Mums against Harlesden Incinerator

This Soapbox has been posted  on the West London Mums website LINK

Contributed by: Virginia Rowe

Be afraid! Be very afraid! A new dangerous neighbour has set its sights on West London.

Yes mummies, daddies and kiddies, disturbing plans are afoot to build a giant waste incinerator at Willesden Junction, with devastating effects for family-friendly neighbourhoods for miles around.  So what would we be looking forward to if Ealing planning department give this the green light? (And folks, they really are leaning towards giving this the green light…)

Four 25 metre chimneys chugging out burnt toxic fumes 24/7 + in excess of 60 heavy duty trucks rumbling in and out of the area every day and night, polluting the lives of not only the poor residents that live on the doorstep of the proposed site, but also the whole area around Kensal Rise, Queens Park, North Kensington, Willesden Green, Harlesden, Ealing, Acton….. all family-friendly neighbourhoods.

Incinerator chimneys emit dioxins and heavy metals, associated with cancer, hormonal issues, reduced immune system capacity, effects on foetal development, lung and kidney disease and nervous system problems. These emissions travel for miles!

Despite mass public appeal, this planning application, submitted by a property company located in an offshore tax-haven, is actually being favoured by Ealing Council who will be making their decision on whether to go ahead with it on 19th December.

Few local residents have been informed or consulted on this toxic plan and the wording in the proposal is designed to deliberately mislead those who read it, using smoke and mirrors and a whole array of PR new speak.  At no point do they use the word ‘incinerator’ even though the ‘pyrolysis’ part of the plant, which will be burning gases, is actually deemed an incinerator by the European Union Waste Directive.

This would ruin our neighbourhoods and put our collective health at risk. There is no place for incinerators in highly populated residential areas. It is inhumane. And taking into account the overwhelming public response against them – undemocratic.

Say NO to our West London neighbourhood being turned into a toxic waste dump by a tax-haven based company that cares nothing for our area.

Contact your local MP, councillors and most importantly vote NO to the NW10 incinerator here:

Virginia is a creative director living and working in Kensal Rise. Follow her campaign against the proposed west London waste incinerator on twitter @NOincineratorNo

Calling Brent Youth: All I want for Christmas is a Future that works

 A one-day rally and workshop for 16-27 year olds on Youth Unemployment, Education, Apprenticeships and a welfare system that works.

Tell your story on youth unemployment and find your voice in our activism workshops.

Organised by Brent Youth and SERTUC Young Members Network

CONTACT: David Braniff on 020 7467 1283 or email LondonYouth@TUC.org.uk

 Saturday December 8th, 11am-4pm
 Harlesden Methodists Church,

25 High Street, Harlesden, NW10 4NE London, United Kingdom

View Map · Get Directions

Leveson: Green Party wants conscience clause, union representation and action on concentration of press ownership

 The Green Party has welcomed many aspects of the Leveson report, while expressing disappointment that there was little in it to practically address the concentration of ownership in the press.

 Green Party leader Natalie Bennett said the call from Lord Justice Leveson for a new independent self-regulatory body, with the majority of its board comprising non-industry representatives and no serving editors, was a step forward.

 "We would welcome the creation of independent oversight with majority civil society involvement.”

"But although there is the call for independent regulation here, the mechanism suggested is indirect, clunky and open to subversion, rather than the direct creation of an independent body along the lines of Ireland's Press Council. There's also no reference to union representation, which would provide an important expert, hands-on view within the new regulatory body."

 Natalie said that although the call for the new regulator to run a whistle-blowing hotline, and for a "conscience clause" to be inserted in journalists' contracts of employment was positive, the judge had failed to recommend direct action to ensure this happened.

"The NUJ has long been calling for journalists to be protected if they refuse to act in manners they consider unethical, and it is essential for a future decent, independent press that this right is provided."

 Natalie also welcomed the judge's call for a legal duty for the freedom of the press to be enshrined in law, which is not currently the case. She said: "Whilst the Leveson inquiry has rightly focused a spotlight on inappropriate and outright illegal behaviour by the press, we must never forget that a tenacious, questioning, independent press has in the past served Britain well, from the Sunday Times thalidomide campaign, to the Guardian's exposure of Jonathan Aitkin.

"This must be preserved and protected, and Leveson has rightly made his opposition to government regulation clear right from the start."

 Natalie also welcomed the judge's recognition that the public was rightly suspicious of close relations between press and politicians when it came to lobbying about media issues.

"He was right to say that this undermines public trust and confidence, and his call for transparency in the form of registration of lobbying contacts was a good one, and potentially revolutionary, insetting a model that could be used across other industries and sectors. Registration of lobbyists is something the Green Party has long been calling for and this report provides a real opportunity to return to that broader issue."

 The Green Party's chief criticism of the report is in the area of media ownership. While the judge makes a strong statement about the importance of plurality, he fails to make a direct recommendation for action, or taken board submissions made to him about limits for media concentration.  Natalie said:

"His call for greater transparency when ministers consider whether or not to refer a media merger to the competition authorities on plurality grounds is welcome, but does not go far enough. An independent regulator or overseer should have the power to make this referral."

Brent spends £11m annually on temporary staff

A report LINK going before the Brent Executive at their December 10th meeting reveals that the Council spent £10.7m on temporary agency staff last year. A new contract is proposed giving the Council more say over  who is hired  The fee element of the current contract was £735,282.56 and the new arrangement is expected to reduce this by £212,966.51 as a result of employing a 'Master Vendor' that directly employs some categories of agency staff and sources the remainder from other agencies. Previously the contract was held by a 'Vendor Neutral' Supplier who employed nobody directly but sourced all Brent temporary staff from a number of agencies. Thus there was a fee to the Master Vendor and to the agencies.

Nevertheless the new contract is valued at £11m.