# data[].attributes.headline
Tanzania earthquake kills 13 and injures more than 200

# data[].attributes.subject
Tanzania earthquake kills 13 and injures more than 200

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A magnitude 5.7 earthquake has killed at least 13 people and injured 203 in northern Tanzania, the authorities say.

The quake struck close to the border with Uganda and Rwanda near Lake Victoria.

Images posted on social media showed significant damage to buildings in Bukoba, a city of more than 70,000 people where most casualties were reported.

Tremors were felt as far away as western Kenya.

"This incident has caused a lot of damage," Deodatus Kinawila, the district commissioner of Bukoba, told the BBC.

"For now, the situation is calm and under control," he said later.

"Some people have been discharged from hospital," he added. "We don't expect many more injuries."

The US Geological Survey says the quake struck at a depth of 10km (six miles) at 15:27 local time on Saturday (12:27 GMT).

East Africa's Great Rift Valley runs along a geological fault line but major earthquakes there are rare.

A magnitude six quake struck the Tanzanian town of Arusha, east of Bukoba, in July 2007.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A magnitude 5.7 earthquake has killed at least 13 people and injured 203 in northern Tanzania, the authorities say. The quake struck close to the border with Uganda and Rwanda near Lake Victoria. Images posted on social media showed significant damage to buildings in Bukoba, a city of more than 70,000 people where most casualties were reported.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ratification Of The Paris Climate Change Deal

# data[].attributes.subject
Ratification Of The Paris Climate Change Deal

# data[].attributes.body
The conflicting views of different political parties on including the deal in the law due to the pressure from the joint ratification of America and China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pressure is growing on the UK government to ratify the Paris climate change deal immediately.

A spokesman for the prime minister told the BBC the UK would ratify "as soon as possible", but did not suggest a date.

But Labour, the Lib Dems, SNP and the Greens say the UK has lost its long-term leadership on climate after the US and China jointly ratified the deal at the weekend.

They say there is no good reason for the UK to delay.

Labour warns that unless ministers start the ratification process right away they will attack the government's "failures" on climate policy in an opposition day Commons debate on Wednesday when a motion will call for immediate action.

It is supported by the Lib Dems, SNP and the Greens.

Some analysts believe ministers are delaying the process until they have their long-awaited low carbon plan in place.

This plan was due last year but postponed until late this year following the chancellor's sweeping cuts to subsidies for clean energy.

The Commons environmental audit committee last week warned that plans for expanding the use of electric cars were failing.

The government has not yet replaced its failed Green Deal scheme to insulate homes - a problem green groups say ministers appear unable to solve.

The opposition parties say they want a return to the long-term cross-party consensus on climate policy, which they say was ended by former chancellor George Osborne.

Labour's shadow climate change minister Barry Gardiner says he has offered an "olive branch" to Business Secretary Greg Clark, who has previously expressed great concern for the climate.

Mr Gardiner says he will turn the opposition day debate into a co-operative policy exercise if Mr Clark begins ratification beforehand.

Mr Gardiner told BBC News: "The normal procedure for domestic ratification would see the government issue a Command Paper, which would be discussed by a small committee of MPs.

"The government has not indicated it is ready to do this to allow the UK to be one of the founding parties to the agreement when it comes into force - most likely by the end of this year.

"We need to re-establish common ground on this vital issue. I am holding out an olive branch to the government.

"Their acceptance would be a welcome acknowledgement that climate change is not just one of the most important challenges we face but is one where all politicians must be seen to be working together."

'Hugely important'

Many observers at the Paris climate conference judged that former prime minister David Cameron's speech, urging collective action on climate change, was one of the finest - and the UK has played a long-term leadership role on climate change.

Liberal Democrat spokeswoman Lynne Featherstone told the BBC: "Now America and even China have ratified the Paris Agreement, Britain must move as swiftly as possible to sign.

"This is a hugely important example of where Britain should be working with our European partners to set an example for the rest of the world."

Follow Roger on Twitter @rharrabin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pressure is growing on the UK government to ratify the Paris climate change deal immediately. A spokesman for the prime minister told the BBC the UK would ratify "as soon as possible", but did not suggest a date.

# data[].attributes.headline
UK Migration Data Affected by International Students

# data[].attributes.subject
UK Migration Data Affected by International Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The government might be targeting "phantom students" in its efforts to control migration, a study suggests.

The number of non-EU migrants who come to the UK to study but remain five years later could be about half that ministers claim, say researchers.

The "current self-destructive policy is deterring genuine international students", says the Institute for Public Policy Research.

Ministers say it is crucial to crack down on immigration abuse.

Ministers say official statistics suggest that each year about 91,000 non-EU students do not leave the UK at the end of their studies.

This figure is an extrapolation of data from the International Passenger Survey (IPS) carried out annually by the Home Office on a sample of travellers at UK ports, says the IPPR.

Arrivals who plan to stay more than a year are asked their main reason for coming to the UK - and people who leave after more than a year are asked what they were doing while they were in the UK.

For students, the difference between the two figures is about 90,000 - so reducing this figure would help the government in its objective of cutting overall net migration.

Discrepancy

But this approach is based on "dubious evidence", says the report.

Other ways of counting international students put the figure at less than half that suggested by the passenger survey, say the researchers:

Home Office visa data suggests about 40,000 non-EU students had leave to remain or settle five years later

The Office of National Statistics annual population survey suggests between 30,000 and 40,000 non-EU students are still in the UK after five years

The Higher Education Statistics Agency suggests that six months after graduating, 75% of international students in work are employed outside the UK

"The large discrepancy between the other sources' figures and that of the IPS suggest that the latter's 90,000 figure is not reliable enough to be used as a guide for policy," says the report.

"While it is certainly right to root out abuse and tackle bogus colleges where there is robust evidence of wrongdoing, these rules have adversely affected genuine students and institutions, and have undermined the UK's reputation as a desirable destination for international students," it adds.

"Our research suggests that many of the students they are targeting may be phantom students who are no longer in the country," said report author Marley Morris.

The report urges the government to:

exclude students from net migration cuts and, instead, class them as temporary migrants, as in Australia, Canada and the US

set out a 10-year plan to expand international education

reintroduce post-study work visas for key professions

improve data collection on the migration patterns of international students

Seamus Nevin, head of employment and skills policy at the Institute of Directors, agreed it was time for the government to re-evaluate its approach to international students.

"Restrictive student and post-study visa rules undermine the UK's claim to be an open, outward facing, trading nation," he said.

"Most students who come to the UK to study are not permanent migrants."

And the umbrella group Universities UK urged the government to view international students as "valuable temporary visitors".

A Home Office spokesman said: "We continue to welcome the brightest and best to our world-class institutions. We are also committed to bringing net migration down to sustainable levels as soon as possible and are looking at all visa routes as part of that work."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The government might be targeting "phantom students" in its efforts to control migration, a study suggests. The number of non-EU migrants who come to the UK to study but remain five years later could be about half that ministers claim, say researchers. The "current self-destructive policy is deterring genuine international students", says the Institute for Public Policy Research.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37271420
The UK Brexit vote was largely about immigration control. But there are uncertainties about how the UK can control its immigration. A points system is not the answer....

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Theresa May has rejected a points-based system for controlling EU migration, one of the key promises of Leave campaigners during the referendum.

Speaking in China, the PM denied she had "gone soft" on migration and said people backed Brexit because they wanted "an element of control".

A points-based model would not let the government control arrivals, she said.

Ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage said many people had voted Leave for the policy, backed by Boris Johnson among others.

Mrs May is attending the G20 summit of world leaders in Hangzhou, her first international summit as prime minister.

Although Mrs May supported remaining in the EU, she has said that the Brexit vote must be respected and suggested that curbs on the current free movement of EU citizens into the UK would be a red line in future negotiations with the EU.

But speaking to journalists in China she dismissed Vote Leave's proposal of an Australian-style points system for deciding the number of skilled and unskilled workers who could come into the UK every year from the EU and beyond - with numbers to be determined by MPs.

Rather than giving the government control, such a system would allow anybody into the UK if they met the criteria, she said, adding that curbs on student visas had been a more effective measure to reduce immigration.

"I want a system where the government is able to decide who comes into the country - I think that's what the British people want. A points-based system means that people come in automatically if they just meet the criteria," she added.

'Vote for control'

Her spokesman said: "The precise way in which the government will control the movement of EU nationals to Britain after Brexit is yet to be determined. However, as the PM has said many times in the past, a points-based system will not work and is not an option."

On Sunday Mrs May suggested a points-based model was not a "silver bullet", adding: "You have to look at the whole range of issues, not just how you bring control through the rules you have for people coming in, but also making sure you are rooting out abuse in the system and dealing with people if they are discovered here illegally."

Mrs May also indicated that EU citizens may continue to have preferential rights to live and work in the UK after Brexit.

She said people "wanted to see an ability to be able to control the movement of people from the European Union. And obviously that's what I say, not free movement as it has been in the past".

During a series of interviews, Mrs May also declined to guarantee the UK would use money saved by leaving the EU to spend another £100m a week on the NHS or cut VAT on energy bills.

Analysis
By Laura Kuenssberg, BBC political editor
The multiple red carpets have been rolled up and put away.

And at the end of the prime minister's first major summit there are questions that will follow her home. No more so than on how she really proposes to control immigration from the European Union. Having ruled out the points-based system that was promised by the winning side in the referendum, her answer on what might come instead? Simply, wait and see.

Downing Street officials are acutely aware they may come under increasing pressure to give more details. They face calls for clarity from allies too, as country after country expressed economic concerns about our planned departure.

But while it comes with political risk, at this summit the prime minister is displaying perhaps a significant contrast to her predecessor - choosing to work up the detail first, then make the decision, rather than make a decision and then make the details fit.
Read more from Laura Immigration points-based systems compared Would a points-based system work for the UK?
Mr Farage said he was "worried" by Mrs May's comments.

"The people were clear in wanting a points-based immigration system which is why so many went out and voted to leave the European Union," he said.

"Any watering down from that will lead to real anger."

Labour MP Chuka Umunna, who chairs Vote Leave Watch, which was set up by Remain campaigners after the referendum, said that, proportionally, immigration was higher in Australia, where a points-based system was in use.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the prime minister could "square the circle" of getting the UK continued access of the single market but also ending "free movement as we know it", for example by only allowing immigration within the EU in respect of people who have a job offer.

Mrs May has faced pressure to sketch out a vision of what Brexit will mean for the UK's relations with key partners and major inward investors, such as the US and Japan.

Having held talks with US President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday, she is meeting Chinese president Xi Jinping on Monday among other engagements before heading home.

In a briefing released to journalists on Sunday, the Japanese government expressed concern about the impact of the UK leaving the EU on its firms' tariff-free access to the single market and their ability to recruit highly-skilled workers for its UK plants.

The country's ambassador to the UK, Koji Tsuruoka, told Today it was hard to imagine Japanese companies pulling out entirely from the UK, but said "all options" would be open to businesses if export conditions worsened as a result of Brexit.

In his first Commons statement in his new job, Brexit Secretary David Davis told MPs the government wanted to "build a national consensus" for its EU negotiations.

The process would be an "exciting and considerable challenge", he said, adding that the government would "take the time to get it right".

"Naturally, people want to know what Brexit will mean," he said.

"Simply, it means leaving the European Union."

The Commons will also debate a public petition calling for a re-run of the EU referendum which has attracted more than four million signatures.

A poll for BBC Radio 5Live, conducted by the polling firm ComRes, suggests 62% of the 1,032 British adults canvassed say they are positive about Britain's future post-Brexit.

On the other hand, 26% of those spoken to have considered leaving the UK and moving elsewhere - including 43% of 18-34 year olds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theresa May has rejected a points-based system for controlling EU migration, one of the key promises of Leave campaigners during the referendum. Speaking in China, the PM denied she had "gone soft" on migration and said people backed Brexit because they wanted "an element of control".

# data[].attributes.body
This is an interesting summary of the different views in US politics about global warming....

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two starkly different visions of global warming are offered by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in their race for the White House.

The Democratic Party contender says she believes in the science of climate change and plans to see America become a "clean energy superpower" - installing half-a-billion solar panels by the end of her first term.

By contrast, the Republican candidate talks down the threat of rising temperatures and says his priority is to cut the costs of energy for manufacturers and to revive the coal industry.

Hillary Clinton is a strong supporter of the Paris Agreement on climate change. Donald Trump wants to renegotiate it or pull America out of it.

Because the US has the world's largest economy, and is the second-biggest emitter of greenhouse gases after China, the outcome of this struggle will reverberate internationally. If the US leaves the Paris Agreement, the painfully-negotiated deal could unravel.

With such sharply opposing perspectives, this is the first presidential contest in which the candidates are highlighting their stances on global warming and energy, and using them to attack each other.

So how is this playing out in a swing state like Ohio, which hosts some of America's oldest coalfields and one of the most innovative solar panel makers?

Through the east of the state, the mighty Ohio River flows like an artery for the coal industry, with the heavy machinery of mines, loading stations and power plants lining the steep green banks.

For more than a century, this has been a crucible of power production for the US economy, with vast quantities of coal burned to generate electricity. And because the jobs paid well, and there were lots of them, the communities thrived.

But in recent years, fortunes have changed. The pollution belching from the smokestacks has been gradually limited by wave after wave of legislation - first on emissions of sulphur dioxide, then of nitrogen dioxide, and now of carbon dioxide.

It's no surprise, but along this valley the Environmental Protection Agency is held in contempt. This is the body responsible for cleaning up the air and reducing greenhouse gases under President Obama's Clean Power Plan. A key Trump promise is to dismantle both the agency and the plan.

The reality is that environmental regulation is not the only challenge to coal. Another has come from fracking, the revolution that's opened up deep layers of shale rock to release new supplies of plentiful gas that's cheaper and cleaner than coal.

In any event, the result is that demand for coal is falling and the mines have long been in trouble. As many as 50 mining companies have filed for bankruptcy.

At one pit head, a dozen blackened faces emerged from a lift - this was the day shift, about half the size it would normally have been. Cuts are taking their toll. The mine will close by the end of the year.

Here, Hillary Clinton is a hate figure. A newspaper cutting, pinned to a wall, highlights her saying "We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business."

She later clarified that comment. What she meant to say was that the switch to cleaner energy would inevitably mean coal closures and that she wants to support communities making the transition. But the damage was done.

I talked to the mine's owner, one of the leading figures in the coal industry, Robert Murray of the Murray Energy Corporation.

An outspoken defender of US coal, and prominent in launching legal challenges against the Clean Power Plan, he followed his father into the mines and keeps a polished lump of coal in his board-room.

While many coal mining companies declined our requests for interviews, Mr Murray jumped at the chance, and there was no holding him back.

"What happens is when two coal miners get laid off, if they own anything it's their homes and, when they get laid off, they have no one to sell their homes to.

"So those people who just want to work in honour and dignity are denied that, and it's not the America that I cherish... That's why I speak out like I do, that's why I say, Obama is a greater scourge than America has ever had in its history."

Donald Trump would agree with all that. He sees coal as abundant and homegrown, and responsible for thousands of jobs. And he talks of revitalising the industry, which goes down very well in mining country.

The fact that it is the dirtiest fossil fuel is irrelevant in the Trump view because global warming is a "hoax" as he once called it, though he later said that was a joke.

So what about the alternative vision?

Only a hundred miles to the west, there's a very different Ohio. The zoo in the city of Toledo has solar panels covering its walkways. The huge roof of the city's famous Museum of Art is shining with them too.

With many major companies like Wal-Mart investing in renewable power, the sight of solar installations in this notoriously gas-guzzling nation is no longer so unusual.

On the edge of Toledo, in a landscaped business park, stand the sleek buildings of First Solar. A gigantic manufacturing hall is busy with robots and people working side-by-side. Together with a larger sister plant in southeast Asia, this company can boast of a remarkable statistic: it churns out a new solar panel every single second.

The executives do not want to be drawn into talking politics but they argue that we are witnessing a fundamental transformation: not only have solar panels increased in efficiency but they have also tumbled in price.

No longer is solar just a fad for the eco-conscious rich. The largest solar installations - "utility-scale" in the jargon - in the sunniest parts of the US can generate electricity that is comparable in cost to that of coal.

Though solar power is still intermittent, as with wind, the fall in cost does mean that during the hot days of high summer, when air-conditioning is running at full blast, the electricity supply can be carbon-free.

The implication is that solar power may be starting to make sense purely on financial grounds, regardless of any other motivation such as aiming to reduce carbon emissions.

At the state's largest solar array, covering a long rolling field, Bill Spratley of Green Energy Ohio, a renewables advocacy group, told me that the new reality of cheaper renewable energy would change the debate.

"We have some politicians that are fighting the last war, they're fighting over something, they still believe solar is in the future but it's here now.

"We've probably passed the tipping point or the turning point and they just don't know it yet."

If solar costs keep falling, and coal continues to be undermined by shale gas, then it may be that a Trump victory would not do much to alter what could be an historic trend away from coal into cleaner sources of energy. Even outside the Paris Agreement, US energy companies and big corporations may still see logic in making the switch.

As we leave the solar farm, an engineer managing the installation joined the conversation. "Solar makes sense to me," he said, "and I'm a Republican".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two starkly different visions of global warming are offered by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in their race for the White House. The Democratic Party contender says she believes in the science of climate change and plans to see America become a "clean energy superpower" - installing half-a-billion solar panels by the end of her first term.