It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Labour whips suspend seven MPs for voting against child poverty
JULY 24, 2024
Seven Labour MPs have been suspended from the parliamentary Party after voting against the government on a motion to scrap the two-child benefit cap.
Former Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell MP, said ahead of the vote: “I don’t like voting for other parties’ amendments but I’m following Keir Starmer’s example as he said put country before party.”
He was joined in the rebellion by Apsana Begum MP, Richard Burgon MP, Ian Byrne MP, Imran Hussain MP, Rebecca Long-Bailey MP and Zarah Sultana MP. 42 other Labour MPs abstained.
“Though the majority of Labour MPs who had been pushing for scrapping the cap were on the left of the party, there is support across the party,” reported the Guardian. “Rosie Duffield, the Canterbury MP, said she would have rebelled to vote for the SNP amendment but was prevented from doing so because she had tested positive for Covid.”
Diane Abbott MP also missed the vote on account of personal reasons, but tweeted that she was “horrified” that colleagues were suspended for six months for voting for what was supposed to be Party policy.
Given the huge majority the government has, the suspension of members for a rebellion on an issue so widely supported is both authoritarian and factional – especially as members of the Cabinet have suggested the government should be open to the idea of scrapping the cap.
Momentum said the suspension was outrageous, tweeting: “Removing the Party whip from Labour MPs for voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap is not only an insult to the 4 million children living in poverty, but also an affront to democracy.”
Ahead of the vote, Zarah Sultana MP said: “If the Labour Party has a moral mission, it must be to eradicate child poverty. I join the 11 unions affiliated to the Labour Party and the TUC, which represents six million workers, in calling for the two-child benefit cap to be immediately scrapped. I will vote for it today.”
NEC member Jess Barnard called the suspension of the Labour MPs “an utter disgrace”. Another NEC member, Mish Rahman, called it “complete control-freakery and authoritarianism.”
TUC president and Fire Brigades Union General Secretary Matt Wrack said: “The seven MPs who voted to scrap the cap spoke for millions of trade union members and many Labour Party members. Keir Starmer must restore the whip to them immediately.”
As Politics Professor Philip Crowley pointed out, removing the Party whip from rebel MPs used to be considered a “nuclear option”. He called this suspension both “unprecedented” and “heavy-handed”, saying it completely “changed the rules of engagement”. He added: “It guarantees that the next rebellion will be big – big enough that you can’t suspend them because there will be too many.”
Mirror journalist Ros Wynne-Jones tweeted: “This is terribly wrong. What happened to ‘understanding the passion’ Labour MPs feel on this issue? Eradicating poverty is not a weird macho ‘virility’ test, it must be the mission of this government.”
A total of 103 MPs voted for the amendment which was comfortably defeated by the government majority.
But the government response will prove unpopular. Public opinion is supportive of ending the two-child cap and there is a strong economic case for doing so. Former Labour MP Alan Simpson tweeted that scrapping the cap was “right in principle and affordable in practice. These 400,000 children aren’t in households who bank offshore. The money to feed them will be spent in local shops, and provide local jobs that pay UK taxes. The money-go-round pays the country back as it feeds the kids.”
The campaign to scrap the cap will intensify – as will the demand to restore the whip to these seven committed MPs who put principle before expediency.
Two-child cap: ‘Why Starmer punished MPs who voted to tackle child poverty’
Tom Belger 24th July, 2024
Keir Starmer Leader of the Labour Party makes his speech at Progressive Britain one day conference in London today
:
Few people in Labour will have enjoyed the spectacle of the party whipping its MPs to vote down a plan to lift children out of poverty last night.
Whichever way individual MPs voted – or did not vote – on scrapping the two-child benefit cap, tackling poverty will be high up on the causes that got many into politics in the first place.
Socialist Campaign Group co-chair Zarah Sultana told GMB this morning she “slept well” having backed the SNP’s amendment – despite being one of seven MPs whose defiance lost them the Labour whip. The cabinet itself has been dubbed “the most working-class of all time”, and probably would have slept better too if they’d felt able to immediately scrap a controversial Tory policy.
There is fresh anger on the left, with FBU general secretary Matt Wrack saying today rebels “spoke for” many in the labour movement and they deserve the whip back. National executive committee member Mish Rahman called it “shameful” and “control freakery”.
But there were plenty of reasons the leadership hasn’t just kept the cap for now, but brutally punished rebels – and plenty of reasons 361 MPs toed the line.
First, the leadership saw voter trust in a clear, fully-costed programme, strict fiscal rules and minimal tax-raising plans as foundational to Labour’s election bid. Even Jeremy Corbyn at least partially attempted something similar.
The aim was tackling public and market fears about Labour threatening the public finances through excessive tax, spending or borrowing – which proved fatal for the last three Labour leaders.
Sam White, Starmer’s former chief of staff and a former Alistair Darling adviser, told me how unlikely it ever was that “in the first test of whether she’s a serious Chancellor, Rachel Reeves was going to pull off her mask Mission Impossible-style and reveal she was in fact Liz Truss, pretending there’s money when there isn’t.”
He is optimistic Labour will address child poverty, but noted the “vast backlog” of issues Labour faces too – from crumbling schools to public sector pay to scandal compensation. Yet Reeves has a poor fiscal inheritance, meaning growth is vital for raising funds to “work through problems as resources allow”.
Even Nye Bevan said socialism is “the language of priorities”. Starmer will face similar demands over countless important causes this parliament, and even a Corbyn government wouldn’t have felt able to fund them all.
Nor would Corbyn have wanted to look weak to voters – or pliable to MPs – by caving immediately on his own King’s Speech, particularly at the whims of the SNP rather than a fiscal event. One senior source told Sky News “we expect Labour MPs to support the programme we were elected on”.
Punishing the rebels sends a loud signal not just to the left but to his many new MPs and the public that Starmer’s “changed” party and ruthless streak weren’t just for show in opposition. Aides may have calculated the move also spares Starmer continual media coverage of further potential defiance by these seven MPs at least.
As a whipping operation, the fear factor plus the carrot of a child poverty review has largely worked. Note a fair few SCG members did not rebel, including even Kim Johnson, who had filed her own two-child cap amendment.
The six-month whip restoration review might be aimed at keeping now-independent MPs more optimistic about returning and thus on side than they might have been otherwise, given other recent suspensions have been much longer.
But the big question is how far it has deepened many MPs’ unease over the policy, particularly if Labour gives in later on, as it partly did on Gaza. Many, particularly new, MPs would have backed the government’s programme in their first crunch votes without a stick over their head.
Sky News’ Sam Coates notes too that if Labour only scrapes to victory in 2029, and the sidelined SCG became kingmakers on knife-edge votes, votes like last night won’t be forgotten.
“The campaign to scrap the cap will intensify – as will the demand to restore the whip to these seven.”
By Mike Phipps
Seven Labour MPs have been suspended from the parliamentary Party after voting against the government on a motion to scrap the two-child benefit cap.
Former Shadow Chancellor, John McDonnell MP, said ahead of the vote: “I don’t like voting for other parties’ amendments, but I’m following Keir Starmer’s example, as he said, to put country before party.”
He was joined in the rebellion by Apsana Begum MP, Richard Burgon MP, Ian Byrne MP, Imran Hussain MP, Rebecca Long-Bailey MP and Zarah Sultana MP. 42 other Labour MPs abstained.
“Though the majority of Labour MPs who had been pushing for scrapping the cap were on the left of the party, there is support across the party,” reported the Guardian. “Rosie Duffield, the Canterbury MP, said she would have rebelled to vote for the SNP amendment but was prevented from doing so because she had tested positive for Covid.”
Diane Abbott MP also missed the vote on account of personal reasons, but tweeted that she was “horrified” that colleagues were suspended for six months for voting for what was supposed to be Party policy.
Given the huge majority the government has, the suspension of members for a rebellion on an issue so widely supported is both authoritarian and factional – especially as members of the Cabinet have suggested the government should be open to the idea of scrapping the cap.
Momentum said the suspension was outrageous, tweeting: “Removing the Party whip from Labour MPs for voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap is not only an insult to the 4 million children living in poverty, but also an affront to democracy.”
Ahead of the vote, Zarah Sultana MP said: “If the Labour Party has a moral mission, it must be to eradicate child poverty. I join the 11 unions affiliated to the Labour Party and the TUC, which represents six million workers, in calling for the two-child benefit cap to be immediately scrapped. I will vote for it today.”
NEC member Jess Barnard called the suspension of the Labour MPs “an utter disgrace”. Another NEC member, Mish Rahman, called it “complete control-freakery and authoritarianism.”
TUC president and Fire Brigades Union General Secretary Matt Wrack said: “The seven MPs who voted to scrap the cap spoke for millions of trade union members and many Labour Party members. Keir Starmer must restore the whip to them immediately.”
As Politics Professor Philip Crowley pointed out, removing the Party whip from rebel MPs used to be considered a “nuclear option”. He called this suspension both “unprecedented” and “heavy-handed”, saying it completely “changed the rules of engagement”. He added: “It guarantees that the next rebellion will be big – big enough that you can’t suspend them because there will be too many.”
Mirror journalist Ros Wynne-Jones tweeted: “This is terribly wrong. What happened to ‘understanding the passion’ Labour MPs feel on this issue? Eradicating poverty is not a weird macho ‘virility’ test, it must be the mission of this government.”
A total of 103 MPs voted for the amendment which was comfortably defeated by the government majority.
But the government response will prove unpopular. Public opinion is supportive of ending the two-child cap and there is a strong economic case for doing so. Former Labour MP Alan Simpson tweeted that scrapping the cap was “right in principle and affordable in practice. These 400,000 children aren’t in households who bank offshore. The money to feed them will be spent in local shops, and provide local jobs that pay UK taxes. The money-go-round pays the country back as it feeds the kids.”
The campaign to scrap the cap will intensify – as will the demand to restore the whip to these seven committed MPs who put principle before expediency.
You can add your signature in support of John McDonnell, Rebecca Long Bailey, Zarah Sultana, Richard Burgon, Apsana Begum, Ian Byrne and Imran Hussain here.
Thousands back the seven MPs who voted to tackle child poverty, as backlash grows against Starmer’s whip suspension move, reports the Labour Assembly Against Austerity.
In less than an hour, a grassroots petition calling on Keir Starmer to restore the Parliamentary Labour Party whip to seven MPs suspended for voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap gained over 1,000 supporters, and continues to grow.
The petition to Sir Keir reads as follows: “We oppose your decision to suspend seven MPs from the Labour Whip for voting for scrapping the two-child benefit cap – a move which would immediately lift 300,000 children out of poverty. This shameful decision must be reversed.”
Welcoming the petition and its initial support, former MP Beth Winter said, “Labour was elected on a commitment to reduce child poverty. That’s how Labour MPs should vote. Support the campaign for their reinstatement.”
She was joined by PCS General Secretary Fran Heathcote who said, “Labour MPs should not be disciplined for fighting child poverty. Sign the petition to restore the whip.”
Labour Lord John Hendy KC meanwhile condemned the move to remove the whip from the MPs, saying, “No one should be penalised by a Labour government for voting to save hundreds of thousands of our children from poverty.“
Adding another trade union voice in support of the seven MPs and the campaign, BFAWU General Secretary Sarah Woolley said, “It’s disgraceful less than three weeks after telling the world ‘country before Party’ that seven MPs have been suspended for taking that stance. We stand in solidarity with Apsana, Richard, Becky, John, Zarah, Imran and Ian and demand they have the whip reinstated.”
Neil Findlay, former Labour MSP and former Shadow Minister for Campaigns and Party Engagement in Scotland, added, “Keir Starmer said it would be ‘country before Party’ . Last night seven Labour MPs were suspended for putting ending child poverty before Party – they should have the whip restored today.”
Labour NEC member Jess Barnard gave her strong backing to the initiative, saying “Solidarity with the seven, who stood up for kids condemned to poverty – a principled stance taken by Labour MPs who were elected to stand up for their communities, who pledged to put ending child poverty at the top of the agenda. This is designed to punish principles and scare new MPs into submission, while poor kids pay the highest price for it – please give this petition your full support.”
Fellow Labour NEC member Gemma Bolton added, “The initial support for this petition illustrates the anger in our movement that these seven MPs have been suspended for standing up for their constituents, and calling for measures to tackle child poverty. Keir Starmer and co. still seem more obsessed with bashing the left than changing the country.”
Other figures to have spoken out in support of the seven MPs on broadcast and social media include Diane Abbott MP, Labour NEC member Mish Rahman, RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch and FBU General Secretary/TUC President Matt Wrack.
Zarah Sultana also received support from her local Labour Club. Ollie Chapman, Warwick Labour Students, said, “Warwick Labour Students fully supports Zarah Sultana’s decision to vote to scrap the two-child benefit cap and we condemn the suspension of her and the six other Labour MPs. Zarah is an inspiration to young people within and outside the Labour Party, and stands on the right side of history.”
Local to another MP, Rebecca Long-Bailey, who had the whip withdrawn, Fraser McGuire, co-chair Manchester Labour Students said: “I’m incredibly disappointed to see Rebecca and six other MPs suspended for daring to stand up and demand better from the leadership, and speaking to students and young people I know that many feel the same. Labour ran on a promise of ‘change’ and that is what many people voted for, yet the Party has fallen at the first hurdle. Starmer should scrap the two-child benefit cap and return the whip to those who rebelled.”
The petition was initiated by the Labour Assembly Against Austerity and Arise. Commenting on behalf of the two organisations, Matt Willgress said “These seven MPs were right to support a measure that would lift 300,000 children out of poverty – and would be a great start to undoing the social emergency caused by 14 years of failed Tory austerity.”
He added,“The immediate support for the petition shows the anger there is across the movement at Keir Starmer’s anti-democratic move. Now we need to build this campaign everywhere, including by reaching 5,000 supporters as soon as possible.”
“We’re the 6th richest country in the world. We shouldn’t stand by & allow our children to be suffering in this way.”
John McDonnell MP this morning issued a video explaining why he would vote for an SNP amendment to the King’s Speech calling for the 2-child benefit cap. We reproduce the transcript in full below.
“Today in Parliament is the last day of the debate on the King’s speech and the normal procedure is that there’ll be a number of amendments that are put up and will be voted upon.
The first will be a Conservative amendment, a general carping amendment about the incoming Labour government.
The second will be a Lib. Dem. amendment, which is quite a broad, sweeping amendment, and the third is an amendment from the Scottish National Party specifically calling for the scrapping of the two-child limit on benefits. 37 Labour MP’s like me put forward our own amendment to scrap the two-child limit, but that won’t be called.
So the only opportunity we’ll have to vote on the two-child limit will be on an SNP motion. I have some history on this measure. I was in Parliament in 2015 when it was introduced and I condemned it and voted against it then. It’s really iniquitous. It’s forced large numbers of children into poverty and caused real hardship.
So I believe we should get rid of it at the first opportunity. And that’s why I’ll be voting for the SNP amendment. I don’t like voting for other parties’ amendments, but I’m following Keir Starmer’s example, as he said, put country before party. So I’m putting lifting children out of poverty before party whipping or anything like that.
120 different organisations have called for the scrapping of the two-child limit and they comprise community groups, religious groups, churches, trade unions and, many in my own community. I think it’s a dreadful measure that the Conservatives introduced and we could lift – the latest estimate is – anything up to nearly 400,000 children out of poverty just by this one measure?
That’s why I think it’s important to vote for it today. The Government has set up a poverty task force, which is terrific, that will get to work now, and I’m hoping that it will address the scrapping of the two-child limit. But we need an absolute commitment on that and a timetable to do that rapidly so that our children no longer suffer this hardship and poverty.
We’re the 6th richest country in the world. We shouldn’t stand by and allow our children to be suffering in this way.”
John McDonnell is a regular columnist for Labour Outlook. Follow John on Twitter here and Facebook here.
23 July, 2024 Left Foot Forward Labour’s Zarah Sultana has explained perfectly why Labour needs to scrap the cap and also said that the party can fund the commitment, it’s ‘just a matter of political will’.
With today the last day of debate on the King’s speech, Labour leader Keir Starmer is facing a rebellion over his refusal to scrap the two-child benefit cap which is responsible for keeping hundreds of thousands of children in poverty.
The SNP has tabled an amendment to the King’s Speech calling for it to be axed, with a number of Labour MPs saying they would vote to scrap the cap, resulting in a headache for Starmer should Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle selects an amendment on the issue today.
Labour MP Kim Johnson has also put forward an amendment calling on the government to abolish the policy to lift an estimated 300,000 children out of poverty.
Politico reports: “As of last night 18 Labour MPs, including John McDonnell, Diane Abbott and Zarah Sultana, had signed their Liverpool Riverside colleague Kim Johnson’s amendment calling on the government to abolish the policy to lift an estimated 300,000 children out of poverty.
“Under normal parliamentary convention, that amendment is unlikely to be chosen, as it’s been put forward by MPs representing the party of government. But fear not, prime minister — the Liberal Democrats and the SNP are here and more than happy to help.”
Labour’s Zarah Sultana has explained perfectly why Labour needs to scrap the cap and also said that the party can fund the commitment, it’s ‘just a matter of political will’.
Sultana told Laura Kuenssberg’s show on Sunday that: “If the Labour Party has a moral mission, it has to be to eradicate poverty, especially child poverty.
“There are families experiencing unnecessary hardship. Rachel mentioned tough decisions we can fund this, if we look at different tax decisions where the wealthiest with the broadest shoulders pay for this.
“We are the sixth largest economy in the world and yet one of the most unequal in the developed world.”
Sultana went on to add: “We can uplift 300,000 kids instantly from poverty if we do this.
“This policy is the policy of the Labour Party’s 11 affiliated unions. It’s also the policy of the TUC, which speaks up for 6 million workers, so this is not a radical demand.
“In fact, if Rachel decided to put a 2% wealth tax on assets over £10 million, you can raise £24 billion a year, if you want to equalise capital gains with income rate thresholds, you can raise £16.7bn.
“So, when we say that there isn’t any money to fund this, we’re not looking in the right places.”
MPs to vote on amendment to King’s Speech calling for two-child cap be axed
MPs will vote on an amendment to the King’s Speech calling for the two-child benefit cap to be axed – setting up a potential rebellion on the Labour benches among MPs on the left of the party.
The House of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle confirmed this afternoon that an amendment put forward by the Scottish National Party will be voted on by MPs later today. The amendment calls on the government to “immediately abolish” the two-child limit “as a vital first step in tackling child poverty”.
Former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell and Socialist Campaign Group chair Zarah Sultana have indicated they will vote to scrap the cap on Tuesday.
The Labour leadership has faced considerable pressure from within and beyond the party to abolish the cap, which prevents parents from claiming Universal Credit or child tax credit for a third child, with some exemptions. According to the Child Poverty Action Group, axing the cap would lift 300,000 children out of poverty.
Asked about abolishing the cap in an interview with Times Radio this morning, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said Labour was elected “on the promise that we would only make spending commitments that we know we can keep”.
The Labour frontbencher added: “I’m not going to look constituents in the face and tell them I’m going to do something without actually having done the sums, figuring out how I’m going to pay for it.” She said elsewhere in the interview that driving down child poverty is a “real priority for this government”.
Multiple amendments had been put forward to the King’s Speech calling for the cap to be scrapped, including one tabled by Labour backbencher Kim Johnson, with the Speaker responsible for selecting which amendments would be put to a vote.
McDonnell – the Labour backbencher and former Shadow Chancellor – said in a video posted on X this morning: “37 Labour MPs like me put forward our own amendment to scrap the two-child limit, but that won’t be called. So the only opportunity we’ll have to vote on the two-child limit will be on an SNP motion.
“I have some history on this measure. I was in parliament in 2015 when it was introduced, and I condemned it and voted against it then. It’s really iniquitous. It’s forced large numbers of children into poverty and caused real hardship.
“So I believe we should get rid of it at the first opportunity. And that’s why I’ll be voting for the SNP amendment. I don’t like voting for other parties’ amendments, but I’m following Keir Starmer’s example as he said put country before party.”
The full text of the SNP’s motion is below:
At end add ‘but respectfully regret that the Gracious Speech fails to include immediate measures to abolish the two-child limit to Universal Credit; recognise that this policy is pushing children into poverty; further recognise that 1.6 million children are currently impacted and maintaining this policy will result in 670,000 additional children suffering poverty by the end of this parliament; believe that eradicating child poverty must be a primary priority for the newly-elected government; and therefore call on the government, as a vital first step in tackling child poverty, to immediately abolish the two-child limit’.
The Labour Party needs to take on neo-liberalism and the rich
The government has inherited lots of social problems but problems caused by neoliberalism can’t be dissolved by more neoliberalism
The King’s Speech heralded the new Labour government’s legislative agenda. Most of it had already been leaked and therefore provided little surprises.
A political party funded by corporations and the rich was not going to do anything radical and upset its backers. The government has reduced its policy options by promising not to create money, borrow or increase taxes on the rich. Such self-imposed constraints will in time become problematical but so early in its term of office, it isn’t going to do U-turns. At the same time, the faithful need to be told that ‘change’ is coming. So, the government makes populist noises and gives the impression that it is interventionist, but not enough to upset its backers. Here are a few examples.
All governments engage in populist rhetoric claiming that they will be tough on crime. Labour is no exception. Due to government imposed austerity, cuts in real wages and benefits, there is a spike in shoplifting. It is also the consequence of supermarkets cutting checkout staff to boost profits. Labour has promised to be tough on shoplifting, but there is little mention of crackdown on the causes of shoplifting and petty crime.
People’s living standards are being quashed by corporate profiteering by water, gas, oil, insurance, rail, mail, energy, banks and other companies. This pushes some very sane people into petty crime. A report by Unite examined 17,000 UK companies and found that their average profit margins have soared by 30% compared to the pre-pandemic period. Electricity and Gas supply companies were the worst culprits as they increased their profit margin by 363%. The government has no intention of curbing profiteering which erodes people’s income and increases pressures for petty crimes and shoplifting.
Opinion polls have suggested that people want to see railways renationalised. Labour has promised to bring passenger rail services in England and Wales into public ownership during the next five years, eventually morphing into Great British Railways (GBR).
To some extent rail nationalisation is relatively easy because 4 of the 14 national train operators are already state-controlled. The franchises to operate passenger train services are granted by the state for a period of 5 years and can be terminated by either side at three months’ notice. The plan is to bring passenger services into public ownership as and when the current franchise agreements expire.
The nationalisation of railways will provide integrated services and avoid duplication of administrative structures, resulting in lower costs. Train operating companies, mostly owned from abroad, make about £400m a year in profit. Elimination of that could result in lower subsidies and/or fares. However, freight and rolling stock companies (ROSCOs), the most lucrative parts of the rail industry, will remain in private hands. Just three companies (Angel Trains, Eversholt and Porterbrook) own 87% of rolling stock (coaches, engines, wagons) which they lease out to train and freight operating companies. Through complex and opaque corporate structures they are owned by financial service and infrastructure investment companies located in low/no tax jurisdictions. ROSCOs paid dividends of £409.7m in 2022-23 and had a profit margin of 41.6%. The cumulative dividend is around £2bn (£2.7bn between 2012 and 2020) in the last decade. The dividend is typically 100% of the pre-tax profits and escapes taxation in the UK. The Labour government is not planning to disrupt this massive outflow of cash, the cost of which is ultimately borne by the public purse.
People want to see water industry nationalised too but there is no plan to nationalise England’s troubled water companies. Since 1989, they have hiked bills in real terms, invested little in infrastructure, dumped sewage in rivers and seas, paid exorbitant dividends and executive remuneration, and are now deep in debt. Their shares are worthless, debt is classified as junk and their finances are precarious. In common with the last Tory government, Labour does not want to nationalise water. Instead, it will tinker with regulation imposing better monitoring of sewage disposal, possible criminal liability of directors for sewage dumping and banning payment of executive bonuses if specified environmental standards are not met. It is hard to see how this will address lack of investment, exploitation of households and lack of corporate accountability.
Economic growth has been the mantra of the Labour government but that is partially hampered by low investment in productive assets. Despite a plethora of subsidies, grants and tax reliefs the UK has been bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of last 30 years, and ranks a lowly.28th for business investment out of 31 OECD countries. Labour’s response is to resuscitate the private finance initiative (PFI) in the guise of public private partnerships (PPP). PFI ran from the early 1990s to 2018. Under this, the government obtained £60bn of capital investment from private sector with repayments of over £306bn. The state effectively became guarantor for private profits. The same is to be repeated again. The government has announced a National Wealth Fund of £7.3bn for investment in public projects, which is hardly ambitious. It will cost more than that just to fix potholes in roads.
The aim is to secure £3 of private funds for every £1 of public cash. The Labour manifesto promised to de-risk additional private investment i.e. it will guarantee corporate profits. Inevitably repayment of each £3 of private finance will be much bigger as the private sector must make profits. Of course, the alternative would be to create money, possibly through quantitative easing. The government can borrow as the cost of borrowing for government is always lower than the cost of the same debt by the private sector. It can eliminate tax anomalies and also tax the rich, but such possibilities are ruled out.
A major reason for low investment is that people lack the money to buy goods and services. Labour’s employment Rights Bill will provide some security to workers by protection from unfair dismissal and ensuring that all adults benefit from the minimum wage. Currently, minimum wage of £ 11.44 is paid to adults over the age of 21. Lower rates are paid to workers below the age of 21. However, considerable real increase in wages is needed to enable people to stimulate the economy. Workers’ share of GDP, in the form of wages and salaries, has gone from 65.1% in 1976 to barely 50%. The median UK pre-tax wage is £28,548, lower in real terms than in 2008. Joseph Rowntree Foundation estimates that a single person needs annual income of £29,500 and a couple needs £50,000 for minimum standard of living. At the same time, 1% of the population has more wealth than 70% of the population combined. The poorest pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes than the richest. The richest fifth households pay 31% of gross household income in direct taxes; compared to 14% by the poorest fifth. The richest fifth pay 9% of its disposable income in indirect taxes, compared to 28% by the poorest fifth.
Successive governments have failed to adjust the tax imbalance or increase workers’ share of GDP. They increasingly rely upon a shrinking proportion of population to boost consumer spending and stimulate economic growth. This has not delivered sustained economic growth. Labour needs to boost workers’ share of GDP and that can’t be done without reducing capital’s share. Will Labour rise to that challenge?
Labour’s 2024 manifesto promised to “develop an ambitious strategy to reduce child poverty”. However, there is no indication of such strategy in the King’s Speech. In opposition, Labour supported the Conservative government’s two-child benefit cap. Around 1.6m children are living in 450,000 households affected by the cap. Families are losing out benefit of £3,455 a year. £3.5bn would go a long way towards lifting a million children out of poverty, but the government has not done so. To put this into broader perspective the government spent some £1,200bn last year.
In response to mounting pressure, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has sought to disarm critics by setting-up a taskforce to develop child poverty strategy. In the face of overwhelming evidence the taskforce will inevitably conclude that children are suffering. This taskforce tactic will only prolong the agony of poverty for millions and further confirm to some that major political parties care little about the ‘have-nots’. The government’s position is that it can’t make uncosted financial commitments. Interestingly, the King’s Speech promised more spending on the military and support for Ukraine’s conflict with Russia. I can’t recall these policy options being explicitly costed.
It may be too early to reach any definitive conclusions about the Labour government’s policies, but the King’s Speech shows that the government will expend considerable energies in impression management. The government has inherited lots of social problems but problems caused by neoliberalism can’t be dissolved by more neoliberalism. The government needs to be bold and show that a different future is possible.
Prem Sikka is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting at the University of Essex and the University of Sheffield, a Labour member of the House of Lords, and Contributing Editor at Left Foot Forward.
As crucial environmental developments like this go unnoticed, the media continues to fixate on Just Stop Oil, prioritising sensationalist headlines over stories with genuine environmental impact.
While the headlines been preoccupied with the record jail terms for Just Stop Oil protesters – a move criticised as a “low point for British justice” but lauded as a decision by a “judge who spoke for all of us,” as the Daily Mail’s front page read – an important environment story has slipped under the radar. Shell has quietly backed away from its promise to increase the ‘advanced recycling’ of plastics, a decision that could have a significant environmental impact.
The energy giant had pledged to ramp up its use of “advanced recycling,” touted by oil and petrol producers as a solution to plastic pollution. The process involves breaking down plastic polymers into molecules that can be turned into new plastics or synthetic fuels. Since 2019, Shell has invested in pyrolysis, the most common method of advanced recycling, even producing oil via pyrolysis in one of its chemical plants in the US. “Our ambition is to use 1m tonnes of plastic waste a year in our global chemicals plants by 2025,” Shell announced at the time.
But by 2023, Shell quietly established that the goal was “unfeasible.” Davis Allen, an investigative researcher at the Center for Climate Integrity, unveiled the finding to the Guardian. “It’s an acknowledgment that advanced recycling is not developing in the way that companies have promised it will, and are counting on it to. That’s pretty meaningful,” said Allen.
Environmentalists have long raised concerns about the pollution that advanced recycling creates, warning it is more toxic and energy-intensive than traditional plastic recycling. Yet, as the Guardian reports, Shell’s retraction is not due to these environmental concerns. A company report cites market changes, including a lack of available feedstock, slow technology development, and regulatory uncertainty, as reasons for the U-turn.
Despite reversing its advanced recycling plans, Shell is not stepping back from plastic production. Operations began in November 2022 at Shell’s new Pennsylvania Petrochemicals Complex, an “ethylene cracker plant” capable of producing 1.6m tonnes of plastic annually. Since opening, the plant has violated clean air laws 19 times and incurred over $10m in fines.
Shell remains a member of the American Chemistry Council and its subgroup America’s Plastic Makers, which recently promoted advanced recycling in an ad urging audiences to “imagine a future where plastic is not wasted, but instead remade over and over.” However, the company’s retraction is seen by some as a tacit acknowledgment of the technology’s longstanding issues. Judith Enck, president of the advocacy group Beyond Plastics, told the Guardian: “I have never said this before, but Shell has made a wise decision here. Chemical recycling is a polluting and unreliable way to address the growing problem of plastics.”
As crucial environmental developments like this go unnoticed, the media continues to fixate on Just Stop Oil, prioritising sensationalist headlines over stories with genuine environmental impact.
Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward
National self-determination is the only way forward for Palestine – Declan Kearney MLA
“Progressive and democratic international pressure has to focus upon introducing positive initiatives to deliver a lasting ceasefire”
By Declan Kearney MLA
In May I visited Johannesburg and addressed the ‘Global Anti-Apartheid Conference’ on Palestine.
It addressed the urgent need to launch a global campaign against Israel’s occupation of and apartheid system in Palestine, emulating the scale of the international actions which were so essential to achieving national democracy in South Africa.
It was supported by the South African government, and speakers included Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor; Namibia’s Justice Minister Yvonne Dausab; former South African government minister, Ronnie Kasrils; Reverend Frank Chikane; and many others.
The war in Gaza has become a lightning rod for mobilising popular world opinion against Israel’s apartheid occupation.
The actions of students, particularly in the US, but also in Ireland, Britain and across Europe, in demanding the implementation of divestment policies by academic institutions, are reminiscent of the student movements against the Vietnam war.
The groundbreaking legal action against Israel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague by South Africa is not only morally courageous; it has become a catalyst for actions by other international governments.
Decisions by Ireland, Spain and Norway to formally recognise the state of Palestine have disrupted the pro-Israeli consensus within the European Union.
For the first time, discussions have begun to happen in Brussels about the need to apply sanctions against Netanyahu’s government and the Israeli war economy.
The announcement by the International Criminal Court to pursue arrest warrants against Netanyahu and his defence minister will reinforce such new shifts in western governments’ policies.
All of these factors are relevant to the development of the global anti-apartheid campaign launched in Johannesburg.
For the success of a global campaign to be fully optimised, there must be a resolution to divisions within the Palestinian national struggle.
The resistance and reluctance by some to forge a national consensus, embrace political unity, and form a united leadership, is a strategic failure and weakness.
But the Palestinian struggle needs to equip itself with the cohesion, capacity and strategies to achieve self determination.
Progressive and democratic international pressure has to focus upon introducing positive initiatives to deliver a lasting ceasefire; inclusive talks, followed by fully representative negotiations; an irreversible peace settlement; and, Palestinian national self-determination and sovereignty.
Over 1,000 workers and trade unionists shut down access to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office headquarters in central London this Wednesday morning, demanding that the new Labour Government immediately halt all arms exports to Israel. To try to break the blockade, police dragged protesters across the floor at the Whitehall entrance and arrested six people.
The action comes as Israeli forces launched an assault on, and ordered the evacuation of, parts of a designated humanitarian zone in Khan Younis, killing nearly 100 people in one day, wounding several hundred more and forcing over 150,000 people to flee since Monday. It also follows one of the deadliest weeks in aerial attacks on Gaza since the onslaught started nine months ago and a damning new International Court of Justice ruling about Israel’s occupation clearly violating international law.
After Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Alicia Kearns accused the Foreign Office of hiding legal advice that Israel is breaching International Humanitarian Law in Gaza in March, David Lammy – now Foreign Secretary – demanded the UK Government publish the advice and “suspend the sale of those arms” if the advice shows there is a “clear risk that UK arms might be used in a serious breach of international humanitarian law.”
Today trade unionists are calling on the Foreign Secretary “to practice what he preached in opposition” and “meet his own demands” by immediately publishing the advice and suspending the sale of arms. They are also calling on the Foreign Secretary to withdraw the UK’s legal bid to block the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. In Opposition, David Lammy called on David Cameron to drop this, accusing the Conservatives in May 2024 of “U-turning on one of Britain’s most fundamental principles: respect for the rule of law.”
Today’s disruptive action follows parliamentary pressure on the new Labour Government to halt arms exports to Israel, including an amendment to the King’s Speech put forward by Labour MPs, and other amendments and questions from Lib Dem, SNP, Green and independent MPs. The Foreign Secretary signalled a few days ago that he has started a new process which would delay any such publication and this week he refused to answer a question from Lib Dem MP Munira Wilson about whether he will publish the legal advice in line with his own calls on David Cameron.
The ICJ has ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories – the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem – is a clear violation of international law. It ruled earlier this year that Israel’s actions in Gaza plausibly amounted to genocide and ordered Israel to comply with provisional measures, which it has failed to do. Even before the latest ICJ ruling, some 600 lawyers, legal academics, and former judges, including former Supreme Court justices and the Court’s former president Lady Hale, warned that the UK government is breaching international law by continuing to arm Israel.
Today’s blockade has been organised by Workers for a Free Palestine in support of civil servants and members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) . The Foreign Office and the Department for Business and Trade are involved in granting arms export licences, thus playing a fundamental role in the continued sale of UK weapons used by the Israeli army. Civil servants have requested to “cease work immediately” on arms export licences to Israel over fears they could be complicit in war crimes in Gaza, and their union PCS is considering bringing legal action to prevent their members from being forced to carry out unlawful acts.
Tania, a Unite member and organiser for Workers for a Free Palestine, taking part in the blockade said:
“We blocked all entrances to the Foreign Office, completely shutting down access to the building until the police started violently dragging people across the pavement on Whitehall. We disrupted the department in solidarity with the Palestinian people and with civil servants who are raising concerns about being forced to carry out unlawful acts, which no worker should ever be asked to do. By shutting down the Foreign Office, workers and trade unionists are supporting civil servants concerned with the legality of the Government’s actions, as well as standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
“Keir Starmer and David Lammy have blood on their hands and we will not rest until they meet their legal and moral duty to end British complicity in war crimes, in accordance with the will of the people they purport to represent. It is shameful that the Labour Government is choosing to crack down on its citizens for peacefully protesting the UK’s complicity in Israel’s genocide rather than listening to the majority of the British public – including the droves of Labour voters who defected over Gaza – who want arms exports to Israel halted immediately. Indeed, David Lammy should listen to his own words from a few months ago when he called on the then Foreign Secretary to publish the legal advice and halt arms sales to Israel based on the Foreign Affairs Committee Chair’s account of its contents.
“The invasion of the humanitarian zone in Khan Younis is a devastating reminder that each day Labour refuses to halt arms exports, more Palestinians are slaughtered with UK support, and in some cases, with British made weapons. Today’s repression will not deter us from disrupting the flow of arms to Israel from arms factories in the UK or from blocking access to the Government departments which facilitate those exports.”
Harriet, an NHS A&E doctor and BMA member taking part in the blockade, said:
“Every day that the Labour Government refuses to halt arms sales to Israel, more people are killed in our country’s name and subsidised by our taxes, and Britain’s complicity in Israel’s ongoing genocide deepens. No worker should be forced to carry out unlawful acts. By shutting down the Foreign Office, workers and trade unionists are supporting civil servants concerned with the legality of the Government’s actions, as well as standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
“As a doctor, I can’t stand by and carry on as normal while the Government – and a Labour Government no less, which claims to stand up for human rights – arms the regime which is turning hospitals into mass graves, targeting and killing the workers who save the lives of others, who are doing the same job as me. We will keep showing up to shut down their buildings and disrupt the flow of arms to Israel. We will ensure the Labour Government knows no rest until they end their complicity in Israel’s war crimes, including the onslaught on a designated humanitarian zone happening right now.
“As our blockade today shows, if the Foreign Secretary refuses to listen to his staff and public opinion – and to his own demands from three months ago – by publishing the legal advice and suspending arms sales, workers will enforce an effective arms embargo themselves. We will keep shutting down the Departments which enable arms exports which are being used to wage a genocide in which the death toll could be as catastrophically high as 186,000 people according to medical researchers.”
Polling by You Gov shows that among all voters in the UK a majority of 56% to 17% are in favour of a ban on the export of arms and spare parts. By a majority of 59% to 12%, voters say Israel is violating human rights in Gaza. Before the general election, an overwhelming 71% to 9% of those intending to vote Labour backed an arms export ban, while Lib Dem voters support a ban by 70% to 14% and Conservative voters by 38% to 36%. Asked if Israel is violating human rights, Tory voters by two to one said Israel is doing so.
Workers For a Free Palestine is a network of workers and trade unionists organising blockades which shut down access to arms factories and key Government buildings to disrupt the flow of arms to Israel. This included shutting down all entrances to the Department of Business and Trade on May Day, as a result of which the Department closed the office and instructed all staff not to come into the office that day.
In a separate action, protestors have shut down a factory in Edinburgh in protest at the ongoing war in Gaza. The Leonardo plant was targeted due to its components being produced for Lockheed Martin, which sells jets to Israel.Rosemary, a teacher from Edinburgh, said: “I couldn’t stand by anymore and watch Israel commit a genocide with weapons made in our own city. As people who live in Scotland, whose friends and neighbours work at this factory, we have a responsibility to put pressure on arms manufacturers to comply with international law.”
Arrest of protesters blocking access to FCDO over arms sales to Israel amid attacks on Gaza humanitarian zone
“Today’s blockade has been organised in support of civil servants & PCS members. The FCDO and the Department for Business & Trade are involved in granting arms export licences, therefore playing a fundamental role in the continued sale of UK weapons used by the Israeli army.”
From Workers For A Free Palestine
At least six protesters arrested while blocking access to the Foreign Office on Wednesday morning at both the Whitehall entrance and the St James’ Park entrance.
Workers and trade unionists blockaded the Foreign Office to demand the new Labour Government immediately publish legal advice and halt arms exports to Israel – as the Foreign Secretary called for in opposition – amid ongoing attack on Gaza humanitarian zone in Khan Younis. They’re chanting that Keir Starmer and David Lammy have “blood on their hands”
To try to break the blockade, police dragged protesters across the floor at the Whitehall entrance and arrested six people.
Protesters shut down access to the Foreign Office as Israeli forces have ordered the evacuation of and invaded parts of a designated humanitarian zone in Khan Younis, killing nearly 100 people in one day and wounding several hundred more and forcing over 150,000 people to flee since Monday.
After Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Alicia Kearns accused the FCDO of hiding legal advice that Israel is breaching International Humanitarian Law in Gaza in March, now-Foreign Secretary David Lammy demanded the UK Government publish the advice and “suspend the sale of those arms” if the advice shows there is a “clear risk that UK arms might be used in a serious breach of international humanitarian law.” The ICJ’s damning new ruling further confirms that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories – the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem – is a clear violation of international law, with the ICJ having ruled earlier this year that Israel’s actions in Gaza plausibly amounted to genocide.
Today workers and trade unionists have been chanting that Keir Starmer and David Lammy have “blood on their hands” and calling on the Foreign Secretary “to practice what he preached in opposition” and “meet his own demands” by immediately publishing the advice and suspending the sale of arms. They are also calling on the Foreign Secretary to withdraw the UK’s legal bid to block the ICC issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, which David Lammy called on David Cameron to drop, accusing the Conservatives in May 2024 of “u-turning on on one of Britain’s most fundamental principles: respect for the rule of law”.
This disruptive action follows Parliamentary pressure on the new Labour Government to halt arms exports to Israel, including an amendment to the King’s Speech put forward by Labour MPs, and other amendments and questions from Lib Dem, SNP, Green and independent MPs. The Foreign Secretary signalled a few days ago that he has started a new process which would delay any such publication and this week he refused to answer a question from Lib Dem MP Munira Wilson about whether he will publish the legal advice in line with his own calls on David Cameron.
Today’s blockade has been organised by Workers for a Free Palestine in support of civil servants and PCS members. The FCDO and the Department for Business and Trade are involved in granting arms export licences, therefore playing a fundamental role in the continued sale of UK weapons used by the Israeli army. Civil servants have requested to “cease work immediately” on arms export licences to Israel over fears they could be complicit in war crimes in Gaza, and their union PCS is considering bringing legal action to prevent their members from being forced to carry out unlawful acts.
Tania, a Unite member and organiser for Workers for a Free Palestine, taking part in the blockade said:
“We blocked all entrances to the Foreign Office, completely shutting down access to the building until the police started violently dragging people across the pavement on Whitehall. We disrupted the department in solidarity with the Palestinian people and with civil servants who are raising concerns about being forced to carry out unlawful acts, which no worker should ever be asked to do. By shutting down the Foreign Office, workers and trade unionists are supporting civil servants concerned with the legality of the Government’s actions, as well as standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
“Keir Starmer and David Lammy have blood on their hands and we will not rest until they meet their legal and moral duty to end British complicity in war crimes, in accordance with the will of the people they purport to represent. It is shameful that the Labour Government is choosing to crack down on its citizens for peacefully protesting the UK’s complicity in Israel’s genocide rather than listening to the majority of the British public – including the droves of Labour voters who defected over Gaza – who want arms exports to Israel halted immediately. Indeed, David Lammy should listen to his own words from a few months ago when he called on the then Foreign Secretary to publish the legal advice and halt arms sales to Israel based on the Foreign Affairs Committee Chair’s account of its contents.”
“The invasion of the humanitarian zone in Khan Younis is a devastating reminder that each day Labour refuses to halt arms exports, more Palestinians are slaughtered with UK support, and in some cases, with British made weapons. Today’s repression will not deter us from disrupting the flow of arms to Israel from arms factories in the UK or from blocking access to the Government departments which facilitate those exports.”
Harriet, an NHS A&E doctor and BMA member taking part in the blockade, said:
“As a doctor, I can’t stand by and carry on as normal while the Government – and a Labour Government no less, which claims to stand up for human rights – arms the regime which is turning hospitals into mass graves, targeting and killing the workers who save the lives of others, who are doing the same job as me. We will keep showing up to shut down their buildings and disrupt the flow of arms to Israel. We will ensure the Labour Government knows no rest until they end their complicity in Israel’s war crimes, including the onslaught on a designated humanitarian zone happening right now.
“As our blockade today shows, if the Foreign Secretary refuses to listen to his staff and public opinion – and to his own demands from three months ago – by publishing the legal advice and suspending arms sales, workers will enforce an effective arms embargo themselves. We will keep shutting down the Departments which enable arms exports which are being used to wage a genocide in which the death toll could be as catastrophically high as 186,000 people according to medical researchers.”
“I ask the Government to clarify that they support the processes that will prosecute war crimes, and that the UK accepts the ICC jurisdiction over Israel and has no truck with the nonsensical legal argument that Israel is exempt from international law.”
By Andy McDonald MP
The following is an excerpt from his contribution in the House of Commons during the debate on the King’s Speech.
On foreign affairs, it is perhaps a statement of the obvious, but our foreign policy must be based on human rights and adherence to international humanitarian law.
On Gaza, I welcome the Foreign Secretary this week calling for an immediate ceasefire, for hostages to be released and for aid to reach the people of Gaza, but the question is how we will apply pressure to achieve these goals.
I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary's decision to overturn the suspension of funding to UNRWA.
But on arms sales and compliance with international humanitarian law, we urgently need the government's legal assessment – and action.
— Andy McDonald MP for Middlesbrough & Thornaby East (@AndyMcDonaldMP) July 19, 2024
We must have clarity in a number of areas.
First, I urge the Government to set out how they will use all the necessary levers to achieve the ceasefire, including the end of arms export licensing. Secondly, I trust that this Government can provide the House with early confirmation of the re-establishing of direct funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.
Thirdly, I ask the Government to clarify that they support the processes that will prosecute war crimes, and that the UK accepts the International Criminal Court jurisdiction over Israel and has no truck with the nonsensical legal argument that Israel is exempt from international law. We have seen that time and again.
I do not think that anybody in this House was not shaken to the core by the vision of that young man with Down’s syndrome who, having been attacked by IDF soldiers, was savaged by dogs and then bled to death. We have seen such scenes over and over, and the justification that it is okay to kill 110 people—innocent children, women and men—in the pursuit of a military target is an abomination.
Fourth, I hope the Foreign Secretary will quickly clarify the new Government’s approach to the early recognition of the state of Palestine. We need equality and fairness to resolve this crisis, and it will not be resolved without the recognition of Palestine.
Andy McDonald is the MP for Middlesbrough & Thornaby East. You can follow Andy on Twitter/X and Facebook.
