Under TTIP when procuring goods or services, local governments would have to submit tenders across the EU & the USA. Very likely is that multi-national companies would win the tenders. Local companies would simply not get a look-in, nor the administrative resources challenge the big companies. Bad for the local economy and local employment. ·        TTIP negotiations are carried out in secret. ·        There has been no

We have been told repeatedly that the Capita One Barnet Contract will save residents millions of pounds. The two main contracts and the forecast savings are as follows: NSCSO (now called CSG) Baseline (at December 2012) costs £38.8 million Forecast costs savings £7.01 million Procurement savings £4.69 million Improved council tax collection £0.84 million Total guaranteed saving £12.54 million By my reckoning this means that Barnet should pay

TUESDAY 5 NOVEMBER 6pm outside Hendon Town Hall, the Burroughs, NW4 4BG Let’s build a bonfire of The sell-off of Barnet Council’s services to Capita The Privatisation of the NHS The sell-off of Royal Mail Rising energy bills The bedroom tax and housing benefit changes   Join the fight in Barnet to reclaim our services   Across the country, protests and actions against austerity and privatisation are being organised on Guy Fawkes day

  Take a look at what has been happening to Birmingham City Council since Capita came in. Remember we are told that privatisation will prevent cuts to frontline services, yet Birmingham Council are having to make huge cuts to public services whilst Capita sit there and make obscene profits from our taxpayer’s money.   It all started when the Coalition of Tories & Lib Dems running Birmingham City Council until 2012 agreed to let Capita

  Barnet Alliance for Public Services PRESS RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 30 August 2013     R.I.P. Barnet Public Services – Residents mourn the takeover by Capita   ‘People in Barnet are dismayed at the Council’s massive outsourcing not only without consultation,’ says BAPS spokesperson Barbara Jacobson, ‘but especially in the light of continuing news about the failure of the private sector in delivering public services.’

A funeral procession for Barnet's public services: We are gathered here today to bid farewell to Barnet Public Services.   It is sad, of course, to lose a single service, but to lose the majority of this family is truly tragic. Perhaps you did not know all of them, but all of us were acquainted with some of them. They were there to serve us and they provided jobs for some of us. The purpose of these services – like the motivation of those

The article on One Barnet by Hannah Fearn in the Guardian shows that she needs a stronger light to see what is really behind the empty claims of necessity and the promises of big savings. The ‘well-publicized local objection’ referred to was well-publicised only locally, despite our efforts to interest the national press. While it is true that the Court of Appeal found in favour of the Council, it is essential for a well-balanced article to point

During June meeting of the Budget, Performance, Overview and Scrutiny Committee Cllr. Anthony Finn, the Chair, inform the world that "the purpose of scrutiny is not to criticise, but to make a positive contribution."   But apparently, Cllr Finn quibbling turned to be a serious issue, when the disgraced ex-Tory cllr. Coleman revealed in the full council meeting last week that there is no scrutiny in Barnet Council, and that the Councillors are whipped

  Barnet Alliance for Public Services PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 16 July 2013 After one and a half days in the court of appeal Master of the Rolls Lord Dyson, Lord Justice Davies and Lady Justice Gloster retired to consider their judgment in the case of Nash v Barnet. After urging by Barnet counsel, the Master of the Rolls said they will try to deliver their judgment by the end of September, but did not guarantee it. Mr Nigel Giffin

  10-June-2013 23:00 UPDATE: BAPS STATEMENT It has come to our attention that an email has gone out to all staff about the JR Appeal. (See email below ) Having read the email we have the following comments.   It is not true that permission to appeal was refused, the claim did not seek permission from Underhill J. The email manages to make it sound as though the Council wanted early hearing when it was entirely down to the Council that it