AFFORDABLE SELF BUILD CUSTOM HOUSING ACT 2015 ECONOMY ECONOMIC FUNCTION TO PROVIDE SOCIAL LOW COST HOMES ANTI CORRUPTION LEGISLATION ENHANCED PENSIONS WAGES SALARIES FOR COUNCILLORS COUNCIL OFFICERS CRIMINALS CRIMES PREVENTION LAWS UNITED KINGDOM

SELF BUILD CUSTOM HOUSING ACT 2015

COUNCILLORS AND COUNCIL EMPLOYEEES HAVE NO COMPUNCTION ABOUT TAKING MONEY IN EXCHANGE FOR NOT BLOWING THE WHISTLE, AND NOT REPORTING CRIMES - BUT RATHER, KEEPING A LID ON INSTITUTIONALISED DISCRIMINATION, LONG TERM SLAPP ACTIONS AND OTHER FRAUDULENT ACTS - THAT ANY DECENT HUMAN BEING WOULD RUSH TO REPORT TO AN OUTSIDE POLICE AUTHORITY, OR THE JUSTICE MINISTERS, OR INTERPOL

Please see our A-Z INDEX or return HOME

REPORTING CRIMES - The onus is on councillors who are elected to represent the public and public interest - to be vigilant, ask questions, demand proofs, and report crimes (if necessary) directly to the Whistleblowing Commission, on what constitutes fraud, and a lack of transparency.

Be warned, you may become the subject of multiple SLAPP actions, be arrested, have your home searched, and worst of all, you may be framed by your local police force, for a crime that never happened. It is easily done, and you'll have no recourse in law, under the British injustice system - as it presently stands. That is because of the Innocence Tax. An unwritten agenda to prevent those wrongly convicted, of ever getting a matter back into a court, that is not tainted. And is genuinely impartial and unbiased. For the avoidance of doubt, that includes no British court, where a Masonic influence exists, or where the State gives awards for deflecting appeals, especially concerning Human Rights activists.

There is a duty imposed on Council officers and Councillors, to identify or provide land for low cost housing and affordable self builds in English law. But councils all over England have so far failed in this regard, mainly because of pandering to wealthy landowners (many of whom are councilors) landlords and property developers. Who do not want genuinely low cost housing in their geographical region, as it will affect rental values and the selling price of the glut of executive housing, for which planning consents are flowing freely.

The Conservative government under Margaret Thatcher, manipulated the law, to allow the selling off of social housing, without ensuring that genuinely low cost replacements would be provided. Maggie' short termist policies were quick fixes. She failed to grasp the very basics of economics, as in supply and demand. Mainly because she was an elitist, who believed her electorate were chattels like slaves, to be worked to death until they drop. She even said that South Africa should be all white. And then of course there was the Poll Tax, that finally caught her out. Forcing her resignation, for pursuing blatantly unfair policies, that abused the human rights of the less well off, to advantage her wealthy backers.

Her attitude is hardly surprising since, it is alleged that the Royal Family have links to slave trading, and King Charles III, refused, and continues to refuse to apologise for British slavery and slave trading under various kings and queens, that caused untold suffering on a mass scale. All to buoy up a Britain with Empire building aspirations.

LOW COST HOUSING IS A RIGHT

According to the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015, local authorities in England have a duty to keep a register of individuals and associations who are interested in acquiring serviced plots of land for self-build and custom housebuilding in their area1. They also have a duty to grant sufficient development permissions to meet the demand for such plots, as evidenced by the number of entries on the register, within a three-year period [1]. The Act aims to support the government’s aspiration to double the number of self-build and custom build homes by 2020 [2].

However, the duty to identify or provide land for low cost housing and affordable self builds does not necessarily mean that such housing will be affordable for everyone. The Act does not define what constitutes affordability, and local authorities have discretion to set their own eligibility criteria for the register, such as local connection, financial capacity, and design quality [1]. Moreover, the Act does not require local authorities to subsidise the cost of the plots or the construction of the homes, nor to impose any restrictions on the resale or rent of the homes [1].

The lack of affordable housing in the UK is a complex and long-standing problem that has multiple causes and effects. Some of the main factors that contribute to the housing crisis are:

A chronic under-supply of new homes, especially social housing, that fails to keep up with the growing demand and population. Between 1970 and 2018, the number of council homes in Great Britain declined from 6.5 million to 1.6 million, while the number of owner-occupied homes increased from 10.6 million to 17.9 million [3]. The UK needs to build at least 250,000 new homes per year to meet the current demand, but only 178,000 were completed in 2019 [4].

- A rise in house prices and rents that outstrip wages and inflation, making housing unaffordable for many people, especially low-income and young households. The average house price in the UK was £256,000 in January 2021, more than eight times the average annual earnings [5]. The average rent in the UK was £987 per month in February 2021, taking up more than a third of the average income [6].

- A lack of regulation and intervention in the housing market, which allows landlords, developers, and investors to exploit the scarcity of housing and maximise their profits, often at the expense of tenants, buyers, and the public interest.

For example, some landlords charge excessive rents, evict tenants without good reason, or provide poor quality accommodation [7]. Some developers avoid building affordable homes, hoard land, or use loopholes to reduce their obligations [8]. Some investors buy properties as assets, leaving them empty or under-occupied, or driving up prices for local buyers.

These factors, among others, have resulted in a housing system that is dysfunctional, unequal, and unsustainable, and that contributes to social problems such as poverty, homelessness, health inequalities, and environmental degradation. To address the housing crisis, the UK needs a comprehensive and long-term strategy that involves building more and better homes, reforming the planning and taxation systems, regulating the private rented sector, supporting low-income and vulnerable households, and promoting a low-carbon transition.

Is accepting an enhanced pension in return for not reporting crime in councils, as in keeping quiet about wrongdoing, or not investigating crime in police forces, bribery under the Bribery Act 2010?

Hello, this is Bing. I can help you with some information about the Bribery Act 2010 and whether accepting an enhanced pension in return for not reporting crime in councils or police forces is bribery under the Act.

The Bribery Act 2010 is an Act of the UK Parliament that criminalises bribery of any kind, including bribing or being bribed by foreign public officials, and failure of commercial organisations to prevent bribery [1]. The Act covers transactions that take place in the UK or abroad, and both in the public or private sectors [1].

According to the Act, a person is guilty of bribery if they offer, promise, give, request, agree, receive, or accept a financial or other advantage in exchange for improperly performing a relevant function or activity, or to induce or reward another person for doing so [2]. A relevant function or activity is one that is of a public nature, connected with a business, performed in the course of a person’s employment, or performed by or on behalf of a body of persons, and is expected to be performed in good faith, impartially, or in a position of trust [2].

Therefore, accepting an enhanced pension in return for not reporting crime in councils or police forces could be considered bribery under the Act, as it involves receiving a financial advantage for improperly performing a public function or activity that is expected to be performed in good faith and in a position of trust. Such a conduct could amount to an abuse of the public’s trust and a breach of the duty to report crime. The person accepting the pension, as well as the person offering it, could be liable for prosecution and penalties under the Act [2] [3].

The penalties for bribery offences under the Act are a maximum of 10 years imprisonment, a fine, or both, for individuals, and a fine for organisations [4]. The Act also provides for a defence for certain bribery offences if the person can prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their conduct [4]. However, this defence would not apply to accepting an enhanced pension in return for not reporting crime, as there is no reasonable excuse for such a behaviour.

GUARDIAN REVIEW 24 MAY 2023 - "He is one mean motherfucker you don’t want to mess with!” The memo arrives too late for the Nazis. When they clap eyes on the mean motherfucker they mistake him for a harmless old gold miner. “Get down on your knees, grandpa,” one orders, laughing so hard that he doesn’t notice the hunting knife entering his skull through his left ear and exiting out of the right. And that’s just for starters.

For the rest of this extravagantly violent and cheerfully entertaining action film from Finland, director Jalmari Helander treats us to a comedy of deaths: a lavish grisly feast of Nazis meeting their maker in outrageous and wildly silly ways that had the audience I watched it with shrieking with laughter.

Sisu is set in 1944, towards the end of the second world war. It opens with a granite-faced miner striking gold in the middle of nowhere. But setting off on horseback heading to the city, satchel full of gold, he meets a convoy of Nazis rolling out of Finland. You might think there’s zero mileage left in the movies for psychopathic Nazis, but Helander finds a newish and sort-of-interesting angle here with his portrayal of Germans at the fag end of the conflict: war-addled and woozy, dressed in torn uniform with dead eyes and grimy faces. The game is up, and they are nihilistic.

That said, none of them is exactly burdened with character complexity. That goes for the miner too: he turns out to be a legendary Finnish soldier called Aatami, so tough that he can plunge his hand deep into his own innards to pull out shrapnel. Earlier in the war, the Russians nicknamed him the Immortal, and he’s played by Jorma Tommila, a strong though not quite commanding presence. Like John Wick in a spaghetti western, Aatami takes out the Nazis one by one.

Everyone speaks here in accented English – “get off zeee horse” – which the film gets away with. Firstly, because there’s very little dialogue and secondly, because everything here feels a bit tongue-in-cheek in a Tarantino kind of a way. It’s super fun entertainment, which mostly disguises the fact it’s not going to stick in the mind for long.

THE ACT

...

BOUNTY HUNTERS - Any council member, or officer who breaks the law, is fair game. At the moment WC are trying to charge ratepayers more for Sussex police to quash discontent, and to pay for their gargantuan mismanagement and profiteering from the planning system, presumably as untraceable brown envelopes: typically, planning favours. Years of not building affordable houses, by pandering to developers and landlords, who only want to build executive housing, has led to a shortage of low cost homes. And a staggering bill for temporary accommodation. The shortsightedness of which constitutes mind blowing misfeasance in public office, where the cover up, may well translate to malfeasance. As in criminal negligence. To date councils like Wealden have been getting away with it, because when planning fraud is reported, Sussex police have been covering it up. No wonder we have the Horizon post office fiasco. Statute in this country is not fit for purpose. We need a Written Constitution.

IMPACT ON COUNCILS - NIL

Corruption in the United Kingdom, in the public sector, is defined by public servants using their office for private gain. Public sector corruption in the United Kingdom is perceived to be mostly rare with Transparency International rating the United Kingdom joint 11th out of 180 in their 2020 Corruption Perceptions Index.

THE ECONOMIC CRIME & CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT 2023 & WHISTLEBLOWING

The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (ECTA) 2023 has some direct application to individual Council and Post Office officials, or indeed, ministers or police officers engaged in a cover up fraud against members of the public. It can play a supporting role in uncovering and prosecuting such cases in several ways:

Supporting Tools:

- Enhanced Financial Investigations: ECTA expands powers for authorities to obtain financial information and trace suspicious transactions. This can help connect corrupt officials' activities to illicit financial gains.

- Whistleblower Protection: The Act strengthens whistleblower protections, encouraging council staff to report internal fraud without fear of reprisal. This can provide valuable information for investigations.

- Unexplained Wealth Orders: If a council official possesses wealth disproportionate to their known income, UWOs can be used to investigate the source of that wealth and potentially uncover fraudulent activities.

Indirect Impact:

- Corporate Liability: While ECTA targets companies, it can put pressure on local authorities to implement better anti-fraud controls and oversight mechanisms. This can make it harder for individual officials to commit fraud undetected.

- Increased Scrutiny: The Act's focus on transparency and beneficial ownership can expose hidden conflicts of interest or shell companies used by corrupt officials. This can raise public awareness and encourage investigations.

- Deterrence: The harsher penalties and increased risk of detection under ECTA may serve as a deterrent to potential fraudsters within local authorities.

Additional Measures:

While ECTA isn't the primary tool for directly prosecuting corrupt council officials, other legal frameworks have specific provisions for such cases:

- Bribery Act 2010: Criminalizes offering, accepting, or bribing an official.

- Fraud Act 2006: Covers various forms of fraud, including deception, false accounting, and abuse of position.

- R v Dytham 1979: Makes it an offense for public officials to knowingly act in a way that constitutes a breach of trust, such as abusing their position for personal gain.

To effectively prosecute corrupt council officials, a combination of these legal frameworks, along with investigative resources and political will, is crucial.

Several sections of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECTA) strengthen whistleblower protections and encourage individuals to report wrongdoing within companies:

Enhanced Protection:

- Section 83: Extends existing whistleblower protections under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) to cover disclosures made to certain regulated activities outside the UK, aligning with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Anti-Bribery Convention.

- Section 84: Introduces a reverse burden of proof in certain PIDA cases, meaning employers must prove they did not take retaliatory action against whistleblowers who disclosed qualifying information. This makes it easier for whistleblowers to win unfair dismissal claims.

- Section 85: Expands the definition of "work-related information" in PIDA to encompass information about potential environmental damage, health and safety risks, and tax evasion, broadening the scope of protected disclosures.

Confidentiality and Support:

- Section 86: Strengthens anonymity protections for whistleblowers, allowing them to make disclosures anonymously through internal or external reporting channels without fear of being identified.

- Section 88: Mandates companies with 50 or more employees to establish internal reporting channels for whistleblowers to report concerns confidentially.

- Section 89: Requires companies to provide appropriate support to whistleblowers, including access to legal advice and counseling.

Reporting Mechanisms:

- Section 90: Introduces a new reporting mechanism for whistleblowers to disclose concerns directly to the Office of the Whistleblower Commissioner, an independent body empowered to investigate complaints and recommend remedies.

- Section 91: Expands the powers of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the National Crime Agency (NCA) to receive and investigate whistleblower disclosures concerning money laundering and economic crime.

These provisions aim to create a more supportive and secure environment for whistleblowers to report wrongdoing, potentially leading to earlier detection and prevention of corporate misconduct.

Contact Victor confidentially for details, proofs of evidence, etc: victor@humanrightsuk.org

REFERENCES

[1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/self-build-and-custom-housebuilding
[2] https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/planning-self-and-custom--edc.pdf
[3] https://www.self-build.co.uk/right-build/
[4] https://www.bigissue.com/news/activism/why-does-the-uk-have-a-housing-crisis/
[5] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/17/contents/enacted
[6] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/105/contents/made
[7] http://planningguidance.communities.gov.uk/blog/guidance/self-build-and-custom-housebuilding/
[8] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/22/contents/enacted/data.htm
[9] https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2021/mar/31/uk-housing-crisis-how-did-owning-a-home-become-unaffordable
[10] https://www.mfsuk.com/blog/housing-crisis-report/

Please use our A-Z to navigate this site or return HOME

A FAILURE TO IDENTIFY IN LOCAL PLANS, OR PROVIDE LAND AS PLOTS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IS CONSIDERED TO BE A CRIMINAL OFFENCE, BY WAY OF A FAILURE TO PERFORM A FUNCTION REQUIRED IN AN EQUITABLE SOCIETY