A motion has been tabled to the Full County Council meeting for Monday January 16th to debate having an independent review.

Councillor Boswell says ‘I first asked the Chief Executive for such an independent review in June last year when I could see that the public had lost confidence in Norfolk County Council. It was essential then to restore confidence, it is even more essential now. It is over six months since I first suggested it, and it is disgraceful that the Council has created every possible obstacle to prevent a full investigation into the public's concerns.‘

Councillor Boswell also said that it was important for the Council to relook at its waste strategy in the face of the overwhelming opposition to incineration.

He says: "Whatever the outcome, the Council needs to face up to the huge opposition, across Norfolk to incineration as a waste disposal method, demonstrated by the opposition to it by both Norwich City and Kings Lynn Councils. The choice is not between landfill and incineration, or ‘skyfill' - we need a new waste strategy that brings in much more innovative solutions so that we radically reduce our landfill without incineration. Simply, the Norfolk Waste Partnership Strategy is completely unviable since Norwich City Council reasserted its opposition to incineration and it needs to be rewritten as a matter of urgency."

On his election, Richard Bearman, councillor for Mancroft Ward, said: "I am proud to take on the leadership of the Green Party group at the beginning of 2012, when there are so many social, economic and environmental concerns for Norfolk people. We will take a strong line in challenging the Conservative cabinet on key issues, such as limiting cuts to social welfare and public transport in the upcoming budget, and opposing the Kings Lynn incinerator that is a threat to public health and the environment."

County Councillor for Wensum Ward and Deputy Leader of the Green Party County Group Marcus Hemsley said of the appointment "I'm looking forward to working with Councillor Bearman, he brings a lot of experience and knowledge to the role. I'm sure Green Party supporters will be pleased with this appointment."

So far the news ahead of the Durban conference has been depressing. Global recession is taking precedence and many of the industrialised countries are reluctant to commit to the financial programmes necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

We have been told that a positive and substantial outcome is unlikely, but Greens believe it is essential that a package is negotiated that allows a global agreement to be forthcoming for the post-2012, second commitment period.

From 28 November to 9 December this year, the global community will converge in Durban for yet another round of negotiations to work out a deal to stabilise the climate system and assure vulnerable communities of a promising future.

Many of the world's poorest countries will be first to face the severity of climate change leading to ecological devastation and thousands of environmental refugees.

The challenges at Durban are to secure the future of the Kyoto protocol and to have a political commitment to the continuance of a second commitment period under Kyoto. For all of its difficulties, it is the one tool that we have that is a legal tool that has mandatory binding targets and that is why it is so important that we have to make sure that there is some way of that going forward.

It's the wealthy countries that have contributed most of the greenhouse gas emissions and they are absolutely in a position to help the poorer countries. Most poorer countries have not even reached the levels of CO2 emissions that climate scientists say is causing climate change. A contraction and convergence model, whereby the rich industrialised countries drastically reduce their greenhouse gas emissions allowing the poorer countries to stabilise theirs is the model preferred by the Green Party.

Of course many will feel that asking politicians to safeguard our world is like asking wolves to guard lambs but sadly there is little alternative. Time is running out. We must hammer home to them the importance of people before profit.

Adrian Ramsay said:
"The UEA Music School is popular and successful. I was very disappointed to hear that the University management is considering closing the school and I'm pleased to be supporting the students and staff campaigning to keep it open. The Government's cuts to higher education funding mean that arts schools in many universities will be threatened with closure."

The campaign highlights that the University's review failed to consult students, staff and external experts. Campaigners are calling for another review to be carried out to consider the opportunities that investment in this school, ranked 12th in this year's Guardian tables, could bring.

Green Party Councillors have been actively supporting the campaign from the outset. At next week's City Council meeting Green Councillor Ruth Makoff will be asking the Council's Cabinet if it shares her concern about the impact of the school's closure on the cultural life of the city.

Adrian Ramsay continues:
"Cuts to arts schools around the country will reduce educational opportunities for thousands of young people - not only those who study subjects such as music but also those studying other subjects who do extra-curricular activities in music, drama and the arts alongside their studies. Successful universities need to have a wide range of subjects on offer, including arts subjects such as music."

Lakenham is in the 10% most deprived East of England wards, with JSA claimants on the rise at 5.3% (above the national rate 3.9%). An RRP, which recovers materials traditionally destined for landfill sites for re-use, repair and recycling, would provide environmentally sound employment.

Paul Neale said:
"Since the time when I was growing up in Lakenham, Norwich has lost a number of large employers, such as shoe factories, Rowntree MacKintosh and Jarrolds Printing. The unemployment rate in Lakenham is high so I will push the Council to designate brownfield sites like Harford Place for development of light industry that will create jobs locally. A good example is a resource recovery park which would provide a secure source of employment as well as helping local people reuse and repair goods."

Green Party Councillors have previously proposed an RRP in Norwich. Paul Neale believes that Harford Place would be a suitable site, being in an area of light industry away from residencies and on a main road. Existing planning proposals for the site are for shops, offices and houses but development plans have stalled.

Resource recovery parks are common in other European countries and becoming more common in the UK.

Adrian Ramsay, Green Party Deputy Leader, commented: "There are numerous brownfield sites in Norwich that were once used for thriving industry - and many could be again. We need to create lasting jobs in industries we need for the future. A resource recovery park is a much better way to approach the waste issue than the proposals for an incinerator in Norfolk."

Paul Neale's proposal builds on the recent success of Green Party County Councillors, whose proposals for an energy company will create new jobs in Norfolk through the installation of solar panels on Council buildings. Paul is engaging with residents in Lakenham leading up to the by-election to gather their views on a RRP development.

Phil Hardy, Leader of the Green Party County Councillors, said:

"Councillor Paul Rice's defection from the Lib Dems to the Tories only a few months ago was the first one in Norfolk since the 1970s. Now David Callaby has defected so soon after, this is a clear indication of how close the Liberal Democrats are with the Tories, not just with the coalition Government but here in Norfolk too. People in Lakenham need to be aware of this when they decide how to vote in the by-election on 24th November.

"At County Hall the Green Party is an effective alternative to the Conservatives. We oppose them where we disagree - such as on cuts to youth services and transport priorities. But we also work constructively with them to make a difference wherever we can - such as on the energy company that the Green Party proposed and is now being set up."

The defection follows ex-Labour Councillor Andy Pearmain's recent endorsement of Paul Neale, the Green Party candidate for the Lakenham by-election, where Pearmain highlighted that the Green Party County Councillors are now the most effective alternative to the Conservatives at County Hall.

Andy Pearmain said:

"The Green Party holds 7 out of 13 County Council seats in Norwich, whereas Labour has just 3 seats across the whole of Norfolk. Green Party Councillors are the most effective alternative to the Conservatives at County Hall. They are fighting to protect social care and youth services from severe cuts and have produced an alternative budget to the Conservatives to show how this can be done. They have also made a real difference by introducing the energy company that will install solar panels on Council buildings and generate new income for the Council to help protect services from cuts."

The new make-up of the County Council is 62 Conservatives, 10 Liberal Democrats, 7 Green Party Councillors, 3 Labour Councillors and one UKIP Councillor.

to provide a full range of hospital services at Hinchingbrooke hospital in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, from 1 February 2012 (2).

Adrian Ramsay, Deputy Leader of the Green Party, said:
"This Government, much like the last, seems determined to privatise more and more of the NHS. Allowing private companies to run hospitals will mean poorer quality care and greater financial strain on the NHS - because the companies will be making a profit as well as running the service out of the same amount of public funding."

He continued: "The workers and local people at Hinchingbrooke have been campaigning for years to stop this NHS hospital falling into private hands. The Government has failed to help the hospital and the decision today marks a new stage in the privatisation of the NHS. We are gradually losing Britain's best-loved institution.

"The Government may well now try to privatise more hospitals. We need to send the Conservatives and LibDems a clear message: that the people of the UK want to protect the NHS from privatisation, which we know will lead to a lower standard of care and a worse value for money for the taxpayer."
This move sets an extremely dangerous precedent as it give other cash-strapped hospitals incentive to consider outsourcing their management to private corporations (3). Two other hospitals - the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital and the Whiston Hospital (St Helens) - are already considering private sector management options.
Under this deal, hospitals controlled by the private sector have more interest in profit than in care. Doctors are able to take a slice of the profits, and although the company must maintain employee services, unions fear staff numbers could be cut.
Stuart Jeffery, health spokesperson for the Green Party, said: "This will mark the first in a long line of NHS privatisations that we can expect. This government has clearly decided that profit comes before quality. Sadly, it is happy to feather the nests of its corporate friends in the City rather than provide care for patients. Patients will suffer, hard working staff will suffer and the reputation of the NHS will suffer. This milestone puts another nail in the NHS coffin."
Proponents of the deal argue that privatisation will make the hospital more efficient and help pay off its debts, but many critics argue that there were other options that weren't considered.

Circle Healthcare is part-listed on the London Stock Exchange and valued at around £120m.
ENDS

Notes:
(1) Private sector firms already operate in the NHS, such as hip replacement centres, but this marks the first time an entire hospital is controlled by a private business.
(2) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15436685
(3) http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/10/private-firm-run-nhs-hospital

So why the fuss? Solar panels or photovoltaic panels use the energy emitted in solar rays and convert it to electricity. This way of sourcing energy is not only environmentally friendly but also a secure way of meeting our energy needs and keeping prices down in the future.

The UK is a long way behind other European countries in terms of the proportion of our energy that is produced from clean, renewable sources - even though we are blessed with huge potential from wind, wave and solar power. Since the solar feed-in tariffs (FIT) were introduced in April 2010 we have started to catch up. Organisations and individuals have seen that they will be able to get a financial return on the investment they put into solar installations and this has given the UK solar industry the kick-start it needs. There have been some 100,000 solar installations, the creation of more than 25,000 jobs and almost 4,000 new businesses.

But the Government plans to cut FIT payments from 43p per Kwh to just 21p - a move which will dramatically undermine the progress we have been making. And furthermore the date when the new rate is brought in has been moved from 6th April 2012 to 12th December 2011 - earlier than the deadline for its own consultation on the issue!

Not only does this further undermine the credibility of Government consultations but it is putting many solar businesses at risk whilst forcing other organisations and households that have been planning solar installations to think again. Thousands of solar panels will be delivered to businesses gone bust. Thanks to the lack of notice of the change, residents who have bought into the scheme but not yet had their panels installed are now being hung out to dry by the Government. Many customers have cancelled orders concerned that they wouldn't be able to meet 12th December deadline.

At a time when the UK is being held to ransom by the big energy companies and dwindling fossil fuel reserves thrusting 5 million into fuel poverty, I am unable to understand the logic of the Government's decision. The solar industry was expecting a review of the FIT rate, but not one that cut it by halve and not one that came in four months earlier than planned.

As a country we urgently need to be investing in measures that will create a secure energy supply for the future and tackle fuel poverty. This means a nationwide programme to insulate people's homes and investment in clean, renewable energy. This is a far more efficient use of taxpayers' money than the huge Government subsidies needed for new nuclear power stations. But sadly this Government is taking us in the wrong direction and seems to have completely given up on its pledge to be the ‘greenest Government ever'.

As always it is those on the lowest incomes who will suffer the most. This cut will jeopardise free solar schemes for people unable to afford the upfront costs of solar panels and is forcing councils to review schemes to install solar panels for council tenants and on other council buildings - schemes which, under the current FIT rate, were enabling local councils to generate a profit that can be invested in services that are under threat from Government cuts.

By investing in renewable technologies, not only does the Government help combat climate change and create jobs but it gives councils a further incentive to help the fuel poor and increase local authority revenue. It seems perverse that the solar industry should be so dramatically punished for doing well at a time when financial institutions are being rewarded for failure. This topsy turvy mentality appears to be the hallmark of this Government.

Adrian Ramsay, Green Party Deputy Leader.

Mr Pearmain, who was elected as a Labour Councillor for Lakenham in 1999 and served until 2003, is impressed by the policies and impact of the Green Party County Councillors and believes that the Green Party is the most effective opposition to the Conservatives at County Hall.

Andy Pearmain, who still lives in Lakenham, said: "The Green Party holds 7 out of 13 County Council seats in Norwich, whereas Labour has just 3 seats across the whole of Norfolk. Green Party Councillors are the most effective opposition at County Hall. They are fighting to protect social care and youth services from severe cuts and have produced an alternative budget to the Conservatives to show how this can be done. They have also made a real difference by introducing the energy company that will install solar panels on Council buildings and generate new income for the Council to help protect services from cuts."

Paul Neale, who was born and brought up in Lakenham, said: "I'm delighted to have the support of Andy Pearmain and other former Labour Councillors who are supporting my campaign. I used to be a Labour member myself but left because of the Iraq war. I now strongly believe that standing for the Green Party is the best way to work towards a fairer and healthier society."

Last month, Adrian Ramsay used his party conference speech to attack the Government's proposed reforms of the NHS and called on the Conservatives and LibDems to reconsider their proposals.

He stated: "The private companies will bid for the services that are easiest to run - they won't bid for the expensive services that don't make any profit. The NHS will be left with those services that are essential to people's health but don't make profits. Far from this helping the public finances, it will place more financial strain on the NHS."

The Green Party has been actively campaigning across the country in order to keep the NHS public. The party is concerned about plans to remove from the Secretary of State for Health the obligation to ensure that health services are provided across the country and to place the responsibility on GPs to buy health care services for the NHS, often from private companies.

The purpose of this protest, organised by the Norwich branch of the Keep Our NHS Public campaign, is to highlight the support that local Conservative and LibDem MPs, including Simon Wright, have given to the plans and to call on them to reconsider. Mr Wright recently voted for the reforms in a crucial Commons vote. The proposals are currently being considered by the House of Lords.

It's no surprise that there is such strong public opposition to the plans when local communities already have an uphill struggle to defeat unpopular planning applications. It's also no surprise that Britain's biggest property companies are the main supporters of the plans.

As well as threatening cherished green land, the proposals would make it harder for councils to gain contributions from developers towards building social housing. With growing council housing waiting lists this approach is simply unethical. There are a third of a million potential homes in the UK that already have planning permission as well as nearly a million empty properties. If the Government wants to provide homes and create jobs then it could take action on companies sitting on this land - without destroying the countryside.

With continued public pressure let's hope that we see another U-turn on this disastrous plan, as we did on the proposal to sell our forests.

You can read more at www.nationaltrust.org.uk

The new Tax and Financial Transparency Bill would recover billions of lost pounds by forcing multinational companies to publish information on where they make their sales, record their profits and pay their taxes. Caroline Lucas MP said: "The first aim of this Bill is to tackle the scandalous reality that around 500,000 companies appear not to be paying tax in the UK. HM Revenue & Customs admits that tax evasion and avoidance together come to at least £40 billion a year. When the Government is cutting public services across the board we can't afford to make it easier for tax dodgers to get away with not paying their fair share."

Mark Serwotka, General Secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), said: "This Bill goes right to the heart of the economic issues facing our country. If the Government were serious about protecting the most vulnerable people in our communities from the cuts it would start investing in tax collection and proper regulation so that companies would not be allowed to simply disappear without paying the taxes they owe."

Creating Jobs
Adrian Ramsay, Green Party Deputy Leader, said: "Cutting jobs and public services is a false economy as it leads to more people claiming benefits and greater burdens on the NHS, police and social services. The best way to build a stable economy is to create jobs in areas where they are most needed. Producing more of the foods and manufactured goods we need in the UK would boost jobs and cut carbon emissions. Investing in home insulation schemes, rail and bus services and renewable energy could create a million new jobs while cutting people's bills."

Banks
The Green Party is also calling for tougher regulation of the banking sector and believes that bailed-out banks should be transformed into low-risk banks that serve the public good, such as the mutuals, ethical banks and co-operatives. The Government could avoid savage cuts to public services and generate billions of pounds by clamping down on tax evasion and supporting a Robin Hood Tax. This
proposed tax, on high-risk transactions between financial institutions, would
raise an estimated £20-£30 billion each year in the UK if levied at 0.05%.

A Stable Economy
The Green Party believes that regulation of the financial sector and rebalancing the economy with a greater focus on local production will help end the cycle of ‘boom and bust' we've seen in recent years. Greens are calling for a wider range of measures to judge the success of the economy. Currently the Government just looks at levels of economic activity but does not consider the types of economic activity, health and wellbeing in society, levels of inequality, access to public services or the impact of the economy on natural resources and the environment. Current economic thinking fails to value many ‘free' goods, such as the services provided by nature
(pollination, soil formation, water and climate regulation). This leads to the destruction of valuable assets for short-term profit, while ignoring long term costs such as cleaning up pollution, or dealing with floods, erosion or health problems.

For more information on alternative economics please visit www.neweconomics.org

There has been a spate of incidents in recent months of other dogs and cats being attacked and injured or killed by dogs. Initially, the ruling Labour Cabinet at City Hall said it would not take action, claiming there was a lack of evidence of the problem.
Green Party Councillors have been working with the RSPCA in pressing the Council to take action to promote responsible pet ownership. An RSPCA representative has asked the Council if it will take part in the nationwide Community Animal Welfare scheme, where councils are awarded for positive measures taken.

Amy Stammers, Green Party City Councillor for Mancroft Ward, said: "I think there is significant evidence to show that a DCO is needed in parts of the city. I hope that the ruling Labour Cabinet responds positively to the motion that was agreed and also engages with the RSPCA. Any DCO that is agreed needs to be combined with action to promote animal welfare across the city."

Green Party Deputy Leader Adrian Ramsay will use his party conference speech tomorrow to attack the Government's proposed reforms of the NHS and call on the Conservatives and LibDems to reconsider their proposals.

The proposed health reforms would remove from the Secretary of State for Health the obligation to ensure that health services are provided across the country and would place the responsibility on GPs to buy health care services for the NHS, often from private companies.

Adrian Ramsay will say: "We know that there are several fundamental problems with GP commissioning. The British Medical Association is clear that most GPs want to focus on caring for patients, not have their time tied up in management. Making GPs responsible for both patient care and buying services presents major conflicts of interest for GPs, forcing them to weigh care options against costs.

"The private companies will bid for the services that are easiest to run - they won't bid for the expensive services that don't make any profit. The NHS will be left with those services that are essential to people's health but don't make profits. Far from this helping the public finances, it will place more financial strain on the NHS."

In his speech to the party's conference Mr Ramsay, who is a Green Party campaigner in Norwich, will also:

• Highlight the effect of Government cuts on young people and call for a new approach where Government creates work opportunities and maintains funding for youth services.
• Criticise the Government's proposed reforms to planning laws, which will make it easier for developers to get planning permission to develop in the countryside and other greenfield sites. The Green Party is supporting calls from The National Trust, CPRE and other nature organisations who want local people to be able to stop development that will destroy the natural environment.
• Point to the Green Party's successes in the 2011 local elections when it gained seats from all three of the other parties in different parts of the country, including making a gain from the LibDems in Norwich.
• Highlight the party's continued growth in membership.

Mr Ramsay's speech is at 11:20am on Saturday 10th September at the Green Party Conference at Sheffield Hallam University.

The conference is being held in Sheffield, the city where Nick Clegg holds his seat in Parliament, to highlight the support that the Green Party is winning around the country from people who feel let down by the LibDems.

She said: "This is not a true coalition. This is a Tory government being kept in power by the Lib Dems."

"I have a special message for those Lib Dem supporters who are beginning to despair of the path their leadership has taken them down. If you became involved in politics to serve your local community, to protect the environment, or to challenge inequality, then join us.

We are working for the same ends. You'll find many former Lib Dems among our ranks. And your contribution to politics in our country is more valuable than ever."

Lib Dem minister by minister, she outlined how the coalition is falling short of what Lib Dem voters expected in the 2010 general election.

Lucas said: "Chris Huhne's government has slashed support to marine renewables, caused chaos in the solar industry, promoted new deep water drilling, and given the green light to shale gas fracking.

"Then there's Vince Cable at Industry. Whose sole idea for more employment seems to be boosting the arms trade? Who missed the chance to see Northern Rock turned back into a mutual, rather than sold off to the highest bidder?

"We have Danny Alexander at the Treasury. And one of his top ideas for reducing the deficit? Selling off our forests.

"And Nick Clegg, of course. The Minister for meeting angry people and being shouted at."

Lucas emphasised that: "The Lib Dems aren't getting what they want. But they're also helping the Tories give the rest of us things we don't want, and never voted for. Like privatisation of the NHS. Like the cuts in services. Like £9,000 tuition fees."

Claire Stephenson, Leader of the Green Party City Councillors, said: "The ruling Labour administration at City Hall is not conducting this consultation in a fair or effective way. Residents are only being consulted on around 20% of Labour's planned cuts, many of the questions are too simplistic and there is no space for residents' own suggestions.

"In addition, the ruling Labour Cabinet is not planning to give opposition councillors the opportunity to consider and debate the consultation results.

"We are encouraging residents to respond to the consultation but also send additional comments to the Green Party so we can present them to the Council."

You can respond to the Council's consultation online at www.norwich.gov.uk or call 0344 980 3333 to ask for a paper copy. The consultation runs until 12th October. To give additional views on Council spending please write to Norwich Green Party at cutsconsultation@norwichgreenparty.org .

The consultation in detail

There are problems with the Labour Council's cuts consultation:

The first question offers impossible choices. Residents are asked to rank five 'priorities'. Each priority contains a range of services, some of which the Council legally has to provide. The Council is most likely to take money out of services in the option that comes last.

The main part of the questionnaire is partly an advert, encouraging us to contact the Council through 'cheaper' methods. However, some people will need to contact the Council by telephone or in person. If you need face-to-face contact, or know someone who does, say so.

The final question is a list of 20 specific ways the Council can save money. Some cuts may be sensible, such as reducing floodlighting of Council buildings and moving to sustainable planting. However, there are many items on this list where residents already often comment that Council spending is too low (e.g. street cleaning, trees, litter bins). Note that the order is unusual in that your top priority - number one - is what you are most willing for the Council to 'change or reduce'.

Green Party Deputy Leader Adrian Ramsay said: "The Government has a choice about how it addresses the deficit. It could be clamping down on corporate tax avoidance and evasion and cancelling Trident nuclear weapons, for example. The County Council has a choice about how it deals with the Government cuts. It could be cancelling plans for an expensive Northern Distributor Road and reviewing the pay of its top-earning staff.

"Instead, the ruling Conservative Cabinet at County Hall has cut its entire budget for youth services - and we are now seeing youth centres and other crucial facilities close.

"This approach is extremely short-sighted. The policies of local and national government are creating a bleak future for a whole generation, where it's harder to find work, harder to gain further education and where vulnerable young people are not getting the support they need.

"The Green Party is calling on the Government and the County Council to urgently re-think this approach."

Save Future Education

The Green Party is calling on the County Council to continue its funding for Future Education. Future is a charity based in North Earlham that provides education for young people who have struggled in mainstream school.

Phil Hardy, Leader of the Green Party County Councillors, said: "Facilities like Future are crucial for ensuring that young people who have not managed in mainstream school get the education and support they need. We are pressing the Council to maintain its funding."

Cuts Affect Us All

People of all ages are being affected by the County Council's cuts. Next year, new charges are being brought in for day care centres and fees for care homes are being increased. Earlier this year the Council proposed ending care services for people with ‘substantial needs' but backtracked on this following a strong campaign from Green Councillors, voluntary groups and residents. One of the current battles is over Wensum Lodge sports hall. Green Party Councillors are actively supporting a residents' campaign against the Council's proposed closure of this facility.

Earlier this month, a spate of terrifying violence and disorder erupted onto our streets. Communities were terrorised, individuals attacked and city centres trashed. Horrendous images on our TV screens of burning buildings and mindless looting created a climate of fear in which people were scared to leave their homes - and in which public trust in the capacity of our police force to respond effectively was shaken.

The Green Party unequivocally condemns the violence and vandalism which has left indelible scars on families, businesses and urban environments across England. We express sincere condolences for those who lost loved ones in the chaos. And we feel admiration for those who took part in the peaceful defence of their neighbourhoods, as well as those came out onto the streets for the clean-up effort.

In the weeks since, the sheer number of column inches devoted to attempts to understand why the riots and looting took place - and how we might be able to prevent such devastation in future - illustrates the huge complexity of this issue. The honest truth is that there are no easy answers.

As a political party, we believe it is crucially important for the fabric of UK society that the Government and the police strike a balance between keeping our streets safe - protecting people from harm and defending communities against destruction - and upholding the hard won civil liberties of our citizens. And we want to keep things in perspective. We do not believe, as Mr Cameron does, that British society is ‘sick'.

Underpinning any analysis should be a recognition of the deep inequality which lies at the heart of British society. So too should we understand the consequences of a consumer culture which promotes endless material accumulation, an aggressive sense of entitlement and a demoralising level of status anxiety.

The Coalition Government's reckless austerity agenda, combined with rising youth unemployment and economic stagnation, is contributing in no small way towards a sense of hopelessness - with huge cuts in public funding for young people's clubs and services, and the scrapping of Educational Maintenance Allowance already having an impact. It's clear that many people feel disempowered and that some have become disengaged from their own communities, to the extent that they are willing to attack them without fear of consequence.

Policing

That the riots and looting escalated to such an alarming degree is no doubt in part due to the failure of the police on the first two nights of the outbreak to maintain order - a result of inappropriate operational tactics and lack of numbers, and the Party has publicly voiced criticism of the police to this effect. However, we have largely welcomed the police approach on the last three nights of riots, which proved more successful in containing the unrest.

In light of these events, the Greens are calling for a moratorium on all police cuts until December 2012; in other words, after the colossal policing challenge that is the London 2012 Olympics, and after the various inquiries into the riots have reported back. In the meantime, the police should focus on spending money wisely, and ensuring that police officers are not burdened with administrative tasks which take them away from frontline policing.

Public order policing needs to be more flexible and intelligent. A review of public order policing training is required, as well as a strategy to train up more reserve police officers. Urgent initiatives should be put in place to improve cooperation between police and communities to build stronger foundations for the future.

Draconian tactics are not the answer

While it is crucial that the police develop the necessary tactics to provide public protection in challenging times, we must also recognise the dangerous and draconian nature of some modern policing methods. Such methods can pose a serious risk to public safety and individual liberty, and incidents such as deaths in police custody serve to fuel negative perceptions of the police.

We condemn, for example, the use of plastic bullets, which raise serious public health and civil liberties concerns. We reject calls for the police to be routinely armed. We do not support the use of Taser guns unless as a last resort and as a more humane option to lethal shooting with bullets. In these cases, they should be issued only to fully trained armed response units.

The use of water cannon was operationally inappropriate in the recent riot situations we saw around the country; that is, small and mobile groups on high streets or barricaded urban estates. They are also very costly - senior Met officers in 2009 investigated the purchase of six water cannon, at a cost of £5m - and involve practical challenges of transport and storage.

The Green Party rejects the idea of localised curfews, which we view as repressive and difficult to enforce. We also strongly reject any attempts to close down social media, which we believe to be misguided and counterproductive - and urge people to sign up to the Open Rights Group's online petition on this issue.

The Party also continues to support the principle of free speech for legal organisations, and is therefore concerned about the consequences of kneejerk reactions in the wake of the riots which could see this principle breached. The Party is opposed, for example, to bans on events such as marches by the English Defence League, which would serve to drive these groups underground - making it far harder to challenge their contemptible views.

Cameron's political punishments will undermine respect for the law

The sentencing of riot perpetrators in a way which is clearly designed to "set an example" and act as a deterrent is overtly political and wholly misguided. The varying sentences given out so far reveal serious inconsistencies and an alarming lack of proportionality. As such, they threaten to bring the legal system into disrepute. Overly tough sentencing will lead to costly and time consuming appeals, and add to the sense of unfairness already rife in our society.

Rather than succumbing to kneejerk calls for draconian punishments, David Cameron and the UK justice system should be doing all they can encourage trust in, and respect for, our laws and the legal profession itself. They should also be clear about the consequences of sending hundreds of young people to jail - especially when prison capacity is at an all time low - with little chance of any proper rehabilitation.

In April this year, justice secretary Kenneth Clarke called for a rethink of prison policy, including a 3,000 reduction in the number of people locked up. "It is just very, very bad value for taxpayers' money to keep banging them up and warehousing them in overcrowded prisons where most of them get toughened up", he said. Mr Cameron should take heed.

Sentencing guidelines already allow courts to take into account, where relevant, "aggravating circumstances". No more than this should be necessary; criminals should continue to be punished for their crimes in the correct manner. We support a greater focus on community sentencing for those involved in the riots and looting, as well as efforts to bring perpetrators face to face with their victims, and to involve them in the repair of damage done to businesses and communities.

The Greens completely oppose withdrawing benefits from those linked to the events and we oppose the eviction of families from state-supported housing. Such measures will only exacerbate existing problems of poverty and alienation - cutting off ever further those who we must seek to bring closer. Driving people into deeper poverty will not make the streets safer - nor will it help us build a stronger, fairer society.

Long term solutions

The Coalition Government must show it is willing to address the shocking level of inequality which exists in our society. Research by UNICEF suggests that the UK is one of the worst places to live as a child or teenager in the developed world - largely thanks to the growing gulf between the haves and have nots. This is not something which the Government has shown any interest in tackling.

We need policies to create a more equal society. And as the economy continues to teeter dangerously on the edge of disaster, we need urgent action to create jobs and get people into work. The Green Party has long supported, and implemented where possible, the introduction of a Living Wage to begin to address these issues. We will continue to push for this change at every opportunity.

We also continue our call for Government investment in the clean industries of the future to create millions of new green jobs and help our transition towards a greener future. And we demand bold measures to tackle the scourge of tax evasion and avoidance which allows those at the top of society to loot the public purse with impunity.

Although we reject the idea of any kind of military-based national service, the Greens would support a voluntary national community service programme for young people - particularly one geared towards training and eventual employment. Sadly, such a positive scheme would require a level of funding unlikely to be forthcoming from this Government.

Yet by investing money in intervention now in programmes to broaden the horizons of young people, address their concerns about the future, offer them a way to participate in public life and have their voices heard, we can save the state money - and save lives - in the long term.

For example, to tackle the lethal gang culture which blights our inner cities, the Greens propose the introduction of Community Initiatives to Reduce Violence (CIRVs) based on the successful model we have seen in Glasgow. The scheme seeks to reduce violent behaviour and provide mentoring, career and employment services, bringing together different social services in an integrated approach. This way, we can make sure that those at the bottom are drawn away from criminality, and are able to gain control of their own lives.

In the meantime, the Greens welcome the inquiries now underway to investigate the complex causes behind the August riots - in particular, the formal commission being coordinated by Nick Clegg which aims to speak directly to people within the affected neighbourhoods about what happened. We also support efforts to establish "payback" sentencing and restorative justice for people found to have participated in the disturbances. Plans for a "riot payback scheme" would ensure that those who are convicted are forced to mend the damage done via community service work, and to face up to the consequences of their actions through meetings with victims. If the Government is serious about preventing a repeat of these terrible events, then such solutions must form part of a more balanced, humane and realistic approach - one which can help to bring our society closer together, rather than pushing us further apart.

The problem has arisen since the Labour Government introduced a new pricing structure in 2006, which changed the way dentists are paid for NHS work. Dentists working under NHS contracts can provide both private and NHS treatments, but are supposed to treat NHS patients at fixed NHS prices, not private rates.

Adrian Ramsay, Green Party Deputy Leader, said: "The many honest dentists are finding it hard to cover costs under this system due to insufficient Government funding, while less honest dentists are over-charging patients. The Government needs to scrap the current system and employ dedicated NHS dentists on a fixed salary. Dentistry ought to be free at the point of delivery but at the very least the Government must protect NHS patients from being charged the full market rate. The problems in dentistry illustrate why the Government should not go ahead with plans to mix together NHS and private services within the rest of the health service."

What are your rights?

Everyone is entitled to dental treatment on the NHS. Treatment is free for some people including children, the unemployed and pregnant women. For those who pay for NHS dentistry, there are three fixed payment levels depending on the treatment:

Band 1 - £17: includes an examination, diagnosis and advice, plus X-ray and scale and polish if needed.

Band 2 - £47: includes all treatments in Band 1, plus fillings, root canal treatment and extractions.

Band 3 - £204: includes all treatment in Bands 1 and 2, plus complex treatments like crowns, dentures and bridges.