Vince Cable I can lead Lib Dems back to power

Sir Vince Cable has said he can lead the Liberal Democrats back to power by offering a mix of "hope and realism".

In his first conference speech as leader, he said he was "impatient for success" and had the vision and "grown-up" approach to "fill a huge gap in the centre of British politics".

He called for higher taxes on foreign property speculators and second home owners to help tackle inequality.

And he claimed Brexit would be an act of "masochism", leaving the UK poorer.

He said his party must not be solely defined by their opposition to Brexit - but he repeated his call for the public to have the final say on whether the UK actually leaves or not through a further referendum.

But the party - which increased its MPs from eight to 12 in June, but saw its vote share go down - had paid a "very high political price".

On tuition fees, he said levels of student debt were a source of "real concern" and the party was ready to consider all options to improve the current system, including a graduate tax, in a wide-ranging review.

Barriers to young people getting on the housing ladder must be removed, he said, with councils being able to borrow to build affordable homes and private sector investment in new garden cities.

Calling for a bigger programme of investment in the railways, broadband and other infrastructure, to be funded by government borrowing, he said his party would be both pro-enterprise and pro-worker, prepared to stand up to tech giants over corporate tax avoidance.

It was becoming ever clearer that the UK's exit from the EU was a "looming disaster" which could leave the UK poorer and weaker, he told party activists.

"And that pain will mainly be felt by young people who overwhelmingly voted to Remain."

"We have to put aside tribal differences and work alongside like-minded people to keep the single market and customs union, essential for trade and jobs."

Questions

What did Vince Cable say about Brexit?

How many seats do the liberal democrats have in the House of Commons?

What did he say about tuition fees and young people getting on the housing ladder?

What does he mean when he says the liberal democrats will be “pro enterprise and pro worker?

Trump US would destroy North Korea if forced to defend itself

US President Donald Trump has told the UN General Assembly that America would destroy North Korea if forced to defend itself or its allies.

In his debut speech, he mocked North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un, saying: "Rocket man is on a suicide mission."

North Korea has tested nuclear bombs and missiles in defiance of the UN.

Just before Mr Trump spoke, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres had urged statesmanship, saying: "We must not sleepwalk our way into war."

The American leader also attacked Iran, saying it was a "corrupt dictatorship" intent on destabilising the Middle East.

He called on the government in Tehran to cease supporting terrorism and again criticised the Obama-era international agreement over Iran's nuclear programme, which he called an embarrassment.

In his own debut speech, French President Emmanuel Macron strongly defended the Paris climate accord, signed in the same room in New York two years ago and rejected in June by Mr Trump, to widespread international dismay.

The General Assembly, which continues until Monday, is an annual event, bringing together leaders of the UN's 193 member states.

In other parts of Mr Trump's speech he:

said the US could "no longer be taken advantage of or enter one-sided deals"

said the crisis in Venezuela, which is led by a leftwing government hostile to the US, was "unacceptable" and America could not "stand by and watch"

denounced socialism as an ideology, saying it had only brought "anguish and devastation and failure"

condemned "uncontrolled migration" but insisted America was a "compassionate nation" which had spent billions of dollars on helping refugees return to their home countries

Washington has repeatedly warned North Korea over its weapons tests, which violate UN Security Council resolutions.

The crisis worsened last month when the North announced plans to test missiles around the US Pacific territory of Guam.

Kim Jong-un watched a recent missile test in person

Brexit - EU repeal bill wins first Commons vote

You have ten minutes - read the article and complete the questions below

The government's bid to extract the UK from EU law in time for Brexit has passed its first parliamentary test. 

MPs backed the EU Withdrawal Bill by 326 votes to 290 despite critics warning that it represented a "power grab" by ministers.   

The bill, which will end the supremacy of EU law in the UK, now moves onto its next parliamentary stage.

Ministers sought to reassure MPs by considering calls for safeguards over their use of new powers.

Prime Minister Theresa May welcomed the Commons vote in the early hours of Tuesday morning, saying the bill offered "certainty and clarity" - but Labour described it as an "affront to parliamentary democracy".

Having cleared the second reading stage, the bill will now face more attempts to change it with Conservative MPs believed to have tabled new amendments.

Previously referred to as the Great Repeal Bill, the EU Withdrawal Bill overturns the 1972 European Communities Act which took the UK into the then European Economic Community.

It will also convert all existing EU laws into UK law, to ensure there are no gaps in legislation on Brexit day.

Critics' concerns centre on ministers giving themselves the power to make changes to laws during this process without consulting MPs.

The government says it needs to be able to make minor technical changes to ensure a smooth transition, but fears were raised that ministers were getting sweeping powers to avoid parliamentary scrutiny.

The bill will now receive line-by-line scrutiny in its committee stage.

The Bill's committee stage will take place when MPs return to parliament after their party conferences.

Questions

1. What was the figures for the vote?
2. How many votes did the government win by?
3. What did the Prime Minister say the bill offered?
4. What did Labour say about the bill?
5. What was the bill known as previously?
6. What is the correct name for the bill?
7. What will the bill overturn?
8. What will it do?
9. Why has the bill been criticised?
10. What will happen in the Committee stage?
11. When will this take place?

Government defeated by Lords over Brexit Bill

Government defeated by Lords over Brexit Bill

You have 15 Minutes

Read the article and answer the questions below

The government has been defeated after the House of Lords said ministers should guarantee EU nationals' right to stay in the UK after Brexit.

The vote, by 358 to 256, is the first Parliamentary defeat for the government's Brexit bill.

However, MPs will be able to remove their changes when the bill returns to the House of Commons.

Ministers say the issue is a priority but must be part of a deal protecting UK expats overseas.

The bill will give Theresa May the authority to trigger Brexit under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and begin official negotiations.

The amendment backed by the Lords requires the government to introduce proposals within three months of Article 50 to ensure EU citizens in the UK have the same residence rights after Brexit.

But it could be overturned when MPs, who have already backed the Brexit bill without amendments, vote on it again.

"The bill has a straightforward purpose - to enact the referendum result and allow the government to get on with the negotiations."

The government said its position had "repeatedly been made clear", saying it wanted to guarantee the rights of EU citizens and British nationals "as early as we can".

Ahead of the vote, the government made a last-minute attempt to persuade peers not to change the draft legislation.

Brexit Minister Lord Bridges said the government had been keen to reach an agreement with other EU nations on the issue.

However, he said, "a small number of our European counterparts" insisted there could be no discussions until the formal Brexit talks begin once Article 50 had been invoked.

But most peers wanted a unilateral move from the UK government.

Labour's shadow Brexit minister Lady Hayter said the concerns of EU nationals here and British expats living in Europe shouldn't be "traded against each other".

She added: "These people need to know now - not in two years' time or even 12 months' time. They simply can't put their lives on hold."

Seven Conservative peers voted in favour of the amendment, which was proposed by Labour with the support of the Liberal Democrats.

Among those opposing it during the sometimes heated exchanges was former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Tebbit, who said the debate seemed to focus on "nothing but the rights of foreigners".

Shortly after the Lords vote, MEPs in the European Parliament debated the status of EU migrants in the UK.

Justice Commissioner Vera Jourova told MEPs that EU citizens in UK and British citizens elsewhere in the EU "deserve to know that their rights will be" after Brexit.

She said the matter should be addressed "as soon as possible" but that negotiations could only begin after the UK has triggered Article 50.

Questions

Why has the Lords voted against the Brexit bill?

What was the number of peers who voted in the debate?

What was the result?

Why have ministers been reluctant to clarify the rights the rights of EU nationals living in the UK?

What will the bill allow Theresa May to do?

What has Lady Hayter said about the rights of EU nationals?

Which party proposed the amendment?

What was Lord Tebitt’s position on the bill and what did he say?

Using the bar chart above, how many Polish, Italian and Bulgarian EU nationals live in the UK?

Brexit in tatters: Article 50 by the end of March 2017 in jeopardy!

Read the article, summarise it and answer the questions below

Parliament must vote on whether the UK can start the process of leaving the EU, the High Court has ruled.

This means the government cannot trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty - beginning formal exit negotiations with the EU - on its own.

Theresa May says the referendum - and existing ministerial powers - mean MPs do not need to vote, but campaigners called this unconstitutional.

The government is appealing, with a further hearing expected next month.

The prime minister's official spokesman said the government had "no intention of letting" the judgement "derail Article 50 or the timetable we have set out. We are determined to continue with our plan".

Brexit Secretary David Davis said he presumed the court ruling meant an act of Parliament would be required to trigger Article 50.

"The people are the ones Parliament represents - 17.4m of them, the biggest mandate in history, voted for us to leave the European Union."

But UKIP leader Nigel Farage said he feared a "betrayal" of the 51.9% of voters who backed leaving the EU in June's referendum and voiced concern at the prospect of a "half Brexit".

BBC assistant political editor Norman Smith said, if the court's decision was not overturned, there could be delays with potentially "months and months" of parliamentary hurdles.

He predicted that, although a majority of MPs had backed the Remain campaign, most would ultimately be likely to vote for Article 50, as Brexit had been supported in the referendum.

The prime minister has said she will activate Article 50, formally notifying the EU of the UK's intention to leave, by the end of next March.

The other 27 member states have said negotiations about the terms of the UK's exit - due to last two years - cannot begin until Article 50 has been invoked.

Analysis 

It is one of the most important constitutional court cases in generations. And the result creates a nightmare scenario for the government.

Theresa May had said she wanted to start Brexit talks before the end of March next year but this ruling has thrown the prime minister's timetable up in the air.

This decision has huge implications, not just on the timing of Brexit but on the terms of Brexit. That's because it's given the initiative to those on the Remain side in the House of Commons who, it's now likely, will argue Article 50 can only be triggered when Parliament is ready and that could mean when they're happy with the terms of any future deal.

Questions

What do the UK have to do before they leave the EU?
Why do you think campaigners have called The PMs approach unconstitutional?
What does David Davis say about  triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty?
What does article tell us about Parliamentary Sovereignty?

Green group wins air pollution court battle

Read the article and answer the Questions below

Campaigners have won the latest battle in legal action against the UK Government over levels of air pollution.

A judge at the High Court in London ruled in favour of environmental lawyers ClientEarth.

The group called air pollution a "public health crisis" and said the government has failed to tackle it.

The ruling in the judicial review called the government's plan "woefully inadequate".

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) told the BBC that it accepted the court's judgment.

ClientEarth won a separate, Supreme Court ruling against the government in April 2015.

That judgment ordered ministers to come up with a plan to bring down air pollution to within legal limits as soon as possible.

But ClientEarth was dissatisfied with those proposals, and took the government to the High Court in a judicial review.

'Over-optimistic'

In the ruling on Wednesday morning, Mr Justice Garnham said the 2015 Air Quality Plan (AQP), devised when Liz Truss MP was Environment Secretary, failed to comply with the Supreme Court judgment and EU directives.

Mr Justice Garnham. said the Secretary of State "fell into error" by fixing on a projected compliance date of 2020 (and 2025 for London).

In particular, he drew attention to the cost implications of bringing in Clean Air Zones no earlier than 2020.

The evidence demonstrates clearly that Clean Air Zones, the measure identified in the plan as the primary means of reducing nitrogen dioxide emissions, could be introduced more quickly than 2020," Mr Justice Garnham said.

In February, the Royal Colleges of Physicians and of Paediatrics and Child Health said outdoor air pollution was contributing to some 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK.

ClientEarth chief executive James Thornton commented: "This is an urgent public health crisis over which the Prime Minister must take personal control.

"I challenge Theresa May to take immediate action now to deal with illegal levels of pollution and prevent tens of thousands of additional early deaths in the UK. The High Court has ruled that more urgent action must be taken."

Question

Which court ruled against the government?

What was the name of the Pressure group?

What happened in 2015 and what did the government have to do?

What did the Judge say about Clean Air Zones?

How many deaths per year is air pollution related to?

What challenge has ClientEarth given to the PM

The Hand Out Collection - G8 Profile

With no headquarters, budget or permanent staff, the Group of Eight is an informal but exclusive body whose members set out to tackle global challenges through discussion and action.

The G8 comprises seven of the world's leading industrialised nations, and Russia.

The leaders of these countries meet face-to-face at an annual summit that has become a focus of media attention and protest action.

The G8's roots lie in the oil crisis and global economic recession of the early 1970s.

In 1973, these challenges prompted the US to form the Library Group - an informal gathering of senior financial officials from Europe, Japan and the US.

At the instigation of the French, the 1975 meeting drew in heads of government. The delegates agreed to meet annually. The six nations involved became known as the G6, and later the G7 and G8 after the respective entries of Canada (1976) and Russia (1998).

Though the G8 was set up as a forum for economic and trade matters, politics crept onto the agenda in the late 1970s. Recent summits have considered the developing world, global security, Middle East peace and reconstruction in Iraq.

G8 members can agree on policies and can set objectives, but compliance with these is voluntary. The G8 has clout in other world bodies because of the economic and political muscle of its members.

The workings of the G8 are a far cry from the "fireside chats" of the Library Group in the 1970s. Holed up behind fortress-like security, the delegates are accompanied by an army of officials. Elaborate preparations are made for their meetings, statements and photo-calls.

Nevertheless, G8 leaders strive to keep at least some of their encounters free from bureaucracy and ceremony. On the second day of their summit the leaders gather for an informal retreat, where they can talk without being encumbered by officials or the media.

The European Union is represented at the G8 by the president of the European Commission and by the leader of the country that holds the EU presidency. The EU does not take part in G8 political discussions.

 Rotating leadership

The presidency of the G8 rotates between the group's member nations on an annual basis.

The country holding the presidency in a given year is responsible for hosting the annual summit and for handling the security arrangements.

The next summit in 2017 is in Italy

As the foremost economic and political power in the G8, the US is regarded as the dominant member of the group, although this position is not formally enshrined.

Unrepresentative?

Critics of the G8 have accused the body of representing the interests of an elite group of industrialised nations, to the detriment of the needs of the wider world.

Important countries with fast-growing economies and large populations, including China and India, are not represented. There are no African or Latin American members.

The G8's positive stance on globalisation has provoked a vigorous response from opponents, and riots have sometimes overshadowed summit agendas, most notably in Italy in 2001.

Since 2001, there has been a tendency for the summits to be held in more remote locations, with the aim of avoiding mass protests. The lengths to which security forces have gone to shield the politicians from demonstrators has served to reinforce the G8's closed-door image.

Within the last decade or so, the G8 has launched drives to counter disease, including HIV/Aids, and has announced development programmes and debt-relief schemes. Aid is often conditional on the respect for democracy and good governance in the recipient countries. Critics say that spending on such initiatives is inadequate.

Basic disagreements sometimes emerge within the G8: Global warming was a sticking point at the 2001 Genoa summit, where US President George W Bush underlined his rejection of the Kyoto treaty on emissions.

The subject was revisited at the 2007 Heiligendamm summit, where an agreement among leaders on the need to tackle climate change was hailed as an important step forward.

Since 2009, summit talks have focused on finding a common approach to stabilising the world economy and stimulating growth in the face of continuing global financial upheaval.

Questions

 Explain the role of the G8

What are the main criticisms against the G8