Friday 29 October 2010

EU Budget Farce

Forgive me if I treat David Cameron's boast of saving money from the EU with some scepticism. When our local services are likely to be cut by 28% in line with the cut in Local Government grants, a 3% increase in the EU budget is hardly to be celebrated. When 600 jobs may be lost among Armed Forces support staff at Catterick, local people should rebel at such EU profligacy.

Thanks in part to Tony Blair's spiteful hand back of our EU rebate as he was hounded out of office in 2007, this country will still be forking out £6.5bn every year to pay for the EU. What does that pay for? Among other things an increase in EU bureaucrats' entertainment budget! And the extraordinary thing is that the EU budget has never been properly audited. Millions are lost every year and the EU budget office fail every single year to account for it, leaving the EU with qualified accounts (i.e. inaccurate).

The Tories and Liberal Democrats should honour their pre-election promises and have a referendum on our EU membership. As the Germans are insisting on an amendment to the Lisbon Treaty to facilitate the latest Euro-zone bail out of failing economies like Greece and Portugal, the coalition has the perfect opportunity. After all it was part of the Con Dem coalition agreement that there no further powers would be handed to Europe without a referendum.

Will we now see the will of the majority of the people prevail and Britain at last throw off the shackles of EU membership? Don't hold your breath. How many other promises have the Con Dem coalition kept?

Monday 25 October 2010

Coalition Cause New Recession

UK economic growth in the 3rd quarter has fallen to just 0.4% from the 1.2% in the previous quarter. A two-thirds reduction in growth is likely to bring about another lot of "quantitative easing" i.e. printing another £50bn of fake money by the Bank of England. As on previous occasions when the Government did this, it will undermine the pound, causing yet another fall in the value of sterling.

The cuts and one million job losses (estimate by accountancy firm PWC) that will be caused by the Con Dem coalition's £81bn annual reduction in public spending, is already "damaging household confidence, weakening investment intentions and depressing the economy" (Independent 25/10/10). Along with a devaluation of the currency, the coalition is well on its way to causing yet another recession.

We should be spending money saved from cancelling Trident and withdrawing from the Afghanistan on investing in Green Jobs making our homes, hospitals and public buildings more fuel efficient and saving much more money (and lives) in the long run. All things the Lib Dems promised, but reneged on once elected.

Friday 22 October 2010

Stop Finger Printing Children

Yet another local school is introducing the finger printing of school children. These systems are used for such things as libraries and cashless catering as an administrative convenience.
As Terry Thomas, Professor of Criminal Justice Studies at Leeds Metropolitan University has said "A whole generation of children not involved with any criminal behaviour may be growing up thinking fingerprinting is just a 'normal' way of being identified, and innocuous phrases like school 'kiddy-printing' only further minimises what is going on. Children are being inducted into the world of the 'surveillance society' without really knowing what it means."

This practice is the thin end of the wedge in an increasingly intrusive state. Deputy PM Nick Clegg denounced the practice in his "freedom" speech just after the election, committing the Government "to end the scandal of children being fingerprinted at school without their parent’s consent".

However, at the same time the Con Dem coalition has provoked a civil liberties storm after reviving Labour's "Big Brother" plans to track details of every phone call, email and website visit in Britain (Independent 22/10/10).

Which ever of the three grey parties is in power, the Whitehall mandarins and local public servants are bent on creating a "big brother" society. Given the scandal of lost computer files and Government IT cock-ups, this personal information is not safe in the hands of the bureaucrats who run our schools and security services alike. Stand up for the rights and stop big brother now!

Thursday 21 October 2010

Politicians support Tax Avoidance

Yet again we have seen crocodile tears about opposing tax avoidance. The chancellor George Osbourne, whilst casually throwing an additional one million people onto the dole, claimed he would crack down on tax avoidance. But he continues to avoid taxing the real culprits of the recession and increase in public debt.

Mr Osborne, himself apparently supported by a £4m offshore trust, a form of legal tax avoidance, has apparently allowed Vodafone to write off outstanding tax bill of £6bn. According to Johann Hari in the Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-colder-crueller-country-ndash-for-no-gain-2112069.html) bankers have just awarded themselves £7bn in bonuses for their part in causing the recession.

Nor are Labour politicians free from blame. As Mark Thomas pointed out last year (see him on You Tube) Government buildings sold off under PFI are paying rent to offshore companies paying no tax. These include the Treasury building where George Osborne hatched his plans. It also includes Home Office buildings, hospitals and even the Albert Bridge House tax office. So the HMRC tax collectors, who are paid bonuses for the tax demands they send out (whether or not they are correct), are paying rent to tax avoiders.

This Con Dem budget will push the country back into recession. The job losses will continue into the private sector as sub-contractors and temporary staff are the first to be laid off by local government and the NHS. The overall loss of tax and additional unemployment benefit will cost more than the savings made and I predict that the public deficit will go up, not down, in the next 4 years. Surely it would be so much better to tax the tax avoiders and use the money to invest in new Green jobs, as the Green Party suggested at the general election?

Wednesday 13 October 2010

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!

There is nothing more shameful than for politicians, only a few months after an election, to renege on an election promise. Abolishing University tuition fees was not only part of the Liberal Democrat manifesto, but it was also a written pledge by every Lib Dem candidate who publicly signed their name to a written undertaking. It was a central part of the Lib Dem claim to fairness, along with opposing Trident and a promise of proportional representation (AV is not PR).

The Lib Dems have now broken all of these promises, but nothing is more shameful than their complete volte-face on tuition fees. Instead of abolishing tuition fees, Vince Cable has announced they could quadruple up to £12,000!

The British Medical Association warned: "Graduates are currently leaving medical school with an estimated £37,000 worth of debt under the present £3,290 annual fee. There is the potential that some students could incur debts up to and beyond £100,000 if fees are set at £10,000 or above by medical schools."

It is no wonder people do not trust politicians, when the Liberal Democrats betray our trust in this way. It is neither liberal nor democratic to lie to us the way the Lib Dems have done.

Compare and contrast Caroline Lucas, the single Green MP, who has already had more impact on the House of Commons than the whole Lib Dem backbench put together. Clive Aslet, editor-at-large of Country Life magazine said, “She appears to be doing the work that might otherwise be done by several dozen politicians.”

Thursday 23 September 2010

Liberal Democrats

See Green MP Caroline Lucas talking about the broken promises in the Lib Dem manifesto at:

http://yorkshireandhumber.greenparty.org.uk/region/yorkshireandhumber

I never thought to see the day when Liberals, given their first share in Government in my lifetime, proposed keeping Trident, cutting public services, privatising Royal Mail, voting against proportional representation in voting and continuing the war in Afghanistan. Strange and sad times indeed.

Monday 20 September 2010

Allerton Quarry Incinerator

North Yorkshire County Council and York Council propose to build a £900m incinerator to dispose of waste. There will be a series of public consultations, including one at the Catterick Garrison Leisure Centre at 10.00 am on Wednesday 22/9/2010. NYCC have issued what I believe to be a misleading briefing in their propaganda sheet, the NY Times. To redress the balance, I have written what I believe to be relevant facts about this controversial proposal.

1. I understand that this is a commercial venture belonging to Amey Cespa of Spain, but is being funded by NYCC and York Council under a PFI scheme. The Councils, not the Spanish company will therefore be taking the commercial risks. This will saddle North Yorkshire Council taxpayers with 25 years of debt. The minimum total cost to NYCC taxpayers over 25 years is estimated at £1.4 billion at today’s prices, assuming all the financial assumptions are correct.

2. These assumptions include the OVER capacity that has been built into the contract, based on an unrealistic future waste tonnage INCREASE (not decline) and population growth. The contract assumes only 50% recycling is achieved by 2020 (we are nearly there now!). The contract will further financially penalise the councils if the level of waste to feed the incinerator is too LOW! It therefore discourages attempts to recycle above 50% or reduce waste generally. Switzerland, the Netherlands and Austria have national recycling rates of 60% or more.

3. At least half a million jobs would be created in Europe if member states recycled 70% of their waste, according to a Friends of the Earth (FoE) study http://www.foeeurope.org/publications/2010/More_Jobs_Less_Waste_Sep2010.pdf. The report comes one week after José Manuel Barroso called for three million new green jobs by 2020. The Allerton Park site will only employ up to 70 staff, with a similar or greater LOSS of jobs likely at landfill sites.

4. The scheme depends on the import of at least 100,000 tonnes of commercial waste per annum to feed the incinerator. There is no guarantee that that amount of commercial waste would be available to Allerton Park, which would be a substantial financial risk to NYCC. There are currently plans for 65 new incinerators to be built in the UK, in addition to the 25 incinerators that already exist in the UK. Overcapacity in the stock of waste incinerators in Germany and Netherlands has led to the import of waste from other countries. Sheffield City Council Planners asked their incinerator operator Veolia to explain why in 2002 Veolia argued that a projected 80,000 tonne per annum shortfall could be filled with commercial waste, when now “it is now being argued that this level of commercial waste is a problem”. RPS replied: “The composition [of] commercial wastes today do not reflect the circumstances which prevailed in 2001”. http://ukwin.org.uk/2008/07/17/did-mcdonalds-give-sheffields-incinerator-indigestion/ ) It is likely that Amey Cespa are equally being over optimistic in their forecasts of commercial waste available.

5. DEFRA on behalf of the Government is reviewing the treatment of waste nationally. Their aim is (I quote): “The Review will look at all aspects of waste policy and delivery in England. Its main aim will be to ensure that we are taking the right steps towards creating a ‘zero waste’ economy, where resources are fully valued, and nothing of value gets thrown away.” This presumably includes being thrown into an incinerator, so the Allerton Park plan seems premature. http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/waste-review/index.htm

6. Professor Paul Connett, a leading environmental campaigner over the last 25 years, has ridiculed the “pathetic” recycling targets set by North Yorkshire County Council and York Council. “It is an out-dated technology with no flexibility and the councils are living in the 19th century if they push ahead with the incinerator plans. It simply should have no place in the 21st century. (Yorkshire Post 13/9/2010). Prof Connett claimed a 75 per cent recycling target is achievable and pointed towards cities such as San Francisco, which have made huge strides in boosting recycling rates. The Californian city hit a 50 per cent recycling rate a decade ago and is now up to 75 per cent and is aiming towards a zero waste policy by 2020.

7. All incinerators produce dioxins that are vented into the atmosphere and are a risk to health. In Sweden, the lowest levels have been measured at 0.1 ng/m3n in Malmö, Sweden, which is equipped with a dry scrubber/fabric filter. This technology is regarded as being the best technology available for municipal waste incinerators, but it is not clear whether this is included in the Allerton proposal. Either way some dioxins will still escape into the atmosphere.

8. Sweden is held up as an advertisement for incineration as 45% of waste is incinerated there. Sweden has a major industry exporting Waste to Energy schemes, often linked to district heating schemes in very cold areas. These industries date back to the 1970s and are increasingly controversial in Sweden, blamed for keeping down the country’s recycling rate, which is less than in other European countries.

9. The proposed siting of the incinerator near Knaresborough is close to a Grade 1 listed building.

10. There are fears that having commissioned an incinerator, recycling rates will plummet, as happened in Nottingham and Sheffield. Sheffield now has to negotiate efforts to improve recycling with the operators of their incinerator. York Green Party have commented “Other Councils such as Milton Keynes and Lancashire have ruled out using incineration in their waste policy. Incineration has proven again and again to be costly, polluting and deeply unpopular – and to undermine waste reduction and recycling. As a method of energy generation it is absurd. It would be far more cost effective to invest in energy conservation and renewables than building inefficient plants to dispose of material we didn’t need to produce in the first place.”

11. Materials produced by the new facility will include methane from the anaerobic slime that will be used to increase Co2 in the atmosphere by burning it to generate power. Also produced will be potentially toxic residue (bottom ash) that will be incorporated into building aggregate for use under your new drive or house. This toxic waste will be transported out via the nearby A1 and will potentially be blown from these lorries into villages adjacent to the A1, such as Brompton on Swale.

12. Workers from North Yorkshire County Council were sent out to remove signs protesting against the Allerton Park plans that had been put up in villages close to the proposed site. According to Mr Drury, the parish clerk for Little Ribston, 18 signs have gone missing in recent weeks. “It seems the council is intent on smothering any dissenting voices about the scheme to make sure that is goes through smoothly. I’d hate to think that it is a foregone conclusion that the incinerator will be built but that is the way it seems,” he said. “No-one who I have spoken to is against the Allerton Park site being used for recycling. But what every person who I have talked to is against is the incinerator.” (Yorkshire Post 03/09/2010).

13. Liberal Democrat groups and Councillors have campaigned against planned incinerators in Dovesdale, Wiltshire, Plymouth, Bedford, Marston Vale, Bardon, Suffolk, Widnes and many more places. Their general election manifesto opposed incinerators unless alternatives such as waste reduction and increased recycling were not possible. Waste reduction and recycling above 50% are not catered for in the Allerton proposal, so York and NYCC Liberal Democrat councillors should oppose this incinerator if they are going to be true to their manifesto commitments. Unfortunately some still need persuading of this.

14. Richard Lane of YRAIN (York Residents Against Incineration) says “It was no surprise that the Waste Management companies consulted all came back with plans for big burners. It’s easy and profitable to build an incinerator – just stack up the rubbish and send it up the chimney for the next 25 years. But we need to do better than this – we need to protect recycling, reduce greenhouse gases, and reduce waste. That is the sustainable route, but unfortunately also the less profitable one. Private operators looking to turn a buck will not do this without political leadership, and this has been sadly lacking.”

15. Further information can be obtained at The North Yorkshire Waste Action Group (NYWAG - http://www.nywag.org website - others include the Tockwith Residents Association, tockwith.net, who fought a long-running campaign against an attempt to build an incinerator near to their village, and the Marton-cum-Grafton village website. There is also an online petition at http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petitions/dont-incinerate-north-yorkshire/sign.html