IDS's pre-paid cards aimed at creating hostility against the poor and humiliating them

•  

  

  antonynbrit.com

• The Coalition Government are balancing the budget on the backs of the poor
• The Green Party is the only party committed to transforming the economy to make it work for all not just the 1%

 

Work and Pensions Minister Iain Duncan Smith’s announcement on Government plans to introduce payments on pre-paid cards to welfare state claimants has  been denounced as “positively Orwellian” by the Green Party.

 

The party has responded to Iain Duncan Smith’s speech with anger saying that “this move is deliberately aimed at generating  disunity and creating hostility towards the most vulnerable.”

 

Green Party Welfare Spokesperson, Romayne Phoenix said:

The Conservative's  disastrous decision to introduce payments on pre-paid cards for claimants shows how out of touch they are with the realities of life for many people in Britain today. Anyone that is in debt or struggling to earn a living doesn't need reminding to spend their small benefit payments on food for their families. What most people need are better wages and better support. 87% of people claiming state aid are already in work but often in such low paid jobs that leave them  unable to pay their bills and having to look to the state for help. These families deserve support, not retribution and humiliation.

If the Conservative's really want to help people facing problems with gambling and addiction, they should stop promoting the national lottery and stop cutting funding to those vital support services that have been set up specifically to help people in tackling such issues. If the government is really that hung-up on problem gambling, a more socially beneficial approach might be to introduce pre-paid cards for their friends in banking that require them to invest sustainability and ethically rather than speculating away public finances.

The Welfare reforms have so far caused "financial hardship and distress" a committee of MPs found in April.

Greens slam Osborne's benefits freeze

Only the Green Party are committed to transforming the economy so that it works for the common good

Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne’s plans for a two year benefits freeze will once again penalise the most vulnerable in our society, says the Green Party, the only Westminster party committed to transforming the economy so that it works for the common good, not just the 1%.

Reacting to Osborne’s speech to the Conservative Party Conference, in which the Chancellor said a future Conservative government would freeze benefits paid to people of working age for two years, Natalie Bennett, Green Party Leader, said:

It is obvious our current economic model, as inexplicably praised by the Chancellor today, has failed. Tackling the deficit by ruthlessly targeting the poor and vulnerable is not what constitutes an economic recovery.

We should acknowledge that we are a wealthy economy that can afford to pay decent benefits to everyone who needs them, as a decent, humane society should. That must be paid for by rich individuals and multinational companies paying their way - something that this government has notably failed to enforce.

Responding to news that a future Conservative government would freeze working-age benefits and make further public spending cuts of £25bn, Molly Scott Cato MEP said: 

Public debt is greater now than when the Tories came to office, demonstrating that public spending and welfare cuts have failed spectacularly in tackling the deficit. The truth is, austerity provides an excuse to punish the poorest in society, which is not only morally indefensible, it is also a false economy. 

Policies like the bedroom tax just push more people into the private rented sector which then costs the public more in housing benefit. Likewise, the increasing levels of poverty and inequality under the Coalition government impact on health and so pile more costs onto the health service. Greens believe in positive alternatives to austerity that would tackle the misery of poverty and address inequality; policies such as a citizens income, rent controls and a massive home insulation programme.

Since the May 22 European elections, the Green Party has announced a string of progressive economic policies, which would deliver real change for the common good. 

The Green Party’s 2015 General Election manifesto will include a Wealth Tax, and plans to deliver a £10 minimum wage for all by 2020, a Living Wage for all immediately, and a People’s Constitutional Convention to deliver meaningful constitutional and electoral reform.

The latest YouGov resultsfor the Sunday Times have the Greens and Liberal Democrats both at 6% in voting intention.

Proposers miffed as WHIF fails to get approval

In the flurry of announcements about new free school approvals from the DfE one school was missing.

The controversial West Hampstead International Free School is the brain child of Dr Claire Craig and was featured on this blog earlier in the year LINK

Today the following notice is on the WHIF website:

We submitted our application to government for a new primary and secondary free school in May 2014. Our petition included 1870 children eligible to attend the school including 719 who could attend in 2015 and 2016.  We had an interview with the Department for Education in July and have since heard that the West Hampstead International School has not been approved for opening in 2015.

We are immensely disappointed and very sorry to have let down our many supporters.

We are awaiting feedback before we decide how to proceed.

Butt to be rebuffed by Labour Group on Monday?

The Brrent Council Labour Group on Monday will be discussing proposals for the Labour leader (and thus at present the Council leader)  and Cabinet to be elected on a basis other than an automatic annual election.

Muhammed Butt after the May elections said that a four year cycle would end the problem of him having to 'look over his shoulder' all the time.

Brent Central Labour Party recently passed the following motion unopposed:

Brent Central CLP believes that because of the benefits in terms of accountability the Leader of the Labour Group and the Cabinet should remain as annually elected positions.

The potential loss of democratic accountability and the loss of ability to exercise some power on an annual basis has been too much for some councillors although there had been talk of introducing some compromise process which would require a certain number of signatories to trigger an election.

Meanwhile disquiet is mounting over the reputational damage the Council and Labour Party is suffering due to the Cabinet's failure to grasp the nettle of the current scandal regarding the Human Resources Department and the personal, business and career relationships between senior council officers.

There has been one Cabinet resignation recently with Cllr Perrin unwilling to explain the reasons for his resignation beyond the usual 'personal reasons' statement.  It would be to his credit if he had taken a principled stand on the Cavani-Corporate Management Team issue and had opposed the decision to spend council tax payers' money on an appeal over the Employment Tribunal's Judgment.

James Powney's concerns expressed on his blog may be dismissed by some as sour grapes from a member of the deposed Ann John team but his concerns are shared by Labour Party members on the Brent Trades Union Council and members of the Brent Labour Representatation Committee who were never Johnites.

After the Tricycle: Can arts organisations say ‘no’ to embassy funding?

Amnesty has sent the following invitation which will be of interest to readers involved in the debate over the Tricycle Theatre's refusal of Israeli Government funding (via the Embassy) and the subsequent events.

Do artists and arts organisations have the right to say ‘no’ when governments with negative human rights records try to co-opt culture in the service of their public relations strategies? 

Please join the discussion – After the Tricycle: Can arts organisations say ‘no’ to embassy funding?
In August 2014, during the Israeli bombardment of Gaza, the Tricycle Theatre asked the UK Jewish Film Festival to forego Israeli embassy funding. The festival refused, walked away from the Tricycle, and briefed the press that the theatre was boycotting a Jewish festival. The theatre came under sustained attack: campaigns to de-fund the theatre, denunciations by liberal newspaper columnists, even intervention by the Secretary of State for Culture himself.

Do we have to accept that the kind of backlash the Tricycle experienced is inevitable as far as funding by a powerful state is concerned, and make sure we never follow where this theatre led?
Panel chair: Kamila Shamsie, novelist.

Speakers: April De Angelis and Tanika Gupta playwrights, Antony Lerman writer & commentator, and Ofer Neiman of the Israeli group Boycott from Within.

Panel discussion. Free entry, but reservation is recommended.
There will be a drinks reception afterwards.
When: Tuesday 7th October, 19:00 – 21:00. Doors open 18:30
Where: Amnesty International UK Human Rights Action Centre, 17-25 New Inn Yard, London. EC2A 3EA.

James Powney comments on 'tragic situation' regarding Brent Council bullying allegations

Former Brent Labour councillor James Powney has posted two interesting articles on the current controversies in Brent regarding the Human Resources Department and the Employment Tribunal findings of Racial discrmination, victimisation and constructive dismissal.

Yesterday he wrote:

Following an Employment Tribunal that found Brent Council had tolerated racist bullying, there has rightly been a lot of disquiet.  The concerns are highly unlikely to be met by any internal review into the issue, as such a review is far to close to the people alleged to be involved to have any credibility.

What saddens me most about this is that Brent has over many years made real efforts to tackle equality issues, and this looks like an organisation losing those hard fought gains through neglect and perhaps something worse.

Commenting that the Council had come through a rigorous review over the libraries case he went on:

Since then I get an impression of decline.  A lot of this follows on from the removal of Gareth Daniel as Chief Executive.  There has never been any public explanation of why this was done, but I suspect part of it was because Gareth had objected vigorously to a particular councillor bullying staff.  The councillor bore him a grudge as a result and persued a vendetta against him.

Once you start allowing this kind of thing without objection, you begin to create a culture where it is acceptable, and people cease even to object to bullying and simply keep their heads down.  That is a tragic situation not just for the victims but also the organisation as a whole.

I agree that the root of much of the current situation goes back to the removal of Gareth Daniel and deals that were done at the time. The leaking of email communications between Gareth Daniel and Muhammed Butt, to the local press, the suspension of Clive Heaphy for gross misconduct (not financial) and then the settlement with him, the initial stand of three Corporate Management Team members in support of Daniel and the rapid appointment of Christine Gilbert are all part of the scenario.

James Powney today discusses some of the wider issues involved LINK:

I mentioned some of the failings of Brent's human resources yesterday.  Understandably there has been a lot of focus on accusations of racism and bulling, but I think the Human Resources function at Brent Council has a number of problems that need examination by rather more rigorous examiners than the "internal review" apparently set up.  The questions I have in mind are:

1) The obvious concerns about issues to do with bullying, intimidation and possible misuse of funds.
2) The continued appointment of an "interim" Chief Executive whose term appears to be set to extend for more than two years.  During this time other London Boroughs (eg Barnet) have seen seen Chief Executives go and be replaced.  Lambeth Council has advertised recently.  Why is Brent unable to perform this basic function?
3) The rising use of interim staff, which is an enormous cost to the taxpayer, and whether this reflects an underlying weakness in the structure of the organisation.
4) Whether anyone is getting any benefit from the One Oracle project.  One of the main aims of this was supposed to be the improvement in human resources information, which should lead to genuine efficiency savings as well as potentially improving the Council in terms of diversity and so on.

I am sure that these concerns are shared by many Labour councillors as well as local Labour Party members.

The bullet has to be bitten.

Breeding at the top of Brent Council

The tangle of previous employment, business and personal relationships among the top management of Brent Council is rapidly becoming a talking point in the Civic Centre.

The case of Cara Davani, Head of Human Resources and Andy Potts, Principal Employment and Education Lawyer in the Legal and Procurement Department is particularly colourful.  Fiona Ledden heads up Legal and Procurement.

Cara Davani has recently announced that Andy Potts has become a partner in Kebulak her dog breeding business. LINK

Terrier World LINK congratulated the breeders by posting a picture of their twins who were born in June. (scxroll down)

The name of one of the twins is purely coincidental. (I hope)

Brent Borough Plan will set out cuts in Council services for the next four years

Christine Gilbert, Interim Chief Executive of Brent Council, has been kept on to work on the new Borough Plan, according to Muhammed Butt, Labour leader of Brent Council,

Although the Borough Plan sounds innocuous and not a little boring, it would be wise to look a little more closely. It is really the Council's attempt at embedding future cuts into a long-term plan. Cuts that many see as meaning the end of local government as we know it.

The Borough Plan will earmark services to be cut as well as to be preserved. As such is is more important that the annual budget making as the budget making will be informed by its priorities.

It basically signals that the Council will acquiece in the cuts rather than challenging them and leading the community in campaigning against them.

We are being asked to tell the Council which of our limbs we want to cut off first.

The Council makes no secret of this but local residents may have missed the introduction on its website.

Here it is:

The Brent Borough Plan 2015/19 Consultation

Brent residents are being asked for their views on how local public services should evolve and what they can do to improve the borough given the continuing squeeze on budgets.

The borough plan consultation opens today (September 16) and invites residents to help shape the future of the borough in the context of significantly reduced budgets for local public services.

Over the next four years services in Brent face the most challenging financial cuts ever. The council’s budget alone is expected to be halved by 2018.

Have your say now

Brent also has increasing demands on public services with a growing population, more babies being born, more people moving into the borough and more people living longer. To meet these challenges some services will need to be delivered in different ways and some stopped altogether. Residents are being asked what their priorities are through a series of surveys and public meetings throughout September and October.

Residents are being asked how they could play a vital role in their local community as well as how services should be designed in the future. In some cases, prioritising one area will mean that something else has to be cut back, or stopped altogether.

Leader of the Council, Councillor Muhammed Butt, says: “Brent has been through tough financial times – which are sadly not yet over.

“Local public services face the same challenges, those of reducing income and increasing costs, which many of our residents are facing.

“For example, by 2018 Brent Council's funding from central government will have been cut in half. To put this in context, we would need to more than double council tax next year to start plugging the gap in the council’s budget and this would still not address the shortfalls in other local service budgets such as the Police and Fire Brigade.

“This harsh reality means we will inevitably face tough choices in the coming months and years and this is why the borough plan consultation is so important in informing the future of Brent.

“All of the organisations involved in the consultation want to work with local people to make sure that our plans are the right way forward given the limits we are all working with.

“This is your Brent, your community and your services so please get involved as we are listening.”
You can get involved by responding to the call for evidence before 28 November 2014.

Read more about the call for evidence and the challenges Brent faces

Have your say now