The Secret Olympic Corporate Tax Haven Exposed

Written by Watt Tyler

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

The £625million Olympic Stadium virtually given away to West Ham United Football Club.

The £625million Olympic Stadium virtually given away to West Ham United Football Club.Another dodgy deal at our expense?

Along with many other British people I watched the London 2012 Olympic Games on television – I didn’t have the time, money or inclination to travel to London so would have had a very similar experience if it had been held in Paris. Except we wouldn’t have spent £10 to £12 billion hosting it if it had been held in Paris – about £150 to £200 for every man woman and child in Britain. Anyway these huge Games must surely have generated some tax revenue? Well apparently not.

Corporate And Personal Tax Avoidance Agreements Are Now Part Of Bidding For The Olympic Games.

No tax was paid on ANY earnings related to the Olympic Games. How was this possible in a country like the UK, you might ask, where you pay your taxes? The reality is that setting up tax avoidance legislation has now become a major criteria for hosting international competitions such as the Olympics – no tax free deal means no point even bidding.

Mo Farah didn't pay any UK taxes in 2012 - did you?

Mo Farah didn’t pay any UK taxes in 2012 – did you?

Big name athletes such as Mo Farah, and the organisers, have applied pressure to potential host nations to ensure that winnings, and profits, are not taxed.

In July and August in 2012 Stratford,  London, became a temporary tax haven. Millions of pounds were channelled through foreign subsidiary companies operating in the area before it left these shores for the bank accounts of  shareholders across the World.

Logo of the 2012 zionist games.

Logo of the 2012 zionist games.

Zero Tax Or We’ll Go Elsewhere!

Without a zero tax deal the IOC would simply take their zionist roadshow elsewhere. The new zero tax rules ushered in as part of the winning Team GB bid included ‘a temporary exemption from UK Corporation Tax and UK Income Tax for certain non-resident companies’.

The tax legislation was written to include corporate partner organisations such as McDonald’s and Visa. McDonald’s had a near monopoly on selling food and Visa did have a total monopoly on all venues and ticket payment methods – earning them both a tax free fortune.

I'd be lovin' it if I paid no tax on earnings.

I’d be lovin’ it if I paid no tax on my earnings.

The HMRC said “For the purpose of this exemption a London 2012 Partner is an organisation that is supplying services to LOCOG in return for the right to market and advertise themselves or their products for commercial purposes by reference to their association with the Games. It includes a company connected with the Commercial Delivery Partner.”

Thousands of foreign Nationals were exempt from taxation, from competitors to media workers ( journalists, technicians and producers) to members of official Games bodies and other officials (including judges and referees) along with all the athletes.

So We Got Ripped Off As Usual By The Corporations?

Many of the corporate sponsors are no strangers to the more traditional tax havens. The table below shows the London Olympic partner companies and the subsidiaries they have set up in tax havens. British Airways appeared not to have subsidiaries in any tax havens.

So How Much Money Is Involved?

Currently the IOC is projected to make £2.7 billion from the London Olympics and the total amount of lost UK tax revenues is estimated to be over £600 million.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is based in Switzerland and enjoys very low tax rates there. Also it is totally exempt from paying any tax in the UK on earnings from the London Games.

LOCOG itself (the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games) is also exempt from all taxation.

LOCOG is chaired by Paul Deighton, a former Chief Executive of Goldman Sachs.  LOCOG itself is also using employee benefit trusts, often registered in tax havens, to pay staff bonuses.

With the amount that LOCOG would have been liable for, the total tax revenue lost is approx. £700 million. Add to that the potential tax income lost from the profits of corporate partners.

Lost Tax Revenue

So, despite using London’s public roads and other infrastructure, paid for by British taxpayers, those financially profiting from the games and working at them were exempt from all UK tax.

The credit rating agency Moody’s, has said that “Overall, we think the Games are unlikely to provide a substantial macro-economic boost to the UK during 2012. However, a number of individual sectors and creditors [banks] look well placed to benefit from the short-term fillip that the Games should provide.” Their report concludes that those who will benefit most financially from the games are the corporate sponsors.

This brinkmanship tactic of ‘make it tax free or we’ll take our business elsewhere’ has long been used by the financial elites in tax havens. It is now being extended to countries with usually strong democratic legislators via major sporting events from the FIFA World Cup to the London Olympics. Some of the laws have already been extended to cover the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014, and this process of relaxing tax rules looks set to continue with costs borne, as ever, by tax payers.

The Great Tax Credit Swindle – Global Greed Inc. As Usual

Written by Cigpapers

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

What Are Tax Credits And Who Started Them?

Tax credits ( or wage top ups ) are when the Government top up the wages of low income workers with taxpayers’ money. They were started under New Labour by Blair and Brown.

Gordon Brown and New Labour started Tax Credits which now transfer £30billion per year from the taxpayer to big business.

Gordon Brown and New Labour started Tax Credits which now transfer £30billion per year from the taxpayer to big business.

So Why Is It A Swindle?

As usual this swindle is based on transferring taxpayers’ money to Global Greed Inc. who get subisdised workers, in return the workers have the humiliation of begging to the State after working all week. The corrupt politicians get their pay offs later in multi-million pound consultancy fees. It was a very easy New Labour pinko/socialist cover story to describe this as helping low paid workers, instead of having a decent minimum wage that Global Greed Inc. would have had to pay themselves. In effect Tesco get taxpayer subsidised workers.

Did Lord Levy come up with the PFI fraud and the Tax Credit swindle? The cover story was pure genius.

Did Lord Levy come up with the PFI fraud and the Tax Credit swindle? The Tax Credit swindle cover story of “helping low paid workers” was pure marketing genius.

So How Much Does This Cost Taxpayers?

Next to the PFI fraud this is just pocket money for the banks and Global Greed Inc. The cost of Tax Credits ( taxpayer subsidised workers ) was just under £30 Billion in the tax year 2012 to 2013. That is about £500 taken from every man, woman and child in Great Britain to subsidise big business. The cost is even more though because we are borrowing this money from the Banks with interest.

Blair and Miliband - do these really work for your interests or their big business paymasters'?

Blair and Miliband – do these two really work for your interests or their big business paymasters’?

If The Solution Is A Higher Minimum Wage Wouldn’t That Lead To Price Inflation?

That is the argument that Global Greed Inc. , the Banks and their puppet Politicians will give. However that is based on the assumption that  businesses set their prices on some sort of socialist “fair price” principle. In fact businesses set their prices as high as they can without starting to lose business and therefore profits falling i.e. Starbucks would already be charging more for their coffees if they could without sales falling. Some small local, labour intensive businesses may have to put up their prices slightly. But should people get a taxpayer subsidised car valet anyway?

Isn't it a Communist State where everyone is paid by the State?

Isn’t it a Communist State where everyone is paid by the State?

The tax credit swindle is dwarfed by the PFI fraud pulled off by New Labour:

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/the-private-finance-initiative-pfi-fraud/

How To Kickstart The UK Economy – At Zero Cost To The 99% Of Us

Originally written by M. Meacher

When today even the EU’s leading economic officials Manuel Barroso and Olli Rehn are openly urging growth policies rather than further retrenchment, the game’s surely up. But before he takes a very deep breath, it’s worth bearing in mind that a £40bn programme of infrastructure works and housebuilding could be generated at no cost to the exchequer at all.

Manuel Barroso

Manuel Barroso

The untapped source for this funding would come from taxation of the seriously rich. This group can be variously defined as stretching from the top 0.003% of the population (the richest thousand persons) to the top 10%. Whichever category is used, the wealth of the ultra-rich is far, far greater than most people realise – which may explain why it is never discussed in this era of austerity.

British workers pay has dropped for the last 30 years.

British workers pay has dropped for the last 30 years.

According to the annual Sunday Times Rich List, the richest 1,000 persons now sit atop of £414bn, a sum more than three times the size of the entire UK budget deficit. The richest 1% of the population, about 300,000 persons with an income of more than £3,000 a week, are estimated to possess wealth of about £1tn. The richest 10% control wealth of about £4tn. To put these figures in perspective, Britain’s total GDP is £1.45tn.

443680_1

Consider first that minuscule group in the stratosphere at the top, Britain’s thousand richest. In 1997 they held assets of £99bn, but they took full advantage of New Labour’s being “intensely relaxed about people becoming filthy rich” to nearly quadruple this to £336bn by 2010. That process of gargantuan enrichment now means that in order to get access to this exclusive club, one needs personally to command assets of at least £450m to get into the top 200, £750m to get into the richest 100, and no less than £1.4bn to break into the top 50.

443680_1

It’s not only that the very rich have colossal wealth, they also overwhelmingly monopolise it. The richest 1% of the population own a quarter of total UK wealth, and the richest half control no less than 94% of total wealth. Ownership of land is even more skewed: 69% of it is owned by 0.3% of the population.

443680_1

Yet in the absence of a wealth tax, a mansions tax, a land value tax, or a supertax on excess gains, the super-rich are being required to make hardly any contribution at all to deficit reduction, even though many of them were directly involved in causing the financial crash in the first place. That is even more remarkable when there has been a real terms 6% drop in the income of the population as a whole since the 2008 collapse, yet over the same period the gains of the richest 1,000 persons escalated by no less than £155bn, considerably more than the current total UK deficit.

People have starved to death in Britain.

People have starved to death in Britain.

The most recent incomes data shows this trend is continuing or even growing. Data published in January showed that the bottom tenth of earners got a 0.1% rise in pay in the previous year (that is, they had to take a real terms pay cut of nearly 4%) while over the same period the rise for the top FTSE 100 directors was 49%, nearly 500 times greater. The average annual pay of FTSE 100 chief executives is now about £4.5m, which works out at £84,615 a week. This compares with their low-paid workers on about £240 a week, a ratio of 352:1.

443680_1

Even this is not the whole story. The very rich also largely monopolise the system of tax reliefs. In the case of pensions, this amounts to £21bn a year, of which two thirds is concentrated on the top 10% of the population. Equally, tax avoidance and evasion is very much the perk of the extremely rich, who command the armies of accountants and lawyers in order to organise it on an industrial scale, which is reckoned to cost the taxpayer £25bn a year.

443680_1

What, then, should be done? In the short term, the most feasible approach is to impose a capital gains tax charge at the current rate of 28% on the topmost layers of wealth, the £155bn gains amassed by the 0.003% over the last three years. That would yield £43bn, more than enough to generate the public investment to create 1.5 million jobs over the next two years. This could then steadily be extended to the remainder of the top 1%, which would provide the funds to widen and deepen the early recovery.

443680_1

A wealth tax and land value tax, the details of which would have to be carefully drafted, should then follow in the medium term, and would achieve several purposes. They would resuscitate a public sector ravaged by the Tory ideological assault, curtail the grossest excesses of inequality that have disfigured the last three decades, and lay the foundations for an industrial and technological revival without which British living standards cannot be sustained. And all this without burdening the remaining 99% of the population.

Nationalist Trades Union Congress NTUC

Nationalist Trades Union Congress by Cigpapers

British Workers must unite.

British Workers must unite against Globalisation.

The need for a Nationalist Trades Union Congress is now becoming apparent to Nationalists in Britain to replace the Trades Union Congress following its hijacking by Marxists/Globalists ( Union boss Bob Crow, the General Secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers and a member of the General Council of the TUC has Publically admitted he is a Marxist). Under the Marxist/Globalist control of the TUC, British Workers have seen their wages and living standards decrease in real terms for the last 30+ years. This has mostly been caused by the mass immigration and de-industrialisation supported by the TUC both politically and financially.

The TUC has links to organised paedophilia.

The TUC has links to organised paedophilia.

The TUC was founded in the 1860s. The United Kingdom Alliance of Organised Trades, founded in Sheffield, Yorkshire in 1866, was the immediate forerunner of the TUC, although efforts to expand local unions into regional or national organisations date back at least forty years earlier; in 1822, John Gast formed a “Committee of the Useful Classes”, sometimes described as an early national trades council.
However, the first TUC meeting was not held until 1868 when the Manchester and Salford Trades Council convened the founding meeting in the Manchester Mechanics’ Institute (on what is now Princess St. and was then David St. ;the building is at no. 103).
The Trades Union Congress (TUC) is a national trade union centre, a federation of trade unions in the United Kingdom, representing the majority of trade unions. There are fifty-eight affiliated unions with a total of about 6.5 million members, around half of whom are represented by Unite or UNISON.

The TUC have supported War Crimes and multiculturalism.

The TUC have supported War Crimes, genocide and multiculturalism.

The TUC’s decision-making body is the Annual Congress, which takes place in September. Between congresses decisions are made by the General Council, which meets every two months. An Executive Committee is elected by the Council from its members. The senior paid official of the TUC is the General Secretary, currently Brendan Barber. It was announced in July 2012 that Frances O’Grady will be the next General Secretary. The TUC is affiliated to the International Trades Union Congress.

The TUC financed Harriet Harman.

The TUC financed Harriet Harman.

The TUC, and its Union Members, is the major source of funds for the Labour Party in Britain. However with Nationalist Unions now starting up there is a need for a Nationalist Trades Union Congress as a real alternative for British Workers and their Unions to affiliate to.
Personally I think a new NTUC should not be solely affiliated to one Nationalist Party or Group , but should be supportive politically and financially of all Nationalists whenever it can be.
There would obviously be a public call from a new NTUC for all Union Members in the UK to be given a free vote on whether to affiliate with the TUC or the NTUC. I would be demanding a vote at my Union and believe we would affiliate with NTUC, given a free vote of all Members.

Mike Whitby - first General Secretary of the NTUC?

Mike Whitby – first General Secretary of the NTUC?

The NTUC would not be expensive or difficult to set up, and in my humble opinion someone of the calibre of Mike Whitby would be an excellent first General Secretary.

Latin Monetary Union 1865 to 1927 – The Political Disaster That Led To World War One

Latin Monetary Union 1865 to 1927 by Cigpapers

The Political Disaster That Led To World War One

Napoleon the Third

Napoleon the Third

There has been a Monetary Union of European Nations in the past – the consequences were as predictable as they were catastrophic and horrific for ordinary People and the Nations involved.
Zionist bankers had financed the 1851 coup d’etat that had re-established the Bonapartists in France under Napoleon III. The payback for the Zionist bankers was Napoleon III’s support for the Latin Monetary Union. It is also believed that Napoleon III had run up huge personal debts with Zionist bankers while in exile in Italy, Switzerland, Spain and Germany.

Zionist bankers.

Zionist bankers.

In 1865, France, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium established the Latin Monetary Union under the direction of Napoleon III, making their currencies interchangeable under the orders of Zionist bankers including the Rothschilds.

11111

This new monetary union was forced on the people against their will and led to a fall in wages, and a rise in prices across the Nations involved. Conversely countries like the UK and the Scandanavian Countries who stayed out enjoyed an economic boom and a rising lifestyle for their People. It was this economic boom for Workers that led to, among other things, the establishment of professional football teams, whose income was derived from the British Working Class having newly found access to “spare“ income. The growing British Middle Classes also enjoyed an economic boom leading to investing in industry, business, education , arts , parks , philanthropy etc.

Britain prospered outside the Latin Monetary Union.

Britain prospered outside the Latin Monetary Union.

The four nations ( France, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium) were joined by Spain and Greece in 1868, and Romania, Bulgaria, Venezuela, Serbia and San Marino in 1889. In 1904, the Danish West Indies were also placed on this standard but did not join the Union itself. When Albania emerged from the Ottoman Empire as an independent nation in 1912 it also joined. Greece was forced to leave in 1910 following food riots in Athens, however Greece rejoined in 1912 following bailouts and increased austerity measures.
The stagnation of the economies in the Latin Monetary Union led to poverty, a rise in Nationalism and eventually the outbreak of World War One in Serbia, which soon spread across Europe and then Worldwide.

World War One.

World War One.

World War I (1914-1918) brought differing rates of inflation to these countries, forcing a dissolution of the union at massive expense. The Latin Monetary Union formally ended in 1927.
It is believed the Latin Monetary Union led directly to the deaths of around 17million People in World War One. There were over 17 million deaths and 20 million wounded ranking it among the deadliest conflicts in human history.
The Latin Monetary Union also caused lack of opportunity and poverty for hundreds of millions of People across the World.
However the Latin Monetary Union was a massive earner for Zionist bankers who raked in trillions of pounds of Public money.
It is believed by leading economists that the Latin Monetary Union held economic and social progress back across Europe by about twenty to forty years.

11111

Anyone recognise this story line yet?

BBC/ISLINGTON/JERSEY CHILD SEX ABUSE CARE HOME SCANDAL

BBC/ISLINGTON/JERSEY CSA CARE HOME SCANDAL by Cigpapers

Islington Borough of London

Islington Borough of London

Islington is a borough of London that was formed as a Borough Council in 1965. At the start of the 1970s Islington Council ran 12 Care Homes for Children who were in the care of the State for various reasons. The Council was run by politically correct multiculturalists of the Labour Party.At the start of the 1970s there were several militant groups in London promoting sexual deviancies , among these were the Gay Liberation Front , the Paedophile Information Exchange and Paedophile Action for Liberation. GLF , PIE and PAL were all funded by the Government via the Scottish Minorities Groups and shared many members as well as their London address.

Join the campaign.

Join the campaign.

The GLF demanded that Islington Care Homes were handed over to its’ members to run , and any political resistance was met with accusations of homophobia. GLF , PIE and PAL were all being represented by the National Council for Civil Liberties at the time who were lobbying the Government for them, and threatening legal action against any resistance to their take over of Islington Care Homes. GLF were in complete control of Islington Care Homes by about 1974.

GLF Founder Member Peter Tatchell

GLF Founder Member Peter Tatchell

Quite predictably Islington Care Homes soon became the centre of an international Child rape/pornography/torture and murder ring. Virtually all Children who went through Islington Care Homes between 1974 and 1997 were seriously sexually abused , raped , tortured and in some cases murdered. Thousands of vulnerable British mostly Working Class Children were repeatedly raped and it is estimated hundreds are still missing presumed murdered. In one case a 12 year old boy and his six year old sister were taken in to Care when their parents died in a car crash and the boy was made to repeatedly rape his sister for the gratification of paedophiles, including senior Labour Politicians and BBC Executives.

Leader of Islington Council Margaret Hodge

Leader of Islington Council Margaret Hodge – a close friend of Tony Blair who later made her Minister For Children.

At the start of the 1970s Islington Council started trafficking Children to the Haute de la Garenne Care Home in Jersey, and the Casa Pia orphanages in Portugal. It is believed the non compliant Children , or ones who had parents making complaints , were taken to Jersey for rape, torture and murder. The more attractive/compliant Children were taken to Portugal for Eurocrat paedophile networks. Even though hundreds of Children were shipped to Jersey and Portugal there is no record of any ever returning.

Sir Jimmy Savile at Haute de la Garenne Care Home in Jersey he always denied visiting.

Sir Jimmy Savile at Haute de la Garenne Care Home in Jersey he always denied visiting.

      Jimmy Savile’s nephew , Guy Marsden , remembers attending “Showbiz Parties” at large private houses round London in the 1970s run by BBC executives with his Uncle Savile. At these “Showbiz Parties” attended by Politicians , Judges , BBC Executives , Radio One DJ s and celebrities Children as young as 9 , mostly from Islington Care Homes, were raped and tortured. There was also the production of Child pornography at these “Showbiz Parties” using BBC equipment and Staff.

Are Children safe near the BBC?

Are Children safe near the BBC?

Islington Council also had a large trade in Child pornography and Children with Lambeth and other Councils.
The Gay Liberation Front , who ran Islington care Homes from about 1974 to 1997 , had a special technique for dealing with non paedophile staff. They would send Children for “weekenders” with known paedophiles, if the Social Workers delivered the Child they then knew they would comply with anything. If they refused they could be fired. Social Workers Liz Davies and David Cofie refused to comply and resigned so they could raise their concerns with Scotland Yard. Liz Davies had refused to deliver a 7 year old Child to a known paedophile. All concerns raised with Islington Council were treated as homophobic and anyone who got in the way of the GLF was harassed and attacked, sometimes physically. Scotland Yard were very corrupt at the time and refused to investigate despite overwhelming evidence.

Press were silent for years due to political correctness.

Press were silent for years due to political correctness.

      Eventually the Evening Standard newspaper started covering the story and the Police were forced to investigate. Only one serious conviction was obtained against Roy Caterer and he received seven and a half years in Prison. The Police then called the case closed and refused to investigate any further. It is believed Roy Caterer received around £300,000 in pay offs for being the fall guy, over half of this may have come through a third party from Islington Council’s budget. This also happened in the Jersey Child sex abuse case where a small time, low level paedophile takes the fall and everyone else walks free with the case closed.

BBC involved in sexual abuse of Children.

BBC involved in sexual abuse and rape of Children.

 Liz Davies Writes Margaret Hodge MP An Open Letter:

Last Friday (August 1st, 2014), Margaret Hodge, Labour MP for Barking and Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, issued a statement on the poor treatment of whistleblowers, and how they are often victimised by managers (see Rayeev Syal, ‘Public service whistleblowers ‘treated shockingly’, report finds’, The Guardian, August 1st, 2014). Hodge was earlier Leader of Islington Council from 1982 to 1992, during which time the council was beset by a terrible child abuse scandal affecting most of the children’s homes in the borough. Liz Davies was a social worker for Islington Council who acted as the principal whistleblower about this scandal; she is now Reader in Social Work at London Metropolitan University. Below I reproduce, without permission from Dr Davies, an open letter from her to Margaret Hodge in response to Hodge’s recent comments.

See also Liz Davies’ website, in particular this page featuring videos of various TV reports about the Islington child abuse scandal, as well as this account of Davies’ work with journalist Eileen Fairweather, who broke the news of the scandal. A wide range of articles about abuse in Islington can be read at the Spotlight blog here and here.


Open letter to Margaret Hodge MP

Dear Margaret Hodge,

You rightly say that, whistleblowing is ‘crucial’ and has to matter ‘right to the top of an organisation’. Your perspective has certainly changed since the time when, as leader of Islington Council, you so seriously hindered my investigation of crimes against children. As the main ‘whistleblower’ I have been struggling since the 90s to put the record straight about the murders, sexual exploitation, neglect and physical torture of children both within the care of Islington social services and in the local community. I have also tried to expose the connections between Islington networks and those in other parts of the country.

We have all learnt a lot in the last 20 years and I am continually discovering more about what actually happened during those years when, as a social worker, I was working to protect vulnerable Islington children. It would seem now, in the context of your statements on whistleblowing and your support of the National Inquiry into Organised Abuse of Children, that it is certainly appropriate to move forward in order to increase all our understanding about what led to the cover up of organised child abuse in the Borough.

A few years ago, as more information came to light, you apologised for your mistakes and provided the explanation for your actions that you were misled by senior officers. However, I now question why you did not give evidence to this effect to the final Islington Inquiry in 1995. Also, you have not said if you referred these managers to the police and to the appropriate regulatory body in order to prevent them working with children. So many of them, whose names I remember clearly, have progressed in their social work careers without ever having been accountable for their actions or inactions.

Most puzzling is my discovery of how much was previously known about child abuse in Islington since the early 80s and I, of course, realise that you were council leader from 1982. Am I to believe that you really did not know that there had been a long established pattern of sexual exploitation and even the alleged murders of children within Islington’s care? These events were well covered in the local and national media and, in this context, I cannot understand why my disclosures just a few years later were met with such disbelief. Geoffrey Dickens MP, for instance, exposed the sexual exploitation of Islington children. This was just four years before I raised similar concerns about children’s safety in the neighbourhood of Islington where I worked and for which you were the local councillor. This area was just a few streets away from the location that he was including in one of his now famous dossiers. I have to question why I was not informed at the time about these very serious cases. All this prior intelligence would have validated some of my enquiries and greatly assisted my investigations. If I had received support and understanding from you, I would have been far better able to protect the children who were so severely harmed. Instead, every obstacle was put in my way. My only professionally ethical option at the time was to work covertly with police. When our work achieved a major conviction I thought I would be believed but instead I was further silenced by managers. I now question if you were informed about this conviction and the circumstances in which young people were disclosing? I wonder if you were also informed about all the professionals working alongside me in the investigations and how many were told by their agency representatives on the Area Child Protection Committee that there was no evidence.

What exactly did influence your decision-making at the time? What led you to take a stand, for instance, in publicly blaming a brave whistleblowing residential worker? After raising the alarm about child sex abusers accessing children as young as 9 years old in a children’s home, he was dismissed and prevented from working with children for many years. What led you to dismiss my substantial report about a local network of sexual exploitation? Your support from ‘the top’ of the organisation might have been able to reverse the path of history and protect so many children. I am now being contacted by survivors who feel more able to come forward in the current climate. It is deeply worrying that so many of their files are missing. When I attended the Inquiries not a single one of my records was to be found. What is your understanding now of such negligence?

There are so many questions I would like to ask you. Did you know that after presenting 4 hours of evidence to one Islington Inquiry none of my information was included in the report? Did you know that one of the people who was the subject of one of the 14 Islington Inquiry reports returned to Children’s services in recent years and had not been barred from work with children? I do not know the 32 names listed by Ian White, in the Appendix to his final report, of professionals deemed unsuitable to work with children. I do know two social workers who should never have been named on the list as they were whistleblowers. In the light of your recent comment that some whistleblowers are treated badly I would expect that you would agree that the list of 32 needs to be urgently reviewed.

The White Report in 1995 (Report of the Inquiry into the Management of Child Care in the London Borough of Islington) made reference to 61 children I had identified as possible victims of an organised abuse network. It went on to conclude that, ‘while some individual children were at risk of abuse, the Police found no evidence of connections between these such as would support the assertion that there was organised abuse’ (p. 42). I would like to know in the light of current knowledge, and with hindsight, what your opinion is of this finding.

You say that there should be sanctions for those who victimise whistleblowers. The Islington Inquiries were not a legal process and no-one was required to give evidence. Do you think, therefore, that it is too late to call to account those who obstructed my investigations and those who misled you? Other authorities are now interviewing former whistleblowers and considering what action can be taken to right the wrongs of the past. I have not been asked by Islington authorities to assist in identifying perpetrators or to help survivors in understanding what happened to them. As one example, I recently learnt from the media about the unnamed Islington children’s home supposedly related to Savile – no-one has asked me if I know which home it might be. I remain a registered social worker and am therefore appropriately qualified to professionally assist with child protection investigations and I would readily contribute my knowledge about networks of abuse in the area.

I am pleased that you are now supporting whistleblowers. I am one of them and I now ask for your full support in helping to unravel what really did happen in Islington about which you must surely know so much. It is a story which includes your story which has never been told. Many politicians are now bravely coming forward to speak out about organised child abuse – it is surely your time to contribute your account of what really happened.

Yours sincerely

Dr Liz Davies
Reader in Child Protection
London Metropolitan University
l.davies@londonmet.ac.uk
3rd August 2014

Copies to;

Cllr Richard Watts, Leader of Islington Council
Cllr Joe Caluori, Executive Member for Children and Families
Andrew Johnson, Islington Tribune

The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Fraud by New Labour

Co-written by Cigpapers and Watt Tyler

The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Fraud

Following the unexpected death of John Smith QC MP Labour Party Leader in 1994 Tony Blair and his New Labour cronies took over the Labour Party and committed the PFI fraud.

The PFI fraud committed by New Labour was probably the greatest financial crime ever. It is believed the real mastermind was Lord Michael Levy who, although he is nominally Blair’s fund-raiser, is probably really his boss.

Lord Levy who funded the hijacking of the Labour Party by Blair's Islington People. Was he the mastermind behind the biggest financial crime in British history?

Lord Michael Levy who funded the hijacking of the Labour Party by Blair’s Islington People. Was he the mastermind behind the biggest financial crime in British history?

During the late 1990s and through the 2000s New Labour and Gordon Brown signed an unknown total of £billions worth of PFI deals with the banks and private sector. The figures released by the Government claim that in 2013 we pay around £9billion per year. The total cost left for us and our descendants to pay is around £301 billion – about  £5,000 for every man, woman and child in the Country. It has been claimed, by Michael Meacher Labour MP,  that about one fifth or Britain’s GDP for the next 50 years will go on paying off the PFI fraud.

Gordon Brown

Gordon Brown – financially incompetent or a fraudster? Maybe both.

What are PFI deals?

PFI deals are where the Government wants a building such as a school or hospital building, and don’t want to finance through normal Government means at low-interest rates . They effectively get a hire purchase deal on the building from banks or private companies and pay over  20 to 50 years, often with maintenance included at much higher interest rates. These deals always cost more than usual Government finance and maintenance, sometimes two or three times as much.

19092011574[1]

Why PFI deals?
New Labour and Gordon Brown first claimed that PFIs were the fastest way to build Government buildings as a socialist/pinko cover story. When this was exposed as obvious rubbish Gordon Brown incredibly claimed that they signed these deals to “hide” Government borrowing from the financial markets, and these expensive PFI deals wouldn’t be counted by City financiers as Public Debt. To anyone connected to the real World this is obvious nonsense as any half decent financier would be well aware of these PFI deals and would calculate them in as Public Debt.

Lord Peter Mandelson

Lord Peter Mandelson

Really why PFI deals?
New Labour had the age-old problem of transferring huge amounts of Public Spending in to the bank accounts of corrupt Politicians. They went with the PFI fraud as it sounded very Labour to build schools and hospitals to the Public. Anyone questioning the PFI deals was attacked for opposing new hospitals, schools etc. The PFI fraud also had the spin-off benefit that the City of London laughably claimed Gordon Brown as financially competent, as he helped them siphon off hundreds of £billions of Public money. As usual our corrupt Politicians get their pay-offs in the form of consultancy fees when they leave Office. Some 24 former New Labour ministers – including Charles Clarke, Patricia Hewitt, Frank Field, Alan Milburn and David Blunkett – are heavily involved in the PFI industry and are now mostly multi-millionaires.

$(KGrHqMOKkEE1vjFW+JIBNcSuOh1D!~~_12

But Surely All These PFI Deals Are Examined By Accountants?

These deals all have to be signed off by one of the “Big Five” accountancy firms as “Value for Public Money”. However the PFI accountancy work is worth hundreds of millions of pounds, and further work only goes to compliant firms. Many senior accountancy partners walked away with tens of millions of pounds of Taxpayer’s money in fees.

The massive Arthur Andersen accountancy firm wrote a report in January 2000 praising PFI and claiming it led to 17 percent savings. It went on to be involved in £10s of billion of PFI deals. As former Labour deputy prime minister Roy Hattersley points out, “Arthur Andersen’s timing was impeccable. The PFI report was published at the moment when the government wanted both to hold down public expenditure and demonstrate its faith in private enterprise.” The Arthur Andersen report is virtually the only one ever to claim PFI is efficient. When Blair came under pressure over his links to Andersen, he referred in Parliament to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers, another of the ‘big five’ auditing multinationals.

But PricewaterhouseCoopers has also benefited from the PFI scam. It is part of PFI deals worth £10s of billions. It is also the administrator of the European arm of Enron, and did some valuation work on two of the ‘partnerships’ set up by Enron executives to hide its losses.

Lord Peter Mandelson and his boyfriend Reinaldo

Lord Peter Mandelson and his boyfriend Reinaldo

Was this a victimless crime?
Hardly. Right across the Country the NHS, Councils and other areas of Government have had to make severe cut-backs to pay for the PFI fraud. These cut-backs can include new schools and hospitals, building repairs, meals for the disabled, after Schools Clubs for disadvantaged Children, fewer Police, fewer Teachers and cutting back on NHS Staff.

Miliband and Blair

Miliband and Blair

How about the criminals?
Blair and Mandelson are quite open about being corrupt and flaunt their wealth. Mandelson bought a multi-million pound house for cash as soon as he left Office and Blair is well on his way to becoming a billionaire. Brown has the problem of when to break cover and buy the first big house, and as usual is dithering. The Milibands are just starting to pick up their first few £millions in consultancy fees.

19092011574[1]

Lord Mandelson’s new house.

How about the Victims?
That’s us Joe Public. We’ll all moan about it, but we’ll let our Families and descendants do with less to pay off the PFI fraud rather than do anything about it.

Is the PFI fraud linked to the Bilderberg Group?
All the major New Labour criminals are regular Bilderberg Group attendees where they receive their instructions regarding Globalisation and multiculturalism, so it’s not inconceivable they got their instructions for the PFI fraud there.

Was Labour Party Leader John Smith QC murdered to facilitate the biggest fraud in British history by New Labour?

Was Labour Party Leader John Smith QC murdered to facilitate the biggest fraud in British history by New Labour?

John Smith QC MP was a Scottish politician who served as leader of the Labour Party from 1992 until his sudden and unexpected death from a heart attack in 1994.
As with all unexpected deaths of prominent politicians such as that of Robin Cook Labour MP, there was some speculation at the time that his death was suspicious, but there was no apparent specific motive. Robin Cook Labour MP had been a thorn in Blair’s side with awkward questions about the Iraq War, PFI and Al Qaeda’s existence.

Labour MP Robin Cook died of a heart attack in suspicous circumstances.

Labour MP Robin Cook died of a heart attack in 2005 in suspicious circumstances.


However, events since the coming to power of New Labour in 1997 and their PFI fraud, present a much clearer reason why John Smith might have been murdered.

Tony Blair at John Smith's funeral before taking over the Labour Party with his New Labour cronies.

Tony Blair at John Smith’s funeral before taking over the Labour Party with his New Labour cronies.

John Smith QC MP would never have been part of the PFI fraud and he was in the way of some very ruthless greedy people.
John Smith’s death was certainly convenient for some people. Suspiciously convenient.

Manchester Chief Constable Michael Todd died in unexplained circumstances after starting investigations in to several PFI deals in Manchester.

Manchester Chief Constable Michael Todd died in unexplained circumstances.

Popular, straight talking Manchester Chief Constable Michael Todd died of a heart attack in unexplained circumstances in March 2008 after starting investigations in to several PFI deals in Manchester. He was soon replaced by Peter Fahy, a Common Purpose graduate and New Labour supporter. The Manchester PFI investigations have not been continued.

Dr David Kelly died in suspicous circumstances in 2003. The authorities claimed he had an abnormal heart condition.

Dr David Kelly died in suspicous circumstances in 2003. The authorities claimed he had an abnormal heart condition.

Dr David Kelly died in suspicious circumstances in 2003. The authorities claimed he had an abnormal heart condition. Dr Kelly was nothing to do with the PFI fraud, but had crossed Blair over the Iraq War. Is there a pattern here?

In July 2012 Michael Meacher Labour MP wrote this article on PFIs:

In Ancient Egypt we are told there were 7 fat years, then 7 thin years.   Not much has changed.   For a decade we had the arrogant swagger of the New Labour hegemony seemingly carrying all before it, but actually pitted with lies (the Iraq war), deceit (the ubiquitous culture of spin), prostration before power  (Blair’s cuddling up to Murdoch), adulation of the City (regulation-lite leading to the Great Crash and today’s interest-rate fixing), worship of wealth (Mandelson’s immortal “New Labour intensely relaxed about people becoming filthy rich”).   And now another colossal Tory-New Labour scam – PFI – is coming home to roost, big time.   The collapse of the South London Healthcare NHS Trust is just the harbinger of a whole cascade of hugely costly failures coming home to roost.

Under pressure from New Labour this Trust signed up to a £2.5bn PFI deal which it now costs £61m a year to service, no less than 14.4% of its annual income.   In the case of one of its hospitals, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woolwich this PFI levy on its income will last for another 18 years, and in the case of another, the Princess Royal Hospital in Bromley, it will continue for the next 20 years.   The hospital Trust is now losing £1m a week, and obviously the original deal was never sustainable.

PFI was started by the Tories in 1992 and hugely expanded by New Labour after 1997.   In total it has now committed the public sector to pay back £301bn to banks, investors and private companies for more than 800 hospitals, schools and prisons projects by 2050.   That is, New Labour has put the State in hock to the private sector to pay back a sum equal to one-fifth of Britain’s entire GDP within the next 50 years.   What this means is that New Labour crippled the public sector with gargantuan unpayable debts for the next half century and now the Tories are eviscerating what’s left with further spending cuts of another £81bn.

This slow-moving catastrophe has come about for two mean reasons.   One was the ideological prejudice of both New Labour and the Tories to privatise the State down to every last nook and cranny they could find.   Second, New Labour (and over 90% of the expansion of PFI has occurred under their regime) wanted to establish their number with Big Business just as also with the City, media and security services (police and MI5), and a £300bn increase in corporate profits – at taxpayers expense of course – was very persuasive.   Blair and Brown have a lot to answer for, even more than we yet know.

img866

THE MONEY MADE FROM A SMALL SAMPLE OF PFI SCHEMES:

scheme / capital invested by companies / projected cash return

New Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh / £20m / £228m
County Hospital, Hereford / £9m / £92m
Hairmyres Hospital, East Kilbride / £8m / £145m
Council offices and car park, Perth / £2m / £31m
Eleven schools, Highland / £2m / £12m
James Watt College, Kilwinning / 0.7m / £9m
TOTAL / £42m / £517m

pic004

A recommended book to read on the PFI Fraud is Captive State : The Corporate Takeover Of Britain  by George Monbiot. You can borrow it from your local library free of charge, or if you want to buy a copy they are available from Amazon on Kindle or from about £1.98 including UK delivery for a paperback or hardcover copy:

  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Captive-State-Corporate-Takeover-Britain-ebook/dp/B00DRFRO18/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1389025626&sr=1-1&keywords=Captive+State%3A+The+Corporate+Takeover+of+Britain

pic005

 

West Ham United’s New £625million Council House

Report by Cigpapers

Image

£600million Olympic Stadium in East London

In March 2013 London Mayor Boris Johnston signed off the Olympic Stadium to West Ham United Football Club on a 99year lease. The Olympic Stadium had been seen as a political humiliation and “white elephant” with no real practical use.
The terms for the lease of the £600million Olympic Stadium are a down payment by West Ham of £15million plus £2million per year for 99 years. In return the Government/taxpayer will hand over the £600million stadium plus £25million in cash for an upgrade.
However the deal is structured in such a way that the estimated £40million upgrade is paid first with the Government’s £25million and then by West Ham’s £15million. If West Ham spend £25million or less on the upgrade they will pay nothing. It is interesting that there are claims that the £40million upgrade estimate was provided by West Ham themselves. The yearly payments part of the contract are also quite interesting and mean in certain circumstances West Ham may pay no or very little rent.
West Ham will be free to sell or rent out their present ground Upton Park and keep all the proceeds.

Image

Upton Park

West Ham are co-owned by David Gold and David Sullivan who made their fortunes in pornography. Karen Brady the vice-chairman of West Ham stated “ We accept the cost of making this into a world-class stadium has come from the Government, but we hope over 99 years we can pay it back.”
There are obviously all sorts of allegations flying around about this deal, and Leyton Orient Football Club have launched a legal challenge. Ironically Leyton Orient may eventually buy or rent Upton Park from West  Ham and this legal challenge could just be about getting some leverage on that deal.
As usual Joe Public will pick up the tab for this fiasco/fraud.

Image

West Ham’s New Ground

99% Slaves 1% Masters in the Multicultural Global Economy

Written by Cigpapers

Captions and photos by Watt Tyler

99% Slaves 1% Masters in the Global Economy

As the debt-slave Globalisation plan (also known as multiculturalism) put together by World bankers and corrupt Politicians at the Bilderberg Group nears completion let’s look at what it means for the 99% ordinary working people in Britain:

The future of de-unionised Workers.

The future of de-unionised Workers.

Worse pay: As we compete on wages, instead of productivity, with the rest of the World the British Worker can only expect lower pay for longer hours. Over the last 30 years of Globalisation/multiculturalism real wages and living standards have dropped for British Workers. De-unionised Labour and zero-hours contracts will become the norm for the British Workers. £30 billion per year of welfare spending now goes on tax credits to subsidise low wages, which is in effect subsidising big business. This new zero-hour “flexible workforce” is the Twenty First Century equivalent of standing outside the dock gates in the morning hoping for a day‘s work.

Wages for British Workers have dropped since 1981 in real terms.

Wages for British Workers have dropped since 1981 in real terms.

Worse unions: The de-unionised debt-slaves won’t be allowed collective bargaining leading to much lower wages and worse conditions. The Workers still in Unions are being sold down the river by their Marxist capo Union bosses supporting Globalisation, most of these Marxist Union bosses earn hundreds of thousands of pounds a year and have no connection with the Workers they nominally represent. We all saw the hijacked Marxist Trade Union Congress support mass immigration in pursuit of Globalisation/multiculturalism and lower wages.

Marxist Union bosses have betrayed the Workers.

Marxist Union bosses have betrayed the Workers.

More Privatisation: The Government will use more minimum wage employees with no pensions via private contractors. A lot of these Workers will be on zero-hours contracts.

Globalisation + multiculturalism = Lower wages.

Globalisation + multiculturalism = Lower wages.

Worse education: The new breed of debt-slave won’t need much of an education. The dumbing down of education over the last 50 years serves two purposes: firstly saving money and secondly less well educated debt-slaves cause less trouble and work for less. We will see an increase in the use of class assistants instead of fully trained teachers in State schools, they have already been taking classes on their own in some schools. State schools will effectively become babysitters for debt-slaves with some Globalist/multicultural brainwashing thrown in.

Education has been dumbed down.

Education has been dumbed down.

Worse pensions: The new breed of debt-slave won’t have much of a pension and will rely on the State’s largesse. Already the State is using widespread euthanasia of the old with the NHS’s Liverpool Care Pathway, straight from Nazi Germany, where the poor and elderly (130,000 in 2012) are drugged up and food and water are withheld until they die. NHS hospitals and their managers are paid cash bonuses for each patient they place on the Liverpool Care Pathway. Expect the Liverpool Care Pathway ( probably under a new name ) to soon include the seriously disabled and mentally ill. The Masters and their Marxist Union capos have no time for non-productive debt-slaves.

Poor British Pensioners.

Poor British Pensioners.

Worse welfare: We are seeing the cutback of all welfare, and in West Sussex a 63 year old man recently starved to death after ATOS removed his benefits. ATOS are a private assessment firm who are paid £300 if they kick you off welfare benefits and only £100 if they keep  you on. We are moving closer to a “don’t work – don’t eat” culture.

People have starved to death in Britain after their welfare was stopped.

People have starved to death in Britain after their welfare was stopped.

More repression: The State has already started removing the Children of Nationalists to put them through the most horrific abuse as the ultimate sanction against anti-Globalists. There will be even worse State oppression as Globalisation/multiculturalism progresses. This will probably lead to some sort of terrorist backlash from Nationalists leading to worse State oppression and detention without trial.

British Police are  getting more violent.

British Police are getting more violent.

Worse democracy: Most People now realise that the leaders of major parties whether Marxist capos like Blair, Brown, Milibands etc. or Corporate puppets like Cameron and Osborne, are on the payroll of the banks and corporations. Tony Blair now owns ten houses around the World and is believed to be worth around £300 to £500 million from pay-offs. You’ll notice that all these corrupt Politicians get their pay-offs in the form of consultancy work. As the workers start to object to the Globalised debt-slavery and form their own Nationalist self-defence groups we are seeing a new and sinister development where debt-slaves’ Children are taken by the State if it is deemed their political beliefs are wrong. In February 2013, in Birmingham UK, a newly born Child was removed from her mother because her boyfriend was linked to legal Nationalist Groups. Labour Party activists have been gloating all over Birmingham about the fun they’ll have abusing “the fascists” child. This horror is straight from North Korea and could eventually lead to a debt-slave backlash in the form of terrorism.

British Politicians are puppets of zionism.

British Politicians are puppets of zionism.

More War Crimes: As the Global Elite now control our Politicians they can use our armies for whatever War Crimes or genocide they want.

Zionists will demand more war crimes.

Zionists will demand more war crimes.

Worse Police: Already they use lower paid PCSOs instead of real Police Officers, and also have Wardens from the Council which are even cheaper. On one Manchester Council Estate they have a private security firm, which really means two men and a dog. The Masters don’t really care how safe the debt-slaves’ neighbourhoods are.

The future of British Police?

The future of British Police?

Worse holidays: With a lot of debt-slaves working 48 to 60 hour weeks they can’t afford to take their holidays, which only pay 40 hours. A lot of debt-slaves will soon work through agencies with no holidays at all in the future.

A return to Victorian work paractices?

A return to Victorian work practices?

More foreign aid: Blair led the way on this corruption where our Politicians give billions every year to third World dictators in return for kick-backs in the form of consultancy fees when they leave office.

More money for African Dictators?

More money for African Dictators?

Worse roads: It’s often said you can tell the true state of any Country by its’ roads. Look at the British roads with their potholes and patchwork repairs. The Masters don’t really care about the debt-slaves’ roads, or damage to their cars if they can still afford one. The roads will probably get privatised and certainly will get worse.

Britain's road system is crumbling.

Britain’s road system is crumbling.

WHAT IS THE SOLUTION:
Quite simply “do an Iceland” and declare the debts null and void due to fraud and throw the bankers in prison. However due to the corruption in British Politics that won’t happen here, the Milibands are corrupt Marxist capos and the Conservatives are openly in the pay of the Globalist bankers all following an agenda of Globalisation/multiculturalism.
The long term solution will be to build up Nationalist Political Parties and Unions to represent the British Workers.
However in the short term we can all take some immediate action.

BUT WHAT CAN I DO?
1. Inform and educate yourself – the State and Globalist controlled media won’t.
2. Mentally refuse to accept this horrific future for yourself and friends/family/People.
3. Resist on an individual level by removing your support and finance from Globalist Political Parties, Unions, Charities and other groups. Many of these were once great Nationalist organisations but have been hijacked and corrupted by Globalists/multiculturalists/Marxists.
4. Talk to friends, family, neighbours and work colleagues about the situation.
5. Get on the internet and put an anti-Globalisation message out.
6.  If safe join and/or support Nationalist Groups, Unions, Charities and Political Parties – if unsafe consider becoming a Lone Wolf Agitator for a Nationalist Party or Union.
7. Support campaigns like the Charlene Downes one or at least raise awareness.
8. Make 10 copies of this and distribute to friends/family/neighbours.

Harriet Harman of the Paedophile Information Exchange Wears a Butterfly Brooch.

Co-written by Cigpapers and Watt Tyler:

Harriet Harman in butterfly brooch.

Jewess Harriet Harman in butterfly brooch.

Jewess Harriet Ruth Harman MP QC (born 1950) She was the interim Leader of the Labour Party, and Leader of the Opposition, from 11 May to 25 September 2010. Harman is currently Deputy Leader for the Labour Party. After qualifying as a lawyer, Harriet Harman worked for Brent Law Centre in London. Her husband is Jack Dromey MP. She is the niece of Lord Longford who was the close friend of multiple child sex killer Myra Hindley.
Between 1978 and 1982, Harriet Harman was employed as the Legal Officer for the National Council for Civil Liberties which later became Liberty.
At the time the National Council for Civil Liberties was officially affiliated to two organisations, the Paedophile Information Exchange and the Paedophile Action for Liberation, whose members argued openly for the abolition of the age of consent.

The butterfly logo is constructed out of four hearts: a big blue for man, a big pink for woman, a small blue for boy, a small pink for girl. The butterfly logo is used by paedophile organizations all over the world.

The butterfly logo is constructed out of four hearts: a big blue for man, a big pink for woman, a small blue for boy, a small pink for girl. The butterfly logo is used by paedophile organizations all over the world.

When Harriet Harman first entered politics this matter was brought up, but a friendly media and other politicians accepted her claims that the NCCL no longer had any connection with P.I.E./P.A.L. when she was Legal Officer between 1978 and 1982 . However it later transpired that P.I.E./P.A.L.  had been officially affiliated with the NCCL until 1982, when Harman left and P.I.E./P.A.L. went underground.
She has since repeatedly veered between denying any connection with P.I.E. and P.A.L., and claiming that as a Legal Officer for the NCCL she had no choice in who she represented. Patricia Hewitt ex MP  was General Secretary of the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1974 to 1983.
As with a lot of liars Harman has different versions of events for different audiences.
Let’s look at the first lie that she was never connected or in contact with P.I.E. or P.A.L. in any way:
Documents now in the Public Domain show a NCCL letter signed by Harriet Harman objecting in the strongest terms to any laws against child pornography, unless it could be proved by the prosecution that the child was harmed. The NCCL also submitted a response to the Government arguing for lowering the age of consent and stating “ Childhood sexual experiences , willingly engaged in , with an adult result in no identifiable damage.” When the Government moved to crack down on child pornography , the NCCL’s response, again signed by Harriet Harman , claimed the new law could lead to “ absurd prosecutions and increased censorship”. As Legal Officer for the NCCL she also argued to abolish incest laws. Jack Dromey served on the NCCL Executive Committee from 1970 to 1979. There are allegations that Lord Longford was part of this lobbying but no documentary evidence has emerged yet.
So having nailed the lie that she was never involved in P.I.E. or P.A.L. let’s have a look at the lie that she had no choice but to represent paedophile groups as Legal Officer for NCCL. Well this is also obviously not true as visiting the NCCL/Liberty website will show that NCCL/Liberty state :
“ Liberty receives thousands of requests for legal advice and assistance each year. Because we’re a small organisation with limited resources, our lawyers are unable to take up all of these cases actively.”
So clearly NCCL/Liberty don’t have to take up every case they are approached with.
P.I.E. went underground in around 1982/3, but resurfaced in June 2012 mounting a demo in support of muslim paedophiles outside Liverpool Crown Court led by a Labour Party Councillor and Labour Party Activists.

Please note that the butterfly is the insignia of female paedophilia.
For more Labour Party paedophile scandals google “Labour25” .

img114

img115

img116

img117

img118

img119

img120

img121

NCCL advert in Paedophile Information Exchange magazine.

NCCL advert in Paedophile Information Exchange magazine.

On 24th February 2014 Harriet Harman MP released this denial:

In recent days I have been the subject of a politically-motivated smear campaign by the Daily Mail.They have accused me of being an apologist for child sex abuse, of supporting a vile paedophile organisation, of having a relaxed attitude to paedophilia and of watering down child pornography laws. These are horrific allegations and I strongly deny them all of them.

This is not the first time the Daily Mail has made this horrible and untrue allegation. And, this is not the first time the Daily Mail has attacked me. The editor and proprietor of the Daily Mail are entitled to their political views and they are of course entitled to oppose what I stand for but they are not entitled to use their newspaper to smear me with innuendo because they disagree with me politically and hate my values.

I sincerely hope people won’t believe these smears – I suspect even the Daily Mail doesn’t believe them to be true.  But given the seriousness and the aggression with which the Daily Mail are pursuing me, I feel that I need to put the facts in the public domain.

1.  Allegation that I supported the lowering of the age of consent to 10:

This is not true.  I supported the equalisation of the age of consent (as set out in NCCL document “priorities and strategy for the executive committee June 1981″) by making the age of consent the same for homosexual as well as for heterosexual sex.

2. Allegation that I opposed the law on incest:

This is not true.  The document they refer to was written by NCCL in 1976 before I started to work there.

3. Allegation that I was seeking to water down a proposed ban on child pornography:

This is not true.  I supported the Protection of Children Bill 1978.  At the start of the document it makes clear that  “The NCCL deplores the exploitation of children whether in the form of use in commercial pornography or as victims of sexual assaults”

The submission argued for some amendments to guard against unintended consequences including:

 – Parents being criminalised for taking pictures of their children on the beach or in the bath

–  The use of pictures in sex education being criminalised

–  We also proposed that the definition of indecent was too wide and instead proposed “obscene” as indecent was very broadly defined and could include Page 3 of the Sun.

The  Mail have tried to make me guilty by way guilt by association.

NCCL was an organisation which anyone could apply to join and indeed any organisation could apply to be “an affiliate” on payment of a fee. When I was at NCCL there were around 6,000 members and nearly 1,000 affiliated organisations of which PIE was one.

Members and affiliates decided the organisation’s policy at the AGM from year to year.

I was aware that because NCCL opposed censorship and supported gay rights, paedophiles had sought to exploit that and use NCCL as a vehicle to make their arguments.  But by the time I came to work for NCCL this vile organisation had already been vigorously challenged within the organisation. Jack Dromey was instrumental in that challenge when he took over the chair of NCCL in 1976

The reason I decided to go to work for NCCL was because I actively supported the work they had done and in particular the work of their women’s rights committee on the Equal Pay Act, on the introduction of the Sex Discrimination Act and for greater protection of victims of domestic violence and against race discrimination.

Since being elected to the House of Commons in 1982 and during my times in Ministerial Office I have always championed the rights of those subjected to sexual abuse – especially women and children.

I hope The Daily Mail will stop this campaign of smear and innuendo against me.  I have done nothing wrong and am guilty of none of their grotesque allegations.

Join the campaign.

Join the campaign.