Louise Nousratpour
Wednesday July 28, 2010
Morning Star
Council house tenants in properties with more than one spare room could be forced to move into smaller accommodation under the Con-Dem austerity drive.
Announcing the proposals on Wednesday, Welfare Reform Minister Lord Freud claimed the housing swap scheme would tackle overcrowding.
Statistics show 234,000 households in the social tenant sector are overcrowded while 456,000 are "under-occupied" - meaning people have more than one spare room.
Former banker Lord Freud declared he was "putting fairness" back into the system by uprooting working-class families from their home and community because they have a spare room.
Housing campaigners branded Lord Freud's proposals "nasty" and called for more investment in council house building instead.
Defend Council Housing chairwoman Eileen Short said that with 4.5 million people on council house waiting lists, the proposals were yet another "cynical cut" disguised as helping tenants.
"It would attack the poorest, the sickest and the oldest in society," she said.
"If a fraction of the public money used to subsidise private developers and high rents was diverted into building new council homes, the problem of housing would be solved."
Ms Short urged the government to identify the thousands of empty houses owned by property speculators and take them into council control.
Recalling Prime Minister David Cameron's comments in a newspaper interview before the election that he did not know how many homes he owned, Ms Short quipped: "Maybe he can turn some of his homes into affordable housing."
National Housing Federation (NHF) assistant director Paul Rees said the policies would penalise some of Britain's poorest families and tear them away from their communities.
"Higher-income families living in private homes won't be told that their house is too big for them," he observed.
Wednesday's proposals are part of the government's welfare reform agenda, which will also see a maximum housing benefit cap of £280 a week for a flat and £400 for a house.
An NHF report last week warned that the raft of proposed changes to housing benefit could lead to up to 750,000 people at risk of becoming homeless.
"Ministers should go back to the drawing board and rethink the plans," Mr Rees demanded.
Leaked files reveal Afghan atrocities
by Louise Nousratpour
Monday July 26, 2010
The leaked military documents detailing the brutality of the Afghanistan war are "fantastically damaging" to Nato forces and could spell the end of their bloody venture, peace campaigners have said.
Thousands of secret military documents have been leaked by the whistleblowers' website Wikileaks revealing details of incidents when civilians were killed by occupation troops in the country.
The cache contains more than 90,000 US records giving a blow-by-blow account of fighting between January 2004 and December 2009.
They include references to incidents involving British troops.
The files reveal the operations of a secret special forces unit which is allegedly responsible for the "kill or capture" of Taliban leaders.
They also claim that 195 civilians have been killed in "error" and 174 wounded.
But campaigners argued that the real numbers ran into tens of thousands.
Stop the War Coalition convener Lindsey German said: "UN figures estimated that 10,000 Afghan civilians were killed by the end of 2001.
"We could easily triple that number now."
Ms German welcomed the revelations as "fantastically damaging to Nato forces and could be the beginning of the end of the war as the truth will turn public opinion overwhelmingly against it."
Recalling former defence secretary Des Browne's remarks that the Afghan war was the "most noble cause of the 21st century," she said: "The leaks tell a very different story about a sordid, brutal and unwinnable war. It's time to get the troops out."
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange defended the leaks, which he said had showed "the true nature of this war.
"The public from Afghanistan and other nations can see what's really going on and take steps to address the problems."
In response to the leaks, a Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "It would be inappropriate to speculate on specific cases without further verification of the alleged actions."
But he insisted: "Reducing the risk to local civilians has always formed an essential part of all military operations carried out by UK forces."
Former British commanders, nervous about the personal implications of the exposé documents, claimed yesterday that the leaks could compromise operational security.
Colonel Richard Kemp claimed: "It's potentially damaging to operational security," while Colonel Stuart Tootal groaned: "This is going to be seen as more bad news coming out of Afghanistan."
Monday July 26, 2010
The leaked military documents detailing the brutality of the Afghanistan war are "fantastically damaging" to Nato forces and could spell the end of their bloody venture, peace campaigners have said.
Thousands of secret military documents have been leaked by the whistleblowers' website Wikileaks revealing details of incidents when civilians were killed by occupation troops in the country.
The cache contains more than 90,000 US records giving a blow-by-blow account of fighting between January 2004 and December 2009.
They include references to incidents involving British troops.
The files reveal the operations of a secret special forces unit which is allegedly responsible for the "kill or capture" of Taliban leaders.
They also claim that 195 civilians have been killed in "error" and 174 wounded.
But campaigners argued that the real numbers ran into tens of thousands.
Stop the War Coalition convener Lindsey German said: "UN figures estimated that 10,000 Afghan civilians were killed by the end of 2001.
"We could easily triple that number now."
Ms German welcomed the revelations as "fantastically damaging to Nato forces and could be the beginning of the end of the war as the truth will turn public opinion overwhelmingly against it."
Recalling former defence secretary Des Browne's remarks that the Afghan war was the "most noble cause of the 21st century," she said: "The leaks tell a very different story about a sordid, brutal and unwinnable war. It's time to get the troops out."
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange defended the leaks, which he said had showed "the true nature of this war.
"The public from Afghanistan and other nations can see what's really going on and take steps to address the problems."
In response to the leaks, a Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "It would be inappropriate to speculate on specific cases without further verification of the alleged actions."
But he insisted: "Reducing the risk to local civilians has always formed an essential part of all military operations carried out by UK forces."
Former British commanders, nervous about the personal implications of the exposé documents, claimed yesterday that the leaks could compromise operational security.
Colonel Richard Kemp claimed: "It's potentially damaging to operational security," while Colonel Stuart Tootal groaned: "This is going to be seen as more bad news coming out of Afghanistan."
Peace campers driven off Parliament Square
Louise Nousratpour
Tuesday July 20, 2010
London's Parliament Square was sealed off on Tuesday after bailiffs stormed the site and forcibly evicted peace protesters who had camped there since May 1.
The protesters in the makeshift camp known as Democracy Village were removed in the early hours after losing a Court of Appeal battle last week to stay there.
However, veteran peace activist Brian Haw, who has been camped out since 2001 near the Houses of Parliament, was not affected by the eviction order sought by London Mayor Boris Johnson.
Court officials arrived at 1am to move campers on, with protesters claiming they were left "bruised but unperturbed" after a short-lived attempt to stop the bailiffs moving in.
Dozens of activists remained outside Parliament for most of Tuesday after temporary metal fencing was put up around the square.
Londoner Maria Gallastegui, who has camped outside Parliament for four years, said: "People were forcibly removed. There are certainly a few bruises."
Eywitness and Democracy Village activist Phoenix reported that the bailiffs had "kicked and punched people, including one protester who has been on hunger strike for 25 days. He was later treated in an ambulance."
He noted that the camp had received "considerable" backing from current and former servicemen expressing their support for immediate troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.
He added that the peace activists had walked in the footsteps of the Chartists and the Suffragettes who also occupied Parliament square and engaged in civil disobedience to achieve their demands.
"You have to break the law to change the law," he declared.
A message on the group's website on Tuesday encouraged supporters to join in "ongoing mass civil disobedience" around Parliament Square throughout the day.
Campaigners have also called a "people's assembly forum" to discuss future action. This will be held on Saturday between 1pm and 5pm at Victoria Tower Gardens public park next to Parliament.
Police confirmed that they had made no arrests during Tuesday's eviction. A Metropolitan Police spokesman said officers were "in a supporting role to High Court enforcement officers."
A spokeswoman for mayor claimed that the protest had caused "considerable damage" to the site, adding: "The square will now be closed temporarily, during which time the site will be restored."
Tuesday July 20, 2010
London's Parliament Square was sealed off on Tuesday after bailiffs stormed the site and forcibly evicted peace protesters who had camped there since May 1.
The protesters in the makeshift camp known as Democracy Village were removed in the early hours after losing a Court of Appeal battle last week to stay there.
However, veteran peace activist Brian Haw, who has been camped out since 2001 near the Houses of Parliament, was not affected by the eviction order sought by London Mayor Boris Johnson.
Court officials arrived at 1am to move campers on, with protesters claiming they were left "bruised but unperturbed" after a short-lived attempt to stop the bailiffs moving in.
Dozens of activists remained outside Parliament for most of Tuesday after temporary metal fencing was put up around the square.
Londoner Maria Gallastegui, who has camped outside Parliament for four years, said: "People were forcibly removed. There are certainly a few bruises."
Eywitness and Democracy Village activist Phoenix reported that the bailiffs had "kicked and punched people, including one protester who has been on hunger strike for 25 days. He was later treated in an ambulance."
He noted that the camp had received "considerable" backing from current and former servicemen expressing their support for immediate troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.
He added that the peace activists had walked in the footsteps of the Chartists and the Suffragettes who also occupied Parliament square and engaged in civil disobedience to achieve their demands.
"You have to break the law to change the law," he declared.
A message on the group's website on Tuesday encouraged supporters to join in "ongoing mass civil disobedience" around Parliament Square throughout the day.
Campaigners have also called a "people's assembly forum" to discuss future action. This will be held on Saturday between 1pm and 5pm at Victoria Tower Gardens public park next to Parliament.
Police confirmed that they had made no arrests during Tuesday's eviction. A Metropolitan Police spokesman said officers were "in a supporting role to High Court enforcement officers."
A spokeswoman for mayor claimed that the protest had caused "considerable damage" to the site, adding: "The square will now be closed temporarily, during which time the site will be restored."
Delivering a united fightback
Louise Nousratpour talks to the victimised Burslem postal workers making a stand
Sunday July 18, 2010
The Morning Star
Just weeks after the 2007 national postal dispute Burslem delivery office managers summarily sacked 12 union activists in what the union describes as a "conscious decision" to bust the "strongest and most organised" postal branch in the country.
Dave Evans is one of four men who have taken Royal Mail to an employment tribunal to win their jobs back and expose the company's "corrupt" and "bullying" management.
The Burslem 12 were locked in the canteen for the best part of that morning, weren't allowed out, and were eventually told that they had been suspended due to "complaints and allegations" made by members of staff, Evans says.
The sackings triggered a five-and-a-half-week solidarity strike by the entire workforce of the Burslem office over the 2007-8 Christmas period.
The solid strike, the third longest in the Communication Workers Union's history, forced management to launch an internal appeals process which resulted in six of the workers being reinstated and all charges against them dropped.
And after a further six months, a year to the day, another was reinstated.
Of the remaining five, one has since left the industry. Evans, along with Mick Gardner and former reps Dave Scarratt and Paul Malyan, took their case to the tribunal, fully backed by the union. The tribunal finished earlier this month with the results due in September.
"Not one person crossed that picket line for five and a half weeks," Evans recalls. "One of the guys on the picket line told me: 'My kids aren't going to have a great Christmas, but I'll explain to them when they are older why they didn't have any presents that year'."
Paul Dawson, one of the original 12 who was reinstated, says: "They would not have walked out for so long over the busiest time of the year when they could have earned the most money if we were bullying anybody.
"They stood up for us and we are forever indebted to them."
I caught up with Evans and Dawson at this year's CWU conference in Bournemouth where they were minding a stall adorned with framed cut-outs of local press coverage of their fight, and offering passers-by solidarity badges and information leaflets.
Dawson made front-page news locally when he was sacked for a second time last August after staging a rooftop protest at the Burslem office demanding a written apology from Royal Mail, part of the deal during the initial reinstatement victory.
"My protest was successful in that I got my apology faxed to me on the spot," Dawson says proudly. "But a few weeks later, I received a letter saying I had been sacked for 'gross misconduct.'
"I exhausted all the legal channels with Royal Mail to get the apology, to clear my name and for the unnecessary trauma my family and I had gone through. But they were not big enough to give it to me until I climbed the office roof."
Dawson says he cannot understand why he was originally reinstated, but Evans and the others weren't.
"I believe it was a clear divide-and-rule tactic, but it didn't work because we're still here, shoulder to shoulder," he adds.
Evans, who has been unemployed for nearly three years and has had to rely on his wife's income and financial support from the union, brands the sackings a "total stitch-up."
He explains that the allegations of bullying and harassment levelled against the 12, all of whom happened to be reps or active members of the branch, were based on complaints made by one member of staff.
As for the internal appeals hearings, Evans says: "There were no witnesses, just one judge who decided to sack us all on balance of probability, even after admitting that the evidence wasn't there."
Dawson adds: "The corrupt managers wove a cunning plot and coerced one person in a 100-strong workforce into making complaints against 12 people and that stood."
He also says that, the day after the initial suspensions on September 11 2007, the managers ransacked the Burslem branch office and removed union documents.
"They got a locksmith to break into the filing cabinets and took agreement books containing records of union meetings and staff complaints against management harassment and bullying," says Dawson. "These books suddenly went missing."
Thanks to Thatcher's anti-union laws brought in during the 1984 miners' strike, even if the four win their tribunal case Royal Mail has no legal obligation to reinstate them.
"I have no doubt that I'll win the case but whether or not I'll get my job back is another matter," Evans sighs.
Dawson, whose latest sacking will be dealt with through separate channels, declares his readiness to defend his colleagues till the bitter end.
"If they lose their case, or win it but don't get reinstated, I think we should organise a fightback, including strike action and even a trip to the EU Court of Human Rights.
"If we let them get away with it, they will do worse in the future. It's no longer a question of individual cases, but an attack on the whole movement."
And both Evans and Dawson say that their ordeal has made them even more determined to get involved in union business and continue to defend workers' interests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
