Archives For News

By Ranjan Kumaran @FinancialEyes

HSBC are being grilled by Margaret Hodge today at the Public Accounts Select Committee on tax and tax avoidance.

HSBC offshoot HICL, based “offshore” in Guernsey are significant owners of UK hospitals via PFI, with 43 projects under ownership based on 2013 Treasury data.

Margaret Hodge has stated that PFI has been a rip off for the taxpayer.

HICL are still based in Guernsey. Their business model is based on overcharging hospitals and avoiding tax.

The 2011 Treasury Select Committee found that: “Treasury could not tell us if PFI companies had paid tax in the UK on profits and on equity gains, or whether corporation taxes had been collected from PFI” [Richard Brooks – The Great Tax Robbery pg 222].

Two Hospitals, Central Middlesex and Chase Farm have since closed their A&E wards (end of 2013) as a result of unsustainable PFI debts.

In 2011 HICL was sold to its directors in a Management Buy Out.

Ex-HSBC directors continue to profit tax-free from UK Hospitals which have closed their A&E wards due to overcharging and lack of funding resulting from rip off HSBC PFI deals.

Click on the image below to see a list of HICL Hospitals.


Screen Shot 2015-03-09 at 13.05.09

See attached 2010 HSBC – HICL prospectus by clicking here and offshore corporate structure diagram

Screen Shot 2015-03-09 at 12.50.38


by Ranjan Kumaran – @financialeyes

Anti-corruption campaigners gathered at University of London’s Senate House today to highlight the inaugural meeting of a Legal Think Tank, EFILA, whose members lobby for the ISDS clause, in which countries can be sued by corporations, to be included in the latest Tory backed EU-US trade deal.

Linda Kaucher of Stop TTIP said –

“Investor State Dispute Settlement is a blatant attempt by corporations to ransack public resources, aided by the sort of people attending this EFILA conference.

“The lawyers attending this meeting today make big money from investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) cases, whether acting as adjudicators, acting for corporations or defending states in these cases.

“Their background work is seeking out agreements, often signed up years ago, to find opportunities for corporations to sue governments, regardless of how that will hit a country’s health or education budgets. Even when governments successfully defend these cases they have to pay millions in costs to these lawyers. Thus these lawyers are like leeches on public finance, sucking the public money that is there to be used for the public good, a disgrace to the law profession and to humanity.

“The EU public has clearly stated, in response to the EU Commission ISDS consultation, that it does not want ISDS at all. Now those charged with carrying out the will of the people must act accordingly.

“There is an opportunity, in law, to end existing member states agreements (Bilateral Investment Agreements) that have ISDS. That opportunity must be taken, not the fact of existing agreements used as a reason to sign up to ISDS provision in ever more far-reaching agreements like TTIP, as is currently happening.

“ISDS must be kept out of any new so-called ‘trade agreements’, even as the fight against these corporate agreements being signed at all, continues. The people coming here for this conference need to understand that the people are opposed to how they make money.”



We featured an interview with West Hendon resident Jasmin Parsons a few weeks ago, detailing the treatment of local residents while property developers Barratts and the Metrolpolitan Housing Trust attempt to cleanse the estate to make way for luxury dwellings. On 22nd January, West Hendon residents are holding a day of activism and a rally. Please show your support if you can:

Image: Our West Hendon

Image: Our West Hendon


Come and listen to the Focus E15 Mothers talk about their campaign 2-4pm West Hendon Community Centre Marsh Dr NW9

Join us for some hot soup and rolls while we drop our ginormous banner – 4-5pm

March from the estate to the Public Inquiry at Hendon Town Hall – 5-6pm

Outside Hendon Town Hall we will be joined by the Women from The New Era campaign, speakers from the Our West Hendon Group, Radical Housing Network , Unite The Union and other estates in Barnet where we will make a noise and voice our objections to the social cleansing of West Hendon and London wide. – 6pm onwards”

See the Facebook event here

Like Our West Hendon on Facebook for updates

By Michael Crick

At the centre of Old Mill Street stands Ancoats Dispensary. Once the ‘beating heart’ of the community, making up one section of the historic Ancoats Hospital, the building now lies empty and abandoned. Broken windows and the absence of a roof leave it exposed to the elements, while scaffolding surrounds the crumbling facade. But a collection of placards hanging at each corner of the building displaying defiant messages – ‘Save Our Heritage’, ‘Say No to Demolition’, ‘Is this the Way to Treat a Listed Building?’ – reveal the efforts of a group of local residents and activists fighting to restore the ruined building and reunite a fragmented community.

Image: Guardian

Image: Guardian

The Ancoats Dispensary Trust began their campaign to save the Grade II listed building in 2011 after discovering that its owners, property developers Urban Splash, were planning to demolish it. The mere mention of demolition could have sounded the death knell for the dispensary if it weren’t for the efforts of the Trust. Inspired into action, a group of Ancoats residents quickly organised and established a grassroots campaign, relentlessly opposing the destruction of the iconic building. Since then, the movement has been gaining momentum as local residents have employed a range of tactics, presenting their case to the local MP, collecting five thousand signatures of support and appearing on BBC radio. The activists even held a daily vigil outside the derelict dispensary for two years, their physical presence acting as a constant reminder of the threat to the cherished building and the residents’ determination to save it. The Trust’s unwavering oppositional stance gave them a taste of victory in 2013 when Urban Splash bowed to popular pressure, putting their plans for demolition on hold. But having successfully deferred the destruction of the building, the group are now continuing the fight to restore the dispensary and reclaim it for the Ancoats community.

The strength of feeling for the dispensary is unsurprising given its central position in the industrial heritage of Ancoats. After standing at two different locations in the area, the dispensary moved to its current position on Old Mill Street in 1874 and has been a vital part of the community ever since. As a ‘voluntary hospital’, the dispensary offered free healthcare to poor workers from the mills, foundries and factories of Ancoats. Driven by a requirement to meet the needs of an overcrowded and underprivileged industrial area, the dispensary saw innovations in the treatment of infectious diseases and physical injuries, notably opening the world’s first fracture clinic in 1914. However, the dispensary’s prominence gradually faded throughout the twentieth century, before it was eventually closed in 1989.

The Trust are now aiming to release the potential of the dormant dispensary with a plan to transform the building into a public space that can be used to promote creativity, cultural diversity and community cohesion. This renovation would potentially include art studios, meeting rooms, spaces for local social enterprise groups to operate and a community cafe. Describing themselves as a group that ‘represents a community that sees a future in the successes of their past’, it is clear that the Trust’s restoration plans deliberately draw on the institution’s history of healing. In the early twentieth century, the dispensary pioneered the treatment of broken bones. Now, the Trust are determined to reignite this reconstructive spirit to repair a community still bearing the scars of post-industrial decline.

“If you look back over the last 50 or 60 years, maybe even longer, the Ancoats area, including the hospital, was a thriving, busy community jam-packed with lots of social agencies in terms of community work going on”, recalls Linda Carver, Ancoats resident and co-ordinator of the Trust. “There was a sense that everybody was looking out for everybody else.” Changes to the community, however, caused by deindustrialisation and the demolition and relocation of housing, led to the rapid erosion of this network of social support in the second half of the twentieth century. “Nothing was happening in Ancoats. Where did people go? How did they get together and meet?”

Though recent regeneration schemes, led primarily by Urban Splash, ostensibly sought to reinvigorate the Ancoats area, they seem to have only exacerbated existing issues of disconnection in the community. “There is this feeling that there is a gentrification taking place”, notes Carver, acknowledging the concern felt by local residents about the new developments in the area, “particularly when they know that it’s almost as if no-one can get access to these apartments.” Indeed, as Urban Splash have overhauled the area with their ‘New Islington’ regeneration project,  the open arrangement of the council estate has largely been replaced by the imposing and isolating architecture of the luxury apartment block. It’s not hard to see why residents might feel they are being excluded.

It is unity, however, that is at the heart of the Trust’s vision and, for Carver, that includes the residents of the new flats. She envisages the restored dispensary as a catalyst for community activity, a centre around which Ancoats residents, both old and new, can converge. By transforming the building into a space to promote the arts, Carver hopes to “challenge the perception” that recent arrivals may have of Ancoats and encourage them to engage with the community. But this focus on art and culture is also intended to inspire the existing community, as Carver emphasises the empowering potential of creative activity: “Creativity is the key to Ancoats Dispensary. The creativity that in turn creates a sense of wellbeing, which in turn creates a feeling of hope and optimism that has the power to change people’s lives.”

Highlighting the success of recent projects run at Bridge-5 Mill, 42nd Street and Hope Mill, Carver points out that the Ancoats area is seeing a resurgence of cultural and community activity, noting that the Trust hope to contribute to this increasingly cohesive network of organisations. For Carver, this transformation represents a reclamation of power for the Ancoats community after years of seeing their neighbourhood altered by private developers and the City Council: “It’s about local people feeling that they are in control of things that are happening in their area, that something isn’t being imposed on them.” With this assertion, Carver reveals the radical core of the campaign. No longer content to simply resist demolition, the group are now actively attempting to restructure the community; the Trust have progressed from a group with primarily defensive ambitions, to one that is demanding an alternative through collective grassroots action.

But the building is still not safe. Having partnered with property developers, Igloo Regeneration, the Trust have formally drawn up their restoration plan and applied for a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund. While their initial application has been approved and the group have been awarded a provisional round of funding, the Trust still need to raise £55,000 by February 2015 in order to secure the full grant, take ownership of the building and fully realise their vision for the dispensary. The group are now engaged in a huge fundraising effort, seeking help wherever they can find it by applying for extra grants, running a ‘Night of Art’ benefit event and holding an online crowdfunding campaign at “I’m convinced we will get it”, asserts Carver, who remains optimistic despite the formidable nature of the task ahead. “When people realise what they are about to lose, I think they’ll step up.”

“People have always described it as our Ancoats – it’s our hospital”, notes Carver, returning again to the sense of community entrenched in the area. If the Trust can continue to inspire and empower the residents of Ancoats, then perhaps in their effort to preserve their past, they will be able to reclaim and reshape their future.

You can support the campaign and find out more here.

Today the government revealed how many excess winter deaths there were last year. Fuel Poverty Action and Reclaim the Power are holding a demonstration in London, along with providing information on energy rights and advice on how to protect yourself and your community.

From Fuel Poverty Action:

“Despite a mild winter and ‘relatively mild flu season’ there were still more than 18,000 Excess Winter Deaths last year- meaning that more than 6,000 people in the UK died from the impacts of a cold home.
We think this is an outrage. Join us today to demand change.”

See the Facebook event here.


This is the name of the talk held by the High Pay Centre last week. We have previously shared their brilliant work and along with this event, they also released a booklet with insightful essays that we suggest you read – you can download them here. 

Screen shot 2014-11-25 at 13.39.30

The talk began with Professor John Kay highlighting the stark reality of how entrenched the heavy and unfair hand of business in our government has come to be accepted:

“Prof Kay cited a case in the US in the 1870’s where a lobbyist had been hired by a company that subsequently refused to pay him as they didn’t like the outcome. The lobbyist sued the company.The case went to the Supreme court that took the view that lobbying was so repugnant, the contract was unenforceable.

“He contrasted this with a decision by the US Supreme court in 2010 that took the view that lobbying was protected by free speech.”

We are given a mantra day in, day out that business interests are somehow the interests of us all. That paying bank managers more is what we must do to ‘keep the talent’ that has overseen the corrupt architechture of the banks, with full impunity. So much so, that further damage is allowed, further corrupt practice, further lives ruined by the allowance of these interests to oversee the ‘solutions.’

Business in Government 

Everyday we see our ‘leaders’ bowing to corporate interests. Blair is believed to have once said of his alliance with Murdoch “It is better to be riding the tiger’s back than let it rip your throat out.” Throughout changes in party colours and faces in government, Murdoch has remained a presence in 10 Downing Street. Blair is Godfather to Murdoch’s grandchild, The Chipping Norton Set describe a village of affluent, connected power which include David Cameron, Rebekah Brookes and more. Not forgetting Cameron’s PR man throughout the election and beyond was former editor of the now defunct News of The World, Andy Coulson, who presided as editor during the phone hacking scandal. Indeed, have we ever seen a more successful ‘solution’ for corporate interests than in Leveson? The public are sold the idea of the investigation like no other, that justice will be served, before revealing that Blair advised Brooks to hold a public inquiry as he had done with Chilcot to peter out, to make some noise, but of no real consequence. Blair walked free.  As did Brooks and Murdoch after plenaries of amnesia.

Government decisions are now always made with corporate interests in mind. Murdoch’s power to distort the news with a 40% hold on UK media, is more important than public interest, or indeed, the truth to our politicians. Those funding political parties have sway over our laws and policies. Corporate lobbying is an investment, not an expense – the power given to companies, businesses and billionaires is access to the society we live in, a proven, working system of manipulating laws and motions to the interest of profit – with no interest paid to public feeling or indeed lives.

In the booklet from the High Pay Centre, Luke Hildyard, Deputy Director, describes in the foreword how controlled our politicians have come to be:

“During one meeting with a leading politician we were told that though they found a particular policy convincing, they were not prepared to say so publicly until business leaders do likewise….

Our experience at the High Pay Centre is instructive. Our polling suggests that an overwhelming majority of people support proposals to cap executive pay at a fixed multiple of their lowest paid worker. When I discussed the idea on Sky news – owned by one of the UK’s biggest corporations – the interviewer suggested, probably correctly, that ‘it was never going to happen.’ The Spectator noted no mainstream politician ‘would embrace such a provocatively anti-capitalist measure.’

That the idea of capping executive pay, at say,  a mere 75 times that of their lowest-paid worker is seen as more provocative than pay gaps of that size and larger is perhaps worrying. But the issue with corporate power is less about whether big business is right or wrong about certain policies, than whether it is sustainable for them to exert such influence in the face of public opinion.”


And this is part of the crux, if it can be assumed that all ‘mainstream politicians’ could not support anti-capitalist measures, or anything that bucks the trend of money flowing to the top, it means we have no real choice (Read 8 Reasons why the UK is not a democracy).

Further, as business controls the leaders who speak about policy, and the media that feeds us information, business has worked hard to instil us with an amnesia that there can be anything other than this system. But there are plenty of alternatives now and in history…

“By the 1940s high rates of taxation deterred people at the top from trying to secure excessive pay rises. What was the point? They would receive only a fraction of the extra money when top tax rates were taken into account. To imagine what it was like, think of what the re-introduction of higher taxation today might mean. A chief executive could receive as little as 10% today on earnings over £500,000 a year, if they could be taxed at 90%. There would therefore be little point in asking for pay rises once you were on £500,000. Double your pay after that, to a nominal £1million a year, and you would receive only an extra £50,000 for all your supposedly additional efforts.”

Danny Dorling, All That Is Solid

This kind of taxation was taking place not so long ago. The fact that we have come so far in the changes to wealth distribution, shows how destructive this path is. Take a look at the news to see the entrenched contradictions of punishment and reward. The week the bedroom tax came in, which of those it affected two thirds were disabled, 96% had nowhere to move to in order to escape the charge, and arrears increased after it’s implementation. Some £14 from a person on between £65-150 a week can mean the difference between eating or heating. That same week, there was a tax cut for the rich, that would in essence eat up any of that money saved through hammering the poor. This is how in favour of business our government and entire system is. The news is littered with these contradictions – particularly during austerity.

The protection of these interests as we have seen in Leveson, in Chilcot, in Teresa May’s inability to find someone to head a child sex abuse inquiry into government who does not have links to those in question, in Priti Patel’s ‘rebellion’ as Conservative MP against plain cigarette packaging when she was an ex-lobbyist for the tobacco industry, in ex-Sun editor Richard Caseby’s lash out at the Guardian for inaccuracies in welfare reporting when his current organisation (a senior communications position at the DWP!) have been publicly reprimanded for manipulation of welfare statistics to push through punishing policy, demonstrate how much a part of the fabric they have come to feel. But they still are working against the public interest.



Last night, BBC Panorama did an investigation into small businesses who were made bankrupt by their banks following the 2008 crash. They did this by manipulating house price valuations and cutting them in half in order to hurry on business owners to sell their assets (despite enjoying good business prior to this) and by bringing in administrators to ‘help’ who would then gain access to business information, and continue administrating for the bank when they demand the business sell up. This shows how free these companies are to manipulate our entire lives for their benefit. And this happens everyday.

Tamasin Cave, from Spinwatch, was also at this HIgh Pay Centre talk. She had worked to instate a lobbying register, to give transparency to the world of corporate lobbying. Unsurprisingly, there is always a way out. A register has been instated but it is shoddy, there is no obligation to record the meetings that would shed light on political affiliations and decisions, and therefore it is of no use.

What the real results of overbearing and insidious corporate interests really mean is a society where these interests are neither punished, nor questioned. They are above the law. As we are choked on the image of potential benefit fraudsters, our entire society is under a heist by the city. The Libor scandal, where the manipulation of inter-bank lending rates affected trillions of pounds of transactions has still seen no one jailed, but the government has introduced an increase to a 10 year maximum penalty for benefit fraudsters to keep us all safe.

“At the very lowest level of housing fraud is someone begging for money for a bed for the night or just for a cup of tea, only to use the money they are given to buy a can of beer…Whether it’s £20 of unwarranted housing benefit claimed, £2000 cash in hand to a builder or a £200,000 bonus secured because your Libor guesses were correct (after having manipulated them with your mates), it is still fraud. It is, however, fraud that increases by several orders of magnitude as you move up the spectrum. It would take millions of acts of homeless people all uttering the same lie to equate to a single lie of a single banker awarded a bonus.”

Danny Dorling, All That Is Solid

by Kam Sandhu @KamBass
Like us on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
Sign up for updates via

Hestia, a charity delivering supported housing, registered care, domestic violence refuges, community outreach services and day centres across London, today expressed concerns about changes to the welfare system saying that Government reforms are failing vulnerable people – with less and less practical support being available to people in urgent need.

Hestia’s services support adults and children who are in crisis. For example they support people with mental health needs as well as helping 500 victims of domestic abuse every day through the largest number of domestic abuse refuges in the capital.

In responding to the Government’s current consultation on Local Welfare Provision, the charity spoke to staff and service users across its schemes to get a real view of how the removal of Community Care Grants and Crisis Loans, as well as cuts to discretionary funds are having on the most vulnerable in society.

Hestia found that vulnerable people are not being adequately protected by the current system.

A series of case studies found it common that women moving on from domestic abuse refuges would have no access to beds, fridges, cookers, washing machines or other essential household items as they moved into empty and unfurnished accommodation. This situation could remain unresolved for months due to current constraints and delays. The Government proposals could withdraw discretionary support entirely and make the situation even worse.

Patrick Ryan, Chief Executive of Hestia, said:

“From our experience of working with vulnerable people across London every day, we can see that the  previous changes to the welfare system are failing those most in need. We are concerned that further changes and reductions to discretionary support will have devastating effects on the most vulnerable.”

“We already see that discretionary assistance is inadequate to meet the needs of vulnerable people at a time of crisis. For example, we have seen women who are pregnant or with severe physical health needs being denied a bed to sleep in or a cooker to feed themselves for months on end.”

“One service manager stated that of the 290 tenants she supports, around a quarter had made enquiries for financial and practical assistance – and none of these had been successful under the current provision. These setbacks undo much of our work to rebuild people’s lives. The human and financial costs of not providing these essential necessities are much greater than the financial commitment required to do so.”

The BBC have reported that the Government is considering cutting the rate of Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by nearly £30 per week. Those in the Work Related Activity Group (WRAG), who have been found to be not ‘fit for work’ but able to engage with activities to help them move towards work, could receive little more than those claiming Jobseekers’ Allowance (JSA), according to Michael Buchanan at the BBC.

Let’s also not forget that more than a third of those with degenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s have also been put into this WRAG group, which is a cut to Full Employment Support Allowance already, and being in this group callously suggests these people will be able to work in the future despite the nature of their conditions meaning they worsen over time.

Tom Pollard, Policy and Campaigns Manager at Mind, said:

“If these proposals go ahead it would leave many people with disabilities struggling to make ends meet. People in the WRAG, over 40 per cent of whom have mental health problems, face significant barriers to returning to work and will take much longer to do so than people on JSA. As such, it is right that they receive additional support to allow them to have a reasonable standard of life while preparing for work.


“Rather than looking to make reckless short-term savings, the Government should be focused on fixing a system that is failing people with mental health problems. The only responsible way to reduce the cost of ESA is to provide personalised and specialist support to people help them move closer to work. Current Government schemes are failing to do this and, in many cases, are causing stress and anxiety to people that is making their health worse and pushing them further from work.”

And on the new provider for Work Capability Assessments (which the BBC have reported as being US firm Maximus):

“We hope that the appointment of a new provider to carry out Work Capability Assessments will be used as an opportunity to make much needed improvements. The assessment process continues to cause a great deal of distress for people with mental health problems and often fails to recognise the impact of people’s conditions on their ability to work. We have long been calling for assessors with expertise in mental health, and greater use of evidence from professionals who knows the applicant best.”

“However, the WCA needs to be understood in the context of a wider benefits system that is failing people with mental health problems. Only a tiny proportion of people with mental health problems are moving into employment through this process, and actually many people find the pressure placed on them is making their health worse and a return to work less likely. We still need to see a complete overhaul of the system and a more personalised approach which helps people with mental health problems move closer to work and continues to provide ongoing support once they’re in work.”

By Ranjan Kumaran

It was announced yesterday that the Green Party will definitely be excluded from all live TV debates in the run up to next year’s General Election.

The controversial decision to include UKIP at the Green’s expense was made by Sky, ITV, Channel 4 and BBC.

UKIP have been included despite not having a single sitting MP until two days before the debate schedule was announced.

UKIP, funded by multimillionaire former Tory donor Paul Sykes, have benefitted from millions of pounds worth of free BBC publicity.

Unlike the Green Party’s Natalie Bennett, the UKIP leader and ex-commodities trader Nigel Farage regularly appears on BBC Newsnight, Question Time and the Today Programme.

The Greens have been snubbed despite receiving more votes per minute of TV exposure than any other UK party.

Here is 12 other reasons the Greens should have been included in the debates.

In a statement yesterday the BBC failed to mention that, despite receiving far less coverage, the Greens won more votes than the Lib Dems in last May’s Euro elections.

Campaigners are now asking whether the debate line-up was decided based on specific pre-existing criteria or if the BBC has colluded in rigging the election by purposely including UKIP at the Greens’ expense.

The BBC’s head of politics Ric Bailey said the BBC had taken an “objective look” at past and present electoral support when making their decision.

So how was this decision arrived at? What methodology did they use?

Despite several Freedom of Information Requests, the BBC have refused to explain what criteria they set when selecting parties for the TV debates.

They claim to have followed ‘objective impartial guidelines’ as well as using ‘editorial judgement’.

James Hardy of the BBC media team says that their decision-making process does not have to be made public as its journalistic output is exempt from scrutiny.

“The BBC is not required to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities.”

The BBC also cited Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights  (“ECHR”).

‘The BBC, as a media organisation, is under a duty to impart information and ideas on all matters of public interest and the importance of this function has been recognised by the European Court of Human Rights. Maintaining our editorial independence is a crucial factor in enabling the media to fulfil this function.’

Green Campaigners remain unconvinced that the European Court of Human rights was designed to rig General Elections.

Some point out that there is no link between ‘editorial independence’ and withholding crucial information. Licence payers may never find out if the BBC really have been objective.

Willingness to hand over the documents might have saved the BBC’s reputation, already tarnished by paedophilia scandals and right wing bias.

Even if that means promoting UKIP, an anti-EU party who have formed a coalition with Jew-Haters from Poland in order to secure further funding – from Europe.


James Purnell, Head of Strategy at the BBC, is one rung below Director General Tony Hall and may be responsible.

When he was the Labour Secretary of State for Work and Pensions he brought in several measures to cut welfare payments some of which were overruled by Gordon Brown.

Conservative Home Blog once created a mock-up picture of him with the slogan: WANTED for stealing Tory policies in which they claim he stole his policies from current Justice Minister Chris Grayling.


Grayling’s other suggestions include leaving the European Court of Human Rights and preventing prisoners from reading books.

Purnell brought Tory Lord Freud into government. Freud recently controversially suggested paying disabled workers £2 per hour but has managed to miraculously cling on to his role in the current coalition government.

Purnell had to quit Labour to take up his ‘impartial’ role at the BBC.

Given that nobody wants the Greens to participate in the election less than Labour, questions about Purnell’s impartiality have been raised.

James Harding is Head of Current Affairs at the BBC. His previous role editing the Times would have qualified him for a daily telephone call with Rupert Murdoch.

Murdoch has a particular dislike of the Greens as they are the only party whose leaders have consistently refused to pose with copies of The Sun.

Given that Murdoch runs Sky and has his former employee, Harding, in an influential role at the BBC, many are saying that the TV debates, and consequently the elections, have been rigged.

In 1992, before Rebekah Brooks took over the editorship of the paper, The Sun claimed to have ‘won’ that year’s General Election for the Conservative party.

Old habits die hard.

Two years after the LIBOR scandal no-one has been jailed and more markets have been shown to be rigged.

Now the political marketplace has been shown to be fixed by the national TV broadcaster.

Unlike the Banking sector it seems there are no independent regulators, courts or prosecutors who have the power to even pretend to stop them.

You can sign a petition to stop the media blackout here.

Coming soon…

kamsandhu —  October 24, 2014 — 1 Comment

We’re tired of a media that feeds us lies and is detrimental to our understanding of each other. So   we’re creating a new platform alongside campaign groups and activists. A truthful channel of information. Watch out for Real Media. More news coming soon.

Sign up for updates or ask how you can get involved at Media Logo