| Thurmaston | Birstall | Leicester Forest East & Kirby Muxloe | Syston, East Goscote, Queniborough & Barkby |
|
STEPHEN DORRELL INVESTIGATED BY BBC
Stephen Dorrell, a former minister in the Thatcher Government
and tipped for a return to the front bench under Cameron has been
questioned by Radio 4's flagship investigative journalism program
File on 4. The programme, (click here) ,
took a close look at companies who are alleged to have turned to
the tax payer to bail out black holes in pension schemes. Uunder investigation is Dorrell's corporate
clothing company Wensum PLC, which suddenly went in to administration
in June 2009. The collapse of Wensum took place barely 4 weeks after
the company agreed a merger with the UK holdings of LA Group of South
Africa in return for a 19% stake in the new company and a loan
guarantee of £500,000. A group of Far East bankers then purchased
the assets of Wensum, including LA Group's UK holdings, and
re-appointed Dorrell as Chairman. Whilst legal, the use of what is
known as a 'pre-pack' deal is highly controversial. LA Group were
left as a major share holder of a bankrupt company with substantial
debts, and it now seems a pension fund with a minimum multi-million
£££ black hole. LA Group are
justifiably aggrieved, and are taking legal advice on how they can
recover their UK assets. The File on 4
investigation centred around Wensum's Pension Fund black hole, which was not part of
the 'pre-pack' and must now be bailed out by the tax payer. With unemployment well below
worst expectatons, the economy now shown to have returned to
growth in 2009, do not risk a double dip recession with Cameron &
Osborne. They made all the wrong choices on the way out of the Banker's
recession. They are pledged to abolish the Building Schools for the
Future programme, R&D Tax Credits, and Working Families Tax
Credits. They want Stephen Dorrell to return to the Front Bench as a Minister. We cannot afford a Conservative Government.
WE HAVE A DUTY TO CARE FOR OUR PARENTS |
|
Stephen Dorrell and Wensum PLC - Judge for yourself. Our view is that he should surrender Wensum's Royal Warrant
11% pay rise claim by Telegraph
Threat of Legal Action claimed by Telegraph Times article Telegraph article
ATOC analysis estimated annual income of £2.54 Million pa from
507188 passenger journeys, at a running cost of £1.42
Million p.a. - This is an annual profit of £1.12 Million per
annum
![]() |
WE DO NOT NEED INCINERATORS IN LEICESTERSHIRE
There
is an alternative to incinerators - anaerobic biodigestion plants are
able to dispose of organic waste cleanly, and produce usable
by-products such as bio-fuels and fertiliser - Why is Leicestershire
County Council ignoring this new technology - It works in Shropshire. New plants are being built now in Gateshead and South Yorkshire, and mroe are plannedI would like to express my full support for the campaign group seeking to
stop the construction of an incinerator in Shepshed, not because I am
opposed to incineration, but because there are more modern, cleaner and
greener alternatives. I hope that the campaigners identify the
true cause of the problem,
which is Leicestershire County Council (LCC). Biffa are more than
capable of managing a wide range of waste disposal methods, including
incineration, but also the more modern techniques of Mechanical
Biological Treatment (MBT), Autoclave (AC) and Anaerobic Digestion
(AD). They are already operating MBT & AD for Leicester City. Biffa
are
only doing what any commercial company is entitled to do, responding to
a tender from LCC. The fault lies with the Tory leadership who refused
to rule out the use of incineration in the tender documentation. Other
local authorities in the UK are in the same position and
specifically stated that incineration was not an acceptable option; and
I anticipate the Leicester City Council will do the same. As a direct
result there are a number of MBT, AD & AC processes
already under construction or operating in the UK. More sinister is the
way that an infrastructure to support incineration seems to be already
under way by stealth. There is simply not enough rubbish generated in
the County to keep a
Shepshed incinerator burning at maximum efficiency, and LCCs assumption
that there will be 180,000 tons available in time fails to take account
of three major factors:
Incinerator issues1) We are recycling more. 2) The City is unlikely to offer rubbish for incineration. 3) Legislation is forcing manufacturers to produce products that result in less waste. The only alternative is to import rubbish from Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Northamptonshire to keep the fires burning. That is why the waste strategy document recently approved by LCC states clearly that the proposed Sustainable Urban Extensions (SUEs) will be preferred locations for non-strategic waste disposal; which means they can be used to stock-pile rubbish to be used as fuel for the incinerator. One SUE is planned for Leicester Forest East, just by the M1 and perfect for a waste transfer station to store Northamptonshire rubbish.Another is planned for Thurmaston, perfectly located to store rubbish from Nottinghamshire transported on the A46.One will be located in North West Leicestershire, well-placed to store rubbish from Derbyshire.Protecting our environment is a political decision, not a just an economic one and the Conservatives have badly let us down. |