Mandatory porn site age checks urged

28 March 2014 Last updated at 00:14 By Leo Kelion Technology reporter

A UK industry regulator has called for the law to be changed to require pornography sites to carry out age checks before granting access.

Video-on-demand watchdog Atvod said the government must act to protect children from seeing graphic adult material.

It said credit and debit card operators would be forbidden from processing payments from British customers to sites that did not comply.

But one campaigner said the action would be a "worthless gesture".

The Authority for Television On Demand (Atvod) said the matter was so urgent that it was "critical the legislation is enacted during this Parliament".

To back up its demand, the body commissioned market research firm Nielsen Netview to install equipment that monitored the online habits of 45,000 desktop PC and laptop users over the course of a month. The volunteers were picked to reflect a cross-section of the wider population.

The survey indicated that during that period:

• 6% of children aged 15 years or younger had accessed an adult website
• 5% of visitors to such sites had been under-18
• One website alone - Pornhub - had been visited by 112,000 boys in the UK aged between 12 and 17-years-old
• Of the wider population, 23% of those who had used the net over the month had visited an adult site
• Visitors to adult sites spent an average of 15 minutes looking at them during each visit and typically clocked up two-and-a-half hours of time in total over the month

Atvod added that the survey probably underestimated the scale of the issue since smartphone and tablet use was not included in the figures.

Porn licences

The regulator already forces UK-based sites to carry out age verification checks before explicit photographs and videos can be viewed.

This can be done by requiring valid credit card details, or other personal information that can be cross-referenced with the electoral roll or another ID database.

However, the body said the vast majority of online pornography was downloaded from businesses based overseas, over which it had no control.

To tackle this, Atvod said it wanted all adult sites to request a licence that would only be granted if they had age checks in place. Payment processors would be ordered not to handle fees for premium services - such as higher definition or longer clips - from UK citizens to unregistered sites.

"We're a very substantial market and to access the money that's flowing from the UK would be quite a powerful incentive to introduce restrictions," Atvod's chief executive, Pete Johnson told the BBC.

Mixed reactions

The UK government has already pressured the UK's major internet service providers to use software filters that automatically block adult material unless households specifically ask for them to be turned off.

However, a spokesman for the coalition government indicated it needed time to consider Atvod's request.

"We will continue to work with industry and others to look at where further action could be taken, including around age restrictions," he said.

Labour has, however, already come out in support of the move.

"It is only by threatening to cut off the flow of money that we will force these websites to act responsibly, and payment processors need legal clarity before they can act to help achieve this," said shadow culture minister, Helen Goodman.

However, Sex and Censorship - which describes itself as a free speech campaign group - said the move would prove ineffective.

"It won't make any difference to the sites that give all their videos away for free and sell advertising because they don't need credit card processing," said Jerry Barnett.

"And some sites are already accepting bitcoin and other anonymous online payment systems. A clampdown on card payments would just accelerate this trend.

"Even if implemented, this measure would have no effect on the range of content available to British consumers."

Mr Barnett previously ran a UK-based adult website himself until he was fined for failing to prevent children accessing its content.

'Significant win'

Mindgeek, the Luxembourg-based operator of adult site Pornhub, said it already carried out age verification checks in countries where this was required. But it indicated this did not address the crux of the problem.

"There is no single 'silver bullet' solution to protecting children and adolescents from potentially harmful content and interactions in their digital lives," said a spokeswoman.

"The best solution lies in a multi-layered approach in which the parent assumes the central role."

Atvod acknowledged its proposal was only part of the solution, but it insisted that the scheme could still be designed to make a difference.

"The material that appears on the free services is placed there by the paid services to attract customers to sign up to subscriptions.

"As long as the paid service placed content on a free service without age verification it would be in breach of its licensing conditions and so would not be able to access funds from the UK.

"We're not saying this will stop all children seeing all pornography online.

"But our argument is that even if you reduce the number of children who are accessing hardcore pornography online by 10%, that would be a significant win."

15.36 | 0 komentar | Read More

'20% would spurn' gay wedding invite

28 March 2014 Last updated at 02:18

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

"Barely will midnight have struck before gay Britons will... be celebrating their new status as married couples", reports Robert Pigott

About one in five British adults would turn down an invitation to a same-sex wedding, research suggests.

As legislation allowing gay couples to marry comes into force on Saturday, the BBC Radio 5 live survey also found men were nearly twice as likely to spurn the nuptials as women.

The poll of 1,007 people found 68% agreed gay marriage should be permitted, with 26% opposing it.

A gay rights charity said people's attitudes were "incredibly positive".

A spokesman for lesbian, gay and bisexual charity, Stonewall, said it was important to highlight the fact that four in five people would accept an invitation to a gay wedding.

'Bigoted or intolerant'

But Catholic Voices, which represents the Catholic Church, said the findings of the survey reflected the reality that people remained "deeply uncomfortable" with being honest about their true feelings on the meaning of marriage.

Continue reading the main story

As gay Britons celebrate their new status as married couples for the first time in England and Wales their legal status will be little changed.

Civil partnerships - available to them since 2005 - confer virtually all the legal benefits of marriage. But for many it was never enough.

The distinction between the modern invention of civil partnership, and marriage, an institution dating back for centuries, left the impression in some minds that gay relationships were inferior.

For them, only full, visible, equality would do - and politicians agreed. Most religious groups remain opposed - and Radio 5 live's poll shows they are not alone in deeply held objections to gay marriage.

However, with support in wider society growing strongly, faith groups are feeling the effects of internal divisions about an issue that arouses passionate opinions.

Father Edmund Montgomery, a member of the organisation and a Catholic priest in Greater Manchester, said: "As the Church, we love those seeking a same-sex union, but our love for them requires we tell them the true meaning of marriage, something which that fifth of respondents find difficult but have the integrity to do by turning down the invitation.

"In our modern culture it is increasingly difficult to have an open debate without being labelled as bigoted or intolerant."

He continued: "It is a great irony that those seeking to increase tolerance do not extend that to those who disagree with them."

Fr Montgomery, who at 29 is the youngest priest in the diocese of Shrewsbury, said he thought more people might turn down an invitation to a gay wedding were they not concerned they might be regarded as extreme.

He added that, as marriage predates "the State", it should not be the government's place to change its meaning.

With same-sex weddings in England and Wales permitted for the first time from Saturday, the research suggested a substantial proportion of the population had reservations about the issue - with 42% disagreeing that gay marriages were no different from heterosexual marriages.

Of the 1,007 British adults polled by ComRes for the Stephen Nolan Show, 22% said they would spurn an invitation to attend a same-sex wedding ceremony.

'Landmark moment'

Some 29% of men asked said they would not attend, compared with 16% of women.

The research also found that younger people were more likely to support same-sex marriage, with 80% of 18 to 34-year-olds backing it, compared with 44% of over-65s.

Of those polled, women were more likely to support gay marriage than men, with 75% of women for it compared with 61% of men in favour.

A majority of 59% of people asked agreed a person should not be considered homophobic for opposing the legislation permitting gay marriage.

Stonewall said the organisation recognised that not everyone would support same-sex marriage, but that the legislation permitting it should not affect them.

"Same-sex couples are living in committed, loving relationships and people have realised that the sky has not fallen in," the spokesman said.

He said the prevalence of civil partnerships had been an "incredibly important factor" in paving the way for same-sex marriage.

"This is a landmark moment and for the first time ever, someone young growing up knowing they are gay can have the exact same avenues open to them, [and know] that their relationship will be valued the same way their parents' was," the spokesman said.

"As campaigners and MPs have said in the past, the first thing a parent says to their son or daughter when they tell them they are gay is, 'Oh, you'll never be able to get married.' Well now they can."

15.36 | 0 komentar | Read More

Germany offers UK eurozone backing

28 March 2014 Last updated at 05:43

The EU must ensure non-eurozone countries, such as the UK, are legally protected in the event of further European integration, the finance minister of Germany has said.

Chancellor George Osborne and his German counterpart said any changes to EU treaties must "guarantee fairness".

Writing in the Financial Times, the pair say non-eurozone nations must not be put at a "systematic disadvantage".

It comes a month after Germany's leader Angela Merkel visited the UK.

During the visit she and Prime Minister David Cameron discussed possible changes to the EU.

'Optimism'

Mr Cameron has said that if the Conservatives win the 2015 election, he will seek to renegotiate the terms of the UK's membership of the European Union and put the outcome to an in-out referendum of the British people in 2017.

One of Mr Cameron's key negotiating demands ahead of the referendum is that the interests of non-eurozone states must be protected.

In the joint article, Mr Osborne and the German finance minister Wolfgang Schauble wrote that "as the euro area continues to integrate, it is important that countries outside the euro area are not at a systematic disadvantage in the EU".

It is the first time Germany has indicated that countries such as the UK must not be put at a disadvantage by eurozone nations' moves to integrate more closely.

Writing together, the pair said: "So future EU reform and treaty change must include reform of the governance framework to put euro area integration on a sound legal basis, and guarantee fairness for those EU countries inside the single market but outside the single currency."

They said economic recovery in Europe was "vital", but warned that the European economy had "stalled" over the last six years.

The pair wrote that they "approach European reform with optimism", adding that "looking ahead we can create a flexible and outward-looking EU".

Mrs Merkel, who met the Queen during her visit to UK, said after meeting Mr Cameron that she was willing to work with the UK to reform the European Union but warned it would not be "a piece of cake".

And during an address to Parliament she praised the "unparalleled success" of the EU free market but stressed that "we need to change the political shape of the EU in keeping with the times".

She told the UK's gathered political leaders the EU had to become stronger, saying: "In order to attain this goal we need a strong United Kingdom with a strong voice inside the European Union.

"If we have that, we will be able to make the necessary changes for the benefit of all."

15.36 | 0 komentar | Read More

Benefit change 'sees 6% move home'

28 March 2014 Last updated at 08:17

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Marion Smith and her family have been told it will be "decades" before they can move to a big enough house

About 6% of social housing tenants in Britain affected by changes to benefits partly designed to cut under-occupancy have moved home, BBC research suggests.

Ministers claim the policy - dubbed the bedroom tax by critics - will free up big homes and save taxpayers £1m a day.

The employment minister said 6% - 30,000 people - was "not a failure".

BBC analysis of the data from social housing providers also suggested 28% of affected tenants were in rent arrears, a year after the changes came in.

But Employment Minister Esther McVey disputed the figures on debt, saying her own feedback from local authorities and the National Housing Federation found an "indiscernible number" of tenants were in arrears.

She said 50% of people affected by the change were already in debt.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

Michael Buchanan BBC News

---

This research suggests the government is on course to meet a key target, namely to cut the overall housing benefit bill.

Few people moving means more people contributing to their own rent. But doing so it seems will come at the cost of another goal - cutting overcrowding.

Many simply can't move, repeatedly failing to find smaller properties. With demand for new homes constantly outstripping supply, too many families are likely to stay in crowded, unhealthy households.

The increase in rent arrears is not only a problem for those tenants unable to pay. While it could lead to evictions and heartache, it is also likely to cause problems for councils and housing associations.

Not only will their debts increase but their ability to invest in new homes will also be reduced. Given they're the main builders of affordable homes, it will be unfortunate if a policy intended to cut overcrowding leads to fewer homes being built.

Among the benefits changes introduced on 1 April 2013 was the removal of what ministers called the "spare room subsidy" - social housing tenants deemed to have one spare bedroom have had their housing benefit reduced by 14%. Those with two or more spare bedrooms had reductions of 25%.

Labour dubbed the change a "bedroom tax" and promised to scrap it if it wins the next election.

'Knock-on costs'

The government had argued there were two reasons for cutting housing benefit for those of working age living in social housing with spare bedrooms - to reduce the benefits bill and to help the 300,000 people living in overcrowded accommodation.

But the BBC research - involving 331 social housing providers across England, Scotland and Wales with Freedom of Information requests submitted to council and surveys of housing associations - found just under 6% of tenants whose benefit was cut had moved house.

It also found that while most were paying their rent, 28% had fallen into arrears for the first time in the past 12 months.

Prof Rebecca Tunstall, director of the centre for housing policy at the University of York, said: "There were two major aims to this policy - one was to encourage people to move, and the other was to save money for the government in housing benefit payments.

"But those two aims are mutually exclusive. The government has achieved one to a greater extent and the other to a lesser extent."

Affected tenants who had not moved were being forced to make up the shortfall in their income, leading to extra pressure being placed on them to make ends meet, said Prof Tunstall.

Continue reading the main story

'We feel trapped'

Marion Smith lives in a two-bedroom apartment in Dyce, Aberdeen, with her husband Mark and their three children. They are currently 36th in line for a new property in the area.

"It can be quite claustrophobic staying here," said Mrs Smith. "We feel kind of trapped in our situation at the moment, so that impacts on us.

"The children are all in one room, so it can be stressful for them. They don't get any space away from each other. Our oldest child is eight and she's at the stage where she's needing a bit of space now and hasn't got the same interests as my youngest child, who's four."

The family had hoped the benefit changes would result in more properties being freed up. "It's not fair for people like us at the moment," Mrs Smith said.

With one property available each year in her area, Mrs Smith said her family faced waiting for "decades". "Realistically, we're going to have to wait until I'm in full-time employment and can start saving for a deposit and can buy somewhere," she said. "We've accepted that, although it's depressing."

Asked if the policy had proved successful, she added: "To some extent it's achieved some of its aims. It's achieved an aim of making a saving in housing benefit for national government, probably slightly less than they'd originally hoped for.

"But there are other knock-on costs. There's a social cost for tenants and a cost of having less efficient and fewer new homes. And you can imagine that those costs can start to mount up.

She said that while tenants in arrears could have been in debt for other reasons, the fact remains that there is "new debt for local authorities and that means fewer pounds to go round to spend on improvements for others".

'Spiralling bill'

Carl Mitchell, assistant director of Riverside Housing Association, based in Hull, said the service had noticed an impact in the past 12 months.

He said: "Approximately two thirds of all tenants affected by the bedroom tax essentially struggle to pay the rent and associated bills.

"So by default that usually means that people are ether falling into rent arrears or having to compromise on other things such as fuel costs and the cost of living in respect of food. So there's a knock on effect elsewhere, it's not just rent arrears.

"From Riverside as a service, the lack of income coming in does mean it impacts on the new build properties that we have to build, and services that we offer to tenants."

Labour's Chris Bryant, the shadow work and pensions minister, said: "Trapped with nowhere else to go, thousands of people have had no choice but to fork out an extra £14 a week.

Continue reading the main story

'I had no choice'

When the changes came into force, Jayne Dennis was one of those who moved from her three-bedroom home.

Ms Dennis said her children had moved out and she was then under-occupying by two rooms, with a cut to her benefits of £12 per room. "With that really, I had no choice but to move," she said.

In her old home, she started to build up arrears. "I was finding it difficult to pay that," she said. "You've got your other bills at the same time. You don't pay it all, you pay like half of it, because you haven't got the money."

She said her old home had been vacant for three months. She said. "You'd think they'd have filled it by now, but no. I think it's because we're out of the way and a lot of people don't like to be out of the way."

"David Cameron's government have pretended this was all about helping people who are overcrowded, but in truth the bedroom tax is a cruel, unfair and appallingly administered policy."

But Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said: "It was absolutely necessary that we fixed the broken system which just a year ago allowed the taxpayer to cover the £1m daily cost of spare rooms in social housing.

"We have taken action to help the hundreds of thousands of people living in cramped, overcrowded accommodation and to control the spiralling housing benefit bill, as part of the government's long-term economic plan.

"Our reforms ensure we can sustain a strong welfare safety net, and we are providing an extra £165m next year to support the most vulnerable claimants."

Ms McVey said the benefit change was helping to get social housing tenants out of debt.

"I question your [BBC] figures because actually what I'm hearing back from the local authorities and the National Housing Federation is that an indiscernible number of people are getting in to arrears," she told BBC Breakfast.

"The statistics that we're getting back are that we're helping people to live within their means and move to a property they can afford.

"We've got to look at this from a full 360 degree angle. It's very difficult, I don't dispute that, but we're doing the right thing."

15.36 | 0 komentar | Read More

30m financial policies to be probed

28 March 2014 Last updated at 08:25

The City regulator is to investigate about 30 million insurance company policies over concerns that customers are subject to "unfair" conditions.

The investigation will include pensions, endowments, investment bonds and life insurance policies sold in the UK between the 1970s and 2000.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) will look into policies which penalise savers who want to switch providers.

The FCA told the Daily Telegraph it might "intervene on exit charges".

'Zombie' funds

A large number of policies sold to consumers in the 30 years leading to the millennium include terms which penalise those attempting to switch to a cheaper provider.

Some savers face losing up to half of their savings if they move to another company.

The FCA also said it feared "zombie" funds, which are closed to new clients, are being used by insurers to pay bills from other parts of their businesses.

Details of the investigation will be published on Monday, as part of the FCA's annual business plan.

Clive Adamson, the FCA's director of supervision, told the Daily Telegraph: "We want to find out how closed-book products are being serviced by insurance companies, as we are concerned insurers are allocating an unfair amount of overheads to historic funds.

"As firms cut prices and create new products, there is a danger that customers with older contracts are forgotten," Mr Adamson added.

"We want to ensure they get a fair deal."

Independent pensions expert John Ralfe told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that the figures "suggest that there's a very large amount of money at stake".

"It's £150bn in total," Mr Ralfe said. "That's quite a chunky piece of work for the FCA to be looking at."

He added that the FCA seemed to be saying that, rather than fining pension companies, the remedy was for individuals to exit these policies without penalty.

15.36 | 0 komentar | Read More

Clegg and Farage clash on migration

26 March 2014 Last updated at 22:06

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Mr Clegg and Mr Farage each had one minute to set out their position as the debate began. Courtesy LBC/Global TV

Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage have clashed over who is telling the truth about EU immigration.

The pair were taking part in a live TV and radio debate about whether Britain should stay in the European Union.

Mr Clegg - who wants Britain to stay in - said the UKIP leader's claims about how many Romanians and Bulgarians might come to the UK were "simply not true".

But Mr Farage denied this and said EU immigration was costing Britons jobs and driving down wages.

The exchanges on immigration were the most heated in the hour-long debate, which ranged across issues such as trade, the Human Rights Act, the EU referendum, gay marriage and political integrity.

'Scare' tactics

BBC chief political correspondent Norman Smith said "there was no knockout blow" and both men had given a good account of themselves and their case.

Continue reading the main story

"Start Quote

Much will be written about who won and who lost this debate. That, though, ignores the reason both men agreed to take part - they knew they could both be winners"

End Quote

In a YouGov poll of 1,003 voters, some 57% thought that Nigel Farage had performed best in this evening's LBC debate and 36% Nick Clegg.

Mr Clegg - who stared down the TV lens during his opening statement as he did during the 2010 election debates - made jobs the centre of his pitch to the audience.

Mr Farage said Britain needed to regain control of its own laws and borders, saying the European Union was a "failed project" and it was time to leave it.

He also hit out at the EU's role in the Ukraine crisis, saying: "We should hang our head in shame - we have given false hope - the EU does have blood on its hands in the Ukraine."

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

The issue of immigration sparked a fiery exchange between Mr Clegg and Mr Farage. Courtesy LBC/Global TV

The UKIP leader made a few jokes - but it was an earnest, and at times, impassioned battle of wits between two politicians who, despite being former colleagues as MEPs in Brussels, are diametrically opposed on the European Union.

Mr Farage attacked Mr Clegg for being part of the political elite who had "never had a proper job" but the pair mostly steered clear of personal attacks.

Mr Clegg brandished a UKIP leaflet from the Eastleigh by-election, highlighting its claim that 29 million Romanians and Bulgarians were poised to come to the UK - a claim he said was wrong and a "scare" tactic.

Continue reading the main story

"Start Quote

They couldn't bear to look at each other, eyes fixed firmly on the studio audience or TV cameras. "

End Quote

Mr Farage said: "I am not claiming 29 million have the right to come to Britain, I am saying 485 million people have the total, unconditional right to come to this country."

He said the accession of eastern European countries to the EU meant that "for hundreds of thousands of people, working in trades like the building industry, we have had a massive oversupply of labour and you've seen your wages go down over the last 10 years as the cost of living has gone up, and that is not fair on working people in this country."

Mr Clegg hit back, saying immigration was good for the economy - claiming the NHS would "collapse" without foreign workers - and denied the UKIP leader's claims that it was uncontrolled.

"I am not prepared to see anyone lose their job on the altar of Nigel Farage's anti-European dogma," he said.

'Crumbling EU'

On trade, Mr Farage said "people like Nick don't think Britain is good enough" to strike its own deals with countries such as India and China.

The UKIP leader said the UK was now "the eurozone's biggest export market in the world" and would hold "the whip hand" in obtaining good terms in any trade negotiations following exit.

But Mr Clegg said: "It's not the 1950s, we can't turn the clock back.

"We have got new powers on the world stage - Brazil, China, India - and we get more clout by being part of the world's biggest economy."

At the start of the hour-long clash, Mr Farage won the coin toss (of a pound coin) to decide who made their opening statement first, but said: "I will ask Nick to open the batting."

"Make no mistake - if we cut ourselves off from Europe, from the countries that we trade with more than anyone else, then our hard-won economic recovery will simply be thrown away," said Mr Clegg.

He said he wanted "a Britain that leads in the world by standing tall in our own European backyard, a Britain prepared to work with other countries on the things we can't possibly sort out on our own."

Mr Clegg said: "We are better off in Europe - richer, stronger, safer - and that's why I will fight to keep us in, for the sake of jobs, for the sake of our clout in the world, for the sake of Britain."

But Mr Farage replied: "This debate is between a tired status quo defending a crumbling EU that frankly isn't working any more, and a fresh approach that says let's be friendly with Europe, let's trade with Europe, but let's not be governed by their institutions."

'Real question'

The UKIP leader said that if Britain was voting now on whether to join the EU, it would be presented with the offer "to join a club that will cost £55m a day as a membership fee, and there will be thousands of new laws over which our own Parliament and you the electorate can make no difference, and mean an open border, unconditionally, to 485 million people from across the whole of Europe - many of them from very poor countries - who can come here to work and live and settle and bring their families".

He said that the UK would also be told it would have to cut links with the Commonwealth and other English-speaking countries as a result of joining the club.

And he told the audience: "I know the result of that referendum: You wouldn't join it."

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Conservative minister Anna Soubry: "What (the public) want is the opportunity to have a referendum. "

The first EU debate was hosted by radio station LBC. On 2 April, round two will be televised live at the same time on BBC Two.

Prime Minister David Cameron, who has promised an in-out referendum if the Conservatives win the next election and Labour leader Ed Miliband, who says he will only sanction a referendum if further powers are handed to Brussels, have opted not to take part in the debates.

Conservative minister Anna Soubry said Mr Cameron's decision not to take part was "not really of any relevance at all" and "the real question" was who could deliver a referendum.

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Jonathan Ashworth, Labour shadow minister: "Is it the big issue on people's minds? I don't know"

Labour's shadow Cabinet Office minister Jon Ashworth said it had been an "amusing" debate but did not mean much to ordinary voters worried about the cost of living.

For the Scottish National Party, MSP Aileen McLeod said: "Scotland's always been much more pro-European than other parts of the UK

"Our interests are best served by being part and parcel of the EU."

Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood added: "There are one in 10 jobs in Wales reliant on our membership. Civic society in Wales is united in wanting Wales to remain as a member of the EU.

"So the debate that took place tonight was one that wasn't really focussing on Wales's interests, and Wales's part in this debate."

15.37 | 0 komentar | Read More

New access to pension savings begins

27 March 2014 Last updated at 00:00

The first stage of the overhaul of pensions, announced in the Budget, has come into force with retirees given greater access to their pension pots.

New pensioners are now allowed to take a maximum of £30,000 from their pension savings as a lump sum, up from £18,000.

This is an interim arrangement before full flexibility over pension savings takes effect next April.

However, there are fears that some new retirees will take the wrong decisions owing to a lack of advice.

Concerns

The changes mean:

• Pension savings of up to £30,000 can be taken as a lump sum by those aged 60 and over, up from a previous maximum of £18,000
• The maximum amount that can be taken as income from a pension - under an arrangement known as capped drawdown - has risen
• Those with a guaranteed pension income of more than £12,000 a year can draw down an unlimited amount from their pension pot. Previously income needed to hit more than £20,000
• A small pension pot of less than £10,000 can be taken as cash by anyone aged 60 or over, regardless of their total pension wealth. Previously a small pot, among various savings pension pots, was judged to be less than £2,000.

The government said that about 400,000 people would have more options in the next 12 months when it came to accessing their pension savings as a result of the changes. The changes affect those with defined contribution pensions.

From next April, the overhaul will go further, giving retirees complete control over what they do with their pension savings.

'Urgency'

There has been criticism from the insurance industry, which said that Chancellor George Osborne had only given them 10 days to prepare for the changes.

Huw Evans, of the Association of British Insurers (ABI), said there was particular concern over the the rules for those who had bought an "irreversible" annuity - an annual pension income for the rest of their life - just before the chancellor's announcement.

"Insurers remain committed to working with each other closely to help customers who wish to exercise their 'cooling-off' rights but needs the government to do its part to recognise the urgency of clarifying the post-Budget situation it has created," he said.

Joanne Segars, chief executive of the National Association of Pension Funds (NAPF), said that it would be a huge undertaking to organise good quality guidance, as promised by the chancellor, in time for April next year.

She said that people needed help and support when making major decisions about financing their retirement.

This guarantee of guidance will not be in place in time for those making decisions under the new temporary rules over the next 12 months.

15.37 | 0 komentar | Read More

Councils 'divert' public health cash

27 March 2014 Last updated at 01:25

Councils in England are using public health budgets to fund other services, the British Medical Journal has said.

Local councils in England took over responsibility - and funding - for public health last April.

The BMJ says Freedom of Information requests reveal a third have stopped at least one public health service, with money being spent on other services such as parks and leisure instead.

But the Local Government Association said the report was "scaremongering".

A spokesman said: "Spending levels on public health have remained consistent and it is inaccurate and wholly misleading to suggest that local authorities have been siphoning off funds to prop up services elsewhere."

'Diversion'

The BMJ report says it found "examples of councils reducing funding for a wide range of public health services, including those for substance misuse, sexual health, smoking cessation, obesity, and school nursing".

Public health funds had been diverted to other areas including trading standards, citizens' advice bureaux, domestic abuse services, housing, parks and green spaces, and sport and leisure centres, it said.

The BMJ contacted all 152 councils to ask for information on all services commissioned and decommissioned since April 2013 and plans for the coming financial year.

Of the 143 that replied, almost a third (45) had cut at least one service, while others had reduced funding to other services.

Gabriel Scally, a former regional director of public health for the South West and now professor of public health and planning at the University of the West of England, Bristol, told the BMJ: "Of course, local authorities are having their budgets reduced, but the Department of Health has provided that funding to local authorities to spend on public health, not to be siphoned off to prop up other services.

"It's robbing Peter to pay Paul. They maintain that NHS funding will be protected, but it is being used for non-NHS purposes."

There are also concerns about unfilled director of public health posts, with a quarter vacant or staffed by temporary directors, the BMJ reports.

'Not anxious'

But a spokesman for the Local Government Association, which represents councils, defended funds being used in different ways.

He said: "Councils are investing just as much as previous arrangements in public health services, and indeed are supporting wider determinants of health too.

Continue reading the main story

Many services - such as housing, planning, leisure and recreation, and environmental services - are crucial in keeping people fit and healthy"

End Quote Local Government Association

"Many services - such as housing, planning, leisure and recreation, and environmental services - are crucial in keeping people fit and healthy.

"We are convinced that the most effective use of resources to improve public health is to combine the public health professional workforce, with its specialist expertise and intelligence, with mainstream council plans and services.

"The key is to develop services that are locally appropriate, efficient and effective in improving outcomes."

He added: "Councils must account each quarter for their public health spend across 18 areas. The rules are clear and involve sign off by the director of finance or chief executive."

Duncan Selbie, chief executive at Public Health England, said: "We have been perfectly clear that the public health grant is there for improving the public's health and the conditions describing what this means preclude substitution and savings towards balancing the books."

He added: "We are not anxious about local government taking their new public health responsibilities extremely seriously - we know they are.

"Local authorities don't have to tell us or ask permission as to how they spend their public health grant, but they will be judged on their outcomes."

Dr Janet Atherton, president of the Association of Directors of Public Health said "Public health responsibilities have transferred into local government at a particularly challenging time financially for councils.

"This makes it more important than ever that the ring-fenced public health grant is used well to achieve the best health outcomes and value for money."

She added: "The pattern of spend within the public health grant should rightly change over time, by decommissioning services that are not achieving good outcomes and reinvesting in higher priority areas."

But she said it was important to fill vacant director posts.

15.37 | 0 komentar | Read More

Police 'fail domestic abuse victims'

27 March 2014 Last updated at 08:11 By Dominic Casciani Home affairs correspondent, BBC News

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

One woman tells of her experience of abuse and police failings

Thousands of people are at risk of harm or even murder because of widespread police failure in England and Wales to tackle domestic abuse, a report says.

The response from many police forces is alarming and ineffective, the report by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary said.

Home Secretary Theresa May said she would chair a new group to look at the issue and called for a radical change to the way police responded to it.

Police chiefs said they were working to improve their response, despite cuts.

'Serial offenders'

Greater Manchester, Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Gloucestershire police forces were specifically criticised in the report, which said Bedfordshire had only one dedicated domestic violence officer.

Continue reading the main story

Forces criticised

• Greater Manchester Police
• Bedfordshire
• Gloucestershire
• Cambridgeshire

And it accused forces of unacceptable weaknesses despite domestic abuse being linked to 8% of crimes and police chiefs saying abuse was a priority.

Of 600 domestic assault files, half did not include pictures of injuries - a standard piece of evidence for a prosecution - the report said.

HMIC said police received more than one million calls a year relating to domestic abuse and almost 58,000 victims - the vast majority of them women - were at risk of serious harm or murder. It said three women a fortnight were being killed by a partner or former partner and a third of all assaults recorded by the police related to domestic violence.

In an exceptionally critical report, HMIC said chief officers must recognise that domestic abuse constituted a major problem that demanded comparable resources and focus to those devoted to tackling other high volume crimes such as burglary.

The report said only eight out of 43 forces were responding well to domestic abuse.

HMIC said that victims faced a "lottery" in how they were treated.

Sixteen of the 43 forces had no systems in place to prioritise calls from known victims or to prepare emergency response officers, and HMIC blamed many of the failings on the culture and ethos of individual officers.

"HMIC is concerned about the poor attitudes that some police officers display towards victims of domestic abuse," said the report.

"Victims told us that they were frequently not taken seriously, that they felt judged and that some officers demonstrated a considerable lack of empathy and understanding."

HM Inspector of Constabulary Zoe Billingham said three out of 10 police statements were missing "very important" pieces of information, while arrests were made in just 45% of cases in some police force areas.

"We're asking them to do their job - and their job is, where there's a crime that looks like it's been committed, to arrest. And if they don't they need to give a justification for not arresting," she told BBC Radio 4's Today Programme.

Mrs May, who commissioned the report, said it made depressing reading and the findings were deeply worrying.

"HMIC makes a series of recommendations to forces and I expect them all to be implemented quickly," she said.

"I am establishing a new national oversight group, which I will chair myself. I expect chief constables to respond to this report by changing radically their response to domestic violence."

'Second-class crime'

Assistant Chief Constable Louisa Rolfe, of the Association of Chief Police Officers said domestic abuse presented "a huge challenge" to police forces.

"It's complex, it's difficult, and it's not something we can do alone," she told BBC Breakfast.

Continue reading the main story

Forces praised

• Lancashire
• Dorset
• Durham
• Norfolk
• Northumbria
• Suffolk
• Thames Valley
• Warwickshire

The UK's justice system "doesn't always lend itself to the complexities of personal relationships", she added.

ACC Rolfe said there was "really good practice" in some forces.

Diana Barran, chief executive of charity Co-ordinated Action Against Domestic Abuse (CAADA), said Police and Crime Commissioners and Chief Constables had a responsibility to tackle the problem.

"We look forward to seeing the leadership, accountability and transparency that can move domestic violence from being treated as a second-class crime by the police to one where victims get the response that they deserve," she said.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said Labour had been warning that action against domestic abuse has "deteriorated" for three years, branding the situation a "national scandal".

"We need answers from the home secretary about why things are getting so much worse and what she will do to improve action by the police, prosecution and support services too," she said.

15.37 | 0 komentar | Read More

'Big six' face competition inquiry

27 March 2014 Last updated at 08:17

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Dermot Nolan, Ofgem: "No evidence of a cartel but there's weak competition"

Regulators will investigate whether the "big six" UK energy suppliers are preventing effective competition in the UK energy market.

The investigation will be by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and is expected to take 18 months.

Regulators have spent three months looking at how vigorously the six largest suppliers compete, and how they can remove uncertainty from the market.

Regulators also looked at market share and how new entrants can compete.

The big six - SSE, Scottish Power, Centrica, RWE Npower, E.On and EDF Energy - account for about 95% of the UK's energy supply market.

But the Ofgem report does not accuse the major energy firms of colluding over prices. However, it does find "possible tacit co-ordination" on the size and timing of price rises.

The BBC's Industry Correspondent John Moylan said the report also cited low levels of switching by consumers and the fact that the market shares of the big six suppliers had not changed significantly over time.

'Clear the air'

Ofgem is referring the market to the CMA - the new competition body - "to consider once and for all whether there are further barriers to effective competition".

Ofgem also says profit increases and recent price rises have intensified public distrust of suppliers and have also highlighted the need for a market investigation "to clear the air".

Supplier	2013 average bill cost	2014 average bill cost	Average price increase
Source: Uswitch based on 3,200kwh of electricity consumption, and 13,500 kwh of gas. Dual fuel standard tariffs. Payment by cash or cheque on quarterly basis.
E.On	£1,226	£1,240	1.1%
EDF	£1,190	£1,237	3.9%
SSE	£1,211	£1,259	4.0%
Scottish Power	£1,230	£1,284	4.4%
British Gas	£1,191	£1,265	6.2%
Npower	£1,220	£1,299	6.5%
Average	£1,212	£1,264	4.3%

Dermot Nolan, Ofgem chief executive, said: "The CMA has powers, not available to Ofgem, to address any structural barriers that would undermine competition.

"Now consumers are protected by our simpler, clearer and fairer reforms, we think a market investigation is in their long-term interests. "

When asked on Radio 4's Today Programme whether there would be a breakup of the six largest suppliers Mr Nolan said: "It's possible, (but) I couldn't guess what the Competition and Markets Authority will do".

He said the investigation will take some time, so meanwhile, "we'll be keeping the pressure on" suppliers.

But Sam Laidlaw, Centrica chief executive, said he hoped "a lengthy review process will not damage confidence in the market, when over £100bn of investment in new infrastructure is needed".

He added: "A prolonged period of uncertainty could damage investment at a time when Britain's energy security is being seriously challenged."

The report comes a day after supplier SSE announced it was freezing prices until January 2016, putting pressure on rivals to do the same.

SSE whose companies include Swalec said the freeze would lower profits, but that it would "streamline" its business to cover the shortfall.

'Restore confidence'

The energy sector has been at the centre of some strident political debate since last summer.

This began with Labour leader Ed Miliband's party conference speech, in which he pledged to freeze energy prices for 20 months if Labour were elected.

He also vowed to abolish the current energy regulator, Ofgem, and replace it with a new regulatory regime that ensured consumers got a "fair deal".

Caroline Flint, Labour's shadow energy secretary, said that the new energy report from Ofgem confirmed that the energy market was broken.

The road towards a full inquiry into competition in the market was announced by Ed Davey, the energy secretary, in February.

He wrote to regulators to say that the profit margins made by the six major energy suppliers in the UK were higher than previously thought.

E.On UK chief executive Tony Cocker has now said an investigation was the only way "to restore full public confidence to the energy sector and depoliticise the whole issue".

What do you think of the findings of the report? Are you happy with your current energy supplier? Is enough being done to increase competition?

Email us at haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk adding 'OFGEM report' in the subject heading and include your contact details.

15.37 | 0 komentar | Read More