The decision on Tuesday by federal Judge John S Martins upheld a 1995 city law banning female topless dancing in

The decision on Tuesday by federal Judge John S Martins upheld a 1995 city law banning female topless dancing in residential areas. “One does not have to be a psychologist or a sociologist to recognise that,” he said, “if it were known that 10 topless women were walking down Park Avenue and 10 topless men were walking down Madison Avenue, the effect on the traffic on Park Avenue would be substantially greater than on Madison Avenue.” AP – New York. Rome – The Italian Chamber of Deputies yesterday gave its approval to the initiative of the Prime Minister, Romano Prodi, to deploy Italian troops in a multinational force in Albania. The Chamber approved the force, to be led by Italy, by a vote of 503 to 85, with seven abstentions. Mr Prodi won the vote at the cost of a damaging rift with his hard left allies. Facing the stiffest political challenge in 11 months in office, he staved off an immediate government crisis when the centre-right opposition Freedom Alliance said it would vote with his centre-left coalition on a joint motion to deploy the force.

But it exacted a high price for voting with the government, forcing Mr Prodi into a humiliating admission that he was not able to muster a majority of his own on the policy after key ally Communist Refoundation said it would vote “no”.
Addressing the lower Chamber of Deputies, Mr Prodi said he would ask President Oscar Luigi Scalfaro to decide his fate if his key allies in the Communist Refoundation failed to back him in the vote to deploy an Italian-led security force in the troubled Balkan state.Refoundation, without which the centre-left government cannot muster a majority in the lower house, confirmed that it would vote against the 6,000-strong force of up to eight nations, the first of its kind to be led by Italy.The party’s stance compelled Mr Prodi to rely instead on the main centre- right opposition Freedom Alliance to support the mission.”I declare now that if the dissent expressed by the Communist Refoundation group persists, I will go immediately to the head of state to inform him officially of the situation and await his evaluation,” Mr Prodi said. The options open to President Scalfaro, the supreme arbiter in Italy’s politics, include asking Mr Prodi to tender his resignation or, which is more likely, sending him to parliament for a vote of confidence, in order to determine whether his 11-month-old government stands or falls.The split has highlighted the vulnerability of Mr Prodi’s coalition to Refoundation’s casting votes on a difficult domestic agenda. These include a drive to reduce Italy’s social spending to prepare the country for entry into Europe’s planned single currency.Refoundation says it will back Mr Prodi in any confidence vote as long as it is not on Albania. But the coalition party leaders now want a thorough review of the stormy alliance in order to assess whether the hard left can be brought into line on key economic policies.”What we have to do now is seek a confidence vote on the government’s programme. The vote must be on precise issues and not general matters,” said the Italian Foreign Minister, Lamberto Dini, leader of the centrist Italian Renewal party.The opposition supports the idea of sending a force to Albania. But it exacted a high price for voting with the government, insisting Mr Prodi acknowledge that his parliamentary majority has been cut to shreds on the issue.. Hong Kong’s incoming government yesterday confirmed its critics’ worst fears when it made clear that draconian curbs will be imposed on the operations of political organisations and the right to protest after the handover of the colony to China at the end of June.

The office of Tung Chee-Hwa, Chief Executive of the incoming government, issued what it described as a “public consultation document on civil liberties and social order” setting out a programme for reviving some of the more restrictive curbs on the rights to dissent which were scrapped by the outgoing colonial administration and introducing measures which appear to be squarely targeted at weakening Hong Kong’s large pro-democracy organisations.
The document was described as “consultative” But it offered no options for consideration. Instead, it set out the various proposals made by Chinese advisory bodies who had previously indicated that Hong Kong’s relatively recent spate of human rights law reform would have to be clawed back.Presenting the document, Michael Suen, the Secretary for Policy Coordination, insisted that the new government was committed “to continued protection of human rights and personal freedoms”. But he underlined the need to “strike a balance between civil liberties and social stability, personal rights and social obligations, individual interests and the common good’.Reaction to the proposed changes has been swift. Albert Ho, the spokesman of the Democratic Party, Hong Kong’s largest party whose operations would be curtailed under the law reforms, said: “If all the proposals were put into statute, there would be flagrant violations of human rights.”Allen Lee, leader of the Liberal Party, which supports the incoming administration, thought the proposals were balanced but said they contained grey areas. He singled out concern over the definition of “national security”, a phrase peppering the document at points where prohibitions on political activity are mentioned.Chris Patten, the Governor, questioned whether a “genuine consultation process” would be allowed. He challenged the new administration to say it would withdraw the proposals if public opinion were shown to be hostile.Mr Suen stressed that changes would be made as China’s parliament, the National People’s Congress (NPC), had decreed that Hong Kong’s public order laws contravened the Basic Law or mini-constitution for the territory.However, Mr Patten said, “the NPC is not Moses bringing the tablets down from the top of the mountain”. He maintained that its rulings could be changed.The amendments attracting most attention relate to the right to hold demonstrations and the right of political organisations to associate with overseas bodies and individuals.The proposals would revive old laws giving the police wide powers to ban or curtail demonstrations of more than 30 people and, in general, would make it difficult to hold demonstrations without giving seven days notice.

All of the colony’s biggest demonstrations in recent times have been organised in response to events and at much less than seven days notice, although the police have powers to prevent their organisation.Under the new proposals, special permission could be granted within 48 hours but not less than that.Political organisations would be banned from all international contacts on the grounds that “Hong Kong is extremely vulnerable to external forces”. The Democratic Party, for example, is heavily dependent on funding from overseas Chinese communities.The proposals also seek to weaken the recently introduced Bill of Rights which ensures that other laws have to fulfill human rights criteria.. Sydney – There is no sign of a Martin Bell in white armour riding to the rescue. But Australia is proving that Britain is not alone with its worries about sleaze. The Australian government was embroiled in controversy yesterday, as three MPs aligned to the ruling Liberal-National coalition faced police investigations and charges over alleged misuse of their parliamentary expenses.
John Howard, the prime minister who came to power last year promising new standards of probity in public life, has been embarrassed by the sleaze, known as the parliamentary “rorts” after an Australian colloquialism meaning rackets or deceptive practices.

Mr Howard’s shame has been compounded by the fact that he had spent weeks defending one of the MPs amid mounting public clamour for the politician’s resignation.That MP is Mal Colston, a member of the Senate, the upper house of federal parliament, who was forced to repay almost A$7,000 (pounds 3,300) last month after an inquiry revealed he had wrongly claimed allowances for trips. Mr Colston has been accused of flying 3,000 miles across Australia from Brisbane to Perth, on parliamentary expenses, just to claim frequent flyer points, of claiming travel allowances on 43 days since 1993 when he did not travel, and of using a chauffeur-driven government car when he already had a self-drive car funded by taxpayers.The defence of Mr Colston by Mr Howard and some senior ministers was based on sheer political opportunism. Mr Colston once belonged to the Labor Party, but he left it in a huff last year when it refused to back him for the job of deputy president of the Senate.Mr Howard’s conservative government needed Mr Colston’s vote in the Senate, where it does not have an absolute majority It supported the newly independent Mr Colston for the job. In return, he has supported the government in getting some of its most controversial legislation through the Senate, especially its bill to privatise one-third of the state-owned telecom.But Mr Howard’s refusal to condemn Mr Colston’s behaviour over his use of public money backfired spectacularly on Tuesday night. It came when Christine Smith, a member of Mr Colston’s staff who had earlier taken the blame for his false travel claims, recanted.