contents page
previous next
zoom out zoom in
thumbnails double page single page large double page
fit width
Go to page 20 Go to page 17 Send email to Go to page 30 Go to page 32 Go to page 27 Send email to Go to page 28 Send email to Call +85227568193 Call +496105925573 Send email to Go to page 13 Call +496157804599 Go to page OBC Go to page 19 Go to page 39 Send email to Send email to Call +14165853131 Call +85227998840 Look up postcode SW1W 0DT Call +2542540295 Go to page 24 Look up postcode SW1W 0DT Go to page 25 Look up postcode ME4 4TT Go to page 11 Go to page 21 Call +4532968600 Go to page 14 Send email to Look up postcode SW1W 0DT Send email to Call +44865117067 Send email to Go to page 33 Send email to Send email to Go to page 18 Send email to Look up postcode ME4 4TT Go to page 38 Call +2542540280 Send email to Call +4532968682 Call +14165855476 Go to page 26 Go to page 23 Go to page 40 Go to page 37 Go to page 7 Go to page 24 Go to page 22 Call +6493082871 Look up postcode 07114 click to zoom in Open Go to page OFC click to zoom in
contents page
previous next
zoom out zoom in
thumbnails double page single page large double page
fit width

2 |

September 29 - October 52010





μWorld News PAGES14-17

μComment PAGES18-21



μObituaries PAGES22-23





μExpat Life PAGES28-32










Barrister inquest Wife says police refused her chance to save husband


Blunder that sank the Titanic Steering error covered up and revealed almost 100 years on


Virtual star pupil How the web is transforming home schooling


Embrace modern architecture Philosopher’s challenge to Britons’ ingrained prejudices

LOTTO 22/09

LOTTO 25/09

12 9 27 29 41 47 19 22 30 33 35 39

Bonus Ball 19

Bonus Ball 05

There were nowinners of Saturday’s £7.4m jackpot and no one won Wednesday’s £2.3m prize

μEDITORIAL OFFICE:111BuckinghamPalaceRoad, London SW1W0DT.Tel(Int 44) μADVERTISING:Fordetailsof local offices, contact Julie Bridge, Tel (44) 2079313290.Email For further information from any advertiser in this issue, please email your contact details, the advertiser(s) and issue date μSUBSCRIPTIONS:WeeklyTelegraphSubscriptions, 3rd-4th Floor, Victory House, Meeting HouseLane, Chatham, KentME44TT. Tel (44) 1622335080.Fax(44)1634815163.(Office hours: 09.00-17.00 GMT.) Email μDELIVERY INQUIRIES: Australia: Network Services. Contact MAGSHOP.Tel: 136116. Email Canada: Vito Petrucci. Tel 0014165853131.Fax0014165855476.Email Denmark:Bjarne Balle-Christiansen. Tel 004532968600. Fax: Germany:FrankBlumhofer. Tel 00496105925573. Fax Hong Kong: Jeff Law. Tel 0085227568193.Fax0085227998840.Email Kenya: Shadrack Ochanda. Tel 002542540280.Fax002542540295. Malaysia: Peter Lee. Tel (03) 79818563.Fax (03) 79819613. NewZealand:Netlink Subscriptions. Tel 006493082871. Philippines: Denis Catangay. Tel 8325383.Fax8313256.Email Singapore: DoreenTan. Tel 62821960.Fax63823021.Email South Africa: Global News, 74First Road, Kew2090,SouthAfrica. Tel: (011) 8872670/1. Fax 0865117067. Email: Thailand: KhunTai. Tel (02) 8873331.Fax (02) 8872259. United States: Marlon Johnson. Tel 18009332147. μNEWSSTAND INQUIRIES:ThePublisher, 111BuckinghamPalace Road, LondonSW1W0DT.Tel(44)(0)2079313447 ŠTheWeeklyTelegraph (USPS#006819) is published weekly for US$218 a year by Telegraph Media Group Ltd, 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W0DT, England. Periodicals postage paid at Newark, NJ. POSTMASTER:Sendall address changes to TheWeekly Telegraph, c/o SDSGlobal Logistics, 263Frelinghuysen Ave, Newark, NJ07114-1539.

μDATA PRIVACY: WhenyourespondtoTelegraphMediaGroupLimited’s competitions, offers or promotions, wemayuseyourinformation formarketing purposes. Wewill contact youbymail or telephone to let you knowaboutanyofourspecial offers, products and services whichmaybeofinterest to youunless youhaveasked us not to. Wewill only contact youbyemail, text message, or similar electronic meanswithyourpermission. Wewill only pass your nameontothird parties if you have consented for us to do so. In somecasesourspecial offers, products and services maybeprovided, onour behalf, byourpartners. If youhaveagreed to becontacted byus, your personal information maybepassedtoourpartners; however, in all such cases weremaina data controller of your personal information. Whenresponding to competitions, offers or promotions bypostcard, if youdonot wish for your details to beusedbyustosendyouspecial offers, please makethis clear by stating “NoOffers”. Werespect your data privacy. Youmaymodifyyourpreferences or get further information bywriting to us at Data Privacy, Telegraph CustomerService, Victory House,Meeting HouseLane,Chatham,KentME44TTorbyemailtodata.


The Telegraph

By Richard Edwards Crime Correspondent POLICE have lost control of the streets, the forces’ watchdog warned last week, as figures showed that an estimated 14million incidents of antisocial behaviour take place each year — one every two seconds.

sliding scale of grief”, Sir Denis added, made worse by police sometimes seeing them as being part of the problem.

Officials believed that only a quarter of all incidents, about 3.5million, were actually reported and Sir Denis said there had been a “degree of normalisation” around people dropping litter, drunken behaviour and vandalism that should not be accepted.

Sir Denis O’Connor, the Chief Inspector of Constabulary, said the rowdy and abusive behaviour of yobs was a “disease” within communities that had been allowed to “fester” because police have retreated from the streets in the past two decades.

‘Yobs in the high street? Thanks for warning us, we were about to walk there’

Senior officers have been accused of failing to make antisocial behaviour a priority after a series of high-profile cases, including that of Fiona Pilkington, 38, who killed herself and her disabled daughter in October 2007 after years of abuse from yobs.

In a report, he claimed that forces had been guilty of chasing crime statistics and targets and ignoring antisocial behaviour or “screening out” 999 calls because it was deemed “not real police work”.

“We all want civility restored to society and the public rely heavily on the police to help this happen. But the police cannot do this on their own,” Sir Denis said.

“The public won’t tackle antisocial behaviour on the streets while they fear reprisals. Perpetrators need to know they are wrecking lives, the results can be tragic and that they will get swift action from the authorities if the public call for help.”

Earlier this year, Sir Denis disclosed that just one in 10 police officers was free to tackle crime at any given time because the vast majority were either off work or tied up on other duties.

In last week’s report, he said the “retreat” of beat policemen since the 1990s had been a “mistake that had undermined their connection with the public, and allowed some of these things to gather momentum”. The growing “intensity and harm” of antisocial behaviour in Britain signalled a “lack of control on our streets”, he said.

Sir Denis said the shortcomings often arose because antisocial behaviour lacked the same “status” as crime to police officers driven by central targets.

“For almost 20 years the police record of accomplishment and failure has been expressed, increasingly strongly, in terms of crime statistics,” he said.

The report, entitled Stop the Rot, disclosed the scale of the problem. About 45 per cent of all calls made to the police in the past year were about antisocial behaviour, the vast majority related to disorderly behaviour, the joint study by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Ipsos MORI and Cardiff University found.

More than two thirds of forces did not even know when they were dealing with a repeat victim of intimidation when they called, the report said. For the victims, it was “a

“Meanwhile, the ‘nonqualifying’ antisocial behaviour issue and its variants, that signal lack of control on our streets, have grown and evolved in intensity and harm.”

The chief inspector said an “early intervention” approach was essential.

He criticised forces for “screening out” too many antisocial behaviour calls because of an apparent lack of resources.

Editorial comment, page 19

By Martin Evans and Ben Farmer in Kabul A BRITISH female aid worker has been kidnapped by suspected insurgents in Afghanistan.

The woman was seized at gunpoint along with three fellow workers, thought to be Afghans, as they were travelling in a convoy to visit an aid project in the Narang district of Kunar province.

The unnamed woman was believed to be working for Development Alternatives Inc, an American aid contracting firm that has offices throughout the world, including one in London.

The group was travelling between Asabad, the provincial capital and Jalalabad, in two vehicles, when they were stopped by gunmen.

The insurgents struck in the Spin Jumaat area of Sawakai district at about 11am on Sunday, according to Gen Abdus Saboor Allahyar, the local police chief. He said the workers had not informed police of their trip.

Along with the British woman, her guard, driver and another worker were also seized. A security official said the workers had wanted to attend the opening of a canal refurbishment project in the Narang district of Kunar.

A spokesman for the Foreign Office added: “We can confirm that a British national is missing in Afghanistan. We are working with other international agencies to urgently investigate these reports.”

THE British consulate in Australia is to sell several of its properties as part of costcutting measures that have seen 19 ambassadorial residences across the world sold in the past year.

The plush residences of the consuls general in Sydney and Melbourne and the residence of the deputy consul general in Melbourne will be put on the market next year. The diplomats will be expected to live in more modest city apartments, according to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

The Sydney residence in Vaucluse houses Richard Morris, the consul general, and his family, and is regularly used for official functions. With a swimming pool, two-car garage and views of Sydney Harbour, it is expected to fetch several million dollars.

By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem WORLD leaders have scrambled to save the Middle East peace talks from collapse after Israel refused to extend a ban on Jewish settlement construction in the West Bank.

United States officials made frantic attempts to broker a deal but failed to make a breakthrough by the time the freeze, imposed 10 months ago, expired at midnight last Saturday.

With Palestinian leaders long insisting that they would leave the peace talks if the moratorium was not extended, the future of the negotiations appeared to be in jeopardy less than a month after they began in Washington.

The US State Department said it would “keep pushing for the talks to continue”.

Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, spoke to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, twice on Sunday. Mr Netanyahu appealed to the settlers to display “restraint and responsibility” once the moratorium expired.

On Sunday night he urged Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian President, to pursue “expedited, honest talks” to achieve a peace deal within a year. “Israel is ready to pursue continuous contacts in coming days to find a way to continue peace talks,” he said.

Addressing the UN General Assembly last Saturday, Mr Abbas urged Israel to “choose between peace and the continuation of settlements”.

As the Israeli and Palestinian delegations returned home, their chief negotiators remained in America at the request of

President Barack Obama, whose credibility in the Middle East is at stake if the talks collapse.

Ehud Barak, the Israeli defence minister, said there was still a “50/50” chance of “achieving a mutually agreed understanding”.

MrAbbas has also spoken of his desire to keep the talks alive, while pledging that the Palestinians will not resort to violence if they collapse. But as both sides tried to find a way out of the impasse, settlers raised a fresh challenge by symbolically resuming construction in the West Bank.

A bulldozer rumbled through the settlement of Kiryat Netafim, near the Palestinian city of Nablus, as the cornerstone of a new building was laid – the first of 2,000 the settlers hope to build.


September 29 - October 52010

| 3




By Robert Winnett Deputy Political Editor DAVID MILIBAND may be offered the high-profile role of shadow chancellor if he decides he wants a senior position on the new Labour front bench.

Ed Miliband said on Sunday that it was “too early” to decide on the role his older brother might play and that David must decide his future.

However, it is understood the party’s new leader and his aides have not ruled out making David Miliband shadow chancellor if the position becomes the price of rebuilding the pair’s relationship.

The appointment could pave the way for major policy disagreements since David favours sharper and quicker cuts to public spending than his brother.

David Miliband was on Sunday night continuing to consider his options and made no public comment on his future career after his unexpected loss. He reportedly had until Wednesday to decide if he will serve in the shadow cabinet.

Before the leadership announcement, sources close to the elder brother thought he would remain temporarily as shadow foreign secretary.

He would then probably look to leave politics in the coming years. If he were to take the coveted position of shadow chancellor that would be likely to annoy Ed Balls, the shadow education secretary, who is thought to be competing for the role against his wife, Yvette Cooper.

Mr Balls on Sunday gave a television interview in which he set out his economic strategy. The formerTreasury adviser said that he thought plans by Alistair Darling, the outgoing shadow chancellor, to halve the deficit in four years were a “mistake”.

“We should have gone more slowly than that,” Mr Balls said. “We should have a debate about what we’re going to do now for the future and Ed [Miliband] was clear today, get the deficit down, but in a gradual and careful way, not in a reckless and dangerous way.”

On Sunday night Mr Darling, who was due to make a farewell speech as shadow chancellor on Monday, urged Mr Miliband not to avoid cuts altogether.

“Where I would have a problem is, were people to conclude that there is no need to deal with the deficit and we can flop into a ‘no cuts’ position,” he said.

Ed Miliband is also thought to be considering Miss Cooper for the post of shadow chancellor. She is currently the shadow work and pensions secretary. A source close to the new leader said: “No decisions have yet been made but Yvette would be a good choice as she could be the caring face of our response to the Coalition’s savage cuts.”

If Miss Cooper became shadow chancellor and David Miliband continued as shadow foreign secretary it might make it difficult to appoint Mr Balls to the fourth great office of state – shadowing the Home Office. This position may then be given to Harriet Harman, the deputy Labour leader.

Ed Miliband is embraced by his brother David after becoming Labour leader by a wafer-thin majority

IT WASbilled as the most complex voting system in existence, but in the end the announcement of the Labour leadership result was as exciting as prize bingo.

Ann Black, the chairman of Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee, started by explaining that she would need to read out the results round by round.

If none of the five candidates had won outright in the first round, securing support of more than 50 per cent, the last-place candidate would be eliminated and she would then read out how the second preferences of their backers had been redistributed. The process would be repeated until the threshold was reached.

Under the electoral college system, voting power is divided equally between MPs and MEPs, party members, and affiliated organisations including unions.

After the first round, Diane Abbott was eliminated with a total of 7.42 per cent and her second preferences were redistributed. In the second round, Andy Burnham was eliminated on 10.41 per cent.

From the start, the votes of David and Ed Miliband were close. The older brother led by 37.78 per cent to 34.33 per cent after the first round, but as the process went on they got closer and closer. In the third round, there were gasps as they polled 38.89 per cent and 37.47 per cent. At that point, Ed Balls was eliminated on 16.02 per cent.

Finally, in the fourth round Ed Miliband crept past his brother, and past the finishing post, with 50.65 per cent to David’s 49.35. It was not quite “full house!” but the hall erupted into applause.

Continued from page 1

British Airways dispute and planned BBC industrial action that is threatening to black out the Tory conference.

But he replied: “I’m not going to adjudicate on every strike. But what I am going to say to you is that they should always be a last resort.” He also failed to back what will be controversial changes to the gold-plated system of public sector pensions. Mr Miliband indicated that he would not oppose all the public sector cuts being planned by the Coalition.

He also said he would look again at Alistair Darling’s plan to halve the deficit in four years, suggesting that a greater tax take was possible to compensate for fewer cuts. His declaration of the death of New Labour was welcomed by the union bosses.

Paul Kenny, the general secretary of Unison, said: “It had its time and now it has gone. The general public don’t trust it any more. People like Mandelson, and to a certain degree Tony Blair, are harking back to a golden era.”

Lord Kinnock, a supporter of Ed Miliband, claimed David Miliband lost out because Tony Blair and Lord Mandelson both backed him. “I think Peter Mandelson’s book and his utterings … may have made a difference that damaged the case of David Miliband,” he said.

‘Say what you like about the Krays, but they’d never have fought each other for the Labour leadership’

Sketch by Andrew Gimson BY 10 O’CLOCK on Sunday morning Red Ed could have turned into Dead Ed. If he had made a fool of himself in his interview with Andrew Marr, we would already be writing his obituary.

But Ed Miliband gave a skilful and engaging performance from which it was quite hard to tell what he really thinks about anything. In a mere three words he managed to sum up the almost fathomless ambiguities of his position: “I’m nobody’s man.”

It is just conceivable that this should read “I’m Nobody’s man”, or the political representative of Charles Pooter, the main character in Diary of a Nobody. Mr Miliband said in an article for The Sunday Telegraph — an attempt, we suppose, to establish himself as Read Ed rather than Red Ed — that he is “on the side of the squeezed middle”, a description that fits Mr Pooter.

Perhaps sensing that his politics required further explanation, Mr Miliband went on to say: “I’m my own man and I’m very, very clear about that.”

On the evidence of this interview, Mr Miliband wishes to be thought to be on the side of everybody except for a few very unfashionable people such as the militant rail union boss and super-rich tax dodgers. Mr Miliband refused to accept “a 1990s formula for the future”, or indeed the term “New Labour”.

Later that morning we were fortunate to see him address an audience of Labour women in Manchester Town Hall.

The women screamed, cheered and whistled at Mr Miliband, but we were relieved to find that they hurled no items of clothing at him. Mr Miliband said: “We did not come into politics to manage our society. We came into politics to change it.”

This recalled Karl Marx’s observation: “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.”

The new Labour leader seems a very personable young man, even capable of admitting in a sympathetic tone that “there’s no perfect system” of electing a Labour leader. But we fear that inside Mr Miliband’s capacious brain, the echoes of every self-confident Lefty since Marx still resonate.

Here is an intellectual determined to make the world more equal: a project that usually ends in tears.