Greens in legal challenge to Government's drone 'Kill policy'

-->  

Washinton demonstration against drones

Members of the British Parliament are threatening legal action to force the UK Government to come clean over its ‘targeted killing’ of people in countries where Britain is not at war.

The challenge comes in response to the Prime Minister’s recent announcement of a US-style programme, in which covert strikes are carried out, commonly by drones, as part of the ‘War on Terror.’  A combination of faulty intelligence and a lack of safeguards has seen hundreds of civilians killed by the US drone programme in countries such as Pakistan and Yemen.

Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, supported by human rights charity Reprieve and law firm Leigh Day, are today demanding answers on whether the Government has formulated a targeted policy, and if so what that policy it is, and whether it is legal.
A Letter Before Action (LBA) sent by Leigh Day on behalf of Caroline Lucas MP and Baroness (Jenny) Jones highlights the lack of Parliamentary approval for the UK’s adoption of the new targeted killing policy; a lack of consistency in the justifications provided by Government ministers; and an overall lack of transparency.

The Prime Minister described Britain’s adoption of the US-style programme as a “new departure” for the country, but has refused to disclose details on how such strikes are governed or justified.

The LBA states: “The Claimants condemn terrorism. The Government is right to dedicate resources to ensure the British public is protected. Yet those planning or involved in such acts must be dealt with in accordance with the law. If any pre-authorised and targeted killing can be lawful, they must be carried out under a formulated and published Targeted Killing Policy which ensures transparency, clarity and accountability for such use of lethal force.”
The same lack of transparency in the US has seen claims by the CIA that its drone progamme had resulted in zero civilian casualties go largely unchallenged, until investigation by Reprieve and other organisations showed that civilian casualties – including children – were in fact in the hundreds. 

Caroline Lucas MP said: “The Government appears to have adopted a ‘Kill Policy’ in secret –without Parliamentary debate or the prospect of proper independent scrutiny. Sanctioning lethal drone attacks on British citizens is a significant departure from previous policy, as well as potentially unlawful, and it’s deeply concerning that it has occurred without appropriate oversight.  By refusing to publish the legal basis for these attacks, the Government has created a legal and accountability vacuum. We need to be able to determine whether the attacks – and what they signify in terms of Government policy - meet the robust conditions set out in international and domestic law.

“I am part of bringing this case because if we want to be effective at countering terrorism then we must ensure we act lawfully. There are serious questions to be answered about the legality of the strikes, as well as the lack of robust oversight.  Given the evidence from the USA, where former heads of defence and others have called their secret use of drones a ‘failed strategy’, it’s crucial that the UK’s actions to date and moving forward are subject to proper debate and scrutiny, particularly as its apparent new ‘Kill Policy’ goes beyond even what the US has been doing.”

"An effective strategy to end terrorism must learn from US drone policy which former senior military and intelligence staff have said creates a 'tremendous amount of resentment inside populations' and is deeply counterproductive."

Kat Craig, legal director at international human rights charity Reprieve said: “The Government has said it has the power to kill anyone, anywhere in the world, without oversight or safeguards.  This is a huge step, and at the very least the Prime Minister should come clean about his new kill policy.  Instead, we are seeing the UK follow the US down the dangerous path of secret, unaccountable drone strikes – a policy which has led to the deaths of hundreds of civilians in Pakistan and Yemen, without making us any safer. Parliament and the public deserve to know what is being done in their name.  It is disappointing that MPs are having to turn to the courts to extract even the most basic information on a policy which the Prime Minister himself has described as a ‘new departure’ for the country.”

Baroness Jones said: “The Government can't argue that they are defending British values of democracy and the rule of law if they suddenly invent a new 'bomb to kill' policy which ignores all those democratic traditions and safeguards. If our Government is saying it will kill certain individuals,  outside of armed conflict, whenever the opportunity arises, then you have to ask several obvious questions.

“Which countries do we, and don't we, apply this to? Who decides that these people are guilty and how is that evidence challenged and proven without judicial oversight? If it is seen as likely that the individuals pose a direct and imminent threat to our safety, but remain at large for six months, or a year, when is the 'immediacy' reassessed? How many individuals are we targeting and why are we applying a death sentence to them rather than others? The Government need to not only answer these key questions, they need to be prepared to have their answers debated in public and challenged.

Brent Council Standards: After the 'Missing Minutes' the 'Missing Agenda Items'

The Agenda for the October 1st Meeting of Brent Standards Committee LINK  has now been published and surprisingly does not include any reference to the case of Dr Helen Carr, nor a referral made by Philip Grant.

On September 18th Philip Grant wrote to the chair of the Standards Committee:

Dear Councillor Dixon,

I am writing to you in your role of Chair of Standards Committee.

On 18 June 2015 I wrote to Brent's Monitoring Officer to complain of multiple breaches of the Members' Code of Conduct by one of Brent's elected councillors. I have since made further allegations of breaches, or potential breaches, of the general conduct principles in the Code by the same councillor.

I would be grateful if you would liaise with the Monitoring Officer, please, to ensure that this matter is referred to Standards Committee on 1 October 2015, so that your committee can decide whether the alleged breaches should be investigated. Thank you.Best wishes,

Philip Grant.

I expect we will hear more of this.

Previewing the Green Party Autumn Conference

The Green Party will be assembling for their Autumn Conference in Bournemouth tomorrow at a time when we need  to  come to terms with the Corbyn victory and what it means for the left in general and the Green Party in particular.

In the above interview Caroline Lucas sets out Green Party's positive welcome for a socialist led Labour Party, although that is a long way from the Labour Party itself democratically adopting socialist policies.

One key quote is her response to a question on whether the Green Party itself is a socialist party:

"...Sometimes words like socialist can be more problematic than they are worth in a sense because  people will bring different baggage to what the term means for them. If you're asking is the Green Party fundamentally committee to the redistribution of wealth, to equality and social justice, absolutely 'Yes' it is and I don't think there's any difference between any of us on that."

She indicates that the main difference with Corbyn is that for the Greens these policies are seen through the lens of challenging climate change, the biggest challenge facing human-kind, so that issues such as the nature of an ever expanding consumer led capitalist economy contributing to the depletion of world resources and the acceleration of global warming are paramount.

She is positive about the potential for progressive alliances which is ironic because Green Left, the Eco-socialist grouping within the Labour Party were not successful in their bid for an official  Fringe Meeting on  'A principled or pragmatic progressive alliance?'

However GL are going ahead anyway and holding the meeting outside the conference venue at  The Goat & Tricycle 27-29 W Hill Rd, Bournemouth, Dorset BH2 5PF 8-11pm on Saturday night.

An issue discussed in Lucas' interview which will loom large at the Conference is the Green Party's position on the EU Referendum.  There will be a panel on EU Referendum: the Green 'Yes' at 1pm on Saturday which Lucas will chair.

Basically the party position is Yes to a referendum but Yes to reform. This position is now under strain, not just because Cameron's negotiations may result in dilution of the progressive aspects of the Social Chapter, but the searing experience of Greece in trying to challenge neoliberalism and austerity, TTIP and the failure of the EU to deal humanely and effectively with the refugee crisis.  This means that somew on the left and some trade unions are now leaning towards a socialist 'No' on the basis that the potential for reform is so much pie in the sky.

Later on Saturday at 6.15pm Caroline Lucas will chair a Panel on "Climate Countdown to Paris" which will discuss strategies and alliances to bring pressure on the December talks so that they are more ambitions both in terms of eventual impact on global warming and in terms of speeding up the response.

On Sunday afternoon at 2.30pm following the General Election result there will be a panel on 'How to get PR: What needs to happen to ensure there is never again a repeat of the unfairnessof the 2015 General Election?' The panel includes Neal Lawson of Compass and Robin McAlpine of the Scottish referendum campaign and chair of Common Weal.

Alongside this in the plenary sessions members will be actively engaged in making policy. Members have prioritised a motion on housing into the No.1 slot.

Ark Elvin accused of Wembley 'land grab'

The site (Chetan Patel)

Local resident Chetan Patel has launched a campaign on what he sees as a 'land grab' from local people of the playing fields behind Ark Elvin Academy  (formerly Copland High School) in Wembley.

The school is due to be part of a large redevelopment LINK.

In a letter to Annabel Bates, the Ark Elvin Headteacher, Chetan Patel said:

With respect to ARK's planning application (ref 15/3161) for the school redevelopment, I believe your proposal breaches the community's 'Public Right Of Way' onto the existing fields in accordance to Highways Act 1980 Section 130A.

The community has had access to the existing park without any objections from ARK or from the previous management of Copland Community School for many decades now. The law assumes that if the public uses a path without interference for some period of time – set by statute at 20 years - then the owner (ARK) had intended to dedicate it as a right of way.

ARK's proposed development of the school can only be described as 'land-grab' with no consideration for the community users and the Law.

I ask ARK to respectfully withdraw its poorly conceived planning application before a decision is made by Brent Council.

If ARK still wishes to pursue the development, which displaces community access to the existing parks (see Appendix A), I will be forced to pursuing legal advice on this matter, at further expense to the tax payer.

I believe the general public has right to know how many hundreds of thousands pounds if not millions have been wastefully spent to date on this poorly conceived project.  Under the Freedom of information Act can you please confirm how much money has been spent in relation to the proposed re-development works of the school.

I had hoped to communicate the aforementioned to you at the recent 'exhibition' meeting held at the school on the 15th July 2015, but you had failed attend this key meeting. It's very disappointing that the school's own head teacher, a key stakeholder, could not be bothered to attend this key meeting.

Annabel Bates replied:

Thank you for your letter, dated 22nd September 2015, about the planning permission that has been submitted by Kier Construction to rebuild our school.  I was present at the consultation on 15th July so I am sorry I did not manage to speak to you in person.  I am of course happy to meet with you to discuss your concerns.

The land shown in the appendix to your letter has always been occupied by Copland, and now Ark Elvin, as it is school playing fields rather than a public park.

As you may be aware, since Ark took over the school we have been making a concerted effort to keep the school playing fields secure and stop the unauthorised access to this private land.  We have repaired the fence a number of times (despite it being repeatedly cut through), moved on any rough sleepers, cleared up the rubbish at the London Road end of the playing fields, engaged a landscaper to cut the grass and carried out regular litter picks so it can be used by pupils for sports.  I cannot comment on how this area was managed by Copland Community School as neither I nor my senior management team worked at Copland.

I am unable to respond to your Freedom of Information Act request as we are not party to that information.  This project is being funded by the Education Funding Authority so you will need to contact them with your request.

Wembley Matters covered the initial plans when they were first published and the article elicited many comments LINK

Chetan Patel is campaigning on several fronts including an official complaint about what he alleges are the failures of Brent's Planning Enforcement Team in the matter as well as a referral to the Local Government Ombudsman,

Time to ask if Butt is fit to hold office?

The Kilburn Times has published an article LINK on the out of court settlement by Brent Council in the Rosemarie Clarke racial discrimination casewhcih was reported on Wembley Matters last Friday. LINK

Deciding to challenge an employer on such issues is always stressful but Brent Council's stance on the matter has added to the stress as Nan Tewari pointed out in her statement to the Kilburn Times:

Rosemarie is relieved that the original employment tribunal case is over. Her priority now is to try to recover her health, which has hit rock bottom as a result of Brent’s ill-treatment of her throughout the period from her submitted resignation in 2013 right up until the 11th hour of the case being settled out of court. 

The tribunal went through everything in great detail. It went through all so-called disciplinary charges and it was very clear they were made up and supported by documents that weren’t accurate.”

Unfortunately this is not the end and Rosemarie’s recovery will inevitably be hampered by the council leader having effectively caused damage to her reputation by the imputation in a public statement, of a justified finding of gross misconduct against her by the council. She is worried about what the future holds for her and this will inevitably impact on her recovery.

The role of Muhammed Butt, the Brent Council leader in the case is deeply disturbing. He sought to undermine Philip Grant when he tried to raise this matter at Scrutiny LINK , heckled him at an earlier Council meeting and after the last Council meeting interupted me when I was speaking to Helen Carr about her disgraceful attack on Philip. Despite other Labour councillors being aghast at Carr's conduct, Butt gleefully congratulated her on her attack and asked for a copy of the statement she had read out. 

Helen Carr has been made to apologise to Philip Grant and other councillors.

Muhammed Butt has not.

It is surely time for Labour Party Region, the Labour Group and Labour Party members to ask if Muhammed Butt is fit to hold his current office.

Urgent action needed to prevent a fatality in Forty Lane corridor Wembley

In a much wider discussion about transport improvements in Brent the Cabinet last night discussed the problems in the Forty Lane corridor (Forty Lane/Forty Avenue is the main road going across the centre of the map above). You can see my video of the problem at the Kings Drive/Asda junction HERE.

Cllr Pavey, speaking in his Barn Hill ward councillor role, acknowledged that the issue was dealt with as a long-term objective through a preliminary design process in the ILP but was concerned that given the number of accidents recorded it had not been addressed much earlier.

Cllr Southwood, the Lead Member for the Environment, said that this a TfL responsibility but that a shorter term alleviation may be possible - there may be other ways of looking at the problem. She went on to say:

The safety of people on our roads is an absolute priority for the Council.

Sandoor Fazekas, Project Development Manager Brent Transportation last week acknowledged the need for...

...immediate action to discourage motorists contravening the traffic regulations at the junction of  Kings Drive and Forty Lane. we shall therefore review the existing signage and road markings to improve compliance and this will include the introduction of camera enforcement signs along with increased enforcement during peak hours to target habitual offenders.

Meanwhile earlier yesterday a resident emailed me to say that what was recorded on the video was an example of what she was seeing daily. She went on:

This morning – I’m sorry, I know this is probably getting boring but I’m so frustrated – many people, including students from Preston Manor, got off the bus at the stop outside Asda on Forty Lane.  They then continued their journey across the junction by the Torch towards Forty Avenue – this involves crossing against traffic in two lanes from Forty Avenue on a left turn only down Bridge Road to the first pedestrian island, then across one lane for traffic turning right from Forty Avenue or straight across Barn Hill, and then across two lanes of traffic from Bridge Road turning right into Forty Lane, and then across one lane of traffic turning left from Bridge Road into Forty Avenue.  As I stood to cross over Forty Avenue towards Wembley Park station at 08.10 two cars from Forty Avenue jumped the red lights, blocked the box junction, and then continued on down Bridge Road against the green man pedestrian light with people trying to cross.

Again, there are students, school age children, using these crossings where I, with 50+ years of experience as a pedestrian and 30+ years as a car and motorcycle user, have trouble crossing.

In an email to Cllr Pavey ahead of the Cabinet Meeting I wrote that there was a real possibility of a fatality if the problems were not addressed. He agreed.

Cllr Helen Carr apologises for her conduct at September 7th Council Meeting

This was published as a comment on an earlier posting LINK on September 20th. I publish it here for readers' information.

On 16 September, I received a written apology from Cllr. Helen Carr, addressed both to me and to her colleagues on the Council, for her conduct at the Full Council meeting on 7 September 2015. I have accepted that apology, and as far as I am concerned that is the end of the matter (in as much as it involves Cllr. Carr).

Philip Grant

Possible collobaration to ensure survival of Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre

1980s campaign by children to keep the Centre open

More recent visitors

The Brent Cabinet confirmed its first Community Asset Transfer at yesterday's Cabinet Meeting. Thames21 is the preferred bidder but Cllr Margaret McLennan said that Thames21 and Careys, the other bidder, both had strengths, and the Council was working towards a collaboration between the two in background talks. What they had to offer was complementary and would strengthen the Centre's offer.

Cllr Mashari expressed concern at the lack of detail in the officers' report over the long-term viability of the transfer and requested further information to come back to Cabinet.

Cllr Michael Pavey praised the Chalkhill Primary School children who had written to him calling for the Centre to be saved and apologised that their letters had initially been mislaid at the Civic Centre.