SOCIALIST UNITY

Boris loses another appointment under cloud of sleaze

The deputy chair of London’s fire authority (LFEPA) yesterday become the fifth Boris Johnson appointment to leave City Hall in shame. Bertha Jospeh was forced to quit after spending almost £1,000 of cash donations for children’s charities on ball gowns for herself. She was suspended from Brent council for six months last October for bringing her office into disrepute but Boris Johnson repeatedly refused to remove her from the fire authority.

Boris Johnson approved the promotion of Bertha Joseph to deputy chair of LFEPA despite her having been found guilty by the standards board. The deputy chair receives £19,705 a year in allowances.

Councillor Joseph lost her appeal on 9 February. The judge who heard her case said her actions could have deprived two charities of income. The charities involved are the Down’s Syndrome Association and Starlight, who work with seriously and terminally ill children. The police are reportedly investigating whether her actions broke the law.

Len Duvall, Labour’s leader on the London Assembly, said: “You have to question the integrity and judgement of this mayor standing by someone who has been disgraced and banned from public office. It’s not the first time one of the mayor’s appointments has had to leave under a sleazy cloud but he could have done the right thing a lot sooner. This is someone who spent money intended for children’s charities on clothes for herself. I’m amazed it took so long for the mayor to decide she was unfit for office.”

Boris and his appointments

Jun 2008 - James McGrath – forced to resign after saying African-Caribbean Londoners could “go home” if they didn’t like Boris Johnson

Jul 2008 - Ray Lewis – forced to quit amid allegations about previous roles and lying about being a magistrate

Dec 2008 - David Ross – forced to resign over issues relating to FSA regulations

Jun 2009 - Ian Clement – sacked after lying about using a GLA credit card to pay for meals with his lover, groceries and repairs to his Jaguar. Convicted of fraud.

A quick reminder to all. Anna Chen’s Radio 4 programme about quirky novelty items designed here in the UK, made in China, and sold back in the West, goes out this morning and appears to have garnered some positive attenton in the press.

China, Britain and the Nunzilla Conundrum, wins Pick of the Day and Week status in several publications.
BBC RADIO 4 - 11.00-11.30am
Friday 19 March 2010
PICK OF THE DAY Guardian Guide and Radio Times
PICK OF THE WEEK Sunday Telegraph who calls it ” … refreshingly original …”
Also spotted in the Observer and Daily Telegraph on Saturday, as well as Time Out.
As recommended by the Diocese of Liverpool
Presented by Anna Chen - Produced by Sally Heaven

You can listen for seven days after broadcast here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00rbpb4

More on the programme here:
http://madammiaow.blogspot.com/2010/03/china-britain-and-nunzilla-conundrum.html

This is a video of David Toube, blogger from Harry’s Place making an Islamophobic rant. The women sitting behind him is none other than Gareth Peirce one of the most respected Human Rights solicitors in Britain. Not one of the charges made are true accept to those who want to believe such things. Toube has made a habit of attacking people personally in a very public manner. His inflammatory tone and actions fuel the growth in xenophobic hatred when most sound people are seeking to subdue such emotions.

Islamophobic rant by lawyer David Toube
Uploaded by themissingpoint. - Up-to-the minute news videos.

POSITIVE ACTION IN HOUSING

Wednesday, March 17, 2010 BY FAX: 0131 226 6910

FAO the Rt Hon Elish Angiolini QC
Lord Advocate
Crown Office
25 Chambers Street
Edinburgh EH1 1LA

Dear Lord Advocate,

REQUEST FOR FATAL ACCIDENT INQUIRY INTO THE DEATHS OF SERGUEI, TATIANA AND STEPAN SERHYK

Positive Action in Housing Ltd is a Scottish wide charity working with communities, housing providers, voluntary organisations and faith groups to enable everyone to have an equal chance to live in good quality, affordable and safe homes, free from discrimination and the fear of racial harassment and violence. We offer advice, information and support to people from new migrant, refugee and minority ethnic communities. We run a free, confidential and impartial casework service for those facing poverty, homelessness, racism or poor housing. We run a Hardship Fund and provide emergency shelter and practical resources for destitute asylum seekers and their families. We support human rights and anti-racist campaigns. We inform social policy from a user-led perspective.

Since 2000, over 10,000 asylum seekers were dispersed to Glasgow, the second largest asylum
population in the UK. Since 2004, Positive Action in Housing has operated a destitution fund to support refused asylum seekers who are made destitute in an attempt by the UK government to force them to return to their countries of origin. In 2009, we provided 1,365 nights of free shelter and distributed a total of £18,020 from our Hardship Fund to refused asylum seekers and their families when they were forced into destitution. While the asylum population in Glasgow are relatively transient, the problem of long term destitution, mental illness, despair and hopelessness have been permanent since around 2004 and we have warned previously that things are likely to get worse if not addressed with humanity and understanding.

I am therefore writing to request that you use the powers available to you as Lord Advocate to instruct a Fatal Accident Inquiry into the deaths on 7 March 2010 of Mr Serguei Serykh, his wife Tatiana and their 19 year old son, Stepan, a family of asylum seekers who sought refuge in the UK. Based on our experiences of the way the UK asylum policy operates on Scottish soil, we believe that the Sehryk family would still be alive were it not for the way they were treated by the UK asylum system.

We believe it is in the public interest that a Fatal Accident Inquiry be carried out. There are a number of issues of concern:

1. Serguei Sehryk was a former member of the Russian Military Intelligence, and this was accepted by Canada where he first sought asylum and was granted “protected person status” alongside his family on 31 October 2005.

2. The family claimed asylum in November 2007. We have documentary evidence that the UKBA was fully aware of the family’s fear of being killed and of being prepared to kill themselves. Those close to the family state they “were extremely worried about perceived threats to their physical and mental well being”.

3. It is believed that Mr Sehryk had some psychological issues, as well as his wife and stepson. We possess evidence which shows clearly that the UK Borders Agency knew of the family’s psychological issues and that they were a danger to themselves, and possibly to others. Despite all these factors, the UKBA did nothing to support the family. Indeed, we would contend that their actions only served to exacerbate the family’s sense of fear, isolation and hopelessness about their situation.

4. On 15 February 2010, the UKBA issued a letter refusing the Sehryk family’s claim to asylum. The UKBA informed the family that they could appeal after they return to Canada. They further informed the family that if they did not leave voluntarily, directions would be given for their removal. The UKBA further informed the family that there were no “compassionate” circumstances, i.e. “no known serious medical conditions” which were “sufficiently compelling” to justify allowing the family to stay in the UK.

5. A few days later, the UKBA notified the family that they no longer qualified for support under Section 98 or 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. They were further notified that their support, ie money and accommodation would be discontinued 21 days following the notification of the resolution of their asylum claim.

6. Around mid-February 2010, the YMCA, which is contracted by the UKBA to provide accommodation to asylum seekers, also issued a letter informing the family they must leave their flat at 63 Petershill Drive by Sunday 7 March, 2010. Their benefits of £105 per week in vouchers would also have stopped around Sunday 7 March. This date is important because it was the same day that they family is said to have committed suicide from the balcony of their 15th floor flat.

7. Around 24th February, eleven days before their deaths, the family sought advice about their asylum refusal to find out what the “the next step” was. They were informed that

i. their money and housing would be stopped.
ii. That they were forbidden to work
iii. they would have no “recourse to public funds”, ie they could not go to an emergency hostel, a
homeless unit or apply for income support or crisis funds. They had no other means of support.
iv. They could be detained at any time, i.e. removed by force from their home or from Brand Street Reporting Centre.

Mr Sehryk and his 19 year old stepson Stepan were observed to become upset. Stepan in particular became animated and incredulous and asked “how do they expect us to survive on the street without any money or somewhere to live”. If one were to strip every basic human need from a person with good mental health it would be inhumane. But to tell a family with a clear fear of return as well as psychological issues would clearly be more than enough to tip them over the edge. I should make it clear that there are many others who are in the same position in Red Road and elsewhere in Glasgow.

8. Since the deaths, there has been much conjecture about the family’s circumstances and what drove them to kill themselves. While the UKBA stated that they would not comment “at this point in time”, an “unnamed” source leaked details to the press, at a time when questions were being asked about the asylum system. The source suggested the family was mentally ill hence the reason for their deaths. We do not know whether the source was political or from within the UKBA. Either way, the desired effect was to divert public scrutiny away from the UK asylum system as it operates on Scottish soil, and place the blame for the deaths on the Sehryk s themselves. What is utterly reprehensible is that the “unnamed source” effectively cherry picked the dead family’s asylum application to discredit them, when that family could not answer back. By highlighting Mr Sehryk’s psychological state, the subsequent press coverage gives a misleading impression that this tragic incident was somehow inevitable and that Mr Sehryk was to blame for the family’s deaths.

9. I am sorry to say that this explanation does not match up with our experiences of the Red road, or the wider asylum issues affecting our service users. In our experience, the service users we deal with do develop psychological issues as a result of the asylum process and this should be one of the focuses of the Fatal Accident Inquiry. Only a few of hours after the suicides we made it clear that it was “normal currency” for service-users to inform our staff that in their minds suicide was a viable alternative to being returned to unsafe countries. We believe GPs and mental health charities operating in Glasgow should be questioned about the extent of mental health problems amongst Glasgow’s refugee population relative to the rest of the city.

10. Since that time, we have stepped up our presence in the Red road and liaised with the Police and the local community. On Tuesday 9 March, one asylum seeker from Afghanistan informed us at the Vigil for the Sehryks “I wish I was one of them [the dead family]”. When asked why he was saying that, he replied, “at least their problem is over”. Another woman, one of our service users, said she fully identified with the family’s despair. She said she had tried to throw herself and her three year old son from her balcony at Red Road at two am in the morning. She said she could not go on any longer and could not leave her son behind because there was no-one to look after him. She opened her window and was trying to cut the anti-suicide wire with a knife with her son sleeping in her arms. Her son awoke suddenly and said to her “Mummy its cold”. She broke down crying and took her son to bed.

11. On Wednesday 10th March, Archbishop Conti wrote to us about the Sehryk family. He said, “I have been appalled time and time again at the way refugees, after several years residence here, are suddenly deported. During those years they have often forged relationships within the community, and people are ready to stand by them and support them and are deeply distressed when they suddenly disappear. The tragic case of the Russian family who jumped to their deaths from the Red Road Flats last weekend is a unique case but serves as a terrible reminder of the anguish faced, on a daily basis, by asylum seekers in the city. We must constantly examine our conscience as a society and ask whether we are fully respecting the dignity of the human beings who find their way to our shores. It is right that there be robust and clear rules in place to prevent abuses, but at the same time compassion must have a role, especially where children are concerned who have grown up here and have no memory of a land to which they face deportation … questions still need to be asked about the practice of stopping families’ already-meagre benefits and threatening them with eviction. It is far from humane that such families have to live in constant fear of their deportation; a more efficient and compassionate method with migrants and refugees is urgently needed”.

As a charity providing hundreds of pounds each week to destitute asylum seekers from the Red Road and elsewhere, we have seen first hand the inhumane practices endured by our service users and the depths of their despair at the prospect of being returned to unsafe conditions. It is our contention that the UKBA was culpable in this family’s deaths and could be culpable for others, unless their policy is changed. We believe that lessons need to be learned from the systemic failures in order to prevent such a tragedy happening again on Scottish soil, or anywhere else in the UK. Certainly we want to know how much of a role the family’s imminent destitution and threat of removal or detention played in their deaths. A Fatal Accident Inquiry would assist in informing future policy and decision making affecting the lives of hundreds of asylum seekers currently in Glasgow. I would finally add that this case has resulted in conjecture and rumour and it is in the public interest that this matter is investigated properly and the facts of this case made public. We do not want any more
suicides.

We would be pleased to provide documentary evidence to support our request for a Fatal Accident Inquiry, and supply any evidence which would help you to make a decision.

I look forward to hearing from you.

With best wishes and kind regards,
ROBINA QURESHI
DIRECTOR

NHHT - UNISON Strike Action - 15th March 2010
Uploaded by unisoncomms. - Up-to-the minute news videos.

via John Gray

No carers leave?
No flexi time?
No Consultation?
Love where I work?

These important and highly valued family friendly policies are being taken away by a Chief Executive who could cover the entire cost with under a third of her own salary. The company operates at a vast level of profit and there is no economic basis for the cuts.

These changes unfairly target women and roll back years of progress. Without the ability to work flexibly many people, especially women with young families, could well be forced out of the workplace all together. For the sake of these relatively low cost initiatives many women have been able to pursue good careers in the housing sector.

All we want to do is talk. We are not anti change or anti progress, in fact quite the opposite. We want to retain the progress made in the past and build upon it. NHHT seems to want to roll back the clock to a time where women were not allowed to contemplate having a career and a family.

As we inexorably approach the general election, it is worth considering the long term decline of the Conservative vote, as shown in this graph from John Ross.

The historical trend is that the Tory vote has reached a level of around 40%, which they will struggle to break out of.

The Conservative Party face the “Marks and Spencer” dilemma, that their core business is insufficient to succeed, but any changes to attract new customers jeopardise the loyalty of the existing fuddy duddies.

Despite superficial spin hinting at change, Cameron’s Conservatives remain the Nasty Party, as is so clearly exposed by their links with their far-right European partners.

The Conservative Party have slipped from being the natural party of the capitalist establishment, a position they enjoyed after the effective collapse of the Liberal Party; into being an obsessive organisation with its own ideologically driven and regressive social agenda of scarcely concealed bigotry, and economic policies driven by an extremist, and frankly old-fashioned, faith in the virtue of reducing the state’s footprint.

 The pressing task in British politics is therefore how to mobilise the anti-Tory majority to exclude them from regaining control of the government.

from Morning Star 

A furious Unite union has demanded that the Transport Secretary step in to ensure passengers won’t be put in danger if BA uses volunteers to cover this weekend’s cabin crew strike.

In a letter to Lord Adonis, Unite said it was seriously worried that using up to “1,000 fast-tracked, under-trained volunteers” to deputise for cabin crew would damage not only BA’s but also Britain’s reputation as a country where safety standards are respected.

“Unite is writing formally to you to request an urgent investigation by your department into the rushing through of stand-in cabin crew and ask that you take all steps to assure yourself, the government and the travelling public that during this dispute corners have not been cut in the standards which govern our aviation industry,” they wrote.

The Department for Transport responded that passengers’ safety was its highest priority - but didn’t mention whether its right-wing chief would launch a specific investigation into BA’s volunteers before the strike started.

A Unite spokesman said: “BA’s figure of 1,000 volunteers is highly suspect. We have it on good authority from a source at the training centre that BA has a maximum of 345 volunteers - and there are likely to be much less than that.”

While claiming neutrality, pilots’ union Balpa offered some support for the strike yesterday.

Spokesman Keith Bill said “We’re leaving it to pilots to make their own decisions whether they choose to volunteer as cabin crew. There will be more strike-breakers from Unite than Balpa anyway.

“We certainly won’t be penalising our members if they choose not to volunteer.”

Asked whether he thought pilots deputising for cabin crew would poison relations after the strike, Mr Bill said: “Unite will have a lot of rebuilding relations to do too, with all the other non-striking members of the aviation sector.”

Senior Unite members met long into the night with their US counterparts yesterday in a bid to drum up global support.

The powerful Teamsters union’s members work on ground operations and aircraft services at major US airports - and have the capacity to seriously affect BA’s trans-Atlantic routes if they support the strike.

the full text of the letter sent to Lord Adonis is as follows:

Dear Secretary of State

FOR YOUR URGENT ATTENTION: British Airways Dispute and Volunteer Cabin Crew

In a bid to resolve the long-running dispute between BA and its cabin crew, Unite is doing all in its power to persuade British Airways to re-table the offer in withdrew last week and to allow our members a voice on their future.

However, Unite has grave concerns that BA’s threat to break any lawful strike by deploying up to 1000 fast-tracked, under-trained volunteers as crew during a dispute places not just our national carrier’s reputation for quality at risk, but will jeopardise the UK’s reputation as a place where the standards governing air passenger transport are respected and upheld.

In January this year, Unite wrote to Transec, the transport security contingencies directorate, detailing specific concerns we have in relation to the training and vetting of volunteer crew by BA, set to be deployed this weekend. To date Unite has had no response from the directorate to this letter, which in itself is concerning.

This sector is clearly of national importance, and has rightly been given significant support by your government. Given recent developments, Unite is now writing formally to you request an urgent investigation by your department into the rushing through of stand-in cabin crew and ask that you take all steps to assure yourself, the government and the travelling public that, during this dispute, corners have not been cut in the standards which govern our aviation industry.

Setting aside our obvious concerns that paying passengers will be in the care of an under-trained crew, reliant on them for their in-air safety and well-being, there are two clear issues of concern with the volunteer programme: first, the compliance of all volunteers with UK security checks; and secondly, BA’s duty to other national governments to comply with their vetting laws.

Irrespective of the views Ministers may hold on the nature of this dispute, we know that your first concern is to ensure that the travelling public does not suffer. Therefore, we are urging you as Secretary of State for Transport to demand that BA responds to you urgently on these two principal matters of concern, giving you total assurance that no corners are being cut with passenger safety and security in this country or in any of the BA designation countries. We also urge that these Reponses are placed in the public domain to encourage wider public assurance.

Unite’s critical questions are:

1. What steps has BA taken to comply with all security and record checks required by those who are to work “airside”?

You will be aware that last week a potential BA ‘volunteer crew member’ was remanded in custody on charges relating to an alleged terrorist plot which pivoted around his role as a ‘volunteer’ crew during any dispute.

You will also be aware that Criminal Records Checks (CRCs) are conducted on potential cabin crew but these are only able to identify those who already have a criminal record on file in the United Kingdom. There is no way of obtaining such information on those from overseas or indeed UK residents who may have committed offences overseas, which could impact on their ability to access other countries to work, such as the United States, when deployed as strike-breaking cabin crew.

2. Has British Airways taken all steps to comply with the visa and vetting requirements of the national governments of BA destinations?

British Airways says that they are able to employ ‘volunteer’ crew on from across the airline as well as to ‘charter’ crewed aircraft to provide BA services from leasing companies. Further, it is our understanding that many of these ‘volunteers’ we be travelling as paying passengers not ‘crew’ and then changing and working on-board, thereby avoiding working visas where required and the necessary vetting procedures of other national governments. If this is the case, this is clearly a deception of these national governments. We urge you to clear this matter up urgently.

Many of BA’s key routes are into the USA, and the airline has pledged to run the New York route during any strike. Our understanding is that the visas required to enter US airports as crew are only issued by the US Embassy but we ask that you now check that this Embassy been fully informed by BA of their intentions and are they satisfied that BA is complying with their criteria for those crew who will pass through US airports as workers?

Finally, we have serious concerns over the training being provided to ‘volunteers’ given the central role of crew in providing a safe and secure environment on-board aircraft. Experienced, professional cabin crew save lives, a fact that has been proven on many occasions whether in times of aircraft emergency or in relation to individual passengers suffering a serious ill health emergency, such as in New York just last week. ‘Volunteer’ crews simply will not have the expertise to deliver such care, placing the travelling public at serious risk should an incident occur, and setting a dangerous precedent for tolerating lower standards which other airlines may seek to follow.

Deservedly, UK aviation has a world-wide reputation for high standards in both it operations and the calibre of people employed, and BA in particular embodies these values. It would be hugely damaging for our global reputation were these qualities to be sacrificed by one company’s pursuance of a conflict and not negotiation.

BA’s desire to break a lawful dispute - twice voted for by our members, so strongly do they feel about their futures - must not lead to the dilution of long-standing aviation standards. We therefore ask that your Department urgently reviews the arrangements BA has put in place in respect of the above matters and takes all necessary steps to give the public confidence that standards in this important industry will be safeguarded.

I look forward to your speedy reply.

Yours sincerely

Steve Turner
National Officer – Civil Air Transport

Copy: Paul Clark MP Aviation Minister, Louise Ellman Chair Transport Select Committee, CAA, FAA

Three activists from Swords into Ploughshares have been found NOT GUILTY of all charges laid against them in a New Zealand court for their action breaking into the Waihopai spybase in Blenheim in April 2008, and deflating one of the two domes covering the satellite dishes which capture intelligence data.

As Bryan Law’s blog reports:

The Jury went out to consider its verdict at 3.45 pm Wellington time on Wed 17 march 2010. The returned to deliver their verdict just two hours later.

Not Guilty for all defendents on all charges

Adrian Leason, Father Peter Murnane and Sam Land – the three men who were charged with intentional damage and unlawful entry at Waihopai spy base – have today expressed their thanks to the jury, the judge, and the prosecution and defence lawyers. (Adi and Sam shown praying after their deflation of the dome, while waiting for arrest)

At the conclusion of the trial, Father Peter, Sam and Adrian said they feel privileged to have helped uncover the true nature of the spy base. “Our actions in disabling the spy base and stopping the flow of information helped save lives in Iraq”, added Adrian.

“What has been humbling for us to realise is how our witness has impacted on so many people around the world and at home”, said Sam.

“We did not try to avoid the consequences of our actions, because we respect the rule of law although we do believe we are ultimately accountable to a higher authority. We damaged property at the spy base in order to save victims of war and torture. It’s all about Jesus’ command for us to treat all people as our brothers and sisters”, said Father Peter.

The jury heard that the Waihopai Echelon spy base is New Zealand’s largest contribution to the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq. The ongoing war has resulted in horrific war crimes, including more than one million dead Iraqi civilians, torture, and permanent poisoning of parts of Iraq by the use of depleted uranium munitions.

The jury also heard evidence from a former British Echelon intelligence analyst, Katherine Gunn. She blew the whistle on secret Echelon spying operations when she was instructed by the US National Security Agency to spy on United Nations Security Council members leading up to the US invasion in 2003.

“Evidence presented in the court confirmed that the ongoing war in Iraq is illegal, and causing massive human suffering”, said Adrian. “As an outcome of this trial, we hope that New Zealanders will insist on an enquiry into the activities of the spy base and its links to US-led illegal wars”.

Father Peter, Sam and Adrian expressed gratitude for all the support they have received from family, friends and the New Zealand public.

Commenting at the conclusion of the trial, Graham Bidois Cameron, Waihopai Ploughshares media spokesperson, said this Ploughshares action is part of an ongoing tradition: “The practice of non-violent resistance and direct action in the cause of peace has a long history in this country – the peaceful resistance to the invasion of Parihaka, and non-violent direct action against nuclear armed warships entering our harbours being just two examples”, he said.

“The actions of Waihopai Ploughshares also need to be understood in relation to an international movement for disarmament and peace”, said lawyer Moana Cole, herself a Ploughshares activist. “Adrian, Sam and Father Peter are part of rich history of activism in support of those without a voice and the movement is certainly growing”.

Today, at Mayor’s Questions, Boris Johnson claimed that no ticket office will close due to his proposed cuts in transport spending. However, a leaked Transport for London document revealed to Socialist Unity shows that claim is untrue. Several will close, several others will close for most of the week, and many more will see their hours of operation severely cut.

This is a clear example from London of broken Tory promises and how the Conservatives cannot be relied on with our public services.

Labour’s Navin Shah AM said:

“Boris Johnson misled Londoners today when he told the Assembly that no ticket offices will close under his programme of ticket office cuts that constitute one of his biggest broken election promises. Documents released today show he was not telling truth. Several ticket offices will close, others will close for most of the week and large numbers of offices will see their opening hours drastically cut. Nearly five hundred ticket office staff will be lost under these Conservative cuts and many stations will feel less safe and less friendly as a result of this broken election pledge.

“Nearly two years in Londoners are entitled to ask what the mayor is delivering. It shows our public services are not safe with the Tories.”

Other broken promises from Boris Johnson here