Political Cleanup

Archive for the ‘Democracy undermined’ category

Soapbox 499 – for the 99%: does government turn ‘a blind eye to corporate rule’ or aid and abet its food commodities masters?

May 24th, 2013

A dairy farmer writes:

Without a shadow of a doubt, the corporate-political nexus is definitely paving the way for factory farming.

The claim of corporate responsibility is a sham. It means nothing and is entirely dishonest.

Anything and everything is being used to beat family farmers and the small producer over the head, and producers who are encouraged to invest are being led into a dangerous trap.

Government promises of scrapping of quangos and regulations were meaningless and once a token gesture was accepted the quangos have gone into overdrive to help satisfy the pincer-like hold the corporates have over the family farmers and small to medium sized producers.

It is no coincidence there are 15% less farmers on supermarket aligned contracts in the last year and one by one dedicated contracts will be quietly dropped.

We are in the grip of large corporate retailers and two large foreign processors who, by stealth, are gradually forcing efficient small and medium sized producers out of business or trapping them into slavery by encouraging fruitless investment.

They are exposing producers to intense financial risk in the market as government turns a blind eye to corporate rule and practices such as price capping, unethical collusion behind the scenes.

»

Posted in Advisors and consultants, Agriculture, Conflict of interest, Corporate political nexus, DEFRA minister Owen Paterson, Democracy undermined, Economy, Government, Lobbying, Planning, Secret State, Soapbox 499, Vested interests

Tags: corporate retailers Dairy Factory farming Financial risk in the market Food producers Supermarket aligned contracts Two large foreign processors

Government scientific advisor’s priority “ensuring that scientific knowledge translates to economic growth”

May 14th, 2013

In an article to be published in the Guardian today, George Monbiot lists racism, nationalism and war as three of many hazards to which society are exposed if ‘intellectuals’ side with soldiers or sellers.

He refers to his castigation of the new chief scientist, Sir Mark Walport, featured here in April, for misinforming the public about risk, making unscientific and emotionally manipulative claims and indulging in scaremongering and wild exaggeration in defence of the government’s position on several issues.

But he now thinks that the problem runs deeper than he has surmised:

“Speaking at the Centre for Science and Policy at Cambridge University, Walport maintained that scientific advisors had five main functions, and the first of these was “ensuring that scientific knowledge translates to economic growth”. No statement could more clearly reveal what Benda called the “assimilation” of the intellectual. As if to drive the point home, the press release summarising his speech revealed that the centre is sponsored, among others, by BAE Systems, BP and Lloyd’s”.

Also at Oxford and Manchester . . .

“Last week, two days before CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere reached 400 parts per million, Oxford University opened a new geoscience laboratory, named after its sponsor, Shell. Among its roles is helping to find and develop new sources of fossil fuel.

“This is one of many such collaborations. Last year, for example, BP announced that it will spend £60m on research at Manchester University, partly to help it drill deeper for oil. In the US and Canada universities go further: David Lynch, dean of engineering at the University of Alberta, appears in advertisements by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, whose purpose is to justify and normalise tar sands extraction.

Monbiot concludes:

“Climate change is one of the great moral issues of our age, but the scholars in the strongest position to challenge the industry responsible are, instead, lending it what Benda calls their “moral prestige”. Neoliberal economists, imperialist historians, warmongering philosophers, pliable chief scientists, compromised energy researchers: all are propelling us into the arms of power . . .

“Over the past few days, I have asked the Shell Professor of Earth Sciences at Oxford, the university itself and the umbrella body Universities UK to explain the ethical difference between taking tobacco money for cancer research and taking fossil fuel money for energy research. None of these great heads, despite my repeated attempts to engage them, were prepared even to attempt an answer.

“So perhaps this is where hope lies: unlike Benda’s scholars, these people have not yet developed a justifying ideology, which permits them to excuse or glorify the compromises they have made with power. . . “

Read the article at www.monbiot.com

»

Posted in Advisors and consultants, Corporate political nexus, Democracy undermined, GM, Parliamentary failure

Tags: Cambridge University Dr Mark Walport George Monbiot Government's chief scientist Manchester University Oxford University

Soapbox 499 – for the 99%

May 14th, 2013

The ‘captive state’ – a Britain organised under successive governments to suit the corporate few – grossly mistreats people like the late Stephanie Bottrill. A Cambridge reader writes:

This suicide should shock and shame the government.

Politicians on £64,000 per year have no idea how low-income people in this country
have to live.

How would they respond if they were suddenly required by law to move far away into a smaller house, away from friends and relations?

And yes, all sectors of our state are captive to the corporations, who are the real rulers of this country.

.

»

Posted in Advisors and consultants, Conflict of interest, Corporate political nexus, Democracy undermined, Government, Lobbying, Parliamentary failure, Soapbox 499, Vested interests

Tags: Cambridge reader Stephanie Bottrill The captive state The corporations The real rulers of this country.

PCU: the ‘captive state’ – a Britain organised under successive governments to suit the corporate few – grossly mistreats people like the late Stephanie Bottrill

May 13th, 2013

Following posts on Birmingham and Solihull websites, readers who have responded fall into two categories:

Some – living on average or above average incomes have been quite unsympathetic:

In her place I’d cut my coat according to my cloth
Would losing £20 be such a big deal?
These people are always whining.
The son’s approach to the Sunday papers was motivated by financial gain.
Think of the mothers and children cramped in one-bedroom accommodation.
She didn’t care about the trauma she would be inflicting on the lorry driver

Others affected:

are thankful that this issue has been raised,
have written about similar problems they are facing,
say that their grand-children will not be able to stay with them if they move,
point out that to a person with a disposable income of £77 – £20 is a 25% cut,
and that for a single person, £20 is the amount a person will spend on food bill – not including fresh meat.

PCU sees the captive state – Labour and Conservative governments alike, in thrall to the rich and powerful.

Many politicians are eager for the crumbs falling from these corporates – not usually in brown envelopes but in the form of declared directorships and also undeclared lucrative opportunities for family employment.

Two of many examples where the ‘captive state’ is easy on the affluent but bears down on people like Stephanie Bottrill:

The government commandeered taxpayers’ money to bail out other affluent bankers and HMRC created a “bespoke” tax arrangement for Goldman Sachs in order to resolve a “huge relationship issue” with the bank. It excused Goldman Sachs from paying £10 million interest on tax it had not paid. The government also commandeered taxpayers’ money to bail out other affluent bankers.

No parallel desire is shown to create relationships and help the poor and powerless.