Saturday, 20 April 2013

Big Business agenda "Crossrail jobs" lies resumed via Tower Hamlets Council [4]

Big Business agenda "Crossrail jobs" lies resumed via Tower Hamlets Council [4]

Big Business agenda "Crossrail jobs" lies resumed via Tower Hamlets Council [4]

The © Muhammad Haque Daily Economics and Environmental and Democratic Accountability Commentary:

Abysmal state of dysfunction, ignorance and the betrayal of the local Community by the Tower Hamlets Council’s controlling clique which has reverted to openly peddling the lies for Big Business via the word “Crossrail” as it had done seven years ago [1]

2100 Hrs GMT London Saturday 20 Aril 2013

October 2007 to 20 April 2013.
How many years is that?
SIX years.
Of course!
But it could easily be SIXTY years.
Sixty years?
Isn’t that stretching the imagery a bit too far?
Not at all, if the imagery is being devised about the Big Business Agenda AS fronted via “Crossrail”.
Why?
How?
Answer

Because it was as part of the untruths peddled via Ken Livingstone’s “Undone Mayor” [that too is a KHOODEELAAR! devised phrase to depict Ken Livingstone in the correct contest of his role whilst still in that Onion - a word that KHOODEELAAR! had coined for that building YEARS before Boris Johnson was even heard of in that context at all] hat they had released a wanton lie and untruth and had claimed that “CROSSRAIL was worth the public costs because it would being so many £Billions INTO the Economy in the NEXT SIXTY years” [or a temporal stretch and economic "period" near to 60 years!].

Now any rational person would see that that was stupid beyond condemnation.
How can the “GDP” be predicted for even the next ONE year, let alone for the next SIXTY years? Especially after the evidence has at last been admitted of large scale lying and fakery by the entirety of the country’s Financial “institutions” and by the “Banks” including the “financial regulators”, themselves and by the UK Department called the Treasury, and the MPs themselves......!

All of those “hitherto” [to the brainwashed] hallowed “Authority-Entities” have been exposed by the overwhelming weights of their own corruption, dishonesty, fraudulence and crimes!

So the SIXTY years ....of that we have used as an image is to illustrate the incredible emptiness in the Tower Hamlets Council Chamber, as witnessed on Wednesday 17 April 2013.

There was no debate.
No audit
No holding to account of anybody on behalf of the people of Tower Hamlets
Only crass, contaminated exchanges aimed by each bunch at the other, across the so-called “opposed” “benches” of “Councillors”!

There was no political discourse, least of all any ethics or morality on behalf of the affected, the outraged. the really actually unglamorously dispossessed people and families across the Borough who were being targeted by the CONDEM assault on Society

No atmosphere in the “Council Chamber” of the “London Borough of Tower Hamlets” therefore to even theoretically expect an uptodate in-depth exposition by any side on the dire, deeply worrying, unjustified, undemocratic, treacherous and cruel and uncaring and indifferent and contemptuous state of the failures by “the elected Tower Hamlets Council” to speak up, to challenge the assault by the CONDEM Collusion.

If, in that situation and in that environment, a bid is made for a Chunk of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets by an agency operating as a front for any of the Big Biz outfits and conglomerates that are notionally required to get the [“planning”] “approval of the local Council” then the likelihood is that the bid would succeed.

If it is “rejected” at first or at a later “repeat application” that event must NEVER be treated as a genuine rejection by the Council at all.

Such rejections constitute the TACTICAL parades, the haggling for the “bribe” to the “Council” by the DEGENERATORS, misleadingly referred to by the “mainstreams” in Britain as “developers”.

In the years SINCE October 2007, a very long list of DEGENERATOR plans has been approved by the Tower Hamlets Council.

So much so that the Council bureaucracy is now referring to Crossrail without any hesitation, qualification, let alone and reservation at all!

Exactly what WE SAID ten years ago, in December 2003 when the KHOODEELAAR! Campaign was conceived of in this form by myself and Kay Jordan as we walked to the Bishopsgate Bus terminal one evening when Kay was going to catch a bus home to the Kentish Town area.

Four years after the KHOODEELAAR! campaign had been active, in October 2007, I wrote a diagnostic pice for publication in the then “East London Advertiser”.

The “East London IDIOTISER” failed to honour its “then” promise and so the piece was not published.
What, however, remains valid is the accuracy of the analysis [that I had written in October 2007] that must be applied to the role being played by the Tower Hamlets Council’s controlling clique of paid post-holders today, in April 2013.

That role is to LET the BIG BUSINESS agenda INTO the East End and let Bg Biz take over the East End land and dispossess the people, the community out of here.

EXACTLY as they had ATTEMPTED to do via the front Of their agenda disguised as “Crossrail” and its “benefits”.

So grossly ignorant is the Tower hamlets Council’s controlling bureaucracy now that it has uttered abysmally idiotic plug words “for Crossrail” within DAYS of the huge piece of admission PUBLISHED by the UK’s LARGEST CIRCULATED "popular" daily the SUN of Crossrail’s JOBS for local people lies!!!!


[To be continued]


Against this diagnostic and evidential UPDATER, I publish BELOW the temporally edited version of my piece that the then “East London ADVERTISER” had REQUESTED but failed to publish in October 2007.





KHOODEELAAR! defends the community in the East End of London against the Crossrail hole attacks.

This defence also entails campaigning against the deliberate misrepresentation by the institutions like Tower Hamlets council that are supposed to speak for and to protect the community in the area.
I say that because during the last four years of our campaign we have repeatedly experienced such misrepresentation-and we expect it to continue.
We have found that the Council has been controlled in such a way, and by such unrepresentative elements, that it has been made into a puppet and a conduit for hugely damaging attacks on the entire East End.
It is in this context that we must examine what I believe are streams of diversionary and divisive activities that have been used by the Council's "controlling clique".
Take the recent ignorant exclusion of some elected councillors from having any say at all on council policy-making simply because they were not Bangladeshi: that was diabolically hostile and treacherous behaviour which ADDED to racial disharmony, not reduced it.
That act merely proves the Khoodeelaar! point that Tower Hamlets Council is being mis-led by a clique that has no understanding of its duties.
And this is exactly what we have found in relation to the role of the clique in surrendering the rights, interests and safety of the local community to the commands of 'Big Business' who pretend to be the 'bringer of benefits' to the East End.
The Council clique has said Crossrail will bring benefits to regenerate the area. In fact, we have found they will deprive the area and degenerate it even further.
They have said that they will negotiate with Crossrail promoters to minimise the impact of the disruptions that Crossrail will cause to the area.
Actually, we have found that they are-and have been-colluding with Crossrail to cause the main disruptions, dislocations and devastations to the area.
The proposed new station at Whitechapel and the knock-on effect that creates would not have happened without council complicity.
They have said that they are working with the community.

However, we believe they have been actively seeking to wreck the community and to disenfranchise it even further.
Now it appears that they are no longer even pretending to defend the area against attacks, which include the destruction of streets for the building of huge ventilation shafts.
In response to my question posed at the full council meeting on September 11, in which I asked why they had failed to answer 800 questions posed by us since January 2004, they made that plain.
In the last paragraph of their 'answer' they don't hide the fact that they have surrendered the council to the dictates of Crossrail by saying:

"Ultimately, the council must respect Crossrail's overarching duty to have regard to...the health and safety of Crossrail passengers and workers which will dictate the location of such shafts."

That one paragraph gave the game away! No mention in there of the say or the right or the welfare of the local people in Tower Hamlets.
"Overarching" indeed!
This could only come from collusion relationship, not from a dignified, democratic representational relationship.
It has been almost four years since we started to say the [Tower Hamlets] Council was acting for Big Business, CrossRail and against the Community in the East End.
At long last the [Tower Hamlets] Council clique have admitted it. [That was a reference to the Clique’s “response” to the then latest formal representation by me in September 2007 of the KHOODEELAAR! Demands for the “ELECTED COUNCIL” to do its job and stop acting as a stooge to Big Business


[DIAGNOSTIC updates, reports and analyses are to be continued in defending the Community in the East End of London against the ploys and the Agenda of Big Biz]     

UK Tory MP David Davis raises alarm over police spying on public's email, phone calls


UK Tory MP David Davis raises alarm over police spying on public's email, phone calls

UK Tory MP David Davis raises alarm over police spying on public's email, phone calls

TORY DAILY TELEGRAPH reporting

UK Tory MP David Davis raises alarm over police spying on public's email, phone calls

HOME»NEWS»



POLITICS Police forces spying on our phone calls and emails 250,000 times a year Police forces are routinely snooping on people's email and phone call details hundreds of thousands times a year, a major survey has found.





By Christopher Hope,

Senior Political Correspondent6:00AM BST 20 Apr 201336 Comments A survey using Freedom Of Information laws found that 25 police forces made 506,720 requests for people’s “communications data” over the past three years. There were big disparities between force areas, with people in Merseyside are six times more likely to be spied on than those in neighbouring Lancashire.

A breakdown shows that the number of requests for phone or email records - but not the content of calls or emails - increased from 158,677 in 2009/10 to 178,985 in 2011/12.

Including estimates for the forces which failed to reply to the FOI survey, the figures suggest that as many as 250,000 requests are being made every year. Campaigners Big Brother Watch, which carried the survey, said the evidence suggested the police and other agencies do not need more “snooping powers”.

A newly drafted Communications Bill is due to be published in the summer, which is likely to propose more powers to spy on people.

Emma Carr, deputy director of Big Brother Watch, urged ministers to order a “comprehensive investigation of how current powers are operating” before bringing in new ones later this year. She said: “The research makes clear that between police forces there are significant inconsistencies in the way that communications data is being used. “It emphasises how it impossible to form a measured view of how the current system is operating given the huge discrepancies in the way forces are recording how they use communications data.” Merseyside made 36 requests for every 1,000 residents living in the county – compared with the Metropolitan Police, which put in 21 requests, Lancashire (6 requests) and Hampshire (0.8 requests).

David Davis MP, the former Tory shadow home secretary who quit the front bench in protest over the Labour government’s treatment of civil liberties, said:

“It is frankly not good enough that the government is considering introducing a snoopers' charter without even being able to tell us what they have used communications data for in the past – and indeed not even be able to tell us how many times they have done so.

“The Government should come clean with parliament and tell us exactly how the powers they currently have been used in the past, and tell us for example, whether they have been using it across the country for traffic offences.” A Home Office spokesman said: "This legislation is vital to help catch paedophiles, terrorists and other serious criminals. Communications data includes time, duration and dialling numbers of a phone call, or an email address. It does not include the content of any phone call or email.

“The cross-party Joint Committee which scrutinised the Bill reported that it was impressed with the thoroughness with which each and every application for communications data is considered. “The police and other requesting authorities are subject to rigorous independent inspections by the Interception of Communications Commissioner (IoCC). The IoCC also publishes annual statistics on communications data requests and releases.”


[To be continued]

London: East End, 'most deprived' "Council" colludes as City of London grabs the Borough land...

London: East End, 'most deprived' "Council" colludes as City of London grabs the Borough land...

London: East End, 'most deprived' "Council" colludes as City of London grabs the Borough land...

The © Muhammad Haque Daily Ethical Commentary:

The "LOBBY" by about five or six persons that were photographed outside Tower Hamlets Council building on Wednesday was not really registered as a political event at all.

Why?

Here is my Report [3]

1025 [1015] [0955] [0925] [0855] Hrs GMT London Saturday 20 April 2013

INSIDE the "Council Chamber" ["full Council" meeting, a ritualistic absurdity that is staged in the Tower Hamlets Council which is no longer a Council with the democratic powers but is lumbered with a diversion from democratic accountability via the installation of a post called "Executive Mayor"], there were noisy utterances by individuals who are called "councillors".

But they did not make any campaigning noises at all.

Most of their noises, as far as I could see from where I was sitting, were performances of scripted items!

Those scripts were NOT devoted to accountability about the ordinary people out in the Community in the London borough of Tower Hamlets.

The scripts were about "the Council Administration" and their supposed opponents, which are made up of the [more numerous] Labour Party councillors and the smaller Conservative ones.

When the "leader" of the supposed Opposition [on the Labour Group, notionally speaking for The Opposition] Joshua Peck, spoke, he spoke about HIS personally-related issues.

Not about the Community.

Least of all about the Council's duties to the Community!

Not that I could hear or discern any manifest prominence given in his spiel to the reality of the Council's behaviour in delivering its duties to the Community out across the area called in context here the "London Borough of Tower Hamlets" [=LBTH]!

And the listed "petitions and the questions" from the supposed members of the Public, on this occasion [Wednesday 17 April 2013] at that sitting of the LBTH Council, were as far beyond my comprehension as they ever could be. Of course there were words that I could recognise.
Of course there phrases that I had heard before and some of those I could even understand.

But I could not hear any campaigning in anything that was presented in those presentations!
So Eileen Short will have to show me what I had missed in the two sets of presentations under

"Petitions" and "Questions".

I heard nothing about campaigning.

Nor did any of the "councillors" from any of the "sides" make any noise whilst I was there [until just before 10 PM when I left] that amounted to what I know to be a campaigning noise.

Far less did any of those make any Campaigning statement!

NOTHING that the "rival" title to the LBTH Council’s very own PR “pravda” the "East End Lies" has since [that meeting] published, about or after that "LBTH Council Meeting” shows that there was any campaign in that Tower Hamlets Council Chamber during that meeting.

Below is the latest piece on the web site of the eastlondonadvsier.co.uk that shows that IF ANYTHING, the most interesting and reportable events are happening OUTSIDE of that LBTH Council Meeting.

Such as the alleged abuse of the Council's resources and its Constitutional law position and remits by the CURRENT LBTH COUNCIL ADMINISTRATION

[To be continued]

____________________________________________________

http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/news/politics/investigation_launched_into_tower_hamlets_mayor_s_advisors_illegal_election_planning_1_2120044

Investigation launched into Tower Hamlets Mayor’s advisors’ ‘illegal election planning’

Robin de Peyer

Friday, April 19, 2013

2:56 PM

An investigation has been launched into the role of Tower Hamlets Mayor Lutfur Rahman’s team of taxpayer funded advisors, amid claims they are illegally planning his re-election campaign.

Mr Rahman recently used council reserves to almost double the budget for his office and advisors, to £750,000 for the current financial year. But leaked minutes of a meeting held last year have triggered allegations the Mayor’s team has been illegally using council facilities and staff for electoral and partisan political purposes – in contravention of the Localism Act.

The minutes reportedly showed council officers and advisors involved in preparing campaign literature for electoral wards and discussing setting up a bank account for election funding.

Opposition councillors from Labour and the Conservatives voted together this week to “appoint an independent investigator into this […] in order to identify all misuse of public funds by using council facilities and officers for political campaign activity.”

But Mr Rahman’s cabinet member for resources Cllr Alibor Choudhury defended the £300,000 increase in the budget for advisors and the Mayor’s office.

“Let me stress that our advisors play an important part in the delivery of council services and the Mayor’s priorities”, he said.

He has previously insisted the advisors represent “great value”.

A council spokesperson confirmed the investigation, but offered no further comment.

Mr Rahman will take on London Assembly Member John Biggs in what is expected to be a closely fought contest next year.