tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-67035952024-03-13T13:52:57.260+00:00libertyandlawjournalinformation for actiongerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comBlogger122125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-59241260455865178992016-08-03T16:46:00.000+01:002016-08-03T16:48:08.598+01:00Libertarian Lifetime Achievement Award 2008<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3TKtTYIJH94/V6IPDC3VNhI/AAAAAAAAAAM/nGWqU9eDTEU9THnps4-f9DyJE6Jkp-FBwCLcB/s1600/LA%2BAward.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3TKtTYIJH94/V6IPDC3VNhI/AAAAAAAAAAM/nGWqU9eDTEU9THnps4-f9DyJE6Jkp-FBwCLcB/s320/LA%2BAward.jpg" width="223" /></a></div>
<br />gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-85852747490934743002016-08-03T16:35:00.000+01:002016-08-03T16:50:07.114+01:00Brian Micklethwait on Gerald's Stroke in 2007<a href="http://www.brianmicklethwait.com/index.php/education/why_gerald_hartup_deserves_an_especially_happy_christmas/">Click on this link</a> ... gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-83076932933147367782007-09-13T19:55:00.000+01:002007-09-14T07:07:02.839+01:00<strong>Conservative report on environment a "blueprint for feudalism"</strong><br /><br />The <strong>Libertarian Alliance</strong>, the radical free market and civil liberties policy institute, today denounces the Conservative Party report <strong>Blueprint for a Green Economy</strong> as a "blueprint for green feudalism".<br /><br />Libertarian Alliance Director, <strong>Dr Sean Gabb</strong>,argues:<br /><br />"The Conservatives are proposing more taxes and more regulations on the basis of fraudulent claims about the impact of human activity on the climate. There is no global warming. If there is, it is not our doing. If it is our doing, government action is not the answer. But there is no global warming. This whole set of claims is a device to rescue socialism from the failure of its promise to deliver heaven on earth. Shame on theConservatives for joining in the clamour.<br /><br />"And shame, above all, on the very rich men who are telling us to tighten our belts in their attempt to 'save the planet'. <strong>Zac Goldsmith</strong>, one of the authors of this Report, is one of the richest men in the country.<br /><br /><strong>David Cameron</strong> and <strong>John Gummer</strong> are not poor. If all the economic growth of the past century were to be rolled back, their sort would not suffer. <br /><br />"If the rich want to travel, they have their private jets and helicopters. If they want to eat fresh fruit and vegetables out of season, they have their vast greenhouses. If they want to do without washing machines and gas-fired central heating, they can fall back on armies of servants and expensive personal generators. If they want entertainment, they can have their private theatres and orchestras, or<br />whatever in our degraded modern culture serve in their place.<br /><br />"For them, a reduction of the general wealth would be a blessing. It would ease pressure on the roads that they would continue using, and reduce numbers at exotic holiday resorts that would remain within their reach.<br /><br />"These people talk about making the world a better place. Perhaps they believe what they say. The natural effect of their words, however, would be to make the world a better place for people who have done nothing to earn their wealth other than take the trouble to be born.<br /><br />"This whole report is a blueprint for green feudalism."gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-19636364949120550642007-09-04T14:47:00.000+01:002007-09-14T06:58:01.376+01:00<strong>European Commission’s racially offensive comic rises from the dead</strong><br /><br />The <strong>European Commission</strong> cartoon comic <em><strong>What?me? a racist?, </strong></em>on the <strong>Europa</strong> website since 2001, was taken down after a complaint by civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law</strong>, backed by the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality</strong>, that its caricatures of Europeans of African heritage were offensive.<br /><br /><strong>Commissioner Spidla’s </strong>spokesperson asked the Communications Directorate General on 21 August to remove the comic from its website and this was done.<br /><br />A check on 4 September, however, showed that the comic was up on the site again necessitating another call to the Commission from Liberty and Law and further action from the Commission’s spokesperson.<br /><br /><strong>Update 14 September</strong><br /><strong>After reporting its resurrection to the Commission it is now not available.</strong>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-42578506755826134422007-08-22T16:27:00.000+01:002007-08-22T16:36:10.351+01:00<strong>European Commission to take down racially offensive comic from its website</strong><br /><br />The <strong>European Commission</strong> is to remove the comic <em><strong>What me a racist </strong></em>from its <strong>Europa</strong> website following a complaint from civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law </strong>taken up on its behalf by the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality </strong>[CRE]. <br /><br />The glossy A4 comic produced in 1998 to combat racism was published in all the official European Union languages. It was <em>“designed for teachers to use when addressing the subject of racism with young people”</em> and has been on its website since 2001. <br /><br />Liberty and Law complained about the offensive racial caricatures of the black characters portrayed, reminiscent of the treatment given to Africans in <strong>Hergé’</strong>s 1931 book <em>Tintin in the Congo</em>.<br /><br />The CRE made rapid progress with the <strong>Commission for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities</strong>. On 21 August the CRE told Liberty and Law that the Commission underlined to them that it was “<em>not their intention to be offensive to any group or individual and are looking into the matter</em>”. Just a few hours later <strong>Commissioner Spidla’s </strong>spokesperson asked the Communications Directorate General to remove the comic from its website.<br /><br /> The Commission also confirmed that the paper copies were out of print and would not be reprinted. The CRE reported that the <em>“Commission wanted to reiterate that they did not intend to offend African Europeans (or any other group addressed in the cartoon) and should this have been the case they regret this deeply and offer their sincere apologies.”</em><br /><br />Liberty and Law director <strong>Gerald Hartup </strong>commented: “<em> It is amazing that so little sensitivity was employed by those responsible for its commission and production and that it got past Europe’s anti-racist campaigners. However, Commissioner Spidla deserves credit for acting promptly when it was belatedly brought to his attention.”</em><br /><br />What me a racist? <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/publications/young/txtt_whatme_racist_en.pdf">http://ec.europa.eu/publications/young/txt_whatme_racist_en.pdf</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-76535025876912867912007-08-08T12:24:00.000+01:002007-08-08T18:11:23.026+01:00<strong>Bedfordshire girl puts race commissars on the spot</strong><br /><br />It has taken an eighteen-year-old Bedfordshire student, <strong>Abigail Howarth</strong>, to expose the sickness and confusion at the heart of the UK’s race relation’s legislation. She did so because of what she found out when she wanted to compete for a training scheme with the <strong>Environment Agency</strong>.<br /><br />The strangely worded advertisement stated that applications for the four traineeships “are encouraged from people of the following descents: Asian, Indian, White other (e.g. Irish, Welsh, Scottish, European), African, Caribbean or of Mixed Race origins.<br /><br />The traineeships purported to be provided under <strong>Section 37 </strong>of the <strong>Race Relations Act 1976 (Amendment 2000). </strong>This allows employers and their agents to provide training schemes to racial groups underrepresented in particular jobs compared to their numbers in the working population either locally or nationally. It had been restricted historically for commonsense reasons to non-white groups although civil liberties groups have long opposed the racial discrimination it perpetuates.<br /><br />In this case <strong>PATH National Ltd</strong>, the major development agency acting in this business, in a bizarre and arguably illegal move, extended the qualifying groups to include everyone except white English people.<br /><br />Civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law </strong>has successfully campaigned against misuses of the Race Relations Act including Section 37 in cooperation with the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality</strong>. It has asked the CRE to request PATH to <strong>freeze </strong>the recruitment scheme until it has determined its legality.<br /><br /><strong>There appears be no co-ordination between PATH and the Environment Agency. </strong><br /><br />Extending the scheme to anyone who is white unless they are English cannot be justified by the statistics available from the Environment Agency. They explained to Liberty and Law that they “<em>have no evidence that white Scottish, Irish or Welsh are underrepresented in the Anglian region of the Environment Agency.” </em>More strongly they stated: “ <em>Whilst PATH employ a broad criteria inviting applicants from people of these backgrounds, applicants would not be progressed further with us.”</em>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-79444199760996932582007-08-02T18:09:00.000+01:002007-08-02T18:28:01.149+01:00<strong> Financial Times latest to award Trevor Phillips a knighthood </strong><br /><br />Today in a report about the <strong>Commission for Equality and Human Rights</strong>, <strong>Trevor Phillips </strong>its chair, in the news over his Queen Mother colostomy bag joke, was designated <em><strong>"Sir Trevor Phillips". </strong></em><br /><br />The <strong>Financial Times</strong> joins a host of other bodies that have assumed a man of his distinction would have a knighthood.<br /><br />Mr Phillips <strong>OBE </strong>heads the new body that will combine the roles of the the <strong>Disability Rights Commissionthe Commission for Racial Equality and the Equal Opportunities Commission. </strong>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-47323764409152558882007-08-02T12:44:00.000+01:002007-08-02T13:09:02.394+01:00<strong>Commission for Racial Equality: institutionally racist and sexist to the end</strong><br /><br />White staff and men stay grossly under-represented at the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality [CRE]</strong>. This is revealed in the £20 million organisation’s final report buried away on its website.<br /> <br />It shows 43% of its staff are white and that 64% of are women. <br /><br />The CRE has remained indifferent about its discriminatory recruitment policy during its entire existence despite being challenged by equality campaigners to set targets to attain a racially and sexually representative workforce..<br /><br />It still brazenly claims in its final report that its <em><strong>“workforce showed a good mix by ethnicity”</strong></em>1. It has refused to state for many years what the racial profile of its staff should be. This strategy has worked well given lax parliamentary supervision of its work.<br /><br /><strong>Liberty and Law</strong> director <strong>Gerald Hartup </strong>stated: “<em>This claim is outrageous. Do its commissioners read the publications their organization puts out? Why do they believe that targets are necessary for everyone else but that they should be exempt? That’s a rhetorical question, of course. The answer is clear. They knew they could get away with it.”</em><br /><br />In the absence of any statement from the CRE, Liberty and Law believes that it should have adopted the targets of <strong>Ken Livingstone’s </strong><strong>Greater London Authority </strong>that 52% of the workforce should be women and 27% black, Asian and minority ethnic people. This would at least reflect London’s population from which the majority of the CRE’s staff is presumably drawn - if not the national population.<br /><br />As the CRE will only exist until 31st September 2007 it will of course escape any sanctions from our holidaying elected representatives.<br /><br />1 Commission for Racial Equality Employment Monitoring Data 2006 <br /><br /><a href="http://www.cre.gov.uk/downloads/cre_employment_monitoring_data.pdf">http://www.cre.gov.uk/downloads/cre_employment_monitoring_data.pdf</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-1779672464608522522007-07-27T21:11:00.000+01:002007-08-03T15:54:20.572+01:00<strong>Equal Opportunites Commission celebrates over thirty years keeping out men</strong><br /><br />Institutional gender discrimination had been alive and kicking at <strong>Britain’s Equal Opportunities Commission [EOC]</strong> ever since its inception. Arguing relentlessly for “targets” for all other employers it has resolutely failed to act to bring about fair employment policies in its own organisation. Successive government paymasters have failed to bring the organisation to heel. The annual report of the government funded <strong>£9.438 million quango </strong>reveals that male staff has been reduced in its final year to just <strong>17.6%</strong> - down even from last year’s derisory 18.2%. <br /><br />It is surely the lack of a male perspective that ensured that the EOC last year let <strong>Avon and Somerset</strong> and <strong>Gloucestershire Police Services </strong>get away scot free with their recruitment scam excluding almost 300 men in favour of women. <br /><br />We don’t read about these “achievements” in the EOC’s annual reports. Who knows what other initiatives doing down men will be lost down the memory hole when the EOC in October metamorphoses into the <strong>Commission for Equality and Human Rights.</strong>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-71267716488985581892007-07-21T06:33:00.000+01:002007-07-21T06:57:40.976+01:00<strong>Does Britain need a Libertarian Party?</strong><br /><br />Maybe, or maybe not. The argument bubbles up regularly in the forums and now the <strong>Libertarian Alliance</strong> makes it the subject of the first £1000 <strong>Chris R Tame Memorial Prize. </strong><br /><br /><strong>Dr Tame</strong> was the dynamic founder of the Libertarian Alliance whose contribution to British politics and political thought was not fully appreciated until his premature death last year. It is now and in his honour The <strong>PROMIS Unit of Primary Care </strong>has established a major yearly <strong>£1,000 </strong>essay prize.<br /><br />It is open to everybody. The deadline for receipt of essays is 1 October 2007.<br /><br />Details of the <a href="http://libertarian.co.uk/conf07/prize07.htm">prize</a> can be found here.gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-17138659336164575492007-07-12T21:16:00.000+01:002007-07-21T07:15:18.912+01:00<strong>European Commission updates offensive Tintin cartoons</strong><br /><br />The <strong>European Commission </strong>has had on its website now for almost seven years offensive images of <strong>African European</strong> young people. The artist for the publication <em><strong>"What me a racist?", </strong></em><strong>Sergio Selma</strong>, illustrates "sympathetically" a black mother and her son with the same enormous mouths used by <strong>Hergé</strong> in his 1931 book <em><strong>Tintin in the Congo</strong></em> that has now been reported to the British police.<br /><br />The most offensive illustration in the ezine is a cartoon showing a middle aged white couple looking fondly at a little black boy and girl with enormous offensively caricatured mouths stating: "Aren't they cute? They're just gorgeous at that age." with the reply "Pity they have to grow up." <br /><br />The cartoon magazine crassly designed to combat racism can still be seen on the European Commission's website. <br /><br />Civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law</strong> has reported the website to the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality</strong> asking it to use its good offices and European contacts to get the European Commission to take it off the website and to pulp all remaining copies of the document published in all the official European Union languages. <br /><br />The European Commission in a forward to the document claims that <em>"it is determined to combat discrimination based on sex, race, ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability , age or sexual orientation"</em>. It goes on to claim that <em>"the humorously written and informative pamphlet has been designed for teachers to use when addressing the subject of racism with young people"</em>.<br /><br />Liberty and law director <strong>Gerald Hartup</strong> commented: "It is astonishing that this comic has circulated so widely for so long without any action being taken especially given the sheer size of the race relations industry in Europe. We are contacting the European Commission directly to have it taken off its website."<br /><br /><strong>What me a racist?</strong> can be seen <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/publications/young/txt_whatme_racist_en.pdf">here</a>.gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-13683068788465322882007-07-06T06:45:00.000+01:002007-07-06T07:07:11.458+01:00<strong>The <em>modalities</em> of an offer from Europe too good to refuse</strong><br /><br />Rt Hon David Miliband MP<br />Secretary of State.<br />Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA),<br />Nobel House<br />17 Smith Square<br />London SW1P 3JR<br />16 May 2007<br /><br />Dear Secretary of State,<br /><br />My friend, who is in farming at the moment, recently received a cheque for £3,000 from the <strong>Rural Payments Agency</strong> for not rearing pigs. I would now like to join the "not rearing pigs" business.<br /><br />In your opinion, what is the best kind of farm not to rear pigs on, and which is the best breed of pigs not to rear? I want to be sure I approach this endeavour in keeping with all government policies, as dictated by the <strong>EU </strong>under the <strong>Common Agricultural Policy</strong>. I would prefer not to rear bacon pigs, but if this is not the type you want not rearing, I will just as gladly not rear porkers. Are there any advantages in not rearing rare breeds such as <strong>Saddlebacks</strong> or <strong>Gloucester Old Spots</strong>, or are there too many people already not rearing these?<br /><br />As I see it, the hardest part of this programme will be keeping an accurate record of how many pigs I haven't reared. Are there any Government or Local Authority <strong>courses</strong> on this?<br /><br />My friend is very satisfied with this business. He has been rearing pigs for forty years or so, and the best he ever made on them was £1,422 in 1968. That is - until this year, when he received a cheque for not rearing any.<br /><br />If I get £3,000 for not rearing 50 pigs, will I get £6,000 for not rearing 100?<br />I plan to operate on a <strong>small scale</strong> at first, holding myself down to about 4,000 pigs not raised. which will mean about £240,000 for the first year? As I become more expert in not rearing pigs, I plan to be <strong>more ambitious</strong>, perhaps increasing to, say, 40,000 pigs not reared in my second year, for which I should expect about £2.4 million from your department. <br /><br />Incidentally, I wonder if I would be eligible to receive tradable <strong>carbon credits</strong> for all these pigs not producing harmful and polluting methane gases.<br /><br />Another point: These pigs that I plan not to rear will not eat 2,000 tonnes of cereals. I understand that you also pay farmers for not growing crops. Will I qualify for payments for not growing cereals to not feed the pigs I don't rear? <br /><br />I am also considering the "not milking cows" business, so please send any information you have on that too. Please could you also include the current <strong>Defra </strong>advice on set aside fields? Can this be done on an e-commerce basis with <strong>virtual fields</strong> (of which I seem to have several thousand hectares)?<br /><br />In view of the above you will realise that I will be totally unemployed, and will therefore qualify for <strong>unemployment benefits</strong>.<br /><br />I shall of course be voting for your party at the next general election.<br /><br />Yours faithfully, <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />This genuine letter on not rearing pigs was sent to <strong>Eurorealist</strong> by <strong>Cyril Randle</strong>, the Walsall Pensioner who was almost prosecuted by Walsall MBC for not throwing chewing gum out of a car window he could not open at the time. <br /><br />NB In the latest reshuffle <strong>Mr Miliband</strong> has been promoted to <strong>Foreign Secretary</strong>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-48500348544561314572007-07-06T06:38:00.000+01:002007-07-06T07:11:25.193+01:00<strong>The <em>modalities </em>of an offer from Africa too good to miss</strong><br /><br />Dear,<br />How are you and your present health condition I hope all is well with you?<br />I am Mr Asumugah Weah. I am from Liberia in West Africa but I am residing at Dakar Senegal at the moment. I am contacting you on this business venture that I would like to associate with you, My late father Dr George Weah Deposited some capital valued at US$15.5 million dollars that was deposited in bank of Senegal by my late father and the statement of account is with me please I would require your urgent concern on this matter because, the Senegalese bank, has issued me a notice to claim the money or have the fund confiscated within the next twenty Official working days, please my current statue now does not permit me to have full access to the money or to deal with the bank to claim the money, So I will be needing your urgent assistance please to recover the money from the bank, and for you to help me start up a good investment in your country with the money.<br /> <br />Therefore, on receipt of your positive response, we shall then discuss the sharing ratio and modalities for transfer. I have all necessary information and legal documents needed to back you up for the claim. All I require from you is your honest cooperation to enable us see this transaction through. I guarantee that this will be executed under a legitimate arrangement that will protect both of us from any breach of the law. <br />NOTE: On your request the Senegalese bank will released all the details of the account for your verifications.<br />Awaiting to hear from you in earnest. <br />Best Regards, <br />Asumugah weah<br />00221-3901542.<br /> <br />Inbox cluttered with junk? Clean up with Yahoo! Mail.<br /><br />asumugah weah asumugahweah1983@yahoo.co.ukgerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-89263010432002118312007-07-03T22:29:00.000+01:002007-07-03T22:32:37.819+01:00<strong>How many Shami Chakrabatis does it take to change a light bulb?</strong><br /><br /><strong>Liberty</strong> has come up with a super idea to protect citizens from terrorism in the UK. With their experience they should really be handed the job of security if the paying public want to really feel safe.<br /> <br />As a spokeswoman put it: <em>"If stop and search powers are applied even-handedly, without racial profiling, they will have the support of Liberty and, hopefully, the whole community." </em><br /><br />Just the ticket. Under no circumstances use other than hard intelligence to stop and search unless done on a random basis. That means stopping 90 white people for every 10 minority ethnic people. And make sure you get a fair share of kids playing on the swings too. <br /><br />This may take a little longer to get results. But, hey, better safe than sorry, surely?<br /><br /><strong>The Scotsman </strong>3 July 2007 <em>Terror, bomb scares, arrests - and births </em>at the Alexandria <a href="http://">http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1033292007</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-77359308830107950542007-07-01T13:21:00.000+01:002007-07-01T18:46:42.053+01:00<strong>Is it really time to sack smokers?</strong><br /><br />If you want to know about employment matters log on to <strong>Personnel Today</strong>. They have a very good selection of informative articles on smoking in the workforce and smoking by members of the workforce.<br /><br />On 6 May they ran an article <strong>Smoking is not the only addiction that must be tackled in the workplace</strong> in which the following mainstream advice was given to employers: <em>"…you should adopt a robust approach to your recruitment strategy and find out at an early stage whether a candidate is a smoker, or likes more than a glass of shandy after work. If so, reject them - unless you are prepared to spend the time tackling future issues that may arise."</em><br /><br />These major issues are productivity and absentee losses associated with smoking and alcohol related accidents in the workplace.<br /><br />This is already being done by some employers. A Sunday Times </strong>October 3, 2004 <strong>Job vacant ... but not for smokers </strong>explained: <em>"BRITISH companies have started to refuse to employ smokers, even if they promise not to indulge their habit during working hours."</em> It reports Kalamazoo-UCS of Northfield, Birmingham that employs 400 people and Kershen-Fairfax, a London accountancy firm as leaders."<br /><br />Using <strong>google</strong> "smoking sacking" gives a good introduction to such trends. <br /><br />Personnel Today’s <strong>Employment law: smoking ban special </strong>26 June is cautious about sacking existing smokers <em>"Sacking someone because they smoke in their spare time would be an unfair dismissal…" </em> but as they go on to point out of the United States <em>"… twenty states give employers the right to sack employees who smoke away from work in their own time."</em><br /><br />The <strong>European Commission</strong> provides no protection for smokers. According to Commission equal opportunities spokesperson <strong>Katharina von Schnurbein</strong> <em>"The Commission can legislate on age, disability, sexual orientation, religion, race and gender . For all other areas, it's the member state's responsibility." </em><br /><br />Under these circumstances civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law</strong> is asking the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality</strong> [CRE] and the <strong>Equal Opportunities Commission</strong> [EOC] to investigate any companies who refuse to employ smokers as well as any recruitment companies or media outlets that accept advertisements proclaiming such discriminatory intent. <br /><br />Companies refusing to take on smokers are certain to be indirectly sexually and racially discriminatory because of the differential smoking patterns related to the sex and race of Britain’s workforce. The penalties for such discrimination are potentially massive and trade unions can be expected to support affected members at employment tribunals. <br /><br /><strong>Action on Smoking and Health</strong>, ASH provides evidence of widely differential smoking patterns by race and sex. It shows that<strong> Bangladeshi</strong> men for example under a no smoking regime will be turned down almost twice as frequently as<strong> Chinese</strong> men. <strong>Irish</strong> women will be turned down 13 times more frequently than <strong>Bangladeshi</strong> women.<br /><br />Liberty and Law is contacting recruitment companies to check that they have not and will not accept commissions from companies that refuse to hire people who smoke outside working hours and that they will report such companies to the CRE and the EOC. <br /><br />It will also directly report companies advertising their intention to exclude smokers to the CRE the EOC and libertarian smoking rights group <strong>Forest</strong>. <br /><br />http://www.forestonline.org/output/page209.asp <br /><br />Liberty and Law director <strong>Gerald Hartup </strong>stated: “We must have zero tolerance of businesses that would indulge in repressive bullying. Their hectoring intolerance must be stubbed out. If necessary they need to suffer the consequences of their anti-social pretensions in the courts or in other ways that affect their bottom lines.”gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-86123746330486624112007-06-30T23:19:00.000+01:002007-06-30T23:45:34.959+01:00<strong>Do you really want to know how they dumbed down A-level maths?</strong><br /><br />Education think tank <strong>Campaign for Real Education </strong>published a short document in 2004 summarising what has happened. You can find it on <a href="http:www.cre.org.uk/maths1.pdf">http://www.cre.org.uk/maths1.pdf </a><br /><br />It shows exactly what was ripped out of the syllabus and the disastrous results for students taking university courses with a substantial mathematical content.gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-22916258292565377562007-06-19T14:18:00.000+01:002007-06-19T14:37:53.202+01:00<strong><strong>Mayor’s action over Fire Authority appointments reported to race and sex watchdogs</strong></strong><br /><br />London mayor <strong>Ken Livingstone</strong> has blocked the appointment of every Conservative and Liberal Democrat white male nominated to the governing body of the <strong>London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority</strong>. He has acted claiming that their nominations failed to tackle the under representation of women, black, Asian and ethnic minority Londoners. He has asked these parties to reconsider their nominations except for one Conservative female councillor acceptable to him.<br /><br />At a press conference on Tuesday he confirmed that he had not sought advice from either the <strong>Equal Opportunities Commission</strong> or the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality</strong> and that there were contradictory legal views of his powers in this area.<br /><br />These appointments are well paying with a basic allowance of £7,206 a year to every borough representative. Special responsibility allowances bumped up the average payment to over £11,000 in 2005/2006.<br /><br />By discriminating in favour of Conservative <strong>Cllr Rebekah Gilbert </strong>in her appointment and against her white male colleagues it is thought that Mr Livingstone may be in breach of both the <strong>Sex Discrimination Act </strong>and the <strong>Race Relations Act</strong>.<br /><br />Civil rights group <strong>Liberty and Law </strong>has asked the EOC and the CRE to investigate urgently the action of the Mayor to determine whether it conforms with equal opportunity legislation.<br /><br />Director <strong>Gerald Hartup </strong>said:“ This is not just a quarrel between the Mayor and the political parties. It raises important issues about the nature of our democracy. It is too important to be just left to them to sort out".“<br /><br />The mayor argues in a press release of 15 June: "It is crucial that important public bodies such as the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority represent London’s diverse communities. This year’s nominations offered a real chance to improve the profile of the authority and address the serious under-representation of women and black and ethnic minority Londoners but sadly this has not been acted on.<br /><br />‘The nominations that have been made by groups within London Councils and the London Assembly are unrepresentative of London’s diverse communities.<br /><br />"I just do not believe that it is impossible to find more black and Asian people to serve on the fire authority, or that there are not more women who wish to participate.<br /><br />"It is unacceptable that when there are 1,861 councillors in London, of which 555 are women and 293 from Black, Asian and Ethnic Minority groups, all seven Conservative nominees to the fire authority are white and include only one woman, and all three Liberal Democrat nominees are white men.<br /><br />"To fulfill my duty to promote genuine equality I have decided not to accept these unrepresentative nominees for the fire authority and to ask those who are making these nominations to ensure that they reflect London as it really is.<br /><br />"I have written to the Chair of London Councils, Cllr Merrick Cockell, Conservative Assembly leader Angie Bray AM and Liberal Democrat Assembly leader Mike Tuffrey AM to ask them to reconsider their nominations.<br /><br />"It is absolutely crucial that the body which runs the third largest firefighting organisation in the world is far more representative of the people it serves and I will use all the powers of my office to promote equality and tackle under-representation.” <br /><br /><strong>Merrick Cockell</strong> Tory chairman of <strong>London Councils</strong> (formerly the <strong>Association of London Government</strong>) responded : "It is disappointing that the Mayor has rejected two pensioners, an openly gay councillor and a councillor under 30 as being 'unrepresentative' of London's diverse communities. The fact remains these councillors were democratically elected by London's diverse communities." <br /><br />Lib Dem leader of the London Assembly <strong>Mike Tuffrey </strong>raises the fundamental question to be answered:"It is not for the Mayor to dictate to the other parties who they appoint." <br /><br />This remains to be seen.gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-37696491308152044312007-06-07T04:25:00.000+01:002007-06-07T05:22:30.679+01:00<strong>Chancellor reported to race watchdog over jobs for Brits speech</strong><br /><br />Following <strong>Gordon Brown's</strong> speech to the <strong>GMB</strong> union on 5 June in which he indicated that he wanted a claimed 200,000 new jobs to go to what he called "British workers" civil liberties group <strong>Liberty and Law</strong> has reported him to the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality [CRE].</strong><br /><strong></strong><br />It has asked the CRE to make a statement explaining that any job discrimination based on nationality is against the <strong>Race Relations Act</strong> and to investigate the policy of the government to ensure that its employment policy is not designed to privilege British job seekers over any other people entitled to seek work in this country.<br /><br />It has also asked the CRE to obtain a statement from Mr Brown clearly indicating that nothing he has said was intended to suggest that British workers were to be given any priority whatsoever in obtaining employment over foreigners seeking the same work.<br /><br />Headlines in the media showed clearly Mr Brown's message.<br /><br /><strong><em>British workers for British jobs</em></strong>, Daily Telegraph<br /><strong><em>Brown pledges ‘British workers for British jobs’</em></strong> Daily Mail<br /><strong><em>Get British jobless doing British jobs</em></strong> Daily Mirror<br /><strong><em>Brown to put British workers first in jobs queue</em></strong> The Herald<br /><strong>Brown promises Britons first refusal on jobs</strong> The Independent<br /><br /><strong>Colin Brown</strong> of the <strong>Independent</strong> explained: <em>“Gordon Brown promised his union backers for the leadership of the Labour Party that as Prime Minister he will ensure British people get first refusal of jobs in Britain.”</em><br /><em><br /></em><strong>Oonagh Blackman</strong> of the <strong>Daily Mirror</strong> summarised his position as<em>:"Gordon Brown yesterday pledged to give jobs to British workers ahead of migrants.”</em><br /><br />These headlines were eerily similar to a <strong>British National Party</strong> campaign posted by its South West Correspondent a few days earlier on 26 May.<br /></em><br /><em>"A new leaflet sized poster is starting to “mysteriously” appear on works notice boards in a growing number of Somerset factories - particularly those increasingly employing migrant labour in preference to local people. The posters have the basic design as shown in the example below - but are “customised” by the addition of Party contact details and a strap line depending upon location - such as “<strong>British jobs for British workers</strong> at Bloggs Foods".</em><br /><br />Mr Brown's policy would seem to be similar to that of the BNP. He has given the clear impression that employers can and should discriminate in recruitment between British people and people who are not British but have come to Britain to work and live either permanently or temporarily.<br /><br />Liberty and Law director <strong>Gerald Hartup</strong> stated <em>"He must be aware that non- British citizens from the European union have an absolute right to live and work in this country without being subject to discrimination by employers. His speech appears to be xenophobic and gives reason for foreigners to fear for their safety in this country as well as for their employment rights, apparently facing a government under his leadership that will attempt to discriminate against them. The BNP website does not yet contain an article trumpeting the fact that the government is now belatedly following its lead. No doubt it will. Mr Brown is doing its job for it."</em>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-11723901540108218442007-05-28T15:08:00.000+01:002007-05-28T15:32:28.241+01:00<strong>Prison Service Directorate colour bar sinks Corby</strong><br /><br /><strong>Liberty and Law Journal </strong> has now been provided with the Prison Service’s delayed draft <strong>Race Impact Assessment</strong> on the controversial proposed move of 65 jobs from the struggling town of Corby to Peat House, Leicester. <br /><br />The document claims “<em>the setting up of a Joint Midlands Procurement Service Unit is expected to result in efficiency gains in excess of £700k</em>.” It will “<em>try and assist as many staff as possible to relocate to the new property in Leicester through the provision of excess fares and possibly a coach service.”<br /></em><br />Apart from the logistical advantages claimed for the move it makes clear the reason why Corby had to be disqualified as a contender from the start and has caused such outrage in the town among staff, residents, councillors, local MPs and Northants Race Equality Council.<br /><br />The document boldly states: <strong><em>“Crown House is unable to meet Directorate (13%) or HMPS (6%) Race/Ethnicity targets. Race/Ethnicity targets to contribute to meeting HMPS’ Race Equality Duty. This is a ministerial requirement.”<br /></em></strong><br /> It adds: “<strong><em>Leicester provides good recruitment prospects and in time (existing staff are likely to transfer) is likely to assist HMPS in meeting its staff race/ethnicity targets.”</em></strong><br /><strong><em></em></strong><br />Liberty and Law director <strong>Gerald Hartup</strong><em> </em>commented: "It looks hopeless for Corby. It seems there is nothing the town can do to persuade the Prison Service to stay. The demographics are against them. They are a black spot to be avoided by employers with government racial targets to meet."<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><strong><em></em></strong>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-1107239381687398002007-05-27T10:46:00.000+01:002007-05-28T15:07:30.912+01:00<strong>Time to end charitable status of schools and state interference<br /></strong><br />According to <strong>Geraldine Hackett's</strong> report [<em>'Poor law' comes to public schools</em>, The <strong>Guardian</strong> 26 October 2003] charitable status was worth £82 m a year in tax relief to independent schools. Since then it has apparently escalated to be worth £100 millions.<br /><br />I use Ms Hackett’s report simply to show how the government uses gradualism as a means of taking control of every aspect of our lives. The government is determined to interfere in their running as a condition for keeping this tax advantage.<br /><br />In 2003 I calculated on the back of an envelope that with 600,000 children in the independent sector the charitable tax break was worth just £137 a year for each pupil. According to the <strong>Independent Schools Council</strong> “<em>the UK independent sector as a whole educates 620,000 children in around 2,500 independent schools</em>”. My revised back of the envelope calculation makes the tax break now worth £161.29 per pupil. [Let’s go for spurious accuracy. We are talking education after all.]<br /><br />Parents in the independent sector subsidized the the state in 2003 by the £1.7 billion it would otherwise have cost to educate their children. No doubt given the investment in state education since then the figure has risen considerably.[ A <strong>Daily Telegraph</strong> editorial<em> </em>puts it at £2.2 billion: <em>Johnson's threats lack both charity and sense, 27 May 2007 </em>and one of its published letters on 28 May puts it at almost $3 billion.] But pretending it has not for a moment another back of the envelope calculation shows that the Education Secretary takes in a cool £2741.94 from each of these children. [At £2.2 billion we are talking £3548 and at £3 billion £4839.]<br /><br />Parents whose children are educated independently should demand that their schools should deregister as charities and pay the extra 44p a day necessary to get the government and its bureacrats off their backs. Their schools can still carry on making some of their facilities available to children forced to go to state schools . It would no longer be charitable of course but an independent gesture of social solidarity untainted by the state.gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-14783992454857644702007-05-12T04:25:00.000+01:002007-05-12T04:34:51.141+01:00<strong>David Cameron’s ‘no platform] group wins campus ban on BNP<br /></strong><br /><strong>Ken Livingstone’s</strong> group <strong>Unite against Fascism</strong> successfully stopped <strong>British National Party</strong> chair <strong>Nick Griffin</strong> from speaking at <strong>Bath University</strong> next Monday . Together with the <strong>University and Colleges Union </strong>[UCU] and the <strong>National Union of Students</strong> they argued for the ‘no platform’ policy to be extended to the university.<br /><br />Currently the most prominent parliamentary UAF supporter is Conservative leader <strong>David Cameron</strong>. He is joined by his <strong>shadow Home Office minister Edward Garnier, QC MP.<br /></strong><br />Historically the Conservative party has argued in favour of free speech and against the ‘no platform’ policy of the National Union of Students that in the past was used to prevent Conservative cabinet ministers from speaking.<br /><br />Bath University had originally given permission for the meeting to go ahead as the BNP was a lawful political party and to conform to its freedom of speech code.<br /><br />The university only reversed its stance on 10 May following a campaign launched by the ‘no platform’ groups that made the university fear for the safety of staff and students. It also had “fears of disruption to examinations given the likely scale of protests on the day."<br /><br /><strong>Weyman Bennett, Joint National Secretary</strong> of <strong>Unite Against Fascism</strong> explained his stance: “<em>The racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic politics of the BNP pose a danger to many of the staff and students who make up the diversity of the university.”<br /><br /></em><strong>Sally Hunt, UCU joint general secretary</strong> said: <em>“Allowing the BNP to speak would have compromised the safety of staff and students and sent out a very worrying message about Bath University’s commitment to diversity.”</em>/<br /><br /><br />Let’s give them a warm welcome 4 May 2007<br /><a href="http://bristol.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=26246">http://bristol.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=26246</a><br /><br />University in row over BNP invite 10 May 7.34a<br /><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/6641407.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/6641407.stm</a><br /><br />University halts BNP speech plan 10 May 2007 17.55<br /><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/6644117.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/6644117.stm</a><br /><br />Fascist BNP leader stopped from speaking at Bath University<br />Protest cancelled 10 May 2007<br /><a href="http://www.uaf.org.uk/news.asp?choice=70510">http://www.uaf.org.uk/news.asp?choice=70510</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-27469729369436696462007-05-01T14:21:00.001+01:002007-05-01T14:52:53.035+01:00gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-39330377964600272552007-05-01T14:21:00.000+01:002007-05-01T14:27:20.408+01:00<strong><span style="color:#ff0000;">Legal aid cuts need race equality impact assessment first</span></strong><br /><br />The UK Parliament’s <strong>Constitutional Affairs Committee</strong> has woken up to the fact that the government’s proposals to reform legal aid payments to “save” £100 million pounds a year could breach statutory duties under the <strong>Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000</strong>. These regulations now force businesses to carry out a <strong>race relations impact assessment</strong> when making changes to their business practices that could have an unequal impact on different racial groups.<br /><br />The government’s scheme has been opposed by Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and the Law Society.<br /><br />The <strong>Law Society Gazette</strong> reported last week that the <strong>Society of Asian Lawyers (SAL)</strong> and the <strong>Black Solicitors Network (BSN)</strong> had sent the legal Services commission a letter before action challenging its failure to carry out the assessment.<br /><br />The “best value” competitive tendering sought by the LSC these groups argue would have a disproportionate effect on small firms which themselves disproportionately employ minority ethnic staff.<br /><br /><strong>Liberty and Law</strong> believes that SAL, BSN and the Law Society have a very good case. It also believes that the legal profession should be able to pick up massive fees in litigation certain to take place across British industry as a result of the legislation. Trade union lawyers should be on to a winner.<br /><br />Already the <strong>Prison Service</strong> has been challenged over its proposed move from <strong>Corby </strong>to <strong>Leicester</strong> over the disproportionate effect that would have on the employment of its existing white staff.<br /><br /><strong>MPs say legal aid changes could breach race laws<br /></strong><a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL3032764720070430">http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL3032764720070430</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-88844457350088233102007-04-30T21:41:00.000+01:002007-04-30T21:45:49.688+01:00<strong><span style="color:#663333;">National Black Police Association poll rejects ACPO's Affirmative Action bid</span></strong><br /><br />The decision by the <strong>Association of Chief Police officers [ACPO</strong>] to campaign for the right to discriminate against the hiring of white males has met opposition from the <strong>National Black Police Association</strong>. Its website poll shows that 55.6% of 520 respondents strongly disagree with Affirmative Action. They outnumber those who strongly agree [28.1%] by 2:1. A further 13.1% agree "with conditions".<br /><br />National Black Police Association<br /><a href="http://www.nbpa.co.uk/index.php?option=com_poll&task=results&id=16&mosmsg=Thanks+for+your+vote%21">http://www.nbpa.co.uk/index.php?option=com_poll&task=results&id=16&mosmsg=Thanks+for+your+vote%21</a>gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6703595.post-19704718628454030302007-04-24T15:00:00.000+01:002007-04-24T15:31:56.289+01:00<strong><span style="color:#3333ff;">Police colour bar puts Trevor Phillips at odds with CRE</span></strong><br /><br />The decision by <strong>ACPO </strong>to campaign to racially and sexually discriminate against white males in order to meet government employment targets has revealed a split between <strong>Trevor Phillips</strong> the newly appointed boss of the <strong>Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR).</strong> and his old organisation the <strong>Commission for Racial Equality (CRE).<br /><br /></strong>A spokeswoman for the CRE told <strong>The Guardian</strong>: "<em>The CRE doesn't support positive discrimination and affirmative action," and that "these forms of 'reverse discrimination' could actually increase community tensions, rather than ease them.<br />"In many areas forces are struggling to recruit people from diverse backgrounds because of people's negative perceptions and experiences. This is the real problem that needs to be addressed."<br /></em>In the CRE’s view<em>: "The police ought to stop hiding behind the smokescreen of 'affirmative action' and start looking at the real reasons why ethnic minorities are not applying to become police officers."</em><br /><em><br /></em>Mr Phillips has argued for a change in the law since he was first appointed chair of the CRE . In an early and important interview with The Guardian [March 17 2004] his views were revealed:"Phillips wants the body that will succeed the CRE, which goes under the working title of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CEHR), to be given powers to apply to the secretary of state to suspend race and sex discrimination laws so that, in "extreme" cases, numbers of ethnic minorities may be fast-tracked into the force. Once the organisation had boosted its ethnic recruitment, the exemption would be lifted, and recruitment would continue normally."<br /><br />He went on in the interview to express his alarm that he might be compelled to act against a police force for jumping the gun."A woman or a white man or a man might come along to us and say, 'They're fast-tracking ethnic minorities or they're fast-tracking women; that means I am being deprived of the possibility of two years' salary as a police officer', and under the law we would have to support their case."<br /><br /><strong>Liberty and Law</strong> director <strong>Gerald Hartup</strong> said: “ACPO have got the man for the job. <em>Since Mr Phillips in his new job will once again be responsible for policing the police we can have no confidence whatsoever that they will not go ahead with discriminatory schemes even without any change in the law. The law seems to be for the little people. I had never thought that I could possibly regret the passing of the CRE but now I do</em>.”gerald hartuphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14449703886152289213noreply@blogger.com