Star date: 10th January 2017


Today, a consultation ends on Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 which could see small community media like the Salford Star closed if big developers or politicians decide to have a go at our editorial through the courts.

Unless magazines and newspapers like the Star sign up to a state-approved regulator, we could be stung for costs in a libel case – even if we win! It means that the likes of Peel Holdings, or whoever, could threaten legal action if they wanted to suppress articles that are in the public interest. The Salford Star does not believe that journalists should be subject to state regulation of any description, no matter how it's dressed up.

Full details here...

We've been told a million times how developers and politicians would love to shut the Salford Star up...to stop us from printing articles that are well in the public interest about their iffy and dodgy dealings*. Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 might give them the green light to do just that.

As it stands, if someone wanted to sue the Salford Star for libel it's generally recognised by the courts that, if they lose, they pay the costs which can run into thousands of pounds. Section 40 would change this so that, unless the Star signed up to a state-approved regulator, this publication would be liable for our own and our opponents' legal costs – even if we won!

However, if we signed up to an approved regulator – and an organisation called IMPRESS is the only one at present – we would apparently be exempt from paying opponents' legal costs, even if we lose a case. The Government's rationale for Section 40 is that "recognised self regulators have to have a low cost arbitration scheme that replaces the need for court action".

Over the last few years, the Salford Star has had many friendly chats with IMPRESS but has always decided not to sign up, for three reasons. Firstly is the cost. The Star hardly has enough money to keep its website going, never mind paying subscriptions to an organisation that we've never needed.

Secondly, if we sign up to IMPRESS and any person fancied having a go at us we would have to go to what the Government calls `low cost arbitration' – that would not only take up funds that we haven't got but also time that we just haven't got, with a ridiculously shoestring full-time-ish staff of one!  

Thirdly, there's the ethical argument. As one journalist eloquently put it on the National Union of Journalist's Facebook site, "I believe such a system runs counter to my obligation under the NUJ's code of conduct, which begins: A journalist: At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed...

"This does not add a caveat `provided they belong to a privately financed and state sanctioned regulator' or anything like that..."

The Salford Star does not believe that journalists should be subject to state regulation of any description, no matter how it's dressed up.

While supporters of Section 40 say that it's about curbing the dodgy antics of media barons and big proprietors, they forget that small community media outlets, run by journalists themselves, will be caught up in the net and quite possibly closed down under the constant threat of libel cases by the rich, the powerful, the elite and the corrupt - those who want to silence media outlets like the Salford Star.

The Government's consultation on Section 40 ends at 5pm today (see here). There's four options being considered...

Option 1: Keep Section 40 under review
So far, the Government hasn't commenced Section 40, and this option will see it remain under review.

Option 2: Fully Commence Section 40
That the Government brings Section 40 into force immediately

Option 3: Repeal Section 40
That the Government scraps the law

Option 4: Partially Commence Section 40
The Government commences only those sub-sections of Section 40 that
would give protections to members of a recognised self-regulator. "This would
mean publishers who are members of a recognised self-regulator would be
protected from the adverse costs arising from legal action brought by powerful
claimants" states the Government "Those who are not members of a recognised self-regulator would not share those benefits".

The Salford Star will be pushing for a full repeal of Section 40.

* To see some `iffy and dodgy dealings' see the winners of the Salford Star Mary Burns Awards - click here and follow the links

Update: 10th January 12noon...The National Union of Journalists has just issued its response to Section 40...

Michelle Stanistreet, General Secretary, said:

"A perfect storm poses a mortal threat to British journalism – a crisis of trust, a crisis of revenue and a crisis of relevance. The first would be much aided by the establishment of a genuinely independent system of arbitration that would allow those who believe that the press has overstepped the mark to seek redress easily and inexpensively. Journalists, publishers and the public would benefit from the establishment of such a process.

"The NUJ believes that by partially implementing Section 40, it would potentially bring benefits to those regulators that have established proper systems of arbitration. Those who have not would continue to deal with the courts as they do today. The government should continue to encourage those regulators that do not have effective arbitration in place to establish such systems.

"While providing significant benefits for those with systems of arbitration, ministers should now rule out implementing Section 40 in a way that could lead to publishers facing potentially ruinous legal costs. Therefore the NUJ favours option (d), that the government should partially commence Section 40 and keep under review those elements that apply to publishers outside a recognised regulator.

"It is also vital that Part 2 of the Leveson inquiry commences. Commitments were made to victims of abuse by the press that have not been fulfilled.  It was appropriate to allow live legal cases to extinguish themselves, but serious questions remain about the relationships between senior police officers and executives at some of our biggest media conglomerates.  Without the long-promised inquiry, the suspicion of a cover up, or a private deal between ministers and industry bosses, will hang in the air."

Stephen wrote
at 06:47:24 on 19 January 2017
Sharon, please point me in the direction of another article where I have twisted words or attacked anyone. I find your suggestion I antagonise people and pick on the disabled deeply offensive. I have an opinion that is different to yours.
Mr b. r exit wrote
at 07:36:27 on 17 January 2017
I like to say to Steven, you mention In one of your posts that a news agency that tells the truth has no fear of this section 40, that's not true, the fact is any one who dosn't like what is reported about them, they could have been accused and found guilty of a serious crime and a news outlet could report on it accurately, this person can then sue the news out let, lose their case and the news out let has to pay all the costs, so anyone can make spurious claims, knowing they won't be paying out, the news outlet will. This is just a ploy by the rich and wealthy to silence the free press.
Mr b. r exit wrote
at 07:36:12 on 17 January 2017
This section 40 was started by Steve coogan, Hugh "mr blow job" grant, max Mosley who all set up hacked off to stop the press reporting on their sexual perversions, it's designed to protect the rich and to keep them unaccountable to the law that the rest of us mere mortals have to live under. Jimmy savile would be proud of them. A press that is blind folded and that have their hands tied behind their back will only lead to a state of dictatorship, and max Mosley who's funding and behind this, would love that, it's in his blood.
at 18:30:27 on 16 January 2017
@Sharon my original comment back on the 10th was in relation to the article. As I previously mentioned many people post as 'wrote' and I did not make every single one of the other 'wrote' comments. I am disabled, it makes no difference to me if you are disabled or not, if you post bull and are a hypocrite I will call you out. I am not Stephen or anyone else posting on this thread. So to reiterate, I AM DISABLED, and you chat sh*t!! Now back to the original thread, i think the Murdochs of this world have too much power but I don't think regulation will work per se. If an editor/journalist went to prison for speaking lies and fake news then that may make them stop!
Sharon Hooley (Independant Activist and advocate for disabled people) wrote
at 11:47:48 on 16 January 2017
@Wrote and @Stephen. The pair of you (or is it just one person hiding behind both names) should be ashamed of themselves. Every time an article is commented on by Mx Chakotia you both start your twisting of words and attack him. Then play the victim whilst in all the comments....nothing is said properly on the article. And when I say you attack....I mean using words like "Scrounger" so don't think the rest of us are idiots. We all see what you are doing.// So apart from agreeing to s40, what else are you going to comment on about the Salford Star? Or are you going to antagonize someone else here? Oh I'm disabled, want to pick on another vulnerable adult? Your just words, not even human as you hide behind false names so you declare everyone else hides behind their disabilities...what a load of bull.
Stephen wrote
at 17:04:48 on 14 January 2017
All of my comments are about s40
Salford Star wrote
at 12:14:27 on 14 January 2017
These recent comments are nothing to do with this article - unless it's to do with section 40 new comments won't be posted
at 06:00:54 on 14 January 2017
Tahir contact who the hell you want, yours are the rantings of a hypocrite! You have threatened this many times before! I would suggest you desist from Incorrectly naming individuals on here and stop making ridiculous threats! Ps stop hiding behind your disability! Once again If you cannot take it, do not give it!
UoS wrote
at 17:28:07 on 13 January 2017
Sorry Steve but this is something of a farce. Journalists are and always have been subject to regulation by the state. You are not permitted by the law to publish lies about people or corporations. You are not permitted to intercept communications for the sake of journalism. You are not allowed to print secrets such as the identity of spies or the location of nuclear submarines. You are not allowed to interfere with people's privacy in order to attract visitors to your website. You cannot publish 'kiss and tell' stories where no public interests exists. You cannot publish the names of complainants in sexual assault and rape cases. You cannot publish the identities of children convicted of criminal offences. You are not allowed to report the details of certain trials. You cannot report salacious or incendiary reports of criminal proceedings in the courts. You cannot publish financial data in advance of its public disclosure. Should I keep going? The idea that you have ever been free to publish whatever you want beyond the scrutiny of the apparatus of the state is a nonsense. The courts do not exist to protect the executive, they exist in the overwhelming majority of cases to uphold the rights of the ordinary individual, including against abuse by the 'free' press. Why would you not agree to mediation if you published lies about somebody? What reason would you have for resiling from this? Simply saying it is 'the State regulating me' is not good enough. The state ALREADY regulates your activities.
Stephen wrote
at 17:27:17 on 13 January 2017
I only respond to your comments becasue I believe its you writing all of them. I am not a cyber bulley, I just have a different opinion to the one you have. Again, I find you hippicritical - relying on an Act designed to protect people from misuse of their information whilst at the same time arguing against s40 which is aimed at doing the same thing. s40 will be there to protect people and organisations who would otherwise be powerless to stop the press from promoting unfounded stories. If Salford Star can substantiate its stories, it has nothing to fear with regards to s40. Further, if Salford Star cannot afford to sign up to a regulator, maybe its stories need to be more robust so it doesn't need to worry about legal challenges.
at 17:27:13 on 13 January 2017
It's curious how little internet presence this Mr Wong "the well known Chinese Comedian, who does the Liverpool circuit" has.
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 14:22:46 on 13 January 2017
Just had the well known Chinese Comedian, who does the Liverpool circuit contact me? Who the hell is stating, in his name, that he is being racially offensive. @Wong Not Wight is a famous Chinese Comedian, called Mr. Wong. So please tell me how someone pretending to write that he himself, who is a Chinese Comedian, is being racist?
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 14:22:30 on 13 January 2017
@Stephen. @Wrote, AKA, "J" and according to previous comments by @Wong Not Wight, "J" is in fact Ian Hilton. You both have not commented on @Alice, @Sharon Hooley nor @Wong Not Wight's comments. So you have, without any shadow of a doubt, proved that you are targeting only me. A mentally and physically disabled adult, too which which both of you feel I have no rights to express my own opinion. That by definition makes you both "Cyber Bullies" which is a criminal offence, Section 1a of the Mallicious Communications Act of 2014. Your comments again does not mention once Section 40. And yes, I am pretty sure by your ability to spin and your advanced knowledge of me, combined with the fact that in a previous comment, you implied indirectly a ball park figure of what you earn, I am pretty sure that you work for either the Salford Council or a Social Housing Body. You have already stated incorrectly that I am sponging of the benefit system, I am not a representative for the Autistic Community, which @Sharon Hooley proved is utter rubbish, and considering that there was no way that I could have known that I was going to get so ill, within the near future, does not make me a "Benefit Sponger". You are in my opinion, using your own inaccurate, wholly inappropriate comments and actions on the Salford Star, a very small minded, bigoted, "Cyber Bully". I will now be contacting the ICO as I believe your comments not only justify a Data Protection Breach, considering who you work for, but you have publically shared private / sensitive data, inaccurately, on a public forum, which means it is not fit for the purpose it was intended. Any person working for an organisation or governing company must ensure all information passed to a third party, this includes online forums, must be accurate and fit for the purpose it was intended. Your inappropriate comments have been proven by @Sharon Hooley to be wholly inaccurate and due to who you work for, you can and will be investigated and hopefully prosecuted by the ICO. Have a nice day!!!! Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 14:22:20 on 13 January 2017
@Wrote, AKA "J", the Salford Star Article you refer too is quite old. What makes you think I am still claiming any disability benefits? Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Wong Not Wight wrote
at 14:22:13 on 13 January 2017
Chinese Proverb Say "Men who intimidate the weak and disabled have large Bicep and sore palm".
Stephen wrote
at 09:32:26 on 13 January 2017
Are you suggesting I am not allowed to disagree with you because you are disabled? Again, clearly touched a nerve. This thread is a prime example of why s40 is needed. If Salford Star chose to write a story about you sponging off the state I'm sure you would want protection from regulators to ensure only facts were reported. To satisfy your paranoia once again, I do not have access to your personal information, I read the Salford Star which you appear to use as your personal journal. Maybe you should find a tax payer funded course on cyber security.
at 05:59:48 on 13 January 2017
Tahir - it says "TJ has passed three tough disability assessments by ATOS - two for ESA and one for DLA - in the last three years" right here: http://www.salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=3306
@Wong not Wight wrote
at 05:59:45 on 13 January 2017
Doing grotesque racist caricatures of the Chinese is more cringy than humorous. Sorry.
at 03:32:10 on 13 January 2017
'Wrote' is the name given to one who chooses not use ones name, or pseudonym. 'Wrote' on Salford Star is in fact many many people. Don't give it out if you can't take it.
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 03:31:50 on 13 January 2017
@Sharon Hooley. It's nice to see that a fellow voluntary Housing Advocate has noticed that @Stephen & Wrote, AKA, "J" only insult and target me on the Salford Star. If Section 40 causes small honest publications to cease publishing, then Section 40, by its very definition has to be wrong. The Salford Star is one of the last honest and caring publications left in Salford, and we certainly cannot afford to loose this service. I do have some very good news however. After leaving the Salford Star I went onto the ICO, Information Commissioners website, which clearly states that even if a member of a government institution writes in an anonymous name / alias online and divulges data sensitive or inappropriately passes private information about one of its citizens, to the general public, they can and will investigate such matters, using the police to identify the persons real identity. If any member of a Council or a Private Organisation passes on Data Sensitive Information concerning a Vulnerable or Disabled Person, then the perpetrators could spend up to 10 years in prison. So the next time Stephen or Wrote, AKA "J" write on the Salford Star, the ICO, Information Commisoners will be watching, recording, and locating who this person / persons are, and if they are part of a Goverment Organisation / Council and / or a Housing Association, they could be spending the next 10 Christmas's in Prison. Meanwhile we must all act against Section 40 in order to keep small, honest news publications online. I don't know where I would be now without the Salford Star. I just wish the editor of the Salford Star would take over the Evening News, so I can start to trust what I am reading once again. Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Wong not Wight wrote
at 22:21:43 on 12 January 2017
Chinese proverb say "two men who bully one man live very lonely sad life".
Sharon Hooley (Independant Activist and advocate for disabled people) wrote
at 22:21:34 on 12 January 2017
Section 40 will kill off small media like the Salford Star who tend to print only Factual information. So how can it help the progression of telling the truth and outing incompetence within an already corrupt society? It can't. The Salford Star can't afford to pay for this kind of "regulation". They rely on donations to keep going. So tell me @Stephen and Wrote aka J... why is this a good thing again? The "Underdogs" loose out and get silenced while councils and other organizations bath in the money they should have spent on tax so the elderly, disabled and vulnerable are left without valuable services. I don't see papers like Manchester Evening News writing up on something like this.// It is obvious that you both don't care about our valuable Salford Star and that it has, on many occasions, been the voice of people within our city airing real problems arising due to the unnecessary cuts and even ignorance. // I've read comments from both @Stephen and @Wrote (aka J) and I can confirm that you are both bullies trying to gang up on an autistic guy with multiple disabilities. I know Mx Chakotia and can confirm that he IS a representative for the Autism Community as I too attend a closed meeting with local professionals and the council to help better the services provided within Salford. In my opinion I have only ever seen Mx Chakotia write nothing but facts on the Salford Star. Why is it always you two attacking him every time he comments on an article? Oh, and no he has never said the comment of "Small minded" directly at anyone....untill now. So please, can you write anything that is actually worth reading about the fact we could loose the Salford Star or are you going to carry on calling vulnerable people "scroungers". You have o idea what it's like to be disabled and unable to work so don't try belittling people.// Salford Star I do hope you survive this horrendous Section 40.// Sharon Hooley, Independant Activist and Advocate for disabled people.
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 22:21:25 on 12 January 2017
@Stephen & Wrote, AKA "J". It is absolutely evident that both of you work in sync. In my opinion, your comments mimic that of a person who has working connections with the Salford Council and / or a Social Housing Provider. I have also noticed that you both have been personally attacking me online for some time, and certainly have put no effort, whatsoever, into debating Section 40 as adults. As far as me sponging off the system, you might want to look at why it is I am no longer working and it has a great deal to do with the Salford Council. If I had not moved to Salford, I can assure you that my health would be good enough to work, thus not having to claim benefits. My physical injuries are man made, not naturally caused. I have also noticed, in my opinion, that you both like to spin topics and insults to your advantage, thus misleading the general public in the process. I too could spin a lie to sound like the truth, but I choose not too. It called being ethical combined with professional integrity. So you have attacked an Autistic Adult Online, discussed me instead of the article which concerned Section 40, have tried to spin to the general public that being a good father somehow means I have sponged off the benefit system, when the real story is that you have attacked a mentally disabled person, who against the odds, passed two degrees, brought up two children, and supported them through university, ensured they can always afford to keep a roof over their heads, and made sure they never need to claim any benefits. My two children put more into society, often working voluntary as well as paid, and certainly make up for any shortfall in your taxes that pay for my disabled benefits. You also state that I do not represent the Autistic Community, when in fact I do. I often represent the Autistic & Physically Disabled Community, and the Autistic & Non Binary Community at Salford Council AIG Meetings, to which are closed to the general public. What is very surprising, and many reading your comments may not have known is that you do actually know me and have access to my private information, to which I have never disclosed to the general public. Even within Salford Star articles, nowhere does it state I am on benefits, of any kind. But both of you seem to know exactly what benefits I am on. Are you aware that if either of you work for a Council and / or Salford Housing Association, both of you could be investigated and imprisoned by the Information Commissioner, for "Breach of Data Protection". So yes, I do know who you both are, and completely understand that both of you made little or no attempt to discuss the merits of this Salford Star story. Your main goal was to attack and challenge my honor and integrity, while dragging my good name through the mud. What makes it worse is that you attack one mentally disabled person, using two neurotypical people. In my opinion, and in conclusion I think you are both online bullies, who have certainly not hit any of my nerves, as people like you are just not worth it. The only thing you comments bothered, was my iPad spellcheck system. Lol :) In future may I suggest that you either comment and debate rationally on the story at hand, and stop insulting those who have a backbone, and are proud to be a supporter of the Salford Star. Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
at 17:10:41 on 12 January 2017
I fully agree with Stephen, very very well said! People like Tahir make veiled threats of "I know who you are", Well you clearly don't! And thanks for admitting that my taxes have secured your children's future and are now paying for you!! And I know what someone in your role would have earnt and it certainly isn't anywhere near 5 times what I earn and I certainly won't ever need to sponge off the state! Why do you always turn important issues raised in The Star into personal attacks??
Stephen wrote
at 16:18:16 on 12 January 2017
I appear to have touched a nerve. It wasn't a put down, it was a question directed at you, not the autistic community who you do not represent the views of. I might also add that your autism is not an excuse to be rude and patronising. With regards to knowing me, you clearly have me mistaken with somebody else so I find it very unlikely that you know how much I earn. For information (to assure your obvious paranoia) I know none of the other commentators this or any of the news stories that appear on Salford Star. My views are completely independent. Without wanting to turn this thread into a personal debate, I find your comments very hippocritical. Are you trying to say using your own money to pay for your children's privelages, inluding paying of their mortgages so you now rely on benefits and state supported housing is not 'sponging'? I would suggest that is sponging of the worst kind! Having paid into the system does not give you the right to extract as much as you can back from it! If Salford Star and other small, independent publications provide the public with evidence based stories and opinion they have nothing to worry about with regards to s40. I fully support freedom of speech. I do not support libelous scaremongering and hate campaigns.
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 06:49:37 on 12 January 2017
@ Stephen & Wrote AKA "J". I went over to North Korea many years ago, as I was requested to do so by our government. (BNFL) I am a fully qualified Chartered Electrical Design Engineer, who specialises in the cooling of nuclear reactors. North Korea requested that 10 of the engineers from Sellafield visit their country, as they were having problems with their experimental nuclear reactor. And as far as sponging of the tax payer Stephen, I used to earn more money in a year, than you earn in 5 years. I only became seriously ill within the last 10 years. I have brought up a family on my own, put my kids through university and payed for everything, so when they left, they had no student loans to pay off. I used the last of my money 13 years ago to pay of both of their mortgages. My kids are now self sufficient financially and have turned out to be very good role models within their community. I am an Autistic Adult, and despite having a mental disability I have passed two Degrees in Electrical / Advanced Electronic Design Enginneering & Electrical, and until I became seriously ill, I have always payed my way, and also financially supported my son & daughter. I sacrificed living in a council tower block, so they would never have too. So I have not gone to Korea on Tax Payers Money, and if you were so well informed, you would know my state of my health does not allow me to travel any more. Besides that, I've paid more in taxes that you have, and yes, I know exactly who you are, and who "Wrote" AKA "J" is as well. Section 40 cannot be good for society as it means the closing of essential small publications like the Salford Star. So I stand firmly in what I have said previously, Section 40 is an attempt to silence the honest smaller publications from printing the truth about the dodgy dealings of those who work against the general publics best interests. To conclude I think you will find it is you who insults others. You "Spin Doctor Techniques" do not work on me. The Autistic Community, to which I am part of, are very literal people who certainly to not hide, mix their words nor opinions. If something is wrong the Autistic Community tend to be very honest and voice our concerns. That does not give you the right to put down others, and if you put down an Autistic Person, expect a very literal and honest response. This story was about Section 40 and the travesty it will bring to smaller publications. It certainly was not a story about me. So considers I know you and "Wrote" AKA "J" know each other, could you possibly not use my comments as an excuse to damage what's left of my integrity. Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Stephen wrote
at 14:05:23 on 11 January 2017
People like me? Apologies, but I wasn't aware we had met. It's flippant, unjustified views like yours that make me a supporter of article 40. Regulation does not equal dictatorship. You have too much time on your hands and need to get out more if you believe that to be the case. Was it my hard earned taxes that paid for your trip to North Korea or did you have a job at some point?
at 09:15:19 on 11 January 2017
Tahir you sound like a North Korean dictator!! Every time anyone disagrees with you, you attack them using terms such as 'small minded person' and worse! Get off your high horse and learn to respect the fact that other people have opinions and it's not all just about you! And to say we are like North Korea!! Joke! Oh go on sue me!
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 04:30:53 on 11 January 2017
P.s. Well done Maria!!!
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 04:30:49 on 11 January 2017
@Stephen. I absolute love people like you!!! Have you ever been to North Korea? I bet you have not!!! I have!!! And believe me, Salford, & Manchester City certainly resembles some provinces of North Korea. In some provinces of North Korea most people are scared to voice any concerns about their dictator lead government. Homelessness & poverty are rife. The rich find ways to fleece the poor of even more money, but provide little or no services to their citizens. The Police are corrupt and arrest those who dare speak the truth, and too top things off, it has become a criminal offence for any citizen to publicise a complaint against the North Korean Government. Does this sound familiar Stephen? So when you tell me Stephen that I am talking complete rubbish, please remember that some of us within Salford have travelled, and learned a great deal. In my opinion, and in conclusion, I feel that you are a small minded person, with little or no respect for others and their cultures. I have seen some of the worlds worst atrocities first hand, and as a result, I have a very good understanding of what is behind Section 40 and it does not have anything to do with protecting the general public from vexatious news stories. Section 40, in my opinion, is being used to censor small publications, so the general public are left blind and certainly kept in the dark about how the local council and the government spends tax payers money. That, dear Stephen smells like an attempt to censor the opinions of the general public, which in my opinion, constitutes an act of dictatorship, because the right of free speech is being censored by our government using Section 40. Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Maria wrote
at 20:50:24 on 10 January 2017
I sent in my objections to the relevant Govt Department a couple of weeks ago. Very bad news if Section 40 comes law.
at 20:50:20 on 10 January 2017
There is also the fact that so much of what is in the press is lying bullsh*t and journalists opinions which destroys many people's lives. Something needs to be done, but maybe something like prison sentences for those caught lying? Stifling the truth int a good thing but neither is free rein in publishing lies.
Stephen wrote
at 20:50:11 on 10 January 2017
So you would prefer newspapers to print what they want without regulation? Where is the protection for the people they report about? To suggest this is a step towards North Korea is ridiculous!
Tahir Chakotai (Independent Housing Advocate) wrote
at 15:31:42 on 10 January 2017
Section 40, in my opinion, is yet another attempt, by the Government, to protect the dodgy dealings of organisations who secretly work against the interests of the general public. It is also of my opinion that yet again, we are seeing another attempt, by the government to stop "freedom of speech". Therefore in conclusion and in my opinion, the government is starting their attempt at converting the current UK democratic Government system into a dictatorship regime. I therefore believe that Section 40 is attempt to turn the UK into a version of North Korea. For this reason Section 40 should not, and cannot be introduced. Small Publications, such as The Salford Star, need to be allowed to report and expose those that work against all of our best interests. This is a Human Right. If Section 40 is introduced, how will we ever find out about those who spend the tax payers money inappropriately, or who is building what, where, and at who's expense. In my opinion, I feel that the government should stop perverting the media and justice system, and put their time and efforts into resolving problems like homelessness, poverty, unlawful eviction, and unreasonable social care budget cuts, that leave the most vulnerable in society, without adequate care and support. Kindest Regards, Tahir Chakotai, (Independent Housing Advocate).
Please enter your comment below:
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
Recent comments
Really fun day. ... [more]
Well come on then, what are we gonna get for £4million? Or is this "confidential"?... [more]
This is the best news I have heard in a long time. We must make sure we keep Stephen and the Star out there finding out what is g... [more]
article: John Cooper Clarke On Life In Higher Broughton.
I am desperately trying to find photos of Bangor st I am desperately trying to find photos of Bangor st mum lived at no... [more]
so whats all the secrecy about ? Is this money a SLUSH fund ? WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO KNOW ITS OUR MONEY ... [more]


Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome


More articles...


Star date: 11th December 2018


Panto On The Park
Sunday 16th December 12noon-3pm
Green Grosvenor Park, Lower Broughton (suggested donation £1-£2)

This Sunday, 16th December, Up Ere Theatre Group will be performing their own version of Salford's Cinderella in a heated marquee at Green Grosvenor Park in Lower Broughton. There'll also be performances from dance troupes Salford Aces, Urban Angels and JD Dance, plus lots of stalls, face painting and more.

Full details here...


Star date: 10th December 2018


After two auctions, two exhibitions and a pop-up shop over just ten days, the immediate future of the Salford Star has been saved, with around £3,000 raised by the community.

At Salford Shopping Centre yesterday, over £1,000 was raised as actor and long time Salford Star contributor, Nigel Pivaro conducted an auction of Salford relics and memorabilia... "This isn't just about raising money for the Salford Star" said Nigel "It's also symbolic in terms of raising awareness of what we've done over the years...shining the torch where councils, developers and companies don't like it shone..."

Full details here...


Star date: 9th December 2018


Tony Kinsella - More Jokes about Girls and Chocolate
Sunday 9th December
Bolton Socialist Club

Eccles comic Tony Kinsella debuts a show dedicated to The Undertones at the Bolton Socialist Club tonight. Ian Leslie checks out the laughs...

Full details here...


Star date: 8th December 2018


Salford Star Exhibition, Auction and Event
With Nigel Pivaro, Simon Williams, Chris Flynn and Sandra Bouguerch
Sunday 9th December 10am - 4pm (events from 1:30pm/auction around 3pm)
Salford Shopping Centre (next to Lloyds Bank)

Tomorrow sees the final day of the Salford Star pop-up shop and exhibition, with an auction hosted by Nigel Pivaro of weird and wonderful Salford relics and bargain Christmas presents; plus street poetry from the spirit of Salford himself, Simon Williams, songs by the ace Chris Flynn and a Party On performance piece for all the family by artist Sandra Bouguerch.

Full details here...


Star date: 8th December 2018


Salford Star Auction and Events
Sunday 9th December from 1pm
Salford Shopping Centre (next to Lloyds Bank)

The great Salford Star Auction takes place tomorrow, Sunday 9th December at the Star pop-up shop and exhibition at Salford Precinct. It's being conducted by Nigel Pivaro, with events from 1pm and the auction around 2:30pm.

Lots include a Holiday With The Salford Star (plus a night in a dangerously cladded tower block), the original Salford Star (£1,000,000 ono), artworks and photos, prints, amazing children's items from the Savannah-Rose Collection and loads more...

Full details here...


written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx