Britain cannot take for granted that it will retain its world-leading position in science and innovation after Brexit, a committee of MPs has warned.
The House of Commons science and technology select committee is concerned that the UK has not yet committed itself to the next round of EU funding which will start accepting bids for research finance in the next few weeks.
“It is crucial that the government acts swiftly. If it fails to do so both sides could suffer considerably as a result,” said Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb, chairman of the committee.
MPs say a deal needs to be in place for continued participation in the EU funding programme by October at the latest.
The UK has the option of paying into the EU’s science research funding as an associate member like other non-EU members including Switzerland and Norway, but the committee said it was concerned that the government had “openly avoided” committing to the EU’s next round of funding for science research, Framework Programme 9.
It is the successor to Horizon 2020, the EU’s seven-year flagship research programme which has spent around €80bn (£70bn) since 2013.
MPs noted a number of ministers had made speeches reaffirming the importance of science to the country, but there had been no follow up through action.
“With just one year remaining until Brexit, and a commonly-accepted aim of reaching a comprehensive Brexit deal by this autumn, the time for setting out broad aspirations has passed,” said the cross-party committee. More clarity was urgently needed to avoid “unfortunate” results.
“It cannot be taken for granted that the UK will retain its status as a science superpower,” said the report.
MPs also want clarity on immigration policies post-Brexit in order to continue attracting talent to British universities and businesses at the heart of research.
“Researchers and businesses need to know what the UK’s intentions are,” MPs concluded in their report, Brexit, Science and Innovation.
The uncertainty over Brexit is already hitting research. Last year medical researchers told how they had been “bumped off grant applications” for EU grants by European colleagues unsure that they could depend on British collaboration post-Brexit.
Radical stuff from the European commission: it is proposing a tax on the revenues of large digital companies operating in the EU, to be levied at 3%. The idea breaches the basic principle that corporate taxes should be charged on profits, not turnover, and thus will cause conflict with the US and probably a few EU countries too. But Brussels deserves support.
No measure to date has halted the massive under-taxation of global technology firms. A crude local revenue tax, intended to operate until an international solution can be agreed, is better than the current state of affairs.
Digital businesses pay an effective average tax rate of only 9.5%, compared with 23.2% for bricks-and-mortar firms, according to the commission. We know why. The global tax system was designed for a different age and it is too easy for large technology firms to shift intellectual property and profits to low-tax territories. The contortions are legal (mostly) but the result is a skewed system that is a tech subsidy by another name. Other taxpayers are obliged to fill the inevitable tax shortfall.
The commission calculates that a 3% tax on local revenues from tightly defined digital activities would raise €5bn (£4.36bn) annually. Spread across 150 qualifying large companies – including Apple, Facebook and Google – the sum cannot be described as punitive. Nor can the tech titans really have believed their free lunch would last forever. When challenged over elaborate tax arrangements, executives have tended to argue that they play by the rules as they find them, and that if politicians want a different system they should change the law. Now the commission is inviting EU governments to do exactly that.
The UK Treasury, perhaps surprisingly, has itself flirted with the attractions of a revenue tax. Here is a proposal it can support – before and after we leave the EU.
Aviva: picking the wrong battle?
Aviva’s hard-charging chief executive, Mark Wilson, gets plaudits for restoring financial discipline to the FTSE 100 insurer, but sometimes he needs to slow down. Since declaring last week that Aviva was generating excess cash and that the moment had arrived to have some “fun”, he has walked into a unfunny City row.
At one level, the quarrel is merely technical. The dispute is over Aviva’s claim that it is entitled to cancel £450m worth of “irredeemable” preference shares at their par value of 100p. Since the coupon, or annual interest rate, on these shares is 9%-10% (they were issued a couple of decades ago), the market price was much higher – about 170p. Shareholders are understandably furious that their investment has plunged in value by a quarter. They thought they owned something more like a fixed-income bond.
Aviva says it is pursuing financial efficiency. Regulators have decreed that preference shares will no longer count as core capital from 2026. Plus, the company would save £38m annually by paying to cancel at par, which would be a good trade for ordinary shareholders.
Even if Aviva’s lawyers have triple-checked the legal basis (the Financial Conduct Authority wants the details), the manoeuvre smells completely off. Try explaining to Joe Punter why it is fair to call something irredeemable and then declare that cancellation doesn’t count as redemption under section 641 of the Companies Act. Every private investor group in the land, and the big battalions of M&G, Legal & General and Prudential, is opposed.
Aviva hasn’t yet put a formal proposal on the table, so its bald “may we remind you of our legal rights” approach may be the opening position in a negotiation. But it is aggressive, will cause maximum aggravation and cannot be good for the company’s reputation.
The insurer’s other news last week was only slightly less awkward. Wilson has accepted a non-executive post at BlackRock, the world’s largest fund manager and thus surely a direct competitor to Aviva Investors. Does Wilson – and Sir Adrian Montague, chairman of Aviva, for that matter – stop to think about how these things look?
Spotlight on audit watchdog
The surprise in the latest Carillion hearings wasn’t that a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers can charge £865 an hour for his time: there is no real competition at the top end of the consultancy market, especially in cases when half the rivals are tainted by past association with the fallen firm.
Rather, the revelation was that the business secretary, Greg Clark, is about to order a review of the Financial Reporting Council, the audit watchdog. It is unclear whether he suspects the FRC lacks powers or is simply feeble at using the ones it has. Either way, an investigation is overdue. Even before Carillion, faith in the auditing of UK companies was low and falling.
Conservative party donors are among the investors in the company that spawned the election consultancy at the centre of a storm about use of data from Facebook.
Filings for SCL Group, which is at the top of a web of companies linked to Cambridge Analytica, show that since its conception in 2005 its shareholders and officers have included a wine millionaire who has given more than £700,000 to the party, a former Conservative MP, and a peer who was a business minister under David Cameron.
On Wednesday, Theresa May faced questions in the House of Commons over Tory links to the company. “As far as I’m aware the government has no current contracts with Cambridge Analytica or with the SCL Group,” the prime minister said.
Downing Street said that Cambridge Analytica had approached the Conservativesabout working for the party, but that the approach had happened “under a previous administration”, and the bid had been rejected.
“An approach was made and the party decided not to take that forward,” May’s spokesperson said.
Later a spokesperson acknowledged that the government had previously held three contracts with SCL Group but said that they had ended well before the current issues. Two of the contracts were undertaken under the last Labour government.
From its outset as a UK-registered company, SCL Group had investors from the upper echelons of British life. Lord Marland, a successful businessman who became a minister in 2010, held shares personally and through two related investment vehicles, Herriot Limited and a family trust.
Marland said that he had not been involved in running the company, and had refused a request to introduce it to Conservative party HQ.
“I have had very little engagement with the company and in fact am fairly sure I have only met Mr Nix once,” he said.
“I also know very little of their operations as my initial investment was over 10 years ago. As such I had no idea of their Facebook data and am naturally concerned about current events.”
Sir Geoffrey Pattie, a former Conservative defence and industry minister, took a key role in the company for its first three years. In a Guardian article from 2005 he is described fronting the company’s stand – which is “more Orwell than 007” – at a defence show in London. Pattie is shown to have resigned as a director in 2008.
One of Marland’s fellow investors, and the person now registered as having “significant control” over SCL Group, is a Conservative party donor called Roger Gabb.
Gabb, who introduced the Volvic water brand to the UK then went on to make millions selling wines including the Kumala label, now owns more than 25% of the company. At its formation he was named as a shareholder, as was the Glendower Settlement Trust which is linked to him and his wife.
Gabb has given £707,000 to the Tories since 2004, making contributions to the main party and his local Ludlow branch. In 2006 he gave £500,000 to the party, making him one of its largest donors at the time.
The property tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz was also a shareholder via his company Consensus Business Group. Tchenguiz donated £21,500 to the Conservatives between 2009 and 2010.
For eight years from 2005 Consensus Business Group held just under a quarter of the shares in SCL, which was valued at around £4m at the time of the investment.
The firm said it had no role in the running of the company, and had sold off its stake in 2013. It appears that it received around £150,000 for the shares.
In a statement a Consensus Business Group spokesperson said the company was a minority financial investor in SCL and was never involved in the day-to-day management or its operations.
The spokesperson added: “Consensus Business Group invested in SCL in 2005 taking a 24% stake in the business, on the basis that the company developed a major emergency response and strategic communication centres capabilities for clients.
“SCL was one of many investments made by Consensus Business Group between 2002 and 2008. Consensus Business Group lost interest and began negotiations for exit in 2013 and finally sold its stake back to SCL in Q1 2015.”
Julian Wheatland, a close associate of Tchenguiz, was involved with SCL Group from the beginning, and is still a director at the company.
The other main players at SCL Group are Nigel Oakes, an old Etonian from a military family – his father is Maj John Waddington Oakes – and a former boyfriend of Lady Helen Windsor. Oakes had previously set up a company called Behavioural Dynamics which made many similar claims to SCL about its ability to influence voters. In 2000, it worked for the Indonesian president, reportedly without great success.
Nix, a fellow old Etonian, is reported to have joined Oakes at an earlier incarnation of SCL in 2003. Companies House data shows he is linked to 10 firms, which all appear to be linked in some way.
On Wednesday, the Scottish National party’s leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford, asked May about her party’s links with SCL, which he said “go on and on”.
“Its founding chairman was a former Conservative MP. A director appears to have donated over £700,000 to the Tory party. A former Conservative party treasurer is a shareholder,” he said.
“Will the prime minister confirm to the house her government’s connections to the company?”
May said the allegations around Cambridge Analytica were “very concerning”.
Boko Haram has released more than 100 of the schoolgirls it abducted last month, returning them to their village in north-east Nigeria.
Waving the black and white flag used by the Islamic State and wearing balaclavas, military fatigues and ammunition belts, members of the group released most of the girls they had abducted in Dapchi early on Wednesday morning.
On 19 February armed militants pretending to be soldiers herded the girls into trucks and escaped. The Nigerian government was initially slow to act but then said it would negotiate with the group for the girls. It has denied any ransoms were paid.
Witnesses said the militants pulled up near Dapchi police station on Wednesday and shouted that parents should pick up their daughters. Initially, villagers ran away fearing another attack. But when they realised what was happening, they began to cheer and wave at the militants, chasing after their pickup trucks, some recording videos on their phones.
“Dapchi is full of joy,” said Mohammed Mdada, who saw the girls being whipped as they were driven away a month previously. He said the militants apologised to some of the girls’ parents in their language, Kanuri, and shook their hands before driving off.
“They said that if they knew they were Muslim girls they wouldn’t have abducted them,” Mdada said. “They warned the girls that they should stay away from school and swore that if they came back and found any girl in school, they’d abduct them again and never give them back.”
One of the goals of Boko Haram – which has kidnapped thousands of girls, boys and women, forcing some of them to blow themselves up, killed thousands of others and displaced millions – is to stop children receiving what it perceives as western-style education.
Usman Mataba, whose niece was among those returned, said she had talked to the militants. “I approached them and they told me that they had brought all the girls except six – that five had died on the day they were taken,” he said. “They said they discovered they were dead when they arrived at their destination, so they buried them.”
Mdada said he had been told the five girls were trampled to death. The sixth had “refused to cooperate” with them, Mataba said.
Amnesty International later said four girls were still missing. Locals said Boko Haram also dropped off a boy who had apparently been kidnapped by accident.
Hafsat Abdullahi phoned the Guardian to say her 16-year-old sister Fatima, who had been taken, had been dropped off in Dapchi. She put her sister on the phone.
“It took us three days to get back to Dapchi,” said Fatima. “We were divided into three groups and flown in planes, and taken over rivers in boats.”
Soon after arriving back in Dapchi, the army told Fatima and her schoolmates to assemble at the village hospital.
“They took all of them to the hospital, Fatima is in the hospital now,” Hafsat said later, waiting at home to see her sister. “I heard that the chief of staff of the army is here and wants to take the girls with him to Damaturu. I don’t like that – I want her to stay.”
Their parents were not allowed in to see them, and the girls were soon put into vehicles and driven away. Their destination was Abuja, Nigeria’s capital, where they were to meet the president, Muhammadu Buhari.
In the aftermath of the Dapchi attack, Buhari said his government would negotiate with the militants, but in a statement released on Twitter on Wednesday he claimed there had been “backchannel” negotiations and that no ransoms had been paid.
This raises the question of what was offered to secure the girls’ release. The Nigerian government held several Boko Haram commanders who could have been handed over as barter.
Other aspects of the abduction and release remain murky. According to an Amnesty International report, the army and police had been warned that Boko Haram would abduct the girls and made no attempt to stop them.
However, their kidnappers drove them into the centre of the village, close to the police station.
Neither the military nor the police attempted to apprehend the militants, who even stopped to change a tyre before leaving Dapchi, according to Mataba.
Parents of the Chibok girls, kidnapped four years earlier in a neighbouring state to worldwide condemnation, happened to be in Dapchi to commiserate with their counterparts and urge them to be patient.
The Chibok girls were taken before Boko Haram split into several factions, when it was led by Abubakar Shekau, a notorious militant who vowed to “sell them in the market” and who is still believed to have some 100 of the girls in his custody, having traded others for vast sums of money, according to an investigation by the Wall Street Journal.
After turning its back on mopey comedies about listless people grappling with ennui in big houses, Amazon is banking everything on its upcoming Lord of the Rings TV show. According to Reuters, buying the rights to the property alone set Amazon back $250 million. Once production and marketing has been factored in, it’s likely that the first two series will cost half a billion dollars, and it could reach the $1bn mark if it completes the full six seasons. By some degree, that makes it the most expensive television programme in history. But just because a TV programme is expensive, does that make it any good? Let’s look at some of the costliest series ever made and find out.
An ensemble series about a plane crashing onto a mysterious tropical island was always going to be expensive. The pilot alone – which involved wrecking an aeroplane, laying it out across a beach, setting it on fire and then fastidiously removing all trace of it – apparently cost so much money that Disney fired ABC’s chairman for having the temerity to even greenlight it. However, it’s Lost for god’s sake. It’s one of the best programmes ever made. This was money well spent and I swear to god I will fistfight anyone who disagrees.
Some shows – like Breaking Bad or Fleabag – earn their prestige. Others simply buy it in. House of Cards is the perfect example of the latter. Netflix needed a hit, so it hired one of the world’s best directors and an Oscar-winning actor to achieve it. The result was House of Cards. At first the formula worked – it won seven Emmys, two Golden Globes and quickly established itself as a reason to subscribe – but now it’s all come crashing down. People will still watch the upcoming final series, but only because they want to see how the show will Poochie Kevin Spacey away.
Hopes are high for Chris Chibnall’s turn at running Doctor Who, but you’ll notice that everyone is determinedly ignoring his 2011 show Camelot. That’s because Camelot was both eye-wateringly expensive and unforgivably terrible. Billed as no less than “an idea of hope that has resonated at different times throughout history”, Camelot managed to miss every target it set out to hit. The funny bits weren’t funny. The spectacular bits weren’t spectacular. There was too much talking. It was studded with ridiculous sex scenes that felt like they were shipped in from Skinemax. The fact that you can’t even remember it speaks to how bad it was.
Traditionally, you give a television programme a huge budget because you’re confident that it’ll have mass appeal. That wasn’t the case with Sense8; partly because it was a baffling sci-fi about a psychic connection that linked an entire global community, but mainly because the only thing anyone remembers from the pilot is the close-up of a damp strap-on squishing to the ground like a sack of fish. Sense8’s ambition and dedication to telling stories about non-binary characters earned it an audience, just not one big enough to justify all that money.
Sometimes a show’s budget gets out of control because of all the cool car chases and explosions it contains. Then there’s Friends, which became blisteringly expensive to make because the actors knew their worth. In 2002, the cast had become famous and bored. During contract negotiations, they pushed for a million dollars an episode each; and if they didn’t get it, they’d all leave. They got their million dollars, and Friends became the worst-looking expensive show ever made.
You didn’t watch all of Netflix’s The Get Down, because The Get Down looked and sounded like what it feels like to have a migraine in a branch of Topshop on a Saturday afternoon. It was like 15 television programmes happening simultaneously. It was like a burning farmyard. It was like dying and having an X Factor audition take place on your grave. It was terrible, and made worse by Baz Luhrmann’s refusal to understand the mechanics of a regular television budget. Genuinely the worse use of money since the Maginot Line.
Apparently, the most expensive programme ever made so far, largely thanks to all the opulent palaces and costumes on show. It’s undoubtedly paying off – this is television of a scale and ambition we simply haven’t seen before – but you can’t help wish they’d pay their female stars properly.
The upcoming final series of Game of Thrones is hurling money at the screen. Each of its six feature-length episodes will cost around $15 million to make, partly because each of them will be a pedal-to-the-metal extravaganza of cutting-edge special effects, and partly because some of the cast have hung around long enough to negotiate better contracts. Will it be worth it? Who cares, because you’re going to watch it anyway.
Car F1-W09 Engine Mercedes Principal Toto Wolff Debut France 1954 GPs 168 Titles 4 2017 1st
Ominously strong in testing, Mercedes have stuck with last year’s concept and focused on ironing out their weaknesses. Already relentlessly reliable, the drivers believe the car is a step forward and the team are now favourites to equal Ferrari’s record of five consecutive drivers’ and constructors’ titles. Once again the team to beat.
Lewis Hamilton (GB, aged 33)
No44 Debut Australia 2007 Wins 62 Poles 72 Titles 4 Last season 1st Odds 4-6
At the top of his game and now only improving when presented with a challenge. Hugely comfortable with the team, he is motivated and still hungry for a fifth title to equal Juan Manuel Fangio. It will take a vigorous assault to stop him.
Valtteri Bottas (Fin, 28)
No77 Debut Australia 2013 Wins 3 Poles 4 Best finish 3rd Last season 3rd Odds10-1
Still has much to prove. The Finn opened last season strongly but was soundly beaten by Hamilton thereafter. Now must show his pace and ability across the season to keep the seat. Putting Hamilton under pressure would be a major step.
Ferrari
Car SF71H Engine Ferrari PrincipalMaurizio Arrivabene Debut Monaco 1950 GPs 948 Titles 16 2017 2nd
Have taken last year’s well-balanced car and adopted a new high-rake approach, which has still to prove itself. Have not moved on as far as Mercedes over the winter but retain strong balance through the corners. Potentially have much to come but may open slowly.
Sebastian Vettel (Ger, 30)
No5 Debut USA 2007 Wins 47 Poles 50 Titles 4 Last season 2nd Odds 4-1
A strong effort last season marred by costly moments of weakness. Still Ferrari’s No 1 driver but to challenge must be able to match Hamilton’s mental strength and flawless execution.
Kimi Räikkönen (Fin, 38)
No7 Debut Australia 2001 Wins 20 Poles 17 Titles 1 Last season 4th Odds 40-1
Wingman to Vettel. If Ferrari harbour any ambition for the constructors’ title (and Räikkönen’s retention suggests they do not) the Finn must be more consistent and less erratic.
Car RB14 Engine Renault Principal Christian Horner Debut Australia 2005 GPs 244 Titles 4 2017 3rd
Brought a far more competitive car to testing and can expect to hit the ground running this season. Remain hampered by the Renault engine but are potentially closer to Mercedes than Ferrari. Early wins and solid reliability are crucial to back up a strong driver line-up.
Daniel Ricciardo (Aus, 28)
No3 Debut GB 2011 Wins 5 Poles 1 Titles 0 Best finish 3rd Last season 5th Odds9-1
Has struggled to get on top of the higher grip and downforce of the new cars and although he outscored Verstappen last season was not as impressive as the youngster. Consistent and aggressive, can be fearsome if he puts it together.
Max Verstappen (Neth, 20)
No33 Debut Australia 2015 Wins 3 Poles 0 Best qualifying 2nd Titles 0 Best finish 5th Last season 6th Odds 11-2
Showed far greater maturity last season, especially dealing with some woeful unreliability and was mighty quick when he had the car under him. Fearless and unintimidated, a burgeoning and exceptional talent who will push to the limit against all comers.
Force India
Car VJM10 Engine Mercedes Principal Vijay Mallya, Robert Fernley Debut Australia 2008 GPs 191 Titles 0 Best finish 4th 2017 4th
May struggle to punch above their weight as they have for the previous two seasons in a tense midfield. Currently focused on developing a strong mechanical platform for this year’s car. Upgrades arrive in Melbourne and subsequent deployment will dictate their real competitive level.
Sergio Pérez (Mex, 28)
No11 Debut Australia 2011 Wins 0 Best finish 2nd Poles 0 Best qualifying 4th Titles 0 Best finish 7th Last season 7th Odds 250-1
Has been crucial to his team’s recent success but faces real a battle with Ocon this year as both have a point to prove. Still harbours ambitions of another shot with a top team and putting his highly rated team-mate in the shade is the best way to do it.
Esteban Ocon (Fr, 21)
No31 Debut Belgium 2016 Wins 0 Best finish 5th Poles 0 Best qualifying 3rd Titles 0 Best finish 8th Last season 8th Odds 250-1
Now settled at Force India, the young Mercedes driver will expect to prove his worth and potential to replace Bottas at the senior team by roundly beating Pérez. If he stays out of trouble he should have the edge over his team-mate.
Williams
Car FW41 Engine Mercedes Principal Frank Williams Debut Spain 1977 GPs 666 Titles 9 2017 5th
Adopted the most revolutionary approach on the grid with Paddy Lowe’s new design a drastic change from last year. Their ambitious plan has potential but it may take time to realise, especially given the inexperienced driver line-up.
Lance Stroll (Can, 19)
No18 Debut Australia 2017 Best finish 3rd Poles 0 Best qualifying 2nd Titles 0 Best finish 12th Last season 12th Odds 750-1
A solid rookie season was a riposte to some of the opprobrium he received for earning his place with his father’s dollars but now he knows the cars and tracks he has nowhere to hide.
Sergey Sirotkin (Rus, 22)
No35 Debut season Odds 500-1
Russian rookie also bringing cash to the seat but has impressed and now has a chance to prove himself. Technically adept, he has a degree in race car engineering. Beating Stroll and bringing on the new Williams would make a major impression.
Renault
Car RS18 Engine Renault Team principals Jerome Stoll, Cyril Abiteboul Debut GB 1977 GPs 341 Titles 2 2017 6th
Now fully enjoying the resources a works team requires. Various new concepts on this year’s car will provide a challenge to bring it up to speed. Have focused on reliability first for the engine, with more power expected later. The second half of the season may indicate just how far the team has come and how far they are from the top three.
Nico Hülkenberg (Ger, 30)
No27 Debut Bahrain 2010 Wins 0 Best finish 4th Poles 1 Titles 0 Best finish 9th Last season 10th Odds 100-1
In his seventh season has perhaps the best chance yet to score his first podium and must perform strongly to reach the expectations of his ambitious team. The German enjoyed the grip of the new cars last year and now has a chance to exploit it and cement a long-term future with Renault.
Carlos Sainz Jr (Sp, 23)
No55 Debut Australia 2015 Wins 0 Best finish 4th Poles 0 Best qualifying 5th Titles 0 Best finish 9th Last season 9th Odds 125-1
Also eager to make his mark and Renault’s new car may prove to be just what the Spaniard wanted. He has shown flashes of great skill and undoubtedly has more to come.
Toro Rosso
Car STR13 Engine Honda Principal Franz Tost Debut Bahrain 2006 GPs 226 Titles 0 Best finish 6th 2017 7th
New partnership with Honda has got off to a good start. Put in huge number of laps in testing, with Honda beginning to deliver reliability. If they can turn up the performance the team may be in for their best finish yet.
Pierre Gasly (Fr, 22)
No10 Debut Malyasia 2017 Wins 0 Best finish 12th Poles 0 Best qualifying 14th Titles 0 Best finish 21st Last season 21st Odds 1000-1
Red Bull-backed and highly rated, the Frenchman has won GP2 and stood up well to being parachuted into Toro Rosso at the end of last season. Has great potential.
Brendon Hartley (NZ, 28)
No28 Debut USA 2017 Wins 0 Best finish 13th Poles 0 Best qualifying 17th Titles 0 Best finish 23rd Last season 23rd Odds 1000-1
Despite being in his first full season in F1, Hartley is hugely experienced at high-level racing. With Porsche he has won the World Endurance Championship twice and the Le Mans 24 last year. Gasly may have the edge in pace but the New Zealander could prove invaluable in developing the car.
Haas
Car VF-18 Engine Ferrari Principal Guenther Steiner Debut Australia 2016 GPs 41 Titles 0 Best finish 8th 2017 8th
Have the potential to threaten the bigger midfield teams, especially early in the season. Consistent and strong on single lap and long runs in testing, the car had pace and good balance. Could be the surprise package of the season.
Romain Grosjean (Fr, 31)
No8 Debut Europe 2009 Wins 0 Best finish 2nd Poles 0 Best qualifying 2nd Titles 0 Best finish 7th Last season 13th Odds 500-1
May benefit from confidence within the team that brake issues are behind them but as the senior driver he may also need to prove he can manage the anchors better by adjusting his style.
Kevin Magnussen (Den, 25)
No20 Debut Australia 2014 Wins 0 Best finish 2nd Poles 0 Best qualifying 4th Titles 0 Best finish 11th Last season 14th Odds 500-1
Another McLaren refugee looking to impress enough for a second shot at the top. Has settled well at Haas and could now assert himself over Grosjean and become the team leader.
McLaren
Car MCL33 Engine Renault Principal Eric Boullier Debut Monaco 1966 GPs 821 Titles 8
Highly optimistic of the new partnership with Renault but the team have much to do. The car looks good but was unreliable in testing with a range of issues. Under massive pressure, especially now the Honda money has gone, they must hope the worst is behind them and the upgrades for Melbourne will pay off. Failure will have major consequences.
Fernando Alonso (Sp, 36)
No14 Debut Australia 2001 Wins 32 Poles 22 Titles 2 Last season 15th Odds 25-1
Signed for another season on the basis that the team had a competitive engine but will not be pleased if compromised by reliability. Still wrestles more from a car than almost any other driver but wants a shot at podiums at least.
Stoffel Vandoorne (Bel, 25)
No2 Debut Bahrain 2016 Wins 0 Best finish 7th Poles 0 Best qualifying 7th Titles 0 Best finish 16th Last season 16th Odds 100-1
Escaped major scrutiny last year with the car so far off the pace but now has to impress. If he can match Alonso it would go far in answering critics. With Lando Norris being prepared to step up at McLaren, he needs to deliver.
Sauber
Car C37 Engine Ferrari Principal Frédéric Vasseur Debut South Africa 1993 GPs 441 Titles 0 Best 2nd as BMW 2017 10th
Celebrated receiving this year’s Ferrari engine and the technical Alfa-branded relationship that goes with it with a raft of innovative aero ideas. However, they have yet to show any great effect. The car appears to lack grip and pace but the team, in the process of rebuilding, are optimistic they can unlock its potential.
Marcus Ericsson (Swe, 27)
No9 Debut Australia 2014 Wins 0 Best finish 8th Poles 0 Best qualifying 9th Titles 0 Best finish 18th Last season 20th Odds 2000-1
Faces his toughest test in the challenge from new team-mate Leclerc and is likely to be overshadowed. Ericsson brings finance but little else.
Charles Leclerc (Mon, 20)
No16 Debut season Odds 1500-1
Talented Ferrari junior driver comes hot from dominating F2 last season but now faces a testing rookie season in an uncompetitive car. Tipped as a replacement for Räikkönen, he is eager to make his mark and should do so, beginning with beating Ericsson.
Facebook is changing the way it shares data with third-party applications, Mark Zuckerberg announced Wednesday in his first public statement since the Observer reported that the personal data of about 50 million Americans had been harvested and improperly shared with a political consultancy.
The Facebook CEO broke his five-day silence on the scandal that has enveloped his company this week in a Facebook post acknowledging that the policies that allowed the misuse of data were “a breach of trust between Facebook and the people who share their data with us and expect us to protect it”.
“We have a responsibility to protect your data, and if we can’t then we don’t deserve to serve you,” Zuckerberg wrote. He noted that the company has already changed some of the rules that enabled the breach, but added: “We also made mistakes, there’s more to do, and we need to step up and do it”.
Facebook’s chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, shared Zuckerberg’s post and added her own comment: “We know that this was a major violation of peoples’ trust, and I deeply regret that we didn’t do enough to deal with it.”
Zuckerberg also spoke to a handful of media outlets on Wednesday, including a televised interview with CNN in which he apologized for the “breach of trust”, saying: “I’m really sorry that this happened.” In similar conversations with the New York Times, Wired, and tech website Recode, Zuckerberg expressed qualified openness to testifying before Congress and said that he was not entirely opposed to Facebook being subject to more regulations.
The crisis stems from Facebook policies that allowed third-party app developers to extract personal data about users and their friends from 2007 to 2014. Facebook greatly reduced the amount of data that was available to third parties in 2014, but not before a Cambridge University researcher named Aleksandr Kogan had used an app to extract the information of more than 50 million people, and then transferred it to Cambridge Analytica for commercial and political use.
On Saturday, Facebook’s deputy general counsel, Paul Grewal, appeared to defend the lax policies that allowed data harvesting from unwitting friends, writing in a statement: “Aleksandr Kogan requested and gained access to information from users who chose to sign up to his app, and everyone involved gave their consent.”
But after five days of outrage from the public, and calls for investigations and regulation from lawmakers in the US and UK, the company appears to be acknowledging that blaming users for not understanding its byzantine terms of service will not suffice.
The company will investigate apps that had access to “large amounts of information” prior to the 2014 changes, Zuckerberg said, and audit any apps that show “suspicious activity”. A Facebook spokesperson declined to share how Facebook was defining “large amounts of information” or how many apps would be scrutinized.Zuckerberg said in his interviews that the number of apps was in the “thousands”.The company will also inform those whose data was “misused”, including people who were directly affected by the Kogan data operation.
An online petition calling for just such disclosure for people included in Kogan’s data set had garnered more than 15,000 signatures since the weekend.
Facebook also promised to further restrict the amount of data third-party developers can access when users login to their sites with their Facebook profile, turn off data sharing for apps that haven’t been used for three months, and move the tool that allows users to restrict the data they share from the Settings menu to the News Feed.
David Carroll, a US design professor who is challenging Cambridge Analyticathrough the UK courts to access his data profile harvested from Facebook, called the reforms “inadequate”. “Users should be notified, and not have to know to go and find out,” he told the Guardian by email.
Zuckerberg’s statement notably did not offer any explanation for why Facebook did not make any effort to inform affected users when Guardian reporters first told the company of the data misuse in December 2015. He did address the question in his press interviews, acknowledging to CNN that it was “a mistake” to rely on Kogan and Cambridge Analytica’s certifications that they had destroyed the data.
“I don’t know about you, but I’m used to when people legally certify that they’re going to do something, that they do it,” he said. “We need to make sure that we don’t make that mistake ever again.”
“With Mark Zuckerberg’s response, they are trying to convey that they are taking this seriously, but they are reacting to furore rather than facts,” said Jeff Hauser of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “The facts are not new to them.”
Jonathan Albright, a research director at the Tow Center for Digital Journalism, said that while he welcomed Zuckerberg’s explanation of how Cambridge Analytica gained access to the data in question, he was disappointed that the CEO did not address why Facebook enabled so much third-party access to its users’ personal information for so many years.
“This problem is part of Facebook and cannot be split off as an unfortunate instance of misuse,” Albright said. “It was standard practice and encouraged. Facebook was literally racing towards building tools that opened their users’ data to marketing partners and new business verticals. So this is something that’s inherent to the culture and design of the company.”
Olivia Solon and Edward Helmore contributed reporting.
Safety, Professionalism, Innovation: essential elements for the patient!
The skin is the largest organ in our body (15% of the body mass) has always played a fundamental role. The most important functions are: protection against dehydration, oxygen absorption and elimination of waste products from our body, protection from UV solar radiation and reduction of the risk of infections by preventing bacteria from accessing them. “Precisely because of its functional role, it is good practice, before any medical treatment, to make an accurate diagnosis able to establish the state of health of the skin, to subsequently define an effective and personalized intervention program” asserting in no uncertain terms the Dr. Mariarosaria Di Placido, affirmed Aesthetic Doctor of Rome.
Increasingly, cosmetic medicine treatments are carried out in beauty centers or by doctors who are not specialized in the subject, thus increasing the risks to the health of patients.
A growing number of people, indistinctly men and women, want to prevent and contrast the signs of aging, improving their appearance. In recent years, research and innovation have given an important impetus to this branch of medicine, thanks to the help of latest-generation medical devices that guarantee a natural and more effective result.
It is essential, however, to rely on experienced professionals who not only have invested in an appropriate training path in the field of aesthetic medicine, but who have gained the necessary experience to practice the profession in a complete manner, according to science and conscience for the good of the patient. If the price of a treatment is far below the average, do not be “indulged by the occasion”: the price to pay in terms of health could be very high. Whether it is a filler or another, the medical devices used must be of proven quality and above all certified.
Dott.ssa Di Placido, what is the most correct way to optimize the effectiveness of medical-aesthetic treatments?
In my daily clinical practice, at the first meeting with the patient, I perform a complete skin check-up to study the state of skin health. Only later, I choose, in agreement with the patient, the appropriate treatment to correct the imperfection, minimizing any risks and complications. It is my habit to guide the patient to a correct lifestyle, so as to optimize the treatment performed at the studio. To obtain the best result, the patient must “cure” his skin at home. Good hydration and quality cosmetics will prolong the treatment.
For more info (www.studiodiplacido.com) (info@studiodiplacido.com)
Coxarthrosis is a degenerative disease of the hip joint and is characterized by a progressive erosion of the cartilage that covers the head of the femur and the acetabulum that houses it. It is one of the most important forms of arthrosis, both for the frequency with which it manifests itself in the population, and for the serious disability that can be achieved. To illustrate the new frontiers on minimally invasive interventional methods, is dott. Luca Lucente, renowned specialist in Orthopedics and Traumatology of Rome.
Dr. Lucente, when it is necessary to resort to the surgical procedure of prosthetic hip replacement?
When osteoarthritis causes significant functional limitations and pain is no longer controllable. The surgery immediately eliminates the arthritic pain and helps to radically improve the patient’s quality of life. Today the surgeon has more advanced materials and operating techniques than in the past, with the result that implants are increasingly stable, long-lasting and better integrated biologically and biomechanically with the bone. Even the operating techniques have evolved and are increasingly aimed at the preservation of bone and periarticular soft tissues (muscles, vessels and nerves).
Speaking of surgical techniques, you prefer the inguino-medial access route, applying a small incision at the level of the inguinal fold, why?
The hip prosthesis can be implanted through a lateral, lateral, anterolateral, anterior, or inguino-medial posteroal surgical incision. This last access, true novelty in the prosthetic surgery of the hip, does not provide for the cutting of its stabilizing muscles (buttocks, fascia fascia lata and rectus femoris) and allows to reach the joint through a direct path, without causing damage to anatomical structures. The advantages of this minimally invasive technique are manifold: the operation is less painful, the blood losses are lower, the postoperative functional recovery is almost immediate, the patient can immediately return to their daily activities and the risk of dislocation is practically absent ( the preservation of the muscular component allows to improve the stability of the joint). It also offers an important aesthetic advantage, which makes it particularly attractive to patients’ eyes: the surgical incision is practically invisible, because it is placed along the inguinal fold. In recent years, the growing interest in minimally invasive surgical procedures and “tissues sparing” has brought this technique to the fore, of which I have supported its effectiveness in numerous national and international medical congresses, such as the ISTA which is held in Boston in 2016 and the GFAC that took place in 2017 in China.
For more info (luca.lucente@fastwebnet.it) (www.protesiancaroma.it) (cell 3355446427)
“The moment I received the invitation, I understood that Ileana and Alfonso would have been a perfect wedding, cared for down to the last detail, so as not to disappoint the expectations of those who waited with trepidation on the yes day of a wedding planner so cool. In line with the season of the event, autumn, already the ticket, warm, welcoming, sensual, introduced in a context of great intimacy. The formal and classic exterior, made of precious Amalfi paper and sealed with sealing wax, once opened, gave way to an explosion of warm and autumn colors inviting to enter a friendly, hospitable and infinitely sophisticated atmosphere. I did not have to wait long to discover that every detail, from the choice of colors to that of floral arrangements, from Wedding Stationery to mise en place, from the menu to wedding cake, was taken care of to make everything unique and unforgettable. “Mrs. Terracciano, for you who had the opportunity to observe every detail, what was the most exciting moment of this wedding?“One of the most touching moments was undoubtedly the entrance of the bride in the church: on the notes of the masterfully interpreted by the orchestra of dear friend Master Gerardo Cavallo, Ileana has walked the whole aisle, elegantly decorated, with a luminous smile, with the look moved, the slow and elegant step, exciting friends and relatives. And when the priest finally blessed the union between the two spouses, an uncontrollable joy exploded in the heart of us all.”How was the Antico Casale dei Mascioni decorated for the occasion?“I think Ileana wanted to give the ceremony a less formal imprinting, enhancing the aromas and the typical colors of autumn, in the warm and welcoming rooms of the Casale. The sparkling light of small lanterns, light bulbs, candles and braziers positioned in every corner of this nineteenth-century noble residence, has contributed to making the atmosphere enchanting and enveloping. Every corner of the first room, all white, romantically decorated with majestic compositions representative of the harvest, has allowed to enjoy the natural charm of the vegetation and the rich foliage with incomparable nuances. Here we started to delight us with an unparalleled enogastronomic journey. From norcineria to sushi, from crudité to embers, the refined and refined cuisine of the Antico Casale has given us a truly incomparable sensory journey, with intense, delicate, tasty and fragrant dishes, paired with wines from the best wineries. Crossing the village and its picturesque views, we were then introduced into another room with a majestic fireplace: here a new explosion of beauty with important fittings, rigorously elegant and refined to excite, move, leave an indelible mark in the memories of all of us . The creative flair and the mastery of the Chefs have proposed unique dishes for quality and presentation, real “gourmet chests” with unique aromas and flavors, rigorously autumn, able to delight even the most demanding palates.So, a ceremony without equal. What’s the most exciting novelty that has made it so successful?From the fairy atmosphere created in the church to the preparation of the rooms up to the confettata of great effect, nothing can be defined as “usual” or already seen. It is clear that Ileana wanted a very personal and authentic style, oscillating between rustic chic and romantic princely, for a perfect balance between classicism and innovation. In line with the whole ceremony, even the wedding cake, the most awaited dessert ever, could not but leave you breathless: a suggestive “pyramid” of mini cake, with its blaze of flavors, was the undisputed star of a wonderful and an amazing finale, which transformed Ileana’s special day into the refined and exclusive fairy tale that has always dreamed of. As a souvenir of this unforgettable day, a refined crystal wedding favors and an elegant wedding bag, hand-made by Ileana’s mother, Onorina, in her workshop, the Scarabattolo of Caserta: I will jealously preserve them over time, in memory of this intense day of beauty and emotions …
For more info (www.anticocasaledeimascioni.it) (ileana@anticocasaledeimascioni.it)
Founded in 2023 and led by GAVEFER Srl, the International Uro-Andrological Center was created with the goal of placing the individual and their health...
The new therapeutic frontiers for the treatment of proctological disorders have finally become a reality, thanks to an innovative approach based on the use...
Fewer Risks, Better Results: Laser Surgery for BPH Explained by One of Italy’s Leading Experts
In Italy, over 30,000 surgeries for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)...
In the current system governing tax law, characterized by an exceptionally high rate of legislative production, tax litigation continues to represent one of the...
