STOP FIRE & REHIRE - the campaign continues. Film introduced by Barry Gardiner MP at Preston Community Library Saturday October 29th 7.30pm

 

Barry Gardiner MP takes up the issue of pollution in the Wealdstone Brook

Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North, in whose constituency some of the sewage pollution of the Wealdstone Brook, has occurred has taken up the issue with the CEO of Thames Water, Sarah Bentley, and the Environment Agency.

Dear Sarah Bentley

 

Re: Pollution Event at the Wealdstone Brook

 

I am concerned that Thames Water claim that the ongoing pollution incident at the Wealdstone Brook is the result of misconnections upstream. You will be aware of the work that your officials have been doing over a number of years with the Brent & Harrow Flooding Working Group which I established with John Timms MBE. Part of this work was to address the problem of misconnections which has blighted the Brook for so long. However, it is clear to us that the current pollution is not the result of domestic or industrial misconnections, but rather of an asset failure on the part of Thames Water. As such it represents a Category 2 Pollution Event and for this reason I am copying Emma Howard Boyd and Sir James Bevan at the Environment Agency to this letter.

 

In one of your recent speeches you were good enough to refer to my constituent, John Timms, and acknowledged that the company had learned a great deal about the local catchment from the monitoring and graphic representations which he had compiled over almost a quarter of a century. Key to his work is the data on water quality and river levels which can indicate when there is a problem with one or more of your assets such as the Dual Manhole Chambers. It is for this reason that we in the Flooding Working Group have not only insisted on the need for a proper separation programme and the need to track misconnections upstream (which your officers have strenuously resisted on cost grounds), but also on the importance of putting Flow Monitors into the surface water sewer at strategic points.

 

You will understand that in the Dual Manhole Chambers where an inspection cap is missing from the surface water sewer, it allows the foul water to back up into the surface resulting in precisely the sort of pollution incident that has afflicted the Wealdstone Brook now since February. The same pollution event can arise from a fracture in the surface water chamber which it is Thames Water’s responsibility to maintain. Had you followed the advice of the Flooding Working Group and installed Flow Monitors as suggested, we believe the latest incident could have been instantly identified and remediated. Their lack has meant that Thames Water has not been able to identify the source of pollution and is putting forward what your officials must surely recognise is a highly unlikely claim that it is the result of domestic misconnections.

 

I am aware that you are seeking to identify the pollution source and work with the riparian Authorities to clear detritus and flush the Brook with clean water to get rid of the toxic smell. I would also ask that you now install the Flow Monitors as requested so that incidents such as this do not keep happening.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Barry Gardiner

Member of Parliament for Brent North

 

Pressure mounts over academisation of The Village School

Brent North Labour Party has now joined Brent Central CLP LINK in opposing the academisation of The Village School in Kingsbury through the formation of a Multi-Academy Trust with Woodfield School LINK.

Brent North CLP welcomed what they called Brent Council's 'decision' to return out-sourced services in-house and said that this should also apply to academies, noting the return of Sandown Bay Academy in the Isle of Wight to local authority control. They called for Labour's National Education Service to include a policy to return all privatised academies to local authority control.

They appealed to all governors of the school, whose chair is Brent North Labour member and the Labour Group Whip,  Cllr Sandra Kabir, to pause the process and postpone the vote on academisation due on February 26th so that the school, local authority and unions could have talks to consider alternatives to academisation. In addition they asked that union representatives, who are also staff governors, be allowed to report back on what is going on at governor meetings.

Finally the motion called for the final vote on academisation to take place publicly with observers able to attend and speak.

The motion passed without opposition and, according to sources, the support of Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent) who was present at the meeting.

Barry Gardiner MP joins parents and residents in opposing Bryron Court expansion but Cabinet gives approval anyway

The Cabinet this afternoon approved the expansion of Byron Court Primary School to five forms of entry. This would create a school with 1,050 4-11 year olds.

The expansion was overwhelmingly opposed by local residents and many of the school's parents LINK:

Informal consultation:

Formal consultation:

Opposition centred on the inappropriateness of such a large, secondary sized, school for young children; doubts about the demand in the immediate area for school places, and traffic congestion which is already a problem at the school.

Local MP Barry Gardiner MP wrote a letter to Councillor Butt on behalf of his constituents opposing the expansion. Cllr Butt refused residents permission to read out the letter stating that the Cabinet had already read it.

The expansion will now go to the Planning Committee.

The full report that went to Cabinet is HERE

Where does Barry Gardiner stand on fracking?

I was approached recently by some neighbours, concerned about the environment and the future of their young children, and therefore interested in  their MP's position on fracking.  They knew that the Green Party  POLICY LINK was opposed to fracking anywhere in the UK but were not sure about Labour's position. Labour Brent Council had opposed fracking in Brent but not elsewhere.

I said that Labour appeared to be ambivalent but undertook to write to our Brent North MP, Barry Gardiner, a shadow minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for an authoritative statement:

This is what he said:

I know there has been real concern about the potential environmental dangers of fracking and I agree that this process should only go ahead if it is safe and environmentally sound. Indeed, it is only by fully addressing legitimate environmental and safety concerns about fracking through robust regulation and comprehensive monitoring, that people will have confidence that the extraction of shale gas is a safe and reliable source that can contribute to the UK's energy mix.

Shale gas does potentially offer an opportunity for the UK to improve our security of energy supply, to replace depleted North Sea gas reserves and to displace some of the gas we currently import. Shale has should not, therefore, be dismissed and I believe it is right that any communities that do host nationally significant energy infrastructure are able to share its rewards.

However, the Government also need to get their priorities right and I do not believe that fracking is the silver bullet for all our energy needs that the Government seem to suggest. Indeed, it is unlikely that it will be possible to extract shale gas in large volumes in the immediate future in the UK or that it will make a significant difference to consumer bills.

Given this and the legitimate safety and environmental concerns that have been expressed, I believe there should be a cautious and proportionate approach to shale gas exploration.

It is also unhelpful for the Government to have established a false opposition between shale gas extraction and investment in renewable energy. Gas will, of course, continue to play a part in our short and medium term energy mix but here is not reason why this should preclude heavy investment in renewable generation, which represents the long-term future of our energy sector.

I know that some environmental groups have also expressed concern about the Government's approach to encouraging shale gas production and I hope the Government will now listen to these concerns and adopt a more cautious and proportionate approach that address key safety and environmental concerns.

Protests continue against fracking in Barton Moss, Salford. Report HERE

Gardiner: Councils must be allowed to build new schools

I wrote to Barry Gardiner, Labour MP for Brent North, recently, asking him to support the campaign for local authorities to be restored the right to build new schools to deal with the school places shortage.

This is his response:

Thank you for contacting me recently regarding school places and the related campaign by the NUT.

I share your concern and that of many parents, teachers and headteachers about the growing crisis in school places. Indeed, the number of primary schools with more than 800 places (so-called 'titan; schools) has trebled since 2010 and the number of infants in classes of 30 or more has doubled in the past year.

Recent figures from the National Audit Office (NAO) has also found that 256,000 new school places need to be provided by 2014/15 to meet increased demand and the Local Government Association (LGA) has also warned that 1,000 of the 2,277 local school planning districts will be  over capacity by 2015/16. Here in Brent there are currently 3.2% more children than school places which could rise to a 10.3% shortfall in 2016/17.

Providing a proper, high quality place for every child is one of the foremost duties for any Government and it is clear that responsibility for this growing crisis in school places rests squarely with the current Government.

Firstly, the Government has prioritised its Free School programme, which has often delivered new places in areas where there is not shortages. I firmly believe that in the current economic climate funding for new school places should be prioritised for areas where there is a genuine need and it cannot be right that millions of pounds have been spent opening free schools with a surplus of places.

The Government have also failed to provide a fair deal for capital spending in education, with the cut to education capital being greater than that of all other Government departments.

The Government have also refused to give Local Authorities the power to set up schools to respond to shortages. I believe that allowing local authorities this power could be a practical solution to ease the pressure on places and I know that many parents and organisations, including the NUT, are calling for urgent action to address this. I also believe it is important to look at how local communities could be given a bigger say when new schools are being created and how a local accountability framework for schools could be strengthened.



The Government should also ensure that there is a qualified teacher in every classroom.

I can assure you that I will continue to press the Government to address this growing crisis in school places and ensure that new schools are created in areas where they are most needed.

Barry Gardiner faces wrath of anti-Modi demonstrators

A wet Monday morning is not the most auspicious time for a demonstration but this morning's at Brent Civic Centre was lively enough. Human rights activists were protesting at Barry Gardiner's invitation to Narendra Modi to speak in the House of Commons on 'The Future of Modern India'.

Modi (see previous posting LINK) is charged by activists with not intervening in, or even supporting, the 2002 massacre of more than 2,000 Gujerat Muslims. His Hindu nationalist party, the BJP, is denounced by many as fascist.

Barry Gardiner is Chair of the Labour Friends of India and issued the invitation in that capacity, However his critics suggest that the invite was aimed at securing the substantial Hindu vote in his Brent North constituency and to be based on enhancing business opportunities rather than human rights principles.

Modi has said he cannot come to the UK at present but the invitation is still extant. The demonstrators want the invitation to be officially withdrawn.

Gardiner came outside to meet the demonstrators and to distribute a statement. He was surrounded by angry activists who tried to talk to him to the background noise of chants of, 'Barry Gardiner, Shame, Shame/Inviting Modi, Not in Our Name; Barry, Barry, Don't Lie/Modi Guilty of Genocide.'

It does seem that Barry Gardiner has introduced a potentially explosive and divisive element into UK politics with his invitation and an issue that could impact on local community relations.

Gardiner faces demonstration over Modi visit on Monday

There is to be a demonstration on Monday at 11.30am outside the Brent Civic Centre where Barry Gardiner MP for Brent North will be holding his surgery. The demonstration is against Gardiner's invitation, as Chair of Labour Friends of India, to Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujerat,  to address the House of Commons. The demonstration is supported by  South Asian Solidarity, Islamic Human Rights Committee, Brent Trades Council, Brent Labour Representation Committee and many individuals. 

The exchange of letters below sets out the different viewpoints:

Barry Gardiner to Council of Indian Muslims (UK)

Dear Sirs,

 Asalaam Aleyeekum

Thank you for your courtesy in sending to me a copy of your open letter in which you refer to the invitation I issued to Narendra Modi to speak on “The Future of Modern India” in front of an invited audience in the House of Commons. I did this in my capacity as Chairman of Labour Friends of India. I appreciate your giving me the opportunity to set out my reasons for doing so.

Narendra Modi is the Chief Minister of Gujarat, which as you know is where a large proportion of the Indian community in Britain come from originally. He has been re-elected three times since first becoming Chief Minister in 2001, most recently in 2012 with the overwhelming support of both the Hindu and the Muslim community in the State. Since 2001 he has stamped out corruption in the State administration and is widely recognised (even by his enemies) to be personally not corrupt and to live frugally. Many non-resident Indians who hold him in high regard have a keen interest in maintaining their family contacts in Gujarat and are therefore interested to hear his views.

He has presided over what is often referred to as an economic miracle in Gujarat, encouraging foreign direct investment and improving roads, electricity and infrastructure whilst increasing education and healthcare. In particular women’s education has increased and death in childbirth has dropped by a third. All of this, he has done in the aftermath of the devastating Gujarat earthquake which wrecked the city of Bhuj and much of the surrounding villages and towns leaving 600,000 people homeless. The growth rate in the state from 2001 to 2012 has been almost 12% -- the highest of any state in India and as a result of his governance Britain now has more foreign direct investment in Gujarat than in the rest of India put together. He has been voted as the most successful Chief Minister by India Today Magazine 6 years in a row and has recently been made the Leader of the official Opposition Party, the BJP. The BJP is a Hindu Nationalist Party and those are certainly his uncompromising views (he would like India to be a Hindu State just as Pakistan is a Muslim State). However he has always governed in line with the secular constitution of India as did the BJP when it was the party of government under Atal Bihari Vajpayee between 1998 and 2004.

 I am of course aware of the allegations that he was implicated in – some say that he organised – the appalling rioting that took place in Gujarat in 2002. The riots took place in the immediate aftermath of the murder of 64 Ram Sewaks (Hindu religious) who were locked in a train that was set alight by Muslim extremists who objected to the Ram Sewaks’ demands to build a Hindu temple at Ayodhya. Hindu mobs then went on the rampage in revenge for this atrocity, burning out Muslim shops and homes. The official figure of those killed at the time was 850 but subsequent reports say that up to 2,000 Muslims were murdered. You have quoted from a BBC report that referenced an analysis prepared from contemporaneous accounts including the Human Rights Watch Report compiled immediately afterwards which made it clear that police and other officials had stood by and not tried to protect the Muslim community. This led some to accuse the authorities of a planned massacre.

Other contemporaneous reports in newspapers show that the state government had imposed curfews, issued shoot-on-sight orders and called for the army to prevent the violence from worsening. Clearly there was a horrific failure in the implementation of those orders. In April 2009, the Supreme Court of India appointed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to inquire into the Gujarat government and Narendra Modi's role in the incidents of communal violence. The SIT reported to the court in December 2010 submitting that they did not find any incriminating evidence against Modi of willfully allowing communal violence in the state. In all the rioting lasted for three days before the police got things under control. (In this respect you may recall that the rioting two years ago here in London took four days for the police to bring under control and they too were accused of standing by and doing nothing.)

Given that the Indian Courts have fully investigated the allegations about official complicity in the riots and have in fact convicted some senior administrative and political figures, it is I think all the more significant that they found that Modi was not implicated in any way.  This has of course not stopped people using the allegations against him for political reasons; and they continue to do so. That is no reason for us to regard them as justified and proven when the Indian courts, under a Congress government, have found that there is not even a case for him to answer.

My assessment in inviting Modi to speak in the UK is that he is a hugely important figure in Indian politics. He is already Leader of the Opposition and depending on the outcome of next year’s elections he could become the Prime Minister of India. At the very least he will continue to be a dominant influence on India’s future direction one way or another. Britain has good relations with India and our trade and education links are strong and growing. It is therefore in my view entirely appropriate that British politicians and leaders of the Indian community in the UK should have an interest in what he has to say about the future direction of his country. 

 I trust that this clarifies the situation for you, and once again want to thank you for affording me the opportunity to address your concerns.

With Kindest Regards
Yours sincerely

Barry Gardiner MPMember of Parliament for Brent NorthChairman of Labour Friends of India

Council of Indian Muslims (UK) response:

Dear Right Hon. Mr. Gardiner,

Thank you for promptly responding to our concerns about your invitation to Gujarat Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi.  Please forgive us for saying that we have been vindicated in our assessment that you have been misinformed.  Before we respond to the points raised in your letter, let us start by providing some background on the most serious charge against Mr. Modi, about his role in the Gujarat pogrom of 2002. 

The viciousness and barbarism that marked the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 including the burning alive of hundreds of people, and brutal sexual violence against women, make the Gujarat riots among the worst human rights violations in recent history. Over 2000 people were killed, countless others wounded, and over 150,000 displaced from their homes.

After their investigation of the violence, Human Rights Watch stated that the “attacks against Muslims (and other religious minorities) in Gujarat have been actively supported by state BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) government officials and by the police.” [13]

The "Concerned Citizens Tribunal", established by journalists, retired judges and intellectuals in India to investigate the massacres in Gujarat, noted in its report:

The scrutiny of the evidence, which came before us, also reveals that there was systematic preparation for unleashing the violence all over the State. The attackers had with them the lists of persons and properties of the victims. The lists could not have been prepared without an access to government records and agencies like the state intelligence, the sales tax department, the revenue department and the state electoral rolls. The Muslim localities were identified beforehand, as also the property and business houses belonging to the Muslim community.

[Crime Against Humanity, Volume 1 - An Inquiry into the Carnage in Gujarat]

Babu Bajrangi, a convicted mass-killer of the Gujarat pogrom, acknowledged on camera during a media sting operation, that the pogrom would not have been possible without the support of Chief Minister Narendra Modi [14].  

There is much more evidence that we would be happy to provide, should you need us to corroborate our position against Mr. Modi. 

We would now like to respond to your letter point by point.

1. Modi, “has been re-elected three times since first becoming Chief Minister in 2001”

This is not unusual in Indian electoral politics which is often driven by sectarian loyalty rather than principle. Nor does it mean that he is governing well. The Left Front government ruled the state of West Bengal for 32 years until 2009. Naveen Patnaik (Orissa), Sheila Dikshit (Delhi) also were re-elected three times in a row. You must be aware of the fact that electoral arithmetic does not entirely depend on the persona of any individual, especially in a Westminster model of democracy. 

2. Muslims have voted for him in 2012

The Center for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), which collects electoral data collected using scientific survey methodology, reported that only 18% of Muslims voted for BJP. 

The same data reports that BJP did not field any Muslim candidate in the last Gujarat election. There were areas where Muslims had no option but to vote for the other candidate. This has nothing to do with Modi. Muslims were forced to express, under threat or intimidation by BJP/RSS, their support for him but there is nothing to suggest that they have voted for him as a community. [3]

3. Since 2001 he has stamped out corruption in the State administration”

This is false – an example of Mr. Modi’s expensive propaganda machine at work. If corruption has been stamped out, why then did the Modi administration resist the appointment of state Lok Ayukta (anti-corruption ombudsman) since 2003? When the State Governor appointed one, the Modi administration contested it up to the Supreme Court where it lost.

4. Modi, “is widely recognized (even by his enemies) to be personally not corrupt and to live frugally.”

Our objections to Mr. Modi's politics concern his fascist traits in politics and government, not his personal lifestyle, which incidentally is also not above board. 

5.  “Many non-resident Indians who hold him in high regard have a keen interest in maintaining their family contacts in Gujarat and are therefore interested to hear his views.”

This is no reason to justify implicit support for his views by providing him with a platform. Emigrants all over the world maintain contact with their families and relatives back home. There may be many in the UK who support other leaders with fascist views and would be very interested to hear them.

6. “He has presided over what is often referred to as an economic miracle in Gujarat, encouraging foreign direct investment and improving roads, electricity and infrastructure whilst increasing education and healthcare....”

Gujarat has not been a leading state in foreign direct investment (FDI). The Gujarat government claims that it signed nearly $1 trillion worth of memoranda of understanding (MoU), putting the state ahead of China! The real numbers tell a different story. Most of the MoUs never come to fruition. Gujarat's actual FDI is only sixth in the country and slightly ahead of (until recently communist ruled) West Bengal. Mr. Modi’s formidable PR armada led by APCO has created the fiction of Modi’s magic in Gujarat’s prosperity. Even if it were true, how much does a pound of human flesh cost?

7. Britain now has more foreign direct investment in Gujarat than in the rest of India put together.

This is a rather unfortunate admission in that it implies that economic interests are more important than human rights. Please note that the massacres he gave free rein to in 2002 also took the lives of three British citizens. These facts, if underlined, would anger the general British population as well. Under these circumstances, it would be highly regrettable for a British politician to be associated with and seen as endorsing Mr. Modi.

8. He has been voted as the most successful Chief Minister in India by Today Magazine 6 years in a row.

India Today is an English language magazine. English is spoken by 2-3% people in India (per the national census of 2001) - the poll therefore does not carry much weight as representing a significant proportion of Indian citizens.

9. He has recently been made the Leader of the Official Opposition Party

The Leader of the Official Opposition Party is in fact Mr. Rajnath Singh; Mr. Modi is simply in charge of the election campaign for 2014 elections.

10. The BJP is a Hindu Nationalist Party. And those are certainly his uncompromising views (he would like India to be a Hindu State just as Pakistan is a Muslim State.)

Thank you for pointing this out. The issue is that the Hindu Nationalist charter goes above and beyond India as a Hindu state a la Pakistan as a Muslim state. The VHP and RSS who are the ideological sources of the Hindu Nationalist movement were strongly influenced by Nazis in their formative years. University of Chicago Professor Martha Nussbaum calls the movement the most successful proto-fascist movement of modern times [1]. To quote Prof. Nussbaum:

“Since long before the 2002 Gujarat riots--in which nearly two thousand Muslims were killed by Hindu extremists--the power of the Hindu right has been growing, threatening India's hard-won constitutional practices of democracy, tolerance, and religious pluralism. Led politically by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Hindu right has sought the subordination of other religious groups and has directed particular vitriol against Muslims, who are cast as devils in need of purging.”

The Hindu Nationalist movement not only threatens the Muslims in India, but Christians, Dalits, Sikhs, Buddhists, and other minorities as well. In the long run, they will threaten other regional powers (Because India, according to them, extends from Afghanistan to Burma and from Tibet to Sri Lanka.)

BJP is the political wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a fascist group whose leader M. S. Golwalkar in his book We; Our Nationhood Defined, laid down the aims and objectives of this group in these words, “...the foreign races [read non Hindus] in Hindusthan [India] must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture...must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation...We are an old nation; let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races...” Otherwise, “...To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races—the Jews. Germany has also shown how well impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”

India has a remarkably successful constitution.  Modi’s uncompromising views are constitutionally inappropriate and legally unjustifiable. 

11. I am of course aware of the allegations that he was implicated in – some say that he organised – the appalling rioting that took place in Gujarat in 2002…  train that was set alight by Muslim extremists who objected to the Ram Sewaks’ demands to build a Hindu temple at Ayodhya

The official probe conducted by Indian Railways concluded that there was no attack from outside, that the fire started inside the coach; the claim that the fire was started by the Muslims’ as a retaliation to the temple at Ayodhya is a fiction and perhaps uttered here for the first time.

Muslims do not oppose the construction of a Ram Temple. What they are against is the occupation of Waqf (Muslim trust) land, where once stood a historic mosque and that was pulled down by extremist Hindus under the full gaze of the media. 

12. “Hindu mobs...  planned massacre”

As has been pointed out, all evidence points to a planned and systematic ethnic cleansing that could not have been possible without the overt support of the state machinery. A former minister in Modi cabinet Maya Kodnani was convicted by the High Court in Gujarat for her role in the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 [12]. This alone is a damning indictment and proof that the pogrom was planned and executed with direction from the highest levels of the state administration.  

13. “Given that the Indian Courts... Modi was not implicated in any way”

The truth about Modi will be known only when he is out of office and unable to use government machinery to silence his critics– please see what he does to officers who expose his role like Sanjiv Bhat.

14. “This has of course not stopped people using the allegations against him for political reasons; and they continue to do so... That is no reason... there is not even a case for him to answer”

Even the Supreme court has made these allegations [2, 10]. Are you, sir, suggesting that the Indian Supreme court has political agenda?

Mr. Modi has refused to condemn the attack on Muslims; he has instead focused his efforts on denying relief and assistance to the victims [11]. He has polarized Gujarati and Indian society along religious lines, leading to social and commercial boycott of Muslims, walls separating Muslim and Hindu areas in cities and towns and “Muslim-free” villages. There are still tens of thousands of the displaced during 2002 living in shanty towns and temporary refugee camps too afraid to return to their homes and villages.

The amicus curiae appointed by the Supreme Court has asserted that Modi can be prosecuted [2]. There is enough evidence against him that the United States denies him entry [5,6]. It is difficult to file a case against a Chief Minister everywhere and especially in India. 

15. My assessment in inviting Modi to speak in the UK is that he is a hugely important figure in Indian politics. He is already Leader of the Opposition and depending on the outcome of next year’s elections he could become the Prime Minister of India. At the very least he will continue to be a dominant influence on India’s future direction one way or another. Britain has good relations with India and our trade and education links are strong and growing. It is therefore in my view entirely appropriate that British politicians and leaders of the Indian community in the UK should have an interest in what he has to say about the future direction of his country.

As we have pointed out before, Modi is not the leader of the Opposition. He is not as popular as you have been told [9]. Humanity has nothing to gain from a fascist leader, however alluring his promises may seem. 

We hope we have convinced you that the facts and arguments provided to you by Modi supporters are false and reprehensibly so. We would like to expand on why we oppose Mr. Modi and his propaganda of a Gujarat `miracle.’ 

He inherited a rich state which was richer than the rest of India even before independence - in comparison to other Indian states Gujarat has always been an economically better [4].

Even so, income disparity in Gujarat is one of the most extreme in India. Per data released by the planning commission of India, 31.8% are still below poverty line.  Note that poverty means those who do not earn Rs. 20 (GBP 0.20) per day! 

Responding to a question on malnutrition in Gujarat, Narendra Modi, on 29 August 2012, said: "The middle class is more beauty-conscious than health-conscious that is a challenge…If a mother tells her daughter to have milk, they'll have a fight-she'll tell her mother, 'I won't drink milk. I'll get fat."   

We would like to emphasize that Mr. Modi refused to condemn the 2002 riots, let alone apologize to the victims. He walked out of an interview with Karan Thapar when pressed on this. On the contrary he continues to evoke the 2002 case to create his image as a nationalist!

We have tried our best to answer you point by point. We specially request you to watch and read the links and references provided in our responses. If that is difficult, please ask an unbiased and credible source about the facts presented here. At stake are values that are common to both the United Kingdom and India and indeed to all civilized nations [7, 8].

Regards,
Munaf Zeena

Notes and References

[1] “The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India's Future” Martha Nussbaum Belknap Press of Harvard University Press (2009)

[2] “Gujarat riots: Amicus curiae says Modi can be prosecuted” http://www.indianexpress.com/news/gujarat...amicus-curiae...modi.../946400/

[3] “Muslims solidly against Modi: Katju

”http://www.siasat.com/english/news/muslims-solidly-against-modi-katju

[4] Growth Rate: As per the Planning Commission data, this is true that in the period of 1995-2000 and 2001-10, Gujarat increased its annual rate of growth from 8.01% to 8.68%. 

But look at other states Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. In fact, Gujarat was ranked second after Rajasthan (8.34%) in the first period and third after Uttarakhand (11.81%) and Haryana (8.95%) in the second period. Even Bihar and Orissa, the two most backward states of the country, have also shown growth pick up from 4.70% and 4.42% in the first period to 8.02% and 8.13% in the second period. Even smaller states like Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh have registered growth of 11.01% and 8.96%, respectively. In 2011, Gujarat ranked sixth among major states with PCI of Rs 63,996, after Haryana (Rs 92,327), Maharashtra (Rs 83,471), Punjab (Rs 67,473), Tamil Nadu (Rs 72,993) and Uttarakhand (Rs 68,292).

[5] Keep denying visa to Modi: US lawmakers (Dec 4, 2012)

25 US lawmakers have urged US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to continue with America's move. 

http://in.news.yahoo.com/keep-denying-visa-to-modi--us-lawmakers-052424447.html

[6] US official warns against giving India’s Narendra Modi a visa (Aug 16, 2013)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/10250928/US-official-warns-against-giving-Indias-Narendra-Modi-a-visa.html

[7] India would not survive if Modi becomes PM: Press Council of India Chairman (Feb 25, 2013)

“India will not be able to survive because it has so much diversity, so many religions, castes, languages, ethnic groups, etc.

http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/GUJ-AHD-india-would-not-survive-if-modi-becomes-pm-markandey-katju-4191218-NOR.html

[8] Narendra Modi's re-election a black mark for Gujarat: Martha C Nussbaum (Dec 24, 2012)

Martha C Nussbaum is the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago.

"Modi has long been denied a visa to enter the US because of his complicity in the 2002 pogrom, as ascertained by the US State Department. But now, the Naroda Patiya verdicts make official the fact that responsibility for heinous crimes goes very high up in his government," she notes.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-12-24/news/35991670_1_gujarat-chief-minister-gujarat-riots-naroda-patiya

[9] Printers protest Narendra Modi as chief guest, pullout from conference (Feb 25, 2013)

"We do not agree with the content of your seminar and invitation of Narendra Modi as a chief guest," he said. "As a magazine and as a publishing house in India with more than 12 years of standing, we stand by the principles of good taste, decency, progressive values, democratic principles and above all, the Constitution of India. As editor of PrintWeek India, I don't think Narendra Modi stands by these values; and hence the withdrawal of support," Ramnathan said.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/printers-protest-narendra-modi-as-chief-guest-pullout-from-conference/1079417/

[10] Godhra Riots: Gujarat HC Raps Modi for 'Inaction'

Passing strictures against the state government, the court said, "Gujarat Government's inadequate response and inaction (to contain the riots) resulted in an anarchic situation which continued unabated for days on".

[11] HC asks Modi Govt. to implement minority scholarship scheme (Feb 8, 2012)

In a major blow to the Narendra Modi government, the Gujarat High Court today censured it for "inaction and negligence" during the 2002 post-Godhra riots, holding that this had resulted in an "anarchic" situation.

[12] Naroda Patiya case: Former BJP minister Maya Kodnani convicted along with 31 others http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-30/news/33499655_1_naroda-patiya-gujarat-riots-kodnani

[13]"We have no orders to save you" - Report by Human Rights Watch

http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2002/india/

[14] The Truth – Gujarat 2002: Babu Bajrangi

http://www.tehelka.com/video/the-truth-gujarat-2002-babu-bajrangi/.

Barry Gardiner caught in August storm over Modi visit

Brent North Labour MP Barry Gardiner has upped his profile in India considerably as can be seen on the many versions of the above interview on the internet and the highly partisan comments it has attracted.

Reaction to the invitation he submitted in his role as Chair of Labour Friends of India to Narendra Modi, leader of the BJP, is also building in the UK. Modi is a controversial figure because of his role in the 2002 communal riots in the Gujerat and he is only just becoming rehabilitated with Barry Gardiner, who counts himself a friend, leading the process. Indeed the India Times called him Modi's 'biggest fan'. LINK

The Conservative Friends of India have joined Gardiner in issuing the  invitation for Modi to speak on the 'Future of India' but the Labour Party is divided on the issue.

John McDonnell, MP for Hayes and Harlington, told The Hindu that he was “deeply shocked that Mr. Modi has been invited to meet British Parliamentarians, given the continuing concerns in India and across the world at his record on human rights and the sectarian politics of his party.”

He said the invitation

....should certainly not be seen as an endorsement of Modi by the British Labour Party or the British Parliament. I do not believe Modi should be associated with by any true friend of democracy or India.

He added that he “along with others” would “boycott any meetings or events with Modi present.”

Kamaljeet Jandu of BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) Labour has written to Ed Miliband slamming the invitation LINK :

....So, to my dismay I have learnt that Narendra Modi, who is still the Chief Minister of Gujarat, was invited by Barry Gardiner, Chair of Labour Friends of India, to speak at the House of Commons.

Mr Gardiner believes that since Britain does more business with Gujarat than with the rest of India put together, and he could possibly be India’s next Prime Minister, this is enough to whitewash Mr Modi’s past

Kalpana Wilson, of the South Asian Solidarity Group, strongly disagrees with the invitation.

[They] have invited somebody to address the House of Commons who has been responsible for what can only be called genocidal attacks in which more than two thousand members of the Muslim minority community in Gujarat were targeted for the most horrendous forms of violence and were murdered,

Women and children were particularly targeted, and this is something which South Asian communities in Britain simply are not able to forget.

We're not prepared to see Modi being rehabilitated as a respectable leading politician, which is what this invitation seems to suggest.

The Islamic Human Rights Commission Bookshop, based in Preston Road Wembley, has tweeted a link to the IHRC Report on the riots  in which more than 2,000 people, mainly Muslims, died LINK

A Change.Org petition LINK which has only been up for a day or so has already attracted more than 2,000 signatures calling for the invitation to be withdrawn. It reads:

Stop the Visit of Narendra Modi to the UK! Remember the Gujarat genocide of 2002

We the undersigned write to express our concern at the invitation to address the House of Commons issued to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi by the Labour Friends of India and the Conservative Friends of India. We strongly believe that Narendra Modi, who is responsible for the 2002 genocidal attacks in which over 2,000 men, women and children from Gujarat’s Muslim minority community were systematically killed, must not be allowed to visit the UK. Modi’s past visits to the UK have been used to raise extensive funds and support for communal violence, and a visit at this time when Modi is launching a campaign to become India’s next Prime Minister, and continues to try to gain votes using openly fascistic and anti-minority rhetoric, would be particularly dangerous.

In the wake of the 2002 genocide and the extensive documentation of Modi’s role in co-ordinating and sponsoring it. the UK, other EU, and US governments were compelled to distance themselves from Modi and the Gujarat government. However recently we have seen the British government take steps to rehabilitate Modi, as evidenced by meetings between the British High Commissioner and Modi in Ahmedabad. This puts the interests of British corporates wishing to invest in Gujarat ahead of any concerns for human rights and justice, and makes a mockery of the rights of the three British citizens who were murdered during the genocide and whose families are yet to receive justice. We condemn this collusion in Modi’s attempts to deny his role as a mass murderer. We demand that the invitation to Modi is withdrawn and he is refused a visa to the UK.

Barry Gardiner says no demand for Michaela Free School and urges residents to make their views known

In a letter to a constituent, Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent North) has said that he has seen no desire in Brent for the Michaela Free School which is run by Katharine Birbalsingh:

Although there is a shortage of school places in Brent, I do not think that a free school In Wembley is the best solution to this problem, especially as there has not been, to my knowledge, a call from the community to open such a school.

He goes on to urge residents to make their views known on the issue before tomorrow's deadline:

The school has not yet been approved by the DfE and as the consultation period is still open, I would urge you and other concerned residents to complete the online questionnaire so that the views of local people are taken into account. The deadline for submissions is on Monday 22nd April 2013 and the questionnaire can be found here: http://www.mcsbrent.co.uk/questionnaire/ .

Be aware that the questionnaire contains some seemingly fairly innocuous statements which few would disgree with but where agreement can be used to claim that the school is supported.

Lord Nash, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Schools, had written to Gardiner on behalf of Michael Gove and claims that Michaela have had 'production meetings' with Brent Council officials:  

The proposers of Michael Community School are committed to opening a school with a distinct ethos and high expectations that will serve disadvantaged communities in London. The Department considered that their application to open a Free School was strong   and we have been working with them seince September 20122 to develop their school. As Free School projects develop, there are often aspects of the original application that evolve and change. Ministers will consider the final location, evidence of demand and revised plans for the school before making the final decision to open the school.

The Michael Community School is proposing to open in Brent for September 2014. Following an extebnsive site search, the Education Funding Agnecy has been helping the proiposers identify as site which ahs the ca[acity for their proposed school and can serve disadvantaged communities. We believe it is likely that the school will help meet rising demand for places across Brent. The Secretary of State will also consider any evidence that the school proposers provide that the school will improve choice for parents alongside any evidence of basic need for places before deciding whether to enter a funding agreement.

Brent Council has been aware that the Michaela Community School was looking at potentially opening in Brent since last summer. I understand that representatives of the school have had productive meetings with council officials. The Department will write to Brent Council during the school proposers' consultation to seek their further views on the school before a final decision on whether to open the school is made. (My emphasis)

The Secretary of State will ot make the final decision on whether to pen the Michael Community School until the school is ready to enter into a funding agreement. By that point, the school's proposers will have completed a public consultation on the opening of the school. The Secretary of State will also consider the evidence of demand for the school and the potential impact on other nearby state-funded schools.

Finally, we are fully committed to making the Free School programme transparent and accountable. The Department will publish the final pre-opening development cost of each project shortly after the school opens. The Department will also publish the final capital cost of each school once it has been established, which can be after the opening date as sometimes work continues after a school has opened.

Clearly it is important that we know what Brent Council has said during the consultation. The fact that only 8 people in total turned up to the consultation meetings and most, if not all, were opposed to Michaela should have given Brent Council the message that the school is not wanted her.

It is telling that we cannot know the cost, which might well contribute to our views on the project until after the school has opened.


  

 

Ash dieback worsened by 'science dieback'

Natural fascination: children discover a slow worm in Fryent Country Park

There was an interesting juxtaposition of articles in yesterday's papers. The lack of plant pathologists was cited in evidence to the Parliamentary Environment Committee as a reason for the slow reaction to the ash tree die back crisis. This was attributed to 'severe' job losses in plant science as well as the lack of university courses in the subject. Barry Gardiner MP uncovered the lack of controls on the import of firewood and wood pellets produced from infected ash trees which could carry the disease into the country if they were mixed with leaves and twigs from the trees. Meanwhile the National Trust criticised the government's interim measures for prioritising the continuation of trade over dealing with the threat. Simon Pryor from the National Trust said, 'Through this action plan we're effectively surrendering the British landscape to this disease.'

Cuts, education policy and the prioritisation of trade combine to make a difficult situation worse and underline the Coalition's incompetence.

The other news story was about the decline in scientific knowledge of 14 year olds in international comparisons, Such comparisons are notoriously unreliable but there has been less emphasis on science in primary schools as a consequence of the ending of written tests in the subject at the end of Key Stage 2. With schools being judged on test results in English and Mathematics and low results bringing negative Ofsted judgements and threats of forced academy status,  schools are concentrating on the 3Rs.

Children's fascination with the natural environment (see them clustered around snails, slugs and worms in the school garden or bent over paving stone cracks on 'flying ant day') should be an interest to build on in the classroom, but too often it is ignored, to concentrate on the timetabled literacy and maths lessons.

This is a pity as so much mathematics and literacy can come out of science based on motivating and exciting  first hand experience rather than lessons down-loaded from the internet. A lifelong interest in nature can come from such early encounters.

Michael Gove will no doubt blame teachers for this, although it is a consequence of both Labour and the Coalition's narrow view of education and their repressive testing regime. It does not even make sense in their own terms as the need to compete internationally, that they both cite,  requires creativity and adaptability rather than the regurgitation of facts and model essays that the new examination system is emphasising.

I'm Barry - Fly Me!

Today's Independent draws attention to the number of flights and expenses paid trips undertaken by members of parliament LINK 

242 MPs declared an average of £6,500 for 'fact finding missions' and trips.


Barry Gardiner MP, who ironically is Ed Miliband's Special Envoy on Climate Change got a special  mention:

Barry Gardiner, the MP for Brent North, has accepted £52,071 in foreign trips since the election, spending a total of 73 days out of the country as Vice-President of Globe International – an international group representing parliamentarians.

Full report into allegations against Ann John published

The report of the investigation into allegations that Ann John illegally intervened in a planning application, which exonerated her has now been published and is available below.

Apart from the findings the report gives insight into the relationships within the Labour group, concern over the the way the Planning Committee operates and the conduct of the chair, and includes walk-on parts from Navin Shah AM and Barry Gardiner MP. (Read from para 4.40)

It is possible to conclude that although she was cleared of wrong-doing the report's contents did not help Ann John in her bid to retain the leadership of Brent Council.

Barry Gardiner intervenes over Town Hall Library mess

Barry Gardiner, MP for Brent North, went and saw the state of Brent Town Hall Library himself after complaints from constituents and my February 9th post on the issue LINK

The Library was in a mess after stock and shelves were transferred from closed down libraries including Neasden.

He saw  boxes of books dumped on the floor in disarray and apparently unsorted, stands and shelves with sharp edges unsecured and protruding. He wrote to Sue McKenzie, Head of Brent Library Service to express his concern and remarked that if health and safety inspectors had visited at that time they would have noted several serious health and safety risks.

He requested that the issue be sorted out urgently and also asked what would happen to the books currently being moved from the six libraries, and when they would be available for use by the public. In addition he asked if other options had been considered including dispersal to Brent schools, nurseries or children's centres

I visited the Town Hall Library earlier today and it was a lot tidier, although there are still boxes of unsorted books tucked under the  bookshelves. A number of additional shelving units from Neasden are now in use at the Town Hall. A large space has been cleared for the  '60 years of Wembley' exhibition which begins at the Library on Saturday. It looks likely that things will be quite congested.

Are we hearing the true voice of Brent Youth?

Protest against threatened youth centre closures last year

 In January 2010 Barry Gardiner MP accused the the Brent Council (Lib-Dem and Conservative Coalition) of trying to intimidate members of the Brent Youth Parliament and raised the issue in the House of Commons. My report on it HERE attracted  40 comments so it was clearly an issue people felt strongly about.

Two years on I have received a message from a local youth activist who wants to publicise what s/he sees as new problems. I believe in giving youth a voice so reprint what s/he wrote below and invite youth and those involved with the Youth Service and Youth Parliament to respond. I make no personal judgment about the veracity of the comments but it is important that the issue is aired.

Dear Blogger,

I see you are writing a blog about Wembley as this came up during my searches for Wembley news. It is very good indeed. I have recently been getting wind of anger from teenagers in Brent about the youth service.. people are complaining about officers taking control of youth activities and "children and young people" are being left out in the cold. I draw your attention to one Facebook status:

"I cannot believe that a Brent Council officer in the Youth Service can get away with refusing to allow Brent youth radio members to have a Lead Councillor present in a meeting with them and him.

 X is correct when he says that this is serious and suspicious stuff and exactly what the prime minister has been talking about.

Council officers need to be more accountable and transparent in their dealings.
More young people should be educated about the need to Vote."

Extremely worrying I'm sure you will agree. I am also hearing that the BYP or Brent Youth Parliament has had members arguing  the same thing.. One person contacted me saying:

"BYP has become rigged. We have elections next month and the officers are showcasing who they want to be elected. Nobody else stands a chance."

If something is written on the matter by yourself something could be done! Please consider it.

 Please use the Comment facility or send me an e-mail with your views.

BMYVOICE - YOUTH PARLIAMENT
BRENT YOUTH RADIO