EuroMaidan

Euromaidan’s popularity has nothing to do with Ukrainians finding the question of free trade with the European Union so significant that it emboldened them to survive sleepless nights on the square. The country’s socioeconomic problems, which are much more acute than those of its neighbors to the East and West, gave the protest its meaning. The average salary in Ukraine is 2 to 2.5 times lower than in Russia and Belarus, and much lower than in the EU. The worldwide economic crisis affected the Ukrainian economy much more drastically than almost any other economy in Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals. Economic growth after the crisis nearly froze, and industry will most likely continue to decline in 2013. Furthermore, Ukraine’s economic system more or less exempts oligarchs from paying taxes. One can completely legally export tens of billions of dollars worth of minerals, metals, ammonia, wheat, and sunflowers, and report no profit. All earnings are stashed in offshore jurisdictions, where almost all of Ukraine’s functioning enterprises are formally located. Any profits earned by an enterprise inside the country can be legally and effortlessly transported to offshore locations by reframing them as a fictitious loan, for example.

Is it any surprise that the Ukrainian government systematically has trouble replenishing the budget? At the end of last year, Ukraine was in a pre-default stage. Withholding wages owed to state employees became common practice, and the budget practically stopped allotting funds to social programs. The situation was exacerbated by a trade war with Russia, when Gazprom forced Ukrainian gas prices to record heights in Eastern Europe. Oligarchs drove the country into a corner; even after endless discussion, they could not formulate a coherent development strategy, avoiding any investment in the state while systematically draining it. Any development strategy must include a curbing of their appetites – it must at least partially ban offshore schemes and enforce minimum tax payments. But that’s exactly what oligarchs cannot accept, even though they understand that if they don’t change the rules of the game, they will drive the state into socioeconomic catastrophe, chopping off the branch where they themselves sit.

The right-wing opposition, when speaking about economic problems, focuses almost exclusively on the themes of corruption and ineffective rule. And if the conversation does turn to oligarchs looting the state, then it limits itself to the businessmen who are close to the Party of Regions, and most often does not delve further than the business that belongs to Yanukovich’s sons. From the right wing’s point of view, the other oligarchs are not a problem, because they have national consciousness. By this logic, when Ukraine is plundered by a “щирый” (Ukr. for “authentic”– editor’s note) Ukrainian, it is still beneficial to the national cause.

A paradoxical situation is unfolding. All conscientious economists (even quite neoliberal ones like, for example, Viktor Pinzenik) agree that the tax and regulatory systems of the country were built to completely exempt oligarchs from paying taxes. Everyone can see that this system won’t last much longer, but none of the politicians in the Parliament have dared to offer the obvious and realistic systemic alternative. Almost nobody dares to publicly admit that the most pressing issue facing Ukraine is not the EU or the trade union, but simply that oligarchs should start paying their taxes. The apparatus of the state is perfectly capable of forcing them to do so since the oligarchs’ functioning assets are all located in Ukraine. However, as Andrei Hunko recently pointed out, the oligarchization of Ukrainian politics has reached such proportions that not a single one of the existing parliamentary parties can even mention this matter.

Sadly enough, only radical leftists voice these minimal and obvious demands. I emphasize that these demands must be seen not as the agenda of the Left Opposition, but as first steps toward the formation of policies that could gather together all anti-oligarchic forces, who don’t consider an ultra-right fascist dictatorship to be any kind of solution – the kind of dictatorship the All-Ukrainian Union “Svoboda” so insistently pushes us towards, while the official opposition leaders sit by and watch.

The glaring absence of any coherent plan of action to help Ukraine out of its crisis has become so pressing that even quite liberal, almost right-liberal publications have started discussing our “Ten Points” – such as, for example, Lvov’s zaxid.net.
Zahar Popovich, “Left Opposition”

 

Plan for Social Change, in ten points.

Foreword, by the Left Opposition.

We submit to your attention a document titled “Plan for Social Change”, which outlines ways to increase the well-being of the citizens and ensure social progress. It was created partly because most socio-economic demands at the Euromaidan demonstrations have been ignored. Our hope is that this document might serve as a platform to unify a wide range of social, leftist, and trade-union initiatives. This document was written by activists belonging to the Left Opposition, a socialist organization that aims to unify all those who belong to the community provisionally called #leftmaidan.

It goes without saying that political parties transform the protest movement and direct it toward electoral politics; they try to find new voices, instead of making significant changes to the system. We do not support the ideas of liberal structures, which propagandize free market economics, nor do we support radical nationalists who push discriminatory policies.

Our hope is that the protest movement, spurred to action by social injustice, might ultimately eradicate the root causes of this injustice. We believe that the cause of most social problems is the oligarchy that formed as a result of unbridled capitalism and corruption. It is important to limit the egotistic interests of our oligarchs, instead of relying on the help of Russia or the IMF, with the consequent national dependence. We believe that it is harmful to add our voices to the demands for Euro-integration; instead, we need to clearly delineate the changes necessary to support the interests of ordinary citizens, especially hired laborers. On several occasions, we cite the progressive experiences of a few European states that have taken similar measures.

The goals we’ve created are relatively moderate, so that they might appeal to the widest possible range of organizations. We won’t conceal the fact that, for us, this plan is less a reaction to current events than a step toward the formulation of a contemporary leftist political force – a force that is capable of influencing those in power and offering an alternative to the existing social order. The Left Opposition considers the proposed plan to be the minimum for building socialism on the principles of self-government: the socialization of industry, the allocation of profit for social needs, and the appointment for citizens to government functions.

We welcome you to subscribe to our Facebook and VKontakte pages to voice your opinions there, or to email us at gaslo.info@gmail.com.
Replacing one set of politicians and oligarchs with another without overall systemic changes will not improve our lives. Instead, our group of social and union activists is proposing ten basic conditions for overcoming the economic crisis and ensuring Ukraine’s future growth.

The Left Opposition Collective

1. GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE, NOT BY THE OLIGARCHS      
   There must be a transition from a presidential to a parliamentary republic, in which presidential power is limited to representative functions on the international stage. Authority should be transferred from state administrators to elected regional committees (soviets). Authorities should have the right to fire delegates who have not met expectations; judges and police chiefs should be elected, not appointed.
2. NATIONALIZATION OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES
   Metallurgy, mining, and chemical industries, along with infrastructural enterprises (energy, transport, and communications) should contribute to social welfare.
3. WORKERS SHOULD CONTROL ALL FORMS OF OWNERSHIP
   Following successful European examples, we should construct a wide network of independent workers’ unions, which will control management and guarantee workers’ rights. Workers should have the right to strike (refuse to work when payment is not received). Workers should also have the right to take out loans at the employer’s expense if wages are delayed (following Portugal’s example).  Production, accounting, and management data of all enterprises that employ more than 50 people, or have a capital turnover of over $1 million, should be published online.
4. INTRODUCTION OF A LUXURY TAX
   We should instate a 50% tax on luxury items – yachts, elite automobiles, and other items that cost more than 1 million gryvna. A progressive personal income tax should also be introduced. Individuals with an annual income of more than 1 million gryvna should be taxed up to 50%, following Denmark’s example (in such a system, Renat Ahmetov alone would have paid 1.2 billion gryvna to the federal budget, as compared to the 400 million he actually paid in 2013 on a 17% tax).
5. PROHIBITION OF OFFSHORE CAPITAL TRANSFERS
   The bylaws that exempt Ukrainian enterprises from taxation in a number of offshore countries should be revoked, in order to prevent the transfer of capital offshore. The assets of offshore companies in Ukraine should be frozen, and a temporary administration should be appointed until the legality of the investments can be proven.
6. SEPARATION OF BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT   
   Citizens with incomes that exceed 1 million grivni should be banned from government positions and seats in local government. Nationwide reelections should be held in compliance with this rule.
7. REDUCTION OF SPENDING ON THE BUREAUCRATIC APPARATUS
   Government spending should be controlled and transparent. Administrative reforms should take place, resulting in a reduction in the number of managerial employees. Today, whole departments could be replaced by computer programs. But instead, in the last eight years the number of bureaucrats in the government has grown by almost 10%, comprising more than 372,000 people (in Ukraine, there are 8 bureaucrats for every 1000 people – in France, there are only 5 per 1000!).
8. DISSOLUTION OF BERKUT AND OTHER SPECIAL FORCES
   Beginning in 2014, there should be subsequent reductions in spending on the sercurity apparatus of the state: the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Security Service, the Office of the Prosecutor General, and special police forces. It is unacceptable that the Ministry of Internal Affairs was allocated more than 16.9 million grivni in 2013 – 6.9 million more than all public health expenditures!
9. ACCESS TO FREE EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE
   Funds for this initiative should come from the nationalization of industries and reduced spending on the security and bureaucratic apparati. To eliminate corruption in education and medicine, we must raise doctors’ and teachers’ salaries and restore the prestige of those fields.
10. WITHDRAWAL FROM OPPRESIVE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONSWe support the termination of further cooperation with the International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions. We should follow the example of Iceland, which refused to pay debts accrued by bankers and bureaucrats (under government warranty) for the purposes of personal enrichment and “social handouts”, rather than for the development of industry.

Published in Russian on the Open Left platform: http://openleft.ru/?p=1157

Translated from the Russian by: Jordan Maze and Helen Tsykynovska

 https://ukrainesolidaritycampaign.org

Now is the time for socialists to stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people

15FEB 2022


Mick Antoniw

For those socialists who oppose imperialism and believe in the right of nations to self-determination, international law and democracy, now is the time to stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people. The situation in Ukraine for most comrades is admittedly confusing and Vladimir Putin’s propaganda strategy has been hard at work for over eight years, in Ukraine and throughout Europe. But there are certain facts which cannot be credibly ignored.

The current tensions are a threat to European peace and economic stability. They are also a direct result of eight years of hybrid warfare on the border of Ukraine, sponsored and co-ordinated by the Russian government, and accelerated by the build-up of an invasion force of around 130,000 soldiers and an array of military equipment and weaponry the like of which has not been seen in Europe since the Second World War. Putin has added to this with his increasing military engagement to the North of Ukraine in Belarus, the additional build up of forces and the Russian Black sea fleet in occupied Crimea and some 8,000 troops in Transdnistra to the West of Ukraine.

Ukraine is de facto surrounded by a Russian invasion force. Every month that has gone by since 2014, Russia has been controlling, financing and arming mercenary and surrogate separatist groups it has created and controls in parts of Eastern Ukraine in Luhansk and Donetsk, which has led to over 14,000 deaths and nearly two million displaced persons.

The risk of war with Ukraine will only be realised if Russia invades Ukraine. It is clear that Ukraine has no intention or even capacity to invade or in any way threaten Russia. Nobody should be under any illusion that this conflict is a direct result of Putin’s commitment to recreating a greater Russian empire. He sees Ukraine and Belarus as one people, one volk, with Russia. He has made it clear that he does not recognise Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

Prior to the 2014 invasion, the overwhelming population of Ukraine did not see any need or desire to join NATO. The invasion and Putin’s actions and rhetoric have changed all that, probably irreversibly. Ukraine now looks for allies who will help it resist Russian aggression and asserts its right to defend its sovereignty.

It is ironic that Putin now seeks legally binding defence guarantees from the West, yet it is the very same Putin who, alongside the United States, Britain and France, signed a legally binding guarantee of Ukrainian sovereignty in return for unilaterally giving up its nuclear weapons. It is a tragedy that, at a stroke, Putin has, by his actions, guaranteed that there will never be any further unilateral nuclear disarmament in any part of the world. Why would any country now ever give up its nuclear weaponry in return for such a worthless guarantee?

For socialists, there are, of course, many valid issues and concerns about NATO and its role in Europe – but these have little to do with the current conflict. Putin is intent on the assimilation of Ukraine and Belarus in any event, and his speeches and writings make that clear. Blaming NATO and his absurd claim of protecting Russian speakers are merely camouflage for these ambitions.

Even if NATO succumbed to all of Putin’s demands, it would not change his geopolitical strategy of creating a greater Russia under the direction of Moscow. The invasion of Eastern Ukraine and the illegal occupation of Crimea had nothing to do with NATO. The current aggression is a continuation of a strategy he could not complete in 2014 when the Ukrainian army and volunteers turned back the tide of invasion by Russian and hybrid forces.

Were NATO to agree, it would in all likelihood only make this process, in time, inevitable, and without military support and weaponry Ukraine would have no substantial ability to resist other than in the form of long-term and bloody partisan resistance.

There are those on the left who are so fixated with NATO and American imperialism that they have become blinded and indeed apologists for a ruthless Russian expansionism, for Russian imperialism based on a greater Russian nationalist ideology.

The belief amongst some sections of the left that what is happening is a result of NATO expansionism does not stand up to scrutiny. It is at best misguided and at worst delusional. It puts the Ukrainian people into the category of mere geopolitical pawns and lends succour to the authoritarian and fascistic politics that now dominate Russia. It denies the Ukrainian people the fundamental right to determine their own future.

To add to the mythology is the assertion that this is somehow about protecting Russian speaking people. Most of those resisting Russian-backed aggression on a daily basis, on the front line of the occupied territories, are Russian-speaking.

There is no doubt that Russian propaganda has been increasingly effective in promoting these ideas across the world, but the scale of interference and manipulation across Eastern and Central Europe is significant as it is in the US and in Europe. Russian money has increasingly been manipulating political systems across Europe, including the Conservative Party, which may explain their reluctance to act on the Russia report commissioned by the Tory government following the Skripal murders by Russian agents, and their total failure to tackle oligarchic money laundering and corruption in London, which has become the money laundering capital for the world’s oligarchs.

Ukrainians have never expected NATO to fight their battles for them. They do, however, expect those countries to at least give it the weaponry ability to deter aggression and, if invasion occurs, to defend itself.

There is a route to peace. It is by Russia fulfilling its obligations under the Budapest agreement, ending the supply of weaponry to its hybrid forces in the East, withdrawing its invasion forces and entering into multilateral discussions to reduce militarisation throughout Central and Eastern Europe and Russia.

The fear amongst Ukrainians is that the US and European will try force some sort of Minsk 3 deal upon Ukraine, which will only strengthen Russia’s foothold in Eastern Ukraine and the Black Sea, delaying but not ending the risk of invasion.

Mick Antoniw MS is a second generation Ukrainian, a former member of the EU committee of the regions taskforce on Ukraine, and is regularly engaged with Ukrainian civic organisations and trade unions. He is a member of Ukraine Solidarity.

 https://ukrainesolidaritycampaign.org

NO to war – Russia’s hands off Ukraine!

February 8, 2022

An international statement of solidarity launched by the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign. The International Marxist-Humanist Organization has signed and supports this statement. — Editors

We, socialists, trade unionists, scholars, activists for human rights, social justice and peace, stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine against Russian imperialism.

The international left and labour movement must vigorously oppose Russia’s threats against Ukraine.

We say neither Washington nor Moscow. We oppose the policy and manoeuvrings of the big Western powers and NATO.

But currently it is Russia that is threatening the Ukrainian people’s right to self-determination and challenging their legitimacy as an independent nation.

It is Russia that has massed troops on Ukraine’s borders; Russia that has annexed Crimea and persecuted the Crimean Tatars; and Russia that has organised an eight-year war in eastern Ukraine leading to 14,000 deaths, 30,000 wounded and 1.9 million displaced people on the Ukrainian side alone.

Subjugated by Russian Tsarist and Stalinist rulers, for centuries Ukraine was the object of exploitation and national oppression, its culture and language subject to discrimination. Millions perished at the hands of the Kremlin.

We call for peace through self-determination of the Ukrainian people. That does not mean support for the current government of Ukraine or the capitalist oligarchs it serves.

Despite its rhetoric, self-evidently the Russian government is interested in neither democracy nor opposing fascism. The Russian government actively promotes pro-Russian sections of the far right in occupied eastern Ukraine and other parts of Europe; and its anti-Ukrainian policy strengthens the hand of far-right Ukrainian nationalists too.

We hail the brave internationalists in Russia protesting against Putin’s war politics. We demand the release of Russian political prisoners.

We stand in solidarity with socialists, trade unionists and activists for democratic and human rights who, who can bring real progress – in Ukraine and in Russia..

We demand the withdrawal of Russia’s troops from the Ukrainian borders and occupied territories, and an end to Russian interference in Ukraine.

—
This statement was launched by the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign (UK) https://ukrainesolidaritycampaign.org.

Economists Warn Against the Fed Raising Rates at Worst Possible Time

"A large across-the-board increase in interest rates is a cure worse than the disease," says economist Joseph Stiglitz. "That might dampen inflation if it is taken far enough, but it will also ruin people's lives."


People shop in the egg and dairy case on March 13, 2020 at Whole Foods Market in Vauxhall, New Jersey. (Photo: Rich Graessle/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)

KENNY STANCIL

COMMON DREAMS

February 7, 2022

As the U.S. Federal Reserve mulls hiking interest rates in the coming weeks in an effort to curb inflation, progressive economists are warning against such a move—arguing that it will hurt workers and fail to address the real source of rising prices: unmitigated corporate power.

"The last thing average working people need is for the Fed to raise interest rates and slow the economy further."

"A large across-the-board increase in interest rates is a cure worse than the disease," Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics and Columbia University professor, wrote Monday in Project Syndicate. "We should not attack a supply-side problem by lowering demand and increasing unemployment. That might dampen inflation if it is taken far enough, but it will also ruin people's lives."

Josh Bivens, director of research at the Economic Policy Institute, echoed Stiglitz's message, writing Monday: "The inflation spike of 2021 has been bad for typical families and is a real policy challenge. But it remains the case that an overreaction to it could end up causing the most damage of all."

Stiglitz and Bivens' essays came three days after Robert Reich, professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, made a similar warning.

According to Reich:

Fed policymakers are poised to raise interest rates at their March meeting and then continue raising them, in order to slow the economy. They fear that a labor shortage is pushing up wages, which in turn are pushing up prices—and that this wage-price spiral could get out of control.

It's a huge mistake. Higher interest rates will harm millions of workers who will be involuntarily drafted into the inflation fight by losing jobs or long-overdue pay raises. There's no "labor shortage" pushing up wages. There's a shortage of good jobs paying adequate wages to support working families. Raising interest rates will worsen this shortage.

Although Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell "has expressed concern about wage hikes pushing up prices," Reich wrote, "there's no 'wage-price spiral.'"

"To the contrary, workers' real wages have dropped because of inflation," he added. "Even though overall wages have climbed, they've failed to keep up with price increases—making most workers worse off in terms of the purchasing power of their dollars."

Reich conceded that "wage-price spirals used to be a problem" but argued that's no longer the case "because the typical worker today has little or no bargaining power."

Declining union membership and corporations' increased mobility—both key pillars in the ruling class' highly effective assault on workers that has been carried out on a bipartisan basis for more than four decades—"have shifted power from labor to capital," wrote Reich. "Increasing the share of the economic pie going to profits and shrinking the share going to wages... ended wage-price spirals."

It is "totally wrong" to contend that inflation is being fueled by rising wages stemming from a so-called "tight" labor market, Reich argued. He continued:

The January jobs report shows that the U.S. economy is still 2.9 million jobs below what it had in February 2020. Given the growth of the U.S. population, it's 4.5 million short of what it would have by now had there been no pandemic.

Consumers are almost tapped out. Not only are real (inflation-adjusted) incomes down, but pandemic assistance has ended. Extra jobless benefits are gone. Child tax credits have expired. Rent moratoriums are over. Small wonder consumer spending fell 0.6% in December, the first decrease since last February.

"Given all this, the last thing average working people need is for the Fed to raise interest rates and slow the economy further," Reich added. "The problem most people face isn't inflation. It's a lack of good jobs."

When it comes to what is causing inflation, Reich blamed "continuing worldwide bottlenecks in the supply of goods, and the ease with which big corporations (with record profits) are passing these costs to customers in higher prices."

Corporate greed has played a large role in why people are paying higher prices for food and gas, as Common Dreams has reported and a majority of the public appears to understand, based on recent polling. Amid a public health crisis that has claimed the lives of more than 900,000 people in the U.S. and 5.7 million people globally, price-gouging corporations are enjoying mega-profits not seen since 1950.

Related Content

Data Highlights 'Egregious' Pandemic Profiteering by US Food and Oil Giants
Jake Johnson

While pandemic profiteering is evident, the question remains as to what made global supply chains so fragile to disruption in the first place—leading to prolonged shortages of key inputs and increased shipping costs that have been accompanied by price hikes.

According to Rakken Mabud, chief economist and managing director of policy and research at the Groundwork Collaborative, the answer lies in offshoring, financialization, deregulation, just-in-time logistics, and other profit-maximizing policies associated with neoliberalization and globalization.

Mabud made that case last week when testifying at a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing. She and David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, expanded on that argument in a recent essay introducing a new series on the supply chain crisis.

As a number of economists have warned recently, policymakers on the verge of making life-altering decisions with respect to interest rates may be doing so based on faulty data or misconceptions.

"Among the biggest job gains in January were workers who are normally temporary and paid low wages (leisure and hospitality, retail, transport and warehousing)," Reich cautioned. "This January employers cut fewer of these low-wage temp workers than in most years, because of rising customer demand and the difficulties of hiring during Omicron. Due to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' 'seasonal adjustment,' cutting fewer workers than usual for this time of year appears as 'adding lots of jobs.'"

Stiglitz, meanwhile, noted that "the inflation rate has been volatile. Last month, the media made a big deal out of the 7% annual inflation rate in the United States, while failing to note that the December rate was little more than half that of the October rate."

"Moreover, given that a large proportion of today's inflation stems from global issues—like chip shortages and the behavior of oil cartels—it is a gross exaggeration to blame inflation on excessive fiscal support in the U.S.," Stiglitz continued.

While "the U.S. has slightly higher inflation than Europe," he added, "it also has enjoyed stronger growth. U.S. policies prevented a massive increase in poverty that might have occurred otherwise. Recognizing that the cost of doing too little would be huge, U.S. policymakers did the right thing."

Stiglitz wrote that his "biggest concern is that central banks will overreact, raising interest rates excessively and hampering the nascent recovery. As always, those at the bottom of the income scale would suffer the most in this scenario."

"What we need instead," he argued, "are targeted structural and fiscal policies aimed at unblocking supply bottlenecks and helping people confront today's realities."

For instance, wrote Stiglitz, "food stamps for the needy should be indexed to the price of food, and energy (fuel) subsidies to the price of energy."

"Beyond that, a one-time 'inflation adjustment' tax cut for lower- and middle-income households would help them through the post-pandemic transition," he added. "It could be financed by taxing the monopoly rents of the oil, technology, pharmaceutical, and other corporate giants that made a killing from the crisis."

'Obscene': BP Profits Hit 8-Year High Amid Climate Emergency

"Oil company bosses are being allowed to make obscene profits from climate breakdown and the gas price crisis on the back of widespread devastation for people around the world," said one campaigner.


Climate activists with Stop the Money Pipeline held a rally in midtown Manhattan on March 3, 2021, protesting companies that have profiting off the climate crisis.

 (Photo: Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)

JULIA CONLEY

February 8, 2022

Fueled by rising oil and gas prices that have left millions struggling to afford energy bills, British fossil fuel giant BP reported its highest yearly profits in nearly a decade on Tuesday while rejecting calls for a tax on its financial windfall.

The company raked in $12.8 billion in profits in 2021—more than its annual income for the past eight years. The announcement comes a week after BP's rival Shell reported $19.3 billion in profits last year.

"BP and Shell are raking in billions from the gas price crisis while enjoying one of the most favorable tax regimes in the world for offshore drillers."

BP CEO Bernard Looney said Tuesday the company is "delivering distributions to shareholders with $4.15 billion of buybacks announced," and the company intends to deliver $1.5 billion more in share buybacks.

"We see these wealthy firms extracting billions in profit from one of our most basic needs," said Ryan Morrison, a just transition campaigner for Friends of the Earth Scotland. "BP and other fossil fuel bosses are getting even richer as the price of energy pushes millions more homes into fuel poverty and forces people to choose between heating and eating."

Oil and gas prices have skyrocketed in recent months due to higher demand following economic shutdowns during the coronavirus pandemic, with the crisis in Ukraine being blamed for pushing them even higher.

In the U.K., an estimated 22 million households are expected to see their energy costs rise after the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (OFGEM) announced last week a 54% increase to its price cap from 2021.

Household energy bills in the U.K. could rise by nearly $1,000 per year, according to CNBC.

BP's announcement intensified calls for a windfall tax for large fossil fuel companies in the U.K., which, Greenpeace head of climate Kate Blogojevich noted, are "pushing our world closer to catastrophic climate change" while collecting record profits.

"These profits are a slap in the face to the millions of people dreading their next energy bill," Blagojevich said. "BP and Shell are raking in billions from the gas price crisis while enjoying one of the most favorable tax regimes in the world for offshore drillers."

Caroline Lucas, a member of British Parliament representing the Green Party, called BP's profits "obscene" in light of the energy and cost-of-living crisis in Britain.

Despite reports that more than one million additional U.K. households could struggle to afford adequate heat due to rising prices, Finance Minister Rishi Sunak last week rejected calls for a windfall tax for oil and gas profits derived from drilling in the North Sea, where BP and Shell have drilled for decades.

Looney also dismissed demands for a windfall tax, which the Labour Party put forward earlier this month, saying it could save most households more than $200 per year on energy costs.

"We need more gas, not less gas, and therefore we need to encourage investment into the North Sea and not discourage it. That's number one," Looney told CNBC Tuesday. "And the second thing is around the transition, we need to accelerate the transition."

Like other Big Oil companies, BP has recently released plans to purportedly reduce emissions and shift toward renewable energy sources as global experts at the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have warned that companies must stop burning fossil fuels to avoid the worst effects of the climate crisis and to limit global heating to 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures.

But as Common Dreams reported last week, climate pledges released by companies including BP, Shell, Chevron, and ExxonMobil are rife with loopholes which "ultimately serve little more than to greenwash the fossil fuel industry's image and deceive customers about the climate risks inherent in continued use of its products," according to the Center for Climate Integrity.

"Oil company bosses are being allowed to make obscene profits from climate breakdown and the gas price crisis on the back of widespread devastation for people around the world," said Morrison Tuesday.

The Stop Cambo campaign, which successfully pressured Shell to cancel plans to develop the Cambo oil field in the North Sea late last year, tweeted that the solution to the energy crisis as well as the climate catastrophe is "cheap, green energy."

"Instead of allowing these companies to continue causing social and environmental devastation for their own pocket, we need to overhaul our energy system to end our dependence on oil and gas," said Morrison.

"It's time to rapidly scale up investment in renewables and energy efficiency while winding down fossil fuel production to create affordable renewable energy for everyone," he added. "A just transition will not be realized while profit-obsessed fossil fuel companies call the shots."

Paid Leave for All: Worker Advocates Demand Expanded Protections

"The call for paid leave has never been clearer or louder from all corners of our country," said a pair of Senate Democrats marking the 29th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act.


A woman works at a distribution station at the 855,000-square-foot Amazon fulfillment center in Staten Island, one of the five boroughs of New York City, on February 5, 2019. (Photo: Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images)

ANDREA GERMANOS

COMMON DREAMS

February 5, 2022

Economic justice advocates and Democratic lawmakers on Saturday issued fresh demands for comprehensive paid leave for the nation's workers, saying such protections would address crucial gaps in labor law that the ongoing pandemic has underscored.

The calls came on the 29th anniversary of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which provides eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of job-protected leave to care for a new child or take care of one's own or family member's illness. But, worker advocates say, the groundbreaking law is sorely insufficient, because the leave is unpaid and FMLA doesn't cover all workers.

"It's been 29 years today since the FMLA was passed—the first federal protection for people to take time off work when they need it most. But about 10.5 million need leave and don't take it," tweeted the National Women's Law Center.

"All workers should not only be covered," the group added, "but be able to afford to take their leave."

The House Education and Labor Committee similarly noted that "millions of workers are not eligible for FMLA. And unpaid leave is not practical for most Americans."

"We must build on the FMLA by expanding access to PAID leave for workers across the country," the panel added.

Such expansion would also help advance racial equity.

According to NARAL Pro-Choice America: "The 44% of Americans not covered by the FMLA include 48% of Latinx workers, 47% of AAPI workers, and 43% of Black workers. Every American should be covered by the FMLA."

In a Friday statement, Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who heads the Senate's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said the lack of guaranteed paid leave is especially problematic in light of the ultra-contagious Omicron variant.

"American parents still can't take paid time to care for a seriously ill child. Patients can't take paid time to recover from surgery or cope with a cancer diagnosis. And workers with a cold, the flu, or even Covid-19, can't take the time to get well and keep their coworkers safe—because they would risk losing a paycheck or even their job," said Murray and Gillibrand.

Related Content

Calls for Paid Leave Grow as Workers Face 'Vicious Cycle': Their Jobs or Covid Safety
Brett Wilkins

In addition to harming families and the economy, the pair said the absence of paid leave and sick days is "hurting our ability to fight this pandemic. If we want to stop the spread of Omicron, be ready for whatever this pandemic brings next, and prepare for future public health crises—then we need paid leave."

Pointing to recent polling showing overwhelming public support for such protections, the lawmakers added that "the call for paid leave has never been clearer or louder from all corners of our country" and urged their congressional colleagues to help enact such a measure.

President Joe Biden, for his part, said in a Saturday tweet marking the FMLA anniversary that he is "committed to continuing the fight for national paid family and medical leave."

That vow was welcomed by Center for Economic and Policy Research co-director Eileen Appelbaum, who expressed hope Biden would "push for it when bills to provide it are introduced in the Congress."

"People are desperate for paid leave," she said, calling it "policy that is needed and popular."

Activist Fund Pushes Insurers To Drop Oil And Gas Clients


Editor OilPrice.com
Thu, February 17, 2022

Activist investment fund Green Century Capital Management has filed shareholder resolutions aimed at forcing three insurance companies to stop offering coverage to oil and gas companies, MarketWatch reports.

In response, the targets of the arm-twisting attempt—Chubb, Travelers, and The Hartford—filed no-action requests with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Green Century Capital Management resolutions call on the insurers to “adopt and disclose new policies to help ensure that its underwriting practices do not support new fossil fuel supplies, in alignment with the International Energy Agency (IEA)’s net-zero emissions by 2050 scenario.”

The scenario in question was released as a Road Map to Net Zero by the IEA in May 2021. In it, the agency said the world would not need so much oil and gas in the future, so new oil and gas exploration needs to stop immediately. A few months later, however, the IEA was vocal in its calls on OPEC to boost oil production as demand rose faster than expected.

A growing number of companies from various industries are becoming targets for activist investors, insistent that more action needs to be taken to reduce carbon emissions.

“Investors are demanding that insurance companies stop supporting the rampant expansion of fossil fuels that is driving the climate crisis,” said Elana Sulakshana from the Rainforest Action Network as quoted by MarketWatch.

“But instead of taking concrete action to limit fossil fuel insuring and investing, Chubb, Travelers and The Hartford are trying to silence their shareholders and continue business as usual,” she added.

Speaking of fossil fuel financing, a recent study from a group of nongovernmental organizations found that top international banks had provided some $1.5 trillion in direct financing and debt underwriting services to the coal industry between 2019 and 2021. All of the banks involved, including HSBC, Barclays, and Mizuho, had made emission-cutting pledges.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

  

Oligarch's death sends Czech giant west

A year after the death of Czech oligarch Petr Kellner, PPF Group — the conglomerate he left behind — appears to be retreating from his bet on eastern markets.

Well-versed in tales of how Kellner became Czechia's richest man by steering PPF into some of the world's riskiest markets, the country was shocked by the 56-year-old billionaire's demise in a helicopter crash in March 2021. A year on, shorn of the oligarch's vision and political sway, PPF looks to be seeking safer waters.

Founding the company during the much-maligned coupon privatization of the post-communist 1990s, Kellner spent three decades building PPF into a rare beast: a Czech giant. The corporation now sits on around €40 billion ($45 billion) in assets, with Central European banking, telecoms, and media at the base.

However, over the past decade or so, the Home Credit subsidiary was the main driver of profitability via its consumer loans businesses in China and Russia. How PPF in 2010 became the first foreign company to land a lending license in China or survive the cut-throat competition of Russian oligarchs has long been a topic of conjecture.

Most connect the success to Kellner's skillful political maneuvering, for which he was both admired and feared. The billionaire had links with the pro-Russian former President Vaclav Klaus and worked closely with his successor, Milos Zeman, and his inner circle of Russia- and China-linked businessmen, who have spent years trying to push Czech foreign policy closer to eastern interests.

Scandals have been common. In 2014, Zeman introduced Kellner to Chinese President Xi Jinping and was ferried home by the billionaire on a private jet. The oligarch was then suspected of helping to shut down roads and protests when Xi visited Prague two years later.

Many eyed with concern PPF's growing interests in Central Europe's media sector after the company was revealed in 2019 to be running a PR campaign for Beijing.

"Czech foreign policy certainly shifted around the time that PPF got its first break in China," says Vit Havelka at the Association for International Affairs (AMO).

President Zeman (center) welcomed President Xi to Prague back in 2016

Closer to home

The analyst admits there's a dearth of hard evidence that the billionaire's politicking drove PPF's eastern adventures. However, almost a year after his death, PPF appears to be pulling back from some of those risky markets to focus on Europe and the US.

Numerous reports claim that the company is set to sell Home Credit's Russian unit to local corporation Sistema. PPF refused to either refute or confirm the speculation to DW.

However, in late December, CFO Katerina Jiraskova hinted that Home Credit could sell or take on partners in markets with "limited … potential."

That has sparked suspicion that the Chinese arm of Home Credit could also be on the block. Bloomberg also reported that disposals worth close to $2.5 billion could be due in India, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Meanwhile, PPF is still busily chasing acquisitions, as has long been its habit. But its focus is clearly on markets closer to home.

The group is working, for instance, on deals that will see it create the Czech Republic's third-biggest bank, expand its holdings in European telecoms, and extend its recent push into the US real estate market.

"It's fair to say there is a repositioning," said one source at the company.

"PPF has always been and still is opportunistic, but there is now a deeper concentration on established markets," PPF spokesman Leos Rousek told DW. "We're strengthening in Europe and the US in banking, telco, biotech, industry, and real estate."

Just business?

Battered by the pandemic, Home Credit saw operating revenue in China drop to €462 million in the first half of 2021 compared with over €1 billion in the previous year. But it's not only COVID-19 hurting the bottom line. Competition is rising in some of the Asian markets where Home Credit works.

"The banks in these markets see PPF handing out consumer loans and they've decided that they'd could be doing it themselves," said the company source.

These local competitors can have significant advantages. For instance, a local partnership in a market like China, where Beijing last year began restricting access to local financing for foreign banks, might make sense.

It's such changing regulation that can make operating in these markets so risky. And that risk is only growing as geopolitical tensions rise, analysts point out.

"There's been a change in China since PPF entered," said Lukas Kovanda, chief economist at Trinity Bank in Prague. "The growing tensions make it ever riskier to operate in countries with authoritarian regimes that perceive a business as being from an unfriendly nation. This is likely to lead a company like PPF to consider its direction."

Protestors have picketed the presidential office in Prague over its political and business links with Russia and China

Home Credit also faces geopolitically driven difficulties in Russia. The unit's sizable assets in Kazakhstan reportedly deterred Hungary's OTP Bank, thought to be an early suitor, as the Central Asian country teetered on the edge of civil war late last year.

"There is clearly geopolitical tension around Russia and this influences business decisions of course," said the PPF source. "We always follow the money. Just look at the ruble! You eventually have to ask yourself if you want to be long in a market that has an almost endlessly depreciating currency?"

Running low

Amid the raised tension, "good political connections are increasingly important if you're going to work in markets like Russia and China," remarked Kovanda.

But PPF appears to be running low on political know-how just when it needs it most.

For the meantime, Ladislav Bartonicek, who owns half of the 1% stake in PPF that is not held by Kellner's family, sits in the CEO's chair. But he has appeared to admit that he's not able to steer PPF through the same dangerous waters as did the late oligarch.

"He was a bigger risk-taker, that's for sure," Bartonicek said late last year as he explained his approach to the group's deal-making strategy.

The billionaire, by way of contrast, had built such influence that his death spurred widespread discussion in the media of the implications for Czech foreign policy.

"Kellner's empire has so dug into the basic infrastructure of the state, wrote one columnist, "that any change of course is fundamental throughout the country."

Even worse, PPF has actually lost two political champions of its Eastern fortunes, suggests a senior political source in Prague.

Weakened by ill health and resistance from large swathes of the political establishment, President Zeman's eastward push has struggled in recent years amid a series of diplomatic disasters that have sent Prague's relations with Moscow and Beijing nosediving.

"The loss of Zeman's clout has been just as damaging for PPF as Kellner's death," stated the source. "There have just been too many setbacks. The Russians now understand Zeman's growing irrelevance. And China's not far behind."

Edited by: Hardy Graupner

THUMBNAIL The main thoroughfare from Prague’s airport is dominated by PPF’s headquarters

UN Palestinian refugee agency still short of cash

UNRWA chief Philippe Lazzarini visits Germany to shore up long-term financial commitments. After the US stopped funding the agency, Germany became one of its most important donors.

Around 58% of the UNRWA's funds are spent on education

At the outset of 2022, the cash-strapped United Nations organization tasked with supporting Palestinian refugees in the Middle East put out yet another call for funding. Over the year it would take $1.6 billion (around €1.4 billion) to make ends meet, the UN Relief and Works Agency said.

Commonly known as the UNRWA, the agency has previously spoken of an "existential crisis" due to a lack of funding.

The UNRWA takes care of the educational, health and welfare needs of close to 6 million Palestinian refugees living in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Funded almost completely by voluntary donations from UN member nations, it has been in financially straitened circumstances since 2018.

In August that year, the US government, then headed by Donald Trump, said it was cutting all funding to the UNRWA. Until then, the US had been the agency's biggest donor, making up about a third of its annual budget.

The UNRWA employs around 30,000 staff, most of whom are Palestinian refugees

Germany steps up

"[The] UNRWA is perceived as a lifeline by Palestinian refugees," the agency's head, Philippe Lazzarini, told DW during a three-day visit to Germany this week.

"For example, we have nearly 600,000 girls and boys in 700 schools," he explained. "We provide primary health care to more than 2 million people across the region and we also provide a social safety net. ... In places like Gaza and Lebanon and Syria, we provide cash and food for the most destitute Palestinian refugees." The UNRWA also offers micro-financing loans.

Lazzarini was in Berlin to discuss Germany's long-term financial and strategic support for the UNWRA. After the US halted funding in 2018, the agency appealed to other countries to make up the shortfall.

"Germany significantly stepped up its contribution to the organization in 2018," Lazzarini told DW's Emmanuelle Chaze.

Germany is now one of the agency's largest donors, supplying €150 million ($170 million) in 2021 and €210 million ($238 million) in 2020.

"We will continue to do so in the future," Germany's Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock confirmed after a visit to an UNRWA-run refugee camp in Jordan last week.

On a visit to the Jordanian camp, Annalena Baerbock (far left) said it was important to

 keep giving, "within the framework of the UN"

The US, under President Joe Biden, also started funding the UNRWA again in 2021, donating around $240 million by the end of last year.

Financial struggles 

The UNRWA has a core budget of around $800 million, about half of which goes on education. It uses the rest of its funding for emergencies that impact Palestinian refugees, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Syrian civil war or the Lebanese economic crisis. Its international staff are paid out of a different UN budget.

But, as Lazzarini pointed out during his visit, despite donations from the US and Germany, the agency has been in debt since 2019. 

Financial struggles are nothing new to the UNRWA. It was first founded by the UN in 1949 to provide relief to Palestinians who had fled or were displaced during the 1948 war that established the state of Israel. It has regularly run a deficit since 1950. But thanks to factors such as changing donor priorities and other humanitarian crises, donations have been dropping for around a decade.

For example, the UK recently cut donations by more than half and donations from Arab Gulf countries have also plummeted. 

Not political

The donations are decreasing, even as the Palestinian refugee population has grown. This is because, until a long-term solution is found, descendants of refugees can also claim refugee status under international law.

"The organization keeps struggling to deliver its services … because of financial challenges, which most of the time are also an expression of political challenges," Lazzarini told DW.

In an open letterto Palestinian refugees, published in December last year, Lazzarini explained what he meant.

"Since 2018, [UNRWA] and its mandate have come under increased political attacks," he wrote. "These attacks are based on the foolish and wrong idea that by closing UNRWA, they will erase 5.8 million Palestine refugees."

Critical opinions

The UNRWA has been criticized by former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, among other Israeli politicians, and ex-US President Donald Trump because of how it defines who can be called a Palestinian refugee.

It defines them as "persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946, to 11 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.” Descendants of those people may also sign up with the UNRWA.

Netanyahu argued that the UNRWA should be disbanded, calling it a "refugee perpetuation agency" and suggesting other UN agencies take care of Palestinian refugees in the region.

"It also perpetuates the narrative of the so-called ‘right of return' with the aim of eliminating the state of Israel," Netanyahu said in 2018.

No solution in sight

Israel has always rejected the right of Palestinians to return. If millions of Palestinians returned, the demographic change would make Israel a Palestinian-majority state, rather than a Jewish-majority one.

However, as the UNRWA itself explains on its website, even if it were dissolved, Palestine refugees "would still be Palestine refugees and retain their rights under [UN] General Assembly resolution 194, pending a just and lasting solution to their plight."

The same UN resolution incorporates the right of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return to the homes from which they were displaced.

Close to 3 million Palestinian refugees use the UNRWA's health services

At the moment, any kind of solution to one of the Middle East's longest-running conflicts does not appear to be in sight. And many political experts, including Israelis, warn that closing the UNRWA without an alternative could result in deepening poverty and maybe even more violence.

"The root causes of the conflict remain," Lazzarini said at a press conference in Gaza, following fighting there in May 2021. "These must be resolved."

Until then, the UNRWA will be needed, he concluded.

Edited by: Nicole Goebe