Blog

11^th December 2021

On the occasion of United Nations Human Rights Day (10^th December) the human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to be a desperate one for anyone opposed to the regime.  Jane Green reports on the current situation.

Protests in Iran – regularly met with force

Human rights abuse in Iran continues to be an issue for young people, women, trade unionists and the political opposition. The regime does not see the judiciary as being independent from the ruling theocracy in the country.  The Islamic Republic’s judicial system criminalises dissent and even imprisons lawyers for doing their job. Few lawyers will continue to take on human rights cases due to the level of intimidation by the regime and its security services.

Anyone remotely critical of the regime is usually tried under trumped-up “national security” charges.  Cases often involve individuals who have been targeted by the state’s sprawling security establishment for publicly criticising the government and it is the state security agencies, not the rule of law, that dictates the outcome of the cases.

In effect, in the Islamic Republic, those detained under trumped-up national security charges are guilty until proven innocent.  Intelligence agents carry out the arrests and fabricate the charges. The judicial process becomes a means to settle political scores.

The targeting of lawyers in order to weaken the chances of effective legal representation is underlined by the fact that, as of November 2021, at least five defence lawyers had confirmed prison sentences based on false charges

Another three human rights lawyers are awaiting trial on trumped-up charges because they tried to sue the government for its failed COVID-19 response.

The case of Iranian-British dual national, Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, is a further example of the Iranian government’s use of imprisonment for political purposes.  Ms. Zaghari-Ratcliffe is effectively being held hostage as part of negotiations for money owed to Iran by the British government for a weapons deal in the 1970s.  

A recent report from Amnesty International has highlighted the ongoing issue of the unlawful killing of at least 324 members of the public in mass protests which swept Iran in November 2019.  There is no evidence that those engaged in the protests possessed firearms or posed any threat to life, yet the security forces still engaged in the unwarranted use of lethal force.

Two years on from the protests, the families of victims continue their campaign for truth and justice in the face of ongoing harassment and intimidation from the authorities.  The regime has undertaken a ruthless campaign to intimidate families and prevent them from speaking out.  The regime persists in its refusal to reveal the truth about the death toll; conduct thorough, independent and impartial criminal investigations; and bring to justice those responsible for ordering and carrying out these killings.

Given the gravity of the human rights violations in Iran, Amnesty International has reiterated its call to member states of the UN Human Rights Council to mandate an inquiry into the killings, and identify pathways for truth, justice and reparations.

The assault on human rights also extends into the cultural sector with Baktash Abtin a poet, documentary filmmaker and a member of the Iranian Writers’ Association, being imprisoned on charges of “gathering and colluding with the intention of committing acts against national security” and “propaganda against the state.  Abtin, along with two other members of the Iranian Writers’ Association’s board of directors, Reza Khandan Mahabadi and Keyvan Bajan, were sentenced to 6 years each in prison.

The evidence to support the accusations were the books published by the Iranian Writers’ Association, including the commemorative work “Fifty Years of the Writers’ Association of Iran,” statements by the Writers’ Association and articles and content published on Abtin’s personal social media accounts.

The rise of labour strikes, including in the automobile maker Iran Khodro, mines, and manufacturing industries, along with popular protests across the country, reflects the deepening crisis in Iran.  The regime is increasingly seen by the vast majority of the people in Iran as a major barrier to progress and the establishment of freedom, democracy, and social justice.

The experience of recent years in Iran is that the macro-economic policies of the Islamic regime have resulted in the destruction of the infrastructure of manufacturing and driven millions of people below the poverty line and into deprivation. This situation is further exacerbated by widespread corruption within the regime, which sees millions of dollars syphoned out of the economy into private hands.

The necessity of expressing solidarity and continuing to publicly challenge and defy the government, is increasingly seen by many as the only means to move away from a regime whose continuation is synonymous with that of disaster, poverty, deprivation, and misery in the country.

In the UK major trade unions unions have added their voices to expressions of support for the Iranian people and in condemnation of the human rights record of the Iranian government.  It is vital that such support continues to build and extends across the labour and peace movement. 

Such solidarity, especially articulated on UN Human Rights Day, will send a clear message to the Iranian people that they continue to have international support in their struggle for peace, human rights and democracy.

For the full version of this article visit www.codir.net

4^th December 2021

Keep calm and carry on says the British government

As the Omicron variant of the Covid-19 virus begins its inexorable journey around the globe the British government insists upon taking up its usual pandemic position of being just behind the curve.  While public health and World Health Organisation (WHO) advice at every stage of the pandemic has been to take hard measures quickly and early, to contain infection spread, the British government continues to adopt an attitude of ‘let’s see how much longer we can spend down the pub’.

Such an approach is fuelled by a beleaguered hospitality sector, less concerned with getting jabs in arms than getting arms pulling pints, and the usual trio of Tory cheerleaders in the right wing press, the Mail, the Express and the Telegraph. 

Keen to undermine the evidence that Omicron is highly transmissible and socially mixing will only accelerate the spread, the Tory press trio are more concerned to demonise the so called ‘cancel Christmas’ brigade.  The message is wrapped in the usual phoney rhetoric of plucky Brits seeing it through, with a liberal draping of Union Jack iconography, just in case the message is not clear that the ‘cancel Christmas’ crowd are not real patriots and are simply out to undermine British tradition.

As more cases of the Omicron variant are identified, the government is pinning its hopes on an acceleration of the vaccine booster programme which it hopes will “buy the time” needed to further assess the impact of the Omicron variant.

British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has said everyone who is eligible will be offered a booster jab by the end of January.  The government is hoping this, coupled with new mask measures and restrictions on travel from countries in southern Africa, will be enough to contain the variant.

Minutes from the Sage Advisory Group have suggested that there is a danger of the government “putting all its eggs in one basket” by relying on the booster programme without taking any measures to reduce social mixing.  In particular it has been suggested that working from home would be a minimum measure that could enhance infection control with one adviser stating,

“Working from home is substantially less intrusive as an intervention.  If you can easily do your job from home until Christmas, to me that seems a very proportionate thing to do right now.”  

The government position however remains to sideline such advice and adopt a “keep calm and carry on” approach, a phrase actually used by Conservative Party Chairman, Oliver Dowden, when asked about private parties at No 10 Downing St this year.  Dowden insisted that people should,

“…keep calm and carry on with your Christmas plans.  We’ve put the necessary restrictions in place but beyond that keep calm and carry on.”

Downing St is already on the defensive, having been found to be the venue for parties during lockdown last November, once again exposing the government’s one rule for them and another for the rest, approach to the pandemic.

The Tories’ position is at odds with that of Jenny Harries, Chief Executive of the UK Health Security Agency who made clear on BBC Radio 4 that,

“Of course our behaviours in winter – and particularly around Christmas – we tend to socialise more, so I think all of those will need to be taken into account.  So I think we need to be careful, not socialising when we don’t particularly need to, and particularly going and getting those booster jabs.”

Concerns about the capacity of GPs and the NHS to step up the rate of vaccination to deliver the booster programme are also very real with services already struggling to cope due to reduced capacity.  The NHS has announced it would need an army of 10,000 volunteers and 1,500 new sites to help offer the required 25m vaccines over the next two months.

Prof Andrew Hayward, co-director of the UCL Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, said,

“I am concerned that the intensification of mixing at Christmas social events will provide a boost to transmission at just the time when the Omicron variant will probably be picking up speed, potentially leading to an earlier peak in the new year before we have an opportunity to counteract this through boosters. Such a peak could seriously affect the ability of an already struggling NHS to provide adequate care.”

The determination to put private wealth ahead of public health has been the only consistent position taken by the British government throughout the pandemic, allied with the desire not to take any decisions which may prove unpopular.   

With the UK death rate now past the 145,000 mark and daily infections in their thousands, the government is once again taking a massive gamble with the lives of those who are most vulnerable and have least capacity to fight off infection, in spite of the vaccination programme.  

The government may not be brave enough to take any decisions which could be characterised as ‘cancelling Christmas’, leaving most to have to take the decision themselves when deciding just what level of celebration is safe.

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.