Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
سُعدت بالتوقيع اتفاقية شراكة بين شركة ابراهيم المشعل للمحاماة شركة ابراهيم المشعل للمحاماة ووزارة الصناعة والثروة المعدنية وزارة الصناعة والثروة المعدنية واعتمدنا من قبل الوزارة كمقدمي خدمات الملكية الفكرية والقانونية لـمستفيدي "برنامج المنتجات الصناعية والتعدينية المبتكرة" خلال فعالية مستقبل الابتكار الصناعي والتعديني في مدينة الرياض. ويهدف هذا البرنامج إلى... show more
16,900 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)
12 Kommentare
@almeshal_law @mimgov كل التوفيق ومزيد من التألق سعادة الزميل القدير .
@almeshal_law @mimgov أسعدك الله دكتورنا العزيز وشكرا لكم على دعمكم 🌷
The Future of IoT Devices: Analog Computing and the Fusion of Analog-Digital Processors #tech #news
@almeshal_law @mimgov ما شاء الله تبارك الرحمن الف الف مبروك اخي العزيز استاذ/ ابراهيم خطوة هامه وانتم تستاهلون ونتوقع لكم التميز والنجاح .. وفالكم التوفيق .
@almeshal_law @mimgov الله يبارك فيك أستاذنا ابو الوليد وبارك الله فيكم وفي جهودكم وجهود الزملاء الافاضل في الهيئة المتميزة، وبفضل الله جهودكم هي دعم وتمكين للزملاء المهنة 🌷
@almeshal_law @mimgov ماشاء الله الف مبارك فالكم التوفيق والسداد
@almeshal_law مبارك شيخ إبراهيم انت مكسب
@almeshal_law حبيبنا ودكتورنا العزيز الله يحفظك ويبارك فيك
@almeshal_law @mimgov موفق ، ومسدد ، مزيدا من تألق والتقدم شيخنا القدير 💐
@almeshal_law @mimgov حبيبنا واستاذنا الغالي أسعدك الله على مشاعركم الطيبة وأنتم مكسب لكل شخص عرفكم🌷🌷
@almeshal_law @mimgov تهانينا، وإلى مزيد نجاحات
@almeshal_law @mimgov كل الشكر والتقدير لك أ.سمر
![COMMONS HOUSING SELECT COMMITTEE: STATEMENT FROM FREE LEASEHOLDERS 3/3/26 Today, we told Parliament the truth. About the cynical games Conservative and Labour governments have been playing with your homes, money and lives. It was awkward. We had to motor through to cover as many points as humanely possible in a short time. Sorry if we didn’t cover yours. We are the insurgents against a very closed and broken political system. We will go away when they finally free the people from the property servitude of leasehold. Until then, we will keep challenging the official line and holding power to account, however uncomfortable that may be. Parliament has been talking about abolishing leasehold, a legacy of serfdom, since the 1880s, before working men and women had the right to vote. In 2026, we keep hearing it’s “complicated” and our politicians need more time because they might get sued by the wealthy landowners. What happened to the will of the people? Isn’t Parliament sovereign? Wasn’t that what all the Brexit lark was about? And doesn’t this Labour government have the second biggest parliamentary majority in its 126-year history as the so-called working people’s party? Keir Starmer can do a TikTok stunt on ground rents. But he can’t run away from the truth. His government are peddling a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill that has been purged of policies that you voted for in the The Labour Party manifesto. Policies promised again in the July 2024 King’s Speech: the remaining Law Commission of England and Wales enfranchisement and Right to Manage recommendations. So you can finally “take back control”. The Starmer administration appears to be captured by the deep-pocketed freeholder lobby and property cartels. And the Prime Minister is in thrall to the hand-wringing lawyers who bleat on about the risk of judicial review and ECHR lawfare, as if the rights of extortionists, many offshore, and lofty international law matter more than the British people being looted in their homes and what election manifestos have promised time and time again. This government claims that they are ending the feudal leasehold system. Instead, they keep it on life support by protecting money-for-nothing ground rents until 2068. We’ll have flying cars before feudalism is banished from our homes! And buried away in the small print, the Labour government concedes our point: “leasehold as a tenure will not disappear overnight and it will be a feature of the housing market for many years to come.” The government is also siding with the leasehold grifters by failing to restrict development value in the draft legislation, which means many flat leaseholders will never be able to afford to buy their freehold, something that must happen before conversion to commonhold. Remember, the freeholders’ main lobby group, the Residential Freehold Association, admits that the typical freeholder owns just 2.5% capital value in a block of flats. These wealth-destroying corporates own a sliver of our homes and have the cheek to talk about their human rights. We are not Mugabeists. We will, of course, pay a fair rate to compensate the freeholder to leave our homes for good. But demanding more of our money so they can thwart our right to buy them out, on the basis that they could theoretically build a skyscraper in the garden, is taking the mick and must end, as the government first promised in 2021. Don’t take our word on the scam of freeholders invoking development value to block leaseholders’ bid for self-rule. Barrister Nicola Muir, of Tanfield Chambers, has written that “it is amazing what developments landlords believe are possible and the profits they claim they will generate”, citing a telling example from practice: “The landlord initially claimed £34 million for the alleged potential to build a skyscraper in the front garden of the block. Such claims can obviously be a deterrent to leaseholders, who probably have no intention of developing.” And we were the ONLY campaign group that urged the Housing, Communities & Local Government Committee to ensure that this government sets enfranchisement rates high in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, to the benefit of leaseholders. There is a major risk that, due to the influence peddling of ground rent grifters and their lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall, the government will fail to implement these long-awaited reforms already on the statute books. Matthew Pennycook MP promised in November 2024 to put enfranchisement rates out to public consultation last summer, but it never happened. And if the government is forced to begin the enfranchisement changes in the 2024 Act, it will likely set the deferment and capitalisation rates artificially low, stuffing freeholders’ mouths with gold when desperate leaseholders try to extend their leases or buy out the freehold. These deferment and capitalisation rates are already derived from freeholder-friendly case law, specifically the 2006 Upper Tribunal decision known as Sportelli, with the deferment rate set at 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%. While the 2024 Act is vague on what these rates should be, we know that investors routinely buy freeholds at auction or directly from developers at higher rates than those implied by Sportelli, meaning they pay significantly less than leaseholders are already required to pay under statutory schemes with the low Sportelli rates. For example, an analysis of Allsop Ground Rent Auctions found that investors have been paying an average 9% capitalisation rate for the ground rent in freehold titles – well above Sportelli’s 6%. This situation is clearly unfair, and there is significant industry lobbying to keep the deferment and capitalisation rates low, i.e. below the going market rates, so that freeholders are excessively compensated by leaseholders. Once the rates are set in the 2024 Act, they remain fixed for ten years, creating jeopardy that they will be set to the disadvantage of leaseholders, who are less organised and resourced than industry interests to influence policy. If the rates are set substantially below Sportelli rates, the savings from other provisions of the 2024 Act – such as the removal of marriage value, the 0.1% restriction on ground rents, and the end of the requirement to pay the freeholder’s reasonable legal and valuation costs – would be more than cancelled out, leaving leaseholders paying more than they do today under the current rules. Minister Pennycook highlighted this risk while in opposition during the passage of the 2024 Act, stating that Labour “remain[s] convinced that this government, or a future one, could be lobbied by vested interests to set a deferment rate that will be punitive to leaseholders.” He proposed an amendment on the deferment rate to guide the Secretary of State, requiring that “in setting the deferment rate, the Secretary of State must have regard to the desirability of encouraging leaseholders to extend their lease at the lowest possible cost”, although the amendment was not passed. This policy ought to be in the draft Bill, yet it remains absent. We are urging that the 2024 Act be amended to require that the enfranchisement rates must not fall below an absolute floor of the existing Sportelli rates (with the deferment rate of 4.75% for houses and 5.0% for flats, and a capitalisation rate of 6.0%). But leaseholders should really benefit from market rates, i.e. those which developers and investors already enjoy being significantly above Sportelli, to ensure that they do not pay excessive compensation to freeholders, as occurs under the current system, to buy their freehold or extend a lease. And this isn’t just about what goes into the algorithm for the online enfranchisement calculator under the 2024 Act, or about ending the development value scam, a reform dropped from the legislation after behind-the-scenes lobbying. We will not accept a failure to bring forward a Universal Right to Manage, as part of a glidepath to commonhold. Watch what our founder said about a well-connected landlord and tenant barrister who bragged to the property tribunal last year that he had worked on the Law Commission’s Right to Manage reforms, all while representing an offshore billionaire freeholder trying to block leaseholders’ quest for Right to Manage. It should be easy. But the leaseholders at this development had to spend £150,000 just to defend their no-fault right against this legal onslaught at the First-tier Tribunal. They won, but the freeholder is now appealing… Beyond Right to Manage reform, we need a Right to Participate in collective enfranchisement so that all flat leaseholders can buy a share of the freehold even if they miss out the first time when one group of neighbours has enough support to enfranchise the block. It is unfair for leaseholders to be locked out of decisions over the charges they pay and the services affecting their home when they are ready to buy their share of the freehold. Sorting this inequity was the will of Parliament with Right to Enfranchise provisions in the 2002 Act. It’s also what the Law Commission originally recommended before seemingly being pressured by vested interests to drop the policy from their final recommendations in 2020. Also, why on earth should leaseholders have to contort themselves to get 50% support of all unit-owners in a block? Satisfying the onerous 50% participation threshold is near impossible in bigger buildings and those with high levels of buy-to-let, yet scummy investors face no qualifying criteria when hoovering up the freeholds of our homes from developers or auctioneers behind our backs. Don’t patronise us with Lord Best’s scheme for managing agents. We want liberation, not regulation. There’s a reason both the freeholder and managing agent lobbies are gagging for the cosy Lord Best policy, which wasn’t promised in either the Labour manifesto or the King’s Speech. It will jack up leaseholders’ already sky-high service charges, repeat the cruel joke of the Building Safety Regulator, and keep freeholders and their managing agent cronies firmly in the ecosystem. At the same time, a statutory regulator of managing agents will no doubt restrict competition by keeping out small ethical new entrants. It will also allow the government to claim job done while failing to end leasehold. Even without leasehold abolition, leaseholders will still be denied rightful control of their service charges and the power to easily sack their managing agent - the real regulation needed to rein in rip-off service providers and put them out of business, not some powerless or captured regulator in Whitehall. Labour should be for the grafters. If the government wants to win back public support after the Gordon and Denton by-election drubbing, salvaging this draft legislation and swiftly commencing the 2024 Act must be its priority. Show that politics can be a force for good. Stand up to the ground rent grifters and offshore property mafia. Free leaseholders. 5.3 million households in England and Wales are watching.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2028949666432205114/media/HChK-xoXEAAI0u3.jpg)
![FULL DISCUSSION: Tucker, Botswana, Zimbabwe & Sierra Leone Leaders Clash on China, U.S. and Europe Tucker Carlson: Gentlemen, thank you for doing this. It’s awfully nice of you to do this. I’d just like to go right down the line. Um, and first to you, President Mnangagwa. Again, thanks. In as clear terms as you can, I wonder if you would, um, contrast your experience with China versus the Western powers. Do you think that Zimbabwe and other African countries, to be totally blunt, get a better deal from Chinese investment than they have with Western powers over the past 150 years? President Mnangagwa (Zimbabwe): Well, um, my view is that, um, initially as we became independent, we had, um, most of our development thrust was from the West. But as we evolved, we have also benefited from investment and cooperation from countries like China. But what are... I mean, the basic structure seems the same? Foreign powers extract mineral wealth from various African countries. But do you think that the arrangement that Zimbabwe and other countries currently have with China is better or worse for Zimbabwe than it was under, say, the Brits? President Mnangagwa (Zimbabwe): I think the premises upon which you construct your question... I don’t think is perfect. Yes, Zimbabwe is a sovereign state. And we move on the basis that gives us the best results for our resources. Whether it is relation with the West or the East, what is primarily important is what we ourselves, as an officer, are satisfied with. We don’t need to please the West or please the East. We please ourselves. Tucker Carlson: That seems like a good model for every sovereign country. President Mnangangwa, thank you for this. Do you think that there is a substantial difference? I’m just trying to understand from a Western perspective how the East does business in Africa versus how the West does. It may be too sensitive a topic to talk about out loud, but to the extent you have a view, you can share, would you? President Mnangangwa (Zimbabwe): I’m sure relations cannot be measured country by country. Yes, relations depend on the historical background of countries between one country and another. That’s the base on which relations grow and are nurtured. For us in Zimbabwe, yes, we are a former British colony, but we are very happy with the relations that have now developed with countries like China and so on. Yes, despite being a former British colony. Tucker Carlson: I think this may be one of these topics that's too difficult to talk about in public. Let me just ask you, President Bio, about one of the strengths of your country and the continent, which is its birth rate, which so far surpasses that of any other region in the world, and that seems like a strength. How has your country, Sierra Leone, but also many other countries in Africa, been able to maintain a birth rate at replacement when Europe, the US, Canada, and lots of other parts of the world have not been able to? President Bio (Sierra Leone): Thank you very much. I think, um, we are hard workers, and, uh, we work both in the day and at night. That is such great advice. It is essential to have, uh, young people and to keep the birth rate at the right level so that, uh, there is sustainability in development. What we do today, or as leaders, we provide the enabling environment, provide them with the tools, uh, the young people to navigate the world, which is extremely tough, complicated, and evolving and changing all the time. So it is our responsibility to bear that in mind. We have to plan ahead, be ahead of the curve, to be able to replace accordingly, so that we don’t have a gap in our development process. So we have been busy producing, um, as much as we can, a lot of good people, and we are investing in their education so that they are fit for purpose for a world that is becoming digital and of course going extremely to the edge of technological advancement. Tucker Carlson: If I could just ask a quick follow-up, uh, to you, Mr. President, do you keep track precisely of how many of your young, educated citizens leave and how many stay? Are you thinking hard about how to retain the smartest, most energetic people? President Bio (Sierra Leone): Definitely. Um, in fact, what, uh, my administration did was to make sure that, uh, we provide basic primary and secondary education free of charge to the citizens. Every child born in Sierra Leone, uh, can go to school, be, um, and finish high school without paying a penny. We don’t just provide tuition. We also make sure that we provide other essentials to make it possible for so that nobody has an excuse not to go to school. Because, um, in the 21st century, without education, definitely you can’t make it, and we do not just want to make it at the personal level, family level. We want to grow as a nation. We want to be, um, useful citizens of West Africa, um, the community that I chair today, but we also want to be useful citizens globally, useful citizens that can contribute to the world. So we are taking stock of that, and we are educating them, equipping them, in fact, I call education as an equip—equipment, a navigation equipment in a world that is becoming very, very complicated and complex. Tucker Carlson: Thank you, President Boko. If, as you look at young people in Botswana who are educated and energetic, what’s your pitch to them? What’s your argument to them to stay in Botswana, not go to South Africa, Europe, or the United States? President Boko (Botswana): Young people are generally innovative. They are entrepreneurial. They now have become digital natives. And that presents immense opportunities to them. These opportunities mean they can pretty much operate wherever they are, and they must, as a matter of course, remain within Botswana so that they can then spread their reach and influence to every part of Botswana. And so the opportunities that there are in Botswana, the training, the education, the acquisition of skills, the support, the environment that nurtures them and, uh, feeds and fuels their vitality is what, uh, Botswana offers and what, uh, will power Africa. Africa generally is a very young continent with a median age of 19.3. Botswana's median age is 25. And so with such a population, Africa is poised to rule the world. Tucker Carlson: So what are your plans for the world once you rule it? President Boko (Botswana): To make it fairer, to make it more equitable, to ensure that, uh, intellectual property is internalized in every part of the African continent, that innovation serves humanity, not just a predatory elite, and that everybody can partake equitably and benefit from the fruits of the economy and the vast opportunities that are available in the world. Tucker Carlson: Well, I look forward to being treated fairly under your rule. Thank you. President Mnangagwa, I wonder, you’ve been in the government of Zimbabwe for decades in various roles, including through a very turbulent period where your predecessor famously kicked out the whites and then the economy tanked, and now it’s rising again. I wonder if you would summarize the lessons that your country has learned from that experience. President Mnangagwa (Zimbabwe): I'm not so sure what you have in mind, [clears throat] but let me say, um, our economy has faced challenges. I'm sure you're aware. Yes, Zimbabwe has been under sanctions for decades as a result of us claiming our land from the British and making ourselves independent. Uh, we seized the land and gave it to our people. So sanctions were imposed on us. But in spite of all that, uh, constraint, we have developed, and we are happy that, um, we have developed on our own and we feel very independent. Tucker Carlson: Well, some of the land was seized from people who were born there. Um, so I wonder if there's a lesson about targeting people on the basis of their skin color. Do you think? President Mnangagwa (Zimbabwe): No, land did not belong to a race. It belonged to Zimbabweans. [snorts] [clears throat] So when the colonialists took land from us, time came when we asserted ourselves to take back our land. Those who wanted to have land at the same basis as the African people of Zimbabwe remained. But those who felt superior left. Tucker Carlson: Okay, um, Mr. Bio, I—it does seem like President... Mr. President, that, um, the model of government around the world seems to be changing, or people seem to have lost confidence in democracy. At least in the West, people aren’t quite as keen to promote democracy. Do you notice this? Do you think democracy is in retreat around the world? President Bio (Sierra Leone): I think the world is in transition. Yes, and normally that comes along with instability. I normally refer to it as we are in a state of flux. Yes, we have been told to go democratic, and those who are leading the way or who have been teaching us to be democratic are no longer committed to that method of governance. So we are left to choose. But I still believe that democracy is the best method of governance, choosing who leads, especially liberal democracy, with all the freedoms that go with it so that human rights and other liberties are observed and maintained. We remain committed to democracy, irrespective of the fact that, um, there are now reversals, um, even in Africa, around the world. In fact, these days when you listen to world news and other things, you hardly hear about democracy.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2019024811582718157/amplify_video_thumb/2019019841680646144/img/rCGDLF4XfFqJr0iO.jpg)