radiofree.asia

Category: UK

  • Two legal challenges have been launched against a new Lake District coal mine

    Environmental campaign group Friends of the Earth said on 16 January that is has launched a legal bid to stop the creation of a new coal mine in North West England. The UK government granted planning permission on 7 December for the project, which is being led by Australian-owned West Cumbria Mining. The mine will be located in Whitehaven, on the edge of the Lake District National Park.

    The project has long faced opposition from activists, who argue that it contradicts Britain’s pledge to become carbon neutral by 2050. Tony Bosworth, a campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said:

    Planning to open a new coal mine in the middle of a climate emergency is unthinkable. Our legal challenge focuses on how the Secretary of State dealt with evidence relating to climate change put forward by Friends of the Earth and others at the planning inquiry.

    Another charity, South Lakes Action on Climate Change (SLACC), said separately that it had filed legal papers at the High Court in Manchester.

    Home insulation not coal mines

    The government said the mine will produce coal for steel manufacturing, and not to generate power. It insisted that the commitment to phase out coal power by 2024 remains in place. However, environmental groups argue that the decision – announced by senior minister Michael Gove – undermines the UK’s policy.

    Carole Wood, chair of SLACC, said:

    Gove acknowledged that 220 million tonnes of greenhouse gases would be released from the coal extracted over the mine’s lifetime, and that most of the coal would be exported rather than used in the UK or EU… but he still concluded that the mine would be “climate neutral or slightly beneficial”.

    Our claim sets out the errors in law; the failure to give intelligible reasons, and the disparity of treatment between the parties that Gove employed to arrive at this contradictory conclusion.

    The UK government argues that the project will create over 500 local jobs and will seek to be net zero in its operations. But Bosworth said the government could create such jobs through greener measures:

    The people of West Cumbria have been badly let down by years of government under-investment. Long-term, sustainable jobs are desperately wanted and needed.

    Hundreds of jobs could be created in the area by a programme to insulate homes which would also bring down household energy bills and cut climate emissions.

    The government’s Net Zero Strategy document, published in October 2021, specifically said that “new ways of making concrete, cement, [and] steel” are necessary.

    Carbon credits

    Solicitors Leigh Day, who are handling the legal challenge, said that a major focus of the case is on the investigation of the impact of carbon credits. It will ask whether ministerial approval for the mine:

    lawfully concluded that the purchase of carbon credits would make a meaningful contribution to the UK’s net zero targets.

    Friends of the Earth’s legal challenge is available for reading on its website.

    Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via Rob Lawrence/Flickr

    By Glen Black

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • It’s not surprising that one of the worst sex offenders in Britain is a Met police officer

    A Metropolitan Police officer has pleaded guilty to at least 29 sexual offences, including 14 rape charges. David Carrick was an armed police officer, serving in the parliamentary and diplomatic protection command. He joined the Met in 2001 after leaving the army, and his attacks span a period of 18 years. The police force admitted that there are likely to be more victims who are too scared to come forward, and other women who couldn’t face the ordeal of a trial. Carrick used his position in the police to terrify women into staying silent.

    Inaction by the Met over Carrick

    The Met suspended Carrick in October 2021. However, Sky News has reported that:

    the Met Police confirmed Carrick “had come to the attention of the Met and other forces on nine occasions prior to October 2021” but had not been charged over those allegations against him.

    They included allegations of rape, domestic violence, and harassment between 2000 and 2021.

    Barbara Gray, the Met’s assistant commissioner, said:

    We should have spotted his pattern of abusive behaviour and because we didn’t, we missed opportunities to remove him from the organisation.

    However, the force chose to ignore multiple complaints. It didn’t miss them, as Gray claimed. Not only did the police force do nothing about the allegations, it even armed Carrick, giving him a gun in 2009. He even passed another vetting procedure in 2017, despite the force knowing about the allegations.

    This shows, once again, how disgustingly misogynist the Metropolitan Police is. It has such little regard for women’s safety that it ignored multiple complaints, and rewarded Carrick by promoting him up the ranks into an elite armed unit.

    Rampant misogyny

    It is hardly surprising that one of the worst sex offenders in Britain could be allowed to thrive in the Metropolitan Police. The Canary has extensively reported on the rampant misogyny in the Met. It took the brutal murder of Sarah Everard for the Met to announce that it would investigate all cases of sexual misconduct or domestic abuse allegations against its officers. Sarah was kidnapped, raped, and murdered by then-serving Metropolitan Police officer, Wayne Couzens, in March 2021. He even remained an officer after police arrested him that month, and was only sacked in July, over a month after he pleaded guilty to kidnapping and raping her.

    Just months after Sarah’s murder, Cressida Dick – who was then the Metropolitan Police Commissioner – was accused of “presiding over a culture of incompetence and cover-up”. Dick resigned in April 2022 after she was criticised for her handling of racist, misogynist, and homophobic messages shared by a group of officers based at Charing Cross police station. The men sent WhatsApp and Facebook messages to each other, making multiple references to rape and violence against women. One officer was even referred to as “mcrapey raperson” because of rumours that he had brought a woman to a police station to have sex with her.

    It’s also important not to forget the Met’s handling of the murders of sisters Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman, who were stabbed to death in a park in Wembley in June 2020. Their family had to search for the women themselves after the Met didn’t immediately respond to their calls for help. When the police did finally turn up, officers took selfies of themselves next to Bibaa and Nicole’s dead bodies. Their mother, Mina Smallman, said at the time:

    If ever we needed an example of how toxic it has become, those police officers felt so safe, so untouchable, that they felt they could take photographs of dead black girls and send them on. It speaks volumes of the ethos that runs through the Metropolitan Police.

    Thousands of women have been murdered or abused by the police

    In 2021, a report found that at least 194 women have been murdered by the police and prison system in England and Wales. In 2022, freedom of information requests from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that 82% of police officers who were accused of domestic abuse kept their jobs. The Guardian reported that:

    1,080 out of 1,319 police officers and staff who were reported for alleged domestic abuse during a three-year period were still working.

    The Guardian continued:

    The conviction rate of police officers and staff for domestic abuse is 3.4%, lower than the 6.3% in the general population.

    Institutional violence

    This being the case, it’s little consolation when the Met yet again sheds crocodile tears, apologising that one of its elite officers, Carrick, has been raping women for two decades. Gray said:

    We are truly sorry that being able to continue to use his role as a police officer may have prolonged the suffering of his victims.

    The Met will go on looking after their own, thriving on a culture of violence, racism, and misogyny. Its officers will, no doubt, continue to abuse and terrify women. These officers will be loose on the streets, arresting and traumatising women, children and Black communities with brutal and humilitating strip searches, while their undercover police officers will continue to invade women’s lives.

    Meanwhile, the state will continue to play its part, having passed a succession of new laws giving some of the country’s most violent men – police officers – inexhaustible new powers.

    The Met will start the process of sacking Carrick on Tuesday 17 January. Far too little, too late.

    Featured image via Guardian News/screen grab, resized to 770*403

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • New info shows the cost of living crisis hits poor people the hardest

    As the cost of living crisis continues, new research has told poor people what they already knew: that financially, they’re screwed. However, what the data does do is shine a useful light into just how bad things are.

    Cost of living crisis: dire straits

    Torsten Bell is the chief executive of think tank the Resolution Foundation. The group does a lot of research into how government policy affects the poorest people. Now, Bell’s team has crunched some more numbers. He tweeted that 65% of the poorest fifth of people have no savings at all:

    This has hardly changed since 2016-18, at a time when the poorest people who were in bad health could save even less. However, it’s no surprise that poor people can’t save any money. This is because they spend more on everyday costs than all other groups – from housing to food – and the least on “recreation”:

    weekly expenditure by decile

    Soaring inflation has hit the poorest people the hardest. So their ability to save is directly linked to income, as Office for National Statistics (ONS) data has shown:

    Median income across deciles

    Falling into arrears

    However, Bell showed another problem: that the poorest people are also often behind on their bills:

    Again, it’s no surprise that people reliant on social security are in the worst position regarding paying bills. This is because successive Tory governments have repeatedly frozen benefit rates, cutting them in real terms. Similarly, polling commissioned by the BBC found that 32% of social housing tenants had fallen behind with utility bills in the past six months during the cost of living crisis. Between 2016 and 2018, the poorest fifth of people had the highest rates of “problem debt”, despite having the least money. This is likely to be the same now. Yet as Bell pointed out, the government helps the poorest people the least when it comes to savings:

    The end result of this is financial chaos for the poorest people.

    A catastrophe

    The BBC carried out a poll, but didn’t check whether people were rich or people. The poll found that:

    Half those asked paid for at least some of their Christmas and holiday season spending on credit.

    And:

    A third of respondents to the poll who used credit to help get through Christmas and the holiday season said they were not confident about their ability to repay.

    This leads to a deterioration in people’s mental and emotional wellbeing. Search engine optimisation agency BlueArray reported that surveying showed that:

    when asked if they are worried about affording essentials such as food, clothing, housing, and travel over 84% are worried with 36% of these being extremely worried.

    It also found that:

    87% of those surveyed say financial stress is impacting their mental health with 26% of those saying it impacts them a lot.

    2023 is going to be a disaster for countless people during the continuing cost of living crisis. With no savings, little meaningful government support, and energy bills set to go up again, the poorest people are running out of places to turn. So, it will be left to communities and not-for-profit groups to pick up the pieces.

    Featured image via pixabay

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Sturgeon vows that Scotland will defend Gender Recognition Reform Bill

    On 16 January, Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon warned London against any bid to block Scottish gender recognition reform (GRR). This comes after sources close to Downing Street reported that prime minister Rishi Sunak looks set to block the law using Section 35 of the Scotland Act.

    The looming standoff over the law to make it easier for people to change gender ratchets up London’s tense relations with Scotland’s government. It is currently less than two months after the ruling Scottish National Party (SNP) saw its efforts to hold a new independence referendum stymied by the UK Supreme Court.

    A ‘high degree of confidence’

    Sturgeon told a press conference in Edinburgh that her government is prepared to “rigorously” defend the gender legislation all the way to the UK’s top court if Prime Minister Rishi Sunak steps in to block it. She stated that, if necessary:

    We will defend the bill in the Supreme Court…

    What I can say in general is that we will absolutely, robustly and rigorously and with a very, very, very high degree of confidence, defend the legislation.

    Sunak is considering legal advice ahead of Wednesday’s deadline for him to act.

    Under devolution rules, which led to the establishment of the Scottish parliament in 1999, London can block legislation if ministers believe it will have an “adverse effect on the operation of the law”.

    If Sunak decides to take action, he will become the first No 10 incumbent to use the blocking mechanism. As the Canary previously reported:

    The powers afforded to Westminster by Section 35, essentially dismissing a bill despite Holyrood’s assent, have never been invoked. This would risk causing a constitutional crisis at a time when the union between Scotland and the UK has never been more fraught. Such a clear demonstration that Scottish parliament is only permitted to make its own laws at Westminster’s decree could be a disastrous move.

    Gender recognition reform

    The legislation, passed by the Scottish parliament in December, makes it easier and quicker for people to officially change their gender, dropping any requirement for a gender dysphoria medical diagnosis.

    The legislation also allows people aged 16 and 17 to change their gender. Furthermore, it reduces from two years to three months – or six months for 16-17 year-olds – the time needed for an applicant to live in their new gender before it is officially recognised.

    Opponents of the law have argued that it could present dangers to women and girls, particularly around the provision of single-sex spaces. However, when pressed, the Scottish Human Rights Commission could not:

    identify any objectively evidenced real and concrete harm that is likely to result from the reforms. Indeed, the majority, if not all, of the concerns that have been outlined do not appear to have a relationship with the proposals that are set out in the Bill.

    The Scottish government also insists it will not impact the UK’s Equality Act, which already allows for trans people – even those with Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) – to be excluded from single-sex spaces such as changing rooms and shelters when necessary and proportionate.

    Sturgeon said the previous system to change gender was “intrusive, traumatic and dehumanising”.

    Old appeals

    Officials in London are closely assessing the impact the law would have on the Equality Act before advising the prime minister, according to a government spokeswoman. She went on to say:

    We share the concerns that others – including the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls – have with the Bill, particularly around safety issues for women and children.

    Our concerns include the protection of single sex spaces, and the checks and balances included in the process of gaining a legal gender recognition certificate.

    However, Holyrood has already comprehensively addressed the concerns raised by the UN special rapporteur. In fact, the response quoted another UN expert, highlighting that:

    Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Argentina are examples of states that have implemented systems based on self-identification and eliminated pathologising requirements and where the numbers and outcomes in terms of social inclusion and the decrease in violence against trans and non-binary persons are remarkable. At the other end of the scope of worries, so to speak, the theoretical concerns that were raised in the process of adopting those processes have not materialised.

    Desperation

    The the GRR Bill was first proposed over 6 years ago. Since then, it has faced intense public and parliamentary scrutiny, which has failed to generate any significant changes to its contents. It is also true that at least 15 other countries around the world have introduced similar legislation without adverse effects.

    As such, there are strong questions about what exactly Mr Sunak believes could possibly be found to stop it at this 11th hour, and why such evidence was not revealed sooner. Meanwhile, Starmer – in typical centrist fashion – admitted concerns over the legislation, though he didn’t back the Tories’ challenge either.

    With the union between Scotland and the UK appearing tenuous at best, the prime minister is gambling the fate of the union itself on blocking a Bill which does little beyond making trans lives marginally less bureaucratic. More pity the spiteful fool.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons, licensed under cc-by-2.0, resized to 770*403

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Labour has teamed up with the Sun AGAIN – this time to help burn the planet

    The Labour Party under Keir Starmer clearly doesn’t give two shits about a) the victims of the Hillsborough disaster, b) working-class people, and now c) the planet. This is because shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has teamed up with right-wing shitrag the Sun. However, it’s not the first time Starmer and his team have endorsed the right-wing tabloid.

    Labour: giving the Sun exclusives

    As the Sun itself reported, Reeves has ‘backed’ calls to freeze fuel duty for motorists. The tabloid marked the article as an ‘exclusive’. This means that the party has given the Sun first dibs on the story. It noted that:

    Reeves is demanding Jeremy Hunt spares drivers from an increase at the pumps in his next Budget.

    She points to official analysis showing motorists face a 12p per litre hike if Ministers raise the petrol levy by inflation and end the temporary 5p cut.

    The Sun quoted Reeves as saying:

    With so many families and businesses reliant on their cars, the government must rule out yet another fuel duty rise at the Budget to ease some of those pressures and prevent yet another shock to our economy.

    The tabloid also quoted the founder of campaign group FairFuelUK, Howard Cox, who called Reeves’ announcement:

    gobsmacking political about-face that will secure votes for Labour…

    The traditional party of lower taxation, the Tories, are being trumped by Keir Starmer’s common sense and surprising new support for drivers.

    Of course, the Sun failed to mention that an investigation by openDemocracy found that Cox has a financial interest in lobbying for lower fuel tax. This is because he:

    owns a business that markets a fuel additive called Ultimum5, for which he owns the trademark.

    Cross the floor, Starmer, and be done with it

    So, Labour has not only happily given exclusives to the Sun but has also (maybe inadvertently) been backing a right-wing lobby group in the process. If you need reminding why the party should not be anywhere near this tabloid, the Canary‘s Joe Glenton wrote:

    The Sun‘s reporting of the 1989 Hillsborough football disaster led to the newspaper being despised and boycotted in the city. Following the disaster, in which 96 people died, the Sun made false claims, including that fans pickpocketed the bodies of victims.

    On top of all this, Labour has also shoved its climate crisis-fighting credentials up its own arse. This is because fuel duty is one way of limiting carbon emissions. As DeSmog wrote:

    According to analysis by Carbon Brief, the [freezing of fuel duty] policy has led to road transport emissions being as much as 16 percent higher (or 5 percent across the whole economy) than they would have been, had the last Labour government’s fuel duty “escalator”, which upped the levy by slightly more than inflation each year, been maintained.

    Lose-lose all round for the Labour Party, then. On top of this, as Glenton previously wrote, Starmer has already written for the Sun as Labour leader. Moreover, he allowed the shitrag to be at the party’s 2021 conference. There is nothing ‘Labour’ about endorsing a lying tabloid to win votes – but then, Starmer and his motley crew would be more at home in the Tory Party anyway.

    Featured image via Wikimedia, resized to 770×403 pixels, under licence CC BY-SA 4.0 and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Cancer and leukemia are affecting Grenfell’s firefighters at a startling rate

    Hero firefighters who fought the 2017 Grenfell Tower blaze are being diagnosed with cancers and leukaemia at a startling rate. An investigation found that over a dozen of the firefighters involved may face untreatable illnesses, including digestive cancers. 72 people died in the west London fire.

    Flammable cladding attached to the building was largely to blame for the way the fire spread – and those affected are still fighting for justice years later.

    Depressing data

    The report claims that the cancers, often being found in men as young as their 40s, are linked to the contaminants they were exposed to in the blaze.

    A fire service source told The Mirror:

    We are expecting some really depressing data to be revealed soon. It’s shocking.

    Riccardo la Torre, a Fire Brigades Union (FBU) national official told The Mirror:

    When workers on the front line are tackling fires to save lives and property, like all those who attended Grenfell, they need every protection possible from toxic health risks.

    He added:

    This vital research proves that firefighters are suffering and dying from cancer, strokes, heart disease, and mental ill health as a result of going to work and protecting the public.

    Justice denied

    Political hip-hop artist Lowkey has long championed the cause of the Grenfell victims. He called for similar research into the implications for the community and others who, like him, were at the scene:

    Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who also fought for the Grenfell families, said that residents and workers would continue to fight for justice:

    Housing campaigner Kwajo Tweneboa said that “tragedy” wasn’t a strong enough word to describe Grenfell:

    Labour group leader Emma Dent Coad recalled begging officials to carry out mass screening for local residents:

    Scapegoats

    The Grenfell Inquiry which reported in 2019 was attacked for scapegoating the firefighters who tried to save lives that day. It said that their individual heroism could not “mask or excuse the deficiencies in the command and conduct of operations”.

    Some Labour MPs contested this. Then-shadow home secretary Diane Abbot said at the time:

    It is the cladding. The people that need to be held responsible in my view are the people who commissioned the cladding, the people who signed off the use of that cladding and the people responsible for regulation.

    The fight for justice for those involved in Grenfell must continue. And we must never accept blame to be put onto the victims or those who fought to save them – and did so with terrible consequences for their own long-term health.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Cbakerbrian, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under Cc BY-SA 4.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A second protest is also going right to Sunak’s front door next week – this time, NHS workers

    After the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) announced a protest opposite Downing Street, a group of NHS workers has also organised one. It’ll be just two days after the RMT’s strike, with both unions taking the fight directly to Rishi Sunak’s front door.

    RMT: taking the fight to Downing Street

    As the Canary previously reported, the RMT will be protesting opposite Downing Street on Monday 16 January at 6pm. It’s over the Tories’ anti-strike laws. We previously wrote that:

    the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill… will force trade unions in certain industries to make sure some people work during strikes – defeating the object of industrial action entirely. The Tories call this “minimum services levels”. They’re mainly focusing on the emergency and transport services to begin with.

    The law will force unions to give-in to what the government and/or employers say minimum service levels should be – depending on the sector. Business secretary Grant Shapps will be deciding what a minimum service level looks like for emergency and transport services.

    So, the RMT is not having it – rallying people to go to Downing Street, where the heart of the problem lies. The union said:

    we will simply not accept this attack on our fundamental and democratic rights to strike.

    Now, NHS workers will also be paying Sunak a visit – this time, as an extension of their strikes.

    NHS workers say enough is enough

    Royal College of Nurses (RCN) members will be striking on Wednesday 18 and Thursday 19 January – staging walk outs across England. Then, Unison ambulance staff will strike on Monday 23 January. To coincide with the RCN 18 January walk-out, grassroots campaign groups NHS Workers Say No, Keep Our NHS Public, and NHS Staff Voices have organised a solidarity rally on 18 January:

    People will march from University College London Hospital to Downing Street, where a rally will be held. Speakers include the Communication Workers Union (CWU) general secretary Dave Ward, author Michael Rosen, Labour MP Beth Winter, and grassroots NHS workers – like midwife Laura Godfrey-Isaacs.

    The groups said in a Facebook post:

    With shocking news of 500 people dying avoidable deaths per week due to delays in emergency care, alongside heightened awareness of the government’s heinous plans to destroy the NHS – something it has been doing for years – we are seeing more NHS workers coming out in support of strikes.

    We are tired of working to the bone in order to keep patients safe and healthy, while the government refuse to do the same for us!

    Staff are striking as we face yet another year of cuts to our pay – this has left us with the highest waiting lists on record and a national staffing crisis. We have been raising the alarm for years, but our callous government refuse to listen.

    We must come out in opposition and make it clear WE DO NOT support plans to further privatise the NHS in order to keep the wealthy rich and satisfied, while regular people like us pay with our taxes and our lives.

    We must come out and show them we will no longer allow this to continue.

    Please join us.

    Going beyond just strikes

    Meanwhile, NHS Workers Say No has joined as a signatory on an open letter from campaign group EveryDoctor:

    The letter states:

    In January 2017, the Chief Executive of the British Red Cross described the situation in the NHS during winter pressures as a humanitarian crisis. We are now witnessing a wholesale collapse of our NHS and social care system, with millions of people on waiting lists and hundreds of people dying needlessly every single week.

    Given this loss of human life, the leaders of all nations must declare this a humanitarian crisis. With every day they fail to act, more people are needlessly dying.

    It’s remarkably positive that NHS workers are going beyond just striking. Doing protests and publishing pointed letters will draw attention to years of Tory underfunding and wilful decimation of the NHS. This multi-pronged approach is what’s needed at this time. So, see you all outside Downing Street on 18 January – if we don’t see you before at the RMT demo on the 16th.

    Featured image via NHS Workers Say No and the Telegraph – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A busy week for the CWU and UCU as the Tories run ‘scared’ over strikes

    Two of the UK’s biggest unions have had a busy week. The Communication Workers Union (CWU) and the University and College Union (UCU) have both made major announcements. This means that spring will be another major headache for the Tories – and as a Novara Media journalist summed-up on Question Time, the government is running scared as it is.

    UCU: 18-days of strikes

    First, the UCU has announced industrial action across a massive 18 days. The union and its members will strike in February and March – meaning 70,000 staff at 150 universities will walk out. The UCU posted on Twitter that “every single UK university will be shut down”. Its general secretary Jo Grady said there will also be a:

    marking and assessment boycott in April, which will hit summer graduations… we will [also] launch a re-ballot campaign to send a clear message to our employers that we are in this dispute for as long as it takes.

    The UCU’s previous action was across three days – now paling in comparison to this next round of strikes. However the issues remain the same: university bosses have cut workers’ real-terms pay by around 25% since 2009. The pension fund that manages university workers’ retirement pots has also been managed appallingly – cutting up to 35% off people’s final pension income. So far, bosses have only offered workers a pay rise of between 4-5%. So, the UCU is upping the ante in a very significant way.

    Royal Mail could have given CWU workers £1.7k more pay

    Meanwhile, the CWU is re-balloting its members for industrial action against Royal Mail. Its strikes were high profile in 2022 – and the union refused to budge amid Royal Mail’s derisory offers. As the CWU said on its website:

    last year’s two national Royal Mail ballots ‘expire’ on 19th January (Pay) and 17th February (Change) respectively. The union is, therefore, holding another national strike ballot, which will encompass all of the issues in dispute.

    Ballot papers will be dispatched to members on Monday 23rd January and the result will be declared on Thursday 16th February.

    Plus, there were two debates in parliament over Royal Mail, and the CWU’s dispute with it. During one on Tuesday 10 January, Labour MP Dawn Butler noted that:

    If half of the money that was given to shareholders was given to the actual workers, then there would be no need for this dispute and strike… the members of the CWU deserve a pay rise and the company can afford it

    Indeed – half of the £400m Royal Mail paid out to shareholders in 2021 would have given CWU members an extra £1,739 each in wages that year. Then, on Thursday 12 January Labour MP Kate Osborne had organised another debate in parliament on Royal Mail. CEO Simon Thompson must be getting twitchy with all these MPs airing his dirty laundry in Westminster – because Osborne said during the debate:

    Instead of negotiation… Thompson is attacking employees on social media and taking disciplinary action against workers taking legitimate action.

    With countless NHS workers also set to hold more strikes along with civil servants, as well as the National Education Union (NEU) ballot closing on Friday 13 January and the British Medical Association (BMA) junior doctors ballot open until 20 February – the Tory government has got continuing problems on its hands. Its response is anti-strike laws, which will attempt to impose minimum service levels during industrial action on some industries. However, as Novara Media journalist Ash Sarkar said on BBC Question Time on Thursday 12 January:

    This government is scared of what happens when workers organise collectively together. They’re scared that after 12-years of stagnant and falling living standards… people are realising that the only power they have is collective bargaining and… withdrawing their labour.

    The Tories should be scared – because the next few months will be worse for them than the last, and rightly so.

    Featured image via BBC iPlayer – screengrab, the UCU – screengrab and the CWU – screengrab 

    By Steve Topple

  • Britain’s most tedious centrists are still crying about Jeremy Corbyn

    To us, he’s a kindly socialist grandad figure who likes large vegetables. But to centrists, Jeremy Corbyn remains an object of absolute terror who has to be lied about and disparaged at every turn. So it was that MP Liz Kendall (remember her? No?) clashed with Corbyn on Robert Peston’s ITV show on Wednesday 11 January.

    Liz who?

    Kendall, who we should always remember lost massively to Corbyn in the 2015 Labour leadership election, decided to roll out some of the ageing attack lines loved by Red Tories across the land. She tried to argue that Corbyn only has himself to blame for being ejected from the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP). She also rehashed the old centrist line that Corbyn was to blame for antisemitism in Labour and that Corbyn should apologise:

    Corbyn rejected the charges. He pointed out that he had commissioned a report by Shami Chakrabarti on the issue and apologised repeatedly for anyone affected. However, Corbyn reiterated that the scale of antisemitism in the party had been exaggerated for political purposes by his opponents. This was something which the Forde report partly confirmed, calling antisemitism a “factional weapon” used by both sides of the party – but specifically to Corbyn’s opponents as a “means of attacking” him.

    Loser

    Corbyn supporters slammed Kendall on Twitter. One made sure that his followers were fully aware that Kendall is most famous for getting very few votes in a leadership contest – just in case anyone forgot:

    Kendall’s rather wooden diatribe even made one viewer gasp:

    And journalist Ian Fraser said Kendall came across as a “truly horrible” person:

    Kendall was branded “derogatory” and “condescending” towards Corbyn:

    Labour: fearful of Corbyn?

    The continued centrist assault on Corbyn started to grate a long time ago – not just because they are vapid people, but also because they base their analysis on so many untruths.

    But, it also tells a story. The reason Keir Starmer and the likes of Kendall are so desperate to slander Corbyn is because they fear and hate the ordinary working people who identify with the reformist program he put forward during his time as leader. Sadly, these capitalist goons are what the public is left with in the Labour Party, now – and Corbyn is well out of this toxic mess.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Jeremy Corbyn, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC 1.0 Universal.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Forced prepayment meters keeping millions in the dark, Citizen’s Advice Bureau warns

    The energy crisis, the cost of living crisis, and companies imposing prepayment meters on customers are keeping millions in the dark and cold. A new report by the Citizen’s Advice Bureau (CAB) claims that more than two million people are being disconnected at least once per month.

    The CAB did polling on people’s experience with prepayment meters. It found that that 33% of people’s energy had gone off at least once in the last year. Also, 19% of people had gone without electricity for periods of more than 24 hours at a time. Both these figures were due to people not being able to afford to top-up their meters. So, when the money runs out energy companies automatically switch off their supply. This equates to one person every ten seconds losing access to gas and/or electric – more than three million people. 

    Rule breaking

    Additionally, the CAB said its staff had seen energy companies force people onto meters in breach of regulations:

    At the same time, Citizens Advice frontline advisers have consistently seen evidence of people in vulnerable circumstances being moved onto prepayment meters, in breach of energy supplier regulations. We continue to see evidence of these practices even after the regulator wrote to suppliers in mid-November to remind them of their obligations.

    They said the government and regulator’s lack of enforcement of regulations had had profound effects on the most vulnerable people:

    Our polling exposes the consequences of the failure to effectively enforce these regulations: Over 130,000 households including a disabled person, or someone with a long-term health condition, are being disconnected from their energy supply at least once a week because they can’t afford to top up.

    The CAB warned that the issue of prepayment meters is “so acute” that the government must ban their forced installation, and put extra safeguards in place:

    This ban must include legacy prepayment meters and remote switches for smart meters. We will take forward further work to define what these safeguards should be in collaboration with industry, Ofgem and Government.

    They said new and existing meter users should be reviewed “with a commitment to replace them with credit meters where this is necessary to remove the risk of disconnection”.

    Class war

    Prepayment metering is another front in the class war. Alongside the cost of living and fuel crises, frozen wages, and the precarious state of housing in the UK, the practice leaves many of society’s most vulnerable people struggling to survive.

    Campaigns like Don’t Pay UK have sprung up to resist the increased costs being forced onto the population. And, as if we needed reminding, while bills have soared, energy bosses have been making a mint even as they’ve forced people onto meters.

    The state should intervene to help people. However, the power to make them do so can only come from below – through organised resistance by those affected.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Eric Jones, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY-SA 2.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • More people are in court this week for taking direct action for Palestine

    Two trials are starting this week, of people who took direct action against Israeli arms company Elbit Systems. Elbit supplies the majority of the drones that the Israeli military use to murder Palestinians.

    Last year The Canary wrote:

    Elbit manufactures around 85% of Israel’s drones which have been used to massacre Palestinians in Gaza.

    For example – during Israel’s 51 day attack on Gaza in 2014 – Israeli drones killed 840 Palestinians. Drones were also used extensively in Israel’s 11 day attack on Gaza in 2021.

    People have long tried to push the company out of the UK. And, the campaign to shut down Israeli arms companies operating in the UK stepped up after Palestine Action launched in 2020.

    Court Cases

    This week the case of two people who blocked the doorway of Elbit’s London office is underway. Their protest was one of a series of disruptive actions that eventually contributed to the closure of Elbit’s London HQ.

    The campaign tweeted:

    At the same time, the trial of three people who were arrested close to Elbit’s premises in Leicester has also begun. Police charged them with carrying items that could be used to cause damage. Palestine Action tweeted:

    Court cases of people who take action against Elbit have repeatedly fallen apart. Last year the Canary wrote:

    Very few people have been successfully prosecuted during the course of the campaign against Elbit. The likely reason for this is that the Israeli company is extremely scared of having its business exposed through court proceedings.

    Four campaigners who trashed the Teledyne factory in North Wales – which also supplies arms to the Israeli military – remain in prison. And the courts have now remanded them for over a month.

    Defiance

    But, the campaign remains defiant. Palestine Action wrote over the New Year:

    In trials across the country, activists have been acquitted, had their cases thrown out by judges, or have seen their charges dropped. In the courts this year, 18 activists have walked free, while 5 have seen minor convictions in the magistrates courts, those being for ‘criminal damage’ or ‘obstruction of the highways’. Dozens of other activists have had their cases dropped and trials postponed, until 2023 or 2024. Palestine Action are set for a number of major jury trials in 2023, where once again activists will deliver the message: Elbit is guilty, Palestine Action is not

    Mobilisations are called for outside every trial, the full list can be seen on our website at https://www.palestineaction.org/elbit-on-trial/

    The campaign maintains that resistance has never been stronger. They wrote:

    Despite harassment by the state, resistance has never been higher against complicity in Israel’s crimes. On top of this, we are gearing up for another year of action, promising to continue the escalation as we move against Elbit’s remaining sites. Now, we’ve begun the end of Elbit — 2023 is the year to finish them off for good.

    You can donate to Palestine Action here.

    Featured image via Unsplash/Ömer Yıldız

    By Tom Anderson

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • “No more landlords”: students take housing matters into their own hands

    As student housing reaches crisis point in the UK, one organisation is determined to break the mould – and the grip of rogue landlords – by creating co-operatives to run accommodation.

    Student housing in crisis

    Housing for university students is in chaos. As the Guardian reported, charities are saying it’s the worst crisis since the 1970s. It noted that the company StuRents did research that:

    suggests there is a shortfall of 207,000 student beds, and 19 towns and cities where there is more than a 10% undersupply of beds, ranging from 28% in Preston and 25% in Bristol to 10% in Birmingham and Swansea.

    Martin Blakey from the charity Unipol told the Guardian:

    purpose-built student accommodation has stopped expanding to the extent it was, and we don’t think that’s going to change. At the same time we think there’s a significant decrease in shared houses – [landlords] are moving back to renting to professionals or leaving the market.

    The reason for the chaos is fairly obvious: government-driven privatisation of the sector. As a report by the Higher Education Police Institute noted:

    Student housing no longer sits within the control of universities. Private sector involvement used to be confined to shared student housing in the community. Universities, for their part, owned and ran halls of residence. Now, almost half of residences are owned by private providers, working independently or alongside university partners.

    However, students aren’t taking the chaos lying down. In Manchester, a rent strike is currently ongoing. Meanwhile, one group is helping students take direct control of their homes.

    A co-operative way

    Student Co-op Homes (SCH) launched in March 2018:

    It acts as an umbrella for student housing co-operatives. SCH explained in a press release that:

    A student housing co-operative is a not-for-profit alternative housing model, whereby the tenants have control over their home. This enables the students living in them to learn and share skills to create homes where everyone collaborates for mutual benefit.

    The group works with external people and organisations to build portfolios of properties for lease to local co-ops. So far, it’s had some success. SCH says on its website that:

    We raised over £300,000 through our first community share offer, allowing us to start buying properties and help create a thriving student housing co-op movement.

    It currently has ten co-ops under its umbrella. SCH works with students who would usually struggle to get housing. It aims to support them to create democratically run student housing co-operatives that remove what it calls “profiteering landlords” and make rents affordable. Moreover, the basis for the idea is evidenced around the world. SCH said in a press release:

    We know from elsewhere in the world this model works and is replicable at scale. North American Students of Cooperation (NASCO) has nearly 50 co-op members representing 4,000 co-operators across the USA and Canada. There are now four such co-ops in the UK (housing over 130 students) in Birmingham, Edinburgh, Sheffield and Brighton, plus active groups looking to secure property in Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow, Manchester, and Nottingham. Further enquiries are coming in every month.

    Now, SCH has made further moves.

    Ethical financing could be the key

    The group has negotiated an agreement in principle with the ethical Ecology Building Society. It will provide SCH with mortgage finance. The group hopes it will make co-ops more accessible, encouraging more people to set them up. Ecology’s community and business development manager Jon Lee said:

    We are a long-standing supporter of co-operative housing and we are very excited about the role of co-operatives in delivering affordable, energy efficient and high-quality rental accommodation for students. We look forward to working with SCH to help enable their vision to expand the availability of mutually owned student housing”.

    SCH said:

    We urge those such as university and college authorities who are in a position to support the expansion of student housing co-operatives – whether through providing finance or making suitable properties available – to do so as a matter of urgency, in order to address the desperate situation in which so many students now find themselves.

    The co-op model could well be the way forward for student housing – and anything that takes power away from parasitic landlords can only be a good thing.

    Featured image via Student Co-op Homes

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Mick Lynch and the RMT call emergency demo over Tory anti-strike laws

    THIS ARTICLE WAS UPDATED AT 6PM ON THURSDAY 12 JANUARY TO REFLECT A CHANGE TO THE DEMO. THE RMT ARE NOW HOLDING AT AT 6PM ON MONDAY 16 JANUARY, OPPOSITE DOWNING STREET

    The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) and its general secretary Mick Lynch have called an emergency protest. It’s over the Tory government’s authoritarian new anti-strike law – and will be happening on the day parliament debates the new bill.

    Tories: trying to stop strikes

    The Tories are trying to push this new anti-strike law through parliament. It’s called the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill. The new law will force trade unions in certain industries to make sure some people work during strikes – defeating the object of industrial action entirely. The Tories call this “minimum services levels”. They’re mainly focusing on the emergency and transport services to begin with.

    The law will force unions to give-in to what the government and/or employers say minimum service levels should be – depending on the sector. Business secretary Grant Shapps will be deciding what a minimum service level looks like for emergency and transport services. As the Canary previously reported, Lynch has already called Shapps “incompetent” – while we noted that he is an ‘all-round clusterfucker’. Shapps has not said what these minimum service levels will look like yet. However, Lynch pointed out that:

    The government’s own impact assessment of minimum service levels shows it wouldn’t work.

    Moreover, the Tories minimum service level nonsense ignores the fact that in sectors like rail and the NHS, minimum service isn’t even being met on non-strike days anyway:

    The sharpest end of the Tories already brutal new law is that it gives bosses the option to sack workers who break it.  For example, if workers went on strike when the government claimed their industry hadn’t met the minimum service level, bosses would have the power to sack them. You know things are bad when almost everyone who is not right wing agrees something is dire (including Keir Starmer’s Labour Party) – and that’s the consensus on the bill. So, the RMT is taking emergency action.

    RMT: not having it

    The RMT has organised a demo opposite Downing Street on Monday 16 January:

    It said in a statement:

    This week the Government tabled legislation that launches a fundamental attack on our democratic and human rights to withdraw our labour. The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will give the Secretary of State for Business the power to set Minimum Service Levels following “consultation” across six different sectors including Transport, Health, Fire and Rescue, Education, Nuclear and Border Security.

    The second reading of this Bill takes place in Parliament on Monday 16th January and we are mobilising an emergency demo to send a clear message to Government that we will simply not accept this attack on our fundamental and democratic rights to strike.

    The RMT’s demo is already gaining some support:

    Everybody out – to parliament on 16 January

    Clearly, the Tories are not bringing in their new anti-strike law in isolation. It’s part of their wider crackdown on anything they see as getting in the way of the capitalist system’s interests – and therefore, by default, them and their rich mates. However, under Rishi Sunak, the Tory government is treading a very fine line at present. It is still way behind in opinion polls and generally the majority of the public seems to still support many of the ongoing strikes. So, this anti-strike law may be a step too far even for it – and with unions already mobilising to oppose it, it remains to be seen how far the bill will get.

    Featured image via Guardian News – YouTube, Good Morning Britain – YouTube, Lorraine – YouTube and the RMT – screengrab 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • UK government’s attempts to block Scottish self-ID continue – and broaden in scope

    On Thursday 22 December, the Scottish parliament passed its Gender Recognition Reform (GRR) bill with a vote of 86-39. Now, the Tory-led UK parliament is in a frantic and spiteful scrabble to block the bill from becoming law.

    The GRR bill introduces what is commonly termed ‘self-ID’, allowing Scottish trans people to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) with a simple self-declaration. This is in contrast to the current UK process, which requires either a gender dysphoria diagnosis or a lengthy period of living under one’s declared gender.

    Blocking and wrecking

    Despite the bill having been been proposed six years ago, and having faced lengthy public and parliamentary debate, the actual vote itself was still fraught. Over 150 amendments were proposed, delaying the passing of the bill by two whole days. In the end, seven Scottish National Party (SNP) members voted against their party whip, two abstained, and Ash Regan MP quit.

    However, although the GRR bill passed with a wide majority in Holyrood, it has not yet become law. The Times reported that Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government intended to block it if at all possible. To this end, there are three possible interventions that the UK government could make:

    • It can use s.104 of the Scotland Act to pass regulations clarifying whether Scottish GRCs will be valid in the rest of the U.K.
    • It can use s.33 of the Scotland Act to refer the bill to the UK Supreme Court to assess whether the bill is within the competence of the Scottish Parliament.
    • It can use s.35 of the Scotland Act to make an order vetoing the bill, regardless of whether it is within competence, because it adversely affects the law relating to the reserved matter of equal opportunities

    Indeed, within hours of the bill passing in Holyrood, Scottish secretary Alister Jack threatened to invoke Section 35. He stated:

    We will look closely at that, and also the ramifications for the 2010 Equality Act and other UK-wide legislation, in the coming weeks – up to and including a section 35 order stopping the bill going for royal assent if necessary.

    The powers afforded to Westminster by Section 35, essentially dismissing a bill despite Holyrood’s assent, have never been invoked. This would risk causing a constitutional crisis at a time when the union between Scotland and the UK has never been more fraught. Such a clear demonstration that Scottish parliament is only permitted to make its own laws at Westminster’s decree could be a disastrous move.

    Enter Badenoch

    A statement from Stonewall has stressed that the UK government should not try to block the bill. The LGBTQ+ advocacy group said that:

    It will be yet another example of hampering progress on LGBTQ+ rights & undermine the PM’s pledge to govern with compassion.

    The UK Government already recognises equivalent birth certificates from all EU/EEA countries, including countries which have a de-medicalised model of legal gender recognition.

    As if in response, Kemi Badenoch – the anti-equality Tory equalities minister – has announced a review of the list of gender certificates from overseas that the UK will recognise.

    As things stand, individuals from a list of 41 countries don’t need to provide a dysphoria diagnosis to the UK government when applying for a GRC. This is on the proviso that their gender was previously affirmed by one of these other countries. Of these 41 countries, eight have a self-ID process not unlike the one Holyrood just passed.

    Badenoch stated that she would “make sure it does not compromise the integrity of the Gender Recognition Act”:

     There are now some countries and territories on the list who have made changes to their systems since then and would not now be considered to have equivalently rigorous systems.

    It should not be possible for a person who would not satisfy the criteria to obtain UK legal gender recognition to use the overseas recognition route to obtain a UK Gender Recognition Certificate.

    This would damage the integrity and credibility of the process of the Gender Recognition Act.

    Badenoch’s statement didn’t mention Scotland, but the link between the current public scrutiny of self-ID and the reactionary backlash against countries with the law already in place is clear.

    The catch

    The list of recognised countries was last updated in 2011. This was three years prior to Denmark – which features on the list – becoming the first country in Europe to allow self-ID in 2014. We should note the fact that it is now 2023, nine years after this landmark move for trans equality, and there has been no fatal compromise of the UK’s GRC process.

    But there’s another flaw in Badenoch’s logic – one which has been conveniently missed by a great deal of the debate around self-ID in the UK. In most cases, a UK resident applying for a GRC needs to fulfil the following criteria:

    • you’re aged 18 or over
    • you’ve been diagnosed with gender dysphoria in the UK
    • you’ve been living in your affirmed gender for at least 2 years
    • you intend to live in this gender for the rest of your life

    However, there’s also another set of criteria available for people without a dysphoria diagnosis. It requires the fulfilment of all of the following:

    • you currently live in England, Wales or Scotland
    • you were in a marriage or a civil partnership on 10 December 2014 and living in England or Wales, or on 15 December 2014 and living in Scotland
    • you had been living in your affirmed gender for at least 6 years before those dates, and you have evidence of that
    • you have had gender affirmation surgery

    The fact that this secondary set of criteria requires surgery means that it is by no means de-medicalised. However, it does expose the fact that the UK’s gender recognition process isn’t reliant on the diagnosis of gender dysphoria. It also shows that the length of time living in one’s affirmed gender that is considered satisfactory is completely arbitrary. Here, it varies between two and six years.

    Delay, delay, delay

    During the self-ID debate in Scotland, the Times  was quick to point out – using its own commissioned YouGov poll – that the majority of Scots wanted to keep a requirement for gender dysphoria diagnosis. However, as we’ve seen, even the UK government itself doesn’t strictly require an actual diagnosis.

    Instead, its requirement is much more mundane. It’s reflected in the six-year discussion around the GRR bill, the three-day debate before it finally passed, and the spiralling waiting times for transgender healthcare created by government cuts.

    In the end, what the UK government requires above all else is delay. Whether it’s six years, or two, or going through the whole process of obtaining a GRC again after moving country, the system is designed to put trans lives on hold.

    A GRC does little beyond updating a birth certificate and allowing trans people to get married and die with dignity. That’s it. There is no good reason why these basic acts of respect should take years.

    The GRR bill would reduce this wait to just three months. It is this fact which is truly intolerable to the transphobes in power.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons, licensed under Open Government License 3, resized to 770*403

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Government rejects call to ban wildlife-killing snares in England, against public’s wishes

    Parliamentarians debated whether to ban wildlife-killing snares on 9 January. As MPs pointed out during the session, there’s widespread approval among the British public that the government should prohibit the devices. Indeed, the debate happened because a petition on banning snares reached the 100,000 signature threshold that can trigger parliamentary discussions.

    Nonetheless, the government rejected the demand to take action. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ Trudy Harrison merely promised to “keep an open mind” about bringing in restrictions in England in the future.

    Snares should be banned

    The petition that triggered the debate called for a ban on the sale, use, and manufacture of so-called ‘free-running snares’. These are restraining devices with a wire loop that relaxes when a wild animal trapped in them stops pulling. Needless to say, wild animals don’t tend to just sit motionless when they find themselves trapped in wire. So, as Surge Activism has explained, the devices:

    cause serious stress, injury, and sometimes death to animals. Caught foxes are frequently found to have deep wounds in their necks as the wire cuts into their flesh.

    Moreover, people – such as farmers and shooting industry workers – set the snares for certain species, such as foxes and rabbits. However, many other species find themselves trapped in them. According to a 2012 study by the government, only around a quarter of the animals found in snares are the intended targets.

    Due to all this, the petition argued that:

    such snares cause unnecessary suffering to mammals, are indiscriminate and should be banned

    Widespread support

    The idea of a ban had widespread support among the MPs in the debate. As Conservative MP Nick Fletcher, who led the debate, summarised at the end of the session, support for the ban outweighed opposition by a ratio of 3:1. A number of MPs’ views were shared on Twitter, too:

    Meanwhile, as Conservative MP Tracey Crouch highlighted, research by Survation and a YouGov poll indicated that the public widely supports a ban on snares. Crouch raised this point in response to a prior acknowledgment from the government that “some” people consider snares inhumane and unnecessary. The MP argued that it was more accurate to say:

    “some” people support the use of snares, while most of the British public wish to see their use come to an end.

    Shooting industry talking points

    MPs such as the Democratic Unionist Party’s (DUP) Jim Shannon liberally aired views of the “some” who do support the use of snares. Protect the Wild’s Charlie Moores wrote after attending the debate that they managed:

    to shoehorn every line from the BASC [British Association for Shooting and Conservation] and Countryside Alliance playbook on ‘Why we should buck the European trend and keep snaring’

    Shannon, for example, strongly insinuated that snares were the main thing stopping foxes predating some threatened birds into extinction. A self-professed shooter of birds, Shannon highlighted the alarming decline in species such as lapwings and curlews. He seemed oblivious to the contradiction in his assertions, as the declines have happened while snares are still legal.

    Moores dismissed the idea that foxes are responsible for the demise of such birds. He pointed instead to issues such as the loss of wetlands and the “vanishing numbers of invertebrates that these birds depend on”. In other words, he argued that land use change and farming practices – the main causes of biodiversity loss globally – are spurring these declines.

    As the Natural History Museum has explained, farming is killing the food source of birds – namely insects – through the use of agro-chemicals such as fertilisers and pesticides. The conversion of wilder landscapes into pastures and fields is also damaging in this regard.

    Moreover, as research from a prior badger cull trial – known as the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) – showed, animal agriculture affects species such as ground-nesting birds in other ways. Ecologist Tom Langton explained to the Canary that the RBCT indicated that:

    never mind the badgers or the foxes, it was the overstocked cattle that are destroying the nests. They were treading on them, eating them, and actually the conservation problem is the cattle.

    UK moves to ban snares, but not in England

    In the government’s contribution to the debate, Harrison – DEFRA’s parliamentary under-secretary – noted the trend elsewhere in the UK to prohibit snares. Wales is on course to bring in a ban, and relevant developments in Scotland suggest it could also do so soon.

    Harrison said that the government would “observe” how these devolved administrations implement changes and improve the DEFRA website’s guidelines on the use of snares. However, the under-secretary gave no commitments to banning snares in England anytime soon.

    Featured image via Fox Guardians / YouTube

    By Tracy Keeling

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • No wonder Tory MPs don’t want to give our nurses a proper payrise

    Alt Text: a cartoon entitled “One Rule For Them” showing a bar chart. One half shows that MPs’ pay has gone up from £65,738 in 2010 to £84,144 in 2022 – excluding expenses. That’s a 28% increase. The other half shows that a highest bracket, newly qualified nurse’s pay has gone up from £27,534 in 2010 to £32,934 in 2022. That’s a 19% increase.

    Alt Text: a cartoon entitled "One Rule For Them" showing a bar chart. One half shows that MPs' pay has gone up from £65,738 in 2010 to £84,144 in 2022 - excluding expenses. That's a 28% increase. The other half shows that a highest bracket, newly qualified nurse's pay has gone up from £27,534 in 2010 to £32,934 in 2022. That's a 19% increase.

    By Ralph Underhill

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Labour’s DWP plans are little more than perverse, Tory-esque policies

    The Labour Party has revealed its plans for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). However, the party’s claims around why it will shake up the DWP actually have little grounding in evidence.

    Labour and the DWP: “new thinking”?

    Labour’s shadow DWP secretary Jonathan Ashworth spoke about the party’s plans for the social security system on Tuesday 10 January. It was at the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) thinktank – founded by former DWP boss and architect of Universal Credit Iain Duncan Smith. In short, much like his colleague Wes Streeting’s plans for the NHS, Ashworth thinks the DWP needs reform – but he also said it needs new “thinking”. His overall thrust is that, as he said:

    unemployment is never a price worth paying.

    Much of what Ashworth proposed is not in the context of unemployment but of people who are classed as “economically inactive” – either due to retirement or ill health. His idea is that these people need more support to get back to work. However, this narrative – that too many people are not working due to sickness, disability or old age – is exactly the same one that the Tory government is using. But do Tory and Labour plans differ? Labour’s press account tweeted some of the key points. First, it quoted Ashworth as saying:

    Being out of work is bad for health and the longer someone is out of work, the more difficult it becomes for them to return to a job.

    This was the first point that Ashworth had grounded in zero evidence.

    ‘Work is good for your health’

    Ashworth’s notion that “being out of work is bad for health” is exactly the same as successive Tory governments’ stance – an idea that was actually introduced by Tony Blair. They pushed the notion that work is a health outcome, despite little evidence to back up this claim. As sociologist and writer Sue Jones noted:

    Some people’s work is undoubtedly a source of wellbeing and provides a sense of purpose and security. That is not the same thing as being “good for health”.

    For a government to use data regarding opinion rather than empirical evidence to claim that work is “good” for health indicates a ruthless mercenary approach to fulfill their broader aim of dismantling social security and to uphold their ideological commitment to… [capitalist] policy.

    Jones further noted regarding politicians’ claim that work is good for your health:

    There is plenty of evidence that indicates government policy is not founded on empirical evidence, but rather, it is ideologically framed, and often founded on deceitful contrivance. A… [DWP] research document published back in 2011… said that if people believed that work was good for them, they were less likely to claim or stay on disability benefits.

    So a political decision was made that people should be “encouraged” to believe that work was “good” for their health. There is no empirical basis for the belief, and the purpose of encouraging it is simply to cut the numbers of disabled people claiming Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by “helping” them into work.

    So, it seems Ashworth and Labour are set to continue this lie. Ashworth then continued aping Tory DWP policy further.

    Zero evidence base

    Ashworth said:

    Finally, the social security system should support – not hinder – people’s journeys to work.

    But too often the system disincentivises work, making even considering trying to engage in possible employment too much of a risk.

    He noted that the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) ‘traps’ sick and disabled people “out of the workplace”, because:

    Many people with ill health simply do not want to risk having to go through the whole benefits application and assessment process again if things go wrong.

    Once again, there is no evidence that sick and disabled people are not looking for work because the DWP disincentivises or traps them. On the contrary, the DWP has actively forced chronically ill, sick and disabled people back to work when it shouldn’t have done. One such trial of a back to work programme resulted in 37% of participants’ wellbeing actually getting worse. Moreover, the DWP’s aggressive policy of forcing people back to work has ultimately resulted in thousands of people dying. Ashworth is playing into this, as well as tabling co-working between the DWP and “local health services” (NHS) – again another flawed and dangerous policy. Ashworth framed this in the context of:

    we know there are hundreds of thousands of people currently out of work and economically inactive who may want to participate in employment with the right support… we owe it to them and their families to give them a fair chance to participate in decent employment.

    Again, there is no evidence for this.

    Labour: too many benefit scroungers

    Labour are clearly peddling the right-wing idea that there are chronically ill, sick and disabled people who should be working but aren’t – ‘benefit scroungers’, but without explicitly saying it. Ashworth gave the half-hearted caveat with his speech that:

    I want to be clear. For people who can’t work, they deserve security with inclusion not fear or threats. A Labour government will always guarantee that.

    This is not the reality of what Labour is saying, nor what would happen if they introduced the policies Ashworth has tabled. As Jones noted about the Tories, as capitalists they:

    see the state as a means to reshape social institutions and social relationships based on the model of a competitive market place. This requires a highly invasive power and mechanisms of persuasion, manifested in an authoritarian turn. Public interests are conflated with narrow economic outcomes. Public behaviours are politically micromanaged. Social groups that don’t conform to ideologically defined economic outcomes are politically stigmatised and outgrouped.

    … the merging of health and employment services and the recent absurd declaration that work is a clinical “health” outcome, are all carefully calculated strategies that serve as an ideological prop and add to the justification rhetoric regarding the intentional political process of dismantling publicly funded state provision, and the subsequent stealthy privatisation of Social Security and the National Health Service.

    While the language may be cuddlier, Ashworth’s plans are fundamentally no different. A Labour government with an agenda of wanting more chronically ill, sick and disabled people in work – when the Tories have already wrung that sponge dry, leaving thousands dead – is perverse in the extreme.

    Featured image via Sky News – YouTube and Wikimedia

    By Steve Topple

  • A look at the 15+ countries which now allow gender self-ID

    Lawmakers in Spain and Scotland advanced transgender rights bills last month, allowing anyone aged 16 and over to change their gender on official documents.

    In Spain, people will eventually be able to change the gender on their ID card with a simple declaration. And in Scotland, they will no longer need a gender dysphoria diagnosis.

    In light of this happy news, here’s a roundup of the situation worldwide on the progress of self-ID for gender identity. 

    Still early days

    The World Health Organization (WHO) reclassified being trans as recently as 2019 so that it was no longer considered a mental disorder. This followed a similar move over 30 years ago to declassify homosexuality – which is now commemorated as the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Lesbophobia and Transphobia (IDAHOBIT).

    According to the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), at least 25 UN member states:

    allow for legal gender recognition without prohibitive requirements.

    However, only around 15 countries currently allow transgender people to change their status with a simple declaration. In other countries, the legal and administrative process can take years, and it may include requirements such as psychiatric diagnosis, hormone treatment, gender reassignment surgery, or even sterilisation.

    Argentina, the pioneer

    Argentina has led the way on this aspect of trans rights, allowing a change of gender on national identity cards with a simple declaration since 2012. Several South American countries have since adopted similar laws, including Uruguay, Colombia, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru.

    In Chile, the gender identity law came into force in 2019, having gained traction following the international success of the country’s Oscar-winning film ‘A Fantastic Woman’, which starred transgender actress Daniela Vega.

    Denmark, first in Europe

    In 2010, the Council of Europe adopted a resolution calling on member states to guarantee the rights of transgender people to obtain official documents with their chosen status without requiring other procedures such as sterilisation, surgery, or hormone therapy.

    Four years later, Denmark became the first European country to allow people to apply for a legal gender change and obtain a new gender status on their identification card with a simple declaration. Other European countries have since followed, including Malta, Sweden, Ireland, Norway, and Belgium.

    Since 2017, France has allowed trans people to change their status by asking a court. France was also the first country worldwide to remove trans identity from its list of mental illnesses in 2010.

    In June 2022, Germany also unveiled plans to make it easier for trans people to officially change their first name and gender. Human Rights Watch stated that the:

    simple, administrative self-declaration process proposed would remove the financial and time burdens of complicated court requirements.

    Beyond male and female

    Some countries, particularly in South Asia, have traditionally recognised genders that are neither male nor female.

    In 2009, Pakistan became one of the first to legally recognise a third sex category. The country issued its first passport with an ‘x’ gender marker almost a decade later.

    Nepal, in 2013, added a transgender category on citizenship certificates, which act as a national identity card. In the same year, Australia allowed its citizens to add a third category to passports. In 2014, India’s Supreme Court recognised the existence of a third gender.

    From 2018 onwards, transgender people have been able to register to vote as a third gender in neighbouring Bangladesh. In the same year, Germany also legalised a third gender on birth certificates.

    In the US in 2021, the State Department eased gender selection on passports, allowing transgender passport holders to use ‘X’ for gender. The move began officially in April 2022. A press release from the US Department of State said that:

    After thoughtful consideration of the research conducted and feedback from community members, we concluded that the definition of the X gender marker on State Department public forms will be “Unspecified or another gender identity.”  This definition is respectful of individuals’ privacy while advancing inclusion.

    A demonstration of respect

    The countries mentioned above have made life that little bit easier and better for their own trans citizens. However, they also serve as a clear demonstration of the fact that allowing self-ID and non-binary gender markers does not cause a collapse in women’s rights or a breakdown of society, as some opponents claim.

    In fact, when just such concerns were raised with regard to self-ID in Scotland, an official response quoted the United Nations independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It highlighted that:

    Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Argentina are examples of states that have implemented systems based on self-identification and eliminated pathologising requirements and where the numbers and outcomes in terms of social inclusion and the decrease in violence against trans and non-binary persons are remarkable. At the other end of the scope of worries, so to speak, the theoretical concerns that were raised in the process of adopting those processes have not materialised.

    With this in mind, one can only hope that more countries around the world follow suit regarding gender self-ID. At the same time, let’s leave the archaic idea that transness can be independently measured by government agents in the past, where it belongs.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse (AFP)
    Featured image via Unsplash, resized to 770*403

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Kurdish people gather in UK cities to remember those killed in the Paris attacks

    On Monday 9 January, people demonstrated in Cardiff and London to commemorate the three people killed by gunman William Malet last December at the Kurdish Cultural Centre in Paris.

    The Canary recently reported that those who died on 23 December were “Abdurrahman Kizil, singer and political refugee Mir Perwer, and Emine Kara, a leader of the movement of Kurdish women in France”. Glen Black wrote:

    Police arrested Malet after the murders, and charged him on 26 December. Malet told investigators at the time that he had a “pathological” hatred for foreigners and wanted to “murder migrants”. As well as killing Kizil, Perwer, and Kara, Malet wounded a further three people. The suspect had a violent criminal history. At the time of the murders, he had just left detention for attacking a Paris refugee camp with a sabre in 2021.

    Thousands attended the funeral in Paris on 3 January, and French police attacked the mourners.

    The attack comes ten years after Turkish intelligence agent Ömer Güney assassinated Sakine Cansız (Sara), Fidan Doğan (Rojbîn), and Leyla Şaylemez (Ronahî) in a similar attack in Paris. Kurdish freedom movement news agency ANF Firat wrote that there has been no justice for Sara, Rojbîn and Leyla in the ten years since. According to ANF:

    justice remains far and so does truth

    London demonstrators demand action

    The Kurdish People’s Democratic Assembly of Britain (NADEK) held a demonstration outside the French embassy in London on 9 January, where they remembered both massacres.

    People tweeted news from the demonstration:

    NADEK said in a statement:

    Ten years on, there has been no justice for Sakine, Fidan and Leyla or any of the thousands of other women assassinated, raped, tortured and murdered by the Turkish state. We demand the UK, France, the European Union and international organizations take action to hold Turkey to account and to bring the real murderers to justice.

    The group demanded that:

    The UK, France, EU and the international community must launch a proper and thorough investigation into the chain of command which led to these deaths.

    “the second triple murder in 10 years”

    On the same day in Cardiff, around 40 demonstrators gathered to remember those who died in the attacks.

    A vigil was held in Cardiff city centre, and then the demonstrators moved to a statue of Lloyd George. The group explained why in a press release:

    Lloyd George, the Welsh prime minister of Britain was responsible for the partition of Kurdistan 100 years ago. The partition of Kurdistan, meant that in Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran Kurds are being massacred to this day.

    Jill Davies from Kurdish Solidarity Cymru said:

    Kurds are being forcibly assimilated, murdered and tortured, this is happening not only in the middle east but also in Europe. This triple murder is not the first time for this to happen. France failed to protect its Kurdish born citizens that came to France to flee violence

    Wales is not innocent either, a Welsh prime minister was behind the partition of Kurdistan, and to this day we have statues of him in Cardiff and Caernarfon. There is even a Lloyd George museum that fails to mention his role in the partition that had lead to war that lasts to this day. There are 40 million Kurdish people worldwide, they are the largest nation without a state in terms of population.

    ‘Violence is following us here’

    Baris Rubar, a member of the Kurdish community in Wales said:

    We flee from our countries so that we can live in safety, only to have the violence follow us here. The European governments have a responsibility to protect its citizens. This is the second triple murder in 10 years in Paris of Kurdish activists. We believe there is something sinister going on and that the Turkish state should be investigated for these assassinations.

    Kurdish organisations have vowed to keep on organising until they get justice for those killed in the two Paris massacres. They deserve support and solidarity in their struggle.

    Featured image via Kurdish Solidarity Cymru (with permission)

    By Tom Anderson

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • First-of-its-kind census data on LGBTQ+ identities could be a mixed blessing

    More than a quarter million people in England and Wales identify with a gender different from their sex registered at birth, the countries’ first such census data showed on Friday 6 November.

    The once-a-decade questionnaire, conducted in 2022, also revealed around 1.5 million people gave their sexual orientation as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or another queer sexuality. This represents 3.2% of individuals aged 16 and over.

    It was the first time English and Welsh census data included an estimate of the LGBTQ+ population, as well as asking about gender identity.

    A ‘historic step forward’

    Campaign group Stonewall described the publication of the figures as a “historic step forward”. It comes after decades of campaigning and centuries of LGBTQ+ people being “invisible” and “missing from the national record”. Nancy Kelley, the charity’s chief executive, added that it was:

    finally painting an accurate picture of the diverse ‘Rainbow Britain’ that we now live in, where more and more of us are proud to be who we are.

    On Twitter, she also commented on the robust nature of the data due to the sheer number of responses:

    First-of-its-kind population data

    The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will be publishing the 2021 census in stages over two years.

    It has already revealed that 262,000 people said their gender identity was different from their sex registered at birth. This represents 0.5% of the population aged 16 and over. This means that, for every 200 people in the UK, one of them will be trans. People on Twitter were therefore quick to highlight the fact that the current moral panic around trans people is completely out of proportion:

    A total of 30,000 people identified as non-binary, while a further 18,000 people wrote in another gender identity. Some 48,000 identified as a trans man, and an equal 48,000 identified as a trans woman, while 118,000 did not provide further detail. Notably, this served to dispel a longstanding and widespread preconception that trans women outnumber trans men.

    Among those responding to questions about sexual orientation, 43.4 million people – 89.4% of the population aged 16 and over – identified as heterosexual. Some 748,000 described themselves as gay or lesbian, 624,000 as bisexual, and 165,000 selected “other sexual orientation”. Important data was also gathered on some less-often-mentioned sexual identities:

    Breakdown by area

    The fact that the data could be searched by area led to a wide spread of observations. Some were pure fun:

    You could even figure out the gayest place to live with the cheapest housing (it’s Lincoln, by the way):

     

    However, the data also pointed to some worrying correlations, such as trans people being confined to poorer areas:

    Cautious reactions

    The ONS noted that nearly 46 million people – 94% of the population aged 16 and over – answered the question on gender identity, and around 45 million people did so about their sexual orientation.

    ONS director Jen Woolford said the first census estimates would help policy-making. She said that decision-makers can now better:

    understand the extent and nature of disadvantage which people may be experiencing in terms of educational outcomes, health, employment and housing.

    However, some trans people were more cautious, given the current reactionary political climate. One Twitter user brilliantly summed up the potential issue:

    Scenario 1: the numbers suggest there are fewer of us than estimated. In this instance we may see The Usual Suspects claiming that, since there are so few of us (particularly trans people), that we don’t need as many protections, services, support, etc.

    Scenario 2: the numbers suggest there are more of us than expected. If this is the case, we will likely see a bigger pushback against LGBTQ+ people, particularly trans people. There may be calls to limit how we can identify ourselves, and concerns about the stability of gender.

    How exactly the increasingly transphobic British government will react to the census results remains to be seen. Somehow, though, it is a struggle to imagine an immediate future in which this new data leads to a lessening of hostilities against the UK’s queer population.

    If you would like to see and search the data for yourself, follow this link.

    Additional reporting via Agence France-Presse (AFP)
    Featured image via screengrab from www.ons.gov.uk/census, resized to 770*403

    By Alex/Rose Cocker

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • DWP complaints to government watchdog are through the roof

    Claimants are lodging more official complaints about the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) than at any time in the past decade. That’s the headline figure from the independent government watchdog that deals with DWP complaints. However, this is not news, as the Canary previously reported that the figures were already up for 2022/23 – something the DWP denied to us at the time.

    DWP: complaints up again

    Claimants can complain about the DWP to the department itself. Alternatively, they can lodge a complaint with the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) – a separate government body from the DWP. As John Pring at Disability News Service (DNS) wrote:

    For a complaint to be examined by ICE it must be about DWP service failure and the claimant must have had a final response to their complaint from DWP within the last six months.

    As the Canary previously reported, complaints to the DWP and to the ICE were up in the period 1 April to 31 June 2022. We wrote that:

    Compared to the same period in 2021, these figures are a 29% rise in overall complaints and a 33% rise in the number of cases ICE is investigating. This represents 37% of all cases the DWP passed to ICE – the highest for this quarter since 2017.

    Now, as DNS also reported, the ICE has revealed that complaints to it in the previous year 2021/22 were at their highest levels since 2013/14. The verdict of the ICE’s boss was also critical of the DWP.

    Level of complaints not seen for a decade

    DNS noted that complaints were up in all areas – from working-age benefits to disability-related social security like Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The ICE itself noted a:

    17% increase in customers approaching the ICE office and the significant 68% increase in the number of complaints we accepted for our review.

    Joanna Wallace from the ICE said that:

    my office has not experienced referrals or intake at this level for at least the last decade

    Crucially, all this is with the number of people claiming some social security actually falling. For example, the number of households on Universal Credit fell in the year 2021/22 – while the number of complaints the ICE accepted about working-age benefits rose by 38%. Despite this, Wallace noted “more than half” of complaints to the ICE were about Universal Credit, and regarding the nature of the complaints:

    we found that confusion or a lack of knowledge on the part of staff resulted in customers making inappropriate claims in error in particular with the treatment of students and income they received from loans during the academic year.

    Meanwhile, the number of PIP claimants went up during this time, which may explain part of the 37% increase in the number of complaints about disability benefits the ICE accepted. However, this would not account for the entire increase. As Wallace noted, the majority of complaints to the ICE were about PIP, and:

    In the main the complaints my office received concern the PIP assessment process and how medical evidence provided to support a claim had been interpreted. However, my office has also seen complaints about payment delay, and misadvice.

    DWP says…

    The DWP did not respond to DNS‘s question about why it thought complaints were up. It did tell DNS that:

    We support millions of people each year so they get the help and service to which they are entitled.

    The vast majority of complaints are handled by DWP, with only a small proportion escalating to the Independent Case Examiner which provides an independent avenue for customers.

    However, Wallace concluded that:

    It is already a concern that cases with my office take far longer to be brought into investigation than I am happy with, and a sustained increase in cases coming to us such as we have seen this year, will only make that position worse.

    Given the figures the Canary previously analysed for the start of 2022/23, and the fact the DWP incorrectly claimed these were falling, it seems the level of complaints to the department will not be coming down anytime soon.

    Featured image via the Guardian – YouTube and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

  • EveryDoctor GP hits back at Wes Streeting for Labour’s NHS plans

    Labour’s shadow health secretary Wes Streeting has caused uproar among medical professionals. He laid out his plans for NHS GPs in an interview with right-wing newspaper the Times on 7 January. So the Canary spoke to a frontline GP who responded to many of Streeting’s claims and ideas. They were, at best, unimpressed – and at worst ‘deeply sad’, ‘fearful’ and felt like the Labour frontbencher had delivered a “kick in the teeth” to GPs.

    EveryDoctor UK

    Streeting has some interesting plans if the public elect the Labour Party in 2024 and he becomes health secretary. Right-wing newspaper the Times published an interview with him on Saturday 7 January. As the Canary previously reported, his proposals have left many people angry and disdainful. So, we reached out to a frontline group to get its reaction.

    The Canary spoke to a grassroots NHS GP and media spokesperson for campaign group EveryDoctor UK. You can find out more about the group here. We’re keeping the GP’s identity anonymous at the request of the group, due to the amount of abuse, on- and offline, medical professionals currently receive. The GP told us:

    ‘Disappointing’, was my first thought on reading the article in the Times by Streeting. Then, as his words sunk in that turned to deep sadness, and fear.

    It starts off well with an interesting anecdote, but then descends into inaccuracy, ignorance and incitement. It has already been shown that what is currently overwhelming A&Es across the country is not difficulty in accessing a GP, yet Streeting repeats this claim here anyway. He also notes that seeing a GP costs a tenth of an A&E appointment. Unsurprising, given the investigations that patients attending A&E usually need. So although he implies it, it is clear that GPs cannot deal with most of the patients attending A&E. It is like comparing apples and oranges.

    The GP then went on to address some of Streeting’s main points.

    Patients self-referring to NHS specialists

    As the Canary previously reported, Streeting wants the NHS to let patients self-refer to specialists. He said:

    Sometimes it’s pretty obvious that you don’t need to see the [family] doctor. I had a lump on the back of my head, during the pandemic. I needed to see a dermatologist but in order to get an appointment with a dermatologist, I had to go through the GP. What a waste of my GP’s time. I think there are some services where you ought to be able to self refer.

    However, the GP the Canary spoke to vehemently disagreed with Streeting’s assertion. They said:

    Where the article really starts to alarm is where Streeting asserts that “GPs should no longer be the sole gatekeeper to the NHS”: a statement followed with the suggestion that patients should self-refer to specialists. Many of my hospital colleagues are aghast at the suggestion.

    An enormous part of what GPs do is risk management: taking symptoms, making diagnoses, calculating the risks of it being cancer or something else needing urgent treatment. Take bloating for example. Is this IBS, bowel cancer, helicobacter pylori infection, ovarian cancer etc? Which specialist do you need? How quickly? This is core to what we do. Allowing anyone to self refer means that hospital consultants will waste an enormous amount of time on patients they should never have seen, and patients may come to harm through delay. We already have long waiting lists, how much longer would they be under this scheme?

    “Deeply depressing”

    Streeting then took aim at GP finances. About pharmacies doing jobs GPs currently do, like vaccinations, Streeting said:

    I can well understand why there are GPs who look with anxiety at [this]… but that’s because they’re thinking about their own income and their own activity. Vaccinations are money for old rope, and a good money spinner, and not unreasonably GP partners are thinking about the finances of their own practice. That’s totally reasonable but what matters to the patient is fast, accessible care, wherever that is.

    The EveryDoctor GP made short shrift of Streeting’s claims:

    The sentence “GP partners are thinking about the finances of their own practice.” is deeply depressing, with Streeting apparently believing patient care is of secondary importance to the profession. If I were thinking purely of my own financial position, I wouldn’t be a GP partner. Income has dropped over the last 10 years, and every wage increase for my staff comes out of this dwindling pot. That means my income goes down. I could earn far more as a locum, and have a better work-life balance if I became salaried.

    Streeting goes on to say that “the way GP practices operate financially is a murky, opaque business” – an assertion belied by the ease with which the Times managed to show it in a small diagram as part of the article. He also appears to have forgotten we have to publish our earnings. It’s about as transparent as it gets. This is just a lie.

    But moreover, the GP highlighted how Streeting’s comments are both dangerous and very anti-Labour Party – or rather, what the Labour Party should stand for:

    Not only is this another kick in the teeth for GPs who have been singled out on a number of occasions by politicians, the NHS England CEO, and media for uninformed criticism, but it is likely to increase the abuse encountered by staff and clinicians in their work environments. We are still seeing waiting rooms trashed, and verbal abuse being levelled at staff daily. This article from an MP will be seen to legitimise it. It is further astonishing to see a Labour MP picking a fight with a union. Accusing them of having a “vested interest”? The only interest a union has is to support its members, and the BMA of recent years past can hardly be accused of having done that. Streeting quotes Nye Bevan’s “stuffed their mouths with gold” speech, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the doctors to who he refers are long gone, and visiting the sins of the father on the sons is insulting and gratuitous.

    The truth of the matter is that the NHS is in its current parlous state after 12 years of underfunding. Of course aspects can be improved, but to suggest we do not continuously strive to do that is nonsense. Many people suggest it is ‘not fit for purpose’, few have a fully costed alternative. We spend about £3,000 per person per year on health in the UK; it is £7,500 in the US.

    A “responsibility to patients” in the NHS

    Then the GP picked apart Streeting’s idea of making GPs salaried NHS staff:

    Why is the GP Partnership model worth retaining? Because what you have is a group of people who have decided to take on a responsibility to patients. They manage the practice and provide the clinical cover. As it is their practice, if ill they will continue to work unless they pose a risk to patients. They won’t call in sick – they would have to find the cover. They work as many hours unpaid overtime as is needed to ensure all the letters, discharge summaries, blood test results, prescriptions and other paperwork are dealt with. This often involves another five hours or more work once the last patient is seen. They know their patients and have committed to continuity of care by anchoring themselves to partnership. If you take that away, you will be paying more for managers, and need significantly more GP time to get the work done. There are 7,000 too few GPs in the current system. In the long term a salaried workforce would certainly improve GP working conditions significantly, but we simply don’t have enough GPs. The service relies on partner GPs working ludicrously long hours to take up the slack. And it takes 10 years to train a GP, at a time when they are leaving in increasing numbers because of the cumulative strain.

    Streeting has enraged many medical professionals and members of the public alike. As the EveryDoctor GP summed up:

    Having said all this about GPs and doctors and the BMA, Streeting closes by saying he “love[s] and appreciate[s] people working in [the NHS]”. Presumably just not GP partners, eh?

    It remains to be seen how, if Labour got into government, Streeting would convince GPs his plans are well-intentioned and workable. Moreover, he’d have to convince us all they were good for patients, too. And based on the reaction of the GP the Canary spoke to, it seems like the shadow health secretary’s ideas would fail on both counts.

    Support EveryDoctor UK by donating to the group here. 

    Featured image via EveryDoctor UK and Sky News – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A far-right troll’s intervention appears to have seen anti-fascist news sites banned from Twitter

    In late 2022, Twitter banned two long-standing anarchist news sites. In 2021, a US investigative journalist who participated in a Kill the Bill demonstration in London was arrested.

    So how are they connected?

    Answer: in both cases a troll – the same troll – intervened.

    CrimethInc banned

    In October 2022, CrimethInc published an article criticising Musk’s acquisition of Twitter, arguing in favour of alternative media platforms. The following month, CrimethInc published an article about its ban from Twitter.

    According to the anarchist website It’s Going Down (IGO), this is what happened:

    On November 24, Paul Ray Ramsey, a white nationalist who speaks at conferences alongside Richard Spencer, posted a tweet approving of a wave of bans targeting “antifa” and anti-fascists on Twitter. Elon Musk responded favorably to him. Early on the morning of November 25, far-right troll Andy Ngô answered Musk, specifically requesting that the @crimethinc account be banned from Twitter.

    Ngô’s ‘evidence’ was nothing more than years-old screenshots of CrimethInc postings, providing routine tips for direct action.

    On 9 December 2022, CrimethInc warned:

    As everyone knows, we have been suspended from Twitter at the same time that Elon Musk is welcoming notorious neo-Nazis back to the platform. On a platform like Twitter, a project like ours is like a canary in a coal mine: when things change, we are the first to go, and that means the clock is ticking for everyone.

    The Intercept reported that IGO, which has had a presence on Twitter since 2015 – along with 108,000 followers – was also banned from Twitter. IGO pointed to Ngô’s possible role in the suspension.

    Resistance reporting

    So what is CrimethInc known for?

    On its website, and via its presence on the alternative media site Mastodon, CrimethInc describes itself as:

    a rebel alliance—a decentralized network pledged to anonymous collective action—a breakout from the prisons of our age. We strive to reinvent our lives and our world according to the principles of self-determination and mutual aid.

    Since it began in 2008, CrimethInc has regularly reported on resistance to fascists and authoritarian regimes. For example:

    • In 2008, CrimethInc ran an article on the riots in Greece and how anarchist resistance groups there organise.
    • In March 2015, it published a historical overview on the Kurdish fight against authoritarianism, and in more recent years its war on Daesh.
    • In February 2022, with indications Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine, it published an interview with an anarchist in Ukraine on the resistance to authoritarian tendencies there.
    • It also published a statement by Russian anarchists critisising the planned invasion.
    • Three weeks later, it published an article on the grassroots resistance to Putin’s war.

    An earlier Ngô intervention

    As for Ngô, he is no newcomer to interventions against antifascists. In April 2021, a #KillTheBill demonstration took place in London. Some people were seen holding up a modified version of a “Cops Kill” banner:

    Ngô intervened by publicly naming one of the people holding up the modified version of the banner. The individual concerned was US radical left journalist Barrett Brown.

    Brown was in London hoping to seek asylum in the UK, as he believed the US was no longer a safe place for him to carry out his research. However, after he was identified at the demonstration, Brown was arrested. He was released on bail but detained by immigration officials.

    Here is Brown’s take on what happened.

    Barrett Brown

    Prior to his prosecution in the US, Brown had previously worked on a number of research projects. For example, he was one of the first journalists to warn about the activities of data miners Palantir. Similarly, he warned about Tartan, a threat-modelling facility which identifies and targets political activists and their networks. He also warned of Trapwire, a global surveillance system.

    This interview with Brown covers his 63 months in prison and the circumstances surrounding his arrest by the FBI. He also goes into some of his research projects, such as exposing persona management tools, i.e., online trolls/sock puppets:

    More on Brown’s projects and the attempted suppression of his research by US authorities can be found here.

    Disinformation

    A 2019 Rolling Stone article summed up Ngô, who describes himself as an “independent journalist and photographer”, saying he has developed:

    a knack for obtaining footage of anti-fascist protesters that leaned into preconceived notions of radical leftists, making them look violent, red-faced, angry, or even just irrational, a gimmick that landed him a handful of spots as a commentator on Fox News.

    Indeed, in a story on a confrontation in Portland, the Washington Examiner claimed that Ngô appeared to be “watching the right-wing group Patriot Prayer making plans for a violent clash at a bar, which he did not report or try to stop”. Though Ngô denied that.

    A 2019 Salon article refers to a video that shows far-right Patriotic Prayer members:

    discuss their weapons and making preparations for the attack [on antifa]. Ngo is present the entire time and can be seen laughing at certain points…

    In Ngo’s coverage of the violence, however, videos of the attack were selectively edited to remove violence by Patriot Prayer members. His tweets entirely blamed antifa for the violence.

    Meanwhile, CrimethInc continues to publish its research – via Mastodon.

    As for online trolls, we need to be vigilant – Ngô’s intervention on Twitter has shown, once again, just how easy it is for the right to manipulate social media.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons, licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0., resized to 770×403 pixels

    By Tom Coburg

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Bristolians mourn another death in custody at HMP Eastwood Park

    Content warning: Deaths in state custody, Suicide, Sexual violence, Self Harm

    A demonstration was held on New Year’s Eve outside HMP Eastwood Park in Falfield, near Bristol.

    New Year’s Eve is traditionally a day of solidarity with incarcerated people, but Bristol’s NYE 2022 was different, as people had heard the news that another person had died in custody shortly after Christmas. The anger was visceral.

    Demonstrators chanted, “Eastwood Park, blood on your hands”.

    Prisoners at Eastwood Park reported that a woman had died after a fire started in her cell. They said that they could hear her screams as the cell burned, and that prison staff did nothing to extinguish the blaze.

    The Canary contacted both the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the fire service for a comment about what happened. Avon Fire & Rescue Service said that they had responded to a fire at the prison on 26 December. The MoJ said that a woman – named as 48-year-old Clare Dupree – died on 28 December, and said that:

    As with all deaths in custody, the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman will investigate.

    The MoJ claims that all “procedural efforts to put out the fire took place”. However, this statement completely contradicts the accounts from inside the prison.

    Officers accused of doing ‘nothing to extinguish the flames’

    The Bristol branch of the Anarchist Black Cross (ABC) prisoner support group tweeted a statement expressing rage about Clare’s death:

    ABC alleged that the officers (or ‘screws’) did nothing to try to put the fire out:

    Just after Christmas, Clare Dupree died after a fire started in her cell. Prisoners in several wings heard her screams for help, but the screws did nothing to extinguish the flames. Women shouted out for the officers to help Clare, but they would not open the door of Clare’s cell, and failed to put a firehose through the cell’s hatch.

    Under prison regulations, prison staff are supposed to be trained to use Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE) in order to respond to fires inside prisons. The policy allows trained staff wearing RPE to enter a cell where a fire is taking place – if it is safe to do so – in order to remove prisoners. The prisoners’ accounts suggest that this did not take place.

    Many cell doors are fitted with ‘inundation ports’ for prison officers to insert a hose in case of fire. However, ABC claims that this didn’t happen either.

    We asked both Avon Fire & Rescue Service and the MoJ what specific measures had been taken to prevent Clare’s death. Neither made any further comment.

    ‘We feel deep anger and sadness’

    Bristol ABC has invited Clare’s family and friends to contact them:

    We didn’t know Clare, but we want to invite her friends and family to reach out to us. We hate the system that killed Clare, and we hate HMP Eastwood Park. Although we never met Clare, we feel deep anger and sadness at her death.

    ABC stated that at least four people have died in custody at HMP Eastwood Park during 2022. One of them was Taylor, a trans prisoner who took his own life after serving 14 years of an indeterminate sentence with no end date in sight. The second person whom the group named was a woman called Kayleigh who, like Taylor, committed suicide soon after allegedly receiving a beating from officers:

    Clare was at least the fourth person to die in Eastwood Park’s custody in 2022. Some of us knew Taylor, who cut his own throat and bled to death at Eastwood Park in July 2022. Taylor had faced violence and transphobia from officers. Guards beat him viciously just weeks before he killed himself. You can read more at https://bristolabc.org/riptaylor/

    The same week that Taylor died, another prisoner named Kayleigh took her own life. She too had been the victim of a violent assault by officers just before her death.

    The MoJ claims that there were three deaths at Eastwood Park in 2022. An MoJ spokesperson told the Canary:

    The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman is investigating the three deaths in custody at HMP Eastwood Park in 2022, as they do with all such cases, and our thoughts remain with their families and friends. It would be inappropriate to comment before their investigations conclude.

    Independent Monitoring Board ‘concerned’ about level of self harm

    ABC’s figure of four deaths in custody in Eastwood Park during 2022 is double the two deaths recorded by the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) during their reporting year ending in October 2020.

    In its last published report from 2021, the IMB said it was “concerned about the levels of self–harm and violence” at Eastwood Park, and that it had to “stop short of reporting that prisoners were treated humanely” because of the lengths of time people spent locked up. The time people spent in their cells had gone up as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, but the increase has continued long after the end of coronavirus lockdown restrictions.

    Recorded self-harm incidents reached over 200 during one month in 2021. The IMB also expressed concern that a prisoner with an acquired brain injury had been segregated for over 1200 days. This is despite the UK Supreme Court acknowledging that the Council of Europe’s Committee on the Prevention of Torture advises that segregation for punishment purposes should be limited to just 14 days.

    ‘Murdered by the state’

    The ABC statement said that violence and sexual violence by officers at Eastwood Park is common:

    Attacks by screws are common in Eastwood Park, and so is sexual violence. Taylor and others have shared with us how women have been forced to give oral sex to officers in exchange for drugs being brought from outside.

    We put these allegations to the MoJ, but had not received a reponse by the time of publication.

    ABC said that it holds the prison responsible for the deaths that have taken place in its custody. In fact, it sees Clare, Kayleigh, and Taylor’s deaths as murders “by the state”:

    like Taylor and Kayleigh – Clare was murdered by the state. Their names – and their murderers – should not be forgotten.

    ‘Solidarity is strength’

    The group said that it is afraid for other friends and comrades currently imprisoned at Eastwood Park:

    We are actively involved in supporting friends and comrades in HMP Eastwood Park right now – and we are scared of what this rotten institution might do to them. We want to invite anyone whose loved ones are imprisoned in Eastwood Park to get in touch, so we can support each other. Solidarity is strength!

    Clare’s death has – up until now – not been reported in the media. This is an example of the callousness and apathy endemic in the mainstream press towards prisoners. The fact that this violent death in state custody went unreported for so long is deeply disturbing. It is not acceptable for prison deaths, skyrocketing levels of suicide and self harm, and isolation to the point of torture to become normalised.

    As an institution, prison – like the police force – is a tool that helps maintain the power of the existing ruling class. The violence of prison is predominantly felt by working class people, people of colour, and other structurally oppressed groups. If we want to stand with the oppressed, we need to envision a society without prison, and stand against the injustices that prisoners are facing right now.

    Around the UK, local community organisers have been establishing Copwatch groups to counter the violence of their local police forces. We need similar local initiatives to be set up in every community to defend ourselves against the violence of prisons.

    It’s important that we honour the memory of Taylor, Clare, Kayleigh, and all the incarcerated people who have lost their lives behind prison walls. We can do this by not standing idly by while more of our comrades are killed by the carceral system. We need to show up for our friends inside, and fight for the abolition of prisons.

    Featured image via Unsplash, resized to 770*403

    By Tom Anderson

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Wes Streeting’s NHS plans are typical of this charlatan

    Labour’s shadow health secretary Wes Streeting has enraged healthcare workers and activists with his latest NHS proposals. His comments came in the Rupert Murdoch-owned the Times – and it’s pretty obvious why he’s coming up with the Tory-lite plans he has.

    Streeting: greedy GPs getting ‘money for old rope’

    The Times published its interview with Streeting on Friday 6 January. Amid a swathe of commentary on the NHS (and the predictable ‘I’m just like you!” anecdotes about growing up on a council estate), Labour’s shadow health secretary proposed some bold plans for GPs (general practitioners). The Times wrote that:

    With a record two million people waiting more than a month to see a GP, the shadow health secretary says: “I think we need to completely rethink what primary care looks like.” GPs should no longer be “the sole gatekeeper” to the NHS, he says. “I’m convinced that pharmacy has a big role to play. This is where competing interests among providers might not always work in the interests of patients. I can well understand why there are GPs who look with anxiety at pronouncements from politicians that community pharmacies should be doing more vaccination or more prescribing, but that’s because they’re thinking about their own income and their own activity. Vaccinations are money for old rope, and a good money spinner, and not unreasonably GP partners are thinking about the finances of their own practice. That’s totally reasonable but what matters to the patient is fast, accessible care, wherever that is.”

    Straight out of the blocks, people pointed out numerous problems with Streeting’s idea that GPs were thinking about “their own income”:

    Streeting also wants to make GPs salaried NHS workers – which one GP took issue with:

    Self-referral chaos?

    Then, Streeting wants patients to be able to self-refer to specialists, and not have to go through their GP. He stated:

    Sometimes it’s pretty obvious that you don’t need to see the [family] doctor. I had a lump on the back of my head, during the pandemic. I needed to see a dermatologist but in order to get an appointment with a dermatologist, I had to go through the GP. What a waste of my GP’s time. I think there are some services where you ought to be able to self refer.

    The lump could have been a tumour for all Dr Google knows, Wes – and you would have wasted a dermatologist’s time when the GP would have referred you to oncology straight away. Streeting’s nonsense about self-referral has also been heavily dragged on social media:

    Streeting: feathering his own nest?

    So, if Streeting doesn’t want GPs to do vaccinations, doesn’t want them to always have to refer patients, and thinks they’re only feathering their own nests, what the hell does he want them to do? Well, he has another bold plan, as the Times noted:

    Instead of GP surgeries he wants modern health centres with a wider range of facilities “where you will have your family doctor, but you’ll also see nurses, you’ll see physiotherapists, you might go for a minor injury or a scan…

    Mate, this LITERALLY already exists. In Beckenham, South London, for example, there’s a GP surgery with (shock) nurses, GPs, physios, extended appointment hours, and even minor surgery – and it’s accepting patients. This likely isn’t the case everywhere, but the point is that Streeting isn’t making some revelatory statement. His model already exists.

    What Streeting is really doing with his plans is quite obvious to some people. As Dr Julia Grace from campaign group Every Doctor UK pointed out on Twitter:

    Of course, Streeting’s position on the NHS comes with the caveat he’s accepted donations from a hedgefund manager with investments in private healthcare companies. Go figure.

    If Streeting was so concerned about patients, why not commit to properly funding the NHS? He could aim to improve care for chronically ill and disabled people – an area where the NHS falls down. However, Streeting instead decides to attack GPs. Labour’s shadow health secretary is a charlatan of the highest order – and it didn’t take much to show this, either.

    Featured image via STV News – YouTube and Sky News – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Rupert Murdoch rag rehashed old article to attack junior doctors

    Rupert Murdoch-owned the Times has run what it thinks is a hit-piece on a senior British Medical Association (BMA) member. The article is a clear piece of anti-strike propaganda. It frames the medical professional as the “daughter of Corbyn-backing activists”. This right-wing catnip comes as junior doctors are looking likely to strike – except the story isn’t new. The piece was actually first published in December, with the Times rehashing it now to maximise the damage to the BMA.

    BMA: junior doctors set to strike?

    Sky News reported that on Monday 9 January that the BMA started balloting around 45,000 junior doctors over strike action, for the first time since 2016. As Sky News noted, the potential industrial action is over the 26.1% real-terms cut to junior doctors’ pay since 2008. It reported that:

    If they reach the 50% ‘yes’ threshold, junior doctors – any doctor below consultant level – will begin a 72-hour “full walkout” in March.

    They will not provide emergency NHS care during the strike and trusts will need to arrange emergency cover to ensure patient safety, the BMA said.

    The BMA junior doctors’ strike would come on top of the nurses and paramedics who have also been taking industrial action. So, enter the Times to ensure its right-wing readers positively froth at the mouth over the thought of workers using their legal right to strike after nearly 15 years of pay restraint.

    Enter the Times

    The Times took aim at Dr Emma Runswick. She is the deputy chair of the BMA council. However, Runswick is no ordinary chair. The Murdoch rag screeched that she’s also “unashamedly socialist” (God forbid) and the daughter of:

    Jeremy Corbyn-backing trade union activists.

    Clearly, the former Labour leader is still living rent-free in the right-wing media’s heads. However, this kind of propaganda – tying the BMA in with Corbyn – is perfect anti-strike content for the press. The Daily Mail ran a similar story to the Times on Saturday 7 January, again about Runswick and how the:

    Far left hijacks doctors’ union: Investigation reveals how a unit of militant young medics have infiltrated the BMA in a bid to engineer 72-hour walkout by junior doctors

    A union being left-wing and organising strikes? ‘What madness is this?’ Daily Mail readers must ask. Well, it’s an obvious case of manufacturing right-wing consent for anti-trade union sentiment. However, in the case of the Times it was also blatant manipulation – the Murdoch shitrag had already published the article on Runswick in December.

    Desperate anti-strike propaganda

    As writer Mic Wright noted on Twitter:

    A cursory search of the Wayback Machine shows that the Times did indeed first publish the piece on 17 December. Due to the Times being paywalled it’s not possible to see how it’s changed the article since then – not that that really matters. The point is that this obvious propaganda from the Times is par for the course from the right-wing media over strikes – especially NHS ones. Oh, and a bit of Corbyn as well, which reeks of desperation. C’mon, the Times. You can do better than this, surely?

    Featured image via the Times – screengrab

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Every worker needs to sign Strike Map UK’s letter to the PM

    The Tories want to roll out even more authoritarian, anti-trade union laws. However, if they thought workers were going to take it lying down, they were wrong – as one group shows.

    Tory attacks on core democratic rights

    As the Canary‘s Joe Glenton previously wrote:

    Unelected British prime minister and billionaire Rishi Sunak wants to take away your right to strike. At least, that’s what he seemed to be getting at when he floated the idea of a new anti-worker law this week.

    The proposed legislation could see public sector workers who refuse to come in and provide a ‘minimum’ service during industrial action sacked. The laws may also allow employers to take legal action against trade unions.

    This is a clear attack on a core democratic right – and the Daily Mail reported that the laws could be brought to parliament by the end of the month.

    Business secretary and all-round clusterfuck Grant Shapps had a hand in the new laws, too. However, trade union leaders have already mocked Sunak and the Tory government, hitting back at their plans. National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers’ (RMT) general secretary Mick Lynch said Shapps was “incompetent” and that:

    I think these laws will be a failure. Working people are not going to put up with an oppression of their rights, and we’ll fight back. We’ll oppose it in parliament, we’ll oppose it on the streets and we’ll oppose it in the workplace.

    Now, thanks to the group Strike Map UK, workers are already opposing the Tories’ planned authoritarian laws – and you can get involved, too.

    Strike Map: striking back

    Strike Map UK has launched an open letter to Sunak. It’s being supported by the likes of the Fire Brigades Union, the Morning Star, and People’s Assembly. The groups want to encourage:

    workers, union reps and branch officers to sign their workplace up to reject these changes and pledge to fight to protect our right to strike.

    The letter is addressed directly to Sunak. You can read and then sign it here. Part of it states:

    These authoritarian and restrictive laws will further tighten what the incoming Trades Union Congress (TUC) General Secretary, Paul Nowak, has described as the “most restrictive trade union laws in western Europe”. The right to strike is a fundamental democratic right. These proposals will remove this right.

    Employers and Government have together offered pay cuts, as a crippling cost-of-living crisis – fuelled by inflation – continues to drive many into poverty and financial difficulty. What is needed now is action to support workers of Britain. Not threats and punitive laws.

    Hundreds of people have joined strike clubs throughout the country to offer support to striking workers. Thousands of people have pledged to visit picket lines in person this year. Half a million people have visited Strike Map since the current wave of strikes started this summer. Public opinion is with striking workers.

    Resist, resist – resist

    Strike Map UK tweeted that as of Sunday 8 January, workplaces representing over 50,000 workers had signed up:

    People were tweeting saying they’d signed the letter, such as National Education Union (NEU) national executive member Gawain Little:

    The Canary is backing Strike Map UK’s action, and we’ve signed our workplace up to it. As Glenton previously wrote for us:

    These new proposals must be seen in their proper context. Under the Tories, a range of authoritarian bills have passed into law. And they have brought with them the sense of democratic space narrowing before our eyes.

    With the Spy Cops Bill, the Policing Bill, the Overseas Operations Bill, and the Snooper’s Charter, it is evident that many of the basic rights which have been won over many years are being stripped back by successive Tory administrations.

    Trade unions – already subject to severe restrictions from the Thatcher era – seem to be the next target.

    Everyone must resist this and other regressive, authoritarian laws. As Strike Map UK says, the Tories will face “the determined opposition of workers” – and they won’t know what’s hit them.

    Featured image via Strike Map UK

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Letters to the Canary: post-Christmas poetry, the DWP, the NHS and Catalonia

    The Canary is excited to share the fourth edition of our members’ letters page. This is where we publish people’s responses to the news, politics, or anything else they want to get off their chest. However, this is a members-only benefit! If you’d like to subscribe monthly to the Canary – starting from just £1 – and get a letter published, then you can do that here:

    Subscribe here

    This week’s letters

    This week we have some thoughts on neoliberalism, the Warm Home Discount debacle, more on the situation in Catalonia and a question on whether we should pay more tax to fund the NHS. 

    The Week Before Christmas

    Twas the week before Christmas and the news has not changed.

    It’s the same as before but just re-arranged.

    Doctors and nurses are burnt out and tired,

    More agency staff are now being hired.

    Rail workers are striking and bus drivers too,

    Causing chaos, confusion for me and for you.

    So many people are going on strike –

    Britain is broken, there’s nothing to like.

    Money is short and our budgets are tight.

    Children are starving, there’s no end in sight.

    It is snowy and icy and windy and cold

    And some people’s houses are riddled with mould.

    Those MPs who govern are callous and tough.

    They refuse to negotiate. Well we’ve had enough.

    Those seeking asylum will soon be deported,

    They’ll then wash their hands and say “well that’s sorted,

    We’ve got back control of our borders at last.”

    Their cruel decisions just leave me aghast.

    As we start to celebrate the birth of a child

    Born in a manger and yes, meek and mild,

    A man for all people, for you and for me,

    We remember Him too, as a young refugee.

    We ask those who govern to remember Him too,

    To govern with kindness and just think things through.

    Please sit round a table and listen and hear

    What people are saying, so loud and clear.

    They are broken, exhausted and just want to be able

    To look after their families, put food on the table.

    As I write this book I am filled with despair.

    It’s all so depressing as I try to share

    The sadness and grief, the hunger and pain

    Over and over again and again.

    Sue Wood, via email – follow her on Twitter @beneathbluster

    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Warm Home Discount

    A letter from a claimant to their MP – shared with permission:

    I have finally managed to get an answer from the Warm Home Discount (WHD) helpline regarding my eligibility.

    I was absolutely shocked to hear that because I live in a bungalow I do not qualify. Apparently this means it is a low cost heating residence – which I can assure you it is not. My utility bill has already almost trebled despite my being extremely frugal.

    As I have chronic health conditions, being cold exacerbates these but I have no choice as I cannot afford for my heating to be on as it should be. My rent has already increased twice this year. I do not quality for any additional help from external sources as I am always extremely careful to manage my budget so I do not get into any debt. How long I can maintain that though I do not know. Quite frankly I am scared.

    Regarding the WHD all other criteria is met, yet disability and claiming disability-related benefits has now been excluded, which was a strict criteria previously. As a large proportion of disabled people have to live in bungalows why on earth has this been excluded? Is this yet more evidence of the government’s continued discrimination towards people with chronic ill health and disabilities? Do we not find life hard enough already?

    I worked hard for thirty one years until I was struck down with multiple illnesses and physical disabilities. Then I was thrown on the scrap heap by my employer, shunned by society and treated like I was scum by the DWP. The DWP brought me so close to taking my own life back in 2016. I have fought and struggled to gain a semblance of a life since then but still I struggle and feel utterly discriminated against. This latest kick in the teeth from the government cannot keep me silent any longer.

    Is their long term plan to kill us all off by any means possible? They consider us to be a drain on society, on the Treasury’s coffers. It doesn’t matter that I paid full tax and National Insurance all those years. My usefulness is no longer relevant.

    I sincerely hope you will take my situation on board and look at the overall situation for disabled people, take this to parliament and fight for us. Get an answer as to why disability-related benefits been excluded.

    I am asking for your help as my MP.

    Anonymous, via email

    Neoliberalism

    Neoliberalism, the highwayman of economics, was ushered in by the odious Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. Maggie, however, did save the planet – as a chemist she understood the gravity of the hole in the ozone layer and convinced governments to invest and regulate against aerosols. The ozone healed while CO2 increased.

    Neoliberalism asserts that the market is always right and should be left to function assisted by deregulation (selectively quoting John Maynard Keynes in support). This is rubbish: the market can function well if regulated and directed, but otherwise creates inequality, making the rich richer and poor poorer. It has dominated economics and politics for four decades.

    Thatcher muzzled the unions and wages stagnated while executive pay became obscenely high. Those that caused the banking crisis were bailed out, while the cost was borne by taxpayers via austerity. Companies thus assisted often used the money for share buy-backs, boosting their stock exchange value, instead of investing to increase productivity. That was diabolical and could have been prevented by attaching conditions to bailouts. Austerity was not even the best response to the situation from an economic point of view: it was a political decision – to quote economist, Yanis Varoufakis. I would support a suggestion by Jeremy Corbyn that executive pay should be capped at twenty-times the average pay. Workers create the wealth and should be fairly rewarded: nobody is worth excessive salaries and workers should come before generous dividends to shareholders.

    Money hidden in tax havens by criminals, corporations and the rich could improve conditions and provide everyone with a living wage. Millionaires multiply while the need for foodbanks grows, demonstrating a broken system. Capitalism requires growth to cover interest on investment: infinite growth on a finite planet is impossible and drives extinction. Corporate courts are toxic: written into trade deals they enable corporations to sue governments if government action diminishes corporate profits. Profits are highest when safety, pollution and climate are ignored. Governments must stop colluding, outlaw corporate courts and refuse their inclusion in trade deals to protect people and maintain a liveable planet.

    The current situation with strikes by nurses, railway and postal workers underlines the toxicity of the neoliberal economics espoused by the Tory Party. Nurses looked after us during the pandemic at great personal cost – sometimes at a terminal cost. An earlier pandemic preparedness exercise (Cygnus) concluded that we were totally unprepared and made recommendations. These were ignored as it meant spending money, and the blame lies squarely with the Tories. The government should be utterly ashamed that some nurses have to resort to foodbanks. Everyone deserves a living wage and our NHS has been underfunded for decades.

    Proportional Representation (PR) and citizens assemblies would be first steps towards restoring democracy and tackling the increasing inequality of neoliberalism. We must hope to arrive at a better system that enshrines humanity and aims for sufficiency and sustainability. It should be measured via wellbeing and not meaningless GDP.

    Carol Broom, via email

    Response to the Daily Mail calling Gary Neville a “hypocrite”

    I would like to make a few points in response to the Daily Mail attack on Gary Neville (20 December 2022)

    There is no hypocrisy in Neville criticising Qatar at the same time as he works for that country, however well paid that work might be.

    He did not, as the Mail falsely implies, equate the treatment of migrant workers in Qatar with the government’s treatment of workers in this country.

    The true hypocrisy in the matter of Qatar and the football World Cup lies with mainstream media like the Daily Mail, and with British politicians. Britain has high level engagement with the Qatari government and military. It became known many years ago that there was a terrible death toll among migrant workers building the stadiums. There was silence from mainstream media and politicians here up until about a year ago when the issue could not be ignored any longer. If leading politicians, BBC News and the front page of the Daily Mail had reported what was going on from the outset there is little doubt that many lives could have been saved. They have more powerful voices than any football pundit, and more moral if not legal responsibility to expose and condemn human rights abuses wherever they occur.

    Brendan O’Brien, via email

    Far-right judges who attacked Catalonia now go against the Spanish government

    Spain has always refused to negotiate with the Catalans over a referendum on self-determination. Then, when in 2017 this peaceful social movement self-organised a referendum, the Spanish state again denied people political debate and sought to criminalise the movement through the judiciary. Spain wanted to defeat Catalan independence at any cost, and gave the judges a free hand: they imprisoned politicians and activists, dismissed two presidents of the Catalan government, prevented the investiture of the most voted politician, banned parliamentary debates and political initiatives, covered up illegal spying with Pegasus and are legally persecuting 3,600 activists. As the EU has not questioned Spain, when the EU criticises the Chinese, Turkish and Russian governments for not respecting human rights, they respond by acting as Spain does with the Catalans.

    Now, this judicial interference is beginning to spill over into the Madrid government itself. The judiciary’s leadership has been out of date for four years, and as judges are chosen by the parties, they have political colour. Now the right-wing People’s Party (PP) has a majority in the judicial bodies and that is why it is blocking their renewal in order not to lose that majority. After four years, the PSOE-Podemos (centre-left) government has wanted to modify the law on the appointment of judges to overcome the blockage. However, at the request of the PP, the Constitutional Court (which also has two lapsed members) has prohibited the Senate vote that was supposed to approve the reform. The whole country has been shocked to see how the judiciary has violated the separation of powers as if it were the most normal thing in the world.

    Moreover, in order to create tension, the opposition says that the government wants to renovate the judicial bodies in order to modify the penal code and thus favour the Catalan independence supporters. Nothing could be further from the truth. The government wants to repeal the crime of sedition under which the activists were convicted in 2017 (a crime that the Council of Europe had called for the elimination of) and replace it with the crime of aggravated disorder (an ambiguous crime that judges can apply as they wish). The pro-independence movement has denounced that this new offence would allow aberrations such as preventing the right to demonstrate and continuing the judicial war against pro-independence – but in a more disguised way.

    We Catalans have already warned that, if such violations by Spain were not prevented, it would end up having repercussions beyond Catalonia. Until now, the EU has been permissive with Spain, thinking it meets minimum democratic standards and looking the other way whenever Madrid has transgressed the rules in an attempt to destroy the Catalan national minority. If anything, far from succeeding, it has further strengthened Catalonia’s determination for independence. We shall see how far this anti-democratic decomposition, which is already affecting the very stability of the Spanish state, will go.

    Jordi Oriola Folch, Barcelona, via email

    How to properly fund the NHS – a dilemma

    You guys are missing what is going on now. No political commentators are calling out the government or ruling classes.

    We have nurses striking for the first time in their organised history as well as ambulance staff (first responders). I am a retired firefighter and took strike action during my service. That was a huge moral dilemma. It is an even bigger call for the nurses and paramedics.

    What we seem to have is a massive breakdown in society. The “elite” is just taking the piss. Yep, we all know about defunding, then opening stuff up for privatisation. Classic Tory stuff.

    However, I’m a pensioner and I’d be happy to pay 2-5% more tax to make the NHS work and fend off the money grabs from the ruling classes. We need to open up a debate about increased and equitable tax rates to properly fund what we need.

    Over to you guys.

    Stu, via email

    Want to get involved? Support the Canary here and we’ll publish your letters, too! Terms and conditions of publication apply.

    By Steve Topple

  • Keir Starmer reaffirms his loyalty to the dead politics of Blairism

    Some of us are old enough to remember ‘that’ Keir Starmer video. The former barrister’s 2020 leadership pitch was enough to stir the soul – even for those of us who thought he was a bit too slick and slimy back then.

    Three years on, Starmer has made his actual political commitments abundantly clear. And they’re eerily familiar to 1997 and the rise of Tony Blair, which will be a disaster for all of us – unless you’re rich and powerful, of course.

    Blairites gonna Blairite

    In his first major speech of 2023, Starmer laid out his vision. Beneath a veneer of progressive language and nationalist nods to a ‘great renewal’ of the country, it’s the same old, same old:

    But let me be clear – none of this should be taken as code for Labour getting its big government cheque-book out. Of course investment is required – I can see the damage the Tories have done to our public services as plainly as anyone else.

    But we won’t be able to spend our way out of their mess – it’s not as simple as that.

    What, then, is his prescription for re-invigorating the nation? Well, a Blairite commitment to shareholders is absolutely clear:

    So let me spell it out – no more short-cuts. Strong, dynamic government is necessary but it’s not sufficient. Communities need strong public services, but that’s not enough on its own. For national renewal, there is no substitute for a robust private sector, creating wealth in every community.

    Of course, one of the problems for the past 40-odd years has been that which Starmer is now advocating: the private sector. From the stagnation of wages that the state has to top up to the state of housing, the decimation of the public sector in favour of the private has failed.

    The private sector does not create wealth – workers do, while bosses syphon off the profits for themselves and shareholders. Yet the false prophet Starmer has reneged on his 2020 vision in favour of an essentially Tory-lite approach, at a time when the country is in a capitalist-created cost of living crisis. Genius.

    Blair 2.0

    In 2020, during the chaos of Covid-19 and the defeat of Corbynism, many were convinced by Starmer’s pitch. He played himself as a socialist with a commitment to human rights, trade unionism and the condition of the working class which he claimed to have been born into.

    Others were not so taken in. We saw in Starmer the return of an older, failed politics for which the pursuit of power without principle was the only animating force. New Labour 2.0 politics – and that is what we are dealing with here – is ultimately a continuation of Thatcherism.

    That may benefit some people in our society, but your average worker is not one of them. Starmer is no better than Blair – and let’s not forget it.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Common/Jeremy Corbyn, cropped to 770 x 403, licenced under CC BY 2.0.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • It’s almost as though Starmer is deliberately trying to be right-wing

    Alt text: At Labour HQ, four people are sat around a table – one of them looks like Keir Starmer. One man asks: “What slogan will make us look fresh, exciting and a genuine alternative to right wing politics?” Another says: “How about the one Nigel Farage kept flogging in 2016!” and holds up a sign that reads ‘Take Back Control’.

     

    By Afroze Fatima Zaidi

    This post was originally published on Canary.