Blog

27^th November 2021

Vaccines are desperately needed in developing countries

The emergence of a new Covid ‘variant of concern’ in Southern Africa, designated Omicron by the World Health Organisation (WHO), is a direct consequence of vaccine hoarding by the rich capitalist nations, more concerned with addressing the economic consequences of the pandemic rather than the public health impact.  

The Omicron variant is regarded as the most complex seen so far and has emerged in countries with vaccination levels of under 30%, with Namibia at a low of only 12% being fully vaccinated.  South Africa itself has 27% vaccination rates but this is unevenly spread across the country, with some rural areas at levels in single figures.

Worldwide there is no shortage of vaccines but distribution remains massively uneven.  The G20 richest countries currently hold 89% of existing vaccines with 71% of future deliveries scheduled for these countries.  The storage time for many of these vaccines is not infinite.  COVAX calculate that around 100 million of these vaccines will pass their use by dates in December.  The prospect of the world’s richest countries pouring vaccine down the drain while infection rates, hospitalisation and deaths continue to escalate in the developing world, is very real.

As ever, the leaders of the ‘free world’ can talk the talk but they cannot walk the walk.  Promises of vaccine distribution to the developing world are routinely made but are rarely delivered upon.  At a summit chaired by US President, Joe Biden, in September a target of 40% vaccination by December was set for the 92 poorest countries.  In the majority of those countries that target will not be met.

The vaccine hoarding nations of the world are directly to blame for this.  The United States has only delivered 25% of the vaccines promised.   The European Union has delivered 19% of its promise, the UK just 11% and Canada merely 3% of its commitment.  The net effect of this is that only 3% of people in low income countries are fully vaccinated, compared to over 60% in higher income countries.

The early identification of Omicron has meant that quick action is being taken to sequence the variant and test the efficiency of existing vaccines in combatting it.  However, should further vaccine development be required that will take some time to test, produce and disseminate.

The British government was quick to ban flights from Southern Africa and started a domino effect across the world, as steps are taken to contain the spread.  Calls to introduce Plan B in Britain, which would require mask wearing in public, working from home and a Covid passport system, restricting access to public spaces for those without a double vaccination, have already been raised and may yet be part of the response to the new variant.

So far British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has only been prepared to go with a Plan B-lite, introducing mask wearing as compulsory in retail and on public transport; re-introducing PCR tests for anyone entering the country; and enforcing 10 day isolation for any contacts of someone who has tested positive with suspected Omicron variant.

Measures will be reviewed after three weeks, giving the scientists time to see how the new variant behaves and politicians to hedge their bets in the run up to Christmas.

The WHO is meeting next week to consider the current situation but only has the power to exhort and persuade rather than enforce.

It is clear from the international response to the pandemic so far that the world’s richer nations cannot be relied upon to support those at the sharp end of the pandemic.   The current upsurge in cases of the dominant Delta variant across Europe, with Germany already considering a national lockdown, is likely to distract attention from vaccine equity, as the G20 continue to prioritise their own economic salvation above all else.

COVAX, which is led by the World Health Organization, GAVI and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and in partnership with UNICEF, has 190 participating countries. It needs more than US$2 billion to fully meet its goal to vaccinate those most in need by the end of the year.

The United Nations campaign, Only Together, launched in March continues to press for the scaling up of vaccine access by sharing excess vaccines, transferring technology, offering voluntary licensing or waiving intellectual property rights.  There will no doubt be a majority of UN members who support the goal of vaccine equity but the disproportionate balance of power means that only with the promises of the minority rich capitalist world coming good can the goal be achieved.

The pandemic has clearly exposed the capitalist system as one which is moribund and incapable of meeting the basic needs of its people.  If a pandemic which has claimed 2.5 million lives worldwide, and is set to claim as many again, cannot compel co-operation to support the most deprived it is a damning indictment of the system.

The ultimate solution is that the people themselves take control.  Through socialist planning and co-ordination of resources for the needs of the people first, rather than the profits of the banks and corporations, a different way is possible.  It may be too late for the victims of the current pandemic but it is the only way the same mistakes will not be repeated, when the world finds itself in this position again.

23^rd November 2021

The bumbling of British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, through a speech to the CBI this week, was characteristic of Johnson’s lack of attention to detail and inability to judge his audience.  Johnson’s political rise to date has often been ascribed to his ability to connect with ordinary people, speak plainly and shake free from established political platitudes.

That such an assessment has gained any credence is only due to the activity of Johnson’s spin doctors and the determination of the political establishment and media to build any alternative to Jeremy Corbyn, after Labour’s showing in the 2017 General Election.

No one has ever suggested that Johnson has a clear ideological stance, other than the default Tory position of hanging onto power and defending the capitalist system, but recent events suggest that the powers that be may be preparing to cut Johnson loose.

As well as the CBI debacle, Johnson also faced a minor rebellion in the House of Commons as 19 Tory MPs opposed government plans for changes to the social care system.  With abstentions a reduction in the Tory majority to 26 was the outcome.  This in itself may not be a sufficient harbinger of Johnson’s departure, governments with large majorities can absorb a certain amount of rebellion, but Johnson does not appear to have strong core support. 

The coalition of disparate Tories which propelled Johnson into No.10 is beginning to unravel as hard core Brexiteers are frustrated by the pace of change; low tax Tories are frustrated by the level of public spending; and the new intake of so called red wall Tories begin to see through the smoke and mirrors of the illusory ‘levelling up’ agenda.  The failure of the governments recently announced rail plan to reach, never mind reinvigorate the North, being just the latest example of policy car crash.

Prime Ministers have survived bouts of bungling, backbench muttering and Commons revolts but they rarely survive indefinitely.  As Johnson blusters his way through his catastrophic handling of the pandemic his credibility with those previously fooled by the blather drains daily.

The political establishment also have other concerns, not least the health of the Head of State, currently being kept from public view as both spin doctors and medical doctors work to keep the Monarchy from slipping into crisis.  Planning for the Platinum Jubilee in 2022 continues apace but sources suggest than a Plan B is being taken off the shelf should the magic 70 year mark not be achieved.

While the media establishment continue to perpetuate the myth of a popular Monarchy, that would soon dissipate should the septuagenarian Prince and his consort get the keys to Buckingham Palace.  An unpopular Prime Minister and an unpopular Monarch may be more than the political establishment could tolerate and one or both could come under pressure to clear the way for a more media friendly alternative.

In political terms that would not rule out a Labour government.  Kier Starmer has made a clear pitch that capitalism will be safe in his hands and any difference in policy with the Tories at present is largely one of nuance. A spell of tame Labour government, while the Tories sort out their differences and find a leader they can unite behind should not be ruled out.

By the same token the easing out of the jaded Charles and Camilla, in favour of the family and media friendly William and Kate, is not hard to imagine.  The notion of the Royal Family as being the embodiment of the nation has always been a conjuring trick designed to divert attention from the real class interest the Monarchy defends and represents.

The British ruling class has survived for so long, in spite of periods of pressure and challenge, because it has been able to change just enough to keep ahead of any demands for a real transfer of power from the ruling class to the working class.    

 There is little sense of pressure for real change coming from within Parliament.  A vote for Labour, when the time comes, will be the lesser of two evils but reliance on Parliamentary action has never been enough for change.  Mass extra Parliamentary action will be necessary to truly shift the balance of power, challenging not only the illusion of democracy under capitalism but the historical anachronism of the Monarchy in the twenty first century.

13^th November 2021

Over 100,000 gathered in Glasgow to protest against climate change

The famous revolutionary and Marxist philosopher, Vladimir Lenin, in 1913 characterised a revolutionary situation as one in which the lower classes do not want to live in the old way and the ruling class are unable to rule in the old way.  There has been little Leninist analysis applied to COP26 but Lenin’s thinking, while not immediately applicable to the present circumstances, certainly indicates the direction of travel.

There are certainly a significant number of the poorer and developing nations of the world who do not want to live according to the international economic order as it is currently constituted.  The climate crisis for many presents a literal existential threat, as rising sea levels threaten the very existence of their nations.  For others, already impoverished by imperialist plunder of their natural resources over centuries, including enslavement of their people, the hollow rhetoric of the rich nations continues to sound like an exchange of glass beads for gold.

In the current situation, for many of these nations, the climate emergency adds to a triple hit they are already having to deal with.  On top of their historical impoverishment there is the added inequity in vaccine distribution to tackle the Covid 19 pandemic, as the West continues to hang onto and hoard supplies.  For many developing nations Western intervention, either economically or militarily, has resulted in the migrant crisis, which drains many of their resources.  The climate crisis adds another layer to these struggles to survive.

COP26 appears to have done little to move forward the commitments of the rich nations of the Global North to take the climate emergency as seriously as they should.  Their default position remains one of giving as little ground as they can, while appearing to give concessions to the nations of the developing world and Global South.

This tactic becomes more transparent as the crisis deepens and the impact is felt in the richer nations too.  Recent floods in Germany, forest fires in the United States and the loss of coral reef in Australia have seen sections of the population waking up to the fact that real action, real commitment and real change is necessary if the impact of climate changed is to be addressed and reversed.

The demand to ‘keep 1.5C alive’ has gained increasing resonance as the COP26 process has unfolded but commitments so far, if they are actually delivered upon, amount to global warming reaching at least up to 2.0C above pre industrial levels.  Some models predict this may be higher still, which would not only be catastrophic, but potentially irreversible.

Capitalism as an economic system, especially in its imperialist globalised phase, is predicated upon competition and gambling.  The bankers gambling debts were the source of the 2008 financial crisis, debts we have all had to pay back over ten years of austerity.  Capitalist corporations routinely hedge their investments, buying commodities into the future to protect themselves against price fluctuations in the market.  Gaining a competitive edge is the driving force of capitalist philosophy and that edge has been gained, over the past 150 years, through the development and more efficient deployment of fossil fuels to drive economic growth.

Recognition that this phase of human development and exploitation of the Earth’s resources has gone is dawning slowly.  Unfortunately, it is dawning too slowly for those who predominantly control such resources, even where they are prepared to admit it. Like the Covid 19 vaccination deniers of the world, there remain those wedded to the reactionary notion that climate change is all part of a wider conspiracy, which will get sorted without human intervention.

Such ivory tower thinking may be the preserve of a hard core but it is often an influential hard core.  However, the next decade will undoubtedly see the glass fronts of such ivory towers breeched as the real life experience of those at the sharp end of the climate emergency draws more people into the struggle for change.

COP26 was never going to come up with all of the answers in one go.  It was always optimistic to expect a seismic shift in thinking on the part of those in entrenched positions of power.  However, the conference and the waves of protest which have surrounded it have ensured that world leaders cannot keep their heads forever in the sand when it comes to the climate emergency.

The ruling classes are beginning to struggle to rule in the old way and the lower classes are increasingly expressing their dissatisfaction at having to live in the old way.  A revolutionary situation may not be quite at hand but the makings of one are there.  However, Lenin was astute enough to also observe that not every revolutionary situation leads to a revolution. 

Capitalism is ruthless in defence of ruling class interests and, as history shows, will stop at nothing to defend its privileges.  Co-ordination, clarity of purpose and unified leadership are all pre-requisites of transforming a revolutionary situation into actual revolutionary change.  The challenge for those intent on not only saving the planet, but transforming it into one in which resources are equitably distributed for people not profit, is to forge that unity and force change.  

Protest at climate change, raising awareness of the climate emergency, is a vital first step towards drawing many into struggle.  It must be allied however to an understanding that the problems of the climate emergency are rooted in capitalism itself.  Until the means of production are in the hands of those who produce the wealth and society is planned according to the needs of its people, on a socialist basis, there will only be short term solutions on offer.

In an emergency situation short term solutions are never going to be good enough.

7^th November 2021

Commentary on climate change progress in Glasgow

Former Tory Prime Minister, Sir John Major, has criticised the government of present British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, for being “un-Conservative” and “politically corrupt” due to its recent attempts to change the rules governing standards for MPs in the House of Commons.  Major’s comments have been given prominence across all BBC News bulletins and been elevated to the status of insightful comment on this aberration within the Conservative Party.

The reality however is that Johnson and his cronies are not an aberration at all but are simply behaving, albeit a little more flagrantly, in the same way as all representatives of the ruling class Tory Party before them, and no doubt more after, should they be allowed to continue.

As a Prime Minister who presided over a period of significant sleaze, from 1992 – 1997, having inherited the Tory Party leadership from the politically corrupt Margaret Thatcher, Major is in no position to assume the moral high ground.

The current subject of the row, former MP Owen Paterson, was found by the House of Commons Standards Committee to have broken the rules by accepting over £100,000 a year from two companies who were paying him to lobby on their behalf.  In total Patterson is estimated to have netted £500,000 from the two companies, Lynn’s Country Foods and Randox Laboratories.

Nice work if you can get it for sure.  A care worker, nurse, or low paid worker claiming Universal Credit, would take 20 years to earn £500,000 if they managed to scrape together £25,000 a year.  Paterson was rightly taken to task by the standards committee for having his snout in the trough.  The response of the Johnson gang was to try and get him off by proposing to change the rules and lift the 30 day suspension imposed upon him.

That this decision was reversed in a screeching government u-turn, followed by Paterson resigning as an MP, was some justice but is hardly the whole story.  The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is yet to investigate the refurbishment of 10, Downing St, including the now infamous £850 per roll gold wallpaper, and how that was paid for.  Paterson is also implicated in his £8,000 per month retainer with Randox Laboratories, who went on to ‘win’ two Covid testing contracts, worth £480m, without any competitive tendering process.  

With the Tories it is never a case of one bad apple but the whole barrel being rotten.

Johnson’s arrogance was further underlined when preaching that the planet was at one minute to midnight in relation to the climate emergency at COP26, before taking a private jet from Glasgow to London to meet his former boss at the Daily Telegraph, Charles Moore, at the men’s only Garrick Club.

The protests in Glasgow and across the world this weekend, at the lack of meaningful action from world leaders on the climate crisis, was the most hopeful sign that pressure will continue beyond COP26 to deliver on easily made promises.

At present the rich countries of the capitalist West are still keen to equalise the requirement to take action, rather than recognising that they have benefitted from the burning of fossil fuels and need to do more to support those countries who they have exploited and had their development suppressed as a result.

The position of China, routinely characterised as the bad guy in relation to emissions, is a case in point. At present China is responsible for 28% of new global emissions as it embarks upon its programme of development and poverty eradication.  Looked at historically though Europe has contributed nearly 35% and the United States 25% to the stock of greenhouse gases, in order to build the wealth of a relatively small number of individuals, families and corporations.

It is little wonder that the world’s developing nations are calling upon those who have built their abundant wealth upon burning fossil fuels to shoulder more of the responsibility for tackling the crisis.  Imperialist exploitation and the destruction of resources in the developing world has left many nations ill equipped and under resourced to tackle the consequences of climate change.

Real change will come through a revolutionary shift in the ownership and control of those resources in the developing world, combined with the reversal of the grip of capitalism worldwide.  In the short term some immediate demands still need to be made. The financial obligations promised by Western nations at Paris in 2015 have yet to be met.  They could do so sooner rather than later.  The West could provide debt relief for countries struggling to adjust to the impact of climate change.  Trade deals could be structured to help benefit those nations striving to adapt to climate change.

As COP26 moves into week two the issue of adaptation will be high up the agenda.  United Nations General Secretary, Antonio Guterres, has pointed out that 4 billion people have suffered climate related disasters in the past decade alone.  Guterres has called for greater investment in adaptation measures to prevent vital infrastructure in developing countries from collapse, resulting in irreversible damage.

The hollow rhetoric of Boris Johnson and other leaders, keen to talk up their commitment but slow to take action, will not be enough address the realities of the climate emergency.  Mass popular action, street protests and boycotts of firms not committed to addressing the climate emergency, will need to be stepped up.  That is the only way that the current world leaders can be made to take meaningful action.  It may also be the first steps towards their removal, making way for real commitment to real and lasting change.

30^th October 2021

Sunak’s budget will not pay the bills for many families

The extent of Tory spin in relation to Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s budget this week would be regarded as breathtaking if coming from any government other than one led by Boris Johnson.  After ten years of Tory driven austerity which has seen a financial squeeze upon local government, education, the NHS and accelerated the low skills, zero hours contract economy, we are now expected to believe that another Tory government will reverse this.

Sunak proclaimed, in true headline grabbing style, that the budget was one to herald “An economy fit for a new age of optimism”.  The impact of the pandemic upon the economy was judged by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to be a long-term hit to the UK of 2 per cent, rather than the 3 per cent it forecast in March.  This gave Sunak latitude to increase spending on public services and offer tax cuts in areas such as business rates.

Sunak based his budget on OBR assumptions that UK economic growth would be 6.5% this year and reach pre pandemic levels by the end of the year.  Sunak failed to mention that the rate of growth only appeared greater because the British economy had tanked further and faster than other G7 economies in the first place.  Still, the Tories have never been ones to allow the facts to get in the way of a good soundbite.

While Sunak made some adjustments to the tapered reduction of universal credit, the budget will still hit the poorest the hardest as they faced a serious cost of living crisis.  While the Tories have been spinning the impact of changes to Universal Credit as benefitting over 2 million low income families, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation offer a different assessment.

Katie Schmuecker, the deputy director of policy at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said,

“The reality is that millions of people who are unable to work or looking for work will not benefit from these changes. The chancellor’s decision to ignore them today as the cost of living rises risks deepening poverty among this group, who now have the lowest main rate of out-of-work support in real terms since around 1990.”

Even those set to benefit from the £1,000 a year increase Sunak claims his changes represent will see much of that wiped out in rising national insurance contributions, increased rent and energy bills, as well as escalating food costs.  Quite how much of the “new age of optimism” families in these circumstances will see is hardly even open to debate.  The reduced duty on sparkling wine and short haul domestic flights may also be of little benefit to those families struggling on the breadline.

In reality Sunak’s budget will barely go towards shoring up the damage caused to local communities, and the services upon which they depend, by the decade long Tory austerity drive.

A recent report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that nearly 4 million low-income households are behind on rent, bills or debt payments, up threefold since the pandemic hit.  A third of the 11.6 million working-age households in the UK earning £25,000 or less were found to be in arrears on their rent or mortgage, utility bills, council tax bills or personal debt repayments.

Even Tory Councils are warning of a surge in homelessness this winter as a result of the end to government support measures such as furlough and the eviction ban.  Just under three-quarters of Councils have reported an increase in homelessness acceptances over the past four months, while nearly two-thirds said people they had housed during the pandemic had recently slipped “back in the homelessness cycle”.

No matter how Sunak or any other Chancellor chooses to spin the figures or cook the books the reality remains that the problems are systemic.  Capitalism is predicated upon competition, exploitation and aggressive individualism.  The problems faced by those in poverty in 21^st century Britain cannot be fixed by adjustments and tinkering with the system, they are as a result of the system itself.

Once the dust and the post Budget media spin settles the realities of life under the Tories will continue to come home to people.  Sustained and organised opposition is sadly lacking on the Opposition benches in Parliament.  Increased extra-Parliamentary action will be key to shifting the parameters of the debate and moving the Labour leadership to action.

The Budget has made it clear that the Tories are preparing themselves for an early General Election, with 2023 being the likely date, before the economy takes another nosedive.  Labour need to get themselves into shape well ahead of then.   

24^th October 2021

Chancellor Rishi Sunak – little help for working class expected in 27^th October budget

The desire of the Tories to get the economy moving, a euphemism for keeping corporate profits high, continues to outstrip the priority they place upon saving lives.  This has been the pattern of the entire pandemic, as the recent Parliamentary report, Coronavirus: lessons learned to date, illustrates.

The report was published by the House of Commons and Science and Technology Committee and Health and Social Care Committee, examining the initial UK response to the covid pandemic.

The 150-page Report contains 38 recommendations to the Government and public bodies, and draws on evidence from over 50 witnesses, as well as over 400 written submissions.

The Report was agreed unanimously by members of both Select Committees, which consist of 22 MPs from three political parties—Conservative, Labour and SNP.

In what has been widely seen as a damning indictment of the government’s handling of the pandemic the report highlighted some key areas of learning, namely that,

• The forward-planning, agility and decisive organisation of the vaccine development and deployment effort will save millions of lives globally and should be a guide to future Government practice;
• The delays in establishing an adequate test, trace and isolate system hampered efforts to understand and contain the outbreak and it failed in its stated purpose to avoid lockdowns;
• The initial decision to delay a comprehensive lockdown—despite practice elsewhere in the world—reflected a fatalism about the spread of covid that should have been robustly challenged at the time;
• Social care was not given sufficient priority in the early stages of the pandemic;
• The experience of the covid pandemic underlines the need for an urgent and long term strategy to tackle health inequalities; and
• The UK’s preparedness for a pandemic had been widely acclaimed in advance, but performed less well than many other countries in practice.

To date, deaths associated with the coronavirus in the UK stand at more than 150,000, placing the country in the Top 10 worldwide for total fatalities, according to World Health Organization data.

Penny Ward, an independent pharmaceutical physician and visiting professor at King’s College London, has argued the report is self-congratulatory on the ‘success’ of the vaccine and of the foresight of the Vaccines Task Force, going on to state that,

“However,we have failed to ensure sufficient uptake of the vaccination among younger adults and teenagers and some higher risk communities,” she said, “most notably those of African heritage — which is at least one possible reason for the continued circulation of infection resulting in more than 700 hospitalisations and 100 deaths daily on average in the UK currently.”

A full Public Inquiry at some future date has been promised by the government but the assessment at this stage hardly reflects well upon their handling of the crisis.

It would appear however that the critique contained in the report is little more than water off a duck’s back when it comes to the Tories’ response to the rising hospitalisation and death count.

Widespread scientific advice suggests that the government should be implementing its so called Plan B, which would bring in greater enforcement of mask wearing, a return to working from home and an acceleration of the vaccine booster programme.  Instead, the government continues with its blasé assertion that simply ensuring vaccination coverage is increased will be enough.  This is the case for England, which is out of step with the rest of the UK, where stricter measures are already in place.

The Tories latest tactic to divert attention from their mismanagement of the pandemic is to talk up the ‘positives’ which Rishi Sunak is expected to announce in the budget this week.  English regions getting £6.9 billion for public transport has been the recent big announcement, one which will allegedly contribute to ‘levelling up’.

Cutting VAT on energy bills has been widely mooted, as has an increase in the National Living Wage, though not to the Living Wage Foundation’s recommendation of £9.50 an hour.  Assistance for a small proportion of homes to instal heat pumps to replace gas boilers has already been announced.

None of which will address the £20 a week cut in Universal Credit to the most vulnerable, tackle the ongoing inflation crisis which will add to the costs of basic goods for ordinary families, or address the ending of the furlough scheme, which could add thousands to the unemployment figures.

The failure to implement more robust public health measures added into this mix will mean pressure upon the NHS building and the secondary impacts of Covid, longer waiting lists and operation cancellations, growing even further.

As the twin crises in public health and living standards gather momentum one government advisor, Prof Peter Openshaw, has said he feared another “lockdown Christmas”.  For the hungry, the homeless and the hard to reach it may not just be a case of being locked down but continuing to be locked out of access to the benefits and privileges that living in the world’s fifth largest economy should bring.

The key factor of course is the distribution of wealth within that economy and the comfort, wealth and security that being one of the privileged elite can bring, compared to the harsh realities of life for those at the sharp end.

The government may yet be forced into a U-turn and realise late, at it often has throughout the pandemic, that it needs to change course.  Plan B may yet become a reality but more extensive and more revolutionary plans will be needed, way beyond the pandemic, if the working class are to benefit fully from the wealth they create.

18^th October 2021

Getting the climate change message across

The COP26 Climate Change summit meets in Glasgow in less than two weeks’ time and equivocation already seems to be the name of the game.  To date it is not clear whether or not leaders from China, India and Russia will turn up.  The leaders of the G20 counties, scheduled to meet in Italy ahead of the COP26 gathering, are responsible for 80% of global emissions and are key to the “keep 1.5C alive” strategy.  This aims to hold global temperature rises below 2C above pre-industrial levels, while working towards the 2015 Paris climate agreement of holding rises to no more than 1.5C.

The British government, as the host nation is expected to show leadership and manage the diplomacy necessary to make the summit a success.  On both counts the Tories appear to be failing dismally.  While the government has set out its ambition to cut carbon emissions by 78% by 2035, aiming for net zero by 2050, the Cabinet is beset by division over the issue.

The strategy for tackling the heating of buildings, insulating homes, phasing out gas boilers, massively expanding offshore wind power and expanding the network of electric vehicle charging points has the backing of the Business Secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng.  The key elements are another example of the Tories stealing ideas, slightly diluted, from Labour Manifestos under Jeremy Corbyn, when the need for a Green Deal was pushed to the top of the political agenda.

Not all Tories are signed up to the plan, most notably Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who is allegedly refusing to come up with sufficient funding.  His recent speech to the Tory Party Conference saw the climate, net zero strategy and COP26 conspicuous by their absence, at a time when significant investment in the development of new fossil fuel free energy technology is vital.

There is also concern that the government emphasis upon conversion to hydrogen power, especially in the case of gas boilers, is not helpful as some hydrogen requires conversion by fossils fuels and the resulting carbon is then stored.  Green methods of manufacturing hydrogen, using renewable energy are available but are potentially less profitable. As such they are certainly not attractive to the fossil fuel lobby.

The nuclear lobby is also making its voice heard and plans by Rolls Royce to build 16 small nuclear reactors across the UK already appear to have both government backing and investment to the tune of over £200m.  This follows the withdrawal of Toshiba from a plant in Cumbria, Hitachi pulling out of building a plant in Anglesey and government refusal to work with China General Nuclear which has a 20% stake in Sizewell C, though the government are looking at ways it can remove it from the project.

While there are obvious dangers to reliance on nuclear energy it remains favoured by many green lobby groups.  However, the unplanned nature of the government’s approach to the energy sector overall, leaving it is the hands of the private sector, means that it is not only chaotic but profit driven, rather than being based upon the needs of the people as a whole.

Nuclear power plants are notoriously expensive to build and maintain, due to the high levels of safety required, which means either significant government subsidy upfront, more expensive energy for the consumer, or both.

Competition and the drive for greater profit is the mantra of the capitalist economy but its failings are significantly exposed when it comes to the energy sector.  Only a systematic, planned, socialist approach with a nationalised energy sector can bring about the level of control necessary, based on need not profit, to ensure the security and safety of energy supply.

The COP26 gathering will once again be faced with the contradictory challenge of getting a world full of predominantly capitalist economies to agree and co-operate towards reducing carbon emissions.  Getting them to stick to the 1.5C target and commit to finding ways to achieve that is the least the conference needs to deliver.

Over a decade ago the world’s wealthiest countries agreed to commit $100bn a year by 2020 to help the world’s poorest countries adapt to climate change.  There is little evidence that this commitment has been met.

The scale of the British government’s commitment to getting any outcomes from COP26 has been the appointment of relatively minor Cabinet member, Alok Sharma, to be the co-ordinator.  Sharma has been doing the job part time until recently, combining it with his role as Business Secretary.   

COP26 does at least provide the opportunity for climate change activists to raise the issues and expose the hypocrisy of, for example, the Royal Family who preach climate change on one hand while using private jets and helicopters on the other.

Only a few weeks ago it was revealed that the royal household had used the royal prerogative to demand that the Queen’s Donside estates in Scotland be given an exemption from laws designed to help tackle climate change.

According to the Ecoexperts blog, the annual carbon footprint of the royal family in 2019 was a massive 3810 tonnes. The carbon footprint of the average person in the UK is just 10 tonnes a year.  In 2019, Prince Charles and his wife with their entourage took 17 flights on private jets, three scheduled flights and two trips on RAF helicopters, releasing 432 tonnes of carbon.

As ever, when it comes to action for change the rich and powerful have too many vested interests to be relied upon.  Only mass direct action will force change, as it always has done. Young people in particular are beginning to realise this.   More such action, directed against those profiting from the demise of the planet, not just the the average motorist, would be a positive step. If the likes of Prince Charles think that is uncomfortable, then we are heading in the right direction.

9^th October 2021

Amanda Staveley and Mehrdad Ghodoussi (PIF) pose for photographs inside St James’ Park having found Newcastle on the map

The long suffering fans of Newcastle United have finally been freed from the dead hand of sports tycoon, Mike Ashley, whose lack of ambition has been like a slow suffocation, squeezing the breath out of a once vibrant, lively club.  The glee with which the takeover by the Saudi led Public Investment Fund (PIF) consortium has been greeted is akin to the glory days of Kevin Keegan and Bobby Robson, when the team rode high in the league and played eye catching football, the envy of many.

Expectations are that journeyman manager Steve Bruce will be sacked, an appropriate high flying replacement will be installed and magic will once again be in the air at St. James’ Park.  Suited executives who previously struggled to find Newcastle on a map now talk of their love for the city, its unique character, the special bond with the fans.  Even local legend, Alan Shearer, waxed lyrical about the fans now having their club back, though unless they are stakeholders in PIF, 80% owned by the Saudi dictatorship, that notion is a little fanciful.

The Premier League have had to engage in some fancy diplomatic footwork to approve the deal.  Not least has been turning a blind eye to the scale of the Saudi stake in PIF, being satisfied with assurances that the Saudi regime will play no part in the running of the club.  With Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as the Chair of PIF, other Saudi ministers being on the board and the Saudi regime the major stakeholder, the Premier League is either being naïve or disingenuous.

The fact that the Saudis have agreed to pull the plug on Middle Eastern pirate TV stations, which were illegally airing Premier League product may have been something of a sweetener too.

The Saudi deal is not the only dubious football purchase in recent years or the only example that money dictates the play on the international football stage.  Roman Abramovich, may have been a knight in shining armour to many Chelsea fans, but less than a hero to many overworked and underpaid Russians.

The oil rich Arab dictatorships have been moving into football in a big way recently.  The Abu Dhabi royal family takeover of Manchester City in 2008 set the trend.  Qatar will host the first desert based World Cup in 2022, in a nation with no history or tradition in the game.  To prove their bona fides the Qataris did proceed to buy Paris St. Germain, to show that they have the interest of the sport at heart!

The Saudi deal with Newcastle United is by no means the only questionable issue of ownership in the Premier League.  However, it does outstrip the others in the open engagement of members of the ruling dictatorship being so closely involved and the extent of their collusion in other dubious practices with the British government.

It is estimated by Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) that more than £20 billion worth of arms have been sold to the Saudis by Britain since the bombing campaign against Yemen, started in 2015, a conflict which has seen 150,000 lose their lives and which the United Nations describes as the world’s worst humanitarian disaster.

Beheadings, 90 last year alone, and public floggings continue to be the order of the day in Saudi Arabia.  The rights of women are severely restricted and political opposition silenced.  Would a company 80% owned and controlled by Kim Jong Un, with a promise that the North Korean government would not directly interfere in the day to day running of the operation, have passed the Premier League’s fit and proper owner test? Unlikely, unless Kim were to spend more time cavorting with the British Royal Family and buying UK manufactured weaponry!

The only small positive to emerge from the sorry farrago is that even the BBC have had to acknowledge that the Saudis may not be squeaky clean on human rights, though the British government‘s role in propping up the dictatorship with billions in arms deals somehow never gets mentioned.

As a financial operation the Premier League is unequalled in world football.  As an ethical proposition it is sinking ever deeper into a mire of its own making.  The extent to which football as an industry is bound to the world of international finance capital continues to grow.  The recently mooted European Super League failed to materialise this time but the idea in some way, shape or form will be back.  

The Toon Army, with the long held hope of success in their grasp, will only lose their heads in the metaphorical sense.  Those opposed to the Saudi regime are in danger of losing their lives for real for not complying with an Islamic dictatorship. 

It is an irony that Premier League footballers are berated when they are not deemed to be proper role models for young people, or are criticised as being overpaid when others struggle to make ends meet.  It may be that it is time to apply more rigorous standards across the Premier League as a whole.  The fit and proper persons test for owners and directors has clearly failed in the case of PIF.

Amnesty International have stated recently of the Newcastle United deal, it risks making the Premier League, “a patsy of those who want to use the glamour and prestige of Premier League football to cover up actions that are deeply immoral, in breach of international law and at odds with the values of the global footballing community.”

It is a stinging indictment that the once beautiful game which gave hope and pride to working class communities, is increasingly the plaything of the super-rich.    The rules desperately need to change.

6^th October 2021

Johnson hails the Party faithful

On the day that the temporary uplift in Universal Credit was snatched away from the poorest families in the country, the well-heeled delegates to the Tory Party conference settled in to hear the Leader’s speech in Manchester.  As usual Boris Johnson was high on rhetoric and low on actual practicalities.  Johnson’s speech was little more than an opportunity to jolly along the faithful.

He spoke of re-wilding the countryside, re-introducing otters, seeing an expansion of the beaver population, “Build back beaver, that’s what I say!” proclaimed Johnson to hearty guffaws.  It is unlikely that those families contemplating their next, significantly higher, energy bill, or whether they have enough cash to cover the kid’s dinner money for the week, were either listening or laughing along.

For a government which has renamed the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) as the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), meaningless phrases come ready made.  Whether this change means that local government has been written even further out of the script, or has suddenly become synonymous with levelling up remains to be seen, though the Tory track record to date would certainly suggest the former.

Johnson took no responsibility for the gross mishandling of the pandemic, with Britain still notching the highest numbers of deaths in Europe, in spite of the ongoing reluctance of the BBC to report the fact.  The mishandling of Brexit negotiations and the debacle of a shortage of labour in the farming industry and the haulage sector, resulting in gaps in food and fuel supplies, were not issues Johnson felt inclined to address.  

The crisis in policing, brought to a head by the Sarah Everard case did not merit a mention, nor did the lack of affordable social housing or the real difficulties in saving for a deposit faced by young people trying to get a foot on the housing ladder.

Johnson did claim that the Tories wanted to distribute wealth and opportunity more evenly across the UK.  Regional disparities do play a part and make a difference to the quality of life for many communities.  The real re-distribution of wealth however is not one between regions but between classes.  Part of the so-called levelling up agenda of the Tories is to divert attention away from class distinctions and focus upon regional ones.

Perversely, the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn must take some credit for this.  The slogan ‘For the Many, Not the Few’ was clearly gaining sufficient traction to worry the political establishment and the thousands attending Corbyn rallies in the period from 2015 was cause for concern.  The right wing in the Labour Party, incapable of seeing the opportunity for change unfolding before them, concentrated their energies on supporting the conspiracy to undermine Corbyn, playing directly into the Tories’ hands.

While the Labour right have searched in vain to find the key to ‘electability’ the Tories have simply commandeered Corbyn’s appeal for change and diluted it to be rebranded as ‘levelling up’.  Superficially it sounds fair, reasonable and desirable.  Who could argue against being levelled up?

The reality is, as usual, that this is simply sleight of hand on the part of the Tories.  Any amount of levelling up on a regional basis will do nothing to change the disparities endemic to capitalism because of its class nature.  The Tories are also aware that Labour under Starmer will not attack them on the grounds of class ownership of the means of production because they do not have the philosophical acumen to tackle the issue head on.

So, for the time being, Johnson gets away with it.  However, the reality of levelling up being little more than shallow rhetoric will increasingly hit home, as people realise that opportunity is not knocking on their door, that the rich continue to benefit disproportionately under the Tories, that the social care system will not be fixed by an adjustment to national insurance rates and that undermining local government will not help meet the needs of local communities.

The mass action seen outside the Tory Party conference; the opposition to the Police, Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill (2021) which criminalises activity deemed ‘serious annoyance’; the ongoing protests organised through the People’s Assembly, will all be vital to building opposition to the Tories and exposing their lies. 

This train is leaving the station, the Labour leadership need to get on board.

2^nd October 2021

Reclaim the streets protesters demand action

Lack of confidence in the police is nothing new.  As the enforcement arm of the state the police have a long history of intervention in industrial disputes, violence against pickets and covering up their actions from scrutiny.  The Miners’ Strike of 1984/85 is the most significant recent example, the actions of the police against miners on a picket line at Orgreave the most flagrant example of their violation of human rights.

The failure of the police to protect football fans in the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 and the subsequent lengths to which the police went to cover up their ineptitude, with falsified evidence statements and false accusations, has taken decades to be fully uncovered.

The murder of black teenager, Stephen Lawrence, which resulted in the MacPherson Inquiry which found the Metropolitan Police to be institutionally racist, has still not seen the perpetrators brought to justice.  The failure of the police to take the initial investigation seriously meant vital time and evidence, which could have led to convictions, was lost.

The level of violence and intimidation that black communities across Britain suffer at the hands of the police has long been a factor in the relationship between those communities and the police being one of mistrust.

The recent conviction of a serving Metropolitan police officer, Wayne Couzens, for the rape and murder of Sarah Everard, has re-activated the discussion about trust in the police, in particular in relation to violence against women.

Couzens is clearly a particularly malign and disturbed individual but the fact that he could not only survive but prosper within the police forces for which he worked points to a deeper, more intractable cultural issue which needs to be addressed.  That Couzens was known ‘jokingly’ as ‘the rapist’ amongst colleagues is bad enough.  That he was implicated in at least two incidences of indecent exposure is hard to believe.  That, in spite of this, he went on to secure a position as an armed officer with the Metropolitan Police is a scandal.

Couzens’ rise through the ranks is symptomatic of the institutional failings of a police force where there is widespread acceptance of sexism and, worse still misogyny, as banter.  The problem however, goes much deeper.  As Anthea Sully, CEO of White Ribbon UK has pointed out,

“86% of women have been harassed in public places, 9 in 10 girls of school age have experienced sexist name calling or sent explicit videos and 1 in 2 women have experienced harassment in the workplace.  1 in 4 women will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime and every year in the UK 120 -150 women are killed by men.  This violence, coupled with women’s fear of men’s violence significantly reduces women’s freedom to live the lives they want to lead.”

The growing prominence of women in the fields of sport, the arts and politics all helps to change wider perceptions of women’s capability and achievements.  Women visibly being in important and challenging roles are vital and necessary role models for girls but also for boys, many stillcurrently raised on the assumption that it is men who will, and should, do the most important jobs.

Conversely the roles in which women are prominent as the majority workforce, often in the areas of caring, nursing and teaching, should be as valued as any professions in which men currently predominate.

The changes required go deep into the assumptions of roles in family structures and at every level of the education system, including the Early Years.  They require the challenge to long held institutional throwbacks to women as property, to the concept of a family ‘breadwinner’, to the role of both parents in raising children and how that is accommodated by employers and not seen as an impediment to career advancement.

 It requires a change to the teaching of history and bringing to the fore the invisible women whose achievements have been written out of the narrative of society’s progress.

Such actions challenge the very edifice upon which the capitalist system has evolved and the structures which have developed to support that system, denying women their voices as equal citizens.

None of this will bring back Sarah Everard or the many other women who have suffered a similar fate.  It may however accelerate the process of valuing women more highly and reducing the possibility of such acts occurring.

In the short term, reform of the police force and how it deals with crimes of domestic violence and rape will be necessary.  This is a vital first step towards women simply feeling safe in their own homes and their own communities.  It is a vital step towards women being empowered to speak up and know they will be taken seriously.

The longer term eradication of violence against women is inextricably bound up in the ideology, values and assumptions upon which the British state is based, all of which are long overdue for revolutionary change.