Politics

  • Statement by leaders of Fair Payment Campaign for HO interpreters

    Steve WoodsLanguage, Politics, Social Media

    The leaders of the Fair Payment Campaign for Home Office Interpreters have issued the statement below in response to the Home Office’s plan to cut their pay with effect from 1st January 2016 (posts passim). The statement originally appeared on Linguist Lounge.

    The Fair Payment Campaign for Home Office Interpreters resulted from a notice they received in November 2015 in relation to a reduction in rates due to take place on all bookings undertaken on behalf of the Home Office, including UK Visas & Immigration, Border Force, Immigration Enforcement and HM Passport Office and any other bookings made through Interpreter Operations Unit, from 1st January 2016 onwards.

    Professional qualified Home Office interpreters are standing up against the proposed cuts to our already meagre fees which have been unchanged in at least 13 years. While cuts are being proposed, we contend that we have in fact been subsidising the Home Office over the years by the lack of increase in our fees.

    Many interpreters and their supporters have already written to the Home Office Central Interpreters’ Unit expressing their dismay and opposition to these cuts in rates which were already much eroded through inflation, and mean that it will no longer be feasible for them to continue working in this field.

    This will result in a diminishing pool of qualified, experienced and vetted interpreters for the Home Office, detrimental both to them but especially so to the great number of vulnerable people who depend on reliable interpreting services to put their cases across since they are unable to do so themselves. Their lives may be at stake. The right to a fair hearing is enshrined in international human rights law.

    As a result of our letters and petition, campaign leaders have been invited to meet with CIU senior managers on Monday 21st December 2015. We shall keep colleagues updated as to the outcome of that meeting.

    We shall be listening to what they say, re-iterating the contents of our petition letter and also making a point to stand firm on those points.

    We have it on good authority that the strength and unity of our campaign stands us in good stead: our unity is our strength.

    We shall capitalise on this fact and we must not forget the fiasco with the Ministry of Justice outsourcing of Court Interpreting Services to a private agency in 2012, which resulted in many qualified interpreters declining to continue working in that sector and consequently the lowering of standards and quality of services, causing the delay and collapse of many court cases, as can be verified by the extensive media coverage about this matter which can be found on this Linguist Lounge.

    We have collected hundreds of signatures and many interpreters are still contacting us to join the Campaign.

    We have the support of non-Home Office interpreters, translators and non-linguists. Some of these supporters have also written to CIU about their dismay, disappointment and disgust at what is being proposed.

    The Fair Payment Campaign for Home Office Interpreters also has a social media presence on both Twitter and Facebook.

  • Sign petition to help save RiL

    Steve WoodsLanguage, Politics

    Routes into Languages logoIn the never-ending austerity drive, the government is now threatening to cut funding to Routes into Languages, a vital resource for language learning in the UK.

    Language learning in the UK has lagged behind other countries – particularly other EU member states – for as long as I can remember and looks likely to get worse if this latest funding cut goes through.

    A petition has been organised on the UK Government and Parliament petition website. The petition’s text reads as follows:

    Routes into Languages (RiL) works with schools and colleges to promote language learning. It works with teachers to develop and roll out innovative projects such as Mother Tongue Other Tongue and the Foreign Language Spelling Bee which benefit students and motivate them to learn languages.

    Routes into Languages has worked tirelessly across the country to develop a range of regional and national networks to support schools and teachers to be innovative, raise students’ aspirations and make the case for language learning.

    To lose this resource would be devastating, the RiL Spelling Bee alone involved 77,000 Year 7 students last year and this is only one example of the work that Routes does to offer free opportunities to all schools.

    Please sign the petition to change this decision.

    At the time I signed, some 6,000 signatures had been added to the petition.

  • Boycott threatened as Home Office ready to cut interpreters’ pay

    Steve WoodsLanguage, Politics

    image of Theresa May
    What is it about the office of Home Secretary that turns people into control freaks?
    Yesterday’s Guardian reports that the Home Office wants to cut the pay of the estimated 2,000 interpreters it uses in processing immigration claims.

    Interpreters received an email from the Home Office’s central interpreters unit in Liverpool on 20th November notifying them that their pay would be cut from 1st January.

    Interpreters currently receive £16 per hour for working weekdays and slightly more at weekends. In addition, a Home Office interpreter’s first hour of work is paid at an enhanced rate to reflect the time and cost of travelling to appointments; this is being reduced from £48 to £32 on weekdays and from £72 to £46 at weekends.

    Home Office interpreters have not had a pay increase since 2002, i.e. they’ve already had 13 years of de facto pay cuts – and the actual pay cut announced for the New Year will be implemented in various areas of the Home Office’s work, including UK Visas and Immigration, Border Force, Immigration Enforcement and HM Passport Office. For this work they have to be highly trained and undergo counter-terrorism security clearance.

    As a result of this insulting treatment by Theresa May’s department, interpreters are threatening a mass boycott. The boycott is planned to start on 1st January, followed by a series of walk-outs thereafter.

    One unnamed organiser told The Guardian: “There is no strike planned because, as freelancers, we cannot legally do so. We may, however, choose not to accept assignments and that is what the boycott will consist of.”

    “At the moment, the Home Office needs interpreters more than we need them. They do not have any other system currently in place to substitute our services other than for telephone interpreting, which they can outsource to thebigword. They know that if we boycott even for a day, that will cause major disruptions to their business.”

    In addition, the interpreters have written to the Home Office to express their disgust at this disgraceful treatment and the lack of consultation, the latter being a breach by the Home Office of the interpreters’ contractual terms.

    As per usual with this dreadful government, the Home Office spokesperson contacted by The Guardian insisted that the department had done nothing wrong and everything was hunky dory.

    From where I’m sitting, it looks like there’s every chance of a repeat of the drop in professional standards and other farcical states of affairs that occurred when the Ministry of Justice placed interpreting for courts and tribunals in the incompetent hands of Capita Translation & Interpreting (posts passim).

  • No fossil fuel power plant in St Werburghs

    Steve WoodsBristol, Politics

    On Wednesday councillors on Bristol City Council’s Development Control Committee B voted overwhelmingly – by 8 votes to 2 with one abstention – to accept the planning officers’ recommendation to refuse an application filed by UK Power Reserve Ltd. for 14 gas-fired generators with 11 metre high flues for a site off Gatton Road.

    The recommendation for refusal was soundly based on both national and local planning guidelines for reasons of noise and air pollution, plus visual amenity.

    drawing of one of the 14 generators refused planning permission
    One of the 14 generators refused planning permission

    The application attracted nearly 700 objections and over 50 personal statements by members of the public, including your correspondent, whose statement is reproduced below.

    I have been a resident of the Easton area for nearly 4 decades.

    I have read the case officer’s report on this application and am pleased to note he has recommended its rejection since it contravenes both local and national planning policies in many regards.

    It should be pointed out that this speculative application – one of 3 for fossil fuel generating plants in Bristol’s less prosperous communities – is being driven by central government’s ideologically-driven mismanagement of electricity production in the UK.

    I live downwind of the proposed facility and feel the air quality in my part of Easton is already bad enough with the traffic pollution from the M32 and Stapleton Road, plus diesel fumes from the nearby railway line.

    By filing this application in the way it did, the applicant has shown contempt both for the local authority and local residents in St Werburghs and Easton.

    Contempt to the local authority is demonstrated by the application’s filing during Bristol’s year as European Green Capital. Nothing further need be said on that point in respect of a generating plant powered by polluting fossil fuels.

    As regards local residents, consultation has been minimal and I believe that the applicant is guilty of what is called “environmental racism”. This is a concept from the United States defined as: “is placement of low-income or minority communities in proximity of environmentally hazardous or degraded environments, such as toxic waste, pollution and urban decay”.

    If this facility is so clean and aesthetically pleasing to the eye, why did the applicant not decide to site in, say, Stoke Bishop?

    Any future applicant thinking of indulging in further environmental racism in Bristol’s inner city communities will be told very firmly what they can do with their applications and where they can stick their proposed facilities.

    Three local councillors – Rob Telford and Gus Hoyt from Ashley ward – and Lawrence Hill’s Marg Hickman also spoke against UKPR’s plans.

    There was only one speaker from the public gallery in support of the application; and that was from UKPR’s agent. He urged the committee to defer a decision to allow them to mitigate the air quality impact by fitting catalytic converters, reduce noise problems and reduce the height of the chimneys. However, the councillors on the committee gave this late concession short shrift.

    Indeed, the only councillor on the committee to speak in favour of the application was Conservative Richard Eddy (described as a ‘dickhead’ by a fellow councillor. Ed.). He and fellow Tory Kevin Quartley voted in favour of the power plant, whilst Chris Windows, the third Tory on the committee, abstained.

    Two further planning applications for similar plants powered by dirty diesel in Lockleaze and at Avonbank (posts passim) were withdrawn a few days before the meeting. Along with the St Werburgh’s application, they would have formed part of the STOR back-up energy programme subsidised by the Government.

  • Dirty diesel planning applications withdrawn

    Steve WoodsBristol, Politics

    Good news has been received regarding the planning applications two diesel generating stations (posts passim) just a few days before they were due to be considered by councillors on the relevant Development Control Committee.

    diesel generating plant somewhere in Africa
    A diesel generating plant somewhere in Africa

    Plutus Energy has withdrawn both its planning applications for diesel generating facilities in both Lawrence Hill and Lockleaze wards.

    All 3 applications that were due to be considered by councillors had been recommended for rejection by planning officers.

    Your correspondent objected to the application at Feeder Road in Lawrence Hill ward as follows:

    The fact that the applicant has filed this application during Bristol’s year as European Green Capital shows the applicant’s utter contempt for the city’s aspiration to be a showcase for good environmental practice.

    The applicant’s proposals will result in a loss of amenity for neighbours in terms of visual amenity and more particularly as regards air quality.

    Visual amenity: standby generating stations featuring diesel generators and associated flues/chimneys are not the most aesthetic of facilities.

    Air quality: the site is on Feeder Road and is crossed by St Philip’s Causeway. Both of these roads are already high levels of traffic with the associated repercussions for local air quality. Local air quality will be further impaired by the addition of diesel generators, not only in terms of carbon dioxide/monoxide and NOx, but also particulates. Diesel combustion exhaust is a source of atmospheric soot and fine particles, which is a component of the air pollution implicated in human cancer, heart and lung damage and mental functioning.

    Lack of environmental impact assessment: although the site is below the threshold for conducting this assessment, such an assessment should be requested due to the nature of the facility proposed by the applicant.

    Unsatisfactory noise impact assessment: the applicant has not carried out a proper noise impact assessment for the site. Edward Road was chosen for the noise impact. This ignores the fact that noise from the facility will have a significant effect on St Philip’s Marsh School, which is far nearer to the site than Edward Road. As the applicant has shown poor faith in this regard, the application should be rejected.

    Impact on St Philip’s Marsh School: this proposal will have a negative impact on the amenity of this establishment in terms of noise, air quality and visual amenity, not to mention the possible effect of the poorer air quality on any pupils with respiratory problems such as asthma. For this reason too, the application should be rejected.

    Safety concerns re 2 diesel storage tanks with a capacity of 22,000 litres: this represents a hazard to neighbours, both industrial and residential.

    Finally, I believe the only reason this application has been filed by the applicant is that because it is in a poor, deprived council ward, the applicant thinks it can get approval for its noisy, polluting facility is that fewer people are likely to object. If this is so, I think the applicant’s reasoning is seriously flawed.

    For all the reasons cited above, the application should be rejected.

    Yesterday I received the letter below from Bristol City Council (all errant and/or lacking punctuation, plus dodgy use of the English language are © Bristol City Council. Ed.).

    Application No. 15/02310/F
    Site address: Avonbank, Feeder Road, Bristol BS2 0TH
    Proposal: Proposed installation of diesel powered generators and associated infrastructure for the provision of a Flexible Generation Facility to provide energy balancing services via the capacity market for the National Grid.

    Further to the recent letter advising you that the above application was due to be considered by Development Control B committee, on the 9 December 2015 I now write to advise that the application has been withdrawn and will no longer be considered by the committee.

    Should a new application be received, you will have the opportunity to comment on that application.

    Development Management
    Bristol City Council

    Talking to Bristol 24/7, Lawrence Hill councillor Marg Hickman said: “We have won. It is just quite remarkable and wonderful. The local community has come together on this and we have won because we have got such a good campaign together.”

    This still leaves an application for a similar gas-powered plant in St Werburgh’s, which has gained 684 objections, on the table.

  • “Open source can liberate local authorities being held to ransom,” says Dutch MP

    Steve WoodsOpen Source, Open Standards, Politics, Tech

    Open source software is a good option for local authorities who are dissatisfied with the price and quality of their software, says Dutch Labour MP Astrid Oosenbrug. This former sysadmin believes open source and open standards can liberate local authorities from their current suppliers, who she maintains can have too much power over their customers.

    Situation “has been going on for years”

    It recently became apparent from an investigation by NRC and Reporter Radio that many local authorities feel they are being held hostage by their software suppliers who are making the most of a dysfunctional market with price increases. According to Oosenbrug, the situation “has been going on for years”. She has been campaigning for a long time for open standards and open source solutions, her greatest success being a parliamentary motion passed in April according to which the government would be obliged to give preference to open source in invitations to tender.

    More opportunity for open source

    From their dissatisfaction, Oosenbrug perceives that local authorities are seeking alternatives to their current software. Oosenbrug states: “The opportunities for open source are increasing and definitely now the government is giving it preference. Amongst local authorities we do find those where the councillors won’t interfere (with procurement choices. Ed.), but I’ve also sat in the council chamber myself. Not every intervention from The Hague is in itself bad or negative, but is on the contrary supportive.

    Open source good option for local authorities

    Astrid OosenbrugIn open source software the software’s source code is published and freely available to the public. The software can therefore be freely copied, adapted and distributed. Software standards between applications that work, services, systems and networks that work with each other can be inspected with open standards.”

    Oosenbrug views open source and open standards as a good choice for local authorities. “Software companies have a hold on them with their products. If there’s no agreement with price rises, they stop providing the services and local authorities get into quite a bit of trouble. With open source local authorities can be freed from the stranglehold. With open source, anyone can examine the software used and inspect the source code. In this way security holes and clumsy coding are quickly traced.” Users with expertise are also looking everywhere, on account of which the software remains up to date and inexpensive solutions can often be found,” declares Oosenbrug. “There is a safe environment in which ethical hackers for example can play a major role.”

    Open standards

    Local authority websites are regularly attacked and are sometimes as leaky as a sieve. Consequently, Oosenbrug is also advocating open standards in addition to open source. “Of the 360 local authorities, only thirty comply with accessibility standards. You can overcome these sorts of problems with open source and open standards.” Oosenbrug believes there should be a template for websites with which local authorities can comply with all standards. “The remainder of a website can then be completed according to the local authority’s own preferences.”

    Investment repays itself

    Open source and open standards mean a considerable investment, but Oosenbrug believes it’s one that is repaid. “The bid that works best wins invitations to tender. Everything is checked for price and quality by the users themselves. Local authorities are currently in the land of the blind where the one-eyed man is king and they must always pay more. Software is becoming safer and cheaper with open source. The government must not view open source as a punishment, but as an opportunity.”

    Municipality of Ede

    Several local authorities have made progress with open source. In this way the Municipality of Ede has been able to make appreciable savings. After the changeover, it has been spending ten times less for software licences than comparable local authorities. On account of this, total ICT expenditure has been one quarter less than previous years.

    Original Dutch source article: http://www.binnenlandsbestuur.nl/digitaal/nieuws/open-source-kan-gegijzelde-gemeenten-bevrijden.9500508.lynkx

    Originally posted on Bristol Wireless.

  • Greenwash Capital: stuff air quality, let’s build power stations

    Steve WoodsBristol, Language, Media, Oddities, Politics

    If one only read the Bristol Post, there’d be no way that residents in the wider city would have any inkling that three polluting standby electricity generating stations were currently awaiting planning permission in the European Capital of Greenwash.

    Fortunately, this dreadful development has been picked up by Bristol 24/7: and here’s the unsurprising bit; they are all in the more deprived parts of the city.

    It is believed these power plants will form part of the Short Term Operating Reserve (Stor) network of reserve power banks which provide additional generating capacity to feed into the National Grid at peak times.

    Firstly, a planning application (ref. 15/02310/F) has been submitted on behalf of Plutus Energy for a 48 unit diesel generating plant and 2 diesel storage tanks with a capacity of 22,000 litres for 6 Feeder Road, Bristol and Avonbank, Feeder Road, Bristol, (both in the deprived Lawrence Hill ward. Ed.) close to St Philips Marsh School.

    Forty-eight diesel generators will doubtless chuck out a fair old quantity of particulates, which is a component of air pollution implicated in human cancer,heart and lung damage, and mental functioning.

    The applicants have not conducted an environmental impact assessment for the site since its small size (0.5 ha) is below the threshold for such a requirement. Nevertheless, local ward councillors believe such an assessment should be carried out due to the size and impact of the proposed development.

    In addition, some skulduggery is evident in the noise impact assessment that has been carried out. Edward Road was chosen for the noise impact, significantly further away from the site than St Philips Marsh School. Again, local councillors think this study should be reviewed and amended to include the impact on the school and the nearby Severn Vineyard Church.

    diesel generating plant somewhere in Africa
    A diesel generating plant somewhere in Africa

    Despite the fact that inner city Bristol already has dreadful air quality, this is not the only dirty diesel generating plant planned for the city.

    An application (ref. 15/04297/F) for another such facility has been submitted for Romney Avenue in Lockleaze, another of the city’s not so prosperous areas. Once again the applicants are Plutus Energy, who want to put 32 generators on this site close to a major housing estate and obviously care very little indeed for Bristol’s air quality.

    Finally, yet another application (ref. 15/04420/F) has been filed by UK Power Reserve for 10 diesel or gas generators for in in New Gatton Road in St Werburgh’s, with ten 12-metre high exhaust flues.

    Below is a short video on the St Werburgh’s scheme made by local residents.

    It’s quite scandalous that UK Power Reserve and Plutus Energy are even considering putting polluting power stations in or next to residential areas. On account of the need for extra domestic heating and lighting, these back-up power stations are most likely to be used on cold, foggy winter days when something called a temperature inversion occurs; this causes cold air to sink, trapping the warm air in a bubble enveloping the city, thus enabling urban pollution to build up to dangerous levels, perfect for increasing the incidence of respiratory ailments. The fact that both companies have cut corners in the form of environmental and noise impact assessments shouldn’t be forgotten.

    These dangerous unwelcome schemes should be thrown out by councillors.

    Finally, a language note. Over in the United States of America, this dumping of dirty, polluting and generally unwelcome facilities on poor, deprived communities has a name – environmental racism. In Wikipedia, environmental racism is defined as follows:

    Environmental racism is placement of low-income or minority communities in proximity of environmentally hazardous or degraded environments, such as toxic waste, pollution and urban decay.

  • Greenwash Capital – how serious is Bristol about tackling fly-tipping?

    Steve WoodsBristol, Politics

    I am indebted to my friend Julien Weston for the images below of yesterday’s fly-tipping on Jane Street, a notorious fly-tipping hotspot just off Church Road in the Redfield area of Bristol (posts passim).

    Jane Street fly-tipping photo 1

    Jane Street fly-tipping photo 2

    After 18 months of the Tidy BS5 campaign (both formally with UP Our Street and informally with residents acting on their own initiative. Ed.) to tackle litter and fly-tipping in Bristol’s Easton and Lawrence Hill wards, the cleanliness of the city’s streets doesn’t seem to be getting any better. Indeed it seems to be getting worse.

    Furthermore, statistics released by central government recently reveal that Bristol is the filthiest of the West Country local authorities when it comes to fly-tipping. Fly-tipping reported to the four unitary authorities that comprise the former Avon County Council area during the 2014-15 financial year are as follows:

    • B&NES – 530;
    • South Gloucestershire – 1,359;
    • North Somerset – 2,343;
    • Bristol – 9,709.

    Jane Street and the rest of Easton and Lawrence Hill wards are part of the Ashley, Easton & Lawrence Hill Neighbourhood Partnership. According to the city council’s website the Neighbourhood Partnership (NP) has the following purpose:

    The Neighbourhood Partnership (NP) is about residents working with the Council to influence decisions. Its aim is to use local knowledge to make better decisions about what needs doing. It also has a small budget to spend on local improvements.

    At the last NP meeting on Monday, 5th October 2015, the report of the Neighbourhood Partnership Co-ordinator promised the following change in the Area Action Plan in respect of Lawrence Hill/Church Road corridor where Jane Street is situated:

    Increase responses to the ongoing problems of fly-tipping in Lawrence Hill, mainly Jane Street, Morton Street, Thomas Street, Ducie Road Car Park and Lawrence Hill.

    The evidence of one’s eyes reveals that if there has been any increase in the local authority’s response, it must be starting from a very low, if not to say, almost non-existent base.

    The fact that Bristol City Council allows this level of filth during its year as European Green Capital – and is seemingly helpless or hapless in tackling it – is an eloquent indictment of its treatment of its less prosperous wards like Lawrence Hill and Easton.

    According to the European Green Capital website, the justification behind the establishment of the European Green Capital award is that:

    Urban areas concentrate most of the environmental challenges facing our society but also bring together commitment and innovation to resolve them. The European Green Capital Award has been conceived to promote and reward these efforts.

    If Bristol is prepared continually to tolerate the “environmental challenge” of high levels of persistent fly-tipping in its less prosperous districts, as well as lacking the commitment and innovation to resolve them, then I believe the city was awarded the European Green Capital accolade on false pretences.

    Litter and fly-tipping are not only unpleasant to look at and live with day after day, they’re a hazard to health – both physical and mental.

    Come on Bristol City Council, get your finger out and let’s not just have a tidy BS5, but a tidy city generally! Let’s see if you’re really prepared to deal with this serious level of environmental crime or are just going to carry on making placatory noises to angry residents who despair at your inability and inaction.

    Footnote: my opinion of Bristol City Council’s ability and motivation to get to grips with environmental crime in Lawrence Hill and Easton has not been improved by the fact that I have reported 16 instances of fly-tipping – matching my highest daily count to date – to the local authority today. Help lighten my load by reporting fly-tipping too!

  • How long can you frown?

    Steve WoodsBristol, Media, Politics

    Up Our Street has produced a film in conjunction with Bristol’s Telling Tales Films about being an active citizen.

    Most active citizens become active after frowning and tut-tutting about problems in their communities, but there’s only so much scowling and muttering that can be done: action ultimately needs to be taken; and that starts with a smile. These East Bristol residents tell you how.

    Up Our Street has also produced an active citizenship toolkit. To get one please give them a ring on 0117 954 2834.

Posts navigation