radiofree.asia

Category: UK

  • Accusations of racism and inequality to be investigated by Cabinet Office

    A civil servant tried to take their own life after “prolonged racial bullying” in a government department, it has been alleged. The Cabinet Office has launched a review into “respect and inclusion” amid accusations of racism as well as unfairness towards disabled staff.

    The review was launched earlier this year by the department, which has a cross-government role and describes itself as the “corporate headquarters of the Civil Service”, after pressure from unions.

    “Lived experiences of Ethnic Minorities”

    The PA news agency understands that concerns have been raised over a number of years around how Black members of staff are treated, with examples given of one Black worker being called “boy” in a meeting and the use of the N-word.

    Concerns were raised about the handing out of bonuses and rewards, with the accusation that non-white or disabled staff often would not reach the internal scoring threshold given to trigger the benefits, or that reasonable adjustments requested by disabled staff have not been met. PA understands some cases had been settled financially.

    A draft presentation to be shared with all staff before the review was launched as part of a series called So Let’s Talk About Race from March 2020 set out the:

    lived experiences of Ethnic Minorities staff in the Cabinet Office today

    It is understood the presentation was intended to shine a light on the experiences of staff in order for improvements to be made.

    London aerial views
    Whitehall (PA)

    Some of the effects of “prolonged racial bullying”

    In the slides – seen by the PA – one member of staff said they would not put their photo on internal services “because I don’t want people to know I’m Black before they meet me”.

    Another said a member of their team had only appointed white men, and when challenged on not appointing a colleague with a Nigerian name, said it was because “‘no-one can pronounce their name’ and ‘I don’t understand them when they speak’.”

    A further employee said:

    Things reached a very low point for me about what is happening in certain parts of the department when I was told by a colleague that someone had attempted to take their own life because of prolonged racial bullying.

    The slides said the series of presentations was sponsored by John Manzoni, who was chief executive of the civil service and the cabinet office permanent secretary from 2014 to April 2020, and Simon Tse, the crown commercial service chief executive and cabinet office race champion.

    The So Let’s Talk About Race programme has been implemented in a number of government departments and often involves the sharing of incidences where staff felt they had experienced racism to highlight the issue.

    The Cabinet Office said latest data showed a “decline in reported incidents of discrimination” and that the whole purpose of the presentation was to elevate experiences and “help make our workspace more inclusive”.

    People’s lived experience

    Tse wrote about running the sessions in an article for the Black History Month website in August last year, where he said:

    colleagues hear examples of the lived experiences of colleagues from an ethnic minority background of the subtle, covert, and sometimes not so subtle, overt racism, that is still happening, and these stories have a profound impact on all who hear them.

    A letter from current permanent secretary Alex Chisholm to chairman of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee William Wragg in October 2020 also referenced the programme. Another member of staff described in the slides as being referred to as “you people” and was told they were “making a storm out of a teacup and making false claims”.

    Others said it was more subtle behaviours, “micro-aggressions” or simply having to work harder than white colleagues to progress that were the root of the issue. The PCS union, which represents civil servants, called the accusations “utterly shocking”.

    PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka wrote to Chisholm last December raising concerns about bullying following the Civil Service People Survey.

    TUC Congress 2019
    Mark Serwotka (Gareth Fuller/PA)

    “Large numbers” have complained

    At that time, he said that “large numbers” of Black and ethnic minority staff had complained to the union about prejudice. He also said disabled staff faced direct and indirect discrimination at work. The union earlier this year said it was considering taking the issue to the Equality and Human Rights Commission after more than 80 staff members had complained about being racially bullied.

    The Cabinet Office – which until September this year was headed by Michael Gove until Steve Barclay became chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster – said improvements had been made, and this was reflected in the most recent staff survey. An entry published on the government website shows that the Cabinet Office is paying the Business Disability Forum £10,200 to conduct “a review of bullying, harassment and discrimination in relation to disabled employees within the Cabinet Office”.

    This is part of a wider initiative called the Respect and Inclusion Review, which would also cover racism.

    A Cabinet Office spokesperson said:

    The Cabinet Office does not tolerate bullying, harassment or discrimination in any form. We sought out these experiences precisely to help make our workspace more inclusive.

    This is a vital part of our commitment to set a new standard for diversity and inclusion, as set out in the Declaration on Government Reform. While our latest data shows a decline in reported incidents of discrimination, there is always more we can do.

    Our Respect and Inclusion review will build on the improvements made in recent years by considering our policies, practices and workplace culture, supported by specialist external advice.

    But a PCS spokesman said the union had not been included in the process.

    A spokesperson said:

    While we welcome the Cabinet Office launching a review, it is disgraceful that PCS is being excluded from the full process by not being allowed a seat on the project management committee.

    It is unacceptable that the full Cabinet Office report will be withheld from unions when PCS and others are the ones who have highlighted the appalling examples of racism within the department.

    Only by a full and transparent process can we begin to give confidence to staff that their concerns are being addressed and that there will be a significant culture shift within the Cabinet Office.

    Featured image via – Wikimedia Commons – Ardfern

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Equality commission steps in after Labour accuses nearly entire Jewish Voice for Labour board of antisemitism

    The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has asked Jewsh Voice for Labour (JVL) to submit evidence of the Labour leadership’s antisemitic discrimination against leftwing Jews in the party. A number of JVL members have been suspended or expelled from Labour, including two who have since passed away. In many cases, they were singled out for comments on Israeli policy in occupied Palestine.

    JVL has submitted twice to the EHRC before. But this is the first time it’s been asked to contribute. In the new submission, JVL aims to raise:

    the continued unfair targeting of Jewish members of the Party and in particular Jewish members with particular beliefs set out in further detail below, which appears to be entirely contrary to the findings of the EHRC Report and the purpose of the Action Plan

    And:

    the unfair procedures the Party is continuing to follow in respect of disciplinary proceedings
    against individual members, in breach of principles of fairness, natural justice and
    recommendations made by both the EHRC, and by Baroness Shami Chakrabarti in her report
    published on 30 June 2016, following her inquiry into antisemitism in the Party (the
    “Chakrabarti Report”). [Original emphasis]

    Unresolved

    The submission also highlights how two members of the organisation have died without being able to clear their names:

    Two JVL members, Riva Joffe under investigation, Mike Howard having received a punitive suspension for antisemitism, have recently died, tragically with these offensive and unfounded charges against them unresolved. In the case of Mike Howard, his appeal against his suspension remains unresolved since 12 April 2021

    JVL says the Labour Party has failed to even understand antisemitism, with devastating effects for some:

    As a preliminary point, JVL considers that the failure of the Party to introduce a fair process to tackle antisemitism has resulted from its failure to properly understand antisemitism.

    Definitions

    JVL’s submission sets out what it means by antisemitism according to the key definitions:

    The understanding of antisemitism on which this analysis is based reaffirms the traditional meaning of the term. This is important in the light of attempts to extend its meaning to apply to criticisms often made of the state of Israel, or to non-violent campaigns such as BDS. A charge of antisemitism carries exceptional moral force because of the negative connotations rightly attaching to the term. It is illegitimate to make such claims to discredit or deter criticism, or to achieve sectional advantage. To do so is to devalue the term. To be clear: conduct is antisemitic only if it manifests ‘prejudice, hostility or hatred against Jews as Jews.

    And JVL cites the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, arguing this is a far more precise definition than that used by the Labour Party.

    Vague charges

    JVL also charges the Labour Party with using a confused framework for accusations. This, they write, has hindered those accused from responding to allegations:

    In the majority of investigations into alleged antisemitism, the Party asserts that the member is guilty of conduct that “undermines the Party’s ability to campaign against antisemitism”. This is a vague accusation that does not provide the member with sufficient information to understand, or defend themselves against, the charge. It also gives the Party an effective carte-blanche to investigate members in relation to complaints that have no basis and to stifle any questioning of the Party by its members.

    Case studies

    The submission also argues that Jewish Labour members have been accused of antisemitism at disproportionate rates. They point to Annex 11 of their submission:

    which contains statistics on the number of investigations by the Party brought against Jewish members and in particular, anti-Zionist Jewish members. Annex 11 sets out that, as a population share, over five times more Jewish than non-Jewish Party members have been investigated in relation to allegations of antisemitism.

    While Annex 17 looks at how the work of Jewish writers has been used as evidence of anti-Jewish racism without the author’s knowledge:

    No attempt has been made by the Party to discuss the work with the respective authors; instead the Party proceeds on a misrepresentation that its interpretation is based on firm, legal evidence

    Lifelong anti-racists

    The submission refers to Mike Howard, an accused JVL member. He passed away in 2021 having never had the chance to clear his name. The submission document tells part of his story:

    JVL draws attention in particular to the case of the late Mike Howard, whose appeal against his unjust punitive suspension is set out in Annex 15. Prior to investigation, Mr Howard had an unblemished record as a Jewish Labour, trade union and anti-racist activist. He was therefore incredibly angered and distressed to find himself subject to investigation.

    The submission continues:

    His appeal was filed in March 2021, with further submissions made on 13 April 2021. Following that date, Mr Howard received neither any update on progress nor any substantive response from the Party. Tragically, Mr Howard died in November 2021, without even an acknowledgement of his appeal by the Party.

    A video of Mike Howard’s full story is available on YouTube:

    Failed

    JVL’s Jenny Manson and Richard Kuper spoke to The Canary. Manson said said she was disappointed with the EHRC:

    It’s disappointing that the EHRC have not agreed to open an investigation into the targeting of so many Jews by the Labour Party. They seem to consider that their Report in January 2021 had dealt with issues relating to antisemitism in the Party.  We by contrast considered they got off on the wrong premises, made questionable findings and failed to expose both the politicisation of the Party’s procedures and the Party’ misinterpretation of antisemitism.

    She said the EHRC had originally referred them to Labour’s antisemitism Action Plan. But reminded them that JVL’s nominees had originally been excluded from involvement:

    So, after the EHRC referred us to the Action Plan we wrote back again and reminded them that JVL nominees and eg  those put forward by John McDonnell including a Rabbi and two Jewish experts on the interpretation of antisemitism, were excluded from consultation or any involvement in the new Plans.
    Targeting
    JVL felt that the evidence of harsh treatment of Jewish members was finally being considered by the EHRC:
    It now appears that evidence we have been providing of the increasing harsh treatment and targeting of our Jewish members has been of concern to the EHRC.  It’s hard to believe it wouldn’t be.  Looking at Annex 11, you will see that 41 Jewish individuals have faced investigations for antisemitism.  Of the current eleven JVL exec committee, ten have been or are presently facing disciplinary action or investigations related to allegations of antisemitism.
    They added that the group was pleased their concerns were finally being noted:
    We are very pleased that the EHRC have now taken account of our specific concerns about this Plan by asking for us to make further submissions to assist the EHRC’s monitoring exercise.
    Unjust
    Manson said that the whole process had been “unjust” to members:
    Incidentally, the EHRC did not endorse the IHRA definition of antisemitism and noticed as we did the Party’s use without publication till this year of the ‘NEC Code of Conduct; Antisemitism’ to try to explain the IHRA.  This was unjust to members and hugely ironic given this NEC plan in 2018 was considered yet another sign of the scandalous. antisemitism of the Party’s leadership.
    Asked what they hoped would be achieved from the submission, JVL’s Richard Kuper told The Canary:

    We  believe  that  the evidence we have supplied and the arguments we have made will reinforce realisation the EHRC that these issues need to be taken into account in their monitoring of Labour’s actions. Doing so would be an important step in breaking the mainstream media’s radio silence on the harassment of Jews in the Party which is taking place under the aegis of the current leadership..

    It can only be hoped that JVL members finally get a chance to be heard. And that the names of those who have passed away will now be cleared.

    Featured image  – Jewish Voice for Labour.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Outpouring of solidarity for university staff demanding fair pay and conditions

    On 1 December, higher education staff and University and College Union (UCU) members launched their first of three days of strike action against pension cuts, racial, gender and disability pay gaps, low wages, unpaid hours, and excessive workloads. University staff across the UK have taken to picket lines – and social media – to demand that university bosses take action to challenge poor wages and entrenched exploitation and inequality in the higher education sector.

    Unjust pensions, pay and conditions

    According to the union, “UCU members are taking action over falling pay, the gender and ethnic pay gap, precarious employment practices, and unsafe workloads”. Since 2009, university staff have seen real terms pay cuts of nearly 20%. And cuts proposed by Universities UK (UUK) will see the average pension drop by around 36% (despite claiming that the proposed cuts would lead to 10% to 18% drop).

    The casualisation of work in higher education means that today, nearly 90,000 university staff are employed on insecure contracts. Reflecting the limited rights, protections and security such arrangements provide, University of Bristol researcher Dr Eleanor Johnson shared:

    And Dr Eve Hayes said:

    Striking staff are also challenging excessive workloads in higher education. According to an Education Support report, excessive workloads and unpaid hours are causing a mental health crisis among higher education workers. The report found that 79% of respondents struggled with an intense, excessive workload. It also found that over half of respondents displayed signs of depression.

    Speaking to the entrenched exploitation of higher education workers, University of St Andrews lecturer Roxani Krystalli shared:

    University staff are also taking industrial action to challenge unjust pay gaps. As it stands, the pay gap between Black and white higher education staff is currently 17%. The average gender pay gap is 15.1%. And the disability pay gap is at 9%. A UCU survey found that marginalised university staff are disproportionately impacted by excessive workloads and insecure contracts.

    Contextualising racial and gender pay gaps in the sector, King’s College’s UCU shared: 

    Higher education staff unite

    Announcing the first day of industrial action, the UCU tweeted:

    Striking staff are demanding the reversal of pension cuts, and a £2.5k rise in pay for all staff. They are also demanding “action to tackle unmanageable workloads, pay inequality and insecure contracts”.

    Threatening further industrial action if university bosses fail to meet these demands, UCU general secretary Jo Grady said:

    If they continue to ignore the modest demands of staff then we will be forced to take further industrial action in the new year, which even more branches will join.

    On 1 December, approximately 50,000 staff from 58 higher education institutions took to picket lines nationwide to demand fair pensions, pay and conditions.

    Striking staff took to social media to share pictures from picket lines up and down the country. The University of York’s UCU shared:

    And Leeds Student Staff Solidarity tweeted:

    Highlighting that the marketisation of the UK’s higher education system impacts all workers in the sector, UCU posted:

    And striking staff at universities including the London School of Economics (LSE) held teach-ins:

    Solidarity with striking higher education workers

    An overwhelming number of students have met the industrial action with outpourings of support and solidarity for striking university staff. Indeed, according to the National Union of Students (NUS), 73% of students support industrial action. On 1 December, students took to picket lines across the country to express solidarity with striking higher education workers. NUS president Larissa Kennedy tweeted:

    Student activists from the Red Square Movement came together to block UUK’s head office in solidarity with striking higher education workers:

    Students occupied the University of Manchester’s business school to support the ongoing strike. One student posted:

    And over 330 Birbeck University students have signed an open letter to senior leadership, stating “we will continue to support staff as they fight for better working conditions – their working conditions are our learning conditions”:

    Meanwhile, the University of Sussex Students’ Union has organised a march and rally in solidarity with local striking staff:

    Join the movement

    The strike action is due to continue until Friday 3 December. In the meantime, UCU is urging supporters to join their local picket line to support striking higher education staff. The union has shared a list of all institutions taking part in the industrial action. UCU is leading a march and rally in London on 3 December. The union is encouraging anyone who can’t make it to the picket lines to express solidarity on social media, and to donate to UCU’s strike fund. It is vital that we – particularly those of us who are students – unite in solidarity with striking university staff and against the marketisation of higher education.

    Featured image via Twitter Screengrab – @UM_UCU

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Twitter locks out the Northern Independence Party

    Steve Topple speaks with Philip Proudfoot, Leader of Northern Independence Party, about the impact of tech firms on UK politics after the party’s Twitter account was locked following a tweet calling for the patent on Covid vaccines to be removed.

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Mail on Sunday publisher loses once again to Meghan Markle

    The publisher of the Mail On Sunday has lost a Court of Appeal challenge against a ruling in favour of the Duchess of Sussex over publication of a personal letter to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.

    Meghan, 40, sued Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), also the publisher of MailOnline, over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter to Thomas Markle, 77, in August 2018.

    The duchess won her case earlier this year when a High Court judge ruled in her favour without a full trial.

    ANL brought an appeal against that decision and, at a three-day hearing in November, argued the case should go to a trial on Meghan’s claims against the publisher – including breach of privacy and copyright.

    Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
    Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, gave evidence in a witness statement (PA)

    Mail’s appeal unanimously rejected

    Lawyers representing the publisher said at the earlier hearing that Thomas Markle wished to counter points made by friends of Meghan who had given an interview to People magazine in the US. But, in a ruling on Thursday,  Sir Geoffrey Vos, Dame Victoria Sharp and Lord Justice Bean dismissed the publisher’s appeal.

    Reading a summary of their decision, Sir Geoffrey said:

    It was hard to see what evidence could have been adduced at trial that would have altered the situation.

    The judge had been in as good a position as any trial judge to look at the article in People magazine, the letter and The Mail On Sunday articles to decide if publication of the contents of the letter was appropriate to rebut the allegations against Mr Markle.

    The judge had correctly decided that, whilst it might have been proportionate to publish a very small part of the letter for that purpose, it was not necessary to publish half the contents of the letter as ANL had done.

    “Self-evidently was intended to be kept private”

    The judges were told during the hearing that 585 out of 1,250 words had been republished in the five articles. Meghan’s barristers argued the letter was “deeply personal” and “self-evidently was intended to be kept private”.

    In her written evidence, Meghan denied she thought it likely that her father would leak the letter, but “merely recognised that this was a possibility”. Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, claimed in a witness statement that Meghan wrote the letter with the understanding that it could be leaked.

    He said she sent him an early draft of the letter and had written:

    Obviously everything I have drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked so I have been meticulous in my word choice, but please do let me know if anything stands out for you as a liability.

    In further texts released by the court, the duchess can be seen expressing her frustration about the response of the royal family, describing them as “constantly berating” Harry.

    The Court of Appeal also heard that Knauf provided information to the authors of the biography Finding Freedom – Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand – leading to Meghan apologising for misleading the court about whether he had given information.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • As poorly insulated homes continue to leak heating, energy bills are set to rocket

    A charity has warned that an increase to the energy price cap in April 2022 could see the cost of heating the average home doubling since the previous year.

    Fuel poverty charity National Energy Action (NEA) said average domestic dual fuel energy bills have already soared by more than £230 per customer compared with winter 2020. The charity warned that bills could increase by a further £550 a year.

    Skyrocketing bills

    NEA also warned that the average household gas bill could increase by £467 compared with October 2020. This means the cost of heating the average home will have doubled since last winter.

    Meanwhile suppliers have been collapsing across Great Britain in recent weeks. It comes after the price of gas spiked by as much as five times compared with the start of 2021.

    The boss of energy regulator Ofgem, Jonathan Brearley, has said the regulator will need to reassess the price cap on energy bills. Although the obvious solution would be to look at bringing energy supply back into public ownership.

    Energy prices have spiked globally due to a series of issues aligning around the world. Increased demand from a reopening economy has been paired with higher demand from China, and a summer that was less windy than normal.

    At the moment the regulator caps the energy bills of more than 14 million households at £1,277 per year on average. A consultation on potential changes will end in February. And changes could be implemented at the beginning of April, when the price cap is set to change.

    Even before potential changes, experts at analysts Cornwall Insight predict that energy bills will rocket to £1,660 per year for price cap customers.

    Is using less heating an option?

    A poll by NEA found six out of 10 British adults say they would reduce their heating use by a fair amount or a great deal if the cost of heating doubles.

    While hypothermia can be fatal, many elderly people have to choose between feeding themselves and staying warm:

    Some 85% of UK residential buildings, or 23 million homes, are still currently connected to the gas grid, using a boiler and central heating system. Moreover, poorly insulated homes continue to leak heating, greatly increasing gas consumption.

    But the government has cracked down on campaign group Insulate Britain for calling attention to the issue and continues to arrest activists. Nine activists have been jailed and told to pay towards legal fees for National Highways.

    A “cold reality”

    NEA chief executive Adam Scorer said:

    Every home should be a warm and safe place, but for over 4.5 million UK households the cold reality is very different and getting much worse.

    The cost of living in the UK is at its highest level in a decade, with household energy bills the biggest driver. When the costs of essential services go up, those on lowest incomes get hit hardest.

    Bills have increased by well over £230 since last winter and millions now face a daily heat or eat dilemma. We estimate energy bills will rocket again in April, doubling the average householders’ heating bills since last year.

    Over the same period, those on the lowest incomes have seen their income plummet by over £1,000 per year. Just think about that. For people already on a budgetary knife-edge, the cost of keeping a family warm has exploded, while budgets have collapsed. No amount of useful tips or savvy shopping can cope with that.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The unreported crisis

    By Ralph Underhill

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Will the Plaid Cymru/Labour deal be a reflection of ‘The Welsh Way’?

    Plaid Cymru and Welsh Labour have made a three-year “cooperation agreement” to govern Wales. Having fallen just one seat short of an overall majority in May’s Senedd (Welsh parliament) elections, Labour needed support to stay in government.

    So, on 22 November, Plaid Cymru and Labour announced an agreement that promises free school meals for primary schools, a strengthening of the Welsh language, to increase representatives in the Senedd, and to tackle the housing crisis. Ideas which are also discussed in a new book called The Welsh Way: Essays on Neoliberalism and Devolution

    That deal was then approved by Plaid Cymru members at its virtual annual conference on 27 November. Leader of Plaid Cymru Adam Price said the agreement means a Senedd:

    which is gender balanced in law, enshrining the right to equal representation for women for the first time ever

    Price called it:

    a radical agreement that represents the clearest and most decisive break with the proceeding 10 years of neoliberalism that followed the end of the One Wales coalition when Plaid Cymru last succeeded in shifting Labour in Wales to the left.

    He also said:

    It’s a unique Welsh departure from the British constitution, a down-payment, if you like, on independence.

    A broad welcome?

    Different political and community groups across Wales welcomed the agreement. Acorn Cardiff said it was a victory for “ordinary people across Wales”. UNDOD welcomed it as a hopeful first step away from neoliberalism. And some in England also welcomed it:

    Former shadow chancellor and Labour MP John McDonnell said it could put “clear red water between Welsh Labour and the Tories”:

    When the former Labour first minister of Wales Rhodri Morgan used the term “clear red water” in 2002, he meant putting a distance between Welsh Labour and Tony Blair’s Labour government.

    A Welsh politics writer told The Canary:

    in general what some of this reflects to us is that a lot of the London/English left are not really interested in the reality of politics in Wales but rather would prefer to depict us and Welsh Labour in a way that favours their narrative and reflects their own concerns – basically that a genuine leftist politics is possible in Britain under [Labour] because that’s what we see in Wales.

    Whilst I think it’s fair to give some credit to Drakeford on this… it’s a very naive reading of Welsh Labour as a whole.

    But while some framed it as a victory for Welsh Labour, the question is, if this was the case, why has it taken this long? Labour has been the dominant party in Wales since 1999. Mark Drakeford has been a front bench minister since 2013 and first minister since 2018. In all that time, there has only been one radical and progressive programme agreed before going into government – namely One Wales. It’s one from 2007 which also involved an agreement with Plaid Cymru.

    And while the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (WFG Act) is progressive legislation, a political activist told The Canary, the government’s:

    inability to create and apply it [WFG Act] in meaningful ways is indicative of the issues of devolution

    The Welsh Way

    When speaking on BBC Radio Wales’s Sunday Supplement on 28 November, Price explained what he saw as the main problem in Wales:

    What we’ve had… over the last ten years, and its set out in the book… ‘The Welsh Way’ which charts the last ten years – particularly under democratic devolution when we’ve had the language of progressive politics from a Labour led administration – but the reality has been tinkering at the edges…

    The problem… we’ve had in Wales and across the wider world is people have been caught within this trap of neoliberalism

    The “book” Price mentions contains a collection of essays that could represent “a radical challenge to Welsh political thinking”. The book believes “politicians have failed to deliver on the devolution dividend”. And it:

    includes an array of different themes, with discussion on underlying beliefs and structures, policy fields and issues, as well as accounts of life under the current devolution settlement. What ties them together is the negative impact of neoliberalism – the prevailing capitalist ideology with which Thatcher wrought destruction – and how consecutive Welsh governments have failed to protect Wales from its ongoing effects.

    Neoliberalism and Wales

    In its introduction, The Welsh Way critiques a speech Drakeford made at the Institute for Public Policy Research in July 2019. According to the book, Drakeford said:

    it is socialism that teaches us to have optimism that the arc of history does in the end bend to justice, but the courage to know that it does not do so without a struggle, that nothing has ever been won for progressive causes or working people without the determination to take the action that wins those rewards … and that struggle, to return to the Future Generations Act, is not just a struggle simply for today but is a struggle to create the conditions that lead to better tomorrows.

    But, according to the authors of this book:

    none of this is, or indeed ever has been, remotely true. Despite Welsh Labour’s relentless self-mythologising over the past twenty years, Wales is, in practice, a deeply neoliberal country.

    The book states that inequality has grown since devolution began, child poverty is the worst in the UK, homelessness and the prison population are at record highs, house prices are rising, and the private rented sector seems to mainly serve private landlords.

    The book, therefore, claims to offer “a dose of the truth”, which it contrasts with the image of “Wales as a progressive, socialist country safely distanced from Tory policy by Welsh Labour’s ‘clear red water’”. It says:

    the notion of ‘clear red water’… is nothing more than, a rhetorical device designed to obscure reality and secure the ascendancy of the Labour Party in Wales… the reality…was much closer to ‘murky brown water’.

    In his chapter on neoliberal politics, Huw Williams says:

    Neoliberalism… will never be reconciled with the type of far reaching policies that are required in order to tackle inequality and marginalisation in a meaningful way. This aversion to state interventionism is sometimes reflected in the manner in which the Welsh Government, when not simply funding the private sector directly, ‘outsources’ even some of its most mundane tasks in an attempt to cloak its own actions and influence.

    Williams believes this allows politicians to deny any responsibility for a country’s problems while maintaining an appearance of concern for those problems.

    Tackling housing

    One such problem is housing. In his virtual conference speech at the weekend, Price touched on some of the detail of the “cooperation agreement”. In doing so, he gave an overview of what it would mean for housing. He said the agreement means:

    Radical and immediate interventions to tackle the housing crisis and to reset the housing market in favour of people and communities…

    The creation of Unnos, a national construction company, to improve the supply of social housing.

    This could mean a lot to the people of Wales. Campaigners have previously spoken to The Canary about how neoliberalism has contributed to its housing crisis; a crisis that means people can’t afford to buy in the communities they grew up in. Angharad Tomos highlights the problem of second home ownership. Tomos says this problem means young people have “no chance at all” to buy a house because “they are priced out of the market”. In 2020, in places such as Gwynedd, 38% of the houses sold “were sold as second homes”.

    Steffan Evans also writes about the affordability of housing and the effects it has on homelessness. According to Evans:

    The average rent on a two-bedroom property, both social and private rent, is unaffordable to the lowest quartile of earners in every local authority area in Wales. This pushes people into poverty, leading to households having to cut back on heating, food, and other essential items. At its extreme, this lack of affordable housing can push people into homelessness: 12,000 households were made homeless in Wales in 2018/19. Yet these problems are not new. The current crisis is a result of decades of policy failure, the lessons of which we are still too slow to learn.

    He says in those last two decades the number of homes that are privately has rented doubled.  And at the same time, the percentage of owner-occupied homes and social homes have fallen. The implications of these changes, according to Evans, is that it puts “more families at risk of poverty”. And he says there has been little response from the Welsh government other than “professionalising” this sector.

    He believes the Welsh government has contributed to the growth of the private rental sector by spending “vast amounts of money supporting tenancies”. And because of a shortage of social housing, tenants are forced to live in private sector housing. Many of these tenants struggle to afford these rents or they have needs that the sector can’t deal with.

    While Evans understands a solution to this problem will take time, he believes we should start by moving away from subsidising rents to subsidising house building. He adds that the Welsh government should immediately move its investment to social housing. Additionally, the Welsh government should use its taxation powers to raise the necessary funds by raising taxes on second home owners and landlords and by ensuring homeowners pay their fair share.

    A timely message

    As Plaid Cymru and Welsh Labour begin this programme together, they appear to have the support of quite a few groups in Wales and beyond. The challenge for both parties is to ensure it acts on that agreement to ensure Wales can properly tackle the damage done to it by decades of neoliberalism.

    There’s been enough “tinkering at the edges”, and now, with so much support on the ground, it’s time for Welsh politicians to tackle inequality in a way that means something to its people.

    Featured image via YouTube – Institute for Government & Parthian Books & Plaid Cymru video

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The ‘ongoing blatant illegal hunting’ of stags is still happening now

    “The cruelty is clear; the animal is heaving and gasping for breath,” Bobbie Armstrong tells me. She’s showing me footage of an exhausted stag, literally running for his life.

    Armstrong is an animal rights activist and a volunteer for Somerset Wildlife Crime. She goes out on to the hills documenting the horrific hunting incidents that take place in the region. I have interviewed Armstrong a number of times about the UK’s most horrific blood sport: stag hunting.

    Stag hunting is an illegal sport that continues to take place despite people like Armstrong exposing those who engage in the cruel practice. It involves an hours-long chase with hunters using quad bikes, motorbikes, and hounds. The ‘sport’ takes place on Somerset’s Quantock Hills and in other locations in the South-West.

    The Quantocks are owned by various landowners including the National Trust and the Forestry Commission.

    Illegal

    The footage is distressing to watch, and of course the hunt is against the law. Armstrong tells me:

    This stag was hunted by the Quantock Stag Hounds relentlessly. As he had clattered through fields, pursued by hounds and riders, he had become entangled in the crop. Anyone can see that this is an animal who is exhausted, who has run beyond his limits, and is still being forced to run on.

    The hunting ban means that no animal should ever be pursued. It can only be ‘flushed’ out and shot to protect crops, or to relieve it of suffering. It can also be killed in the name of ‘research’.

    Armstrong continues:

    This is not ‘flushing to guns’. This is not relieving suffering by dispatching a casualty. This is not research and observation. This is ongoing blatant illegal hunting. No animal may be pursued by hounds. Period. There is no exemption in the act which permits it.

    Failure of the police and landowners

    It is perhaps unsurprising that despite its illegality, nothing has been done by the police or the land owners to stop stag hunting. After all, the Hunting Act came into force in 2005, but hunters have continued to murder foxes and deer regardless. Armstrong explains:

    It’s happening because of the failure of Avon and Somerset Police to tackle the issue. It’s happening because the National Trust and the Forestry Commission are still turning a blind eye to it. It happens because Natural England are full of empty promises about enforcing the rules regarding vehicles on this Site of Special Scientific Interest, which in itself is a criminal offence.

    For four years we have been raising awareness and highlighting the plight of the deer on the Quantocks. There is NO question that they are hunting them, but until the stakeholders on the Quantock Hills actually take steps to enforce the law, protect the deer and take guns off the hills, this will go on.

    This latest incident of illegal stag hunting took place just a few weeks before the National Trust finally announced that it would ban trail hunting on its land. Trail hunting is when packs lay an artificial trail for hounds to follow – supposedly instead of chasing a real animal. Since 2005, hunters have used trail hunting as a guise to go about real hunting of both foxes and stags. Footage of foxes and deer being murdered had been presented to the National Trust over the years prior to the ban, but the Trust only acted when a top hunter was convicted in court for encouraging others to use trail hunting as a cover for real hunting.

    Armstrong says:

    The National Trust had to accept that the lies of so-called trail hunting had been exposed, and along with it their own plausible deniability.

    They knew what was really going on, all the while thinly veiled by these claims of trail hunting was barbaric illegal hunting.

    “Russian roulette”

    Armstrong is rightly very concerned that one day a member of the public will get injured. She says:

    Two years ago we put Avon and Somerset police and the National Trust and Forestry Commission all on notices regarding the safety issues on the Quantock Hills. Since then, none of them have taken any proactive steps to address what the whole country knows is a smokescreen, but in the case of stag hunting, one that has potentially fatal consequences.

    How many walkers, bird watchers, school excursions or cyclists know that they’re walking on a live firing range up there? They don’t! They have no idea. But the police know, the National Trust know… They are playing a game of Russian roulette with the safety of ordinary folk.

    The Canary contacted the National Trust for comment about the latest footage of the stag being hunted, but so far has received no response.

    While we should be celebrating the news that the National Trust has finally taken steps to ban trail hunting on its land, time will tell whether it actually enforces it. Thankfully we have groups on the ground, such as Somerset Wildlife Crime and local hunt saboteurs, who will continue to expose illegal hunting. It’s through these activists that both the hunting packs and landowners will be held to account.

    Featured image via Somerset Wildlife Crime

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • The Canary is launching round two of our Amplify mentoring programme

    How often do you watch or read the news and think ‘what a load of shit’; ‘that’s not how it is’, or ‘why aren’t they telling the truth?’ At The Canary, we know how you feel. That’s why we’ve launched a new project called Amplify.

    Fighting the system

    We’ve spent the last six years fighting the system to try and make the world work for everyone – not just for politicians and their mates. We’ve been arrested for our activism, had the government refuse to talk to us, and we think we’re on a ‘list’ at the Met. The government says some of our journalists are ‘domestic extremists’. We’ve pissed the establishment off, and that’s a good thing – right? 

    We’re lucky to be able to do this. Because the majority of the people who work at The Canary are from poorer backgrounds. Some of us grew up or currently live on council estates. We’ve been on benefits. Some of us have been addicts. Others are sick and disabled. Many of us are from minority groups. Most of us don’t have degrees in journalism. 

    But we’re not the norm in the media.

    Check the privilege

    75% of all UK journalists come from middle-and upper-class families. 92% of them are white. Nearly all of them have degrees. It’s no wonder then that the rest of us feel like the media doesn’t really speak for us – partly because just 8% of journalists come from the poorest backgrounds. It’s a similar problem for young journalists, with 67% of media roles going to the over-25s – compared to 57% in all other professions.

    So, if you want to get into journalism, then you have to come from a certain background – or be able to do an internship where you work for free for a billionaire.

    That’s not fair. And The Canary wants to change things.

    Time to amplify

    So, we’ve launched Amplify: a training and mentoring programme in media and journalism. The first round ran from January-March 2022, with 13 working-class, 16-25-year-olds. They all completed the programme on 13 March 2022. We’re beginning to publish their work now, which you can find here. 

    Now, we’re recruiting for round two. It will run between April and June 2022. And this time, not only will it be open to young, working-class people aged 16-25 but specifically for chronically ill and disabled people who are not in paid work. We really want to encourage disabled people of colour to send us an application.

    You’ll link up with one of our journalists who’ll be your mentor for the next few months. You’ll take part in Zoom workshops on article writing and filmmaking. Then, with the support of your mentor, you’ll produce a piece of work that The Canary will publish – and pay you for, obviously. 

    You could produce an article like Eileanor Crilly, an Amplify round one participant, did:

    Dying to get treatment, part one: eating disorder services fail to save lives

    Or maybe you want to do a film – like this, where I met legendary film director Ken Loach:

     

    It’s entirely up to you. The Canary will support you in your decision. It will support you while you produce your work and after publishing too.

    You being you

    If you’re interested, the first and most important thing is that this is about you being you. The Canary doesn’t exist to tell you what to talk about or how to talk about it. We want you to produce work about stuff that’s important to you: racism, police violence, benefits, being poor, the climate crisis – anything you feel passionate about or that affects you. 

    Second, this is not about turning you into a particular kind of journalist. This is about giving you the skills to find your own voice and style. We’ll teach you the basics: story selection, article or film construction, making your work accessible to everyone, and also how a 21st-century newsroom works. All your work will of course need to keep within Canary values and style requirements. 

    But it’s really about supporting you to find out who you could be if you wanted to make a living in the media. 

    A new world order

    Thirdly, Amplify is about creating new, better journalists. Established, corporate media doesn’t work in our interests; it only looks after the rich and powerful. That’s why we all need voices like yours to be amplified. Your views, your stories, and your experiences are just as important as anyone else’s. They deserve and need to be heard. That’s what Amplify is about, and that’s what The Canary will support you in doing. 

    Want to know more? Give me a shout. You can email me via steve.topple(at)thecanary.co or link with me on socials – it’s @MrTopple. But you need to be quick: our deadline for applications is Wednesday 30 March 2022 at 5pm. You can fill in the form here:

    Amplify Project Application Form

    I’ll let all applicants know if they’ve been successful or not by the end of Thursday 31 March – ready for the launch event on Sunday 10 April. 

    Check out the overview of the project below:

    Amplify: we’re recruiting for the second round now

    Featured image via The Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Coronavirus inquiry must examine ‘horrific’ consequences of mishandling the NHS 111 service – bereaved families

    The public inquiry into the coronavirus pandemic should examine the “mishandling” of the NHS 111 service, bereaved families have said.

    “Horrific” consequences

    The Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice group said the role of the telephone advice service in the early stages of the crisis was to “alleviate the burden on the NHS”, with “horrific” consequences. Despite an extra 700 call handlers being added, the service was quickly “swamped” as the first wave hit and operators were making life or death decisions with just 10 weeks training, it argued.

    Around a fifth of the group’s then 1,800 members (more than 350 people) at the end of the first wave believed that the 111 service had “failed to recognise how seriously ill their relatives were and direct them to appropriate care”. It is one of several critical issues families and more than a dozen expert groups believe the promised inquiry must cover when it starts next year.

    The groups have published the report Learn Lessons, Save Lives, saying they had not been consulted by Downing Street on the scope of the probe. Other key areas they want the inquiry to examine include:

    • The government’s pandemic preparedness.
    • The disproportionate impact on Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups and the role of socio-economic inequalities and structural racism.
    • Shortages of basic PPE for health and care workers and inadequate risk assessments.
    • The policy to discharge hospital patients into care homes without prior testing.
    • How the crisis affected clinically extremely vulnerable and disabled people.
    “Could it all have been so different?”

    Lobby Akinnola, a member of the bereaved families group, said his father Olufemi Akinnola called NHS 111 four times over two-and-a-half weeks in April 2020 but was told that he should not go to hospital. He believes the assessments were informed by his father saying he did not have blue lips – a symptom of hypoxia that as a black man he did not have.

    The 60-year-old was thought to be recovering from coronavirus, but he was experiencing hypoxia (low blood oxygen) that proved to be fatal.

    Lobby, 30, said:

    It’s hard not to believe that if my dad had gone to hospital, he might still be with us today.

    A healthy, active man, I can’t help but wonder if he’d received different advice from 111, could it all have been so different?

    If he had been white and his lips had turned visibly blue, would he have received the same advice? Would I still have my dad?

    Lobby said he does not blame operators, adding:

    111 must be a key issue that the inquiry looks at, and the families that lost loved ones as a consequence of the failings resulting from the government’s mishandling of the service must be at the forefront of that.

    “Ghosting”

    A government spokeserson said:

    Every death from this virus is a tragedy and our sympathies are with everyone who has lost loved ones.

    We will ensure the inquiry gets to the bottom of many of the questions thousands of bereaved families have about the pandemic.

    We have committed to holding a full public inquiry as soon as is reasonably possible, and will appoint the chair of the inquiry by Christmas and consult bereaved families and other groups on the terms of reference before they are finalised.

    It is critical we understand what happened in detail but, at the moment, it is right that public servants continue to focus their efforts on tackling the pandemic before moving on to the inquiry in spring.

    A separate inquiry, by the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch, was launched earlier this year following concerns that the advice given did not fully respond to severity of reported symptoms and delays in answering or returning calls.

    In September, when meeting members of the bereaved families group for the first time, Boris Johnson said an inquiry chair would be appointed by Christmas and families would be consulted on the probe’s terms of reference. Last week the group complained that the PM was “ghosting” them and said they want to avoid a situation where they are consulted close to Christmas, which will be distressing for those facing the festivities without loved ones.

    Downing Street has said the inquiry is due to start in spring 2022.

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Lord calls the Tories’ Troubles amnesty ‘legally dubious and morally corrupt’

    Controversial plans to ban prosecutions for Troubles murders are “legally dubious, constitutionally dangerous and morally corrupt”, a former Northern Ireland secretary has said.

    “Blanket amnesty”

    The scathing criticism was levelled at Westminster by Labour peer lord Peter Hain as he urged a rethink by the UK government over what he branded “a blanket amnesty”.

    Following a long-running stalemate over dealing with Northern Ireland’s troubled past at Stormont, earlier this year the Tory administration published a command paper outlining its intention to introduce a statute of limitations on crimes committed during the conflict up to April 1998 and would apply to military veterans as well as ex-paramilitaries.

    The contentious proposals, which prime minister Boris Johnson said would allow Northern Ireland to “draw a line under the Troubles”, would also end all legacy inquests and civil actions related to the bloody period. In addition, the package of measures included a new truth recovery body and an oral history initiative.

    The move has been condemned by all the main political parties in Northern Ireland as well as the Irish government, and a range of victims’ and survivors’ groups.

    Lord Hain (Archive/PA)
    Lord Hain (Archive/PA)

    “Shocking”

    Hain used the opportunity to raise the issue in parliament at second reading of the Northern Ireland (Ministers, Elections and Petitions of Concern) Bill, which is designed to protect powersharing at Stormont by offering greater stability in the event of a fresh political crisis.

    Describing the command paper as the “most shocking document” he had come across in his 50-year political career, Hain said:

    It proposes what is in effect a blanket amnesty which would include those who carried out some of the most unspeakable atrocities imaginable during what is still euphemistically called the Troubles.

    He added:

    It would halt all court proceedings on crimes related to the Troubles both criminal and civil. It would halt all inquests even those currently listed for hearing. It would say to traumatised and still grieving victims ‘What happened to your loved ones is no longer of any interest to the state’.

    And it says to the perpetrators ‘What you did to those victims is no longer of any interest to the state’.

    And this from a Government that purports to respect and uphold the rule of law. These proposals are legally dubious, constitutionally dangerous and morally corrupt in my view.

    I am raising it here in an effort to try and get the Government to think again before the Bill is brought to Parliament.

    Responding, newly-appointed Northern Ireland minister lord Jonathan Caine said:

    The Government is committed to bringing forward legislation to try and deal with this subject and hopefully very, very soon.

    The Tory frontbencher, who served as a special adviser to six secretaries of state for Northern Ireland, added:

    It will focus on providing better outcomes for victims and survivors, principally through looking at information recovery. But also importantly ending the endless cycle of reinvestigations and possible prosecutions of former members of the armed forces.

    The government has previously pointed out that normal criminal justice processes have in the past been set aside in Northern Ireland in the interests of peace and reconciliation, including early prisoner release, restricting jail sentences, and secret decommissioning of paramilitary weapons.

    The Canary has reported on alleged crimes which may have involved the British state that could go unpunished as a result of the amnesty.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • HMP Full Sutton faces yet more allegations of Islamophobic assaults

    Campaigners Anti-Carceral Solidarity (ACS) have made allegations of Islamophobic assaults at HMP Full Sutton.

    These latest allegations come after The Canary reported on the continued allegations of racist abuse at HMP Wakefield on 23 November. Since publishing that article, ACS report that one of the men mentioned, Dwayne Fulgence, has since been transferred to HMP Frankland.

    ACS says prison authorities transferred Dwayne without any notice. It claims this transfer is in “direct retaliation” for its protest outside Wakefield prison on 21 November.

    A litany of abuse

    Campaigners allege that Mr Ahmed has faced persistent abuse in HMP Full Sutton. ACS claims this occurred between November 2019 and 2021. It told The Canary there’s a:

    deep level of racism and Islamophobia at Full Sutton.

    On 21 November they listed several examples. These examples include one person:

    currently held captive at Full Sutton who has been experiencing racist violence and threats at the hands of the govenors and guards, as well as other prisoners (who the prison ignore or actively encourage to avoid accountability)

    Then between November 2019 and sometime in 2021, they say Mr Ahmed was subject to different forms of abuse including:

    • Being attacked with a nine inch weapon.
    • Being transferred to a segregation unit where prison authorities denied him writing materials, shower facilities and prayer books.
    • Accusing Mr Ahmed and those who associate with him of terrorism.
    • Not properly treating his broken arm.
    • Withholding letters from him and barring him from communication with his next of kin.
    • Taking his property and returning some in a broken state.

    Persistent abuse?

    This isn’t the first time allegations of abuse have been made against HMP Full Sutton. In April this year, The Canary’s Tom Anderson wrote that Dwayne was assaulted and subsequently abused in the segregation unit at HMP Full Sutton:

    A police complaint has been made after Dwayne Fulgence was left bleeding on the floor of his cell in HMP Full Sutton’s Segregation Unit. Fulgence was reportedly not given medical treatment for a considerable time after the attack. The Canary has been told he’s effectively been denied food since the attack.

    This is the latest in a long line of abuse allegations made against prison staff across several jails. On each occasion, The Canary has contacted the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) for comment. The MOJ denies allegations of abuse, racism and Islamophobia. It also denies any wrongdoing. However, it has admitted to the use of restraint in relation to an incident at Belmarsh although it also claimed that its use was “proportionate”.

    In relation to the new allegations in this article, The Canary once again contacted the Ministry of Justice. A spokesperson said:

    All claims are investigated. We have a zero tolerance for discrimination in our prisons and will not hesitate to take action where necessary.

    Campaigner says they:

    will be continuing to work alongside our friends inside, where ever they get transferred until they are free

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons – Édouard Hue

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Thugs beat up activists, and foxes are torn in two. This is the reality of fox hunting.

    Animal lovers across England should be celebrating right now, as the National Trust has declared that it will finally ban fox hunting on its land. But despite the good news, November has been a brutally violent month. Foxes have been murdered across the country, while the activists trying to save them have been physically assaulted and hospitalised.

    Northants Hunt Saboteurs and Hertfordshire Hunt Saboteurs – who are activists on the ground trying to stop illegal hunting – were beaten up at the weekend while trying to prevent a hunting meet from taking place. They say that they were targeted by “masked thugs” and that:

    Sabs were assaulted from the start, one being punched in the side of the head and knocked to the ground and was then kicked in the head whilst down. Another sab was repeatedly assaulted and punched in the face as he held his ground.

    All sabs present were subject to serious threats of violence in the field. Being forced back to the road sabs were knocked to the ground but refused to be marched away.

    The activists went on to say:

    One sab, who had earlier been hit in [the] head, began to feel unwell and it was decided [they] needed to go hospital. Sabs called an ambulance and waited… within a short while hunt thugs…arrived and again assaulted sabs in and outside their vehicle with one female sab being pulled out of the vehicle.

    The saboteurs say that the thugs stole the keys from their vehicle, as well as two camcorders. Camcorders are used by activists to film illegal fox hunting activities, as well as assaults like this.

    Foxes ripped apart

    As awful as this was for the activists, it is, unfortunately, nothing compared to the brutality that has been inflicted on foxes this November.

    Distressing footage from Weymouth Animal Rights on 13 November shows a fox being ripped up by hounds, while another fox was torn in two. Activists say that they managed to save two more foxes from the same fate that day.

    Meanwhile, Devon County Hunt Saboteurs published a different video of a fox being torn up by hounds, while their activists on the ground filmed another incident of a dead fox’s body being carried to a quad bike to be used as a trail for hounds to follow.

    These are just a few examples of the incidents that hunt saboteurs witness across the country, week in, week out.

    A small victory, but there’s still a long way to go

    On 25 November, the National Trust finally announced that it would ban hunting on its land. The decision was made after a top fox hunter was convicted for encouraging others to hunt foxes under the guise of ‘trail hunting’. Trail hunting is when packs lay an artificial trail for hounds to follow, instead of chasing a real fox. But activists have known for years that real foxes are consistently hunted and murdered on National Trust land.

    Rob Pownall, founder of anti-hunting organisation Keep The Ban, told The Canary:

    Finally the National Trust have made the decision they should have made years ago and banned the hunts from their land. The lie that is ‘trail hunting’ is well and truly over and this should prove to be a momentous day when it comes to finally ending the cruel and barbaric pastime of fox hunting for good.

    Natural Resources Wales has also banned trail hunting on its land, as has the Malvern Hills Trust. But a number of land owners, including the Ministry of Defence, haven’t. In fact, the MoD is still handing out licenses to hunt. As the Hunt Saboteurs Association says:

    how can an organisation, funded by taxpayers, continue to licence illegal hunts?

    Whether the National Trust will actually enforce their trail hunting ban remains to be seen. After all, it has repeatedly ignored ample evidence that stags are hunted and murdered on its land. Public pressure, as well as active monitoring on the ground by hunt saboteurs, will be key in ensuring that the ban is upheld. And it is also up to all of us to ensure that big landowners like the MoD and Forestry England follow suit and ban trail hunting for good.

    Featured image via Weymouth Animal Rights / Screenshot

    By Eliza Egret

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Insulate Britain protester taken to hospital on 13-day prison hunger strike

    An Insulate Britain protester who has been on hunger strike in prison for 13 days is being given hospital treatment, the campaign group said.

    Emma Smart was moved to the hospital wing at HMP Bronzefield in Ashford, Surrey, on Friday.

    She was jailed for four months on 17 November for breaching an injunction and immediately vowed to stop eating until the government moves to insulate homes.

    Hunger strike

    In a statement released by Insulate Britain, Smart said:

    The window of my cell in the hospital wing is blocked up and there is little natural light, in my previous cell I could see the birds and trees that line the prison fence.

    I have less time to go outside in the prison yard for exercise now.

    All of this is testing my resolve to continue, but I feel that not eating is the only thing I can do from prison to draw attention to those who will have to make the choice between heating and eating this winter.

    Insulate Britain members, including Smart’s husband Andy Smith, are to stage a 24-hour fast outside 10 Downing Street on Tuesday morning in solidarity with her, the group said.

    More protesters facing jail

    Smart is one of nine members of the group jailed for breaching an injunction designed to prevent the road blockades which have sparked anger among motorists and others affected by the protests.

    They appeared at the High Court on 17 November after they admitted breaching an injunction by taking part in a blockade at junction 25 of the M25 during the morning rush hour on October 8.

    Insulate Britain protests
    Insulate Britain activists including Emma Smart (back centre)

    They received sentences of between three and six months and ordered to pay £5,000 in costs each.

    A further nine Insulate Britain protesters are to appear at the High Court on 14 December to face a charge of contempt of court.

    Insulate Britain began a wave of protests in September and supporters have blocked the M25, roads in London including around Parliament, roads in Birmingham and Manchester and around the Port of Dover in Kent.

    The group is demanding that the government insulate Britain’s “leaky homes” and end deaths it says are caused by winter fuel shortages.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Universal basic income in Wales ‘would cut poverty in half’

    Poverty in Wales would be halved if the Welsh Government established a universal basic income (UBI) system in the country, a major study has found.

    The research, carried out by leading think tank Autonomy, found UBI would decrease overall poverty rates in Wales by 50%, and child poverty would decrease by 64%, bringing it to a rate of under 10% in Wales.

    It is currently at 28% – the worst in the UK.

    It also found nearly three quarters of people in Wales, 69%, support piloting UBI.

    UBI is a government programme in which every citizen receives a set amount of money on a regular basis, regardless of their employment status.

    It is a minimum payment, designed to meet basic needs, paid to everyone individually, unconditionally.

    Pilot scheme

    Earlier this year the Welsh Government announced its ambition to pilot a form of UBI in Wales, but suggested the scheme would focus on specific groups of people, like care leavers.

    However, campaigners including UBI Lab Wales, the future generations commissioner Sophie Howe and more than 1,000 petitioners have since called on the first minister to ensure the pilot includes children, the employed, the unemployed and pensioners, as well as care leavers.

    Howe, whose role was created under Wales’ Well-being of Future Generations Act, will give evidence to the Welsh Parliament’s Petitions Committee, alongside director of research at Autonomy Will Stronge, calling for a geographically-based universal basic income (UBI) scheme.

    She said UBI could deliver “a more equal, prosperous Wales”. She continued:

    Piloting a UBI trial here in Wales gives us a chance to increase the prosperity of every single person, giving more people a life jacket when they need to keep their head above the water – which has the potential to create a healthier, more equal population.

    The findings in this report should excite leaders who say they want a true green and just recovery that makes life fairer for everyone.

    “Bold changes” are needed

    Stronge said:

    The Covid-19 pandemic necessitates radical and bold changes to support people through future economic shocks.

    As the economy and labour market struggles to find its feet, it’s clear that guaranteeing an income floor for all is the most progressive way of securing livelihoods.

    Ewan Hilton and James Radcliffe, chief executive and head of policy at Platfform, a mental health and social change charity, will also be giving evidence at the session, as well as Lydia Godden, of Women’s Equality Network Wales (WEN Cymru).

    A trial in Wales of 2,500 people, the report finds, could cost about £50m, with adults being paid from £60 per week.

    Those who were already living in poor health, poverty or in marginalised communities are said to have been the hardest hit by the pandemic.

    Rising living costs, combined with the end of the coronavirus job retention scheme, also known as furlough, on top of cuts to welfare benefits such as universal credit, is amounting to a “perfect storm” or “tsunami”, according to respondents to a Senedd Committee inquiry into debt and the pandemic held this month.

    A review into a UBI pilot in Finland, which ran from 2017 to 2018, found people who took part were generally more satisfied with their lives and experienced less mental strain, depression, sadness and loneliness.

    They also worked slightly more than those on unemployment benefits and reported better cognitive functioning. The study researchers said that:

    The basic income recipients were more satisfied with their lives and experienced less mental strain than the control group,

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • One tweet demolished the Tories’ hypocritical refugee hatred

    As people are dying trying to reach the UK via the English Channel, one tweet sums up the toxic attitude and policies of the Tory government:

    Dying in the Channel

    27 people died on Wednesday 24 November while trying to cross the Channel in a dinghy. As BBC News reported, those who drowned:

    included 17 men, seven women – one of whom was pregnant – and three children

    The UN said it was the largest loss of life in the Channel since it began monitoring the situation in 2014. Yet the Tory government’s toxic narratives surrounding refugees continues.

    For example, the Home Office has refused to rule out using “pushback” techniques to stop people crossing the Channel. This would be where agencies like the UK Border Force would send boats back mid-voyage to France. Charities and a trade union have launched a legal challenge against the government over this policy. PCS Union boss Mark Serwotka told the Guardian:

    The pushback policy being pursued by the home secretary is unlawful, unworkable and above all morally reprehensible.

    The Tories are seemingly indifferent to the suffering – even engaging in a blame-game with France. And one tweet from an independent journalist sums up the situation perfectly.

    “Selective” panic

    As Declassified UK chief reporter Phil Miller tweeted:

    Miller shared a screengrab from a Wall Street Journal article from January 2021. It’s headline was:

    U.K. Opens Its Doors to Five Million Hong Kong Residents

    This is the story that the UK has set up a visa scheme for people from Hong Kong, due to China’s actions in the area. As BBC News noted, the visa scheme will offer them

    and their immediate dependents… a fast track to UK citizenship.

    Technically the Hong Kong residents seeking British citizenship aren’t refugees, because they haven’t left their home nation. Like with actual refugees, though, it’s true they’re leaving because of persecution. Figures on the right argue that migration is acceptable in the case of Hong Kong citizens who follow the government’s preferred procedures, but unacceptable in the case of refugees who do not.

    The Tory government, for example, has repeatedly accused people crossing the Channel of doing so ‘illegally’. The problem with their argument is that under international law, people have the right to enter a country in order to make an asylum claim. This means people from Afghanistan and Syria have as much right to physically seek asylum in the UK as Hong Kong residents have to apply through other means.

    Crunching the numbers

    The Times reported that 88,800 people from Hong Kong had applied for UK settlement by 30 September. For context, according to BBC News over 25,700 people had come to the UK via crossing the Channel in boats.

    So that means the number of people from Hong Kong wanting to live in the UK is 346% higher than those coming via the Channel. Moreover, in the year ending June 2021 there had been a 4% fall in the number of people claiming asylum in the UK. But of course, that’s not how BBC News framed it. Its headline said:

    Migrant crossings: Number reaching UK this year three times 2020’s total

    It took the BBC until the eighth paragraph of the article to say that overall asylum applications had fallen by 4%.

    The ‘right kind’ of “migrants”

    Of course, at the heart of this situation is the Tory notion that asylum-seekers from Hong Kong are acceptable yet those from other countries are not. There’s also the convenience of vilifying China in offering refuge to Hong Kong residents. Home secretary Priti Patel said of people coming to the UK from Hong Kong:

    Safeguarding individuals’ freedoms, liberty and security is absolutely vital for those individuals that go through this process

    Yet she and her government are not affording the same decency to people crossing the Channel to get here. There’s no good reason why both groups of people should not be allowed to easily apply to live in the UK. One group is no more deserving than the other of being free of persecution.

    Featured image via Mstyslav Chernov/Unframe – Wikimedia and Good Morning Britain – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Resist will register as a political party to challenge the status quo

    On Thursday 25 November, over 90% of Resist’s members voted to register as a political party. It came after an indicative vote on 17 October which supported the move:

    Former Labour MP Chris Williamson is one of Resist’s founding members. Williamson told The Canary that Resist’s supporters and membership of around 3,500 will now decide on a name for that party.

    Building a meaningful alternative

    Williamson took aim at the Labour Party, saying:

    The Labour Party no longer represents the interests of working class communities. It is in the pockets of global corporations which are responsible for chronic inequality and potential climate catastrophe.

    So, according to Williamson:

    We therefore need to build a meaningful alternative to the broken political system. Our aim will be to help galvanise political and civil opposition to the existing dysfunctional status quo. So we will continue to encourage collaboration with other socialist parties and with civil society too.

    When will it stand for election?

    The registration process could take up to seven weeks. And as the next elections (the local elections) aren’t until 5 May 2022, Williamson believes:

    We will certainly be ready to field candidates next year

    Elections for the Northern Ireland Assembly also take place in May 2022, but Resist only plans to organise in England, Scotland, and Wales. In contesting the next elections, Williamson added:

    We will work with other socialist parties to maximise the impact.

    However, he emphasised it wasn’t just about elections:

    we are not obsessed with electoral politics. The most important focus will be on building a social movement. Grassroots support will be essential in building opposition to the mainstream corporate parties.

    Its core policies

    Williamson outlined Resist’s 10 core polices. Broadly speaking, the policies are about keeping essential services in public hands. Among other issues, they deal with the economy, housing, justice and education. Resist wants an economy that works for “the many”. Additionally, it wants a “comprehensive green new deal” for homes and businesses.

    Other policies include replacing the monarchy with a democratically elected head of state, scrapping the House of Lords and making elected representatives more accountable. It also wants to scrap the trident nuclear programme and withdraw the UK from NATO.

    Number one on the list, though, is health and social care. Resist wants publicly owned and “free at the point of delivery” health and social care treatment. This is of particular importance given the Tories’ ongoing attempts to further privatise the NHS. The policies in full are:

    1. HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE:
      Publicly owned health and social care service, free at the point of delivery, including free dental and ophthalmic treatment.
    2. PUBLIC SERVICES:
      Reverse all previous privatisations of public services, including health, education services, prisons and utilities, to ensure they are properly resourced.
    3. EDUCATION:
      Provide free cradle to grave access to education and write off outstanding student debts.
    4. HOUSING:
      Build and acquire new council housing to address shortages and homelessness, applying stringent eco and space standards; regulate private sector housing; expand cooperative housing for sale and rent.
    5. ECONOMY:
      Utilise powers available to a currency-issuing nation to create a strong economy that works in the interests of the many, not the few; introduce a genuinely progressive tax system; introduce a job guarantee scheme; Standardise a four-day working week; raise the minimum wage to a genuine living wage; make trade union representation a right in all workplaces and repeal anti-trade union laws.
    6. ACCESS TO JUSTICE:
      Overhaul the Justice system to ensure legal equality through access to legal aid for all; focus on community rather than custodial sentences and prioritise rehabilitation rather than punishment; decriminalise substance misuse and treat it as a public health not a criminal justice issue.
    7. COMPREHENSIVE GREEN NEW DEAL:
      Invest in renewable technologies; insulate all residential and commercial premises to reduce the carbon footprint and end fuel poverty; introduce a climate change adaptation programme, including reforesting the uplands; end factory farming and increase sustainable arable food production.
    8. NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMME FOR A SAFER AND PEACEFUL WORLD:
      Scrap Trident programme; withdraw from NATO; use position as a permanent member of UN Security Council to promote peace and disarmament; demand a democratic UN; diversify arms industries into socially useful eco production.
    9. SOCIAL SECURITY:
      Reduce state retirement age for men and women to 60; re-establish universal principle for social security entitlements; extend paid parental leave to 18 months.
    10. CONSTITUTION:
      Replace the Monarchy with a democratically elected head of state; scrap the House of Lords and remove all feudal privileges; decentralise power to local regions; ban paid lobbying; make elected representatives accountable through participatory democracy.
    Collaboration is “essential”

    While admitting the difficulty of the task ahead, Williamson noted:

    We know that changing the political status quo won’t be easy, but believe we have an obligation to future generations to try.

    And in changing that status quo, Williamson believes “collaboration on the left is essential”. If people are interested, they can find out more on Resist’s website.

    Featured image via Resist

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

  • REVEALED: ‘Critical new evidence’ suggests the British army lied about McGurk’s Bar bombing

    The British loyalist Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) blew up McGurk’s bar in Belfast on 4 December 1971. It murdered 15 innocent people and injured more than 16. This bombing occurred in the early years of the 30-year conflict in Ireland. British authorities blamed the IRA, claiming the bomb detonated prematurely en route to its intended target.  But campaigners claim that this assertion was a lie.

    As the 50th anniversary of that massacre approaches, victims’ families have launched a new website. The website commemorates the dead, those who survived, and their families. Since the bombing, those families have continued to fight for the truth. And in the lead up to the anniversary, they will be “publishing critical new evidence and articles”.

    The Canary is exclusively revealing some of that evidence that shows a British army commander lied about his knowledge of the bombing in a newspaper article just two weeks after the incident. Campaigners claim this is the first instance of that commander lying about the McGurk’s bar bombing.

    A new project begins

    The site also includes work from award-winning Belfast artist Sinéad O’Neill-Nicholl. The artist started a sound installation project where she’s recording “the lived experiences” of the families in the aftermath of the massacre. O’Neill-Nicholl’s project is called Never the Same. The installation, at the site of the explosion, currently features:

    16 short recordings of the families’ personal memories around grief and loss, which visitors can listen to whilst at the McGurk’s Bar memorial.

    Ciarán MacAirt is a justice campaigner and grandson of two of the McGurk’s Bar victims. He called O’Neill-Nicholl’s work “an innovative sound installation”. MacAirt will be revealing “new evidence” about the bombing on this site. He said:

    Unfortunately, the new website is a timely reminder too that our Campaign for Truth is ongoing even after 50 years, as the British authorities – including the Office of Police Ombudsman, Police Service Northern Ireland, Ministry of Defence and Cabinet Office – are withholding evidence from our families to this very day. We will prove this over the coming weeks.

    Some of this evidence relates to what lieutenant general Harry Tuzo knew about the bombing. Tuzo was general officer commanding (GOC) of the British Army at that time. In a newspaper article on 20 December 1971, Tuzo said he was 98% certain the bomb went off inside the pub. In that article, Tuzo speculated that it was unlikely:

    anybody not known to the denizens [regulars] of that pub could have got in with a parcel under his arm.

    Therefore, Tuzo’s statement implicates the people inside the pub in the bombing.

    What we already know

    The website shows previously seen secret documents that indicate British armed forces knew the bar had been attacked from outside. Additionally, it suggests brigadier Frank Kitson colluded with local police to tell lies about the bombing and to conceal the truth.

    Indeed, as reported by The Canary in August 2020, MacAirt uncovered new files that revealed the name of the UVF’s original target. The files also showed that there was a nearby British army presence that evening. Moreover, MacAirt claims his files showed a connection between Kitson and the atrocity.

    In December 2020, MacAirt released previously unseen documentation that showed:

    a high-level, coordinated and sustained Security Force and Civil Service plot to deceive the Parliaments of Britain and Northern Ireland about the true circumstances of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre.

    Critical documentation

    Now, MacAirt has exclusively revealed to The Canary that some of this new documentation implicates GOC Tuzo. Because just four days before his statement in the above newspaper article, he attended a security meeting in Stormont just outside Belfast:

    They discussed the McGurk’s bar bombing at this meeting. Notes on the meeting state:

    Circumstantial evidence indicates that this was a premature detonation and two of those killed were known I.R.A. members at least one of whom had been associated with bombing activities. Intelligence indicates that the bomb was destined for use elsewhere in the city.

    “A republican own-goal”?

    Campaigners claim this is a lie. In fact, on the 49th anniversary of the bombing, they had challenged police to prove that the bombing victims were IRA members. They say they’ve yet to get a response. And as previously reported by The Canary, MacAirt alleges the British army and the RUC colluded “just a few hours after the bomb explosion” to blame the victims for the explosion. They labelled it “a republican own-goal”. A British army log stated:

    RUC have a line that the bomb in the pub was a bomb designed to be used elsewhere, left in the pub to be picked up by the Provisional IRA. Bomb went off and was a mistake. RUC press office have a line on it – NI should deal with them.

    But the British knew where the bomb was planted

    According to MacAirt, all of this could have led to security forces misinforming Tuzo. However, in 2009, MacAirt uncovered information that showed Tuzo had been informed the bomb was planted outside the bar and not inside:

    A bomb believed to have been planted outside the bar was estimated by the A.T.O. to be 30/50lb of HE (high explosive)

    Then in 2016, MacAirt and his legal team uncovered a Headquarters Northern Ireland log from December 1971. This revealed proof that officers examined the bomb site the following morning and informed Tuzo’s Headquarters on the morning of 5 December 1971:

    ATO [Ammunition Technical Officer] is convinced bomb was placed in entrance way on ground floor. The area is cratered and clearly was the seat of the explosion.

    MacAirt said the authorities had always told the families they hadn’t discovered the probable seat of the explosion. But this was not the case. Because the ATO’s report, which had first gone to Kitson’s Brigade Headquarters, read:

    As far as can be assessed from the damage and the crater by the expl[osion]… the bomb was placed on the ground floor entrance on the corner of the building that faces into the junction.

    MacAirt told The Canary:

    The British Army and its leaders including Lt. General Sir Harry Tuzo and Brigadier Frank Kitson knew that the bomb was placed outside the bar and the bar was attacked. They knew that the innocent victims were not to blame.

    So, when Tuzo offered his Christmas message at the press conference on 20th December 1971 and he spoke about the McGurk’s Bar Massacre, he was lying.

    Lt. General Sir Harry Tuzo is as much in the frame for the cover-up of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre as his subordinate, Frank Kitson.

    The truth will not remained buried

    The project organisers believe the Never the Same project will inspire other families in Ireland and the UK who wish to commemorate the loved ones they lost during this 30-year conflict. The launch comes as Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis is planning an amnesty from criminal prosecution for British military personnel. This amnesty would also apply to loyalist and republican paramilitaries who fought in the conflict. That amnesty would take effect if Lewis’s plans become law.

    Long before the government proposed this amnesty, campaigners believed British authorities had never been forthcoming with the truth behind Britain’s involvement in the conflict. And as MacAirt added:

    It is horrific to consider that before we buried our loved ones on cold days in December 1971, the British state buried the truth.

    This new website, along with MacAirt’s relentless and thorough investigative work, shows that whatever attempts the British employ to bury the truth, campaigners will continue to uncover it.

    Featured image via YouTube – Paper Trail & YouTube – British Movietone

    By Peadar O'Cearnaigh

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Boris Johnson announces half-measures for highly concerning Omicron variant

    Boris Johnson has ordered the return of mandatory mask-wearing in shops and on public transport after the concerning variant was detected in Britain.

    According to the PA news agency, the prime minister is preparing to reimpose measures to control the spread of coronavirus (Covid-19). There are fears that the new strain has a higher risk of reinfection and could evade existing vaccines. However, Johnson announced no mitigations for schools and workplaces. Nor has he issued any guidance for hospitality, entertainment and cultural venues. Meanwhile, contacts of Omicron cases will be required to self-isolate for 10 days, even if they are vaccinated.

    All international arrivals will have to take a PCR test and “self-isolate until they have a negative result”. But government guidelines only require them to take a test by the end of their second day in the UK. So positive cases could still expose others upon arrival to the UK before they take their test.

    A price heavier than loss of life?

    Johnson announced the strengthening of England’s rules at a Downing Street press conference. It came after two cases of Omicron were identified in Nottingham and Brentwood, Essex. Both were linked to travel to southern Africa.

    On Saturday 27 November, the UK Health Security Agency confirmed the two Omicron cases in England after genomic sequencing overnight. The individuals and their households were ordered into self-isolation. And targeted testing is being carried out in areas where they are thought to have been infectious.

    The prime minister said the strain, designated a variant of concern by the World Health Organisation, appears to spread “very rapidly”. Moreover, it can transmit between the double-vaccinated and may partially reduce the protection of existing vaccines.

    But although the new safety measures are minimal, the prime minister described them as “temporary and precautionary”. He added that the measures will be reviewed in three weeks.

    On Sunday 28 November, health secretary Sajid Javid said that the UK is “nowhere near” introducing stricter safety measures, including social distancing. He told Sky News that introducing further restrictions “comes with a very heavy price”. That’s despite the potential price of reduced restrictions being even more needless deaths and unsustainable pressure on the NHS.

    A “major issue”

    England’s chief medical officer, professor Chris Whitty, said the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) will be tasked with looking at whether boosters can be extended from the over-40s to the over-18s.

    They’ll also consider whether second doses should be offered to 12 to 15-year-olds, and whether the waiting time before a booster jab could be reduced.

    Chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said the country needs to “face up” to the possibility the variant will be a “major issue” if it turns out to be highly-transmissible and evades immunity.

    He said that the existing booster programme is the current priority. But vaccine manufacturers believe they can tweak their existing jabs to better counter Omicron “in about 100 days”.

    Selective travel restrictions

    Ministers said Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and Angola will face travel restrictions from 28 November. They will join South Africa and five other neighbouring nations on UK red lists. Although no restrictions have been announced for Belgium, Germany, Italy and Czech Republic, where Omicron cases have also been detected.

    The UK, Germany and Italy all confirmed the presence of Omicron on 27 November. It came after the variant first detected in South Africa was reported to be in Belgium on 26 November.

    But the prime minister said border measures can “only ever minimise and delay the arrival of a new variant rather than stop it all together”. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland said they intend to mirror the border restrictions.

    Johnson said he’s “confident” this Christmas “will be considerably better than the last”. But he refused to say whether further restrictions, including social distancing and work-from-home guidance, would follow.

    Wary that many on the Conservative backbenches will be angered by the move, Johnson said:

    I very much hope that we will find that we continue to be in a strong position and we can lift these measures again, but right now this is the responsible course of action to slow down the seeding and the spread of this new variant and to maximise our defences so that we protect the gains we’ve worked for so hard.

    MPs are expected to be given a vote to approve the measures after they come into force, during which a number of backbench Tories may stage a rebellion. But it is thought unlikely Labour would oppose the restrictions, virtually guaranteeing that they will pass.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Downing Street protest calls for safe passage across the Channel

    Around 150 people have gathered near 10 Downing Street to protest over the deaths of more than two dozen people who drowned while attempting to cross the English Channel this week.

    The demonstration was organised by anti-racism group Stand Up To Racism. It heard speeches from the general secretary of the UK’s largest teachers union – the National Education Union – and several others including religious groups and volunteer organisations directly involved in helping refugees.

    English Channel migrant deaths
    People take part in a protest outside Downing Street (Aaron Chown/PA)

    Safe passage

    Twenty-seven people died during the crossing on 24 November. That has made it one of the deadliest days for refugees crossing the channel. Women and children were among those on board the boat which capsized after leaving Calais. Only two survived.

    Following the tragedy, politicians argued about how to halt the perilous Channel crossings. MPs from Labour, the SNP, and the Green Party called for safe passages that would allow refugees to travel securely in accordance with international law:

    While several Conservatives blamed France, it’s been pointed out that countries like France have taken in considerably more people than Britain over the past decade:

    There’s also the fact that the UK has contributed to the refugee crisis by its involvement in military action in other countries. But it now refuses to take responsibility for the refugees it helped to displace.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Sadiq Khan branded ‘anti-worker’ for his attack on striking rail workers

    London’s Night Tube service will not resume on the evening of 27 November because of industrial action. The situation has sparked debate – especially around Sadiq Khan’s criticism of striking workers.

    Strike

    Members of the Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union will walk out at 8.30pm on the Victoria and Central lines in a dispute over drivers’ rosters. Tube services were disrupted on 26 November after drivers launched a 24-hour strike, which led to criticism from Khan. The strike will be followed by more weekend stoppages in the run up to Christmas.

    The 27 November strike will last for eight hours, altering plans to restart the Night Tube this weekend. It was due to resume after being suspended last year because of the pandemic.

    On 26 November, Khan said:

    But his intervention drew criticism:

    Khan was also criticised by Conservatives who noted he once said “strikes are ultimately a sign of failure”:

    Union response

    RMT says Transport for London (TfL) has “ripped up “ an agreement on Night Tube driving by changing rosters. Meanwhile TfL says no jobs are being lost and the changes mean drivers would work around four Night Tube weekends a year.

    RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said:

    The widespread impact on services is solely down to management failure to recognise and address the anger of their staff at the imposition of damaging and unacceptable working practices.

    This action was wholly avoidable if LU (London Underground) bosses hadn’t attempted to bulldoze through arrangements that abolished the Night Tube driver grade, lumping everyone into a central pool where they can be shunted about at will in a drive to cut costs.

    Our members have spoken and it’s time for London Underground to start listening.

    The Mayor and his officials need to recognise our determination to defend progressive and family-friendly working practices. We remain available for talks.

    Andy Lord, London Underground’s managing director, said:

    I am very sorry for the inconvenience that this strike action is causing. We understand that our customers will be frustrated by the RMT’s strike action, which is timed to cause maximum disruption to London…

    We are expecting to operate a reduced service overnight tonight on the Central and Victoria lines and on 3-5 December, 10-12 December and 17-18 December. Customers are advised to check before they travel and use buses to complete their journeys where required.

    Nick Dent, director of London Underground customer operations said:

    At such a pivotal time for the capital’s recovery, we are hugely disappointed that the RMT is threatening London with this unnecessary action.

    By making changes to Tube driver rosters we have provided greater flexibility for drivers as well as permanent work and job security, something welcomed by all other unions

    Meanwhile, Tribune editor Ronan Burtenshaw drew attention to what could potentially be another scandal of dishonesty in politics:

    Khan has previously spoken out about ‘lies’ told by former London mayor Boris Johnson:

    Featured image via YouTube

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • As Omicron variant arrives in the UK, government stalls on wider restrictions

    It’s reported by PA that two cases of the Omicron variant have been detected in the UK. The new coronavirus (Covid-19) variant that originated in South Africa has also been identified in Belgium.

    Travel restrictions have been imposed by the UK government on six countries including South Africa. But despite concerns that the new variant may have greater transmissibility, UK health secretary Sajid Javid has not yet re-imposed further coronavirus safety measures country-wide.

    Omicron in UK

    According to PA, one case of the new variant was reportedly found in Nottingham and another in Chelmsford. The UK Health Security Agency has confirmed both cases after genomic sequencing.

    UK health secretary Sajid Javid has ordered targeted testing in both towns. But he neglected to mention anything about introducing further safety measures and restrictions:

    Transmissibility

    The first known confirmed infection of the new variant was taken from a specimen on 9 November. The new variant was reported to the World Health Organisation (WHO) on 24 November. WHO subsequently declared it a variant of concern (VOC) and named it Omicron.

    Sharon Peacock, who is a specialist in genetic sequencing at the University of Cambridge, said that the new variant appears to have mutations “consistent with enhanced transmissibility”.

    WHO declared that the variant “has been detected at faster rates than previous surges in infection, suggesting that this variant may have a growth advantage”. It added:

    Preliminary evidence suggests an increased risk of reinfection with this variant, as compared to other VOCs

    The person who contracted the variant returned to Belgium from Egypt on 11 November:

    Instances of the new variant have also been found amongst travellers in Hong Kong, Botswana, and Israel.

    Travel restrictions

    While the data on the new variant is still at the preliminary stage, it’s better to be safe than sorry (and take preventative action now):

    Regarding the travel restrictions, it appears the UK government could have acted quicker, as this tweet indicates:

    It’s reported that the EU has also imposed restrictions on flights to and from southern Africa.

    Not just about vaccinations

    Dr Duncan Robertson is one of the scientists involved in coronavirus modelling and analysis. He succinctly explains why limiting coronavirus cases is about more than just vaccination:

    Indeed, we need both vaccinations and mitigations in order to protect people effectively:

    And WHO has reminded individuals to reduce further risk by:

    wearing well-fitting masks, hand hygiene, physical distancing, improving ventilation of indoor spaces, avoiding crowded spaces, and getting vaccinated.

    Worrying stats

    Professor Christina Pagel of Independent SAGE tweeted how coronavirus cases amongst the young in England are significantly rising, particularly for 5-9 year olds:

    These stats also show that, in contrast, coronavirus cases for those age over 60 are decreasing. A coronavirus tracker shows that Scotland and Wales are 72% and 71% fully vaccinated, while England and the north of Ireland are 68% and 66%. The UK as a whole is 69%  which is behind 33 other countries (Portugal, for example, is 89% fully vaccinated).

    Indie SAGE’s latest report includes a slide showing that the number of “rolling deaths per week per million people” is far higher in the UK compared to similar sized countries in Europe.

    Responsibility

    In October, a report from the Health and Social Care committee and Science and Technology committee had warned the government that it had erred at every stage of the pandemic. With the new variant in our midst, the UK government needs to be ultra vigilant and act swiftly.

    Yes, more vaccinations are needed. But scientific advice is clear that additional restrictions can make all the difference in controlling the spread of the virus. This particularly applies to crowded indoor places such as public transport, shops, offices, and schools. The government must heed this advice.

    We need to hold the government to account so that it doesn’t risk yet more lives to the new variant. But meanwhile, we all have a role to play in ensuring that we protect ourselves and the wider population.

    Featured image via YouTube

    By Tom Coburg

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • UK-France relations are ‘strong’ says minister, despite all evidence to the contrary

    A Home Office minister has insisted that relations between France and the UK are “strong”. That’s despite Boris Johnson and French president Emmanuel Macron clashing over how to deal with refugees crossing the English Channel in small boats as they flee war, poverty, and persecution.

    Deadliest day of Channel crossings

    Damian Hinds, whose brief covers security and borders, defended the prime minister’s letter to the French leader as “exceptionally supportive and collaborative”. It came after Paris was enraged by Johnson making the letter public on Twitter.

    A full-scale diplomatic row between the two nations erupted as the first of the 27 victims of a capsizing on 24 November was named as a young Kurdish woman from northern Iraq.

    Relatives identified 24-year-old Maryam Nuri Mohamed Amin, known to her family as Baran, as one of the people who died on 24 November. It was the deadliest day of the Channel migration crisis. The student was said to have been trying to join her fiance who already lives in Britain.

    Tres bien?

    As families mourned the loss of their loved ones, politicians argued about how to stem perilous Channel crossings. Paris withdrew an invitation to home secretary Priti Patel to attend a meeting of ministers from key European allies in Calais on 28 November.

    France was angered by Johnson releasing a letter he sent to Macron setting out his proposals. They included reiterating a call for joint UK-French border patrols along French beaches to stop boats leaving, which Paris has long resisted.

    French government spokesperson Gabriel Attal rejected the proposal as “clearly not what we need to solve this problem”. And he said the prime minister’s letter “doesn’t correspond at all” with discussions Johnson and Macron had when they spoke on 24 November.

    “We are sick of double-speak,” he added. He said Johnson’s decision to post the letter on his Twitter feed suggested he was “not serious”.

    But despite the open derision from French politicians, UK ministers claimed that British-French relations remained intact.

    “Breaching sovereignty”

    Hinds told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme:

    British and French officials have been working together throughout, in fact we’ve been working together for years, on these really important issues. The partnership is strong.

    Moreover, he insisted “nobody is proposing breaching sovereignty” amid concerns over the request for UK officials to join patrols on French beaches. He added:

    The tone of the letter is exceptionally supportive and collaborative, it absolutely acknowledges everything the French government and authorities have been doing, that it’s a shared challenge, but that now, particularly prompted by this awful tragedy, we have to go further, we have to deepen our partnership, we have to broaden what we do, we have to draw up new creative solutions

    Hinds acknowledged the challenges of policing the French coastline and added:

    There is more that can be done and clearly we can’t just say it’s difficult because it’s hundreds of miles of coastline, we have to do what’s necessary to save human life.

    But some have made suggestions as to how the UK can better help “save human life”:

    Patel left out

    In a statement reported in French media, the interior ministry said the meeting on 28 November would go ahead with interior minister Gerald Darmanin and his counterparts from Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, as well as representatives of the European Commission.

    Although the meeting with Patel has been cancelled, the No 10 spokesperson said Home Office officials had travelled to France for talks on 26 November with French counterparts as planned.

    Amid the diplomatic storm, Krmanj Ezzat Dargali identified his cousin among those who died on 24 November. He posted a tribute to Nuri Mohamed Amin on social media and told Sky News:

    The situation is just awful. She was a woman in the prime of her life.

    I understand why so many people are leaving for a better life, but this is not the correct path. It’s the route of death.

    And he said he hoped the British and French governments would “accept us in a better way”, adding:

    Anyone who wants to leave their home and travel to Europe has their own reasons and hopes, so please just help them in a better way and not force them to take this route of death.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Omicron variant from South Africa raises alarm bells as experts urge extra caution

    Work is underway to look at tweaking vaccines against the new concerning strain of coronavirus (Covid-19) that has sparked travel bans.

    The variant has been named Omicron and designated a “variant of concern” by the World Health Organisation (WHO). It has reached Belgium after being discovered in South Africa.

    The WHO warned that preliminary evidence suggests the variant has an increased risk of reinfection and may spread more rapidly than other strains.

    ‘A huge concern’

    As Belgium became the first EU country to announce a case, ministers were facing calls to go further to prevent a wave of the new variant arriving in Britain while a Delta surge is ongoing.

    Professor John Edmunds advises the government as part of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage). He warned that the new variant could create a “very, very, very difficult situation”.

    Moreover, he said the new strain “is a huge worry” and that “all the data suggests” it would be able to evade current immunity. He told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme:

    Our fears are it would do so to a large extent

    He urged ministers to look at extending travel restrictions and to prepare a plan to deal with Omicron because “at some point we’re going to get this variant here in the UK”.

    ‘Lower your exposure’

    .Experts at the WHO said there’s early evidence to suggest Omicron has an “increased risk of reinfection” and its rapid spread in South Africa suggests it has a “growth advantage”.

    Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO’s Covid-19 technical lead, said “What’s really important at an individual is to lower your exposure”. She added:

    The measures – these proven public health measures – have never been more important. Distancing, wearing of a mask, making sure that it’s over your nose and mouth, with clean hands, making sure you avoid crowded spaces, be in rooms where there’s good ventilation, and when it’s your turn, get vaccinated.

    Health secretary Sajid Javid said there’s “huge international concern” surrounding the strain. He has banned flights from South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Eswatini, Zimbabwe and Namibia to limit its spread.

    Javid told MPs there are concerns the variant may be more transmissible. It may also make existing vaccines less effective and may hinder one of the UK’s Covid-19 treatments, Ronapreve.

    The EU, US and Canada all followed Britain’s move to impose travel restrictions on visitors from southern Africa. It came ahead of the WHO adding the strain, also known as B.1.1.529, to its highest category for concerning variants

    Adapting vaccines

    Novavax said it has:

    already initiated development of a new recombinant spike protein based on the known genetic sequence of B.1.1.529 and will have it ready to begin testing and manufacturing within the next few weeks

    Moderna said:

    Since early 2021, Moderna has advanced a comprehensive strategy to anticipate new variants of concern.

    This strategy includes three levels of response should the currently authorized 50 µg (microgram) booster dose of mRNA-1273 prove insufficient to boost waning immunity against the Omicron variant.

    In a statement reported by the Guardian, Pfizer and BioNTech said they took action “months ago to be able to adapt the mRNA vaccine within six weeks and ship initial batches within 100 days in the event of an escape variant”.

    Quarantine

    No cases of the new strain have been detected in the UK. But its arrival in Belgium – after being found in Botswana, Hong Kong and Israel – has heightened concerns.

    Marc Van Ranst is a virologist at the Rega Institute in Belgium. He said a sample was confirmed as the variant in a traveller who returned from Egypt on 11 November before first showing symptoms 11 days later.

    The six African countries were added to the UK’s travel red list on the evening of Thursday 25 November. And passengers arriving in the UK from these countries from 4am on Sunday 28 November will be required to quarantine. They’ll need to book and pay for a government-approved hotel quarantine for 10 days.

    (PA Graphics)(PA Graphics)

    Downing Street urged anyone who has arrived from those countries recently to get tested.

    Javid said discussions are ongoing over the prospect of adding further countries to the red list. He told the Commons the government “won’t hesitate to act if we need to do so”.

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • A House of Lords amendment is a big step forward in holding the military to account

    Commanding officers in the military will no longer be able to decide on serious crimes like rape if an amendment in the House Lords is approved by parliament. It comes as peers voted 210-190 to accept an amendment to the Armed Forces Bill. If approved, it’ll mean serious crimes will only be tried in the civilian system – a big change from the previous rules.

    Individuals and organisations have lobbied for the change. Serving women are particularly vulnerable and may be helped by the new rule. For example, women have reported very high rates of sexual harassment and assault in the forces.

    Civilian courts

    Green Party peer Natalie Bennett was among the first to celebrate the news:

     

    Civilian authority

    The Centre for Military Justice (CMJ) lobbied for the amendment. Recently, it laid out in a short explainer what its objections were. It stated:

    First of all, and most importantly, how cases of rape, serious sexual assault, domestic abuse and child abuse should be dealt with.

    CMJ believe serious offences “should always be dealt with by civilian authorities, not military (‘service’) ones.”

    Serious cases

    CMJ also said that since the army recruit deaths scandal at Deepcut Barracks a new principle had been set. This meant sudden deaths were a civilian matter. So, they asked, why not extend this to other issues?

    If that principle is accepted for those kinds of serious cases, why not rape? Why not child abuse? The investigation of these kinds of offences does not need the investigating officer to have military experience.

    Service police

    CMJ said military police weren’t capable of investigating serious matters:

    On the contrary, from the cases we have dealt with, and from our conversations with people across the forces, the service police are insufficiently prepared and experienced to handle such cases.

    Victory

    It tweeted that this was an important moment for victims of military sexual violence. The bill will now go back to the Commons for further debate:

    Needs work

    Sexual abuse and bullying in the military remain an issue. As The Canary reported recently, an instructor at a military training camp was put on trial for punching recruits. Since that report, the corporal in question was found guilty and demoted.

    Military justice systems still need a lot of work. However, this seems to be a step toward fairer treatment.

    Featured image – Wikimedia Commons/Katy Blackwood

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Young farmers hope ecological farm will ‘reconnect people back to the land’

    Four young farmers have spent their life savings on 16 acres of land to build an eco-farm that could feed more than 400 families.

    “A really beautiful, meaningful livelihood”

    Middle Ground Growers have already spent £210,000 to purchase grassland in Bath but need to raise a further £95,000 to complete their farm. Co-founder Hamish Evans said the group hopes the campaign will inspire a cultural change in farming and the UK’s relationship with food. The 23-year-old told the PA news agency:

    It’s a really beautiful, meaningful livelihood that stemmed from a kind of ecological grief

    Our farm is about connecting people back to the land, as part of the local food movement.

    It is about creating different cultural norms through different eating habits and a lifestyle that minimises the impact on the environment.

    Young farmer Hamish Evans washes some carrots
    Co-founder Hamish Evans said the group hopes the campaign will inspire a cultural change in farming and the UK’s relationship with food (Middle Ground Growers/PA)

    Middle Ground Growers is made up of Evans; Xavier Hamon, 35; Olivia Rhodes, 31; and Sammy Elmore, 28, and a host of volunteers. Money raised through their fundraiser will go towards helping the group complete their 16-acre site at Weston Spring Farm. Donors are also offered the chance to name an orchard tree for an environmentally conscious gift this Christmas.

    So far, more than half of the funds have already been raised and Evans said the support has been “overwhelming”. He said:

    I think people can get behind it because our farm will provide local, healthy, affordable food that is grown in a way that does not destroy things.

    There is usually some resistance to major changes like this but we have not had any backlash.

    Middle Ground Growers group shot standing in a field
    Money raised through their fundraiser will go towards helping the group complete their 16-acre site at Weston Spring Farm (Middle Ground Growers/PA)

    The funds raised will cover the costs of tools and equipment to build a five acre, no-dig, market garden and a solar barn equipped with a 12 kilowatt solar panel system. It will also go towards restoring ponds and wetlands.

    A regenerative ecological farm uses special farming and grazing practices to help restore degraded soil diversity and rebuild the natural area. The farm will produce a range of seasonal fruit and vegetables, including acres of apple, pear, damson, and greengage trees, and there are plans for a nuttery to grow walnuts and hazelnuts.

    Middle Ground Growers currently sell seasonal veg boxes from their two-acre plot in Bathampton for 70 families every week. However, they hope their new farm will enable them to expand this to more than 400 homes around Somerset.

    The contents of each box changes according to what vegetables are in season and includes fresh eggs produced by the farm’s 48 free-range hens. The chickens, which the team refer to as their “co-stewards of the land”, benefit the farm’s ecosystem by keeping the grass down and adding manure to the composting system.

    Hamish Evans teaching trainees
    Hamish Evans (left) runs education sessions on ecological farming (Middle Ground Growers/PA)

    Complex

    Evans admitted that changes to food production are a “complex issue”, particularly around affordability for lower income households. He added there needs to be more education about the importance of food being grown locally but “shaming people for their diets” is not the way forward.

    The farm runs educational programmes and workshops to try to combat this by teaching people about seasonal food production and ecological farming. He said:

    People shouldn’t be blamed or made to feel bad because that won’t make anyone change. The education has got to be inclusive, so we can learn together and inspire change rather than forcing it through guilt or fear.

    People need to know about the realities of the situation and how crazy our global food system is. There are solutions, we just need to get cracking with them.

    To find out more about the project, visit their crowdfunder here.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • PM creates an international incident by allegedly saying one thing then tweeting something else

    France has reacted with fury after Boris Johnson publicly called on Paris to take back people who succeed in making the perilous Channel crossing to Britain. A French government spokesperson accused the prime minister of “double-speak” as the fallout from the sinking of a refugee boat on Wednesday with the loss of 27 lives erupted into a full-scale diplomatic row.

    “Double-speak”

    Earlier the French Interior Ministry announced it was withdrawing an invitation to home secretary Priti Patel to attend a meeting in Calais on 28 November of ministers from key European countries to discuss the crisis. The French were enraged by Johnson releasing a letter he sent to president Emmanuel Macron setting out his proposals to tackle the issue. They included joint UK-French patrols by border officials along French beaches to stop boats leaving – a move which Johnson said could begin as early as next week but which Paris has long resisted.

     

    Johnson also called for talks to begin on a bilateral returns agreement, saying it could have “an immediate and significant impact” on the flow of people attempting the crossing. However, the proposal was dismissed by French government spokesman Gabriel Attal, who said it was “clearly not what we need to solve this problem”.

    He said the prime minister’s letter “doesn’t correspond at all” with discussions Johnson and Macron had when they spoke on 24 November. He said:

    We are sick of double-speak

    Macron said Johnson’s decision to post his letter on his Twitter feed suggested he was “not serious”. He told a news conference:

    We do not communicate from one leader to another on these issues by tweets and letters that we make public. We are not whistleblowers

    Johnson’s alleged “double-speak” has prompted a new round of criticism following the many other problems he’s recently brought upon himself:

    “Hand in glove”

    Transport secretary Grant Shapps insisted Mr Johnson’s proposals were made in “good faith”, and appealed to the French to reconsider their decision to withdraw the invitation to Patel. He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme:

    I think it is really important that we work hand-in-glove with the French. I don’t think there is anything inflammatory to ask for close co-operation with our nearest neighbours

    The proposal was made in good faith. I can assure our French friends of that and I hope that they will reconsider meeting up to discuss it.”

    In a statement reported on French media, the Interior Ministry said the meeting on 28 November would go ahead with interior minister Gerald Darmanin and his counterparts from Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany and representatives of the European Commission.

    Boris Johnson (left) greets French President Emmanuel Macron
    President Emmanuel Macron (right) said Boris Johnson’s proposals were ‘not serious’ (Alastair Grant/PA)

    In his letter, the prime minister argued a bilateral returns agreement would be in France’s interest by breaking the business model of criminal gangs running the people-smuggling trade from Normandy.

    Under Johnson’s proposals:

    – Joint patrols would prevent more boats from leaving French beaches.

    – Advanced technology such as sensors and radar would be deployed to track migrants and people-trafficking gangs.

    – There would be joint or reciprocal maritime patrols in each other’s territorial waters and airborne surveillance by manned flights and drones.

    – The work of the Joint Intelligence Cell would be improved with better real-time intelligence sharing to deliver more arrests and prosecutions on both sides of the Channel.

    – There would be immediate work on a bilateral returns agreement with France, to allow migrants to be sent back across the Channel, alongside talks to establish a UK-EU returns agreement.

    English Channel migrant deaths
    Migrants in Grand Synthe near Dunkirk (Stefan Rousseau/PA)

    However, as many people argue, a much better way of dealing with the crisis would be to open the borders:

     

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Amazon’s Black Friday turns into a global disaster

    Amazon’s Black Friday saw it becoming the subject of blockades, strikes, and protests around the world as activists and campaigners targeted it over a list of “crimes” nearly as substantial as its founder Jeff Bezos’s bank balance.

    XR: facing-off with Amazon on Black Friday

    As reported by PA, Extinction Rebellion (XR) has been blockading Amazon distribution (“fulfilment“) centres around the UK. PA noted that XR’s Black Friday demonstration involving around 20 activists started at 4am at the distribution centre in Dunfermline, Fife. The group said it was also targeting Amazon sites in Doncaster, Darlington, Newcastle, Manchester, Peterborough, Derby, Coventry, Rugeley, Dartford, Bristol, Tilbury, and Milton Keynes. XR said in a press release that the UK action was part of Europe-wide disruption. It has also been targeting fulfilment centres in Germany and the Netherlands.

    PA reported that protesters with lock-ons and placards had stopped lorries entering the Fife site and some from leaving. In the Midlands, XR disrupted three Amazon fulfilment centres:

    It also blockaded a site in Essex:

    The group said in a press release that:

    The action is taking place on Black Friday in order to confront the exploitative and environmentally destructive business practices of one of the world’s largest companies. Amazon is known for a long list of widely recognised “crimes”… while making its founder and largest shareholder Jeff Bezos one of the richest men on earth.

    Criminal practices?

    XR says Amazon’s list of crimes includes:

    • Emitting “60.64 million metric tons of carbon dioxide last year — more than a medium sized country and the equivalent of burning through 140 million barrels of oil”.
    • Lobbying the “US Government to fight against climate legislation, despite pledging to reach Net Zero carbon emissions by 2040. This target also does not include its supply chain which contributes 75% of its overall emissions… They are committing the very definition of greenwash”.
    • “Treating its workers ‘like robots’, with a report… stating that ambulances have been called out to UK warehouses 971 times since 2018. … An employee died at the site in Tilbury just last month”.
    • “Routinely” destroying “millions of items of unsold stock and returned items. Many of the products – including smart TVs and laptops – are often new and unused”.
    • “Legally” reporting “billions of pounds of sales in a tax haven, meaning they are stealing from the general public in order to grow”.

    Activist and student Maciej Walczuk told PA:

    We have to recognise that the consumption in the global north is largely based upon the exploitation of the working class and the global south, while companies like Amazon make massive profits and contribute to worsening the climate and ecological crisis.

    We need a new system that respects people and the planet, instead of blindly chasing profit.

    And it wasn’t just XR exposing Amazon’s crimes on Black Friday.

    Make Bezos pay

    Make Amazon Pay is a global coalition of campaign groups that’s also been taking action against the company. Make Amazon Pay has organised protests and strikes by Amazon workers around the world. For example, workers walked out in Germany:

    The group released a video:

    Make Amazon Pay has a list of common demands for the company. They include calls for Amazon to:

    • Improve the workplace.
    • Provide job security.
    • Respect workers’ universal rights.
    • Operate sustainably.
    • Pay back to society.

    Hitting Amazon where it hurts?

    Owen Espley from campaign group War on Want said:

    Amazon’s growing power is a threat to communities and workers around the world. Amazon is abusing its dominance across online retail, cloud services, and logistics, to create unfair competition that is driving down standards for everyone. Amazon workers face unsafe conditions, constant surveillance and are treated like robots.

    It’s time for Amazon to pay fair wages, fair taxes, and for its impact on the planet.

    It will be interesting to see if the Black Friday chaos for Amazon has hit it and Bezos where it really hurts – in their wallets.

    Featured image via Alex Street/Extinction Rebellion and additional reporting by PA

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • NHS: beginning of the end?

    With the new Health and Care Bill, and funding cuts pushing the NHS to breaking point, Curtis Daly explains exactly how the Tories are setting the scene to privatise the NHS.

    Video transcript

    NYE Bevan:
    “Now, the National Health Service had two main principles underlying it. One, that the medical arts of science and healing should be made available to people when they needed them, irrespective of whether they could afford to pay for them or not. The second, was that this should be done not at the expense of the poorer members of the community, but of the well to do.     In short, I refuse to accept the insurance principle.”

    The government’s Health and Care Bill aims to remodel NHS England, and not in a good way. Currently, the NHS does have private provision, despite any form of privatisation being massively unpopular. This particular bill goes much further by expanding private companies to have a say on how it is run.

    Clinical Commissioning Groups, made up of GPs, are in charge of local services and how they operate. The Health and Care Bill will scrap over 100 of them, and replace them with ‘Integrated Care Systems’ which will span over 42 regions.

    The ICSs are made up of Integrated Care Partnerships, that consist of Integrated Care Boards…. Confused yet?

    The important part to look for is who’s represented on these Care Boards. It will range from charities, councils… and private health firms.

    What insight do private health providers bring to the table? Nothing except profitability over the quality of care. The aim is not to provide patients with the best services but to serve shareholders.

    That is the whole point of these structural changes – to move public wealth into private hands.

    HISTORY OF NHS PRIVATISATION: PFI

    There have been attempts to privatise the NHS for decades. In 1992, Private Finance Initiative or PFI’s were brought in. This was a significant leap toward privatisation.

    PFI gave private companies huge contracts to build public infrastructure such as hospitals.

    What was great for companies was the terms of the contracts. Instead of the government simply using traditional spending methods for investment, PFI meant that we borrowed from the private sector. The repayments involved very favourable terms for those companies, costing us more.

    According to the IPPR think tank, NHS England owed debts of £55bn to private companies in 2019. £13bn worth of borrowing will end up costing NHS England £80bn when contracts come to an end in 2050.

    On the face of it, it’s clearly a scam. Why would we choose to pay more for investment when we could just make it ourselves? When successive governments are in bed with business, it all makes sense.

    PFI has been used  by both Conservative and Labour governments.

    Health and Social Care Act

    The Health and Social Care Act was a significant move to privatisation. Before the legislation was brought in, hospitals were restricted to only making 2% of their income from the private sector. This dramatically increased to 49%.

    The increase of privatisation on this scale pushed competitive tendering, and according to Keep Our NHS Public resulted in “endless rounds of hugely expensive competitive tenders, leading to disastrous fragmentation”.

    Between 2010 and 2015, the private sector was awarded 86% of pharmacy contracts, 83% of patient transport contracts, 76% of diagnostics, 69% of GP out of hours, 45% of community health contracts including children and adults with learning disabilities, and 25% of mental health contracts.

    COVID

    The National Audit Office has investigated the government on Covid contracts producing two reports:an investigation into the supply of personal protective equipment and another into government procurement during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    The reports expose that £17.3bn Covid related contracts were awarded, £10.5bn of it was given to companies with no competitive tendering.

    This can then lead to scenarios such as Matt Hancock’s ex neighbour bagging a £30m contract to produce plastic vials for testing kits… through a WhatsApp message.

    Clear cronyism.

    That is exactly what these reports concluded when it was found that companies with political connections were ten times more likely to be given a contract.

    This doesn’t indicate that decisions were based on quality of outcome but for business interests.

    Labour and especially Tory governments have usually denied privatisation, but nobody is falling for it. In 2005, a book was published named Direct Democracy: A New Agenda For a New Model Party.

    This book, calls for the NHS to be ‘denationalised’. One of the co-authors of the book was former health secretary Jeremy Hunt.

    The Conservatives record on the NHS has been appalling. The NHS is on the edge of what could be its worst winter crisis ever. The waiting times in A&E are at its worst since records began. Response times are three times longer than the target of 18 minutes, and 30% of admitted A&E patients are waiting more than four hours to get a bed.

    It’s easy to see why when the levels of spending were well below the average for a decade. The annual increase of spending has been just under 4% since its creation, with record spending of 6% between 1997 and 2010. The coalition government dramatically cut its funding to around 1% with a marginal increase just before 2019.

    This is the Tories oldest trick in the book. Systematically underfunding a service and bringing it to breaking point – paving the way for private contracts and ultimately full privatisation. They can then make the case for a US style health care system where care isn’t rationed on need but on the size of one’s wallet.

    Examples of a US style system include a woman named Anne Soloviev who had to pay $1,500 a month for toenail cream that… didn’t work. Janet Winston was charged $48,000 for skin testing and a BuzzFeed user claimed they were charged 2.2 million dollars for their NICU baby who was born at 28 weeks.

    The National Health Service is Britain’s finest creation. After the bloody second world war, a new consensus was forged, that of community and collective effort. The health service showed the best of this nation, taking care of everybody regardless of financial worth.

    For decades that has been slowly dismantled, and this Health and Care Bill is the biggest risk to the principle of health care free at the point of use in history.

    The NHS will only survive if there are those who are willing to fight for it; we must protect it at all costs.

    By Andrew Butler

    This post was originally published on The Canary.