue that financial aid is not necessarily the most important or effective way of delivering support. Conflict resolution, security and trade and climate change adaption will all have vital roles to play.

Environment polices are more explicit: the policy paper proposes schemes that provide incentives for forestry protection (deforestation contributes as much to global warming as emissions from China or the US). It wants the post-Copenhagen agenda to focus on supporting low-carbon development and prioritise sustainable agriculture.

Refreshingly, the party acknowledges that aid is difficult, and that sometimes it doesn't work. It warns that fear of failure can tilt aid policies towards more easily achievable objectives at the expense of the most needy. (But some NGOs would argue that trying to help those who will gain most from it is the most effective use of their resources - and they are not necessarily those in the direst poverty).

The party is also clear that the 0.7% target embraces money spent not only on aid as most voters would understand it, but also contributes to debt relief and more controversially to joint spending with the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence. It is silent on the controversial development in Iraq and particularly Afghanistan, where aid workers go in in the wake of the peacekeepers, often blurring the lines between Britain's foreign policy interests and its aid obligations.

In place of wasting billions on redundant systems, we must focus defence spending on what Britain's armed forces need

Former defence chiefs, coroners presiding over inquests into soldiers' deaths and assorted armchair commentators, have been lining up to deride the lack of funds and inadequate equipment for British troops on dangerous operations. If I were a Treasury official, I would be licking my lips, more eager than ever to wield the knife.

That might seem perverse. But let us take a step back. While defence chiefs can feed on sympathy for our troops, they are encouraged to be more and more irresponsible. While their troops, cheered on by enthusiastic ministers, are deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, they can rely on more and more "urgent operational requirements" from the Treasury's contingency reserve.

Budgetary discipline flies out of the window. Chiefs of the three branches of the armed forces go on an apparently never-ending weapons-buying spree, signing cheques for other people's money. Defence chiefs may be strictly correct when they say that the Treasury - under Gordon Brown as chancellor, they stress - did not give them money for helicopters when it was most needed. But what about all the money wasted on far less urgent, yet far more expensive weapons systems and platforms to put them on?

The commons public accounts committee and the national audit office repeatedly produce damning reports about chronic mismanagement in the MoD, leading to escalating delays in projects and the waste of billions of pounds of taxpayers' money. Those responsible for negotiating the purchase of Chinook helicopters cannot even get the basic terms of the contract right. MoD bureaucracy is so sclerotic that orders for badly needed robust armoured cars - to replace the Snatch Land Rovers, for example - take far, far longer than they need to.

Lord Guthrie, the former chief of defence staff, pointed in his address to the centre-right thinktank the Centre for Policy Studies on Wednesday night to a huge black hole in the defence budget. The core annual budget is about £34bn, he pointed out. Up to £20bn was allocated to programmes that are authorised but unfunded.

He pointed out that the national audit office has warned that shortfalls on the defence budget could amount to at least £6bn over the next decade, assuming that spending kept pace with inflation. If spending stayed flat - a more realistic prospect, Guthrie warned - the gap could total £35bn.

Plans to replace the Trident nuclear missile system and build two large aircraft carriers - projects that will cost at least £28bn - should be abandoned and the money saved spent on alternatives more relevant to future conflicts, including a bigger army. The RAF was committed to buying 232 Typhoon Eurofighters it did not need at a cost of £20bn.

Britain, in the foreseeable future, needed more boots on the ground, intelligent weapons, unmanned drones, computer specialists, to fight terrorists, pirates, "non-state aggression", and cyber warfare, said Guthrie.

This may be too much for the heads of the navy and airforce, political and industrial vested interests, to take. But courage and imagination, the breaking of tribes and vested interests, are essential, if the right decisions are to be taken in the coming post-election strategic defence review, the most important for many decades. Our troops in Afghanistan - and everywhere else - need that, rather than complaints from defence chiefs who appear unable to see beyond the narrow interests of their own particular service.

Unite expected to announce British Airways strike over cabin crew staff cuts
o How would the strike affect you?

The Unite trade union is set to announce strike dates by British Airways (BA) cabin crew this morning, with a walkout possible as soon as next Friday.

Unite is expected to give an update on stalled negotiations at a press conference at 11am. It is also likely to announce a second front in the BA dispute by warning the airline that it must withdraw proposed changes to working conditions for baggage handlers or face an immediate consultative ballot.

Following an 81% vote in favour of strike action by Unite-affiliated cabin crew, the union must stage a walkout by 22 March and has to provide BA with seven days' notice. Because Unite has already ruled out striking over the Easter holidays, next weekend is now looming as a likely strike date. Officials from Unite and its cabin crew branch, Bassa, debated strike lengths and dates in a long meeting yesterday.

A walkout by nearly 12,000 cabin crew is likely to bring widespread disruption to BA's 650 daily services. However, the airline has pledged to break the strike with 1,000 volunteer flight attendants drawn from the ranks of its non-cabin crew workforce, and is preparing to hire 23 airplanes, complete with their own trained crew.

The BA chief executive, Willie Walsh, said he hoped to operate a substantial proportion of the airline's Heathrow airport long-haul operations and a good number of short-haul flights.

BA has said it will operate its entire schedule from London City airport during the expected strike and has claimed more than two-thirds of its Gatwick-based crews will work normally.

Informal channels of communication are still open between BA and Unite via the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), Brendan Barber. However, sources close to the talks said there had been little movement in the past 24 hours.

It is understood that BA is willing to partially repeal the staffing cuts at the heart of the dispute and is considering putting around 184 cabin crew positions back on its 239-plane fleet. However, Unite wants 700 positions returned to BA aircraft and has proposed around £60m worth of cost savings to fund the proposal. BA says the figures are significantly short of its cost-cutting target.

Unite is also threatening to hold a consultative ballot over proposed changes to baggage handlers' contracts. If union members vote against BA's proposals an industrial action ballot will be held, although that move is several weeks away.

Unite argues it has been bypassed by BA, despite holding talks about the baggage handler contracts.

Steve Turner, the Unite national officer for civil aviation, said: "It is hugely concerning that BA feel that management by imposition is their preferred approach. Very soon, no worker at the airline will feel that either their job or their terms and conditions are safe. This instability cannot be healthy for the airline."

A BA spokesman said: "We are consulting with our ground-handling staff at Heathrow about potential changes to improve the way in which we work. Any talk of a ballot for industrial action is speculative and premature."

British IT expert held captive for more than two years after Baghdad kidnap laments not trying to escape
Watch the GuardianFilms investigation into how the hostages were taken to Iran

Peter Moore, the British IT expert who spent 31 months in captivity after being kidnapped in Iraq, has revealed how he thought he was about to be killed on the day of his release, spent his ordeal unable to see clearly without his glasses, and played table-tennis with a guard.

Moore said he regretted not trying to escape during the early days of his detention when the captives had the opportunity to kill a guard. The computer consultant from Lincoln said he had had a chance to flee when one of the two men watching over him fell ill.

The 36-year-old told Channel 4 News and the Times how he was seized, with four bodyguards, from a government building in Baghdad in May 2007. He was released in December last year and arrived home on New Year's Day.

Moore said he and his fellow captives were stripped down to their underpants during their capture. Later, his glasses were taken, leaving the short-sighted consultant unable to see clearly until his release.

Moore paid tribute to the other four men seized, saying he was "very grateful" for their help and the medical treatment they gave him after his abduction.

Jason Creswell, Jason Swindlehurst and Alec MacLachlan were shot dead and their bodies returned to Britain last year. Alan McMenemy, the fourth bodyguard, is also believed to be dead.

Moore told Channel 4 News that early in their detention he and Creswell were asked to treat the sick guard.The hostages discussed using a syringe to inject him with air bubbles and attempting to overpower the remaining captor.

"I was concerned it was going to go out of the frying pan into the fire. There were two of them with us but 100 outside. I think we should have done it in hindsight. It was the best chance we had. I think one or two would have been killed and one made it out.

"There was a woman downstairs with a child and we would have had to kill her too."

The men were seized at the end of May 2007, but they were held together only until July. Moore remained with McMenemy, chained side by side in cramped rooms with only a television for comfort until December, he told the Times.

Moore was training finance ministry workers how to spot misspent money when about 100 police in 20 vehicles stormed the building. Initially he believed he was being arrested. It was only when they began removing his clothes during the ride to Sadr City that he realised otherwise.

Moore, who has talked of being subjected to mock executions, said he was beaten on a near-daily basis and once subjected to severe punishment for allegedly breaking a lock.

"They tied my hands behind my back and put a chair next to the door. I was made to stand on the chair with my hands over the door and they pulled the chair out to leave me hanging. They did that four or five times. It was very painful. I was screaming in pain."

Moore said he tried to appeal to his captors' respect for family and religion, so invented a Brazilian wife and pretended to be Catholic. His act seemed to have worked - his kidnappers gave him a string of Islamic beads to pray with.

In early 2009, a major who spoke English ordered that Moore no longer be kept in chains. The two men watched tennis together on television. One day the major appeared with two table tennis bats and a ball.

"We got quite fast, playing for hours at a time," said Moore. "It was a good laugh." The kidnappers had made clear they wanted a prisoner exchange: the five British hostages for leaders who had been arrested by British forces in Iraq but held by the US military. "I just knew we were in it for the long haul," Moore said.

As his living conditions improved, he began to suspect that the other four hostages were dead. On the morning of 30 December last year, he was woken at 5am and told to get dressed in jeans and black top because he was going to be released. Moore refused to believe them. "I was just like, 'Go away,' and put the blanket over my head."

He was bundled into a car, transferred to a minibus, then to another car and finally driven to a driveway where he was met by a large group of Iraqi men in suits and others in combat gear with machineguns. "I thought, 'S***, I am going to die,'" he told the Times.

But a man stepped forward and introduced himself as Sami al-Askari, an Iraqi MP, and told Moore: "I am from the Iraqi government and you are a free man."

In his television interview, Moore contested Foreign Office claims that his kidnappers, from a Shia organisation, Asaib Ahl al-Haq, or the League of the Righteous, had requested a news blackout and insisted they wanted to publicise their message.

"They felt they complied with everything the British embassy said but still were not getting what they wanted," Moore said.

A Guardian investigation reported that the hostages were taken to Iran within a day of their kidnapping in an operation led and masterminded by the Quds Force, part of Iran's revolutionary guard.

But Moore believed he was held in houses in Basra and the cities of Hilla, Karbala and Baghdad during his captivity, although he conceded the men might have been driven across the border.

Iraqi intelligence sources told the Guardian the British captives were never made aware they had crossed the border and back within 24 hours of being seized.

The Foreign Office has continued to insist there was no evidence that Moore was held in Iran, despite claims by Iraqi intelligence that they told their British counterparts and the Foreign Office that the hostages were taken across the border.

General David Petraeus, the head of US central command, said Moore was "certainly" held in Iran for at least some of his time in captivity, although he told Reuters it was "difficult to say" what role the revolutionary guard played.

Until he takes bolder anti-car measures, Boris Johnson's plans to promote cycling in London are little more than hype

Here are two versions of the same story. The way the authorities tell it, London's "cycle revolution" is set to intensify thanks to the brilliant innovations of its mayor, Boris Johnson. May's completion of two of his promised dozen "cycle superhighways" linking the capital's suburbs with its core will be followed by the summer launch of his central London bike hire scheme. Mindful that apprehension deters many potential converts to pedal-power, he has just produced a cycle safety plan that firmly asserts that "Cycling levels in London have increased sharply in recent years while the rate of casualties has declined," and that Johnson wants these parallel trends maintained.

But some of London's two-wheel travellers relate the tale differently. One has made a video of riding a stretch of one of the superhighways-in-progress and isn't impressed. It seems to amount to a long, narrow strip of Smurf-blue where there were previously shorter narrow strips of green. I posted the clip here and high-grade comments ensued. All were critical, not least because the lanes aren't wider or more protected against incursions by motor vehicles. "I've yet to hear a single experienced cyclist say anything good about the 'superhighways" wrote JimG, who linked to this critique of Transport for London's plans. Its author, Dave Hembrow, was born in the UK but lives in the Netherlands. He says they do city cycling much better there.

And then there are the deaths. There were 13 in London last year and 15 in 2008. One took place near Guy's hospital on Tuesday, coinciding with the cycle safety plan's appearance. Another happened in Hackney the following day. Both followed collisions with tipper trucks. Lethal contact with large commercial vehicles is cyclists' greatest safety fear, one Boris Johnson surely shares given his "near-death experience" in Limehouse. The safety plan points out that a "significant growth" in the number of cycle journeys between 2003 and 2008 was accompanied by a relatively small increase in the number of cycling casualties of all kinds, but also acknowledges that collisions involving cyclists are "still one of the most serious challenges to road safety in the capital". Recorded injuries ranging from fatal to slight totalled 3,409 last year.

Anxiety about safety is a major obstacle to maximising cycling in London. Around half a million journeys are made on a bike each day, double the number in 2000. Yet this is a fraction of the number made by car, and Boris has argued that many of those could be cycle ones instead: a daily 2.4 million in the 12 Outer London boroughs alone - around half. His safety plan lists training courses, better information and education, improved vehicle technology and stronger action against irresponsible road-users as aspirations. His goal is for the present number of cycling journeys to have quadrupled by 2026. He's obviously working on it, not least by setting a conspicuous example. The London Cycling Campaign seems broadly behind him. But should he be doing more?

As a bus addict I'm unlikely to ever switch to two wheels in a big way, but until London's roads feel far less hostile to cyclists I remain reluctant to even sample joining their ranks. When commenters at my blog - enjoy their insights here and here - advocate doubling the width of cycle lanes, bold adjustments to road rules, markings and architecture or doing far more to highlight safe routes, it strikes a chord. I start imagining a future in which cars and trucks are minority road transport modes and buses and bicycles dominate. To reach it, though, would require the political will and skill to persuade voters to support bolder measures. The present mayor, mindful that motorists regard him as their friend, seems prepared to go only so far. Until a successor goes much further, the term "cycle revolution" will sound more like hype than reality to me.

General guidance is all very well. But it's not the place of religious leaders to provide a list of approved candidates

If last week's blogosphere was the equivalent of a giant pinball machine, which ball would makes its way around the entire table, hitting the bumpers again and again? The erroneously titled Dispatches: Britain's Islamic Republic is a worthy contender. It resulted in significant debate over the rules of engagement that Muslims should follow when immersing ourselves in the mainstream democratic process.

The programme accused the Islamic Forum Europe (IFE) - a group that operates out of the London Muslim Centre (LMC) in Whitechapel - of trying to infiltrate the Tower Hamlets Labour party and wielding disproportionate influence over its activities. Associates (both Muslim and non-Muslim) tell me that the IFE carries out valuable social welfare work, but they must be held to account over some of the speakers invited to LMC events, one of whom denounced perfume-wearing women as "adulteresses". Dispatches should have also looked at local authority cronyism more widely. This is a problem that extends far beyond the M25, and is a concern for all council tax-payers, regardless of the affiliation of the cronies in question.

However, what struck me was the template letters of complaint drafted prior to the programme's transmission; these were forwarded to many Muslim individual and organisations, with clear instructions to bombard Channel 4 with e-mails. Fair play to those who wanted to complain after viewing the programme, but the mentality behind these cut-and-paste letters of protest - when the public have not yet had the opportunity to make up their own minds - makes me deeply uncomfortable. It strips us of our agency as political actors and asks us to enter an auto-pilot mode of perpetual defensiveness. Unfortunately, elements of this mentality can also be found in a paper on the IFE's website, entitled Voting in Islam. This is an expansion of Sheikh Haitham al-Haddad's earlier work, "Why vote and who to vote for".

It starts off well, urging Muslims to use voting as a means of increasing social justice: "Muslims are recommended or even obliged to vote for the party who will be of most benefit on a national and international level, who will increase upon that which is good, or at least, lessen the extent of the current evil prevalent in the world today." This is a refreshing departure from the clerics who threaten their followers with hellfire for so much as daring to enter the ballot box; Sheikh al-Haddad maintains that anyone who believes voting to be an act of disbelief should not "impose his opinion on other Muslims". He then adds that Muslims should "exert the utmost effort to oppose those whose policies are against the welfare of humanity", and this is sound guidance which would benefit the entire electorate, irrespective of whether they hold religious or not.

However, on the subject of which party to actually vote for, he states that "individuals should avoid involving themselves in this process and rather should entrust this responsibility to the prominent Muslim organisations that have sufficient experience and ability to determine the issue according to the interests of the Muslims". His organisation of choice was the Muslim Association of Britain, who, in a "Here's one I made earlier" moment, had prepared a list of relevant candidates. Now it is one thing for religious leaders to highlight important issues that followers may consider when casting their vote, and even to point out commonalities between their own ideologies and the policies of certain parties. This is part of a healthy, functioning democracy. However, it is quite another thing to order members of a religious group to vote for a particular party or candidate. We have already seen the ramifications of this in the US: the Rev Jay Scott Newman, a Catholic priest from South Carolina, barred his parishioners from taking holy communion if they had voted for the Barack Obama, seen as a pro-abortion candidate - unless they made penance first. It is therefore not surprising that 89% of respondents to the British Social Attitudes Survey 2008 thought that people should follow their own conscience in matters of right and wrong, while only 6% said they should obey the teachings of religious leaders.

My organisation, British Muslims for Secular Democracy (BMSD), supports the right of people to exercise their own judgment when deciding who to vote for. I act as a consultant for the Citizenship Foundation's Young Muslim Leadership Network, whose website states, "Citizenship education is not about trying to fit everyone into the same mould", but rather "enabling citizens to make their own decisions". BMSD is currently undertaking a qualitative research project into factors affecting the voting choices of Muslim students, and the results will be published in Spring 2010.

Muslims are of course comprised of multiple identities, just like everyone else. Any combination of these could come to the fore when marking the cross on that all-important ballot paper. It is up to us to critically analyse the political, moral and social issues facing us today and act as agents for positive change.

Last year, British Gas carried out some works on the round-a-bout that joins the three wards that make-up the 5-Ways Neigbourhood; the round-a-bout joins the wards East Marsh, Sidney Sussex and Heneage and is on the boundary of Grimsby and Cleethorpes. 

Five Ways round-a-bout is a prominent feature in the centre of neighbourhood and is highly visible for many local residents, and over a number of years North East Lincolnshire Council have made the round-a-bout a prominent feature - it's always looked attractive in appearance. 

But last year, planting was somewhat destroyed following the works carried by contractors working on behalf of British Gas. I am pleased to say that an amicable solution as now been reached between all parties, and the round-a-bout is once again beginning to look like its 'former glory', following a recent garden makeover by council staff which was funded by the contractors who worked on behalf of British Gas.

Contractors working on the new Grant Thorold Library are now beginning to make excellent progress, and their work is now in the final stages of construction.

Initially there were some early setbacks with knotweed and weather, and the contractors are still on schedule. If the good progress continues, it is expected that new library should be open before the end of May.

The scaffolding has now been removed from most of the building as the walls and roof are all but completed. The curtain glazed wall has been installed, as have most of the doors and windows, and the first electrical fix is well under way. Even at this stage in the build we can all see it's going to be a library to be proud of!

The plants for the green walls are growing well, despite the cold winter weather and will be in place on schedule, but first the battens have to be constructed and the rainwater harvesting system installed.

The next few weeks will see the installation of the shutters and the mesh barrier wall, as well as mains electrical and gas connections.

The library shelving and furniture have all been ordered, and the staff and are currently processing lots of new books ready for the move, as well as having a spring clean at the old library, before we pack that up ready for demolition.

As for the mural wall, we are asking the After School Club members for their ideas on how to design the wall - characters from books seems to be a favourite at the moment, but there's some time to go so that may well change! I will also be talking to the children at EMAG to ask what they would like to see, so need to set a date to visit them in the next couple of weeks.

Then in the first week of the Easter holidays we will couple of workshops at the current library for children to work with artists from Artlandish, so that a final design can be drawn up. Hopefully having the children involved so heavily in this mural, (as well as an anti-graffiti coating) will help us keep it graffiti free, although I will be setting up a maintenance agreement with Artlandish too, so that any artwork can be repaired if required!

Spring Conference 2010: Birmingham

For the first time, Birmingham will be playing host to the Liberal Democrats' spring conference. Whether you are attending or not, we want you to be able to be part of it. All the latest speeches and motions, videos and photos will be available online.

Read more >

On Saturday Nick will be holding an online Q & A for all those not attending conference. Find out more >

Nick Clegg calls for a rebalance of British foreign policy "The real truth is that the future of British foreign policy is as much in the balance as the future of our economy, or the future of our political system," said Nick in a speech to Chatham House on Wednesday.

Read more > 

Lynne Featherstone launches policy for young people 

This week Lynne launched the party's 'Free to be Young' policy paper outlining Liberal Democrat commitments to youth in Britain. The paper will be discussed this Saturday in Birmingham.

Read more > 

Liberal Democrats celebrate International Women's Day

Monday saw the launch of the Campaign for Body Confidence to coincide with International Women's Day. Women across the party pledged their support and commitment to equality.

Read more > 

Graphics competition: ACT Creative

A couple of weeks ago we launched a competition for creative people everywhere to design and submit a poster based on the theme of 'Fairness.'

There is still time from you to submit your entries via our social network ACT. The best entries will be put to a vote by ACT users and the winner will support our online election campaign

Enter now >