This is not an exhaustive list of aims and objectives for the constituency of Lewisham West. But there are key areas of focus, and I will expand into other issues as soon as I have formed positions on them.
As per usual, I welcome comments from all.
Boosting financial awareness and generating effective dispute resolution in Lewisham West through a million pound counselling project in money management and mediation!
Boosting financial awareness
In July 2004, British consumer debt for the first time smashed through the trillion pound barrier. MORI research commissioned by the Citizens Advice Bureaux in 2004, found that 23 per cent of people did not know how much money they owed. In that year the CAB helped people with 1,444,000 consumer and debt problems. Of these, 1.1 million were debt related. In its Spring 2004 report `Net gains’, the CAB refers to The Bank of England reporting in December 2003, that the credit market has boomed in the last thirty years and is now worth a staggering £169 billion. There are over 1300 different credit cards and store cards, and credit agreements. In a 1999 report, HM Treasury concludes that social and financial exclusion are inextricably linked. Research shows that people who use few or no financial services are more likely to be living on benefits in deprived neighbourhoods, without paid employment. Many, but not all, are social housing tenants. James Bartholomew writing in `The Welfare State We’re In’ states that despite our Gross Domestic Product increasing by 165% between 1950 and 2000, the proportion of people on welfare benefits has gone up from 3.4% to 24%. And it is not the so-called working class who are solely affected. The former BBC Arts Correspondent Rosie Millard recently admitted to owing £40,000 on her credit cards, declaring that being an Impoverished Professional has become a way of life (see more at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 13,00.html).
This UKIP project will secure the services of a full-time paid advisor working through the CAB to attend to the financial counselling needs of the constituency of Lewisham West. This advisor will work exclusively within all six wards in drop-in clinics, confidential home visits and be involved in the training of voluntary mentors over a five-year period. The advisor will not recommend any specific financial product nor advise on the full range of CAB services but will offer advice on better financial management best suited to the circumstances of the constituent. The advisor will also be tasked to carefully document his or her work so that its lessons can be shared with other interested parties across the nation. The £500,000 budget will cover the salary and programme expenses of the advisor over a five-year period. The money will be sourced through Government, grant issuing foundations and EU funding.
…and generating effective dispute resolution
As a member of the Metropolitan Police Service, I am only too aware of the problems of crime. In many instances, these acts are triggered by tensions in the home and community. The resulting frustration can be explosive and cause many problems. The earlier this is caught and resolved, the better it is for all. One tried and tested route is mediation. Mediation UK, which represents nearly 300 mediation services nationwide, makes a powerful case for its use:
· It allows people to be heard. In many cases, a simple apology from either or both sides is all that is required to put the situation right.
· It is an empowering process that encourages people to put forward their own suggestions and ideas.
· It is less intimidating than legal procedures, and people represent themselves rather than having someone speak for them.
· It provides solutions that the parties themselves have decided on, giving them all a sense of ownership of any agreement. As a result, agreements reached in this way last much better than solutions handed down by courts or an arbitrator.
· It can be organised quickly. When disagreements are not addressed, they can escalate. Mediation is easy to arrange and can be completed within weeks.
· It is usually affordable by all. Most neighbour mediation is free to those who want to use it, and many other forms of community mediation are available at a reasonable rate.
By giving everyone the opportunity to explain his or her side of the story, and to talk without being interrupted, mediation can be very helpful when a situation is stuck. It is not an 'easy option' - when people are honest and are encouraged to say what they feel, the situation can provoke strong emotions - but once people have had a chance to express their feelings, they are more likely to let their hostility go.
There is also a sound financial basis: According to Mediation UK, the cost of many mediations are between £350-£500 per case, Some cases that go to court could cost a local authority over £10,000. One housing provider in Wales calculated that they had spent 37 hours of management time and over £1,000 trying to sort out one particular neighbour dispute. The local mediation service successfully resolved the case in 12 hours, at a cost of £400.
UKIP will, in conjunction with LAMP (Lewisham Action on Mediation Project), acquire a full-time paid mediation specialist working for the constituency of Lewisham West. This specialist will be active in all six wards and conduct mediations either singularly or in tandem with LAMP officers, promote out reach programmes and be involved in the training of voluntary mediators over a five-year period. The mediation specialist will also mount workshops on coping strategies such as anger management and meditation. The advisor will also be required to thoroughly record his or her work so that its lessons can be shared with other interested parties across the nation. The £500,000 budget will cover the salary and programme expenses of the advisor over a five-year period. The money will be sourced through Government, grant issuing foundations and EU funding.
The financial counsellor and mediation specialist will play a proactive role in the constituency, and at times liase with each other so as to complement and strengthen their roles in the hope of equipping the constituents of Lewisham West with a formidable set of coping skills for the 21st century.
UKIP manifesto for Lewisham West
UKIP manifesto for Lewisham West [contd]
Help 6,000+ Lewisham council property leaseholders save nearly £200!
UKIP demands that Lewisham Council accept Freeview digital television as another way of dealing with the planned analogue switch-off!
In 2004, Lewisham Council announced plans to install a new digital television integrated reception system (IRS) in a number of its residential properties. The council points out that between 2006-2010, the Government plans to switch off analogue television signals. They also say there are environmental concerns over the spread of dishes for multi-channel television viewing situated on the sides of buildings. And the growing popularity of such television will put greater pressure on the demand of such dishes.
The IRS is supposed to supply TV, satellite and radio signals to homes via a structured cabling network installed at council properties with special roof-mounted aerials. This allegedly negates the need for dishes while allowing residents a chance to receive these signals. Residents will still have to pay extra to receive coded signals from companies like Sky.
Unfortunately, Lewisham Council plans to charge each of its leaseholders around £190 to have IRS.
However, with the advent of Freeview digital television, it is possible to receive digital television now for as little as £35 and some new televisions include this as a standard feature. It is also feasible for such signals to be received with a basic internal aerial that would normally be used on a small standard television. There is no need for IRS to be able to watch Freeview, and UKIP says that £190 is therefore an unfair tax for Lewisham’s 6,000+ leaseholders.
UKIP also encourages constituents who are affected leaseholders to examine their leases and consider how cost contributions are calculated. There is quite possibly a clause that allows only for relevant expenditure to be passed on to leaseholders. In light of the irrelevancy of IRS when Freeview is available, this also seems to be as relevant a leaseholder cost as lifts are to ground floor residents.
We do not disagree completely with IRS. The core system should go ahead but at no cost to leaseholders. Any extension of the cabling into homes should be for those that need it for coded television signals, and this should be at their own cost. Connections to other homes should be mothballed until residents are willing to pay for it. In the meantime, Lewisham Council should promote Freeview to those able to pick up the signal.
UKIP demands that Lewisham Council accept Freeview digital television as another way of dealing with the planned analogue switch-off!
In 2004, Lewisham Council announced plans to install a new digital television integrated reception system (IRS) in a number of its residential properties. The council points out that between 2006-2010, the Government plans to switch off analogue television signals. They also say there are environmental concerns over the spread of dishes for multi-channel television viewing situated on the sides of buildings. And the growing popularity of such television will put greater pressure on the demand of such dishes.
The IRS is supposed to supply TV, satellite and radio signals to homes via a structured cabling network installed at council properties with special roof-mounted aerials. This allegedly negates the need for dishes while allowing residents a chance to receive these signals. Residents will still have to pay extra to receive coded signals from companies like Sky.
Unfortunately, Lewisham Council plans to charge each of its leaseholders around £190 to have IRS.
However, with the advent of Freeview digital television, it is possible to receive digital television now for as little as £35 and some new televisions include this as a standard feature. It is also feasible for such signals to be received with a basic internal aerial that would normally be used on a small standard television. There is no need for IRS to be able to watch Freeview, and UKIP says that £190 is therefore an unfair tax for Lewisham’s 6,000+ leaseholders.
UKIP also encourages constituents who are affected leaseholders to examine their leases and consider how cost contributions are calculated. There is quite possibly a clause that allows only for relevant expenditure to be passed on to leaseholders. In light of the irrelevancy of IRS when Freeview is available, this also seems to be as relevant a leaseholder cost as lifts are to ground floor residents.
We do not disagree completely with IRS. The core system should go ahead but at no cost to leaseholders. Any extension of the cabling into homes should be for those that need it for coded television signals, and this should be at their own cost. Connections to other homes should be mothballed until residents are willing to pay for it. In the meantime, Lewisham Council should promote Freeview to those able to pick up the signal.
UKIP manifesto on Lewisham West [contd]
Pinpointing streets in need of safer crossing facilities using Lovelewisham.org technology already in existence!
The Lewisham Council website, www.lovelewisham.org, has scored a degree of success in encouraging people to send electronic images of graffiti and fly tipping spotted throughout the borough. It openly highlights problem areas in a focused way and a remedy, that is date-stamped, can be applied to the problem. Notwithstanding the absence of `after’ images in many of the clean-ups, the delegation of reporting to the public is a good one.
UKIP calls on the use of this technology to highlight problem areas where crossing streets are concerned. People know only too well the problem streets to cross particularly those with school children or busy intersections without push button pedestrian Pelican crossing facilities. Lewisham Council should encourage the public to submit images of streets that need safer crossing facilities to www.lovelewisham.org. Like its assault on graffiti, the council should also post its date-stamped remedy to the street crossing concern raised.
The Lewisham Council website, www.lovelewisham.org, has scored a degree of success in encouraging people to send electronic images of graffiti and fly tipping spotted throughout the borough. It openly highlights problem areas in a focused way and a remedy, that is date-stamped, can be applied to the problem. Notwithstanding the absence of `after’ images in many of the clean-ups, the delegation of reporting to the public is a good one.
UKIP calls on the use of this technology to highlight problem areas where crossing streets are concerned. People know only too well the problem streets to cross particularly those with school children or busy intersections without push button pedestrian Pelican crossing facilities. Lewisham Council should encourage the public to submit images of streets that need safer crossing facilities to www.lovelewisham.org. Like its assault on graffiti, the council should also post its date-stamped remedy to the street crossing concern raised.
UKIP manifesto for Lewisham West [contd]
Help stop the EU from forcing 77 former European colonies into unfair trading agreements between very unequal partners!
Some 34% of the population of Lewisham West are non-White. Many work hard to send money home to families in need. Unfortunately, these efforts are threatened by the European Union across as many as 77 former European colonies.
The European Union is determined to implement Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with poor countries so as to force the opening of their markets for European imports. This is not just another UKIP anti-EU position but one shared by as many as 150 members from around Europe, Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific (www.stopepa.org). One such organisation is Christian Aid, which has mounted a strong campaign in this area.
Christian Aid argues that:
1. EPAs are free-trade agreements between very unequal partners. In return for African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries having access to European markets, the European Union is using the negotiations to demand that European companies have duty-free access to 90% of these countries' markets. It may sound reasonable – but European companies and producers have all the advantages of size, technology and a developed economy. (Agricultural producers also benefit from European subsidies.) If the ACP open their markets to European goods, their own producers will not be able to compete with the imports from Europe. It is likely that many will lose their livelihoods.
2. The EU is using EPAs to force through its own agenda. The European Union is also using these negotiations to reopen discussions about issues that the ACP has already rejected at the World Trade Organisation. The ACP say that having agreements on these new issues will restrict their choice of policies and will not bring any benefit to their economies.
3. The negotiating process is disastrous. The EU has far greater resources available for negotiating EPAs. ACP countries do not have the time, expertise or money to follow the negotiations properly or analyse their potential impact. The EU claims that countries do not have to sign up to EPAs, but they have not considered any alternatives to ensure that countries that don't sign up will not be worse off as a result.
The European Commission has also commissioned an impact assessment in West Africa by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
It concluded that EPAs would:
· Stifle efforts to develop a modern industrial base
· Reduce exports of traditional crops
· Lead to internal conflict and struggles over resources.
Why didn't the EU stick with its old agreement?
The EU said that arrangements under the old Lomé agreement are not compatible with World Trade Organisation rules and therefore need to be renegotiated. This is technically true, but it highlights a problem with WTO rules rather than a problem with the old Lomé agreement. Most WTO rules allow for poor countries to receive some special treatment in comparison with richer members. However, WTO rules on regional agreements do not have this option.
Christian Aid and other campaigning organisations think the EU and ACP should jointly go back to the WTO and renegotiate these rules. UKIP agrees too.
What can be done?
UKIP supports Christian Aid’s proposal that concerned citizens complain to Patricia Hewitt, the UK's Secretary of State for trade and Industry. She can call on the European Commission to stop EPAs until the mandate for the negotiations has been changed. A similar call can also be extended to Peter Mandelson, the new European Commissioner for trade. He has the authority to refer the negotiations back to European Ministers and ask for a new mandate.
Lewisham West constituents should demand success in this area since its sitting MP Jim Dowd accepted Christian Aid pledges demanding fair trade in December 2001. UKIP thinks Mr Dowd has had enough time to pass on the sentiments to both his current and old colleagues.
Some 34% of the population of Lewisham West are non-White. Many work hard to send money home to families in need. Unfortunately, these efforts are threatened by the European Union across as many as 77 former European colonies.
The European Union is determined to implement Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with poor countries so as to force the opening of their markets for European imports. This is not just another UKIP anti-EU position but one shared by as many as 150 members from around Europe, Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific (www.stopepa.org). One such organisation is Christian Aid, which has mounted a strong campaign in this area.
Christian Aid argues that:
1. EPAs are free-trade agreements between very unequal partners. In return for African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries having access to European markets, the European Union is using the negotiations to demand that European companies have duty-free access to 90% of these countries' markets. It may sound reasonable – but European companies and producers have all the advantages of size, technology and a developed economy. (Agricultural producers also benefit from European subsidies.) If the ACP open their markets to European goods, their own producers will not be able to compete with the imports from Europe. It is likely that many will lose their livelihoods.
2. The EU is using EPAs to force through its own agenda. The European Union is also using these negotiations to reopen discussions about issues that the ACP has already rejected at the World Trade Organisation. The ACP say that having agreements on these new issues will restrict their choice of policies and will not bring any benefit to their economies.
3. The negotiating process is disastrous. The EU has far greater resources available for negotiating EPAs. ACP countries do not have the time, expertise or money to follow the negotiations properly or analyse their potential impact. The EU claims that countries do not have to sign up to EPAs, but they have not considered any alternatives to ensure that countries that don't sign up will not be worse off as a result.
The European Commission has also commissioned an impact assessment in West Africa by PricewaterhouseCoopers.
It concluded that EPAs would:
· Stifle efforts to develop a modern industrial base
· Reduce exports of traditional crops
· Lead to internal conflict and struggles over resources.
Why didn't the EU stick with its old agreement?
The EU said that arrangements under the old Lomé agreement are not compatible with World Trade Organisation rules and therefore need to be renegotiated. This is technically true, but it highlights a problem with WTO rules rather than a problem with the old Lomé agreement. Most WTO rules allow for poor countries to receive some special treatment in comparison with richer members. However, WTO rules on regional agreements do not have this option.
Christian Aid and other campaigning organisations think the EU and ACP should jointly go back to the WTO and renegotiate these rules. UKIP agrees too.
What can be done?
UKIP supports Christian Aid’s proposal that concerned citizens complain to Patricia Hewitt, the UK's Secretary of State for trade and Industry. She can call on the European Commission to stop EPAs until the mandate for the negotiations has been changed. A similar call can also be extended to Peter Mandelson, the new European Commissioner for trade. He has the authority to refer the negotiations back to European Ministers and ask for a new mandate.
Lewisham West constituents should demand success in this area since its sitting MP Jim Dowd accepted Christian Aid pledges demanding fair trade in December 2001. UKIP thinks Mr Dowd has had enough time to pass on the sentiments to both his current and old colleagues.