BBC Climate Panel 26 January 2006

Posted on December 17, 2013 by cigpapers

In 2006 the BBC hosted a climate-change seminar to decide on its reporting of alleged climate-change. The BBC has spent tens of thousands of pounds trying to keep secret who attended this seminar. The publicly funded broadcaster fought off requests for the list of people who attended under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws.

This surreal story is only partly about climate change: the disclosure raises questions about the evidence submitted to the information tribunal by the BBC and Helen Boaden – it’s Director of News who stepped down in 2012.

The case also highlights once again the BBC’s corporate strategy of using an FOI derogation, or legal “opt-out” clause, to withhold a wide range of material from citizens who wish to know whether the BBC is fulfilling its statutory obligations for impartiality under its Royal Charter.

And it raises further questions about the effectiveness of the BBC Trust. The trust, which replaced the Board of Governors, was created with a mission: an “unprecedented obligation to openness and transparency”.

A ‘brainstorm’ that became historic

The seminar whose attendees the Beeb sought to keep secret was founded by three organisation. In 2004, the International Broadcasting Trust – a lobby group funded by a number of charities, including many involved in campaigning on climate change – devised the first in a series of seminars on development issues, where the lobbyists could address broadcasters.

One event on 26 January 2006 was a “brainstorm”, in the IBT’s own words, “focusing on climate change and its impact on development”. The BBC sent 30 senior staff, and 30 outsiders were invited. The event was also organised by CMEP, its second parent – a now dormant or defunct outfit operated by BBC reporter Roger Harrabin and climate activist Dr Joe Smith, and at one time funded by the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and various pressure groups.

Harrabin later explained that the BBC’s head of news in the 1990s, Tony Hall, had invited him “to devise meetings with politicians, business people, think tanks, academics from many universities and specialists (science, technology, economic and social sciences, and history), and policy experts and field workers from NGOs – particularly from the developing world”.

The third parent of the seminar was the BBC.

The following year ( 2007) a BBC Trust report on impartiality cited the 2006 seminar and said it had settled the argument once and for all (as far as the BBC was concerned) on climate change.

Filmmaker John Bridcut wrote:

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts [our emphasis] and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus [on anthropogenic climate change].

The BBC is under a statutory obligation to remain impartial, so this gave the “brainstorm” a historic significance.

An independent blogger, Tony Newbery, was struck by the difference between contemporary evidence that the seminar was educational and composed largely of activists (as confirmed by Harrabin) and the BBC Trust’s insistence that it was a sober scientific presentation that could justify a historic policy change.

Fresh light was shed on Harrabin’s CMEP in 2010, in the second batch of Climategate emails. An email from Mike Hulme, the director of the Tyndall Centre for Climatic Change Research at UEA,complained about a BBC Radio 4 item broadcast in February 2002. The broadcast featured global-warming sceptic Professor Philip Stott and Sir John Houghton, who was a Met Office chief and the editor of the first three IPCC reports on climate change. Houghton came off worst, and an infuriated Hulme wrote:

Did anyone hear Stott vs Houghton on Today, Radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.

Newbery filed his FOI request for the seminar’s attendees to the BBC in 2007 and was denied the information, leading to a second round of information tribunal hearings in November 2012. The cross-examination of the BBC’s Helen Boaden in a court room was reported here.

The BBC is regarded as a public authority by the Freedom of Information Act 2000, but it can withhold information held “for the purposes of journalism”.

In an earlier and separate FOI case against the BBC, Supreme Court Judge Neuberger argued the opt-out should be interpreted narrowly – otherwise the BBC could withhold information about “cleaning the board room floor” using the journalism get-out clause – an obvious absurdity.

In the Newbery case, the BBC maintained that archival material on the seminar could not be found, but also it should not be found: as a back-up argument it argued that the seminar was held under the Chatham House Rule – an agreement of etiquette, rather than a law, to prevent quotes being attributed to particular speakers at a meeting – information that Newbery had never asked for.

In November 2012 the tribunal ruled against Newbery and for the BBC.

Case closed? Think again

However science writer Maurizio Morabito has unearthed the list of attendees.

It confirms the accuracy of Harrabin’s description of the composition of the invitees, with most coming from industry, think tanks and NGOs. And as suspected, climate campaigners Greenpeace are present, while actual scientific experts are thin on the ground: not one attendee deals with attribution science, the physics of global warming. These are scarcely “some of the best scientific experts”, whose input could justify a historic abandonment of the BBC’s famous impartiality.

Intriguingly, Tony Newbery had been supplied with a later version of this document, he tells us – but with the attendee list stripped out.

How much of the Public’s license fee did the BBC spend on lawyers to cover up this list of attendees at their Climate Panel in 2006?

The dramatic appearance of the list raises many questions. Did the BBC know the information was publicly available? If so, why were corporation lawyers spending thousands of pounds to keep a public document “secret”? (FOI requests for public information typically state, quite simply, “this information is public”.)

Questions abound online about the ability of the BBC Trust to maintain its duty to transparency. The BBC’s legal strategy entails the indiscriminate application of its FOI derogation “for the purposes of journalism” – this effectively rewrites the 2000 Act, and redefines the BBC as a private body. The trust is surely aware of this; it has a small mountain of correspondence on the subject. But it has yet to enquire, let alone pronounce on whether this is healthy – or legal.

All the names on the revealed seminar list

Here’s the list – according to the FOI Act reply.

January 26th 2006, BBC Television Centre, London

Specialists:
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Matthew Farrow, CBI
Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer
Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs
Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs
Joe Smith, The Open University
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Anita Neville, E3G
Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University
Tim Jackson, Surrey University
John Ashton, Director E3G
BBC attendees:
Jana Bennett, Director of Television
Sacha Baveystock, Executive Producer, Science
Helen Boaden, Director of News
Andrew Lane, Manager, Weather, TV News
Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment
Emma Swain, Commissioning Editor, Specialist Factual
Fergal Keane, (Chair), Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Fran Unsworth, Head of Newsgathering
George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
Glenwyn Benson, Controller, Factual TV
John Lynch, Creative Director, Specialist Factual
Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Jon Williams, TV Editor Newsgathering
Karen O’Connor, Editor, This World, Current Affairs
Catriona McKenzie, Tightrope Pictures
Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning
Matt Morris, Head of News, Radio Five Live
Neil Nightingale, Head of Natural History Unit
Peter Horrocks, Head of Television News
Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend
Phil Harding, Director, English Networks & Nations
Steve Mitchell, Head Of Radio News
Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes

Fran Unsworth,Head of Newsgathering
Pete Clifton, Head of News Interactive
Liz Cleaver, Controller Learning
Keith Scholey, Head of Specialist Factual
Sarah Brandist, Head of Development, Drama Commissioning
Michael Hastings, Head of Corporate Social Responsibility
Lorna Walsh, BBC TV
Roger Harrabin, Today Programme

The New SS: UK Lawyers, Judges And Social Workers Colluding To Steal Children

Posted on November 13, 2013 by cigpapers

by thecolemanexperience

Time and time again we hear tell of children being snatched from loving parents by despicable social workers, desperate to meet targets and make bonuses, and thrown into the corrupt and secretive world of the UK’s family courts systems.

One of the few MP’s brave enough and caring enough to highlight these cases is Birmingham MP, John Hemming, who recently broke parliamentary convention by naming and shaming Derbeyshire Council who colluded with lawyers and the courts to snatch two young children on misleading evidence.

The Express reports on the story:

” TWO YOUNG children were taken from their distraught mother and placed for adoption because her own legal aid lawyers “colluded” with social workers, according to an MP’s extraordinary allegation in Parliament”

” In a highly unusual accusation, John Hemming said lawyers for Jacque Courtnage colluded with Derbyshire County Council to prevent her analysing a document he believes would have cleared her of abuse allegations.
She and her husband have lost their two sons, now aged six and eight, for ever after a court ruled on the balance of probabilities they were responsible for harming their youngest when he was a baby.

They have never been arrested nor charged with any criminal offence due to lack of evidence.

Their heartbreaking story emerged in a Commons debate two months ago when Mr Hemming used Parliamentary privilege to name the mother and to make accusations against her lawyers and Derbyshire County Council.

He says the parents are the victims of a miscarriage of justice in the secret family court system.

The Lib Dem MP believes lawyers representing families on legal aid have a conflict of interest if they also do work for local authorities.

Mrs Courtnage, a 45-year-old accountant and her husband John, 47, an engineer, only discovered the potentially significant evidence nine months after a judge ruled their children should be taken from them.

They found it among their son’s medical records, which they secured after making a request to his hospital under the Data Protection Act as part of their own probe to discover the “truth”.

The evidence was an alternative diagnosis from a leading hospital consultant saying their son’s head injury had been caused by a fissure, a birth defect that weakened the skull bone.

Until then, Mr Hemming said, they had only been aware of the fracture diagnosis put forward by other experts and used by the council in its arguments before the court.

The children are now with an adoptive family and banned from any contact with their real parents.

Mrs Courtnage, who is not allowed to talk to the media about her case, told Mr Hemming: “Our children are our very existence and without them with us and being unable to touch them is like a living hell. Just talking about our boys reduces us to tears.

“The saying of a living bereavement is very apt and one we live daily. We have no grave to mourn at.”

“We are angry at what has been done to us but words cannot begin to describe the contempt we have for what this has done to our darling sons.”

The couple’s “living hell” started in 2008 when Mrs Courtnage became concerned by a swelling on her baby boy’s head. She took him to the Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham where medics debated the X-ray results.
While two consultants made separate diagnoses of a fissure, others argued a fracture, a conclusion eventually accepted as the official version.

The diagnoses, together with evidence suggesting leg injuries to the child, were sent to Derbyshire County Council which then gave them to Mrs Courtnage’s lawyer.

However, Mr Hemming said the fissure argument was never highlighted to Mrs Courtnage and she did not see it among the 500 other documents in the large court bundles.

He told the Commons in September: “I have for some time been worried about what I was told by a social worker some years ago, which is that at times the legal aid-funded solicitors for parents conspire with local authority staff in order to ensure that the parents lose.

“One example where that appears to have happened is that of Jacque and John Courtnage, whose two sons were taken into care because one had a lump on his head.

The doctors were not sure whether it was because of a fracture or a fissure.”

” The child was neurologically sound, which implies a fissure, but the parents did not see the evidence that it could have been a fissure until after the court had decided in 2010 that it was a fracture, and the question was never considered in any court judgment.

“A court order on October 30, 2008, had said that all evidence should be provided to the parents. That did not happen.
“The hospital provided Derbyshire County Council with the information in December 2008 but this did not get to the parents until after the finding of fact hearing of 2010, when they made a subject access request.
“The question is whether the council colluded with the parents’ solicitors.”

The MP said in the debate that he and Mrs Courtnage had asked the solicitors about the issue. He said a solicitor had denied the allegation but refused to give a “detailed response”.
He said in the Commons that, to him, meant the lawyers “colluded with Derbyshire County Council to keep this evidence from the parents”.

Mrs Courtnage tried to raise the fissure diagnosis before an appeal judge in September 2011.
However, due to an administrative mistake by court officials, the case was heard in her absence and the potentially vital pieces of paper were never presented to the judge.

She has recently decided to try to reopen the appeal under civil procedure rules.

A spokesman for Derbyshire County Council said: “We would strenuously reject any suggestion of collusion.
“The judge had before him all the child’s medical records including all those received from the Queen’s Medical Centre and the issue as to whether the child had a fissure or a fracture was fully brought before the court.

“The court had evidence from experts including a consultant paediatric radiologist and consultant neuroradiologist.
These experts were appointed independently by the solicitor acting on behalf of the child.

The child also had the benefit of a children’s guardian appointed by the court to represent his best interests.
“We are confident that the actions we took were the right ones and that the decision taken by the court was the right one.”

It’s about bloody time the disgusting scandal of Britain’s stolen children was fully investigated by the police.

If children are being snatched illegally, the social workers, lawyers and judges who were complicit in these cases should all be sacked and put on trial.

They may well end up on the receiving end of filthy Britain’s justice system themselves.

They bloody well deserve it.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/442241/Legal-aid-lawyer-secret-court-and-social-workers-colluded-to-adopt-boys

Who The Fuck Is Chris Spivey? Written by Matt Taylor

Posted on September 10, 2013 by cigpapers

If you haven’t heard of Christopher D Spivey, well I don’t blame you. He’s the up and coming voice of the alternative media.

Chris Spivey [pronounced Spy-Vee] first hit the head lines as a feature writer for the Sovereign Independent Newspaper. He’s a tattoo artist and body piercer, a single father [whose 18 year old daughter has recently given birth to a healthy baby boy] and the man most likely to trigger a British revolution.

I first heard of him via Facebook in 2012, after the Jimmy Savile scandal broke. As far as I can gather he’s just a normal guy from Rochford in Essex. He’s got two Rottweiler dogs and he’s built like a brick-shit-house. He raised his daughter alone since she was 6 months old, and by all accounts he’s a loving father who cares about the world around him.

Like the vast majority of the population, I got my news from such places as BBC, Sky, Channel Four and ITV news programmes. I used to pride myself on having a comprehensive understanding of the world around me by investing in the 45 minutes of Newsnight and the hour of Channel Four news everyday. It was only when I got a Sky box that I discovered other news channels such as Press TV, RT and the news channels from India, France and China. Slowly but surely I found myself watching these channels in favour of the old, finding them more informative and balanced. Surprisingly, I got really upset when Press TV [the Iranian news channel] was taken off the airwaves by Ofcom.

I soon came to realise there was a choice in the type of news you could get. Either the mainstream [MSM] namely BBC, Sky, ITV or the alternative [AV] which is made up of a diverse set of blogs, newspapers, websites and programmes screened on obscure TV channels such as Showcase TV, Edge Media TV and Paradigm Shift TV.

Chris Spivey’s articles stuck out as a high-light and my view of the world has been changed irreversibly ever since.

I was once a Royal Military Policeman who pledged an oath of allegiance to the Queen of England. I joined the Army ready to kill and be killed for my country. Kill and be killed on behalf of who I thought then was a great and illustrious Queen.

But reading Monsters Inc by Chris Spivey [the first article which I read of his] I now consider our great and illustrious Queen Elizabeth II to be a monster, a charlatan and an immoral person. Chris Spivey would describe her differently, maybe as a ‘cunt and a slut’ but that’s just how he talks, ‘Don’t cha know’.

Now, I have been called naive before but I’ve never really agreed with that description. I like to think of myself as an intelligence free thinking individual who takes people at face value and who is willing to listen to what anyone says with an open mind.

If someone tells me they’ve seen a UFO, I’ll believe them until such time it’s proven that they’ve lied. If someone says they’ve seen a sex video of the London Mayor Boris Johnson having rampant sex with Samantha Cameron, the Prime Minister’s wife, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt until such time I’ve seen the tape myself or when they’ve been exposed as a liar. I like people and take people at face value until such time they have been exposed as frauds or liars.

I’ve read books recommended by Chris Spivey such as The Falsification of History by John Hamer which totally threw me of kilter and which I’m still recovering from. But I’ve also read other books which he doesn’t recommend about the subjects he covers, to get a balanced view. Many personalities in the alternative media ask the reader never to take them at face value and to do their own research on the subjects they cover.

The reason I’ve taken Chris Spivey’s articles on board is because they are well crafted, articulated, researched and written. Another major factor is that I like them. He injects humour, personality and passion into every piece. If any of you have read his articles you know he swears like a trooper and if you haven’t yet, you’ll be shocked by the language he uses. Then there are his pictures he accompanies with his articles. You have to see them to appreciate their artistic value. But I understand why he uses such language and images. Number one, he’s real and doesn’t hold his punches and number two, he’s pissed off and angry with the status quo.

Make no mistake, Chris Spivey is writing and circulating articles with libellous accusations. Quite frankly I am shocked with everything he comes out with. And that is only because I believed the MSM to be the authority on news and that if it wasn’t reported by the BBC then it wasn’t true. The AV has changed all that.

Okay, let’s get down to the nitty gritty…. WHO THE FUCK IS SPIVEY?

This man writes well crafted and researched articles which tell, amongst many things:

Tony Blair tried to rape his daughter. [See here for article]
The Royal family are Satanists. [See here for article]
Prince Philip is a paedophile. [See here for article]
That all the Parliamentarians and Lords in the House of Commons are paedophiles. [See here for article]
That Gordon Brown is a paedophile. [See here for article]
That the Woolwich hacking murder was a fake and an acted scenario. [See here for article]
An ex South African terrorist worked for the NSPCC. [See here for article]
That David Cameron may have sacrificed his first born to the Devil. [See here for article]
That Lord Mc Alpine is a nonce [as he likes to call paedophiles]. [See here for article]
and that Madeline McCann is buried under the drive way of Robert Murat. [See here for article]

‘Unbelievable’ wouldn’t you say? How can someone circulate such disgusting accusations and get away with it? Surely this man should be arrested for libel and slander and thrown into a dark dungeon for the next one hundred years…

But no…. Chris Spivey backs up every accusation with well researched and verified public evidence. The proof is there right under the surface and all you have to do is scratch and see for yourself that he’s onto something. He’s got a point… What he says rings true… And the blaring FACT that he hasn’t been thrown in prison says a lot about what he says; namely that the accused daren’t take him to court for libel because what he says is true.

After all, Sally Bercow, the wife of the House of Common’s speaker John Bercow, recently lost her libel case in the High Court for sending a tweet which didn’t specifically accuse Lord Mc Alpine of being a nonce but yet Chris Spivey specifically calls Lord Mc Alpine a nonce in dozens of his articles but yet no lawyer has got in touch.

Giving credit where credit is due he covers a wide spectrum of subject matters. Exclusives are common-place. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known about former ANC/MK terrorist Heinrich Grosskopt holding and abusing an important position within the NSPCC. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t know the true nature of the renowned MP Tom Watson. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known where Madeline McCann’s body maybe buried. If it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t known a lot of things. Most importantly, if it wasn’t for him we wouldn’t have known that the British Establishment and Royal family is invested with perverts, murderers and Satanists.

He writes about subjects which are important and relevant. He comments on the news of the day and wipes away the cloak of mediocrity to unveil the stark truth and reality of the subject matter. He doesn’t hold punches and lays the facts on the line. He’s fearless of bullies and doesn’t give a hoot about threats from Lords, Kings or Queens. The man is a brick wall of opinion and righteous stance. He fights passionately for the rights of children, the downtrodden and abused. If ever you were in a war, Chris Spivey is the type of guy you’ll want standing next to you.

Chris Spivey seems untouchable… And as a consequence very likely to be the one who triggers a British revolution which will see every MP in the country and Royal family member put in jail for either sex crimes or treason… [Don’t think it hasn’t happened before!]

He seems even more determined than ever to bring the House of Cards crashing to the ground after the birth of his Grandson.

“Young Clay makes me more determined than ever to see the downfall of these wholly corrupt, nonce infested, so called democratic governments. I will not rest till there is real change for the better in this country.

My new little man deserves better. Your children and grandchildren deserve better… Let’s go to war.”

You might think that he hasn’t been pulled up because he’s simply irrelevant. A lone voice in the throng of bloggers and alternative journalists who are epidemic across the internet…

You’ll be wrong. Firstly, I’ve heard of him, and I’m your average Joe-the-public type of guy. I visit his website [www.chrisspivey.co.uk] once a day for any new articles and I’m not alone because 30,000 to 40,000 others do the same everyday too. He’s a prolific blogger who checks the newspapers so we don’t have too. If there is any news worth mentioning, Chris Spivey will bring it to our attention. His following is increasing everyday and it’ll only increase further with his appearances on the radio and up coming festivals.

Chris Spivey is a clear and present danger to the British Establishment and I amongst many, welcome it.

After all I agree totally with his sentiment:

“THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO YOU FUCKING PLEBS.

The elites raping our kids and getting away with it. And why?

BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL FUCKING NONCES THAT’S WHY! THE ROYAL FAMILY, THE GOVERNMENT, THE POLICE TOP BRASS, AND THE FUCKING JUDGES TOO. VILE, EVIL, CHILD RAPISTS.

The quicker the blind cunts who think the likes of us are mad realize that fact, the sooner we can protect our children. Until that time comes, the sick cunts with money and power will keep on and on.

WAKEY, FUCKING WAKEY.

I am so fucking angry at the moment, I would fucking hang the Monsters myself.

CUNTS.”

Suffice to say Chris Spivey is not going away. I am positive that once EVERYONE embraces the alternative media and switches of the mainstream news, then a British revolution is inevitable.

Chris Spivey has demonstrated through public record and research that our politicians are criminals, paedophiles and murderers. He has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the British Royal Family are Satanists, murderers and frauds.

Chris Spivey has proven beyond reasonable doubt that EVERYTHING we are told by the MSM is a lie and that there is an alternative point of view…

Read Chris Spivey at your own risk. Your opinion of the world will never be the same again…

Let’s go to war….

!Bw7b-h!!Wk~$(KGrHqN,!hEEv1+zyBfNBMLN9YlcZw~~_12

The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Fraud by New Labour

Posted on April 2, 2013 by cigpapers

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 – 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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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

West Ham United’s New £625million Council House

Posted on April 2, 2013 by cigpapers

Report by Cigpapers

£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.

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.

West Ham’s New Ground

cigpapers

How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

Tag Archives: theft