A reminder of the past for Beirut - Holiday Inn building, as it is today and has since the beginning of the civil war in 1976

 Hearing the news of the start of  sectarian violence again in Lebanon is no surprise after my recent trip in glitzy Beirut.

This time last week on a friday afternoon l was in Beirut near the blue mosque, where l kept being asked whether l was a sunni or shia. If anything this illustrates well the extent of sectarianism in Lebanon more clearly to me then anything else. Striking me as not dissimilar to Northern Ireland where everybody seems to know if your catholic or protestant but probably alot worse, if l’m reading the situation well.

Don’t get me wrong, the country has plenty to offer a tourist particularly in Beirut with its multilingual, fashion-conscious residents. You can see one of Rome’s most lavish temples in Baalbek, the “Sun city” of th ancient world. You can go to ski resorts like the Cedars, Lebanons oldest up at 2000m altitude which is akin to a European ski destination. Byblos, north along the coast from Beirut has some very impressive archaeological remains with a charming ancient harbour and a seafood feast awaiting you at any joint. And finally discovering the clubs and bars in Beirut makes one realise why its the Middle East’s most vibrant city.

But it all appears to come back to a demographic timebomb there. So whats the demographic timebomb?  Well since a census in 1932, it has been pre-determined that Lebanon has a Maronite christian as a President;  Sunni Prime Minister and the speaker of the parliament is a shia Muslim. The cabinet also reflects the sectarian mix. The problem with such a power division along sectarian lines is that the make-up of the population has changed some what and does not reflect today the make-up of the communities in 1932. Furthermore, when elections occur you can only vote for one of your faith!Knowingly no new census has occurred in Lebanon since 1932, as this would lay claim to change this sectarian division of power.  

This of course leaves out more recent arrivals like the Palestinians struck in camps since 1948, where in many instances you will now have up to 3 generations living in these very basic camps waiting to return to Palestine.

So any chance of a Census today? No chance but rather its ignored to their peril.

This is all before the troubles next door in Syrian crosses over the border!  It was clear from the local papers that the political classes are in a state of denial on this front. Everyone else has been fully aware that the unrest in neighbouring Syria has been felt most keenly in Lebanon’s second capital during May. Amid the battle between residents of rival neighbourhoods, there has been a clear rise in animosity between members of different sectarian communities and everyone is fully aware that the unrest in Tripoli is fully capable of spreading elsewhere in Lebanon including Beirut as indeed reports from the BBC have suggested since my return. So you can imagine a demographic time bomb is the least of Lebanonese concerns at the moment.

All this is really a reflection of the previous French policy of “divide and rule” in Lebanon in the early 1940’s which in the first instance divided their mandate in Lebanon from Syria along religious grounds with a Syrian republic for Muslim majority and a Lebanon which included Tyre, Beirut and Tripoli.   |

I wish the best for a beautiful country like Lebanon but l’m very anxious about its immediate future after a very relaxing trip there with friends as a tourist.

John McDonell MP told the press launch in Westminster that the message of “Give us a climate Job” was one that made perfect sense in answer to the Coalition’s message of austerity. He was joined by Labour GLA member Murad Qureshi, Graham Peterson from UCU, Peter Colville from Occupy London and Rebecca from UKYCC along with a lively group of climate and trade union activists who plan to set up “Climate Jobs Centres” in 25 cities and towns across Scotland, Wales and England over the next forthnight.
The campaign will bring the message that we can cut emissions and unemployment at the same time if we invest in climate jobs ““ a win win situation for working people ““ not to mention for the growing numbers of young people being thrown on the scrap heap by the reactionary and callous policies of the Tory-led coalition

Find out whether the caravan is coming to your area if you dont already know”¦ Raise the issue in your trade union ““ and if possible make us a donation ““ take copies of the excellent pamphlet to see
and click on tabs for caravan and events to see more

Click here to view article

The groups, including representatives in Kent, are opposed to plans to build an enormous hub airport off Kent.

Originally mooted by London Mayor Boris Johnson, Boris Island was said to be a 20-year project costing anything up to £70billion.

Then, in November last year, world-renowned architect Lord Foster unveiled a more ambitious project on the Hoo Peninsula.

If built, it would more than double the capacity of Heathrow, handling up to 150 million passengers each year, 24 hours every day. It would have four runways, each 4km long.

But both projects have attracted huge criticism, including attacks from Medway Council, which claims the project is unviable, expensive and an environmental hazard.

Now demonstrators are set to gather at City Hall – just one day after Mr Johnson said he was committed to pushing through the scheme.

They claim the Mayor has championed the scheme in the face of opposition from local politicians and environmental campaigners and despite the Estuary being beyond London’s borders.

Campaigners from No Estuary Airport, the Campaign against Climate Change and AirportWatch will be joined at their protest by London Assembly members Jenny Jones, Caroline Pidgeon and Murad Qureshi.

Phil Thornhill from the Campaign against Climate Change said: “There is at the moment no way of sustaining air travel on a large scale without precipitating a potentially catastrophically high level of climate destabilising emissions which will wreck the future for everyone.

“Boris Island is not the answer. We need to think more deeply and imaginatively on how we organise transport systems for the future that are truly sustainable.” 

Click here to view article

Afghanistan is set to dominate the discussions of NATO 2012 Chicago summit this coming weekend. This all the while when Afghanistan is a tragedy and not one the West is ever going to end particularly if its not going to deal with key issues like the Durand line and Pashtun nationalism.

The Soviet Union were there for most of the 1980’s and had to retreat and the only person who appears to have survived going through there has been Alexander the Great locally still known as Sukindar. Thats not surprising as he was just passing through and not setting up camp for a decade or so, something NATO & the Soviet Union should have both learnt before getting involved. 

But  you do have to ask what the North Altantic Treaty Organisation(NATO) is doing in South Asia in the first place? South Asia is a mighty long way from the Atlantic and NATO principal region of operation is Europe when it was orginally set-up. Don’t forget the premise of the alliance was to  ” keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down” in Europe.

But l don’t have much hope for this summit on Afghanistan by NATO, if its not going to deal with the Durand line dispute and Pashtun nationalism demands. Particularly if the main players in the region are not there as well. If these issues and actors  are ignored, all peaceful efforts going for the last ten years would go in vain and the whole region once again turn into devastating political turmoil.  I personally blame British imperialists like Durand that hatched up such lines in the first place!  

Ethnic map of the Pakistan & Afghanistan

 

Mayoral obsession - Thames Estuary Airport

During the recent GLA election period we had a debate at the Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) where we heard why a Thames Estuary airport is not a viable option for providing additional national hub runway capacity for London and the South-East.

Firstly this is not a new idea at all.  Different versions of the same idea have been around since 1943 and  been rejected every time.  Most recently we’ve had the Mayor’s proposal in Shivering Sands and the Foster proposal in the Isle of Grain to consider.

Secondly, its not clear where the space for the airport actually exists in the Thames Estuary anyway.  The coastlines along both Kent & Essex are largely protected,  and we have busy shipping lanes and wind farms being constructed.  Lets not also forget what the CEO of NATs Richard Deakins recently said of the Foster proposal, that its in the worst position possible for incoming flights into London!  Willie Walsh of British Airways has  also been quoted as saying “…..its only for the birds”.

The proposal also poses a real threat to the West London economy as Heathrow is responsible for 114,000 jobs and gross value added of £ 5.3 billion.  That’s 1 in 5 jobs locally.  The reality is that any Thames Estuary airport proposal is only viable if Heathrow is closed and air traffic is forced East.  Quite simply,  two hubs in London is not viable and it’s not clear that either passengers or the airlines are willing to go there (judging by Medway council’s survey of the airlines and GLA Economics Report ” Come fly with me”.

It goes without saying that the wildlife and local environment impact is huge, with the propsed sites in the middle of one of the most important sites for wild birds in Europe.  This could easily cause noise, congestion and pollution problems in outer London suburbs like Bromley, Bexley and Havering as well.  

In the meantime, we are seeing better efficiencies in managing airports.  For example the A380 double decker planes landing at Heathrow have increased the passenger capacity of  Heathrow airport greatly without causing too much local environmental concerns like noise and air pollution.  Indeed if you consider available capacity by passenger numbers, there is potential across all the “London” airports.  For example at Heathrow another 20 million passengers can be accommodated at the terminals.

In short,  this is not the revolutionary new idea we have been led to believe.  The space for it is questionable & the Mayor does not have any juridiction over the Estuary anyway.  There is also the threat to Heathrow and the West London economy; and of course the biggest question about the threat to the environment in the Estuary.  What we need is a different approach altogether which links up the spare capacity amongst “London” airports with better links and connectivity between airports.

For all these reasons and more l’ll be joining the protests outside City Hall on Friday morning against the Mayor’s support for the crazy old idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary.

On 3rd May Londoners face a choice between a Labour Mayor and a Tory Mayor. That choice is this simple, and its a clear choice that matters on May 3. It’s a choice between a Conservative party that will carry on ripping off Londoners and a Labour party determined to make you better off.

The Conservative Party has:

• Pushed Britain back into recession
• Hiked up bus, rail, Tube, tram and DLR fares
• Introduced a ‘granny tax’ to fund a tax-cut for the rich
• Hit young people and students, including scrapped the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA)
• Cut funding for childcare
• Allowed rip-off energy companies to hike up bills

A Labour Mayor of London would:

•  Cut fares, saving the average fare-payer £1,000 over four years
•  Reverse Boris Johnson’s police cuts
• Create a £30-a-week London EMA for 16-19 year olds
• Provide grants and loans for childcare 
• Offer Londoners cheaper electricity and heating through a London Energy Co-op
• Oppose the granny tax paid for by the tax cut for the richest – and freeze Council Tax

The central choice on Thursday is between a Conservative Party continuing to rip you off, or a Labour Party that will make you better off.

Don’t let the Tories get away with it. Vote Labour in London on Thursday.

Offending islamophobic comments in London Elects booklet

Having had a number of constituents complain to me about an offending islamophobic remark in the GLA election booklet on page 9, I have written a letter of complaint to London Elects, the election commissioners of the GLA election on the 3rd of May.  

The offending  quote from Robert West reads  ” I’m backing BNP because they support our traditional christian faith. We need strong leadership to protect our national identity from the threat of Islam ”   This is clearly islamophobic in its intent.

In my letter I have asked London Elects to explain how it saw fit to sanction such  islamophobic comments.  It is simply not good enough for them to tell us it’s not its role to make value judgements about the contents of the booklet from all the various political parties.  Such remarks fall foul of Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, as it denotes that all persons of the islamic faith pose a threat to the wider population.  This is not only untrue, it is also detrimental to race relations between different faith communities to promote this belief.

Public authorities like London Elects must have due regard to the need to “eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited under the Act….and foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it”   This has clearly not happened in this instance.

All this when l had earlier in the week complained about London Elects permitting political slogans on the ballot paper.  Lawyers at London Elect need to consider this again along with how the islamophobic comments were permitted to be published in the first place.  

Unfortunately, the damage has been done because the booklet has already hit the door mats of millions of homes!  Furthermore the quote from Robert West can also be found on the London Elects website. This at least can be dealt with and must be taken down immediately. You can email them at info@londonelects.org.uk or phone 020 7983 4444 to complain.

Ultimately the best way to counter this injustice now, would be to make sure that the BNP does not get another one of its numbers back into the London Assembly as they did in 2008.  For this, we have to make sure that enough people vote across all the political parties to ensure the BNP do not make the 5 per cent threshold needed to get one of their Assembly Member which were only serve to peddle further their islamophobic views.

I hope all readers will go out next Thursday and use their vote to stop this threat and such negatives messages reaching voters again next time round.

Offending ballot paper with slogans!

Like many over this past weekend, l received my postal vote for the GLA election which will take place on the 3rd of May.  There are 3 three ballot papers and the one which caught  my eye is the pink one, which is the vote for the Assembly across London.  There are some parties who have incorporated tag lines or slogans beside their name which is clearly designed to nab voters at the very last moment by igniting an emotional reaction in voters encouraging a reactionary vote.  For example, number 2 on the ballot is the Christian Peoples Alliance with the linet ” Supporting traditional marriage”    This continues further down the ballot paper to number 4 where the English Democrats tell us their are ” Putting England first!”.  Then at number 8 we have the National Front saying its ” Putting Londoners First” and finally number 9 is the House Party with the line ” Homes for Londoners”.  It seems to me, that these smaller parties are being allowed to bend the rules in order to help them get some last minute campagining across to voters at the critically point at which boxes are ticked off.  

Both the major parties could quite easily have slogans of their own, for example the Tories could have “The Boris Party” after its name.  Labour could have “For the many not a few”?

There is also another dimension which strikes me in this, and that is the prejudices which are revealed in the slogans .  For example, the Christian People’s Party seem to be having a go at homosexuality and the plethora of other relationships which exist outside of wed-lock.  Should those who are have to face these prejudices and indeed the rest of voters have to face these sorts of subliminal prejudices at the point of voting?  The English Democrats and National Front on the other hand are trying to define who is one of them, again in a subliminal way trying to exclude many of the communities in London.

The Election Commission should not have allowed any such slogans in the first place.  Although, as much as these slogans are used to identify certain types of parties, voters can also use them to identify who not to vote for!  It is probably premature to start mentioning any lessons to be learned from this forthcoming election but I hope that this is one practice which will not be carried through to the elections in 2016.