Rent? Boy, what a fiasco!

A day after David Laws resigned as Chief Secretary to the Treasury after fiddling his expenses as previously reported... his replacement, Danny Alexander is reported to have avoided paying Capital Gains Tax on a £300,000 second home purchased at public expense.

Well, when are we all going to be in this together? If we remember correctly, wasn't the 'Boy' George Osborne also culpable in this regard?

ADDENDUM: One day later it seems that the non-payment of CGT is only a part of it... It now transpires that Danny 'Boy' Alexander has claimed over £13,000 in travel expenses... get this, for his wife!?!?!

Well, they seem to be in IT together... if the IT they are in.... is the public purse!

Treasury Chief Secretary fiddles...

... whilst gleefully cutting funding to the public sector.

As reported today in all the press, millionaire banker and LibDem David Laws, the ConDem government Chief Secretary of the Treasury has been renting accommodation at public expense to the tune of over £40,000, from his partner in breech of a 2006 parliamentary rule expressly forbidding such arrangements.

He says he has done nothing wrong... because it is all about his private life!

We say it is actually all about our money and his greed.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7139806.ece

ConDem'd Exorsist?

You could make it up, but it would not be half as funny as reality as the following report in todays Guardian demonstrates.

A high-flying prospective Conservative MP, credited with shaping many of the party's social policies, founded a church that tried to "cure" homosexuals by driving out their "demons" through prayer.

Philippa Stroud (pictured), who is likely to win the Sutton and Cheam seat on Thursday and is head of the Centre for Social Justice, the thinktank set up by the former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, has heavily influenced David Cameron's beliefs on subjects such as the family. A popular and energetic Tory, she is seen as one of the party's rising stars.

The CSJ reportedly claims to have formulated as many as 70 of the party's policies. Stroud has spoken of how her Christian faith has motivated her to help the poor and of her time spent working with the destitute in Hong Kong. On her return to Britain, in 1989, she founded a church and night shelter in Bedford, the King's Arms Project, that helped drug addicts and alcoholics. It also counselled gay, lesbian and transsexual people.

Abi, a teenage girl with transsexual issues, was sent to the church by her parents, who were evangelical Christians. "Convinced I was demonically possessed, my parents made the decision to move to Bedford, because of this woman [Stroud] who had come back from Hong Kong and had the power to set me free," Abi told the Observer.

"She wanted me to know all my thinking was wrong, I was wrong and the so-called demons inside me were wrong. The session ended with her and others praying over me, calling out the demons. She really believed things like homosexuality, transsexualism and addiction could be fixed just by prayer, all in the name of Jesus."

Read more here.

The ConDems will set out their plans in the Queens speech today

There will be announcements about overhauls to the benefits system, health and education and there will be gerrymandering of the electoral system.

However, following yesterdays announcements about £6.2 billion pounds cuts in the public sector and further swingeing cuts to come, you might think that an overhaul of our tax system might be in order, especially given that it is estimated that as much as £120 billion pounds a year goes uncollected or is the subject of tax avoidance and fraud. Indeed, this revenue shortfall is some 20 times the value of the cuts already announced and around three quarters of the total national defecit! But an overhaul of a tax system seems to be nowhere on the ConDems agenda. Now why is that?

Each and every one of us, civil and public servants pays our tax and national insurance at source. Further, due to the nature of the beast, our employer ensures that we, each and every one of us, fulfills our council tax obligations. This is pretty much the case for every other 'employed' person in the country... that is around 90% of the population that pays its tax and NI at source.

So who is it that does not pay, avoids or otherwise defrauds the revenue of something like three-quarters the total national debt? Well, that would be the richest 10%. The backers and controllers of the ConDems... and in the case of the cabinet, well, nearly all of them.

It is quite clear that the increasing wealth of the top earners (estimated at around 30% last year) has been derived directly from the public purse in its support to the ailing financial institutions. There was no discernable growth in the economy, the markets fell and property prices remained largely stagnant. The only source of monies since 2008 has been the public injection of cash into the banks and finance institutions. Therefore it is from our taxes that their wealth has come. Surely they should pay tax on it, like the rest of us have done? After all, we are all in this together!

The ConDems plans for defence

Last autumn the then shadow defence secretary, Liam Fox met with the MoD permanent under secretary, Bill Jeffrey. Reportedly, at the meeting Mr Fox demanded MoD draw up plans to cut 20,000 civil service jobs to be enacted upon the election of a Conservative government. At the same time it was reported that the Conservatives were planning a 25% reduction in defence spending – none of which is to come from reducing military numbers, but rather by sweeping cuts applied to the 89,300-strong workforce of civilian staff employed.

After his autumn outburst, we wrote to Mr Fox giving him the facts on the civilian population in our department - MoD civilian numbers falling every single quarter from 109,050 in April 2004 to 85,730 in July 2009.

Now in post as our new defence secretary, it appears Mr Fox has chosen to ignore our letter and the views of the 45,000 workers in our department that our union represents. Today the Tory/Lib Dem coalition agreement, “Our programme for government” has been published. Although there is absolutely no detail of how this will happen, it claims “We will aim to reduce Ministry of Defence running costs by at least 25%“.

It is clear to our union that further cuts in numbers can only be achieved by halting outputs, as the department’s salami slicing is now unsustainable and threatens future defence programmes. Further major reductions are already in the pipeline, leaving some parts of the department at the point of collapse.

Our union will work with any politician and political party who truly believes in quality public services, however, our union is equally clear – real lives will be damaged, real people hurt and real communities devastated by cuts of these nature. Many of the civil servants that they arrogantly call ‘pen pushers’ have dedicated the whole of their working lives to defence and all of our staff make critical contributions to supporting the front line.

The PCS MoD group conference has just concluded in Brighton. There were several motions heard regarding the threats to our jobs, sites, communities, terms and conditions. We now have a very clear bargaining agenda for the coming period -

· To meet with MoD ministers and seek an agreement on a new redundancy and pre-redundancy process that reflects national agreements on job security and where possible improves on them.
· To demand a process to ensure people management issues are treated as a priority, are properly resourced and that TLBs work together to manage surplus staff area by area.
· To negotiate an agreement that ensures that the redeployment pool is properly managed so that it does not become a waiting room for redundancy.
· To ensure that any attempts to enforce mobility moves are resisted and to ensure that an agreement is negotiated to reflect this.
· To negotiate an agreement with the department that protects members from compulsory redundancy where their work is privatised.
· To ensure that all MoD proposals regarding cuts and privatisation are properly equality impact assessed.
· Publish a series of special reports in Defender and via members’ briefings setting out our position and highlighting the damage that further MoD civilian job cuts will do to the economy, to the department and to our members’ lives.
· To clearly set out at every level the case for civil servants and to call for a programme of civilianisation of jobs and a review of non deployable military personnel.
· To campaign to ensure greater accountability and scrutiny in respect of the equipment programme that currently spends billions of pounds some of which is better spent elsewhere.
· To campaign for an end to wasteful and failed privatisations.
· To fully support action that members want to take to defend their jobs and to develop and publish an industrial action strategy to lead the fight to protect jobs and communities.

This will not be an easy fight or an easy time to be a civil servant. However, the magnificent support from members who took three days of industrial action earlier this year, alongside the judicial review victory shows that where we stand together, we can win together.

Please show this circular to any non-members who you work alongside. Ask them to join our union. Only our union and the wider trade union movement will be fighting for public services from now on.

The ConDems first strike.

It is reported in todays papers that the new ConDemmed 'government' will cost many of us at least £1200 in increased taxes, increased national insurance and a VAT increase.

Couple that with a pay freeze in the public sector and it is clear that the ConDem's are going to be an expensive mistake for many voters... especially those that voted LibDem to keep the Tories out!

At least we know who those masked men are... even if Clegg & Co do not.

2010 NEC elections results

The independent scrutineers’ report on voting in the above elections, which closed at 12 noon on Thursday 6th May 2010, is as follows:

President

Number of eligible voters: 287,506
Votes cast by post: 31,453
Total number of votes cast: 31,453
Turnout: 10.9%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 634
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 30,819

Result (1 to elect)

GODRICH, Janice (Department for Work & Pensions) 15,909 - ELECTED
BREEN, Diane (Department for Work & Pensions) 9,729
MOLONEY, John (Department for Transport) 5,181


Deputy President & Vice-Presidents


Number of eligible voters: 287,506
Votes cast by post: 31,453
Total number of votes cast: 31,453
Turnout: 10.9%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 631
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 30,822

Result (4 to elect)

The count was conducted in accordance with the constraints set out in Principal Rule 10A of the Union.

BEAN, Dave (HM Revenue & Customs) 16,166 Elected
MORRIS, Glenys (Ministry of Justice) 15,118 Elected
BOND, Sue (Equality & Human Rights Commission) 14,546 Elected
McINALLY, John (Department for Work & Pensions) 14,278 Elected
BRYSON, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 13,644
KURUP, Ravi (HM Revenue & Customs) 11,395
HENDERSON, Andrew (D.B.I.S.) 9,650
BROWNE, Marjorie (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,856


Ordinary Members


Number of eligible voters: 287,506
Votes cast by post: 31,453
Total number of votes cast: 31,453
Turnout: 10.9%
Number of votes found to be invalid: 565
Total number of valid votes to be counted: 30,888
Result (30 to elect)

The count was conducted in accordance with the constraints set out in Principal Rule 10A of the Union.

MERRY, Lorna (HM Revenue & Customs) 13,255 Elected
McFADDEN, Dominic (HM Revenue & Customs) 13,223 Elected
McHUGH, Kevin (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,866 Elected
WESLEY, Hector (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,698 Elected
LICENSE, Neil (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,584 Elected
KELLY, Emily (Land Registry) 12,277 Elected
HOLBOURNE, Zita (ACAS) 12,267 Elected
REID, Andy (HM Revenue & Customs) 12,262 Elected
BROWN, Paula (Health & Safety Executive) 12,204 Elected
HALL, Sam (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,153 Elected
FERGUSON, Mary (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,130 Elected
COMER, Steve (UK Border Agency) 12,113 Elected
BROWN, Alan (Department for Work & Pensions) 12,101 Elected
GEDLING, Cheryl (Scottish Government) 12,009 Elected
ALBERT, Ian (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,827 Elected
WILLIAMS, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,795 Elected
BREEN, Diane (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,734 Elected
LLOYD, Marion (D.B.I.S.) 11,727 Elected
DENNIS, Alan (Ministry of Defence) 11,586 Elected
BRYSON, Rob (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,524 Elected
GREENWAY, Kevin (Ministry of Justice) 11,519 Elected
KHALIF, Adam (Department for Work & Pensions) 11,461 Elected
CHILDS, Eddie (Ministry of Justice) 11,423 Elected
COLLIS, Simon (HM Revenue & Customs) 11,325 Elected
FRANKLAND-BARBER, Lynda (HM Revenue & Customs) 11,309 Elected
WILDE, Jake (HM Revenue & Customs) 11,293 **
DUNN, Joy (Scottish Government) 10,974 Elected
GREEN, Jackie (Ministry of Justice) 10,722 Elected
CONWAY, Tony (Government Offices) 10,717 Elected
JAMIESON, John (Registers of Scotland) 10,620 Elected
BAKER, Mark (Planning Inspectorate) 10,539* Elected*
WILLIAMS, Paul (Driving Standards Agency) 10,534*
DERBYSHIRE, Michael (Ministry of Justice) 10,423
KURUP, Ravi (HM Revenue & Customs) 10,386
MORRISON, Chris (Capgemini) 10,386
BARROWCLOUGH, Rachel (Department for Work & Pensions) 10,333
RICHARDS, David (Child Maintenance Enforcement Comm.) 10,329
MAGEE, Andy (HM Revenue & Customs) 9,937
FULLER, Howard (Department for Work & Pensions) 9,676
COVINGTON, Mary (D.B.I.S.) 9,290
NIMMO, Alan (Child Maintenance Enforcement Comm.) 9,181
DODD, Owen (Home Office Pay & Pension Services) 9,129
KANG, Gurmit (Department for Work & Pensions) 9,120
KIRKHAM, Frank (Ministry of Defence) 8,890
WRIGHT, Annette (Department for Work & Pensions) 8,847
HASKINGS, James (Cabinet Office) 8,801
COX, Joe (Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission) 8,761
LORD, Chris (D.B.I.S.) 8,738
HARKINS, Bernard James (Crown Office & Procurator F.S.) 8,735
GIESCHEN, Hubert (Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) 8,345
REYNOLDS, James (D.B.I.S.) 8,185
CAMPBELL, Moira (Child Maintenance Enforcement Comm.) 8,145
HENDERSON, Andrew (D.B.I.S) 7,922
HUZZARD, Rosie (Department for Work & Pensions) 7,321
LYONS, Gerry (HM Revenue & Customs) 7,013
LAIDLAW, Bev (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,904
RAFTERY, Theresa (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,614
BROWNE, Marjorie (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,607
BIRD, Nick (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,481
HUNTER, Peter (HM Revenue & Customs) 6,464
HULME, Christine (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,331
CATTEN, Sue (Department for Work & Pensions) 6,110
MOLONEY, John (Department for Transport) 5,906
THOMPSON, George (Department for Work & Pensions) 5,357
JOHNSON, Karen (D.C.L.G.) 4,996
RIGBY, Mike (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,717
KENNY, Martin (Government Offices) 4,669
HICKEY, Christopher (D.C.L.G.) 4,659
CROFT, Teresa (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,630
DUNBAR, Chris (Department for Work & Pensions) 4,344
OKONKWO, Damian (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,314
McNAUGHT, George Anthony (Metropolitan Police Service) 4,051
WINZAR, Stuart (Metropolitan Police Service) 3,853
IQBAL, Jawid (Highways Agency) 3,798
MEGONE, Tim (Treasury Solicitors Department) 3,538
VINCENT, Dave (Ministry of Justice) 2,964

*votes confirmed by recount.

**not elected due to limit of eight elected candidates from any one employer.

MAJOR VICTORY FOR UNION OVER PLANS TO CUT CIVIL SERVICE REDUNDANCY PAY

The Public and Commercial Services union has won a major legal victory against government plans to drastically cut civil service redundancy payments.

Following a two-day judicial review hearing in the High Court in April, Mr Justice Sales ruled today (10 May) that the previous government acted unlawfully when it introduced, without PCS’s agreement, a new redundancy scheme reducing the rights staff had accrued over time.

In what is a dramatic win for the union’s 270,000 public sector members, the judgement quashes a revised scheme that the government had sought to impose from 1 April.

It means the next government, when it is established, must reopen negotiations with the union if it is to agree a new arrangement that protects existing members’ rights.

The union has always maintained the changes to the civil service compensation scheme, which governs payments in the event of redundancy and early retirement, would have made it easier and cheaper to cut tens of thousands of civil service jobs and privatise more of our public services. It has also argued consistently that the government had no authority to act independently.

When PCS members took three days of strike action in March, including on budget day, Gus O’Donnell described it as “misguided” and Tessa Jowell, then the civil service minister said the “time for talking is over”.

Despite widespread anger among the government’s workforce, and opposition from 176 MPs including 121 Labour backbenchers, changes aimed at saving £500 million over three years were forced through. If they had been allowed to stand they would in many cases have robbed civil servants of thousands of pounds if they were forced out of their job.

Strike action was suspended during the election - though the union continued to campaign in targeted constituencies across the UK - but PCS now says a failure to comply with the ruling would risk angering civil servants still further, leading to the possibility of more industrial action.

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said:

"Our members in the civil and public services refused to sit back and watch their terms and conditions being ripped up in front of their eyes. Our members in the civil and public services refused to sit back and watch their terms and conditions being ripped up in front of their eyes. This ruling is a huge tribute to them for mounting one of the most impressive campaigns this union has seen, in the face of some disgraceful criticism from their employer and ministers.

We have always accepted that changes are necessary but all we ever asked is that they were fair and protected those who have given loyal service. We will now be knocking on the door of the next government to remind ministers they are legally obliged to reach an agreement with us. If they do not meet their obligations, the union will have to consider further industrial and legal action.”

Hugh Lanning, PCS deputy general secretary, called on the next government to comply with the judgement and enter into talks as a matter of urgency to reach a fair agreement for all civil servants, adding:

“This is a major victory for our members, who were being deprived of their rights by a government that refused to talk and reach agreement. Let’s hope the new government obeys the law.”

Richard Arthur, head of trade union law at Thompsons Solicitors, said:

“The law says that the government can’t change redundancy rights which have already accrued for civil servants unless the unions agree. As the judge said, this was unsurprising in the circumstances of civil service employment. PCS did not agree to the new scheme and so it was found to be unlawful.”

Eton Rifles.

David 'Call me Dave' Cameron's endorsement of The Jam’s 1979 anthem, The Eton Rifles, which the Conservative leader fondly recalled singing along to whilst studying at, er, Eton, has prompted a response from its creator.

Paul Weller popped up on Channel 4 News to point out that it was actually a song about class warfare specifically attacking Etonian privilege.

“If you can’t take the time or have the intellect to see what the song’s about, you haven’t got much chance of running the country, have you?” sniped Weller.

Bullseye!

Greece in ruins, but?

The Greek economy is heading towards insolvency with the EU looking to shore it up with massive loans only on proviso that the Greek people take savage cuts to their pay, pensions, jobs and services.

Meanwhile it is reported that wealthy Greeks are driving up London property prices in the £2 million plus range. In fact that end of the market has seen prices rise by some 21% in the last year... with wealthy Greeks accounting for 6% of all sales in the capital.

But whose money are they spending? If Greece is near bankrupt, how is it that all these wealthy Greeks can afford luxury property in London?

Voting Tory? Then get the facts...

If Cameron wins, he will not only thwart any move to fairer voting, he will act fast to rig the system in his favour. Even neutrals agree that his plan to cut the number of MPs by 10% – presented as a mere cost-cutting measure – will be one of the grossest acts of gerrymandering in British political history. Cameron will redraw the boundaries so that his rivals lose seats and he gains them, locking in a semi-permanent Conservative majority. Reform of our absurd, unelected second chamber will be postponed indefinitely, enabling Cameron to pack the Lords with his mates and sugar daddies, including perhaps a few more of those businessmen who so obligingly sided with the Conservatives in condemning Labour's plans for national insurance.

The Tories say they've ringfenced health spending, but check the small print. They plan to drop Labour's guarantee on waiting times. No longer will any patient be sure to see a cancer specialist within two weeks: under the Tories, that decision will be left to the consultant. Fine for the sharp-elbowed middle class, who are used to barging their way to the front of the queue. Not so good for the poorest who, all the data shows, struggle to get the most from public services.

Despite all the austerity talk, the Tories have clung to their promise to give an inheritance tax break to the 3,000 richest families in the country. In the words of Nick Clegg, it's the "double-millionaires" Cameron wants to help. And yet, given the hole in the public finances, cash will have to come from somewhere. The obvious source – not that the Conservative leader has ever been challenged on it – is an increase in VAT. That's the most regressive of all taxes, inflicting disproportionate pain on the poorest: pain that will only deepen with the coming Tory assault on tax credits. A third cause for alarm can be expressed in three words: Chancellor George Osborne.

This last downturn has not quite felt like the worst since the Great Depression, whatever the economists say. Unemployment, house repossessions and bankruptcies are all fractions of what they were in the 1990s recession. That's not by accident. It's a function of Labour's active interventionism, which has sought to reduce the impact of the downturn on those at the sharpest end. Such state activity clashes with every Conservative instinct. Cameron still describes government as more problem than solution. Last time the Tories were in charge, dealing with a recession that was actually much less severe, the pain was greater and the weakest suffered most. There is nothing in current Tory policy – despite Cameron's final debate plea to the camera that it's "the most vulnerable, the most frail and the poorest" he truly cares about – to suggest it won't be like that again.

Lancaster & Fleetwood Candidates CQT

Last Wednesday the main candidates in the Lancaster & Fleetwood ward took part in a question time organised by PCS in the Milto Street Centre. The following is a selection of their answers to a few questions:

Question 1: With all the main parties advocating cuts in public services, what assurances can you give me that I will still have a job in 12 months time?

Conservative:
· No party can make ultimate commitment to job security.
· Pay freeze in public sector over £18k
· Committed to stopping NI increase which would severely impact on NHS wage bill.
· Public Services need to be more efficient.
· There is a budget deficit crisis that needs dealing with.

Lib Dem:
· Wage bill majority of public spending.
· Look at where services are delivered and cut jobs strategically through voluntary redundancy.
· Senior Mgt reduction undertaken through negotiation with interested parties.
· Pay restraint of 2.5% or £400 per annum across the board.
· Public sector wages are an essential part of this constituencies economy, have been keeping it afloat in the downturn.

Labour:
· NI increase would mean that the govt can maintain investment in public services.
· Direct threat from Conservatives as they would not implement this.
· TUs should be included and negotiated with on all proposed changes to public services.
· As a trade unionist candidate, Civil Servants in this constituency should be assured that I will be looking out for their interests.

Green
· Raise taxation on the rich and large corporations.
· Cutting public services harms the most vulnerable in society.
· The low tax burden on the rich under this govt has led to public services being under-funded.
· Anyone earning over £110k would face a 50% tax rate.
· Impose an environmental tax to raise funds.
· Scrap Trident and ID cards to raise funds.
· Ordinary people are paying for financial sector mistakes, this should not continue.
· Leading economists are advising against the other parties approaches as could lead to a double-dip recession.

Question 2: What would the parties do to address the impending oil crisis outlined in the J.O.E report?

Labour:
· Will look at renewable energy including nuclear, wind farms, tidal barrages.
· Need to reduce carbon emissions.
· No clear answer but can’t afford to rely on fossil fuels.
· These new energy sources would see jobs being created in the constituency and 1.2million jobs nationally.

Conservative:
· Agree with Labour candidate.
· Shortage of fossil fuels and dependency on countries such as Russia are not helpful.
· Nuclear provides a secure option.
· Support investment in electric cars etc to reduce dependency on oil.

Green:
· Against nuclear power as it is dangerous and still no clear plan as to how to dispose of waste.
· The Green new deal would see investment in renewable energy and is a jobs rich policy.
· Would create 1m new jobs in this area.
· Supports our tax gap pledge in order to generate revenue, an easy win.

Lib Dem:
· Vitally important that public sector react to energy crisis to ensure sustainability.
· Support 10/10 Friends of the Earth initiative and has implemented it in his role on city council.
· Initiatives like 10/10 improve working conditions, bring savings and improve services for the public.
· Reducing energy consumption in public sector is essential and works.

Question 3: Do the candidates feel there is an increased apathy among the electorate?

Lib Dem:
· Not seeing apathy on doorstep.
· Leaders’ debates have seen a surge in interest especially among young people.
· Did see apathy around the time of Euro elections though as MPs expenses scandal broke in the right wing press and democracy suffered as a result.
· Would bring about electoral reform through single transferrable vote option.

Conservative:
· Real cynicism among electorate.
· TV debates have lifted the situation and more people getting involved as a result.
· Does not feel there will be as low a turn-out as expected.
· Need for meaningful Electoral Reform – constituent representation.

Labour:
· Recession and expenses has caused disengagement in electorate, the lowest point being during European elections.
· Economy has improved and changes to expenses procedure been implemented to improve transparency has improved things.
· TV debates has grown enthusiasm.
· Electoral Reform is essential and included in Labour manifesto, they will abolish House of Lords, form a second chamber which will be proportionally representative and hold referendum on constituency reform.

Green:
· Feels people are despairing and are looking for change.
· Green Party should have had a platform within Leaders debates.
· In 1997 public were excited by Labour landslide but have been let down.
· Green Party would see electoral reform through proportional representation which the Conservative party are against.

Question 4: Do GM crops cause more problems than they solve?

Green:
· GM crops causing serious problems not a solution.
· Seeds are being patented which is having a devastating effect on Farmers.

Conservative:
· Agree with Green Party.
· Need to improve food labelling to make it clearer.

Lib Dem:
· Agree with all of the previous candidates.
· Need to move towards more locally sourced food.

Labour:
· Agree with all the other candidates’ points.
· Need to ensure we know our food sources.