for democratic socialism

CHARTIST£2

For democratic socialism #286 May/June 2017

www.chartist.org.uk

Labour: a stone’s throw awayMarina PrentoulisPopulismPeter Kenyon Election fantasiesSarah Champion MPWomen Peter HainJulie Ward MEPStephen Marks BrexitNaomi Wimborne-IdrissiPalestineChartistLabour’s manifestoplusGreenwatch, film andbook reviews

ISSN - 0968 7866 ISSUE

#286 Tuesday Final.qxp_01 cover 25/04/2017 00:10

May/June 2017 CHARTIST 3

Editorial PolicyThe editorial policy of CHARTIST is topromote debate amongst people active inradical politics about the contemporaryrelevance of democratic socialism acrossthe spec t rum of po l i t i cs , economics ,science, philosophy, art, interpersonalrelations – in short, the whole realm ofsocial life.Our concern is with both democracy andsocialism. The history of the last centuryhas made i t abundant ly c lear that themass of the population of the advancedcapitalist countries will have no interestin any form of social ism which is notthoroughly democratic in its principles,its practices, its morality and its ideals.Yet the consequences of this deep attach-ment to democracy – one of the greatestadvances o f our epoch – a re se ldomreflected in the discussion and debatesamongst active socialists.CHARTIST is not a party publication. Itbrings together people who are interestedin socialism, some of whom are active theLabour Party and the trade union move-men t . I t i s conce rned to deepen andextend a dialogue with all other socialistsand with activists from other movementsinvolved in the struggle to find democrat-ic alternatives to the oppression, exploita-tion and injustices of capitalism and class society

Editorial BoardCHARTIST is published six times a yearby the Chartist Collective. This issue wasproduced by an Editorial Board consistingof Duncan Bowie (Reviews), Peter Chalk,Patricia d’Ardenne, Mike Davis (Editor),Nigel Doggett, Don Flynn, Roger Gillham,James Grayson, Peter Kenyon (Treasurer),Frank Lee, Dave Lister, Patrick Mulcahy,Sheila Osmanovic, Marina Prentoulis,Robb ie Sco t t (Webs i t e Ed i to r ) , MarySouthcott.

Production: Peter Kenyon

Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views ofthe EB

ContactsPublished by Chartist PublicationsPO Box 52751 London EC2P 2XF tel: 0845 456 4977

Printed by People For Print Ltd, Unit 10, Riverside Park,Sheaf Gardens, Sheffield S2 4BB – Tel 0114 272 0915. Email: [email protected]

Website: www.chartist.org.ukEmail:[email protected]: @Chartist48

Newsletter online: to join, email [email protected]

CHARTISTFOR DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISMNumber 286 May/June 2017

FEATURES

REGULARS

Cover by Martin Rowson

Can Corbyn carry the red flag intoDowning Street? - page 8

Emmanuel Macron Frenchpresidential front runner - page 23

Contributions and letters deadline for CHARTIST #2877 June 2017

Chartist welcomes articles of 800 or 1500 words, and letters in electronic format only to: [email protected]

Receive Chartist’s online newsletter: send your email address [email protected]

Chartist Advert Rates:

Inside Full page £200; 1/2 page £125; 1/4 page £75; 1/8 page £40; 1/16 page £25; small box5x2cm £15 single sheet insert £50

We are also interested in advert swaps with other publications. To place an advert, pleaseemail: [email protected]

CONTENTS

8 CAN CORBYN STAGE A POLITICAL UPSET?Peter Kenyon ponders May’s snap electionchallenge for Labour

10 POLICIES FOR A LABOUR WINChartist proposes ideas for Labour’s manifesto

12 FIGHTING FOR SOCIAL EUROPEPeter Hain says Labour must do betteragainst Brexit

13 WORKING ACROSS EUROPEJulie Ward MEP gives a view from oursocialist partners

14 ELECTION MASKS TORY SPLITSStephen Marks sees the Brexit bogeyhaunting Tories

15 UNIVERSAL CREDIT HAMMERS POORNew welfare policy is inhumane says IanFoster

16 A NEW LEFT POPULISMMarina Prentoulis argues for a politics thancan win hearts and minds

18 VENEZUELAN TRADE UNIONSMarcos Garcia on the backbone of theradical changes in Chavez country

19 THE WORLD TRANSFORMEDRoland Singer Kingsmith extols the virtuesof a new festival of ideas

20 ANTISEMITISM AND ANTI-ZIONISMNaomi Wimborne Idrissi explains howIsraeli Zionists are trying to silence criticswhile Sue Cooke remembers Deir Yassin

22 THE END OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTWith savage cuts in town hall services PeterLatham questions their future

23 WHICH WAY FOR FRANCE?Pierre Bocquillon analyses the challengersfor the presidency

24 TURKEY VOTES FOR AUTOCRACYSheila Osmanowic examines Erdogan’s newpowers

4 LETTERS Prison reform, progressive alliances,re-branding Labour

5 EDITORIAL People v establishment

6 GREENWATCH Dave Toke on billions going to nuclear

7 OUR HISTORY - 72 The Socialist League (1934)

25 FILM REVIEWPatrick Mulcahy on how Brexit willimpact on British film

26 BOOK REVIEWS Mike Davis on British fascists in War,Duncan Bowie on Edward Upward,Oliver Cromwell and Clem Attlee, BrianO’Leary on Forging Capitalism, BobLittlewood on Creating Freedom andNigel Watt on Zimbabwe and DRC

32 WESTMINSTER VIEWSarah Champion MP on women andausterity

Town Halls under pressure - page 22

DIARY DATEChartist 2017 Annual General Meeting

Saturday July 8thLondon

Venue tbcAdvertisement

#286 Tuesday Final.qxp_01 cover 25/04/2017 00:10

4 CHARTIST May/June 2017 May/June 2017 CHARTIST 5

The campaign battle lines are being drawn,the starting gun has been fired for theprime minister’s opportunistic snap elec-tion on June 8th. Whatever the reasons:20 to 30 Tory MPs facing criminal prose-

cution for election expenses fraud, a substantialopinion poll lead over Labour, or to boost a Torymajority to quell the growing dissent likely toerupt in and around the Tory party as the realityof a disastrous brexit becomes clear, May has cutand run.

The right wing naysayers again tell us JeremyCorbyn cannot win. Perversely that was said ofdonald Trump. but his election demonstrates thatcomplete political outsiders, even with fierce oppo-sition from their own party, can make a populistpolitical pitch and win voters’ hearts and minds.

The daunting reality (read impossibility) of bothnegotiating an eu withdrawal and securing eco-nomic prosperity on the terms of the brexiteershas been haunting the Tory leadership and theirbig business friends. The brussels response toMay’s letter, particularly outlining the immediate£50 to £60b divorce payment, let alone gainingaccess to the single market, refusal of paralleltrade talks, the alienation of virtually every headof state in the eu all looks like a formidablemountain. now Trump says the uk has togo behind the eu in trade talks. so muchfor May’s ‘special relationship’!

Theresa May says ‘Trust us’. butnational debt has risen and immigra-tion has not fallen, despite Torypromises to the contrary. The nHs isheavily under-funded compared tomany european states, while chunkshave been privatised. It is not safe inTory hands. They have messed up oneurope having launched an irresponsi-ble 50% threshold in/out referendumwhich they then lost. Moreover, they plan tocarry on with Cameron/osborne austerity, boostelitist education and continue to dump the finan-cial crisis on the poor. What has changed withMay?

britain under the Tories can only get worse. Alot can change in a six week election campaign.Corbyn got off to a rousing campaign launchattacking the unaccountable elites, casino bankersand corporate tax dodgers that run society. Histalk of a rigged society in which the profiteeringcorporations and the super rich have light touchtax, while the poor get poorer with low pay andincessant public spending cuts, will strike a chord.

The people versus the establishment couldbecome a unifying theme if Labour can establishitself as the authentic voice of a progressive people.using social media, Tv (May is already backtrack-ing on her initial refusal to debate), radio andprint, public meetings and rallies, Labour’s cam-paign could begin to catch fire. but Labour mustalso manage the dilemma of brexit. We must buildon keir starmer’s six tests, promote oureuropeanism and pro single market free move-ment commitment.

The Lib dems will be hoping to win in remainareas, targeting Tory and Labour seats. strongmessages on putting any negotiated deal to bothparliament and the people, Labour’s conference

position, will be needed. In this issue Peter Hainlaments Labour’s confused position while propos-ing this firmer stance. endorsing a pro-europestand Stephen Marks identifies the Tories sim-mering internal divisions on brexit. Julie WardMEP gives voice to our european socialist andradical allies who clearly want Labour to stayclose. Patrick Mulcahy looks at the potentiallydamaging impact of brexit on the film industry

ukIP looks to be imploding with Labour hold-ing stoke from new leader Paul nuttall’s chal-lenge, lone MP Carswell resigning and standingdown and Farage ducking out.

In europe itself the other big election is inFrance. Although the far right candidate Wilderswas defeated in Holland, Marine Le Pen is mak-ing a strong showing in France. PierreBocquillon outlines the key players in the presi-dential race with Macron now the front funner inthe second round against the Fn.

Austerity-wracked britain is the real story.Local government is facing the toughest cuts with40% funding reductions hitting services fromstreet cleaning to nurseries, libraries and schools.Peter Latham asks is this the end of municipal

government as we know it. Ian Foster explainsthe harsh iniquities of universal Credit roll-

out in boosting poverty, food banks,homelessness and ill health.

Peter Kenyon outlines a road mapfor Labour to stage a major politicalupset. Tory arrogance and gaffescombined with consistent Labourcampaign messaging could make thedifference. but brexit cannot beavoided. even by asking the ques-tions about tariff free access to the

single market, eu free movement ofpeople and divorce payments Corbyn

and co can do damage.Labour must hone its message into a

popular, progressive, clear mantra of a betterlife with Labour. Marina Prentoulis puts a pow-erful argument for a new left populism to winhearts and minds.

Labour has launched its manifesto consultation.The original plan for policy development withmembers was stymied. so we also outline somekey policies that can help Labour make an appealto the widest number of voters.

With half a million members, enthusiasticMomentum activists and an embattled tradeunion movement Labour needs to both sustainsupport in its Midlands and northern heartlandsand break into territory in southern england towin.

Inevitably brexit will cloud the campaign andframe much of debate. so Labour needs to connectits economic alternative to cuts, privatisation, lowwages, insecure employment and rising prices to anarrative showing how withdrawal from the euwithout a brussels agreement could make eco-nomic prospects much worse.

Labour faces an uphill but not unwinnable chal-lenge. A united and clear campaign, consistentlyargued through every channel could overhaul theTories. Campaign for Labour. vote Labour. kickout the Tories.

Labour against the establishment

Labour must hone its

message into a popular, progressive

clear mantra of abetter life

LETTERS EDITORIAL

C

Prison problems

The recent article by richardburgon (Chartist 285) iden-tifying current problems in

the prison service makes sensiblepoints about reduced prison offi-cer numbers and increasedinmate numbers ….( 1996 48000inmates X prison officers 201687000 prisoners two third Xprison officers.)

True facts but not all of thestory. Any total institution needsan occupation regime that keepsinmates involved in a wide rangeof activities. These activities domuch to reduce isolation of indi-viduals, keep minds active, pro-mote personal activity, and pro-vide skills for release or for move-ment through the release process.The activities include work – edu-cation and vocational training,

personal skills, prison industrywork - and leisure activities –physical education, library, andrecreational classes.

In the 1980s and 90s most pris-oners serving more than 12months would have been awayfrom their cells for about 5 or 6hours each weekday – not count-ing evening association or mealtimes. When men/women areoccupied in these activities theyare much less likely to beinvolved in inappropriate activi-ties or fermenting dissent anddisruption. We are all aware thatbored children, teenagers, andadults find trouble on their own !

As well as reducing prison offi-cer numbers, large numbers ofteachers, instructors, probation,social work staff have ‘disap-

peared’ as well. bored equalstrouble (look at our own children)

The classic Tory attitude topublic service appears to be “theyare expensive, wasteful, andachieve little, whereas a privatecompany could do it far better forless, or lets cut their budgets.”The failure to grasp the word“service“ is the underlying causeof many of our current public ser-vice crises.

The Prison service cuts - andresulting unrest and problems -are classic examples of outcomesthat follow unplanned idealism.

rod Turner(ForMer reGIonAL eduCATIonoFFICer - HM PrIson servICe)PooLe

We certainly need a power-ful slogan to light thesocialist movement for-

ward, (‘Living together responsi-bly’ keith savage, Chartist 284)

I grew up reciting a socialistcreed week by week, "We desireto be just and loving to all our fel-low men and women, to worktogether as brothers and sistersand so help to form a new society,with justice as its foundation andlove its law". We also used to sing‘the Internationale’, we looked(naively) with admiration at theAmericans who had for their

mantra "We hold these truths tobe self evident that all men (sic)are created equal". What has hap-pened to these wonderful aspira-tions?

The Labour Party has its rootsin the Christian Church and Isaw those meetings as a religiousceremony without a deity. I thinksome of the religious fervours oftoday demonstrate a great thirstfor a moral view of living, theLabour Party is well placed tocontribute to that with a slogansuch as the one keith savage hassuggested: "Living together

responsibly" I would go a bit fur-ther.

When the Labour Party wasformed the issues were more localbut we have now a far greaterresponsibility globally as well aslocally. Globalisation is not atrend; it is a tide that will not goback. Theresa May cannot getaway with "citizen of nowhere". Iwould want to make a Labour slo-gan that reflects that. How about"Living together responsiblynationally and internationally."

GAbrIeLLe MAuGHAnHALesWorTH, suFFoLk

Labour’s decline

The Progressive Alliancesponsored by Compass mayor may not be viable, but it

is becoming an unavoidabledebate and Chartist should pro-mote it in a structured way. Itdoes not have to take a position,as a discussion journal the issueis one tailor made for the Chartistto consider as a collective. As theGreen Party backed the PA attheir spring conference it will notgo away, and while Chartisttoday is largely a Labour orientedjournal, the central challenge iskey to its politics.

This is that Labour can nolonger form a progressive govern-ment due to a decade and a halfof electoral decline, so alliances

have to be sought. We can agreeor not agree on the latter issue,the question of lack of voter sup-port is simple and objective. It isongoing and the May electionswill underline the problem. Thosewho hoped Corbynism wouldsolve the problem must face up tothe failure of that project andincreasing pressure on his posi-tion as his ratings fall. I personal-ly do not want another leadershipelection this year, one every yearsince 2015 damages the limitedcredibility of the Labour Party, itmay be impossible to resist.

This is a contentious view, so areasoned debate promoted byChartist and involving sympa-thetic other groups could be very

positive. The spring following theMay elections going into the sum-mer will undoubtedly raise manyquestions about Labour's future,while John Harris of theGuardian has pointed out moreLabour voters back Theresa Maythan Corbyn, the unpopularity ofCorbyn personally raises morequestions than simply replacingone figure with another. Ibelieve Chartist needs to set outas an immediate objective a focuson the key questions of Labour'sdecline since 2001 and its future.

Trevor FIsHersTAFFord

Together internationally

#286 Tuesday Final.qxp_01 cover 25/04/2017 00:10 Page 4

May/June 2017 CHARTIST 76 CHARTIST May/June 2017

C

C

OUR HISTORY GREENWATCH

PaulSalvesonon a maleand stalepowerhouseinitiative

projects unless the Government guarantees the lot.Hinkley C (3.2GW planned) will cost over £24 billionaccording to the european Commission. The reac-tors at Moorside and Wylfa, assuming they cost sim-ilar amounts, would thus make the taxpayer respon-sible for around £50 billion of debt. People will claimthat the Government is 'only' taking a minorityequity stake. That's how it will start, and even thenwould represent an enormous amount of statespending and liabilities. After all one quarter of £24billion is still £6 billion. but it won't end there, assure as night follows day, with the constructioncosts as well as the rest. It never does with nuclearpower!

normally of course under the Government's 'lowcarbon' programme, projects raise their own financeand the project owners earn their money from pre-mium price contracts (Cfds) awarded through theGovernment. That is always the case with renew-able energy projects. They find their own money.electricity consumers pay a premium price to enablethis on their bills. even so, renewable energy priceshave been falling fast and large scale wind and solarfarms are now much cheaper for the consumer thannuclear power.

but now for nuclear to go ahead, so it is said, notonly will the consumers have to pay a high premiumprice, but taxpayers will have to fund at least part ofthe construction as well. This is money, please note,that will disappear from the Government's coffers asthe plant is built - it is not something that will beshuffled onto future generations like decommission-ing.

The fact that the Government is effectivelyfinancing the building will produce a conflict ofinterests with the Government negotiating withitself in setting the Cfd price. no doubt a 'lower'Cfd price will be set (that is less than the notoriousHinkley C price) when in fact it will be the taxpayerthat will end up paying out countless billions for theprojects.

Annual spending on primary education is around£26 billion. Hence building just Moorside will givethe Government liabilities (likely to be paid by theGovernment) which will rival this spending.

but then to listen to some people, you'd thinkbuilding Moorside was more important than closingdown all primary schools for a year.

It isn't.

Giant portions of public spending are nowat risk of pouring down a nuclear powerblack hole as calls for the Government tomake direct investments into new nucle-ar power plant intensify. ultimately the

sums at risk would be much larger than theGovernment's own estimates of the cost of theTrident nuclear weapons system.

Former Minister and House of Commons energyCommittee Chair, Tim Yeo, is the latest to call forthe Government to take 'minority' equity shares innew nuclear projects. There has been a flurry ofsuch demands in the wake of the near bankruptcy ofToshiba, who spearhead the 3GW proposed plant atMoorside in Cumbria.

In fact nuclear power is proving to be virtuallyundeliverable and ruinously expensive in westerncountries. Toshiba's problems stem from the factthat they own Westinghouse who are responsible forthe construction (so-far non-construction) of AP1000reactors in south Carolina and Georgia in the usA.These plant are as costly as the failing French ePrdesign that is so disastrous in the cases of theFinnish and French reactors, something which isbankrupting the French nuclear industry and edF.

nuclear lobbyists are calling for the contracts tobuild nuclear power plant to be offered to a southkorean company, kePCo. They, so it is claimed, aregoing to make a better and much cheaper job atcompleting nuclear power plant in a programme it isexpediting for the united Arab emirates. butkePCo are demanding that the uk Governmentput a lot of money into the project, and no doubt theproject would require high prices to be paid by elec-tricity consumers, as is the case with the Hinkley Cdeal with edF. What is less known however, accord-ing to uCL’s nuclear expert Paul dorfman, is thatthe uAe projects are being built to lower safetystandards than demanded by uk nuclear regula-tions, casting doubt on any notion that kePCocould build nuclear power in the uk cheaper thananybody else.

despite the manifest bankruptcy of the technolo-gy, rather than question whether it is right to con-tinue with the new nuclear programme, its support-ers are in effect wanting to bet the british economyon it. If the Treasury are forced against their will tosanction 'equity' stakes in new nuclear reactors, thelosses and, eventually, all the liabilities will fall onthe uk Government. nobody else will invest in the

Squandering billionsDave Tokesees publicmoney atrisk aspressuremounts tospend moreon newnuclearpower

David Toke isReader in EnergyPolitics at theUniversity ofAberdeen.

He is author of'The Politics ofGM Food' (2004,London:Routledge)

OUR HISTORY - 72

“We are living today in a potential Age of Plenty, when theproductive capacity of the world, thanks to man’s technicaland scientific conquest of nature, is so enormous that

there should not be any man, woman or child poor, ill-clad,ill-shod, or badly housed. A steadily rising standard of livingfor the millions of workers can be achieved. But from the veryfact that all production is governed by the demand of privateproperty to receive its toll in rent and interest arises from thetragic paradox that, while colossal wealth is piled up in thehands of the few, poverty, unemployment, ill-health, ruin, andsocial degradation are the lot of millions.

“If we want to increase our communal wealth by enablingfull use to be made of the productive capacity of Mines,Factories and Fields, WE MUST HAVE SOCALISM.

To enable each person to have a fair and equal opportunityof making his full contribution to the advancement of life andto obtain his fair share of wealth, WE MUST HAVE SOCIAL-ISM.

To enable all to work reasonable hours under the best pos-sible conditions, rather than some to work long ours and oth-ers not at all, WE MUST HAVE SOCIALISM.

To see that the State accepts the responsibility of providingan opportunity for everyone to render useful service and ofmaintaining in decency and comfort all those who are not fitto work, through age or illness, or for whom no opportunity ofwork is provided, WE MUST HAVE SOCIALISM.

If we are to ensure to every family the privacy and comfortof a real home of its own and full opportunity to enjoy life

freely after work is done, WE MUST HAVE SOCIALISM.So that society as a whole shall be responsible for the

health, well-being, and education of its people, WE MUSTHAVE SOCIALISM.

In order to stop for ever the exploitation of the workers bythe property-owning class and the financiers, by ending theprivate ownership and control of the land and all other meansof production, and of all those financial institutions necessaryfor the maintenance of a highly organised industrial life, WEMUST HAVE SOCIALISM.

“Socialists stand for true Freedom and real Democracy,but are opposed to the time-wasting and obstructive use ofCapitalist democratic procedure, which has brought parlia-mentary government into disrepute, and on which the propa-ganda for Fascism fastens. Parliament must become a work-shop. The issue is joined between the defenders of private own-ership of the means of production, which spreads disaster andchaos throughout society, and the supporters of Socialism,which alone can remove poverty and bring prosperity andwell-being to the Common People. There is no time to lose.The longer Capitalism continues the more will poverty, dis-tress, unemployment, misery, and slumdom curse this coun-try, the more certainly will the men, women and children ofBritain be dragged into the desolation and devastation ofWar. Let the slogan be:

CLOSE UP THE RANKS!FORWARD TO SOCIALISM!”

Socialist League Forward to Socialism (1934)

Building the Open LeftTom Miller - Co-Chair, Open Labour explains how

by one measure, the internalpopularity of a left leader-ship, democratic socialism

in the Labour Party can be judgedto have been a tremendous suc-cess since Labour’s 2015 defeat.but it is now clear to thinkingpeople that this is only one ofmany measures by which the suc-cess of democratic socialist poli-tics can be judged – and rightnow, answers to practically everyother question we face are miss-ing.

After a year in development,open Labour has come togetherto push the Labour left towards amore credible political strategy,and help renew its ideas. In seek-ing to build the ‘open left’, we rep-resent an attempt to reorganise atradition within the Labour leftwhich has fallen into disrepair,having previously invested heavi-ly in organisations like Compass.open Labour challenges theLabour left to abandon tradition-alism and defensiveness, seeking

to embed an open-minded cultureof realism and tolerance amongsocialists in the party. It will seeka move away from a ‘leaderfocussed’ type of politics towardsone with more of an emphasis onricher ideas and debate.

“open Labour is realistic aboutwhere we are, but optimisticabout what we can achieve” – edMiliband

our conference ‘Ideas intoAction’ followed several regionalevents in Manchester,birmingham and sheffield, andwas held at Haverstock school innorth London. The conferencelaunched a paying membershipsection among the 2000 support-ers we have gained since launch-ing. Around 230 attended, wherewe confirmed a constitution andput in place a position paperthrough a motions debate.

open Labour stands for ademocratic party with a tolerantdebating culture, for laying downcore agreed values across the

party, and for continued opposi-tion to austerity economics. Wedemand professionalism from theleft: a political strategy to identi-fy the voters we must win over toleft ideas and to Labour’s votingbloc, with tighter priority settingand communication.

We will campaign for Labour toadopt some specific stances: pre-serving eu trade relationships,workers’ rights and human rights(including for eu migrants), asocialist industrial strategywhich promotes collective bar-gaining, uk federalism includingenglish regions, and the creationof an english Labour Party. openLabour will oppose electoral dealswith other parties, but will alsopress party members to involvethemselves in cross party cam-paigns where this serves thedemocratic left as a whole.

We hope to use more collabora-tive work in future events, pro-viding new models for the widerparty. Moorside Power Station: spot the missing facts - cost and who pays



C

Peter Kenyon isa formerconstituencyrepresentative onLabour’s NationalExecutiveCommittee, whowas agent for theLabour Party inthe City ofLondon electionsin March. Labourwon five seats - afivefold increase

UK ELECTION

Corbyn in Downing Street?

Top marks to Labour forbeing ready. Tories areso vain. The idea thatthey would honour theFixed Term Parliament

Act 2011 was never believed byparty leader Jeremy Corbyn andhis close allies. With opinion pollspointing to a 20 point lead forPrime Minister May, no prospectof a quickie divorce frombrussels, and a strong whiff ofWelsh air on an easter walkingholiday, the scene was set for asnap election. Mrs May has muchto hide.

she dithered over going to thepolls on Thursday 5 May, whichwas possible if she had declaredon 29 March when Article 50 wasinvoked to apply to leave theeuropean union. Why burdenthose voters with another electionon Thursday 8 June? Hopes ofvoter fatigue in the all too cynicaldecision mix to try and maskbritain's hopeless negotiatingposition to leave the europeanunion?

Own narrative

rightly, Labour has not wasteda moment hitting the road withits own narrative. The speed withwhich Corbyn responded to thenews clearly upset some ofLabour's naysayers who thoughta parliamentary war of attritionshould have been fought to wipethat smirk of Mrs May's face. Thevast majority of our elected repre-sentatives had the good sense torecognise 99% of the electoratewould have thought they werebeing denied their democraticrights. so they promptly repealedthe Fixed Term Parliament Actclearing the way for a snap elec-tion. The Prime Minister says sheneeds a fresh mandate. Her willbe done. “Trust me”, she purredin the Evening Standard (editor:Former Conservative chancellorof the exchequer Georgeosborne). “Crush the saboteurs”,screamed the pro-brexit headlinein the Daily Mail (Prop: tax-dodg-ing, offshore aristocrat Lordrothermere).

Within days the demarcationlines were drawn. This is a 'them'and 'us', the people versus the

establishment’ election. Mrs Mayparachutes into constituencies ina helicopter, refuses to debate,shuns the press, and silencesinvited audiences. MeanwhileCorbyn's been taking the train,talking to everyone and anyone,and even finding time to sit downin a reception class and read astory. not any old story but onethat could become known as anelection parable. “We are going ona bear hunt” Just in case, youhave never heard the openingverse, here it is:

We're goin' on a bear hunt We're going to catch a big one, I'm not scaredWhat a beautiful day!

utterly brilliant. How better todraw attention to the growing

clamour from school heads to par-ents to put their hands in theirpockets to pay for books, becauseConservative budgets are starv-ing the state education system ofmoney for essentials, such asbooks? Labour is going to needlots more of that sort of messag-ing over the next six weeks tohave any hope of delivering theupset required to unseat MrsMay from downing street. Thefirst week should been seen asbeing very good for party morale.The essential problem is thatCorbyn remains unelectable intoo many voters’ minds. Labour'sjob is to change that perspective.In the first instance it can only bedone by keeping the focus on theTories themselves and what theyare doing to british society. Thenaysayers within the Partyremain. Wild ideas about massdeselections before the next

General election have been ruledout by the party's nationalexecutive Committee. sittingMPs and prospective parliamen-tary candidates who lost in the2015 General election are beinggiven an automatic right to rese-lection. This sticks in the craw forus democratic socialists, butneeds must. The conduct of ourLabour elected representativesbegs a question about the idea ofAnnual Parliaments – the onlydemand in the Great Charter(1848) not to have been granted.For the moment the naysayershave been silenced. A semblanceof Labour Party unity is beingdisplayed. For the wider member-ship there is an obligation to putaside vengeful ideas of deselec-tion and concentrate on winningeverywhere throughout theunited kingdom. Given the stateof the party in scotland, that israther fanciful – though why isn'tthe scottish Labour Party moreconfident about beating the 'getrid of the Tories' drum – voteLabour. And ditto northernIreland, if only we allowedLabour candidates to stand. TheWestminster electoral calculuscentres on persuading littleenglanders that Labour is bestplaced to get rid of the Tories.And that depends on enough ofthem wanting to get rid of theTories fast – about which there isprecious little evidence in opinionpolls.

Defensive campaign

Allegations are already beingpublicised that the Labour Partypaid staff are focussed on a defen-sive campaign to try and holdonto seats rather than a boldapproach appealing to voters andknown non-voters to powerCorbyn into downing street. ofcourse, the existing base has to beconsolidated. The main planks ofLabour's 2017 Manifesto werelaid down by Corbyn in the runup to and at the 2016 Conferenceafter his second leadership con-test. The ten pledges are: Fullemployment, a secure HomesGuarantee, security at Work,secure nHs and social Care, anational education service,

action to secure our environment,put the Public back into oureconomy, Cut inequality inIncome and Wealth, action tosecure an equal society, Peaceand Justice at the heart of ourForeign Policy. but how manypeople have even heard aboutthem? At the time of going topress the Labour Party hasissued a national appeal offeringmembers a say. but the devil isalways in the detail.

In the first week both Labourand Conservative got themselvesin muddles over tax. Labour'sshadow chancellor JohnMcdonnell got caught out in abbC radio interview about whatlevel of income made someonerich – and Labour ended up witha £70 to £80k a year millstoneround its neck. Then theConservatives excelled them-selves by proposing to drop theirno TAX increases pledge fromtheir 2017 manifesto (yet to bepublished). visions of a Tory taxbombshell even had the Tory-sup-porting press railing against MrsMay. by the first weekend of the'campaign', the Mail on Sundayclaimed the blunder had alreadycost the Tories half their lead inan opinion poll. now this has tobe good news for Labour strate-gists, and those of us with a pen-chant for Lewis Carroll's Alice inWonderland. but it shouldn'tcome as much of a surprise. TheTories have a remarkably consis-tent record for major blunderswhen it comes to governingbritain. The challenge is now howmany times can they be trippedup with headline grabbing storiesthat could bring their term inoffice to a glorious end?

The idea still promoted by

some dreamers close to Corbynthat this election can be won onthe doorstep is ridiculous. evenwith some 500 to 600k members,there are still too few who under-stand that paying a subscriptionto a political party is not enoughto get Labour Party candidateselected. It is a necessary condi-tion of our party democracy, butnot a sufficient one to secure elec-tion. However, a combination ofTory arrogance, vanity, and pom-posity leading to a consistentstream of unfavourable headlinesand an effective doorsteppingcampaign by Labour? That couldbe a winning formula. For thoseliking a flutter, it is definitelyworth a trip to the bookies giventhe odds currently being quotedagainst Labour winning thelargest number of seats. Thenthere is that idea of a ProgressiveAlliance, much discussed inChartist passim. Labour's leader-ship has already ruled that out.

but just in case you are temptedto vote tactically in your own con-stituency, check out the boxbelow.

Finally, there is an elephant inthe room – brexit. on this issuethe leadership has manfully (andthey still are mainly men) soughtto brush it aside as an electionissue. In the first week that wasprobably wise. but in the run upto election day? some very seri-ous thought needs to be given tothis – some commentators arealready persuaded that MrsMay's main reason for calling asnap election is that her brexitnegotiating strategy is doomed.by seeking an electoral mandateto 2022 she would be giving her-self and her deeply divided partysome breathing space to continueto con the british electorate thatit can trust the Tories. Labour'scontorted position over brexitoffers an opportunity to call MrsMay's bluff before 8 June. With asnap election, there is no need towait until the negotiations fallapart for the electorate to see forthemselves. All that has to beasked of Mrs May are questions.she is refusing to do Tv debateswith the other political leaders.Corbyn has to pose rhetoricalquestions of the 'empty chair'. ofcourse, the ground has to be laidacross the country – Mrs May ishiding the truth. That simpletruth is that there can be noaccess to the eu market, withoutfreedom of movement or financialcontributions. To cap her difficul-ties her closest ally, us Presidentdonald Trump has just shuntedthe uk to the back of its tradenegotiation queue.

God bless America.

Peter Kenyon reviews the prospects for one of the biggest upsets in British politicalhistory

Further proof that as Harold Wilsonsaid a week is a long time in politics

The Tories have a remarkablyconsistent record for majorblunders when it comes togoverning Britain. The challenge isnow how many times can they betripped up with headline grabbingstories that could bring their termin office to a glorious end

Huffington Post reports:

A remarkably detailed spread-sheet outlining how to vote tacti-cally in the upcoming Generalelection to keep the Tories frompower has been turned into awebsite.

becky snowden, 28, createdthe online document which showshow voters can attempt to defeatan odds-on Conservative victoryin June.

After it was shared far andwide on social media last weekshe put out a call for help totransform the spreadsheet into awebsite.

To find your constituency and how to vote to stop the Tories go to https://www.tactical2017.com


May/June 2017 CHARTIST 11 10 CHARTIST May/June 2017

C

LABOUR’S MANIFESTO

Policy planks for a Labour victory for new council housing atexisting use value

strengthen Local Authoritypowers to take control of private-ly rented homes which have beenmismanaged.

Local Government

remove borrowing restrictionson local authorities.

restore democratic systemswithin local government (abolish-ing directly elected Mayors andtwo tier political structures with-in councils – i.e. replacing cabinetsystems with committee sys-tems).

remove caps on local authoritycouncil tax increases.

Taxation

Introduce higher rates ofincome tax for persons on higherincome levels on a progressivescale.

Tax savings on same basis asearned income.

Increase inheritance taxes,especially in relation to inheri-tance of property assets

Phased replacement of stampduty by tax on capital gains onresidential property ownership;in short term transfer liability forstamp duty from purchaser toseller.

ensure an effective system ofcorporate taxation which min-imises tax evasion and avoidance.

Welfare Policy

restore cuts in Housing andother Welfare benefits. ensurebenefits, including pensions anddisability benefits, are uprated in

line with inflation. Maintain thetriple lock on pensions.

Trade Unions and workers’rights

repeal all legislation whichimpedes the right to organise inthe workplace.

restore access to employmentTribunals by abolishing fees forinitiating complaints.

Immigration and HumanRights

The uk government to play afull role in supporting refugees inline with its commitments underthe Geneva Convention by taking

secondary school education. Takesteps to ensure every school is agood school.

reduce the burden of testing &give teachers greater control overwhat they teach.

remove charitable status of allprivate education provision.

vAT on private school fees topay for free school meals for allprimary children is a start.

stop the Tory plan to movefunds from deprived inner cityareas to Tory shires.

Higher Education

reinstate the system of freehigher education to parallelscottish system.

ensure that higher and furthereducation provide students withthe skills to access the job mar-ket. This means prioritising fund-ing for courses which relatedirectly to professions and otheremployment opportunities, ineffect ensuring that someuniversities return to the origi-nal functions of polytechnics.

expand apprenticeshipschemes (but without a link to‘academic’ institutions).

Planning

develop a national spatial planto support national and regionallevel decisions on infrastructureinvestment.

Introduce a democraticallyaccountable system of planning atcity regional and combinedauthority level.

re-establish a planning systemwhich is led by an assessment ofneed for development which is inthe public interest rather than bythe demand for private profit.

Housing

Abolish the right to buy inengland (to parallel system inscotland and which is beingintroduced in Wales).

repeal the 2016 Housing andPlanning Act.

reinstate national grant fund-ed programme for new localauthority developed housing.

reintroduce regulation ofHousing Associations in receipt ofGovernment grant.

stop all public subsidy to homeownership.

Allow councils to acquire land

doorstep arguments.Above all Labour, from top to

bottom, needs to campaign for acommon political platform with aclear socialist message. In thepursuit of this goal Chartist pro-poses some key policy ideas on arange of themes that could beused during the campaign. somemay be picked up in the actualLabour manifesto.

Economic Policy

re-build a capacity for econom-ic planning and positive interven-tions in the economy to rein in onthe damage that unfettered freemarkets are capable of inflicting.

re-establish a regionaleconomic Policy to supportemployment growth across theuk. Where unemployment ishigh this will include incentivesto employment generation andrelocation of some employment,including non-local public ser-vices, away from London and thesouth east.

ensure nationally fundedinfrastructure investment sup-ports employment growth in theregions.

ensure representation forworkers on company boards.

establish a green investmentbank.

Transport

Take back public control of railfranchises and repatriate profitsfrom rail and bus services cur-rently owned by foreign compa-nies, including companies ownedby foreign states.

Implement integrated publictransport plans across all regionswhich complement economicgrowth.

NHS

replace internal market byhealth needs led resourcing. nomore PFI deals and outsourcing.

repeal and replace Health Act2012.

reverse Tory planned £22b cutby 2020.

Education

reinstate local authority con-trol of all maintained schools.

no new grammar schools!scrap all existing selection for

Labour has moved quick-ly to get into top gearfor the General electionon June 8th. With theinitial challenge of poor

polls, together with the difficul-ties of mounting a recovery inscotland and the unremittingmedia hostility and diehardblairite snipers, the Corbyn ledparty has taken on the task ofuniting to fight on the issueswhich are vital to working peopleacross the uk.

The crucial need that must bemet to forge success in the cam-paign is for a platform of policieswhich address the deep discon-tent that is known to existamongst the majority of voters.Chartist correspondents havebeen critical on the lassitude ondeveloping policy but this has tobe parked now in the interestsworking for a Labour govern-ment.

The ten pledges are being filledout in the manifesto which isbeing finalised as we go to press.Policy initiatives had begun inthe run-up to the May local andmayoral elections. We have hadpledges to put vAT on privateschooling to pay for free schoolmeals for all, pledges to improveteacher numbers and reducesuper-size classes, a living wageof £10, boosting public sector con-tracts. These policies need to belinked in the way Corbyn did atthe launch of Labour’s campaignin Croydon. The over-archingnarrative has to be formed fromhis powerful popular assault onthe ruling wealthy corporateestablishment and its fawningpolitical elites epitomised by theTory party.

brexit will inevitably framemuch of this election campaign.remain voters will feel this isanother chance to demonstratetheir conviction that britainneeds to be in europe. brexiteerswill argue the contrary, possiblywithout as much passion. Labourwill need to connect its policiesparticularly those on the econo-my, jobs, environment andhuman rights with the case foreurope. The groundwork tomake the case on the folly ofwithdrawal into a nationalist, lit-tle england redoubt (scotlandand northern Ireland clearly seethis) needs to be laid in speeches,campaign statements and

Printer ad

a proper share of those who needa safe haven.

Guarantee the rights of eunationals resident in the uk.

Implement a programme for theregularisation of all migrants resi-dent in the uk for five years.

Maintain the right to free move-ment for all persons resident inmember states of the eu.

ensure the right to family lifethrough reunion with settled fam-ily members, irrespective ofincome levels.

Make a commitment to imple-ment and develop the standards ofthe european Convention onHuman rights as the basis forhuman rights in the uk.

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s 10 pledges: Key planks in Labour’s 2017 Manifestomaking



Former LabourMP and CabinetMinister, PeterHain is a Labourmember of theHouse of Lords;his book Back tothe Future ofSocialism ispublished byPolicy Press

C C

Julie Ward is aLabour MEP forthe North West ofEngland

BREXIT

Remaining for a social EuropePeter Hain argues Corbyn’s Labour must adopt a much stronger position against Brexit

the eeA; belgium, for example,does precisely this by returning totheir eu country of origin eachyear thousands of migrants whodo not have jobs.

The eu single market hasmore than 500 million people,representing an economy ofalmost £11 trillion and a quarterof the world’s GdP – as well ashalf our trade.

Untold harm

uncertainty and loss of marketaccess will cause untold harm tothe economy and people’s jobs,which will be felt most keenly inthe already disadvantagednations and regions.

A hard border across the islandof Ireland, along what willbecome the external customsfrontier of the eu, will also havedamaging consequences for thenorthern Ireland peace process.on top of that, scottish secessionthreatens.

Labour should be standingagainst all this, projecting both arenewal of social europe’s visionof equality and social justice, andabove all a credible -fight-backagainst neoliberalism which hasbecome too embedded in the eu’spolitico-legal framework and hasprompted the surge of right wingpopulism and racism, withincreasing echoes of 1930’s fas-cism.

Above all we should be buildingfor a referendum on the final dealto give voters the final say.

not to trap ourselves on thewrong side of history, as Labour’sofficial stance has so far done.

The Chancellor has said that, ifthe uk loses access to the singleMarket, the Tories would consid-er “abandoning a european-stylesocial model with european-styletaxation and regulation systems,and “become something differ-ent”.

This would clearly mean lowerlabour and environmental stan-dards, and further cuts in thenHs and public services: austeri-ty forever.

That is why leaving the singleMarket poses a threat to thesocial progress and increasedprosperity which the Labourmovement has always fought for.

At the Prime Minister’s meet-ing with President Trump,number 10 implied that Americacould somehow replace the eu asthe uk’s trading partner. butleaving the single market could

mean a loss in uk trade of up to30% when a us deal might boostit by a mere 2%.

Anyone who knocked on hun-dreds of doors as I did in Welshvalleys during the referendum,knows that fears about immigra-tion were a motivation for brexit.However, the right to free move-ment has never been uncondition-al. even under current eu rules,the uk has had a number ofeffective tools which are used byother countries in the europeaneconomic Area (eeA), to managemigration effectively if we wish todo so.

rather than turning our backson our largest export market,surely the left should push for anew interpretation of free move-ment of labour? It is quite possi-ble to impose restrictions onimmigration, reflecting a coun-try’s needs, whilst remaining in

Although keirstarmer’s 6-tests forthe negotiations toleave the eu are bothpositive and welcome,

the Labour leadership’s lacklus-tre stance in Parliament on theArticle 50 bill opened the door tothe hard right brexit the Toriesare determined to pursue.

It has prompted disillusionedmembers and supporters toresign, some to turn to theLiberal democrats who havegrabbed the remain cause. sadlynobody has a clue where Labourreally stands on brexit.

during the Article 50 bill, thekey vote on an amendment tostay in the single Market, movedby myself and former TuCGeneral secretary John Monks,80 per cent of my Labour back-bench colleagues defied theCorbyn 3-line whip to oppose,either backing the amendment orabstaining.

Deep dismay

That reflected deep dismayamongst grass roots Party mem-bers and trade unionists, manyincluding Jeremy Corbyn’sstrongest supporters. of courseLabour MPs have faced a toughdilemma. “The referendum resulthas to be respected. Two thirdsof Labour constituencies votedLeave”, they remind us.

but what about the fact thattwo-thirds of Labour votersacross britain voted remain?even in those many LabourLeave constituencies, remainLabour voters were in the majori-ty. surely that should be ourParty’s mandate?

owen smith MP’s Pontypriddconstituency voted Leave, but hevoted against the Article 50 billdefying Jeremy Corbyn’s whipalongside the Tories in favour.Yet owen smith reports no revoltagainst him – on the contrary,doorstep respect, even fromLabour Leave voters, that hestuck up for what he believes in

The Party leadership, runningscared of alienating brexit voters,has, in effect, put control ofmigration ahead of protectingjobs and economic prosperity.That must now change if we are

British people were conned - theview from Europe

ence, sergei stanishev, MeP andPes President, said, "The britishpeople were conned... britain des-perately needs Labour to be anhonest voice, to hold the liars toaccount, to be the guardian of the48%, and to be the advocate of thepeople who were lied to."

Like many others, I believe itwill fall to young people to graspthe nettle and rebuild britain'srelationship with europe.Wherever I encounter young peo-ple in the uk and across europe Isee passionate young activistswho stand up for our principles.They understand that a unitedand democratic europe, that pro-motes equality and social justice,is the future we must worktowards together. They are notplaying politics because theyknow that we must take immedi-ate action to combat climatechange, to defend our diversity, towelcome refugees, and invest inour economy. They recognise it istheir future that is on the line,and they understand that wemust do these things together,because we cannot do them apart,and that is why we need europe.

Young people in the uk votedoverwhelmingly to remain in theeu, and they detest being takenout of europe against their will.europe is not just a continent forthem, but a sense of belonging tothat open, diverse, and prosper-ous world they were oncepromised. Young people mobiliseden masse to join the Labour Partywhen Jeremy Corbyn stood tooffer a new kind of politics, butthey have watched in despair asthe Party has dithered, split, u-turned, and manoeuvred aroundbrexit. They signed up for a fight-ing opposition, and that is whatthey deserve.

I am encouraged however whenI see new slogans like “brexitmeans resist”, and efforts bygroups like Another europe IsPossible, vote Leave Watch, oropen britain. We need these pro-european voices to continue todispel brexiteers’ lies, to preventthe disaster of a hard brexit, andkeep the channels of communica-tion open beyond the current leg-islatures of the uk and the eu.

appear on the same platform asZita Gurmai, Chair of Pes (Partyof european socialists) Women,and Conny reuter, Ceo of soLI-dAr, the left's civil society advo-cacy network. My ePLP col-leagues are equally active in theirrespective fields; the aggregatedvalue of 20 active and engagedpoliticians building bridges andpromoting british Labour valuesacross europe and beyond cannotbe under-estimated and there willundoubtedly be a huge void to fillafter our departure.

everywhere I go in the courseof my work outside of the ukthere is deep dismay at theunfolding disaster of our with-drawal from the eu, especiallyfrom european youth, the Tradeunion movement, feminists,LGbTI, human rights organisa-tions and wider civil society. We

must not forget that the loss is onall sides and that being active ata european level has never beenmore important as we fightTheresa May's 'hard brexit' anddemonstrate to our socialist com-rades across europe that we willcontinue to stand in solidaritywith them, and hope that theyinclude us in their deliberations.

beyond the next europeanelections in 2019, which we willsadly not be contesting, thebritish left must make strenuousefforts to build on the legacy ofthe ePLP. Jeremy Corbyn hasmade several welcome appear-ances at Pes events in recentmonths, and hosted a Pes confer-ence in London. Whilst he iswarmly received for his clearanti-austerity agenda, the rela-tionship remains awkward as hiseuropean peers are unequivocallypro-eu, determined to stay thecourse and fight for a socialeurope against the narrow inter-ests of nationalism as personifiedby brexit.

speaking at the London confer-

As a member of thee u r o p e a nParliamentary LabourParty (ePLP), work-ing within a consen-

sus-driven democratic politicalassembly of 28 different coun-tries, I experience both the valueand challenges of collective social-ist endeavour on a day to daybasis, not only through member-ship of the socialists anddemocrats (s&d) group, but alsoas a member of the Left Anti-Austerity Caucus which bringstogether MePs from three differ-ent political groups to oppose theneo-liberal centre-right agenda.

The 20 strong Labour delega-tion in the european Parliamentis the third largest within s&dand we punch above our weight,occupying two committee chairsand three vice chair positions aswell as a number of other co-ordi-nation, special representative andlink roles. For example, I am alink MeP for the unCrPd, amember of the european InternetForum steering committee, aMental Health Ambassador andan active member of several the-matic inter-groups. I am also amember of the delegation for rela-tions with bosnia, Herzegovinaand kosovo, which means I amhelping to negotiate the accessionprocess for these fragile states. Iregularly participate in inter-par-liamentary assemblies withAfrican, Caribbean and Pacificcountries (ACP) and join missionsto eu Member states to observebest practice across a range ofissues within my Culture &education, Women's rights &Gender equality, and regionaldevelopment portfolios.

since being elected in 2014 Ihave met, exchanged views anddebated with hundreds of seniorpoliticians from dozens of differ-ent countries. I have spoken inthe French senate and theGerman bundestag as well as atcountless international confer-ences, seminars and rallies,including two gatherings of theYoung european socialists and aconference organised by thesocialist LGbTI campaign organi-sation, rainbow rose. I regularly

Message to Labour’s leadership

Julie Ward explains how solidarity with our European socialist allies can benefit the anti-Brexit movement

Labour should be standing againstall this, projecting both a renewalof social Europe’s vision of equalityand social justice, and above all acredible -fight-back againstneoliberalism

Wherever I encounter young peoplein the UK and across Europe I seepassionate young activists whostand up for our principles



C

Ian Foster is amember ofTower HamletsLabour Party

BREXIT BENEFITS

Holding to Starmer’s six red linesStephen Marks argues if Labour holds steady the Tories may implode

If you want an evening ofinteresting insight intopoverty or just a reason toshake you to the core withbewilderment visit your

local Food bank. I volunteer atmine and although I mainly runthe food pantry away from theusers, I do sometimes meet them.

one story however sticks outand reminds me every day why Iam a socialist and why thatmeans automatically I am also aWelfarist. I met a young malewho was a carer until the point atwhich his father tragically passedaway. He was receiving a carers’allowance whilst his father wasalive. This stopped almost at thesame time as his father's death.

The sad day a parent dies isn'talways coupled with a suddenlack of income but for those whoare at the lower end of the ladder,it is all too common. This exam-ple is far from unique but rathertypical of the response of thedepartment of Work & Pensions(dWP) and Job Centre. The rea-son can be explained in threewords, ‘Change ofCircumstances’.

When a person's circumstanceschanged in the past this wasdealt with by someone at the JobCentre. A member of the JobCentre team would re-assess theperson’s situation. However, thishas changed with the introduc-tion of the brain child of leadingpoverty expert and champion ofthe poor, Iain duncan smith,with his universal Credit.

universal Credit was hailed asa simplification of a complex ben-efit system: a change to reducebureaucracy, something most

would agree with. However, thesimplification of a system is notthe only reason that was usedback in 2013 to announce the poli-cy. ‘Fairness’ was also in theequation with ‘simplicity’.

To dig to the root of the govern-ment's uC policy we have to firstdefine this word 'fairness'.somewhere there has been a mix-up with its definition.

once uC has been rolled outacross a local area every benefitclaimant is placed on watch forthis "Change In Circumstance"that might occur. It could be apositive change such as the birthof a child or marriage or a nega-tive change such as the death of aparent. The result is the same. Achange to the way you claim your

benefits and with it a new sixweek assessment period in whichyou cannot claim anything andare somehow expected to manage.

Whilst 'simplicity' can beargued to an extent (although Iwould argue the catastrophic rollout of the IT service to run thishas proven otherwise), 'Fairness'would be laughable if it didn'thave such barbaric consequenceson the most vulnerable in society.

It is not until you look at theimpact of the changes on thewhole picture that we see the truehorror of the situation. The ChildPoverty Action Group have said

directly opposite to those of theleft.

A ‘hard brexit’ disrupting 40year-old supply chains in sectorssuch as the motor industry andleading to massive delays andextra bureaucracy in cross-bordertraffic would be a disaster forcapital and labour alike [yes com-rades, that can happen even ifthe opposed classes have differentsolutions to it!].

Stupid faction

richard north is perhaps theone brexiteer who actually knowswhat is involved in a ‘hardbrexit’. An original founder ofukIP along with Alan sked, hecontinues to wage a well-informed guerilla war against thestupid faction who predominatein his own camp. He argues thata full disentanglement will takeyears. He advocates a transition-al period of associate membershipas part of the european FreeTrade Area while the details aresorted out [see his blog athttp://www.eureferendum.com fordetails].

As this penny slowly drops onthe non-loony element within theTory brexit team themselves,expect even more shit to hit theTory fan as the CbI and its alliesthrow their weight behind this asthe only realistic option and asthe hardliner know-nothing pop-ulist element scream ‘betrayal’.

If Labour can hold firm behindthe red lines of theCorbyn/starmer ‘six points’ itmay yet be the Tories whoimplode.

terity policies on southerneurope. At the same time com-pulsory tendering rules facilitat-ed privatisation.

There was no popular basis fora democratic federalism whichmight have installed a progres-sive alternative at a pan-european level. so there was atendency for the populism of theleft-behind to be hegemonised bythe right.

As every good socialist knows,the Tories are the party of bigbusiness. so how come the oldestand most sophisticated rulingclass in the world could not getits preferred political instrumentto defend what is clearly in itsinterests - continued membershipof the european union?

In 1988 Commission PresidentJacques delors received a raptur-ous reception at the TuC. Thevision of a ‘social europe’ fright-ened the Thatcherite right withthe prospect that the eu couldoffset the worst excesses of thefree market by importing throughthe back door elements of thepostwar consensus which theTories were busy demolishing athome. This paradigm has domi-nated much debate on europeever since.

For pro-eu Tories the remain-ing elements of ‘social europe’were an acceptable price to pay(especially given britain’s opt-outs) for the benefits of free tradewith an enlarged single market.but to doctrinaire Thatcheriteswho really do believe that themarket is what happens natural-ly when you take away the state,this appeared to be ‘socialism’.

For most of the left however,these remainders of the original‘european model’ were the rea-son for staying in despite the turnto neo-liberalism. under a Torygovernment a brexit britainwould surely be worse than stay-ing in the eu but outside theeuro. This was the justificationfor Labour’s refusal to campaignalongside the Tories and forCorbyn’s much-maligned ’70%good 30% bad’ formula.

Hence the mind-blowing vacu-ity of Polly Toynbee’s welcome forosborne’s appointment as editorof the Evening Standard on thegrounds that it would strengthenthe ‘remain’ camp - despite hisTory reasons for ‘remain’ being

For a quarter of a centu-ry the eu issue hastorn the Tories apart.now it has split thecountry down the mid-

dle, and divided Labour as to howto respond. The cut and run gen-eral election call is clearly aneffort by May to avoid a damag-ing public split in Tory ranks andstamp down her authority.

As the Lexiteers remind us - asif we didn’t know - the eu hasalways been a club of capitaliststates committed by treaty tomaintaining private property andfree competition. but unlike allother international tradingorganisations - WTo, nAFTA,AseAn - it did from the begin-ning make provision to offset atleast some of the known down-sides of trade liberalisation.

Yes free trade increaseswealth. but it also creates losersin both class and regional terms.so the original Coal and steelCommunity put a levy on eachtonne of coal and steel mined, toprovide a ‘social fund’ to retrainworkers in those industries whowould lose their jobs as a result of‘rationalisation’.

Post-war boom

Further rounds of ‘moreeurope’ were matched withregional development funds, envi-ronmental policies and a ‘socialchapter’; all supposed to offset the‘race to the bottom’ which wouldotherwise be expected to followcontinent-wide trade liberalisa-tion. This represented the cen-trist ‘corporatist’ Christiandemocrat/social democrat con-sensus on which the eu wasfounded during the post-warboom.

France led the charge for a sin-gle european currency afterGerman reunification. butGermany insisted on imposingbundesbank standards of rigouron the new currency - without ofcourse the fiscal transfers andconstitutional commitment toregional equality which make asingle currency acceptable to thedifferent German Laender.

rules on balanced budgets andrestrictions on public borrowingmeant, especially after the 2008crash, that the eu became thevehicle for imposing global aus-

that a disabled person livingalone can expect to be £3,500 ayear worse off. These are not peo-ple a low budget Channel 5 docu-mentary would define as'scroungers', but people withsometimes severe physical ormental issues preventing themfrom working.

We have not seen a governmentpolicy where the political decisionmakers are this far away from thefrontline of the issue as we havewith recent benefit changes.

More recent issues show thatthe problems go further with theintroduction of the ‘Two ChildPolicy’, where benefits are cut forfurther children. This is the stuffof far-fetched dystopian novelists.

Yes, we must shout and screamin opposition. However, whilst ouractions must be relentless, con-structive and evidential we mustalso seek to protect those thatthese changes impact upon mostheavily. This teaches us about thesituation and keeps our humani-tarian side alive.

so speak with your local Foodbank, offer to fundraise or volun-teer with them. You will probablyfind that you need them just asmuch as they need you.

Making the poor payIan Foster says Tory Universal Credit will sow destitution for many

EU Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker (R)offering comisserations to British Prime Minister TheresaMay (L) on her hopeless negotiating position?

Former Tory leader, poverty expert and champion of the poor, Iain DuncanSmith MP: living proof that the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Universal Credit – the impacton families

• over 1 million more childrenliving in poverty• Couples with children will be£960/year worse off• Lone parent families will be£2380/year worse off• Families with one child will be£930/year worse off• Families with two children willbe £1100/year worse off• Families with three childrenwill be £2540/year worse off•Working-age couples withoutchildren will be £160/year worseoff

Universal Credit – impact onchildless people

• single working-age people willbe £220/year worse off.• single pensioners will be£30/year worse off• Pensioner couples will be£40/year worse off.

It is not until you look at the impactof the changes on the whole picturethat we see the true horror of thesituation



C

POPULISM

Towards a left populism

not only that, but it is losing the votes of ‘liberal,metropolitan elites’ (used as an all inclusive, derogato-ry term) who have been witnessing xenophobia, misog-yny and a reactionary discourse emerging both domes-tically and across the Atlantic. Although this attitudecan be justified if one takes into account the voting pat-terns of Leave/Labour supporters, it is also an indica-tion of the inability of the Labour party to realign thepolitical forces in a new, progressive narrative and todraw a new antagonistic frontier. In my view, one ofthe key abilities of a populist intervention is to shiftthe heterogeneous demands towards a new direction, anew left hegemony. or put it differently: if Labourfinds itself squeezed by the Leave/remain divide, itneeds to articulate a new divide that cuts across theLeave/remain divide and is in its favour. That’s whatpopulism is about.

The rupture created by brexit against the eu insti-tutions and the principle of free movement dividing theremain and Leave camps, leaves unscarred the neolib-

eral domestic elites, which lead the eurosceptic senti-ment. The hostility towards the eu is not shaped by acritique of neoliberalism, the dominance of which hasbeen assisted by a string of british governments in thepast thirty years. Instead, the way many brexitersimagine their social existence is along the lines of theempire: ‘we have a special place in the world, andwhat if this world is now full of global challenges? Weare GreAT brITAIn, we can make it, and brexitmeans brexit’.

In the past two years, Corbyn’s leadership cam-paigns were perceived as an insurrection against thepolitical establishment within the Labour party, anunprecedented victory against the dominant ‘blairite’frontbench. In this respect, Labour under Corbyn is inthe privileged position to challenge the previous neolib-eral direction of both the Conservatives and Labour.but with brexit on the menu, the new divisions have tobe taken into account. The country is divided betweenremainers and brexiters, divided not only by differenteconomic profiles as the common wisdom wants, butalso by education, age, ethnicity and national identity.This could be the terrain of a cultural war. but in orderto work in Labour’s favour, it must connect all thesedifferent grievances and create a ‘people’ who willstand against the ‘establishment’. This, though, willtake loads of political craftsmanship.

Labour has to sort out its stance on brexit first andto identify clearly the enemy if it hopes to have a clearanti-establishment message. As it stands, it is confus-ing even for the politically initiated. no surprise, then,that in the last few weeks Corbyn’s supporters havebeen breaking ranks and the polls show a 20 point leadof the Conservatives over Labour, hence May’s oppor-tunist decision to try to cash in.

The first indication of Labour’s inability to challengethe brexit discourse was the dispute over whetherLabour MPs should have voted for the bill starting thebrexit process in the first place. The second, overwhether they should have voted for the bill after allthe amendments tabled by Labour and other partiesfell. In that situation the Labour strategy was lefttrailing that of the Tories. With a foot on each side,Labour is able neither to appease the Leave Labourvoters in the Midlands and the north of england nor tocomfort the Labour remainers. Are the latter going toaccept a catastrophic Tory brexit? Just throwingaround the crude soundbite ‘Labour should not repre-sent the 48% nor the 52% but the 99%’ will not do thetrick.

What we have ahead of us, is the Great repeal billwhich in a very medieval fashion will allow the Torygovernment to repeal legislation without parliament’sapproval. ‘Taking back control’ now sounds like a taste-less joke. The question is will Labour realize that eco-nomic policies will not make the trick on their own andwill it find a way to create ‘the people’ in defence ofdemocracy?

A version of this article first appeared in OpenDemocracy

the political, economic and cultural ‘elites’ a sufficientcondition for populism? How has left-wing populismbeen interpreted by the Labour team?

First the definition: A populist discourse wouldbring together different demands in a chain of equiva-lents. From that moment on these demands will berepresented by one, common demand or symbol. Thissymbol will be the answer to all the demands andgrievances participating in the chain. In this process,the populist discourse will divide the political terrainin two: ‘us’ versus ‘them’, ‘the people’ versus ‘the estab-lishment’. It follows that populism is a political logicthat can work both for the left and for the right, butthe content will be very different in each case. Whatwill differentiate a left-populist discourse is its egali-tarian, inclusive and progressive direction.

every time the Labour party felt pressurised to trailthe right-wing discourse (on immigration for instance)in order to appease its Leave voters in the Midlandsand the north, it was moving away from this direction.

The consequences of triggering Article 50 arejust starting to take shape. May’s quest foropposition free negotiations are now tied tothe General election on June 8th. brexitnegotiations are progressively looking more

complicated, more devastating and potentially morelengthy than the popular brexit rhetoric wanted toadmit during the referendum campaign. even beforegetting into the nitty-gritty of the trade agreements,political hurdles are forcing brexiters to confront thepolitical reality they voted for. From the borders ofGibraltar and the two Irelands to the diminishing pow-ers of the british parliament in this process, the popu-larity of brexit should have grown thin. Yet this is notthe case, at least not yet.

When will the Labour opposition take advantage ofthe situation and present a different vision of britain(or rather england?) to the world, rather than thedystopian ‘Global britain’ of Theresa May. A ‘Globalbritain’ catering for the financial, investment andarmaments needs of every autocrat and dictator on theplanet, from Trump and erdogan to duterte. Thesound economic policies proposed by the leadershipteam do not seem to rally the ‘people’ behind theLabour party, at least not in electoral terms. What ismissing from Labour’s relationship with the people?The same question haunts social-democratic and leftparties as we witness the disturbing ascendancy ofright-wing populist parties and the increasingly con-servative and xenophobic environment across europe.

In search of a game-changing recipe (especially afterthe electoral successes of sYrIZA and Podemos inGreece and spain) european leaders are keen toadvance some type of ‘populist’ claim. Taking theFrench elections as an example, emmanuel Macron’santi-establishment call, even if unconvincing for many,has pitted him against the right-wing populist MarineLe Pen. Macron isn’t the only French populist. benoitHamon the new leader of the socialist Party, has alsobeen seen as having a ‘populist touch’. The battle forthe soul of populism does not stop there. Jean-LucMelenchon, back in 2012 was, according to seamusMilne (the current Labour Party executive director ofstrategy and Communications and closest ally toJeremy Corbyn), giving a voice to the real concerns ofthe people (against the establishment) and as suchanother populist leader. His ‘populism’ equipped withhologram meetings and upbeat messages has givenhim a spectacular rise in the polls.

In britain an attempt at left-wing populism tookplace in december 2016, when John Trickett, the thenLabour strategist announced the re-launching ofJeremy Corbyn as a left-wing populist. That waspromised to entail more media appearances and moreflagship policies that will pit the people against theestablishment… yet, months later (and after Trickett’sdismissal), the ‘people’ (both brexiters and remainers)seem very much divided over Labour’s support for thebrexit bill and its consequences.

no one can dispute that if anyone has an anti-estab-lishment appeal it is Jeremy Corbyn. The question isif anyone with an anti-establishment rhetoric, no mat-ter how convincing, is a populist. Is the stance against

In countering the rise of the right Marina Prentoulis argues that Labour needs its own kind of populist politics

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has to sort out his stance on Brexit first and identify the enemy clearly if he hopes to offer a coherent anti-establishment message

MarinaPrentoulis isa seniorlecturer inPolitics &Media atUniversity ofEast Angliaand a memberof Chartist EB



Photo: The WorldTransformed atLabour PartyConference,LiverpoolSeptember 2016

C

Marcos Garciawas firstsecretary at theBolivarianrepublic ofVenezuela in theUK. He is aprominent tradeunion leader

VENEZUELA NEW POLITICS

Unions: backbone of advance The World Transformed

Last september, at theLabour PartyConference inLiverpool, a small teamof ambitious and enthu-

siastic activists organised TheWorld Transformed, a fringe fes-tival of political debate, art andmusic. over the course of fourdays 6,000 people attended 250hours of workshops, talks, instal-lations and concerts. no gather-ing of this scale or scope had beenseen at Conference in a genera-tion.

by 11am on saturday, twohours after we had opened, thevenue was full. In the central hallof the black-e, a two hundredyear old church converted into acommunity centre, stood five hun-dred people looking at a hugescreen on which the results of thesecond Labour leadership electionwere going to be announced.downstairs there were anotherfour hundred people in two hasti-ly arranged overflow rooms. Allthe chairs were gone and therewere queues down the street withmore people arriving by the sec-ond.

Then it happened. The resultswere announced. Jeremy Corbynhad won in an epic landslide, tak-ing an even greater share of votethan he had the previous year.The room exploded. People were

hugging, cheering, waving theirfists in the air, and it went on,and on, and on.

The rest of the four days is asurreal haze. We had breakfastwith Paul Mason, screened I,daniel blake for the first time inthe uk, and watched as CarolineLucas and Jon Lansman wenthead-to-head in a heated debateabout progressive alliances.Journalists were everywhere.one sky reporter brought in alife-size cardboard cut-out of Tonyblair to provoke a reaction thatwas sadly for him not forthcom-ing. Momentum kids waslaunched, much to the chagrin ofthe mainstream media who nick-named it ‘tiny trots’, and we heldgraffiti workshops for children.Glenn Greenwald skyped in froman airport in brazil to tell usabout the snowden files. It wasextraordinary.

but underneath the hype andthe mayhem something impor-tant was happening: a new politi-cal culture was emerging.experienced activists were shar-ing ideas from across the progres-sive and radical left, with peoplewho had never been involved inpolitics before, while newcomersbrought their own perspectivesand energies to bear onentrenched problems.

now The World Transformed

has grown into its own organisa-tion, committed to developingpolitical consciousness and cul-ture. We have just launched ourfirst campaign – Take backControl – a series of participatoryevents happening across the coun-try that ask questions about ourplace in the world and how we cantake back control of britain’sfuture after brexit. We are work-ing with local activists in eachlocation, training and supportingthem to create participatory expe-riences in their own communities.

each event mixes well-facilitat-ed discussions and workshopsduring the day with music andentertainment in the evening.our first event in Croydon was atthe TMrW hub, a new co-workingspace on the High street. Walkingin off the street you could jumpstraight in at the deep end with adebate called ‘What Are britishvalues Anyway?’ or go and learnhow to express your politicalviews in rhyme at a lyric-writingworkshop with local rapper andactivist shay d. In the eveningMercury Music Prize nomineesoweto kinch performed a soloset, mixing saxophone with politi-cal hip hop that blew us all away.

This september we’ll be holdingThe World Transformed Festivalin brighton. We’re still at theearly stages of organising the pro-gramme. You can expect a multi-venue experience with talks,workshops, performances, originalartwork, big networking sessionsand more. We will also be workingwith Momentum to integratemore with conference, providingspace and support for delegates tomeet and get organised. Localgroups and activists frombrighton & Hove will featureprominently, making this themost exciting event in the grass-roots left’s calendar. Make sureyou don’t miss it.

Take Back Control runs until end ofJune and locations can be found atwww.takebackrealcontrol.com

The World Transformed Festival willtake place 23 – 27th September 2017in Brighton

otage of the economy, the CbsTmade proposals “aimed at over-coming the dependence of the oilincome through the diversifica-tion of the economy productivefabric” (resolution CbsT 2014conference). The Presidentialsystem of recovered, occupied,nationalized, Created and AlliedCompanies was created toimprove coordination on logistics,administration and planning. Asystem of inspections with unionparticipation was also organized.

on november 8, 2016, by aPresidential decree the Workers’Productive Councils (CPT) werecreated, in the priority areas offood, medicine, hygiene and per-sonal care and as part of thesecure supply Program, toincrease productivity and solvetechnical and organizationalissues, guarantee the distributionand marketing of all CTP andsecure supply Program relatedproducts, goods and services.

up to now, 662 CPT had beencreated and the Ministry ofLabour issued a special protec-tion decree for all workers orga-nized in these councils. In most ofthese 662 enterprises, workersare not unionized; offering aunique opportunity to developunions in them and the CbsTintends to create new nationalindustrial unions.

The CbsT believe that defeat-ing the ongoing economic war,reminiscent of the war appliedagainst salvador Allende in Chilein the 1970s, is strategic for thecountry, but poses the challengeof consolidating a strong andpowerful workers movement, asnever before seen in venezuela.The people of venezuela and thetrade union movement continuecommitted as ever to building abetter world.

of a new Labour Code. The new Labour Code bill was

discussed over a period of sixmonths in over 1,800 assembliesof workers and social movements,when unions, workers, peasantsand others, submitted 20,000 pro-posals. It was then approved bythe national Assembly on May 1,2012 and was given the status ofconstitutional law. no LabourLaw has hitherto granted somany rights to workers in thecountry’s history. The Law is oneof the best antidotes to neoliber-alism and austerity.

In 2016, the Ministry of Labourreported that the economicallyactive population in venezuelaincreased to over 13 million.Today, it is estimated that unionmembership is approximately19% of the total, that is,2,486,925 workers. About twomillion are organized in theCbsT. The Ministry of Labourreports that between 2000-2014,

6,183 new unions were regis-tered; an increase of 47.3% com-pared to 1986-1999.

Trade union membership inthe public sector is 70%, well over30% of the private sector.However, in the public sectorthere are 2,673,067 workers, and5,153,305 in the private sector.

In 1999, during the neoliberalera, the population covered bycollective agreements amountedto just 4%. Today, it is estimatedthat between 30% and 34% ofworkers are covered.

The defeat of the 2002-03 oil-sabotage led many businessmento abandon their factories, work-ers proceeded to occupy them tobe later nationalized by thevenezuelan state. In these facto-ries the labour movement hasbeen developing different modelsof participation and management.These experiences are also takingplace in state enterprises.

since 2014, as a result of thedrastic fall in the country's oilrevenues, and the increasing sab-

ever since the electionof Hugo Chavez in1998, us governmentshave been promotingregime change aimed

at ousting the bolivarianGovernment. recently oil revenuewent down from us$ 42.990 bn in2014 to us$ 5,291 bn in 2016.

In this difficult context,bolivarian trade unionism hasbeen reorganizing its forces in asustained way by using tradition-al means such as setting up newunions, strengthening existingones, and engaging in collectivebargaining, as well as new toolssuch as workers’ participation inthe management of enterprises,the establishment of Local supplyand Production Committees(CLAPs), and workers' councils,among others.

The policies implemented bythe neoliberal governmentsbetween 1989 and 1998, progres-sively dismantled workers’ socialprotections and through outsourc-ing reduced the space for organiz-ing unions. The right-wing unionleadership of the Central ofvenezuelan Workers (CTv)obstructed the struggle of work-ers through agreements restrict-ing labour rights, such as the1997 reform of Labour Law.

After Chavez’s election, theCTv established an alliance withthe bourgeoisie, organized inFedeCAMArAs (venezuela’sCbI) and together they stagedfour general strikes, a coup d’é-tat, and in december 2002, sabo-taged the oil industry, the coun-try's main source of income. Allthese seditious efforts weredefeated. As a result, unionsorganized in the CTv went intorapid decline.

In 2003, an attempt was madeto reorganize the venezuelantrade union movement with thecreation of the national union ofWorkers (unT), but it failedbecause of internal divisions.

In november 2011, the mainunions in transport, railways,graphics, oil, electrical, education,public sector, health, among oth-ers, held a national conference atwhich they founded thebolivarian, socialist WorkersConfederation (CbsT). PresidentHugo Chávez attended it and toldthe conference about the drafting

Marcos Garcia on new challenges for the Venezuelan trade union movement Roland Singer Kingsmith on the birth and development of a rolling festival forum for newleft ideas and action

Venezualan trade unionists on the march

C

Defeating the ongoing economicwar, reminiscent of the war appliedagainst Salvador Allende in Chile inthe 1970s, is strategic for thecountry

For more information contact [email protected] or check out the website www.theworldtransformed.org



C

ANTI-SEMITISM

Antisemitism – a case of mistakenidentity

return to their homes or receivecompensation.

A uk speaking tour in Marchby one of the report’s authors,richard Falk, a former u.n.human rights investigator for thePalestinian territories, who isJewish, suffered a number of can-cellations at universities intimi-dated by charges of antisemitismfrom pro-Israel lobbyists.

Not a duck — it is apartheid

However, as Hasan also notes,several high-profile Israelis haveused the term apartheid abouttheir own country. Former educa-tion minister shulamit Aloni,said “Israel practises its own,quite violent, form of apartheidwith the native Palestinian popu-lation.” Former environment min-ister Yossi sarid, said in morecolourful language, “whatacts like apartheid, is run likeapartheid and harasses likeapartheid, is not a duck — it isapartheid.”

The axed report only under-lines the daily reality ofPalestinians’ experience, whichprovides ample reason for criticis-ing Zionism and the state ofIsrael, and ample reason formany Jews not wishing to bindtheir identity to either.

Look at the case of Israeli nov-elist dorit rabinyan. Her novel,All the Rivers – about a relation-ship between a Palestinian artist,Hilmi, and an Israeli woman,Liat – was withdrawn from theschool syllabus “because it mightencourage young readers to getintimately involved with non-Jewish residents of the country,”rabinyan told the Observer at thebeginning of April.

A decision supported by thefar-right education ministernaftali bennett said: “Intimaterelations, and certainly the avail-able option of institutionalisingthem by marriage and starting afamily – even if that does nothappen in the story – betweenJews and non-Jews, are seen bylarge portions of society as athreat on the separate identities(of Arabs and Jews).”

There is nothing inherentlyantisemitic about opposing thestate and the ideology that couldbring about such a grotesquestate of affairs. There are other,Jewish socialist traditions, with amuch longer pedigree, that priori-tise universalist, humanitarianprinciples and do not seek touncouple antisemitism from theother forms of racism that theLabour Party should be fighting.

References:

1. Free speech on Israel (FsoI) was founded as a predominantly Jewish campaign group in spring 2016 to counter the misrepresentation of criticism of Israel and of itsfounding ideology, Zionism, as antisemitic.

http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk2. Prof Avi shlaim on Zionism and antisemitism in british politics,http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/anti-zionism-antisemitism-british-politics-avi-shlaim/3. Letter in defence of ken Livingstone http://www.writeyou.co.uk/letter_from_jewish_members4. Legal opinion blasts holes in IHrA definition of antisemitism, http://freespeechonisrael.org.uk/legal-opinion-blasts-holes-pro-israel-definition-anti-

semitism/

who are increasingly dissociatingthemselves from Israeli excesses,governments have brought insome elements of anti-bds legis-lation in the us, France,switzerland, Canada and here inthe uk.

Last month, the united nationseconomic and social Commissionfor Western Asia (unesCWA)was forced to pull a report docu-menting how “Israel has estab-lished an apartheid regime thatdominates the Palestinian peopleas a whole.” Commentator MehdiHasan reported the furore “whichled to the u.n. secretariat remov-ing the report from its websiteand the Jordanian head of theunesCWA, rima khalef, quit-ting in protest.”

Hasan said the report waswithdrawn after Israel’s support-ers, with us backing, alleged thatto mention the “grotesque crime ofapartheid in the same sentence asthe democratic state of Israel” …is “slander”, a “smear”, a “despi-cable” and “blatant lie”, a shame-ful act of “Israel-bashing” anda “new form of anti-semitism.”

The report gave examples of theways in which Palestinians weredivided into four groups oppressedthrough "distinct laws, policiesand practices."

Palestinian citizens of Israel(about 1.7 million) suffer: inferiorservices, restrictive zoning laws,limited budget allocations, restric-tions on jobs and professionalopportunities.

Palestinian residents of eastJerusalem (about 300,000) alsosuffer from expulsions and homedemolitions and the threat of los-ing their residency rights.

Palestinians in the occupiedPalestinian territory (about 2.7million in the West bank and 1.9million in the Gaza strip) liveunder military law, while approxi-mately 350,000 Jewish settlersare governed by Israeli civil law.

Palestinian refugees or thoseliving in “involuntary exile” (6 to 8million) are denied the right,assured them by a un GeneralAssembly resolution in 1948, to

bers who wrote to the nCC aheadof ken Livingstone’s hearing inMarch, “As Jews, we are appalledthat such a serious issue as anti-semitism is being used in thiscynical and manipulative way. Itis harmful to Jewish people thatfalse charges of antisemitism areso casually thrown around.”

There are large numbers ofJews who disagree strongly withthe Zionist orientation of theJewish Labour Movement, aLabour Party affiliate whichemerged two years ago from astate of apparent slumber tobecome a major force in promot-ing the IHrA definition of anti-semitism.

opposition to the definitionreceived a considerable boost atthe end of March with publicationof a legal opinion from HughTomlinson QC (4). Tomlinsonshowed the definition to be badlydrafted, confusing and not legallybinding. He said it would putpublic bodies using it at risk of“unlawfully restricting legitimateexpressions of political opinion.”It could make them liable tobeing sued if they curtail criti-cism of Israel that does notexpress hatred towards Jews.“The fact that speech is offensiveto a particular group is not, ofitself, a proper ground for prohi-bition or sanction.”

so describing Israel as, forexample, a settler-colonialiststate enacting a policy ofapartheid, or calling for policiesof boycott, divestment or sanc-tions (bds) against Israel, cannotbe characterised as antisemiticunless there is other evidence ofanti-Jewish racism.

Support for boycott

For the time being, the attemptto characterise support for boy-cott as driven by hatred of Jews,rather than opposition to Israel’soppression of Palestinians, isnotching up successes in Westerncountries. despite growing sup-port for Palestine in civil society,including among younger Jews

The recurrent unseemlyspectacle, of Labourestablishment worthiesportraying the party asfull of terrorist-loving

antisemites bent on offending anddriving out stalwart Jewish mem-bers, has at its heart a disputeddefinition of antisemitism whichseeks to equate criticism of Israeland its founding ideology,Zionism, with hatred of Jews.

Making this conflation hasbeen a years’ long project of pro-Israel lobbyists worldwide, but itwas rejected by most Jews pre-WWII and is not shared by manyJews now. As explained inJanuary by Avi shlaim, emeritusProfessor of Internationalrelations at oxford university(ref.2), “Israeli propagandistsdeliberately, yes deliberately,conflate anti-Zionism with anti-semitism in order to discredit,bully, and muzzle critics ofIsrael.”

Derail the Corbyn project

The election of Jeremy Corbynas Labour leader, and the conse-quent influx to the party ofenthusiastic left-wingers withinternational solidarity in theirmarrow, suddenly presented thefriends of Israel with an ardentbunch of new allies – every politi-cian and media guru fromblairite to far right determinedto derail the Corbyn project atwhatever cost. It was, and still is,an amazing confluence of interestamongst: the Guardian, the DailyMail, Wes streeting and MichaelGove, to name but a few of thosehanding out the pitchforks.

Hence the adoption indecember 2016 by Theresa May’sConservative government of theso-called IHrA definition of anti-semitism, and the success of itsproponents in winning supportfor it in Labour’s neC. Presentedas a crucial tool in the fightagainst anti-Jewish racism, itthreatens to have the reverseeffect. To quote a letter (3) frommore than 30 Jewish LP mem-

Silencing critics of the Israeli state for its treatment of Palestinians, and long-timechampion Jeremy Corbyn, is at the heart of the anti-Semitism row argues NaomiWimborne-Idrissi of Free Speech on Israel

Deir Yassin – Massacre of PalestiniansSue Cooke says it’s time for a government apology

69 years ago on the 9th April 1948, disaster struck a small village nearJerusalem. At 4.30am during the hours of darkness, 107 Zionist militiamenentered the Palestinian village of deir Yassin. As the villagers, taken by sur-

prise, tried to defend their village the attackers slaughtered 170 children, womenand men. A further 80 people from deir Yassin were taken prisoner, paradedthrough Jerusalem and then murdered.

The people of deir Yassin lived in peace with their Jewish neighbours across thevalley in Grivat shaul; they supported each other to give warnings of attacks. Iheard today from a colleague, Mazin Qumsiyeh, in bethlehem. At the time, in 1948,Mazin's mother was training to be a teacher in Jerusalem. Her best friend wasHayah balbisi, who that fateful April returned to her home in deir Yassin to be withher family. Hayah was 16 years old when she was killed by Zionist militiamen. Tothis day Mazin's mother, now 84, remembers the tragedy which took her friend'slife.

The slaughter and destruction at deir Yassin marked the beginning of the ethniccleansing of the Palestinian people from the land of their birth, which continuestoday with the illegal military occupation of Palestine, and the 10 year blockade ofGaza, brutally enforced by the Israeli Government.

It is important to remember that the ongoing suffering in Palestine and Israel arethe continuation of something our british Government set in train a hundred yearsago this year, with the 1917 balfour declaration. It is time our Government apolo-gised and helped correct the historical injustices that we are responsible for.

As we grieve for the children killed in syria, and children killed in Yemen withbritish weapons of destruction supplied to saudi Arabia, I continue to be hopefulthat readers will find out more about the reasons behind these linked tragedies, andwrite to their Members of Parliament.

Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi is amember ofChingford CLP

C


May/June CHARTIST 23

The brexit vote and theelection of the peroxidemogul donald Trumphave revealed theunpredictable nature of

contemporary politics and givencredit to the prophecy of anunstoppable rise of the ‘populistright’ tapping into the resent-ment of the ‘losers of globaliza-tion’. ever since, one questionhas been nagging political ana-lysts: who is next? since the noless peroxided far-right leader ofPvv, Geert Wilders, scored ‘only’13% of the votes in the dutchParliamentary election, commen-tators have temporarily eased offon the pressure and turned theireye to the French Presidentialelection for another scare story.

support for Marine Le Pen, theleader of Front national, is ashigh as ever. recent predictionfailures have taught us how toplay carefully with numbers, shehas consistently polled around25% of voting intentions in thefirst round. only emmanuelMacron (en Marche movement,centre) seems to be in a positionto dispute her first place. Theseestimates are significantly abovethe score of her father Jean-Marie Le Pen in the infamous2002 Presidential election (17%),or her personal score in 2012(18%). They also tally with thescore of the party in the firstrounds of recent intermediaryelections. It gained a quarter ofthe vote in both the european(2014) and local (2015) ballots,and reached almost 28% in the2015 regional election.

Also striking is the stability ofvoting intentions for Marine LePen. unlike her rivals, she is vir-tually uncontested internally andcan count on a strong base ofdevoted supporters. More than70% of those who intend to votefor Fn consider that they havealready made up their mind,while many of Macron’s support-ers are still uncertain as to theirfinal decision.

Front national has beenembroiled in several affairs –from the fictional employment ofparty members as european par-liamentary assistants, to accusa-tion of irregular campaign financ-ing. Yet, party supporters remain

unshaken. This contrasts withFrançois Fillon (Lesrépublicains, right), whose sup-port has been eroded by a seriesof embezzlement scandals involv-ing, amongst other things, theattribution of fictional parliamen-tary jobs to family members.

Front national has come toembody the protest vote against apolitical class whose policies areperceived as indistinctively simi-lar and detached from the every-day concerns of most citizens.Marine Le Pen stresses the simi-larities between the economicpolicies of Les républicains andthe Party socialiste, which haveboth failed to reduce unemploy-ment. Although an emphasis onsecurity issues, a strongly anti-immigration outlook and racism –disguised as cultural incompati-bility and predominantly directedagainst Islam – are still at the

core of the party’s identity,Marine Le Pen has tried to polishthe Fn’s image as a ‘normal’party, avoiding the sulphurousrhetoric of her father. she hasalso put some distance with thelatter’s neo-liberal economicagenda (he used to present him-self as the ‘French ronaldreagan’), emphasizing thedefence of public services and thewelfare state while attacking anovergrown financial sector andthe european union to appeal todisaffected voters. This new ori-entation reflects the support baseof the party. blue-collar workers,small employees, self-employedworkers and farmers representthe largest shares of its elec-torate.

It is clear that Marine Le Penis in for a top score and will, in alllikelihood, be one of the two can-didates in the second round of thePresidential election on 7th May.In fact most of the uncertaintyseems to lie in the identity of hercontender. We now know Macronwon the first round, and is pre-

The end of local government?Peter Latham proposes a town hall rescue strategy

There are alternative models of‘socialist decentralisation’ in localgovernment to neoliberal ‘austeri-anism/localism’. In The state andLocal Government (2011), I anal-ysed developments in the uk,other advanced capitalist coun-tries, south Africa, the southIndian state of kerala, Cuba,venezuela and the brazilian cityof Porto Alegre to illustrate these.My new book - Who stole the townhall? - applies the approach inthe earlier book, which is ground-ed in Marxist political economy,to developments in the uk sincethe Localism Act 2011.

new Labour’s LocalGovernment Act 2000 concentrat-ed decision-making powers infewer hands. In most authoritiesthe committee system wasreplaced by the cabinet, overviewand scrutiny system. Hence mostcouncillors no longer make policy.Most feel marginalised with littleinfluence over issues that affecttheir local areas. The uk also hasthe highest average populationsize per local authority in europe.

There should be more council-lors and councils - each with thecommittee system, which is muchmore inclusive than any otherform of governance - coveringsmaller areas. Council leaders’powers have also massivelyincreased via the ‘payroll vote’ ofspecial responsibility allowances(srAs). In addition, as theprospect of fewer and lower srAsmay be the main reason why only13 councils have reverted to thecommittee system since theLocalism Act, no councillorsshould be paid more than themedian gross weekly full-timeearnings in their locality.

The privatisation model in theTory-led coalition government’sWhite Paper titled Open PublicServices (2011) is based onPayment for success publishedin 2010 by three senior partnersat kPMG. Councils are also beingneoliberalised via new models oflocal government, which prioritisethe interests of property develop-ers and big business. The uk out-sourcing market is now the sec-ond largest in the world outsidethe us. The amount spent bylocal authorities on outsourcedpublic services almost doubledfrom £64 billion during the lastLabour government to £120 bil-

lion during theTory-led coalitiong o v e r n m e n t .Thus, contrary tothe government’se m p o w e r m e n trhetoric, theirmain purpose isto complete theprivatisation oflocal governmentand other publicservices - startedunder previousTory govern-ments and inten-sified under newLabour - torestore the condi-tions in whichprofitable investment and capitalaccumulation can take place.

Public services provide benefitsto both individual service usersand the wider society. universalaccess, delivery according to need,services free at the point of useand delivered for the public goodrather than for profit should be atthe heart of any model of service

delivery. Hence, as the public sec-tor is best placed to provide publicservices that meet these criteria,it should be the default model ofdelivery.

developments since theLocalism Act reinforce the mainarguments against us-styledirectly elected mayors(usdeMs), including ‘metro’mayors, (which the Conservativegovernment is now imposing oncombined authorities (CAs) inengland) and us-style directlyelected police and crime commis-sioners (usPCCs) which:•lead to lead to cronyism, patron-age and corruption •are monocultures, which excludethe working class •are the optimal internal man-agement arrangement for priva-tised services •have not increased turnout andlack voter support •have an undemocratic voting

system and cannot be removed. so usdeMs and usPCCs

should be abolished as part of theoverall reorganisation of thestructure of local government pro-posed above. until abolition,there should be a right of recallleading to a new election if theyturn out to be bad or ineffectiverepresentatives.

some councils, which havebeen cut harder than the rest ofthe public sector, are alreadybecoming financially unviable. sothe council tax, stamp duty landtax and business rates should beabolished and replaced by a sys-tem of land value taxation plus awealth tax and more progressiveincome tax to fund increased pro-vision of directly provided publicservices.

The eu’s imposition of neo-lib-eral policies on all governments,including those led by the tradi-tional parties of the Left, hasresulted in the collapse of supportfor social democracy. Moreover,although Labour’s national lead-ership until the election ofJeremy Corbyn as leader wascommitted to such policies, thereis still a crisis of working classrepresentation because mostLabour MPs and councillorswould rather he did not exist.Hence, if Labour fails to respondto the challenge of building amass campaign of resistance toTory-driven austerity at locallevel, it will fail to create thepolitical basis in public opinionfor getting a radical Corbyn-ledLabour government elected,which is a pre-condition for imple-menting the above policies.

22 CHARTIST May/June 2017

dicted to win in the run off.Although Fn has considerablyenlarged its support base, it stillremains too repellent to most left-wing and centrist voters to win ina one to one contest where votetransfers are crucial. In the sec-ond round, the so-called‘republican front’ limits the Fn’sprogression, but the cordon sani-taire has also weakened, especial-ly as Les républicains havemoved further to the right.

despite difficulties in formingalliances, Front national hasalready conquered a significantnumber of cities and positions oflocal and regional Councillors. Itcounts 23 Members of theeuropean Parliament but hasonly two national Members ofParliament and two senators.The Presidential election isimportant for Marine Le Pen togain media presence and shapethe political discourse. Howeverthe real battle may be legislativeelections in June 2017, when theparty could win several addition-al seats in the nationalAssembly, thus getting moredeeply entrenched in institutionalpolitics. The chances of Marine LePen becoming President remainlimited, but the stakes are high.Her party could consolidate itsstatus as the main challengerwithin the political system, at atime when both left and right arein a process of re-composition.C

High stakes in French electionThe rise of the French far right party Front National is disturbing – but maybe not for thereasons we think says Pierre Bocquillon

LOCAL GOVERNMENT FRENCH PRESIDENTIALS

Dr Peter Lathamis the author ofThe State andLocalGovernment:Towards a NewBasis for 'LocalDemocracy' andthe Defeat of BigBusiness Control

C

UK local government: another Conservative privatisation target

Councils are also beingneoliberalised via new models oflocal government, which prioritisethe interests of property developersand big business

Five leading candidates in the 1st roundreduced to two: front-runner Macron and LePen

The chances of Marine Le Penbecoming President remain limited, butthe stakes are high. Her party couldconsolidate its status as the mainchallenger within the political system

Pierre Bocquillonis a lecturer atthe University ofEast Anglia


May/June 2017 CHARTIST 25

Brexit and the British Film IndustryPatrickMulcahyon startingover againwith Europe

Article 50 has been triggered and there isno turning back. As on most otheraspects of british lives, the impact ofbrexit on filmmaking and cinema-goingin the united kingdom will be signifi-

cant.First cinema-going: a range of cinemas from the

belmont Film House in Aberdeen to the Lighthousein Wolverhampton, supported by europa Cinemaswill lose their funding to show european films. Thiswill in turn diminish the availability of europeanmovies in cinemas. A response may be to move themonline for personal consumption, but the thrill andimpact of a collectively-viewed experience of some ofthe future classics of european cinema would belost. I will always watch a Michael Haneke movie ina cinema – his latest, Happy End starring IsabelleHuppert, premieres at Cannes in May. After brexit,I might not be able to do so. The beneficiary cinemaswill be forced to programme more conservatively orelse may even close altogeth-er. The british Film Institutecould play a part in prevent-ing this by replacing theeuropa programme withfunding for cinemas thatshowcase diversity in britishfilmmaking. At present, thereare no plans to do so.

second, film production:the united kingdom will nolonger be able to access fundsfrom the Creative europeprogramme. This is a euro1.46 billion programme allo-cated over seven years forfilm, Tv, games, publishing,music, heritage and the per-forming and visual arts pro-duced within europe. Thesingle project grants - euro50,000 for a fiction projectwith a budget above euro 1.5million – are relatively smallbut can help with develop-ment or completion. Therecent releases City of TinyLights, starring riz Ahmedand billie Piper and TheirFinest, a World War Two comedy about a woman(Gemma Arterton) who becomes a screenwriter, ben-efited from this. The Tentmaster’s daughter, abritish project in development from director IsabelAnderton, has similarly received €€euro 50,000 in postproduction services as well as euro 5,000 in ‘softmoney’, an incentive offered by a government for thepurpose of basing a production there.

Third, film sales: significant sums of money fromCreative europe are awarded to sales agents whotake on european film productions and try to finddistribution for them. There will be no financialincentives for beneficiary sales agents to take onbritish films and the british Council will have tostep up its game to fill the gap. The problem is thatoutside of films by stephen Frears – Tamara Drewewas a huge hit in France - and ken Loach, fewbritish films outside the blockbusters receive widedistribution in europe. british films without film

festival recognition will struggle that much harderin the european market place.

Fourth, subject matter: I for one will be glad therewill be a disincentive for british filmmakers tomake films from european writers in english. SuiteFrançaise adapted from Irène némirovsky’s novel,unpublished in her tragically brief lifetime, was adepressing example of this; subtitles should not anddo not prevent films from becoming financially suc-cessful. There will be no incentives for british film-makers to adapt foreign novels for the big screen.This will force british filmmakers inwards – or elseto adopt a new nationality. This is the only aspectthat genuinely thrills me, watching how they willadapt.

Here though british film could play a vital part inrepairing the damage caused by the brexit referen-dum, a vote that divided people between economicsense (‘remain’) and casino gambling (‘leave’) and adefiant belief that forging relationships with differ-

ent partners who don’t shareour values (‘leave’) is some-how better than working withthose with whom we are geo-graphically and culturallyaligned (‘remain’). Films cancelebrate both humanism andrisk taking. They can alsoprove that there is a viablealternative to europeanbureaucracy and inertia,often seen as drivers towardsleaving the union. such pro-jects may not be overtly com-missioned but, as artists,filmmakers have a responsi-bility to respond. It is worthremembering thatThatcherism inspired a pur-ple patch in british filmmak-ing, contributing to the birthof Channel Four and PalacePictures.

The reallocation ofresources within the britishFilm Institute will be crucialin determining how britishcinema lands after brexit.Whilst acknowledging the

decision to leave the european union, ‘bFI 2022’, afive year plan for support to the british movingimage industry from 2017 to 2022, doesn’t anticipatethe loss of resources to cinemas and filmmakers.The plan, launched last november, appears to havebeen written without brexit in mind. Yes, there aredevolving budgets and decision making regionallyand for promoting diversity as well as expandingfilm education (the ‘Into Film’ programme) but thereis disappointingly no acknowledgement of the chal-lenges that british filmmakers will face. It will bechurlish to think that America will provide the samelevel of support or co-productions with China andIndia will result in popular and therefore sustain-able british hits. our new relationship witheuropean cinema will have to be from a zero-basewith filmmakers rather than bureaucrats within thebritish Film Institute being our principal hope.

24 CHARTIST May/June 2017

C

TURKEY FILM REVIEW

President wins autocratic powers

talks Turkey recently led withrussia over the syrian war.

Indeed, the war in syria is anextremely important pretext forthe erdoğan presidency. othernotable greetings to erdogancame from the rebel groups Jaishal-Islam, linked to saudi Arabiaand the sultan Murad brigade,controlled by Turkish intelli-gence, both allegedly forming partof the Free syrian Army. Turkishmilitary has fought with thesegroups at Al-bab, the town at thecrossroads of syrian-kurdishinfluence, and the strategic objec-tive of Ankara policy.

It is in the light of this contextthat the pro-kurdish oppositionPeoples’ democratic Party (HdP)presented complaints aboutunstamped ballots they saidaffected three million voters.They joined with the main opposi-tion republican People’s Party(CHP) in requesting the electoralCommission annul the referen-dum on the basis of an extra-legal decision to allow unstampedballots. The request was swiftlyrejected, as was the eCHr’sjudgement on the unsoundness ofthe result.

The result of the referendumhas highlighted and exacerbatedthe bipolar profile of Turkish poli-tics. The conflict between the sec-ular and orthodox Muslim, thedemocratic and autocratic hasbeen heightened. How this willplay out in a turbulent geo-politi-cal environment is uncertain.

omnipresent narrative thatTurkey is waging an existentialwar against Western forces whoare plotting to carve up the coun-try and who might be behind therecent wave of terrorist attacks.This line of argument, whichincreasingly includes secular neo-nationalists, emphasizes stabilityas the priority. erdoğan is per-ceived by many as the preserverof the Turkish nation and lands,in the face of the Treaty ofsevres, seen as the main weaponof Westerners to keep Turkeyunder political control. TheTreaty was signed after WorldWar I between the defeatedottoman empire and victoriousallies britain, France and theirpartners. The sevres PeaceTreaty aimed to dismember theremainder of ottoman lands(most of them with a majority-Turkish population) and establishWestern spheres of influence. The

Treaty was overturned after theTreaty of Lausanne was signed in1923 following the end of the two-year war against Greece conduct-ed under the leadership ofMustafa kemal Ataturk.

In his speech of 22nd december2016 erdoğan said, ‘We are anation that still lives with thesorrows of what we lost atLausanne. To speak frankly,Turkey is going through its great-est struggle since the War ofIndependence. This is a struggle[to preserve] a single nation, asingle homeland, a single state.’

This approach resonates wellwith some leaders of the Muslimworld. erdoğan is often perceivedas the neo-ottoman reviver ofthe unity of the Muslim umma,an image that he certainly enjoys.Post-referendum, the media fol-lowed up with a series of congrat-ulatory messages coming fromMiddle east states, that promisesimproved relations with many oftheir leaders. significantly, thiswould be an improved relation-ship with Iran, perhaps due to

on 16 April the Turkishpeople voted in a ref-erendum for constitu-tional changes. by thenarrow victory of

51.4% ‘yes’ over 48.6% ‘no’, votershave chosen to support Presidenterdoğan and his leading Justiceand development (AkP) Party inestablishing an executive presi-dency, (enabling erdogan to rulefor 12 years) and abolishing theoffice of Prime Minister.

Whilst the new constitutionbestows on the President furtherexecutive powers, such as theappointment of judiciary andministers, the pro-governmentTurkish media have been cele-brating the result as an affirma-tion of love for democracyamongst the Turkish population.The media reported a generalmood of celebration amongst theTurkish population. The differ-ence was 1.3 million votes forerdogan’s plan, though the per-centage figure might haveseemed somehow insignificant.Many citizens have been ecstaticover the annihilation of militaryfigures ruling behind the scenesin the Parliament, following lastyear’s failed coup, in a modewidely known amongst Turks as‘deep state.’ However, not onlyhave many military personnelbeen arrested, but so too havehundreds of journalists and aca-demics.

In this regard, the outcome ofthe referendum was not totallyunexpected. Two other key fac-tors were at work. Firstly, wasthe way conservatives perceivedthe changes the constitutionalpackage promised to bring about.There has been always a clear riftbetween the conservative factionwho believed the proposed presi-dential system would acceleratedemocratisation of the politicalsystem in Turkey, and more liber-al segments who rejected changesas erdogan’s attempt to domi-nate and control the politicalscene in all spheres. The pater-nalistic mesh, however, hasalways had a strong holdamongst a majority of Turkishvoters, as demonstrated by thesnap elections called by erdoğanlast year which only strengthenedhis political grip.

The second reason is the

Sheila Osmanovic examines the forces behind Erdoğan’s narrow referendum victory

C

The conflict between the secular andorthodox Muslim, the democratic andautocratic has been heightened. Howthis will play out in a turbulent geo-political environment is uncertain

European films: another casualty of Brexit for UKcinema goers?


May/June CHARTIST 2726 CHARTIST May/June 2017

BOOK REVIEWS

British Nazis Art and lifeEDWARD UPWARD Peter Stansky (Eritharmon, £25)

upward was a communist nov-elist and school teacher. upwardwrote a trilogy – The SpiralAscent, a novelised autobiographyof his life in the CommunistParty from the 1930’s to the1950’s, which I remember readingwhen it was republished in apaperback edition in 1979. Thethree volumes: In the Thirties,The Rotten Elements and NoHome but the Struggle, have sat

in pride of place next to orwelland olivia Manning ever since. Ihave been puzzled as to why hewas so little known andstansky’s biography should nowcorrect this. eritharmon Presshas also published upward’s firstnovel, Journey to the Border, orig-inally published by the HogarthPress in 1938, as well as someshort stories written in his 90’s.upward lived to the age of 105.

upward was one of the groupof public school intellectual com-munists never much of an activistand certainly not a militantstreet-fighter. educated atrepton school and then atCambridge university, his closestfriend was ChristopherIsherwood, with whom he collabo-rated on a number of juvenile

fantasy writings, centring on afictional village of Mortmere.upward was not however a homo-sexual as were Isherwood and hisother close friend and collabora-tor stephen spender. upward’swife Hilda was also a member ofthe Communist Party. Whatintrigued me most about upwardwas that for over 30 years he wasan english teacher at the presti-gious if liberal Alleyn’s school indulwich, and that for most of thistime he lived in a house indulwich village only a few hun-

dred yards frommy own.

The biography,as do the autobio-graphical novels,traces upward’sincreasing disillu-sion with theCommunist Party.This was not overthe German-sovietPact of 1939 norover the invasionof Hungary of 1956nor ofCzechoslovakia in1968. upward andhis wife left theparty in 1948, crit-icising the Partyfor being reformistas the CommunistParty leader,Harry Pollittbrought the Partyinto supportingthe Labour Party.The CommunistParty was to loseits only post-warMPs, Phil Piratinand William

Gallagher in 1950, withCommunist influence subse-quently limited to the trade unionmovement.

Much of stansky’s study focus-es on upward’s dilemma of tryingto write readable novels andshort stories while at the sametime holding to his communistprinciples. Alleyn’s school seemsto have been tolerant of theirCommunist teacher as both headof english and housemaster,clearly not too concerned that hewould corrupt their sixth formersand turn them all into sovietagents or Communist militants.In many ways, it would appearthat upward was a fairly tradi-tional english teacher.

despite attending dulwichbranch communist meetings and

holding meetings of theCommunist writers group in hishouse and being active in theteachers union, he does notappear to have been active politi-cally locally. nowhere in the bookis there any reference to theactivity of Mosley’s british unionof Fascists, which was strong indulwich and included WilliamJoyce (Lord Haw Haw) and hisbrother Quentin. no mention ismade of a hotel on dulwich com-mon between dulwich Collegeand the golf course, used by agroup of nazi spies (later demol-ished to make way for a house inwhich Margaret and dennisThatcher were to live). All of thisperhaps makes dulwich a bitmore interesting that at firstappears to be the case.

regulation 18b the Homesecretary could detain any personsuspected to be of hostile origin orassociation or to have beenrecently concerned in acts preju-dicial to the public safety ordefence of the realm’. Initially,only a handful were arrested.Mosleyites continued unham-pered.

Then in May 1940 it allchanged. Churchill became primeminister and further emergencylegislation proscribed member-ship of numerous fascist groups.The attack on the ‘fifth columnmenace’ saw many pro-nazi lead-ers, including Mosley, but manymore rank and filers, interned.some fascist top brass, withestablishment contacts, got offlightly or were released wellbefore the end of the war. Thosewho had broadcast open and per-sistent pro German propagandaduring the war –most notoriouslyWilliam Joyce (Lord Haw Haw),were tried and hanged after thewar. but many others escapedthe death penalty, again due totheir connections.

Share platforms

Prominent anti-warIndependent Labour Party MPslike John Mc Govern crossed theline in showing a willingness toshare platforms with fascists.Worse with John beckett we findthe story of a man who was aleading ILPer, but jumped ship tothe fascists in the late 1930s.beckett juniors’ account of hisfather’s embrace of anti-semitic,pro nazi politics is as absorbingas it is salutary in its explana-tions of the transformation of rad-ical socialist to racist nationalsocialist.

The chapters of Griffith’s bookdetailing the antics of prominentfascists, MI5 monitoring and thecat and mouse games thatensued are fascinating andunderline a largely benignapproach on the part of the gov-ernment. There is a useful‘rogues gallery’ potted biographychapter to conclude. After thewar many leading activists wenton to campaign with Mosley andhelped form the League ofempire Loyalists and nationalFront.

In today’s climate of growingrace hate, populist nationalismand neo fascism it all makes for asobering read.

invasion of Austria,Czechoslovakia and Poland (asdid other british fascists) andwrote pro-nazi pamphlets likeThe Truth about this War. Hewas arrested and imprisonedsoon after war was declared.

However, the Peace Pledgeunion, and Peace News started byQuaker Humphrey Moore, neversupported the war. ‘While manypacifists maintained purity oftheir ideals, in the late Thirtiesand Forties there was…a signifi-cant minority whose viewsbecame tempered with a desire tosee the best in motives of naziGermany…and even to promotenazi attitudes’ writes Griffiths.From 1939 numerous fascistgroups, including Mosley’s,encouraged members to join thePPu. Many articles in Peacenews were written by pro-nazis.After kristallnacht in november1938 some Pn writers excusedthe nazis by pointing out britainhad been guilty of similar treat-ment of Jews in WW1. nor didthe German invasion of Praguechange the Pn view with Mooredescribing Hitler as ‘an idealisticdreamer’. naivity and gullibilitypartially explains this stance. Afurther sinister turn occurredwhen war was declared. Griffithsgives numerous examples. Manypacifists attended Mosley’s ralliesand pro-German articles contin-ued to appear in Pn. roseMacauley frequently protestedagainst fascist tendencies in Pn.Adverts appeared for the fascistbritish People’s Party meetingsand the related movement,Campaign Against War andusury. At one point the rabidlypro-nazi The Link was advertisedin the Peace services Handbookand was considered as a candi-date to handle all Pn foreign cor-respondence.

Moore seemed sucked in.Leftist writer ethel Manninwrote a piece entitled Anti fas-cists propaganda a danger blam-ing Jews for the war mentality.Griffiths paints a picture of apeace movement in disarray.When John Middleton Murrytook over editing Peace News thepolicy remained with Murry talk-ing of nazism as ‘the destinedinstrument of european unifica-tion’ and speaking favourably ofthe German ‘new order’. orwellwas prompted to bemoan thedecline of british pacifism.

under the wartime defence

WHAT DID YOU DO DURING THE WAR?Richard Griffiths (Routledge, £19.99)FASCIST IN THE FAMILY Francis Beckett (Routledge, £16.99)

subtitled ‘The last throes ofthe british pro-nazi right1940-45’ Griffith’s book is

full of unexpected revelations onthe odd alliances against warwith fascist Germany.Appeasement with Hitler hadbeen the leitmotif of theChamberlain Tory government.Avoidance of war was the aim.Many on the left, including theLabour Party led by Attlee, advo-cated putting britain on a warfooting. Churchill and other lead-ing Tories were also for rearma-ment.

Amidst this darkening politicalclimate of the late 1930s britishfascists were manoeuvring. Theywere the most vocal advocates ofsupport for Germany and Hitler’santi-semitic, anti-big-money capi-tal (read Jewish) rhetoric. Theywere to find strange bedfellows.

oswald Mosley’s british unionof Fascists, later british union iswell known. Lesser known figureslike Admiral sir barry domvile(The Link), Major douglas,Jeffrey Hamm, Arnold Leese,Captain ramsay (The rightClub), Lord Tavistock (britishPeople’s Party) crop up time andagain under various guises pro-moting pro-German, anti-semiticattitudes. An ex Mosley manJohn beckett (whose son, Francishas updated his biography, pub-lished in this same series), alsofeatures prominently amongthese fanatics.

Level of infiltration

Griffiths’ research reveals adisturbing level of infiltration,and at times overlap of views, ofpreviously bone fide pacifists andpro-nazis. As Griffiths argues,there is a perfectly legitimatestrand of pacifism but there wasa blurring of differences. He citesthe case of ben Greene, a cousinof writer Graham, who was aLabour parliamentary candidateuntil defecting in 1938. He joinedthe Peace Pledge union and setup the ‘Peace and ProgressiveInformation service’ within it.Its aim was to combat war propa-ganda and oppose a system ofusury, a code for ‘Jewish MoneyPower’, underlying capitalism.Greene supported the German

MikeDavis onhomegrownfascism

DuncanBowie oncommunismin Dulwich

Advertisement



BOOK REVIEWS

Traitor to the Republic A principled socialistCITIZEN CLEMJohn Bew (Riverrun, £30)

Why another biography ofAttlee? on checking mybookshelves, I discovered

I already had seven: Jenkins(1948), Harris (1982), burridge(1985), brookshire (1995), beckett(1997), Pearce (1997), andThomas-symonds (2010) – nodoubt there are others which havenot reached me. We also haveswift (2001) on Attlee in opposi-tion before 1940, Cowcroft (2011)on Attlee during the war andbrooke (1992) onLabour in thewartime coalitionand several studiesof the 1945-51Labour governments.

The answer mustbe partly nostalgia, awish to revisit a timewhen Labour wasmore successful andactually inGovernment. butAttlee has alwayspresented a chal-lenge for would bebiographers, oftenseen as an enigma, aquiet man whoappeared to be apatriot who believedin the british empire- a ‘conservative’with a small ‘c’, whoactually introduced asocialist programmein government andwhose legacy lastedlonger than any post-war prime Ministerother than perhapsThatcher, whosemain achievementwas to destroy thatlegacy.

Attlee’s own auto-biography As itHappened is so understated as tobe dull. Attlee himself wrote verylittle – a pamphlet and an essayon local government - the first forthe Fabians and the latter for asocialist League book (in his mostradical period) and in retirementa set of short unrevealing lecturesgiven in the us on the transitionfrom empire to Commonwealth.

bew is perhaps a surprisingbiographer of Attlee. A lecturer inwar studies, he has never beforewritten on Labour politics and hismost acclaimed previous work is astudy of Castlereagh, british for-

eign secretary at the beginning ofthe 19th century. His unfamiliari-ty with british socialist historyshows- with a number of errors inthe book’s early chapters, notablyconfusing Morris’ Commonwealwith the Christian social union’sCommonwealth and referring toMargaret bondfield, the tradeunion organiser as an ‘undercoverjournalist’. The fact that the coverblurb states that the book is thebest biography of Attlee written,from the Conservative historianAndrew roberts, also worried mea little.

However bew’s volume isworth reading, despite its lengthat 650 pages if you include notesand bibliography. bew’s mainargument is that Attlee had aclear political objective and prin-ciples throughout his politicalcareer and that his commitmentto the welfare state and nationali-sation of key industries and man-aged decolonisation, can be tracedto his early work at the ToynbeeHall settlement in Whitechapeland his early writing on socialwork. bew presents a fairly famil-iar narrative of the wartime coali-

tion and the post-war govern-ment. His focus is rightly on gov-ernment rather than internalLabour party divisions and is per-haps stronger on internationalissues than on domestic matters.

A novel approach is the exten-sive use of letters which Attleewrote to his brother Tom, a paci-fist with different views toClem’s. The lifetime correspon-dence reveals more about Attlee’sopinions and principles than hisbrief, often curt, political state-ments or the official records.

In my view the book ratherruns out of steam in1951 when Labourlost the general elec-tion and the cover-age of Attlee’s roleas leader of theopposition between1951 and 1955 isvery brief – at only18 pages. Perhapswe should thankbew for his brevityat this point, but Ithink it is a mistakethat this importantperiod and Attlee’srole within it istreated in so dismis-sive a manner, espe-cially as it has notperhaps been fullystudied in previousb i o g r a p h i e s .Thomas symondsshorter biographyonly gives 15 pagesto this period in achapter called‘Managing theParty’, though thishas more substan-tive content, focus-ing on the politicswhile bew focuseson the personal.

despite this criti-cism bew’s book is

worth the slog, even for thosewho thought they knew every-thing they wanted to know aboutAttlee. The main value of thebook is that it shows Attlee to bea thoroughly decent and princi-pled man and a committed social-ist, as well as a highly competentpolitician and Prime Minister, aman without ego and alwaysunderstated. The error of hisrivals was to mistake his qui-etude for timidity. What a con-trast with more recent politicianswe could think of.

anti-democratic acts, it is betterto read barry Coward’s two vol-umes on Cromwell and his ‘pro-tectorate’, return to the classicand lengthy narratives of Firthand Gardiner or the shorter con-tribution of roger Howell.

Cromwell was a traitor to therepublican ‘Good old Cause’ insubstance not just in style, and itis an insult to parliamentarydemocracy that his statue haspride of place outside the Housesof Parliament which he treatedwith such contempt. HadCromwell focused on developing acollective rather than a personalleadership and a leadership basedon a Council of state reporting toan elected parliament, theenglish republic could have hada chance of survival.

is reinforced by his decision toappoint his son richard as hissuccessor and in effect creating anew royal dynasty, though it wasin his power to do so, according tothe 1657 Humble Petition andAdvice voted by parliament, andthe succession was confirmedafter Cromwell’s death by theCouncil of estate, whichCromwell had created to replicatethe royal Privy Council but whichin effect was of limited powerwhile the older Cromwell was stillalive. If you are however moreconcerned with the substance ofhow england, scotland, Walesand Ireland, first ‘united’ underCromwell’s protectorate, and thecolony of Jamaica, were governedby Cromwell, and aboutCromwell’s autocratic govern-ment and anti-parliamentary and

CROMWELLDavid Horspool (Allen Lane, £12.99)

The no doubt intentional con-troversy over this short newbiography is that it is pub-

lished in the Penguin Monarch’sseries. The author is history edi-tor of the Times LiterarySupplement, not at expert on 17thcentury english history. His pre-vious studies include biographiesof king Alfred, entitled WhyAlfred burned the cakes, andRichard III. such a short biogra-phy can have little new contentand the book shows no evidence ofnew primary research. The book’sargument is ‘monarch’ does notnecessarily imply kingship (as itis derived from the Greek for ‘sin-gle ruler’) and that anywayCromwell as Lord Protector hadall the trappings of kingship, wasreferred to as ‘Your Highness’ andin effect operated regal powers.

What is curious about the bookis that as a study of Cromwell as‘monarch’, it devotes only 14pages to Cromwell’s time as LordProtector, only a few pages morethan devoted to his childhood.This last section focuses almostentirely on his ‘kinglike’ style andbehaviour, including a discussionof Cromwell’s rejection of the offerof kingship, but implying that asecond offer would have beenaccepted. There is no considera-tion whatsoever of his politicaldecisions, his actions in govern-ment, his relationship with themilitary and with parliament,with the state Council (with itsrotating monthly presidency) andthe major-generals (unelected andwith military authority), or withhis successive deputies JohnLambert and Charles Fleetwood.

Ireland and scotland get briefmentions in terms of Cromwell’smilitary activity. John Lilburneappears in passing but not theLeveller movement as a whole.There is no discussion of the reli-gious politics of his administra-tion and no serious considerationof the political and constitutionalimplications of his use of thearmy to over-ride parliamentarydecisions, of his twice dismissingof parliament (though noting thatthis was within his monarchicalpowers – after all Cromwell hadattacked his predecessor CharlesI for dismissing parliament whenhe had been a member).

Cromwell’s monarchical status

DuncanBowie onprotectorasmonarch

DuncanBowie onourgreatestPM



BOOK REVIEWS

Violence and InterventionWe are not responsibleSTATE OF REBELLION Louisa Lombard (ZED, £11.99)

The author is an anthropolo-gist, she writes from herown academic perspective.

This does not make for an easyintroduction to the country but itdoes enable her to make somevery pertinent comments aboutpost-colonial states, about thenature of rebellions and aboutinternational intervention. TheFrench created a boundary with-in which they could exploit thepeople to pay for the running ofoubangui-Chari, a colony theynever asked to be part of. Thespirit of rebellion began duringthese times as the people wereforced to cultivate cotton.

Independence in 1960 providedthe trappings of a state. but what

is a state? In the case of the CArit is a vast area sparsely populat-ed with a number of ethnicgroups. Yet the people, most ofwhom were converted toChristianity, came to like theidea of a state and at least in theearlier years of independencethose with some ambition couldgain status and personal dignitythrough government salaries,university studies or being able totravel. They knew the CAr wasat the bottom of every un statis-tic but they believed the countrywas potentially rich and it had itsunifying language, sango.

In reality the country hasalways been run from outside –first by France, now joined by unagencies and nGos (creaming offthe local talent by paying bettersalaries) – and by neighboring

states, especially Chad.rebellions, usually not very vio-lent, were regular and often com-plicated by the involvement ofChadians and sudanese, but asthe state grew weaker and jobsfewer, the reasons to rebelincreased. In 2013 things becameviolent and gained a religiousdimension. even with morepeacemakers it is not clear thesituation has been resolved. Thenew president may lack theauthority and resources to domore than hold the ring.

The book provides insight intothe general problem of ex-colonial‘failed’ states and the workings ofinternational organisations thatspend a lot of money and oftenfail, but it’s not a light holidayread.

plines with some well researchedempirical evidence to demon-strate the myths surrounding notonly individual responsibility, butjustice, political democracy andthe market.

There’s a discussion of how:opinions are manipulated, con-sent manufactured through cor-porate propaganda, the role of themedia (‘the press writes the firstdraft of history’), myths aboutdemocracy, the American dreamand social darwinism and muchmore. Put together this looks likean overwhelmingly deterministview of society.

but the book is about how tocreate freedom. on what basis isthere ‘hope’? Martinez covers his-torical and current examples ofdisobedience, heroic activism andsocial progress. What’s necessaryis to fully understand the limitsof our freedom so that we are bet-ter placed to transcend them, hesays. It’s the dreamers who makechange. ‘rules mark out what we

CREATING FREEDOMRaoal Martinez (Penguin, £20 h/b)

At the heart of CreatingFreedom is a direct chal-lenge to the idea that indi-

viduals are responsible for theirown behaviour. Martinez goesbeyond telling us that we do notcontrol our upbringing nor theway our brain works (undeniablytrue) to the statement that ‘Luckhas been the decisive force in thelife of every person that has everlived’ He starts with examples ofcriminal behaviour. no psy-chopath chooses to be a psy-chopath and then “ultimately allthat separates the criminal fromthe non-criminal is luck….oursystem of punishment is themeans of reinforcing social injus-tice rather than preventing it.”

How, then are we denied choiceand are dispossessed of any free-dom? Martinez uses insights fromphilosophers, psychologists, histo-rians, scientists and other disci-

UNDERSTANDING ZIMBABWE Sara Rich Dorman (Hurst, £17.99)

At Zimbabwe’s independenceelection in 1980 robertMugabe’s ZAnu won a con-

vincing victory over the othermain nationalist movement,ZAPu, led by Joshua nkomo andthe uAnC of bishop AbelMuzorewa which has briefly beenpopular just before independence.This book is a very detailed aca-demic account of how ZAnu,which became ZAnu(PF) afterthe unity Accord with ZAPu in1987, has held on to power by fairmeans or foul ever since. This isnot a book that will give you anyflavour of the personalities ormotivations of the key players –robert Mugabe and his ministersor his opponents, MorganTsvangirai, Arthur Mutambaraand Margaret dongo. It does,however, trace the history of thenationalist liberation movementunder useful headings.

“The Politics of Liberation1965-1980” examines the growthof the two main movements andtheir part in the war of liberation(which ended not in victory but inthe rather unsatisfactory negoti-ated settlement at LancasterHouse.)

“The Politics of Inclusion 1980-87” was the golden age of the newZimbabwe when the economy wasgood and national development

politics of ‘Winner Takes All’”(2000-2008) where the Movementfor democratic Change won theparliamentary election but wasterrorised into forgoing the presi-dency. The Global PoliticalAgreement, a coalition ofZAnu(PF) and the two factions ofthe MdC, was agreed. ZAnu(PF)kept the key ministries, apartfrom Finance where Tendai bitimoved to solve the inflation prob-lem by bringing in the us dollaras the main currency. Mugabe’smen consistently outmanoeuvredthe MdC with the result thattoday they are firmly back in con-trol and the main debate is aboutwho will succeed the aged presi-dent.

In her final chapter dormansums up the story neatly. “Theargument of this book has been isthat the basis of the regime’spower over society is not simplycoercion, but a tightly weldedtogether fusion of ideology, coer-cion, material interests and statecontrol attempting to incorporatesociety within the regime’s hege-monic framework. but it alsoremains a nationalist project atheart”. In spite of many bad deci-sions and wrong choices the partynever lost its determination neverto let go. sara rich dorman haswritten an interesting politicalcase study.

was the watchword. The goldenbit did not, however, includeMatabeleland where the govern-ment fought a savage war ofrepression. ZAPu was broughtback into the government in 1987and the next ten years (1987-97)are dubbed “The Politics ofdurability”, a time when theeconomy was declining and whenthe ruling elite were seen to beenriching themselves but localcivil society was becoming influ-ential. Things heated up badlyfrom 1998 to 2000 (“The Politicsof Polarization”). A debate openedup about the constitution aboutwhich the government lost a ref-erendum; the economy was in freefall causing protests in the cities,the trade union movement turnedagainst the government andintervention in the Congo washugely unpopular. ZAnu(PF)’srhetoric was now back to libera-tion and anyone who was not ontheir side was a “sell-out”.

2000 to 2008 dorman labels“The Politics of exclusion”, a peri-od when the government was notpopular, yet it survived by devel-oping diamond exports, buildingrelations with China and by theconflict over land which saw theso-called war veterans take overwhite farms and the governmentjoining in. This was the time ofhyper-inflation. (I was the proudpossessor of a 100 trillion Zimdollar bill!) Finally came “The

BobLittlewoodon findingsolidarity

can do; values tell us what weshould do’ and the key to changeis to develop and encourage empa-thy.

none of us is ultimately respon-sible for who we are or what wedo, Martinez says. understandingthis “creates the possibility for adeep solidarity between humanbeings, one built on the under-standing that, had I truly been inyour situation, I would have doneas you did.….all systems ofoppression and exploitationdepend on the denial of thisequality”

This is a challenging book forthose who think themselves pro-gressives but who are focussed onpiecemeal change through theusual methods. It’s written by anartist and film maker, not an aca-demic. We need writers who imag-ine a better future and challengeour assumptions about how tochange the world.

NigelWatt onthe CentralAfricanRepublic

Rogues, swindlers and frauds BrianO’Learyon the riseof modernfinance

FORGING CAPITALISMIan Kraus (Yale University Press,£14.99)

Contemporary City financialfraudsters are the latest ina long line of rogues stretch-

ing back centuries. They swam ina sea of expanding credit support-ing endless empire building wars,booming british internationaltrade and to a much lesser extentindustrialisation.

This is a narrowly focused bookabout the trials and tribulationsof the pre-1914 british rentierclass. As the needs of the empireincreased finance’s functional roleneeded to evolve, both geographi-cally and in the varieties of creditinstruments on offer.Gentlemanly traditional exclusivesocial networks of trust no longersufficed to meet this demand.However, widening the personnelbeyond the privileged merchantand aristocratic classes to includemore diverse social groups, partic-ularly over long distances,inevitably increased the risk ofdeceit and theft. equally thesheer complexity along with themushrooming quantity of credit,not only opened new opportunitiesfor profit but also increased

opportunities for subordinates aswell as rivals to muscle in on theaction. Copious details of thesedastardly acts fill most of thebook.

Consequently, in a dog eat dogworld, there was an on-goingarms race between the allegedgoodies and the baddies. As trustcould not just be confirmed bybirth, education and religion, newmeans had to be found to ascer-tain reputation and maintaintrust and thereby confidence.social class as a marker was notabandoned but seriously bolsteredby checks and inspections of own-ership title, personnel and perfor-mance as management began tobe more systematised. In turnthis led to the ‘era of verification’,overseen by experts and the stateapplying the latest technology e.g.the telegraph and fingerprinting

klaus reminds us, the need forall this was not supposed to hap-pen. earlier thinkers, like Adamsmith and david Hume, hadassumed that private propertyand commerce would lead to bothwealth and moral improvement.In this model of the prudent andindustrious man, self-interesteddesires for riches was welded toreputation, thereby leading to a

virtuous circle of material andmoral plenty.

Mandeville, in his ‘Fable of thebees’, disagreed with this utopianvision. For him vice and com-merce were intricately linked.england’s wealth was not theresult of frugality or responsibili-ty or liberty but borne of envy andgreed. Theft was everywhere,although its legality or illegalitydepended upon who made therules.

Given that klaus favourablyquotes Hayek, he obviously can-not entertain the thought thatcapitalism is itself based onexploitation and therefore theft,whilst its reproduction dependsupon fraudulent lying to theunsuspecting. With his over-whelming sympathies for theproblems of the rentier class, hehas no useful historical insight forunderstanding or addressing ourcurrent financial traumas. Hisaccount is blind to rule britanniaspawning gross inequality, con-centrations of capital, footloosefinance, crony capitalism, demo-cratic vacuums and imperialexpansionism that once againhaunt us, but on a magnifiedscale.

From Liberation to Authoritarianism NigelWatt onMugabe’sRule


several years ago, mypredecessor as shadowsecretary of state forWomen and equalities,Yvette Cooper, began to

commission a piece of researchevery budget day.

The research, undertaken bythe impartial House of CommonsLibrary, shows what the Toriesare afraid of us knowing: just howmuch their economic policies neg-atively affect women.

over the past seven years thatLabour have served in opposition,the percentage of how govern-ment cuts will negatively affectwomen has increased dramatical-ly. In 2010, the figure was 70 percent. on the day of the Autumnstatement last year, I wasshocked; the research Icommissioned showed thatfigure now stands at 86per cent.

spurred on by the fig-ure, I led a debate in theHouse of Commons follow-ing the Autumnstatement. In that debate,I questioned why this gov-ernment, who have sooften talked the talk ontheir commitment to pro-tecting women, are stillfailing them in one of theareas it most matters.This debate, and strongcriticism from my fellowLabour MPs fell on deafears.

Following PhilipHammond’s springbudget last month, it wasrevealed that the figure has notchanged: a staggering 86 per centof net gains to the treasurythrough tax and benefit cuts stillcome from women.

Put simply, time and timeagain, women bear the brunt of

the Tories’ economic agenda. Through the shamefulgender pay gap (which

currently stands at18.1 per cent) to

maternity discrim-ination, which

sees 54,000mothers a

y e a rforced

o u t

Subscribe to CHARTIST at

www.chartist.org.uk

WESTMINSTER VIEW

Austerity hits women hardest

C

Sarah ChampionMP is Labourshadow ministerfor Women andEqualities

hit with cuts constantly.If we are to create a budget

that works for women and thosewith protected characteristics,these factors must be properlytaken into account during the for-mative stages of policy makingand budget setting. It needs to bedone in a way that ensures thatwomen are not disproportionatelypenalised, and that gender eco-nomic equality is advanced.

recent ons data has uncov-ered that 29 per cent of youngblack men in London aged 16-24are unemployed, higher than thesame age group in white men.And a recent joint study by theWomen’s budget Group and therunnymede Trust has shown that

in every income group,bMe women will lose thegreatest proportion oftheir individual income –and low income black andAsian women will losearound twice as muchmoney as low incomewhite men as a result oftax and benefit changes.Muslim women are threetimes more likely to beunemployed than womengenerally, and twice aslikely to economicallyinactive – something thegovernment simply isn’tdoing enough to combat.

The Conservative gov-ernment have failed con-sistently to audit theirown policies, despite beingregularly called upon to dojust that by the Women

and equalities select Committee.Their refusal to send a represen-tative before the committee toexplain why their economic poli-cies are not equality audited isabsolutely indicative of their flip-pant attitude towards damagingthe financial prospects of some ofthe more vulnerable members ofour society.

If we’re to have an economythat benefits all and not just theprivileged few, it is once again upto Labour to ensure that we con-sult, discuss and analyse exactlyhow this could be achieved– andthe positive effects it would haveon so many people. An economythat works for everyone is not justmorally right, it is financiallyright for the growth of the uk.

of work, and cuts to universalcredit which shockingly seeswomen having to fill out an eightpage form documenting thatthey’ve been raped in order toclaim for a third child – time andagain women are being systemati-cally failed.

That’s why in March, Labourannounced a 12-month consulta-tion into a potential economicequality bill. This will look atthe ways governments audit theirpolicies, not only to the benefit ofwomen but to those with protect-ed characteristics.

It will no longer be possible forgovernments to talk the talk onequality while implementing eco-nomic policies that make life

harder for women and allegedlyprotected groups.

It’s about ensuring that weeliminate intrinsic, structuralbarriers that prevent peoplereaching their full economicpotential.

The perceived assumption isoften that budgets are neutral,that they benefit and impact oneveryone equally, regardless ofgender, ethnic background or dis-ability; this simply is not true.

Women are particularly vulner-able to being hit harder by thisGovernment policie, for a numberof reasons, including their greateruse of public care services andtheir greater share of social secu-rity payments as a portion ofincome. They also work more inthe public sector than men, so are

SarahChampionon why theGeneralElection isa chance toend harshTorypoliciespenalisingwomen andfamilies


for democratic socialism

Documents