|
| Newsletter | September 2000 |
We have now added a few fancy gizmos. You can search the site, join our mailing list and a counter gives an idea of the number of visitors to our home page.
If you have not already done so, please add your name to our mailing list. The manual list will be terminated soon. If you are getting two copies of everything and you have already added yourself to our mailing list, please let us know and we will delete you from the manual list.
If you know of a fancy gizmo that is a 'must have', let us know and we will think about adding it. If the demand exists we will think of setting up a BVEJ discussion list. A discussion list is where you make your comments and it goes out to everyone on the list. A bit like letters to the local press, except the anti-TAG ones don't get filtered out.
Our printed copies of the newsletters are still way behind the electronic versions. Yet more compelling reasons for joining the mailing list. If you are able to print off (click on PDF) and distribute copies we'd be very grateful. If the pdf version is not yet available, please print and distribute the html version (web page). Not ideal, but better than nothing for the many people who lack internet access. When you get the electronic version please copy and forward to as many people as you can think of. If we are to fight the many environmental injustices around us then we have to mobilise large numbers of people. The worst we can do is sit on our butts and do nothing.
Empirical data from accidents show that crash positions are more likely to be close to the runway ends than at large distances from them ... -- authors of NATS risk assessment for Farnborough
We put safety first, say BA. When the Air France Concorde crashed on takeoff from Charles de Gaulle Air France immediately grounded all its Concorde fleet until further notice as a precautionary measure. Air France decided that until it was known beyond reasonable doubt the cause of the crash it was wisest to ground all Concorde flights. BA took the opposite view. Until the cause of the crash was established no flights would be suspended.
CAA concurred with BA. Until the cause of the crash was known no Concorde flights would be grounded.
The Air France Concorde crashed into a hotel, narrowly missing the town of Gonesse. All 109 passengers and crew were killed, plus four people on the ground.
It is now known that a tyre burst on takeoff, fragments of rubber ruptured the fuel tank, causing the catastrophic crash. Since 1976 there has been 70 incidents of tyre failure, some have ruptured the fuel tanks, none have caused a catastrophic crash as was witnessed in France.
Three weeks after the Paris crash, when the cause was known, Concorde had its air worthiness certificate immediately withdrawn by the CAA.
CAA are the authority that may be minded to grant a licence for TAG to operate a business airport at Farnborough. CAA only considers the safety of passengers and crew, CAA does not consider the safety of those on the ground, those people living in fear under the flight path.
In spite of promises to the contrary, no safety study has been carried out for Farnborough. The Local Plan was passed by Rushmoor Borough Council, even though they failed to commission a promised safety study.
TAG have repeatedly claimed that their operation is safe. To date they have given no evidence to support that assertion. Indeed the studies carried out by NATS show that at the numbers of flights TAG wish to impose on the area the unacceptable risk contours extend over residential Farnborough.
The risk statistics for Farnborough were rigged, considering the crash statistics for a type of aircraft rather than their usage as business aircraft.
Safety guidelines for Farnborough require pilots to line up on the runway three miles on approach (they should be lined up over Coleford Bridge) and to approach on a 3.5 degree glide path. These guidelines are not adhered to. Cutting down the trees that project into the flight surface will encourage pilots to come in even lower. Installation of an ILS radio beam automatic landing system will prove problematical due to multiple reflections from the many buildings on final approach giving rise to a fluctuating, distorted beam.
World wide there are 30-40 fatal air crashes every year. Business aviation has a crash record 16-100 times that of a reputable airline like Air France.
The Concorde crash is forcing the French to reappraise their urbanisation policies around airports. Similar safety concerns are now being raised across Europe. In addition to safety, questions are being asked about the uncontrolled expansion of airports and air traffic, with mounting criticisms of the environmental impact, especially noise and emissions.
Farnborough is not unique is raising these concerns. What makes Farnborough unique is that the residential area, including a college, is situated at the end of a runway on top of a hill.
TAG have frequently threatened they will relocate to Europe if they face continuing opposition, and good riddance if they go, but it begs the question 'go where?' as they will find no one else will want them either.
18 August 2000, at an airshow at Eastbourne an aircraft crashed into the sea 150 yards offshore.
23 August 2000, a Gulf Air Airbus A320 coming in to land at Bahrain crashed in the Gulf. All 143 people on board were killed. Three years ago a Gulf Air Airbus A320 skidded off a runway injuring 80 passengers. TAG are wishing to bring a business version of the A320 into Farnborough which will exceed the Local Plan limit of 50 tonnes.
There has been several recent incidents at Farnborough only seconds away from disaster and only luck has prevented a major accident.
TAG Aviation will, if they obtain a planning consent and CAA licence, benefit from this work ... -- J C Upshall, Defence Estates, MoD Agency
As we reported last month (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000, BVEJ urgent action 12 August 2000) Rushmoor gave the go ahead to destroy trees in the flight path, TPOs were to be waived, permission was granted to destroy trees on the public highway. On the 15 August 2000, contractors started work in Church Road West.
Rushmoor agreed to monitor the situation. On the day the contractors started work the Rushmoor Tree Officer was nowhere to be seen. Apparently too busy with his office work as the following day he was going away on a two week holiday. No alternative arrangements had been made for site visits to monitor the situation.
On 11 August 2000 (ie two days after the Rushmoor planning meeting that gave the go head) O'Callaghan (who are handling the work on behalf of TAG/MoD and in turn subcontracting out the work) wrote to private landowners seeking access to attack their trees. In their letter, dated and postmarked 11 August 2000, O'Callaghan wrote: '... we write to advise you that we will shortly be submitting details to Rushmoor Borough Council for their consideration and comments prior to implementing the tree works programme.' O'Callaghan continued: 'The reason for this second visit is to allow the Council the opportunity to view the trees and confirm agreement with the proposed specification ...' In other words two days after the council meeting which agreed the trees could go, O'Callaghan were stating that details of the works had yet to be submitted to Rushmoor and no site visits had yet taken place to determine the work. Rushmoor gave the go ahead to O'Callaghan for the work in the absence of information from O'Callaghan relating to that work. At least one letter was with reference to a tree covered by a TPO.
Council officials claim landowners have been advised they can say no to attacks on their trees and thus force a public inquiry which may impose a delay of up to a year. Landowners are unaware of any such advice, and were not aware they could say no until advised by BVEJ.
Several landowners are saying no and will not let MoD/TAG or their agents O'Callaghan onto their land. Their refusal will force a public inquiry causing a delay of anything up to a year. These people need our full support as they will come under a lot of pressure to back down over the coming months.
Until such time as all the trees can be cut down, not a single tree should be touched.
16 August 2000, in a specially hired coach, members of Rushmoor planning committee paid a site visit to Farnborough Airfield. Showing their usual dereliction of duty, the committee did not make any off-site inspections, even though this is where the major impact of TAG's planning application will be felt.
Houses at the western end of Albert Road, immediately under the flight path, have the slates lifted on their roofs every time a plane passes overhead. A problem caused by wing tip vortexes, a problem that can only worsen when larger aircraft use the airfield. When sitting in their gardens the people who live in these houses have a problems with the dumping of kerosene and not only can smell kerosene but can feel it on their skin. Kerosene is carcinogenic.
Days before the council meeting called to rubber-stamp the TAG application, Rushmoor released details of a report that claimed the airfield was not economically viable with a 50 tonne weight limit (Farnborough News, Friday 24 August 2000). The timing of the report was to ensure it could not be subjected to critical analysis. Local objectors were not advised of the reports existence. Reports by local experts have been ignored, the planning inspector's recommendations on safety were ignored, objections from the college were sat on and not made known to councillors, but surprise, surprise, a report favouring TAG takes centre stage. If TAG cannot make a profit that's tough, they are in the business of taking risks, if they cannot make money on their investment that is their problem not ours. What we do know is that the college will suffer economically if the TAG operation goes ahead, student numbers are already falling (no sane student would wish to study in a noisy death trap when there are better options elsewhere), the college is already threatening to fire 60 lecturers to balance the books. Economic viability is a business matter not a matter of planning consideration.
The college is attempting via the back door of the Secretary of State for Education to have the Local Plan called-in. If they succeed it will screw the TAG planning application. The college is also refusing access to their trees.
English Nature granted permission for the removal of reptiles (protected species in a protected area) from the hills to be lopped (western end of runway) way back in July 1999. This was before TAG had even drawn up their planning application, let alone submitted it. The hills are a SSSI and the work will potentially affect two other SSSIs (Fleet Pond and Basingstoke Canal). The heathland is contained within the proposed Thames Basin Heaths SPA (EC Directive 79/409 Conservation of Wild Birds). Lowland heath together with wetland is one of the most endangered of habitats. Fragmentation of heaths is almost as bad as direct loss. [English Nature contact: Catherine Chatters, tel 02380 283944 fax 02380 283834 hants.iwight@english-nature.org.uk]
Following an EC Directive, where protected species are involved permission for development may only be granted if it can be shown to be of imperative public interest and alternative options have been explored. The heathland to the west of the airfield is home to protected species. Imperative public interest has not been demonstrated, nor have alternative options been explored.
Attempts are being made to dissolve the present Farnborough Aerodrome Consultative Panel. Whilst the present panel is in urgent need of reform, its dissolution is not the answer.
TAG's current proposals do not seek to remove the 50 tonne weight limit. However they believe there is an overriding economic case to support some flexibility to facilitate the use of the Aerodrome by a limited number of larger aircraft up to 80 tonnes. -- Rushmoor gobbledegook
Rushmoor officials recommended to Council that the TAG planning application for a business airport at Farnborough be approved. They have swallowed and regurgitated without any critical analysis all the points made by TAG. Officials are recommending that the 50 tonne limit in the Local Plan be exceeded to enable TAG to bring in 80 tonne aircraft, that TAG be granted 28,000 movements. TAG had only asked for an initial 25,000, but if the Local Plan says 28,000 then why not be generous and give TAG an extra 3,000. If TAG cannot make money with 50 tonne aircraft then allow them 80 tonne.
Objections are not even reproduced, not even going as far as the Local Plan, selectively extract then rubbish. Officials merely note the number of objections, 1220 (cf support 186), then list the categories, noise, safety, pollution etc. Officials note: 'Over 500 letters were either based on, or influenced by, the leaflet produced by Blackwater Friends of the Earth.' Whether this is critical comment or praise is not clear, or merely an inference that 500 objections should be ignored because they were generated by BVFoE. It is unfortunate that BVFoE did not continue the momentum they built up before Christmas. Officials note that 'many of the letters are quite detailed in their nature. Some respondents have even placed their comments on the Internet.' For example:
All the surrounding local authorities recorded objections, and in particular wanted to see controls on noise, weight (not exceed 50 tonnes), movements (not exceed 25,000). Objections which Rushmoor officials in their recommendations duly ignored.
Government policy (or to be correct, statements) relating to airfields is very selectively quoted. No mention that a policy is in the process of formulation. And in any case the government statements only express a desire for business aviation facilities to continue at Farnborough, no mention of massive expansion. Expansion is contrary to government policy on sustainable development, greenhouse gases etc.
The risk to the local community is downplayed, then overridden by the need for TAG to make a profit. FCoT need not worry as only part of their site is blighted, if a crash occurs it only affects part of the college.
Officials note the contribution aviation makes to global warming, then repeat TAG's arguments that flights will be displaced from other airports and this will somehow reduce global warming. They totally ignore the fact that flights at Farnborough are additional flights and the freed slots at other airports, eg Gatwick and Heathrow, will be take by other aircraft.
Rushmoor repeat TAG's false assertion that environmental damage is environmental enhancement, a view Rushmoor claim is supported by English Nature. EN regard the work as inflicting significant damage. Destruction of trees on the canal is landscape enhancement, to open up a glorious vista of the airfield (except of course during airshows when screens will be erected to cut off a free view). At a meeting in Church Crookham last year the Chairman of the Basingstoke Canal Society described the work as a scorched earth policy.
Officials note that all aircraft have the potential to detach roof tiles, then falsely claim it can't happen at Farnborough, which ignores the fact that it's already happening and can only get worse with larger aircraft.
Officials claim ILS will make landing at Farnborough safer, ignoring the multiple reflections and fluctuating signals that will be caused by the many buildings on the approach.
Officials claim runway reconfiguration will result in planes 60-80 feet higher over Farnborough. In which case why are trees being cut?
Some affected properties may be offered noise insulation but of little consolation if you wish to have windows open or sit outside in the garden.
Officials note that the TAG planning application accords with the Local Plan. As the latter was rewritten to accommodate the former this is hardly surprising.
TAG make many assertions in their planning application, assertions that lack any supporting evidence. Officials take all on face value.
The TAG operation is to be controlled via a legal agreement and monitoring, details of which have not been made available. There can be no confidence in this or the will by Rushmoor to enforce. The current operation lacks planning consent but no enforcement notice has been served. The current licence has a weight limit of 35 tonnes which is ignored. The designated flight paths are ignored. On the afternoon of Thurs/Fri 24/25 August 2000 with a strong easterly wind, aircraft were on takeoff flying across Church Road East. Aircraft regularly come in at 2.0 degrees not 3.5 degrees as claimed. ASDA received planning consent approximately 10 years ago. They are in breach of their conditions re delivery times which is causing a nuisance to residential properties in Queensmead but no enforcement action has been taken.
[further information see Rushmoor planning committee agenda 30 August 2000]
Friday 25 August 2000, we learnt from the Farnborough News (Matt Burrows, Airfield may depend on big jets) that Rushmoor had commissioned a report from Leeds-based Airport Planning and Development Ltd that showed the TAG operation was not viable at less than 80 tonnes, ie they would have to breach the 50 tonne limit in the Local Plan.
The timing of the release of this report meant there was no opportunity before the special planning meeting (Wednesday 30 August, with an intervening Bank Holiday weekend) to subject it to critical analysis. Inquiries to Rushmoor for further information were told that no one was available in Democratic Services (sic) as they were all out for the day at a wedding, and would Tuesday be alright. Objectors were not formally notified of the existence of this report. The report was commissioned by planning official Richard Short on 27 June 2000, ie two days before Rushmoor approved the Local Plan.
The report only includes business flights, it ignores the airshow, VIPs and other traffic, the income from which would far exceed that from the heavier aircraft.
The agenda devotes several pages to this report and the economic benefits TAG will bring. No mention of studies that show that airports far from being wealth generators are negative wealth generators if we take account of externalised costs and hidden subsidies, let alone the points raised or conclusions reached by such reports.
Two such reports we would recommend:
FoEE, The Myths of Flying: Putting aviation's economic benefits into perspective, Friends of the Earth Europe, November 1998
Ton Sledsens, Sustainable Aviation, European Federation for Transport and the Environment, March 1998
Or for a brief overview of the economics:
Richard Short has claimed there was no intention of pre-empting plans for the airfield and was simply a case of giving the councillors as much information as possible. In which case we have to ask why has the report been placed centre stage, why no mention of other studies that show airfields are not wealth generators. To which we would add that the agenda for the TAG special planning meeting is a one-sided presentation of regurgitated TAG material, is so similar in content to TAG's own material that we wonder if TAG wrote it, and contains no critical analysis provided by the many objectors. Richard Short may wish to give councillors as much material as possible but only if it supports the TAG case, and preferably only if it has been written by TAG, commissioned by TAG, approved by TAG or comes from consultants recommended by TAG.
This is a very important decision for the council and will be taken in light of both the Local Plan and the feedback from our extensive consultation process. -- Andrew Lloyd, Rushmoor Chief Executive
On Wednesday 30 August a specially convened Rushmoor planning meeting met to consider the TAG planning application for a Business Airport at Farnborough.
The accompanying report was a one-sided uncritical presentation of the TAG material. Great emphasis made in the report of economic benefits, but the economic disadvantages to the area are ignored, as are the studies that show uncontrolled aviation expansion is a negative wealth generator. The expansion of aviation at Farnborough is claimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The massive environmental damage is presented as environmental improvement and is claimed to have approval of English Nature. EN have grave reservations.
Even before the meeting had started there was the usual disinformation, dirty tricks and black propaganda from Rushmoor. A report from an airports promotion body was released the previous Friday claiming that 80 tonne aircraft were needed to make the operation viable. A claim disputed by Farnborough College of Technology. On Tuesday, the Farnborough Mail reported that Rushmoor were claiming 500 objections were generated by an emotive BVFoE leaflet which claimed that Rushmoor were in the pocket of TAG. Whether or not Rushmoor are in the pocket of TAG, and it is a commonly accepted belief which the activities of councillors and officials do nothing to dispel, it was not stated in the BVFoE leaflet. The leaflet merely reported what TAG requested and the consequences (lopping of hills, trees, air pollution, environmental damage, number of movements, 80 tonnes etc) the reverse side of which provided information on how to object. During an interview on Southern Counties Radio, Donald Spears, TAG Aviation Director claimed there was little objection; the reporter drew his attention to 1220 letters of objection. Spears claimed this was far exceeded by letters of support; reporter drew his attention to 198 letters of support. Spears claimed wide economic support; but when challenged could not give any evidence.
At the start of the meeting Patrick Kirby attempted to have the meeting adjourned on a number of grounds including that it was during the period when the adopted Local Plan was subject to legal challenge, it was summer holidays, promised safety study never carried out etc. All of Kirby's points were rubbished by officials.
John Starling left the room. He had received a threatening letter from the Borough Solicitor the previous day.
The debate concentrated on trivia (building work to end a couple of hours earlier, slightly earlier times for engine testing), cosmetics for the public gallery to give the false impression that councillors were acting for the local community. The only valid point that councillors raised was that the Local Plan had only been agreed within the last few weeks, it set a limit of 50 tonnes, and it was already being breached by the 80 tonne recommendation. This argument was rubbished by officials who did an excellent job acting as agents for TAG. Councillors were told that TAG would accept nothing less than 80 tonnes, and if they did not get their way TAG would walk away. This was greeted by cheers from the public gallery. Councillors complained of blackmail and being forced to take a decision with a gun held to their heads.
The committee voted to recommended acceptance of the TAG application (28,000 movements, 80 tonnes) with referral to the Secretary of State. Only three councillors voted against, two abstained.
Objectors now have three weeks in which to write to the Secretary of State (John Prescott MP) to have the application called-in, ie to call for a public inquiry. [see BVEJ Urgent Action 05 September 2000]
The following morning planning officer Darryl Phillips gave an interview to Southern Counties Radio. He claimed the TAG application had not been rushed through. Not true, the application sat on the shelve to enable the Local Plan to be rewritten to accommodate the TAG application, once the Local Plan was adopted, it was then rushed through with unseemly haste. Phillips claimed there had been no strong-arm tactics, 80 tonnes was a preference in the TAG business plan, and they could live with 50 tonnes.
When did you last see a sparrow? Without our noticing, the common house sparrow has disappeared. Look around, how many sparrows do you see?
Populations of the once common house sparrow have plummeted. Why, is not known. In the countryside industrialised farming is thought to be to blame, as it is for the many other ills that have befallen the countryside. In the towns it may be increases in pollution, something the sparrow may be sensitive to.
Whatever the reason we should be worried. Sparrows go wherever man goes, like man, sparrows are highly adaptable. Is the sparrow, like the miner's canary, acting as an alarm for some unforeseen impending disaster?
Like some men who fail to notice the existence of their wives until they walk out the door, it will only be after the sparrow has gone that we will value its close presence.
Large-scale dams have a poor environmental track record. They damage a large area, displace large numbers of people, but only have a useful working life of 2-3 decades. Some projects are silted up before they come on stream.
In Thailand over 100 dams are planned for the Mekong river, some of which are already under construction. Already the area is experiencing salination, declining fish stocks, and 15,000 people have been displaced.
In Uganda the US-based AES Corporation is planning a $520 million dam near Bujagali Falls. The spectacular falls are likely to be damaged by the project, 820 people displaced and 6,000 lose their productive agricultural land.
The Ilisu Dam is part of the GAP project in Turkish occupied Kurdistan (Anatolia, south-east Turkey). The project is part of the continuing war of genocide against the Kurds and has been heavily criticised by human rights activists, environmentalists and two House of Commons Select Committees. [see BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000]
A series of dams are planned for north-east India. The Subansiri and Dehang dam projects in the Brahmapurta valley will destroy 28,000 hectares of forest. Two Biosphere reserves lie within the affected area. The Kameng dam project threatens the Namheri National Park and Pakui Wildlife Sanctuary, both of which harbour endangered tigers. The Leshka dam in southern Meghalaya will destroy 50 hectares of forest. No proper environmental impact assessments have been carried out, nor has the cumulative effect of so many dams in a relatively small area been assessed.
The Narmada Valley in India has been the scene of Satyagraha, non-violent mass action, against the imposed submergence, and appalling brutality against the protesters by the police. Damming of the Narmada River will turn the valley into a series of reservoirs. It will affect the lives of 25 million people who live in the valley, and will submerge and destroy 4,000 square kilometres of deciduous woodland. The Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) have been fighting against the proposed dams for the past 14 years. Arundhati Roy, the Booker Prize winning author, was arrested earlier in the year for her part in the anti-dam demonstrations. She describes the effects of such developments in her book The Greater Common Good. [see SchNEWS 244]
The Three Gorges Dam in China will displace 1.2 million people.
It is not only in the Third World that dams are unwanted. The Itoiz Dam in the Basque region of Spain is another controversial dam project.
That large-scale dams have major environmental and social impacts is no longer in dispute. Supporters of dams are now arguing, much the same as we have seen in the nuclear industry, that dams are a clean energy source, with the added advantage of being a renewable energy source. This would enable them to claim carbon credits, something that could prove very profitable and rewrite the economics for large-scale hydroelectric schemes. The carbon credits could run as high as millions of dollars in carbon credits per hydroelectric dam per year.
The implied assumption that dams are zero emitters of greenhouse gases has been found not to be true. The measured emissions range from low for dams in cooler regions to comparable with a thermal power station of the same generating capacity in tropical regions.
The World Commission on Dams has noted that:
Hydropower cannot, a priori, be automatically assumed to emit less greenhouse gas than the thermal alternatives. Net emissions should be established on a case by case basis.
WCD also note that:
Net changes in emissions from alternative sources of energy (including thermal, wind, solar, biomass etc.) should be examined using a Life-Cycle Analysis, that includes cradle to grave assessments.
Or in other words we have to look at construction and other factors. It is when nuclear plants are examined over the life-cycle that they are seen not to be the clean greenhouse gas operations their supporters claim.
There are now more than 40,000 large dams worldwide. One of the problems that has yet to be faced are the decommissioning costs, and who pays. Once it has reached the end of its useful lifetime a dam cannot simply be abandoned and left in-situ. What little is known of decommissioning, as with nuclear power plants we lack the experience, the decommissioning costs are going to be as much as, and may well far exceed, the initial construction costs.
Once again there has been over zealous maintenance of the Basingstoke Canal. The canal has been turned into little more than a muddy ditch. This summer even the patch of water lilies near the bridge over the A325 had gone. Years gone by water weeds fringed the banks. Small wonder the populations of dragonflies are down.
Lopping and cutting of trees has taken place on the canal. This, we are told, is for environmental enhancement, to help the declining population of dragonflies. Strange that it has only taken place at the end of the runway, immediately under the flight path.
Cove Brook has acquired a lot of water weed and rushes, which is a great improvement over its manicured appearance of recent years. For how long we will retain this wetland wildlife corridor we don't know because if interfering busybodies have their way it will revert to its previous manicured appearance. For once we find ourselves in full agreement with a council official. We agree with Rushmoor Conservation Manager Alison Davidson that removal of the undergrowth will be bad for wildlife and if there is a danger of children falling in it is the responsibility of their parents to properly look after them.
Interfering busybodies like Councillors Brian Jupp and Charlie Fraser-Fleming are not the only threats to Cove Brook. The brook drains Farnborough Airfield. Runway spills and run-off (de-icer, fuel etc) will find its way into Cove Brook. It will only take one toxic incident on the airfield to wipe out all the wildlife in the brook.
We believe the planning decision to board up all the empty shops in Farnborough was not legit as no notice was given to affected properties. This is grounds to stop the work, and at the very least for a complaint to the Ombudsman on maladministration. [BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000]
The Arab owners of the town centre finally got around to telling the traders that the empty shops would be boarded up. They said the work would be completed by the end of August. It hadn't even started. But then when have they been known to tell the truth?
If the traders and shopkeepers got their act together they could easily take on the Arabs and Rushmoor. It's almost as though they all want to go out of business.
Rushmoor have earmarked the Iceland car park for a taxi rank, and the library is to be demolished to make way for further redevelopment. Only Rushmoor have not yet got around to telling anyone, including Iceland and the library.
The debate over the Ilisu Dam has however provided a welcome opportunity to consider how issues of development, human rights, conflict and corruption and conditionality are handled by ECGD. In all these areas we conclude that improvements must be made. -- International Development Select Committee
If you are an environmental activist and you are fighting a project that will destroy a river, a forest or displace a community in a developing country, chances are that the project you are up against is being backed by an Export Credit Agency. -- Heffa Schucking of the German NGO Urgewald
New Labour were swept to power on the back of Tory sleaze, arms-to-Iraq and the Pergau Dam aid-for-arms scandal.
On attaining power Robin Cook pontificated on an 'ethical foreign policy', of which we have yet to see any evidence. There was also a clamp-down on aid being used directly to finance British exports, but a corrupt system always finds ways around a few petty restrictions. Exports are now supported or underwritten by the Export Credit Guarantee Department (ECGD).
ECGD, like export credit agencies (ECAs) in other countries, exists to underwrite export projects. It is unaccountable, refuses to give details of its activities to parliament, does not take human rights or environmental damage into account when underwriting projects. The advisory council overseeing its investments is stuffed with directors of the very same companies it underwrites.
Balfour Beatty has received export credit guarantees for every year since 1994. Last year Balfour Beatty received guarantees under three different names - Balfour Beatty Ltd, Balfour Beatty Projects Engineering and Balfour Beatty International. The only company with a similar track record, AMEC, has its chief executive Peter Mason on the ECGD advisory committee.
Business is in the business of taking risks. If they do not like the risk then they should not take on the business. The Ilisu Dam is one example, Balfour Beatty are seeking £200 million of taxpayers money to underwrite their role as prime contractor (see BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000). Other projects include two nuclear power plants in China, which will provide energy at three or four times the cost of power from sustainable sources, the Nathpa Dam in India, which, as predicted, has proved to be totally useless, sale of 40 Hawk aircraft to Indonesia by British Aerospace.
ECGD is responsible for 95% of the debt owed by Third World countries to the British government.
Where does the money come from if there is no money to fund public projects? Public projects are being funded under PFI (public finance initiative), where the private sector provides the capital then leases back at extortionate cost. This could happen with the London Underground, a method of funding which is opposed by Ken Livingstone downwards.
Lack of money is not the problem. In all cases we are talking about corporate welfare, public money transferred into private pockets. ECAs finance projects because business does not wish to undertake the risk. Many of the projects are white elephants which would not otherwise be undertaken. Public money is available to underwrite big business. It is not available for public projects as that would be a waste of public money. Better to encourage public-private partnerships where the public stumps up the money and private business rakes in the profit.
Who better to explain how the system of corporate welfare works than Midland Bank executive Stephen Kock in charge of arms deals and a former MI6 'asset':
You see, before we advance monies to a company, we always insist on any funds being covered by the [UK] Government's Export Credits Guarantee Department. We can't lose. After 90 days, if the Iraqis haven't coughed up, the company gets paid instead by the British Government. Either way, we recover our loan, plus interest of course. It's beautiful.
ECAs, Export Credit Agencies, are now the major source of Third World funding, dwarfing even the development money coming from the World Bank.
The attack by the House of Commons Select Committee on Stephen Byers being 'minded' to allow ECGD to underwrite Balfour Beatty to the sum of £200 million can be seen as an attack on ECGD in general: lack of accountability and transparency, failure to consider human rights or environmental implications, project ill-conceived and badly planned.
The UK government is currently carrying out a review of export credit guarantees. Early Day Motion 191 (EDM 191) has been launched to welcome that review and to call upon the government to negotiate a Europe wide ban on export credits for arms deals. Please check out whether your MP has signed. If not, why not?
ECGD serves no useful purpose. It is not the role of the taxpayer to hand out corporate welfare or finance corruption. ECGD should be closed down.
We simply cannot afford not to respond to the level of concern on this issue. -- Alistair Campbell, Tony Blair's press officer
The world's leaders have retreated to this remote island, and have turned their backs on the poor, ignoring a call that is morally right, economically right, and is supported by millions around the world. -- Ann Pettifor, director of Jubilee 2000 UK
This reminds me of Marie Antoinette dining at her table and when the poor of Paris banged on her door she said let them eat cake. -- Ann Pettifor, director of Jubilee 2000 UK
At the G8 Summit in Cologne last year a promise was made to drop the debt of the world's poorest countries. At the end of the summit Tony Blair said 'I believe this summit will mark probably the biggest step forward in debt that we have seen for many years.' A view echoed by Bill Clinton 'a historic step to help the world's poorest nations achieve sustained growth and independence'. And not wishing to be left out Gordon Brown added, debt relief would begin 'within weeks'.
One year on when the G8 leaders met in Okinawa that promise had not been kept (21-23 July 2000).
Okinawa, a remote Japanese island, was chosen to deter the presence of protesters. But if that had been the intention it did not work. Like Banquo's Ghost the protesters made their presence felt at the banquet in other ways. In the three months leading up to the G8 Summit Tony Blair received 150,000 postcards and 100,000 e-mails telling him to drop the debt. Of the hits on the official Japanese web site most were on the topic of debt relief.
The Japanese spent an obscene $750 million on the summit. More than they have spent on alleviating Third World Debt. The G8 leaders sat down in 15th century palace to a gala banquet of lobster, caviare and duck to discuss the plight of the poor. Protected by 22,000 police and eight destroyers, entertained by a thousand artists on a floating stage.
Having come to no firm decision on debt, the following day the G8 offered the 'Marie Antoinette Solution' - to give support to enable the poor to connect to the internet. To a peasant farmer lacking basic needs, shortage of water, no electricity, no telephone line, lacking basic numeracy and literacy skills, unable to afford a computer, the G8 offer internet access. The only beneficiaries would be the G8 supplying the expertise and the equipment.
There is a digital divide that needs addressing, the divide between the North and the South, between rich and poor.
The failure of the G8 to act on behalf of the world's poor and to live up to the promise given at Cologne has been attacked by Kofi Annan as well as Third World campaigners.
For every £1 given as aid £6 is taken back as debt repayment.
Former First Sea Lord Sir Jock Slater has become a non-executive director of warship builders Vosper Thorneycroft. Former cabinet minister Lord Wakeham is Vosper Thorneycroft chairman. New Labour Geoff Hoon (who?) has announced orders worth billions of pounds for new warships to be shared between Vospers and BAE Systems.
Former deputy to the chief of defence procurement and master general of royal ordnance Sir Robert Harmon-Joyce has a new post as a director of arms supplier Alvis. Two months after Harmon-Joyce left MoD, the army ordered from Alvis a billion pounds worth of battlefield tanks and £60 million of 'all terrain vehicles' for the marines.
As we have seen with TAG and the development of Farnborough Airfield, habits and species can too easily be destroyed with impunity. The existing protection is too weak.
The Countryside Bill was designed to strengthen the protection. With a too full legislative programme it looks like the government may be tempted to drop the Countryside Bill. We can think of many Bills the government should have dropped, the Countryside Bill is not one of them.
Please contact your MP and John Prescott and ask that the Countryside Bill be retained.
Following our criticism of BVFoE last month (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000) we hoped they would get their act together or at the very least their own members would act to get a grip on the situation. But no. What we never expected to see was BVFoE sitting idly by watching local trees being destroyed, especially when their destruction facilitates operation of Farnborough Airfield.
Following the decision by a Rushmoor planning committee to give the go ahead for destruction of trees in the flight path (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000), contractors moved in on trees in the public highway the following week (Tuesday 15 August 2000). We issued an Urgent Action (14 August), a copy of which went to BVFoE. As far as we are aware (and we stand corrected if wrong) BVFoE did not even bother to forward to their own members.
Whilst it is true that at the end of the day it is the local community that has to act to protect its own environment, the community looks to BVFoE to establish a lead, otherwise we have uncoordinated ad hoc and individual action. Although BVFoE did not bother to attend the planning meeting that was discussing the trees, they cannot have been unaware of what was going on as apart from our own Urgent Action they were alerted by members of the public.
Beneath the fine landscaping of the Olympic site lies one of Australia's worst toxic waste dumps. It will be covered by a metre of dirt and a mountain of PR. -- Sharon Beder, Canberra Times
The Sydney Olympics has been heralded as the 'Green' Olympics. The reality is somewhat different.
The Olympic Games will be held at Homebush Bay, a disused industrial site subject to years of unregulated waste dumping with heavy metals, asbestos, chemical wastes including dioxins and pesticides under the surface. Some efforts have been made to contain these chemicals, but in many parts of the complex, gases and toxins are free to seep up through the soil. A volley-ball stadium is being built on Bondi Beach, on land to which local Aborigines hold title.
The UN has criticised Australia for its treatment of Aborigines. They have singled out the eviction of Aborigines from their land to make may for the Olympic Village.
Big business sponsors include all the usual suspects: McDonald's, Coca-Cola, IBM, Murdoch's News Ltd, General Motors, Nike, Shell.
The World Economic Forum (another dodgy bunch like the WTO) will be holding its Asia-Pacific Summit in Melbourne (11-15 September) giving protesters a bit of action in the southern hemisphere to match the Prague action for the IMF/World Bank 50th anniversary summit. One of the major events will be the four day dash from the S11 kick-off in Melbourne to the Games opening ceremony protest in Sydney.
The media attention given to security issues pains me. It seems as if we are preparing for civil war. We should take this more positively. -- Vaclav Havel
The Czech security forces are gearing themselves up for a rerun of WWII and the Russian crushing of the Prague Spring all rolled into one. Czech police have announced that streets will be evacuated, schools closed and 30,000 residents moved out to give the 20,000 delegates a protective ring of 11,000 police. The reason for all this excitement is the 55th meeting of the IMF/World Bank and mass invasion by protesters determined to turn it into Seattle II. [see Diary]
Thanks to the late Princess Diana (and many have been killed for far less) and the hard work of many NGOs and individuals the Ottawa Treaty banning the use, production and sale of anti-personnel landmines came into effect last year. The Landmines Act (1998) implemented the treaty in UK law making dealings with anti-personnel landmines a criminal offence with a maximum jail term of 14 years.
The Landmines Act (1998) is not sufficiently tight and has numerous loopholes. UK armed forces are allowed to deploy with other forces that are not complying with the Ottawa Treaty. The Act does not bar British companies from supplying components for use in anti-personnel landmines.
Last year Royal Ordnance (subsidiary of BAE Systems) was caught supplying an explosive component, RDX, for use in anti-personnel landmines used by the US DoD (US is not a signatory of the Ottawa Treaty).
At DSEi (Defence Systems Equipment International) last year at Surrey, Romtechnica (a Romanian arms company) had promotional material for anti-personnel landmines. In an undercover sting operation Pakistan Ordnance tried to sell anti-personnel landmines to a Channel Four reporter. Pakistan Ordnance admitted that it was still producing anti-personnel landmines for use by Pakistan.
In a parliamentary answer the UK government admitted that 'currently there is no specific check for compliance with the Landmines Act (1998)' at UK arms fairs.
Campaigners in the UK want to see the law tightened.
The campaign against landmines is now pushing for the Ottawa Treaty to be extended to cover all landmines and cluster bombs. Landmines, such as anti-tank mines, will often have anti-personnel handling devices. Cluster bombs release hundreds of small bomblets. Their use is for area denial. Many bomblets remain on the ground unexploded. Bomblets are designed to have interesting shapes and are brightly coloured to make them attractive to children. In Kosovo children are being killed and maimed everyday by cluster bombs dropped by Nato.
The rationale for banning anti-personnel landmines and similar munitions is that they are indiscriminate unfocused killers. They rarely form part of a military strategy and instead are used to terrorise civilian populations. The main casualties are children.
Christian Aid has launched an on-line campaign to enable you to send an electronic postcard to the US Presidential candidates asking them to make a commitment to the Ottawa Treaty and to sign it immediately upon taking office should they be elected President.
I believe that we must have some confidence in the law enforcement agencies and the courts. If we look back at the past 25 years, we can see that the [anti-terrorism] powers have been used proportionately. -- Jack Straw
Towards the end of July, the Terrorism Act (2000) gained Royal Assent - and Jack Straw was delighted. But our illustrious Home Secretary still exhibits a rather poor appreciation of irony. If the above quote is anything to go by, it seems we can all of us look forward to this anti-terrorism law being used in a similar spirit of moderation and sensible proportion as was the old one against the Guilford Four. The victims of that previous, infamous miscarriage of justice were the first to feel the force of the previous Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), brought in as an emergency measure in 1974. Last autumn, the present government decided to clear the legislative decks and come up with a set of permanent, UK-wide counter-terrorist provisions. 'Terrorists are no respecters of borders, continuously developing new methods and technologies to further their aims through violent means anywhere in the world.' Jack Straw warned us, darkly. That's enough to strike terror into all of our hearts. But how about a reality check - since the original PTA we've seen the end of the cold war, and an uneasy truce hold out in Northern Ireland. Who are all these terrorists that the new Act is aiming at?
Persistent 'Animal rights and to a lesser extent environmental activists' and '[their] persistent, and destructive campaigns' says the government consultation paper which led to the new law, pointing a stern finger. And section 1 of the Act offers a clear new definition to cut the wheat from the chaff. Apparently, 'terrorism' is 'The use or threat of action, designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause, where the action (a) involves serious violence against a person, (b) involves serious damage to property, (c) endangers a person's life, other than that of the person committing the action, (d) creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or (e) is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.' Got that? Thank goodness dictionaries aren't written in Whitehall. The Home Office has been using some pretty broad brush strokes to give us their picture of what a 'terrorist' might look like. In fact, their definition casts its net so wide, you'd be forgiven for thinking they'd been er taking liberties.
'Potentially, it turns activist movements into terrorist movements', says Alan Simpson MP, one of a noble but tiny band of MPs to have opposed the legislation. 'Somehow the threat to the stability of the state has given way to threats to the corporate estate, and that will be the basis for the new definition of social terrorism. That is a desperately dangerous path to go down.' Luke, an anti-GM activist, is more blunt; 'The Government is creating a private security service for transnational corporations'. Many people have been speculating as to how the new law might be used. The law comes into force in mainland Britain next spring; possible scenarios abound.
Police will have the power to arrest anyone they 'reasonably suspect' to be a terrorist (clauses 38/39). Then they can detain them for 48 hours - or a week with permission from a court - without access to a solicitor. Jack Straw himself tells us 'The main purpose of the Act is not to extend the criminal code, but to give the police special powers.' And the Home Secretary has the power to proscribe, ie ban, any organisation deemed guilty of terrorism (Part II of the Act). In that case, it will be an offence not only to belong to such a group, but to speak openly in support of it, or speak at the same meeting as someone who is a member. Unsurprisingly, Amnesty International aren't keen in their annual report they singled out the (then) Terrorism Bill as the 'worst piece of legislation in the UK last year'. And the UN Special Human Rights Rapporteur has called for the PTA to be repealed.
Less than 7% of those 5000, mainly Irish - nicked under the first seven years of the old PTA weren't even charged, let along convicted of any offence. And like the PTA, law campaigners reckon the new Terrorism Act will be used for 'dragnet' info-gathering sweeps, and general intimidation of activists. Leon Brittan, the former Home Secretary, said as much of the old PTA in 1985; 'The object of the exercise is not just to secure convictions but to secure information.' The provisional IRA haven't done much for the public image of balaclava wearers. This piece of law doesn't aim to do much for that of banner wavers. Funnily enough, once nicked under the Act, an anti-GM crops activist will have less rights than would Myra Hindley. Perhaps Jack Straw did have a sense of irony after all.
[filched with a couple of minor alterations from SchNEWS 268, also see past BVEJ newsletters, and see Big Issue 397 for some likely scenarios of how the Act will affect you]
Following closely in the giant state footprints of the Terrorism Act comes the RIP Act (Regulation of Investigatory Powers). In July the RIP Bill was signed by royal assent, and will become law in October - another futurist slice of Halloween horror from the Home Office.
From D-Day in October, under new powers of the RIP Act, the effect will be triple whammy. Firstly, UK based Internet Service Providers (ISPs) will be legally obliged to give police, customs and security services open access to monitor all web traffic running through their networks. Secondly, the Act will see the targeting of computer encryption users with prison sentences of 2 years (if you refuse to hand over your encryption keys to the police), and 5 years (if you tell anyone you are being monitored). And finally, the Act includes extra wide-boy ranging powers to plant Big Brother bugs and parabolic microphones wherever the sun might not shine - in the name of 'national security' and combatting 'organised crime'. Rushed through the back door of the Lords for a royal stamp, the RIP Act was spearheaded by Jack Straw, and dreamt up by shady New Labour think tanks well over a year ago. With Cabinet sights on fixing a large nail in the coffin of digital democracy, the planned Bill was hammered out by the Home Office's Encryption Co-ordination Unit. The ECU was established last year to look at ways of expanding traditional state monitoring of phone networks into the world of Internet communications. And the Home Office confirmed in a Performance and Innovations Unit report from May 1999 that UK Police, MI5, Special Branch and Customs should have 'real time' access to web traffic, and recommended 'the establishment of a Government Technical Assistance Centre (GTAC), operating on a 24 hour basis' to do just that.
Each UK ISP will be forced to install black interceptor boxes on the backbone of their networks, for redirecting Internet traffic directly to the Government Technical Assistance Centre (GTAC) for monitoring. And this GTAC facility will be handily housed in MI5 headquarters in London. Under the Internet provisions of the RIP the authorities will have an open pass to log into web sites, chat rooms and e-mail boxes at their leisure. The last recorded number of phone tap warrants issued by the Home Office under the Interception of Communication Act in 1996-97 was 2,700, which was a massive increase on the last official figures. But under the RIP to monitor one person's web communications you have to plug into and filter all web traffic running through one individual's ISP. So virtually anyone's e-mail will be available to be monitored. With Internet Service Providers being forced to stick expensive black box Internet flight recorders on the back of their communication servers, many companies are now looking at uprooting their business and moving overseas. The British Chamber of Commerce estimate the cost to business of enforcing the law could run to over £60 million. One of the UK's largest ISPs, ClaraNet (350,000 users), is looking to move its communication technology outside the UK. And UUnet, Poptel, the Co-operative Internet Service Provider, and GreenNet are also considering the prospect of hosting their network servers elsewhere in Europe.
The wider impact of the RIP Act in other areas is clear. Take the recent David Shayler (ex-MI5 whistle blower) case last month. The High Court rejected MI5 efforts to prosecute a Guardian journalist under the Official Secrets Act and force the newspaper to disclose e-mails sent between the journalist and Shayler. But under the RIP this case might have been a different story, as police and security services will be able to apply for Home Office warrants behind the scenes. As journalist Roy Greenslade commented - 'from this day on, without our knowledge, the authorities can intercept our messages. They will know who said what to whom about what well before the information can be published. Indeed, by having that knowledge in advance they may well be able to take measures to prevent its publication'. [see BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000]
On the brighter side here are a few pointers on a few ideas on ways to rip up the RIP for solid on-line privacy and security.
More info:
[filched with a few minor alterations from SchNEWS 269, also see past BVEJ newsletters]
For background information on net monitoring and the developments that led to RIP see:
For a good background article see 'The Spy in your server' by Duncan Campbell (online, Guardian, 10 August 2000).
Money has not lived up to its potential as a liberator because it has been perverted by the monopolization of its creation and by politically manipulating its distribution - which makes it available to the favoured few and scarce for everyone else. -- Thomas Greco Jnr
As old as trade itself is barter. Today much of international trade takes place as barter. It has its limitations. If I offer web design and want my bicycle repaired and the bike mechanic doesn't want a web site I am stuck. This is why money was invented as a token of exchange. Originally money had its own intrinsic value, it was a commodity in its own right. Roman legionaries were paid in salt, from which we get salary. Gold and silver coins had an intrinsic value. Paper money lacked an intrinsic value but was until recently backed by a promise to pay, now it is backed by debt.
Money has disadvantages when seen beyond its symbolic value to facilitate trade. There is usually not enough of it. It is hoarded for its own intrinsic value. It acts as a conduit to transfer wealth from poor to rich. It has a tendency to flow to where it can make more money.
Various means exist to recycle money and resources locally: farmers markets, community supported agriculture, local currencies. A local currency isolates an area from the rest of the economy, it has no value outside of its area. Some Swiss towns circulate their own currency. Ken Livingstone is considering the idea of a local currency for London.
Local currencies effectively grey the black economy. Rather than attempt to stamp out the black economy we should attempt to grant it legitimacy. One of the beneficiaries are the unemployed. They are able to apply their skills, regain lost confidence, and satisfy unfulfilled demand. Should they wish to return to the formal economy they are able to demonstrate their skills. A second beneficiary are the poor and poor communities. There is no shortage of 'money' in a local currency as the participants create the currency as their needs arise. The only limiting factors are the availability of local skills and resources and local goodwill.
Local currencies are a counter to globalisation. A European currency is the antithesis of a local currency and only serves to damage local and national economies. The only beneficiaries are multinational companies.
We want to open in Farnborough a wholefood store with a snack bar to attract the lunchtime trade, in North Camp a wholefood net cafe. Our friends want to open a shop with clothes made from natural fibres and organic cotton that come from fair trade sources. We are all hopeless at drawing up a business plan so we know the bank is unlikely to give us a second glance or else they will rip us off. So what do we do?
We issue our own £10-00 bills which we sell for £9-00. These 'organic pounds' are redeemable in our shops against goods and services. We post-date so that they do not all come flooding back on the first day we open. The neat trick of these 'organic pounds' is that they are no different to 'real money'. They can be used within the local economy. If we need to raise more capital or hit a cash flow crisis we issue more 'organic pounds'.
A deli in Great Barrington (Mass) issued 'deli-dollars'. They got an immediate take-up of 500 $10 notes sold for $9.
Local Exchange Trading Systems are the best known local currency. LETS were first established by Michael Linton in Comax Valley, British Columbia in 1983. In four years the first LETS had grown from six members to several hundred members and several local businesses. In the first twenty months of operation the equivalent of $250,000 of trade was transacted.
A notional currency exists on a centrally held database. Any transaction between two parties consists of a credit and debit of the respective accounts held on this database. The skills and resources of the local community are the backing of the currency.
One of the success stories has been in Western Australia where it is estimated to have generated the equivalent A$3 million in the local economy. Local businesses are involved. They can only spend their 'LETS dollars' locally, get tax credits if they donate their 'LETS dollars' to local charities. These charities are then able to plough the funds back into the local economy.
Instead of trading a currency, members trade in time. The system was created by Paul Glover in 1991 and operates in Ithaca, New York. In the first few years the equivalent of $50,000 had been issued to over 900 members and been used by hundreds more. These Ithica Hours have been recycled within the local economy many times over generating hundreds of thousands of dollars of what Glover calls 'our Grassroots National Product'.
On joining members pay $1 and receive 4 Ithica Hours (1 hour has the nominal value of $10). Every 8 months members are invited to subscribe for an additional 2 Ithica Hours, thus the currency slowly grows. As with LETS it is the members themselves who back the currency.
In any transaction negotiation takes place to agree on the exchange rate between Ithica Hours and 'real hours' (as measured by the clock). A large number of local businesses are involved. The equivalent of several thousand dollars has been donated to community projects including the purchase of land and the establishment of a recycling plant.
Edgar and Jean Cahn created the Time Dollar Network in 1983. Time Dollars differ from Ithica Hours in one important aspect, one hour equals one hour irrespective of the skill base. Time Dollars combine barter and volunteering.
Ithica Hours and Time Dollars have an advantage in that as they deal in time not some monetary rate they are delinked from inflationary pressures of the national currency.
Susan Meeker-Lowry, Community Money [in Jerry Mander & Edward Goldsmith, The Case Against the Global Economy, Sierra Club Books, 1996]
Perry Walker & Edward Goldsmith, A Currency for Every Community, The Ecologist, July/August 1998
Daniel Vass was a 19-year-old forklift truck driver killed on a building site in Fleet. At the coroners inquest it was revealed that he had insufficient training on the the type of forklift he was driving. Daniel Vass who had only been working for the building contractors for seven weeks had not undergone the usual five-day training course. The inquest jury returned a verdict of accidental death, not the more appropriate one of unlawful killing. Thameswey Homes welcomed the verdict: 'The verdict of accidental death, we believe, was the right one for the jury to reach.' [Farnborough Mail, Tuesday 11 July 2000]
During the construction of the airshow site a worker was killed.
Taking a year out from university, 24-year-old Simon Jones was harassed off Income Support and forced to take a casual job at Shoreham Docks. He was found the job by Personnel Selection, who by law should have checked the job was safe. With no experience, no training, no hard hat, Simon Jones was set to work unloading cargo inside a ship. Within two hours of starting work he was dead, his skull crushed by the grab of a crane. A work mate and witness to the killing, who refused to clean the spattered blood off rubble bags, value £5, was sent home without pay.
1st September would have seen Simon celebrating his 27th birthday if he hadn't been killed by the profits-before-everything economy he hated so much.
The building trade has recently reported a sharp increase in the number of deaths and serious injuries.
All these deaths are a tragic waste of young lives, deaths that should not have occurred. All are the symptoms of the casualistion of labour. Many, like Simon Jones, are forced into unsuitable low-paid jobs to massage the unemployment figures. As was seen at the Paddington train crash, it is extremely rare to bring charges of murder or manslaughter against the corporations involved. The UK lacks an offence of corporate killing, even though the crime is widespread.
Anyone now signing on as unemployed has to sign a job seekers agreement. It is a statement of what you intend to do to look for work, legally a statement that you intend to comply with the Jobseekers Act (1995). It is a prior condition for obtaining Job Seekers Allowance, you will not receive a penny until you have signed the agreement.
Job Seekers Agreement should reflect what you are doing to seek work. It has to be realistic, that is you have to have reasonable prospects of obtaining work. Each fortnight when you sign on you are stating, amongst other things, that you have complied with your Job Seekers Agreement. You may be interrogated, ie treated like a criminal, to ensure compliance.
The system is open to abuse. You will often be forced to agree to apply for so many jobs per week. If you fail to comply, or even fail to agree, your benefit will be stopped.
To satisfy the Act there are two basic conditions that have to be satisfied: that you are available for work, and that you are actively seeking work.
To be actively seeking work you have to take more than one of the steps laid out in the Job Seekers Regulations in any one week. These steps include:
If there is a dispute then it has to be resolved by referral to a decision maker (adjudicator) who is not independent, and then can be appealed to an independent tribunal. The system is open to abuse as whilst an agreement is being contested JSA stops. Too many claimants are forced to sign a Job Seekers Agreement under duress. If JSA is stopped, immediately apply for Hardship Allowance and seek expert help. Farnborough CAB is near the library, the reference library contains a useful book published by Child Poverty Action.
[for a more detailed account see BVEJ briefing]
The rape and pillage of the environment, the maiming and killing of innocent people, including women and children does not occur in a vacuum. It is carried out by corporate man, aided and abetted by political man and bureaucrat man. These people are not anonymous, they have faces, names and addresses, they may be living near you in your neighbourhood.
In the US 'Director of the Day' campaign helps the local community get to know their neighbours a little better, especially their corporate activities and the social and environmental impacts. Do you want a corporate rapist or killer living in your neighbourhood?
In future issues of BVEJ newsletters we intend to name and shame some of these abusers, put faces to their names, tell you where they live, show you how to root them out.
We nominate Derek White for this month's Bastard of the Month.
Derek White a sad pathetic 50s something bully boy to be found at Farnborough Job Centre gets his kicks and sick pleasure out of harassing the unemployed. Several years ago White was pushed out of a job where he thought himself a very important person. Finding no one else shared his inflated opinion of his own self-importance and having nothing of worth to offer he was eventually after several months of unemployment forced to take a low paid clerical job at the Job Centre. Now with a chip on his shoulder a mile high White takes his resentment out on the unemployed.
If you have had a problem with White don't hesitate to complain. Demand to see the Manager, demand to be dealt with by someone else. Don't suffer in silence. Let others know the problem, seek expert help. Farnborough Citizen Advice Bureau is not far away (near Farnborough Library), you may be entitled to legal aid.
Not that you can expect to get very far with the present Job Centre manager Cherie Gyde as she came a close second behind White in this month's nominations. Not above harassing claimants herself, Gyde condones White's behaviour and considers him to be only doing his job.
Always eat fruit and vegetables in season. It's what your body expects.
Think how you feel after a long flight, then think how a strawberry feels.
Seasonal fruit has not travelled so far. It always tastes better. Produce from far flung shores is invariably doused in a cocktail of chemicals, many of which are banned in the West, the workforce exploited. The land that is used to grow cash crops could be used to grow food for local people. The people who used to farm the land are probably now leading a precarious existence in a shanty town.
Better still, grow your own. Nothing tastes as good as an apple picked straight off the tree. When growing your own try to grow traditional varieties. They crop better and taste better. Many of these varieties are now extinct. The EU has deliberately pushed many of these varieties into extinction by making their sale illegal. Henry Doubleday Research Association has a catalogue of Heritage Seeds.
Special Exploitation Zones, SEZs or Special Export Zones as they are sometimes known, are special exclusion zones where the normal rules don't apply, where minimal environmental and labour protection is the norm, where corporations pay little if any tax, where the state provides security to ensure a docile and compliant workforce.
SEZs are found all over south-east Asia and are starting to spring up in South and Central America, but the worst ones are found in China where they resemble concentration camps.
US, Germany, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, Macau and South Korea are the main countries exploiting Chinese labour. Companies include the usual sweatshop fashion brands: Gap, Adidas and Nike. Wal-Mart and Disney also use Chinese labour. The goods produced are mainly electronics, toys and sweatshop fashion.
Migrant rural workers are hired. Usually young women between the ages of 16-24 as they are seen as more docile and pliant. The contracts are temporary short-term. Workers are searched on leaving, monitored whilst they work. 'Three in one' factories, where work space, storage and accommodation are in the same building whilst illegal are commonplace. It is not unusual for 30-40 workers to be packed into one 20 square metre room, four to a bunk bed, 250 workers packed onto one floor with no toilet. The working day is 14 hours, seven days a week, with maybe 1-2 rest days a month.
The Victorians had dark satanic mills, the Third World has sweatshops, the UK has call centres.
Call centres are the human equivalent of factory farming. Hundreds of workers are packed into windowless warehouses called offices, monitored round the clock. Workers are force fed calls, granted minimum periods for breaks, and everything they do is closely monitored.
At the last count the UK had 4,000 call centres employing over 300,000 workers. The numbers are expected to double by 2004. Whereas once upon a time you may have got through to customer services of a company, and if the problem was particularly tricky got through to someone who knew what they were talking about, the chances now are that you will be put through to a call centre.
The call centres are usually located in high unemployment, low wage areas, where wages are low, conditions poor. Staff are temporary, with average employment periods as low as two months.
We reported last month how after years of striving for planning permission Plants For a Future had finally got planning permission for their sustainability project down in Cornwall. Projects like this do not easily fit within current planning policy guidelines, especially when big business is not involved and there is not a lot of spare cash sloshing around to grease the palms of greedy councillors. [BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000]
The Steward Community Woodland is a sustainable working woodland and conservation project near Moretonhampstead, Devon. There are plans to use the woodland for walks, permaculture gardens, orchards, low impact dwellings, low intervention wildlife zone. They have recently applied for planning permission for change of use in order to obtain the legal right to be resident on the land.
It is important that community and conservation projects like this get our full support. Please write to (ref: 0427/00):
James Aven Development Control Dartmoor National Park Authority Parke Bovey Tracey Newton Abbot Devon TQ13 9JQ
Steward Community Woodland, Moretonhampstead, Newton Abbot, Devon TQ13 8SD 07050-674464
We are in the process of destroying an entire society. It is as simple and terrifying as that. It is illegal and immoral. -- Denis Halliday
Why does the US insist the UN maintain economic sanctions on Iraq? They will not produce a democracy in Iraq. Nor will they make the world safe from Saddam Hussein's alleged arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And they most certainly will not promote stability - for the people of Iraq, of the Middle East, of anywhere. -- Denis Halliday
Last month hundreds of people were in Whitehall protesting at the sanctions on Iraq. Many sat in the road and blocked the traffic for more than an hour. These weren't misguided supporters of Saddam Hussein, these were ordinary people trying to highlight the plight of ordinary Iraqi people who are suffering under the US/UK UN imposed sanctions.
Sanctions were imposed ten years ago to force the Iraqis out of Kuwait (6 August 1990). Saddam Hussein left Iraq a decade ago. The sanctions are still in place. At the time the west could have got rid of Saddam Hussein but chose not to. The west baulked at the final step, and for the same reason did not come to the rescue of the Kurds because of pressure from Turkey. Turkey did not wish to see the break up of Iraq and Iraqi Kurds setting up their own state as that would lead to greater pressure from the Kurds who are suffering under Turkish repression to form part of that break away state.
The West is carrying out a medieval siege against the people of Iraq. The logic being that if we starve the people to death it will somehow force Saddam Hussein out of power. It won't. All the west has done is make Saddam Hussein stronger than ever. In the meantime 500,000 children have died.
The sanctions on Iraq are weapons of mass destruction under another name.
Two UN Humanitarian Co-ordinators for Iraq have resigned in protest at the sanctions on Iraq, having been able to see for themselves at first hand the effects sanctions are having on the Iraqi people. Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck are now two of the strongest critics of the Anglo-American policy towards Iraq. Jutta Burghart, Head of the UN World Food Program in Iraq, has also resigned in protest at the brutal sanctions policy.
Even publications like the Economist find they can no longer remain silent on the policy towards Iraq (8 April 2000):
If, year in, year out, the UN were systematically killing Iraqi children by air strikes, western governments would declare it intolerable, no matter how noble the intention. They should find their existing policy just as unacceptable.
In case you may be worried at the effects of sanctions, turncoat Peter Hain (once leader of the anti-apartheid movement and now New Labour apologist for every repressive regime under the sun) assures us that the sanctions are for the protection of the Kurds. That the same Peter Hain condones the supply of weapons to Turkey even though they are used for internal repression against the Kurds in Turkey and external aggression against Cyprus is another story.
Every Monday evening a vigil is held in Whitehall outside the Foreign Office. Voices in the Wilderness break the sanctions by taking medical supplies to Iraqi children.
The New Local Government Network's debate on the Government's reform programme and its implementation are vital to the cultural change we seek. I know that the Network is committed to a brighter, more dynamic future for local government. -- Hilary Armstrong MP, Minister for Local Government
Brilliant! Instead of life before the Act, when small dodgy cliques of councillors lined their back pockets and those of their mates, why not instead line the pockets of big business. So that's what New Labour calls modern. -- SchNEWS
Anyone who has followed the Farnborough Airport debacle (BVEJ newsletters passim) or the Farnborough town centre debacle (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000) will know that local democracy within Rushmoor is dead. Although it is not possible to imagine, things could get a whole lot worse.
Another piece of New Labour legislation that came to pass last month, Local Government Act, abolishes council committees, and in its place we have a choice between either elected mayors or council cabinets. Either way, corrupt politicos will be free to meet in secret, with numerous loopholes to stop voters and journalists finding out what they are up to. And anyone who has tried to prise information out of Rushmoor or seen the arrogance of our councillors in action, will realise how bad the situation is already.
Pushing for this cosy little arrangement of rule by corrupt elites behind closed doors is an alliance of New Labour politicians, lobbyists and big business, working together under the name of the New Local Government Network.
Councillor Gerry Harrison from the Labour Campaign for Open Local Government describes the Network as a 'front organisation' pushing 'anti democratic measures on behalf of private interests.'
Green Party Councillor Pete West describes how this new style of operation works in Brighton:
Whereas before there were public committees, we now have Executive Councillors making a lot of the day to day decisions in private meetings with council officers. Access for the vast majority of councillors is restricted and the press and public aren't allowed in. This means that there is a real lack of opportunity for people to influence and scrutinise decisions. If we aren't involved in the everyday running of the council, it's very difficult to follow the plot. I get the feeling that removing the majority of councillors from the decision making process is the first step in putting us out to pasture, as now the intention is to cut the number of Councillors by a quarter.
As Rushmoor councillors have found during their various rubber-stamping exercises on airfield development. They don't like having the local community scrutinising their every move, especially when the public gallery is moved to voice opinion on their worst excesses.
The big push is coming from big business who want to see a bigger slice of the action. In London boroughs like Islington, Housing Benefit is out-sourced with the net results that thousand of people in Islington are without housing benefit.
One such company is Capita, or Crapita as it is popularly known. Crapita is responsible for housing benefit in Lambeth. At one stage 400 housing benefit files were missing, and 200 are still lost. The backlog of unprocessed claims stood at 55,000 last April, and by early August still stood at 20,000. Crapita told a parliamentary committee on local government that it would be easier to negotiate contracts 'without the hindrance of party politics on a day to day basis.' Crapita have also suggested 'business and professional interests' should be co-opted onto cabinets and committees.
Crapita recently announced sales up 38% to £208 million and pre-tax profits up 30% to £18.4 million. According to Crapita chief executive Paul Pindar, 'we are in a golden period right now,' though not if you are a claimant still waiting for your Crapita processed housing benefit.
We have already seen the detrimental influence TAG and the Arab owners of the town centre have had on local democracy and accountability. The Farnborough Business and Community Panel, which neither represents local traders or the community, meets in secret, is dominated by outside business interests, is driving the debate on redevelopment of the town centre. It was they who persuaded a Rushmoor planning committee to agree to board up empty shops in the town centre which everyone is agreed will only damage the trading positions of existing traders still further and drive more retailers out of the town centre, especially small retailers (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000). But then that of course is exactly what they want as only then can redevelopment start and a lot of cash start sloshing around.
It comes as no surprise then that Rushmoor are keen to adopt the new system of executive committees as soon as possible. They will doubtlessly go through the usual masquerade of consultation.
This attack on local democracy should be opposed.
Most people, no matter how incensed they are about an issue, can not be bothered to write to the press about an issue. How less likely then are they to put pen to paper to a local paper in another town about an issue that does not affect them? Strange then the number of letters that appear in the local press from everywhere bar Timbuctoo welcoming a business airport at Farnborough. Or are they saying 'not in my backyard but we welcome it in yours'? Strange how the content of the letters never changes over time as though they are all writing to the same out-of-date script.
Could it be that TAG got hold of a Christmas card mailing list for ex-RAE employees and sent them all a Christmas Card with a little message seeking their support for a a business airport in Farnborough, and to rub the message home, if TAG didn't get its way a valuable piece of aviation heritage that they had devoted their life work to would disappear under a 10,000 house estate? They would have to be careful not to include anyone local as the cat would be out of the bag. Could it be that the editor of the local rag has a drawer full of a hundred or so letters that he periodically draws upon, feeding them in to the letters page drip, drip, drip to give the illusion of a steady stream of support?
If you have suffered at the hands of a local authority, don't gripe to your friends down the pub (well alright do that as well), complain to the Ombudsman. You can't complain if you don't like their crass decisions (and who does?), but what you can do is complain if you have suffered maladministration or an injustice.
Maladministration, or a cock-up in common parlance, is where something has gone wrong, or the officials have not followed the rules or have been bloody rude or as usual just been bloody incompetent. Injustice is where you have suffered in some way. Examples would be where your Housing Benefit has been delayed, the same form has been sent out ten times, hardship has resulted as a result of delayed payment. A planning decision where you are adversely affected and were never notified as an affected party would be an example of maladministration and injustice.
The Ombudsman for the Blackwater Valley (different parts of the country have a different Ombudsman):
Local Government Ombudsman The Oaks No 2 Westwood Way Westwood Business Park Coventry CV4 8JB tel 01203 695999 fax 01203 695902 web www.open.gov.uk/lgo
We are pleased to see Mike Roberts has pledged his support for our Dump the Car day (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000). Nice to see our councillors acting for the community for a change.
Tentative plans have been launched for a tram system for the Blackwater Valley. The drawback of the system as proposed is that is just runs along the existing railway lines so does not exactly offer a lot. We need a system that interconnects the existing rail network. It also has to be cheap, fast and frequent.
The criticism of the rail privatisation was that it fragmented the system. The proposals for the part privatisation of the London Underground will do just that. HSE have already criticised the plans as putting passenger safety at risk.
Stagecoach, owners of South West Trains, are threatening legal action against South Hampshire rail users group for suggesting that SWT might have caused misery and inconvenience for passengers. Solicitors have warned: 'You have seriously defamed SWT. There is no reason why our client should not sue for substantial damages.'
SWT gets a fat £54.9 million subsidy for running its service. Only 85.2% of SWT trains arrive on time. In the last financial year SWT were fined £3.9 million (the largest fine imposed on any operator) for delays, overcrowding and cancellations. Overall profits for Stagecoach were up 11% to £244 million.
In recognition of their excellent public service record, Stagecoach are in the running to be awarded a 20-year franchise for SWT. New Labour promises to boot out train operators who fail to satisfy their customers appear to have been quietly dropped.
The other local operator has not escaped unscathed. Go-ahead, owners of Thames Trains, were fined £2.1 million.
The Swiss train companies who run an excellent service are hoping to pick up some franchises. Lets hope they are successful in the Blackwater Valley.
Pissed out of his brain, Tory Councillor George Dawson crashed into a wall and has since been banned from driving for 18 months and fined £315. Dawson who remains a member of Rushmoor Planning and Transportation Committee has made it clear that he has no intention of resigning as a councillor.
New evidence shows that BSE can pass across the species barrier to sheep, pigs and poultry. Government assurance are that we have no need to worry, eating BSE contaminated meat is safe. Now where have we heard that fairy tale before? Contaminated animal feed continued to be fed to poultry, pigs and sheep, long after it was banned from cattle feed.
Last month we reported organophosphates as a possible cause of nvCJD (human form of Mad Cow Disease) and how the sharp rise in young people contacting nvCJD could be caused by eating McVommit shit (BVEJ newsletter #0003 August 2000). There is another possible explanation, and yet again vested interest come into play to keep the issue quiet.
Spinal cord material and BSE infected material continued to be used in the production of vaccines long after it was supposedly eliminated from the human food chain. Kids are forcibly injected with all manner of vaccinations, some of which have downplayed serious side-effects and fatalities. The vaccines could account for the present rise in young people developing nvCJD. Not a story the pharmaceutical industry wishes to hear told.
Once gain the precautionary principle is being thrown to the wind in pursuance of corporate profit. If you wish to employ the precautionary principle, go veggie, or at the very least only consume organically reared animals.
For the first time in 55 million years ice at the north pole has melted leaving open water a mile across. The Greenland icecap is also melting.
The polar icecap has already lost 40% of its thickness, and is shrinking at an annual rate of 4-6%. By the end of the century the polar icecap will have gone.
We are entering a period when we may experience runaway global warming. Fresh water entering northern latitudes runs the risk of turning off the 'thermohaline pumps' that drive the Gulf Stream. Sir John Houghton, former head of the Met Office, now head of the IPCC scientific panel, has called for a cut of 60% in greenhouse gas emissions if we are to avoid the worst effects of global warming.
A recent WWF report shows that half the world's remaining wildlife habitats will be lost over the next century due to global warming.
The Ecologist special issue on climate change (March/April 1999) is essential reading, as is Jeremy Leggett's The Carbon War: Dispatches from the End of the Oil Century.
During the summer there has been a growing problem of teenage yobs gathering in North Camp (Camp Road) and by the nearby pond and making a bloody nuisance of themselves.
The problem is not that of displacement by CCTV from Farnborough town centre (where there has never been a problem) or Aldershot, nor does it indicate a need for CCTV in North Camp, as claimed by Councillor Nigel Baines. In case Baines has failed to notice, there has been CCTV in Farnborough town centre for some years. The problem is because Rushmoor has finally tackled the problem of yobs in George V Park who were turning the park into a no-go area. The yobs have simply moved on to cause problems elsewhere.
A few years ago grandiose schemes were proposed for North Camp, external consultants hired at great expense, further expense occurred with an official hired for liaison with the consultants. Locals were to be consulted and invited to participate, but as usual ignored. Once the consultants had received their fat fees, the schemes were quietly dropped. Instead, without any consultation, half of Camp Road was to be paved in brick at vast public expense. Such was the cost, that only half the street, even though only a few hundred yards long, was paved in brick, the other half left in potholes.
There are now more grandiose schemes afoot, only Rushmoor have neglected to tell the local people.
North Camp Matters represents no one other than themselves. Their meetings are conducted in secret and they refuse to make the minutes public. Most people who have an interest in North Camp have stopped going to their increasingly rare public meetings as a total waste of time. North Camp Post Office would be doing everyone a favour if they removed from their window the North Camp Matters board (which rarely has anything displayed and what gets displayed has to have prior committee approval) and instead use the window for a genuine Community Board. This would be used to display local events, meetings etc of interest to the whole community. If the newly opened computer shop across the road from the Post Office wishes to perform a public service, we have no objections to them printing off our newsletters and making them available in the Post Office for all the local community.
@nti copyright - information for education and action - copy and distribute