Questions that need answers……..

So the laughably so-called independent Office for Budget Responsibility…. can’t get its sums right.

The OBR has forecasted 490,000 job losses by 2015 and 610,000 by 2016.

Yet leaked Treasury documents estimate

This shows the government is expecting between 600,000 and 700,000 private sector jobs to disappear by 2015 as a direct result of Osborne’s budget, which represents the biggest squeeze on public spending since the second world war.The unpublished Treasury analysis also shows that between 500,000 and 600,000 public sector jobs will be lost over the five-year period.

Richard Murphy in his article last week predicted

At least 750,000 state sector jobs will go on that basis, in my estimation. I think 750,000 more from the private sector could join them on the unemployment register.

Who is right?

David Blanchflower savages the OBR sums.

To be right the OBR and the ConDem government have got to have neo-liberal policies that work like such policies have never worked before. True, you do get booms following de-regulation tax cutting etc but these are more to do with speculative behaviour pushing up economic activity in a particular place for a limited amount of time. There then follows a bust. Think of Japan, more recently the Gulf, Britain a number of times over , the USA under (1)Reagan and (2)Bush Mk II and at present China. The ConDem austerity drive would need to outdo all these booms and not have a bust at the end of it.

Where is the evidence that this is possible let alone probable?

Search high and low for an answer from the supporters of austerity you will not find an answer to these things.

Home Office loses appeal over Section 44

Excellent news!!

The European Court of Human Rights has rejected an appeal from the Home Office on a January ruling that had found to be illegal the stop-and-search powers granted by the Terrorism Act 2000. BJP has received confirmation that the European Court of Human Rights has rejected the Home Office appeal against a 12 January decision that had found Section 44 to be illegal.

In a statement, the human rights group Liberty, which represented the plaintiffs, says that “today the European Court of Human Rights confirmed it has rejected the British government’s final appeal over section 44 stop and search powers.”

On 12 January, the European Court stated that the use of Section 44 to stop-and-search people is illegal and that the powers lack proper ‘safeguards against abuse’.

The court was hearing the case of Kevin Gillan and Pennie Quinton, who were both stopped during a London-based arms trade show on 09 September 2003. The police were ‘acting under sections 44-47 of the 2000 Act, while (the two were) on their way to a demonstration close to an arms fair held in the Docklands area of East London’.

BP…. art and oil doesn’t mix!

So art loving direct-action activists were out in force yesterday at the Tate Britain protesting over events being sponsored by BP. Even Nicholas Serota admitted, “This is a free country. They’re entitled to make their protest and disrupt in whatever way they think appropriate.”

BP pretty much sponsors hellva lot of art in London, the political message of respectability yet arch-destroyer of the environment and the planet. Do we want an exploitative company like BP sponsoring art? No.

BP has its destructive paws in many pies such as it pensions (why do pension funds buy shares in such a destructive form of energy as opposed to renewables?) to art. Rather like its latest catastrophic oil disaster.… BP’s toxic slime gets everywhere! And there’s the Tate’s own history based on exploitation and right-wing politics.

Art like everything else in this society is commercialised and commodified under capitalism. But do you really want to see the National Portrait Gallery’s portrait award called ‘BP Portrait Award”…? Why do we have to rely on private corporation for sponsorship? Because any form of mutual provision for anything from housing to cultural activities has been or is in the process of being destroyed and swept aside unless it enhances the corporate interest.

Like the landscapes of  national parks or natural resources or other cultural assets such as science art should be a common treasury for all. And yes these are things that the state both local and national should be doing not waging colonial wars or persecuting the marginalised in society. Oh and the other thing the state should be doing is regulating companies to stop the wrecking of the planet.

BP’s involvement is to legitimise itself and this represents a stain on the art movement overall.

Art is at its best when subversive so lets subvert the BP logo by exposing its bloody exploitation and destruction of the environment in pursuit of profit….

Inquiry to be held into security service torture claims

A judge-led inquiry is to be held into claims British security services were complicit in the torture of terror suspects, the BBC understands. Prime Minister David Cameron is to announce the inquiry is being set up, possibly as early as Wednesday, BBC political editor Nick Robinson said. The inquiry will offer compensation to those people who are found to have been the victims of torture carried out by foreign security services but with the knowledge of intelligence officials.

Wonder if ex-foreign secretary and Labour leader candidate will be called to give evidence? Defending the indefensible…no doubt…

Photographers win damages against the Met!

From Amateur Photographer

A photographer and a videographer have each won £3,500 in damages from the Metropolitan Police after the pair were prevented from recording a protest outside the Greek Embassy in 2008.

The Met admitted that it breached Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights – and failed to respect press freedom – when an officer pulled a camera away from photographer Marc Vallée and covered the lens on a camera being used by videographer Jason Parkinson.

The pair were attempting to record a political protest outside the Greek Embassy in December 2008.

Marc Vallée told Amateur Photographer: ‘This is the second time I’ve been forced to take legal action against the Metropolitan Police since 2006 and I would like it to be the last.

‘The question to consider is: “Is the overall harassment of photographers by the police a deliberate policy or a series of unrelated mistakes?”.

In 2008, Vallée won £4,000 in an out-of-court settlement after clashing with police while photographing a political protest outside Parliament.

He said this morning: ‘You have to ask yourself whether it is in the DNA of the Metropolitan Police to restrict and harass photographers and, if so, what are we going to do about it?’

The news is being hailed as a victory for press freedom and a massive boost for the rights of photographers.

National Union of Journalists general secretary Jeremy Dear said: ‘Professional journalists and photographers have detailed numerous attempts by police officers to stifle the reporting of protests.

‘Today we have achieved a significant victory – it is right that the police admit liability, apologise and compensate those whose basic human rights were breached in such a blatant and aggressive manner.’

Chez Cotton, head of the Police Misconduct department at law firm Bindmans LLP, said the pair had complied with police requests to leave the area, but were ‘forcibly removed’ and told to report from a distance.

Cotton added: ‘It is of grave concern that an armed, diplomatic officer of the Metropolitan Police Force felt it was appropriate to call these journalists ‘scum’ and stop them from working and was happy to do so in the full knowledge that he was being filmed.

‘My clients were physically prevented from reporting on protest and political unrest of international importance.

‘Just before he was frogmarched by officers away from events, Mr Parkinson filmed an officer punching a protester in the side of the head, although the protester appears to be already under the control of several officers.

‘[That] the police appeared not to want these journalists to film what appeared to be extremely brutal arrests using force is a cause for further alarm.’

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police told Amateur Photographer: ‘The MPS [Metropolitan Police Service] has apologised and accepted liability for a breach of freedom of expression (Article 10 of the European Court of Human Rights) when an officer attempted to prevent two journalists from taking photographs outside the Greek Embassy on 8 December 2008.

‘The MPS recognises the vital importance of journalists being able to report freely on all occasions, including at public order events.’

More soon…

• Meanwhile, two photographers were arrested while covering a protest outside the G20 summit in Canada over the weekend.

Colin O’Connor and Brett Grundlock were arrested in Toronto on Saturday evening, according to the National Post, the Canadian newspaper they work for.

The men were reportedly charged with ‘obstructing a peace officer and unlawful assembly after refusing police officers’ requests to leave the area’.

Both were released on bail.

Yet another case of a photographer illegally detained

Am very shocked by this, I know Jules and hope he is OK after this appalling incident….

This would be the mandatory angry blog post about my harassment in Romford yesterday. I was told by the police I was breaching the terrorism act, public order act, various misc copyright and child protection laws and otherwise being an “Agitator”.

The incident started when I took an image (not a very good one it seems :p) of a Police Cadet unit forming up to take part in an Armed Forces Day parade. I was quickly and aggressively stopped by one of their adult officers asking me who I worked for. I responded that I was a freelance and upon being told I needed parental permission to photograph them, I explained this was a public event in a public place and that I didn’t for editorial use.

She then demanded my details and when I declined, I was quickly pulled aside by police officers. Then started recording, see below for the rest

I had my lens covered while trying to photograph my harassment , then told ‘I consider you a threat under the terrorism act’ for photographing a police officer, had my camera taken from around my neck, was detained and frog marched away before being pushed down some stairs and told they were concerned for my safety.

Especially poignant this incident took place the day after photojournalist Marc Vallee and videographer Jason Parkinson won their case against the met for an incident outside the Greek Embassy where Marc had his camera grabbed and Jason had his lens covered by an armed police officer.
Many have hailed this ruling as ‘a victory for press freedom’, and I would be inclined to agree. However, until the met’s guidance on photography and a clearer understanding of the law filters down to the streets, we will continue to see incidents like this.

Although, especially disturbing in this case is that the incident took place under the authority of a police inspector who was present, who should clearly know better.

In the end after having my full details demanded by the police or I would be arrested for breach of the peace; only a phone based intervention by NUJ LPB welfare officer and videographer Jason Parkinson, the arrival of two of my colleagues and my meticulous and legal, albeit aggressive, description to the officer of the events leading up to this point prevented my arrest, although I was not released until after the parade I was trying to cover had marched off.

Anyway, I will make no further attempt at a detailed rant or critique of the incident, but will leave you with the recording to listen to, along with stills of the incident. Feel free to skip to the juicy stuff at about 4:30 if you don’t feel like listening to the context etc. :p

 

Plus: Take a look at Kevin Blowe’s blog post of the incident. http://www.blowe.org.uk/2010/06/photographer-illegally-detained-by.html

Who loves ya Clegg? LibDem voters don’t seem to….

Picture your average LibDem voter, all happy in the knowledge that the party they have voted for what don’t anything massively drastic in the short term. And yes, LibDem happily secure in the belief that the nice Nick Clegg won’t damage his support. But damage his support he seemingly has. Supporters who possibly couldn’t bring themselves to vote Labour nor Tory so they opted for the safe option….LibDems. But to the ever deluded LibDem voter this was going to be the outcome, Clegg was on track to work with the Tories and once safely ensconced into the establishment they have capitulated to the Tories. But then the LibDems were always Tories in brighter shade of orange. The LibDems are not the tactical voters’ dream but the nightmare.

At the last election, in fact, less LibDems MPs got elected than previously. Many voters sensed that there was a clear ideological choice although they would not have understood it in that way. Tory attacks or (hope against hope) the softer attack from Labour. The result was that 2005 protest voters and stay aways voted Labour while Tories had someone slightly less creepy than Michael Howard and sensed their chance of a government that would bring the proletariat properly under manners.

The old joke “what do you call a Tory wearing sandals…a LibDem” never seemed as quite true as it turned out to be. With a five-year Parliament a distinct prospect as LibDem MP’s fall quietly into line and NL unable to land any political punches it is up to the Left (all several hundred or so of us…) to organise whatever opposition to the imposition of austerity that we can. And get the message home that tactical voting gets you a try government every time.

NB: Practical ways of fighting the cuts see the excellent comrade Cotterill here and here.

Seaford

Went to Seaford today, lovely hot day wandering by the sea with a nice breeze to cool you down…. Lots of people, lots of activities, from jumping off piers to fishing to boating to just plain old walking up the headland. Here are some pix I took (along with the usual seagulls gliding around….)

Emergency Budget: Redistribution from poor to big business

Press release from the LRC regarding yesterday’s budget.

Today’s Emergency Budget will redistribute wealth from the poor to big business. The Budget announced a 4% cut in corporation tax from 28% to 24%, a higher threshold for employer NI contributions and employer NI exemptions for new businesses, and a cut in the small business rate of tax.

Meanwhile, £11bn of cuts are announced on welfare, benefits will only now be uprated in line with CPI not RPI, maternity grants are abolished, child benefit will be frozen for three years and public sector pay frozen for two years.

In response to the Chancellor’s Emergency Budget today, John McDonnell MP, LRC Chair, said:

“The budget is a significant redistribution of wealth from the poorest in our society to big business. Cuts in welfare benefits to children, pregnant women and the homeless are being used to fund cuts in corporation taxes for big business. Welcome to the Coalition’s concept of ‘fairness’

“People rightfully perceive a grotesque unfairness in that they are being forced to pay with cuts in their jobs and services for a crisis caused by the greed of the bankers. Cuts on this scale will inevitably be met by resistance from not just trade unions but from across our community”.

The real human cost of this miserable & draconian Budget

This emergency Budget is totally draconian and utterly austere. To think otherwise (only if you are wealthy) is a fool’s paradise. Richard Murphy highlighted:

Benefits will be cut by about 10%. Departmental spending, except in health and overseas development will be cut by 25%. At least 750,000 state sector jobs will go on that basis, in my estimation. I think 750,000 more from the private sector could join them on the unemployment register. And this budget, which according to George Osborne promised growth, did no such thing.

Sunny Hundal points to this YouGov poll where 49% of the respondents believe that the cuts are a good idea (the vox pop on tonight’s C4 News concluded that it wasn’t too bad and many expected to ‘pay’ for the crisis)… . Firstly, regarding this YouGov poll, who was precisely polled and secondly, it’s the calm before the storm…and the impact has not sunk in as yet. People will pay, and pay dearly they will. But the reality is that people will suffer, a massive 25% will be slashed from public departments. Public sector pay will be frozen for two years (translated…. a pay cut). Therefore massive unemployment, poorer population and the likelihood of a double-dip recession. To put it bluntly, we are fucked….

Another area that has been plundered is welfare, Con/Dems attack the poorest and the most powerless with their raid on the coffers of welfare.

Uprating

• the government will adopt the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the uprating of benefits and tax credits from April 2011

DLA

• the government will introduce the use of ‘objective medical assessments’ for all DLA claimants from 2013/2014

Translated this means bullying people into the job market based on supposedly “objective medical assessment” when really it is based on ideology.

Tax credits

• from April 2011, the second income threshold for the family element of child tax credit will reduce from £50,000 to £40,000 and, from April 2012, the family element of child tax credit will be withdrawn immediately after the child element;

Benefits and children

• from October 2011, lone parents whose youngest child is aged 5 or above will be eligible for jobseeker’s allowance rather than income support, and existing claimants will be transferred from income support to jobseeker’s allowance from April 2012;
• from April 2011 the government will restrict eligibility to the sure start maternity grant for the first child (or children where the first is a multiple birth) ;
• the health in pregnancy grant will be abolished from January 2011; and
• child benefit will be frozen for three years from April 2011.

Housing costs and housing benefit

I know there are other measures regarding Housing benefit but this below is very worrying as it will cause untold misery;

• from April 2013, housing benefit awards will be reduced to 90 per cent of the initial award after 12 months for claimants receiving jobseeker’s allowance;

This means not just that people will be finding things a bit tough but that they will not be able to pay the rent. They will be made homeless. George is putting beggars back on the street in the same way that his hero, Thatcher, did.

Unemployed people will be used to put downward pressure on wages. This the role of the employment advisers involved in the “New Deal”. The result is that the rich and their big corporations will benefit hugely at ordinary peoples’ expense. Expect more bullying in the workplace and in the Jobcentre.

We are going to be living in a very nasty and destructive society (and the CBI btw want to restrict strike action). The message people should take is organise and resist or be destroyed.

As Mark Serwotka (PCS general secretary) argues, This is one of the most regressive budgets we have seen for many years, with attacks on the low-paid, the unemployed, pensioners, the welfare state and the public sector as a whole. This is not a progressive budget to help the country recover from the worst economic crisis in living memory, it is a programme of despair for millions of people who did not cause the recession and should not be made to pay for it. We do not believe that these cuts are necessary, we do not accept the flawed analysis on which they are based, and we are committed to helping to organise joint union action and campaigning in communities to resist them.