Vladd’s view of the World

Police order tourists to delete photographs of bus station | Politics | The Guardian

Since when did this become illegal? Even the Met claim not to know of any law making this illegal. I hope the officers concerned were properly disciplined for exceeding their authority. I presume they were actual police officers and not as in the Enfield park incident those jumped up traffic wardens or PCSOs. So are police officers now making the regulations up on the fly? The tourists should be thankful they weren’t citizens of our glorious nation otherwise they would probably have been detained, fingerprinted, and had their DNA taken to be illegally filed before they were finally released with no charge. The public appear to be slowly losing faith in our police and incidents such as this the pre emptive arrest of eco protesters and the police behaviour at the G20 protest followed by the misleading of Ian Tomlinsons family over the cause of his death are not helping.

IPCC chief slams tactics of G20 police at demo | Politics | The Observer

G20 protests: how the image of UK police took a beating | Politics | The Observer 

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7965058.stm

Now this joke, not that funny, is just a play on words it probably dates back to the days of Ghandi. Is it racist? Was the reaction of A Mr Mohammed Shafiq, of the Ramadhan Foundation – an organisation which exists to enhance a better understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims in the West -over the top? He even managed to puff himself into such a rage that he accused Sir David of being out of touch with reality in portraying Pakistanis as cloakroom attendants.
‘He should have known better,’ he said. ‘Many top jobs in this country are held by British Muslims. He needs to be careful about what he says. He need to learn about the wealth of jobs held by Muslims.’
Now did anyone mention muslims? did anyone complain to the radio station? No. Was this an example of people trying to make news out of a regretable lack of judgement? More than likely.

Councils are using anti-terrorism laws to spy on residents and tackle barking dogs and noisy children.

By Chris Hastings, Public Affairs Editor
Last Updated: 8:24PM BST 06 Sep 2008

An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph found that three quarters of local authorities have used the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) 2000 over the past year.

The Act gives councils the right to place residents and businesses under surveillance, trace telephone and email accounts and even send staff on undercover missions.

The findings alarmed civil liberties campaigners. Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said: “Councils do a grave disservice to professional policing by using serious surveillance against litterbugs instead of terrorists.”

The RIPA was introduced to help fight terrorism and crime. But a series of extensions, first authorised by David Blunkett in 2003, mean that Britain’s 474 councils can use the law to tackle minor misdemeanours.

Councils are using the Act to tackle dog fouling, the unauthorised sale of pizzas and the abuse of the blue badge scheme for disabled drivers.

Among 115 councils that responded to a Freedom of Information request, 89 admitted that they had instigated investigations under the Act. The 82 councils that provided figures said that they authorised or carried out a total of 867 RIPA investigations during the year to August

Durham county council emerged as the biggest user, with just over 100 surveillance operations launched during the period. Newcastle city council used the powers 82 times, and Middlesbrough council 70 times.

Derby council made sound recordings of a property after a complaint about noisy children.

Surveillance operations aimed at individual homes and businesses can last for months. Calderdale council in West Yorkshire began “direct covert surveillance” targeting one business in May that is still going on.

Local authorities including Bassetlaw, Easington, Bolsover and Darlington have placed houses under video or photographic surveillance to tackle problems such as anti-social behaviour, unauthorised entry into gardens and benefit fraud. Others admitted using council staff to follow residents to determine whether they were working while claiming benefits.

Northampton council, which did not implement the Act during the past 12 months, said that it had used the legislation on five previous occasions to tackle dog fouling. Councils have used the RIPA to recruit children for surveillance operations. Dudley and County Durham exploited the Act to send children into shops with secret video and audio equipment to see whether they could buy cigarettes and alcohol. Officials in Durham have mounted 60 RIPA investigations against these kinds of businesses in the past 12 months.

Sir Jeremy Beecham, the acting chairman of the Local Government Association, which represents councils, said last night: “Councils are tuned into people’s fears about the potential overzealous use of these crime- fighting powers. They know that they’re only to be used to tackle residents’ complaints about serious offences, like when benefit cheats are robbing hard-working taxpayers or fly-by-night traders are ripping off vulnerable pensioners.”

He added: “Councils do not use these powers to mount fishing expeditions. First and foremost it is about protecting the public, not intruding on privacy. Crime-busting powers are targeted at suspected criminals and used only when absolutely necessary.”

Smokers, drivers and even emails are being monitored

* Newcastle City Council used the Act to monitor noise levels from smoking shelters at two different licensed premises. The council has twice used the legislation to monitor noise from a vet’s practice following a complaint about barking.

* Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council used it to deal with 16 complaints about barking dogs.

* Derby Council made sound recordings at a property following a complaint about noisy children.

* Peterborough Council investigated the operation of the blue badge scheme for disabled drivers.

* Poole Council used it to detect illegal fishing in Poole Harbour.

* Basingstoke Council used photographic surveillance against one of its own refuse collectors after allegations he was charging residents for a service that should be free. The operation was dropped when it was decided the allegation was false.

* Aberdeenshire Council admitted using the Scottish version of the Act to request the name and address of a mobile phone user as part of an investigation into offences under the Weights and Measures Act.

* Easington council put a resident’s garden under camera surveillance after a complaint from neighbours about noise.

* Canterbury City Council used CCTV surveillance and an officer’s observations to monitor illegal street trading.

* Brighton and Hove council launched four operations against graffiti artists

* Torbay Council accessed an employee’s emails after an allegation that suspect material had been sent. A second employee was investigated over the “use of council vehicle for personal gain”.

* Westminster City Council covertly filmed a locksmith following allegations of fraud.

* Durham County Council obtained authorisation to monitor car boot sales during an investigation into the sale of counterfeit goods.

Power in the hands of local authorities

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act allows for the interception of communications, acquisition and disclosure of data relating to communications, carrying-out of surveillance, use of covert intelligence sources and access to encrypted or password-protected data.

It can be evoked by public servants on the grounds of national security, and for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime, preventing disorder, public safety, protecting public health, or in the interests of the UK’s economic well-being. Councils were first granted use of the legislation in 2003.

From The Times

June 20, 2008

Scotland Yard reopens case of Georgy Markov, victim of umbrella assassin

(PA)

Georgi Markov, assassinated in London 30 years ago

Adam Fresco, Crime Correspondent

A team of British detectives has flown to Bulgaria for the second time in three months to investigate the murder of Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov after new information is said to have come to light.

Markov, who fled Communist Bulgaria in 1969 for Britain, where he worked as a journalist, was stabbed in the leg with an umbrella on Waterloo Bridge in London on September 7, 1978, while he stood in a bus queue.

He developed a fever and died a few days later in hospital without being questioned by police. A postmortem examination found a tiny ricin-filled metal pellet embedded in his calf.

When the Communist regime collapsed in Bulgaria a decade later a stock of assassination umbrellas was found at the Interior Ministry in Sofia.

It seems reasonably certain that he was killed by a tiny man-made metal object probably containing bacteria or a chemical poison.

Up to five officers from the Counter-Terrorism Command of Scotland Yard spent two weeks in Bulgaria last month, having visited the country only a few weeks earlier. It is understood that they were following up a specific line of investigation.

The team is said to have requested documents, Andrei Tsvetanov, the Bulgarian investigator in charge of the case, told a Bulgarian newspaper. They also asked for permission to question about 40 witnesses, including two former top-secret police officers.

“We are fully cooperating with our colleagues and are having a 100 per cent exchange of information on both sides – something we lacked in the past,” Mr Tsvetanov told Dnevnik.

A spokesman for Scotland Yard said that officers reviewed the case periodically. The investigation has been all but closed in Bulgaria because its 30-year statute of limitations expires in September.

In 1992 Oleg Kalugin, a former KGB counter-espionage chief, claimed that Todor Zhivkov, the Bulgarian communist dictator, had ordered the murder.

Europe struggles to keep reform plans alive after Irish reject treaty

By John Lichfield in Paris and Vanessa Mock in Brussels
Saturday, 14 June 2008

FRANCOIS LENOIR/REUTERS

‘No’ campaign supporters watch the results of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in a bar near EU headquarters in Brussels

Political leaders across Europe were trying desperately last night to keep EU reform plans on track after Irish voters overwhelmingly rejected the Lisbon Treaty.

The French and German governments led calls for the other 26 EU nations to push ahead regardless with the ratification of the treaty. But senior officials in Brussels accepted that – unless Ireland could be persuaded to stage a second referendum next year – seven years of painful negotiations to simplify and streamline the governance of the EU had come to nothing.

The European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso, called on the Irish government to suggest possible “solutions” at an EU summit in Brussels next week. He said: “I believe the treaty is alive. Eighteen member states have already approved the treaty and the European Commission believes that the remaining ratifications should continue.”

However, another senior European commissioner, speaking off the record, said: “There will be no repeat vote in Ireland. That means the treaty is dead. It’s part of a general disenchantment with the EU. We would have had similar results if there had been referendums in other European Union states.”

A group of countries, led by France, which assumes the EU presidency next month, is expected to try to minimise the importance of the Irish “no” vote. If other countries ratify the treaty, they argue privately, Ireland will be obliged to have a second vote.

Other countries could agree on declarations, they say, guaranteeing respect for Irish neutrality, or on Ireland’s low business tax status. The Irish electorate might then in a second referendum vote “yes” as they did with the Nice Treaty in October 2002.

And if Ireland refuses? Legally, the new treaty must be ratified by all 27 member states to come into force. Officials in some capitals, notably Berlin, argue that Ireland, with 4 million people, is too small to be allowed to hold up the plans of governments representing almost 500 million people. Dublin would have to be bullied into accepting some kind of semi-detached European status, like that of Norway.

Officials in Brussels said they doubted whether that could work. In any case, they said, why should Ireland be menaced with de facto expulsion when France and the Netherlands escaped any threat after their popular “no” votes in 2005? Besides, the officials said, it would be dangerous to ride rough-shod over a popular vote.

EU capitals are confronted with a depressing conundrum. The peoples of the European Union – even those who have manifestly benefited from the enterprise such as the French and the Dutch and now the Irish – feel threatened, rather than inspired or protected, by their membership of the enlarged EU.

The Lisbon Treaty is not, as sometimes claimed, a blueprint for a federal united states of Europe. In some respects, it buried that idea for ever. The treaty is an absurdly complex attempt to try to make an absurdly complex system, designed for six countries, work better – or simply work – with 27 countries.

In truth, officials recognised, EU governments have only four options.

First, they can agree to renegotiate the treaty (again) to take account of the Irish electorate’s disparate objections. This is practically a non-runner.

Second, they can press ahead with their own ratification processes. When 26 countries have signed up, they can turn to Ireland and ask for a second referendum. A few rhetorical concessions could be made to Dublin in annexes or declarations. Third, Ireland, as the only non-signatory, can be asked to leave the EU.

Fourth, the EU can forget the whole thing (for now) and continue with its existing rules.

There will be some voices – maybe including British ones – suggesting that the EU should now concentrate on practical problems which directly concern its citizens – climate, globalisation, immigration, terrorism – rather than continue to argue about itself.

This may be the de facto outcome, whatever governments say in the next days and weeks. Whether the old EU rules will permit any progress to be made on practical issues is open to doubt.

Brown vows to press on

Gordon Brown will reject pressure to halt the passage of the Lisbon Treaty through Parliament following Ireland’s rejection of the blueprint.

The Irish “no” vote provides a headache for Mr Brown, who has adopted a low-key approach to ratifying the treaty in an attempt to avoid alienating public opinion and Britain’s Eurosceptic newspapers.

Ironically, his “softly softly” approach had almost worked. The Bill implementing the reform of EU institutions is due to complete its passage through Parliament next week. But the Europe issue reignited again yesterday as the Tories and Liberal Democrats urged the Government to think again.

But ministers said the European Union (Amendment) Bill would receive its Third Reading in the Lords next Wednesday, and will receive Royal Assent.

What is The Lisbon Treaty?

*The Lisbon Treaty would replace the aborted draft constitution voted down by French and Dutch voters in 2005.

*The 50-article charter contains a list of well-established rights, including freedom of speech and religion. Britain and Poland obtained opt-outs.

*The EU would get a president and a foreign policy chief to control the EU’s aid budget and its extensive network of diplomats and civil servants.

*The European Commission would be cut from 27 members to 18 as of 2014. Commissioners would be selected on a rotation system among the states, and will sit for five-year terms.

*The European Parliament would win more power to influence or reject EU legislation. MEPs capped at 751 members from the current 785.

*To streamline decision making for 27 states, decisions would be taken by majority rather than unanimous voting in 50 new areas including judicial and police co-operation; Britain and Ireland had negotiated opt-outs in these.

www.giftsafari.co.uk

Andreas Whittam Smith: Irish voters have stated the truth for all of us

The countries outside the eurozone have done better than those inside

Monday, 16 June 2008

Ireland is in danger of being bullied. The big boys planning the assault are France and Germany. That is the plain meaning of the statement they issued on Friday in response to the news that Irish voters had rejected the Lisbon Treaty designed to streamline the European Union.

The two countries urged that the small number of member states that had not yet completed their processes of ratification should do so – even though, strictly speaking, without unanimous backing the treaty cannot come into force. The circumstances which France and Germany are trying to create are those in which 26 out of 27 member countries accept the treaty and only tiny Ireland, four million people out of 450 million, the one state to have submitted the new arrangements to a referendum, holds out.

The desired scene would resemble a skyscraper city in which, bizarrely, one old building has survived and you wonder how long it can last until it, too, is replaced by an office block. How would the pressure be applied? I discount the notion that Ireland could be offered one or two special “opt-outs” from the treaty clauses and asked to vote again. The Irish exceptions could not amount to much, otherwise the balance of the treaty would be upset. Nor would it be a particularly democratic thing to do, seeing that participation in the referendum vote was at a respectable level.

In effect, European leaders would be saying to Ireland, “look, you have made a mistake and here is a face-saving way of getting out of the mess you have created”. That sounds like exactly the wrong thing to say to any European electorate.

Instead, if France and Germany were to have their way, the Irish might be asked to proceed with the elements of the treaty that do not require a referendum and opt out of those which do. Then the other 26 members would proceed along their path and leave Ireland tagging along behind as a sort of associate member. The country would lose influence as a result.

Big countries can opt out of this and that and yet still retain the leverage they require. This benefit isn’t available for small countries. It would be an unpleasant prospect. Or, worse still, if everybody else signs up, then Ireland could be asked to leave the European Union.

In all this, the attitude of Britain will be crucial. If we were to side with France and Germany, Ireland’s fate would be sealed. If not, not.

The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has said that the few remaining stages of our process of ratification will be completed. However, I do not think that this has much significance. We will do what we have promised to do, but make no commitment as to what would happen after that. In fact, I think it unlikely that we would join others in bringing pressure to bear on our Irish neighbour.

The Prime Minister knows very well that a referendum would also have been lost if the British had been offered one. Moreover, Irish attitudes to the notion of a European entity are like our own. A recent Eurobarometer survey asked Irish people, “In the near future, do you see yourself as Irish only, Irish and European, European and Irish, or European only?”. Some 59 per cent – second only to Britain and followed by the three Baltic states – rejected the proffered degrees of European identity and opted for an exclusive Irish identity. Thus British pressure on Ireland would appear as the ultimate example of British hypocrisy. It won’t happen.

However, even when the Lisbon Treaty is finally declared null and void, as it must eventually be, there will surface an old idea that would put Britain, as well as Ireland, into the same, undesirable place – a Europe of two speeds, an inner group which combines more tightly together and an outer group, Britain and Ireland included, which continues to use the European Union as essentially a free-trade area and gets nothing else out of it.

This is usually put forward on the footing that the inner ring countries would be treated as first-class members and the outer ring as second-class. But the way that the eurozone, with its common currency, the euro, has developed with the rest of us outside, retaining our economic independence, shows how bogus is the two-speed argument. For the countries outside the eurozone have done better than those inside, while the inner group grows ever more restive with its arrangements.

In its way, then, the Irish vote will prove to have been historic. The Irish will not be bullied into submission. The present arrangements for the European Union, with all their imperfections, will endure. Only one people has spoken, but it is likely that the Irish have stated the matter for all of us.

www.giftsafari.co.uk

Thousands of passengers face delays and cancellations – to allow President Bush’s Air Force One jet to land at Heathrow

By Michael Lea
13th June 2008

Hundreds of thousands of passengers at Heathrow face lengthy delays and even cancellations this weekend because of George Bush’s visit to London.

The U.S. President is refusing to fly in to a military base and has demanded that he land at the world’s busiest airport.

Security concerns mean arrivals of commercial flights will be almost halved for an hour before the fleet of planes, including Air Force One, touches down on Sunday.

Scroll down for more

President George Bush and his wife Laura will land at Heathrow on Air Force One on Sunday. But their visit is set to cause chaos at the world’s busiest airport

Industry experts predict the knock- on effects will last for up to six hours.

Departures will also be hit because planes arriving late will not be able to turn around quickly enough to meet take-off times.

The entire process will be repeated when the President leaves on Monday.

Last night Heathrow sources were predicting chaos at the airport, whose image is still recovering from the Terminal Five fiasco.

‘For some inexplicable reason Bush wants to fly in to Heathrow,’ a source told the Mail.

‘It is going to cause massive delays and possibly even some cancellations. It is ridiculous and the arrangements are total overkill.’

The fleet includes the 747s Air Force One and Two, a smaller 757 and four helicopters.

Yesterday, there were some minor delays after air space over Heathrow was cleared for two hours to allow a military cargo plane carrying the President’s armoured cars to land at nearby RAF Northolt.

Today there is also likely to be some disruption when the four helicopters land and sit on the tarmac for an hour as part of a dress rehearsal.

According to airport sources, an hour before Mr Bush arrives the number of flights allowed to land will be cut from 42 to 24 an hour. Once he has touched down the restrictions will be gradually lifted.

There is even a suggestion that a runway will have to be closed before touch-down so that it can be inspected by security sources.

Similar limits will be in place again on Monday when Mr Bush leaves. ‘We think the knock- on effects will last for at least six hours,’ an insider said.

‘Although it hits arrivals first, departures later in the day will also be affected because airlines won’t be able to turn round planes in time and crews will need sufficient rest breaks. If a plane doesn’t come in on time then it doesn’t go out on time.

‘This is basically going to effect everyone flying in or out of Heathrow on Sunday and Monday and a fair few people on Friday, too.’

Airlines had only been told on Wednesday about the plans and it was claimed last night that the Department for Transport had also been kept in the dark as all arrangements had gone through the Foreign Office.

Mr Bush is visiting London as part of his farewell tour before he leaves the White House next January.

Defence officials believe the president and his entourage could have landed at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire or the vast U.S. airbase at Lakenheath in Suffolk.

‘No one knows why on Earth he wants to come to Heathrow,’ one said. ‘It’s not as if he is going to stay and have a look around.’

www.giftsafari.co.uk

First signs of panic at the pumps as drivers warned price of petrol ‘will double’

Crucial talks aimed at averting a strike by hundreds of tanker drivers were held today amid signs some drivers were panic-buying petrol.

As long trails of cars formed on garage forecourts, industry insiders predicted petrol would rise to 230p a litre.

Leaders of the Unite union met officials of two companies working on Shell contracts in a bid to resolve a row over pay.

Motorists queue up at a petrol station in Aintree, Merseyside, today

Queues had also formed at Tesco superstore filling station in Fforestfach, Swansea

The talks looked likely to adjourn later and continue tomorrow, with time running out on averting a four-day stoppage from 6am on Friday.

One in 10 filling stations across the UK could be hit by the strike.

The Government has urged drivers not to panic-buy fuel, but there were queues at some garages today with one woman admitting: ‘I am panic buying.’

A Downing Street spokesman said: ‘We want the public to continue to buy as normal so as to avoid creating problems that might otherwise not exist.’

Contingency plans include allowing suppliers to share information about stocks without falling foul of competition laws.

Fuel supplies to the emergency services would also be maintained in the event of shortages.

The pay row has erupted because members of Unite claim they are paid the same now as they were in 1992, just under £32,000 a year, despite their working week being 11 hours longer.

Bernie Holloway, spokesman for Hoyer, the biggest of the two transport companies involved in the dispute, said it was ‘disappointing’ that Unite had rejected an improved pay offer last week.

‘We believe this was a very good offer that would take the average driver’s pay up to around £39,000,’ he said.

Driving instructors from Sunderland on a ‘go slow’ protest’ at the rising cost of fuel

The company said its improved offer, made during a meeting last week, was worth 6.8%.

Unite repeated its call for Shell to get involved in the dispute and stop ’sitting on its hands’.

Unite assistant general secretary Len McCluskey said: ‘It is no use Shell bosses, who have themselves enjoyed 15%-plus pay increases in the last year, sitting on their hands.

‘They should start focusing on avoiding the disruption this will cause to the general public, who are already mindful of the staggering profits Shell rakes in.

‘Shell tanker drivers are earning exactly the same today as they were 15 years ago while working for a company that makes £1.3 billion every month, profits our members’ hard work helps deliver.

‘So Unite is saying to Shell bosses, stop hiding behind your sub-contractor and help us sort out a solution.’

However, the petrol giant is refusing to get involved, and has reiterated calls for the two sides to resolve the dispute.

A spokesman for the Business Department said it was ‘inevitable’ that some petrol stations would run out of fuel if the industrial action went ahead.

‘If the strike were to affect other retailers it would have a more significant impact,’ he added.

The Petrol Retailers Association said it had not received any reports of panic buying from members.

Petrol sales had remained steady, although buying patterns suggested households were using second cars less frequently.

A spokesman said: ‘Anecdotally our members are saying petrol consumption is staying the same, but consumers are using it differently.

‘It could be that people are doing more errands in one journey and leaving their second cars at home.’

Despite the reassurances, queues began building at one petrol station near Aintree in Liverpool.

Delays: Motorists wait at a Sainsburys garage, in Wigan, Lancs

By 1pm at the Asda petrol station near Aintree racecourse, staff put up a sign saying that they had run out of diesel.

Dave Alty, one of the Asda porters who placed the sign on the forecourt, said: ‘We are normally quite busy here but drivers are just panicking today.

‘There were around 40 cars queuing this morning. Drivers are saving up their petrol.’

Driver Amanda Holland, 40, an account manager for Yellow Pages who lives near Buxton in Derbyshire, said: ‘I am panic buying. I live in Derbyshire and I have already had calls from friends who are working in different cities including Manchester saying there are people queuing.’

Warnings that a litre of unleaded could hit 230p followed Russian energy giant Gazprom’s prediction that crude oil was set to sky-rocket to $250 a barrel ‘in the forseeable future’.

It peaked last week at a fraction under $140.

Diesel prices are poised to soar past £6 a gallon.

Fuel rationing could be imposed on motorways and in isolated rural areas to prevent drivers becoming stranded. Motorists would be limited to a £20 fill-up.

Supplies would be prioritised for essential users including the police, emergency services, hospitals and the armed forces.

But there are fears the ‘don’t panic’ call could make things worse if it simply alerts drivers to possible shortages.

It has emerged drivers have already started to cut back on the on the amount of fuel they used because of the soaring costs.

‘British motorists are clearly driving less,’ according to the International Energy Agency.

It said filling stations sold an average of 350 million barrels a day in March compared with 445 million a year ago, a 20 per cent fall.

Meanwhile a survey found that one in six commuters said the cost of driving to work had made them consider quitting their job and looking for work closer to home.

The research, by insurance comparison website insurance.co.uk, found that the average commuter had seen fuel bills rise 21 per cent over the past year.

Driving instructors also joined the protest today by staging a ‘go slow’ through Sunderland city centre.

Cars were emblazoned with the logo: ‘Get off our backs, cut the fuel tax.’

One onlooker said: ‘It caused traffic chaos in the city but most people didn’t mind.

‘The fuel tax is hitting everyone who drives so they got a lot of support.’

There were also queues at petrol stations in the Midlands today

www.giftsafari.co.uk

‘Bin bureaucrats’ secretly taking families’ wheelie-bins to sift and weigh the food they throw out

By Colin Fernandez

10th June 2008

Covert: Sussex Council has been secretly rummaging through people’s rubbish to see how much food they are throwing away

Householders are having their rubbish secretly sifted and weighed to see how much food they are throwing away, it has emerged.

Wheelie-bins are being taken from residents without their knowledge, and spot checked to see how many scraps of food are in them and how much they weigh.

No permission is sought for the ’sampling’ exercise and the householder is simply presented with a new bin.

Council taxpayers in Sussex have reacted furiously to the latest example of ‘bin bureaucracy’ and said officials had no right to snoop on the contents of their refuse.

Officials at Tory-run Mid-Sussex District Council attempted to reassure locals by telling them it is a ‘fact-finding’ exercise to gauge how much food is being dumped.

But residents branded the survey – which cost £1,700 – an invasion of privacy and fear it is the first step towards charging residents who fail to meet Government recycling targets.

Mother-of-three Michelle Gregory, 46, of Haywards Heath, received a letter sent to her by the council explaining they were looking through her waste the day after her regular rubbish collection.

She said: ‘It just seems to be the way the world is going with CCTV cameras, ID cards and fingerprinting at schools.

‘We just seem to be paying an awful lot of council tax for not a lot. The council should have informed people properly and clearly.

‘Hopefully people are taking more care in throwing away important paperwork because there are conmen who could pick up on the right details.

‘As a victim of a conman myself it just makes me cautious in everything that I do.’

Mid-Sussex Lid Dem opposition leader Cllr Brian Hall said: ‘The sampling of residents’ waste is a gross invasion of privacy. I was astonished when I found out it was going on.

‘It’s a thoroughly intrusive step. What people put in their bins is private, it’s not for other people to go rummaging through. The fundamental issue here is security.

‘Anyone who puts personal data in their bin will be at risk. Someone’s private life could become a subject for gossip and speculation.’

Council bosses want to know what residents are throwing away and whether patterns have changed since weekly collections were introduced last summer.

The survey of 30 households is being carried out by the council and a team of students from the University of Brighton’s Waste and Energy Research Group.

A council spokesman said: ‘We are doing this as part of a campaign to reduce food waste. It’s purely a fact-finding exercise.

‘We can re-assure people that the purpose is to assess what the food waste is. Nobody is going through people’s things. It’s purely to assess how much food waste there is.’

Last year a survey revealed that taxpayers are footing a rising bill for Town Hall “rubbish police” as councils wage war on homeowners who fail to meet strict refuse laws.

The survey carried out under the Freedom of Information Act showed that local authorities across the country have seen increases of as much as 100 per cent in the cost of tackling ‘enviro-crime’.

On Saturday the Mail reported how jobsworth binmen told householders that if they could not pull a wheelie bin using just two fingers it would not be emptied as it was too heavy.

Katie Shergold in the historic market town of Warminster, Wiltshire was astounded when refuse collectors stuck a ‘too heavy to move’ sticker on her bin of grass cuttings – even though the petite 26-year-old had managed to wheel the bin to the front of her house without any problems.

Last month, war veteran Lenny Woodward, 95, was told that binmen would no longer collect his rubbish because he had put a ketchup bottle in the wrong bin.

And in April bus driver Gareth Corkhill, 26, from Whitehaven in Cumbria, was fined £210 and given a criminal record because his wheelie bin lid was ‘too full’ as it was open by a few inches.

www.giftsafari.co.uk

ZANU-PF using torture camps to ‘re-educate’ opposition voters into voting for Mugabe

09th June 2008

Challenge: Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the Movement For Democratic Change party addresses his first rally on Sunday

Robert Mugabe has set up torture camps in Zimbabwe to ‘re-educate’ opposition voters so he can cheat his way to retaining power, an international rights group has said.

A systematic government campaign of murder and brutality has eliminated any chance of a fair presidential election, said the report by US-based Human Rights Watch.

The group said it had documented at least 36 politically motivated murders and 2,000 victims of a campaign of killings, abductions, beatings and torture by the ruling ZANU-PF party of President Mugabe.

It said more than 3,000 people had fled the violence which began after March 29 elections in which ZANU-PF lost control of parliament for the first time and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai beat Mugabe in the presidential race.

Official results showed Tsvangirai fell short of the absolute majority needed for outright victory and a run-off against Mugabe will be held on June 27.

“Since the run-off was announced, the violence in Zimbabwe has gotten even worse. Zimbabweans cannot vote freely if they fear their vote may get them killed,” said the human rights group’s Africa director Georgette Gagnon.

The report said the government had incited and perpetrated the violence to intimidate and punish opposition supporters and had failed to prosecute those responsible, who included the security forces, liberation war veterans and youth militia.

The violent campaign “has extinguished any chance of a free and fair presidential run-off,” HRW said.

Mugabe accuses the opposition of inciting violence and Deputy Attorney-General Johannes Tomana told the state-controlled Herald newspaper on Monday that both sides were involved.

Scroll down for more

Last chance: Movement For Democratic Change supporters greet Morgan Tsvangirai in Kwekwe , Zimbabwe

Human Rights Watch said ZANU-PF and its allies had established torture camps and re-education meetings around the country to try to force opposition supporters to vote for Mugabe. Hundreds of people had been beaten with logs, whips and bicycle chains.

The group said party officials and war veterans beat six men to death and tortured another 70 people including a 76-year-old woman at a re-education meeting in north-eastern Zimbabwe.

In another incident, around 20 men suspected of voting for Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) were beaten in front of their village. A 45-year-old man said he was beaten with whips, chains and iron bars and his leg was broken.

SENIOR OFFICERS IMPLICATED IN VIOLENCE

HRW said it had extensive evidence that senior army and police officers were directly implicated in the violence.

“President Robert Mugabe and his government… bear full responsibility for these serious crimes. They have shown gross indifference to the plight of the people, allowing senior-ranking security officers, war veterans, youth militia and ZANU-PF free rein to commit horrifying abuses,” Gagnon said.

Six MDC lawmakers have been arrested since the first poll and Tsvangirai was detained twice last week while campaigning. The High Court on Saturday overturned a police ban on several planned MDC rallies.

The government last week accused aid agencies of political interference and ordered them to stop humanitarian programmes.

Deputy Attorney-General Tomana told the Herald authorities had prosecuted over 80 cases of political violence.

“In some provinces it is almost 50-50, with both parties violating the law. We have treated both offenders equally, we deny them bail and speedily handle the cases,” he said.

HRW called on the African Union and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) to pressure Mugabe to end the violence and urged them to deploy strong poll observer teams.

It said violence had been particularly bad in the ZANU-PF’s former rural strongholds where the MDC made significant gains in the March 29 elections.

www.giftsafari.co.uk