BBC
Guardian
TechWeb
ZDNet
PC World
NewsForge
The Register
Slashdot
New Scientist
Java
Pixel2Life
Main
A photographic exhibition is part of a project to broaden care leavers' horizons
A photographic exhibition is part of an ongoing project to broaden care leavers' horizons and help ease their transition to adult life. By Rachel Pugh
Exhibition of photographs by care leavers, The Things You Don’t See
A new exhibition showcases the work of care leavers who were given free rein to show life behind the scenes of Manchester's Library Theatre
FAQ: Mortgage help
How do I qualify for help with my mortgage? What if I am on income support?
Case-study: Behind on payments, with 56 days to sell up
Jassette Donaldson, 53, a checkout assistant from Leytonstone, east London, who has fought for months to keep her three-bedroom house, is not sure if the government's repossession scheme will help her. She has been given 56 days to sell her house after falling behind with her £1,230-a-month mortgage repayments in 2005"I ruled myself out of this," she says of the scheme . But so few details have been released that homeless charities are unsure who will qualify. Shelter, which helps people facing repossession, was inundated with phone calls yesterday from confused people and local councils asking them who can benefit from the scheme.Donaldson was unable to keep up with her mortgage after she was hit by a car and had to take six months off work. She then returned part-time and was supporting her daughter at university.She went to court and made some repayments with help from her son, but he is now unable to help further. Donaldson, who suffers from arthritis and sciatica, said: "Sometimes I can't walk as I'm in too much pain but my employers are threatening to sack me because I'm off work." When the Guardian spoke to her two weeks ago, her solicitor was about to go to court for the second time to ask the judge if she could have more time to sell her house. The courts granted her 56 more days. Her house was valued at £300,000, but is on sale for £250,000. She also had to buy a home information pack, which cost £300, to put her house on the market. "I could've used that money to help with my mortgage repayments," she said.Housing marketMortgagesInterest ratesBanks and building societiesRecessionCredit crunchguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
House prices hit by biggest annual fall in 25 years
House prices in the UK fell by their biggest amount in 25 years over the last 12 months - and economists predict that they have much further to fall.Halifax, Britain's biggest lender, said that prices dropped 2.6% in November and 16.1% over the last 12 months, to leave the average price of a house falling just over £30,000 to £163,605. This is worse than the early 1990s, when the country was last in recession, and is the biggest fall since 1983. Howard Archer at IHS Global Insight said: "The latest Halifax house price data are a real shocker, even by the recent very low standards of the housing market."Would-be buyers are currently unable to get on the property ladder as it is so difficult to obtain a mortgage. Housing experts are doubtful that yesterday's one percentage point cut in interest rates will help boost the housing market. Liam Bailey, head of residential research at Knight Frank, said: "This cut is unlikely to have any immediate effect on the housing market, although it may tempt some buyers to make a decision. Prices will continue to fall into 2009. Much depends on whether the new rate is passed on to borrowers." Simon Ward, chief economist at New Star, the fund management group, predicted earlier this week that house prices might not return to their August 2007 peak until the mid-2020s. The Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, Lord Oakeshott, said: "The Halifax house price index is at last catching up with what property professionals have known and auction prices have been shouting since the spring: there is a market, but in a mortgage famine houses only sell at the levels cash buyers are prepared to pay."House pricesHousingMortgagesBanks and building societiesInterest ratesRecessionCredit crunchguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Ministers meet banks to thrash out two-year mortgage interest holiday
Mortgage lenders were last night demanding clarity on the fee they would be charged for the government's two-year guarantee on missed mortgage payments to help struggling homeowners.At a meeting between the major banks and Alistair Darling and Lord Mandelson yesterday, the hastily announced scheme to give customers breathing space was discussed along with a number of other pressing issues affecting banks.The chancellor and the business secretary will also have a number of top-level meetings with lenders next week as the government attempts to ensure that small businesses are not deprived of finance during the continuing economic crisis. Thrashing out the details of the scheme to help households affected by redundancy or a "significant loss of income" is vital for the lenders, who have been told to implement the package in the new year.In working through the fine print of the scheme, the eight lenders - seven banks and one building society - which have signed up to the plan will be anxious for clarity on the price they will pay for the guarantee being provided by the government for missed interest payments.The eight lenders represent 70% of the mortgage market, where there are concerns that as many as 75,000 homes could be repossessed next year as unemployment rises.Gordon Brown, who stunned parliament with the announcement on Wednesday, yesterday made it clear more lenders should sign up. "The eight major lenders that are responsible for more than 70% of the mortgage market are fully behind the plans. We are now working on getting the remaining 30% signed up," Brown said.The lenders were asked to support the scheme, which will cover mortgages up to £400,000 - but only those with less than £16,000 worth of savings will be eligible. It will allow customers in difficulty to defer a proportion of the interest payments on their mortgage for up to two years. The deferred payments will be added to their outstanding mortgage debt, which the borrower will pay off when their finances improve. It could leave the government with liabilities of about £1bn. Up to 9,000 homeowners could be helped by the scheme, which is being backed by HBOS, Nationwide, Abbey, Lloyds TSB, Northern Rock, Barclays, RBS and HSBC, although housing minister Margaret Beckett said yesterday that it was "really genuinely quite hard to judge" how many applicants there might be. Lenders are determined it should target people who "can't pay" rather than "won't pay". They had already been warned by the Financial Services Authority to treat customers having difficulty with mortgage payments with care. Lenders such as Royal Bank of Scotland, which is 58% owned by the taxpayer, and state-owned Northern Rock, had also taken steps to try to avoid accusations of heavy-handedness by promising to wait six months before initiating the repossession process rather than the three-month industry norm.The government is also putting pressure on credit card companies to treat customers fairly during the economic downturn. They have to draw up a new statement of principles to avoid an investigation by the Office of Fair Trading. This might include a "window" when card companies can move rates, and a potential limit on the size of rate rises. The business secretary, Lord Mandelson, is also demanding monthly data from banks on the amount of money they lend to small businesses.Economic policyMortgagesBanks and building societiesInterest ratesRecessionCredit crunchguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Court: take innocent off DNA register
The rapid expansion of the DNA database in Britain was halted yesterday by a damning ruling by European human rights judges that the retention of the profiles and fingerprints of more than 850,000 innocent people was unlawful.The unanimous ruling by the European court of human rights scuppers Home Office plans to extend automatic retention of DNA samples to those arrested for low-level offences such as traffic violations and littering and for the Europe-wide sharing of records. The national DNA database contains profiles of 4.3 million people who have been arrested by the police in connection with "recordable" offences that carry a potential prison sentence.Data protection experts also warned last night that it had wider implications for other criminal justice data-sharing schemes in Britain and across Europe.The 17 judges ruled that the "blanket and indiscriminate" lifetime retention of DNA samples from unconvicted crime suspects, including children, constituted "a disproportionate interference with the applicants' right to respect for private life and could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society".The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, has until March to tell the Strasbourg court how she intends to comply with the ruling. Urgent talks were being organised last night with the police over how that might work. Chris Sims, the chief constable of Staffordshire and lead spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said that the judgment could have a profound impact on the way the police use DNA technology to tackle crime.One likely solution is to adopt the system in Scotland where the DNA samples and fingerprints of people arrested only in connection with serious sexual and violent crimes can be retained on the database - and only for five years.DNA databasePoliceCrimePrivacyHuman rightsguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Rate cut brings mix of relief and dismay
Holders of tracker mortgages are looking forward to the lowest monthly payments in a lifetime following yesterday's base rate change, which is also set to slash the rates paid to savers.Within hours of the Bank of England's announcement, all the big banks said they would pass on the rate cut to some extent. Customers can expect lower monthly repayments from January 1. However, savers can expect to see the interest they are paid fall to 1% or less. The Bank's second big rate cut in recent months was also bad news for anyone who is about to retire.MortgagesSome lucky tracker mortgage customers - whose interest rates shadow the Bank of England base rate - will be paying just 0.99% for their home loans.Someone with a £100,000 interest-only deal at that rate is now paying just £82.50 a month - a payment that would have been unthinkable as little as a year ago.After the heavily-trailed rate cut and pressure from the government, the majority of the big banks said they would pass on the full one percentage point cut. HSBC, Lloyds TSB/Cheltenham & Gloucester and Bristol & West announced immediately that they would pass it on in full The majority state-owned Royal Bank of Scotland group, which includes NatWest, said it would not. Instead, it said it would adjust its rates by an amount that would strike "an appropriate balance between the interests of savers and borrowers in any decision it makes". This is understood to mean it aims to cut standard variable rate (SVR) by half a point to allow it to lessen the impact on savings rates.It was joined by fellow government-backed lender Halifax Bank of Scotland. Britain's biggest lender said it would only cut its SVR by a quarter-point to 4.75% - again from January 1.Earlier in the day Halifax said 500,000 customers on tracker deals would receive the full benefit of yesterday's rate cut. The announcement followed the intervention of the Financial Services Authority, which had been concerned Halifax would use terms buried in its small print that allow it not to pass on the full rate cut. Later Nationwide, the UK's biggest building society, said it would lower its SVR by 0.69 of a point. It said it would not enforce a controversial "floor" that allowed it not to pass on reductions to tracker customers if rates went below 2.75%.Overall, the UK's 4m tracker mortgage holders have been the main beneficiaries of the collapse in interest rates. Since the Bank of England started cutting rates in the autumn, those with interest-only tracker mortgages will see their monthly mortgage payments halve by January 1.Anyone with a fixed rate deal has had to watch in dismay as their borrowing costs have remained unchanged. Around 1m households have deals linked to the SVR and they are now paying 4%-6% - considerably more than those on trackers.There was a ray of hope yesterday for anyone who has been frozen out of the mortgage market by the credit freeze. Cheltenham & Gloucester and First Direct launched reasonably-priced mortgages for up to 90% of a home's value. These deals had disappeared until this week. SaversWhen the Bank of England cut rates by one and a half points in November savings rates across the UK were slashed. Last night savers were facing further cuts, and they were racing to grab the last decent fixed rate savings products.Saga said yesterday it would pull its one-year fixed rate bond paying 5.75% today and replace it with a 4.75% deal. The firm, which has £3bn of savings, said it "can only defy gravity for so long". Overall, savings rates on current accounts look likely to all but disappear. Nationwide, where some rates fell by as much as 1.6 points last month, says it is reviewing savings accounts but "these are not likely [to change] in the next few days". The Anglo Irish Bank's 5.75% fixed rate deal until February 2010 was last night doing brisk business as consumers sought to fix their savings at the remaining decent rates.RetirementThe rate cut spells more gloom for those about to retire. Those in their 60s have watched on as the value of their pension pot has been badly hit by falls in the stockmarket. When they convert it to an annuity the income payouts are expected to fall to historic lows. Annuity rates - which give an income for life - are pegged to bonds which in turn feed off interest rates. This week bond yields fell to their lowest level for 30 years.MortgagesInterest ratesEconomic policyBanks and building societiesguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
How happiness can be catching
Happiness is catching, new research has confirmed, and depends on how cheerful about life your friends feel.Happiness is spread through social networks and exists in clusters of close friends and neighbours, according to a study published today in the British Medical Journal. Being around happy people at work does not help, the research found... - happiness is most contagious in your street. Living next door to somebody who becomes happy can increase your own chances of happiness by 34%.The research was carried out by academics from the University of California in San Diego, who used data from the Framingham heart study in Massachussetts, which has been going since 1948. Most of the children and many of the grandchildren of the original participants are regularly monitored to establish the state of their health.Professors Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler have carried out research on the impact of social networks on other aspects of health and found that they influence obesity and smoking habits. The current study was designed to find out whether happiness is peculiar to an individual or dependent on the people around him or her. The researchers assessed the happiness of people (whom they termed egos) and their friends, neighbours and relations (alters). They asked whether they agreed or disagreed with four statements relating to the previous week: "I felt hopeful about the future," "I was happy," "I enjoyed life," "I felt that I was just as good as other people." Happiness was a perfect score in all four. The academics found it does not matter how many friends you have. "Having additional social contacts is helpful to the ego's happiness only if the extra social contacts are happy themselves," said Chistakis and Fowler. What is important is how happy your friends are and how close to you they live.Healthguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Couple fight adoption 'injustice'
A couple who claim they suffered a miscarriage of justice when three of their children were adopted after they were accused of inflicting multiple fractures on the youngest child yesterday went to the appeal court to reunite the family. Mark Webster, 35, and Nicky, 28, say the injuries to the boy, referred to as B, were due to scurvy, brought on by his acute eating problems, which saw him existing on an exclusive diet of soya milk. Doctors who discovered six fractures said the injuries were non-accidental. The Websters have not seen the children since January 2005, when they were aged five, three and two. The couple, from Cromer, Norfolk, fled to Ireland in 2006 to have their fourth child, Brandon, fearing that otherwise he too would be taken from them. When they returned to England Brandon stayed with them for six months under monitoring.Their counsel, Ian Peddie QC, said it was time for a court to publicly acknowledge they were victims of a "terrible miscarriage of justice". He added that, even if the court ruled it was too late to go back on the adoptions, the children should learn the truth and the Websters and Brandon should be allowed to see them. Peddie said the Websters wanted to thank the adoptive parents and they "recognised the anguish" that the case presented for them. "They desperately want to reunite the family even if only visiting contact is established."The judges will reserve their ruling.Child protectionguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
How traces linked killers to victims in high-profile cases
DNA evidence has played a significant role in high-profile cases in the past year
17 judges, one ruling - and 857,000 records must be now wiped clear
The fingerprints and DNA samples of more than 857,000 innocent citizens who have been arrested or charged but never convicted of a criminal offence now face deletion from the national DNA database after a landmark ruling by the European court of human rights in Strasbourg.In one of their most strongly worded judgments in recent years, the unanimous ruling from the 17 judges, including a British judge, Nicolas Bratza, condemned the "blanket and indiscriminate" nature of the powers given to the police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to retain the DNA samples and fingerprints of suspects who have been released or cleared.The judges were highly critical of the fact that the DNA samples could be retained without time limit and regardless of the seriousness of the offence, or the age of the suspect.The court said there was a particular risk that innocent people would be stigmatised because they were being treated in the same way as convicted criminals. The judges added that the fact DNA profiles could be used to identify family relationships between individuals, meant its indefinite retention also amounted to an interference with their right to respect for their private lives under the human rights convention.The case provoked an expression of disappointment from the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, and the promise that a working party, including senior police officials, will report back to Strasbourg by next March on how the government will comply with the judgement."The government mounted a robust defence before the court and I strongly believe DNA and fingerprints play an invaluable role in fighting crime and bringing people to justice. The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgement."It is thought that the policy in Scotland, where DNA samples can only be held for a maximum of five years and only in serious violent and sexual cases, even if the suspect was not convicted, will be the first option to be looked at.The Strasbourg court ruling came in a case brought by two Sheffield men who asked for their DNA records to be destroyed. The first man, Michael Marper, aged 45, was arrested in 2001 and charged with harassing his partner, but the case was dropped three months later after the couple were reconciled. He had no previous convictions. In the second case, a 19-year-old named only in court as S was arrested and charged with attempted robbery in January 2001 when he was 12, but was cleared five months later. Both asked the South Yorkshire police to remove and destroy their DNA samples and profiles and fingerprints. But police said they needed to retain them "to aid criminal investigation".Their lawyer, Peter Mahy, said last night: "This is a fantastic result after a seven-year hard fought battle against the UK government . We are obviously delighted that the European court of human rights found in our clients' favour. It will be very interesting to see how the government respond - they should start immediately to destroy the DNA records of innocent people on the DNA database. "The ruling will have a major impact in shaping the future development of the DNA database in Britain and its use across Europe. Set up in 1995, the British DNA database which now holds the samples of 4.3 million individuals in Britain, including children, is already proportionately the largest in the world. The Home Office acknowledged yesterday that its plans to extend the retention of DNA to low level, so-called non-recordable offences, including littering and minor traffic offences were now dead in the water. Tony Bunyan of Statewatch, the European civil liberties monitoring group, also said it put a question mark over EU plans to share fingerprint and DNA data across the 27 member states.The Association of Chief Police Officers said the ruling would have profound impact on their use of DNA technology. They pointed out that over a four-year period from May 2001, 200,000 DNA samples taken from unconvicted suspects, had led to 8,500 individuals being linked with 14,000 offences including 114 murders and 116 rapes.But Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said: "This is one of the most strongly worded judgements that Liberty has ever seen from the court of human rights. The court has used human rights principles and common sense to deliver the privacy protection of innocent people that the British government has shamefully failed to deliver."The Equality and Human Rights Commission said it welcomed the judgement and would work with the Home Office and the police to ensure the implications of the ruling were implemented.DNA databaseCivil libertiesPrivacyCriminal justiceCrimePoliceguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
What it means for the UK
The implications of the legislative change made by the European court of human rights
Stephen Moss on the crisis facing The Kennel Club and the future of Crufts
'We are the tiniest production company on the planet - there are more dogs here than staff," Jemima Harrison tells me when I am arranging a visit to her Wiltshire farmhouse. She isn't exaggerating. There are two and a half staff - Harrison herself, who writes, directs and produces films, as well as cooking excellent sausages in her smoke-filled kitchen; partner Jon Lane, co-producer and cameraman; and part-time researcher Rachael Turner. And there are at least seven dogs: five full-timers, one of which attempts to eat my tape recorder, and two in transit. Harrison, in between making documentaries, runs a dog rescue centre. While her company, Passionate Productions, is small, it is also noisy. It may, indeed, be the jack russell of the film world - limited in stature but capable of a loud yelp and fearsome nip. As the Kennel Club, bastion of the dog world, organiser of Crufts and for 135 years ruler of dogdom, is finding out. In August, BBC1 broadcast Harrison's disturbing film Pedigree Dogs Exposed, which argued that highly selective breeding was damaging the health of many pedigree dogs and undermining their genetic diversity. Several organisations, including the RSPCA, the PDSA and leading charity the Dogs Trust, have responded by pulling out of Crufts. Sponsors Pedigree have also jumped ship, but claim this was a commercial decision rather than a moral statement. And, potentially most serious of all, the BBC is reviewing whether it should continue to broadcast the show - next year's Crufts takes place at Birmingham's NEC in March. Dogdom is in uproar. So-called whistleblowers who helped Harrison with her film have been frozen out and allegedly subjected to hate campaigns by traditionalists. The world of prize-winning shih tzus and schnauzers will never be quite the same again.The Kennel Club has taken Harrison to the broadcasting regulator Ofcom, complaining that the documentary was unfair (they were especially angry to be likened to Nazis in their alleged commitment to a doggy version of eugenics), but she is unrepentant. "I got a very emotional email from a senior figure at the Kennel Club after the programme," she says. "They were incredibly upset. They thought it was a travesty, but obviously the Kennel Club were never going to be happy with the programme. The Kennel Club has remained largely unchallenged for 135 years and it needed doing. That sort of pomposity and arrogance needed puncturing. I don't really care how many people I've upset if it gets a better deal for the dogs."Harrison's argument is that the breed standards overseen by the Kennel Club have caused an exaggeration of certain characteristics that has taken some breeds further and further away from the originals, causing physical deformities that are harmful to the dogs. There is also a separate, but related, issue concerning the decline in genetic diversity caused by the mating of dogs which are closely related and the use of "super-sires", champion dogs which are deemed highly desirable in a pedigree and, through artificial insemination, can now produce many litters. Some critics accuse breeders of "playing God" with dogs. Amazingly, all these animals - from the chihuahua to the great dane - are descended from wolves. Harrison says the "plasticity" of the dog - its malleability in the hands of breeders - has been its greatest enemy.Pedigree Dogs Exposed includes painful footage of a cavalier King Charles spaniel writhing in agony because its skull has allegedly, over time and by selective breeding, been modified in such a way that it is now too small for its brain. The story is repeated across many breeds - bull terriers and dachshunds whose legs are too short, German shepherd dogs with collapsing back ends ("half dog, half frog", according to those demanding reform), pugs with squashed faces that can barely breathe, basset hounds whose exaggerated skin folds are liable to become infected, bulldogs which have departed so much from the 17th-century original that they find it hard to mate without human assistance or give birth naturally, since the puppy's head is often too large to pass through the birth canal.Harrison compares photographs of breeds a century ago with those today, and the changes in conformation are startling. Beauty is the watchword of the showing world, according to staunch critics such as the RSPCA's chief veterinary adviser, Mark Evans, who has labelled dog shows a "parade of mutants". Aesthetics have been placed before health and functionality. Harrison and her supporters reckon this is dogdom's "Miss World moment": if the BBC pull the plug on Crufts, it will lose its large television audience and the sponsorship that goes with it, and at best end up on some obscure cable channel. Poor Peter Purves.The Kennel Club is doing a good job of not looking panicked when I visit its Mayfair HQ. "Members must be dressed appropriately in the dining room," reads a notice pinned to the reception desk. "No jeans, leggings or trainers." A wooden board has inscribed on it the club's patrons since its inception in 1873: the Prince of Wales from 1873 to 1901 and the five reigning monarchs since. Embarrassingly, the Queen is patron of both the Kennel Club and the RSPCA. The Kennel Club is not used to criticism. In its library, I look at Edward Ash's monumental two-volume Dogs: Their History and Development, published in 1927; the reference to the club in the introduction sets the tone. "In April 1873 the Kennel Club was formed, with Mr S E Shirley as chairman. He subsequently became president, holding this honour until his much-regretted demise in March 1904. In 1874 the first KC Stud Book was published. No remarks of mine are needed to suggest that the founding of the Kennel Club was the greatest step in the welfare of dogs and dog shows. With a master-hand this organisation controlled without jar or unpleasant interference, to the benefit of all. Gradually the dog show emerged from perfectly impossible conditions to a controlled and satisfactory one."The club's principal function is to register pedigree dogs - more than 270,000 a year. The certificate it provides for a £12 fee gives puppy buyers a guarantee of the dog's pedigree. The club also funds research into canine health issues, tries to educate the public on responsible pet ownership, runs dog shows and field trials, and lobbies parliament on behalf of dogs. None of this good work, it complains, was discussed in Harrison's programme. "We knew there were health problems with some breeds and were already working to address them," says the club's secretary, Caroline Kisko. "We started on this five years ago. That's part of the reason we were miffed with the programme. It made it look as if we weren't aware of the issues and that we weren't doing anything, as if we had our heads in the sand." She also dismisses the argument that beauty rules supreme in the show ring. "Health has to be the number one criterion for judging dogs," she insists, "temperament the number two, and everything else comes afterwards." The Kennel Club has put 12 breeds on what it calls its "worry list". These are breeds with recurring health problems that may be linked to the breed standard - a written description of the ideal dog that is holy writ for breeders. It has already revised the standard for the pekingese to encourage a less flat face. The gradual elimination of the pekingese's muzzle - in line with a standard that specified "profile flat with nose well set between eyes" - meant that these dogs, too, were having difficulty breathing. Noses are now back in.The breed standards, many of which date back to the Victorian era, are remarkably detailed. Take the dachshund: "Rump full, broad and strong, pliant muscles. Croup long, full, robustly muscled, only slightly sloping towards tail. Pelvis strong, set obliquely and not too short. Upper thigh set at right angles to pelvis, strong and of good length. Lower thigh short, set at right angles to upper thigh and well muscled. Legs when seen behind set well apart, straight and parallel. Hind dewclaws undesirable." And that's just the hindquarters. There are also detailed specifications for general appearance, characteristics ("intelligent, lively, courageous to the point of rashness"), temperament ("faithful, versatile, good-tempered"), head and skull, eyes ("almond shaped"), ears ("mobile"), mouth, neck, forequarters, body, feet, tail, gait, coat, colour ("no white permissible, save for a small patch on chest which is permitted but not desirable"), and, controversially, size - between 9kg and 12kg. Controversially because there are suggestions that some owners starve their dachshunds ahead of shows to ensure that they make their fighting weight.The degree of detail is obsessive, the search for perfection hard for the outsider to fathom. This is one of those closed worlds which may make perfect sense to its inhabitants but look bizarre to those who stray into it. So, are the people who show dogs barmy? "I would completely dispute that dog people are in some way nutty," insists the Kennel Club's Kisko. "They are very enthusiastic about their dogs, but unlike someone who is very enthusiastic about sailing or golfing, these are living creatures and they need care all year round, all day round, rather than a yacht or a golf club which you can just put away until you need it next time."Geoffrey Davies, one of the UK's leading experts on the pekingese, also rejects the charge of eccentricity. Showing is a hobby like any other, he argues, but he admits Christopher Guest's spoof documentary, Best in Show, is a wickedly accurate portrayal of the world of dog shows. "Showing dogs can be very competitive and intense, but it's also great fun."Davies is fascinating because his life has been dominated by dogs. He has owned more than 200 pekingese in 50 years of showing, had 15 champions, owned best of breed and the toy group winner at Crufts, and judged all over the world. "I've been associated with the breed for 50 years," he says, "since I was a schoolboy of 12. The pekingese is a small dog with the heart of a lion. They've brought so much to my life. When I was first introduced to them, I was an introverted, shy, stuttering boy. They developed my life enormously, took me out to shows, and introduced me to people who covered every socio-economic group - from a cousin of the Queen to a man who swept the streets. All social barriers were broken down through common love of the dog."Davies's enthusiasm is infectious, and it is tempting to play up the comedy of the bitchy world of showing. But Harrison warns me against being seduced. "People have dismissed it as something that's quirky and British and Best in Showish," she says. "It's been the subject of humour from the outside world, but in fact it's really serious for the dogs. They're not having a good time."David Balding, professor of statistical genetics at Imperial College London and co-author of a recent report on inbreeding in purebred dogs, agrees. The exaggerations caused by slavish devotion to the standards is one problem, but the loss of genetic diversity is potentially even more devastating and may threaten the viability of some breeds. "Because you're mating animals with similar genes," says Balding, "you're getting a big loss of genetic diversity and that has bad consequences in terms of your ability to resist disease. Breeding has gone too far. It was something that started getting organised and became systematic in the 19th century, and it didn't do much harm for a long time. But now we have reached the point where the harm is starting to show more and more. We are now doing genetic damage to the dog."The Kennel Club argues that it is doing what it can, but says it has to move cautiously or the breed clubs - the autonomous bodies which represent each breed (there are 18 for the pekingese alone) - will go their own way. Unlike in other European countries, the Kennel Club has no statutory powers; breeders can do what they want. "The most important thing is keeping people with us so we can influence them," says Kisko. "Once you've pushed them away from you, you have no influence over them."Critics of the club, however, believe its hybrid status - part private members' club (with a ceiling of 1,500 members), part charity, part commercial business dependent on registration fees from breeders - renders it incapable of implementing the root-and-branch reform now needed to return to functionality rather than cosmetic appearance in breeding, to rewrite breed standards (all of which the Kennel Club is currently reviewing), and to combat the loss of genetic diversity."The Kennel Club's constitution is the main problem," says Beverley Cuddy, editor of Dogs Today. "It has tried to make changes, but how can something that is so undemocratic vote for democracy? The snobbery and silliness have to go." She says we should copy Sweden, where the government and kennel club work paw in paw, all dogs are registered (mongrels as well as pedigrees), health tests are mandatory, and breeders are made responsible for the health of a dog in the first three years of its life. "Can't we borrow a Swedish manager, like the England football team did?" asks Cuddy, perhaps forgetting the grisly consequences.What happens next is hard to say. Much hinges on the BBC, which has convened an expert panel to advise it on whether the health concerns raised by Harrison's programme are being effectively addressed by the Kennel Club. A BBC spokesman says the decision on whether it will broadcast next year's Crufts is imminent and that the corporation is "hopeful" of continuing the 42-year association. Harrison says she would be "incredibly disappointed if the BBC does not drop Crufts". Even if the BBC does carry on with the show, Cuddy says things will never be the same again. "I don't think coverage in the future will be uncritical," she says. "There will be no more rose-coloured spectacles." If the pekingese wins the toy group by a nose, the statisticians will henceforth be there to check its length.Animal welfareAnimal behaviourBBCguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Victoria Beckham's designer dress collection proves a hit with shoppers
The British shopping public ratified Victoria Beckham's successful debut as a fashion designer at Selfridges yesterday. The presence of her name on the shop floor alongside such greats as Alexander McQueen, Vivienne Westwood and John Galliano was quite an achievement for a designer who unveiled her first collection of dresses just three months ago. More impressive still was the fact that by 3pm on its first day on sale only three dresses were left unsold.Beckham and her backer, Simon Fuller, have sought to maximise the excitement that has surrounded The Dress Collection since it launched to unexpected rave reviews at New York fashion week by limiting production in the first season to an extremely exclusive 400 dresses worldwide. Gossip about whether Beckham had expert help from Roland Mouret in designing the collection - an accusation both she and Mouret have repeatedly denied - has served only to fuel interest.Selfridges, which bought 58 of the dresses, has exclusive selling rights until next month, when dresses go on sale in Harrods, as well as Bergdorf Goodman and Neiman Marcus in the USA, and Restir in Tokyo. Selfridges has received 17 dresses so far, which it split between its London and Manchester stores. Remaining on the rail yesterday afternoon were one strapless, hourglass evening dress in a size eight - retailing at a cool £1,920 - and two simple black silk sequined shifts with soft fabric belts, in sizes 12 and 14, for £1,390. While Beckham was mid-flight home to America, a waiting list had already begun for styles arriving in February.FashionCelebrityguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds