‘Deluded twats lol.’
Friday, 23 June 2017
I work close to the Houses of Parliament in London, and after I left work on Wednesday I strolled down to Parliament Square to take a look at the Day of Rage protest, to take some photos and write a report for this blog.
There are often mid-week, evening, protests around Parliament, and I have covered some of them before here. Being so handy to where I work, these are easy stories for me to post. They are generally pretty popular too, and Wednesday’s post was much better than average for these type of posts.
One of the reasons that I started this blog, was to put out an alternative narrative to main stream media and right wing social media. A green left take on things like demonstrations and news stories more generally.
Around about 70% of the traffic to this blog comes from Facebook links, the rest come from left politics aggregator sites, twitter, email groups and google searches. I have over 700 Facebook friends and posts are public, and I also link the blog posts in various Facebook groups. These groups are mainly of the green, left liberal, socialist and anarchist type political groups. But I also post the links into some more general politics groups and some London based community type groups.
The reaction to Wednesday’s post in the lefty groups was overwhelmingly positive, with likes, shares and comments from posters. In the more general political groups, there was some support, but a hell of a lot of negative, and in some cases, downright offensive comments.
I should have guessed really, as before I even went to the demonstration I’d read the twitter #dayofrage thread and it was full of right wing trolls, often complaining of paying taxes for the police to keep order at this protest, and maligning the protesters for being work shy, on benefits etc etc. No proof of these things was offered of course, but hey, why let the truth get in the way of your twisted view of the world?
No doubt these characters have been ‘radicalised’, by the right wing media, such as Rupert Murdoch owned The Sun, The Telegraph, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express, but the trolls went even further than these right wing rags.
Here’s a selection from the general Facebook groups that I post blog links to:
"Why won't you come face us?" ‘Because you smell and no one likes lefties.’
‘Must have been dole day today, or the snowflakes melted in the heat.’
‘Or was it too early for the great scrounging unwashed perhaps?’
‘If you support the politicization of grenfell, as these brain dead cunts do, then fuck you too, you are what’s wrong with this Country.’
‘The residents of the Grenfell flats disassociated themselves from this march. it would seem it was hijacked to further a political agenda.’
‘Here we go will try anything to win an election.’
‘Deluded twats lol.’
‘Deluded twats lol.’
Charming! Remember, this demonstration was about probably well over a hundred people being burnt to death, because of the neo-liberal policies of the last 40 years and general uncaring and negligent behaviour of the local and national politicians, Tory, New Labour nationally and at local level which has been controlled by the Conservative Party since 1964.
Of course, I fairly often get trolled by these ring wing numpties, and you have to have a bit of a thick skin if you blog about politics, but Wednesday’s post attracted the worst reaction I have ever had. Maybe I hit a raw nerve with this post?
I noticed during the recent general election campaign, as the opinion polls narrowed between the Tories and Labour, the right wingers became increasingly silent. I think Owen Jones, The Guardian columnist, might have put his finger on the reasons causing this outburst now. I’m not a big fan of Jones’ writing, but on Thursday he wrote a piece entitled ‘The old Tory order is crumbling – it’s taken Grenfell for us to really see it’ where he argues ‘The iconic episode that, for the right, summed up the fall of the post-war consensus was the “winter of discontent….If any episode sums up the collapse of our own neoliberal era, it is surely Grenfell Tower.’
Jones maybe onto something here, the political wheel in place since the late 1970s looks to be turning at last. Just like the post-war Keynesian consensus ended by Tory leader Margaret Thatcher, the neo-liberal era looks to be coming to a close. This is why these right wing trolls are making so much noise, but I think it is in vain. Their time, and neo-liberal politics time are about to become a nasty memory. It’s almost the time for the trolls to crawl back under their rocks.
Here’s to the not too distant future.
Wednesday, 21 June 2017
I stopped by the Day of Rage protest in Parliament Square in London on my way home work this evening. I was only there from about 4.45 pm to just after 6pm, although the protest had been going on all day. It was the hottest day of the year in London.
The demonstration organised by Movement for Justice by Any Means Necessary [MJF] saw protesters marching from Shepherd’s Bush to Downing Street on Wednesday afternoon and is aimed at “bringing down the Government”.
The MFJ said the protest was in reaction to “brutal austerity, cuts and anti-immigrant attacks” and last week’s Grenfell Tower tragedy.
From what I saw the demonstration was peaceful, if definitely angry, the mood was mainly calm. One woman said to me, pointing to the Palace of Westminster on the other side of the road, 'why won't they come and face us?'
Organisers made speeches calling justice for the Grenfell Tower victims and survivors.
Whilst I was there, there was only a few hundred protesters, they were outnumbered by police. Isaw several police vans with riot officers in side streets, but they were not need when I was there.
Rebel Media, which is a Canadian right wing media outfit, provoked some of the demonstrators, with angry words exchanged, but it did go beyond that.
There were plenty of home made placards, although, as usual there was the Socialist Workers Party and Socialist Party made ones.
The Rebel News interviewer was led away by police, after some angry exchanges with the protesters. Police stopped the traffic to get her away from the crowd.
The discussion carried on with the crew from Rebel Media.
Messages were chalked on the pavement on Whitehall opposite Downing Street.
There will be further protests against the minority Tory government over the next few months.
Tuesday, 20 June 2017
A week and a half after the prime minister Theresa May went scuttling off to Buckingham Palace to inform the Queen that she is to form a government, there has still been no announcement of the terms of the deal with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), that is meant to keep the minority Tory government in power. It could be argued that May was somewhat premature in seeking the sovereign’s ascent to form a government, with no agreement in place. May acted quickly to shore up her position as prime minister, but it a fair bet that some deal, perhaps a promise of not voting down the Queen’s speech, by abstaining at the least, is in place with the DUP.
Or maybe it isn’t. Rumours are circulating that the DUP, apart from wanting extra funds and other concessions for Northern Ireland, may want to curb the austerity measures of the last seven years.
A DUP source told the Guardian: “The DUP is a unionist party and that means it has concerns for the people of the whole of the United Kingdom. That means protecting the winter fuel allowance for the elderly person in Scotland is as important to us as protecting the welfare of the elderly person in Northern Ireland. We are keen to defend the rights and welfare of the vulnerable across the UK and that is why any arrangement in our view should be one that benefits everyone in the UK.”
It has been suggested the DUP could achieve this objective by voting for amendments to the Queen’s speech put down by Labour. It depends on what is in the Queen’s speech, so it is likely that, certainly on domestic policy, there will be little of consequence. The main thrust will be Brexit, with some anti-terrorist measures and a bit of infrastructure spending, but it could still be possible to design amendments around an anti-austerity agenda. We will find out tomorrow.
Meanwhile, a legal challenge will be made to the agreement between the Tories and DUP, as a breach of the Good Friday Agreement.
If the government are forced into accepting Labour amendments to the Queen’s speech, it would in effect mean that the government cannot control the domestic agenda, and it would be carrying on just to deliver a Brexit deal. It is hard to see the government surviving for long when it is implementing Labour policies, but they might just stretch things until March 2019, when we formally leave the European Union. Although, there will be a fierce battle in the Tory Party over what the terms will be. This is a sport that the Tories can’t resist, and hasn’t it always been the case, Tory infighting over Europe?
Even if no amendments are forced onto the government, and they pursue a minimalist domestic agenda, the fight over Brexit in the Tory Party will still take place, and threatens to destabilise the minority government.
The government will also be at the mercy of events, like last week’s Grenfell Tower blaze, and is likely to be buffeted about by these events, as it staggers on in zombie like fashion.
The House of Lords, where the government has no majority, will feel at liberty to be awkward with any legislation brought forward, since the government has no effective mandate or majority in the House of Commons. It may be that no primary legislation will be introduced in this Parliament, because of the emphasis on Brexit, but also because the government will be unsure of getting anything through. In short, a recipe for paralysis.
So how long can this state of affairs last? Well, it depends on events to a very large extent. Will there be by-elections in Tory held seats? If there are, and they are lost, the government’s majority will be whittled away, even with support from the DUP. But the main threat to the government will be from within its own ranks.
There are just too many forces pulling in different directions, particularly over Brexit, Europhiles and Eurosceptics, the Scottish Tories 13 MPs, who are looking for a soft Brexit, are one dangerous grouping for the government. It doesn’t look like they will be able to keep all of their MPs happy, given the differences of opinion.
My best guess is that May is replaced as prime minister in the autumn, and a new leader elected, and a general election next spring, but they may stagger on a bit longer, or may be brought down sooner. But, bookmaker Paddy Power has the odds at 13/8 that a second General Election will be called this year.
There is a protest march and demonstration tomorrow in London, called the Day of Rage, where protesters will march from Shepherd’s Bush to Parliament, to demand the government goes, and as the facebook page puts it ‘Bring Down the Government - Shut Down London.’ Attend it if you can.
Sunday, 18 June 2017
First published at Politico
After a botched election, and then an awkward response to the Grenfell Tower fire that left the Queen to intercede to calm the nation, even the loyalist press has turned against her — with the conservative Sunday Telegraph and Daily Mail ganging up on her.
The widespread talk of stalking horses, leadership challenges and party coups may appear to confirm her Tory nemesis George Osborne’s christening of May last week: “dead woman walking.”
But there are good reasons, five to be precise, why May isn’t going anywhere anytime soon — and one big reason she might be forced out of the driver’s seat in the U.K.
1. There’s no legitimate excuse to ditch her
If May leaves No 10 Downing Street of her own accord or is dragged out by her rivals, the result would be the same: she was forced to go because the public rejected her leadership. What then gives her successor the right to assume he or she can govern without the endorsement of the public?
“Unless she says it’s for medical reasons then we’ll have to go to the country sooner or later and that’s a real risk,” one government minister told POLITICO.
One option being discussed by Conservative MPs is for a “caretaker” prime minister to come in and oversee Brexit before calling an election in 2019. It would doubtless mean a softer, more consensual Brexit with big questions over the single market and customs union potentially left unanswered. One name being discussed is Philip Hammond, the Chancellor.
2. No obvious replacement
If there was someone obvious who could do what May has failed to by uniting the country, then she might have gone already. But there isn’t.
Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters like to claim he is now the prime minister in waiting — but he won fewer votes and fewer seats than the Tories, he has a fuzzy vision of Brexit and he ran a campaign about austerity, not leaving the EU.
Perhaps more importantly, on the Tory side there are no clear contenders either. David Davis and Boris Johnson are the favorites. Both are more confident, charismatic figures than May. But in the wake of the Grefnell Tower fire, Johnson’s bumbling persona is judged unsuited to the times by many of his colleagues.
Davis tried for the leadership before, losing to David Cameron in 2005. Many Tories do not believe he’s the answer to their problems.
Amber Rudd, the home secretary, may have been an option before the election but she sneaked back into parliament after two recounts and could well lose her seat at the next election.
Tory grandee Kenneth Clarke is fond of reminding people that the winner of Tory leadership contests often emerges from left-field — from Thatcher to Major to Cameron. So don’t rule out a centrist candidate who embraces Brexit — the new First Secretary Damian Green perhaps, or the George Osborne acolyte Sajid Javid.
Watch out for any young pretender who reaches out to the Conservative’s popular leader in Scotland, Ruth Davidson — a potential kingmaker in any future election.
3. Not another election!
The last thing the Conservative Party wants is another general election. The emotional national mood is too unpredictable to risk it.
Some ministers who spoke to POLITICO fear the “intensity and ferocity” of the public response to Grenfell Tower, and how quickly it has turned into a symbol of Tory misrule, may yet be too great for the prime minister to withstand. However, even if she is forced out, Tories remain determined to kick the can of another general election down the road for as long as they can.
It’s not just the Conservative Party that doesn’t want a general election. The Democratic Unionist Party, May’s prospective parliamentary partners, will never again be in such a sweet spot. A party with 10 MPs, representing the unionist half of the six counties of Northern Ireland, now holds the balance of power in the world’s sixth largest economy. They’ll want to eek this out for as long as possible.
In Scotland, the SNP are desperate to avoid another poll. They fear a further erosion of support should voters be given another chance to debate a second independence referendum, which has become a millstone around the party’s neck.
4. Jeremy Corbyn
There are many non-Corbynite Labour MPs who told the electorate he could never be prime minister and who now fear having to go back to those same voters to tell them that he can. Many in the Labour Party still do not believe a Corbyn premiership is in the national interest.
If that’s what Labour MPs feel, imagine the reaction from Conservative MPs. There is a genuine concern in the party that anything that increases the chances of a Labour general election win has to be avoided at all costs — even if that means sticking with a party leader whose authority is shot.
The alternative view is that the public will “come to its senses” when it comes to Corbyn, in the words of one Tory minister, who spoke on condition of anonymity. But for most MPs and ministers it is too big a risk.
After May, the next long-term Tory leader is unlikely to be forced on the party in another coronation. That view has been publicly put forward by the former education secretary and leadership hopeful Nicky Morgan, but is widely held.
Unless there is a “caretaker” leader for 18 months, the new Tory leader will therefore require a vote and that means a campaign. And campaigns take time, which is the one thing Britain doesn’t have as Brexit negotiations start in Brussels on Monday.
What’s more, any campaign will inevitably boil down to Brexit — hard or soft. So any leadership contest forced on the country by May’s resignation (or a coup) will mean Britain’s Brexit clock ticking away while the governing party decides its own future.
The public anger at such obvious national mismanagement might well be enough to force them out of power.
So for worse and for better, Theresa May is the prime minister seen as the one who should settle the divorce with Europe.
Reason and logic are all very well, but sometimes the pressure for change is too great to withstand.
At the moment, May can do no right. The personality traits which were qualities two months ago when she called the election — steadfast, unshowy leadership — are serious deficiencies. She is now unresponsive and robotic — a leader lacking compassion.
Theo Bertram, a former adviser to Gordon Brown, summed up May’s problem in the Sunday Times. “No matter what May does, she has an unshakeable problem with people,” he said. This is unsustainable.
If May does not have the confidence of the people, then she has to go.
Her party will ensure that happens, because they will have no choice — any option which keeps her in power would be worse and all the problems associated with removing her will have to be managed, even if that means another election which produces another stalemate.
Saturday, 17 June 2017
Written by John Wight and first published at Counterpunch
Neither oversight, negligence, nor malfeasance lies at the root of the Glenfell Tower fire in West London. Strip away the sickening obfusaction and platitudes, peddled by the usual coterie of confected politicians, and the roots of this disaster lie in the virulent disdain, bordering on hatred, of poor and working class people by the rich in a society which in 2017 is a utopia for the few and a dystopia for far too many.
What will future historians say about a culture in which there is more than enough money to pay for nuclear weapons, to finance the bombing of other countries, to fund tax cuts for the rich, but not enough to provide decent housing for people whose only crime is that they happen to be poor and on low incomes? Given the scathing nature of the evidence, it’s a fair bet that the verdict issued will be a scathing one —and rightly so.
If this mind numbingly awful event does not mark the end of 7 long years of callous cruelty that describes the previous and current Tory government — unleashed in obeiscance to the god of austerity — then nothing will and we deserve to end up in the abyss where, make no mistake, we are headed unless we rise up with a collective and resounding cry of “No more!”
No more living in a country in which cruelty has been raised to the level of a virtue and compassion relegated to the status of a vice, in which foodbanks, benefit sanctions, zero hours contracts, homelessness, and crumbling public services are justified on the basis of moral rectitude and fiscal responsibility, when in truth they are symptoms of the class war unleashed by the Tories on working people and which up to now working people have been losing.
The hollowing out of the state, deregulation, the near free rein accorded to property developers and private landlords, all at the expense of people’s wellbeing and safety, is tantamount to a crime committed by the rich people who govern us in the interests of other rich people. Don’t politicise the Grenfell Fire, they tell us. Are they serious? Are they having a laugh? This event is verily dripping in politics. Indeed it could not be any more political, coming as it does as the logical conclusion of decades of under investment in social housing that is a badge of shame and refutes any claim by Brexit Britain to the status of a civilised country.
The one hope we can cling onto is that despite the inordinate and sustained efforts by the Tories and their rancid media cohort to pit working and poor people against one another in recent years — Muslim against non-Muslim, low waged against unwaged, migrant against non-migrant, refugee against native — it has failed. Out of Grenfell, along with the recent terrorist attacks in Manchester and London, has come incontrovertible evidence of the innate solidarity of people of every background, ethnicity, faith, and creed when the chips are down. The outpouring of kindness, support, and humanity in response stands as a rebuke to those who want us to believe there is no such thing as society, that we are not connected by a common humanity but instead are merely a vast agglomeration of individuals, just like so many atoms spinning in the air.
Then, too, as a further rebuke to these rotten Tory values we have our emergency services. Made up of men and women who have no hesitation in risking their lives when tragedy strikes, they deserve better than a government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich — and so do we. They stand in sharp contrast to a Prime Minister who cannot even summon the decency to face angry and traumatised residents during her recent visit to the scene of what bears all the hallmarks not of a disaster or a tragedy but a crime.
In memory of those who perished and whose deaths are indistinguishable from the fact they were poor and working class, let Grenfell be the line over which Tory greed and mendacity does not pass.
Yes Theresa May you are right: enough is enough.
John Wight is the author of a politically incorrect and irreverent Hollywood memoir – Dreams That Die – published by Zero Books. He’s also written five novels, which are available as Kindle eBooks. You can follow him on Twitter at @JohnWight1
Friday, 16 June 2017
The horrific fire at Grenfell Towers in west London in the early hours of Wednesday has shocked the entire nation. The images of the tower block ablaze in one of the world’s leading cities conjured memories of the 9/11 tragedy in New York in 2001. But unlike New York, which was attacked deliberately by Islamic terrorists, the Grenfell Towers fire was a self inflicted disaster. Brought about by the callous pursuit of profit for construction firms and a negligent, uncaring government set on slashing public spending and building safety regulations. Police fear that in excess of a hundred residents have perished in the fire.
As the shock at least begins to subside, it is increasingly being replaced by a feeling of anger that these poor people, the residents, have been sacrificed to the ideology of free market neo-liberalism. Many questions are being asked, but not so many answers are being proffered. A group of angry residents stormed Kensington Town Hall this afternoon to try and get some answers.
David Lammy, Labour Party MP for Tottenham in London, has called for criminal charges to be brought against those responsible for the decision to clad the building in combustible plastic material, which is banned from use in the US for buildings above 15 meters in height. There have been several fires in the US and elsewhere where this type of cladding has made fires worse.
Speaking to the Municipal Journal (subscription), the chair of the Passive Fire Protection Forum (PFPF) who is also a trustee of the Children’s Burns Trust, Hannah Mansell, said: 'To every local council and housing association, I say, you know what to do, take action today. The next one could be tomorrow.
'We have a right to be very angry at the news about Grenfell Tower. I regularly sit in meetings with fire safety professionals, and their fury and frustration at the inaction of local councils and social landlords is palpable.'
Ms Mansell added that the PFPF has been warning about the risks of a fire like this for years and that there is an 'endemic' fire safety problems in buildings such as this one. She said she has seen flats without fire doors, emergency lighting or signages or smoke seals.
Minutes from a 6 January 2016 meeting of Kensington & Chelsea housing and property scrutiny committee about the refurbishment of the building, noted new cladding, now thought to be among potential causes of the fire, “improved the look of the building,” according to the Local Government Chronicle (subscription).
The original plans for the refurbishment of the block had been to site boilers in kitchens but “it had then been considered easier to place these boilers in the hallways which had been conveyed to residents”, the minutes said.
A posting on a blog run by the Grenfell Action Group on Wednesday morning said warnings over safety failings at the tower and other properties managed by the Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) had “fallen on deaf ears.”
In posts dating back four years, the group detailed concerns raised with councillors and officials at Kensington & Chelsea, and senior staff at the TMO.
In November last year the group complained of inadequate fire escapes and expressed the belief that “only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of our landlord.”
In 2015, the group reported London Fire Brigade issued an enforcement notice following a fire at the Adair Tower in North Kensington. The unverified enforcement notice was said to have ordered the TMO to improve safety in fire escapes and install self-closing devices to all front doors.
In 2013, the group complained the closure of the block’s car park would seriously restrict emergency vehicle access. Later that year the group reported “continuous electric surges” that had resulted in smoke emanating from electrical appliances and light fixtures.
In October last year Gavin Barwell, who lost his Parliamentary seat in Croydon Central at last week’s general election, and who has been appointed as Prime Minister Theresa May’s new chief of staff, announced a review into Part B of the Building Regulations 2010 that cover fire safety in tall and wooden buildings.
However, the review has yet to be launched. In March, a spokesperson for the Department for Communities and Local Government said the review would be undertaken “in due course.”
The Part B review was due to look at how fire safety measures could be improved following a major fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, south London, in 2009, in which six people lost their lives. Earlier this year Southwark Borough Council was fined £270,000 and order to pay £300,000 legal costs after admitting safety failings at Lakanal House.
Ronnie King, honorary administrative secretary of the parliamentary group on fire safety and rescue, told the Local Government Chronicle ”We still have 4,000 older tower blocks in the UK which have the same regulations applied to them. The message to other social landlords and housing providers is unless there is a review of [part B] of the regulations you could face multi-million pound legal costs and compensation should you experience a Lakanal House tragedy.”
If criminal charges can be brought against individuals, as David Lammy suggests, then of course they should be. But the problem runs far deeper than negligent individuals who, are only acting within the logic of neo-liberal ideology, where ‘red tape’ (safety regulations) must be cut, and housing policy is to maximise profits for building firms, and increase the value of surrounding privately owned properties in an area.
The right wing media has tried to blame the fitting of the wall cladding on an ‘obsession’ with ‘green’ issues, that is energy conservation, but this was a secondary consideration. As the minutes from the local authority’s housing and property scrutiny committee, quoted above demonstrate, that making the outside of the building more attractive for some of the very rich residents in adjacent flats and houses was the primary goal.
Non-combustible cladding could have been used instead, but it is a little more expensive at around an extra £5,000. Too expensive for the likes of the working class residents of Grenfell Tower. Things have got to change, people before profit.
Tuesday, 13 June 2017
Apart from Green co-leader Caroline Lucas doubling her majority in Brighton Pavilion, last Thursday, the general election delivered a poor result for the Green Party. The national vote halved from 2015 and in Bristol West, where we started the campaign as favourites to win the seat, the Greens finished a distant third behind Labour. I got wind of this from local activists here in London who had visited Bristol to help out. The Labour surge swept the Greens away, in Bristol and across the country, with not even a second place finish anywhere.
We can perhaps claim that our very existence pulled Labour to the left, and so played a part in Labour’s success. One of the reasons Corbyn supporters cited for electing him leader, was to get votes back from the Greens.
For sure, by pursuing a ‘progressive alliance’ which in practice meant the Greens standing down in dozens of constituencies, in favour of Labour or the Lib Dems, our vote was bound to fall. And even where we did stand, the message either got through that we didn’t think we could win, or else people just threw their support behind Labour without giving us a thought. We did invite this with our strategy.
It is likely that even if we had stood everywhere the result would have been similar, I think, although our total would have improved a little. Something happened in the election campaign, a big shift in the mood of the electorate. All the various discontents of the voters coalesced into a surge in support for Labour. I can’t ever remember a late swing to Labour in a general election campaign before, but it happened this year.
Most Greens will be pleased that the Tories lost their majority in Parliament. I for one was jumping up and down, punching the air as the exit poll was revealed on TV at 10pm on Thursday. But now the dust has settled a little, we need to think through where we go from here. Off the top of my head, there are a couple options available.
Labour pretty much lifted their environment policies from the Greens, and may well drive this further home by appealing even more to Green voters, next time. Certainly, this is one of the recommendations from Paul Mason, economic journalist and Labour member, on how Labour should proceed. It doesn’t look as though returning to our old policy of standing everywhere in Parliamentary elections will be fruitful.
Therefore, we could continue and extend the current strategy, that is defend Brighton Pavilion and stand in less seats elsewhere, at least saving some money. It could be that a few other target seats can be identified, but logically this will involve challenging in Tory held seats, perhaps where the Lib Dems are the main challengers, but Labour nowhere. I haven’t picked through the results of Thursday’s election in any great detail, but there may be some areas where this is feasible.
This might mean that we largely give up on Parliamentary elections, and become a party that exists mainly at local and regional government level, until such a time as support is solidified enough at local level in an area, before any attempt is made to stand in Westminster elections. We can continue to press for proportional voting, but I doubt Labour or the Tories will introduce such a system for Parliament, it is in their interest to continue to back the status quo.
The only other strategy that I can think of for the Greens, is to pursue an ecosocialist approach and to outflank Labour on their left. Not full blown ecosocialism of course, that would mean tearing the down the capitalist system entirely and starting again. Much as I might like this idea, I think the public is not ready for it yet. But there is still electoral space in being radical, which in all honesty the Labour manifesto was not. It has been likened to the Social Democrat Party manifesto from 1983, which at the time was considered tame by the left.
There are obvious areas for Greens to exploit. Labour are in favour of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, which is a subject that a sizable minority of people in the UK are opposed to. Labour will not change their approach to this, whatever Corbyn’s views are. These voters will be disenfranchised if the Greens do not stand.
Labour is pretty much committed to carrying on welfare benefit cuts, with no mention in their manifesto of reversing the Tory cuts of the last seven years. Anyone with a once of compassion for their fellow citizens cannot support such cruelty. Some in Labour are toying with the idea of a Citizens Income, but it will not be in their next election manifesto.
Labour is essentially a centralising force, with big government solutions to everything and a desire for control at the centre. It is part of Labour’s tradition to be like this, and I can’t see them changing this approach. Greens can champion a real kind of localism, as opposed to the Tories bastardisation of the term, by handing back real and substantial powers to local communities. No other party offers this.
We should tax wealthy individuals and corporations more than Labour is suggesting. Their policy on raising corporation tax would leave the level still 2% lower than it was in 2010, so this is an easy hit. We should also advocate a wealth tax on the richest individuals including any property owned.
We should end the absurd notion of a monarchy and all the hangers on who go with it. We would make the country a republic, and not before time in the twentieth first century. Labour, much as some of them might like it, will not go near this type of policy.
Although, as I say, it is probably too soon to advocate full ecosocialism, we should not shy away from pinning the blame for our environmental ills where it firmly belongs, on the capitalist system, and say that we should be transitioning ourselves away from this damaging system, in the longer term.
Perhaps the dye is now cast, and there isn’t anything much we can do to improve our electoral prospects in the short term. The political wheel will no doubt turn again at some point, but we may have a very long wait indeed. Some may consider joining Labour and trying to Green them, but I don’t think I will be one of them. But whatever we do we should aim to be part of this movement for change, however we position ourselves electorally.
Sunday, 11 June 2017
The knives are being unsheathed in the Tory Party after Thursday’s electoral humiliation turns into a search for scapegoats. With the prime minister’s special advisors, Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill the first heads to role, Theresa May looks to be heading for the same fate.
Former Tory Chancellor, George Osborne (not a fan of May’s by any stretch of the imagination of course) has called her a ‘dead women walking,’ in an interview with Andrew Marr on BBC TV today. If you want a good laugh visit The Telegraph, the house journal of the Tory Party, and read what they are saying. It is not at all complimentary.
But disquiet is not contained in the upper reaches of the Tory Party. A snap survey by the ConservativeHome website on Friday and Saturday, where Tories activists congregate, finds 60% want May to resign in the next few months. Here’s a selection of the comments:
‘announce that you're off to retirement. You're a decent person - but the wrong person.’
‘she has produced a really nasty election result and looks like doing the same in Brussels.’
‘The likelihood is that there will be another Gen Election sooner rather than later and she clearly has very little ability when it comes to campaigning.’
‘Her woeful lack of political judgment has been exposed. She is now a liability to the party.’
‘It is clearly untenable for her to stay. The timing is the issue.’
‘The fact that Mrs May judged them (Timothy and Hill) as fit for the job after 10 years of knowledge of them, also makes her unfit as a PM.’
‘She cannot be allowed to lead us into another GE is the only thing I am certain of and I voted that she should go.’
‘She is a wooden performer, unable to think on her feet, who was forced to resort to soundbites….That is why we have got to remove her.’
‘I only voted no cause there wasn't a 'yes but not right away' option.’
And some even sweeter comments if you are a Labour supporter, like this one:
‘The next GE will see a Labour majority and the longer the Conservatives try and delay that election the heavier their defeat will be. The choice is between losing narrowly to Labour in a year's time or less and hanging on for 4 or so years and suffering a 1997 style landslide defeat .’
To further rub things in, Survation, the polling company who were closest to getting result on Thursday right, has published its first post election poll and it shows a 6 point Labour lead.
The comments on Conservative Home make it clear that May can’t carry on for much longer as prime minister, but the Tories are fearful of a new election being won by Labour, so they want to avoid one anytime soon. Although, if the above comment is anything to go by, some think the longer they leave it in calling another election, the bigger the defeat will be. A cheery thought, if they do hang on for a while.
The only problem with removing May now, is that there is not a consensus on who should replace her. There doesn’t seem to be much appetite for a Boris Johnson premiership, but that is maybe who they will end up with. I think Corbyn will beat Johnson.
My bet is, that May will announce within a week or two that she will be standing down, and the Tory Party will elect a successor. Then in the autumn or next spring we will have another general election. The odds now look like Labour will win it.
Saturday, 10 June 2017
Well, the hope didn’t kill us after all. This blog remained optimistic that the Tories could be kicked out throughout the seven weeks of the general election campaign, and although they are clinging on, limpet like, the optimism was justified. This wasn’t the result the Tories and their backers in the mainstream media expected.
The Tories have lost their majority in the House of Commons, and are being propped up by the bigots of the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), homophobic, anti-abortion and climate deniers, they make UKIP look like liberals. What may be a short term gain for the prime minister and the Tory Party, staying in government, probably at a price of increased funding for Northern Ireland, could well be a longer term further toxicity to the Tory brand.
Giving extra money to Northern Ireland, whilst the rest of the UK endures more Tory austerity will not go down well in England, Scotland and Wales. But more than this, the illiberal attitudes that are the stock in trade of the DUP, will be a big turn off for many, including the more liberal types of Tory, I forecast.
For the Prime Minister, Theresa May, this election result was a personal disaster, and a complete humiliation. After months of telling everyone there would be no early general election, she called one, in what became the first of many U-turns during the campaign. She said she called the election to increase her majority in Parliament, and to give her a stronger hand in the upcoming negotiations with the European Union (EU) on the UK’s terms of exiting the organisation. The majority has not increased, it has been lost altogether and her hand at the Brexit negotiations with the EU has been weakened.
May made matters worse with her speech in Downing Street yesterday, delivering what I think was pretty much the same speech that had been written weeks ago when she was expecting to win an increased majority of around 100 seats. Apart from adding a few lines about her friends in the DUP, this was what she was always going to say. No acknowledgement of what had just happened, she intends to carry on as normal. A complete denial of her rejection by the voters. The woman is deluded.
Congratulations to Green MP Caroline Lucas, who almost doubled her majority in Brighton Pavilion, with little else to cheer for the Greens, but we played our part in the election result by standing down for Labour and the Lib Dems, although we have some thinking to do about future strategy.
Congratulations to Labour who ran a good campaign and to its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who surpassed all expectations and was rewarded for his relentlessly positive attitude and who refused to join May in the gutter of trading personal insults.
The right wing media got a bit of a bloody nose, as their dire warnings of calamity if the Tories were not returned with a bigger majority, fell largely on deaf ears. In fact, I think it actually backfired and encouraged more people to vote for Labour, such was the tone of their attacks on Corbyn.
Young people made sure their voices were heard in this election by turning up to vote, with reports from around the country, in university towns and cities, of queues on young voters at the polling stations. It could be that other groups who don’t normally turn out in large numbers also voted this time.
So, can May survive? Not for very long I think. The Tories will be determined to keep Labour out of power, so in the short term she will probably be allowed to stay on as prime minister, but she is fatally wounded now, and it is only a matter of time before Tory MPs replace her.
The right wing Brexiteers will back her, but there are enough other Tory MPs to bring her down, when they can agree an alternative candidate. Boris Johnson, the Foreign secretary is said to ‘on manoeuvres.’
Who will wield the knife though? My money is on Michael Gove, former Education Secretary and the first to be sacked when May became prime minister. Gove and May are long term enemies and the former will want revenge. I expect he is just biding his time.
In the meantime, people outside of Parliament should demand another general election in the autumn, because we can’t allow ourselves to be ruled by a bunch bigots from Northern Ireland. Bring it on.
Tuesday, 6 June 2017
What an extraordinary general election campaign this has been. The Prime Minister, Theresa May surprised everyone with her announcement on 18 April that she was calling a general election for 8 June. No matter the Fixed Term Parliament Act, that was swept aside as though it never existed.
No matter May had been saying for months that there would be no early election, she had changed her mind, she said, because the opposition parties were trying to thwart the will of the people, in implementing the leave decision in the EU referendum. In reality, the opposition were doing their job, in opposing May’s reckless version of Brexit, and the real reason for the snap election was one of cynical political opportunism. 24 points ahead of Labour in the opinion polls, it was too good an opportunity to cement her control of the Tory Party and the wider political landscape.
It all seems like a long time ago now, much has happened in the intervening six weeks of the campaign. The Tory strategy was to keep May away from being questioned too much, and scheduled a series of stage managed events in often remote locations, filled with Tory supporters, with even journalists kept at arms length. This could not hold though, and May agreed to some limited TV engagements with audiences drawn from the public and some questioning from journalists.
May appeared awkward and hollow, in contrast to Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who was relaxed and seemingly quite normal by comparison. Indeed, Labour generally have fought a good campaign, and Corbyn has played a big part in it. The polls started to move away from the Tories, slowly at first, then more rapidly. May’s U-Turn over funding social care by taking all but £100K off those requiring care, including their house, to pay for it, went down badly. It was quickly dubbed the ‘dementia tax’ and the polls narrowed dramatically. A huge own goal by May.
The campaign has been afflicted by two terrorist atrocities one in Manchester and one in London. I feared after the first attack, it would play well for the Tories, but everything just carried on as it had, with the Tories falling in the polls. It may be too soon to judge after the second attack at the weekend, but May has been battling questions about cuts to the police and issues of competence when she was Home Secretary.
As always at elections, the opinion polls have been the subject of much debate. After largely failing to predict the result of the 2015 general election, they have altered their methodology, which basically amounts to discounting certain groups of voters who are mainly supportive of Labour. Those under 25, black and ethnic voters and the older poor, who are less likely to turn out in elections traditionally, are given less weight than other groups of voters. But still Labour has steadily narrowed the gap with the Tories.
Not a single adjusted poll, has given Labour the lead during this campaign, but an interesting analysis in The Independent last week of the Ipsos MORI poll which gave the Tories a 45% to 40% lead, also looked at the raw figures, unadjusted. It gave Labour a 43% to 40% lead. The lesson is clear, if everyone who says that they will vote Labour on Thursday does so, Labour will win the election. It’s as simple as that.
What about the Green Party? I suspect that we have been side-lined somewhat by the Labour surge, and I guess we played into this by trying to form an anti-Tory alliance, and then standing down in several seats to allow Labour or the Lib Dems a better chance of beating the Tories. However, if you are a Green supporter and live in a constituency where the Tories have no chance of winning or the Greens are best placed against them, you should vote Green. Brighton Pavilion of course, Bristol West and the Isle of Wight should be foremost in this list of constituencies. Some local Green Parties are standing in seats which do not fall into this category, and I don't want to contradict them, they know the local situation. But this blog is not only read by Greens, and I'm making a wider appeal here. I will be voting Green myself, but I live in safe Labour seat.
Where there is a chance of either getting or keeping the Tories out, people should vote for the best placed party to beat them. You can check out who this is in your area at Unite Against the Tories website, but there are other guides on the internet.
If you want to see an end to the misery of seven years of Tory austerity policies. If you are disabled and a benefit claimant who has suffered under the Tories cruel regime of benefit cuts. If you are a public sector worker whose wages have fallen by around 14% under the Tories. If you are unemployed. If you are a woman, as Tory cuts have affected women disproportionately. If you are young, burdened with university debt, and see no hope of ever owning a home. If you are old, and worried about losing the value of your house if you fall ill, and the removal of winter fuel allowance and safeguards on your pension. If you are worried about cuts to our police service and security services. If you are low paid. If you are on a zero hours contract. If you are dismayed by cuts to health services and schools, and more privatisation of these services. If you are fed up with the privatisation of our public services to line the pockets of big business. If you care about our environment. If you want to see a fairer taxation system. If you are just about managing. If you would like to see the UK have an ethical foreign policy. If you think fox hunting is barbaric. If you are concerned about the Tories reckless pursuit of the hardest possible Brexit. If you are appalled at the prospect of the UK becoming a xenophobic, insular and nasty country. Make sure you vote.
We are legion. Use your vote to kick the Tories out on Thursday.
Monday, 5 June 2017
(Photo credit BBC)
In an example of the worst type of political opportunism, Tory leader, Theresa May, has tried to use Saturday night’s horrific terrorist attack on innocent people, around London Bridge, to gain some political capital out of it. Election Campaigning was stopped on Sunday, but the Prime Minister used a speech about the attack and promised new powers for the police and blamed the internet for helping terrorist. She also blamed too much ‘tolerance’ of extremism in this country. Presumably, this is an attack on the Muslim community in the UK, with whom we need cooperation if we are to tackle this problem successfully.
There is no doubt that the internet has played a part in radicalising some people in the UK, and inspired them to commit atrocities. Some may have learnt bomb making techniques from the internet too. But it is pretty much impossible to stop this kind of content getting onto the internet, so you might as well howl at the moon, for all the good this will do. May is trying to deflect blame from herself and her government over recent terrorist attacks on the UK, but it doesn’t appear to be working.
It should be pointed out though, that Saturday’s attack was low tech, involving a hired van and kitchen knives as weapons. This latest attack did not have anywhere the sophistication of last week’s attack in Manchester.
Questions are being asked of May about reports that the Manchester Arena bomber, Salman Abedi, was reported to the police on several occasions over the last five years, when May was Home Secretary, and so in charge of counter terrorism operations at this time. Nothing was done about these reports, with tragic consequences in Manchester. Abedi, had been in Libya just a few weeks before the Manchester attack, why was he not monitored when he returned to the UK?
Reports are now emerging that at least one of the London Bridge attackers was reported to police two years ago, again on May’s watch as Home Secretary, and nothing was done. Obviously, ministers can’t know every detail of what is happening in their departments and agencies, but they can put in place processes that are robust and guard against lapses. It appears as though May did not do this, and we are having to live with the consequences now.
Questions are also being asked about cuts to police numbers, which amount to over 20,000 since the Tories have been in office, and for six years May was Home Secretary, and nearly a year as Prime Minister. Included in this reduction of police officers is a reduction of over 1,300 in armed police officers, precisely the ones who are meant to prevent events like Saturday night’s. May even accused the police of ‘crying wolf’ over cuts to their numbers in 2015, when she was Home Secretary. She should have paid attention, rather issuing such a complacent and arrogant speech to the Police Federation.
The Culture Secretary, Karren Brady, was unable to give the figures for the reduction in armed officers whilst being interviewed on several occasions on TV today, in something of a series of car crash interviews. Yet another gaffe by the Tory campaign team, in what is becoming a more and more shambolic effort as each day passes.
Even, Steve Hilton, a former senior adviser to ex Tory Prime Minister David Cameron, has called on May to resign over the issue. Given that we have only three days left until the general election on Thursday, this might be a little implausible, but the voters of the UK can deliver their own verdict on May’s performance, and remove her from office. It will be richly deserved.
Meanwhile, May is suppressing the release of a report into Saudi Arabia’s funding of jihadist terror groups, presumably to avoid further embarrassment for the government who sell millions of pounds worth of arms to country and which is meant to be a strategic ally of the UK.
This election campaign has shown that May is unfit to be Prime Minister, and the Tories are a shambles of a party that should not be trusted with the nation’s security. The British public appear to be catching on to this in increasing numbers, let’s hope they are. This episode could well be the final nail in May’s coffin, and push the swing away from the Tories in the polls enough to remove them from office.
Kick the Tories out on 8 June.
Saturday, 3 June 2017
On last night’s BBC TV Question Time Leader’s Debate, between the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, and Tory leader, Theresa May, the ‘there’s no magic money tree’ line was trotted out by May. It was rather condescending I thought, to answer the concerns of a nurse in the audience who asked about her pay and conditions of work. May was using the tried and tested, ‘we have to live within our means’ line, and that there is no real alternative to cutting public sector pay.
This line has been very effective in the past in dismissing anyone who suggests there is indeed an alternative to the Tories austerity measures dating back to 2010, as a fantasist, or at least not credible in economic prudence. The truth though, is that how we tax and spend the proceeds raised is entirely a matter of political choice. That the Tories slash public spending and decrease taxation on the wealthiest individuals and global corporations, is just one approach, and on the evidence of the last seven tears, is not even an effective let alone fair one.
If we look at the graph above, which shows UK GDP figures from 2007 to 2016, you will see that since the Tories came to power, in only one year, 2014, has GDP been better than in 2007, when the economy was beginning slow into recession from the third quarter onwards. So it is stretching it a bit to argue, as the Tories do, that they are somehow some kind of economic geniuses. By historical standards, their performance has been poor, much worse than Labour’s, until the 2008 global recession.
The more growth that is generated in the economy, the more the amount of tax revenue rises, regardless of actual tax rates. If you like, the pie gets bigger, and in theory all boats rise on the tide. Unless, the proceeds of growth are not shared around fairly, which is essentially what the Tories have done, by cutting taxes for the rich. The rich have gobbled up what little extra wealth the Tories have created, so they have failed on both counts. Low growth, unfairly distributed.
Labour aims to increase economic growth by borrowing (at historically low interest rates) to introduce a National Transformation Fund that will invest £250 billion over ten years in upgrading our infrastructure and our economy.
The chart below from the Equality Trust shows the spread of disposable incomes in the UK. Of course the richest 5% do considerably better than £100,000 per year. Such gross inequality, and then the poorest having the least disposable income, and expected to pay a higher marginal rate than the rich.
All of this has happened at the same time as the UK national has more than doubled to 88% of GDP. This can hardly be sold as successful, but the Tories cling to their magic money tree mantra, and mouth it repeatedly. It is all nonsense, coming from serial failures at economic management.
There is another way, and Labour’s (and the Greens) manifesto sets this out. Labour proposes to increase income tax rates for the top 5% of earners, those who earn more than £80,000 per year. As the manifesto states:
‘Only the top 5 per cent of earners will be asked to contribute more in tax to help fund our public services. We renew our pledge not to extend VAT to food, children’s clothes, books and newspapers, and public transport fares.’
Corporation tax, which is what companies pay on their profits, will be raised back to 26% from the 19% the Tories reduced it to last year. In 2010 corporation tax stood at 28%, so this is not an especially radical proposal, but is much needed to help fund public services properly, from which corporations do benefit from. It seems only fair to me that should pay their fair share.
Labour also promises to clamp down on tax avoidance, but all parties promise that, but it often turns out to be difficult to implement effectively. We shall see.
And there you have it, the magic money tree. Not so fantastical really is it? Don’t listen to the Tory lies, we can have a fair system of taxation, it is only a matter of having the political will to do so.
Kick the Tories out on 8 June.