Ibrahim Taguri confirms he will not stand as an Independent in Brent Central

As Brent Green Party was meeting across the road, the signage at Ibrahim Taguri's temporary campaign office in Walm Lane was being taken down last night. Earlier Ibrahim had confirmed to me that he would not be standing as an Independent in the General Election. He had anticipated a quick resolution of the allegations about donations made in the Daily Telegraph but this has not happened.

Lauren Keith was last week selected as the Liberal Democrat candidiate for Brent Central.

On March 26th the Electoral Commission made the following statement:

The Electoral Commission has today (26 March 2015) provided an update on its consideration of two separate allegations regarding donations to the Liberal Democrat Party.

Daily Telegraph allegations

Following the allegations that appeared recently on The Telegraph online (11 March) and subsequently in the newspaper regarding Ibrahim Taguri and donations to the Liberal Democrats, the Electoral Commission requested information from the newspaper, the party and Mr Taguri to help it establish the facts in the case.

Based on the information that the Commission has seen, one alleged offence centres on the potential evasion of restrictions on donations in contravention of section 61 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA). Offences under this part of PPERA are ultimately a criminal matter and fall outside of the Commission’s civil sanctioning powers.

The Electoral Commission has therefore passed the information that it has received to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPS have confirmed to the Commission that they are also aware of the allegations and that they are considering them.

Channel 4’s ‘Dispatches’ 

Following the allegations that appeared as part of Channel 4’s Dispatches programme (23 March), the Electoral Commission requested further information from the programme to help it establish the facts in the case.

Based on the information that the Commission has seen, the alleged offence in this case centres on the potential evasion of restrictions on donations in contravention of section 61 of PPERA and is ultimately a criminal matter. As a result, the Commission has also passed the information that it has received to MPS who are aware of the allegations and are considering them.

Donations received in the course of both cases

In both of these cases, the Liberal Democrat Party received a number of donations.

One donation in the Telegraph case, a cheque for £7,650 was delivered to the party. However, it had not been banked and the funds had not cleared and as a result no offence was committed under the donation rules set out in PPERA.

The other donations included one of £1,450 made by the undercover reporter in the Telegraph case that was received and accepted by the party; and another of £10,000 received from the ‘step father’ of the undercover donor in the Dispatches case, Mr Paul Wilmott. The Commission is in contact with the Liberal Democrats about the actual source of these donations and will provide a separate statement about this matter once these further facts have been established.

Next steps

Any decisions about what further steps to take at this stage in relation to potential evasion of restrictions on donations in either case rest with the Metropolitan Police Service.

Should further facts emerge in relation to The Telegraph allegations or Channel 4’s Dispatches, which could lead the Electoral Commission to consider any other potential breaches of PPERA, the Commission will do so in line with its enforcement policy.

TTIP: the threat to local authorities and public services

As the perils of TTIP are still not widely known and only a few organisations. including the Barnet Alliance and the Green Party seem to be ringing the alarm bells, I am reposting this long piece first published on the Barnet Alliance website LINK.

The EU and the US have been negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Agreement since July 2013. The consequences of this treaty could have a profound effect on EU member states at regional and local levels.TTIP would affect many sectors which are the responsibilities of local and regional authorities.

 The broad scope and myriad responsibilities of German Federal States, regional governments and local authorities across the EU would have justified involving them in the decision-making process as stakeholders. However, this has not happened. Representatives of regional and local governments as well as the public are puzzling over the content, the scope and the possible consequences of this treaty. It is therefore the aim of this short briefing to shine a light on possible consequences of this treaty for local and regional government. However, as negotiations are still ongoing, and owing to the restricted access to documentation, we can only present a rough estimation as to what TTIP will entail.

TTIP will have a profound effect on many areas under the remit of regional and local authorities and is examined in more detail here under in order to allow for a realistic assessment of risks. The source for this analysis are a series of leaked documents such as the text of the negotiating mandate of the EU Commission and drafts texts of various chapters and appendices.

As TTIP negotiations cover a very broad spectrum of topics, only those which are of relevance to local and regional authorities are considered for this briefing:

They include the planned Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) of arbitration, and issues relating to the status of public services, grants, subsidies and public tendering.

The Effects of TTIP on Local and Regional Governments.

by Thomas Fritz

Translation by Phil Fletcher

Arbitration tribunals: Local authorities and international courts.

When the Lisbon Treaty came into force in 2009, the European Commission was given the exclusive authority over direct foreign investments. This allows it to include into trade agreements far reaching provisions for investor protection, provisions which had already been included in a multitude of bilateral treaties. The mandate to negotiate on TTIP, which the European Council granted the European Commission, also provides for investor protection including ISDS, albeit on condition of an overall “satisfactory” result of the negotiations for the EU.

Notes from the Mansfield Enquiry

Guest blog by Peter Latham

On Saturday 28 March 2015 I went to Hounslow Civic Centre for the morning half of the NW London local authorities' Mansfield enquiry hearings into the impact of the NW London NHS 'Shaping a Healthier Future' project on healthcare for patients in NW London.

 

The main new thing I learnt was that the enquiry secretary Peter Smith told me that all the Clinical Commissioning Group and hospital trust NHS witnesses have declined to attend to give evidence until after all the 5 volumes of written evidence have been disclosed by the enquiry online next week. So any Clinical Commissioning Group or Healthcare Trust witnesses will be only be cross-examined at Brent Civic Centre on 9 May - after the General Election. 
Counsel to the enquiry is the barrister Katy Rensten instructed by a solicitors Birnberg Pierce.  She asked very easy leading questions for all witnesses critical of the Shaping a Healthier Future project.  There was no-one to cross-examine witnesses critical of the 'Shaping a Healthier Future' project.
The chairman of the enquiry Michael Mansfield QC asked a few well focused questions to each witness.   The other panel members are a retired Ealing GP Dr Stephen Hirst MBBS London 1974, and Dr John Lister (non-medical PhD) who is is a journalist academic with strong links to the National Union of Journalists and prominent in the pressure group 'Save Our NHS'.
It was clear from the panel questions that they are very interested in the same topics that the Brent CCG locality Patient Participation Group chairs criticise:

• weaknesses of the evidence for the original case for the 'Shaping a Healthier Future' project; 
• the failure to put in place the proposed community services to take the strain before the acute A/E departments were closed on 10.9.14;
• the lack of clarity for the public as to the demarcation between Urgent Care Centres and acute A/E;
•  the flimsy basis for the attempted implementation of the Shaping a Healthier Future projects with insufficient tendering procedure know-how.

It became clear to me that the panel and even some of the professional witnesses are not fully familiar with the full range of new NHS structures e.g. no-one was able to say where the funding for the Better Care Fund comes from - although it was thought that it involves no new money.  There appeared to be ignorance as to how limited the first tranche of implementation of Whole Systems Integrated Care is to be: in Brent just over 65s with at least one long term condition.

It became clear to me that some of the witnesses are failing to distinguish 2 quite separate issues: the political controversy over privatisation of NHS services, and the separate clinical and financial efficiency issue as to the merits of transferring more NHS out-patient services from the secondary hospitals into a community primary care setting.  This was particularly true of Professor Allyson Pollock of Queen Mary College who made a  very emotive politicised statement about destruction of the NHS by importing US style commercial privatisation.

The witness Hounslow Councillor Melvin Collins chair of NW London Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (JHOSC) was very critical of the NW London and CCGs long-standing secretiveness towards them with failure to provide requested information which he said made their work ineffective e.g. at a meeting on about 23 March Dr Mark Spencer had made it clear they would only get the business case for Whole Systems Integrated Care after the general election.

The 2 witnesses from Hounslow Council, their leader Steve Curran and cabinet member for Health and Adult Social Care Lily Bath, emphasised the shortcomings of their local CCG over SaHF and WSIC, but understandably had no criticisms of the local authority component of local health and social care other than emphasising their insufficient funding.

Consultant in Emergency Medicine Dr Julian Redhead, Chair of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine London Regional Board and with Imperial College and St Marys emergency trauma unit emphasised the shortage of appropriately qualified and experienced A/E staff as driving the need for centralisation of acute A/E services, and the need for a sufficient patient base to support specialist skills.  He gave rather vague oral evidence about the NHSE/Monitor 2009 patient base A/E funding cap with 30% funding disincentive for excess patients, and suggested that the whole way in which we pay for emergency medicine needs to be reformed: without making any specific suggestion in his oral evidence.

Medical practitioner Professor Allyson Pollock emphasised the transformation resulting from the repeal of sections 1 and 3 of the NHS Act 2006 by the Health and Social Care Act 2012 with the result that the Secretary for State no longer has a statutory duty to 'provide' health care  for the people of England, but only a duty to 'promote' such healthcare.  The duty transferred to the NHS Commissioning Board and local CCGs is only to meet the reasonable requirements of their population.  Public health has been carved out of CCGs and transferred to local authorities.  GP practices no longer have a specific territory.  She contended that we no longer have a National Health Service.  The present government are keen on the prime provider model which encourages sub-contracting so that we are importing US solutions and US problems.  Services are already falling away when specific services are not not specifically includedin contracts.  We are moving to the over-treatment and under-treatment of the over-expensive commercial insurance company US model whose algorithms focus on profitable premium fixing with no local accountability or local link.   She strongly proposed abolishing Foundation Trusts and the NHS internal market.  

The chairman of the enquiry Michael Mansfield QC asked Professor Pollock whether she had researched the vested interests of members of the House of Commons and House of Lords who had spoken in favour of the model of the 2012 Act.  She said that she had not researched this but that many did have such vested interests e.g. Alan Milburn.  She said that the last leader of the NHS had described it as being in 'managed decline'.

Peter Latham,  Chairman Willesden Patient Participation Group.

Now Cricklewood Llbrary land and building to be sold off

After the controversy over the attempted sale of Kensal Rise Library, Cricklewood Library is now up for sale.  As the library is an  asset of community value there is now a period in which community interest groups can lodge notice that they are potential bidders

Brent Advocacy Concerns is looking for new trustees

                                    

Are looking for New Trustees

   BAC has been supporting Disabled People in Brent since 1988 and are looking for trustees who can help take us forward in these challenging times.

  We are seeking people who:

·      Feel they can support the aims and objectives of the organisation and the social model of disability.

·      Have a knowledge of disability issues either by personal experience or by close association with disabled people (75% of our trustees should define as disabled)

·      Are able to commit to 6 meetings a year at a mutually agreed time.

·      Feel a connection to our work and will spread the word

·      Would like to help to develop the organisation

·      Could be pro-active in helping to raise funding, sponsorship etc.

·      Could support the organisation with any skills they may have e.g. experience of disability, organising, IT, website design, management or business skills, legal knowledge, accounting, social media etc.

·      Live in the GLA area

We can offer:

·      Disability, equality awareness training

·      Management Committee training and out of pocket expenses

·      The chance to make a difference for disabled people in Brent and surrounding areas.

·      An opportunity to improve skills.

If you, or anyone you know, is interested in joining us please contact John Healy by 3^rd April 2015.

020 8459 1493

bacadvocacy@outlook.com     or       innit67@icloud.co

Brent Advocacy Concerns, Willesden Centre for Health and Care, Robson Avenue, London NW10 3RY. Registered Charity Number 1001369

Emperor's New Clothes Rap - Cassetteboy

The future of local government should be an election issue

Readers may be interested In this editorial from the Local Government Chronicle LINK :

“Britain is walking tall again,” declared George Osborne in his Budget statement last week. For much of the past five years local government has felt a long way from walking tall after being targeted in a series of cuts that have diminished councils’ ability to provide for their local populations. “Local government is walking small and lean,” is a fair representation of its fate.

The chancellor made much in his speech of the projection that in 2019-20 public spending, as a share of gross domestic product, will be at the same level as it was in 2000, three years into the Blair administration. However, this line from his speech – a response to the critics accusing him of taking public spending back to 1930s levels – hardly tells the whole story.

Further swingeing cuts take place in the next few years before, according to the Treasury, spending perks up in what is set to be the year before the next general election. Any respite from austerity seems a long way away.

Councils will contrast their current position with that of 15 years’ ago. Their spending power is far lower, at a time the ageing population and growing awareness of the scale of need in children’s safeguarding leads to a far greater demand for services.

The Local Government Association this week revealed a projection stating that adult and children’s care would take up over 60% of councils’ tax revenue in 2019-20, leaving far less available for other services. Environmental services, libraries, roads, regulatory services and culture, in particular, face a very rough ride.

Little wonder then that the sector has been making its case for a sea change in both the government and the public’s attitude to the sector. Shortly before the pre-election purdah begins, this week saw the LGA launch its Future Funding campaign to raise awareness of the 40% budget cuts councils have experienced in the past five years and warn that we face “difficult decisions about which services continue”. Both it and the Special Interest Group of Metropolitan Authorities have produced slick but powerful videos explaining councils’ financial predicament.

Some may note the irony of a sector spending money on publicising the fact that it has little money. However, this expenditure really is a drop in the ocean. It is vital that everything possible is done to make the public – the voters – aware of the impact of councils’ financial hardship. This is not to make a party political point; it is equally entirely right that the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats point out the impact of the state running a massive deficit.

As Rob Whiteman points out, election debate too often takes the form of a lightweight and unbelievable soap opera. Discussion has focused on Ed Miliband’s two kitchens, with too little debate on the housing crisis which means that far too many people have no kitchen of their own at all. Sector leaders need to make their case loudly and clearly in an election crucial to local government’s destiny.

Lib Dems select Lauren Keith to fight Brent Central

The website YourNextMP LINK has made some rapid changes today following the announcement that Lauren Keith will be the new Liberal Democrat candidate for Brent Central, she was previously listed as the 2015 candidate for Barking. She tweets at @laurenpk

Her selection as candidate follows Ibrahim Tuguri's stepping down as Liberal Democrat candidate over donation allegations. LINK  It is not clear whether Taguri will stand as an Independent.

Lauren Keith stood in the Brent local elections in May 2015 in Mapesbury ward. Result below:

Lia Colacicco	Labour	1402	15%	Elected
Ahmad Shahzad	Labour	1278	13%	Elected
Helen Ginette Carr	Liberal Democrats	1257	13%	Elected
Columbus Moloney	Labour	1241	13%	Not elected
Paul John Edgeworth	Liberal Democrats	1179	12%	Not elected
Lauren Keith	Liberal Democrats	1067	11%	Not elected
Scott Bartle	Green Party	776	8%	Not elected
Bertha Joan Joseph	Conservative	445	5%	Not elected
William Bernard McGowan	Conservative	416	4%	Not elected
Samer Ahmedali	Conservative	408	4%	Not elected