Filed under: Uncategorized
Talha Ahsan - British born Aspergers sufferer facing extradition to the USA
Campaigners calling for the trial of Babar Ahmed to take place in the UK have scored a huge victory following the success of their on line petition. This evening parliament will debate a motion demanding that ministers renegotiate the US-UK extradition treaty. This could also be one of the rare occasions when MPs are given a free vote. Not surprisingly The Affront to British Justice Campaign have also piggy backed onto this session, and their representatives will no doubt highlight other similar cases like the one of Gary McKinnon.
While the Babar Ahmed case has been the catalyst for the e-petition, and Gary Mckinnon is probably the most widely known example of individuals fighting extradition to the US, we should not forget the plight of Talha Ahsan, another British citizen arrested at his home in 2006 in response to an extradition request from the USA under the Extradition Act 2003 and detained for 5 years without trial.
I recently asked the Mayor of London for his views on the Talha Ahsan case but very unfortunately he responded saying that it would not be appropriate for him to comment on a particular case. This did not however, stop Boris in the past, when in the Mail, he lead calls for a reform of the extradition laws to help British businessmen like Gary McKinnon. Both Talha Ahsan and Gary Mckinnon are British born and live in London. I am not sure therefore, why he felt compelled to speak up for one and unable to comment on the other?
Whilst we are unlikely to see a complete repeal of the Act, a significant overhaul would be welcome. At the very least, British Citizens should be afforded the same “probable cause” protection as their US counterparts. Presently, this is the test applied to individuals when Britain makes an extradition request to the US and yet the same test is not applied when the US make a request for a British citizen. This is now the time for our MPs to redress the balance in the interests of justice for their own citizens.
December 5, 2011
Site of the Big Table
Just before the public meeting at Paddington Arts Centre on the 9th of November to save the Big Table, l learned that Crossrail needed a site measuring 30 metres by 70 metres (as marked out in purple on the plan above) to accommodate a sub-station near the start of the tunnel in West London. This took me by surprise as l’d met with Crossrail officials at City Hall only recently, and they led me to believe that the site could accommodate both business and the sub station by moving the factory arm of the business into their old building at the back of the shop and starting at street level, while positioning the sub-station at track level.
The area marked in red above shows the site currently leased to Big Table. If you imagine trying to align the space needed by Crossrail to build their substation with the area leased to Big Table, then you quickly come to realise that it just doesn’t fit! Perhaps Crossrail should be looking for another site altogether, maybe closer to the Tunnel on the other side of Great Western Road Bridge, nearer to Royal Oak tube.
Interestingly, the adjacent site at the back of the Big table site is owned by Network Rail (marked in blue). It looks to me that the shape of that site can more easily accommodate the 30 x 70 metre site needed by Crossrail and would also have the benefit of much better road access. Furthermore, shouldn’t Network Rail & Crossrail have looked into these possibilities long before coming down on the Big Table?
December 2, 2011
Protestors call on Crossrail to spare local heritage landmark from demolition
This morning l joined the local community in Paddington & North Kensington to protest against the closure of the “Big Table” bed shop which is located in the neighbourhood l grew up in.
I’ve been a supporter of Crossrail but did not expect it to cost local jobs and devour a local landmark like the Big Table (56 Great Western Road, W9) which has resided on this site for many years. Crossrail have had more then 20 years to sort these issues out and therefore, decisions which affect real lives, livelihoods and local businesses should not be left until just a few months before the tunnelling begins proper in March 2012 at Royal Oak. A conventional planning application to the local council setting out their plans for the electrical sub-station on the site would have afforded sufficient opportunity and time for all parties concerned to deal with the issues and the proposals. Instead, plans are railroaded through using the powers of the Crossrail Act.
In addition we also have the tunnel lining being transported into theRoyal Oak portal via the Great Western Road by lorry. We were originally led to believe it would come in by rail.
It was for this reason that I decided to “go to the mattresses” with Crossrail this morning and to support calls to support local people, jobs and heritage.
November 18, 2011
Renewed hope for step free access at Greenford station in Ealing
One of the themes of my questioning recently of the Mayor both verbally and in writing has been to ask him about his broken promises on increased accessibility of our tube system, particularly with reference to the lack of lift access at many of our tube stations.
l used two examples; the first revolved around Ealing tube stations. At last weeks plenary we had Transport for London in front of the London Assembly for questions and so I used the opportunity to highlight this issue. l commented that while it was daft to have stopped the works on lifts at Greenford station at a huge cost, it is still worth looking at some more affordable alternative proposals for lifts put forward by Cllr Bassam Mafrouz (lead Member for Transport at Ealing Council). Rather surprisingly the Mayor said he would consider them, (although his Transport Commissioner, Peter Hendy did not appear appear particularly keen). Nonetheless, I hope Ealing Council can make the most of this renewed opportunity.
My second question was prompted by the West Hamstead Amenity and Transport Group (WHAT), I submitted a written question asking why there is no lift at West Hampstead tube given the works being done by Network Rail on the West Hampstead Thameslink stations? This would not only aid passengers travelling to and from airports it connects to, it would also assist disabled people and those with pushchairs. The response was a fairly standard one about the lack of funding but also made clear that for airport connections, other tube stations took priority, including Paddington (Hammersmitth & City line); Victoria (for Gatwick) and also stations at Tottenham Court Rd, Bond St and Bank.
So, although I managed to get some something from the Mayor with his promise to consider seriously the proposal from Cllr Bassam Mafrouz, I only got a rehash of policy spiel on lifts and budget prioritisation on West Hampstead, despite his acknowlement that it is a “strategic interchange” in his transport strategy.
November 16, 2011
London's largest electricity supplier needs to do more to help its customers
At the plenary last week, I received the full support of the London Assembly for my motion on the energy companies poor performance in London in dealing with fuel poverty. The motion was passed unanimously. For some time now, I’ve made the point that it won’t be the council tax or even the Mayor’s annual fare increases for Transport which hit family budgets the hardest, but it is the energy price hikes of up to 18 per cent which will make the biggest dent in household expenditure, especially for London households. This issue is further compounded by the postcode lottery which is also prevalent in the energy price market, as firms charge up to £180 more in some areas with the best deals to be found in Brighton, Bristol and Leeds. According to London Councils, we already have 1 in 4 households living in fuel poverty. In addition, we are warned (David Blair in FT 10.10.11) that if energy bills remain on their current path, the average household will be in fuel poverty by 2015. In 2008, the Environment Committee produced a report called “Lagging behind – Insulating homes in London”. This report noted then, the poor performance in London of insulating homes. We asked the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to reconsider the rules around CERT (carbon emission reduction targets) in order to address the lower funding delivery in London, as part of the measures to bring forward measures to insulate the hard to treat homes. Therefore this is not a new problem, however, it has been compounded by the esculating fuel prices which are now disporportionate with household incomes. As for the largest energy company in London, EDF, their performance has been lamentable. Even the industry journal “Uility Week” commented, that out of all the major energy suppliers, EDF achieved the second lowest proportion of its overall obligations in the third year of CERTs. This obliges suppliers to reduce carbon emissions by providing customers with measures such as loft insulation. Instead, we have seen a bombardment of energy efficient electric light bulbs landing on our doormat! Incidentally, the fourth year of the CERT programme ends on the 31st of March 2012 hence the adverts for insulation suddenly appearing in the Evening Standard. So while energy company shareholders are enjoying record profits, London consumers are getting fleeced. We desparately need DECC & OFGEM, the regulator, to take on the greed of the energy companies and to put the interests of London energy consumers first.
November 16, 2011
Next page
Previous page
