ANTI-CUTS ACTIVISTS SHUTDOWN VODAFONE FLAGSHIP STORE IN DISGUST AT £6BN TAX EVASION

65 activists have today stopped trading at Vodafone’s largest retail store on Oxford Street, London, by blockading the doorway in disgust at the HMRC’s deal with Vodafone that have allowed them to walk away from paying a tax bill thought to be worth £6bn to the public purse.




The action started at 09:30 this morning where activists gathered at The Ritz hotel near Oxford Street following rapid mobilization over the weekend via Twitter, Facebook, blogs and text messaging.

The 65 activists confronted the minor security in front of the shop to gain entry to the shop and proceeded to blockade the entrance with arm tubes and banners before the store had chance to even receive its first customer.

This comes exactly a week after George Osborne’s Comprehensive Spending Review in which he announced that another £7bn will be cut from welfare, producing a total of £18bn of cuts from vital welfare services.

These cuts have been widely condemned by charity groups representing the most vulnerable in society, and the highly respected Institute of Fiscal Studies confirmed on Thursday last week that the coalition’s cuts will indeed hit the poorest in society the hardest.

The issue of tax evasion by corporations and the wealthy was not however even mentioned during Osborne’s Comprehensive Spending Review speech, despite the fact that it is estimated that the deficit to the public purse from tax evasion amounts to at least £12bn each year.

To add salt to the wound, Osborne also announced last week that large corporations in addition will be expected to contribute 4% less in tax to public services across the next four years through a reduction in corporation tax.

Activists on today’s action also note that Andy Halford is both a financial advisor to Vodafone and a corporation tax advisor to the treasury.

Under a banner that read “Pay your taxes - save our welfare state”, Jennifer Kyte said, “The cuts are not fair, we're not all in this together, and there are alternatives. Why not start by collecting - instead of writing off – the tens of billions owed in taxes by wealthy corporations?”

She continued, “The economic downturn was caused by the reckless greed of the private sector, but it is the public sector and those at the bottom that are picking up the bill. Is this their idea of the wonderful Big Society?”

Zeketa Darby said, “We will not pay for their crisis! The public need to join together and hit the streets to take concerted action to fight these cuts”

Government’s cuts are “reckless gamble with the future of this country” - Lucas

The Chancellor’s strategy is to “close his eyes, cross his fingers, and hope that the private sector will manage to produce the jobs that have been destroyed in the public sector”, says Green MP on flagship current affairs show

Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MP made a powerful contribution to last night’s BBC Question Time programme, in which she condemned the government spending cuts as unfair and unnecessary.

The first question from the audience was put to Caroline first. Audience member Michael Teague asked: “Can the government really talk about fairness when it is talking about cuts that will devastate the unemployed, the sick and the poor?”

Caroline Lucas responded: “No, absolutely not. This reckless gamble with the future of this country and this economy is deeply unfair.

“And it doesn’t need us to say that, we’ve got people like the IFS – the Institute for Fiscal Studies – and many others, who are repeatedly saying that the poorest 10% are going to be paying at least more than the average when it comes to who actually pays the price for this.

“When you see what is being done, it is an absolutely wicked targeting of the most vulnerable.”

The Brighton Pavilion MP argued later in the programme:

“I do not think that the best way of getting the deficit down is through cuts, and I appreciate that sounds counter-intuitive, so let me explain.

“We do need to get the deficit down, but there is every risk that if we try to do that through throwing more and more people out of work, we will simply lose their tax revenues, we will have to pay out their redundancies, we will have to pay out benefits, and actually that’s going to make matters worse, that is more likely to tip us into that double-dip recession.

“George Osborne’s strategy is basically to close his eyes, cross his fingers, and hope that the private sector will manage to produce the jobs that have been destroyed in the public sector.”

She concluded:

“What this government should be doing is things like tackling tax evasion and tax avoidance in a serious way, not in the pitiful way they are doing at the moment, and use that money for investment, for example, in energy efficiency and renewable energies.

“This is the best way to get people back to work, it would also address the issue of climate change, getting our emissions down. There is an environmental crisis, there is an economic crisis: we can tackle them both at the same time.”

Caroline Lucas’s responses were greeted with applause and cheering from the studio audience.

At the end of the programme, “Caroline Lucas” was the most mentioned phrase in the UK on Twitter, and 7th most mentioned worldwide.

Caroline Lucas appeared on the panel alongside Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond; Shadow Business Secretary, John Denham; former head of the British Army, General Sir Richard Dannatt; former political editor of The Sun, George Pascoe-Watson and journalist Polly Toynbee of The Guardian.

Brent Council forced to widen Preston Manor consultation

Following complaints from residents at last week's consultation meeting that they had not been written to about the proposal to expand Preston Manor High School into the primary sector, Brent Council this week circulated 4,000 letters to local people. At that meeting they had claimed they followed procedure and could not send out lots of letters.

There was a further consultation at Wembley Area Consultative Forum on Wednesday which succeeded in producing more confusion rather than clarification. Half a dozen men from Brent Council, Preston Manor High School and Watts the project managers stood at the front of the hall next to the screen as a power point presentation was made. ("How many men does it take to do a presentation?" came the whispered comment behind me.)

The presentation included the claim that there were 72 reception aged children out of school 'in the area of Preston Manor'. This was slightly different wording than the 'immediate area of Preston Manor' claimed at the previous meeting, but I pointed out that we had already been told that this meant the whole of HA9 and HAO, which clearly includes children a long way from Preston Manor. One of the presenters said that there had been confusion about whether it was an 'all-through' school or not (without mentioning that this was a confusion stemming from different descriptions in their own two consultation documents) and claimed it was not an 'all through' because the primary building was some distance from the secondary school and separated by playing fields. In fact 'all through' is a matter of whether the primary and secondary departments have one overall management structure and one governing body - not their proximity.

A question asking what the catchment area of the new new primary school would be ('catchment'  is a geographical concept which allocates particular streets to particular schools - you can find your street on Brent's website and see which school is allocated to your children) was answered by reference to the over-subscription criteria and the priority in which places would be given - not on whether the new department./school would have its own catchment area. All Brent community primary schools, with the exception of Sudbury, have their own catchment areas. If Preston Manor were to have its own catchment then those of neighbouring primary schools would have to be redrawn. However if the new primary school has Foundation status then community school catchments would not apply and the school may devise its own admisisons criteria.

In fact we were told that Preston Manor was conducting the consultation because it was a Foundation School and therefore managed its own affairs, although it was made clear that Brent Council strongly backed the proposal. Confusion was increased when Watts seemed to be addressing educational rather than building issues and speaking for the council.

Only three questions were allowed by the chair of the meeting because of the crowded agenda so 'consultation' was more about residents being 'told' rather than asked. However residents did manage to speak about their concerns about increased  traffic and in a soapbox earlier, Rose Ashton, head of nearby Chalkhill Primary School, was able to express her concerns about the impact of the expansion on her own school which has vacancies in both its nursery and reception places. This phase of the consultation ends on Monday so there is still time to get a response in. Consultation document HERE

If Preston Manor governors decide to go ahead there will be a further six week statutory consultation ending in December.

GLA Backs 'Still Human Still Here" Campaign

The London Assembly today expressed its support for the 'Still Human Still Here' campaign which calls for a change in the rules governing the right of asylum seekers to seek work.

In a motion agreed today, the Assembly said a change in policy would help many asylum seekers living in London out of poverty and would reduce the burden on the taxpayer and charities.  

The campaign calls for asylum seekers whose cases are taking longer than six months or who have been refused asylum, but temporarily cannot return home through no fault of their own, to be given permission to work until their cases are finally resolved.  

The Assembly called on the Mayor to join it in making representations to the Government in support of the campaign.

Darren Johnson AM, who proposed today's motion, said:

"The majority of asylum seekers survive on just £5 a day. If asylum seekers were allowed to earn a living and pay their own way, it would improve their self-esteem and self-reliance. It would also reduce some of the hostility they face and the burden on the taxpayer."

Jennette Arnold AM, who seconded the motion, said: 

"This would provide a route out of poverty for asylum seekers affected, the majority of whom live in London. Something needs to be done to help those who have been waiting for more than six months to have their application dealt with. What we are arguing for is a workable and fair way to deal with those seeking shelter in this country."

The full text of the motion reads as follows:

"This Assembly supports the Still Human Still Here campaign calling for asylum seekers who have been waiting for more than six months for their cases to be concluded, or who have been refused asylum but temporarily cannot be returned home through no fault of their own, to be given permission to work until their cases are finally resolved. This policy would provide a route out of poverty for those affected, the majority of whom live in London, and reduce the burden on the taxpayer and the charitable sector. 

"This Assembly resolves to make representations to the UK Government in support of this campaign, and calls on the Mayor to join it in making these representations, including by commissioning supporting evidence regarding the impact on London from GLA Economics."

"A budget to destroy a million jobs," Lucas

Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MP has called George Osborne’s comprehensive spending review a “budget to destroy a million jobs” – and has again argued that the worst cuts could have been avoided by an alternative policy based on a fairer tax regime.

Caroline Lucas said immediately after the budget statement:

“This is a budget to destroy half a million jobs in the public sector, according to the government’s own estimates. And the knock-on effects will be at least as many jobs lost in the private sector.”

The Brighton Pavilion MP added:

“When those public sector workers find themselves out of work they will, along with disabled people, feel the full force of the additional £7 billion worth of cuts in welfare spending, on top of the £11 billion of cuts announced in June. The housing benefit regime will become much more harsh, risking a rise in homelessness.

“They will also find that the loss of public services that this budget represents will massively disadvantage them, and all the most vulnerable people in society who rely on those services.”

She asked:

“Where’s the fairness in a budget that lets vital public services go to the wall, hitting the poorest hardest?”

Britain’s first Green Party MP concluded:

“This was a budget of false economies, undermining the economy and hitting the most vulnerable – and all, incredibly, under the banner of fairness.”

No to billions in cuts!

Preston Manor Primary Consultation Riles Residents

The consultation on the expansion of Preston Manor High School to incorporate primary provision got off to a controversial start at the residents consultation meeting on Wednesday.  Residents complained that householders on nearby streets had not received consultation letters and had only heard about the meeting by word of mouth. It was apparent that they did not have full information when it emerged that many thought the proposal was only for a temporary 2 classroom building on the school site, rather than a two form entry permanent building for 420 children (more if a nursery is incorporated into the plans). A Brent officer said that there was a limit to how many individual letters to householders could be sent out. Residents retorted that householders on streets adjacent to the development had not been informed.  A quick search on the Brent planning website reveals that for a minor development, such as the temporary swimming pool at Chalkhill Primary  School, which will be in place for only 15 weeks, 104 individual letters had been sent out. LINK

Residents also complained that the timing of the meeting, from 5pm-6pm, meant that the majority of residents in employment, were unable to attend so had been denied their democratic rights.

Another issue was a statement from the Authority that 'In the immediate local area of Preston Manor High School 72 Reception aged children' remain without a school place. When I sought clarity on what 'immediate area' meant I was told this was the whole of HA9 and HAO, a huge area compared with the common-sense assumption that 'immediate area' suggests the streets immediately around the school. It became clear that pupils attending the school would be coming some considerable distance, raising concerns  that traffic levels would increase at the same time as the ARK academy's gradual growth will produce additional congestion in the vicinity.  This is a copy of the Authority's map showing where reception pupils are unplaced. It is clear that there is a cluster in the Wembley Central area as well as several south of the North Circular:

Apart from this issue of whether a new school was actually needed on the Preston Manor site, rather than elsewhere, questions were raised about why Brent Council had not anticipated the increased demand for primary provision given that these children were born 4 years ago (although obviously some were children of recently arrived families);  whether in the face of the recession some were only temporary residents who would return to their countries of origin; and the impact of the cap on housing benefits which Martin Cheesman, Brent's senior housing officer, had said would make local rents unaffordable for many families.

When I asked what plans had been made for a primary school on the Quintain development site around  Wembley Stadium, where the next phase includes the building of 1,300 new homes, I was told that Section 106 money which could be used for a new school, would only be drawn down after the housing was built. Surely this will create a further school places crisis until the new school is completed? Overall Brent's approach seems to be 'flying by the seat of our pants' when what we need is a strategic school places 'master plan'.

At the conclusion of the meeting the Chair of Preston Manor Governors said that the governors had not yet made up their minds on the expansion proposal and welcomed representations to aid their deliberations.

There was no time to discuss educational issues but hopefully there will be time to explore these at the Wembley Area Consultative Forum on Wednesday 20th October at the Patidar Centre, 22 London Road, Wembley.  The meeting starts at 7pm and the Expansion of Preston Manor Consultation is timed for 7.35. However only 30 minutes is scheduled for this item  and discussion on parking charges and Wembley Link.

Among the educational questions that need to be answered are:

1. Is the proposal for an 'all through school' as stated in the consultation document (i.e. one school, under one leadership, perhaps with separate heads of the primary and secondary departments) or a 'feeder primary school' as stated in the glossy consultation leaflet given out at Wednesday's meeting?  A feeder would be a separate school with its own headteacher.
2. What system of governance is envisaged? Separate governing bodies for the primary and secondary schools or one governing body?
2. If it is to be an 'all through' school what are the educational arguments for such a structures?
3. As the ARK Academy is already an all-through school and Capital City is applying for primary provision, is this emerging as  the de facto favoured development option of the Authority? If so an open debate is needed on the policy.
4. What repercussions would there for local primary schools of such a policy?
5. What would be the catchment area of the new school and how would this affect the catchments of neighbouring primary schools such as Preston Park and Chalkhill?
6. Would the primary school pupils receive preferential treatment for entry to the secondary school? If so this would reduce the places available to pupils from other primary schools by a quarter.
7.  As the secondary school is popular and over-subscribed, canny parents would enrol their children into the primary school in order to secure a secondary school place. What would be the knock-on impact on other local primary schools both in terms of their rolls and social make up?

Consultation document is HERE. Closing date October 25th. If the governors of Preston Manor decide to go ahead on the basis of this consultation, there will be a further 6 week statutory consultation period.

Bestway takes on Barnet Council in Brent Cross Battle

Barnet Council has been given an ultimatum of the likelihood of impending legal action by a major local company who fear the loss of their successful business to a massive waste dump.  The controversial Brent Cross Cricklewood (BXC) regeneration plans, which are fiercely opposed by thousands of local residents, politicians and campaign groups, call for the compulsory purchase and demolition of Bestway cash and carry and its replacement with a huge waste handling facility and incinerator, taking refuse from all over north London.

Bestway have discovered major flaws and inconsistencies in the plans and proposals put forward by Barnet Council and their development partners.  An official letter from the North London Waste Authority in early September stated that they no longer needed the site.  This was hastily retracted a few days later, quite likely following discussions between Barnet Council and the Waste Authority. Bestway are now challenging the whole scheme on the basis of this and other serious flaws and irregularities.  A letter from Bestway on the 8^th October asks Barnet to meet with them, the developers and the North London Waste Authority as a last ditch attempt to resolve matters, since Barnet has stated that it is likely to confirm the BXC application by October 29^th.  Otherwise, lengthy and costly legal action would likely follow.

Malcolm Carter, Head of Property, Bestway Holdings says, “I cannot understand why Barnet is still pursuing the Bestway site as it is patently not required any more.”

Alison Hopkins, member of the Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan and Dollis Hill resident says, “Barnet Council is allowing a single unelected official to decide the future of much of North London.  This is clearly undemocratic, especially in view of the cosy relationship that seems to exist between it and the developers.  Barnet’s motive is for financial gain to cover the massive losses made by ill-advised investments in Iceland banks and huge project overruns.

“A judicial review could kill the project altogether.  This will likely cost Barnet millions of pounds better spent on services for local residents.” 

The Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme has been formally opposed since last year by both Brent and Camden Councils. It was wrongly stated at Barnet's Planning Committee that Brent had withdrawn its opposition, and that brought a stinging response from Brent's Head of Planning to Barnet officials.

The Coalition has been fighting for several years the proposals for a Brent Cross incinerator, the demolition of houses with gardens, and the massive increase in road congestion.  It is now calling on Barnet Council to reconsider before it is too late.