“We want the ratings to be as free of cultural judgement as possible,” said Mr Kerr.At the child’s computer, software in the browser would read the ratings and compare it against criteria set by the parents. Other elements, including “intolerance” – for racial items – and “dangerous activities” including cigarettes and alcohol but also sports and suicide methods, might also be offered.The site’s owner would rate the site against those criteria, and then include that rating on the site. But the US side is under a lot of pressure to get it developed as soon as possible.”The ratings would be a two-sided system, in which every site that wanted to would voluntarily compare itself against a set list of criteria, on a scale of 1 to 5, for elements such as the amount of sex, violence, nudity and strong language on the site. “I said at the meeting that in order to go through the necessary consultation in the various countries, you couldn’t achieve it in less than 18 months. They met last week for two days to try to thrash out the key issues.But while the European side of the coalition, represented by the Internet Watch Foundation based in Cambridge, reckons that it will take at least 18 months to develop a workable pairing of a ratings system and software that can interpret it, the US partners and software companies have privately said that they have, at most, nine months before the US demands mandatory ratings legislation.”We’re not all fully in agreement,” said David Kerr, the chief executive of Internet Watch.

Charles Arthur, Science Editor, looks at the arguments over censorship. The sprawling growth of the Internet, a place where good, bad, and repulsive sites can sit cheek by jowl, may be under threat from impatient lawmakers in the United States – who, in their desire to “protect children” from unsuitable material, may end up destroying a global information resource.
An international coalition of non-governmental organisations has been trying for months to devise a workable “ratings” system that could be used by parents in a wide range of cultures to prevent their children from accessing unsuitable material on the global network. There is a substantial amount in the pot and we hope to increase the figure in the future.”. Can the Internet be tamed? An international coalition wants to introduce “ratings” for Web sites, so that parents can choose what their children can access. “But if they won’t, then I’ll have to set up my own landmine charity.

He also said that he was anxious to correct reports that the tapes of interviews with the Princess had been sold to an American tabloid. “They have not and they won’t be,” he said.He said that he had been perturbed to read reports in some newspapers yesterday that charities associated with the removal and abolition of landmines had rejected his offer of a “substantial” donation.”I have not spoken to these charities myself, so I don’t know whether they really will not accept the money we are offering,” he said. At the end of 1993 the sector was trading on as narrow a discount as I have ever seen, around 3 per cent. Now it has widened to around 12 per cent.I believe it is the discount that really grates with investors – people who bought into new trusts in late 1993 will have seen, on average, 15 per cent wiped off the value of their investments by movements in the discount.What’s worse, many new issues focused on Japan, the Far East and emerging markets. Fleming Japanese, a well-run trust, has never had a chance of beating the UK market.Another chunk of underperformance is down to the widening of the “discount” – the difference between investment trusts’ share prices and the value of their underlying investments (called net asset value). Trusts as a whole are also heavily committed to smaller companies in the UK.

Notoriously, “small caps” have underperformed the stock market.So, many of the problems are down to where trusts have been invested: not enough UK banks, too many Asian stocks. The Japanese and Far East stock markets have fallen, and trusts as a whole have been heavily biased towards these areas (largely because this was where investors wanted to invest). Over the same period, the UK stock market has risen by almost 50 per cent.
The UK has been a strongly performing market, but trusts as a whole have had at least half their own investments outside the UK. Before prescribing either Prozac or hemlock, it is worth looking at the facts. Investment trusts as a whole have risen in value by nearly 20 per cent between the end of 1993 and the end of September 1997. Hostile shareholders are circling, uttering war cries such as “shareholder value”‘ and “restructure now”.

If I were an investment trust, I’d be talking to my analyst. Virtually every article about the trusts recently has slammed them as “under-performing”, “sleepy”, “fusty” or “struggling” Two funds have been set up simply to pick on the strugglers. Do not enclose SAEs or any documents you wish to be returned. We cannot give personal replies or guarantee to answer every letter We accept no legal responsibility for any advice given..