Saturday, November 23, 2024

UK

Ofgem price hike intensifies pain for pensioners and poor, say campaigners

 

NOVEMBER 23, 2024

The energy regulator Ofgem has announced a rise in the energy price cap in January for a second consecutive time, raising bills by 1.2% and bringing the average household energy bill to £1,738.

The announcement comes at the end of a week in which the Government’s own figures suggest that 100,000 pensioners in England and Wales could be pushed into poverty by its decision to cut winter fuel payments.

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK, called the cap rise “the latest in a series of blows for pensioners living on a low or modest income.”

Greg Jackson, CEO of Octopus, opined that pensioners could always stay warmer “by snuggling up on an electric blanket for a while.” But charity leaders have already warned that people will be “going to bed in hats and coats” this winter.

Simon Francis, coordinator of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, commented: “The decision to introduce a price cap change in the middle of winter was taken by Ofgem in 2022 and was described as an inhumane policy at the time. No wonder it has been opposed by campaigners ever since as households will have to find more money to keep themselves warm at the worst possible time. Already the average household will have paid around £2,500 extra for their energy than had we not been so exposed to volatile energy markets.

“To make matters worse, the new Government has cut back the levels of support available to some of the most at risk households. It is so vital the ministers bring in more support for vulnerable households this winter and speed up plans to bring in a social tariff for next winter – a move that is backed by the vast majority of voters.”

Warm This Winter spokesperson Caroline Simpson said: “It’s freezing this week and now we have another price cap rise which is devastating to the 6.5 million in fuel poverty and all of us who will be paying 66% more on energy than we did before the start of the  energy crisis.

“We desperately need to get on with the job of  ramping up our supply of homegrown, renewable energy, which is abundantly available to us on this windy island and a properly funded programme of insulation and ventilation to upgrade our leaky homes.

“Homegrown renewables are the only way we will cut our bills for good but whilst that kicks in we also need commitment from the government that vulnerable households will be supported with their energy bills this winter and next with a social tariff funded by the energy sector’s vast profits. In this day and age, nobody should be afraid to turn on the heating because they can’t afford to pay for it.”

New figures from the Warm This Winter campaign have found that almost half of those polled are worried about how they will stay warm this winter, with 46% worried that they may need to rely on the NHS this winter. Over 65s are the most concerned group with half worried about how they will stay warm.

Campaigners warn that the official statistics are likely to underestimate the suffering caused by the decision to means-test winter fuel payments. Those missing out on Winter Fuel Payments this year include 1.2m pensioners in absolute poverty and 1.6m disabled older people.

As part of the long term solution to cold damp homes, the Warm This Winter data shows that nearly three quarters of the public want the UK’s worst homes to be prioritised with a properly funded insulation and ventilation scheme.

But until the Government’s Warm Homes Plan is introduced, energy bills remain around 65% higher ( about £700 per average household) than in winter 2020/21 – a fourth winter of the energy bills crisis driven by our over-reliance on expensive gas.

As the first cold snap of the 2024/25 winter hits home, data analysis by academics has found fuel poor households are using dangerously low amounts of energy during freezing weather. Some of the UK’s poorest households use 21% less energy during cold weather than other households, leaving them exposed to potentially dangerous cold damp homes.

This has also led to calls to reform the Cold Weather Payments so they are paid out when the Met Office predicts the temperature in the next 24 hours is likely to fall to -4C or below, rather than paid after a cold snap as is the case at present.

As well as short term measures to tackle high energy bills, six out of ten people actively support a fully-funded nationwide insulation and ventilation programme to create healthy, energy efficient homes that will also make bill payers less exposed to energy shocks. Experts have calculated it could save households up to £400 on yearly energy bills.

Jan Shortt, National Pensioners Convention (NPC) General Secretary said: “Given that we already have freezing weather across the country, it is inevitable that those without the support of the Winter Fuel Payment will be suffering in cold homes – many afraid to turn the heating on at all. 

“The NPC is concerned to learn that the wait for those applying for pension credit is extended to 10 weeks as the extra staff being brought into the DWP will not be trained until the new year.  This delay will take those applicants who need their winter fuel payment now to at least February. We genuinely fear that some may not survive to see February and their delayed payment.”

Commenting on Ofgem’s price cap announcement, Friends of the Earth campaigner, Sana Yusuf, said: “Yet another increase in energy prices shows just how vulnerable we remain to the volatility of global gas pricing. We need a decent plan for upgrading our heat-leaking homes, which are largely the reason energy bills remain high and why too many people are freezing in cold, damp conditions again as we move into the colder months.

“The rise in inflation this week, driven primarily by climbing energy prices, shows why upgrading our homes goes beyond lifting people out hardship and protecting the planet – it makes economic sense too, as it will leave people with more of their hard-earned cash to spend. That’s why in its forthcoming Warm Homes Plan, the government must go much further and faster, by committing to spend £6bn a year on a national insulation programme, targeted in the areas most in need first. It’s only with this level of investment that we can end the scourge of cold homes for good.”

A large-scale insulation drive to bring the homes of 31 million people up to standard would cut household bills by 20% or around £150 in 2024. For the worst homes this saving rises to just less than £400. It would also reduce  pressure on the NHS as cold homes cost the NHS around £500m per year, and bring  down new cases of childhood asthma by 650,000, according to Citizens Advice

Meanwhile, in the short term, three-quarters of people want a social tariff for older and disabled people and two-thirds also feel that it should be part -funded by the wider energy industry who have raked in over £457 billion in profits since the start of the crisis. 

Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cj_collective/6992454230 climatejusticecollective Licence: Attribution 2.0 Generic Deed CC BY 2.0

Reform UK MP jailed for ‘repeatedly kicking his ex girlfriend’

Yesterday

He had not publicly disclosed the conviction before he was elected as an MP

atsAppMail


It’s been revealed that a Reform UK MP James McMurdock was jailed 18 years ago for repeatedly kicking his then girlfriend.

The shocking revelations were made by the Times newspaper.

McMurdock, who was previously an investment banker, joined Reform this year and agreed to be a paper candidate for the party in South Basildon and East Thurrock, a seat he ended up winning after defeating Tory candidate Stephen Metcalfe by just 98 votes.

He had not publicly disclosed the conviction before he was elected as an MP.

When his previous conviction initially came to light, McMurdock tried to downplay it, claiming that he had “pushed” his former girlfriend and that the attack as a “teenage indiscretion”.

However, further investigations by the Times, which included the paper seeking further information from the courts, revealed that ‘the reason for his custodial sentence was “kicking to victim on around four times’.

The paper reports: “His previous conviction came to light when the victim’s mother accused him of having “left marks on her body” and said that “it took two security guards to pull him off her”.

“At the time the MP contradicted the mother’s account. In a statement, he said that “while I absolutely deny the horrific details in this tale, there is one truth in it that I cannot, nor will not deny or hide from”.

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward
Labour minister Peter Kyle doesn’t rule out ditching Elon Musk’s X

Yesterday
Left Foot Forward


Peter Kyle has become the latest senior political figure who has refused to rule out quitting Elon Musk’s X, after claiming that the site was no longer as enjoyable as it used to be
.

Labour Cabinet Minister Peter Kyle has become the latest senior political figure who has refused to rule out quitting Elon Musk’s X, after claiming that the site was no longer as enjoyable as it used to be.

Tech billionaire Musk has come in for criticism in recent months, for allowing X to become a platform where fake news and extremist content is allowed to go unchecked. Musk was accused of fanning the flames of division, after claiming that the UK was ‘headed for civil war’ after scenes of far-right violence and thuggery in towns and cities across the UK following the horrific murder of three young girls in Southport.

The riots occurred after misinformation was shared on social media, including on X, claiming that the perpetrator of the mass stabbing in Southport was an asylum seeker. Three young girls were killed in the attack which took place during a Taylor Swift-themed dance class. Eight other children suffered stab wounds and at least two were in a critical condition, alongside two adults.

Asked on LBC whether his ‘world on X had got better’, since Musk’s takeover, Science and Technology Secretary Kyle replied: “No, it hasn’t. In fact I don’t scroll through X anymore. I use it because I know there’s an audience I really want to communicate with.

“Me and my team both have access to my account now and post things on it. But I have to say in the past I really enjoyed interacting on X.”

He added: “That enjoyment isn’t there anymore. But I do realise there are people on that platform that I’m really, really keen to connect with and to communicate with and to share the information that comes out of the work I have as a Secretary of State.”

Asked about whether he would stop using X altogether, he replied: “I can see the circumstances where I would. But again I’m open minded about this kind stuff going forward. At the moment I really strive to try and communicate with people from as many backgrounds and as many perspectives as possible.”

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward
Opinion

How Labour can make public ownership of the railways a success
Yesterday
Left Foot Forward

The Passenger Railway Services Bill is only the first step to take back our railways



The Passenger Railway Services Bill was passed in the House of Lords on Wednesday. It’s an important moment in the history of our railways that ends 30 years of privatisation. Credit where it’s due, it’s a significant piece of legislation that sets this current Labour government apart from the Conservatives and even New Labour – at least on transport policy.

With ticket price hikes, crowded trains and increased cancellations, passengers have endured the failures of privatisation over many years. Whilst this bill will not solve the railways’ problems overnight, it does set the direction of travel towards a better deal for the public.

76% of us want the railways back in public hands, making it a hugely popular policy. Labour is going with the tide of public opinion and should feel confident pushing this agenda. We Own It, along with local and national groups, have campaigned hard for many years to reach this point, so we should allow ourselves a moment to mark this victory.

However, it is only a partial victory. If Labour is to make Great British Railways a raging success, there are three things that need to happen.
Bring the trains themselves into public ownership

Firstly, the government must tackle the issue of rolling stock. Under current plans, the trains themselves will stay privately owned in what amounts to an ongoing racket. The biggest profits on the railway go to the rolling stock companies (the ROSCOs) which lease out the trains, and the biggest three have parent companies in low tax jurisdictions.

£2.7 billion has been paid in dividends to their owners in the last decade, according to the RMT. In 2020, the taxpayer underwrote dividends of £950 million. Around 13% of government funding for these companies is extracted in profit. This is hugely wasteful.

The government should look at building rolling stock directly in a publicly owned company so it doesn’t have to rely on these costly middle men. This would chime with Labour’s bold ambition to invest to boost jobs and tackle the climate crisis.
Give passengers the power to elect their representatives

Secondly, the government must give passengers a real, democratic voice in the governance structures of Great British Railways. Louise Haigh has promised that passengers will be at the heart of the new railway, with a “powerful new passenger watchdog, the Passenger Standards Authority, to independently monitor standards and champion improvement in service performance”.

This authority should be a democratically elected body that passengers can vote for, not just another quango. Transport Focus already exists but doesn’t have much clout and dodges the issue of ownership which passengers care about.

Passengers need to feel that public ownership is a reality, not just rhetoric, that their views are taken into account. A West Yorkshire poll by Survation carried out for We Own It showed that 76% want community groups, drivers and local businesses to be represented on a transport board.

If passengers were organised into their own democratically accountable union or watchdog, they might make big demands, like asking for more funding to bring down fares or reopen lines. This is a risk the Government must take if it is serious about a railway which “relentlessly focuses on improving services for passengers”.
Invest in rail to reopen lines and bring down fares

The third issue is funding. Public ownership is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a successful railway. All excellent transport systems have a high level of government support and investment.

The government should invest to reduce fares and reopen lines. The UK has the highest fares in Europe for walk-on tickets on the day, making it hard for the railway to compete with the car. The TUC has found that rail fares have risen by 28% more than wages since 2010, and seasonal commuter tickets as a proportion of average wages are up to 7.5 times higher than in France, Germany, Belgium and Ireland.

The government must reduce fares to deliver on its modal shift targets to reduce emissions from transport.

The previous government set up a “Restoring Your Railway Fund” in 2020 to reopen lines and stations. Campaign for Better Transport called for this, to bring half a million people within walking distance of a train station, and allow an extra 20 million journeys a year. In just four years the fund has been hugely successful, reconnecting communities and enabling millions of train journeys.

The Dartmoor Line was fully restored in nine months and £10 million under budget, and now provides regular services. The restored Northumberland Line will bring passenger trains back between Ashington and Newcastle with six new railway stations from December 2024.

It’s truly shocking that the new Labour government has cancelled this fund, rowing back on the good decision by a Conservative government.

Every £1 invested in rail generates £2.50 of economic benefits, as Labour’s plan for rail itself highlights, so this is short sighted and misguided. It should be a no-brainer to reopen railways for the benefit of communities and the economy. The government cannot use rail to “deliver on the mission to drive growth” without reinstating this fund.
Public ownership is needed in other sectors too

So as the ink dries on the Passenger Railway Services Bill, we’re already turning our attention to the coming battles, on the railways and beyond.

Thames Water is on the brink of collapse. Decades of financial vandalism has left the company on its knees and a piece of our critical infrastructure in peril. Like a huge ponzi scheme, they are now robbing Peter to pay Paul – or to be more specific, hiking customer bills to service £18 billion of debt. In financial terms they are hugely ‘overlevaraged’. Do you know who else was ‘overleveraged’? American banks right before the global financial crash of 2007/8. There is no happy ending to this story unless the Government steps in and uses its special administration legal powers to bring the company back into public ownership.

This is not an abstract ideological discussion. Privatisation has failed and in some sectors we are reaching the point of total collapse. The country is full square behind a programme of public ownership that covers rail, mail, water, energy and more.

The railways bill has shown us a glimpse of the light at the end of the tunnel. Labour must keep the engine running on public ownership and push through to the end – otherwise we could all be left stranded in the dark.


Cat Hobbs is Director of We Own It
Excessive deregulation means that the UK is hurtling towards the next crash



Opinion
Yesterday
Left Foot Forward

Deregulation creates opportunities for bankers to take reckless risks with other people’s money, collect bonuses and destabilise economies.



A wise man once said that “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce”.

Successive UK governments have learnt so little from financial crises and the UK is hurtling towards the next crash. The country has had a banking crisis in every decade since the 1970s. Each crisis drew attention to frauds and predatory practices, but governments remain besotted with light-touch regulation. The finance industry is always bailed out and rarely bears the full cost of its own failures. After the 2007-08 crash, the obedient state provided £1,162bn of cash and guarantees (£133bn cash + £1,029bn of guarantees) to bail out banks. Another £895bn of quantitative easing was handed to capital market speculators. Households are yet to recover from this and the real median wage has hardly grown since 2008.

The tragedy is that deregulation fever is deeply rooted in institutions of government and at the behest of financial elites most of the post-2007/08 banking crash reforms have been dismantled. How long until the next crash and at what cost?

In folklore, regulators are there solely to protect people from predatory practices but that is not the case. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 introduced by the Conservative government, with full support from Labour, has returned to the pre-crash position. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has a secondary objective to support growth and competitiveness of the finance industry over the medium to long term. This is a race-to-the bottom. The industry will exert pressure on the regulator by claiming that country X has lower consumer protection and regulatory requirements, and that is making us less competitive.

This dilutes the FCA’s consumer protection duties in a sector riddled with scandals. It is hard to think of any financial product that has not been mis-sold. Car loans are the latest example. Banks gave car dealers secret commissions to entice people into taking loans. The compensation bill could hit £30bn. Rather than helping victims get speedy compensation, the FCA says banks can take up to a year to hear complaints.

Not that the FCA has ever been in a hurry to resolve cases of frauds by banks. Frauds at HBOS date back to 2002 and may exceed £1b. The FCA neither investigated nor prosecuted anyone connected with them. It deemed it to be a matter for Lloyds Bank (Lloyds acquired HBOS in 2008). To disarm critics, in 2017, Lloyds appointed former high court judge Dame Linda Dobbs to investigate and publish a report by 2018. To date, no report has been published and the FCA has not inquired into its disappearance.

Growth of the finance industry is now a major plank of the Labour government’s economic policy. The government wants the FCA to tear up rules and encourage more risk-taking across the City i.e. grow the finance industry for the sake of its own growth. The UK is supposed to be a major global financial hub but industry has been starved of investment. Despite a plethora of subsidies and tax reliefs, amongst industrialised nations the UK languishes near the bottom of the investment in productive assets league tables. In pursuit of short-term gains, the finance industry prefers speculation i.e. gambles on the price of shares, bonds, derivatives and other securities. The price of food and commodities is increasingly determined by speculation by banks, private equity and hedge funds, rather than farmers. They play a major role in creating hunger and poverty.

Deregulation has attracted plenty of predators but has never secured much needed investment in the UK economy, which requires an effective industrial strategy, education, infrastructure skills and focus on the long-term. Significant parts of UK industrial sectors such as rail, water, motor vehicles, energy, steel, shipping, airports, ports, and microchips are all owned from abroad as the finance industry has shown little appetite for long-term investment and risks.

In pursuit of short-term profits private equity has devoured town centres. Its victims include Bernard Matthews, Body Shop, Byron Burger, Casual Dining, Cath Kidson, Comet, Debenhams, Flybe, Four Seasons Health Care, HMV, Maplin, Monarch Airlines, Paperchase, Poundworld, Southern Cross, Thames Water, TM Lewin, Toys R Us and more.

Huge swathes of shadow banking, which includes private equity and hedge funds, remain unregulated. The opaque $63 trillion global industry is bigger than the regulated banking sector and is enmeshed with insurance, pension and banking sectors. Any turmoil will crash the entire economy. The governor of the Bank of England has highlighted dangers but there are no capital adequacy requirements or regular stress tests. The state actually subsidises the sector. For example, excessive debt is the prime investment strategy for private equity. The government grants tax relief on interest payments and thereby reduces the cost of debt and inflates returns to shareholders. The government has no plan to end this subsidy.

Deregulation creates opportunities for bankers to take reckless risks with other people’s money, collect bonuses and destabilise economies. In 2014 to prevent economic shocks a ‘cap’ on bankers’ bonuses was imposed. In October 2023, Conservative government, with full support from Labour, abolished the ‘cap’. Bankers are free to be reckless as they pursue riches and have been encouraged to develop an industry beyond the reach of formal regulations.

Instability is checked by higher capital buffers, but they are also being eroded. The Bank of England has watered down capital requirement rules meant to shock-proof the banking system from another 2007-08 style crash. Banks would have to increase their current capital buffers by “less than 1%” to abide by the Basel 3.1 standards. That is down from previous proposals for a 3.2% rise. Capital adequacy rules for insurers are being rolled back with the claim that this may generate £100bn of private investment in infrastructure. How much will end up in dividends and share buybacks? The more important question is what would happen when financial institutions with low capital requirements have problems? That would destabilise the economy and no doubt the government would once again bail them out with public money.

Deregulation is creating a new Eldorado for bankers. There will be no limits on bonuses and no clawback of gains made with predatory practices. Prosecutions of offending bankers are rare. During the parliamentary passage of the Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Bill I urged government to impose a clawback of salary and bonuses of executives facilitating bank crashes. The government refused and the Minister said: “it is a key principle of the resolution regime that natural and legal persons should be made liable under the civil or criminal law in the UK for their responsibility for the failure of the institution. This is delivered by Section 36 of the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013, which provides for a criminal offence where a senior manager of a bank has taken a decision which caused the failure of a financial institution”.

So, how many bankers have been prosecuted. When asked, the Minister of Justice replied: “The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database has not recorded any prosecutions under section 36 of the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013 since its introduction”.

Major political parties are obsessed with deregulation and the UK is hurtling towards the next financial crash. Regulators have been emasculated, regulation has been weakened, and enforcement is diluted. The government claims that growth of the finance sector will somehow bring economic prosperity to the UK, something it failed to do in all previous bouts of deregulation. The City has always focused on short-term returns and neglected long-term investment. That will sharpen as bankers will want higher bonuses before moving on to the next job. Equitable distribution of income and wealth to boost purchasing power of the masses, and free education to build a skilled labour force are key requirements for reinvigorating the industrial base but that is off the political agenda.

The next crash won’t just affect banks, pension funds and insurance companies; it will infect all sectors of the economy as private equity and hedge funds binging on debt now own large swathes of the high street and industry.


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.

Bus and tram workers in Greater Manchester to strike after ‘years of falling wages’

Today
LEFT FOOT FORWARD


'Strike action can still be avoided but that will require TGM sitting down with Unite and tabling an offer our members can accept.'


TweetShareWhatsAppMail


Around 200 bus and tram workers employed by Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) have voted in favour of industrial action over pay.

Unite, which represents the workers, said the “predominantly low-paid workers are angry at having suffered years of below inflation pay rises” which have resulted in their wages falling in real terms.

An offer of a £1,290 increase for all employees up to and including colleagues on an annual salary of £52,866 was rejected by the unions, which said it fails to reflect the increased cost of living. Workers above this threshold were offered a 2.5% increase.

Union members balloted included those in office-based roles, as well as frontline workers at the interchanges and information and ticket offices. It does not include frontline transport workers such as Metrolink drivers and staff (employed by KeolisAmey) or bus drivers (employed by franchised bus operators).

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said that transport for Greater Manchester workers have seen their wages eroded year after year.

“The current pay offer does nothing to rectify that. They are absolutely right to strike and they have Unite’s full support in doing so.”

The TfGM is a living wage employer and says it is “proud” of its accreditation and that it is committed to carrying on discussions with the union to avoid strikes. It explained how its pay award is made as part of the Passenger Transport Forum (PTF) alongside the West Midlands Combined Authority and West Yorkshire Combined Authority. It claims the PTF’s offer is in line with that made to the unions by the Local Government Association (LGA) for those working in local government.

Steve Warrener, managing director of Transport for Greater Manchester, told LFF: “Whilst union members have voted in favour of industrial action over pay, we’re committed to continuing discussions with the aim of avoiding strikes and minimising any impact on our passengers. We are proud to be a long-standing member of the Greater Manchester Good Employment Charter, with real living wage accreditation.”

But Unite says that TfGM is using its Passenger Forum membership as an “excuse” for not offering a higher pay rise. The union’s regional officer Howard Percival said:

“Any disruption caused to the travelling public will be entirely the fault of Transport for Greater Manchester. Its use of the Passenger Forum is just an excuse to try and get out of paying these workers fairly.

“Strike action can still be avoided but that will require TGM sitting down with Unite and tabling an offer our members can accept.”

Government policies to blame for SAs’ chronic mass unemployment



Thursday 21 November 2024, by Dominic Brown                                                                                 
The level of unemployment in South Africa is second to no other country in the world. Everyone recognises that it’s a problem, with various polls suggesting that it’s the main concern for people in the country. The problem is so bad that it is described by some as a virus. The symptoms are the widespread desperation of the majority of people in the country and deepening social tensions.

Like any illness, an incorrect diagnosis can lead to prescribing the wrong medicine (solution), resulting in worsening outcomes. Therefore, an understanding of what lies behind unemployment in South Africa is important in order to start to think about what potential solutions may be available. There are many factors that contribute to high levels of unemployment in the country. The legacy of apartheid is certainly one of them. But the unemployment rate has more than doubled since 1994, from 20% to 43%. So, what went wrong since?

Mainstream narratives commonly argue that the reason for increased joblessness in post-apartheid South Africa primarily lies with supply-side factors in the labour market—for instance, skill shortages, resulting in a mismatch between job seekers and the jobs on offer. I will offer an alternative explanation that argues that chronic mass unemployment has less to do with the lack of skills and fundamentally to do with the political-economic trajectory that South Africa embarked on post-1994.

Unemployment is not a uniquely South African problem. Unemployment occurs everywhere and during all times under a capitalist mode of production. Nevertheless, the level of unemployment varies depending on how the economy is organised. During the post-World War 2 period up until the early 1970s, many developed countries had virtually full employment. Large levels of state investment, financed through taxation and disciplining private capital, were channelled into developing public infrastructure in the post-war rebuild. This, together with the roll-out of mass public works programmes, was essential to employment and job creation.

In short, the state was a fundamental player in creating employment through investing in production and public services. This changed dramatically following the rise of neoliberalism.

Neoliberalism in general

Neoliberalism is a set of economic and political policies that views state intervention in the economy as an impediment to achieving economic and social development. It includes trade liberalisation and deregulation of finance, reducing taxes, privatisation of public institutions, fiscal prudence, and a general reduction of public spending and government debt levels. These are all ways of minimising the state’s role in the economy.

Increased emphasis was placed on investments in finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE) rather than investment in the real economy (tangible goods and services). These FIRE sectors are less employment-intensive than brick-and-mortar industries like manufacturing.

As a result of these policies, many countries’ economies, particularly developed economies, were deindustrialising—manufacturing as a share of employment and of the economy as a whole began to shrink. Existing industries have become increasingly capital-intensive (using more machinery than labour in production). As neoliberalism unfolded around the world, unemployment began to rise in most countries that adopted these policies.

South African neoliberalism

Even though unemployment is a global phenomenon, South Africa is certainly an extreme case. The post-apartheid government inherited high levels of unemployment. Large-scale public investment was necessary to re-industrialise the South African economy, to shift from dependence on the capital-intensive mining sector and diversify the economy. Expanding social spending and investing in public infrastructure and production should have been the objective. Unfortunately, the opposite unfolded during the transition from apartheid and beyond. The very macroeconomic policies that have resulted in worsening unemployment globally were implemented. They drove the premature deindustrialisation of the South African economy and undermined prospects for creating a sufficient number of decent jobs.

During the transition period, South Africa integrated into the global economy when it joined the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT) in 1993 and then the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995. This led to the reduction of trade protection policies. Tariffs and subsidies were cut. Overall, average manufacturing tariffs were cut from 23% in 1994 to 8% in 2004. This was even more than was required by the global bodies, despite there being a clear opportunity, in the immediate post-1994 period, to seek more protection rather than less, given what apartheid had done to our economy.

The cheaper imports from China, for example, came at the cost of many job losses. Manufacturing industries, important for labour-intensive employment, were negatively impacted. Over the past three decades, the contribution of the manufacturing industry to the economy has been on a downward spiral, dropping from 23% in 1994 to 12% in 2024. A major contribution to this decline came from the clothing and textile sectors—the most labour-intensive manufacturing sectors. These sectors suffered severe job losses, with a reduction of 37% of the jobs between 1996 and 2005. Between 2005 and 2021, of the more than 300,000 jobs lost in the manufacturing industry as a whole, 120,000 were from the clothing and textile sectors.

Similar trends unfolded in mining and agriculture, with the number of jobs in both declining by more than 20% between 1994 and 2019. The decline of these industries also contributed to the collapse of South Africa’s steel industry, leading to many job losses as well.

Not only were many jobs lost, but the government’s economic policies undermined the possibility of creating enough jobs to absorb job losses as well as new entrants into the labour market. Central features of the government’s economic policy over the past 30 years have been to prioritise reducing the budget deficit and to avoid increasing the level of taxes. The outcome has been inadequate social spending, a shrinking public sector and a lack of fixed investment in public infrastructure.

The role of the Reserve Bank

There are also low levels of private sector investment in the real economy. This relates, in part, to the government giving the Reserve Bank (SARB) the mandate of price stability (i.e. inflation targeting) as its primary objective. This drives up interest rates, which reduces domestic borrowing, which could enable investment in productive sectors, which would spur job creation. One useful measure of investment is the percentage of what is produced in the country (GDP) that is spent on investment in long-term things like infrastructure, machinery and buildings (fixed investment). This percentage has been declining since 2010 as a consequence of these dynamics. It then dropped dramatically in 2020 as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. While there has been some recovery, the current level of fixed investment is still below pre-pandemic levels and even below the 2007/08 level. Worse, investment in the manufacturing industry is particularly low—averaging 8% between 1994 and 2019.

The SARB’s mandate has further implications for employment. The rationale for hiking interest rates is to curb inflation in a context where there is too much money chasing too few goods. However, the majority of people in South Africa are unable to make ends meet due to structural mass unemployment and extremely low wages paid to most of those who are working. The high interest rates push up debt repayment costs for households and businesses. This means that people have less money to spend. The result is a contraction of the economy, which culminates in job losses. This reality is made stark by major economic shocks and recessions, like the global financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic, which triggered massive job losses.

There is another way

The unemployment crisis in South Africa is unsustainable. It underpins many of the social ills we are facing in our country, and makes them worse. When high interest rates come together with government’s harsh austerity economic policies, the chances for creating a large number of jobs are non-existent. This approach simply cannot create a significant number of jobs. We need a different path.

To create millions of decent jobs and livelihoods, the state has to play a leading role. Investing in the development of mass public housing and the roll-out of public transport could be important initiatives that contribute to improving people’s lives and job creation. It would also stimulate employment in other sectors in the value chain. This should come with protection for local productive industries to help grow South Africa’s manufacturing industry, which has played a significant role in generating labour-intensive employment in the past.

Amandla



International Viewpoint is published under the responsibility of the Bureau of the Fourth International. Signed articles do not necessarily reflect editorial policy. Articles can be reprinted with acknowledgement, and a live link if possible.
Reading the Present as History

In his debut novel, Thaer Husien remixes genre and takes readers on a psychedelic ride through a dystopian yet disturbingly familiar future Palestine.
November 22, 2024
Source: Africa is a Country



Set in a hauntingly plausible future, where Israel has marked a century of Palestinian occupation, Thaer Husien’s debut novel, Beside the Sickle Moon: A Palestinian Story, opens with a poetic, sonically disorienting line: “I hear the rhythmic pin-drop of muffled revenge from tunnels being dug 20 meters beneath my feet.” This is the world of Laeth Muhammad Awad, a convenience store owner in a town just outside Ramallah. For a fee, Laeth has allowed Hamas to connect his store’s backroom freezer to the group’s vast underground tunnel network, an artery of resistance running just beneath the surface of daily life under Israeli occupation. The store, which Laeth inherited from his father (who now lives in Michigan), symbolizes the immense network of forces shaping our protagonist’s life. It connects him to the Palestinian resistance and a world where political distance is possible. As Laeth listens, so do we. Sound stretches across the novel like a vibrating membrane sliding between scales: the personal and political, the intimate and the epic.

As a novel of the future, Beside the Sickle Moon is, unsurprisingly, preoccupied with temporality, attempting to reconcile the vastness of macro-historical events with the immediacy of everyday life. Sonic frequency plays a crucial role in this mediation. Laeth’s world is textured with sound: global news reports (“another thousand climate migrants killed at the US-Mexico border,” says one radio broadcaster) intermingle with jazz tunes, death metal hits, Arabic love ballads, rock and roll records, the Beatles, and even the YouTube mix, “LoFi Beats to Study and Relax to,” which Laeth sardonically calls a “classic.”

Husien has structured the novel like a vinyl record; its two parts, named “Side A” and “Side B,” gesture to the illusory simplicity of binary choices. When one side is heard, the other is always just beneath. Husien highlights this tension throughout Beside the Sickle Moon, exploring the interdependence between personal and historical time, and between the competing sides within the Palestinian resistance movement, while stressing the inevitability of having to choose.

If the novel’s music spans from the past into the readerly present, its technology extends across our present into the future. Beside the Sickle Moon’s tech is eerie in its believability. Water is so scarce that the wealthy wear VitaStim wrist implants, gills that pull moisture from the air. Holograms walk among the living, advertising products, reading the news, or appearing as deceased loved ones. And the infamous sport Gladium, where players interact with androids made of ballistic gelatin, is banned by the United Nations for facilitating human cruelty beyond imagination. Yet, amidst these disconcerting advancements, Palestinian life under occupation remains disturbingly unchanged: the same long lines at Israeli Occupation Force checkpoints and the soldiers’ capricious cruelty, the same scarcity of fresh produce, the same dishearteningly fractious political landscape.

In the bewildering complexity of late capitalism’s economic organization, a striking theory has emerged from Marxist literary criticism: Futuristic science fiction may be the most fitting genre for the historical novel today. (See Frederic Jameson’s “The Historical Novel Today,” in Antinomies of Realism, Thomas Laughlin’s essay on Antinomies, and Ian Duncan’s “History and the Novel After Lukacs.”) In 1937, Georg Lukács argued that the finest historical novels center on characters whose culture, psychology, and actions emerge organically from the specific historical conditions shaped by broader social, economic, and political forces. Lukács was, in part, responding to a literary shift after the 1848 wave of European revolutions, when the bourgeoisie quietly abandoned their universal liberal ideals to consolidate dominance over the working class. He criticized generations of bourgeois authors for sidestepping their own complicity in this power imbalance by reducing historical periods in their literature to mere aesthetic backdrops, rather than engaging with them as the material conditions from which human experience, cultural forms, and social drama arise. When making this argument, Lukács was grounded in a European context where power resided within the nation-state, cementing the historical novel as a genre focused on realism and a national perspective.

Since Lukács offered this thesis, the nation-state has become an increasingly insufficient category for comprehending these broad networks of power. Contemporary writers like Husein are inventing new vantage points from which we can analyze individual human experiences about a wider totality. Science-fiction, with its “view from the future,” allows a critical historicization of our contemporary moment. It lets us see the forest as well as the trees, revealing opportunities to challenge hidden oppressions, and forcing us to confront the dangers of staying the course.

Beside the Sickle Moon chronicles Laeth’s uncertain journey through complex political terrain, depicted from the perspective of the Fanonian “native intellectual.” Though he spent his youth immersed in local activism and organizing, Laeth reflects that the “lessons from Jung and Marx,” which he encountered at university, “only helped me understand my deepest flaws, not withstand them.” (Husien leaves open the question of whether this intellectualization is to blame for Laeth’s political deflation.) Unable to bear the human toll of endless struggle, Laeth wonders if survival—perhaps even through surrender—might be the last remaining hope for Palestinian resistance. His friends, aligned with various resistance factions, bitterly disapprove. In “Side B,” Laeth embarks on a controversial path, ultimately assuming an unexpected historical role.

One of the most chilling features of Husien’s novel as history is the world’s renewed abandonment of Palestine. In a future of systemic global crisis, nations have closed ranks and shut their eyes. Israeli mines run on the slave labor of Palestinian captives, and refugee camps have become invisibilized death zones, whose existence Laeth explains here:


Once the US pivoted to ground colonization in Gaza, Israel ran into a problem. Jordan, having spent a century playing along for better oil deals, couldn’t take in more refugees. So, taking a cue from the CCP’s “cleansing” of Uyghurs, Israel set up “vocational training centers.” Four in Gaza at first, but with the world’s attention pulled to the Great Climate Migrations, they could operate in the shadows. A boost to the black market for organs kept certain pockets happy, and without any expansionist agenda, no nation dared intervene. Genocide quietly carried on.

Although sober, dryly ironic passages like this appear in Husien’s novel as descriptive context, they are crucial to the text as a historical novel. Here, Husien deftly connects the dots between international power struggles, the global political economy, and the disastrous consequences of unchecked climate change. He lays bare how national sentiment is, in the last instance, determined by the economy. Beside the Sickle Moon fuses these macro-historical forces with Laeth’s experience of daily life: his social worlds, his pleasures and pains, his hopes and fears, the array of available choices, and the choices that the resistance makes for him.

Tensions between resistance factions—familiar groups like the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, as well as fictional newcomers on the scene—drive the novel’s plot, while Laeth’s political shame and crisis of political identity form its emotional core. Despite constant reminders of his forefathers’ courage, the sanctity of martyrdom, and the unshakable hope animating Palestinian identity and resistance, Laeth’s fighting spirit has been eroded by the constant march of death. But, with his friends spread across the political map, Laeth is not without choice: his cousin Aylul is an increasingly militant actor building the ranks of Al Mubarizun, “the final resistance,” a radical, fictional secular offshoot of Hamas; his neighbors are active Hamas members; his ex-girlfriend is the daughter of a top figure in the Palestinian Authority, who are depicted as collaborators doing backdoor deals with Israel; and Laeth’s latest acquaintance has joined “The Forgotten Ones,” generally despised by both Israelis and Palestinians. The Forgotten Ones—another fictional group—promote “peaceful coexistence,” openly collaborate with Israel, and run compounds where Palestinians and Israelis live and work side-by-side. For Laeth, each of these bodies is compromised in some intractable way. The wealthy bureaucrats of the Palestinian Authority run a slick, diplomatic bureaucracy from sparkling skyscrapers among desperate urban poverty; Hamas’ tactics and religious ideology are increasingly outdated; the high-risk militant actions of Al Mubarizun are equally high in casualties; and joining The Forgotten Ones is tantamount to betrayal of history and the nation. Yet, because his world opens onto both opulence and sordid desperation, abstinence is the most compromised position of all.

Laeth’s experience—his social relationships, his pleasures and pains, his hopes and fears, and especially his immediate sensory world—is portrayed in dense, enigmatic language, which is one of two distinct modes of the novel’s prose. When Laeth listens to Hamas members dig their tunnels, he thinks: “the acrid nostalgia of what should have been keeps their muscles from failing.” When approaching his car: “Gray sleet stardust painted on metal curvature meant to resist nature’s might, stands on twenty-inch black aluminum legs, each autonomous from the other. Shadow-tinted LEDs gaze unblinkingly at twilight, eager to witness land ravished.” In contrast, when political action erupts—protests, underground journeys, life-or-death decisions—Husien’s language sharpens and the novel jolts into urgent clarity.

Oscillating between dense poetry and blunt prose makes Beside the Sickle Moon a particularly unruly novel. The way Husein defamiliarizes language when it comes to Laeth’s perspective is dizzying—at times even confusing—but this disorientation is also part of the novel’s force. Questioning whether “aluminum legs” are an advanced technology or Laeth’s metaphor for his car’s wheels is a sign that you, the reader, are a stranger to his world. Slipping into Laeth’s shoes is not really an option. Husien’s refusal to grant us easy access to Laeth’s experience of a multigenerational Nakba—not just a dystopian Palestine in which outsiders are all implicated—should make us question whether we can claim any fluent understanding of it. The obscurity of Laeth’s psycho-somatic experience can also be read as a rendering of collective trauma so overwhelming that it resists linguistic transmission. Poetic language, however, rejects the illusion of transparency, allowing it to capture something of the inexpressible through indirect means. We might touch it, feel it, have an impression of it, but we can’t understand it. When we feel as though we can really enter a character’s mind and body, and truly grasp them, it is too easy for a reader to accept their experiences of suffering as our own—until we put down the book. And the danger is that emotional catharsis allows an abdication of political responsibility.

In its navigation between temporal scale, poetry and prose, and political contestation, Beside the Sickle Moon rises from the ruins of the present into a future from which our current configurations of power can be seen from a clarifying distance. Although we cannot clearly experience this future from the inside, and it is one where people are bruised, fragmented, and torn, and large-scale violence has reached even more sickening heights, it is also a future where direct action and committed resistance are alive and raw.

By insisting that the fight for Palestinian liberation is still alive after a century of occupation, Husien affirms that resistance is not futile. Against the magnitude of global forces dominating our contemporary historical conditions, we, the people of the world in fierce solidarity, are our only hope.


Londiwe Gamedze writes about African and Black American literature and political history. She is a PhD candidate in English at UC Berkeley and writing her dissertation on political attitudes in the novels of Miriam Tlali, Bessie Head, and Nadine Gordimer.