Bob Blackman accused of hosting Islamophobic speaker at House of Commons event

Tapan Ghosh and Bob Blackman at the House of Commons meeting

Bob Blackman, Conservative MP for Harrow East and former leader of Brent Conservatives has been accused of hosting an Islamophobic speaker at a House of Commons meeting.

Blackman courted controversy at the General Election by supporting Hindu nationalist opposition to making discrimination against Dalots ('untouchables') unlawful under the Equalities Act. LINK

The Zelo Street blog LINK commenting on Tapan Ghosh claims:

Tapan Ghosh frightens his supporters by repeatedly talking about the Muslim “reproduction rate” - the same tactics as those talking about “breeding”. For him, “moderate” Muslims are “really very small in number”. He endorses wacko fringe websites, which naturally includes Breitbart, Voice of Europe, and of course anything from Hindus who share his worldview. He has endorsed Stephen Yaxley Lennon’s Islamophobic agenda.

All of this is not difficult to discover. Yet Blackman has been happy to host Tapan Ghosh, who dressed up his bigotry in his talk “Tolerating the intolerant” as “800 years of defending human rights”. And that is not all: this talk not only took aim at “800 years of Arabic Islamic aggression” (Muslims in Bengal are not Arabs), but also “200 years of European Christian aggression”. Tapan Ghosh is as anti-Christian as he is anti-Islam.

A few days after the House of Commons meeting, according to Buzz Feed's Aisha Gani LINK, Ghosh met up with Tommy Robinson, former leader of the English Defence League and tweeted:

Other Tories at the meeting included Amber Rudd, Damien Green, Priti Patel and Sajid Javid. They might argue that they did not know Ghosh's reputation and their attendance did not mean they endorsed his views and that it was a wider event to celebrate Diwali but Blackman has no such excuse.

This compilation of tweets demonstrates Ghosh's beliefs:

Click to enlarge

This is much more serious than some of the current controversies surrounding other Members of Parliament.

House of Commons vs Football Association February 9th k.o. 2.15pm

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee has secured a debate on the governance of football governance in the House of Commons.

The debate taking place on Thursday 9 February 2017, starts at approximately 2.15pm and is on this motion:

That this House has no confidence in the ability of the Football Association (FA) to comply fully with its duties as a governing body, as the current governance structures of the FA make it impossible for the organisation to reform itself; and calls on the Government to bring forward legislative proposals to reform the governance of the FA.

The Committee published two Reports in the last Parliament calling for reform of the FA, to allow representatives of fans, women’s football, BAME groups, officials such as referees and the grassroots sport a significantly greater say in the governance of the game, and to give the Executive Directors of the FA greater weight in comparison with the representatives of the Premier and Football Leagues. However, the reforms called for by groups representing the wider game, the Committee, successive ministers for sport and recently, a number of past Chairmen and Chief Executives of the FA, have been ignored by The FA.

Last autumn, the Government published its guidance on best practice in sports governance. It is clear that The FA does not comply with this guidance now and there appears to be considerable resistance to the idea of changing its very out-of-date structure at all. The Committee is therefore preparing a draft Bill to bring the structure of The FA—which is, in legal terms, a company—into line with modern company law.

The Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, Damian Collins, said:

The current Minister for Sport told the Committee that The FA had been given six months from publication of the Government’s guidance in October 2016 to demonstrate that it was willing to improve governance, otherwise public money would be withdrawn from The FA and distributed to football through other means.

We do not believe that The FA will comply voluntarily: it can survive easily without the Government’s contribution of money to grassroots sport, and there are powerful vested interests that refuse to accept the right of all those involved in football to play a role in the governance of the sport. We are therefore preparing a draft Bill to bring the structure of The FA, especially its Board and Council, more into line with modern company practice and the Government’s guidelines for sports bodies.

 

• Inquiry: The Governance of Football
• Watch Parliament TV: The Governance of Football
• Culture, Media and Sport Committee

London MPs' Expenses revealed

Meeting with London MPs as education funding cuts threaten London boroughs

The government's intention to move to a National Funding Formula for education and an overall freeze on spending despite rising pupil numbers and increased staffing costs means that London boroughs, including Brent, will face funding cuts in the near future.
Camden NUT has organised a meeting at Portcullis House on February 3rd to which they have invoted Tulip Siddiq MP, who also represents three Brent wards. Keir Starmer has already said he will attend and it would be good if Dawn Butler and Barry Gardiner also committed themselves to listen to the concerns. Brent could face a cut of 8.6% by 2019-20  and subsequent loss of jobs in schools.

This is the invitation letter:

London schools face unprecedented cuts over the next few years. In the Autumn Statement, George Osborne announced that education funding would be frozen despite a significant increase in student numbers and the introduction of a national funding formula. 

If the plans for a national funding formula advocated by many MPs and the f40 group are enacted this  will mean pupils in London schools will have the spending on their education cut dramatically, as  these changes coincide with other cuts in education spending and schools having to pay higher pension and national insurance contributions. 

These changes will be felt most acutely in the most deprived boroughs; however, funding is at risk in every London borough. 

 Overall funding for London schools could be cut by 13% over the next four years.  Schools have never faced cuts of this size before. Education spending has only been cut twice before in the mid-80s and the mid-90s by 4% and 3% respectively. The scale of these cuts will drag schools back to funding levels last seen in the 1990s.  There is a very effective and influential campaign advocating redistributing funding from London and other metropolitan boroughs largely to the shires as a way for those areas to deal with cuts to the education budget. We believe that we need a similarly effec tive campaign to argue that funding should be protected overall; that a national funding formula should properly recognise the true cost of educating large numbers of children from deprived backgrounds; and that the transition to a national funding formula should not force London schools to make significant cuts. 

We have arranged an initial planning meeting for local stakeholders with London MPs in Room R. Portcullis House at 5:30pm on Wednesday 3^rd February.

This is how the new formula would impact on schools in the London Borough of Brent LINK:

Current Individual School Budget 2015-16 £220,485,342
Current Individual School Budget if F40 revised formula applied £217,958,912
F40 budget adjusted for schools inflation 2-19-20 (Source IFS): £206,611,993
Overall budget reduction: £18,873,349
Spending per pupil 2015-16:  £5,371
Spending per pupil 2019-20:  £4,573 (cut of 8.6%)
Loss of teaching jobs 174 (cut of 7%)
Lost of teaching assistant jobs 349 (cut of 27%)

Other London boroughs are even worse off.
  
 Full documentation here: LINK

Barry Gardiner: Injury prevented me from voting for recognition of Palestine

I have received this reply to a message I sent to Barry Gardiner MP (Labour Brent North) asking him to vote for the recognition of Palestine on October 13th and a follow-up email asking why he wasn't present for the  vote:

Thank you for contacting me about the debate regarding the recognition of Palestinian statehood that took place in the House of Commons on the 13^th of October. 

You will, I am sure, be aware that the House of Commons voted in support of the motion with a significant majority of 276-12. Labour voted for the motion because it reflects our support for the principle of recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Unfortunately, I sustained an injury on the Sunday evening and had to go to the hospital, so I was not actually present for the vote. Had I been able to attend, I would have voted to recognise Palestine along with my colleagues in the Labour Party. I believe the events of recent months have made it clear that such progressive steps are essential to avoid further violence and bloodshed.

I also believe that recognition of Palestine at the United Nations would be a further tangible step along this route. That is why I have supported the Labour Party’s consistent calls upon the Government to commit Britain to supporting the Palestinians' bid for recognition at the UN, in 2011 and in 2012, in order to restart peace negotiations.

Modi not coming but Barry Gardiner unrepentant

Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujerat, has told Barry Gardiner that he is unable to accept his  invitation to speak to the House of Commons on the 'Future of Modern India' as he is busy for the next few weeks/

Modi has been fiercely criticised over the massacre of over 2,000 Muslims in the Gujerat in 2002 and campaigns and petitions were launched to get the invitation withdrawn. Local support for the campaign   to withdraw the invitation has included Brent TUC and Brent Labour Representation Committee.

The demonstration outside Barry Gardiner's surgery  at the Brent Civic Centre on Monday, 11.30am-1pm will go ahead in an effort to persuade him to officially withdraw the invitation and not repeat it.

Gardiner told the Kilburn Times: LINK

If it was right to issue the invitation in the first place, it would be wrong to withdraw it. Nothing can be added by that. It is silly.

Given the abject history of official British support for 'strong men' abroad, often for business reasons and the 'national interest', only to rebound later when the strong men trample on democracy and commit human rights abuses, Gardiner may eventually be glad that his invitation was declined.

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.

Green Party welcomes Equal Marriage vote

THE GREEN Party has welcomed yesterday’s vote to legalise gay marriage as a “historic moment.”
The vote in the House of Commons passed by 400 to 175 votes, with the latter including 136 Conservative MPs – almost half of the party.

Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, said: “Yesterday's vote in the House of Commons for gay marriage marks a historic moment in the progress of equality in Britain. With the large Commons majority of 225, the elected representatives have spoken, and the House of Lords has no grounds for resistance.”

“Britain has joined other progressive states, including Sweden, Denmark, Canada and Belgium, in giving gay couples an equal right to marry as that enjoyed by heterosexual couples.

“Our Green MP Caroline Lucas was also leading in yesterday's debate, making the point that now there's a further equality issue be tackled. MPs have acknowledged that civil partnerships don't meet all couples' needs - now they need to go a step further, and acknowledge that marriage doesn't meet the needs of all heterosexual couples.”

“There can be no logical grounds for denying heterosexual couples the option of civil partnership as created under the Civil Partnership Act of 2004 - a simple, legal step that can resolve issues around child custody, inheritance, pension rights and a whole host of other issues.

“There's a further important issue to be addressed - an issue of education and understanding. There is no such thing as "common law marriage" in Britain, yet it's a phrase that you'll hear bandied about regularly, and a false belief in its existence has had severe financial and emotional consequences for many .

“There's also a recognised problem around inheritance when an unformalised partnership ends with the death of an intestate partner - a lot of work has been done around this issue; now's the time for action

“We live in a world of many different family arrangements - what we need to do is to give couples a range of legal tools (and full understanding of them) so that they can have security and certainty about the shape of their family life, and real choices about how to construct it.

“We took an important step forward yesterday - now we need to complete the work.”

Greens call on MPs to vote against 'mean and miserable' Welfare Bill

Together we shout (We are Spartacus)

As the Commons debate welfare benefits and ex Coalition Sarah Teather wields her new found conscience the Green Party has called upon all MPs to reject the coalition’s Welfare Benefits Up-rating Bill. 

The Bill, which has its Second Reading in Parliament today, would raise benefits by 1% per year until April 2015. The current policy sees benefits rise in line with inflation, and so welfare recipients will have a real-terms cut. 

In the debate Caroline Lucas said that this was 'mean and miserable legislation' by a 'mean and miserable' government.

Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, said::

MPs are being asked whether they are prepared to deliberately, with all of the facts before them, choose to significantly reduce the living standards of millions of their voters.

 

We can start with the one in five UK workers paid less than a living wage – who either as parents, or as householders, will have been receiving state support to enable them to continue to live. The responsibility should being lying with their employers - if they all paid a living wage the net benefit to the government would be about  £7.5 billion - but the government is showing no inclination to lift the minimum wage to a liveable level, ending the past decades of corporate welfare payments. 

We can also add in the hundreds of thousands of people surviving – not living, but surviving - on the measly sum of £71/week or less in job seekers’ allowance.

And we can add in millions of children. As the Child Poverty Action group says, the Bill can “only increase absolute child poverty, relative child poverty and material deprivation for children”.  Its figures show that having slowly got the rate of child poverty below 20%, the rate is set under this regime to leap back to 25% in a decade.

Not only is the cut immoral, but it is economically illiterate - facing the clear risk of a triple-dip recession, the government is planning to pull millions of pounds out of the pockets of people who, had they received it, would certainly have fed the money back into the economy in buying food, buying energy, and buying services.

The Green Party argues that the only ethical and effective way of reducing social security costs is to create jobs - not slash budgets. 

Natalie said: 

What we need to do in the longer term is change the direction of the British economy – bring manufacturing and food production back to Britain, restore strong, diverse local economies built around small businesses and co-operatives paying decent wages on which their staff can build lives and communities.

That’s a longterm project – but today we can think about the British people – the nurses, the soldiers, the teaching staff, the local government workers, and yes, the unemployed – and say no to the Welfare Benefits Up-rating Bill.

That’s what Green MP Caroline Lucas will be doing in Westminster today. What’s your MP doing?

Wanted - a Green leader who combines electoral and campaigning politics

Caroline Lucas has announced that she will stand down as leader of the Green Party in September but will of course continue as the only Green MP, and a very effective one at that.

This could be a positive move for the political health of the Green Party, distributing leadership and drawing on the talent of the wider membership. but has the danger of the new leader being overshadowed by our MP. Certainly the demands of being an MP with the normal constituency case work load, the sole representative of the Greens in the Commons and the Leader are great and it is characteristic of Caroline's cool assessment skills that she has recognised that.

The demise of the Liberal Democrats, the knee-jerk resurgence of the Labour Party based on very little in policy terms, and the deepening economic and environmental crisis, demand long-term strategic thinking alongside grassroots activism.  Bringing these together will be a major task for the new leader/s (co-leaders are possible in the Green Party and a positive possibility).

A leader outside the House of Commons will recognise that Greens combine electoral and campaigning politics.

Incidentally, Jenny Jones, on Twitter has said she will not be a candidate for the leadership.

Caroline's statement

In September 2012, Caroline Lucas MP will reach the end of her second term as national Leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, and has announced today that she will not be seeking re-election for another two-year term, in order to broaden opportunities for the range of talent in the Party and to raise the profiles of others aspiring to election.

Caroline Lucas said: "I'm hugely honoured to have served as the first Leader of the Green Party and I'm proud that during the four years of my term, we've moved Green politics forward to a higher level, with the Party by far the most influential it has ever been. We've seen significant breakthroughs in winning our first seat at Westminster and gaining our first ever local council in Brighton and Hove. These were followed by further breakthroughs onto new Councils in the recent local elections, which were among the most successful we've ever had, as well as establishing ourselves as the third party, ahead of the LibDems, in the elections for London Mayor.

"I look forward to continuing to do all I can in my very demanding role as the MP for Brighton Pavilion, representing my constituents and defending them against the Coalition Government's disastrous economic policies and its refusal to accept its environmental and social responsibilities. I will also be able to dedicate even more of my work to the political frontline, putting the Green case for change in Parliament and in all circles of national political debate."

Cllr Darren Johnson, London Assembly Member, said: "Caroline has made a huge impact in her time as Green Party Leader and has helped shift Green politics from the margins to the mainstream of British political life. She will be an extremely hard act to follow but this is an ideal time to allow new talent to come forward."

Jenny Jones, London Assembly Member and recent Green Mayoral Candidate said:
"The Green Party has made some massive breakthroughs in the past two years, since having Caroline as our Leader, in Parliament, in Brighton and most recently in London, where we are now the third party behind the Conservatives and Labour. Caroline's decision not to seek re-election at this point is entirely in keeping with Green principles: it's a strong move, allowing other talented people to come through and to take the Green Party even further forward. She has set a superb example of how to lead. Whoever is elected in her place has a tough act to follow."

Nominations for leadership candidates are now open within the Party and will close towards the end of June. The new Leader (or Co-leaders) will take up the two year post in early September. No nominations have yet been received.

Caroline Lucas added: "We're lucky to have a wealth of capability and experience in our Party. Now feels like the right time to step aside, to allow more of that ability to come forward and help the party to grow. I offer my very best wishes to the next Leader, whoever they may be."

Read what Jim Jepps has to say HERE

Contact your MP now on Pensions Reform

This government are going back on their promise in the Coalition Agreement, and are forcing 5 million people to wait longer for their State Pensions, with little time to plan. Women born in 1953, 1954 and 1955 are hit hardest, with 500,000 having to wait over a year longer for their pension. 33,000 will have to wait two whole years.

Tonight, we have our first real chance to try to defeat these changes once and for all, when the Pensions Bill is debated in the House of Commons.

The Labour opposition is going to argue that the Pensions Bill should be abandoned, because the proposals on the state pension age are so unfair.

It’s crucial we all get in touch with our MPs to ask them to vote to give the Pensions Bill the chop. Even if you’ve emailed a dozen times already, please email them again – this is crunch time. 

Please sign by going to this LINK