A muddled response …

The coalition government are again making muddled decisions when it comes to the recent disorder by failing to take account of the impact of the cuts on essential services. David Cameron rejected Labour calls for a change to government plans for cuts of 20%  on police budgets as he addressed an emergency sitting of the House of Commons following the widespread riots across England. A rarely found unity in the House of Commons evaporated when the prime minister stuck to his belief that the cuts were “totally achievable” and should not affect the number of police officers on the streets.

Mr. Cameron said “What we are saying: over the next four years we are looking for cash reductions in policing budgets. Once you take into account the fact there is a precept, that helps fund the police, [the actual cash reduction of 6% over the next four years] is totally achievable without any reductions in visible policing. A growing number of police chiefs are making that point.

“Today we still have 7,000 trained police officers in back office jobs. Part of our programme of police reform is about freeing up police for frontline duties. That is why I can make this very clear pledge to the house. At the end of this process of making sure our police budgets are affordable we will still be able to surge as many police on to the streets as we have in recent days in London, in Wolverhampton, in Manchester. I do think it is important people understand that.”

There has been complete resistance to the Labour Party’s appeals for this strategy to be reviewed. The LibDems have said that they completely agree with the Conservatives on this matter and that their is complete consensus on the matter within the coalition.

Ironically, the number of police officers that will be lost because of the cuts is reckoned to total 16,000 – the same number of officers that it took to quell the riots in London.

Nip it in the bud? Yeah right …

That caps it all …

Twice today I have heard, or heard of, senior police officers describing their redoubled efforts in a rather played down manner. One of these officers, Sir Hugh Orde, president of the Association of Chief Police Officers told the BBC that police are trying “their level best to contain what is the unexplained and unprecedented levels of violence in London” and asserted “We’ve got to nip this in the bud”.

Countless cars littered the streets, overturned and on fire; shops, railway stations, warehouses, supermarkets and even a police station have been set on fire; hundreds of people have been firebombed out of their homes and looting is widespread and the police describe their effort as ‘nipping it in the bud’? This is a full blown, bloodied bouquet, Sir Hugh – it’s not a bud that I have ever seen.

How true were his words …

.

This is a copy of an email that I sent to BBC Ceefax on 30 June 2009:

 

————————————————————————————————

David Cameron’s comments about public spending have illustrated just how irresponsible he is in his craven attempt to discredit the prime minister [Gordon Brown]. Commenting on Labour’s fiscal policies after the next election, he said: “That would be the worst of it: you go into an election pretending you are not going to have to make spending reductions, then you have to make them, and then you really do have riots on the streets because people do not have faith in their politicians.”

His comment is tantamount to incitement to riot should people believe that they have been deceived in the electoral process, whether that is the case or not. Cameron is unfit to hold his opposition position.

————————————————————————————————–

That shows how perceptive Mr. Cameron is, doesn’t it? After the election he asserted that the state of the economy was “even worse“ than first thought. That was Cameron’s deception and this, these riots, are the logical consequence he predicted. It’s like a wretched prophecy!

The word ‘adolescent’ comes from one of two Latin verbs spelt adoleo. One means ‘to make bigger’ and the other means ‘to emit a smell’.

“Remember that, as a teenager, you are in the last stage of your life when you will be happy to hear the phone is for you.” Fran Lebowitz

 

Have your say … vote in this poll …

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rape of our country …

An open letter to England …

The time has clearly come for those opposed to the mindless violence to make every attempt to prevent a repetition of the previous three nights’ violence and mayhem.  It is difficult to see what the government can do if it insists on policing by consent, or refuses to use methods such as water cannons. It is clearly the wish of most decent people that measures be taken, whatever measures necessary, to break this lawlessness in our country. If martial law is what it takes then so it must be. Our government must give a robust response, with a clear demonstration that any further crime and destruction of this nature will be met by force.

I never, ever thought I would write this, but I seriously believe that decent folk must get out and protect their own neighbourhoods. Gone are the days when this matter could be contained by the statutory authorities: the police were powerless last night to control the rioting mob and if they cannot manage to maintain order then we as citizens must get out and protect our own neighbourhoods, no matter how small, before they are wrecked by opportunist criminals bent on theft and anarchy.

A proposal for emergency laws:

1. A curfew to be called from 8pm until 6am.

2. Explicit policing such as use of water cannons.

3. Powers to enlist citizens – one citizen to one police officer – to go about assisting the police with riot-related tasks.

4. Those attacking the police, fire service or ambulance personnel should be subject to the use of plastic baton rounds/rubber bullets.

5. Emergency powers should include mandatory 10 year prison sentences for those joining the riot.

If the government fails to get a grip of this now we will likely have a right-wing backlash government – such as the BNP – winning a considerable number of seats at the next election.

I don’t know about you, but today, I am ashamed to be British. Please comment on my proposals, tell me what you think.

The riots continue unabated …

As we wake today we will be facing the awful news detailing the extent of the civil unrest through England. It started today in Hackney and quickly spread to other suburbs of London, including Camden, Chalk Farm, Old Kent Road, Woolwich, Enfield, Ealing, Tottenham, Peckham, Lewisham, Clapham … too may places to list. By midnight the news was filtering through that Birmingham and Liverpool were also under seige. The iconic image of tonight’s riots is undoubtedly the total destruction of Reeves furniture warehouse in Croydon, which was razed to the ground by fire. Parts of Croydon resemble a war zone this evening, with an Aldi supermarket completely destroyed by fire. It is still unclear if there is a loss of life from the fires so far.

The situation throughout the capital was dire, with sportswear, electronics and mobile phone shops being some of the business premises targeted. The wanton vandalism and destruction is on an epic scale never before seen in Britain. The acting police commissioner, Tim Godwin, asked parents to find out where their children were and get them to return home. It would seem that little heed was paid to this as the criminal carnage increased as the evening wore on. The capital looks to be under increasing strain as the riots are repeated on a daily basis. The Prime Minister is returning to London to take charge of the situation, cutting his holiday short. As this is his fifth holiday since he took office, he will face considerable protest about his tardy return to deal with this issue.

Meanwhile, following reports of violence in Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham. There are now reports of tense scenes in Leeds. Around a hundred youths are said to be gathered in the city centre and Chapeltown areas and, although there’s no major violence so far, there is a tense atmosphere. There were unconfirmed reports of gunfire earlier, but overall the situation is said to be quite calm at the moment. Still, worrying times. The situation in Leeds is believed to have occurred after a man was shot in the face. It is important to stress that this detail is not confirmed. There’s no absolutely no information if the man is just wounded or dead, for that matter even if the incident happened at all. Disorder is breaking out so rapidly and spontaneously that it is difficult to keep track of each thread of news.

London burns …

RIOTS SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE CAPITAL CITY …

The devastation visited upon London is beyond the comprehension of most of us who live elsewhere and so is the reason why this has happened. The situation was not helped by David Cameron and some of his cohorts not returning soon enough, as it seems to most casual observers that a state of emergency should have been declared, complete with a curfew by Sunday evening. The army should have been called out on Monday evening. I feel that David Cameron should resign over this as his appalling lack of attention to this has allowed this situation to spin out of control.

What must be made clear to the youth of London that feel they can commit these actions is that he rest of the population will not tolerate this. They are bringing this situation perilously close to street warfare with some of those opposed to their actions. The sentences for those found guilty must reflect the seriousness of this situation; an example must be made of these people that will act as a deterrent to others tempted to continue this anarchy.

.

What is even more apparent is that this was completely predictable. Cutting police budgets and manpower at a time when it must have been clear that a deep and difficult recession was upon us is one of the most remarkable blunders that I have ever heard of. It is reminiscent of the withdrawal of seaborne protection for the Falkland Islands that brought the Argentinian invasion. The only difference is that we were able to mount a response to the occupation of the Falklands. It is difficult to see what preventative strategies can be employed to stop this happening again. Water cannons, maybe?

How is this for complete depravity?

It needs no further comment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14456065

At last … something to praise the coalition for …

blank

Council tenancy fraud:  new law proposed to end sub-letting.

Sub-letting by local authority tenants could see them jailed under proposals being considered by the government, targeting an estimated 50,000 people who  are living elsewhere whilst renting out their council homes. Housing Minister Grant Shapps said that under the proposed new laws those abusing the system will lose their tenancies and face a prison sentence. The properties would then be rented to those with the highest place on the council housing list.

Grant Shapps, the housing minister, said: “Social housing is really precious and it’s not right that tenancy fraud and abuse locks out some of the most vulnerable families from getting a roof over their heads.” At the moment it is not illegal to rent out a property in this way. The estimates of losses – those who need a home having to rent from the private sector – runs to around £4 billion a year. There is currently no criminal sanction against council home sub-letting, which is believed to cost about £5bn a year. Some people who sub-let are thought to earn as much as £20,000 a year from the arrangement.

Sub-letting is specifically excluded in local authority and housing association tenancies but this type of letting is often carried out subversively. Prevention therefore requires evening or very early morning visit and often surveillance to uncover the wrongdoing. Naturally local authorities have been worried about the invasion of privacy or even human rights implications but  while it is important to protect the civil liberties of tenants who live in the property, not pursuing a robust line lets the fraudster go about his business.

The government should set up a registration system for let properties with HMRC through the land registry. This would at least demarcate who is a legal occupier and who isn’t. The fines for evasion of registration should be set high – a year’s rent would be sobering slap for a fraudster – and imprisonment for persistent offenders. Well done Mr. Shapps, it looks like you are at last earning your salary. This legislation has been overdue for years as the practice has been known about since the 1980s.

The bottom line is what serves our communities best, not just the profit factor …

The government has just published lists of government and local authority assets to open debate about which ones can be sold instead of cutting services, the government says. Thecoalition has produced a map of properties and facilities belonging to 87 councils in England. We shouldn’t be worried about transparency when it comes to public assets; the general public ought to know what assets are held by national and local authorities and be able to appraise the value for money aspect of their ownership.

However, the existence of a list should not be based on the presumption that selling the assets off is the way forward. Assets liquidised are rarely regained, as we have seen with the housing market in the 1980s. Had the social housing stock been managed properly, we would not find ourselves in the unsustainable situation that we now have. It was completely wrong to sell homes for as little as one third of their market value and has lead us into the £20bn annual cost of Housing Benefit. Efficient asset management should produce sufficient returns. Selling off assets to subsidise services is poor, short-term thinking. It was the very reason why former prime minister Harold Macmillan criticised Margaret Thatcher’s government for ‘selling off the family silver’ when they privatised various public utilities in the 1980s. The bar chart to the left demonstrates exactly what happens when a government applies an ideological policy to a social commodity.

Local authorities should not be browbeaten into divesting themselves of valuable or strategic assets that serve their communities at the whim of the coalition government. The record of such strategies is, as you can see from the chart, is not in our best interests in the long run. The coalition government seems to be ideologically driven by the belief that privatising – reducing the size of the state – is the answer to the country’s economic difficulties. What we may end up doing is leaving ourselves at the mercy of private firms whose bottom line is only profit. I am afraid that we seem to have been sold the lie that there is no other way, which is not true at all.