Olympics 2012: London 'could become a hub for sex traffickers'

Louise Nousratpour
Wednesday February 9, 2011
The Morning Star

The Olympic Games could become a "magnet" for criminal gangs in London to force women and girls into the sex trade, anti-trafficking campaigners warned today.

A coalition of politicians, activists and TUC representatives called on David Cameron to sign the EU directive on human trafficking before next year's Games.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper accused ministers of allowing anti-European sentiments among the Tories get in the way of Britain adopting the "sensible" measures.

She told the Stopping Traffick '11 conference that studies had revealed that international sporting events "can be used by criminals, under the cover of tourism, to exploit particularly women and children."

Tough measures at the 2006 World Cup in Germany stopped the increased demand for prostitution, Ms Cooper said, but weaker measures during the Olympics in Athens almost doubled the number of trafficking victims in 2004.

Last week, US anti-trafficking campaigners warned that "hundreds or even thousands" of women and children had been trafficked into Texas before last Sunday's Super Bowl.

TUC leader Brendan Barber said the government's refusal to adopt the EU directive was a disgrace and abuse would continue as long as the government continued to drag its heels.

Romana Cacchioli of the Anti-Slavery International argued that to combat trafficking Britain must recognise that it can not go it alone.

"It is in the interests of the UK to adopt tougher legislation designed to give Britain the tools it needs to fight the trafficking of men, women and children into forced labour and sexual exploitation," he said.

A Home Office spokesman said: "There is no evidence that there is any increase in human trafficking linked to the Olympics but if this changes we will take appropriate measures to deal with this."

Charity funding: Cam's grand sham

Louise Nousratpour
Tuesday February 8, 2011
The Morning Star

Voluntary sector and trade union speakers warned today that Tory funding cuts delivered under the cover of the "Big Society" are helping to collapse charitable organisations nationwide.

Around 150 representatives from charities and unions rounded on David Cameron's flagship programme at a TUC-organised event in London, with speakers deriding it as a farce worthy of Monty Python.

The Prime Minister has said that he wants to roll back the state and let "an army of volunteers" pick up the slack in the name of empowering communities.

Yet his government is planning to slash funding for the voluntary sector by 40 per cent - or £5bn - which leading charitable groups have warned will lead to the wholesale closure of vital services.

Neil Cleeveley of the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action said charities were being hit by a "double whammy" of squeezed finances and increased demand at a time when local services faced closure.

Community Links chief executive Geraldine Blake added: "We are concerned as to how they will cope if local charities like ours are forced to close the doors of community centres, youth clubs and advice services at exactly the same time that local councils cut services."

National Council for Voluntary Organisations spokeswoman Belinda Pratten said: "By working together, we can send a strong message to government about the scale of the challenges ahead."

Event organisers accused Mr Cameron of pulling the rug from underneath communities and using his "Big Con" idea to drive through unprecedented local cuts.

TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said the conference was part of ongoing efforts to build "the widest possible coalition" against the cuts, involving unions, charities, community groups and faith organisations.

He called on people from across Britain to join a "march for the alternative" in London on March 26 "to send a clear message to ministers that they must find another way."

Unite general secretary Len McCluskey called on the Commons public administration select committee to investigate the "funding crisis" engulfing UK charities because of government cuts.

He said: "Councils that provide financial assistance for many charities are forcing them to axe jobs and services because of the cutbacks in local authority funding.

"That the Prime Minister's Big Society 'czar' Lord Wei had to reduce his unpaid days from three to two a week because he could not make ends meet has turned the Big Society into a sketch from Monty Python."

Mr McCluskey warned that if Chancellor George Osborne fails to address the crisis facing the sector by his Budget on March 23, "many charities will go to the wall and that will be the death knell of the Big Society."

The NCVO has created a website - www.voluntarysectorcuts.org.uk - aimed at mapping out the scale of cuts and closures in the voluntary sector.

So far more than 210 local charities have reported cuts to their funding, worth £41 million, and the number is rising.

louise@peoples-press.com

Giving with one hand, taking with the other

Lousie Nousratpour
Friday January 28, 2011
The Morning Star

Nick Clegg has promised to reform the current "Edwardian" system of parental leave to give fathers more rights and lighten the burden on mothers.

Clegg is right to say that the existing system is inflexible and "paltry," but the Deputy Prime Minister's own proposals are equally pathetic and will not be introduced until 2015 - assuming the shaky coalition survives.

He announced earlier this month that the government will "soon" launch a consultation aimed at improving shared parental leave, though not pay.

Working mothers currently receive 52 weeks of maternity leave, of which 39 are paid. Fathers or partners receive just two weeks leave paid at the statutory rate of £125 a week, rising to £129 from April.

From April 3, new regulations introduced by the former Labour government will allow fathers or partners to take up to six months additional parental leave once the mother has returned to work after 20 weeks. Some of this leave may be paid.

Clegg said he wanted to "go further" by enabling fathers or partners to take leave after six weeks of the child's birth when many mothers return to work as the more generous maternity pay - 90 per cent of average weekly earnings - is replaced by the statutory pay.

Fathers could also be offered additional blocks of "use-it-or-lose-it" leave within 10 weeks of the child's birth.

The proposals have been given the cold shoulder by family groups who are angry at the coalition's unprecedented attack on a range of benefits and services for parents, including restricting maternity grants to the first child and stop funding for Sure Start centres.

4Children charity chief executive Anne Longfield has accused ministers of "giving with one hand while taking with the other."

Maternity Action director Rosalind Bragg has branded Clegg's proposals "extremely disappointing" and designed to appease businesses than give parents real choice.

Bragg argued that an essential step in encouraging parents, especially fathers, to take leave would be to increase the rate of pay.

"The statutory pay is below the earnings of many working parents and places families in significant financial difficulty. They can't afford to take leave," she said.

"Many parts of Europe pay maternity leave at full pay for the first 18 to 20 weeks and in some cases much longer. Increasing paternity pay to wage replacement levels would encourage more fathers to take the time off."

There is widespread misunderstanding about who bears the costs of statutory pay.

While parents receive these payments directly from their employer, the company can claim almost the entire amount back from the government. Small businesses can reclaim 104.5 per cent.

The government actively opposed the now defeated EU Pregnant Workers Directive which would have set minimum legal entitlements for 20 weeks of maternity leave and two weeks of paternity leave at full pay.

Employment Relations Minister Edward Davey argued that Britain could not afford it, even though poorer EU member states like Poland and Estonia already offer 20 weeks of fully paid maternity leave.

As the fifth-richest country in the world, Britain can and must do better than Clegg's measly proposals.

Rather than trying to copy Sweden's regressive "free school" scheme to accelerate privatisation of education, the government should learn from that country's world-class family laws, which allow parents an equal share of 16 months of paid leave per child, including 12 months paid at 80 per cent of average earnings.