It is not only “the mother of all parliaments” that is broken. Our entire political system is as well

Britain has the sixth richest economy in the world, yet 13.7million of our citizens are living in poverty and 4million of those are children. Our government are driving a counter productive, ideological program of austerity against the poorest and most vulnerable in society, while cutting the top rate of income tax and plans afoot to cut it even further from 45% to 40%. The chancellor intends to sell off our 81% shareholding in RBS, to an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, despite objections from the public that the sale will result in a £13bn loss on our initial £46bn investment. However, when inflation and interest repayments since 2008 are factored in, the actual loss to the taxpayer will be £32.6bn. A proportion of our share holding in Lloyds bank has already been sold off, but what we were not told is that it was at a loss to the taxpayer of £530million.

In 2014, an estimated £104bn in tax revenue went unpaid through tax avoidance and evasion. The independent living fund, which provides disabled people with independence and a much needed lifeline will be scrapped and the money it provides will not be replaced. In the name of austerity, all public sector workers have endured a pay freeze since 2010, while MP’s are in line for a 9.6% pay rise that will be back dated to April, which 88% of respondents to a public consultation carried out by IPSA voted against. Due to cuts in the legal aid budget, people are now being forced to defend themselves in court, against well paid and highly trained barristers & solicitors and this may be in breach of their fundamental human right to a fair trial. Despite their denial and having no public mandate to do so, successive governments have been pushing our NHS towards full privatisation.

During the election campaign, David Cameron promised us 5,000 new GP’s by 2020, but just six weeks later health minister Jeremy Hunt has been forced to admit the pledge is unachievable. Since the introduction of the Health & Social Care Act 2012, the provision of all NHS services must be put up for legal tender. But contrary to both UK & EU competition law the process is not a level playing field. As a public sector organisation, our NHS is unable to reclaim the VAT it pays on purchasing medicines, medical equipment, legal advice etc, while private corporations are able to. This means that NHS costs are always 20% higher than those for a private healthcare provider when bidding for a contract. Due to continuing under funding, a growing population, cuts to local authority funding effecting social care provision and staff leaving in their thousands, our NHS is teetering on the very edge of a cliff. Successive governments, who want to see it fall off the cliff so they can declare it is unaffordable and must be handed over to the private sector, have deliberately caused all of the current problems with our NHS.

The outcome will be a two tier health service, where world class healthcare will be available only to those who can afford it. Future governments will provide a certain amount of funding and we will all be expected to take out top up health insurance to cover the additional costs of treatment, or fund it ourselves. Those who cannot afford the top up insurance will not receive treatment. Our NHS is a national treasure and in 2014 was rated the best healthcare service in the world. No government, either past or present have had a mandate from the people for privatisation. It is our NHS, we pay for it and it is a shameful indictment of the state of democracy in Britain that our governments have been able to attack it in the ways that they have, for their own political gain. We should have been given a say in the PFI contracts that were forced upon NHS trusts, changes to the structure of our NHS through the introduction of foundation trusts, the changes made to GP contracts, the introduction of the HSCA 2012 and the way our NHS is funded. If we had, perhaps it would not be in the crisis it is in now and would not have the chronic shortage of GP’s we now have.

Successive governments have not been listening to us and despite their promises, have proven themselves both unwilling and unable to provide a better, more democratic society where we can all prosper. Britain is not a democracy and is playing dangerously close to the edge of becoming something much worse. As our governments have failed to provide the kind of democratic society we all want, it falls to us, the people of Britain to design and build it for ourselves. A society where all of it’s citizens are equal before the law, regardless of their position in society. A society where we decide the role of our government, monarchy and all other institutions. Where our politicians are truly accountable to their constituents, who will have the power to sack their politicians. The make up of government is reflective of our wishes, as expressed in general elections. A society where we set the rates of corporation tax and decide the consequences for those who do not pay what is due. We will decide the structure and funding available for our education system and our NHS. It will be for us to decide the role of our police forces and the powers with which they are entrusted.

In a democratic society, teachers will be free to teach, nurses and doctors will be free to treat patients without the added and unnecessary burden of forms and paperwork, if we so choose. We might decide that in the event of our government wanting to take us to war, a referendum will be called in order for the people to decide. It might be that we decide all government spending is made freely and publicly available, including full details of politicians expenses. All exceptional public spending will require public approval, for example in the event of another bank bailout being necessary, if we so choose. In fact all of the rules around how a new democratic Britain will work, including it’s institutions, would be decided by us, the people of Britain. This will require a mass movement of the people. A coming together of all creeds and races in the name of democracy, to build a better, more democratic and fairer British society. It would be a vast demonstration of people power and a statement to our government and institutions that we will not lay down and take their self serving creed anymore. We will not allow them to divide us. Instead we will unite and from now on we will be setting the rules.

This will be a movement of the people towards a citizens’ convention on the constitution. A constitution is basically a rule book which dictates how society operates and the role of it’s institutions. In Britain, we do not have a written constitution. The citizens’ convention will be a national event involving people from all corners of Britain. We will come together to decide the kind of democratic society we want to live in. We will decide the rules around whether we have a welfare state and how it will operate. We will decide if and when our share holding in RBS & Lloyds banks is to be sold off. We will decide if and when any of our public sector assets are to be privatised. We will decide how many foreign refugees to welcome into Britain. All of this and more, we will decide in the first ever written constitution of Britain. The peoples constitution.

A good day for the labour party, a great day for the future of British democracy

Since the labour party disastrous defeat in the recent general election and Ed Milliband stood down as party leader, I hadn’t paid much attention to the leadership contest. From the little I did hear, it seemed to me to be difference faces saying the same old things. Just the same old tory lite policies we have all heard before. “Aspiration” became the buzz word of the campaign and a number of the candidates attacked the policies of Ed Milliband, saying he was too far left and the party needed to take a more central ground. I, like many others felt uninspired by any of the candidates and quickly lost interest, while wondering to myself what the purpose of the labour party is, if it can’t challenge tory policies and offer the electorate a real choice. Disheartened and disappointed that a golden egg opportunity had been wasted I stopped listening, just as the party stopped listening to it’s members a long time ago. I was certain that the labour party was doomed, finished as a front line player in British politics. Until the Greens, or a new left wing party was formed and gained the required momentum, we would be stuck with successive conservative majority governments.

Then in the final quarter, north Islington MP Jeremy Corbyn declared his intention to enter the competition. I live just outside the border of his constituency, so although he is not my MP (unfortunately) I have met Corbyn a number of times. Two friends and myself had set up a new project for people in early recovery from drug and alcohol addiction and we organised a party to celebrate the clubs first birthday. As chairperson of the committee I invited both local MP’s, the two mayors and the local press. Jeremy Corbyn was the only one who turned up, despite having a busy schedule that evening and spent some time with the club members, talking to them, socialising with them and it was a great evening. He left the club at 9.20pm and told us he was heading back to the houses of parliament to finish off some work.

The second time I met Jeremy was when a friend of mine, who was a constituent of his, was receiving an award from our local mayor. Again, he mixed and spoke to lots of people, didn’t matter who they were. We had a conversation about an issue I was having with the local PCT. The reason I am telling these personal stories is in an attempt to demonstrate the type of man Jeremy Corbyn is. He is an exemplary MP who works hard for his constituents, whatever their issues or concerns might be. Many of our MP’s could learn a lot by following his example. Jeremy is not a 9-5 five days per week MP, nor is he anyone’s puppet, having repelled against different labour party leaders five hundred times when voting. British politics would not be in the state it is now if all MP’s were as dedicated, committed and worked in the interests of their constituents, as Jeremy Corbyn does. The people of north Islington are very lucky to have him as their MP and I am not in the least bit resentful my house is not 500 yards further north.

Today, if only by the skin of his teeth, Jeremy has made it onto the ballot for the labour party leadership contest. This is indeed a good day for the labour party, but also a great one for the future of British democracy. There has been a huge campaign on twitter supporting him and his facebook page now has 21,000 fans. Suddenly there is a new buzz and excitement about the leadership contest. You see Jeremy Corbyn is a man of the people. He is the only candidate who appreciates the damage and suffering being caused to real people by the tories austerity program and he stands firmly in the anti austerity camp. In fact, he has actually joined many of the anti austerity demonstrations in London. He is also the only candidate who is anti trident, believing it is insanity to spend £30billion+ replacing our very own weapons of mass destruction. Jeremy was one of the few labour MP’s who voted against the Iraq war and possibly the only one to join the anti Iraq war demonstrations.

With Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the labour party we would have a strong voice to speak for the benefit claimants who are being unfairly sanctioned, the 4.1million children living in poverty, the working class poor, those unable to get a fair trial because of the tories cuts to the legal aid budget, all of our public sector workers who have had to endure a five year pay freeze, and the 1.084million people who were forced to depend on food banks last year, to name a few. We would have someone to challenge the tory policies of austerity, trident renewal, fracking our countryside, attacking our fundamental human rights, tax breaks for the rich, bankers bonuses, the estimated £122billion in unpaid taxes last year, allowing the banks to continue with their irresponsible activities that caused the global financial crisis in 2008 and perhaps most importantly the privatisation of our NHS. He would be a voice for all taxpayers who stand to lose £14billion from George Osborne’s plans to sell off our 81% shareholding in RBS bank, plus the 7 years of interest we have paid on borrowing the money to bail out RBS in the first place. If elected, Jeremy would be a voice for the millions of British people who currently do not have a voice.

The possibility of a move towards real democracy in Britain is alive again with Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the labour party. Now that he is on the ballot for the leadership contest, a real debate can begin about the future of the labour party, but also how we are to be governed. It will be a tough campaign, but Jeremy has a lot of grass roots support and many people will be encouraged by the possibility of a clear alternative to the policies of the tories. There are four candidates in the contest, but Jeremy is the only one standing firmly on the side of everyone who is fed up with our wholly undemocratic political system. But even if he does not win the contest, the four months campaign will present an opportunity to challenge the lies and myths spread by the tories and our national press. I am not traditionally a supporter of the labour party, but I encourage everyone to grab this opportunity with both hands and join in the debate about the future of the labour party. There has never been a greater opportunity to be a part of bringing real change to British politics and there has never been a better chance for a move towards real democracy.

Bung us 40million francs and we’ll say no more about it

The hopes of millions of people across Europe, that Switzerland would join the tiny number of countries taking legal action against HSBC (Swiss) for money laundering were dashed today when Geneva’s chief prosecutor Olivier Jornot announced that a financial settlement of 40million Swiss francs (£28million) had been reached and that the Swiss authorities would be taking no further action against the bank.  The bank was under investigation for money laundering, following when UK channel 4’s dispatches program made public information that the Swiss arm of British bank HSBC had been assisting individuals to hide money from their national tax authorities. The information originally came to light when IT specialist Herve Falciani who was working at the bank in Switzerland turned whistleblower and leaked details of some 106,000 private accounts at the bank.

In the UK, HMRC received the leaked files in 2010. Following the dispatches program in February, it was revealed by HMRC they had identified three thousand six hundred British nationals from the Falciani files, when they appeared before the Public Accounts Committee. Of those, two thousand five hundred were found to have done nothing wrong, as it is not illegal to hold a private bank account in a foreign country. All but one of the remaining one thousand one hundred British citizens, were allowed to pay the outstanding tax plus a small financial penalty of 10% and that was the end of the matter. That means one thousand and ninety nine British individuals were caught red handed evading tax, which by the way is illegal in Britain and not one of them were prosecuted. HMRC claim to have collected £135million in unpaid taxes and penalties. The one individual HMRC did prosecute was found guilty of tax evasion in the amount of £387,103 and was ordered to pay an additional £469,444 in fines and legal costs. Tens of millions in tax evaded and not a single person spent even one day in jail.

It was through a tax amnesty agreement between the British tax authority and tax authority in Lichtenstein that the one thousand and ninety nine individuals were allowed to make financial settlements. The Lichtenstein agreement was set up in 2009 so that British nationals who held financial assets there could declare them to HMRC without facing prosecution. However the agreement had some strict conditions in order for the amnesty to be offered. Firstly, the assets had to be held in Lichtenstein. Secondly, the amnesty could not be used where a criminal prosecution was likely. Thirdly, the claim could only  involve assets about which HMRC were not already aware and the disclosure had to be made voluntarily, without intervention from HMRC. But none of the assets were held in Lichtenstein. All of the individuals had committee tax evasion and therefore criminal prosecution should have been likely. HMRC had found out about the assets through the Falciani files and therefore already knew about all of the assets when the individuals were approached and therefore none of the disclosures had been made voluntarily. The favourable treatment available under this tax amnesty, should never have been given to any of the one thousand and ninety nine individuals concerned.

When giving evidence before the Public Accounts Committee, HMRC chief executive Lyn Homer said that half of these individuals had asked to be given amnesty from prosecution under the Lichtenstein agreement and were advised by HMRC to move their assets to Lichtenstein in order to qualify for the amnesty. The other half knew nothing about the Lichtenstein agreement, but were advised of it by HMRC staff and told to move their assets. This is not just giving out amnesties to tax evaders, it is advising breaking the rules by advising them of the amnesty and how to qualify. It was never the intention of parliament that those caught red handed evading taxes should be given an amnesty, so clearly HMRC are ignoring the will of parliament and applying the rules how and when they see fit. HMRC do not, nor should they ever be given the power to decide if and when the laws of the land are to be applied and when they can be ignored. Their sole remit is to collect the taxes that are due as determined by parliament.

Online campaign group Avaaz who have more than 40million members worldwide, have initiated judicial review proceedings against HMRC in relation to it’s decision to offer the amnesty.  Avaaz’s campaign director, Alex Wilks, said in a statement when the legal action was launched: “If the police extended the terms of knife amnesties to criminals caught carrying weapons, the public would be outraged. Tax officials must urgently explain why they gave get out of jail free cards to so many wealthy tax dodgers.” The difficulty with financial penalties is individuals who are caught evading taxes on this scale can well afford to pay the tax owed plus a small financial penalty, in the highly unlikely event of them being caught. Therefore financial penalties provide no incentive to change behaviours or to think about the consequences of what they are doing, aside from the fact it is illegal. As with the case of HSBC bank in Switzerland and the multiple fines imposed on UK banks in the past five years, financial penalties send out completely the wrong message to those actively and anyone considering participating in illegal behaviour. It says do as you please because even in the unlikely event you get caught, the worst that will happen is you will receive a fine.

Put these individuals or businesses on trial in a court of law and if found guilty, send them to jail for a substantial period of time. Then use the proceeds of crime act to seize all of their assets and reimburse the public purse. Prosecute a few cases in this way and word will spread like wildfire that there are serious consequences for breaking the law in Britain. Such actions will have the effect of focusing the minds of anyone considering illegal activity and it will be an effective punishment for those found guilty. They will think twice before carrying on with business as usual once released. Treating wealthy tax dodgers and banks who help them exactly the same as we treat an individual who over claims benefits they are not entitled to is exactly how things work in a truly democratic society.

It is also noteworthy here that because the Swiss authorities have decided to agree a financial settlement with the Swiss arm of HSBC, information they gained on exactly what the bank had been up to will never be made public. Also, despite authorities in France, Belgium and Argentina having brought charges of money laundering and fraud against HSBC bank, no such charges have ever been lodged against the bank in Britain. Finally, HMRC had powers at the time of the Falciani files case to impose financial penalties of up to 200% of the tax evaded, but it chose not to use them. What kind of democracy is this?