FRIDAY’s vote on the NHS in the House of Commons brings the Tories’ desire to privatise public services back on to the news agenda.
For those who haven’t followed these developments, MPs voted in favour of a bill designed to curb the worst parts of the Health and Social Care Act that opened the door to NHS privatisation.
I delivered a 16,442-name petition to Westminster showing how strongly Derby people feel about the issue, and I dearly hope Labour’s long-running campaign to save the NHS will bear fruit.
But while talk of losing something as important as our health service is tangible and inevitably prompts a reaction, another broader issue relating to the future of public services has, to a large extent, slipped under the radar.
Many readers will not have heard of TTIP – the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – largely because it has been negotiated behind closed doors, but it’s due to be ratified next year.
It is designed to reduce the trade barriers between the US and EU, and to that end clearly has the potential to reap many benefits on both sides of the Atlantic provided it is drawn up carefully.
But there is a reason that it is causing a rumpus among those who have delved into it most deeply.
TTIP could open all of Europe’s public services, such as the NHS and our education system, to private enterprise.
But the prospect of refocusing our public bodies on making money instead of service delivery is anathema to most British people.
Robust caveats must therefore be inserted into the agreement to ensure that doesn’t happen.
There is also a real danger that corporate interests could become deeply embroiled with our democratic processes.
Imagine the next Labour government implementing our pledge to freeze energy bills, only to find the UK being sued by the giant energy companies for loss of profits.
Yet that possibility could arise through TTIP, which proposes the creation of so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlements empowering big companies to take on nation states.
Not only would that be unthinkably bizarre, but it would also be an attack on democracy. Public policy would be stymied by a corporate agenda, giving far too much influence to multinational companies.
But perhaps the biggest question that needs to be addressed is whose interests the politicians negotiating TTIP are representing – the people who elected them or the private corporations pushing for it?
To my mind, economic development is only beneficial if it serves everyone in the chain, not just fat cat executives and wealthy shareholders.
My fear – and one shared by many commentators – is that if we are not careful TTIP will be another mechanism that widens inequality.
We cannot allow this government to use TTIP to enable the rich to get even richer, without any real impact on working people who are actually creating that wealth.
It would make the whole exercise pointless, and if the politicians locked in the secret negotiations can’t see that then TTIP – which offers so much potential – runs the risk of doing more harm than good
Sunday, 23 November 2014
Tuesday, 18 November 2014
THE HUNTING BAN IS TEN YEARS OLD - NOW IT’S TIME STRENGTHEN THE LEGISLATION TO STOP HUNTERS FLOUTING THE LAW
Tuesday 18th November 2014 marks the tenth anniversary of the passing of the Hunting Act. Now the League Against Cruel Sports has launched a new report calling for specific improvements to make it even more effective.
The Hunting Act has proven to be an effective and popular piece of legislation, with a higher number of convictions than similar wildlife laws. Public support for the prohibition of hunting has always been high, but this has also increased substantially over the past ten years.
Yet, since its introduction, the Act has been the target of considerable attack from the pro-hunt lobby which has waged an ongoing and concerted campaign of disinformation to publicly discredit the legislation and promote their campaign for repeal.
The problem is not with the law. It’s with those arrogant bloodsports fanatics who think they’re above the law and openly flout it. This cannot be allowed to go on in a democracy where the rule of law is sacrosanct.
It is now time to build on the successes of first ten years and strengthen the Hunting Act to ensure the spirit of the Act is fulfilled.
The League is recommending three main improvements to strengthen the Hunting Act, these include:
1. Prohibiting the use of dogs below ground - this is arguably where the worst cruelty occurs in hunting, not only to wild mammals pursued underground with limited opportunity to escape (usually foxes and badgers), but also to the dogs sent below ground to find these animals and either flush them out or hold them at bay.
2. Inserting a ‘reckless’ provision to ensure the killing of wild mammals during a trail hunt cannot be passed off as an ‘unfortunate accident’.
3. Increasing the punishments available to the courts so that the Act is brought in line with other animal protection legislation.
The Hunting Act has proven to be an effective and popular piece of legislation, with a higher number of convictions than similar wildlife laws. Public support for the prohibition of hunting has always been high, but this has also increased substantially over the past ten years.
Yet, since its introduction, the Act has been the target of considerable attack from the pro-hunt lobby which has waged an ongoing and concerted campaign of disinformation to publicly discredit the legislation and promote their campaign for repeal.
The problem is not with the law. It’s with those arrogant bloodsports fanatics who think they’re above the law and openly flout it. This cannot be allowed to go on in a democracy where the rule of law is sacrosanct.
It is now time to build on the successes of first ten years and strengthen the Hunting Act to ensure the spirit of the Act is fulfilled.
The League is recommending three main improvements to strengthen the Hunting Act, these include:
1. Prohibiting the use of dogs below ground - this is arguably where the worst cruelty occurs in hunting, not only to wild mammals pursued underground with limited opportunity to escape (usually foxes and badgers), but also to the dogs sent below ground to find these animals and either flush them out or hold them at bay.
2. Inserting a ‘reckless’ provision to ensure the killing of wild mammals during a trail hunt cannot be passed off as an ‘unfortunate accident’.
3. Increasing the punishments available to the courts so that the Act is brought in line with other animal protection legislation.
Saturday, 1 November 2014
LIB DEM COLLABORATORS SEEKING ALIBI FOR VENAL DECISION TO INSTALL TORY GOVT
AFTER four-and-a-half years of merciless attacks on the poor by this disgraceful Government, it takes something pretty galling for someone like me to find myself agreeing with the Tories on anything.
But if there is one thing that seemingly unites Labour and the Conservatives, poles apart though we are in so many ways, it is in the shoulder-shrugging despair at the utter hypocrisy of the Liberal Democrats.
The Lib Dems truly are the most shameless of all when it comes to outrageous acts of mercenary vote chasing, posturing for the popular vote while displaying an abject inability to deliver anything.
There atrocious behaviour in relation to the bedroom tax is probably their lowest, most scandalous act of hypocrisy yet.
It was their ministers and their MPs who backed the Tories all the way when they introduced the bedroom tax, despite anyone with even the merest hint of conscience feeling thoroughly perturbed at such a socially unacceptable policy.
The so-called “spare room subsidy” was designed to pick on people who couldn’t afford it, penalising single parents, disabled people and even parents of soldiers, hitting them in the pocket for having bedrooms not in permanent use.
Did the Lib Dems tell the Tories they weren’t comfortable with such a cut-throat policy?
Did they feel strongly enough to withdraw support or use their position as kingmaker to force a change of heart?
Did they side with Labour and vote it down to protect the vulnerable people who Mr Cameron and Co were so keen to punish.
Of course they didn’t. They didn’t just sit on their hands either – they knowingly voted it through used their controlling influence to transform crackpot right-wing Tory policy into UK law.
Utterly deplorable.
Labour has opposed the bedroom tax from the outset, and Ed Miliband made it perfectly clear some time ago that a Labour Government will reverse this atrocious act against the poor.
And now, suddenly, the Lib Dems agree.
Hark! Is there a General Election in the offing?
Perhaps the most stomach-churning thing of all was reading the comments on Twitter of professional Lib Dem charlatan Vince Cable boasting how he had cancelled his meetings in order back a bill by his party to “fix the Tories’ unfair bedroom tax”.
Mr Cable is unique among Lib Dems.
He has somehow built a reputation, or at least he had prior to his party’s appalling term of office in Government, as something of a one-off – a bright spark of quality among a despairing pit of mediocrity within his party.
Yet the truth is he’s no better than the rest of them. Whether it’s Lib Dems in Westminster or Lib Dems here in Derby, they’re all the same.
In opposition, they promise the earth. They fasten on to every popular policy and tell people what they want to hear (not unlike UKIP), safe in the belief that they will never have to deliver on it.
But then when they stumble into power, the buffoonery begins. They bumble from one place to the next, breaking promises here and digging holes for themselves there.
They are the artisans of hypocrisy and the definition of dishonesty, whether it means promising not to increase student tuition fees then voting for the opposite, or this latest debacle over the bedroom tax.
We saw it in Derby during two forgettable years between 2008 and 2010, and we’ve endured it nationally for the last five sorrowful years.
But their poll ratings suggest that they've finally rumbled once and for all.
But if there is one thing that seemingly unites Labour and the Conservatives, poles apart though we are in so many ways, it is in the shoulder-shrugging despair at the utter hypocrisy of the Liberal Democrats.
The Lib Dems truly are the most shameless of all when it comes to outrageous acts of mercenary vote chasing, posturing for the popular vote while displaying an abject inability to deliver anything.
There atrocious behaviour in relation to the bedroom tax is probably their lowest, most scandalous act of hypocrisy yet.
It was their ministers and their MPs who backed the Tories all the way when they introduced the bedroom tax, despite anyone with even the merest hint of conscience feeling thoroughly perturbed at such a socially unacceptable policy.
The so-called “spare room subsidy” was designed to pick on people who couldn’t afford it, penalising single parents, disabled people and even parents of soldiers, hitting them in the pocket for having bedrooms not in permanent use.
Did the Lib Dems tell the Tories they weren’t comfortable with such a cut-throat policy?
Did they feel strongly enough to withdraw support or use their position as kingmaker to force a change of heart?
Did they side with Labour and vote it down to protect the vulnerable people who Mr Cameron and Co were so keen to punish.
Of course they didn’t. They didn’t just sit on their hands either – they knowingly voted it through used their controlling influence to transform crackpot right-wing Tory policy into UK law.
Utterly deplorable.
Labour has opposed the bedroom tax from the outset, and Ed Miliband made it perfectly clear some time ago that a Labour Government will reverse this atrocious act against the poor.
And now, suddenly, the Lib Dems agree.
Hark! Is there a General Election in the offing?
Perhaps the most stomach-churning thing of all was reading the comments on Twitter of professional Lib Dem charlatan Vince Cable boasting how he had cancelled his meetings in order back a bill by his party to “fix the Tories’ unfair bedroom tax”.
Mr Cable is unique among Lib Dems.
He has somehow built a reputation, or at least he had prior to his party’s appalling term of office in Government, as something of a one-off – a bright spark of quality among a despairing pit of mediocrity within his party.
Yet the truth is he’s no better than the rest of them. Whether it’s Lib Dems in Westminster or Lib Dems here in Derby, they’re all the same.
In opposition, they promise the earth. They fasten on to every popular policy and tell people what they want to hear (not unlike UKIP), safe in the belief that they will never have to deliver on it.
But then when they stumble into power, the buffoonery begins. They bumble from one place to the next, breaking promises here and digging holes for themselves there.
They are the artisans of hypocrisy and the definition of dishonesty, whether it means promising not to increase student tuition fees then voting for the opposite, or this latest debacle over the bedroom tax.
We saw it in Derby during two forgettable years between 2008 and 2010, and we’ve endured it nationally for the last five sorrowful years.
But their poll ratings suggest that they've finally rumbled once and for all.
Monday, 20 October 2014
FOX HUNT THUGS CONVICTED
Three members of the College Valley and North Northumberland Hunt were last week found guilty of illegally hunting a fox during a hunt meet at West Kyloe Farm, near Lowick, Northumberland on 27th February 2014.
Appearing before Berwick Magistrates’ Court, joint Master, Timothy Wyndham Basil Smalley, huntsman, Ian Robert McKie and kennel huntsman, Andrew John Proe of the College Valley and North Northumberland Hunt, were all convicted of hunting a wild mammal with dogs, contrary to Section 1 of the Hunting Act 2004.
Joe Duckworth, Chief Executive at the League Against Cruel Sports said: “We are extremely pleased with the verdict. We hope this successful case will make other hunt members think twice before breaking the law and causing harm to wildlife.
“We know that many hunts continue to regularly flout the law. Our team of professional investigators work hard in the field to capture illegal activity and work with the relevant statutory bodies to bring about prosecutions.”
The case was brought by the Crown Prosecution Service following evidence supplied by the League Against Cruel Sports and further investigation by Northumbria Police.
Joint Master, Timothy Wyndham Basil Smalley was fined £2,075 with £120 victim surcharge. The Huntsman, Ian Robert McKie was fined £1,150 with a £115 victim surcharge. Kennel Huntsman, Andrew John Proe was fined £480 with a £48 victim surcharge.
Each defendant was ordered to pay costs of £385.
Appearing before Berwick Magistrates’ Court, joint Master, Timothy Wyndham Basil Smalley, huntsman, Ian Robert McKie and kennel huntsman, Andrew John Proe of the College Valley and North Northumberland Hunt, were all convicted of hunting a wild mammal with dogs, contrary to Section 1 of the Hunting Act 2004.
Joe Duckworth, Chief Executive at the League Against Cruel Sports said: “We are extremely pleased with the verdict. We hope this successful case will make other hunt members think twice before breaking the law and causing harm to wildlife.
“We know that many hunts continue to regularly flout the law. Our team of professional investigators work hard in the field to capture illegal activity and work with the relevant statutory bodies to bring about prosecutions.”
The case was brought by the Crown Prosecution Service following evidence supplied by the League Against Cruel Sports and further investigation by Northumbria Police.
Joint Master, Timothy Wyndham Basil Smalley was fined £2,075 with £120 victim surcharge. The Huntsman, Ian Robert McKie was fined £1,150 with a £115 victim surcharge. Kennel Huntsman, Andrew John Proe was fined £480 with a £48 victim surcharge.
Each defendant was ordered to pay costs of £385.
Sunday, 19 October 2014
TORY DIRTY TRICKS DEPT'S BOTCHED 1970s SMEAR BACKFIRES
WHEN a politician is recorded without their knowledge making comments at a fringe event or gathering, there normally follows a PR disaster over their controversial utterances.
But I was far from disappointed to learn on this week’s Sunday Politics Show that Conservative Party representatives had made recordings of me without my knowledge.
What was particularly pleasing was how the attempt at political mischief making backfired calamitously, with even Sunday Politics Show host Andrew Neill describing the ruse as “far from impressive”.
In fact, rather than cause me any embarrassment, I was pleased the comments were given air time – even though the first I knew of it was when I was watching the show live on Sunday morning!
The recording featured me detailing many of the great successes of 1970s Britain that made our country anything but the “sick man of Europe” that some would have us believe during that era.
And the facts back up the point I was making.
While the government boasts today about an economic growth which tells half a story as public services gasp for air, the 1.33 per cent growth achieved to 2013-14 is nothing like
the average 2.255 per cent achieved in the 1970s.
Manufacturing represents just 12 per cent of the UK economy today, as opposed to 30 per cent back then.
We are desperately in need of new homes today, and the 135,550 per year managed during this Government’s mid-term is not a patch on the 365,000 achieved at the start of the 1970s.
The list goes on, with unemployment in 2014 more than double what it was 40 years earlier.
Now I’m not saying we should hark back to the old days. Times move on and politics has to move with it.
But I do know that as a 19-year-old apprentice bricklayer in the 1970s, I was able to afford to buy my own comfortable home, something of a pipe dream for many highly qualified professionals starting out on the job ladder today.
What I do believe is that we can learn from our past – be it our successes or our failures – and there is no shame in remembering either from that particular era.
So while those responsible for releasing the recording sought to paint a picture of regressive politics hankering for a return to the dark old days, the truth is somewhat different on both counts.
Reflecting on the past as we seek to move forwards is absolutely essential, and remembering history for what it was rather than what political cowards paint it to be is vital.
And I can’t deny there was something hugely satisfying about watching a panel of analysts and commentators treat the attempt to cause embarrassment with the contempt it merited.
But I was far from disappointed to learn on this week’s Sunday Politics Show that Conservative Party representatives had made recordings of me without my knowledge.
What was particularly pleasing was how the attempt at political mischief making backfired calamitously, with even Sunday Politics Show host Andrew Neill describing the ruse as “far from impressive”.
In fact, rather than cause me any embarrassment, I was pleased the comments were given air time – even though the first I knew of it was when I was watching the show live on Sunday morning!
The recording featured me detailing many of the great successes of 1970s Britain that made our country anything but the “sick man of Europe” that some would have us believe during that era.
And the facts back up the point I was making.
While the government boasts today about an economic growth which tells half a story as public services gasp for air, the 1.33 per cent growth achieved to 2013-14 is nothing like
the average 2.255 per cent achieved in the 1970s.
Manufacturing represents just 12 per cent of the UK economy today, as opposed to 30 per cent back then.
We are desperately in need of new homes today, and the 135,550 per year managed during this Government’s mid-term is not a patch on the 365,000 achieved at the start of the 1970s.
The list goes on, with unemployment in 2014 more than double what it was 40 years earlier.
Now I’m not saying we should hark back to the old days. Times move on and politics has to move with it.
But I do know that as a 19-year-old apprentice bricklayer in the 1970s, I was able to afford to buy my own comfortable home, something of a pipe dream for many highly qualified professionals starting out on the job ladder today.
What I do believe is that we can learn from our past – be it our successes or our failures – and there is no shame in remembering either from that particular era.
So while those responsible for releasing the recording sought to paint a picture of regressive politics hankering for a return to the dark old days, the truth is somewhat different on both counts.
Reflecting on the past as we seek to move forwards is absolutely essential, and remembering history for what it was rather than what political cowards paint it to be is vital.
And I can’t deny there was something hugely satisfying about watching a panel of analysts and commentators treat the attempt to cause embarrassment with the contempt it merited.
Saturday, 11 October 2014
POLICE FAILURE TO ACT LEADS TO PRIVATE PROSECUTION AGAINST HUNTERS
THE League Against Cruel Sports launched a private prosecution on Thursday 9th October 2014 against six members of the Devon and Cornwall based Lamerton Hunt.
The League was left with no option but to bring a private prosecution against hunt members after Devon and Cornwall Police failed to deal with evidence supplied by the charity’s Investigations Team.
The League contacted the police in May but they did not respond for two months and despite several follow up enquiries, they delayed so long the League was left with no option but to commence proceedings itself.
The League has obtained written independent legal advice that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it would be in the public interest to prosecute
Summonses have been served alleging an offence under Section 1 of the Hunting Act 2004 in relation to an incident which occurred on the 26th March 2014 when the Lamerton Hunt met at Holdstrong Bungalow, near Lydford in Devon.
Joint master George Moyse, huntsman David Lewis, whipper-in Steve Craddock and terrier men, Gilmore Lewis, Stephen Mitchell and Wayne Bartlett of the Lamerton Hunt have been summonsed to appear at Plymouth Magistrates’ Court on November 21, 2014.
The League has also lodged a formal complaint about the actions of Devon and Cornwall Police with the Chief Constable, Shaun Sawyer.
The League was left with no option but to bring a private prosecution against hunt members after Devon and Cornwall Police failed to deal with evidence supplied by the charity’s Investigations Team.
The League contacted the police in May but they did not respond for two months and despite several follow up enquiries, they delayed so long the League was left with no option but to commence proceedings itself.
The League has obtained written independent legal advice that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction and that it would be in the public interest to prosecute
Summonses have been served alleging an offence under Section 1 of the Hunting Act 2004 in relation to an incident which occurred on the 26th March 2014 when the Lamerton Hunt met at Holdstrong Bungalow, near Lydford in Devon.
Joint master George Moyse, huntsman David Lewis, whipper-in Steve Craddock and terrier men, Gilmore Lewis, Stephen Mitchell and Wayne Bartlett of the Lamerton Hunt have been summonsed to appear at Plymouth Magistrates’ Court on November 21, 2014.
The League has also lodged a formal complaint about the actions of Devon and Cornwall Police with the Chief Constable, Shaun Sawyer.
Thursday, 9 October 2014
UKIP: MORE TORY THAN THE TORIES!
As voters go to the polls in the constituencies of Clacton and Heywood and Middleton today, the media hyperbole about UKIP is continuing apace.
The media reportage is nothing short of scandalous, with the public being fed a constant stream of articles about how UKIP poses a threat to both the Conservatives and Labour.
UKIP’s extremist policies are glossed over, even embellished by most media outlets. Their outrageous policies are rarely challenged and the details of what they believe in only surface very infrequently.
This approach to ‘news’ coverage of UKIP is doing a huge disservice to our democracy by failing to inform the electorate to enable people to make an informed choice.
I can understand why a Conservative supporter might vote UKIP, but I can’t see why Labour supporter would when UKIP’s values are completely at odds with Labour’s.
The truth that the media will not tell the public is that UKIP are more Tory than the Tories.
The interests of democracy demands that the truth about UKIP is exposed to public scrutiny.
I wonder how many people realise that UKIP’s policies include charges to see your GP, more tax breaks for the wealthiest and tax rises for everyone else.
I wonder how many Labour voters, who are considering voting UKIP, know that earlier this year Nigel Farage described himself as “the only politician keeping the flame of Thatcherism alive”
The truth is UKIP are a more extreme version of the Conservative Party and have nothing in common with the values of Labour voters.
Last year UKIP’s health spokesperson, Jonathan Stanley, said they wanted to introduce charges to use key NHS services, including your GP.
http://www.public-sector.co.uk/news/article-426
Just after the Coalition came to power UKIP’s deputy leader, Paul Nuttall, said: “I would like to congratulate the coalition government for bringing a whiff of privatisation into the beleaguered National Health Service.”
http://www.paulnuttallmep.com/?p=712
UKIP want even deeper cuts than those already delivered by the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition. Speaking on BBC News in December 2012 Nigel Farage said: “You know we keep hearing this big debate about the cuts, where are the cuts? … I just don't think [David Cameron] is being radical enough at all."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20612624
Tim Aker, UKIP’s Head of Policy, said in August this year that UKIP they would abolish the top rate of tax giving 16,000 millionaires a break of over £100,000
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/opinions/exclusive-what-will-ukips-election-2015-manifesto-look-like
A 2010 UKIP policy document on small businesses said they would abolish workers’ rights, including parental leave, maternity pay, holiday pay, sick pay, and even redundancy pay.
And is if all that wasn’t bad enough, UKIP want even higher bankers’ bonuses. In January this year Nigel Farage told the Daily Telegraph: ”We don’t need official caps or limits.”
The media reportage is nothing short of scandalous, with the public being fed a constant stream of articles about how UKIP poses a threat to both the Conservatives and Labour.
UKIP’s extremist policies are glossed over, even embellished by most media outlets. Their outrageous policies are rarely challenged and the details of what they believe in only surface very infrequently.
This approach to ‘news’ coverage of UKIP is doing a huge disservice to our democracy by failing to inform the electorate to enable people to make an informed choice.
I can understand why a Conservative supporter might vote UKIP, but I can’t see why Labour supporter would when UKIP’s values are completely at odds with Labour’s.
The truth that the media will not tell the public is that UKIP are more Tory than the Tories.
The interests of democracy demands that the truth about UKIP is exposed to public scrutiny.
I wonder how many people realise that UKIP’s policies include charges to see your GP, more tax breaks for the wealthiest and tax rises for everyone else.
I wonder how many Labour voters, who are considering voting UKIP, know that earlier this year Nigel Farage described himself as “the only politician keeping the flame of Thatcherism alive”
The truth is UKIP are a more extreme version of the Conservative Party and have nothing in common with the values of Labour voters.
Last year UKIP’s health spokesperson, Jonathan Stanley, said they wanted to introduce charges to use key NHS services, including your GP.
http://www.public-sector.co.uk/news/article-426
Just after the Coalition came to power UKIP’s deputy leader, Paul Nuttall, said: “I would like to congratulate the coalition government for bringing a whiff of privatisation into the beleaguered National Health Service.”
http://www.paulnuttallmep.com/?p=712
UKIP want even deeper cuts than those already delivered by the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition. Speaking on BBC News in December 2012 Nigel Farage said: “You know we keep hearing this big debate about the cuts, where are the cuts? … I just don't think [David Cameron] is being radical enough at all."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20612624
Tim Aker, UKIP’s Head of Policy, said in August this year that UKIP they would abolish the top rate of tax giving 16,000 millionaires a break of over £100,000
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/opinions/exclusive-what-will-ukips-election-2015-manifesto-look-like
A 2010 UKIP policy document on small businesses said they would abolish workers’ rights, including parental leave, maternity pay, holiday pay, sick pay, and even redundancy pay.
And is if all that wasn’t bad enough, UKIP want even higher bankers’ bonuses. In January this year Nigel Farage told the Daily Telegraph: ”We don’t need official caps or limits.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
