Council Leader should learn some Mancunian generosity

The comments on the Leader’s Blog [1] by Richard Leese on begging and homelessness are reprehensible. It is classic demonization of some of Manchesters’ most vulnerable.

The piece looks to draw distinctions between beggars and the homeless while describing them in almost the same terms. For beggars "the most likely beneficiaries are the nearest off-licence, drug dealer" but the homeless "are people with chaotic, dysfunctional lifestyles often with drink, drug, and mental health problems".

The Leader talks about 80% of beggars not being homeless. What does that mean? There is a noticeable increase in begging AND the homeless on the streets over the few years. We know that the "Lack of affordable housing, welfare cuts, and cuts to support services" has led to an increase in homelessness, why wouldn't it lead to an increase in begging? Foodbanks [2] and soup kitchens can't catch everyone.

The claim that beggars are commuting from London for the notable Mancunian generosity is ridiculous. When is the evidence for this? And are beggars also commuting from Liverpool, Birmingham and other large cities?

As for the generosity of Mancunians, this does not extend to the Council. This spring it cut funding to homelessness support.  [3]

Since then, however, the Council has spent over £100,000 prosecuting the homeless in the city centre while at the same time promoting the huge amount of luxury flats planned for the city centre partly funded by £300 million of government funds. [4]

What use are the Council Leader's comments except to turn the public against the visible homeless on the streets. It casts doubt on any initiative announced by the Richard Leese will be anything more than a token  enterprise, that it won’t approach the scale of action needed to properly address the  homelessness crisis. Next thing you know, he’ll be asking people not to give to the homeless.

Manchester’s generosity is better than the comments of the Council Leader. He should do a better job of representing it. He should learn from it.

In the meantime its to be expected that the homeless themselves will do the best they can to look after themselves on the streets of Manchester.

1.    http://www.manchester.gov.uk/blog/leadersblog/post/743/homelessness-and-street-begging/comment

2. http://www.mancunianmatters.co.uk/content/140773910-benefit-cuts-will-force-more-manchester-families-rely-food-banks-warns-study

3. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/number-people-sleeping-rough-greater-8745312

4. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/300m-housing-fund-designed-unlock-9570783

Read Full Article >>

Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner, Tony Lloyd, must go

Following this week’s announcement of a new ‘ethics committee’ for Greater Manchester Police, Manchester Green Party has joined with other political groups to call for the resignation of the Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner (GMPCC) Tony Lloyd. In the letter below, they highlight a catalogue of issues on which the people of Manchester have seen little action.

The ‘ethics committee’ was formed in response to the launch of a triple investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) following serious allegations into the force’s conduct.

The Chair of Manchester Green Party, Deyika Nzeribe, said:“The formation of an ‘ethics committee’ to oversee the Police, of all organisations, is absurd. Do we really need a panel to tell the Police the difference between right and wrong? The issue is not police ‘ethics’, its police conduct.

He continued: “The IPCC investigations are the latest in a long line of issues to confront the GMP in the time Tony Lloyd has been Crime Commissioner and frankly, he is out of his depth. As an MP for Manchester, he has had a long and notable career but under his leadership, Manchester policing has nose-dived. Greater Manchester’s Black and Asian Police Association (BAPA) is describing it as a ‘crisis in leadership’. He should do the right thing and stand down immediately.”

The letter, in full, is as follows:

We, the undersigned, are concerned about the IPCC investigations into the Greater Manchester Police force and the recent formation of an ‘ethics committee’. We note that in the past six months very little has been heard from the GMPCC, Tony Lloyd, on the following issues:

• The Crown Prosecution Service charging Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy with ‘failing to discharge a duty under the Health and Safety at Work Act’ following the killing of 36 year old Anthony Grainger, father of two
• GMP’s internal affairs department, the ‘Professional Standards Branch’ being investigated by an external police force over allegations of racism
• The revelation that a damning 99 page report by former Superintendent Martin Harding into the force’s recruitment policy was changed to remove the conclusion that the force is ‘still a institutionally racist, sexist, homophobic and disablist organisation’.
• A new report from Government Inspectors putting GMP police ‘under fire’ for failing to protect victims of domestic violence. The force is currently facing another THREE police watchdog probes over the way they handled domestic violence complaints from three women before they were killed.
• The prolonged violence and aggression by GMP in the policing of the anti-fracking protesters at Barton Moss in Eccles. Simon Pook, solicitor for the campaigners has compiled a dossier of evidence to be submitted to the United Nations. He said: “The police appeared to be out of control. I had to go and stand in a field when I went there because I was so afraid of what was going on.”

When Tony Lloyd first took up the £100,000 pa role of Police and Crime Commissioner, he said "Where the public don’t trust and value the police, we don’t get effective policing. At the moment there are big gaps."

With all of the recent scandals, he is doing nothing to improve the situation.

The day to day management of the GMP is the responsibility of Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy and according to GMPCC’s governance document, one of the Commissioner’s key roles is to “hold the Chief Constable to account on behalf of the people of Greater Manchester”.

This is clearly failing to happen. The following people and organisations call for Tony Lloyd, the Greater Manchester Police and Crime Commissioner to resign from this position. The people of Manchester deserve better.

Deyika Nzeribe, Chair of Manchester Green Party

Colette Williams, BARAC and Respect Party candidate

Simon Pook, solicitor for the Barton Moss anti-fracking campaigners

Loz Kaye, Chair of Manchester Pirate Party

Mark Krantz, Socialist Workers Party
Northern Police Monitoring Project
Wesley Ahmed, Justice4Grainger Campaign

The following quotes can also be used:

Colette Williams, BARAC and Respect Party

'During the campaign for Police and Crime Commissioner Tony Lloyd promised that he would be an advocate for the people, that he would work tirelessly to improve the relationship and instil trust and confidence between the community and the Police. However since he has been in office there have been a number of issues which have been brought to his attention regarding police conduct and he has quite simply refused to engage in any real open discussions on these issues. It seems that his only priority is to raise funds for his office and not to fulfil the pledge of building trust and confidence between the community and the Police.'

Mark Krantz, SWP

'It is hard not to draw the conclusion that Tony Lloyd is in the pocket of Peter Fahy.' 

Loz Kaye, Pirate Party Manchester

"We have always said the Police Commissioner post was a bad idea. Now we have found out how bad it can go. When it suits Tony Lloyd can be political by campaigning for the Labour party. But he has shown no leadership on key political issues like policing at Barton Moss. It's time we were given the choice to have a commissioner who really will stand up for all people in Greater Manchester."

Read Full Article >>

Manchester City Council Executive Meeting: Masters of Illusion at work

At least 50 members of the public  attended the Manchester City Council Executive meeting yesterday. They were mainly campaigners and supporters of local services from Withington, Levenshulme and Miles Platting hoping to have change council minds about the closure of swimming pools and libraries in those areas.

3 speakers from the public were allowed in defence of those facilities and they spoke well, the effectiveness of the Withington campaign and work of Councillor Chris Paul  were noted.

The initial response from Council to keep the pools open were met with cheers. These quickly changed to shouts from the public area once more details were revealed.

• Only the pools were considered in this apparent change of heart.
•  The Withington pool (which had the most vigorous campaign and the most active campaigning Councillor (Paul)) would be the most likely facility to remain open. The Levenshulme and Miles Platting pools have ‘less viable business plans’.
•  All the pools to be saved from closure would have find a way to fund running costs for two years, until the new facilities are built otherwise all bets are off.

All decisions would be considered as part of the current and ongoing consultation.

Most of the campaigners left after that but strangely enough, despite the long list on the Exec agenda, the committee ended soon afterwards, without any substantive examination of any of these areas.

Despite the victory tweets and Facebook updates, presumably mainly from Labour supporters, the campaigners impromptu gathering was a more sober affair. The acknowledgement that they had a very temporary reprieve and recognition that the e Council offer could be considered a ‘divide and rule’ tactic led to a resolve that the separate local campaigns should coordinate and work together where they can.

It was good to see all the support for local services. It was good to see Green Party supporters there. It was good to see Alexandra Park put forth from the public area.

But stepping back and looking again, its clear that moving the Council, even temporarily, has only been possible with the combination of organised public pressure AND an active, willing councillor onside.

The Council seems unwilling to have any meaningful public discussion of the budget cuts its proposing for the city, even within its own forums. The council’s agenda included its Budget Strategic Response, how the newly combined Adult and Child Services department will work, the overall Neighbourhood strategy which includes parks, pools and libraries. All completely sidestepped.

The Executive meeting was a fantastic display of political illusion. Not only did the important elements on the agenda disappear, even the commitment to keep the pools open appears to be ‘close-up magic’.

Levenshulme activists were not impressed, commenting to the Withington protesters they had seen this trick before. Manchester City Council promised to keep their baths open until the new facility is built as a result of their 2011 campaign.

There are reports now that Levenshulme Labour councillors will vote against budget cuts.

We will wait and we will see.

Read Full Article >>

True Mancunians, SureStart and Youth Services

Six weeks after the riots, comes news from Manchester City Council (MCC) confirming it will cut funding to the city’s SureStart centres.

With one of the main factors suggested for the cause of the riots being poverty and with rioters coming from high deprivation areas, this is particularly bad news.

But what is Surestart? “Sure Start was part of a Labour government policy to prevent social exclusion, and as such, it was targeted at preschool children and their families in disadvantaged areas. The initiative was the result of a cross cutting review of services for young children chaired by the Treasury. The review's conclusions focused on the importance of the early years for child development, and highlighted the problems of multiple disadvantage for young children, the variation in quality of services for children and families and the need for community-based programmes of early intervention.”

The Labour government eventually devolved responsibility and money for the programme to local councils. This money however, was not ring-fenced and now with the Coalition government budget cuts forced on the Council, MCC has decided to withdraw funding from Manchester SureStart centres.

The Council has done this despite Manchester being named the child poverty capital of Britain, with over 25000 children growing up in ‘severe poverty’. In percentage terms, it is twice the number of neighbours Trafford and Stockport.

On top of this, Manchester has massively cut its youth services provision when the number of young people not in employment, education or training is on the rise. With these actions, the Council is abandoning young people as avenues for employment, further education and higher education for young people are being cut back.

This Council’s attitude has not been to support the people of the city, or to support their services. Its attitude has been to focus on regeneration and business. It can be seen in the comments of Council Leader Richard Leese, in response to a question on whether putting regeneration ahead of services was the right thing to do. It can be seen in the £2 million recent acquisition of land around MCC’s swanky new First Street offices.

This ‘leadership’ does Manchester no favours. With the high levels of deprivation in this city, it is imperative to try and maintain services to the most vulnerable. MCC should be addressing these issues alongside encouraging business development not instead of it.

The Council’s claims that there is ‘no other way’ of progressing should be taken with a bowl of salt. This year it has made drastic decisions on services and jobs which have THEN been followed by ‘consultations’. The Youth services and Surestart cuts have been prime examples of this. The Equality Impact Assessment requirements have happened AFTER cuts have been made. Why?

And of those consultations, have any of the results been made public?

The other side this is about democracy and representation. No Labour Councillor has stood up against the cuts to Manchester Youth and Surestart. Maybe too scared or weak to speak its mind, the body of the local Labour party is one that has forgotten its progressive left roots. The Council spin-doctors in fact even accused the Manchester Save SureStart Mums campaign as ‘hi-jacking’ the issue.

Is this the representation of democracy in Manchester?

The Conservatives and the Labour Council share this in common, both are making a CHOICE to cut essential services in Manchester. And before Labour complain, if they CHOOSE to spend over £2 million on land around their new town hall building instead of putting that money into keeping a some Surestarts open until things turn around, it says more than words.

Hulme Green Party stands against the Council on these cuts. We support the Save SureStart campaigns both locally and nationally.

We stand with the Manchester Coalition Against the Cuts in defending Manchester’s services.

In the wake of the riots, MCC ran the ‘I heart Manchester’ campaign, aimed at getting shoppers back spending money in the city centre. NOT pulling together community spirit, volunteering, supporting local communities in need, their campaign was aimed at shoppers.

Within that intense period, Council spokesman Pat Karney talked about ‘true Mancunians’ supporting the city.

The thing about Manchester, it has a strong history of protest and radical reform.

In keeping with this tradition, the ‘Save Manchester SureStart’ campaigners, Manchester Coalition Against the Cuts, BARAC Manchester, Manchester AntiCuts, Greater Manchester Against the Cuts, the Manchester Unemployed Workers Union, the students of both Manchester University and Metropolitan University and many more, are all closer to the spirit of being ‘True Mancunians’ than any merchandise-heavy shopping campaign by Council fat cats will ever tell us.

Hulme is home to both a SureStart (Martenscroft) , youth facilities and a library. Proctor’s Youth Centre has closed, Hulme Adventure Playground under threat. Our SureStart will be affected with all the other centres in Manchester and Hulme library building is about to be closed.

That being so, we have our own campaign. If a decision to cut services hurts the most vulnerable in our communities, it doesn’t matter if it comes from right-wing government or ‘left’-wing Council.

I “heart” Manchester Surestart – Don’t Cut It

I “heart” Mcr Libraries – Keep Them Open

I “heart” Hulme (of course)

And

If anyone wants to use the logos included in this post in a positive way, for a positive cause, go ahead.

Read Full Article >>