Mahmoud Sarsak's testimony should make Brent Council think again on the Veolia contract

Following the denial of  the Lib Dem's democratic right to put a motion on Veolia and Palestine at the Brent Council meeting on Monday there was an event that should make Brent's Labour councillors think again.

The Palestinian footballer and human rights campaigner Mahmoud Sarsak brought greetings from 'the people of Gaza under siege and Gazan prisoners and Jordanian prisoners in Israeli jails' when he spoke to an attentive audience at the Willesden Green Pakistan Community Centre..

Mahmoud, whose hunger strike attracted international attention, said that the illegal occupiers of Palestine wanted to oppress and discredit any Palestinian talent in any field. Israel wanted persuade people that it was a cultured place in contrast to Palestine. Palestinians wanted to share their culture with other nations as a way of supporting their humanitarian cause.

He described the Israeli strategy as one of imprisonment, exile and ultimately death. Following his arrest on July 22nd 2009 when, replete with the necessary pass, he was crossing Israeli land to the West Bank to take up a place in a local football team, he was imprisoned.

Mahmoud described the prison as:

A graveyard for the living where they kill people's dreams 

He was placed in tiny cell and  interrogated  for 45 days and allowed very little sleep. Tortured both physically and psychologically he had been tied by arms and legs to a chair and subjected to 15 hours uninterrupted interrogation. One technique was to expose prisoners to extreme cold via an open refrigerator. He described how some prisoners fainted were then revived and returned to the freezing conditions, others made seriously ill were taken to hospital and after recovery returned for further interrogation.

Another technique was what Mahmoud referred to as 'the banana' after the shape made when hands were tied to legs and  and the prisoner left for hours. All this was an attempt to get prisoners to confess to what they hadn't done in order to justify the arrests to the international authorities.He said that he had been subject to other tortures but 'these were too ugly to speak about in a public meeting'.

Speaking calmly and with dignity, Mahmoud said. 'They tried to get me to confess but I hadn't done anything'. The detention by Israeli intelligence had taken place under 'illegal fighter' laws of the Israeli Justice system aimed at Lebanese and Hezbollah fighters which were not recognised internationally.

Mahmoud said that bizarrely the Israeli authorities wanted to convince people that he was not Palestinian and not a footballer - but a Lebanese fighter.

Pausing and surveying the hushed audience Mahmoud said, 'When you go to jail you are exposed to human suffering you would never imagine'.

He described how he had witnessed the interrogation and intimidation of 14 or 15 year old children which was clearly against international law. He said:

Children should be protected and enjoy childhood and an education. For Palestinian children it is a different story.

Remarking that children are resilient and would survive to have a future, Mahmoud said that older prisoners were neglected, became ill and were slowly dying. It was very painful to watch helplessly as your brothers slowly died, deprived of the painkillers that would have been available outside jail.

Mahmoud movingly described the death of his cellmate of 9 months from stomach cancer. He had called the doctor repeatedly but each time the doctor had said it was just 'stomach ache'.  After his death the Israeli media had said it was a case of suicide. A case of kidney disease had been refused admission to hospital and there was currently the case of a prisoner with abdominal cancer that was worrying Mahmoud because it appeared that the international community would not do anything to help the victim:

Mahmoud said:

Outside jail you hear stories...inside you see them. You are treated as a number. You have no right to a family or care. No right to socialise. Some prisoners have been in solitary confinement for 11 or 14 years without ever talking to another human being.

After seeing this with my own eyes I had to do something myself. Not just sit - I had to act. This is where the story of my hunger strike began.

When I started comparing my freedom outside with my life inside jail I had to decide whether to live in jail without dignity and probably die or die with dignity. I decided I had no choice but to go on hunger strike, especially when denied the truth.  

I nearly lost my health but nothing compared (after his release) with getting my freedom and seeing my mother again. 

Despite what the international community knew about Israel's abuse of human rights, including bombing football stadia in Gaza in 2009 and 2012, its apartheid against its own citizens and restrictions on who Palestinian teams can play, Uefa had 'rewarded' Israel with the right to hold the Under 21s event, Mahmoud told the audience.

He had taken part in the campaign to 'Show Israel the Red Card' to stop Israel holding the Under 21 finals, as a footballer and a humanitarian, using many strategies and trying to explain the history behind the issue. Since the 1917 Balfour Declaration Palestine has been bleeding. The UK and USA have helped Israel extend their state on Palestinian land and 'denied us our freedom, culture and heritage'.

Israel was trying to kill hope amongst the young and talented but this will not work -  hope can never be killed. Mahmoud  said 'the world has forgotten not just me but 5,000 prisoners' and cited the example of Norway's actions as one that other countries should follow.

As chair of the meeting I thanked Mahmoud saying:

As long as there are courageous, empathetic and insightful people like you to testify, hope will never be killed. I hope your message will be heard not just in this small community centre but throughout the world. We are privileged to have heard you speak this evening.

Brent Lib Dems protest at being gagged by Brent council officers

Press release from Brent Lib Dems:

 In an unprecedented move Brent councillors were on Monday (24 June) blocked from discussing a properly tabled motion put forward by Liberal Democrat councillors.

The motion, proposed by Willesden Green councillor Ann Hunter, sets out concerns about Veolia’s activities supporting Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory which are considered by the United Nations to violate international law. Veolia has a record of building and operating a tramway and bus services which discriminate against Palestinian residents.

Veolia is currently on the shortlist for Brent’s public realm contract. If successful the company will receive tens of millions of pounds to run waste and recycling, street cleaning, grounds maintenance and burial services on behalf of Brent Council and BHP.

The Liberal Democrats want the council to be able to take into account the record of companies which are involved in violations of human rights when deciding who to give business to.

Brent Council already takes a stance on ethical issues when procuring some supplies – for example it has decided to be a Fair Trade borough and encourage the purchase of fair trade goods. The Liberal Democrat group believes it is a logical extension of that principle that when buying services the council should be able to exclude companies who break international law or violate basic human rights.

Councillor Hunter said:

Earlier on Monday evening we honoured Nelson Mandela, a man with a great record of fighting discrimination, promoting truth and reconciliation, and an inspirational advocate  of freedom of speech. Mandela has always been utterly forthright in his condemnation of any system which divides people by race. That is what this man stands for and why we honour him.
 

In Brent we are proud to be a borough where residents from all different backgrounds live, work and travel together We are truly a rainbow borough.
 

Veolia shares in the building and running of services which Palestinian residents are not allowed to use. Just imagine if on our way into London we had to divide: Asians on one bus or tube, White British on another, Jews on another and Afro-Caribbean residents on another. 
 

Of course, here that would be illegal. We should not put local taxpayers’ money into the pockets of companies which act in this way.

Councillor Paul Lorber, Leader of the Liberal Democrat group, added:

I am shocked that council officials intervened to prevent us even discussing this issue. It has been lawfully debated elsewhere. Councillors are elected to speak out for the residents of Brent. If the Labour party or council officers wanted to put forward a different view they should have had the guts to do so in open debate instead of trying to stifle the democratic process.

Mysteries, mavericks and mistresses

The Kilburn Times LINK reports that Carol Shaw, Lib Dem councillor for Brondesbury Park  has defected back to the Conservatives. Shaw hit the national headlines last year when she revealed that she had been mistress of Bob Blackman when they were both Tory councillors.  Apparently the affair began when they were stuffing envelopes together. She subsequently stuffed him in the Sunday Mirror  LINK enraged at his comments on the sanctity of marriage.

Whatever party label she has worn Shaw has always been a maverick and can get on quite a roll denouncing all political parties. She has a good reputation as a case worker and was one of the more responsive councillors to the Save Willesden Green and Save The Queensbury campaigns.

As I reported in a previous blog relationships are pretty tense amongst some of the Lib Dems in the south of the borough and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see another defection, but this time to Labour, by a councillor not intending to stand in 2014. Shaw had said this would be her last term as a councillor but perhaps she will revise that now she has defected. Certainly the present Conservative leadership in Brent could do with a shot of adrenalin - or something more potent!

'Sickened' Sarah Teather and Brent Lib Dems should disown the Coalition

Sarah Teather has said that is is 'appalled and sickened' by George Osborne's statement on the Philpott case and welfare benefits and today's papers report 'deep unease' amongst senior Lib Dems.

Sarah Teather MP, when in opposition and before she joined the Coalition government, had great respect among leftwingers in Brent but forfeited that by her actions and statements when in government. Since her sacking she has distanced herself from some of the Coalition policies, some would say she has rediscovered her conscience, others, more cynical, claim she is worried about losing her Brent Central seat. Whichever is the case the Coalition's policies are now so extreme and damaging that if she is really to stand up for her constituents she should be arguing for Lib Dem withdrawal from the Coalition.

So what of our local Lib Dem councillors? Where do they stand? There have been rumours that a Lib Dem councillor was preparing to defect to Labour but I have been unable to get any confirmation. Despite my political disagreements with Brent Lib Dems I do think that they include people of principle who must be sickened by their party's role in the Coalition.

I cannot deny that Paul Lorber has shown real commitment to the libraries campaign in the Save Barham Library group where he has been unstinting of his time and energy. Similarly I have respect for Ann Hunter's decision to leave the Labour Party over the war in Iraq. Recently Barry Cheese has been a passionate campaigner for keeping Central Middlesex A&E open and opposing privatisation of the NHS. Alison Hopkins has impeccable credentials a s a community campaigner.

So far Brent Lib Dems locally have been remarkably untainted by the party's role in the Coalition and they have been helped by Brent Labour's supine approach to making council cuts. The Lib Dems have been able to oppose cuts at the local level but avoid the electorate making a link with the Coalition's austerity measures. Although they have entered local government ostensibly with a view to making life better for people  Brent they have failed to challenge the Coalition's attack on local government.

 However as Teather increasingly distances herself from the government positioning herself for the fight of her political life at the General Election, chickens will start to come home to roost.

Brent Lib Dems though should go beyond electoral manoeuvrings and consider the principles and practicalities involved. Can they, as liberals, standby while major sectors of the population are stereotyped, maligned and scapegoated? Can they remain silent while families are disrupted, pulled up by their roots and made to move outside of Brent away from their family and friends. Are they going  to tolerate more children falling into poverty? Can they tolerate the poor being made to pay for the economic crisis while the rich get richer?

 Does the argument that by participating in the Coalition the Lib Dems are restraining the more extreme elements of the Conservatives hold water any more when anyone can see the extremism of current policies?

Surely Sarah Teather and her colleagues in the local party must now call on their party to leave the Coalition.

Equal Marriage: Greens celebrate while Tweeters rise up against revolting Teather

The Green Party was jubilant yesterday after the vote on Equal Marriage.  This has long been Green Party policy and has been championed by Green Party member Peter Tatchell.

Before the vote Caroline Lucas, Green MP, said:

 While the Conservative catfight over today’s vote will fade into insignificance, the momentous occasion on which MPs were given the chance to stand up for equality in marriage will be remembered for many years to come.

The majority of the public sees no reason why people of the same sex who love each other and want to marry should not be able to do so – and despite claims to the contrary, this legislation will not force any faith groups to conduct gay marriages.

 Like many of the constituents who have written to me on this issue, I support the aims of the government’s proposed legislation and will therefore vote ‘yes’ to same sex marriage in Parliament.

However, while I’ll be voting for equal marriage, I’ll also be calling for more far reaching reform to allow everyone – same sex and opposite sex couples – to enjoy a civil partnership or marriage, as they choose.

 This is a question of equal love. It’s not about asking for special treatment for gay couples or straight couples, it’s about everyone enjoying the same rights regardless of their sexuality.

Speaking for myself I have always been suspicious of the way marriage is extolled by the right-wing alongside 'hard-working families' but if people want to get married then I see no reason why it should not be open to everyone.

Yesterday the internet was buzzing with comment on Sarah Teather's vote against Equal Marriage and many pointed out that this contradicted the banners on the Lib Dem website. Teather herself posted a long statement that can be found here which said that she had reflected for a long time 'as a life long liberal and a committed Catholic'.

It was a free vote, despite Equal Marriuage being Lib Dem policy, and she pleaded for understanding of her position:

I have found this a difficult decision because of my work previously on gay rights issues, and my judgment is finely balanced. I recognise that others may reflect deeply on these issues and come to a different view, in good faith. But it is my view that where the extra protections offered to same-sex couples are marginal, and where the potential negatives to society over a period of time may be more considerable, I am unable to support the bill.

Although the vote today was subject to a free, unwhipped vote, I understand that my views place me out of step with most of my liberal democrat colleagues and party members. I have not often found myself out of step with party members over the last twenty years. But one of the things that always impresses me about our party is that we are liberal enough to accept that others may hold different views. Our party members hold strong views, but recognise and cherish the space for difference. I am proud of that.

Cherishing 'the space for difference' does not seem to include gay people wanting the commitment of marriage. It's pretty ironic that the left, having urged Teather to revolt on a range of Coalition policies, now find her revolting on one that many of them support.

Among the comments on Twitter were:

Presume Sarah Teather objects to post-menopausal women marrying men as it will "decouple the definition of marriage from family life"? Ben Soffa

Brent's LGBT pop is approx 16,000. Sarah Teather's majority is 3,000. Pukka Punjabi

Just caught news Teather voted against  equal marriage Voted for cuts, for savaging welfare, but against equality. Sounds like a Tory to me Mike Katz

Teather free to vote the way she wants but not when it involves breaking promises made to local constituents Chavalim Bodedim

And Sarah Teather . Up there with Huhne in the talking utter bollox stakes. Suzanne Moore

"Lib Dems are tackling the inequalities faced by the gay lesbian bisexual & transgender community head on" Teather's website & she voted NO! Tweet for Labour

Sarah Teather didn't vote against the massive cuts the Government has made to Brent Central. Just gay marriage. Social liberal, you see. Tom Miller

 I’m sure the large Evangelical population in Brent Central has nothing to do with Teather opposing equal marriage  Nothing at all  Mark Ferguson

 Another aspect of the vote was noted by many Brent tweeters when all six Muslim Labour MPs voted for Equal Marriage.

Teather 'terrified' of impact of benefit cap on Brent families

Sarah Teather, Liberal Democrat MP for Brent Central has spoken out today on the impact of the benefit cap on her constituents. LINK

This is an extract from the Observer's story:

In an outspoken interview with the Observer, the Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Teather, who was sacked from the government in September, says the policy will have devastating effects on many thousands of children whose lives will be disrupted as their parents are forced to uproot from their homes.

Teather predicts that there will be a "reverse Jarrow march" in the run up to next April, when the cap comes into force, as families head out of London in huge numbers, in search of new homes.
Accusing ministers of a deliberate attempt to denigrate those who cannot find work, Teather says she saw clear evidence while in government that the policy would not save money and that it would inflict immense social damage.

While accepting that the wider aim of encouraging people off benefits and into work is the right way forward, she says that imposing a cap on people who live in areas such as her own Brent Central constituency in north London, where rents are high, will have a "horrible" and "traumatic" impact. She also claims that the primary motive behind the policy, which has strong public support, was a desire to court popularity by unfairly demonising the poor.

"There are all sorts of things you have to do when times are tight that have negative consequences but you do them for good purposes. But to do something for negative purposes that also has negative consequences – that is immoral," says Teather. She praised Nick Clegg for showing "immense courage" in limiting some of the effects of welfare cuts and urged her party to fight as hard as it possibly could to prevent more. She said many people in her constituency, which is one of the most ethnically diverse and deprived in the country, did not realise what was about to hit them next April.

Middle-class families were also ignorant of the huge impact of the changes on those around them, particularly on children, because of the caricatures peddled by government and the rightwing press about those on benefits. She believes the effects may only sink in when children from "nice middle-class families who send their kids to the local primary school come home and say 'my friend has just disappeared'. I think then it might hit home and they might realise a whole set of children have disappeared from the class."

Teather added: "I am frankly terrified about what is going to happen. A lot of these families do not know what is going to happen to them … How good is the education system at working out where that child has moved to? How good is the child protection system going to be at working out where children have moved to? I don't feel confident of that."

The local council estimates that more than 2,000 people in Brent will end up losing at least £50 a week when the cap comes in. At the top end, 84 families will lose about £1,000 a week. Many will be driven out of the area, including thousands of children.

She accuses parts of government and the press of a deliberate campaign to "demonise" those on benefits and of failing to understand that those in need of state help are just as human as they are. With vivid outrage she describes the language and caricatures that have been peddled.

"Whenever there is any hint of opposition they wheel out a caricature of a family, usually a very large family, probably black, most likely recent immigrants, without much English, lots of children, apparently chaotic, living in a desirable neighbourhood that middle-class people would like to occupy. That is the caricature and of course it is a partial spinning of the truth and it allows the demonisation to take place.

"I would really urge particularly Conservative colleagues but people in all parties to be careful. I don't think we can afford to preside over a society where there is a gradual eroding of sympathy for people at the bottom end of the income spectrum and a rapid erosion of sympathy for people on benefits."

Lib Dem councillors give verdict on the Coalition

If only......

Green progress in London elections

Green candidate Jenny Jones has come third in this year’s London Mayoral elections.

The Green vote on the London Assembly was also the third highest, meaning the party has overtaken the Liberal Democrats to become London’s third party.

The Greens also finished in the top three in five constituency elections.

Jones said: “This is a wonderful day for Green politics. 

“The almost exclusive focus on the two frontrunners in the Mayoral election meant that any other result was very unlikely, but our resolutely positive campaign has stuck to the issues affecting Londoners and the policies to address them.

“I am over the moon that these messages have resonated. We’ve been able to dispel the myth that when times are tough, green politics are a luxury. More and more Londoners are realising that social and environmental justice are tied together inseparably, and with more Assembly members the Greens can help ensure that the Mayor is held to account on his promises and that City Hall can help create a city more equal, affordable, healthy, and safe for everyone.

“And we know that this campaign has attracted some wonderful bright, dedicated and loving young people to the party, who will pick up the torch and carry it forward in the interests of London’s future.”

Jones received 98,913 votes compared to 91,774 to Brian Paddick in fourth place. 

 

On the Assembly, the Greens received 189,215 votes compared to the Liberal Democrats on 150,447.

The Greens came third in Barnet and Camden, City and East, Greenwich and Lewisham, North East and South West constituencies.

Shahrar Ali, the Green Party candidate in Brent and Harrow, said: "I thank the 10,546 Green voters of Brent and Harrow. We have increased both our vote and vote share across the electoral constituency and we will be back for more. I look forward to receipt of the detailed results in a few days, which I think will show even big advances in places where we campaigned hardest."

Shahrar Ali continued, "I congratulate Navin Shah on his excellent win, where he will be joined by our two London wide Assembly Members Jenny Jones and Darren Johnson. Across London, the Greens came third and we have overtaken the Lib Dems in London for the first time in electoral history."

Commenting on the prolongation of the count for Brent and Harrow, Shahrar Ali said: "I was an observer at the Brent and Harrow count throughout the day, from 8am to 11pm. From the outset, I found I had to make several complaints about what I witnessed as sloppy handling procedures. I think the discovery of two thousand ballot papers whose votes had not initially been recorded, and the need to rectify this, was partly a result of poor handling processes. Whilst I have every confidence in the result, I shall be raising my concerns with the requisite authorities."

Call In on Leaflet Licensing Thursday 17th May

I understand that the meeting of the Call In, Scrutiny and Overview Committee that will hear the Liberal Democrat motion on leaflet licensing will now be held on Thursday 17th May at 7.30pm, Committee Room 3 at Brent Town Hall.