December 4

Steelworkers in Europe feared the tariffs would cost thousands of jobs

England have

The US President, George W Bush, has withdrawn a punitive tax on imported steel to avoid a damaging trade war between the United States and Europe.

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) last month turned down a US appeal against its July ruling that the duties, imposed in March 2002, are illegal.

Mr Bush justified them by saying foreign steel firms were driving US firms out of business with unfair competition and government subsidies.

The EU was planning sanctions worth $2.2bn in retaliation against the move, but says they will now be dropped.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan, reading a statement on behalf of Mr Bush, said: "These safeguard measures have now achieved their purpose and, as a result of changed economic circumstances, it is time to lift them."

US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick said the tariff decision had been made independently of the EU's threat of retaliation.

At no stage did the US administration admit it had acted illegally in breaching WTO rules.

On hearing the tariffs were being dropped, the EU Trade Minister Pascal Lamy said: "This is good news for us.... The important thing is that this sort of thing should not happen again."

It is believed that pressure from the British Prime Minister Tony Blair during Mr Bush's controversial visit to London last month was instrumental in convincing him to lift the tariffs.

The tariffs, which added up to 30% to the cost of a range of imported steel products, were originally imposed to satisfy an election pledge Mr Bush made to steel bosses and workers.

The US blamed cheap imports for the bankruptcy of 31 steel firms since 1997, with 20,000 job losses.

But the EU - which had also suffered 22,200 job losses over four years at the time - said it had not resorted to such measures while it was forced to restructure.

President Bush may now face a backlash from those workers who said he promised to keep the tariffs in place for three years.   

Dr Wiseman says the long-term health effects of the pill are not known

The Health Minister, Enoch Powell, made an announcement in the House of Commons today but did not give any guidelines as to whom the pill should be given.

"It is not for me to indicate to doctors when they should decide for medical reasons to prescribe for their patients," he said.

However some GPs are in a dilemma over whether they can prescribe the Pill, as it is commonly known, for social as well as medical reasons.

Several companies are busy manufacturing the product in Britain which will cost the NHS just over one shilling a pill - 17s a month.

And some politicians are anxious that the drug could be a huge financial burden on the Treasury which currently spends ?0m a year on drugs provided by the health service.

The oral contraceptive is a combination of a synthetic hormones oestrogen and progestogen taken to prevent conception by hampering monthly release of an egg cell from theovary.

Pills have to be regularly in order to work and some physicians are concerned about the effects the drug could have on the body's delicate balance of hormones.

Sir Charles Dodds, Britain's leading expert on the drugs contained in the Pill and who heads a research institute at Middlesex Hospital, has said the pills could have long-term side-effects.

He compared a woman's body with a clock mechanism. "Even if you thoroughly understand the mechanism of a clock, provided it is going well it is very much better to leave it alone. To interfere with it fi you do not understand it can be disastrous," he said.

The Family Planning Association, which runs clinics all over Britain, is still deciding whether or not to gives the go-ahead to its physicians to issue the Pill to married women.

Two scientists at Birmingham University will carry out basic experiments on the Pill because it is not fully understood how it works.

In the current issue of the Queen's Medical Magazine, Birmingham Medical School's journal, they write: "Much careful quantitative work remains to be done before the biological action of these drugs is understood and before any recommendations of these drugs for routine use by the medical profession."

ovary: the organ that bears the ovules of a flower（卵巢）