Scottish Police Force & VAT – The Facts Are – It was Labour That Did It – And Very Nearly Got Away With It

 

 

 

21 November 2007: Top Scottish civil servant ‘knew of VAT bill for the newly formed Scottish Police Services Authority early 2005

The top civil servant at the Scottish Government’s Justice Department was warned in 2005 that the new Scottish Police Services Authority would incur VAT.

The revelation came just a day after the news media revealed a major blunder by the previous Labour administration and civil servants and means the authority, which was set up to create cost savings and centralise procurement, will have to pay VAT.

Civil servants only contacted Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) with their full case for exemption in September 2007 despite the fact the planning for the body started under the Labour Party administration, more than two years ago and the authority became active under the Labour Party administration in April 2007 this year.

Andrew Keddie, former convener of Fife’s police board and a member of the Common Police Services Committee, which preceded the authority, warned Robert Gordon, head of the Justice Department, in late 2005 that the creation of the SPSA would be too costly because it would not be VAT exempt. … (The Herald)

Comment: Amazing what turns up in the archives. It was Labour that committed the Scottish police force to the VAT bill not the SNP.

 

 

 

 

Luke Graham – MP – Another Tory Carpetbagger From England – He is a Snake in the Grass – Scots Need to Waken Up- Update at end of article

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Graham’s of Swindon

Paul Sean Graham was born in the USA in 1958 USA. He married an English girl, Suzanne Elizabeth Graham (nee Wheeler) in 1984. At the time of the marriage he apparently had a son Daniel Aaron Graham b 1975.

15 Dec 1998: The Graham family formed, Amplecom Limited. 50 Fairlawn, Swindon, Wiltshire, United Kingdom, SN3 6EU (Change of address notified: 5 September 2016. Dorcan Business Village, Murdock Road, Swindon, United Kingdom, SN3 5HY:)

Paul Sean Graham and Daniel Aaron Graham were the company’s directors. Additionally, director’s assignments were supported by a secretary – Suzanne Elizabeth Graham.

Luke Patrick Graham worked as a director from 19 January 2016 until his resignation date, 30 June 2017. Murdock Road, Dorcan, Swindon, Wiltshire, SN3 5HY, England. The company is still operating.

 

 

 

 

Luke Patrick Graham was born in 1985, in Eldene, Swindon and attended Dorcan Comprehensive School in Swindon where he excelled in drama and art, joining the Dorcan Performing Arts Group. Once asked to comment he said: “Drama got a lot of people engaged at school – many may not have been before and that is why the performing arts group was set up. There was a big gap for extra curriculum clubs at Dorcan at the time and it slowly grew in popularity. It is still going today and it is great to see that it is still strong with lots of people as members.”

Graduating from the University of Sheffield in 2006, with a BA in Economics and Social Policy he remained in Sheffield and took up employment with the University union from July 2006-2007.

He relocated to London late 2007 and took up employment with Tesco PLC where he was initially tasked to finance duties, including production of performance reports. Tesco were expanding into Asia and in 2008 Luke volunteered to move to China to assist with the ill-fated challenge of developing new shopping centres in Beijing before moving on to Thailand where he completed similar duties.

In 2012, he left Tesco and joined a recently formed “Tough Mudder” venture in the USA where he remained for just under 2 years

In 2014, he returned to the UK and took up a short term contract of employment with Marks and Spencer PLC, employed in Marketing & Strategy. Whilst there he was seconded to the, HRH Princes’ Accounting for Sustainability Project.

 

 

 

 

May 2015 General Election: Ochil & South Perthshire

A guddle of a constituency, grouping traditional labour voters in the old mining communities, farmers in the farmlands around Crieff and the rich people of Auchterarder. The seat throws up weird and wonderful results from time to time. But opinion polls suggest that the SNP could win a staggering 55 of Scotland’s 59 Westminster seats and the prize will fall to Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, an ex-Tory, ex-Labour ‘political butterfly’ who is now one of the SNP’s biggest hopes.

The Tory’s recruited a young Englishman, from Swindon, Luke Graham, to fight for the seat. He had no previous links to the constituency or indeed Scotland and his selection confirmed the lack of talent available to Ruth Davidson and her revitalized party.

He had no place of permanent residence in the constituency making use of an accommodation address satisfying candidacy qualification rules (Clearly no intention of hanging around if defeated).

It was hoped Graham would spring a surprise but this would be dependent on the bulk of the anticipated collapse in the labour vote transferring to his cause, which is not what the forecasting pundits were thinking.

The Tory’s encouraged constituents to vote tactically to defeat the SNP but this was a forlorn hope. There was an 18% + swing to the SNP. But the Tory candidate’s vote held up well.

Party        2010          2015           Change
SNP         27.63%     46.00%       +18.37%
Lab          37.91%     28.43%        -09.48%
Cons       20.49%     20.71%        +00.22%
Lib Dem  11.40%     02.56%         -08.84%

Summary

The Tory polling strategy was to conduct a high visibility public campaign concentrated on blanket canvassing of areas of the constituency where the Tory vote is traditionally strong.

The subsequent gathering of a Tory support figure more than matching that of previous elections proved this political judgement to be sound.

In contrast the SNP stuck to the old ways maintaining a high public profile in towns and larger villages with a higher population density, contacting rural voters by telephone and or promotion leafleting which is impersonal and less effective that doorstepping potential voters.

A campaigning policy weakness that went unnoticed by the SNP in the wake of the landslide victory gained from the collapse of Labour and Lib/Dems.

 

 

 

 

23 Jun 2016: EU Referendum – Britain Stronger In Europe Campaign

Luke Graham, an avid supporter of Britain’s membership of the EU took on the duties of finance director of, Britain Stronger In Europe, dubbed “Project Fear” by sections of the media.

The group unsuccessfully campaigned in favour of the United Kingdom continuing membership of the European Union in the 2016 British referendum. It was launched in London on 12 October 2015 and declared as the official “Remain” campaign for the referendum by the Electoral Commission .

In the referendum, 51.9% voted in favour of leaving the EU, which meant that the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign failed to achieve its goal.

In August 2016 the Electoral Reform Society published a highly critical report on the referendum and called for a review of how future events are run. Contrasting it very unfavourably with the ‘well-informed grassroots’ campaign for Scottish independence, It was described as “dire” with “glaring democratic deficiencies” which left voters bewildered.

The report noted a generally negative response to establishment figures with 29% of voters saying David Cameron (a Remain supporter) made them more likely to vote leave whilst only 14% said he made them want to vote remain.

Looking ahead, the society called for an official organization to highlight misleading claims and for Ofcom to define the role of broadcasters are expected to play in any future referendum.

 

 

 

 

05 Sep 2016: Tech and the Beancounters

Following his failure in Scotland and in the EU Referendum he made his way home to the more hospitable surroundings of Swindon with the purpose of getting back to work in finance and IT.

Thus motivated he first re-joined his parent’s company in January 2016 then formed a new company (with his father and brother), “Tech & the Beancounters”. Company Address: 50 Fairlawn, Swindon, Wiltshire, United Kingdom, SN3 6EU. Provision of financial management services. Directors and Main Shareholders: Luke Graham, Paul Sean Graham, (father) and Daniel Aaron Graham, brother?

 

Liz Smith Landlady

 

 

 

6 Apr 2017: General Election – Ochil & South Perthshire

The UK Prime Minister called a surprise General Election, to be completed on 6 June 2017. The decision to go to the country seeking a new mandate to govern was prompted by opinion polls indicating the Tory Party would command a majority following the election.

The Tory’s in Scotland were also on a high following a good showing (overtaking labour) in the Scottish local elections.

Ruth Davidson was spotted riding a water buffalo across Scotland beating the drum for her party, promoting for all she was worth that the battle for the hearts and minds of Scots would be between the SNP and the Tory’s, the other party’s reduced to fringe voting status.

Key constituencies would be those previously commanding large numbers of Labour voters. Tactical voting would dictate the daily discourse of the media by party’s opposed to the SNP that the Labour vote was up for grabs. But to which political party would Scot’s Labour voters turn.

Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh MP, would be defending the seat against a Tory candidate who at 6 May 2017 had not yet been chosen by Ruth Davidson. The SNP majority of around 9,000 votes was thought to be insurmountable and the seat unwinnable. Excepting that a scandal of significant proportion would engulf the SNP candidate which was unlikely. But!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

03 May 2017: Luke Graham Nominated Candidate for Ochil & South Perthshire General Election 8 Jun 2017.

Sponsored by: Alexander Stirling Fraser Mair, 82yo Perthshire, multi-millionaire landowner and entrepreneur, who leases, Stables Cottage, Madderty, Woodend, Crieff PH7 3PA to Elizabeth Smith, MSP, Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Education.

Luke Graham, the Tory carpetbagger from Swindon notified the Electoral Commission that his place of residence was Stables Cottage. It is assumed therefore that he was temporarily residing with Miss Smith when in the constituency whilst retaining his home address in Swindon.

 

 

 

 

12 May 2017: SNP General Election candidate, Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh embroiled in misconduct probe by legal watchdog related to former career as lawyer

The spoiler

The revelation sparked calls from rivals for her immediate suspension and for Nicola Sturgeon to say when she found out about the matter. But in a statement, the SNP said the probe was over “administrative matters” and Ms Ahmed-Sheikh would be “continuing her campaign to be a strong voice for the people of Ochil and South Perthshire”.

Before her election in 2015, she worked with Glasgow law firm Hamilton Burns. The Law Society of Scotland does not comment on whether it is carrying out misconduct probes and would only confirm Ms Ahmed-Sheikh did not renew her annual practicing certificate last October.

In a statement released through SNP HQ, Ms Ahmed-Sheikh said: “I’m proud of my 17-year career in the legal profession. I am aware that issues have been raised with the Law Society in relation to administrative matters during my time at my former firm. The Law Society has a duty to uphold professional standards and they must be allowed to do so without prejudice. In the meantime, I’m getting on with fighting this election campaign and seeking re-election to stand up for the people of Ochil and South Perthshire.”

 

 

 

 

8 Jun 2017: Ochil & South Perthshire General Election Campaign

The Labour Party and Lib/Dems tried hard early on but then sunk without trace leaving it a two horse race between the SNP and the Tory’s for the seat.

Graham was all over the constituency like a rash, in his battle bus (land rover) greatly assisted by a strong, brash Tory team of activists, not that many of whom spoke with a local dialect.

His daily schedule was always full of engagements and he milked the media for attention with great success getting them to repeat often and loudly his party dogma slogan, “no indy ref2”.

The Tory’s also constantly encouraged constituents to vote tactically to defeat the SNP

Tasmin’s campaign was rather muted although quietly effective by comparison but she appeared to be pre-occupied dealing with the unwelcome and intrusive media attention given over to her private life. but this was a forlorn hope.

There was a 21.00% swing to the Tory’s. The SNP candidate’s core vote held up well. But Labour and Lib/dem voters transferred their loyalty to the Tory’s.

Party          2010        2015            Change         2017           Change
SNP           27.63%   46.00%        +18.37%        35.30%       -10.70%
Lab            37.91%    28.43%       -09.48%         20.00%       -08.40%
Cons         20.49%    20.71%       +00.22%         41.50%      +20.80%
Lib Dem    11.40%    02.56%       -08.84%          03.20%      +00.60%

Summary: Graham deserved his win. He outclassed all other candidates, conducting doorstepping and canvassing in all weathers. The next election might well bring about a different result since Graham was elected due to the miserable performance of Labour and the Lib/Dems and any improvement next time would see the end of the Tory Party.

 

 

 

 

28 Jun 2017: Westminster: Queen’s Speech — Emergency Service Staffing and Pay

Opposition party’s called on the Government to end the public sector pay cap and give the emergency and public services a fair pay rise. The motion was denied by the Tory government. Scottish Tory MP’s including Graham, voted in support of the Westminster government.

Comment: The SNP Scottish government has lifted the pay cap awarding staff at least a 3% pay increase.

 

 

 

29 Jun 2017: Queen’s Speech — Energy Prices — Europe — Tuition Fees — Public Sector Pay — Minimum Wage — Student Grants — 29 Jun 2017

Tory MPs, including Luke Graham, other Scottish MP’s and the DUP voted:

Against an energy price cap.
Against a properly resourced industrial strategy.
Against maintaining the benefits of the European Single Market and Customs Union.
Against maintaining the existing rights of EU nationals living in the UK and EU nationals living in the EU.
Against increased funding of public services.
Against scrapping university tuition fees.
Against restoring Education Maintenance Allowance, maintenance grants and nurses’ bursaries.
Against ending the public sector pay cap.
Against increasing the minimum wage.

Comment: Brutal measures from a government determined to continue with the imposition of harsh austerity measures, rewarding the rich minority of society whilst destroying the will to live amongst the many.

 

 

 

 

7 Jul 2017: Westminster Parliamentary Session: Register of Members’ Financial Interests – Luke Graham, (Ochil and South Perthshire)

Graham declared his financial interests indicating he would be in receipt of occasional travel and associated expenses from the companies with which he retained an interest.

1. Shareholdings: over 15% of issued share capital Tech & the Beancounters Ltd; accounting and finance (a subsidiary of Amplecom Ltd). (Registered 04 July 2017)

2. Miscellaneous Unpaid director of Tech & the Beancounters Ltd. I will receive occasional travel and associated expenses. (Registered 04 July 2017)

3. Unpaid adviser to the Finance and Resource Committee of Sheffield Union. (Registered 04 July 2017)

4. Until 30 June 2017, Director of Amplecom Ltd, 16 Dorcan Business Village, Murdock Road, Swindon, Wiltshire SN3 5HY. No payments since my Election. (Registered 06 July 2017)

 

 

 

10 Jul 2017: Telecom’s Bill (England) Luke Graham Contributes to the Debate

My hon. Friend will agree that the age disparity between young and old can be bridged through the internet and through proper broadband and mobile connections, particularly in rural constituencies and especially those in Scotland.

Although some powers have been devolved—unfortunately no SNP Members are here tonight to speak on such an important issue—I hope that my hon. Friend and the Minister will recognize the important role that Westminster can play in all the nations of the UK by giving funding and offering direction for broadband and mobile.

Intervention by Lindsay Hoyle Chairman of Ways and Means, Chair, Panel of Chairs. Order!!

Mr Graham. This Bill is for England and Wales, not for Scotland. So we need to deal with England and Wales and not drift too far

Comment: Dear! Dear! Luke. That is the reason no SNP members were present at the debate.

 

 

 

19 Jul 2017: Westminster Speech by Luke Graham – Armed Forces (19 Jul 2017)

On the positives, does the hon. Gentleman recognize the contribution of our cadet training forces across the United Kingdom, such as the 383 Alloa Air Training Corps in my constituency, and that we are investing in youth, which will help supply the manpower for our forces in the future?

Comment; Well then now we know the agenda. More young men and women to be recruited to be led by Donkey’s. Enough already I say!!!

 

 

 

31 Jul 2017: Luke Graham MP’s Office Opening in Alloa

Luke Graham opened a constituency office at 32 Primrose Street Alloa.

 

 

 

11 Sep 2017: Westminster Debates – European Union Integration

There have been votes in Parliament on the degree of the UK’s integration with the European Union. Specific matters voted on include the UK’s opt out from the European Union Police and Criminal Justice Measures and the establishment of a European Union External Action Service. Luke Graham consistently voted against more EU integration.

Remember, Graham is the chappie who took on the role of Finance Director of the “Britain Stronger In Europe Campaign.” He claimed to be a “die hard” Europhile. He speaks with forked tongue methinks

11 Sep 2017: Luke Graham voted to end the supremacy of EU law in UK law; to convert EU law into domestic law on the UK’s exit from the European Union and to give ministers the power to correct deficiencies in retained EU law.

11 Sep 2017: Luke Graham voted to end the supremacy of EU law in UK law; to convert EU law into domestic law on the UK’s exit from the European Union and to give ministers the power to correct deficiencies in retained EU law.

14 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted not to require courts or tribunals to have regard to anything done on or after exit day by the European Court, another EU entity or the EU.

21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against requiring the UK Government to report on changes to EU legislation which form part of UK law, and against requiring the Government to consider adopting such changes to ensure that the rights of workers and employees in the UK are no less favourable than they would have been had the UK remained a member of the EU or EEA.

21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights remaining part of UK law on the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union.

21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against retaining general principles of EU law derived from EU treaties, direct EU legislation and EU directives, as part of UK law after the UK leaves the EU, and voted to only retain those general principles deriving from European Court [of justice] case law.

 

 

 

25 October 2017: Prime Ministers Questions – Luke Graham asks a Loaded Question

“As of 2016, 17% of premises in Scotland are without super-fast broadband, compared with just 11% for the UK as a whole. Will my right hon. Friend join me in calling on the Scottish Government to do more and to engage constructively with Departments here in Westminster to deliver this crucial service to communities in Scotland?”

Mrs May: “I say to my hon. Friend that we all recognize the importance of broadband and of fast broadband being available to people in our constituencies. He is absolutely right—the Members of the Scottish National Party come down here and spend a lot of time talking about powers for the Scottish Government, but actually it is time that the Scottish Government got on with using their powers for the benefit of the people in Scotland.”

Comment: Telecom’s and broadband roll-out is not a delegated matter. It is for the Westminster government to decide and implement policy.

 

 

 

 

14 Sep 2017: Point of contact with Ochil and South Perthshire MP unveiled

Recently elected MP Luke Graham has opened a constituency office in Crieff. Located at 2 Comrie Street, the new office will give residents and business owners direct contact with their Conservative MP.

 

 

 

15 Nov 2017: Luke Graham and his Tory MP Colleagues Claim credit for sorting out the VAT charge on the Scottish Police Force

The Scottish government, with the support of the Tory Party merged its eight forces into a single body. HMRC indicated that the change would necessitate a change in VAT qualification since the new body would report direct to the Scottish Government which was not registered for VAT.

The SNP made representations over nearly 3 years, to the appropriate persons within HMRC and Tory government ministers at Westminster asking that a minor change be made to the legislation so that the Scottish Police force would not be disadvantaged over all other police bodies in other parts of the UK. Scotland’s plea for justice was rejected out of hand time and time again.

Then, late 2017 the Chancellor finally agreed the ruling was unfair and it was withdrawn, (but not backdated). The Westminster government broadcast the news through the usual media outlets praising the lobbying skills of the new group of Scottish Tory MP’s who had been sent to Westminster at the 2017 General Election. Needless to say Scot’s were outraged that their elected government requests had been studiously ignored over years, by the Tory government in Westminster. The matter also raised questions about the poor negotiating skills of David Mundell, the Scottish Tory Secretary of State for Scotland who had apparently done nothing to pursue the matter before the intervention of the little group of new blood Tory MP’s that had recently joined him at Westminster. An uninspiring lot of opportunists !!!

Luke Graham tweeted: “Great to hear PM recognize it is Scot Tory MPs representing Scot Police & Fire on VAT, not SNP who caused charge first place!”

Comment: But the 2011 Tory Manifesto Committed the party to reforming the police forces in Scotland thereby incurring the Vat Charge. An extract:

“Scottish Conservatives are committed to maintaining Police numbers over the next Parliament and in order to ensure we can achieve this at a time when the public sector has to make savings, we will merge Scotland’s eight police forces into one.”

 

 

 

12 Dec 2017: Westminster – The “Meaningful Vote” amendment to the EU (Withdrawal) Bill

The Tory Government was defeated after the House of Commons voted in favour of former Attorney General Dominic Grieve’s Amendment 7 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill – to amend Clause 9 of the Bill to require the final Brexit deal with the EU to be approved by statute passed by Parliament – by a majority of just 4.

309 MPs voted for the Amendment,  247 Labour MPs, 34 SNP MPs, 12 Lib Dem MPs, along with 4 MPs from Plaid Cymru, the Green MP and one Independent.

305 MPs voted against the Amendment. All Conservatives, 2 Labour MPs (disobeying their whip to back the Amendment) and all 10 DUP MPs.

 

 

 

 

13 Dec 2017: Luke Graham’s Performance in the commons at Westminster

He has spoken in debates on 126 occasions which is very high.
He has voted 65 times after debates. Never once against the Tory government

 

 

 

Assessment

A very capable young man who has adapted to politics well. He is always ready to promote himself in the media. Interested in acquiring a good working knowledge of constituency matters and in this respect he has ensured his profile is always to the fore through his twitter and Facebook pages.

His stay in the constituency long term is not assured and so far as can be ascertained he simply lodges at the home of Liz Smith Tory MSP on some  weekends when he returns to Scotland from Westminster to complete constituency surgeries etc.

His permanent address is still listed as being in Swindon, with his Dad and Mum and near to his business interests, declared to Parliament.

Getting inside his mind is impossible in normal circumstances but here is a short glimpse:

Swindon is never too far away in his mind and he often reminisces about his time in the town and at Dorcan.

Reflecting on his short time in Scotland he said:

  “I’m proud of Swindon. It is where I come from and I think people see that. I have always felt very strongly about being British and my parents still live in Swindon so when I go to see them, I feel like I’m going home.”

Videos of interest: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PdgBswuYGk) and (https://ieondemand.com/presentations/rolling-forecasting-for-the-future)

 

 

2017/18 update

4 Sep 2018: Graham promoted to PPS for the Cabinet Office

Brown nosing has its rewards. His unqualified support of Theresa May and her government has been recognized by his very early promotion to the Cabinet Office as parliamentary private secretary.

His remit includes responsibility for the constitution, civil service and he is to lead on communication and relations between Westminster and Holyrood.  The latter role will require his focus on Brexit, as it evolves, concentrating on constitutional issues.

His new duties will require a greatly extended presence in Westminster but Graham assured his constituents he would still give Ochil and South Perthshire his support.

 

Image result for luke graham mp brexit

 

 

21 Jun 2017: Graham’s Place of Residence Questioned by Voters

Ian McCubbin (Wings over Scotland)

I have been researching Luke Graham MP. He is not resident in Scotland. Never has been. He apparently lives with Liz Smith MSP, in her rented accommodation at Madderty, Perthshire, at an address owned by Alistair Mair former director of Caithness Glass and STV.  A well known Tory activist and benefactor. Graham’s home is in Swindon. Wonder how many other new Scots Tory MPs are not Scottish by residence?

Ken500 (Wings)

Luke Graham is committing electoral crime. He should be reported to the electoral authorities and the Police. He has made false declaration. Candidates have to be resident in the constituency. To stand for election. Liz Smith (Alistair Mair) has committed electoral fraud as well by aiding and abetting him to make false declaration. Gerrymandering. Punishable by prison.

Ken500 (Wings)

Candidates do not have to be resident in the constituency they are contesting (though I think they should).

Two of the four candidates on my ballot paper 2 weeks ago had addresses outwith the constituency, described only as “an address in Edinburgh West/Glasgow North East”.

It is necessary for ten people on the electoral roll in the constituency to nominate the candidate. That seems to be all, provided the candidate meets other criteria – UK/Irish/Commonwealth citizen with leave to remain, etc. I’ve read the Electoral Commission guidelines – if anyone else can find statements about residency qualifications, that would be interesting.

Police and Crime Commissioners in England and Wales have to be ordinarily resident in the area they seek to represent; one of them was accused of not doing so in 2012. The issue was whether or not he had lied on his nomination form (no, apparently).

Also, Paul Nuttall was criticized during the Stoke by-election because he claimed to be already living there, when he had not moved into the address he gave. Again, the issue was whether or not he lied. But it didn’t disqualify him.

If there is no is no need for residential requirement for election. Why was the Swindon address not given. Or is Luke Graham decamping in Liz Smith accommodation owner by the Tory donor guy. It is obviously not Luke Graham’s abode. Is he in temporary accommodation. Is there not a requirement for permanent residence. Voter need residential qualification. Often conforming with council tax information and confirmed declaration of residency. Does Luke Graham not pay council tax? Or have council tax record. A tax dodger?

 

a person holding a wine glass: A whisky 'nosing' CREDIT: GETTY

 

 

 

23 May 2018: Graham Fully Supports “Made in Britain” Branding of Whisky and other Scottish Products

Theresa May condemned the Scottish Government’s “appalling” behaviour after MPs were told it did not want the Union flag and the word British on food and drink labelling.

SNP ministers were accused by Graham of leaning on Marks and Spencer after documents showed that officials telephoned the high street giant “to seek clarity on the situation” after Scotch whisky was listed on its website as being from the UK.

A separate briefing marked “urgent” was sent to Nicola Sturgeon over Tesco’s decision to change the branding on Scottish strawberries from the Saltire to a Union Flag.

Luke Graham, the Scottish Tory MP, and a former M&S employee, asked Mrs May at Prime Minister’s Questions if she would stand with him “against this petty bullying and support companies that are proud of Scottish and British produce”.

The Prime Minister said she “absolutely agreed”, adding: “We should all be proud of Scottish and British produce, of produce from any part of our United Kingdom.

“And I think it is frankly appalling that the Scottish government did not want to see the Union Flag and the word British on produce.

“It’s not only appalling, it fails to reflect the vote that took place in Scotland, which showed that people in Scotland want to stay part of the United Kingdom.”

It emerged last week that in a briefing to Fergus Ewing, the Scottish Rural Affairs Minister, a civil servant said that M&S had promised to “urgently investigate” the categorization of Scotch and reported back that there had been an error.

Although the company confirmed that the website had been changed, officials then suggested that it issue a public message to “clarify” that the mistake had been rectified. They also promised that Mr Ewing “would respond positively” if M&S did so.

A separate briefing on Tesco strawberries recommended that “no formal action is taken at Cabinet Secretary level at present”, but asked whether Mr Ewing wanted a meeting “in the near future” with the supermarket.

Both cases prompted a series of SNP supporters to write to Scottish ministers, with one questioning whether it was “an attempt by Westminster at a spot of brainwashing or is there something more sinister going on.”

The Scottish Government said the documents showed it had raised public concerns “in a constructive manner”. (Telegraph)

 

a sign on the side of a building: M&S was contacted about its signage for Scotch CREDIT: GETTY

 

The Bonded Warehouse Association (Whisky Trade)

The BWA has over 80 companies as members throughout the UK and has established very close links to Government, regulatory bodies and other Associations. The BWA will engage on a strategic and partnership level to ensure that its members have a powerful voice which is acknowledged and listened to along with a consistent approach and vehicle to influence future policy.

And Graham sponsored this lot to a free dinner party at  Westminster. https://www.thebwa.com/about-us

 

 

"We need a radical, counterintuitive revolution in the Conservative party if we are to survive.”

 

 

18 Mar 2018:  Graham to lead Young Conservatives Campaign to Win Over Millennial Voters

The campaign follows yet another relaunch of the much maligned Young Conservatives, then called Conservative Future, following nearly three years in mothballs after a bullying scandal, (Mark Clarke, who ran the infamous Road Trip 2015 was accused of bullying a young activist, Elliot Johnson, shortly before he committed suicide).

The campaign, led by Scottish Conservative Luke Graham, (who, shocking political pundits unseated an opponent with a massive majority) is being being developed with the activist the recently formed and well funded “rust-belt Tory” group with seats in Scotland and the north of England and is aimed at appealing to a generation of young voters who the Tories claim are not as left-wing as portrayed.

Tory Party chairman Brandon Lewis said the youth arm of the party would seek to engage with “thousands of young people who keep being told they must be Corbynistas, but aren’t.”

Leading the Young Conservatives and discharging the duties  of PPS in Theresa May’s cabinet office begs the question. Where does he find the time for constituency matters? The constituents of Ochil and South Perthshire are being short changed.

 

 

 

Scottish Brexit Legislation

 

 

 

7 Oct 2018: Luke Graham (MP) Fully Supports Westminster Proposals For Farming in Scotland

The Scottish Conservative group submitted their own plans for farming, in Scotland, to Westminster, to be included in an amended bill, allowing amendments to be made to the draft Agriculture Bill so that it will have the same effect in Scotland as it does in Wales and Northern Ireland. The legislation outlining post-Brexit policy in Scotland subsequently had its second reading at Westminster.

Commenting on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives, Luke Graham MP said:

 

“Scottish Conservatives are doing what the Scottish Government failed to do, offering Scottish farmers a brighter future. Farmers need time and support to adapt to changes in agriculture policy. We have known since 23rd June 2016, that farming policy is going to change once we leave the European Union. The Scottish Government have had over 2 years to prepare and come up with a plan, but they have utterly failed to do so. They have continually let farmers down through playing grievance politics instead of doing their job of governing for Scotland. We are urging the Scottish Government to endorse these amendments so they can deliver for Scottish farmers. The U.K. Government offered to make provisions for the devolved administrations, creating a mirror framework to what is planned in England. Both the Welsh Government and Department for Environment in Northern Ireland have asked the U.K. Government to legislate on their behalf, but the SNP have rejected the proposals.”

What a perversion of the truth this chappie spouts. Agricultural policy was devolved from Westminster to Holyrood nearly twenty years ago. The Tory government is intent, (against the expressed wishes of Scots and their government)  on centralizing farming policy on Westminster post-brexit.

The Westminster Tory agenda is now exposed. It will concentrate all decision making on Westminster over time, leading to the closure of Holyrood

 

Image result for luke graham mp brexit

 

 

Graham at Westminster Votes to remove all aspects of EU Integration from Statute

Avid supporter of Britain’s membership of the EU, Luke Graham, was the finance director of, Britain Stronger In Europe”.

The group was launched in London on 12 October 2015 and declared as the official “Remain” campaign by the Electoral Commission and unsuccessfully campaigned in the 2016 British referendum in favour of the United Kingdom retaining membership of the European Union.

Luke’ epiphany: His moment of sudden and great revelation or realization.

“But it happened that as I was on my way, approaching Westminster, a very bright light suddenly flashed through my rail carriage, and I covered my eyes then heard a voice saying Luke, Luke, why are you not supporting the Brexit? And I answered, who the hell are you? and the voice replied, I am a “silly billy” Tory who needs you to support Brexit, and those who were with me were also blinded by the light, but did not understand why the “silly billy” Tory was speaking only to me. And I said what do you want me to do? and the “silly billy” Tory said proceed to Westminster and follow the words and deeds of Saint Michael Gove. and I did.” and I have been well rewarded.”

Talk about a somersault:Ochil and South Perthshire voters were conned.

  • On 11 Sep 2017: Luke Graham voted to end the supremacy of EU law in UK law; to convert EU law into domestic law on the UK’s exit from the European Union and to give ministers the power to correct deficiencies in retained EU law.
  • On 11 Sep 2017: Luke Graham voted to end the supremacy of EU law in UK law; to convert EU law into domestic law on the UK’s exit from the European Union and to give ministers the power to correct deficiencies in retained EU law.
  • On 14 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted to end the supremacy of EU law in domestic law and to remove the mechanism which enables the flow of new EU law into UK law.
  • On 14 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted not to require courts or tribunals to have regard to anything done on or after exit day by the European Court, another EU entity or the EU.
  • On 21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against requiring the UK Government to report on changes to EU legislation which form part of UK law, and against requiring the Government to consider adopting such changes to ensure that the rights of workers and employees in the UK are no less favourable than they would have been had the UK remained a member of the EU or EEA.
  • On 21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights remaining part of UK law on the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union.
  • On 21 Nov 2017: Luke Graham voted against retaining general principles of EU law derived from EU treaties, direct EU legislation and EU directives, as part of UK law after the UK leaves the EU, and voted to only retain those general principles deriving from European Court [of justice] case law.
  • On 12 Dec 2017: Luke Graham voted to allow laws which were required by the UK’s membership of the European single market to be weakened, removed or replaced by Ministers after the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. 
  • On 13 Dec 2017: Luke Graham voted to allow ministers to withdraw the UK from the European Economic Area, the European single market.
  • On 20 Dec 2017: Luke Graham voted against the UK retaining the EU’s common customs tariff and common commercial policy.
  • On 17 Jan 2018: Luke Graham voted for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union.
  • On 17 Jan 2018: Luke Graham voted for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union.
  • On 13 Jun 2018: Luke Graham voted against making the UK’s withdrawal from the EU conditional on seeking, as an objective for the UK’s negotiation of the withdrawal agreement, full access to the internal market of the EU rather than merely European Economic Area membership.
  • On 13 Jun 2018: Luke Graham voted against making the UK’s withdrawal from the EU conditional on seeking, as an objective for the UK’s negotiation of the withdrawal agreement, an international agreement which enables the United Kingdom to continue to participate in the European Economic Area.
  • On 13 Jun 2018: Luke Graham voted against largely retaining the EU “Charter of Fundamental Rights” as part of UK law following the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union.
  • On 13 Jun 2018: Luke Graham voted not to make incompatibility with the general principles of EU law actionable in the UK courts following the UK’s withdrawal from the union.
  • On 13 Jun 2018: Luke Graham voted against steps designed to ensure that the UK’s withdrawal from the EU does not result in the removal or diminution of any rights, powers, liabilities, obligations, restrictions, remedies and procedures that contribute to the protection and improvement of the environment.
  • On 17 Jul 2018: Luke Graham voted against making retaining membership of the European medicines regulatory network a government objective.

 

Graham launches new look young conservatives

Image result for luke graham mp brexit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UK in Breach of the 1968 Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty But the Government Couldn’t Give a Toss for the Concerns of the Electorate – Population of Numpties Happy to be Ruled Over

 

 

 

 

 

US – UK – Mutual Defence Agreement – (MDA) – Year Zero – 1958

1958: the US and the UK signed the Agreement For Cooperation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes – also known as the Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA).

The implications of the agreement were shrouded in mystery until 2004 when the UK public, fed up to the back teeth with the warmongering governments of the UK and USA forced a more open discussion of the implications of signing a new 10 year MDA) agreement.

Private reports surfaced and revealed some, but not all of the extent of the abuses of the 1968 Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This included the formalised exchange of classified nuclear information, weaponry, shared facilities, advanced technology and a range of materials including plutonium, enriched and highly enriched uranium and tritium.

 

 

 

21 Apr 2004: The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs was asked if he planned to lay before the House any amendments to the renewal of the 1958 Agreement for Co-operation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes between Her Majesty’s Government and the United States of America.

The Government obliged, but not until 21 June 2004:

“The amendment to Article III bis of the 1958 Agreement will extend that provision to 31 December 2014.

The 1958 Agreement underpins all nuclear defence co-operation between the US and the UK; without it the US Government cannot share nuclear technology or transfer materials to the UK.

Cooperation under the MDA has been of considerable mutual benefit and it is in the national interest of both the US and the UK to continue.”

No mention of the 1968 (NPT) which superseded the 1958 treaty

 

 

 

22 Jun 2004: The government was asked if the negotiations with the United States for the renewal of the MDA had been concluded and whether there would be an opportunity for Parliament to debate its terms.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Defence, replied that the amendments and an explanatory memorandum to the (MDA) were signed on 14 June by US and UK representatives and laid before Parliament on 21 June under the Ponsonby Rule (established in 1924, based on practices going back to 1892, enabling the Crown to formally ratify treaties 21 days later).

He added that he could not undertake to find Government time for a debate but would give due consideration to any request from the House of Commons Defence Committee and the Liaison Committee for a debate.

In response to a follow-up question about why the confidential intelligence contents of the MDA have never been disclosed to Parliament, He said that “the practice should continue because of the necessity for great confidentiality and because of the use that such information would be to other would-be nuclear states. In other words, it might well assist proliferation”.

 

 

24 Jun 2004: Early Day Motion – Calling for a Sponsored debate in Government time in advance of possible ratification of the treaty

Supported by 51 Labour, SNP and Lib Dem MP’s – US-UK 1958, Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) (10 Year Renewal) & the 1968 Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

“That this House notes the proposed 10-year extension to the 1958 United Kingdom-United States Agreement for Cooperation on the uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence purposes and  believes that the extension of this bilateral treaty undermines United Kingdom and United States’ commitments under Article 1 of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), for which they are depository states, which states each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly.”

The request for a debate was ignored and quite disgracefully, the Labour Government extended the treaty for 10 more years, without any parliamentary scrutiny, only a few days before the 2004 Summer Recess.

 

 

legal or Illegal?

The New Labour government justified the secrecy surrounding the 2004 (MDA) renewal, and the questionable use of the Crown Prerogative as a substitute for parliamentary democracy, on the basis that “such information might well assist proliferation”.

Well, there is no doubt that the provisions of the (MDA) have assisted the vertical proliferation of nuclear capability in the United States and the United Kingdom for over half a century. Indeed, that is explicitly what it stands for.

Legal experts found that it was “strongly arguable that the renewal of the Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) is in breach of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty” (NPT) and outlined the justification for such a finding under applicable treaty law and successive treaties.

“The breach’ referred to is covered by Article I of the (NPT) which states that each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty [China, France, Russia, the UK and the USA] “undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly or indirectly.”

 

 

 

2014: Renewal of the US – UK – (MDA)

20 Jan 2014: Caroline Lucas, Green Party MP asked of the Secretary of State for Defence:

“What the timetable is for his planned renewal in 2014 of the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement and what steps have been taken to facilitate renewal of that agreement to date?”

The answer was delegated to the junior Defence Minister Philip Dunne, who could manage no more than: “Work is under way in the UK and US to amend the treaty by the end of 2014.”

 

 

 

29 Jul 2014:

No surprise then: Cameron and the Tory government ignore the UK public and Westminster by tracing the footsteps of the Blair/Brown New Labour Government

A new agreement critical to Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system, was signed the other day by British and US officials. Whitehall was silent. And the UK public had to rely on the White House, and a message from Barack Obama to the US Congress, to tell us that the 1958 UK-US Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) had been updated.

A new amendment to the treaty will last for 10 years. Obama told Congress it will “permit the transfer between the United States and the United Kingdom of classified information concerning atomic weapons; nuclear technology and controlled nuclear information; material and equipment for the development of defence plans; training of personnel; evaluation of potential enemy capability; development of delivery systems; and the research, development, and design of military reactors.”

The UK, Obama added, “intends to continue to maintain viable nuclear forces into the foreseeable future.” It was in America’s interest, to continue to help Britain “in maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent”.

There was no word from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Whitehall department responsible updating the UK – US treaty. Parliament, a spokesperson said in response to questions, would be informed “at an appropriate time”. MPs would have a 21 day window before the end of the year in which they could debate the issues involved.

However, the content of the new agreement will remain secret. To reveal them, Whitehall officials say, could “assist proliferation” of nuclear weapons.

That is a curious comment given that both the US and UK insist the agreement does not in any way breach their obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).

The updated agreement, means that Britain is stepping up its cooperation with the US over the design of nuclear warheads, raising new questions about the independence of the UK deterrent. Increased cooperation with the US on warhead design and the exchange of material crucial in the manufacture and stockpiling of nuclear weapon is vital to the Trident system.

 

 

 

Legal or Illegal?

Though the agreement is incorporated in US law, it has no legal status in Britain.

The executive director of the British American Information Security Council (BASIC) said that though the agreement is an international treaty that requires regular ratification, it had never been debated in the Commons. Adding: “With the deepening of technical collaboration that shapes the procurement decisions here in London over nuclear weapons programmes, in a manner that stretches or breaks Article 1 of the (NPT), it is high time we took this relationship and its consequences for international security seriously.”

Article 1 of the (NPT) states: “Each nuclear-weapon state party to the treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly…”

A briefing paper drawn up for ministers and Ministry of Defence officials argues that actual physical “movements under the (MDA) do not involve nuclear weapons or devices”. Therefore, the agreement does not contravene the letter of the (NPT.)

There is another, even broader, issue which the government does not want to open up for debate.

The joint Commons/Lords committee on the National Security Strategy has chided the government for not taking such an important issue seriously enough.

“I am afraid that there is little sign that the government has really taken on board the need to put some serious effort into planning for the next National Security Strategy” said former Labour foreign secretary, and chair of the committee, Margaret Beckett. She added: “I fear that — just as in 2010 — the next NSS will be cobbled together at the last minute after the election, as an adjunct to the spending review, rather than guiding the incoming government’s decisions on spending priorities.

“In the run up to the election it is inevitable that the political parties will be focusing on their different policy priorities, but — when it comes to national security — there are strong arguments for identifying where there is common cause.”

Referring to government claims, the committee described as “wholly unrealistic” the assumption that there will be “no shrinkage in the UK’s influence” despite the rise of Asian powers and Britain’s relative economic decline. “Any national security strategy based on this is wishful thinking rather than credible strategy,” the committee said earlier this year.

 

 

Full details here:

Click to access House%20of%20Commons%20Standard%20Note%20UK-USA%20Mutual%20Defence%20Agreement%202004.pdf

http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2003-04/1407
http://www.basicint.org/blogs/2014/02/us-uk-mutual-defence-agreement-renewal-2014-foregone-conclusion
https://www.theguardian.com/world/defence-and-security-blog/2014/jul/29/nuclear-weapons-us-uk-cooperation

 

 

 

Rupert Soames – Cameron’s Secret Fixer Screwed the Scots in 2014 and Nearly Succeeded in Screwing the Brexiteer’s in 2016. So like his Grandfather

 

           Rupert Soames

 

 

Rupert Soames – Winston Churchill’s Grandson – A Business Opportunist?

Departing Oxford University with a third class degree was hardly an inspiring career start for well connected rich boy Rupert and his future was unclear, except that he entered politics as many of his wider family had done previously.

But Arnold Weinstock, CEO of General Electric Company (GEC) rescued him from a lifestyle to which he would be unsuited and gave him a job with the company. He remained with GEC for nearly 15 years progressing through increasing levels of responsibility.

The key to his success was a studious adoption and adaptation of Weinstock business philosophy which had created a business empire comprising over 150 companies and a workforce in excess of 250,000.

After GEC he moved into finance working his way up in the banking software company Misys before falling out with its founder over policy direction.

He was a year unemployed before taking up the post of CEO with Aggreko in 2003 where he achieved a measure of success expanding the company into new business ventures worldwide.

Then Serco came knocking and unable to resist the challenge he applied for and got the job of CEO on a salary package in excess of £2million annually.

 

 

 

2013: Serco

Serco, the Service Company, a corporation so large no one had ever heard of it in 1990, except the Tory party who outsourced to it just about every public service it had not already privatised.

In 10 years it expanded taking over service provision on long contracts, for health, schools, roads, prisons, RAF ground maintenance, naval support, immigration, refugee control, accommodation, the Olympics, The Commonwealth games. The list is endless.

The profits made by Serco from the UK taxpayer registered in the £billions. The value of the company soared to around £6Billion as it took on huge commitments in Australia and other southern Hemisphere nations. The workforce registered around 130,000 at its peak. Investment trusts loved the company reaping immense financial benefits year on year.

But then it all went wrong.

Early in 2013 an aspiring civil servant in the Ministry of Justice picked up an anomaly. Thousands of ex-criminals, freed suspects and timed served prisoners and dead people were apparently still being fitted with tracking devices and being monitored at a cost to the taxpayer of about £50million annually.

Many months of investigation later and following the company’s refusal to accept it was not appropriate to charge the government for monitoring people who were no longer in the justice system and/or were long dead, Serco was banned from bidding for any new contracts with the government, initially for 6 months and the fraud squad were asked to investigate all contracts presently in place.

The ban hit Serco where it hurt most, revenue started to fall quickly as more and more questions about probity were raised by the press and other media. Almost 25% of the company’s annual revenue was dependent of the UK government. “Ripping off the UK taxpayer” headlines were heeded by the stock markets and Serco’s share price hit the rocks. And there were further revelations about potential fraud in respect of a patient transfer contract in London and East Anglia valued at £290million

Serco started to fall apart as investors withdrew their funds and opposition politicians attacked government incompetence. Day after day new allegations surfaced and the management board were forced to act as the company was about to go “belly up.” In October 2013 the Chief Executive fell on his sword and resigned as did a number of other key personnel.

Not long after his departure a damming report was published bringing to the attention of the UK public, horrors being inflicted by Serco, on the most vulnerable people in the country highlighting a disgraceful level of service provision and management of refugee centres at Yarn Wood and Wakefield. Here is a summary of what was witnessed;

“The rooms were home to rats and cockroaches. Pregnant women were placed in poor housing with steep stairs. Food poisoning was common. Some private contractors did not pay council fees, and tenants’ heating and electricity had been disconnected.” This hellish place is called Angel Lodge.”

Serco was forced to introduce immediate organisational and management changes meeting the requirements of their contracts with government through the provision of accommodation fit for human habitation.

But, leaderless and rudderless Serco lurched from one crisis to another over the next 6 months before accepting an offer to manage the company, from English businessman of note Rupert Soames who was at the time the CEO of the Scottish company Aggreko that specialised in the manufacture and supply of temporary power supplies for projects all over the world.

Aggreko had recently benefited from from a merger with a much larger and well resourced US company, was on a sound footing financially and no longer needed his management skills.

Accepting the offer from Soames was a no brainer for Serco which was in dire straights. The company was in desperate need of a CEO unsullied by business scandals possessing influence on the UK government.

Not long after taking up the post of CEO, Soames identified the company was in a very perilous financial state and went to the market seeking around £200million to keep it afloat.

But bad news kept on coming. There were complaints about unacceptable contract performance in respect of refugee, immigration, accommodation provision and sexual abuse at Yarn’s Wood where female asylum seekers were housed. Something had to be done fast to remedy the situation or the company would sink without race.

Soames moved quickly, recruiting proven managers with whom he had worked previously. His new team examined the books and identified risky contracts and or contracts that provided little, if any financial return.

These were speedily disposed of to other companies. He then ensured a full payment of the outstanding debt in respect of the prisoner monitoring shambles to the Ministry of Justice. But Serco continued to Haemorrhage money despite the changes

By the late summer of 2014, Soames had decided to make major changes to Serco.

He would restructure the company directing it’s activity wholly to support of government contracts. All other business would be sold off. The human cost would be the loss of many thousands of employees and a loss of annual financial revenue of about 30%.

But the changes would not be without risk and he needed to be assured of the Tory led coalition government support through the extension of and award of new contracts. He got that from his friend David Cameron, then leader of the Tory party.

 

 

 

2014: The Scottish 2014 Independence Referendum and big Business Support of the Union

Early spring 2014 and the CBI nailed its colour to the Union cause without consulting their membership. The BBC, a member was onside with the decision in contravention of its commitment to the public to be even handed in all respects

Late August 2014. Scotland is subject to a Unionist “shock and awe” campaign signed up to by over one hundred business leaders who say that the economic case for independence is badly flawed and Scotland would be assured of a successful future only if it rejected calls for independence. A campaign letter issued at the start stated:

“Uncertainty surrounds a number of vital issues including currency, regulation, tax, pensions, EU membership and support for our exports around the world; and uncertainty is bad for business. Scotland’s economy is growing. We are attracting record investment and the employment rate is high. We should be proud that Scotland is a great place to build businesses and create jobs – success that has been achieved as an integral part of the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom gives business the strong platform we must have to invest in jobs and industry. By all continuing to work together, we can keep Scotland flourishing.”

HSBC, The Co-operative Bank, BHP Billiton, Edrington, (owners of the Macallan and the Famous Grouse), The BG Group, Cairn Energy, The Weir Group and many other businesses ranging from farming to fishing with technology, energy and finance thrown in were also actively involved sending personal letters to employees and shareholders beseeching them to vote for the Union cause.

Concerns were raised concerning the probity of the letter, when it was revealed that it had been orchestrated through the cabinet office of David Cameron who had stated publicly, on many occasions that he would not interfere with the referendum process believing it was a decision to be made by Scots alone. Scottish businessmen that signed to letter were numbered in single figures which galled those who intended to vote for independence.

More on this later.

 

 

 

2015: Serco and the Red Road Refugees

With the referendum safely out of the way the Westminster government boldly extended additional control of immigration and refugee support to Serco and the abuse continued.

More and more vulnerable people were moved to Glasgow’s Red Road flats, long declared unfit for human occupation. But Scots were outraged and through public pressure they forced Glasgow City Council to clear the flats of refugees, flatten the affront to modern society and rehouse the immigrants and refugees.

Orchard & Shipman, an estate leasing company based in London, England had been sub-contracted by Serco to manage the re-housing process and took scores of Glasgow City Council and district properties to its books.

Quality varied in range from barely acceptable to good, but rental charges to the UK government increased significantly over the Red Road housing, providing greatly increased profits for Serco who charged the exchequer the premium rental rate regardless of the actual accommodation rental charges.

 

 

 

2016 The European Union Referendum

A leaked letter revealed the real extent of David Cameron’s plotting against the Brexit campaign at the time he was still supposed to be renegotiating the UK’s membership of the EU. He had colluded with big business to fight the Anti – Brexit cause.

Pro-Brexit politicians, such as Boris Johnson were affronted, claiming that Cameron’s efforts in Europe, seeking a renegotiation of the UK’s terms of membership was a fraud and called for an independent inquiry into the matter.

The secret strategy included asking FTSE 500 companies to warn their shareholders of the catastrophic effect on the UK economy if the Brexit campaign was successful and was referenced in a letter dated 8 February 2016, from Serco boss Soames to Cameron 11 days before the latter’s renegotiation deal with the EU was complete. But Cameron had been advising the Commons that he ‘ruled nothing out’ unless he won concessions from the EU.

Boris Johnson raged, “Now we learn that some fat cats have been secretly agreeing to campaign for remain while angling for lavish Government contracts. It makes us look like a banana republic. And it is also now beyond doubt that the so called renegotiation was a fiction designed to bamboozle the public. It was a meaningless mime, a ritual, a kabuki drama in which the outcome was utterly preordained. This is not the far-reaching and fundamental reform we were promised.’

Soames letter stated; “There were two points I thought I might follow up on. The first is how to mobilise corporates to look carefully at the risks Brexit represents. In this respect I am working with Stuart Rose (the head of Britain Stronger in Europe) with a view to contacting FTSE 500 companies who have annual reports due for publication before June and persuading them that they should include Brexit in the list of key risks. All public companies are required to set out in their annual report an analysis of key risks.”

In February 2016 Serco was one of 200 businesses to sign a public letter in support of EU membership.

The timing of Soames letter to Cameron had significance since it was written days after Cameron had delivered a speech calling for sweeping prison reforms. Part of the content contained a Soames argument that the private sector had only around 15% of the UK prison’s market and this did not represent value for money for the taxpayer.

Brexiteer’s were furious and demanded to know how many other businesses Cameron had hatched secret deals with and what promises had been made. Tory MP Steve Baker said: “This is proof that big corporates are being asked to gang up on hard-working British families to try to bully them into staying in the EU. There is a coordinated attempt to use company reports as campaigning documents.” And Labour Leave campaigner Gisela Stuart said: “Today George Osborne accused the Leave campaign of inventing conspiracies. Now we see that David Cameron is knee deep in one.” Serco denied there was any link between support for the EU and trying to secure state contracts.

 

 

 

Rupert Soames 8 February 2016 Letter to David Cameron

“Thank you for a very useful meeting last week. There were two points I thought I might follow up on. The first is how to mobilise corporates to look carefully at the risks Brexit represents. I am d Stuart Rose (the head of Britain Stronger in Europe) with a view to contacting FTSE 500 companies who have annual reports due for publication before June and persuading them that they should include Brexit in the list of key risks…

“During the Scottish referendum campaign we managed to garner a lot of publicity as a series of companies formally stated in their annual reports that independence for Scotland was a major risk.”

So there we have it. The tactic worked against the Scots in the 2014 referendum. Worth another outing.

 

 

 

2016: The CBI Gets Involved seeking to influence the outcome of yet another referendum

Just as it did in 2014 at the time of the Scottish Independence referendum the CBI flexes its muscles in support of Cameron and the anti – brexiteers

The CBI chief said bosses should explain to employees the adverse implications of Brexit on their businesses. The organisation, representing around 200,000 firms, backed staying in the European Union and insisted the move was; “not about telling people how to vote” but rather about responsible business leaders explaining the impact a Brexit would have on company growth, their jobs and their communities. We believe that if Britain left the EU, it would be more difficult for us to win EU government contracts, and we regard this as a risk to the business.

Vote Leave blasted the CBI’s advice and said it was ‘highly regrettable’ to see “bosses gang up on staff” in an anti-democratic abuse of power by the EU-funded CBI which supported the ERM and the single currency.”

Microsoft followed CBI advice and wrote to all 5000 of its staff in the UK advising while the decision was one “for individual voters to make” Microsoft’s view “was that the UK should remain in the EU.”

Soames, grandson of Winston Churchill, said he would argue “‘ferociously” for the UK to remain in the EU whatever the result of the PM’s renegotiation. In recent years, Serco has secured contracts worth £3.2billion to run private prisons in England and Wales. It has also won contracts with the Home Office worth £704million to run immigration removal centres and accommodation for asylum seekers. Since joining the company in 2014, former Eton pupil Soames has been entitled to a salary and pension worth more than £1.1million a year. He can also pocket an annual bonus of up to £1.275million.

 

 

Queensferry Bridge Snagging Work – South Bound Traffic Diverted to Forth Road Bridge For 5 Days – Little Inconvenience to Drivers – But All Bridges Have Problems From Time to Time Even Tory Built Projects

 

 

 

 

Building Bridges – A Sorry Tale From the past

The story of the first Severn Bridge is one of incompetent management on the part of the DfT from the start. And the Welsh taxpayer had to meet the cost of the debacle. Consider the following:

The Severn Bridge opened in 1966. Build cost £8million. The Queen described it as “the dawn of a new economic era for South Wales”.

Run as a toll bridge, providing finance for bridge maintenance, its design and build soon revealed major faults with resulting high repair costs.

The Tory government decided to give the bridge back to Freeman Fox, the construction company in the mid 1990’s

But who would finance the deal? The bridge debt had risen to £100million. The answer was the taxpayer, who had to foot the bill so that the, “Severn Crossing” company would be able to sign off the contract for maintaining the bridge.

The subsequent inquiry identified DfT mismanagement.

 

 

 

Freeman Fox had designed and built a revolutionary lightweight box girder bridge which was excellent for light traffic but not heavy use.

A consequence of the bridge design was that the stress load on the boxes increased quickly as the weight of traffic was cubed. And the cube weight transfer would be doubled for dead load compared to live load. That is traffic stopping on the bridge creating massive stress compared to moving traffic. Additional strain would also be placed on the bridge uprights if heavy trucks stopped on the bridge just over an upright.

So lorry convoys were forbidden and traffic jams were to be prevented.

But the DfT placed the toll booths incorrectly forcing a build up of traffic on the bridge at busy times, and they allowed lorry convoys.

When challenged the DfT said that British lorry drivers would never accept a “bridge-master”, a traffic police officer, whose job would be to split up lorry convoys, allowing 5 cars then a lorry, 5 more cars, then a lorry etc.

Just ten years after opening bridge use was first closed then reduced to single lane traffic for extensive periods, resulting in major delays.

Repair costs exceeded £80million, ten times the cost of the build.