Brent Fightback now on Facebook

Follow this LINK to sign up

Fight for Freedom (Pass)

London members of Britain’s biggest pensioner organisation, the National Pensioners Convention (NPC) have accused local politicians of trying to alter the terms of the Freedom Pass without proper consultation.

The capital’s pensioners have issued a damning criticism of London Councils latest attempt to weaken the scope and management of the Freedom Pass; pledging to mount a campaign to oppose the changes.

On August 20, London Councils issued a consultation paper aimed at changing the Freedom Pass, but the deadline for views on the proposals is October 22 – at least a week before councillors in Bromley, Greenwich, Hammersmith and Fulham, Bexley, Westminster, Harrow and Hillingdon are expected to discuss the proposals.

Those behind the changes claim it will make minor amendments to the Greater London Authority Act 1999 in relation to the concessionary fares scheme for older and disabled Londoners – but there is serious concern that these changes will allow the 32 London Boroughs and the City of London flexibility to make unspecified changes to the concessions without consultation.

Campaigners are concerned that:

·        The “reserve powers” currently held by the Mayor of London to settle any dispute about the scheme’s future cost with Transport for London (TfL), would be handed to an “independent” arbitrator – who would not be accountable to Londoners. 

·        Certain overground train services could be removed from the current concession; seriously weakening the Freedom Pass and future services.

·        The plans would allow any single council to invoke the arbitrator - not a majority of London Councils - creating a recipe for outside political intervention every year and the constant danger of cuts in services.

Barry Todman, chairman of the NPC Greater London region said: “The Freedom Pass is enjoyed by 1.2m older Londoners and disabled people – and provides a lifeline for many who otherwise would be isolated and lose their independence. Very few local councillors seem to know about the changes – and the whole thing is being done without proper consultation of local people. It’s clearly an attempt to weaken the Freedom Pass by the back door.”

The NPC is calling on its members to lobby their local authorities and urge them to oppose the plans.

Greens oppose Royal Mail privatisation

Ref Number: 04-27-18 Photographer: Ian Britton www.freefoto.com

Green Party autumn conference has passed an emergency motion today, stating the party's opposition to the proposed privatisation of Royal Mail by Business Secretary Vince Cable.

Adrian Ramsay, the party's newly re-elected Deputy Leader, said the Greens were opposed to the privatisation of such an essential public service. He stressed "the fundamental importance of a strong, modern, publicly owned Royal Mail, which is available to all." Ramsay highlighted that although many people today prefer to use alternative forms of communication, the postal service remains of vital importance to small businesses and rural communities.

During a panel at autumn conference yesterday, Billy Hayes, General Secretary of the Communication Workers Union, also emphasised the opposition of both communication workers and the public to the privatisation of Royal Mail.

Whither Barry Gardiner?

Spot the knife

The Guardian reported on Saturday that Barry Gardiner, Labour MP for Brent North, is one of several ex-ministers likely to put themselves forward for the forthcoming shadow cabinet elections.

Gardiner's ministerial career started at the Home Office and he went on the Northern Ireland, Trade and Industry and eventually DEFRA. It appeared to be a career in decline and this was confirmed by his appointment as a 'Special Envoy on Forestry' when Gordon Brown replaced Tony Blair.

Gardiner, who had always been super loyal to the Blair government, rebelled for the first time when he criticised Brown and called for his resignation LINK . The Anti-Brown faction were quickly swept into oblivion when the banking crisis sent shockwaves across the world and Brown took on the role of saving it. Gardiner left his forestry post 'by mutual consent'.

In the General Election, rather than openly oppose Brown, Gardiner ran a campaign that didn't mention Brown and  references to the Labour Party in his literature were about as prominent as the 'Printed and published by' tag. He adopted green and lilac colours rather than the usual Labour Party red and his rosettes had his smiling portrait in the centre.His  quasi-independent campaign which centred on his public profile, personality and family rather than policy, was very successful and he won the seat with an increased majority. His difficulties with expenses when he faced a constituency meeting to explain himself, pursued by a Lib Dem lunch mob and Lone Ranger Atiq Malik, appeared to have caused him little damage.

During his time as a backbencher in the last months of Brown's premiership, and again now facing the Con-Dem government, Gardiner has been active in asking parliamentary questions and contributing to debates. Helped by his TV coverage friendly seating position just behind the front benches he has established quite a high profile.

Whether this will help him in the shadow cabinet elections remains to be seen. His ultra-loyalty  to Blair means that he is contaminated by his pro-Iraq War stance and his support for Labour's assault on civil liberties. With the Labour leadership contenders distancing themselves from the Blair government and New Labour his best bet is a leadership win by David Miliband. A win by Ed Miliband would mean that even if he won a place in the shadow cabinet it would be likely to be a junior position with an early exit date. Ed Balls, a close ally of Brown, would be even less likely to give Gardiner the time of day.

SIOE One Year On

Reading about the rising tide of Islamophobia in the US over the building of a Muslim Cultural Centre in New York caused me to reflect on the demise of the SIOE (Stop the Islamisation of Europe) in the UK. Little has been heard of them since the mass mobilisation against them at the Harrow Mosque on September 11th last year LINK and their failure to muster more than15, rather than the promised 1,500, at their subsequent demonstration in December 2009 LINK. It appear that their humiliation seriously weakened the organisation.

They are now seeking to build support on the coat-tails of the American protests and had planned demonstrations yesterday in support of the SIOA in Denmark, Norway, Germany, Bulgaria and Australia. A possible protest outside the US Embassy here in London  was given little prominence. It would be interesting to know how many turned out.

Meanwhile Harrow Mosque is thriving and pursuing the aim outlined on their website:

Our vision is to become a dynamic hub that seeks to meet the needs of diverse local Muslim communities and builds bridges with wider society. We are committed to a peaceful and prosperous Harrow where communities learn from each other and work together for the common good.   We will continue to host open days at the mosque showcasing our work, along with inter-faith events with other communities.    

Along with colleagues from the Brent Palestine Solidarity Campaign BLOG LINK I recently received a warm welcome at the mosque when leafleting for a boycott of dates grown in territories illegally occupied by Israel and our presence was announced to the worshippers. We have had similar experiences at other local mosques including Wembley Central, Brent Central and Monks Park.

Eid Mubarak to all

Greens will fight NHS privatisation

An emergency motion, passed unanimously at Green Party autumn conference, has strongly criticised the privatisation of the NHS.

The motion called for a campaign to have those health providers which have already been privatised brought back into the NHS, and for the NHS to be promoted as a public service free of commercial interests.

Caroline Lucas, Green Party leader said: "The White Paper spells out just how far the Tories and Liberals will go with their destruction of our essential services. They are planning on full privatisation of NHS service across England, a move utterly opposed by us. They have hidden their idea as Foundation Trusts and Social Enterprise, but as residents in Huntingdon have found with their local hospital this is just a short step from takeover by corporate giants."

"Health care is not a market and shouldn't be run as one. Buying and selling packets of treatment like widgets in a factory is the wrong way to provide health care. It is expensive, fragmented and destroys quality. Health care is a service, an essential one, and should be run as such. Health care does not lend itself to the business models of Tesco or Asda."

"The new government's ideas are a death knell for the NHS and we will fight these changes. The NHS is a public service and should be publicly owned and run as such. "

Caroline Lucas: Why we need the Green Party

 An activist leader

In her first Green Party conference speech as an MP, Caroline Lucas, leader of the Green Party, told her audience in Birmingham that: "I doubt that any of us expected the realignment of British politics that has come in the aftermath of May's election. But its implications are becoming ever more clear. And one of these is that, on a whole range of issues, there is no effective opposition to the coalition and its plans. And that makes the role of the Green Party more important than ever."

Lucas went on to outline why, on nuclear power, the Trident nuclear deterrent, and education, the Green Party is providing the real opposition to the coalition government:

"Labour championed the Academies programme, despite all our warnings about the risk of creating a two-tier education system. Now - surprise, surprise - the Coalition has dropped any requirement that Academies should gain from outside sponsorship, or should help those communities most in need. Any pretence of a higher social purpose is out. Michael Gove's plans are simply about an ideological opposition to state education and a chance to allow private companies to make a profit from our schools. And Labour, having opened the door to this in the first place, cannot mount an effective, principled opposition, despite their heroic efforts to try to rewrite history. And that's why we need the Green Party."

"We are gaining members from the Liberal Democrats too. Perhaps their anguish and sense of betrayal is all the more sharp, for being so unexpected. Could they really have imagined during the election campaign, when Nick Clegg could hardly open his mouth without saying the word "fairness", that they would be voting for a party that would become an apologist for the most brutal, savage cuts in a generation?

"Cuts which are decimating communities up and down the country.

"Cuts that affect people like the woman who came to my surgery a few weeks ago, desperate to be re-housed because she, her partner and child were all living in a single room in Brighton, and she was expecting another child very soon.

"That's why the Green Party is committed to fighting these cuts every step of the way.

"I don't criticise Nick Clegg and those around him for agreeing to work with the Conservatives. But I do criticise him for the terms of that deal. With our principles and our courage to be honest with the public about the greatest issues of our time, such as climate change, we are the natural home for Liberal Democrats who feel betrayed by their leaders.

"And so to those Liberal Democrats, I say, join us. Many of your former colleagues are already here."

'Savings' will have devastating impact on jobs and services

Brent Fightback: Guest posting by Phil O’Reilly, Branch Secretary Brent UNISON

In May 2009 Brent Council appointed management consultants PriceWaterhouse Coopers (PWC) to undertake a review of the Council’s structure and staffing arrangements.  The aim was to identify significant ‘efficiency savings’ as part of a wider Improvement and Efficiency Strategy.  I asked how much PWC were being paid (management consultants often get paid £1,000 a day) to carry out this review and to date, have not received an answer.

In September 2009 the Council launched its Improvement and Efficiency Action Plan 2010 – 2014.  This plan clearly stated ‘In the light of these financial and political factors, forecasts for the likely scale of the efficiency savings the Council will be required to deliver are a minimum of £53.7 million by the end of the financial year 2013/2014’.  It was also stated that the staffing complement in Brent was to be reduced by ten per cent over four years which is the equivalent of approximately 300 full time posts.  Since then of course we have had a change of government and I have heard it said that the ‘savings’ now required are likely to be £85/£90 million.  Make no mistake this is having and will continue to have a significant and devastating impact on jobs and services.  It has been stated that frontline services will be protected.  However, this is dividing ‘front’ and ‘back’ office workers who need each other to deliver efficient and effective local services.  Also, it is not possible to protect frontline services whilst delivering ‘savings’ of £85/£90 million.  Let us be clear – they are cuts and not savings.

However, the cuts that have been imposed so far are ‘different’ to the ones that Brent, historically, have made in previous years.  We are not seeing (yet) closures of nurseries, old people’s homes, etc.  These type of cuts and closures gain public support and sympathy and galvanise people into action.  What we are seeing are job losses and post deletions in the following areas :  Health, Safety and Licensing, Environmental Health, Cemeteries and Mortuary, Transportation, Youth Service, Crisis Intervention and Support Service, Social Workers, Administrative Workers, Planning, Building Control, Parks, Streetcare, Libraries – these are just some of the cuts that have been imposed so far.

Clearly, the coalition government is out to destroy the public sector.  The savage cuts will have a devastating impact and effect on jobs/services/the community.  Noticeably and alarmingly, they will hit the most vulnerable – disabled people, single parents, those on housing benefit, black and other ethnic minority communities, students, migrants workers, LGBT people and pensioners.  Women are expected to bear 75% of the burden.

So how do we respond?  We need to mount a broad based campaign, working with other unions, the voluntary sector, service users, community groups, etc to defeat the aims of the coalition government and protect jobs and services.  We should also be calling on the newly elected Labour Council in Brent to lead a delegation from Brent to march on Downing Street or Parliament and/or hold a rally/demonstration to coincide with the announcement of the Comprehensive Spending Review on 20 October – which will surely deliver even more cuts to the public sector.