Saturday, September 21, 2024

‘Why we can’t count on North Sea oil and gas – and need a green energy transition’


Credit: Sean Aidan Calderbank/Shutterstock.com

What a difference a general election makes.

Within days of Labour’s historic victory at the polls, the new Energy Secretary Ed Miliband was standing before the House of Commons to announce the steps that the government will take to make the UK a clean energy superpower.

Labour’s ambitious agenda  underscores the seriousness with which it intends to approach the energy crisis – from lifting the ban on new onshore wind projects and approving three new major solar farms, to  publishing a more ambitious solar roadmap.

The creation of GB Energy, a new publicly owned energy generator, will drive investment in new renewables and support a just transition for workers in fossil fuel industries. The government is also taking the decisive step of putting an end to new oil and gas licenses in the North Sea. This is a clear statement of intent: once again, the UK is ready to be a world leader in meeting the challenge of climate breakdown.

But there has been some confusion and misunderstanding, particularly regarding our plans for the future of the North Sea. So, let’s clear things up.

New oil and gas production won’t cut energy costs

In 2022, the Russian invasion of Ukraine sent gas and oil prices soaring. British households were hit harder by rising energy costs than any country in western Europe, with the impact being felt in every corner of the country, including in my own constituency of Sheffield Hallam.

Even today, the average energy bill is £400 higher than it was in 2021. Some have called for more domestic oil and gas production to shield the UK from future price hikes, but that’s not a solution. The price of gas is largely set by the international market with North Sea production too low to make any meaningful impact to global prices.

That meant that in 2022, UK customers’ bills continued to rise even as domestic production of gas increased by 17%.

READ MORE: Labour Party Conference 2024: The full LabourList events programme, from karaoke to key panel debates

With energy bills set to rise again this winter, the only sure way to avoid future crises is to reduce our reliance on gas and oil. That means insulating homes and installing electric heat pumps, powered by renewable sources like offshore wind which generate power at a fixed rate unlike gas power plants. A typical household that made just two key net zero improvements – replacing its gas boiler with an electric heat pump and improving its energy efficiency (to at least Energy Performance Certificate Band C) would have saved £365 on its energy bills in 2022 and £565 in 2023.

We’re already counting the costs of a lost decade for sensible, pragmatic policy, with energy costs for UK households having been £70 billion higher from the early 2010s to 2023 due to the slow roll-out of net zero improvements.

North Sea gas and oil are running out

The North Sea isn’t the limitless resource some seem to think it is. The North Sea Transition Authority, which is responsible for managing the North Sea oil and gas fields, has estimated that production of gas is likely to decline by 55% by the end of the decade and oil by 40%.

That’s even if we were to issue new licences. But too many politicians still refuse to recognise this reality – with as many as 25% of Conservative MPs in the last Parliament refusing to believe the NSTA’s findings. We need to face the facts  and deal with the world as it is.

When it comes to energy independence and the quantum of homegrown energy we generate in the next few years, the simple truth is renewable energy is the main show in town. Just one large offshore windfarm would generate as much electricity as the gas that might have come from new drilling of the North Sea floor.

Unless we’re able to massively reduce our dependence on oil and gas this decade, the UK will become ever more dependent on foreign energy – and more vulnerable to the volatility of international fossil fuel markets.

New licences won’t deliver the long-term security workers deserve

I understand the concerns that a halt to future oil and gas licenses will hit jobs in the sector. But we can’t pretend that continuing with business as usual will deliver the long-term economic security that these communities deserve.

Over the past decade, even as new licences have been issued, the number of jobs supported by the oil and gas industry has more than halved from 440,000 to 215,000. North Sea gas and oil is running out – and workers risk falling off a cliff-edge unless we urgently accelerate the deployment of new renewables.

The choice is between a plan to ease the transition and create new opportunities for these workers, or passively watching on as production runs down while jobs continue to disappear.

But there is hope. Industry experts estimate that 90% of all oil and gas workers have skills that can readily be redeployed to new offshore jobs in renewable energy. With the right training, support, and investment, we can guarantee the futures of oil and gas communities across the UK by ramping up renewables for the long term – exactly what Labour has promised to do.

This won’t be an easy transition. But it’s a necessary one if jobs are going to be preserved. Labour’s promise to at last deliver a skills passport, helping workers to more easily move from oil and gas to the renewables sector is just one example of a step in the right direction.

It’s time to lay the foundations of a fossil free future

Oil and gas workers deserve a just transition that protects their livelihoods. It is crucial that their voices and that of trade unions, are actively included in shaping and planning this transition.

And households across Britain – too many of which found themselves struggling to pay the bills under the last Tory government – need to see robust action to ensure that no one is ever forced to choose between heating their homes and putting food on the table again. But as we approach this important debate, it’s important that we’re guided by facts and evidence.

And the evidence is clear – switching to a focus on renewables will create jobs, enhance energy security and set an example to the rest of the world in addressing the climate crisis.

(TNT: TOMMOROWS NEWS TODAY)


UK

SHA motions at Labour Party Conference

By the Socialist Health Association

SEPT. 20, 2024

The Socialist Health Association has submitted two motions to the Conference Arrangements Committee (CAC). The first is a contemporary motion on physician associates (Replacing Qualified Doctors – A Threat to Patient Safety). The second is an emergency motion (Act Now to Ease NHS Winter Pressures) on NHS pay and conditions.

Physician associates

Physician associates (PAs) and other ‘medical substitutes’ were originally introduced in the US in the 1980s to cut costs by employing cheaper, less skilled staff to carry out specific medical procedures, thereby freeing up expensive medical staff to carry out the most complex aspects of their work. They did jobs like sewing up surgical incisions or putting up drips.

Delegating some medical tasks is accepted and established here – for example phlebotomists who only take blood. However, in the last 20 years there has been an enormous growth of medical assistants such as physician associates, anaesthesia associates and surgical care practitioners. They are science graduates with a two-year postgraduate training qualification. While the intention is that they should always act under medical supervision, it has recently become apparent that this is often not the case. There have been particular problems in general practice, where the Tory government offered GPs incentives to employ PAs under a scheme whereby they were supplied to GP practices at no cost.

This led to a large expansion in the numbers of PAs in primary care, especially in poorer areas that find it harder to attract qualified doctors. In recent years there have been examples of avoidable deaths and other medical harm caused by PAs working beyond their competence and without adequate supervision. There has also been major disruption to the training of junior doctors as a result of PAs being given priority.

Many of the medical royal colleges, as well as the British Medical Association, have carried out surveys and asked the Tory and Labour governments to take urgent action in the face of a rapidly developing two tier health service.

That is also the aim of the SHA motion, which calls for an immediate freeze in the recruitment of these staff and the courses that train them, followed by a phased elimination of these roles from the NHS. In order to support this, the government should undertake an urgent review of the regulation, training and practice of PAs. Following the above, these staff should be retitled medical assistants and employed only in defined, restricted and properly supervised work.

 However, it now seems that the SHA motion may not reach the Conference floor. The CAC has placed the motion in a group called Patient Safety; as this group does not include many of the major NHS issues it is unlikely to get through Sunday’s priorities ballot. The SHA appealed against its categorisation but the appeal was rejected.

NHS pay and conditions

The text of our emergency motion speaks for itself: Act now to ease NHS winter pressures. Here is the short motion in full.

Conference notes that on the 16th September the British Medical Association Junior Doctors’ Committee accepted the government’s pay offer, thereby ending their long-running industrial action. We also note the recent result of the Unite ballot to accept the latest pay offer.

We welcome this first step towards full pay restoration for junior doctors. This should be fully funded but not at the expense of already insufficient NHS reserves. Salaries for essential workers such as these should never again be allowed to fall below inflation.

However, the NHS continues to face an unprecedented staffing crisis, across all cadres of its workforce. This pay award alone will not solve this. On the eve of another difficult winter, and with waiting lists at a record high, a comprehensive plan to drastically improve recruitment and retention of NHS staff is urgently needed.

Conference urges the government to take all necessary steps, including prioritising the necessary funding, to safeguard our NHS staff and patients this winter.

Prospects for our NHS

Emergency motions must be restricted to a single theme. If our motion is accepted for debate, there is much more to be said about the government’s management of the NHS. Most obvious is the need to challenge its commitment to sustaining the privatisation and Americanisation which we have lived with for the last 25 years. What needs to be understood is that physician associates are not in any sense an isolated project, designed to improve NHS efficiency. They are a systematic element of the ‘new care models’ imported from the US by NHS England and designed not to enhance but to undermine the NHS.

Replacing doctors with these underqualified staff in insurance-friendly community ‘hubs’ is part of the plan developed over the last ten years and legislated by the 2022 Health and Care Act, to undermine the traditional pattern of GPs and District General Hospitals.

Every Conference from 2016-22 voted to reinstate a comprehensive, publicly provided NHS (in 2023 the CAC instituted its policy of splitting up NHS motions in order to make it more difficult for them to succeed in the priorities ballot). Sadly, there was little if any response to these Conference motions from the then shadow front bench. Hopefully the need to reinstate a fully comprehensive, universal, publicly provided NHS in England will emerge in this year’s conference debate.

Please ask your CLP, union and affiliate delegates to vote for Patient Safety in the Priorities Ballot.

UK

Andrew Fisher: the man behind For the Many Not the Few

SEPTEMBER 20, 2024

In it’s first birthday, the Labour Left Podcast, produced in association with Labour Hub, interviewed Andrew Fisher, the man behind the iconic 2017 Labour ManifestoHere is the You Tube link.

The interview begins by exploring the inside story behind For the Many Not the Few – the manifesto that Keir Starmer called our foundational document.”  Andrew reveals to us how he ended up writing the manifesto, what was in his mind when he wrote it and the moment when the Labour right leaked it.

In the second half of the interview, we move onto Starmer for some fascinating insights into what makes the man tick.  Find out why Starmer popped into Jeremy Corbyn’s leader’s office while Owen Smith’s attempted leadership coup was still in full swing. What did he want?  Andrew sat alongside Starmer during the Brexit negotiations with Prime Minister May. What was Starmer like as a lead negotiator?

Later we discuss the Oliver Eagleton thesis that there was always a Project Starmer.  We explore to what extent was Eagleton right about the project with the recollections of an insider who saw it all.

Moving on, we look at Reevonomics.  Drawing upon Andrew’s excellent book, The Failed Experiment, to help us define neo-liberalism, we consider to what extent Rachel Reeves is planning to depart from the economic orthodoxy.  Is the Macro Dose, left economics podcaster, James Meadway on the right track when he says Labour Will End Neoliberalism, Just Not in a Good Way?

As we approach the latter stages of the interview, we dissect the prospects for a Labour left revival, the future of the Campaign Groups Magnificent Seven and the role of the soft left.  Andrew has some thoughts and advice for left MPs and trade union leaders on how they might help hasten the arrival of a much-needed comeback.

Finally, Andrew reveals who he wants to put in the Labour Left Podcast Class Hero Hall of Fame.  I think the readers of Labour Hub will approve of his choice.

If you enjoy the Labour Left Podcast 2024 conference special, please have a look at the whole year back catalogue.  Previous episodes have included historian Corinne Fowler, talking about her book Our Island Stories: Country Walks Through Colonial Britain;  Jeremy Gilbert, Professor of Cultural and Political Theory, talking about Thatcherism; Mike Jackson, co-founder of Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners, on the 1984-85 Miners’ Strike; political activist Liz Davies telling her story as the dissenter within New Labour; Rachel Garnham, a current co-Chair of the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy looking back at the history of the fight for Labour democracy; and finally myself telling the story of Brighton Labour Briefing, a local Labour left magazine in the early 1980s.

If you are enjoying the podcast please subscribe on YouTube or your favourite podcast platform so you never miss a future episode.  If you like what the Labour Left Podcast is trying to achieve, please help us to get the podcast in front of  more people by sharing, following, rating and commenting on every episode you watch.

You can watch the podcast on YouTube, Apple podcasts here, Audible here and listen to it on Spotify here  If your favourite podcast site isn’t listed, just search for the Labour Left Podcast

Bryn Griffiths is the host of Labour Hub’s spin off the Labour Left Podcast.  He is an activist in the labour movement, Momentum and The World Transformed in North Essex. You can find all the episodes of the Labour left Podcast here  or if you prefer audio platforms (for example, Amazon, Audible Spotify, Apple etc,) just search for Labour Left Podcast.

U$A

Amazon Drivers in Queens Go Public with Union Fight



Hundreds of delivery drivers based out of DBK4, a warehouse in Maspeth, Queens, delivered union authorization cards to Amazon management on Monday. They are demanding that Amazon recognize their move to join the Teamsters union, and that the company meet them at the bargaining table. This comes in the midst of organizing escalations by Amazon drivers and warehouse workers across the country.


Pola Posen 
September 17, 2024
LEFT VOICE



On Monday morning, hundreds of Amazon delivery drivers in Maspeth, Queens, marched on management with signed union authorization cards. The cards represent proof that a majority of drivers — who are contracted to work for Amazon through three “delivery service partners” (DSP) — support joining the Teamsters union. “We are a union!” the drivers chanted.

Drivers are fighting for higher wages, better working conditions, and against overwhelming routes with excessive packages. As a driver said on Monday to their managers: “these routes are inhumane.” They are joining the fight to have a union and they want to be recognized as what they are: Amazon workers.

The struggle for Amazon driver recognition has accelerated since last April, when drivers at a DSP in Palmdale, California voted to unionize. Because the drivers were considered employees of the DSP rather than of Amazon, Amazon simply cut the contract with the DSP rather than recognizing the drivers.

In response, the Teamsters union brought the case to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), arguing that Amazon is a joint employer of the drivers. The NLRB affirmed this argument in August, laying the groundwork for Amazon drivers’ legal legitimacy in bargaining with the company. Earlier this month, drivers in Atlanta, Georgia also won recognition from the NLRB that Amazon is their joint employer.

Drivers pick up the packages at Amazon facilities, drive vans with the Amazon logo, and use Amazon devices to track the packages. Not recognizing drivers as Amazon workers is open labor fraud. Amazon tries to cut every corner to advance in the flexibilization and precarization of work. It’s also a tool to divide workers and make unionization harder.

You may be interested in: Amazon Labor Union Affiliates With Teamsters: What Does This Mean for Amazon Workers and the Labor Movement?

Amazon is scared. Last Thursday, threatened by the drivers’ fights for unionization, Amazon announced that it would be raising its delivery driver wages by 7%, bumping drivers up to around $22/hour. We saw a similar move from the company this summer in the UK, when Amazon gave warehouse workers a 10 percent raise after successfully union-busting an organizing campaign by a 3,000-worker warehouse outside of Coventry. These raises are an attempt from the company to try to satiate its employees — “you don’t need a union because we give you raises!” But these raises only show Amazon’s desperation. If we can win wage increases through wielding only the whispered threats of our power, it is clear that when we are unified, there is no ceiling to what we can fight for.

It is critical that Amazon workers realize the collective power of warehouse workers and delivery drivers combined. Although the jobs of drivers and inside workers are quite different, no package can be delivered without the labor of both. The behemoth that disciplines our lives is the same. So, drivers must fight for warehouse workers, and warehouse workers must fight for drivers, because our fight is one and the same. Together, organized democratically and from the rank-and-file, we can build the workers’ power necessary to defeat Amazon.

Solidarity with Amazon delivery drivers in Queens who made a stride for the entire movement!



AMERIKA

We Need Free Public Transit, Not Cops on Trains


Three passengers and an NYPD officer were shot by police in a Brooklyn subway station over a $2.90 fare evasion. This was a case of racist aggression against the poor.


Vaishali Patra 
September 20, 2024
LEFT VOICE

Photo: Peter K. Afriyie

Last Sunday, an officer of the New York Police Department (NYPD) opened fire inside the Sutter Avenue subway station in Brooklyn over a $2.90 fare evasion. He shot and injured four people, including an NYPD officer. New York City Mayor and former cop Eric Adams promptly lauded the officers for their “bravery” in a post on X, proudly supporting the criminalization of impoverished communities of color in the city. At no point did Adams acknowledge that the injured NYPD officer in question was shot by his own colleague, deliberately implying that it was the passenger who was the culprit.

Police have accused Derrell Mickles, 37, of evading the fare and wielding a pocket knife after they tased him. However, the police later admitted that they confiscated a knife belonging to another passenger and have no evidence that Mickles was holding a knife. In a further display of contempt, Mickles’s mother has revealed that she was not informed that her son was in critical condition, with the NYPD only dropping a business card at her doorstep. The police department has killed 23 people in New York in 2024 alone, 10 of whom are Black. Nationwide, 229 Black lives have been lost to police brutality this year. Black lives continue to be treated as expendable in this racist and capitalist system, but are simultaneously portrayed as disruptors of public safety. Two dollars and ninety cents is all it took for the NYPD to open fire inside a subway station, endangering the lives of commuters. We condemn this heinous attack on poverty by the NYPD and stand in solidarity with Derrell Mickles and the two civilians injured last Sunday.

The categorization of subway fare non-payment as a crime is nothing more than a symptom of the decades-long defunding of public services and the over-funding of police in New York City. The NYPD has spent over $600 million in overtime pay and over $500 million in misconduct settlements as of January 2024. On the other hand, the city’s public higher education system, City University of New York (CUNY), continues to operate with millions of dollars in debt. This has led to austerity measures and rising tuition costs for a largely low-income Black and Brown student body. Meanwhile, supposedly liberal commentators claim that it’s “obvious” that the subway needs even more police.

This escalation in tactics by the NYPD is not an isolated incident or by any means an accident. This attack comes mere months after Adams announced his plans to turn NYC into a cop city with the establishment of a Public Safety Academy in Queens costing $225 million dollars. The NYPD has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on overtime pay as it continues to target pro-Palestine students at college campuses. CUNY Students have been pushed to the ground and brutalized and some are still faced with felony charges. Friends of mine were chased by NYPD officers carrying zip ties outside the encampment at City College.

It is no coincidence that the NYPD unleashes the worst of its aggression in poor communities of color such as in Morningside Heights, the site of the CUNY encampment, and in Brownsville, home to the Sutter Avenue subway station. In these areas, Black people make up 32 and 68 percent of the population respectively.

As a student and a part-time worker at CUNY, I have spent numerous days waiting over 30 minutes for public transportation to get to my campus. This has been coupled with wages which have not risen despite the approval of a new contract by my union, DC 37, in February 2024. Some members of my union working at CUNY are still earning below minimum wage, far lower than the $18/hour rate outlined in the contract. Paying for public transportation is not easy with this income level. CUNY frequently hires international students and immigrants like myself for part-time temporary jobs who may not be eligible for reduced fare Metrocards or full-time employment. Last semester, 24 professors were fired from my college due to budget cuts while the public safety department at CUNY had its budget increased by $4 million dollars, primarily to repress pro-Palestine students.

While the NYPD eats away at hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money each year, the working class pays for the redirection of funds from transportation, education, and healthcare towards a brutal police force. We need a free and fully-funded public transit system for NYC which is not controlled by ruthless imperialists like Adams or Governor Kathy Hochul. We want decisions for the public transit system to be made democratically by the people who actually ride the trains and buses every day, and by the workers who operate and maintain the MTA. We don’t need decisions made by those who can afford to avoid public transportation by robbing the working-class of their livelihoods





United States


Workers, Unions Must Defend Haitian Immigrants

Attacks on Haitians in Ohio are part of a long term project to divide the working class and blame immigrants for the capitalist crisis.


Julia Wallace and Carmin Maffea 
September 20, 2024
LEFT VOICE

Photo: Jesse Costa/WBUR

This 2024 presidential campaign has been fueled by right-wing rhetoric that has left both parties fighting over who can be more pro-fracking, pro-police, pro-Israel, and particularly anti-immigrant. This is exemplified by Donald Trump and JD Vance’s disgusting targeting of Haitian immigrants, accusing them of eating people’s house pets –claims that are reminiscent of anti-Asian tropes about Chinese people eating dogs and cats. These false claims are meant not only to agitate for harsher anti-migrant legislation but also to give political sanction to attacks on migrants and Black people by painting them as subhuman.

Far-right sentiments such as these have always held prominence in the capitalist system and are woven into the DNA of the imperialist core that is the United States. However, these radical right-wing sentiments have been growing in prominence with the rise of Trumpism and the Far Right, characterized by a series of political attacks on migrants, reproductive rights, and trans rights.

The feeding and broadcasting of right wing sentiments such as this has had the very effect it intended to. Just as minstrel images of Black people perpetuated ideas that Black men were rapists to agitate lynch mobs against them, the anti-Black and anti-migrant lies perpetuated by Trump has agitated acid attacks against Haitian people and the mobilizations by the Proud boys.

This rhetoric plays on the anti immigrant sentiment in the Black community particularly of Black people born in the US as well as anti Black sentiments in the Latino immigrant community. The attack on Haitian immigrants is connected to a greater anti-Black agenda.

Trump, for instance, has received some increased support in the Latino community and Black community, with groups like Latinos for Trump and the ADOS movement and these attacks on Haitians appease both those groups.

It is not only racial bigotry against Black people that fuels these attacks, but also serves an anti working class agenda. Immigrants are workers with no rights in the US. Never before in the history of imperialism has the problem of migration taken on such a scale as a global problem for the working class: hundreds of thousands of Black, brown, and ethnically diverse workers who find themselves and recognize themselves and recognize the shared tragedy of having to to cross borders to new Babylons to feed with their bodies and souls, the cheap labor force that drives imperialist cities. They are Haitian workers, the most precarious, the most oppressed in UPS warehouses in New York and other major cities.
Historical Attacks on Haiti

Attacks on Haitians aren’t exclusive to migrants entering imperialist nations, but are simply the latest in a series of racist reactionary attacks against the spirit of the Haitian Revolution itself.

The motto “L’Union fait la force” or unity creates strength, is a motto that embodies the Haitian revolutionary spirit. It was the guiding sentiment that inspired the slave revolts in Saint Domingue that eventually led to a revolution of enslaved Black people. With the success of the revolution, Haiti became not only the first Black republic but the first state to permanently ban slavery.

By supporting other revolutions in South America, rescuing enslaved people on transport ships, and making Haiti a safe harbor for revolutionaries and enslaved Africans as a free republic, Haiti served as a specter to the slavocracy and colonizers of the world and a beacon of inspiration and support to enslaved Black people around the world. The Haitian revolution showed that African slaves could successfully fight for their freedom, but more importantly, that such revolts could become revolutions. With the revolutionary spirit of Haiti serving as the vanguard of revolutionary progress, reactionary forces have always sought to crush or undermine that spirit, in a process that continues to this day.

To “recognize” Haiti’s independence, France, with the support of the United States and Thomas Jefferson ordered Haiti to pay 150 million Francs or face a French Naval fleet sent by Charles X. After capitulating, Haiti (being a new and small nation) was forced to take out loans from French banks with large interest rates. In today’s numbers the repayment cost the young nation about 20-30 billion dollars and took 122 years to pay off.

These economic attacks were furthered after the US took control over Haiti’s public finances following a near 20 year long, brutal, military occupation that ended in 1947.

Ten years after this occupation and strangulation of public finances came the pro-US military dictatorships of first Francois Duvalier, aka “Papa Doc,” and then his son Jean-Claude Baby doc. These regimes were characterized by their brutal repression of political opponents, especially communists, and acted as a strategic pro-US Caribbean enclave for the United States in its pursuit to crush the gains of the Cuban revolution. Papa Doc for example accrued 50 million dollars in foreign aid during his dictatorship, even as infant mortality rates skyrocketed and the average Haitian life expectancy shrank to just 40 years.

When ‘Baby Doc’ was ousted by a general strike in 1971, a major blow to US imperialism, the US refused to relent in its imperialist reactionary attacks on the island. A series of Agrarian reforms, which reduced tariffs on US imports, were forced on Haiti by Ronald Reagan, then made harsher by Bill Clinton. These reforms undermined Haitian farmers and forced them to abandon their farms. US agencies were fully aware that this would undermine the Haitian economy and exacerbate poverty as they were implementing these policies.

Migrants coming into the United States from Haiti are primarily coming to escape from imperialist-made crises that were implemented to crush the spirit of the revolution. The attacks on Haitian migrants in the US is the continuation of that reactionary response by utilizing the anti-Black and anti-migrant sentiment abundant in the growing far right populist movement.

In these racist attacks, it’s not just Haitian Migrants being attacked, it is also Non-Haitian Black people. This shows that the more the political elite and the right agitate for attacks on the ‘other,’ they are fueling reactionary movements against all of the working class and oppressed, and therefore, our struggles are inherently intertwined not only for our safety and our rights but for our total liberation.

It is important that working class people, Black, Brown, immigrant, and those born in the US actively reject such jingoism. The same tactics for one group one day will be used for another the next. Meanwhile it is the capitalists that increase their profits off of our backs. It is the capitalists taking our jobs, not immigrants. It is the imperialists that force people to leave their homes and immigrate to the US. Borders drive down all workers’ wages. Uniting all workers and oppressed people against bigotry and for higher wages and further political self organization have made the international workers movement stronger and will make us a fighting force.

The Democrats and Republicans vow to attack immigrants crossing the US/Mexico border. While the Republicans use the outlandish rhetoric of “eating pets,” the Democrats are more nuanced and speak about stopping drug dealers. But their aims are the same: to intimidate and divide the working class, and to keep immigrants in the shadows and from organizing for their own rights, or further still, from uniting with workers born in the US.

That is why we must embrace the motto “L’Union fait la force” in the legacy of the Haitian revolution as we build a greater one that is socialist and international.
Fight the Right Through Workers’ Organization

Despite all their rhetoric on fighting the right, the Democrats are showing exactly how they intend to “ fight the right,” which is to do nothing. Proud Boys are marching in the streets and the Democrats are asking for more money for their campaign. They are also catering to right-wing Republicans, bragging about the two hundred who have agreed to vote for Harris. It is clear they have no intention of fighting the Right and we should not rely on them. We, as working class and oppressed people, keep us safe. When hundreds of Zionists, transphobes and other violent bigots descended upon the UCLA campus it was not the police who protected the encampment but the students, workers and community members. The next day thousands mobilized and forced the police, sheriffs, and bigots to retreat into the early morning. As a response UAW 4811 went on strike across the University of California.

Our unions need to mobilize resources to defend immigrant rights as worker’s rights. Unions should take this up as the UAW 4811 took up the issue of Palestine and defending students and workers on its campuses. Instead, leaderships are giving millions of members’ union dues to the Democrats and Republicans. As both parties claim to represent workers, both parties locally and nationally attack the working class, our living standards and right to organize and unionize. To defend ourselves from bigoted attacks requires both the mobilization of the working class, including putting our unions to the services of oppressed people, but further still, to organize ourselves as working class and oppressed people politically into our own political party. A working class party that fights for socialism. In this political form we can develop politics, strategy, and organization to fight for our own interests and our class enemies.




Julia Wallace

Julia is a contributor for Left Voice and has been a revolutionary socialist for over ten years. She served on the South Central Neighborhood Council in Los Angeles and is a member of SEIU Local 721. Julia organizes against police brutality and in defense of LGBTQ, women, and immigrants' rights. When she's not actively fighting the patriarchy, white supremacy and/or capitalism, she enjoys many things: she loves Thundercat, plays ultimate frisbee and is a founder of the team, "Black Lives Hammer."


Carmin Maffea

Carmin is a revolutionary socialist from New York




Must watch: Trades Union Congress roasts Nigel Farage ahead of Reform UK conference

Basit Mahmood



“Nigel Farage isn’t a friend of the working class, he’s a fraud. A public school educated, private equity loving, NHS privatising, Putin apologist fraud.”

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) has torn Nigel Farage to shreds for being a ‘fraud’ and ‘no friend of the working class’.

In a clip posted on the TUC’s social media channels yesterday, ahead of the Reform UK conference taking place today, the TUC’s General Secretary, Paul Nowak is filmed explaining why Farage is a ‘fraud’ and ‘Putin apologist’.

Nowak says: “Nigel Farage isn’t a friend of the working class, he’s a fraud. A public school educated, private equity loving, NHS privatising, Putin apologist fraud.”

Ahead of Reform's conference tomorrow, just a reminder.

Nigel Farage is a fraud. pic.twitter.com/RCtD3yibhf— Trades Union Congress (@The_TUC) September 19, 2024



Nowak goes on to explain how his grandad came to Britain with the Polish RA.F. and played his part in the fight against fascism and how in May he visited Kyiv to meet sister trade unions.

He explained: “I visited a power station raised to the ground by Russian rockets. I saw city apartment blocks destroyed by missile strikes, and I visited the children’s hospital in Kyiv, and met some of those at the sharp and very human end of war.

“People like Katja, 14 years old, who was wounded by the Russian shelling that killed her mother. Six weeks after my visit, Putin bombed that same children’s hospital, operating theatres wrecked, kids with cancer traumatised, doctors and nurses hunting through the rubble for their colleagues, so when I see Farage making excuses for Putin’s illegal and indefensible invasion of Ukraine, it turns my stomach.

“Congress I’ll say it again, the far-right hatemongers are no friends of the working class, they’re not patriots, they are frauds.”



Public reveal what they really think of Reform UK and it’s not good news for Nigel Farage

Basit Mahmood 
Yesterday
Left Foot Forward


Yet more bad news for Farage

...


With Reform UK’s conference underway, the public were asked what terms they would use to best describe the party.

The poll carried out by YouGov, found that the most popular term Britons prefer to use to describe Reform UK are ‘extremist’ (39%) and ‘should not be near power’ (39%), with ‘nasty’ (33%) being the next most popular.

It comes as Reform UK begins its conference today, with Nigel Farage expected to issue a “clarion call” to win the next general election.

The party, which secured five seats at this year’s general election, will begin its two-day conference in Birmingham with speeches from party leader Nigel Farage, deputy leader Richard Tice, chairman Zia Yousuf and MPs Lee Anderson, Rupert Lowe and James McMurdock.

Farage has barely paid attention to his constituents since being elected, jetting off to the U.S and cashing in on lucrative speaking invitations.

During the general election, it was revealed that a number of Reform candidates held extremist views, which included one candidate with links to a British fascist leader to another Reform candidate suggesting the UK should have remained neutral in the fight against the Nazis.

And given Farage’s own views and close associations to the likes of Donald Trump, it shouldn’t surprise us that the public view Reform as extremists.

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward
UK
We are currently witnessing the re-privatisation of water

If despite predatory practices and huge extraction of returns, private companies are guaranteed to be rescued by the state, why should directors act responsibly?



Yesterday
Left Foot Forward.

The 1989 privatisation of England’s water industry is “an organised rip-off” and an unmitigated disaster. Water Companies have neglected investment in infrastructure and dumped tons of raw sewage in rivers, lakes and seas. As monopoly suppliers they have levied inflation-busting charges on customers; paid over £85bn in dividends and borrowed over £65bn to finance them. Over 28% of sales revenues vanish in servicing debts. Major companies have gearing ratios ranging from 500% to over 1,000%, and are struggling make debt repayments. Water regulator Ofwat and the Environment Agency have done little to curb predatory practices.

A crisis point has been reached. Water shareholders are writing off investment, debt is rated as junk, and Thames Water, England’s largest water company, is actively seeking to restructure its debts.


Special Administration Regime


Privatisation can only be ended by the state, but governments in bed with corporate interests are delaying the inevitable. Legislation for putting water companies into Special Administration Regime (SAR) is already in place. It enables the Secretary of State to put a failing water company into special administration whilst continuing to provide water and sewage services to customers. It enables the special administrator to ‘hive-down’ the operating business and assets into a new entity, facilitating a sale of a going concern business to a new purchaser and potentially leaving unwanted assets and liabilities behind in the seller group. Inevitably, shareholders and creditors will lose some value, but why would another buyer step in without guarantee of profits and subsidies to build infrastructure?

The SAR regime may be seen as a form of temporary nationalisation, but a Minister told parliament: “We have no plans to nationalise Thames Water or other water companies”.
Special Measures

The government’s strategy is to manage public anxieties and fatten-up failed companies for (re)privatisation. This is facilitated by the Water (Special Measures) Bill currently going through parliament. Clause 10 of the Bill enables Ministers to do almost anything to restructure water companies and hand them back to the private sector. It enables Ministers to modify water company licences. The explanatory notes accompanying the Bill state that

“The modifications can require a water company to raise amounts of money determined by the Secretary of State from its consumers, and to pay those amounts to the Secretary of State to make good any shortfall…”

What could the shortfall relate to? The Bill does not explain but it could be the cost of government interventions to make the company fit for purpose or resale. It could include cost of cleaning-up rivers, seas and lakes, writing off liabilities, providing sweeteners to potential buyers, and funds for investment, loans and guarantees. It is hard to see how companies are going to make the proposed £260bn investment in infrastructure without massive hikes in customer charges and/or public subsidies.

The government has stated that: “These powers would never be used to pay bondholders, shareholders or creditors … we do not expect customers to pay the price for water companies’ mismanagement … measures in the Water Bill will protect taxpayers”.

At the same time, the government has stated “that that the Secretary of State may provide financial assistance”.

It is hard to reconcile these statements.

The press release accompanying the Bill omits discussion of any of above issues. The Water (Special Measures) Bill also contains measures to improve accountability, governance and regulatory compliance of water companies. Regulators can bring criminal charges against law-breaking water executives, including imprisonment for failing to co-operate or obstruct investigations.

Since 2020, water chief executives have paid themselves over £41m in bonuses, and regulators will be empowered to ban bonuses for persons holding senior roles where companies fail to meet required standards relating to consumer matters, the environment, financial resilience or criminal liability. The government promises that regulators will consult experts covering areas such as the environment, public health, consumers, investors, engineering, economics and campaigners.
Special Measures are not so Special

The proposed governance reforms are fundamentally flawed. They rely upon regulatory bodies, such as Ofwat and the Environment Agency, to invigilate companies even though they have already failed in that task for the last 35 years. None owes a ‘duty of care’ to people.

For any system of regulation to be effective, there needs to be a distance between regulators and the regulated. However, that is not the case in the water industry. For example, two-thirds of England’s biggest water companies employ key executives who had previously worked at Ofwat. Executives of water companies and regulators regularly meet in hotels and private members’ clubs to discuss how to quell public anger over bill rises and sewage dumping. Collusion and cognitive capture is the order of the day.

Regulators are too close to the industry, as evidenced by the Pricing formula, codenamed PR24, used by Ofwat. It takes no account of the level of sewage dumping, unplugged leaks, lack of investment or frequency of regulatory sanctions. It uses a weighted average cost of capital based on fictitious gearing levels to inflate returns to shareholders. It guarantees real returns to companies and does little to protect customers or the environment. The regulatory independence is undermined by the regulator’s secondary statutory objective to promote growth and competitiveness of the industry. This conflicts with the requirement to protect customers and the environment.

Ministers claim that: “customers will have the power to summon board members and hold water executives to account through new customer panels with teeth”.

These panels will be handpicked by companies and/or regulators and will have no independence. If the government is serious about customer representations, it must ensure that at least 50% of the unitary board of water companies and regulators is directly elected by customers. Thus, they will be accountable to stakeholders and cannot be bullied or silenced by Ministers, regulators or companies.

Curbs on executive bonuses may excite some but won’t be effective. Any link to “financial resilience” requires regulators to specify and enforce optimal gearing/leverage levels, borrowing capacities, credit ratings, working capital ratios, capital adequacy and routinely undertake stress tests. How exactly will “resilience” be secured – by exploiting customers or shareholders providing a strong capital base? Ofwat have never shown any interest in such matters and has no independence or capacity to monitor or enforce the required financial standards. The Bill provides no details and matters will inevitably be negotiated behind closed-doors to the lowest common denominator.

Companies can bypass any bonus ban by increasing the basic salary of executives. Companies such as Thames Water are part of a complex corporate structure. It is perfectly feasible for their controllers to offer executives multiple directorships to compensate for loss of any bonus. It isn’t just bonuses, salaries may be undeserved too. The best way to deal with that is to empower customers to vote on executive pay. If customers are satisfied that executives have served the public interest they would approve salaries and even bonuses for extraordinary performance.

Regulators bringing criminal charges against law-breaking water executives are a good idea but the Bill camouflages reality. In practice, most of the sewage dumping is authorised by regulators as poor infrastructure can’t cope with the flows. Directors also have insurance to cover them for negligence in the pursuit of corporate objectives. The cost is woven into customer charges. The chances of directors personally bearing penalties are low, assuming that regulators succeed in securing convictions.

The Bill does not constrain water company ability to pay dividends. In March 2023, Ofwat announced that it is taking powers to enable it to stop the payment of dividends if they would risk the company’s financial resilience, and take enforcement action against water companies that don’t link dividend payments to performance. Despite sewage dumping and unplugged leaks, companies have continued to pay dividends. Under the Companies Act 2006, dividends can only be paid out of distributable reserves, which are essentially realised profits, but water companies do not disclose their distributable reserves. Such reserves are routinely inflated by financial engineering, such as capitalisation of some interest payments and repair and maintenance costs. Ofwat has taken no steps to curb financial engineering.

The Water (Special Measures) Bill may make minor difference but it essentially is part of political manoeuvrings designed to avoid bringing the failed water industry into public ownership as neoliberal state continues to guarantee corporate profits.

Private ownership of monopolies can’t resolve the crisis which is due to profiteering, excessive dividends, exploitation of customers and lack of investment in infrastructure. The new owners would enjoy a state guaranteed monopoly and want a return on investment. Thus, a continuing crisis and conflict with the general public is inevitable.

The Bill provides a thinly disguised framework for bailing out (and in) companies and returning then to the private sector. Cost will be borne by customers and/or the public purse. Reforms to governance lack details and their enforceability must be doubted. Reprivatisation introduces new moral hazards. If despite predatory practices and huge extraction of returns, private companies are guaranteed to be rescued by the state, why should directors act responsibly?

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.

New U.S-Greece LNG Deal Will Boost Europe’s Energy Security

  • Venture Global, a U.S. LNG producer secured regasification capacity at an LNG terminal in Greece.

  • The new South-North Vertical Corridor will shore up Europe’s energy security.

  • Russian gas supplies to the EU have largely been replaced by U.S. and Norwegian gas.

Venture Global, a U.S. producer of liquefied natural gas (LNG) sourced from North American basins, has secured ~1 million tonnes per annum (mtpa) of LNG regasification capacity at Greece’s new Alexandroupolis LNG receiving terminal for five years, starting in 2025, Reuters reports, noting that the new South-North Vertical Corridor will shore up Europe’s energy security by allowing alternative supplies of natural gas to be imported into the region. 

“This move further integrates our business by growing our assets across the LNG supply chain including LNG production, shipping and regasification. As a major point of entry for LNG into Central and Eastern Europe, this strategically important infrastructure will be a game changer for the region’s ability to diversify their energy and access a secure and reliable energy supply. Venture Global is proud to support these efforts as a strategic partner with volumes from both Plaquemines LNG and the future CP2 LNG," Venture Global CEO Mike Sabel said in a press release

Renewable Energy Displacing Gas In Europe

Norway and the U.S. have replaced Russia as Europe’s biggest gas supplier: last year, Norway supplied 87.8 bcm (billion cubic meters) of gas to Europe, good for 30.3% of total imports while the U.S. supplied 56.2 bcm, accounting for 19.4% of total. However, the U.S. is the biggest LNG supplier to Europe: last year, the U.S. accounted for nearly half of total LNG imports by the continent, marking the third consecutive year in which the United States supplied more LNG to Europe than any other country

What’s interesting here is how fast this has happened: the U.S. supplied 27%, or 2.4 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d), of total European LNG imports in 2021; 44% (6.5 Bcf/d) in 2022; and 48% (7.1 Bcf/d) in 2023. Obviously, Russia’s war in Ukraine has played a big part in growing Europe’s appetite for U.S. gas. Meanwhile, Europe’s capacity to accept LNG is increasing. Europe’s LNG import, or regasification, capacity is on track to expand to 29.3 Bcf/d in 2024, a 33% increase compared with 2021. Currently, Germany is adding the most LNG regasification capacity in Europe, with developers in the country having added 1.8 Bcf/d in 2023 and on track to add another 1.6 Bcf/d in 2024. 

On a global scale, the United States shipped a record 56.9 million metric tons of LNG during the first eight months of 2024, surpassing 54.3 million tons from Australia and 53.7 million tons from Qatar during that period. That marks the second straight year that U.S. exporters have topped global export rankings. 

Unfortunately, Europe has bought considerably less LNG from the U.S. in the current year, with shipments from January through August dropping by 22% Y/Y. The slowdown has largely been triggered by a sharp climb in European power generation from renewable energy sources, which remain a priority for Europe's power utilities. Solar and wind power's share of electricity generation in Europe jumped from around 16.4% in 2022 to 20.5% so far in 2024 while fossil fuel generation's share dropped from around 44.6% in 2022 to 36.6% so far this year. As you might expect, coal-fired power has taken the biggest hit in Europe’s energy mix, although natural gas generation's share has also declined, from around 26% in 2022 to 22% so far this year.

The latest Europe natural gas rally has lost momentum, with natural gas futures dropping below €35 per megawatt-hour, the lowest in seven weeks, thanks to warmer weather forecasts and ample gas inventories. Europe’s gas inventories are 0.1 bcm higher than the corresponding time a year ago however and 8.6 bcm above the five-year average.  Storage capacity utilization for the entire continent stands at 93.4%;  95.6% in Germany, 94.9% in Italy and 91.4% in the Netherlands. 

U.S. gas producers are currently going through hard times, with a 25% Y/Y drop in average LNG export prices during the first half of 2024 cutting revenues by $4 billion from the opening half of 2023 to $13.2 billion. That was the lowest half-year revenue total since the first half of 2021, and marks a more than $12 billion fall from the second half of 2022 when U.S. export earnings from LNG peaked. 

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com