What is Art?

What is Art

Banksy's Artwork

Why was it produced?

To create controversy in society and in art, to explain Banksy’s personal opinions on society in a picture form.

Do you think the artists thought of it as “art”?

Many people see Banksy’s art as disruptive and as unacceptable. Artists probably view Banksy’s work as a joke, rather than serious artwork.

What is your opinion of it?

I like Banksy’s artwork as I think it shows true opinion rather than conforming to the norms of society and creating artwork in the same way that everyone expects artists to do.

What is art?

ART has not always been what we think it is today. An object regarded as Art today may not have been perceived as such when it was first made, nor was the person who made it necessarily regarded as an artist. Both the notion of "art" and the idea of the "artist" are relatively modern terms.

Many of the objects we identify as art today -- Greek painted pottery, medieval manuscript illuminations, and so on -- were made in times and places when people had no concept of "art" as we understand the term. These objects may have been appreciated in various ways and often admired, but not as "art" in the current sense.

ART lacks a satisfactory definition. It is easier to describe it as the way something is done -- "the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others" - rather than what it is.

How could the artistic qualities of a controversial work of art such as the installation above or a

winning entry for the Turner Prize be explained to someone who doubted its artistic merits?

(17 marks)

You cannot define art as any one thing - it is simply someone's feelings or opinions expressed in almost any form. Everyone has the right to create an art of their choice in which ever form they choose, whether that be a painting, to music, to a film. One person cannot define art no matter how logical their answer may be - as the appreciation of different artworks depends on the person. Different people interpret art in different ways - for example, Banksy's artwork to one person may be pure vandalism on public property, but to another, could be inspiring and appreciated greatly, if they share the same views on society, or even if they don't.

The African chief converted to Christianity by Dr Livingstone

The African chief converted to Christianity by Dr Livingstone

It is 200 years since the birth of David Livingstone, perhaps the most famous of the missionaries to visit Africa in the 19th Century. But as author and Church historian Stephen Tomkins explains, the story of an African chief he converted is every bit as incredible as Livingstone's.

According to the title of one biography, David Livingstone was "Africa's Greatest Missionary".
This is an interesting claim about the Lanarkshire-born man, considering that estimates of the number of people he converted in the course of his 30-year career vary between one and none.
The variation is because Livingstone himself wrote off his one convert as a backslider within months of his baptism.
The irony is that this one backslider has a much better claim than Livingstone to be Africa's greatest missionary.
This man on whom Livingstone gave up became a preacher, a leader and a pioneer of adapting Christianity to African life - to the great annoyance of European missionaries.
His name was Sechele, and he was the kgosi or chief of the Bakwena tribe, part of the Tswana people, in what is now Botswana.
Born in 1812, he was 10 when his father, the previous kgosi, was killed. Two of his uncles divided the tribe between them. Sechele escaped with a few followers into the desert for nine years, and returned to oust one of his uncles.
This was how things stood when Sechele first met Livingstone - he ruled a half-tribe. Livingstone persuaded him to make peace with his other uncle by sending him a gift of gunpowder for his rifle.

The uncle was suspicious that the gunpowder was bewitched, tried to neutralise it with fire, and in the resulting explosion was killed. Sechele thus ruled over a reunited Bakwena.

Like many kgosi, Sechele was keen to have a missionary living in his town. Missionaries came with guns (and powder), making them an invaluable defence, and with medicine.
Sechele amused Livingstone by asking for medicine to make him a better hunter. But the thing Sechele wanted above all from Livingstone was literacy.
He learned the alphabet, upper and lower case, in two days, compiled his own spelling books, and set about reading the one book in the Tswana language, the Bible. He ate breakfast before sunrise in order to start school as quickly as possible, and then taught his wives to read.
As Sechele grew increasingly interested in Christianity, he found two huge barriers in his way. One was rain.
Tswana tribes had rainmakers, whose job was to use magic to make the rain come. Livingstone, like all missionaries, vehemently opposed rainmaking, on both religious and scientific grounds.
Sechele happened to be his tribe's rainmaker as well as kgosi, and Livingstone's stay coincided with the worst drought ever known, so Sechele's decision to stop making rain was predictably unpopular.
The greater problem was polygamy. Sechele had five wives, and Livingstone insisted that to become a Christian he needed get rid of the "superfluous" ones. This was a political as well a personal nightmare, threatening the political structure of the tribe and relations with other tribes.
But in 1848 Sechele divorced four of the women and was baptised. The following year, however, one of his exes became pregnant, and it turned out that Sechele had fallen. He repented, and told Livingstone: "Do not give me up because of this. I shall never give up Jesus. You and I will stand before him together."
Livingstone did give up on him, going north to embark upon his celebrated adventures.

leveson

This is the official site of the Leveson Inquiry. It aims to provide the latest information on the Inquiry, including details of hearings and evidence, to the public and interested parties.
Background
The Prime Minister announced a two-part inquiry investigating the role of the press and police in the phone-hacking scandal, on 13 July 2011. Lord Justice Leveson was appointed as Chairman of the Inquiry.
Part 1 of the Inquiry examined the culture, practices and ethics of the press and, in particular, the relationship of the press with the public, police and politicians. Lord Justice Leveson was assisted by a panel of six independent assessors with expertise in the key issues that were considered.
Lord Justice Leveson opened the hearings on 14 November 2011, saying: “The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?”  A wide range of witnesses, including newspaper reporters, management, proprietors, police officers and politicians of all parties, all gave evidence to the Inquiry under oath and in public.
Lord Justice Leveson published his Report on Part 1 of the Inquiry on 29 November 2012.
Part 2 of the Inquiry cannot commence until the current police investigations and any subsequent criminal proceedings have been completed.

Censorship

Censorship

•      CENSORSHIP: the suppression, alteration or deletion of material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive.

•      DEFAMATION: anything that damages a person’s reputation in the eyes of society.

•      LIBEL: publishing a false statement that damages a person’s reputation (written defamation)

•      SLANDER: making a false verbal statement that damages a person’s reputation (verbal defamation)

GOVERNMENT CENSORSHIP: (formal) Used by Governments to withhold information from citizens. Often used during wartime to protect soldiers/public.

•      Used by the Department for Information during WW2. At one point the British Government considered taking over the BBC directly to control output

•     
Do you think Government’s should be requesting to have information removed or allow the internet to have complete freedom of speech?
I think they should be allowed to request for information to be removed because certain issues may disregard people’s human rights. Informal censorship is used, operating through independent regulatory bodies such as the PCC (Press Complaints Commission), Ofcom (Office of Communications) and the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification).

Do you think there should be informal censorship of TV? Should there be certain things that should/should not be said at certain times of the day?

•      I think that they should stick to how the current censorship works because if there was no censorship then at certain hours of the day, children may watch inappropriate things which can lead to negative values of life.

AUTHORITARIAN CENSORSHIP: positions of power are used to limit access to information. Media owners and editors can exercise this type of censorship.

•      SELF CENSORSHIP: individuals decide for they the information they will receive e.g. you turn the telly over because you don’t want to watch something you find offensive.

•     
Arguments for:

1.  To protect the security of the state

2.  To prevent children from being exposed to violence

3.  To protect people from being corrupted by overt sexuality

4.  To protect individual privacy

•     
Arguments against:

1.  People need accurate information in order to make choices

2.  Freedom of speech is a fundamental right

3.  It has not been proved that media material may corrupt or deprave

4.  Access to the internet has made censorship ineffective

WHAT PROBLEMS CAN YOU THINK OF WHEN IT COMES TO BLOGGING? DISCUSS!

Blogging allows freedom of speech on the internet however; this can criticise or target certain groups in society regarding social issues such as bullying and racism. Therefore there should be a limitation on blogging so that there is no risk of offence on the public audience.

I am a communist.

independent research
A meteor crashing in Russia's Ural mountains has injured at least 500 people, as the shockwave blew out windows and rocked buildings.
Most of those hurt suffered minor cuts and bruises but some received head injuries, Russian officials report.
A fireball was seen streaking through the clear morning sky above the city of Yekaterinburg, followed by loud bangs.
A large meteor fragment landed in a lake near Chebarkul, a town in the neighbouring Chelyabinsk region.
Much of the impact was felt in the city of Chelyabinsk, some 200km (125 miles) south of Yekaterinburg.
"It was quite extraordinary," Chelyabinsk resident Polina Zolotarevskaya told BBC News. "We saw a very bright light and then there was a kind of a track, white and yellow in the sky."
"The explosion was so strong that some windows in our building and in the buildings that are across the road and in the city in general, the windows broke."
Officials say a large meteor partially burned up in the lower atmosphere, resulting in fragments falling earthwards.
Thousands of rescue workers have been dispatched to the area to provide help to the injured, the emergencies ministry said.
The Chelyabinsk region, about 1,500km (930 miles) east of Moscow, is home to many factories, a nuclear power plant and the Mayak atomic waste storage and treatment centre.
'Blinding'

Of 514 people injured in the Chelyabinsk region, 11 were being treated in hospital, the regional emergencies agency said in a statement.
Among those affected by the meteor were children, in school when it fell at around 09:20 (03:20 GMT).
Video posted online showed frightened, screaming youngsters at one Chelyabinsk school, where corridors were littered with broken glass.

Chelyabinsk resident Sergei Serskov told BBC News the city had felt like a "war zone" for 20 to 30 minutes.

"I was in the office when suddenly I saw a really bright flash in the window in front of me," he said.
"Then I smelt fumes. I looked out the window and saw a huge line of smoke, like you get from a plane but many times bigger."
"A few minutes later the window suddenly came open and there was a huge explosion, followed by lots of little explosions."
In Yekaterinburg, 36-year-old resident Viktor Prokofiev was driving to work when he witnessed the event.
"It was quite dark, but it suddenly became as bright as if it was day," he was quoted by Reuters as saying.
"I felt like I was blinded by headlights."
Debris also reportedly fell on the west Siberian region of Tyumen.
The governor of Chelyabinsk region, Mikhail Yurevich, reported that the meteor had landed in a lake 1km outside Chebarkul, which has a population of 46,000.
A Russian army spokesman said a crater six metres (yards) wide had been found on the shore of the lake.

Where do our values come from and how does this affect us?

Suppose you smoke. Your parents tell you it is bad for your health. Teachers say it is bad for your health. Doctors say it can cause cancer. But you still smoke! Why? Because my friends smoke and it makes me look cool, also it is a thing to do at partys to be sociable. Culture: Culture is the distinctive way of life conducted by an entire community or society. Including codes of conduct, dress, language, religion. Cultural activities: Which include art, song dance, story telling or poetry. What cultural activities have you been involved in either past or present? I have not been involved in any cultural events. Socialisation: Is the process by which we learn the behaviour, values, attitudes considered appropriate in the culture and society in which we live. A society: A society is a grouping of individuals, which is characterised by common interest and may have distinctive culture and institutions. In a society members can be from a different ethnic group. How do your values and beliefs differ from your parents/grandparents? Why might this be? acceptance of alternatives to marriage attitudes to abortion and divorce employment opportunities for married woman equal opportunities (race and gender) using medical knowledge to aid human life What do you think has caused this change in values?

Nature vs nurture

Nature: Our abilities and successes are determined at birth though inherited traits. Nurture: Our abilities and successes are determined by the environment we are brought up in and the influences we are exposed to. Various factors about our environment effect our lives, for example: 1.Family structure 2.Education 3.Health choices/lifestyle 4.Income 5.Gender 6.Social Class 7.Immigrant status “To give all children an equal chance of a good education, all secondary school places in a local authority area should be allocated by ballot, even if that means bussing students around the authority” Discuss the usefulness of this view (7marks) I think that if children all had an equal opportunity being based on their area good be a good thing. This is because they would all have the same facilities and accessibility to developing their education. However this idea is not guaranteed being students may use options that are outside the area in order to pursue education further or receive help therefore perhaps making them more likely to be intelligent or talented at particular sports and hobbies. So this may be useful, but only to an extent due to not preventing the limitations into how educational developement can be secured.

life changes

Individuals ‘life chances’ are the opportunities each person has to improve their quality of life. 2 factors influence your life chances: — Social factors (nurture) – e.g. your family / access to money, type of school you go to / the environment you have been brought up in. — Genetic factors (nature) – e.g. your levels of intelligence / your physical, cognitive and psychological capabilities. Genetic Factors Do parents have the right to influence a child's characteristics in order to improve life chances? (for example make choices about what kind of child they want at conception or chose not to continue with a pregnancy if they detect abnormality.) In a way I think parents do have the right to influence their child's characteristics, for example if they are aware of a possibility of abnormality, it is their decision as to whether they feel they will be able to support the child's needs. Also, if they feel that this abnormality could cause problems for the child's life and perhaps may mean they lack life chances, then they could decide it is in the child's best interest to prevent this. However I think that parents should love their child no matter what is detected before birth - whether it be a preference in gender or ability. Social Factors Your life chances are mainly effected by your circumstances. It is a question of who you know not who you are! Case Study - Education The proportion of young people from working class families taking part in higher education is less than young people among better off families. Why do you think this is the situation? I think that people from better off families are lead to believe that higher education isn't as important for them as they are perhaps starting life into the working world with more of an advantage than those from working class families, who may feel that without a university degree they will get nowhere and earn no money. People from better off families may have parents in high up jobs who have connections, so that they can start on the career ladder straight away. Is it nature or nurture? What is the key determination in life chances? I think this is nurture - it's how the person is brought up and what their families views are like on higher education, aswell as their financial state. The UK government use ‘mean test’ so that only certain groups are given benefits. The government ‘Means tests’ focuses on offering financial support to the most needy. The government argue that a universal benefits scheme would mean supporting Many people who do not need financial support. Debate the argument above of a universal benefit scheme. What do you think? I think that the universal benefit scheme is in some ways a bad idea, as it can be a waste of money for the government as some people receiving benefits don't necessarily need them, when instead we can give those with larger financial issues more money in benefits so everyone is more equal. However for those that are only slightly above the income limit for benefits, it can seem unfair as this money could therefore help them out a lot. ‘Some people are born to be leaders and should get all the privileges society has to offer’ How far and in what ways does evidence support the view above?

article and questions

identify the different stages in the argument in the passage: proposition, conclusion and argument. To what extent are the arguments used supported by evidence? They are supported by a fairly large extent due to the analysing the validity and justification of the argument. It also includes anecdotes to provide real-life data along with statistics to give the argument evidence which is more reliable and accurate. How reliable is the evidence provided? The evidence is fairly reliable due to the information being from personal accounts; however this can be doubted whether or not these people are providing accurate analytical observations and information necessary to obtain the argument. Find 2 examples of argument based on authority. In what ways might the claim to be “authority” be A. justification, B. Unjustified Give reasons for your answer? An expert in one field is not necessarily an expert in others, this makes their claim to authority of justified by their type of field and instead being able to critique on all areas, therefore the topic matter is highly important. Also, Experts are no more entitled to claim authority than any other person, which means that anyone can have the right to authority based argument being easily justified, yet the explanation given can vary to be unjustified to whether or not it makes sense. Examples from text: “Club bosses believe…” They have authority justified by being bosses, yet their view can be bias or unreliable. “Jenny Brannigan, 18” shares her view, which suggests she is not of a particular authority but the claims in which any person can have the right supports this idea and gives it justification. Examples of deductive and inductive reasoning in the passage:Inductive: “If you allow two women into the same cubicle they’ll talk forever” who has rejected idea. Deductive: “it is fact that young women like to go toilet together”. To what extent is the conclusion of the passage implicit rather than explicit? How far is it justified?The conclusion considers two points of views which makes it explicit by considering more than one alternative. However, it can be implicit because it is quite vague and therefore not considering the information as effectively

Mock Paper

January 2010 Unit 1 - General Studies

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF PUNISHMENT IN CRIMINAL LAW? RETRIBUTION This is the idea of an eye for an eye, revenge for the victim REPARATION This is idea that the guilty person should compensate the victim/society for his wrong-doing PUBLIC PROTECTION The aim of punishment is to protect the public, however unfair on an individual wrongdoer REHABILITATION This is the idea that punishment must aim to ensure that the guilty person can fit into society at the end of their punishment DETERRENCE This is the idea that punishment must put the offender, and other potential offenders off reoffending, Also seeks to ensure they understand the error in their act. Do you think this is something that should happen? if they choose to watch the death of the criminal then it should be allowed.

Frankie Dettori banned for six months after failing drugs test Jockey Frankie Dettori has been given a six-month ban from racing after failing a drugs test in France. The 41-year-old, who has more than 3,000 career wins, tested positive for a banned substance on 16 September. The suspension imposed by French racing authority France Galop will run until 19 May 2013, and will apply worldwide for the three-time champion jockey. In a statement Dettori said he "has let down the sport he loves" but most of all "his wife and children". The substance, discovered after a test at Longchamp racecourse, has not been disclosed, although Dettori's solicitor said it was not a performance-enhancing drug. Dettori will miss the start of the British Flat racing season on 23 March and the Dubai World Cup, the world's richest race, a week later. He will also sit out the opening Classics at Newmarket's Guineas meeting in May but he will be back in time for the Epsom Derby, which he won with Authorized in 2007, on 1 June. Solicitor Christopher Stewart-Moore said he had spoken to father-of-five Dettori and he had no arguments with the decision by France Galop. "He also accepts that he has let down the sport he loves and all those associated with it, as well as the wider public. But most of all - and this is his greatest regret - he has let down his wife and children," he said. "He is enormously grateful for the opportunities that he has been given by owners and trainers over the years, and for the support of his many fans. "Racing has been good to Frankie, and he knows that his privileged position brings with it responsibility. For this reason, he is determined to rebuild his reputation when he returns to the saddle in six months' time." Dettori, who made history by riding all seven winners on one card at Ascot in 1996, has taken responsibility for his failed test. "Frankie could make excuses - he has, after all, regularly been tested for prohibited substances throughout his career," said his solicitor. "He is clear, however, that the responsibility for his current situation lies squarely with him. From the start of France Galop's inquiry, he has acknowledged to them that he has made a mistake and that the fault was his."

causes of crime Some people say that crime is a deviation from the norms of society that the state chooses to label as a crime. Therefore what is labelled as a “crime” varies over time and from place to place. How has society’s view and the criminal law changed over time in respect of: Poor children who steal a loaf of bread? poor children who steel isn't really a serious as they used to be. Homosexuality? homosexuality isn't frowned upon and civil partnership is now allowed. Drinking and driving? drinking and driving you get your lisence taken away from you for a year and it will go on your criminal record. Child abuse? your kids will be taken off of you and put into care and you get put into prison. How do different societies view the following? Carrying of firearms? some societies such as america allow firearms on your property so if you get robbed you can threaten them or even fire at them if its a serious case. Women wearing what they like in public? women are allowed to wear what they like now except from muslim women as they have to wear a black robe when they are married so that no other men can look at them. Freedom of expression in terms of religion? Taking/giving bribes to win lucrative contracts?

The Law and Civil Liberties Part II There are offences of criminal law which can lead to fines or imprisonment and are investigated by the police. Civil law is when an individual takes action through the courts to determine responsibilities or to seek damages. Civil liberties are freedoms which protect individuals from state abuse or government power. Civil liberties set limits for government so that it cannot abuse its power and interfere with the lives of its citizens In this country we enjoy certain rights such as freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the right to due process, to a fair trial, to own property and to privacy. 1.Right to Life 2.Prohibition of torture 3.Prohibition of slavery and forced labour 4.Right to liberty and security 5.Right to a fair trial 6.No punishment without law 7.Right to respect for private and family life 8.Freedom of thought, conscience and religion 9.Freedom of expression 10.Freedom of assembly and association 11.Right to marry CCTV cameras - the U.K has more surveillance equipment than the whole of Europe put together. ASBOs – Anti Social Behaviour Orders restrict movements and control offenders. Mosquito Repellers (low level sonic devices that only affect young people)

The Law and Civil Liberties Rule – a regulation or principle governing conduct or procedure within a given sphere. Law – a rule or set of rules regulating the activities of members of country or community and enforced through penalties; something regarded as having binding force. Rule of law – the law is sovereign. Nobody is above the law and will face a sanction. Driving whilst using a mobile phone (not with hands-free device). fine Parking your vehicle on double yellow lines. fine Neglecting your child, emotionally and financially. prison Stealing stationery from work. warning Benefit fraud. prison Murder. prison

Capital Punishment information Capital punishment is the practice of executing someone as punishment for a specific crime after a proper legal trial. It can only be used by a state, so when non-state organisations speak of having 'executed' a person they have actually committed a murder. It is usually only used as a punishment for particularly serious types of murder, but in some countries treason, types of fraud, adultery and rape are capital crimes. The phrase 'capital punishment' comes from the Latin word for the head. A 'corporal' punishment, such as flogging, takes its name from the Latin word for the body. Capital punishment is used in many countries around the world. According to Amnesty International as at May 2012, 141 countries have abolished the death penalty either in law on in practice. China executes the most people per year overall, with an estimated figure of 1,718 in 2008. Amnesty International also states that in 2008 Iran executed at least 346 people, the USA 111, Saudi Arabia 102 and Pakistan 36. Details of which countries are abolitionist and which are retentionist can be found on the Amnesty website. There is now steadily increasing support for abolishing capital punishment. On 18 December 2008, the United Nations adopted resolution 63/168, which is a reaffirmation of its call for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty (62/149) passed in December the previous year. The resolution calls for states to freeze executions with a view to eventual abolition. The World Coalition against the Death Penalty was created in Rome in 2002, and 10th October 2006 was World Day against the Death Penalty.

For or Against Capital punishment For:Murderers forfeit their human rights when they take other peoples lives. The punishment should fit the crime. If the punishment is too light it cheapens our rights to life. It is common sense to say that killing murderers will deter others. It is hard to prove the effect because you are measuring something not happening. A killer who has been executed can never do it again. executions are used to show people to show that murder is wrong. Against:The death penalty goes against our most basic human right - the right to life Being killed by lethal injection or being electrocuted is not always smooth and painless, sometimes it causes a painful death. No-one has ever proven with numbers that killing murderers stops other people committing similar crimes. Mistakes are sometimes made in the law and some people may be executed, but they are innocent.

PM to crack down on 'time-wasting' appeals The prime minister told business leaders he would "get a grip" on people forcing unnecessary delays. Judicial review applications would cost more, with less time put aside to apply and fewer chances to appeal. But green groups said planning laws protected the environment and should not be blamed for economic failings. On Twitter, Conservative MP Zac Goldsmith criticised Mr Cameron, writing: "So the same PM whose dithering on airports will cost 3-6 years is now enraged by the delays affecting big infrastructure decisions?" He added that there was a "gap between what the PM says and what the PM does". In his speech to the CBI conference in London, Mr Cameron said the government had been "too slow" at cutting the deficit. 'Hopeless causes' He pledged to end "equality impact assessments", which need to be carried out when new policy or legislation is introduced. He insisted that "bureaucratic nonsense" was not necessary to ensuring the rights of different sexes, races and religions were upheld. Individuals and organisations can seek a judicial review if they think a decision by a public body has been made unlawfully. The review, carried out by a judge, looks only at the way the decision was reached - rather than whether it was correct or not. A recent example was Virgin's successful challenge against the awarding of the West Coast Mainline rail franchise to First Group. It was found there had been "significant flaws" in decision-making. Downing Street figures show more than 11,000 applications for judicial review were made in 2011, compared with just 160 in 1975. BBC legal correspondent Clive Coleman said the majority of these had related to asylum cases, which was where the "real growth" had taken place. But, in his address to the CBI, the prime minister said the increase in unnecessary applications had been too great: "We urgently need to get a grip on this. So here's what we're going to do: reduce the time limit when people can bring cases; charge more for reviews - so people think twice about time-wasting." It is unclear yet how much the fees would rise by for review applications or by how much the three-month time limit for applications might be cut. But Mr Cameron said that "instead of giving hopeless cases up to four bites of the cherry to appeal a decision, we will halve that to two". Downing Street refused to identify any infrastructure projects which had been delayed by judicial review, saying it was "not going into specific examples". Mr Cameron also argued for less Whitehall bureaucracy and greater emphasis on the pursuit of economic growth. He argued that government was "too slow in getting stuff done" and that civil servants must appreciate delays were felt in "businesses going bust, jobs being lost" and "livelihoods being destroyed". Mr Cameron drew a historical analogy, saying: "When this country was at war in the '40s, Whitehall underwent a revolution. "Normal rules were circumvented. Convention was thrown out. As one historian put it, everything was thrown at 'the overriding purpose' of beating Hitler. "Well, this country is in the economic equivalent of war today - and we need the same spirit. We need to forget about crossing every 't' and dotting every 'i' - and we need to throw everything we've got at winning in this global race." For Labour, shadow local government minister Jack Dromey told BBC Two's Daily Politics: "This is the same prime minister who kicked into the long grass a decision on airports for at least three years. "He is presiding over a shambles in government, where it can't make its mind up on an urgent policy." And Friends of the Earth's Executive Director Andy Atkins said the planning system played "an important role in protecting our green and pleasant land". He added: "It mustn't become a scapegoat for the government's economic failings. "EU rules protect peoples' legal right to defend their environment - any moves to prevent this may well be unlawful. Protecting the environment and boosting the economy are two sides of the same coin." Joe Rukin, co-ordinator of the Stop HS2 campaign against plans to build the High Speed 2, rail link: "The government seem to be making out that they believe any of their infrastructure plans should be above the law and do not realise that it is essential in a democratic society to be able to hold the government to account."

gazas death toll reaches over 100 people! More than 100 people have died in the Gaza Strip in six days of violence, Hamas officials say, as Israeli forces continue a bombardment they say aims to stop rocket attacks into Israel. Monday's fatalities include a commander of the Islamic Jihad militant group. More than 100 rockets were fired on Israel by militants on Monday. Three Israelis have died since Wednesday. Efforts to secure a ceasefire continue, with a senior Egyptian official saying there are "encouraging signs". UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon has arrived in Cairo to aid negotiating efforts. He plans to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the coming days. US President Obama spoke to his Egyptian counterpart Mohamed Mursi and to Mr Netanyahu on Monday and "discussed ways to de-escalate the situation in Gaza," the White House said in a statement. Mr Obama "underscored the necessity of Hamas ending rocket fire into Israel" in his call to Mr Mursi, and "expressed regret for the loss of Israeli and Palestinian civilian lives" in both calls. Khaled Meshaal, the political leader of the Islamist movement Hamas which controls Gaza, said Mr Netanyahu had requested a ceasefire but that it was up to Israel to stop the war that, he said, it had started. "Hamas's comments about a ceasefire, alleging that Israel is begging for one, are about as accurate as its claims to have shot down an F-15 [warplane] or attacked the Knesset," Reuters news agency quoted a senior government official as saying. Mr Meshaal said that a truce was possible in Gaza - as was further escalation of the conflict. Mr Meshaal said Hamas' conditions for a truce included lifting the Israeli blockade on Gaza and an end to "Israel's assassinations". Israel has also presented conditions for a ceasefire, which include no hostile fire of any kind from Gaza and international efforts to prevent Hamas from rearming. Meanwhile, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan described Israel as a "terrorist state", citing the "massacre of children" during its bombardments of Gaza. Once cordial relations between Turkey and Israel soured after Israeli marines stormed a Turkish aid ship in 2010 during a naval blockade of Gaza.