Category: BBC

The biggest and the smallest of the world’s animals are most at risk of dying out, according to a new analysis.

Size matters when it comes to extinction risk, with vertebrates in the so-called “Goldilocks zone” – not too big and not too small – winning out, say scientists.

Action is needed to protect animals at both ends of the scale, they say.

Heavyweights are threatened mainly by hunting, while featherweights are losing out to pollution and logging.

“The largest vertebrates are mostly threatened by direct killing by humans,” said a team led by Prof Bill Ripple of Oregon State University in Corvallis, US.

“Whereas the smallest species are more likely to have restricted geographic ranges – an important predictor of extinction risk – and be threatened by habitat degradation.”

Image copyright Jurgen Leckie

The research adds to evidence that animals are dying out on such a scale that a sixth extinction is considered under way.

This has prompted efforts to determine the key drivers of extinction risk.

One clue is body size. Research on birds and mammals has shown that those with larger bodies are more likely to go extinct.

Yet, when the researchers made a data base of thousands of birds, mammals, fish, amphibians and reptiles at risk of extinction, they found disproportionate losses at the large and small ends of the scale.

“Surprisingly, we found that not only the largest of all vertebrate animal species are most threatened, but the very tiniest ones are also highly threatened with extinction,” Prof Ripple told BBC News.

Image copyright Dave Young

Large charismatic animals, such as elephants, rhinos and lions have long been the target of protection efforts.

However, fish, birds, reptiles and amphibians that are the giants of their kind, such as the whale shark, Somali ostrich and Chinese giant salamander, tend to be overlooked.

Meanwhile, small species at risk – such as frogs and shrews – receive very little attention.

“I think, for the smallest species, first of all we need to bring higher awareness to them, because the larger ones get a lot of attention, but the smaller ones get very little,” said Prof Ripple.

In the study, researchers from the US, UK, Switzerland and Australia compared body mass and extinction risk for more than 25,000 vertebrate species.

Of these, around 4,000 are threatened with extinction, as assessed by the Red List of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

Vertebrates with the smallest and the largest bodies were found to be most at risk of disappearing, whether they were on land or living in oceans, streams or rivers.

Image copyright R Hutterer

Threats facing the heaviest included:

• Regulated and unregulated fishing

• Hunting and trapping for food, trade or medicines

The lightest were mainly at risk from:

• Pollution of lakes, streams and rivers

• Farming

• Logging of forests

• Development.

Image copyright Factcatdog

The researchers say that while different approaches are needed for the conservation of large versus small species, there is an urgent need to step up efforts for both.

“Ultimately, reducing global consumption of wild meat is a key step necessary to reduce negative impacts of human hunting, fishing, and trapping on the world’s vertebrates,” they write in the journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which published the study.

“Indeed, based on our findings, human activity seems poised to chop off both the head and tail of the size distribution of life.”

Extinction can be a natural process, affecting a handful of species each year.

However, estimates suggest the world is now losing species at hundreds of times the “background” rate.

Co-researcher Thomas Newsome of the University of Sydney in Australia said for large animals lessening the negative impacts of hunting, fishing and trapping was key.

“But it’s ultimately slowing the human population growth rate that will be the crucial long-term factor in limiting extinction risks to many species,” he said.

Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi has said her government does not fear “international scrutiny” of its handling of the growing Rohingya crisis.

It was her first address to the country about the violence in northern Rakhine state that has seen more than 400,000 Rohingya Muslims cross into Bangladesh.

Ms Suu Kyi has faced heavy criticism for her response to the crisis.

She said there had been no “clearance operations” for two weeks.

In her speech in English to Myanmar’s parliament, Aung San Suu Kyi said she felt “deeply” for the suffering of “all people” in the conflict, and that Myanmar was “committed to a sustainable solution… for all communities in this state”.

Ms Suu Kyi, who has decided not to attend the UN General Assembly in New York later this week, said she nevertheless wanted the international community to know what was being done by her government.

Hours after her speech, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva called for full access to the region so it can investigate the situation “with its own eyes”.

What is the crisis about?

Rakhine has faced unrest and sporadic violence for years, but the current crisis began in August with an armed attack on police posts which killed 12 people.

Image copyright Reuters

That was blamed on a newly emerged militant group, the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (Arsa).

The Rohingya, a mostly Muslim minority, are denied citizenship and equal opportunities by the Myanmar government, which says they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. They are largely despised by the wider Burmese majority-Buddhist population.

• Who are the Rohingya group behind attacks?
• What sparked latest violence in Rakhine?

The attack lead to a massive security crackdown by the military, which the UN’s human rights chief later said seemed like a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”.

Rohingya Muslims started leaving in vast numbers, crossing into Bangladesh with tales of their villages being burned and saying they were facing persecution at the hands of the military. Thousands of Rohingya had already fled to Bangladesh in recent years.

Access is restricted to the area, but on a government-controlled trip for journalists the BBC found reason to question the official narrative that Muslims were setting fire to their own villages.

• Seeing through the official story in Myanmar
• How much power does Aung San Suu Kyi really have?

What did Suu Kyi say in her the speech?

The Myanmar government does not use the term Rohingya – calling the group Bengali Muslims instead – and Ms Suu Kyi did not do so in her speech.

Delivering her address in a tone of measured defiance, she said she and her government “condemn all human rights violations and unlawful violence”.

Among the key points:

• She did not address allegations against the military, saying only that there had been “no armed clashes or clearance operations” since 5 September.
• She said most Muslims had decided to stay in Rakhine and that indicated the situation may not be so severe.
• She said she wanted to speak to both Muslims who had fled and those who had stayed to find out what was at the root of the crisis.
• She said the government had made efforts in recent years to improve living conditions for the Muslims living in Rakhine: providing healthcare, education and infrastructure.
• She also said that all refugees in Bangladesh would be able to return after a process of verification.

How was the speech received?

Ms Suu Kyi has overwhelming support in her home country, where she was a political prisoner for years before coming to power.

But her speech has been criticised internationally for failing to address the allegations of abuse by the military.

The BBC’s Jonathan Head, who is in neighbouring Bangladesh, disputed the claim that there had been no clearance operations since 5 September, pointing out that he had seen villages being burned days after that date.

Amnesty International said Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi was “burying her head in the sand” by ignoring the abuses by the army.

“At times, her speech amounted to little more than a mix of untruths and victim blaming,” the rights group’s director for South East Asia and the Pacific, James Gomes, said in a statement.

---

‘Blind to the realities?’

By Jonah Fisher, BBC News, Nay Pyi Taw

Aung San Suu Kyi is either completely out of touch or wilfully blind to the realities of what her army is up to.

It is simply not credible to say we don’t know why more than 400,000 Rohingya have fled. The evidence is being gathered every day in the testimony of refugees.

There were other moments that raised eyebrows. Like when she presented as good news the fact that more than half the Muslims in Rakhine haven’t fled. Or when she said that there had been no clashes in Rakhine for the last two weeks.

To say as she did that “all people in Rakhine state have access to education and healthcare without discrimination” is simply wrong.

The Rohingya, particularly those in camps around Sittwe, have long been denied access to the most basic services, in particular healthcare.

---

What is Myanmar’s position?

While Ms Suu Kyi is the de facto head of the government of Myanmar, also known as Burma, it is the military which holds real power in Rakhine state as it is in charge of internal security.

The Burmese military says its operations in the northern Rakhine state are aimed at rooting out militants, and has repeatedly denied targeting civilians.

Ms Suu Kyi has previously said the narrative was being distorted by a “huge iceberg of misinformation” and said tensions were being fanned by fake news promoting the interests of terrorists.

Police are continuing to question two men on suspicion of terror offences following Friday’s attack on a Tube train in south-west London.

It comes as CCTV images emerged showing a man carrying a Lidl supermarket bag 90 minutes before the bombing.

An 18-year-old and 21-year-old are being held over the explosion, which injured 30 at Parsons Green station.

The UK terror threat level has been lowered to severe after being raised to critical, its highest level.

On Saturday, the 21-year-old, believed to be Yahyah Farroukh, was arrested in Hounslow, west London, and the 18-year-old was detained at Dover port.

Local council leader Ian Harvey said he understood the 18-year-old was an Iraqi orphan who moved to the UK when he was 15 after his parents died.

Police are searching two addresses in Surrey in connection with the arrests – one in Sunbury-on-Thames and another in Stanwell, near Heathrow airport.

Mr Harvey, who leads Spelthorne Borough Council, told the Press Association it was “widely known” the 21-year-old was a former foster child who had lived at the property being searched in his ward of Sunbury East.

Mr Farroukh, who is originally from Syria, is believed to have been in the UK for at least four years and is understood to be living at the Stanwell address.

Neighbours there have told the BBC he was a “friendly” and “chatty” young man who had been visited by family from Scotland.

• Residents in Sunbury told to get out of homes
• Terror threat lowered after Tube bombing

A third property in Hounslow has also been searched as part of the investigation, Scotland Yard said.

The BBC understands it is a Middle Eastern chicken shop called Aladdins in Kingsley Road.

Mr Farroukh, whose social media says he is a student at West Thames College, was arrested outside the shop shortly before midnight. A manager confirmed he had worked there for a number of months.

ITV News has obtained CCTV showing a person leaving the property in Sunbury that is currently being searched by police.

The person can be seen carrying a Lidl bag at 6.50am on Friday morning.

At 8.20am, a device exploded on a District Line train.

The “severe” terror threat level means an attack is no longer imminent but is still highly likely.

Home Secretary Amber Rudd said police had made “good progress” in the investigation and urged “everybody to continue to be vigilant but not alarmed”.

Assistant Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mark Rowley said police had gained a “greater understanding” of how the bomb was prepared but said there was “still much more to do”.

---

Analysis: No ‘all clear’ yet

By BBC home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani

The lowering of the threat level is an important sign.

It means that intelligence chiefs have looked at the developing picture in the Met’s huge operation – and other threads we will never see, from perhaps MI5 and GCHQ – and concluded that detectives now have a good handle on what happened on Friday at Parsons Green.

Or, to put it another way, the threat level would not have been reduced if anyone within the counter-terrorism network still thought there was a bomber, or accomplices, on the loose.

This is not the same as an “all clear” – intelligence is only ever fragmentary.

Detectives now appear to have time on their side.

Providing they make evidential progress, they could conceivably hold both suspects for up to a fortnight before they have to charge or release them.

---

Speaking to the Andrew Marr Show on Sunday, Ms Rudd said there was “no evidence” to suggest so-called Islamic State was behind the attack.

“But as this unfolds and as we do our investigations, we will make sure we find out how he was radicalised if we can,” she said.

Thirty people were injured – most suffering from “flash burns” – when a bomb was detonated on a Tube carriage at Parsons Green station.

The house being searched in Sunbury-on-Thames belongs to a married couple known for fostering hundreds of children, including refugees.

Ronald Jones, 88, and Penelope Jones, 71 were rewarded for their service to children when they were made MBEs in 2010.

The couple are said to be staying with friends following the police raid, during which surrounding houses were evacuated.

Friend Alison Griffiths said the couple had an 18-year-old and a 22-year-old staying with them recently.

She described Mr and Mrs Jones as “great pillars of the community”, adding: “They do a job that not many people do.”

Police have urged anyone with information to contact them and to upload pictures and video to the website www.ukpoliceimageappeal.co.uk or to call the Anti-Terrorist Hotline on 0800 789 321.

Maria is expected to become a dangerous major hurricane as it nears the Leeward Islands in the Caribbean.

The category one hurricane will rapidly strengthen over the next 48 hours and will hit the islands late on Monday, says the US National Hurricane Center.

It is moving roughly along the same path as Irma, the hurricane that devastated the region this month.

Hurricane warnings have been issued for Guadeloupe, Dominica, St Kitts and Nevis, Montserrat and Martinique.

A hurricane watch is now in effect for Puerto Rico, the US and British Virgin Islands, St Martin, St Barts, Saba, St Eustatius and Anguilla.

Some of these islands are still recovering after being hit by Irma – the category five hurricane which left at least 37 people dead and caused billions of dollars’ worth of damage.

• Hurricane Irma: A visual guide
• Damage mapped

In its latest update on Monday, the NHC says Maria has maximum sustained winds of 90mph (150 km/h).

The eye of the storm is 100 miles east of Martinique, and Maria is moving west-northwest at about 13mph.

“Preparations to protect life and property should be rushed to completion,” the NHC says.

The most southerly point of the Leeward Islands – where Maria will first strike – include Antigua and Barbuda. The latter island was evacuated after being devastated by Irma.

The NHC says that “a dangerous storm surge accompanied by large and destructive waves will raise water levels by as much as 5-7ft (1.5-2.1m) above normal tide levels near where the centre of Maria moves across the Leeward Islands”.

It also forecasts a maximum potential rainfall of 20in (51cm) in some areas of the central and southern Leeward Islands – including Puerto Rico and the US and British Virgin Islands – through to Wednesday night.

“Rainfall on all of these islands could cause life-threatening flash floods and mudslides,” it warned.

The destruction of Barbuda

Drone footage of Saint-Martin after Irma

Earlier this month, Irma left more than two-thirds of homes on the Dutch side of the island of St Martin (known as Sint Maarten) uninhabitable, with no electricity, gas or drinking water.

The French government has said its side of St Martin – known as Saint-Martin – sustained about €1.2bn ($1.44bn; £1.1bn) in damage, with nine deaths across Saint-Martin and nearby St Barts.

On the British Virgin Islands, entire neighbourhoods were flattened.

After a visit to the area, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson described the damage as something “you see in images of from the First World War”.

In pictures: Irma devastates British Virgin Islands

Virgin boss Richard Branson, who has a home in the Virgin Islands, has been tweeting ahead of the storm’s predicted arrival, warning people to stay safe.

The Puerto Rican government has issued a statement saying it expects the hurricane to make landfall there as a category three on Tuesday.

The US territory escaped the worst of the damage from Irma – although it experienced widespread power cuts – and it has been an important hub for getting relief to islands that were more badly affected.

“Puerto Rico is our lifeline,” Judson Burdon, a resident of Anguilla, told Reuters news agency. “We had two volunteer flights cancel because of the weather that is coming.”

Irma also hit the US, with 11 deaths being linked to the hurricane. Nearly 6.9 million homes were left without power in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Alabama.

A second hurricane, Jose, is also active in the Atlantic, with maximum sustained winds of 90mph.

The centre of the storm was about 335 miles south-east of Cape Hatteras in North Carolina, the NHC said in its advisory at 21:00 GMT on Sunday.

Tropical storm watches have been issued for parts of the north-eastern US.

Former England captain Wayne Rooney has appeared in court and admitted drink-driving.

He was arrested when police stopped a car in Wilmslow, Cheshire, in the early hours on 1 September.

The 31-year-old was banned from driving for two years and ordered to perform 100 hours of unpaid work as part of a 12-month community order.

Rooney was also ordered to pay £170 when he appeared at Stockport Magistrates’ Court.

‘Unforgivable’

The court heard Rooney was almost three times the legal limit when he was stopped by police at 02:00 BST.

A breathalyser test showed his alcohol level was 104 microgrammes in 100 millilitres of breath.

The drink-drive limit in England and Wales is 35 microgrammes per 100 millilitres of breath.

In a statement issued after the hearing, the Everton footballer said: “I want publicly to apologise for my unforgivable lack of judgment in driving while over the legal limit. It was completely wrong.

“I have already said sorry to my family, my manager and chairman and everyone at Everton FC. Now I want to apologise to all the fans and everyone else who has followed and supported me throughout my career.

“Of course I accept the sentence of the court and hope that I can make some amends through my community service.”

Wearing a blue suit with his hands in his pockets, Rooney walked into the court building accompanied by a small entourage.

Kate Gaskell, prosecuting, said a police officer on patrol was on duty in Altrincham Road, Wilmslow, at 02:10 BST when they noticed the rear tail-light of a Volkswagen Beetle on the left hand side had gone out.

She said the officer intended to follow the vehicle but it pulled over with Rooney seen to be at the wheel with a female in the front passenger seat.

Ms Gaskell said the footballer provided a positive roadside breath test before he was taken to a police station where the reading was confirmed.

The court heard that Rooney currently had three points on his driving licence for a speeding offence on August 24 2016.

Rooney’s legal team had asked District Judge John Temperley to consider not imposing a community order because of his ongoing charitable work.

However the judge said he was “not convinced” that imposing a large fine “would have the same effect”.

‘A serious matter’

Rooney’s lawyer, Mike Rainford, told the court it was likely that Everton would fine the player two weeks’ wages, which the BBC understands to be about £300,000.

Judge Temperley said: “This is a serious matter… you placed yourself and other road users at risk as a result of your poor judgement that night.

“I accept your remorse is genuine and that you are aware of the adverse affects the events of that night have had, not least on your family.”

Rooney was also told to pay £85 prosecution costs and a victim surcharge for the same amount.

BBC Sports Editor Dan Roan has been in court following proceedings.

The Liverpool-born player rejoined his boyhood club this summer, 13 years after leaving for Manchester United.

The father-of-three is also England’s record goal scorer.

Ryanair cancelled 82 flights on Sunday after admitting it had “messed up” the planning of its pilots’ holidays.

The budget airline said on Saturday that it would cancel 40-50 flights every day for the next six weeks.

Marketing officer Kenny Jacobs said affected customers with bookings up to 20 September had been informed.

“We have messed up in the planning of pilot holidays and we’re working hard to fix that,” he said.

Most of the cancellations are due to a backlog of staff leave which has seen large numbers of the airline’s staff book holidays towards the end of the year.

The airline is changing its holiday year, which currently runs from April to March, to run from January to December instead.

Rynanair said the shift meant it had to allocate annual leave to pilots in September and October.

Passenger complaints

The cancellations could affect up to 285,000 passengers, who will be offered alternative flights or refunds.

Mr Jacobs said affected customers would have been sent an email.

“We advise customers to check the email address used to make their booking,” he added.

A page on the Ryanair website details flights cancelled up until 20 September. It says 56 flights are cancelled on Monday, 55 on Tuesday, and 53 on Wednesday.

Ryanair has said that less than 2% of its flights would be cancelled and the move would help it hit its annual punctuality target of 90%.

But passengers have complained about the resulting uncertainty.

Gary Cummings was due to fly from Leeds to Bratislava on Friday morning.

On Thursday night he received a text message from Ryanair, saying his flight had been cancelled.

The only alternative flight he was offered was on Monday – when he was originally due to be returning to Leeds.

“We were left in limbo really,” he told BBC Radio 5 live.

UK Aviation Minister Lord Callanan said he expected “all airlines to fulfil their obligations to their customers”.

“In the event of any disruption or cancellation airlines must ensure customers are fully compensated and every effort is made to provide alternative travel arrangements.”

Customers do have rights under the European Passenger Rights legislation.

“The rules say if the airline doesn’t have a suitable alternative flight, you have to be booked on a rival airline,” said Simon Calder, travel editor of the Independent.

He said passengers should also be able to claim compensation for the cancellations.

“It’s a really odd thing in terms of customer care, to say we want to improve the operation by keeping more planes on the ground,” he told the BBC.

Ryanair is the biggest airline in Europe and the king of low cost carriers.

But the new kid on the no-frills block is Norwegian. They’ve grown almost exponentially in the last three years and even plan to set up a new base in Dublin – Ryanair’s back yard.

To rub it in, they boasted last week of taking on 140 Ryanair pilots so far this year.

Furthermore Norwegian said that the newly hired pilots would get, unlike most new Ryanair pilots, a full time job (as opposed to contractor status) and a competitive salary.

Ryanair flatly denies that there has been an exodus of staff and that that might lie behind the sudden decision to ground up to 50 flights a day for 6 weeks.

It says it’s cancelling hundreds of flights due to personnel and air traffic control issues.

What rights do passengers have?

The EU compensation rules for cancelled flights are as follows:

• Passengers are entitled to assistance and compensation, if the disruption was within an airline’s control.
• Airlines have to offer full refunds, paid within seven days, or rebookings for a flight cancelled at short notice.
• In addition, passengers can also claim compensation.
• Cancellation amounts are: 250 euros (£218) for short-haul, 440 euros (£384) for medium-haul and 600 euros (£523) for long-haul.
• Passengers who reach their destination more than three hours late can be compensated from 200 to 600 euros, depending on the length of flights and delay.

Ryanair is under pressure to publish a full list of the flights it plans to cancel every day amid growing anger among customers.

The airline said on Saturday it would cancel 40-50 flights every day for the next six weeks, after it “messed up” the planning of pilot holidays.

However, it has so far only published a list of affected flights up until this Wednesday.

Consumer rights group Which? said passengers needed more notice.

“It’s essential that Ryanair release a full list of flights that will be affected so that passengers have as much time as possible to make alternate arrangements.”

The cancellations could affect up to 400,000 passengers, who will be offered alternative flights or refunds.

Reports on Monday suggested recruitment problems were affecting the airline and that it had lost pilots to rival Norwegian Air.

A Norwegian spokesperson said: “We can confirm that 140 pilots have joined us from Ryanair this year. Pilot recruitment is also underway for more pilots for our new Dublin base opening later this year.”

Ryanair has not issued a response to the claims.

Customer anger

The airline has blamed a backlog of staff leave for the disruption, which has led to large numbers of its staff taking holidays towards the end of the year.

Ryanair is changing its holiday year, which currently runs from April to March, to run from January to December instead.

The carrier said the shift meant it had to allocate annual leave to pilots in September and October.

Ryanair also said air traffic control strikes and bad weather were factors, adding that flight cancellations would improve flight punctuality.

Customers have reacted angrily to the cancellations on social media and called for a full list of affected flights to be released.

Karen Higgins tweeted: “Yet another day of constant checking to see if our flights are safe or cancelled! Cmon @Ryanair help us all out! Get the updates done!!!!”

Dee Moloney tweeted: “Have 2 trips booked in the next couple of weeks. Excitement of trips now replaced with worry!… Won’t be flying with @Ryanair again.”

Richard Westcott, BBC transport correspondent

What’s really making people angry is the lack of information.

Ryanair has only published a list of cancelled flights until Wednesday, so people with tickets booked in the six weeks or so after that don’t yet know if they’ll be changed at the last minute.

The company’s under pressure to let everyone know where they stand, so they can make other arrangements.

140 Ryanair pilots have joined another airline, Norwegian, in the past year. That’s 140 out of around 400 taken on by the ever expanding new airline.

So it’s possible that a pilot shortage is contributing to Ryanair’s woes.

---

Regular updates

Ryanair marketing officer Kenny Jacobs said affected customers with bookings up to 20 September had been informed.

“We will cancel 40 to 50 flights daily for the next six weeks, less than 2% of our schedule, with a slightly higher number initially, as we begin to implement these cancellations,” he said.

“Flights are operating as scheduled unless an email confirming a cancellation has been received.”

He said the airline would continue to send regular updates and post information on its website, with the next set of cancellations to be issued on Monday.

Shares in Ryanair fell by up to 3% on Monday.

---

What rights do passengers have?

The EU compensation rules for cancelled flights are as follows:

• Passengers are entitled to assistance and compensation, if the disruption was within an airline’s control.
• Airlines have to offer full refunds, paid within seven days, or rebookings for a flight cancelled at short notice.
• In addition, passengers can also claim compensation.
• Cancellation amounts are: 250 euros (£218) for short-haul, 440 euros (£384) for medium-haul and 600 euros (£523) for long-haul.
• Passengers who reach their destination more than three hours late can be compensated from 200 to 600 euros, depending on the length of flights and delay.

Former Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron has accused the Conservatives of “breaking Britain” in a bid to cut immigration.

At the party conference, he said Brexit would turn the UK into a “poorer, meaner, insular place”.

And he said the Lib Dems had been “saved” having been “dismissed as irrelevant” after the 2015 election.

Mr Farron, who quit as leader in June, received a standing ovation from the party faithful in Bournemouth.

He described his successor, Sir Vince Cable, as “the wisest person on the planet”.

• A guide to the Lib Dem conference
• Cable urges ‘exit from Brexit’ referendum

And he insisted his party still had a crucial role to play in British politics despite another disappointing general election in June.

He said the party had increased its membership and made gains in local elections, telling supporters: “We saved the Liberal Democrats and I am proud of every single one of you.”

“It is now clear if there is to be a realignment of progressive forces then it can only be around this party,” he added.

Mr Farron also branded Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn “cowards”, saying they had changed their mind on the EU “to suit the weather”.

Labour’s general election result had been “better than expected”, he said, but told MPs who had criticised the leadership: “You may have saved your seats, but you have lost your party.”

Much of the speech focused on Brexit, which he said would “reduce immigration without changing a single law”.

“Because if you turn Britain into a poorer, meaner, insular place, no-one in their right mind will choose to come here.

“So the Tories are breaking Britain to repel the immigrants. And they do it with Labour’s shameful connivance. What a disgrace.”

Mr Farron has called for a second vote on the terms of any Brexit deal.

It was Mr Farron’s first Lib Dem conference speech since quitting, when he said he was “torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader” having faced repeated questions about his attitude towards gay sex.

The four-day conference focusing on Brexit with a debate at the end of the week on the UK’s future relationship with the EU 27 (the other remaining countries in the European Union).

In October a new law comes into force in Germany that will impose huge fines on social networks if they don’t delete illegal content including hate speech. It’s touched off a huge debate over freedom of expression and has attracted an unusual collection of opponents.

The law is called Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz – NetzDG for short. It obliges the biggest social networks – those with more than two million German users – to take down “blatantly illegal” hate speech within 24 hours of it being reported. For material that’s less obviously violating the law, networks such as Facebook and Instagram will have seven days to consider and, if appropriate, delete posts. Failure to meet these deadlines could lead to fines of up to €50m.

Critics argue the short timeframes coupled with the potentially large fines will lead social networks to be overly cautious and delete huge amounts of content – even things that are perfectly legal. But the law’s supporters, and the German government, argue that it will force social media companies to proactively deal with online incitement and hate speech.

What counts as ‘illegal hate speech’ in Germany?

The law doesn’t actually change what’s considered hate speech in Germany. No new offences are created. The law simply cites sections of the German Criminal Code which details illegal speech online. The categories range from “forming terrorist organisations”, to the much vaguer “defamation of religions, religious and ideological associations.”

In addition, German law restricts some types of speech that are allowed in many other countries. For instance, the use of Nazi symbols is banned, as are the symbols and flags of some extremist groups.

An earlier draft of the NetzDG bill barred “defamation of the President of the Federation”, but the clause was removed after criticism. The law has also been criticised for containing no legal mechanism for people whose posts are wrongly deleted to appeal to get them reinstated.

So who is worried?

Opposition has come from a wide range of groups and politicians on both the left and right – and Facebook has also made its disagreement with the law clear.

The United Nations has also weighed in. David Kaye, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, has written to the German government to warn about the potential consequences of the law.

“With these 24 hour and seven day deadlines – if you are a company you are going to want avoid fines and bad public branding of your platform,” he says. “If there is a complaint about a post you are just going to take it down. What is in it for you to leave it up? I think the result is likely to be greater censorship.”

The group Reporters without Borders says the German law has already inspired a “draconian” new online media law in Russia.

But there are voices in Germany who are in favour of the law and who argue that making social networks more responsible for hate speech and illegal content on their platforms is a good thing.

Anas Modamani is a refugee from Syria who now lives in Berlin. In August 2015 he was catapulted to notoriety for taking a selfie with Angela Merkel while she was visiting a migrant shelter.

But the picture would come back to haunt him, as it was used to accuse him of attacks in Brussels and Berlin. His famous photograph was cropped and pasted into wanted posters and false news reports.

“When I read the fake news on the internet, I really cried, it was really bad in my life, it was all untrue,” Modamani says.

He decided to take Facebook to court for not doing enough to stop the lies being shared about him, but in March 2017 he lost the case. The court ruled Facebook had taken enough measures to attempt to block defamatory images of him for users in Germany.

Because of his experiences, Modamani is a supporter of NetzDG.

“I think the law is a good idea because people will be a little bit afraid, they can’t just write what they want,” he says. “I don’t mind if other comments get deleted along with the bad ones.”

Modamani’s lawyer, Chan-Jo Jun, is also optimistic about the new law, and plans to use it immediately after it comes into effect.

“I regularly report the post that was the subject of the [earlier] trial and I keep getting the answer [from Facebook] that it does not violate community standards,” Jun says. “Therefore it is still online. After October I will file a complaint against Facebook under the NetzDG – with the NetzDG, the court case would not have been necessary.”

On the other side of the legal debate is attorney Joachim Steinhoefel. While Chan-Jo Jun has taken Facebook to court to get them to remove posts, Steinhoefel has threatened the company with legal action to get a post reinstated.

In May, photojournalist Markus Hibbeler wrote a Facebook post about Islam and freedom of expression. Translated from German, the post read in part: “We shouldn’t shield Muslims, and certainly not Islam, which has never been through an enlightenment or reformation, from criticism and constantly protect them.”

His post was deleted by Facebook and his account was suspended for seven days. Hibbeler, with Steinhoefel’s help, threatened to sue Facebook if the post wasn’t put back up within a week and his account reinstated. They succeeded, and Facebook reinstated the post and apologised.

It’s cases like Hibbeler’s, Steinhoefel says, that show how NetzDG threatens freedom of expression. He says he doesn’t trust Facebook to decide what posts are legal and illegal and thinks the most likely outcome will be a mass deletion of legal posts that Facebook doesn’t want to take any risks with, out of an abundance of caution.

The attorney has started a blog where he posts examples of Facebook both deleting posts which he says break no laws. The blog also catalogues what Steinhoefel says are blatantly illegal posts which Facebook hasn’t removed.

For example, one of the latter posts reads: “Jews to the gas chambers”. Facebook has not removed it, despite it being reported to the company.

“It goes to show how unprofessional they are in dealing with this content,” Steinhoefel says. He is suspicious of the real motive behind the new law and says it will allow “the media and political elite to regain control over the political debate in Germany.”

“The law is superfluous,” he says. “The law as it is right now in Germany makes Facebook responsible for illegal content on its site from the moment they know about it. It just takes state prosecutors and courts to implement these laws.”

The German government, however, is determined to press forward with NetzDG. Gerd Billen, a State Secretary in the German Ministry of Justice, says that although existing laws oblige Facebook to delete illegal comments “there are no rules about when they have to do it, how they have to organise and what their complaint management system should look like.”

“There is a fear of ‘over-blocking’ but the reality is ‘under-blocking’,” Billen says. “They don’t block enough. We don’t believe there will be a problem (with over-blocking) because the social networks want to keep their customers.”

Billen downplays concerns about freedom of speech, and points out that social media companies already censor content that is perfectly legal.

“There is no obligation for any private company in Germany or somewhere else in the world to guarantee freedom of speech,” he says. “To guarantee freedom of speech is something a government does but not private companies. I didn’t find any notice in the terms and conditions of Facebook that the company will respect freedom of speech.

“For example they delete many things that are allowed in Germany. Facebook don’t accept naked people on their platform. They can decide if they don’t want it, so they delete it.”

Opposition from social media companies

A Facebook spokesperson admitted to the BBC that they can’t rule out the possibility of legal content being deleted.

“The law is not the right way to fight hate speech online,” the spokesperson says. “It provides an incentive to delete content that is not clearly illegal and would have the effect of transferring responsibility for complex legal decisions from public authorities to private companies.

“Several legal experts have assessed the draft law as being against the German constitution and non-compliant with EU law. Facebook is committed to working in partnership with governments and civil society on solutions that would have made this law unnecessary.”

The BBC also learnt that although the company will soon have another 500 content moderators based in Essen, in western Germany, Facebook has not hired any new staff in response to the law.

“We are still evaluating what the law really means for us,” the spokesperson says.

Police have released a new CCTV image of a jogger who appeared to push a woman into the path of a bus.

Footage of the incident showed a man running along Putney Bridge in west London and appearing to shove the 33-year-old into the road.

Two men, both aged 41, have previously been arrested but were later released without further action.

The Met said officers were continuing “to work through the information received to identify the man”.

The woman was knocked into the road as she was walking across Putney Bridge at about 07:40 BST on 5 May.

The new image of the jogger was captured on the Number 430 bus which narrowly avoided her.

About 15 minutes later the jogger returned to run back across the bridge.

The woman, who received minor injuries, tried to speak to him but he did not acknowledge her and carried on jogging.

He is described as a white man, aged in his 30s, with brown eyes and short brown hair.

Det Sgt Chris Griffith appealed for anyone who provided officers with a name of the potential suspect to contact police again “so we can fully follow up those lines of enquiry”.