ACPO, spying coppers and the right to protest

The  impact of the spying copper was a proper jaw dropper. As details have emerged since the weekend, the jaw has stayed firmly dropped. Anyone peddling the story to a Hollywood movie mogul would be told to take the plot away and make it more credible. 

It appears that Kennedy, aka Mark Stone, was not acting alone. So how does this sort of decision to infiltrate campaigning groups take place? Simon Jenkins wrote a very informative - and worrying - article in the Guardian.

“Running Kennedy – let alone his colleagues – cost the taxpayer £250,000 a year, or £1.75m over seven years. Whether tree-hugging and the occasional trespass constituted threats to national security is moot. A gilded sledgehammer was clearly being deployed to crack a few nuts. They were not a serious terrorist threat. The denouement was a costly fiasco. This is what happens when authority has too much money and no one in charge to impose a sense of proportion.

It is significant that Kennedy did not work for any police force. He worked for a murky organisation called the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU). With a budget of £5m this operates as a branch of the National Domestic Extremism Unit (NDEU) which, in turn, works alongside the National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit (NETCU). Ask where this stands, and you will be told it reports to the Association of Chief Police Officers' Terrorism and Allied Matters Committee, codenamed Acpo(TAM).

Only those who have tarried in the foggy corridors of the Home Office, the Ministry of Justice and the Metropolitan police can have any notion of the Orwellian extravagance of these places. Agencies, units and groups cruise shark-like round the feet of terrified Home Office ministers. Their staffs, expenses, overtime and accommodation are crammed into London's Scotland Yard and Tintagel House. If challenged, they incant their motto: "We keep you safe."

Kennedy's bosses in the NPOIU work for Acpo, but this is not what it seems. It is not, as its name suggests, the police officers' staff club, nor is it a public body of any sort. It is a private company, incorporated in 1997. It is sub-contracted by Whitehall to operate the police end of the government's counterterrorism and "anti-extremism" strategies. It is thus alongside MI5, but even less accountable.

Acpo was once a liaison group. But, like all bureaucracies, it has grown. It now runs its own police forces under a police chief boss, Sir Hugh Orde, like a British FBI. It trades on its own account, generating revenue by selling data from the police national computer for £70 an item (cost of retrieval, 60p). It owns an estate of 80 flats in central London. While the generous logistical support it offered the greens was doubtless gratis, we do not know if E.ON UK, the operator of Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station, paid for security intelligence from Kennedy.

As a private company, Acpo need not accede to Freedom of Information requests and presumably could distribute its profit to its own board. The whole operation is reminiscent of the deals set up by the Pentagon with private firms to run the Iraq and Afghan wars, free of publicity or accountability. There is no more vivid testament to the illiberalism of the Blair regime than these eccentric arrangements. They were all approved by the likes of David Blunkett, Charles Clarke, John Reid and Jacqui Smith.” Simon Jenkins Guardian 12/1/2011

New Labour were an absolute disgrace when civil liberties issues arose. This case spells out just what a bunch of second-raters they were when faced by the security industry. Whether it was the tendency to want to appear tougher than the tories on security issues or whether the security services had some good skeletons to pick at is still open to question. Unfortunately the move to roll back the worst of their excesses by the Coalition seems to have stalled. This case should jolt some sense into them - but do not bank on it.

“It recalled Chesterton's satire on the early Met police special branch, The Man Who Was Thursday, in which all the members of the "supreme anarchist council" turned out to be policemen. So, are the greens all policemen, and if so what is their game?” ibid

Who watches the watchmen?

Bankers 5 Democracy 0

‘Too big to fail’ they said. ‘It will never happen again’ they said. ‘Outrageous bonuses are a thing of the past’ they said. ‘Failure to support the banks would be catastrophic’ they said.

Well maybe, but what became clear yesterday was just how powerful these greedy gamblers have become. One fifth of the UK’s Gross National Product is created by the financial sector. In the face of hints, subtle and otherwise, our weak-kneed leaders caved in. They are now singing a very different tune.

This leaves us in even more of a mess. The ‘masters of the universe’ have been strengthened and further empowered by the bail-outs. Unelected, unaccountable and seemingly fire-proof. Our current politicians are incapable of reining them in. They threaten to walk away and in this internet-connected age, do their gambling elsewhere. 

The UK cannot act unilaterally against the financiers and multi-national corporate greed machines but it can mobilise other nation states to act in unison. A long shot. The alternative is a two-tier world where the so-called democracies stand by enfeebled, emasculated and virtually powerless, while the plutocrats condescend to distribute their favours to fawning acolytes. 

The effect of the climbdown will be to turn up the political heat in the UK. As cuts bite, as jobs go and as services wither, there will be justifiable rage against those who created the pain but who continue to gain. That rage will be turned on those who promised to curb the excesses but have singularly failed to deliver anything of significance. 

Why the phone-hacking story matters

It is not going away. Every week there is the drip drip drip of further revelations. A leader article in the Observer yesterday summarised the key elements concisely.

“A powerful news organisation pays cash to avert scrutiny of dubious practices. Those practices are inadequately investigated by a police force that is thought to collaborate with the same news organisation. MPs say their inquiries are tempered by fear. The man who presided over the newspaper at the centre of the allegations is now the prime minister's chief media aide.”

Put like that it is clearly not going to go away. The crucial issue is the collusion of the Met in what looks like a cover up. The damage limitation plan: send two stooges to jail - buy their silence and promote the lone maverick version. Thousands of pages of notes are conveniently ignored by the Met. The then editor (Coulson) denies all knowledge yet resigns - and walks into a plum role with Cameron.  Buy off the three who want to take the matter further (at nearly £1 million each). Accuse any doubters of malice or envy and using the phrase of the century - move on! Job done.

But not quite Lord Copper. The fact that the man in charge of the investigation - Andy Hayman - retired from the Met and immediately became a columnist for News International stank to high heaven. They didn’t even wait for a few months, such is the arrogance of the execs involved.

The Met kept refusing requests for information from the many celebs who want to find out what happened to their phones. The judiciary (thankfully) have taken a much stronger line and ordered the release of document after document. And each one shows what the police ignored, willfully or woefully. 

The list of those wanting their day in court grows weekly. While some want a pay-off, others seem more determined to get News International Executives into court. In the witness box - on oath. Squirm, wriggle and hug moments galore! 

Rupert Murdoch knows all this. He wants to gain control of BskyB and this matter is not helping. There could be several execs taking a walk “for the good of the company.” Damage limitation - version 2. 

And as for the Met? Several MPs are not happy. They are not happy at all and there is talk of an independent investigation from another force and/or a judicial review. 

Anyone still in doubt why this matters? Imagine how the Murdoch group would have handled a similar story if it had been the BBC at fault. Or a different political party. 

Exactly.

Lies, damned lies and Tories

Clegg and his wibbly-wobbly Liberals have, quite rightly, been pilloried for their U-Turn on tuition fees. For thousands of students and many other citizens they stand exposed as lying devious bastards. How convenient for their bed-mates.

Throughout this time, the really, really devious, slippery and deeply untrustworthy bunch of self-serving toe-rags, collectively known as the Tories, have quietly, with the help of a too-friendly media, overturned many more pledges made before the election.

Not convinced? Here is Cameron three days before the election.

  

"any cabinet minister … who comes to me and says 'Here are my plans' and they involve frontline reductions, they'll be sent straight back to their department to go away and think again". (Andrew Marr show)

£81billion in cuts now rain down on frontline services, to the disgraceful sound of Tory cheers in the Commons.

Would VAT rise? A month before the election, Cameron said: "Our plans involve cutting wasteful spending … our plans don't involve an increase in VAT."

Pretty clear eh?

When challenged that the massive re-organisation and preparation for privatisation were not in the Tory Manifesto, health secretary Lansley wriggled  around like a beetle on a pin and talked defensively about ‘mentioning it at a meeting or two.’ 

So that’s alright then.

Want more? How about universal child benefit?  "I wouldn't change child benefit, I wouldn't means test it, I don't think that's a good idea." Cameron, speaking two months before the election.

Or Education Maintenance Allowances? Michael Gove said just before the election, “Ed Balls keeps saying we are committed to scrapping EMA. I have never said this. We won’t.”

There are more. Apart from Polly Toynbee writing in the Guardian, where are the column inches in the mainstream media exposing these lies? Why are these nasty, scheming, devious lying bastards getting away with it? 

Simply remember the Tory cheers when Osborne announced his £81 billion package of cuts. A bunch of well-off toffs, cheering as they inflicted misery on the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. 

Meanwhile the bankers roll on and the tax dodging continues.  

England have won the Ashes

Tax dodgers, News of the Screws phone hacking, Bankers Bonuses, MPs Expenses, Pakistan assassination, Wikileaks, terror threat raised............All pale into insignificance against THE story. 

England have beaten Australia 3-1.

In Australia.  

It is England’s first series win in Australia since 1987. 

The last time they played on Aussie soil they were hammered 5-0. And it was a humiliation. Now the boot is well and truly on the other foot.

It was a record breaking series. Several feats stand out. 

The astonishing batting of Alistair Cook. He batted for longer than any other English player - over 36 hours in total, scoring 766 runs in the process.

Every time England won they marmalised the opposition. It is the first time in Australia that a visiting test side has won three test matches by an innings.

England recorded their highest ever score (644) in Australia.

England head for the World Cup buoyed by the words of the departing Paul Collingwood: "This team can go as far as they want to. They're a very, very special side."

“Paul Keating, Crocodile Dundee, Yvonne Goolagong, Dame Edna, Kerry Packer, Skippy,  Clive James, Kylie, Rolf Harris, Sir Les Patterson....   

We gave your boys one hell of a beating.”

Artful Dodger

Rational people realised long ago that the Tory mantra, “We are all in this together,” is so much hogwash. For those unable to read the text on the advert (below), which appeared in several national papers yesterday, it made three key points:

1. Tax dodging costs the UK £120 billion every year.
2. George Osborne could do something about this but instead keeps dodging the issue.
3. Osborne has benefitted to the tune of £1.4 million in tax dodging himself!

A  related article in the Independent made several points. 

“The ad, which ran in several national papers to coincide with the 2.5 per cent rise in VAT, was the work of 38 Degrees, an online protest group that has dedicated itself to causing trouble for the establishment since its formation in 2009.

"There are hundreds of thousands of people in the UK who care about progressive issues who are not connected with traditional political organisations," said David Babbs, its executive director. "They are not apathetic – they want to take action. What we're trying to do is link all those people together."

Since forming in the midst of the MPs' expenses scandal, the group has attempted to replicate the success of organisations such as MoveOn.org in the United States, which has successfully managed to channel frustration into a coherent, political pressure group.

38 Degrees was launched with the help of a donation from Gordon Roddick, the widower of the Body Shop founder and political campaigner, Anita Roddick. Since then, it has attracted more than 250,000 members.

In the spirit of handing power back to the people, its decision to target the Chancellor was made after a vote of its members.” Independent 4/1/11

Power to the people? Heaven forfend. How on earth would our political class line their pockets?

Facebook Values

“Facebook has received a new round of investment that values the social media firm at $50bn (£32.3bn), making it worth more than Time Warner, eBay or Yahoo.

The funds from investment bank Goldman Sachs and its long-time Russian investor Digital Sky Technologies underlines the astonishing growth of the social networking site, started from a Harvard dorm in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg.” Guardian 4/1/11

Not everyone is so enamoured of this phenomenon. Neil Tennant,  Pet Shop Boy, quoted in The Word magazine said, “There’s a sickly strain of fake friendship which goes across the internet, which I find insincere and dislikeable. I’m not on Facebook, but a friend described it as a place where you keep in touch with friends you don’t really want to see, which sums it up rather brilliantly. It’s complete insincerity.”

Happy New Year!