DOCSLIB.ORG

Agenda Or As Soon As It Becomes Apparent to You

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Agenda Or As Soon As It Becomes Apparent to You C O U N C I L M E E T I N G A G E N D A Monday 19th April 2010 at 5.00 pm S U M M O N S A meeting of the City Council will be held in the Council Chamber, the Town Hall, Oxford, on Monday 19th April 2010 at 5.00 p.m. to transact the business set out below. Peter Sloman 8th April 2010 Proper Officer A G E N D A 1. MINUTES (a) Ordinary meeting held on 25th January 2010 (b) Special meeting held on 22nd February 2010 (c) Special meeting held on 18th March 2010 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST What is a personal interest? You have a personal interest in a matter if that matter affects the well- being or financial position of you, your relatives or people with whom you have a close association more than it would affect the majority of other people in the Ward(s) to which the matter relates. A personal interest can affect you, your relatives or people with whom you have a close personal association positively or negatively. If you or they would stand to gain or lose by the decision, you should also declare it. You also have a personal interest in a matter if it relates to any interest, which you must register. What do I need to do if I have a personal interest? You must declare it when you get to this item on the agenda or as soon as it becomes apparent to you. You may still speak and vote unless it is a prejudicial interest. If a matter affects a body to which you have been appointed by the authority, or a body exercising functions of a public nature, you only need declare the interest if you are going to speak on the matter. What is a prejudicial interest? You have a prejudicial interest in a matter if:- (a) a member of the public, who knows the relevant facts, would reasonably think your personal interest is so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest; and (b) the matter affects your financial interests or relates to a licensing or regulatory matter; and (c) the interest does not fall within one of the exempt categories at paragraph 10(2)(c) of the Code of Conduct. What do I need to do if I have a prejudicial interest? You must withdraw from the meeting. However, under paragraph 12(2) of the Code of Conduct, if members of the public are allowed to make representations, give evidence or answer questions about that matter, you may also make representations as if you were a member of the public. However, you must withdraw from the meeting once you have made your representations and before any debate starts. 3. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 4. APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES 5. LORD MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. SHERIFF’S ANNOUNCEMENTS 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE LEADER 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, THE CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER AND THE MONITORING OFFICER 9. ADDRESSES BY THE PUBLIC To hear addresses from members of the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.8 for which the required notice (1.00 pm on Thursday 15th April 2010) has been given to the Head of Law and Governance. 10. QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC To hear questions from members of the public to the Leader, a member of the City Executive Board or the Chair of an Area Committee for which the required notice (1.00 pm on Thursday 15th April 2010) has been given to the Head of Law and Governance, and to hear responses from those members in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.9. Full details of any questions for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to members of Council before the meeting. 11. CITY EXECUTIVE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS (a) Recommendations (1) 3rd March 2010 (a) Allocation of Homelessness Monies (minute extract and report) (2) 31st March 2010 (a) Annual Lettings Plan – Allocation Percentages 2010/11 (minute extract and report including report from the Value and Performance Scrutiny Committee) A confidential appendix is also submitted (b) Corporate Plan and Performance Targets 2010/11 (minute extract and refreshed report following the City Executive Board meeting) (b) Action Sheets – City Executive Board (1) 15th February 2010 (2) 3rd March 2010 (3) 31st March 2010 12. QUESTIONS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Questions on notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be asked of the Lord Mayor, a member of the Executive Board or the Chair of a Committee. Questions on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later that 9.30am on Friday 16th April 2010. Full details of any questions for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting. 13. STATEMENTS ON NOTICE FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL Statements on Notice under Council Procedure Rule 11.10(b) may be asked. Statements do not need to be directed to a specific Councillor. Statements on notice must, by the Constitution, be notified to the Head of Law and Governance by no later than 9.30am on Friday 16th April 2010. Full details of any statements for which the required notice has been given will be circulated to Members of Council before the meeting. 14. MOTIONS ON NOTICE Council Procedure Rule 11.13(a) refers. The following Motions have been notified to the Proper Officer by 1.00pm on Wednesday 7th April 2010:- (a) Business Permit Scheme (Proposer – Councillor Craig Simmons) “Council notes that the discount Business Permit Scheme agreed as part of the current budget process will, if it is to generate the necessary revenue, have to attract more traffic into the city centre. Since this would lead to more congestion and pollution, discourage the use of the Park and Rides and existing public transport, as well as sending out the wrong message about the Council’s commitment to carbon reduction, the Council invites the Executive to ask the relevant Head of Service to find alternative savings.” (b) Closure of Little Scholars Nursery (Proposer – Councillor Elise Benjamin) “Council asks the Chief Executive to write to the Chief Executive of Oxford and Cherwell Valley College (OCVC) to express disappointment at the lack of consultation about the sudden closure of the Little Scholars nursery which has left many parents with significant child-care problems. Council asks that the letter includes a request for the decision to be immediately suspended and re-examined, with a view to keeping the nursery open at the college, through actively working with the parents and staff.” (c) Energy Saving Trust (EST) Audit (Proposer – Councillor Craig Simmons) “The Council notes the result of the February 2010 Energy Savings Trust Audit which rated the City Council between ‘good’ and ‘excellent’ on its approach to tackling climate change (below the top two categories of ‘excellent’ and ‘best practice’). This Council asks the Executive to set out a plan to achieve a target of an ‘excellent’ rating this calendar year and aim to deliver ‘best practice’ next year.” (d) Voting record of City’s MPs on climate change (Proposer – Councillor David Williams) “This Council notes that an independent assessment of Oxford East MP Andrew Smith’s voting record on climate change shows that he has voted in a way which would suggest that he is ‘moderately against laws to stop climate change’ (theyworkforyou.com). This compares with a rating for Oxford West and Abingdon MP Evan Harris as ‘strongly for’ policies to stop climate change. In keeping with this Council’s commitment to take a leadership role in tackling change, it asks the Leader of the Council to write to Andrew Smith MP expressing our strong views as a Council on the issue of climate change and asking him to consider these when casting future votes.” (e) Warneford Meadow (Proposer – Councillor Mary-Jane Sareva) “Council notes the decision of Justice Wakeman to uphold the decision to register Warneford Meadow as a Town Green. Council therefore invites the Executive to instruct Officers to remove Warneford Meadow as a development site from all current and future planning documents and frameworks.” (f) Temple Cowley Pools (Proposer – Councillor David Williams) “This Council believes that a family focused swimming pool to serve the needs of East Oxford is required and that the Executive should prepare plans that incorporate that vision. The plans may well involve the rebuilding of Blackbird Leys pool and could include a competition pool based there is this is more convenient for coach parking but the forward plan must include a family focused swimming provision housed in a modern eco friendly partial rebuild on the site of the present Temple Cowley Pools. Associated facilities such as the multi gym should also be incorporated into the Temple Cowley site.” (g) Poor Pollution Record (Proposer - Councillor David Williams) “Now that the city Council has had a recent report grading the City’s air pollution as poor especially in the City Centre, this Council believes given the health implications for Oxford People of such a report it is vital to focus on immediate actions to launch a range of policies to address this low standard. The council calls on the Executive to commission as a matter of urgency an action based report from relevant officers focused on resolving the air pollution problems that have been identified.” (h) HMOs (Proposer – Councillor David Williams) “Having taken note of the new rules on HMOs issues by the Minister for Housing on 28th March 2010, this Council although welcoming the reclassification of what constitutes an HMO from more that 5 unrelated persons to 3 is concerned that beyond identifying more HMOs in Oxford the new rules are still unclear as to the powers of local authorities to establish mandatory standards for tenants.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Campsfield to Close! "I Can Also Confirm That I Intend to Close Campsfield House
    May 2002 Campsfield Monitor Newsletter of the Contents Campaign to Campsfield to Close 1 Close Campsfield Protest Works! 2 The Campsfield: News & Updates 4 Bail for Immigration Detainees 5 Asylum & Immigration: the big picture 5 Summary of BWB’s Response to the white paper 6 Barbed Wire Britain 7 Campsfield The New Jargon: Accommodation & Removals Centres 8 Swamped! 8 Bicester’s Accommodation Centre 9 May Yarl’s Wood Cover Up? 10 Open Borders - review 11 2002 Terrorism Law & Refugees 11 Monitor Campaign Info & Contacts 12 www.closeCampsfield.org.uk Campsfield to Close! "I can also confirm that I intend to close Campsfield House. This outdated centre is no longer appropriate in the 21st century. These places will be transferred to the new high- standard removal centres." David Blunkett, Home Secretary, speech to the House of Commons 7th Feb 2002 The unexpected announcement came It certainly looks like that, so the amidst the Home Secretary's speech decision is useful for future unveiling the new white paper on campaigning against detention!" Asylum and Immigration. The The Campaign also pointed out that Campaign, now in its ninth year, of new, bigger detention centres are course welcomed the news to the being opened and more innocent extent the closure will mean one refugees and other migrants are being fewer detention centre and "Oxford's detained (Yarl's Wood: 900, Shame" (Oxford Mail) will be no more. Harmondsworth 550, Dover 400). The However, in the context of Blunkett's new generation of mega detention speech advocating increased centres, Yarl's Wood (which prior to detention capacity, it was clear from the recent fire was Europe's biggest) the out set that this did not represent and Harmondsworth may have bigger a softening of the government's gyms but they are still prisons, with policy of detaining asylum seekers.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports to Conference Spring 2015 Contents
    REPORTS TO CONFERENCE SPRING 2015 CONTENTS Contents Page Federal Conference Committee……….……………………….……………..4 Federal Policy Committee......................…………...……………………......9 Federal Executive.............………………... ………………………………...17 Federal Finance and Administration Committee………….….…..............25 Parliamentary Party (Commons)……………………………. ……………...29 …………. Parliamentary Party (Lords)………………………..………………………...35 Parliamentary Party (Europe)………………………….……………………..41 Campaign for Gender Balance……………………………………………...45 Diversity Engagement Group……………………………………………..…50 3 Federal Conference Committee Glasgow 2015 Last autumn we went back to Glasgow for the second year running. As in 2013 we received a superb welcome from the city. We continue to ask all attendees to complete an online feedback questionnaire. A good percentage complete this but I would urge all members to take the time to participate. It is incredibly useful to the conference office and FCC and does influence whether we visit a venue again and if we do, what changes we need to try and make. FCC Changes Following the committee elections at the end of last year there were a number of changes to the membership of FCC. Qassim Afzal, Louise Bloom, Sal Brinton, Prateek Buch, Veronica German, Evan Harris and David Rendel either did not restand or were not re-elected. All played a valuable role on FCC and will be missed. We welcome Jon Ball, Zoe O’Connell and Mary Reid onto the committee as directly elected members. FPC have elected two new representatives onto FCC and we welcome back Linda Jack and Jeremy Hargreaves in these roles. Both have previously served on FCC so are familiar with the way we work. One of the FE reps is also new with Kaavya Kaushik joining James Gurling as an FE rep on FCC.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Protection and Human Rights
    House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights Data Protection and Human Rights Fourteenth Report of Session 2007–08 HL Paper 72 HC 132 House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights Data Protection and Human Rights Fourteenth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes, and oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 4 March 2008 Ordered by The House of Lords to be printed 4 March 2008 HL Paper 72 HC 132 Published on 14 March 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Joint Committee on Human Rights The Joint Committee on Human Rights is appointed by the House of Lords and the House of Commons to consider matters relating to human rights in the United Kingdom (but excluding consideration of individual cases); proposals for remedial orders, draft remedial orders and remedial orders. The Joint Committee has a maximum of six Members appointed by each House, of whom the quorum for any formal proceedings is two from each House. Current membership HOUSE OF LORDS HOUSE OF COMMONS Lord Bowness John Austin MP (Labour, Erith & Thamesmead) Lord Dubs Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Lord Lester of Herne Hill Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon) (Chairman) Lord Morris of Handsworth OJ Dr Evan Harris MP (Liberal Democrat, Oxford West & The Earl of Onslow Abingdon) Baroness Stern Virendra Sharma MP (Labour, Ealing, Southall) Mr Richard Shepherd MP (Conservative, Aldridge-Brownhills) Powers The Committee has the power to require the submission of written evidence and documents, to examine witnesses, to meet at any time (except when Parliament is prorogued or dissolved), to adjourn from place to place, to appoint specialist advisers, and to make Reports to both Houses.
    [Show full text]
  • A Check Without Balance: How Double-Standards Are Being Used to Remove Homeopathy from the NHS
    A Check Without Balance: How double-standards are being used to remove homeopathy from the NHS On 22 February the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (CS&TC) published its Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy. This report concluded that “The funding of homeopathic hospitals … should not continue, and NHS doctors should not refer patients to homeopaths”,[1] and stated that “we cannot see how further research on the efficacy of homeopathy is justified”.[2] The government said it would respond within 60 days, but the calling of the General Election led the Department of Health to announce that there would be no response. For the same reason there has been no debate of an Early Day Motion which heavily criticises the report.[3] The new coalition government had said that it would respond to this report by the start of the summer recess, but is now saying that it needs longer to consider the roprt and its policies. As a result there has been no Parliamentary scrutiny of the report. Meanwhile there has been detailed criticism of the report by homeopaths from the British Homeopathic Association[4] and Homeopathy: Medicine for the 21st Century,[5] as well as criticism from the Society of Homeopaths, the largest register of homeopaths in the UK.[6] Nonetheless, in April the Pharmaceutical Society of Northern Ireland (PSNI) used the CS&TC’s conclusions to justify proposals to change its professional guidance for pharmacists.[7] If these changes are accepted, they will restrict the public’s access to homeopathic medicines. On 15 May The Telegraph reported that the British Medical Association (BMA) annual conference of junior doctors has used the conclusions to justify calling homeopathy “witchcraft”.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview: Health Policy Under the Coalition Peter Sloman
    Liberal Democrats in coalition: health Overview: health policy under the coalition Peter Sloman hen the coalition government was Paper which proposed to abolish Strategic Health Nick Clegg, David formed in May 2010, few observ- Authorities and Primary Care Trusts, transfer Cameron and Andrew Wers expected it to engage in radical NHS commissioning to GPs, and promote com- Lansley (Secretary of reform of the National Health Service. Health petition between providers. The resulting Health State for Health, 2012– featured less prominently in the 2010 general elec- and Social Care Act 2012 became one of the coa- 12) in February 2012 tion than in any other recent campaign, partly lition’s most controversial – and consequential – because New Labour’s investment programme measures. What role did the Liberal Democrats had improved public satisfaction with the NHS play in the Lansley reforms, and how far were and partly because the Conservatives worked Paul Burstow and Norman Lamb able to use their hard to neutralise the issue. The issue was hardly position at the Department of Health to achieve touched on in the coalition negotiations, and the liberal objectives? NHS section of the coalition agreement focused In the years before the coalition, it was not on the commitment to increase health spending in always easy to discern a distinctive Liberal Demo- real terms and ‘stop the top-down reorganisations crat vision for the health service. Under Charles of the NHS that have got in the way of patient Kennedy’s leadership, the party had stressed the
    [Show full text]
  • A Bill of Rights for the UK?
    House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Human Rights A Bill of Rights for the UK? Twenty–ninth Report of Session 2007–08 Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Lords to be printed 21 July 2008 Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 21 July 2008 HL Paper 165-I HC 150-I Published on 10 August 2008 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Joint Committee on Human Rights The Joint Committee on Human Rights is appointed by the House of Lords and the House of Commons to consider matters relating to human rights in the United Kingdom (but excluding consideration of individual cases); proposals for remedial orders, draft remedial orders and remedial orders. The Joint Committee has a maximum of six Members appointed by each House, of whom the quorum for any formal proceedings is two from each House. Current membership HOUSE OF LORDS HOUSE OF COMMONS Lord Bowness John Austin MP (Labour, Erith & Thamesmead) Lord Dubs Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Lord Lester of Herne Hill Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon) (Chairman) Lord Morris of Handsworth OJ Dr Evan Harris MP (Liberal Democrat, Oxford West & The Earl of Onslow Abingdon) Baroness Stern Mr Virendra Sharma MP (Labour, Ealing, Southall) Mr Richard Shepherd MP (Conservative, Aldridge-Brownhills) Powers The Committee has the power to require the submission of written evidence and documents, to examine witnesses, to meet at any time (except when Parliament is prorogued or dissolved), to adjourn from place to place, to appoint specialist advisers, and to make Reports to both Houses.
    [Show full text]
  • Somebody Has to Speak out Avoid the Camera Tipu Aziz and John Stein, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
    COMMENT GEOSCIENCE A lesson for the HISTORY How novels elevated CHEMISTRY Preserving the PSYCHOLOGY On the definition, future in a history of how sensibility above scent of endangered treatment and prediction life shaped Earth p.460 mechanical views p.462 flowering plants p.464 of stuttering p.465 HARDCASH PRODUCTIONS nature.com/animalresearch Scenes from the film Monkeys, Rats and Me show how animal research is done in Oxford, UK. Animal testing: TV or not TV? Two views on whether scientists who believe that animal experimentation is necessary should become public advocates, or work quietly behind the scenes. POINT COUNTERPOINT Somebody has to speak out Avoid the camera Tipu Aziz and John Stein, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK. Ranga Yogeshwar, science TV presenter near Cologne, Germany. t was not without trepidation that, in 2006, we appeared on elevision is how most people get their news these days: it brings prime-time national television to talk about our work on macaque remote lands closer, and provides emotionally compelling close- monkey models of Parkinson’s disease. After all, there have been ups of individuals affected by world events. But it is a totally Isevere repercussions for researchers in the United Kingdom. In 1985, Tunsuitable platform for delivering complicated information or detailed Molotov cocktails were thrown at the home of Nobel prizewinner John discussion. My advice for scientists involved in the ethically complex Vane, then director of research at the Wellcome Foundation. In 2004, field of animal research? Stay as far away from the camera as possible. activists exhumed the body of Gladys Hammond, just because she was I say this as a science TV presenter and former scientist.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Update
    Coalition Update: 17-23 May Cabinet Government during Coalition Cameron isn't in full charge of the Cabinet (Conservativehome, 17 May) Paul Goodman claims that Chris Huhne has not been sacked by David Cameron because he is not in control of Lib Dem Cabinet appointments; "the first modern Prime Minister to have relinquished control over four appointments to his own Cabinet". http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2011/05/a-lesson-of-the-huhne-affair- cameron-isnt-in-full-charge-of-the-cabinet.html Times Editorial (Times, 19 May) ££ The Times' leader writer discusses claims that Nick Clegg has a veto on Chris Huhne's removal. If true, he claims that it would be wrong if David Cameron was "forced to allow a minister to behave as a freelance, because the Prime Minister’s political writ does not run across the Government, only stretching to Conservatives." http://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co. uk%2Ftto%2Fopinion%2Fleaders%2Farticle3024350.ece David Laws interview (Times, 18 May) ££ David Laws warns in a Times interview that "throwing crockery" across the Cabinet table (as Chris Huhne did) will not achieve anything, and that coalition politics requires a more consensual approach. http://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetimes.co. uk%2Ftto%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Farticle3023090.ece Party Management during Coalition Government Clegg may soon be facing the unpalatable choice of holding the coalition together and keeping his party intact (Conservativehome, 17 May) Mark Field MP claims the Lib Dems could lose the support of 15-20 of its own MPs in order to maintain the coalition, but that if this happens, the party will be a more reliable coalition partner.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010-12-08B HMC21 Supporting Documents
    Document Full Title Earl Baldwin of Bewley, Observations on the report Evidence Check 2: Baldwin Critique.pdf Homeopathy by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, February 2010 (2010). Paolo Bellavite and Andrea Signorini, The Emerging Science of Bellavite p45.pdf Homeopathy: Complexity, biodynamics, and nanopharmacology (Berkley: North Atlantic Books, 2002), p. 45. BHA Critique 0.rtf BHA Critique 1.rtf BHA Critique 2.rtf BHA comments at <http://www.britishhomeopathic.org/wp- BHA Critique 3.rtf content/uploads/2013/08/ST-parts-1-6.pdf>. BHA Critique 4.rtf BHA Critique 5.rtf BHA Critique 6.rtf ‘How much do we know?’, BMJ Clinical Evidence at BMJ Evidence 2008.webarchive <http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/about/knowledge.jsp>, accessed 18 May 2008. ‘How much do we know?’, BMJ Clinical Evidence at BMJ Evidence 2010.webarchive <http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/ceweb/about/knowledge.jsp>, accessed 3 May 2010. BNF Digitalis 1.webarchive British National Formulary, § 2.1.1 ‘Cardiac glycosides’. BNF Digitalis 2.webarchive British National Formulary, § 2.1.1 ‘Cardiac glycosides’; ‘Digoxin’. British National Formulary, § 12.2.2 ‘Topical nasal decongestants’; BNF Rebound 01.webarchive ‘Sympathomimetics’; ‘Ephedrine Hydrochloride’. British National Formulary, § 10.2.2 ‘Skeletal muscle relaxants’; BNF Rebound 02.webarchive ‘Tizanidine’. British National Formulary, § 4.8.1 ‘Control of epilepsy’; ‘Phenobarbital BNF Rebound 03.webarchive and other barbiturates’. British National Formulary, § 4.10 ‘Drugs used in substance BNF Rebound 04.webarchive dependence’; ‘Opioid dependence’; ‘Lofexidine Hydrochloride’. BNF Rebound 05.webarchive British National Formulary, § 4.1.1 ‘Hypnotics’; ‘Sodium Oxybate’. BNF Rebound 06.webarchive British National Formulary, § 12.2.2 ‘Topical nasal decongestants’.
    [Show full text]
  • The Abolition of the Blasphemy Offences
    The Abolition of the Blasphemy Offences Standard Note: SN/PC/04597 Last updated: 9 May 2008 Author: Lucinda Maer Parliament and Constitution Centre During the Report stage of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2007-08 the Liberal Democrat Dr Evan Harris tabled an amendment to abolish the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel. The Government indicated that they would consult the Church of England, and subject to the outcome of that consultation, produce their own amendment to the Bill during its passage through the Lords. Dr Harris therefore did not press his amendment to division. The Government introduced an amendment to abolish the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel during the Committee stage in the House of Lords on 5 March 2008. This was passed by 148 to 87. The House of Commons considered the Lords amendment on 6 May 2008 and agreed to it on a division by 378 votes to 57. The Bill received Royal Assent on 8 May 2008. This note sets out the law of blasphemy and the arguments concerning its abolition. It also outlines a number of previous attempts to repeal or abolish the offence. In particular, this note looks at the Law Commission report of 1985, and the House of Lords Select Committee on Religious Offences Report of June 2003. Contents A. The amendment to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2007-08 3 1. In brief 3 2. Second Reading in the House of Commons 3 3. Second Reading in the Lords 5 4. The Joint Committee on Human Rights 6 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Fortnightly Article May 2010
    Updated daily at www.ResearchResearch.com Founded by William Cullerne Bown 19 May 2010 German science academy says it is world’s oldest - p16 Cadbury takeover Bournville to get chocolate research excellence centre - p6 Astronomy Fears rise of further cuts - p5 Researchers prepare for Osborne’s axe Science budget could be cut by £60 million on Monday CIENCE AND UNIVERSITY LOBBYISTS are working overtime S by Colin Macilwain and Laura Hood this week in an attempt to protect their budgets from the coming cuts, which the government says it will much of that R&D, like most RDA spending, is awarded announce on 24 May. by other parts of the government and would not nec- Chancellor George Osborne confirmed on 17 May essarily stop if the RDAs were abolished. that the first £6 billion in public spending cuts will Capital expenditure is also facing cutbacks, be announced on Monday in advance of the full including landmark projects such as the UK Centre ‘emergency budget’ that the government will intro- for Medical Research and Innovation in central duce on 22 June. London—a £600m project backed by the Medical His words have left researchers wondering where Research Council, University College London, Cancer the axe will fall. Research UK and the Wellcome Trust. Labour had This first round of cuts is in line with a pre-election promised to invest £250m in this project. pledge from the Conservative Party, which the Liberal Pharmaceutical industry leaders, meanwhile, are Democrats also agreed to as part of the coalition anxious about the fate of the patent box scheme, a agreement with the Tories.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Is the New Politics: Evan Harris the Bigger Picture
    Science is the New Politics: Evan Harris the bigger picture The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy. Alex Carey.1 As the result of the political situation and the frightful, not to say diabolical, triumphs of science, we are shaken by secret shudders and dark forebodings. C. G. Jung.2 Forget party MPs, vote science MPs Mark Henderson.3 PART ONE: THE NEAR PAST On May 24th 2010, Dr Andrew Wakefield, together with co-defendant Professor John Walker-Smith, was struck off the British Medical Register. The decision came at the end of a three-year GMC 'trial' that cost British doctors in excess of £6M. The campaign to character assassinate Dr Wakefield began soon after he first wrote to Dr David Salisbury of the NHS in 1996 warning of a public health crisis which might be caused by the MMR vaccination. The campaign has continued for a decade and a half and at its height has 'disappeared' at least 1,500 vaccine damaged children. The making invisible of the reality of vaccine damaged children and the casting into the mist of their parents tragedy, heralds the zenith of a propaganda campaign that the pharmaceutical companies have been working on for the last 50 years. The endgame is the absolute denial of responsibility for any kind of iatrogenic damage in contemporary society. 1 Alex Carey, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy: Corporate propaganda vesus freedom and liberty.
    [Show full text]