Sunderland Labour Councillors' blogs
... good value or another complete waste of taxpayers money?
Nice to see our Sunderland Labour councillors have their own blogs too ... Councillor, and Deputy Mayor Leslie Scott wrote "Members of the Labour Group took a decision considered over three months to devote a percentage of their allowances to promote Labour's achievements in Sunderland and to establish individual websites and blogs for its councillors."
After all, in this new computer age where the public are ditching the newspaper to get information online it is important that anyone wishing to see if their councillor is active and value for money can do so at the click of a button.
It does trouble me however, that it took them three months to consider this.
It also concerns me that, as they wish to promote Labour's achievements in Sunderland we can rule out the following ... the loss-making Port, the Vaux site, the parking shambles, the abandoned and derelict estates, the state of the City centre, the illegal speed humps... need I go on
Let's see how our money is being spent...after all, they must have something to celebrate ... they spend enough on the free hospitality every year at the AirShow, unless that's where they drown their sorrows that they have singlehandedly and collectively failed the people of Sunderland.
Here are the statistics...
Cabinet members blogs:
Leader of the Council, Councillor Bob Symond's blog ... 1 posting on 4th September 2006
Councillor Bryan Charlton's blog... 1 post on 11th October 2006 saying he was off to the gym. Is he still there? Is he in Rocky 6?
Councillor Dave Allen's blog ... 1 posting on 27th September 2006
Councillor Joseph Lawson's blog ... 0 posts (perhaps too busy investigating the failures of his portfolio)
Councillor Mel Speding's blog ... 2 posts He writes: "Hopefully, I can master the bloggers guide and produce a blog that is informative and useful. I intend to update regularly and hope to give an insight into both my role as a ward councillor and as a cabinet member."
Councillor Paul Watson's blog ... 2 posts, last one 4th October.
Councillor Kath Rolph's blog ... 17 posts. The only one in the Cabinet who seems to be doing something.
Councillor H Trueman's blog ... 1 post 11th December
Councillor Pat Smith's blog ... 0 posts
Councillor Eric Timmin's blog ... 1 post 11th December
Here is the full list of Labour Councillors...now don't laugh at the number of posts.
However, fear of technology cannot be used an excuse 'cos some are dab hands at using the laptop. Read how here
Councillor Tommy Foster ... 0 posts
Councillor Leslie Mann ... 0 posts
Councillor Bob Heron ... 0 posts
Councillor Joan Carthy ... 0 posts
Councillor Juliana Heron ... 0 posts
Councillor Elizabeth Gibson ... 0 posts
Councillor Mary Smith ... 0 posts
Councillor Tommy Martin ... 1 post
Councillor David Tate ... 0 posts
Councillor Florence Anderson ... 0 posts
Councillor James Blackburn ... ... 1 post
Councillor Dennis Richardson ... 0 posts
Councillor Joe Lawson ... 0 posts
Councillor Kath Rolph ... 17 posts
Councillor Colin Anderson ... 0 posts
Councillor Celia Gofton ... 0 posts
Councillor Paul Watson ... 2 posts
Councillor Amy Wilson ... 0 posts
Councillor Paul Stewart ... 0 posts
Councillor Richard Bell ... 0 posts
Councillor Bryan Charlton ... 1 post
Councillor Ross Wares ... 0 posts
Councillor Ronald Bainbridge ... 0 posts
Councillor Eileen Handy ... 0 posts
Councillor David Allen ... 1 post
Councillor David Forbes ... 0 posts
Councillor James Scott ... 0 posts
Councillor Mel Speding ... 2 posts
Councillor Anne Hall ... 0 posts
Councillor John Scott ... 1 post
Councillor Phil Tye ... 1 post
Councillor Peter Gibson ... 0 posts
Councillor Pat Smith ... 0 posts
Councillor Norma Wright ... 0 posts
Councillor Maureen Ambrose ... 0 posts
Councillor Margaret Higgins ...admits she would rather talk to people in person
Councillor Tom Wright ... 0 posts
Councillor Patricia Bates ... 0 posts
Councillor Susan Watson ... 1 post
Councillor Leslie Scott ... 9 posts
Councillor Stuart Porthouse ... 13 posts
Councillor Denis Whalen ... 0 posts
Councillor Eric Timmins ... 1 post
Councillor Derek Sleightholme ... 0 posts
Councillor Neil MacKnight ... 1 post
Councillor Bryan Williams ... 0 posts
Councillor Peter Young ... 0 posts
Councillor Jill Fletcher ... 0 posts
Councillor James Walker ... 0 posts
Councillor Peter Walker ... 0 posts
Councillor Graeme Miller ... 0 posts
Councillor Linda Williams ... 0 posts
Councillor Joan Gray ... 4 posts
Councillor Jean Stephenson ... 0 posts
Councillor Bill Stephenson ... 0 posts
Councillor Harry Trueman ... 1 post
So there you have it. Councillor Sidaway quit the Labour Party in protest at the enforced 3% levy on councillors allowances to be paid into Labour Party funds here
Councillor Symonds however appearing on Newsnight said the cash was a "political contribution to the group" which was needed to pay for it's work and that 56 others were happy to pay up.
Well, Mr. Symonds, a total of 54 posts in the 4 months by 56 Councillors since the site was set up in September 2006. The Sunderland ratepaying public must be really grateful.
Let some sleuth ask how much of their allowances went on the sites and then we can work out what perhaps the Guiness Book of Records will confirm will be the most expensive blog posts ever.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Parking Outrage
How officials' free spaces have cost you thousands
Evening Chronicle
Free city centre parking passes costing taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds have been dished out to public bodies.
Newcastle City Council chiefs were under fire today after handing out free parking to the North East Assembly and the Association of North East Councils.
While thousands of motorists have to pay to park in town, 11 free permits worth £1,000 each have been handed out for the past 20 years, the Chronicle can reveal.
Details of the free parking deal have caused embarrassment to the city council, which is trying to reduce traffic congestion by persuading workers to leave their cars at home.
The new row follows the disclosure both organisations were allowed to occupy their offices at the Guildhall rent-free at a cost to taxpayers of between £230,000 and £250,000 in lost income over the years.
Read the full story here
Evening Chronicle
Free city centre parking passes costing taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds have been dished out to public bodies.
Newcastle City Council chiefs were under fire today after handing out free parking to the North East Assembly and the Association of North East Councils.
While thousands of motorists have to pay to park in town, 11 free permits worth £1,000 each have been handed out for the past 20 years, the Chronicle can reveal.
Details of the free parking deal have caused embarrassment to the city council, which is trying to reduce traffic congestion by persuading workers to leave their cars at home.
The new row follows the disclosure both organisations were allowed to occupy their offices at the Guildhall rent-free at a cost to taxpayers of between £230,000 and £250,000 in lost income over the years.
Read the full story here
Monday, January 15, 2007
Notice to Owner: Another Sunderland Clanger
Pity the Sunderland Echo is again dragging its feet in passing information on to the motoring public in the City.
Sunderland City Council is now just releasing Notice to Owners from alleged contraventions after June 2006.
Why so long you may ask?
Well, it appears as though the penny has dropped that they were not legally worded and therefore there was apotential prejudice for the appellant. However, taking such a long time to inform a motorist that he has received a parking ticket compromises the right to a fair hearing. Anyone who has received a PCN after more than 5 months will soon be able to find the defence to force the council to cancel the ticket.
Bigger problem for the Council is that the BIG APPEAL that went to NPAS where they brought in a QC to fight my outstanding tickets all rely on Notice to Owner which are not legally worded.
My request for a review has gone in and is likely to end up in the High Court. ... reliant on documents issued by Sunderland that have now been changed to convey the correct information to the appellant.
How long before they finally put their hands up?
There is a phrase - 'when you are in a hole stop digging' ... Sunderland Council's implement procurement department simply oredrs more shovels.
Sunderland City Council is now just releasing Notice to Owners from alleged contraventions after June 2006.
Why so long you may ask?
Well, it appears as though the penny has dropped that they were not legally worded and therefore there was apotential prejudice for the appellant. However, taking such a long time to inform a motorist that he has received a parking ticket compromises the right to a fair hearing. Anyone who has received a PCN after more than 5 months will soon be able to find the defence to force the council to cancel the ticket.
Bigger problem for the Council is that the BIG APPEAL that went to NPAS where they brought in a QC to fight my outstanding tickets all rely on Notice to Owner which are not legally worded.
My request for a review has gone in and is likely to end up in the High Court. ... reliant on documents issued by Sunderland that have now been changed to convey the correct information to the appellant.
How long before they finally put their hands up?
There is a phrase - 'when you are in a hole stop digging' ... Sunderland Council's implement procurement department simply oredrs more shovels.
Police force reveals there is no way to check an EU national's criminal record
Posing as an employer tendering for a local authority contract we contacted a Police force (who shall currently remain nameless) to see if we could have potential staff CIB checked
Their Criminal Justice Department Central Information Bureau carries out:
Vetting - carries out computer checks on a variety of potential employees on behalf of the Criminal Records Bureau.
After a long period on hold they came back and said that they had no way of accessing the data of any EU national outside the UK ..." Do you mean Scotland?" was one of their questions. They did suggest that any EU national seeking employment should bring his own ... well that's alright then. Job sorted.
If ACPO's 4 man team is working round the clock trying to trace those Britons convicted abroad what chance do they have of checking the records of those 665,000+ who have arrived here since May 1st 2004 ... by contacting the other 26 Member States in 13+ different laguages with different criminal categories.
They would require the release details of ALL prisoners and then have to marry them up with National Insurance numbers given out to those registered for work, then check back with their country of origin for address and family details and then contact the local Police force who may have further intelligence on background and known associates ... AND details of if and when they entered the country from passenger manifests.
...But no-one keeps a record of who comes in and when they leave.
Self-employed not registered and no NI Number?
The fools that govern must be challenged and questioned ... and held fully responsible and accountable.
This is the end game for our relationship with the EU ... question is how do you ever get the milk out of the coffee?
The catalyst will be an event BUT ... John Reid ... you know and you are avoiding the question. Let us hope that some of the press are ready to start asking the difficult questions.
Their Criminal Justice Department Central Information Bureau carries out:
Vetting - carries out computer checks on a variety of potential employees on behalf of the Criminal Records Bureau.
After a long period on hold they came back and said that they had no way of accessing the data of any EU national outside the UK ..." Do you mean Scotland?" was one of their questions. They did suggest that any EU national seeking employment should bring his own ... well that's alright then. Job sorted.
If ACPO's 4 man team is working round the clock trying to trace those Britons convicted abroad what chance do they have of checking the records of those 665,000+ who have arrived here since May 1st 2004 ... by contacting the other 26 Member States in 13+ different laguages with different criminal categories.
They would require the release details of ALL prisoners and then have to marry them up with National Insurance numbers given out to those registered for work, then check back with their country of origin for address and family details and then contact the local Police force who may have further intelligence on background and known associates ... AND details of if and when they entered the country from passenger manifests.
...But no-one keeps a record of who comes in and when they leave.
Self-employed not registered and no NI Number?
The fools that govern must be challenged and questioned ... and held fully responsible and accountable.
This is the end game for our relationship with the EU ... question is how do you ever get the milk out of the coffee?
The catalyst will be an event BUT ... John Reid ... you know and you are avoiding the question. Let us hope that some of the press are ready to start asking the difficult questions.
Foreign criminals ... penny slowly starting to drop ...
Our story breaks in today's Telegraph ... not big enough and it will be a week before the whole of the media circus begins to realise the massive implications, but meanwhile we will sit back and wait.
EU criminals 'can't be checked'
By Brendan Carlin and Caroline Davies, Daily Telegraph 15/01/07
Welcome to the Hunt for forgotten offenders
By Caroline Mcclatchey and Ben Leapman, Sunday Telegraph
14/01/2007
here
EU criminals 'can't be checked'
By Brendan Carlin and Caroline Davies, Daily Telegraph 15/01/07
Welcome to the Hunt for forgotten offenders
By Caroline Mcclatchey and Ben Leapman, Sunday Telegraph
14/01/2007
here
North East Assembly Parking Outrage ... more abuse of public money
Parking outrageJan 15 2007
By Peter Young,
The Newcastle Evening Chronicle
Council chiefs were blasted today for giving free parking passes to two public bodies.
While thousands of drivers pay to park on Newcastle Quayside, free passes went to North East Assembly and Association of North East Councils members.
More ...
EU criminals 'can't be checked'
Daily Telegraph
By Brendan Carlin and Caroline Davies
Last Updated: 11:40am GMT 15/01/2007
A fresh row over criminal databases broke out last night with the revelation that immigration officials frequently cannot check on the criminal past of European Union citizens entering Britain.
The admission is contained in a letter seen by The Daily Telegraph and written by Joan Ryan, the Home Office minister caught up in the criminal records row.
advertisement
John Reid, the Home Secretary, yesterday announced a "root and branch" review of criminal databases as a senior Home Office official was suspended over the affair.
That came after the official "volunteered information" about the department's failure to enter details of the convictions of Britons abroad on to the national police computer.
Mr Reid, with his ministerial colleagues Miss Ryan and Tony McNulty, have been under increasing pressure since last week over the failure to update the police national computer with details of more than 500 British serious offenders who committed crimes overseas.
It emerged that there was a backlog of 27,500 cases that had not been entered.
Last night, the row broadened to include access to criminal records on people from the entire European Economic Area (EEA) – including all EU states – coming into Britain.
In a letter dated last June and addressed to the Labour MP Chris Mullin, Miss Ryan admitted: "The UK Immigration Service is unable to routinely access details of an EEA national's personal information or criminal record in their country of origin."
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said the admission showed "shocking complacency towards the matter of stopping dangerous criminals at our borders". At the weekend, a judge reportedly called for an EU-wide criminal record system after problems checking previous convictions on two Lithuanians convicted of gun-running.
By coincidence, Miss Ryan is in Dresden today to argue with other EU interior ministers for better criminal record sharing.
By Brendan Carlin and Caroline Davies
Last Updated: 11:40am GMT 15/01/2007
A fresh row over criminal databases broke out last night with the revelation that immigration officials frequently cannot check on the criminal past of European Union citizens entering Britain.
The admission is contained in a letter seen by The Daily Telegraph and written by Joan Ryan, the Home Office minister caught up in the criminal records row.
advertisement
John Reid, the Home Secretary, yesterday announced a "root and branch" review of criminal databases as a senior Home Office official was suspended over the affair.
That came after the official "volunteered information" about the department's failure to enter details of the convictions of Britons abroad on to the national police computer.
Mr Reid, with his ministerial colleagues Miss Ryan and Tony McNulty, have been under increasing pressure since last week over the failure to update the police national computer with details of more than 500 British serious offenders who committed crimes overseas.
It emerged that there was a backlog of 27,500 cases that had not been entered.
Last night, the row broadened to include access to criminal records on people from the entire European Economic Area (EEA) – including all EU states – coming into Britain.
In a letter dated last June and addressed to the Labour MP Chris Mullin, Miss Ryan admitted: "The UK Immigration Service is unable to routinely access details of an EEA national's personal information or criminal record in their country of origin."
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said the admission showed "shocking complacency towards the matter of stopping dangerous criminals at our borders". At the weekend, a judge reportedly called for an EU-wide criminal record system after problems checking previous convictions on two Lithuanians convicted of gun-running.
By coincidence, Miss Ryan is in Dresden today to argue with other EU interior ministers for better criminal record sharing.
Legal battle looms for parking ticket millions
Ham & High 24
Katie Davies
EVIDENCE is mounting in the campaign to make Camden Council pay back every parking ticket issued before August 2006.
Lisa Hyams, from Fitzjohn's Avenue, has won her case against a ticket issued in October 2005. A parking appeal ruled it was illegal because it failed to carry two dates - the date of contravention and of the notice.
And campaigners are claiming the judgment could open the floodgates to millions of pounds worth of other fines.
Ms Hyams said: "It is nice to get one over on the wardens. They are so strict about their regulations - if you get back to your car one minute late they slap a ticket on it - so I am delighted."
Camden Council changed its tickets in August to include both dates but the London Motorist Action Group, whose supporters include Hampstead actor Tom Conti, says all tickets before then are invalid.
Chairman Alex Henney said: "For anyone who has a ticket from before August which is still being enforced - going through stages of appeal or to bailiffs - there is no doubt their tickets should be stopped. What is not yet clear is whether we can get them to pay back paid-for tickets.
"I think the council deserves its comeuppence for its incompetence. It would give me a great deal of pleasure because it has been so very unpleasant for such a long time. The council had been advised it was legally safe but this statement is pretty clear."
In making his decision in Ms Hyams' case, the adjudicator from the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (Patas) used the precedent of an appeal won by Golders Green resident Hugh Moses in March. In Mr Moses' case, Mr Justice Jackson ruled tickets given in Barnet were invalid because they didn't carry the two dates.
Ms Hyams' solicitor, Franklin Price, said: "It is not enough to have just one date and that is the important part of the decision. Mr Judge Jackson said there was no financial liability as a result and that would enable people who have fines and all other charges to reclaim them. Camden Council is denying it will be forced to pay anything as other adjudicators have found in its favour.
"I am currently taking Barnet Council to court in another case for Ms Hyams. We got a letter from them this morning. They said in the Jackson case the adjudicator was only able to overturn two PCNs because Mr Moses appealed within the appeal time limit.
"I am not worried about that argument at all - it is ridiculous. If the PCN is not valid why should you need to appeal? How is there a time limit? The PCN has to be valid before you can do anything - therefore everything since, including the warrant of execution and bailiffs, is invalid.
"If it is not valid, they may as well just put a piece of toilet paper on your car and call it a PCN."
A Camden Council spokeswoman said: "Any decision made by an individual adjudicator does not set a precedent and, indeed, other adjudicators including the Chief Adjudicator have found in Camden's favour on this issue. We will therefore continue to contest any challenge made over the validity of our PCNs and are satisfied that our PCNs were, and continue to be, fully compliant with the Road Traffic Act."
katie.davies@hamhigh.co.uk
Katie Davies
EVIDENCE is mounting in the campaign to make Camden Council pay back every parking ticket issued before August 2006.
Lisa Hyams, from Fitzjohn's Avenue, has won her case against a ticket issued in October 2005. A parking appeal ruled it was illegal because it failed to carry two dates - the date of contravention and of the notice.
And campaigners are claiming the judgment could open the floodgates to millions of pounds worth of other fines.
Ms Hyams said: "It is nice to get one over on the wardens. They are so strict about their regulations - if you get back to your car one minute late they slap a ticket on it - so I am delighted."
Camden Council changed its tickets in August to include both dates but the London Motorist Action Group, whose supporters include Hampstead actor Tom Conti, says all tickets before then are invalid.
Chairman Alex Henney said: "For anyone who has a ticket from before August which is still being enforced - going through stages of appeal or to bailiffs - there is no doubt their tickets should be stopped. What is not yet clear is whether we can get them to pay back paid-for tickets.
"I think the council deserves its comeuppence for its incompetence. It would give me a great deal of pleasure because it has been so very unpleasant for such a long time. The council had been advised it was legally safe but this statement is pretty clear."
In making his decision in Ms Hyams' case, the adjudicator from the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service (Patas) used the precedent of an appeal won by Golders Green resident Hugh Moses in March. In Mr Moses' case, Mr Justice Jackson ruled tickets given in Barnet were invalid because they didn't carry the two dates.
Ms Hyams' solicitor, Franklin Price, said: "It is not enough to have just one date and that is the important part of the decision. Mr Judge Jackson said there was no financial liability as a result and that would enable people who have fines and all other charges to reclaim them. Camden Council is denying it will be forced to pay anything as other adjudicators have found in its favour.
"I am currently taking Barnet Council to court in another case for Ms Hyams. We got a letter from them this morning. They said in the Jackson case the adjudicator was only able to overturn two PCNs because Mr Moses appealed within the appeal time limit.
"I am not worried about that argument at all - it is ridiculous. If the PCN is not valid why should you need to appeal? How is there a time limit? The PCN has to be valid before you can do anything - therefore everything since, including the warrant of execution and bailiffs, is invalid.
"If it is not valid, they may as well just put a piece of toilet paper on your car and call it a PCN."
A Camden Council spokeswoman said: "Any decision made by an individual adjudicator does not set a precedent and, indeed, other adjudicators including the Chief Adjudicator have found in Camden's favour on this issue. We will therefore continue to contest any challenge made over the validity of our PCNs and are satisfied that our PCNs were, and continue to be, fully compliant with the Road Traffic Act."
katie.davies@hamhigh.co.uk
Sunday, January 14, 2007
£250,000 rent lost on city building
Council lets prestige offices site for free over 20 years
Evening Chronicle
Thursday 11 January 2007
By Peter Young
Critics are calling for an investigation after Newcastle Council allowed prestige city centre offices to be occupied rent-free for 20 years.
It's now been revealed that the potential cost in lost rent to city taxpayers is between £230,000 and £250,000 and there's a call for the independent public spending watchdog, the District Auditor, to investigate. Read the full story here
Evening Chronicle
Thursday 11 January 2007
By Peter Young
Critics are calling for an investigation after Newcastle Council allowed prestige city centre offices to be occupied rent-free for 20 years.
It's now been revealed that the potential cost in lost rent to city taxpayers is between £230,000 and £250,000 and there's a call for the independent public spending watchdog, the District Auditor, to investigate. Read the full story here
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Judge exposes EU Criminal record problem
I do believe that this is called synchronicity!
The penny is starting drop, and this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
The politicians have created a country called Europe without ever gaining the consent of the people. The practicalities of living as one country means the day to day stuff must fit together and now we are reaching the Project's end game the harsh reality that the dream is unachievable is beginning to strike home.
If the Judge in the breaking story below had had a moment's reflection when he called for an EU wide criminal records system he would have realised that without borders, a single Police force, a common language and set of ideals, morals and principles, a common set of laws and criminal justice system, and one government then it would be impossible to achieve ... cat out of the bag yet?
Do we really want to wait until Lithuania's criminal records systems are on a par with ours before we are safe?
No other country in the EU has a Sex Offenders Register that parallels ours, and many have no such register.
EU Man (or woman) can walk out of prison in their home country, pick up a bag and travel freely wherever they like ... with an ID Card or passport ... and we are aware that there is a massive black market in those two commodities.
Are we to wait until there is a series of child murders by a citizen from an EU Member State by a paedophile who has been released from a prison after a ten year term who simply walked into this country through passport control with a bag of tools and a suitcase? The Police's job is difficult enough after the latest Home Office clanger without having the massive problem of not being able to access the criminal records of any one of the 665,000+ who have registered for work legally after moving from one of the 26 other Member States.
Consider this:
Serial killer on the loose. Five bodies found. Police check records of known offenders in the area. Police records checked, known offenders in the area are checked, there is a match, evidence is gathered and someone is arrested. It could also be that someone is stopped for an unrelated matter ... perhaps by a Traffic Cop for having a tail light out. Vehicle Reg checked with DVLA data base. Records are checked with the Police data base. Name recorded. Body found next day man arrested.
Consider if that man was a paedophile from an EU Member State without any ID driving a car with foreign plates. Would he be arrested for having a tail light out? (has he ever been pursued for a parking ticket or speeding fine ... trouble free parking and trouble free driving?). There is no requirement for him to produce any ID roadside...and why? Nothing suspicious about a broken tail light to justify an arrest. Body found next day. ... now what did that man look like? What did he say his name was? Where do we check that car registration number?
The practicalities of functioning as a country do not mix with the free movement of people agreed by EU treaties. The madness of this greatest ever of political deceptions will be the practicalities that make normal civic society function.
Game over John Reid. There are no excuses you can come up that will that will fool us.
The Home Office knew of the potential consequences yet agreed without a whimper to allow unfettered access after May 1st 2004 (and the predictions of 13,500 migrant workers a year show how out of touch you guys really are)
Home Office Consultation Paper on the Review of Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997: here ...
"the free movement of citizens within the EU adds a further layer of complexity. Passport controls on EU citizens entering the UK are now minimal.""Where it was known that they (a convicted sex offender) had committed a serious sex offence, they could, depending on the serious nature of the offence, be refused entry but this would be more difficult in the case of citizens of EU countries, who do not need to complete landing cards before entry."
You all buried your heads in the sand Mr. Reid...and you continue to do so.
Your primary concern as Home Secretary is to guarantee the safety and security of the citizens in this country. You and your Government can give no such guarantee.
We want a referendum on raising our borders again Mr. Reid and the strict and secure border controls that come with it.
We want to welcome with open arms those fellow Europeans who wish to live and work amongst us and contribute to our ecenomy and society.
We want to know that the people who we wish to welcome into our country can enjoy the same peace and security that we expect from those tasked with that responsibility.
But most of all we demand to know that we have not imported rapists, criminals and paedophiles to work and live alongside us without ever asking the questions before they were allowed in.
We want you to do as we say ... you have given away our country without our consent. We want it back
Judge calls for EU criminal records system
Richard Ford,
Home Correspondent
The Times January 13th 2007
Lithuanian gang jailed for 32 years
'Countries must share information'
A judge called yesterday for an EU-wide criminal record system after warning of serious difficulties in getting accurate information on the previous crimes of foreign offenders.
Judge Stephen Robbins said that it was a “matter of pubic concern” that the courts in England had difficulty receiving details of convictions from foreign states.
He said that the process of checking previous convictions on two Lithuanians convicted of gun-running had shown how “very difficult it was to glean details, let alone precise details” from their home country.
The judge said: “We know there is much concern at the moment in the press about convictions of British nationals coming from abroad, but here we have nationals from a country that has recently joined the EU . . . and who are free to visit Britain.”
More
The penny is starting drop, and this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
The politicians have created a country called Europe without ever gaining the consent of the people. The practicalities of living as one country means the day to day stuff must fit together and now we are reaching the Project's end game the harsh reality that the dream is unachievable is beginning to strike home.
If the Judge in the breaking story below had had a moment's reflection when he called for an EU wide criminal records system he would have realised that without borders, a single Police force, a common language and set of ideals, morals and principles, a common set of laws and criminal justice system, and one government then it would be impossible to achieve ... cat out of the bag yet?
Do we really want to wait until Lithuania's criminal records systems are on a par with ours before we are safe?
No other country in the EU has a Sex Offenders Register that parallels ours, and many have no such register.
EU Man (or woman) can walk out of prison in their home country, pick up a bag and travel freely wherever they like ... with an ID Card or passport ... and we are aware that there is a massive black market in those two commodities.
Are we to wait until there is a series of child murders by a citizen from an EU Member State by a paedophile who has been released from a prison after a ten year term who simply walked into this country through passport control with a bag of tools and a suitcase? The Police's job is difficult enough after the latest Home Office clanger without having the massive problem of not being able to access the criminal records of any one of the 665,000+ who have registered for work legally after moving from one of the 26 other Member States.
Consider this:
Serial killer on the loose. Five bodies found. Police check records of known offenders in the area. Police records checked, known offenders in the area are checked, there is a match, evidence is gathered and someone is arrested. It could also be that someone is stopped for an unrelated matter ... perhaps by a Traffic Cop for having a tail light out. Vehicle Reg checked with DVLA data base. Records are checked with the Police data base. Name recorded. Body found next day man arrested.
Consider if that man was a paedophile from an EU Member State without any ID driving a car with foreign plates. Would he be arrested for having a tail light out? (has he ever been pursued for a parking ticket or speeding fine ... trouble free parking and trouble free driving?). There is no requirement for him to produce any ID roadside...and why? Nothing suspicious about a broken tail light to justify an arrest. Body found next day. ... now what did that man look like? What did he say his name was? Where do we check that car registration number?
The practicalities of functioning as a country do not mix with the free movement of people agreed by EU treaties. The madness of this greatest ever of political deceptions will be the practicalities that make normal civic society function.
Game over John Reid. There are no excuses you can come up that will that will fool us.
The Home Office knew of the potential consequences yet agreed without a whimper to allow unfettered access after May 1st 2004 (and the predictions of 13,500 migrant workers a year show how out of touch you guys really are)
Home Office Consultation Paper on the Review of Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997: here ...
"the free movement of citizens within the EU adds a further layer of complexity. Passport controls on EU citizens entering the UK are now minimal.""Where it was known that they (a convicted sex offender) had committed a serious sex offence, they could, depending on the serious nature of the offence, be refused entry but this would be more difficult in the case of citizens of EU countries, who do not need to complete landing cards before entry."
You all buried your heads in the sand Mr. Reid...and you continue to do so.
Your primary concern as Home Secretary is to guarantee the safety and security of the citizens in this country. You and your Government can give no such guarantee.
We want a referendum on raising our borders again Mr. Reid and the strict and secure border controls that come with it.
We want to welcome with open arms those fellow Europeans who wish to live and work amongst us and contribute to our ecenomy and society.
We want to know that the people who we wish to welcome into our country can enjoy the same peace and security that we expect from those tasked with that responsibility.
But most of all we demand to know that we have not imported rapists, criminals and paedophiles to work and live alongside us without ever asking the questions before they were allowed in.
We want you to do as we say ... you have given away our country without our consent. We want it back
Judge calls for EU criminal records system
Richard Ford,
Home Correspondent
The Times January 13th 2007
Lithuanian gang jailed for 32 years
'Countries must share information'
A judge called yesterday for an EU-wide criminal record system after warning of serious difficulties in getting accurate information on the previous crimes of foreign offenders.
Judge Stephen Robbins said that it was a “matter of pubic concern” that the courts in England had difficulty receiving details of convictions from foreign states.
He said that the process of checking previous convictions on two Lithuanians convicted of gun-running had shown how “very difficult it was to glean details, let alone precise details” from their home country.
The judge said: “We know there is much concern at the moment in the press about convictions of British nationals coming from abroad, but here we have nationals from a country that has recently joined the EU . . . and who are free to visit Britain.”
More
Sex Offenders, paedophiles and criminals ... the questions to the Home Office
Below is the letter that was sent to Labour Constituency MP (Sunderland South) by the campaign's Colin Moran.
We were aware that Chris Mullin would have to refer the matter hence the request:
" I would be grateful of if in turn you pass to the Minister for Europe, Right Honourable Geoff Hoon MP, and the Right Honourable John Reid, Home Secretary."
Remember, this was May last year.
We were acutely aware that honest answers to the questions would help expose that the politicians were aware of the problem, and aware of the fact that it couldn't be fixed.
Follow the questions and then see the post below to see how the Minister wriggled around in order not to expose how they have placed everyone in this country at risk.
The blood of the murdered and the pain of the victims is already on your hands Mr. Reid.
Colin Moran
C/o 12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Chris Mullin MP
House of Commons
Westminster
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Chris,
In view of the latest revelations from the Home Office about who should and should not be in our country, I am prompted to write expressing my concerns and requiring answers on this subject. It is quite some time since my last correspondence between yourself and the then Minister for Europe, Denis McShane, so I hope you consider it reasonable to raise this matter with you again.
Neil Herron and myself are increasingly aware of the consequences of the Single European Act, the cornerstone of the European Project, and other agreements allowing the right of the free movement of people throughout the 25 member states (soon to become 27) of the EU.
Our campaign group, many other groups around the country are now witnessing the fact that the public are now waking up to what is taking place in their country. In fact questions are now being asked about is it a country or are we slowly being drowned in globalism.
I have therefore submitted a number of practical questions, which I would be grateful of if in turn you pass to the Minister for Europe, Right Honourable Geoff Hoon MP, and the Right Honourable John Reid, Home Secretary.
As you know we have no political axe to grind, and we hold our 3 main parties equally responsible for the necessity to ask these questions.
I wish to submit the following questions:
The unacceptable situation of foreign nationals committing serious crimes in our country and then being allowed continued circulation with the general public on release from prison, has brought the media and public opinion to boiling point I hope you agree.
So in view of this unravelling situation would the Ministers please provide answers to the following questions:
1. Can Britain deport EU foreign nationals, in view of the right of ‘free movement’, which the European Single Act and other agreements confer on all EU member state citizens?
2. If the answer is yes, how can such people be prevented from re-entry? EU member state passport holders, it appears, can enter the UK on the same status as UK citizens returning home, and in the same queue.
For your information:
Free movement of people is a basic pillar of the single area the European Union (EU) has been building since its creation … …the notion of "free movement" is used in two senses. First, in the traditional sense of free movement and secondly in the sense of being able to cross the internal borders without undergoing checks.
Source: Europa
3. Have any steps been taken to prevent known criminals from EU countries entering the UK? Is there a central register of everyone who has committed a serious criminal offence in any EU Member State?
4. Do UK authorities have records of people entering the UK who have been convicted of paedophilia or any sexual offence in their own country?
5. Are these people placed on the National Sex Offenders’ Register? I hope this question has a positive answer. It is simply unthinkable that a Government would admit such people within the ‘free movement of people’, but at this moment in time it is far from clear how any exclusion is possible.
6. Within all of the treaties and agreements made over the last 33 years, has any provision been made to control and prevent Europe’s criminal class entering other countries undetected, with the obvious serious consequences for public safety?
7. Considering the right conferred on EU foreign nationals to enter this country, are records available identifying crime levels committed by those who can enter without, it appears, restrictions?
8. If we accept that the Government’s first responsibility is to safeguard its citizens, how can it surrender its duty to know who is in the country by allowing anyone with an EU passport absolute, unchallenged entry?.
As always I would appreciate a prompt reply to these questions and I really implore you for straight answers. Some statements given to me by Mr McShane have already proven to be, at best, incorrect.
Thank you and the Minister for time in dealing with this matter.
Yours sincerely
Colin Moran
We were aware that Chris Mullin would have to refer the matter hence the request:
" I would be grateful of if in turn you pass to the Minister for Europe, Right Honourable Geoff Hoon MP, and the Right Honourable John Reid, Home Secretary."
Remember, this was May last year.
We were acutely aware that honest answers to the questions would help expose that the politicians were aware of the problem, and aware of the fact that it couldn't be fixed.
Follow the questions and then see the post below to see how the Minister wriggled around in order not to expose how they have placed everyone in this country at risk.
The blood of the murdered and the pain of the victims is already on your hands Mr. Reid.
Colin Moran
C/o 12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Chris Mullin MP
House of Commons
Westminster
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Chris,
In view of the latest revelations from the Home Office about who should and should not be in our country, I am prompted to write expressing my concerns and requiring answers on this subject. It is quite some time since my last correspondence between yourself and the then Minister for Europe, Denis McShane, so I hope you consider it reasonable to raise this matter with you again.
Neil Herron and myself are increasingly aware of the consequences of the Single European Act, the cornerstone of the European Project, and other agreements allowing the right of the free movement of people throughout the 25 member states (soon to become 27) of the EU.
Our campaign group, many other groups around the country are now witnessing the fact that the public are now waking up to what is taking place in their country. In fact questions are now being asked about is it a country or are we slowly being drowned in globalism.
I have therefore submitted a number of practical questions, which I would be grateful of if in turn you pass to the Minister for Europe, Right Honourable Geoff Hoon MP, and the Right Honourable John Reid, Home Secretary.
As you know we have no political axe to grind, and we hold our 3 main parties equally responsible for the necessity to ask these questions.
I wish to submit the following questions:
The unacceptable situation of foreign nationals committing serious crimes in our country and then being allowed continued circulation with the general public on release from prison, has brought the media and public opinion to boiling point I hope you agree.
So in view of this unravelling situation would the Ministers please provide answers to the following questions:
1. Can Britain deport EU foreign nationals, in view of the right of ‘free movement’, which the European Single Act and other agreements confer on all EU member state citizens?
2. If the answer is yes, how can such people be prevented from re-entry? EU member state passport holders, it appears, can enter the UK on the same status as UK citizens returning home, and in the same queue.
For your information:
Free movement of people is a basic pillar of the single area the European Union (EU) has been building since its creation … …the notion of "free movement" is used in two senses. First, in the traditional sense of free movement and secondly in the sense of being able to cross the internal borders without undergoing checks.
Source: Europa
3. Have any steps been taken to prevent known criminals from EU countries entering the UK? Is there a central register of everyone who has committed a serious criminal offence in any EU Member State?
4. Do UK authorities have records of people entering the UK who have been convicted of paedophilia or any sexual offence in their own country?
5. Are these people placed on the National Sex Offenders’ Register? I hope this question has a positive answer. It is simply unthinkable that a Government would admit such people within the ‘free movement of people’, but at this moment in time it is far from clear how any exclusion is possible.
6. Within all of the treaties and agreements made over the last 33 years, has any provision been made to control and prevent Europe’s criminal class entering other countries undetected, with the obvious serious consequences for public safety?
7. Considering the right conferred on EU foreign nationals to enter this country, are records available identifying crime levels committed by those who can enter without, it appears, restrictions?
8. If we accept that the Government’s first responsibility is to safeguard its citizens, how can it surrender its duty to know who is in the country by allowing anyone with an EU passport absolute, unchallenged entry?.
As always I would appreciate a prompt reply to these questions and I really implore you for straight answers. Some statements given to me by Mr McShane have already proven to be, at best, incorrect.
Thank you and the Minister for time in dealing with this matter.
Yours sincerely
Colin Moran
Friday, January 12, 2007
Road Pricing Petition ... please sign
The government's proposal to introduce road pricing will mean you having to purchase a tracking device for your car/bike and paying a monthly bill to use it.
The tracking device will cost about £200 and in a recent study by the BBC, the lowest monthly bill was £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver. A non working Mum who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 in one month.
On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked.
Somebody will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit you can expect a NIP with your monthly bill.
If you care about our freedoms and stopping the constant bashing of the driver/rider, please sign the petition on No 10's new website.
Please pass this on to anyone who owns a car/motorcycle. It affects them
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/
The tracking device will cost about £200 and in a recent study by the BBC, the lowest monthly bill was £28 for a rural florist and £194 for a delivery driver. A non working Mum who used the car to take the kids to school paid £86 in one month.
On top of this massive increase in tax, you will be tracked.
Somebody will know where you are at all times. They will also know how fast you have been going, so even if you accidentally creep over a speed limit you can expect a NIP with your monthly bill.
If you care about our freedoms and stopping the constant bashing of the driver/rider, please sign the petition on No 10's new website.
Please pass this on to anyone who owns a car/motorcycle. It affects them
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/
Sunderland needs a Solicitor ... help !!!
Sunderland City Council appears to be close to admitting that the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement regime that they have created is a legal as well as an operational shambles.
This advert was placed in The Newcastle Chronicle yesterday (11th January 2007) but funnily enough, not the Sunderland Echo.
So, the City Solicitor and his Assistant need help ... with the complex legal processes of drafting Traffic Regulation Orders ....
But Leader of Sunderland City Council, Bob Symonds recently stated that the regime was legally robust and enforceable and that anyone parking on a yellow line would get a ticket!
He declined my offer of a walking tour of the City highlighting defective TROs, lines and signs.
But Bob, if the regime is lawful why the expense of another Solicitor?
But Bob, all the TROs are correct ... Sunderland City Council told the Department for Transport that they were in their DPE application in 2002 ... and since it came into force in 2003 over £3m has been extracted from the City's motorists pockets ... then why the need for another Solicitor?
But Bob, what if the Solicitor is being brought in to identify the hundreds of mistakes in the City's TROs ... will wholesale refunds begin then?
Nice to know another documentary is going to be aired ... again about Sunderland, again about the parking shambles. This time it is going national and looks like there are some serious revelations.
Upon reflection perhaps the best way to have dealt with this would have been to admit everything when first caught out and then invite the Department for Transport to assist with starting again and putting it right.
Instead the shambles gets bigger as do the implications.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Parking Mad
Sunderland Echo
Thursday, January 11, 2007
CALL centre staff are being forced to pay two weeks wages to remove clamps on their cars because there are only 400 parking spaces for 1,800 workers. Full story here
Thursday, January 11, 2007
CALL centre staff are being forced to pay two weeks wages to remove clamps on their cars because there are only 400 parking spaces for 1,800 workers. Full story here
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Newcastle City Council exposed offering rent free building to North East Assembly
£250,000 rent lost on city building
Jan 11 2007
By Peter Young, The Evening Chronicle
Critics are calling for an investigation after Newcastle Council allowed prestige city centre offices to be occupied rent-free for 20 years.
It's now been revealed that the potential cost in lost rent to city taxpayers is between £230,000 and £250,000 and there's a call for the independent public spending watchdog, the District Auditor, to investigate.
The row involves a decision by Newcastle City Council to allow the unelected North East Assembly and the Association of North East Councils to occupy offices at the historic Guildhall, a Grade I listed building on the Quayside, rent-free for around six years.
More
Jan 11 2007
By Peter Young, The Evening Chronicle
Critics are calling for an investigation after Newcastle Council allowed prestige city centre offices to be occupied rent-free for 20 years.
It's now been revealed that the potential cost in lost rent to city taxpayers is between £230,000 and £250,000 and there's a call for the independent public spending watchdog, the District Auditor, to investigate.
The row involves a decision by Newcastle City Council to allow the unelected North East Assembly and the Association of North East Councils to occupy offices at the historic Guildhall, a Grade I listed building on the Quayside, rent-free for around six years.
More
Who will be the patsy for this blunder? Political duplicity could now finally be exposed by this EUlephant in the room.
Below is a copy of our press release on the potential implications of the Free Movement of People ... remember this was in May 2006. The damning response and admission from the Minister will be posted tomorrow.
Why are the Conservatives not asking the questions? Could it be that this will be the straw that breaks the elephant in the room's back?
Hopefully the press will finally grasp the implications and start asking the questions and DEMAND answers.
The questions which were put to the Minister can be seen here
The responses will be posted tomorrow.
Press Release
The People's No Campaign / Metric Martyrs
11th May 2006: Immediate
"European Agreements Allow Convicted Paedophiles and Sex Offenders Unfettered and Unchallenged Access to Britain"
In view of the latest revelations from the Home Office regarding who should and should not be in our country, and the problems arising from convicted foreign nationals being released and allowed to roam freely and unchecked, there is one glaring omission.
It is an omission, which will dwarf the problems that led to the downfall of Home Secretary Charles Clarke.
The 'free movement of people' across the 25, soon to be 27, Member States of the European Union allows any EU passport holder free and unfettered access to this country.
The subject of illegal immigration is a completely separate one and must not be confused with the free movement of people
As the European Union's website states:
Free movement of people is a basic pillar of the single area the European Union (EU) has been building since its creation…
…the notion of "free movement" is used in two senses. First, in the traditional sense of free movement and secondly in the sense of being able to cross the internal borders without undergoing checks.
As it appears the Home Office does not know the whereabouts of many serious and dangerous foreign criminals released from British prisons, the major concern now is how serious criminals, including paedophiles and sex offenders released from prisons within EU Member States are monitored.
There are no checks at passport control. Many EU countries do not have a sex offenders register.
There appears to be no requirement to go on the UK Sex Offenders Register and no explanation from the Government as to how many potential paedophiles and serious sex offenders have entered the country perfectly legally under the free movement of people.
How many paedophiles and sex offenders, convicted in their own or another EU Member State, are in this country?
If there are no checks at passport control and no requirement to declare any criminal convictions, how can they be monitored?
How many, if any, are any on the UKs National Sex Offenders' Register?
How many people have taken advantage of 'free movement' since the 10 accession countries joined the EU on May 1st 2004 and how many of those had criminal convictions for sex offences?
Attached is an open letter from the campaign to both the Home Secretary John Reid, and the Minister for Europe Geoff Hoon.
Neil Herron states, "The EU issue is unmanageable from a nation state perspective. It is incredible that the consequences of allowing 450 million people free, unfettered access through our borders without any checks as to their background appear to have never been seriously thought through."
Colin Moran states, " We have been put in a position where we are no longer in control over our borders. Serious questions must be asked of this Government as to why this has been allowed to happen. How many innocent people will become victims before the penny drops?"
Dr. Richard North states, "The Human Rights Act has become the Criminal Rights Act. We have given the right of access to murderers, rapists, child molesters, robbers, fraudsters."
As a matter of protocol the contents of the letter have been raised with respective constituency MPs for answers from both Ministers. The questions and matters raised are too important to wait for the normally pedantic ministerially response.
We urge concerned citizens everywhere to raise this matter with their MP and demand answers.
ENDS:
CONTACT:
Neil Herron
Campaign Director
or
Colin Moran
Strategy Director and Spokesman
The People's No Campaign
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Tel. 0191 565 7143
Mob. 07776 202045 (Neil Herron) 07802 448 635 (Colin Moran)
E-mail: mail@thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Websites: www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk and also www.eurefendum.com
Notes for Editors:
Free Movement of Persons A fundamental right of EU citizenship, allowing citizens to travel, live and work freely throughout the EU. The Treaty of Amsterdam communitised the area, giving the Commission a greater role in proposing initiatives.
(See EU citizenship: Right to move and reside freely, Freedom to travel, Judicial-civil)
Freedom Security and Justice(from the Europa website)
New legislation will simplify conditions and administrative formalities for applying EU citizens' right to travel and reside freely throughout the European Union
Directive 3004/38/EC
Why are the Conservatives not asking the questions? Could it be that this will be the straw that breaks the elephant in the room's back?
Hopefully the press will finally grasp the implications and start asking the questions and DEMAND answers.
The questions which were put to the Minister can be seen here
The responses will be posted tomorrow.
Press Release
The People's No Campaign / Metric Martyrs
11th May 2006: Immediate
"European Agreements Allow Convicted Paedophiles and Sex Offenders Unfettered and Unchallenged Access to Britain"
In view of the latest revelations from the Home Office regarding who should and should not be in our country, and the problems arising from convicted foreign nationals being released and allowed to roam freely and unchecked, there is one glaring omission.
It is an omission, which will dwarf the problems that led to the downfall of Home Secretary Charles Clarke.
The 'free movement of people' across the 25, soon to be 27, Member States of the European Union allows any EU passport holder free and unfettered access to this country.
The subject of illegal immigration is a completely separate one and must not be confused with the free movement of people
As the European Union's website states:
Free movement of people is a basic pillar of the single area the European Union (EU) has been building since its creation…
…the notion of "free movement" is used in two senses. First, in the traditional sense of free movement and secondly in the sense of being able to cross the internal borders without undergoing checks.
As it appears the Home Office does not know the whereabouts of many serious and dangerous foreign criminals released from British prisons, the major concern now is how serious criminals, including paedophiles and sex offenders released from prisons within EU Member States are monitored.
There are no checks at passport control. Many EU countries do not have a sex offenders register.
There appears to be no requirement to go on the UK Sex Offenders Register and no explanation from the Government as to how many potential paedophiles and serious sex offenders have entered the country perfectly legally under the free movement of people.
How many paedophiles and sex offenders, convicted in their own or another EU Member State, are in this country?
If there are no checks at passport control and no requirement to declare any criminal convictions, how can they be monitored?
How many, if any, are any on the UKs National Sex Offenders' Register?
How many people have taken advantage of 'free movement' since the 10 accession countries joined the EU on May 1st 2004 and how many of those had criminal convictions for sex offences?
Attached is an open letter from the campaign to both the Home Secretary John Reid, and the Minister for Europe Geoff Hoon.
Neil Herron states, "The EU issue is unmanageable from a nation state perspective. It is incredible that the consequences of allowing 450 million people free, unfettered access through our borders without any checks as to their background appear to have never been seriously thought through."
Colin Moran states, " We have been put in a position where we are no longer in control over our borders. Serious questions must be asked of this Government as to why this has been allowed to happen. How many innocent people will become victims before the penny drops?"
Dr. Richard North states, "The Human Rights Act has become the Criminal Rights Act. We have given the right of access to murderers, rapists, child molesters, robbers, fraudsters."
As a matter of protocol the contents of the letter have been raised with respective constituency MPs for answers from both Ministers. The questions and matters raised are too important to wait for the normally pedantic ministerially response.
We urge concerned citizens everywhere to raise this matter with their MP and demand answers.
ENDS:
CONTACT:
Neil Herron
Campaign Director
or
Colin Moran
Strategy Director and Spokesman
The People's No Campaign
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Tel. 0191 565 7143
Mob. 07776 202045 (Neil Herron) 07802 448 635 (Colin Moran)
E-mail: mail@thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Websites: www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk and also www.eurefendum.com
Notes for Editors:
Free Movement of Persons A fundamental right of EU citizenship, allowing citizens to travel, live and work freely throughout the EU. The Treaty of Amsterdam communitised the area, giving the Commission a greater role in proposing initiatives.
(See EU citizenship: Right to move and reside freely, Freedom to travel, Judicial-civil)
Freedom Security and Justice(from the Europa website)
New legislation will simplify conditions and administrative formalities for applying EU citizens' right to travel and reside freely throughout the European Union
Directive 3004/38/EC
Is the PM also unaware of massive 'Sex Offender and Criminal' problem caused by EU Treaties?
Now when you read the story below this question may also spring to your mind ... perhaps you can raise it with your own MP before 'events, events, events' highlight the practical consequences of our membership of the EU.
"Dear Tony ... under our EU treaty obligations, signed and agreed to without the consent of the British people, citizens from the other 26 Member States of the EU are allowed 'free movement' within the EU to reside, work and travel.
If you cannot manage the simple task (where you are actually supplied the information of convictions) of alerting the Police when a Briton has been convicted abroad then how on earth can you monitor people with criminal convictions from other EU Member States ... who travel, live and work here? This quite unbelievable state of affairs makes a mockery of our Sex Offenders Register."
- Remember, there are no requirements for any EU national to do anything other than show a Passport or ID Card when he comes into this country. Do you expect a convicted sex offender from another EU country to voluntarily place themselves on the Register?
- Remember, do you know if any of the other 26 Member States has a Sex Offenders Register? Lat year the BBC reported 'EU criminals' freedom to roam.' Check the report out here
- Remember, Home Office estimates for the numbers that would take advantage of the Free Movement of People once the accession countries joined in 2004 were around 13,500. They were wrong by a factor of 50 !!! ... and that is only the ones who registered for work.
- Remember, 430m people have the right to live and work here should they so wish. Restrictions were discussed in 2003 but this was prior to the Free Movement of People. Read the discussion in the Commons here where concerns were raised here and in the Lords here
PM defends Home Office in convict controversy
10 January 2007
Tony Blair has spoken about reports that records of crimes committed abroad by British residents were not inputted into the police database.
Some criminals may have been cleared to work with vulnerable people in the UK after committing serious crimes overseas, police chiefs have claimed.
Responding to a question at Prime Minister's Question Time, the PM admitted there was backlog of cases caused by incomplete information.
Mr Blair told MPs:
"All the people for whom there is sufficient information are on the Police National Computer.
"But those who are part of the backlog of cases, where the information was delivered to us, when it was only voluntary, not compulsory, there may be some of those for whom there is insufficient information. That is not the fault of the Home Office."
Home Secretary John Reid told the Commons he had met the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the chief executive of the Criminal Records Bureau, explaining: "I have asked ACPO to ensure that every one of the most serious offenders that they have identified and on whom there is sufficient information has now been entered on the Police National Computer. I have been given that assurance."
The Permanent Secretary at the Home Office will now set up an inquiry into the Home Office's handling of these notifications, he said:
"This will include: a chronology of events; the practices and procedures in place at different times, whether appropriate action was taken; and the lessons to be learned."
Further Information and Commentary:
Open Europe: The Free Movement Directive here
Guardian: Bid to Curb Paedophile Sex Tourists here
The Tayside Courier: A spokesman for Tayside Police said, “A local police force will endeavour to obtain information relating to any previous offences of any accused, whether a UK or EU citizen, or indeed from a country outwith the European Union.
“This can be straightforward, at times problematic, and on occasions extremely difficult, depending on the country of origin.” ...but is only after a crime has been committed!
Home Office Consultation Paper on the Review of Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997: here ... this Paper was published in July 2001 and higlighted the problem then, way before the mass movement westwards post May 1st 2004
"the free movement of citizens within the EU adds a further layer of complexity. Passport controls on EU citizens entering the UK are now minimal."
"Where it was known that they (a convicted sex offender) had committed a serious sex offence, they could, depending on the serious nature of the offence, be refused entry but this would be more difficult in the case of citizens of EU countries, who do not need to complete landing cards before entry."
Daily Mail 22nd November 2006 "A blunder for which we'll all pay the price" by Sir Andrew Green here
"Dear Tony ... under our EU treaty obligations, signed and agreed to without the consent of the British people, citizens from the other 26 Member States of the EU are allowed 'free movement' within the EU to reside, work and travel.
If you cannot manage the simple task (where you are actually supplied the information of convictions) of alerting the Police when a Briton has been convicted abroad then how on earth can you monitor people with criminal convictions from other EU Member States ... who travel, live and work here? This quite unbelievable state of affairs makes a mockery of our Sex Offenders Register."
- Remember, there are no requirements for any EU national to do anything other than show a Passport or ID Card when he comes into this country. Do you expect a convicted sex offender from another EU country to voluntarily place themselves on the Register?
- Remember, do you know if any of the other 26 Member States has a Sex Offenders Register? Lat year the BBC reported 'EU criminals' freedom to roam.' Check the report out here
- Remember, Home Office estimates for the numbers that would take advantage of the Free Movement of People once the accession countries joined in 2004 were around 13,500. They were wrong by a factor of 50 !!! ... and that is only the ones who registered for work.
- Remember, 430m people have the right to live and work here should they so wish. Restrictions were discussed in 2003 but this was prior to the Free Movement of People. Read the discussion in the Commons here where concerns were raised here and in the Lords here
A country called Europe has been created without ever gaining the consent of the people. History will remember this as the greatest ever political deception.
Shortly I will be releasing the questions that were asked of the Minister 8 months ago ...along with the Press Release ... and the response from the Under Secretary of State, Joan Ryan which will prove that John Reid and the Home Office is fully aware that they have no control whatsoever.
A time bomb waiting to go off. Let us hope that it is not the murder of children that will bring the politicians to their senses and expose what they have all been party to ... it is essential that every one of the Members of Parliament is made to understand what the potential human consequences of our membership of the EU could be.
PM defends Home Office in convict controversy10 January 2007
Tony Blair has spoken about reports that records of crimes committed abroad by British residents were not inputted into the police database.
Some criminals may have been cleared to work with vulnerable people in the UK after committing serious crimes overseas, police chiefs have claimed.
Responding to a question at Prime Minister's Question Time, the PM admitted there was backlog of cases caused by incomplete information.
Mr Blair told MPs:
"All the people for whom there is sufficient information are on the Police National Computer.
"But those who are part of the backlog of cases, where the information was delivered to us, when it was only voluntary, not compulsory, there may be some of those for whom there is insufficient information. That is not the fault of the Home Office."
Home Secretary John Reid told the Commons he had met the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the chief executive of the Criminal Records Bureau, explaining: "I have asked ACPO to ensure that every one of the most serious offenders that they have identified and on whom there is sufficient information has now been entered on the Police National Computer. I have been given that assurance."
The Permanent Secretary at the Home Office will now set up an inquiry into the Home Office's handling of these notifications, he said:
"This will include: a chronology of events; the practices and procedures in place at different times, whether appropriate action was taken; and the lessons to be learned."
Further Information and Commentary:
Open Europe: The Free Movement Directive here
Guardian: Bid to Curb Paedophile Sex Tourists here
The Tayside Courier: A spokesman for Tayside Police said, “A local police force will endeavour to obtain information relating to any previous offences of any accused, whether a UK or EU citizen, or indeed from a country outwith the European Union.
“This can be straightforward, at times problematic, and on occasions extremely difficult, depending on the country of origin.” ...but is only after a crime has been committed!
Home Office Consultation Paper on the Review of Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997: here ... this Paper was published in July 2001 and higlighted the problem then, way before the mass movement westwards post May 1st 2004
"the free movement of citizens within the EU adds a further layer of complexity. Passport controls on EU citizens entering the UK are now minimal."
"Where it was known that they (a convicted sex offender) had committed a serious sex offence, they could, depending on the serious nature of the offence, be refused entry but this would be more difficult in the case of citizens of EU countries, who do not need to complete landing cards before entry."
Daily Mail 22nd November 2006 "A blunder for which we'll all pay the price" by Sir Andrew Green here
Sunday, January 07, 2007
North East Assembly 'Squatters' do a runner!
How much do you think the North East Assembly paid Newcastle City Council over the past six years in rent for the prestigous Guildhall building (left) situated on Newcastle's Quayside?The estimated market rent is £25k per annum...equating to £150,000 over the six years.
Go on, have a guess ... and remember, the amount of rent received offsets the amount of Council tax Newcastle residents will have to pay.
Perhaps it will come as somewhat of a surprise that the North East Assembly, legal personality is an 'unincorprated association' has not paid a penny!
The Freedom of Information response from Newcastle City Council is somewhat revealing and shows a frivolous regard for the residents and ratepayers of Newcastle.
The responses to a number of questions are shown below:
Further to this, there was £280,000 spent on 'improvements' to the Guildhall to meet 'the current and short term requirements by the NEA.' £250,000 of this was to be met from the Corporate Resource Pool in order to 'retain this key regional function within the City.'
This has created an annual cost burden to the ratepayers of Newcastle City Council of £29,348 for the next twenty years.
The North East Assembly has now 'done a runner' and moved to premises in Gateshead!
I am sure that this failure to look after public money will now be the subject of a complaint by residents of Newcastle who may wish to bring it to the attention of the District Auditor.
I am sure that the Council tenants would not get such favourable terms from the City Council...
Friday, January 05, 2007
EU stealing the crown of the great British pint | News | This is London
Yet more EuroCreep. The end to the pint is in sight. Don't say you weren't warned!
EU stealing the crown of the great British pint News This is London
EU stealing the crown of the great British pint News This is London
York Drivers Happy With Parking Fines (from York Press)
I wonder how transparent the Council is with regard to informing motorists of their right to appeal to the adjudicator, or could it be that most parking tickets are handed out to tourists unfamiliar with the area and its parking regime and who simply pay up as the perceived hassle of appealing is simply not worth it.
I have yet to meet a motorist who is 'happy' to receive a parking fine.
York Drivers Happy With Parking Fines (from York Press)
I have yet to meet a motorist who is 'happy' to receive a parking fine.
York Drivers Happy With Parking Fines (from York Press)
Friday, December 22, 2006
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Burns Night in Sunderland ... Parking Cover Up continues
Now if you remember NPAS Adjudicator, Andrew Keenan stating 'all the lines and signs in Sunderland are correct'... and recently the Council Leader and Chief Executive stated that 'the regime is legally robust and enforceable' ...
Well guys ... looks like another attempt at a cover-up has backfired.
While sitting in the bath singing yuletide songs at 9am I received a telephone call.
"Neil, I can smell burning. You had better come into town."
Five minutes later I pulled up on one of their newly marked yellow lines...running through the loading / parking space. Now these locations had recently featured in a BBC Look North piece in which the Council denied that there was anything wrong with the signing in the Park Lane Village CPZ.
This was despite the fact that the DfT had only given them authorisation for the 'combination loading / parking' signs providing that they did not use the loading only legend on the highway.
Today the workers were burning off the Loading Only legends from the highway which had made the bays illegal. As the requirements for the CPZ are that ALL the streets are covered with lawful restrictions the CPZ falls ... and along with it goes every ticket issued in Park Lane Village CPZ.
I am sure that there will be an announcement offering refunds in time for Christmas.
Well guys ... looks like another attempt at a cover-up has backfired.
While sitting in the bath singing yuletide songs at 9am I received a telephone call.
"Neil, I can smell burning. You had better come into town."
Five minutes later I pulled up on one of their newly marked yellow lines...running through the loading / parking space. Now these locations had recently featured in a BBC Look North piece in which the Council denied that there was anything wrong with the signing in the Park Lane Village CPZ.
This was despite the fact that the DfT had only given them authorisation for the 'combination loading / parking' signs providing that they did not use the loading only legend on the highway.
Today the workers were burning off the Loading Only legends from the highway which had made the bays illegal. As the requirements for the CPZ are that ALL the streets are covered with lawful restrictions the CPZ falls ... and along with it goes every ticket issued in Park Lane Village CPZ.
I am sure that there will be an announcement offering refunds in time for Christmas.
Tragedy as TalkSPORT host Mike Dickin dies in car crash
The following report is a report of the tragic death and career of TalkSPORT radio host Mike Dickin.Barrie Segal and I became a regular fixture of the 'angriest man in Britain's' phone-in on TalkSPORT. Mike certainly lived up to his reputation when callers rang up to highlight their personal parking injustices. He did not hold back when he aired his thoughts on the illegality of decriminalised parking and the behaviour of those involved.
He will be a very big miss.
Our deepest sympathies go out to Mike's family.
Radio host Dickin dies in crash
U K
Dickin had been with Talksport for ten years.
Talksport phone-in host Mike Dickin, known to listeners as "The King", has died in a road accident in Cornwall.The presenter, who was in his 60s, was involved in a six car pile-up on the A30 on Monday. He was airlifted to hospital but was pronounced dead.
Dickin started his career at BBC Radio Oxford in the 1970s, where he was the first presenter on the air.
He also broadcast on Radio 4 and LBC, and won an award for his coverage of the Lockerbie disaster in 1988.
The presenter, who broadcast from his home studio in Bodmin Moor, was known for his passionate, outspoken views.
Listeners dubbed him Britain's angriest man, but he was also known as "The King" because of his supposed resemblance to Henry VIII.
Dickin hosted weekend overnight phone-ins on Talksport and was last heard on the station last weekend.
Colleague James Whale paid tribute to the broadcaster, calling him "the original grumpy old man".
"Radio will never be the same again," continued the presenter, who will pay tribute to Dickin in his programme on Thursday night
Mike Dickin was a broadcasting legend and will be sorely missed by the millions of listeners he has informed, entertained and argued with over his 36-year career.
Now here is your chance to remember Mike in this Book of Condolences, which will be passed on to his wife, Karen, and family. Feel free to share your memories, anecdotes or just your simple condolences to this great broadcaster
Mike Dickin (1935 – December 18, 2006), was a late-night host on the British radio station talkSPORT. Dickin used to present the 1am to 6am slot at weekends on Talk Radio. He returned filling in for James Whale during his battle with kidney cancer. He was given the morning show slot soon afterwards. He was affectionately known as the King by his fans due to his resemblance to King Henry VIII.
Starting out as a musician in the 1960s, Dickin was a bass player and singer who found he preferred playing records to making them when he joined the BBC in 1970 as the first presenter on air at Radio Oxford. In 1977, Dickin moved to Australia where he worked for Sydney's biggest radio station, 2UE. Upon returning to the UK in the late seventies he spent 17 years working for BBC Radio 4, LBC and Capital Radio. He started at Talksport (then Talk Radio UK) in 1996.
Dickin was famous for his strongly held views. His passion led to him being labelled “Britain’s angriest man” by talkSPORT listeners. Typical discussions on his show included crime, cars, trains, taxis, the problems of young people, the downfall of Britain, the incompetence of people in the service industry, parking tickets and call centres. He was also known for his catchphrases, such as “My health is not in question,” when asked how he is. Another catchphrase is “If you were constipated, you’d be speechless.”
Mike Dickin was killed in a car crash on the A30 near his home in Cornwall, on December 18th 2006.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Bill's final vote is to quit politics
Sunderland Echo
SUNDERLAND MP Bill Etherington says he's quitting politics because "you're at everybody's beck and call and expected to vote at all hours of life".
But a review of his work in Parliament over the last 12 months revealed the Sunderland North MP has voted in just half of all House of Commons sessions – well below average.
The 65-year-old was blasted by his political opponents in the run-up to the 2005 General Election for not giving the people of Sunderland value for money and not speaking in Parliament enough.
Today Mr Etherington revealed he wanted to stand down before last year's election, but was persuaded to stay on.
Now, after spending 14 years representing the city in the Commons, he will call time on his career at the next General Election because his constituency is being wiped off the political map, after a series of boundary changes.
He said: "My constituency wouldn't exist after the next election. The new Sunderland Central will consist of mostly my patch, but also wards from other constituencies.
"I was going to stand down at the last election, but I was persuaded against my will. I felt I owed it to my constituents to take on one last request."
Neil Herron, who stood against Mr Etherington in the last election, said: "We need someone who can bang the drum for Sunderland. Sunderland needs a loud voice in the region and in Westminster.
"With Mr Etherington stepping down it's the ideal opportunity for someone to come along with Sunderland's interests at heart rather than just that of a political party."
Mr Etherington described his time in Parliament as being a "bit of a mixed bag".
He said: "It's not a very structural form of life being an MP. You're at everybody's beck and call and are expected to vote at all hours of life.
"Other than that, what's nice about the job, which doesn't really happen too often, is when people come and see you and I do what I can, but it's not always the way and sometimes I can't help them, but when I do and I make life better for a few of them, it's quite rewarding."
And after his resignation from the post, the pit worker of 21 years has plans to spend time with his family and at the house he bought in Scotland two years ago.
He added: "I think if you left school when you're 16 and work for the next 43 to 44 years, you can say you've done your bit and you're entitled to be put out to graze."
SUNDERLAND MP Bill Etherington says he's quitting politics because "you're at everybody's beck and call and expected to vote at all hours of life".
But a review of his work in Parliament over the last 12 months revealed the Sunderland North MP has voted in just half of all House of Commons sessions – well below average.
The 65-year-old was blasted by his political opponents in the run-up to the 2005 General Election for not giving the people of Sunderland value for money and not speaking in Parliament enough.
Today Mr Etherington revealed he wanted to stand down before last year's election, but was persuaded to stay on.
Now, after spending 14 years representing the city in the Commons, he will call time on his career at the next General Election because his constituency is being wiped off the political map, after a series of boundary changes.
He said: "My constituency wouldn't exist after the next election. The new Sunderland Central will consist of mostly my patch, but also wards from other constituencies.
"I was going to stand down at the last election, but I was persuaded against my will. I felt I owed it to my constituents to take on one last request."
Neil Herron, who stood against Mr Etherington in the last election, said: "We need someone who can bang the drum for Sunderland. Sunderland needs a loud voice in the region and in Westminster.
"With Mr Etherington stepping down it's the ideal opportunity for someone to come along with Sunderland's interests at heart rather than just that of a political party."
Mr Etherington described his time in Parliament as being a "bit of a mixed bag".
He said: "It's not a very structural form of life being an MP. You're at everybody's beck and call and are expected to vote at all hours of life.
"Other than that, what's nice about the job, which doesn't really happen too often, is when people come and see you and I do what I can, but it's not always the way and sometimes I can't help them, but when I do and I make life better for a few of them, it's quite rewarding."
And after his resignation from the post, the pit worker of 21 years has plans to spend time with his family and at the house he bought in Scotland two years ago.
He added: "I think if you left school when you're 16 and work for the next 43 to 44 years, you can say you've done your bit and you're entitled to be put out to graze."
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Had a Parking Ticket in Liverpool?
Liverpool City Council changed the wording on their PCNs on 15th August 2006.
Head of Parking Services, Roy Tunstall was on BBC Radio Liverpool drivetime programme last night with me. He is adamant that the Council can still pursue non-compliant PCNs issued BEFORE August 2nd 2006 because that was the date of the Moses v Barnet case and before that 'they had not been aware.'
He also stated that the decision only applied to Barnet ... and not Liverpool and it was up to each and every motorist to appeal their ticket individually!
I have threatened a Police and District Auditor complaint should they continue to pursue PCNs that they know to be non-compliant.
Meanwhile, anyone who has had a parking ticket in Liverpool and wishes to challenge it on the point that the PCN is unlawful simply e-mail me at neilherron@btconnect.com
The story in the Liverpool Daily Post can be read here
Head of Parking Services, Roy Tunstall was on BBC Radio Liverpool drivetime programme last night with me. He is adamant that the Council can still pursue non-compliant PCNs issued BEFORE August 2nd 2006 because that was the date of the Moses v Barnet case and before that 'they had not been aware.'
He also stated that the decision only applied to Barnet ... and not Liverpool and it was up to each and every motorist to appeal their ticket individually!
I have threatened a Police and District Auditor complaint should they continue to pursue PCNs that they know to be non-compliant.
Meanwhile, anyone who has had a parking ticket in Liverpool and wishes to challenge it on the point that the PCN is unlawful simply e-mail me at neilherron@btconnect.com
The story in the Liverpool Daily Post can be read here
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Subject: Radio 4 Today Programme and Daniel Hannan...Repeal the 1972 European Communities Act
In case you missed it, here is the link to "Listen Again" on the TODAY prog and Daniel Hannan's call to repeal the ECA 1972. If you haven't already logged your suggestion to repeal this act, please do so asap on the same site.
Click here to listen
Click here to listen
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Parking fiasco
If you remember Sunderland Council's legal department told NCP to change the wording of the PCNs 'without delay' on 16th June 2005. They weren't changed until 30th November 2005. NCP continued to issue PCNs they knew to be unlawful and Sunderland continued to process unlawful PCNs AND bank the money.
Over 12,000 people were issued with unlawful PCNs between May when Sunderland were informed via an NPAS Circular (BC 188 MacArthur v Bury) yet Sunderland say that they cannot have their money back.
However, Eric Brittain who raised the complaint with the Local Government Ombudsman is about to receive an apology from the Council's Chief Executive, a refund and an offer of £50 compensation.
It may well be the precedent that costs many a council many a million.
Sunderland Echo
Letters Page
Monday, December 11, 2006
In all the recent publicity about the parking fiasco in Sunderland it seems to me, although NCP were partners, they have been made the scapegoat for Sunderland Parking Services' failures in some areas to comply with the Road Traffic Act.
Surely, it is an essential fact that those who are empowered to administer the law do so in accordance with the Act, not to suit themselves.
For instance Sunderland Parking Services were instructed by the National Parking Adjudication Service (a legal department supported by most councils with a percentage of the fines imposed) on May 4th, 2005, that their Penalty Charge Notices could be challenged as they did not contain a date of issue on them in order to comply with the Road Traffic Act.
Despite receiving this warning Sunderland Parking Services continued to issue PCNs to motorists without this added detail until sometime I believe in January/ February 2006. Sunderland Parking Services were even instructed by their own City Solicitor on June 14, 2005 to add this detail without delay.
One dreads to think how many motorists received PCNs in Sunderland during that period which did not comply with the RTA and were therefore subject to appeal.
E Brittain
St George's Estate
Harraton
Washington
Over 12,000 people were issued with unlawful PCNs between May when Sunderland were informed via an NPAS Circular (BC 188 MacArthur v Bury) yet Sunderland say that they cannot have their money back.
However, Eric Brittain who raised the complaint with the Local Government Ombudsman is about to receive an apology from the Council's Chief Executive, a refund and an offer of £50 compensation.
It may well be the precedent that costs many a council many a million.
Sunderland Echo
Letters Page
Monday, December 11, 2006
In all the recent publicity about the parking fiasco in Sunderland it seems to me, although NCP were partners, they have been made the scapegoat for Sunderland Parking Services' failures in some areas to comply with the Road Traffic Act.
Surely, it is an essential fact that those who are empowered to administer the law do so in accordance with the Act, not to suit themselves.
For instance Sunderland Parking Services were instructed by the National Parking Adjudication Service (a legal department supported by most councils with a percentage of the fines imposed) on May 4th, 2005, that their Penalty Charge Notices could be challenged as they did not contain a date of issue on them in order to comply with the Road Traffic Act.
Despite receiving this warning Sunderland Parking Services continued to issue PCNs to motorists without this added detail until sometime I believe in January/ February 2006. Sunderland Parking Services were even instructed by their own City Solicitor on June 14, 2005 to add this detail without delay.
One dreads to think how many motorists received PCNs in Sunderland during that period which did not comply with the RTA and were therefore subject to appeal.
E Brittain
St George's Estate
Harraton
Washington
Defeat for in-house parking
Sunderland Echo
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
By Marissa Carruthers
Handing parking powers back to Sunderland Council was compared to putting "King Herod in charge of a nursery" at a meeting last night.
Last month, Sunderland City Council unanimously backed a decision to seize back control of on-street parking after a shocking TV documentary.
The undercover Inside Out programme showed city parking attendants making racist remarks and mocking disabled drivers.
They were also heard claiming that they had "tortured" drivers on Villette Road, caused criminal damage to vehicles and accepted drinks in return for not issuing parking tickets.
Five employees were sacked after an investigation.
But some councillors slammed the decision to take parking enforcement back under council control, and yesterday Conservative Councillors Peter Wood, Paul Maddison and Independent Michael Tansey used the authority's calling-in powers to challenge the decision.
Coun Wood said: "We have had two special meetings relating to parking in a 12-month period. Questions have been raised about whether yellow lines are in the right place and whether notices have the right information on them.
"Those problems, in my view, are really the result of serious failings within the council's own directorate of development and regeneration yet the cabinet is seriously considering giving the directorate more responsibility for parking in the city.
"My suggestion is that giving more responsibility to the directorate is like putting King Herod in charge of a nursery."
He added: "If NCP is no longer appropriate to run on-street parking, why are they okay to retain off-street parking?"
He suggested the council should have handed on-street parking over to another organisation to "restore public confidence" in the system.
But the majority of members of the council's environmental and planning review committee backed the bid to take on on-street parking in spite of these fears.
Coun Les Scott said: "I think the decision by the cabinet to bring parking back in-house was measured, considered and it was the right thing to do."
He said he felt the public felt most "comfortable" with the council seizing control of on-street parking.
The council contracted out parking enforcement in the city to NCP in 2003 when the responsibility was taken from the police and given to the council
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
By Marissa Carruthers
Handing parking powers back to Sunderland Council was compared to putting "King Herod in charge of a nursery" at a meeting last night.
Last month, Sunderland City Council unanimously backed a decision to seize back control of on-street parking after a shocking TV documentary.
The undercover Inside Out programme showed city parking attendants making racist remarks and mocking disabled drivers.
They were also heard claiming that they had "tortured" drivers on Villette Road, caused criminal damage to vehicles and accepted drinks in return for not issuing parking tickets.
Five employees were sacked after an investigation.
But some councillors slammed the decision to take parking enforcement back under council control, and yesterday Conservative Councillors Peter Wood, Paul Maddison and Independent Michael Tansey used the authority's calling-in powers to challenge the decision.
Coun Wood said: "We have had two special meetings relating to parking in a 12-month period. Questions have been raised about whether yellow lines are in the right place and whether notices have the right information on them.
"Those problems, in my view, are really the result of serious failings within the council's own directorate of development and regeneration yet the cabinet is seriously considering giving the directorate more responsibility for parking in the city.
"My suggestion is that giving more responsibility to the directorate is like putting King Herod in charge of a nursery."
He added: "If NCP is no longer appropriate to run on-street parking, why are they okay to retain off-street parking?"
He suggested the council should have handed on-street parking over to another organisation to "restore public confidence" in the system.
But the majority of members of the council's environmental and planning review committee backed the bid to take on on-street parking in spite of these fears.
Coun Les Scott said: "I think the decision by the cabinet to bring parking back in-house was measured, considered and it was the right thing to do."
He said he felt the public felt most "comfortable" with the council seizing control of on-street parking.
The council contracted out parking enforcement in the city to NCP in 2003 when the responsibility was taken from the police and given to the council
BBC Radio 4 Poll ... Your help is required
Simply click on the link below and vote:
Link to BBC Vote
The 1972 European Communities Act
...once struck down, will restore accountability to our own Parliament in Westminster. It is questionable whether there will be restoration of sanity but at least then we will be able to sack those who make our laws. Which political party would then ever dare introduce legislation which would have seen a greengrocer take a criminal conviction to his grave for selling a pound of bananas or make it a criminal offence after Janauary 1st 2010 to make any mention of imperial measures?
Link to BBC Vote
The 1972 European Communities Act
...once struck down, will restore accountability to our own Parliament in Westminster. It is questionable whether there will be restoration of sanity but at least then we will be able to sack those who make our laws. Which political party would then ever dare introduce legislation which would have seen a greengrocer take a criminal conviction to his grave for selling a pound of bananas or make it a criminal offence after Janauary 1st 2010 to make any mention of imperial measures?
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
NPAS Apologises over errors in Herron v Sunderland Case... Review Request to go ahead.
Now if you can remember the hearing ... 3rd October 2006 the day after the BBC expose on the Sunderland Parking regime ... Sunderland City Council brought in a QC to present their case. (If you are a Sunderland Council taxpayer you should ask how much this cost).
Once the decision was sent out on 2nd November I decided that because there were errors in fact, in law and also clerical and administrative errors then I would request a review of the decision ... and therefore, reserve comment until the adjudicator's clerical errors had been corrected the request for review had been accepted ... once I had received a correctly worded decision.
But Sunderland Council couldn't wait and the press office 'briefed' the press that Neil Herron had lost BUT they compounded the NPAS mistake by going live with it. I was then forced to defend my reputation by pointing out that not only were Sunderland mistaken but that the matter would be taken to review once I had received a correctly worded decision.
NCP continued to issue in the area where my appeal had been successful.
The Council are using the NPAS decision to claim that their regime 'is legally robust' and the signs and lines are correct.
A formal complaint will be made to the Council...they went live with a press release which was factually incorrect and this 'maladministration' has caused an injustice and they have also potentially prejudiced other appellants as the Council used this factually incorrect NPAS Judgment in their evidence bundles for cases which were heard before NPAS in November.
I now have 14 days to submit the evidence in the Request for a Review to NPAS that will highlight the flaws that the adjudicator dismissed, and will include evidence from the Government Office of the North East and the Department for Transport. Since the adjudicator rejected Captain Green's photographic evidence without having sight of it.
An exhaustive photographic compilation of illegal signs and lines has been prepared to submit with the request for the review.
The NPAS letter specifically states:
"The consolidated decision which I now enclose rectified the clerical errors in respect of PCNs SX12069459, SX04061790, SX02033207 (they had been 'dismissed' in the original decision when in fact they had been allowed). It also now incorporates the various schedules referred to in the decision. Please accept the apologies of the tribunal for the errors and omissions in the original decisions, which occurred when recording the adjudicator's decision in the tribunal's case management system, and the accompanying covering letters in cases SX05042B, SX05052F,and SX05053J which reflected errors in the original decisions."
Once the decision was sent out on 2nd November I decided that because there were errors in fact, in law and also clerical and administrative errors then I would request a review of the decision ... and therefore, reserve comment until the adjudicator's clerical errors had been corrected the request for review had been accepted ... once I had received a correctly worded decision.
But Sunderland Council couldn't wait and the press office 'briefed' the press that Neil Herron had lost BUT they compounded the NPAS mistake by going live with it. I was then forced to defend my reputation by pointing out that not only were Sunderland mistaken but that the matter would be taken to review once I had received a correctly worded decision.
NCP continued to issue in the area where my appeal had been successful.
The Council are using the NPAS decision to claim that their regime 'is legally robust' and the signs and lines are correct.
A formal complaint will be made to the Council...they went live with a press release which was factually incorrect and this 'maladministration' has caused an injustice and they have also potentially prejudiced other appellants as the Council used this factually incorrect NPAS Judgment in their evidence bundles for cases which were heard before NPAS in November.
I now have 14 days to submit the evidence in the Request for a Review to NPAS that will highlight the flaws that the adjudicator dismissed, and will include evidence from the Government Office of the North East and the Department for Transport. Since the adjudicator rejected Captain Green's photographic evidence without having sight of it.
An exhaustive photographic compilation of illegal signs and lines has been prepared to submit with the request for the review.
The NPAS letter specifically states:
"The consolidated decision which I now enclose rectified the clerical errors in respect of PCNs SX12069459, SX04061790, SX02033207 (they had been 'dismissed' in the original decision when in fact they had been allowed). It also now incorporates the various schedules referred to in the decision. Please accept the apologies of the tribunal for the errors and omissions in the original decisions, which occurred when recording the adjudicator's decision in the tribunal's case management system, and the accompanying covering letters in cases SX05042B, SX05052F,and SX05053J which reflected errors in the original decisions."
SUNDERLAND THOUGHT IT WAS ALL OVER ... NOW IT'S 'START AGAIN.'
Let's hope that the people who purport to be professional and independent do a little better this time...but remember that NPAS do get 55p from every PCN issued, and the adudicators are appointed by the Joint Committee which comprises of representatives from the participating local authorities, including Councillor Joseph Lawson ... Sunderland City Council's DPE Portfolio Holder. ;-)
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Sunderland Council warned over illegal bays
Council warned over loading bay sizes
Sunderland Echo
Tuesday 5 December 06
Officials have warned Sunderland Council chiefs their plans to create loading bays smaller than the legal limit could be seen as entrapment.
Sunderland City Council wanted to created the bays in Front Street, Concord, Washington, narrower than the legal width.
However, an official from the Department of Transport said: "Let's not forget there are elements of potential entrapment here - ie they almost entice lorries to use bays they cannot fit into, then they can fine them for not parking within the bay. Nice little earner."
In November Government Office North-East also told the Wearside council a loading bay, which had been placed in Holmside, would have to be extended to 2.7m.
It was 1.5m wide and then the authority extended it to 2m.
And. it also emerged other loading bays in the city were already well below the legal minimum width.
However, Ged Fitzgerald, Sunderland Council chief executive, said: "The council refutes any inference that there has been any entrapment in the context of decriminalised parking in the city of Sunderland."
The authority said it hadn't created the bay in Front Street, and it would comply with regulations.
The loading restrictions are being created in response to traders' concerns about parking.
There was a series of blunders in Holmside over signs, lines and traffic orders and the council was forced to repay thousands of pounds in wrongly collected fines.
However, the council insists overall its systems are legally sound.
If believe that you must also believe in fairies.
Want to see what the Government Office and the Department for Transport say about Holmeside click here
Sunderland Echo
Tuesday 5 December 06
Officials have warned Sunderland Council chiefs their plans to create loading bays smaller than the legal limit could be seen as entrapment.
Sunderland City Council wanted to created the bays in Front Street, Concord, Washington, narrower than the legal width.
However, an official from the Department of Transport said: "Let's not forget there are elements of potential entrapment here - ie they almost entice lorries to use bays they cannot fit into, then they can fine them for not parking within the bay. Nice little earner."
In November Government Office North-East also told the Wearside council a loading bay, which had been placed in Holmside, would have to be extended to 2.7m.
It was 1.5m wide and then the authority extended it to 2m.
And. it also emerged other loading bays in the city were already well below the legal minimum width.
However, Ged Fitzgerald, Sunderland Council chief executive, said: "The council refutes any inference that there has been any entrapment in the context of decriminalised parking in the city of Sunderland."
The authority said it hadn't created the bay in Front Street, and it would comply with regulations.
The loading restrictions are being created in response to traders' concerns about parking.
There was a series of blunders in Holmside over signs, lines and traffic orders and the council was forced to repay thousands of pounds in wrongly collected fines.
However, the council insists overall its systems are legally sound.
If believe that you must also believe in fairies.
Want to see what the Government Office and the Department for Transport say about Holmeside click here
Sunderland parking shambles... crisis grows
%20showingl%20loading%20bay%2011.11.06.jpg)
The latest news featured on BBC's Look North last night with the Council quoted as saying that 'when we identify mistakes we put them right...'Now let us examine this a bit further:
A mistake?
Sunderland Council told the DfT that everything had been done. All lines, signs and TROs.
We can accept an odd broken line, missing sign or the odd inconsistency in a Traffic Order BUT what we are witnessing here is a shambles on a scale that beggars belief.
Now we reveal that the Council asked for authorisation for specific signs in Park Lane Shopping Village Controlled Parking Zone ... to operate dual purpose bays ( loading and parking or loading / taxi bays).
They were allowed the authorisation BUT it came with certain conditions. One condition was that there must be no loading only legend on the highway.
Now if you check:
Derwent Street
Olive Street
Mary Street and
Park Lane
you will see that there is a legend on the highway, therefore invalidating the special authorisation.
There is no legal restriction so no contravention could occur.
Now go back to the statement ... 'when we identify mistakes we put them right...' the bit they have missed off is ... and everyone fined illegally at these locations will be entitled to their money back because if there was no legal bay then it was free parking. No-one had any authority to demand a £30 fine.
Now check the loading bays at these locations. Some are only 2m wide, some less.
In the backlanes they actually cross the pavements encouraging motorists to park illegally (ie. on the path) or park out of the bay causing an obstruction.:
Back Olive Street
Back Derwent Street (N and S)
Back Albion Place
The Council cannot do as it pleases with regard to signing.
It must do as the law requires. It has not done so at these and many other locations.
More will be revealed including what the Government Office of the North East and the Department for Transport told them... but here is a taster below...
The story on the TV last night mentioned the words 'entrapment' and 'a nice little earner.'
Not my words but the words of a Government official.
Sunderland has been using loading bays which do not conform to the minimum width requirements of 2.7m.
Have you been fined in one of these bays?
The Park Lane Village CPZ requires ALL the signs and lines to be correct before it can come into force ... this little case study above is just a fraction of the evidence that has been compiled so far ... and there is much, much more.
In the Newcastle Journal the Chief Executive stated that they became aware of the narrow bays in Holmeside in the 2006 review in January.
THE BAYS WERE NOT CHANGED UNTIL NOVEMBER!!!
AND THEN IT WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE SENT THE PHOTOGRAPHS TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT.
ENFORCEMENT HAD CONTINUED IN BAYS WHICH WERE ONLY 1.5M WIDE!!! (I know because I received a ticket, photographed it and then photographed the restrcition again after NCP had removed it after being instructed by the Council. The Council claimed it was because the signs had been stolen...but they were in both photographs! That weekend the bays were remarked).
THE BAYS WERE ALSO DANGEROUS AS FURTHER UP THE STREET THEY ENCOURAGED MOTORISTS TO PARK BEHIND ZIG ZAGS AT A PELICAN CROSSING !!!
If you have you been fined in Holmeside?
Check out this link here
Monday, December 04, 2006
Everyone must love the EU... says Tony Blair
The Mail on Sunday
By SIMON WALTERS
Last updated at 21:22pm on 2nd December 2006
A multi-million pound propaganda war to force the British people to love the European Union and Brussels bureaucrats is to be launched by Tony Blair as part of his legacy as Prime Minister, it has been revealed.
Read the full article here
By SIMON WALTERS
Last updated at 21:22pm on 2nd December 2006
A multi-million pound propaganda war to force the British people to love the European Union and Brussels bureaucrats is to be launched by Tony Blair as part of his legacy as Prime Minister, it has been revealed.
Read the full article here
'Entrapment' fear over parking plan
Council scorns 'nice earner' claim
The Journal
Monday, December 4, 2006
By Ross Smith
A civil servant told council bosses their plans for loading bays could constitute "entrapment" because vehicles would be too wide to fit inside them.
The comment is the latest controversy to beset Sunderland Council's parking system.
The council wanted to create loading bays in Front Street in Concord, Washington, which were smaller than the legal width.
But a Department for Transport official warned them on November 6 this year: "Let's not forget there are elements of potential entrapment here - ie they almost entice lorries to use bays they cannot fit into, then they can fine them for not parking within the bay. Nice little earner!!"
Government Office North-East also told Sunderland Council on November 13 that a loading bay already in place in Holmside in the city would have to be extended to the full 2.7m.
It was originally just 1.5m wide, but the council did evtend it this year to 2m.
And it emerged that other loading bays in the city were already well before the legal minimum width.
But Sunderland Council chief executive Ged Fitzgerald said yesterday: "The council totally refutes any inference that there has been any form of entrapment in the context of decriminalised parking in the city of Sunderland."
The council asked for permission for a bay two metres wide - smaller than the legal 2.7m minimum.
The council said it had not yet created the bay in Front Street, and it would comply with regulations when it did.
The loading restrictions are being created in response to traders' concerns about parking. The problem in Holmside is understood to have been uncovered by an internal review of the city's parking problems, which reported last January.
It was carried out in response to a series of blunders over signs, lines and traffic orders which forced the authority to repay thousands of pounds in wrongly collected fines.
However, the council insists its overall regime remains legally robust.
It was buoyed in its claim by a parking adjudicator's decision last month to reject 26 out of 28 appeals taken by campaigner Neil Herron, who has fought against the system.
The council recently decided to take control of on-street parking back "in house" after staff from its contractor, NCP, were filmed making racist remarks in an undercover documentary.
Northumbria Police said they were "looking into" information about the parking system in Sunderland, but had not launched a formal investigation.
The Journal
Monday, December 4, 2006
By Ross Smith
A civil servant told council bosses their plans for loading bays could constitute "entrapment" because vehicles would be too wide to fit inside them.
The comment is the latest controversy to beset Sunderland Council's parking system.
The council wanted to create loading bays in Front Street in Concord, Washington, which were smaller than the legal width.
But a Department for Transport official warned them on November 6 this year: "Let's not forget there are elements of potential entrapment here - ie they almost entice lorries to use bays they cannot fit into, then they can fine them for not parking within the bay. Nice little earner!!"
Government Office North-East also told Sunderland Council on November 13 that a loading bay already in place in Holmside in the city would have to be extended to the full 2.7m.
It was originally just 1.5m wide, but the council did evtend it this year to 2m.
And it emerged that other loading bays in the city were already well before the legal minimum width.
But Sunderland Council chief executive Ged Fitzgerald said yesterday: "The council totally refutes any inference that there has been any form of entrapment in the context of decriminalised parking in the city of Sunderland."
The council asked for permission for a bay two metres wide - smaller than the legal 2.7m minimum.
The council said it had not yet created the bay in Front Street, and it would comply with regulations when it did.
The loading restrictions are being created in response to traders' concerns about parking. The problem in Holmside is understood to have been uncovered by an internal review of the city's parking problems, which reported last January.
It was carried out in response to a series of blunders over signs, lines and traffic orders which forced the authority to repay thousands of pounds in wrongly collected fines.
However, the council insists its overall regime remains legally robust.
It was buoyed in its claim by a parking adjudicator's decision last month to reject 26 out of 28 appeals taken by campaigner Neil Herron, who has fought against the system.
The council recently decided to take control of on-street parking back "in house" after staff from its contractor, NCP, were filmed making racist remarks in an undercover documentary.
Northumbria Police said they were "looking into" information about the parking system in Sunderland, but had not launched a formal investigation.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Another fine mess
100s of city motorists could be let off car parking fines after legal test case
Milton Keynes News
by Craig Lewis
Hundreds of drivers could be let off their parking fines on a legal technicality.
The council could lose out on tens of thousands of pounds of parking revenue as a result of a decision by the National Parking Adjudication Service (NPAS).
Anyone caught parking illegally is subject to a £60 fine, halved to £30 if paid within 14 days.
This means if 500 tickets have to be scrapped the council will lose out on £30,000.
NPAS’ ruling came about after a London motorist took Barnet Council to court over a parking ticket as there was uncertainty if the date of issue was the same as the date of the contravention.
The court ruled that in the future tickets must include both dates and that outstanding tickets which didn’t would be invalid.
NPAS decided that if anyone challenged a ticket that didn’t include both dates it would rule in favour of the individual and not the issuing authority.
Any tickets already paid would not have to be re-visited as liability has already been admitted.
Officers in Milton Keynes Council’s parking department were hopeful the decision would not apply to the city.
Parking regulations in MK start at 6am and finish at 6pm, meaning there is no chance of the date of contravention being different to the date of issue. But NPAS insist the ruling does apply.
On hearing of NPAS’ decision on August 29 the council changed its tickets to include both dates, but it is has been left with hundreds of unpaid tickets.
And council transport boss Cllr Chris Williams is frustrated many motorists who parked illegally could now get off scott free.
He said: “Some people who park badly are going to get away with it.
“We have decided to err on the side of caution and if we have any doubt about a ticket we will write it off.” And he admitted the council may eventually have to write off all outstanding tickets.
It has already ceased legal action against anyone who hasn’t paid their fine while the review takes place.
“We are currently going through many hundreds and we will write off the majority,” he said.
“I want to look at each case on its merits and we will cancel the tickets if there is any doubt.” He added the review is not seen as a loss of revenue as no income has been received.
“The council doesn’t see parking tickets as revenue - rather as a method to encourage people to park properly,” he added.
“This is not about revenue, but putting things right.”
Anyone who has a query over an outstanding parking ticket should call the council’s parking team on 01908 691691.
Milton Keynes News
by Craig Lewis
Hundreds of drivers could be let off their parking fines on a legal technicality.
The council could lose out on tens of thousands of pounds of parking revenue as a result of a decision by the National Parking Adjudication Service (NPAS).
Anyone caught parking illegally is subject to a £60 fine, halved to £30 if paid within 14 days.
This means if 500 tickets have to be scrapped the council will lose out on £30,000.
NPAS’ ruling came about after a London motorist took Barnet Council to court over a parking ticket as there was uncertainty if the date of issue was the same as the date of the contravention.
The court ruled that in the future tickets must include both dates and that outstanding tickets which didn’t would be invalid.
NPAS decided that if anyone challenged a ticket that didn’t include both dates it would rule in favour of the individual and not the issuing authority.
Any tickets already paid would not have to be re-visited as liability has already been admitted.
Officers in Milton Keynes Council’s parking department were hopeful the decision would not apply to the city.
Parking regulations in MK start at 6am and finish at 6pm, meaning there is no chance of the date of contravention being different to the date of issue. But NPAS insist the ruling does apply.
On hearing of NPAS’ decision on August 29 the council changed its tickets to include both dates, but it is has been left with hundreds of unpaid tickets.
And council transport boss Cllr Chris Williams is frustrated many motorists who parked illegally could now get off scott free.
He said: “Some people who park badly are going to get away with it.
“We have decided to err on the side of caution and if we have any doubt about a ticket we will write it off.” And he admitted the council may eventually have to write off all outstanding tickets.
It has already ceased legal action against anyone who hasn’t paid their fine while the review takes place.
“We are currently going through many hundreds and we will write off the majority,” he said.
“I want to look at each case on its merits and we will cancel the tickets if there is any doubt.” He added the review is not seen as a loss of revenue as no income has been received.
“The council doesn’t see parking tickets as revenue - rather as a method to encourage people to park properly,” he added.
“This is not about revenue, but putting things right.”
Anyone who has a query over an outstanding parking ticket should call the council’s parking team on 01908 691691.
Chauffeur’s fury over £150 BP parking fine ... Civil Enforcement at it again
Herts and Essex News
Dad tells of street threats
A ROYSTON chauffeur is “outraged” after receiving a £150 fine for parking at a BP garage.
Colin O’Dell, of Echo Hill, stopped in a designated space for the café while he ate food purchased from the Gatwick North BP Connect garage.
Unaware of the 20- minute limit, Mr O’Dell spent 35 minutes eating his food and drinking a coffee in his Lexus limo.
A month later, he received the £150 fine from BP’s contractors Civil Enforcement Ltd.
Mr O’Dell, of Pinstripe Corporate Travel, said: “They lure you in with their advertising for the Wild Bean Coffee shop, which invites you to ‘chill out’, and they have seating inside.
“I saw no warning sign at the time to tell me I had just 20 minutes to finish a hot coffee and at no point was I warned by staff about this fine.”
In a statement, BP said the 20-minute time limit was clearly displayed on the forecourt, at the café and by the tills.
The company, which announced profits of £11bn earlier this year, said the restrictions were introduced at Gatwick North and South garages to cut congestion as motorists waited to pick-up arriving passengers.
Mr O’Dell said he has no intention of paying up and will appeal against the fine.
Dad tells of street threats
A ROYSTON chauffeur is “outraged” after receiving a £150 fine for parking at a BP garage.
Colin O’Dell, of Echo Hill, stopped in a designated space for the café while he ate food purchased from the Gatwick North BP Connect garage.
Unaware of the 20- minute limit, Mr O’Dell spent 35 minutes eating his food and drinking a coffee in his Lexus limo.
A month later, he received the £150 fine from BP’s contractors Civil Enforcement Ltd.
Mr O’Dell, of Pinstripe Corporate Travel, said: “They lure you in with their advertising for the Wild Bean Coffee shop, which invites you to ‘chill out’, and they have seating inside.
“I saw no warning sign at the time to tell me I had just 20 minutes to finish a hot coffee and at no point was I warned by staff about this fine.”
In a statement, BP said the 20-minute time limit was clearly displayed on the forecourt, at the café and by the tills.
The company, which announced profits of £11bn earlier this year, said the restrictions were introduced at Gatwick North and South garages to cut congestion as motorists waited to pick-up arriving passengers.
Mr O’Dell said he has no intention of paying up and will appeal against the fine.
Fined driver takes on council and wins ... another Council falls
In March 2006 I predicted a national moratorium for drivers who had unpaid non-compliant PCNs.
The dominoes are toppling ... like nine pins ;-)
Havant and West Sussex
A MOTORIST took on a council over a parking fine – and won.
Stephen Taylor was fined £30 after his ticket slipped down the dashboard of his car.
Determined not to pay up, he took Havant Borough Council to the National Parking Adjudication Service.
And the motorist is today celebrating after the panel found in his favour.
It ruled that Mr Taylor, from Chichester, proved he had bought a ticket when he was fined in Emsworth in June.
He said: 'I appealed because I just thought they were being really petty.
'I have never failed to pay in more than 10 years of parking here.'
During the hearing the panel also found that thousands of parking fines handed out by Havant Borough Council were invalid.
Fines issued failed to include two dates – when the offence took place and when the fine was issued.
After a High Court ruling in August both dates must appear on the fine so the motorist – who has 28 days to appeal – knows how much time they have to challenge it.
Immediately after the ruling Havant council changed its parking fines.
Even though the authority had previously been handing out thousands of illegal tickets, it will not have to repay the fines.
Once a fine has been paid an individual motorist loses their right to appeal.
Gerry Facenna, a barrister who works for Monkton Chambers, said: 'Any tickets which failed to have two dates on them even before the High Court ruling are still considered invalid.
'In terms of challenging it, people have a very limited time, 28 days I think.
'Those who have already paid are unlikely to be able to claim it back.'
Havant council said it had changed its parking fines on the day of the High Court ruling.
Council leader David Gillett didn't want to comment on the issue, but a council spokeswoman said: 'The public can be advised that action against drivers who park in a thoughtless, dangerous or improper manner will be tackled by the council.'
The dominoes are toppling ... like nine pins ;-)
Havant and West Sussex
A MOTORIST took on a council over a parking fine – and won.
Stephen Taylor was fined £30 after his ticket slipped down the dashboard of his car.
Determined not to pay up, he took Havant Borough Council to the National Parking Adjudication Service.
And the motorist is today celebrating after the panel found in his favour.
It ruled that Mr Taylor, from Chichester, proved he had bought a ticket when he was fined in Emsworth in June.
He said: 'I appealed because I just thought they were being really petty.
'I have never failed to pay in more than 10 years of parking here.'
During the hearing the panel also found that thousands of parking fines handed out by Havant Borough Council were invalid.
Fines issued failed to include two dates – when the offence took place and when the fine was issued.
After a High Court ruling in August both dates must appear on the fine so the motorist – who has 28 days to appeal – knows how much time they have to challenge it.
Immediately after the ruling Havant council changed its parking fines.
Even though the authority had previously been handing out thousands of illegal tickets, it will not have to repay the fines.
Once a fine has been paid an individual motorist loses their right to appeal.
Gerry Facenna, a barrister who works for Monkton Chambers, said: 'Any tickets which failed to have two dates on them even before the High Court ruling are still considered invalid.
'In terms of challenging it, people have a very limited time, 28 days I think.
'Those who have already paid are unlikely to be able to claim it back.'
Havant council said it had changed its parking fines on the day of the High Court ruling.
Council leader David Gillett didn't want to comment on the issue, but a council spokeswoman said: 'The public can be advised that action against drivers who park in a thoughtless, dangerous or improper manner will be tackled by the council.'
The fine mess continues ... now Redcar and Cleveland and Stockton Councils in trouble
Today we make front page of the Northern Echo
Car parking fines may be cancelled
TWO North-East councils could cancel thousands of unpaid parking tickets as a result of a court ruling, The Northern Echo has learnt.
Stockton Borough Council is taking legal advice over whether parking charge notices it issued during the course of a year were invalid.
Last night, it emerged that Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council was putting on hold outstanding fines from a two-and-a-half-year period. Both have apparently fallen foul of a judge's ruling that parking tickets must carry on them the date of issue and the date on which the offence was committed.
Stockton altered its procedures in September, but could still be forced to write off an estimated 3,600 outstanding tickets, along with the tens of thousands of pounds in fines that would have resulted from their payment.
Redcar, meanwhile, is trying to establish how many outstanding fines are affected by what it called a "technicality".
However, in line with other similarly-affected councils, it said motorists who had already paid would not get their money back, since they are thought to have accepted liability.
Last night, parking campaigner Neil Herron, who has uncovered mistakes in parking enforcement at Sunderland City Council, said:
"There is a domino effect that is hitting every local council that has failed to correctly draft parking charge notices.
"Effectively, an amnesty has been created for all unpaid parking tickets that are non-compliant.
"We predicted this several months ago, and now the penny is starting to drop in bucketloads.
"This is not a technicality, as local authorities are trying to have us believe, it is a fundamental legal requirement and they have failed to apply the law correctly."
The issue hinges on a case, heard in August in the High Court, in London, when a judge ruled that Barnet Council had acted incorrectly in only including the date of issue on its parking charge notices.
It was forced to cancel a number of outstanding "old style" penalty charge notices and lost about £87,000.
Subsequently, a number of councils that did not include both dates have been forced into making changes to their ticketing arrangements.
Stockton council it is yet to confirm whether it will cancel unpaid tickets.
A spokeswoman said: "In September 2005, it became the council's responsibility for issuing penalty charge notices to vehicles parked in contravention of traffic regulations.
"The council's legal service is considering the possibility that tickets issued from that date may not be valid due to a technicality."
Redcar and Cleveland council said: "From the start of this financial year, all parking contravention notices issued have been in compliance with the High Court ruling.
"We were keen to act in a fair and equitable manner and have been advised to put all outstanding payments on hold. We are in the process of establishing the total number of unpaid fines affected by this technicality."
Car parking fines may be cancelled
TWO North-East councils could cancel thousands of unpaid parking tickets as a result of a court ruling, The Northern Echo has learnt.
Stockton Borough Council is taking legal advice over whether parking charge notices it issued during the course of a year were invalid.
Last night, it emerged that Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council was putting on hold outstanding fines from a two-and-a-half-year period. Both have apparently fallen foul of a judge's ruling that parking tickets must carry on them the date of issue and the date on which the offence was committed.
Stockton altered its procedures in September, but could still be forced to write off an estimated 3,600 outstanding tickets, along with the tens of thousands of pounds in fines that would have resulted from their payment.
Redcar, meanwhile, is trying to establish how many outstanding fines are affected by what it called a "technicality".
However, in line with other similarly-affected councils, it said motorists who had already paid would not get their money back, since they are thought to have accepted liability.
Last night, parking campaigner Neil Herron, who has uncovered mistakes in parking enforcement at Sunderland City Council, said:
"There is a domino effect that is hitting every local council that has failed to correctly draft parking charge notices.
"Effectively, an amnesty has been created for all unpaid parking tickets that are non-compliant.
"We predicted this several months ago, and now the penny is starting to drop in bucketloads.
"This is not a technicality, as local authorities are trying to have us believe, it is a fundamental legal requirement and they have failed to apply the law correctly."
The issue hinges on a case, heard in August in the High Court, in London, when a judge ruled that Barnet Council had acted incorrectly in only including the date of issue on its parking charge notices.
It was forced to cancel a number of outstanding "old style" penalty charge notices and lost about £87,000.
Subsequently, a number of councils that did not include both dates have been forced into making changes to their ticketing arrangements.
Stockton council it is yet to confirm whether it will cancel unpaid tickets.
A spokeswoman said: "In September 2005, it became the council's responsibility for issuing penalty charge notices to vehicles parked in contravention of traffic regulations.
"The council's legal service is considering the possibility that tickets issued from that date may not be valid due to a technicality."
Redcar and Cleveland council said: "From the start of this financial year, all parking contravention notices issued have been in compliance with the High Court ruling.
"We were keen to act in a fair and equitable manner and have been advised to put all outstanding payments on hold. We are in the process of establishing the total number of unpaid fines affected by this technicality."
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Now there are spy cameras at rubbish tips
Is the increase in the new stealth tax because we are collapsing the decriminalised parking cash-cow?
Story below creates a problem ... who identifies the driver?
Mail on Sunday
By Jason Lewis
CCTV system will record your car's number plate and what you are throwing out
Spy cameras are being installed at household rubbish dumps to check what residents are throwing away and to fine those breaking recycling rules.
The sophisticated CCTV systems are capable of reading and storing car number plates to identify who is using the dump, how often, and what they are disposing of.
But human rights groups condemned the surveillance as an 'unjustifiable' way of tracking people's movements.
The Big Brother-style tactics come as the Government puts pressure on local councils to cut the amount of rubbish sent to landfill sites. But the fear is that extra surveillance will only lead to more illegal fly-tipping.
The Mail on Sunday has already exposed the electronic 'bugs' secretly planted in hundreds of thousands of household wheelie bins.
Now sophisticated internet-controlled cameras are being installed at waste sites across the country. Officially they are to improve security, but council chiefs admit they will also monitor who is visiting the tips.
Several councils also say they will use camera evidence to mount prosecutions - raising fears more householders will be taken to court over what they throw away.
Cameras have been installed in Buckinghamshire, Croydon, Somerset, Dundee and Hertfordshire, and more councils are planning to follow suit after the £80million-a-year Waste and Resources Action Programme quango suggested they use CCTV to 'check vehicles visiting dumps repeatedly'.
In Hertfordshire about 30 cameras have been installed at dumps, allowing council officials to check vehicle registration plates.
The county's assistant waste manager Mark Simpkins told a trade magazine: "The monitoring systems are invaluable. We use them to analyse...who is using the centre, what is being thrown away and how often." But last night his boss John Wood dismissed privacy concerns, saying: "I have not made the connection between our household waste sites and the wider debate about Big Brother."
However, local councillor Pat Whittaker said: "We have been campaigning for CCTV to guard against street robberies and anti-social behaviour - we do not need it at the local tip. These Big Brother tactics might discourage people from taking their rubbish for proper disposal."
Buckinghamshire and Somerset and County Councils have also installed number plate recognition systems at their dumps. Buckinghamshire council documents admit: "This may lead to investigation and possibly prosecution'.
Cameras have been imposed after the Government last year introduced a penalty of £150 a tonne on local authorities that dump too much waste in landfill sites.
Last night, Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said: "CCTV should only be used to protect high security installations - not to monitor a dump.
"This whole area is very poorly regulated. When you install an automatic number plate recognition system you are tracking people's movements.
"You need proper justification before you track people. I don't see how it is proportionate to use that kind of surveillance in the context of a recycling centre."
Story below creates a problem ... who identifies the driver?
Mail on Sunday
By Jason Lewis
CCTV system will record your car's number plate and what you are throwing out
Spy cameras are being installed at household rubbish dumps to check what residents are throwing away and to fine those breaking recycling rules.
The sophisticated CCTV systems are capable of reading and storing car number plates to identify who is using the dump, how often, and what they are disposing of.
But human rights groups condemned the surveillance as an 'unjustifiable' way of tracking people's movements.
The Big Brother-style tactics come as the Government puts pressure on local councils to cut the amount of rubbish sent to landfill sites. But the fear is that extra surveillance will only lead to more illegal fly-tipping.
The Mail on Sunday has already exposed the electronic 'bugs' secretly planted in hundreds of thousands of household wheelie bins.
Now sophisticated internet-controlled cameras are being installed at waste sites across the country. Officially they are to improve security, but council chiefs admit they will also monitor who is visiting the tips.
Several councils also say they will use camera evidence to mount prosecutions - raising fears more householders will be taken to court over what they throw away.
Cameras have been installed in Buckinghamshire, Croydon, Somerset, Dundee and Hertfordshire, and more councils are planning to follow suit after the £80million-a-year Waste and Resources Action Programme quango suggested they use CCTV to 'check vehicles visiting dumps repeatedly'.
In Hertfordshire about 30 cameras have been installed at dumps, allowing council officials to check vehicle registration plates.
The county's assistant waste manager Mark Simpkins told a trade magazine: "The monitoring systems are invaluable. We use them to analyse...who is using the centre, what is being thrown away and how often." But last night his boss John Wood dismissed privacy concerns, saying: "I have not made the connection between our household waste sites and the wider debate about Big Brother."
However, local councillor Pat Whittaker said: "We have been campaigning for CCTV to guard against street robberies and anti-social behaviour - we do not need it at the local tip. These Big Brother tactics might discourage people from taking their rubbish for proper disposal."
Buckinghamshire and Somerset and County Councils have also installed number plate recognition systems at their dumps. Buckinghamshire council documents admit: "This may lead to investigation and possibly prosecution'.
Cameras have been imposed after the Government last year introduced a penalty of £150 a tonne on local authorities that dump too much waste in landfill sites.
Last night, Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights group Liberty, said: "CCTV should only be used to protect high security installations - not to monitor a dump.
"This whole area is very poorly regulated. When you install an automatic number plate recognition system you are tracking people's movements.
"You need proper justification before you track people. I don't see how it is proportionate to use that kind of surveillance in the context of a recycling centre."
Friday, November 24, 2006
BBC Reports Sunderland Labour Sleaze Row
Labour in £2m party funding row"The Labour party says it is not aware of any police investigation into subscription arrangements between Labour councillors and itself."
"Northumbria police confirmed they have received a complaint from Mr Sidaway. "
Read the rest of BBC story here
If anyone wishes to bring the Police investigation to Tony's attention to keep the 'pretty straight kinda guy' up to speed then click here to e-mail him.
I would suggest that if anyone else is concerned that their Council Tax is being used to illegally fund a political party then they too should complain to the relevant authorities including the Police and the Audit Commission.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
