It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Sunday, September 15, 2024
EU naval mission attempts to salvage burning oil tanker in Red Sea
Anew attempt has begun to try to salvage an oil tanker burning in the Red Sea after attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels, a European Union naval mission said on Saturday.
The EU’s Operation Aspides published images dated Saturday of its vessels escorting ships heading to the Greek-flagged oil tanker Sounion.
The mission has “been actively involved in this complex endeavour, by creating a secure environment, which is necessary for the tugboats to conduct the towing operation,” the EU said.
The Sounion came under attack from the Houthis beginning Aug. 21. The vessel had been staffed by a crew of 25 Filipinos and Russians, as well as four private security personnel, who were taken by a French destroyer to nearby Djibouti.
The Houthis later planted explosives aboard the ship and detonated them. That’s led to fears the ship’s 1 million barrels of crude oil could spill into the Red Sea.
The Houthis have targeted more than 80 vessels with missiles and drones since the war in Gaza started in October. They seized one vessel in the campaign that also killed four sailors. One of the sunken vessels, the Tutor, went down after the Houthis planted explosives aboard it and after its crew abandoned it due to an earlier attack, the rebel group later acknowledged.
Other missiles and drones have either been intercepted by a U.S.-led coalition in the Red Sea or failed to reach their targets.
The rebels maintain that they target ships linked to Israel, the U.S. or the U.K. to force an end to Israel’s campaign against Hamas in Gaza. However, many of the ships attacked have little or no connection to the conflict, including some bound for Iran.
PHILIPPINES
Siphoning of oil from sunken tanker completed
MANILA, Philippines — The siphoning of oil from the sunken MT Terranova was finished on Friday with an oil recovery rate of 97.43 percent, almost two months after it sank off the coast of Bataan province, according to the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG).
The PCG said the contracted salvor, Harbor Star Shipping Services Inc., reported that it collected 1,415,954 liters of oil and an additional 17,725 kilograms of solid oily waste.
Harbor Star explained that “the remaining 37,867 liters, accounting for 2.57 percent of the total oil cargo, were lost due to various factors such as biodegradation, dissipation, absorption by sorbent booms, and unpumpable sludge left in the tanks.”
The recovered oil amounted to about 1.3 million liters of the original cargo, costing more than P100 million. Terranova, owned by Shogun Ships Co. Inc., capsized on July 25 in rough waters about 7 kilometers east of Limay town in Bataan province, leaving one of the 17 crew dead.
Climate march shuts down Hague motorway during police strike
THE HAGUE (AFP) – Extinction Rebellion (XR) climate activists blocked a major motorway running through The Hague yesterday, their “most disruptive” action yet to protest against billions of euros in Dutch fossil fuel subsidies.
The demonstration coincided with a police strike over pensions.
While officers were present in case of emergencies, they were not set to break up the protest as usually happens. Many of the activists had conducted a week-long march from Arnhem in the east of the Netherlands that culminated in the protest on the A12 motorway that serves The Hague.
XR said some protesters planned to take advantage of the police absence to camp out overnight in the motorway tunnels.
“We will keep coming back until the subsidies are abolished,” said XR spokeswoman Rozemarijn van ‘t Einde, adding that they amounted to between EUR39.7 and EUR46.4 billion per year.
Authorities have not ruled out shutting off large sections of the motorway to traffic to ensure the activists’ safety.
The XR group regularly targets the A12 motorway and police often arrest hundreds of protesters.
Extinction Rebellion activists block the A12 motorway near The Hague in the Netherlands. PHOTO: AFP
British man and Americans among 37 people sentenced to death on coup charges in Congo
Saturday 14 September 2024
American Marcel Malanga, fourth right, stands with others during a court verdict in Congo on Friday.Credit: AP
A British man is among the 37 people who have been sentenced to death in Congo after being convicted on charges of participating in a coup attempt.
The defendants, most of them Congolese but also including three Americans, a Belgian and a Canadian, have five days to appeal the verdict on charges that include attempted coup, terrorism and criminal association. Fourteen people were acquitted in the trial, which opened in June.
The open-air military court in the capital, Kinshasa, convicted the 37 defendants and imposed “the harshest penalty, that of death” in the verdict delivered in French by presiding judge Freddy Ehuma.
The UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office made the following statement on the case: “We are providing consular assistance to a British man detained in DRC and are in contact with the local authorities”.
“We have made representations about the use of the death penalty to the DRC at the highest levels, and we will continue to do so.”
It was unable to provide any further details about the man.
Richard Bondo, the lawyer who defended the six foreigners, disputed whether the death penalty could currently be imposed in Congo, despite its reinstatement earlier this year, and said his clients had inadequate interpreters during the investigation of the case.
"We will challenge this decision on appeal,” Mr Bondo said.
Six people were killed during the botched coup attempt led by the little-known opposition figure Christian Malanga in May that targeted the presidential palace and a close ally of President Felix Tshisekedi.
Malanga was fatally shot while resisting arrest soon after live-streaming the attack on his social media, the Congolese army said.
Malanga’s 21-year-old son Marcel Malanga, who is a US citizen, and two other Americans were convicted in the coup attempt. He told the court that his father had forced him and his high school friend to take part in the attack.
“Dad had threatened to kill us if we did not follow his orders,” Marcel Malanga said.
Benjamin Reuben Zalman-Polun, left, Marcel Malanga and Tyler Thompson, all American citizens, attend a court verdict in Congo.Credit: AP
Other members of the ragtag militia recounted similar threats from the elder Malanga, and some described being duped into believing they were working for a volunteer organisation.
Marcel's mother, Brittney Sawyer, maintains that her son is innocent and was simply following his father, who considered himself president of a shadow government in exile.
In the months since her son's arrest, Ms Sawyer has focused her energy on fundraising to send him money for food, hygiene products and a bed.
He has been sleeping on the floor of his cell at the Ndolo military prison and is suffering from a liver disease, she said.
The other Americans are Tyler Thompson, 21, who flew to Africa from Utah with the younger Malanga for what his family believed was a free vacation, and Benjamin Reuben Zalman-Polun, 36, who is reported to have known Christian Malanga through a gold mining company.
The company was set up in Mozambique in 2022, according to an official journal published by Mozambique’s government, and a report by the Africa Intelligence newsletter.
Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.
US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told reporters in Washington on Friday that the federal government was aware of the verdict. The department has not declared the three Americans wrongfully detained, making it unlikely that US officials would try to negotiate their return.
“We understand that the legal process in the DRC allows for defendants to appeal the court’s decision," Mr Miller said. "Embassy staff have been attending these proceedings as they’ve gone through the process. We continue to attend the proceedings and follow the developments closely.”
Mr Thompson had been invited on an Africa trip by the younger Malanga, his former high school football teammate in a Salt Lake City suburb.
Other teammates alleged that Marcel had offered up to $100,000 (£76,000) to join him on a “security job” in Congo, and they said he seemed desperate to bring along an American friend.
Mr Thompson’s family maintains he had no knowledge of the elder Malanga’s intentions, no plans for political activism and didn’t even plan to enter Congo.
He and the Malangas were meant to travel only to South Africa and Eswatini, his stepmother, Miranda Thompson, told The Associated Press.
Get ready for the next Great Resignation as workers say they're burned out and yearning for joy
Workers in search of happiness are reassessing what success means to them
Charlie Elizabeth Culverhouse
THE BIG ISSUE 14 Sep 2024
Illustration: Big Issue / orignial image: Shutterstock
Whatever happened to the Great Resignation? That remarkable spring in 2022 when 442,000 people in the UK handed in their notice and flocked to pastures new. It was a record number and still is. But it’s set to be broken.
Eloise Skinner was one of those who took the plunge in 2022. Leaving her job as a corporate lawyer, she was spurred on by those around her making the change and handed in her notice – though it took guts. “The decision was a slow process,” she says. “I’d already been moving into a more self-employed way of working and lockdown had given me time to really think about what I wanted to do. There were quite a few people resigning around the same time as well, so I definitely didn’t feel alone.”
After leaving her job, Skinner retrained as a psychotherapist and though she says she “works with more intensity now”, it’s something she doesn’t mind as she enjoys her work a lot more. That seems to be the main driving force behind all resignations: finding more enjoyment, whether that’s in our work or personal lives.
“It’s like we’re all on this treadmill, running towards some nebulous idea of ‘success’ and then one day we look up and wonder, ‘Is this really it?”, Rychel Johnson, a mental health expert and clinical counsellor says. “Society has conditioned us to equate success with happiness; get the degree, land the job, climb the ladder – it’s a neat little formula we’re sold. But life has a way of throwing curveballs that make us question this equation.”
There’s a particular turning point when resignation becomes inevitable, Johnson adds. Burnout. “We’ve been sprinting so hard that we’ve forgotten how to walk, let alone smell the roses. And work guilt is like this constant background noise, making us feel bad for even considering a life beyond our career.”
So what do you do when you realise that success is not making you happy? Even if it’s something you wholeheartedly want, resignation is daunting.
“Giving up our careers creates a lot of change in our lives and truly learning how to feel more accepting of change is a skill that requires practice,” Dr Sophie Mort, a mental health expert for the Headspace app, says. “We can start by creating the space and time to reflect on and explore what we love and enjoy. Once we’ve spent some time reflecting, we might consider taking a local beginner class to try something new.”
She urges people to approach these new experiences with an open mind and go into them with zero expectations of being good at or even enjoying them. “This is simply a time to help us reconnect with ourselves and enjoy things outside of work,” she explains.
“We can use this time to explore and find new interests and passions that bring us joy – which is truly an incredible opportunity. It’s a time to reflect and ask ourselves important questions about our desires and needs, and what we want our lives to look like in all areas, not just work.”
To figure out what you might want to do, either hobby or work-wise, start by asking yourself some simple questions: What activities have I enjoyed in the past? What have I always been curious to do but never tried?
Skinner has found a whole host of things to do. As well as working as a therapist, she teaches and sits on the youth board of the UK’s national social mobility charity. She’s also written two books. In short, she’s not slowed down. But she has found more enjoyment in a career that genuinely brings her happiness – and gives her time for a few lie-ins and late nights.
Johnson reminds us that, “Happiness isn’t a destination we arrive at once we’ve ticked off enough boxes. What we can learn from this shift, from all these resignations, is the importance of balance and self-awareness. It’s not necessarily about abandoning ambition, but rather expanding our definition of what a rich, successful life looks like.”
And that doesn’t have to mean resigning. “Maybe success isn’t just about that corner office, but also about the joy of a weekend hike or the satisfaction of mastering a new recipe.”
Whether you’re resigning or just cutting down on hectic work hours, it’s likely you’ll experience work guilt. Unfortunately, it’s become the norm. “We’ve been led to believe that being constantly busy is a standard we should all strive to reach,” Dr Mort says.
To ease the guilt, she adds, “it’s important to remember that our value isn’t defined solely by our productivity and output.”
Horses help regenerate wildflower meadows
Joshua Askew BBC News, South East
Lucy Evans Scotney Castle has started using horses for mowing duties to help grow wildflower meadows
Time-honoured techniques are bringing nature back to life in Kent.
Scotney Castle, near Lamberhurst, is owned by the National Trust and has started using horses for mowing duties to help grow wildflower meadows on the estate.
The Oakwood Clydesdale horses - called Percy and Frank – are used as they cause less damage to the soil and wildlife when clearing vegetation compared to modern machines, the trust said.
They are also more environmentally friendly than heavy machinery since they do not need fossil fuels, it adds.
'Amazing to see'
After a small mowing test with the horses last year, Scotney Castle ranger Richard Newman said wildflowers began to “bounce back” quicker than when tractors were used.
"It was amazing to see. We noticed that the meadow bounced back, with more wildflowers,” he said.
"We believe this is mainly because the horses cause much less compaction of the soil, so the wildflowers are able to break through again quickly.”
He added: "The light fertilisation from horse manure is an added bonus.”
Lucy Evans Scotney Castle, near Lamberhurst, is owned by the National Trust
The National Trust said mowing helped regenerate wildflowers as removing vegetation like grasses and nettles reduced the level nutrients in the soil - a condition favoured by wildflowers.
Flowers then attract insects and birds, which improve biodiversity, the trust adds.
Mr Newman said there was a long tradition of using animals on the land in the High Weald, where Scotney Castle is located.
He said that historically oxen were used by farmers to negotiate the deep valleys, small fields and numerous streams and rivers of the area.
"Sadly these older practices are dying out, but it’s worth trying to get them back again," he added.
U.K. Labour strategists advise Harris on winning from the center left After Keir Starmer led the Labour Party to a big win in July’s election, U.K. strategists say they have relevant insights to share with Kamala Harris’s campaign.
Vice President Kamala Harris speaks at a rally at Bojangles Coliseum in Charlotte on Thursday. (Logan Cyrus for The Washington Post)
LONDON — Strategists linked to Britain’s Labour Party have been offering advice to Kamala Harris about how to earn back disaffected voters and run a winning campaign from the center left.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer didn’t meet with Harris when visiting the White House on Friday. But two of his former top advisers were in Washington this week briefing Democratic strategists and pollsters from the Harris campaign. Last month, a Labour Party delegation traveled to Chicago for the Democratic National Convention.
Since Harris became the Democratic presidential candidate, she has expanded the universe of people helping with her campaign, bringing on board experienced hands from the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
The British political gurus say they haven’t been recruited by the Harris operation and aren’t getting paid. But after Starmer led a revived Labour Party to a thumping election victory in July, British strategists say they have relevant insights to share.
Harris’s campaign has already been sounding a lot like Starmer’s. Like him, she is a former prosecutor who regularly cites that experience to portray herself as tough on crime and border security.
The two campaigns have deployed strikingly similar messaging. “Stop the chaos, turn the page, start to rebuild” was Labour’s slogan as it made a case against the Conservative Party that had been in power for 14 years. “We’re not going back. It’s time to turn the page … and to end the chaos,” Harris said, trying to position herself as the change candidate in her debate with former president Donald Trump.
Keir Starmer launches Labour's general-election manifesto on June 13 in Manchester, England. (Anthony Devlin/Getty Images)
Crucially, the swing voters Labour sought to win over, and the Democrats are now trying to reach, are people who are concerned above all about the economy.
British pollster Deborah Mattinson, a former top adviser to Starmer, and Claire Ainsley, Starmer’s former director of policy, jointly briefed Harris campaign staffers this past week on a target demographic they call “hero voters.”
In Britain, Ainsley told The Washington Post, these tended to be voters who had traditionally backed Labour but who had supported the 2016 Brexit referendum and the “Get Brexit Done” election campaign of Boris Johnson’s Conservative Party in 2019. They were struggling with daily living costs and wanted change.
“They felt like hope for a better life was getting out of reach,” said Ainsley, who now works with the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) think tank in Washington.
Labour under Starmer won them back — partly by capitalizing on a strong anti-incumbent sentiment, but also by emphasizing economic issues, such as affordable housing and job security.
Christabel Cooper, a polling expert with Labour Together, a think tank with ties to the Labour Party, said the “ruthless targeting” of specific swing voters helped deliver an “incredibly efficient” vote. Labour won 63 percent of the seats in Parliament with only 34 percent of the vote share.
So who might be Harris’s hero voters? Ainsley and Mattison commissioned polling and focus groups that led them to a similar category of voters in the United States who expressed concern about the erosion of the middle class, frustration with the cost of groceries and general unhappiness with the status quo.
“They don’t love Trump, but they do believe he is offering change,” Ainsley said. At the same time, “they are open to Harris, but they want to see more of what her offer for them might be.”
To win them over, Ainsley said, Harris should articulate specific policies on core issues “over and over again,” like the tax benefits for young families and small businesses she brought up in the presidential debate.
Harris, like Starmer, has emphasized her middle-class upbringing. While Starmer wants to facilitate “wealth creation,” Harris would build an “opportunity economy.”
But the message shouldn’t be just about the economy, said Mike Tapp, a Labour lawmaker who was part of the contingent at the Democratic convention.
Others in the group included Morgan McSweeney, the brains behind Labour’s election campaign; David Evans, the general secretary of the Labour Party; Jon Ashworth, who runs Labour Together; and Lucy Rigby, another Labour lawmaker.
Tapp told The Post about speaking at an event on appealing to working-class voters. His advice? “To not ignore concerns around immigration and borders.” He noted that Harris was talking about taking on transnational criminal organizations much like Labour has pledged to “smash the gangs” that smuggle people into Britain illegally.
Starmer has repeatedly said he’d be ready to work with Harris or Trump — offering the sort of diplomatic niceties to be expected from a foreign leader.
But Jon Tonge, a politics expert at the University of Liverpool, said there was no doubt about Labour’s preferences in the U.S. presidential election. Labour and Democrats may not be ideological soul mates, but they are broadly similar in many areas. “Starmer will be hoping and praying for a Harris victory,” he said.
There have long been close links between the two political parties — though more often the advice has flowed in the other direction. Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg worked for Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband; consultant Bob Shrum worked with Blair; pollsters Joel Benenson and Pete Brodnitz advised Brown; and Barack Obama strategist David Axelrod worked with Miliband.
Labour insiders interviewed for this article said that when Starmer became party leader in 2020, and Labour was trailing in the polls, Labour strategists spoke with Democrats in the United States, as well as center-left parties in Australia, Germany and Norway.
Tonge agreed that emphasizing economic issues in battleground states was sound, but he stressed that Labour’s path to victory was complex — while the party did actively win back some swing voters, it also benefited from a populace that wanted to chuck out the incumbents and a splintering of the vote on the right.
There are, of course, also numerous differences between Britain’s parliamentary elections and U.S. presidential ones. Among those distinctions: A British party that fields contestants in all constituencies can spend just over 34 million pounds ($44.6 million); Harris raised $47 million in the 24 hours after Tuesday’s debate.
“We have a very different system,” said Benenson, the American pollster, who worked for Obama and with Labour’s Brown. “My advice to the Harris campaign, respectfully, would be to ignore advice and do what you’re doing. You’re winning.”
Karla Adam is a London correspondent for The Washington Post, which she joined in 2006. She is a former president of the Association of American Correspondents in London.follow on X @karlaadam
Macron ‘gives middle finger’ to French voters, appoints fascist-approved Prime Minister
“Relying on (the National Rally’s) support is not a problem for the centrist Macron, it would seem, so long as the [left-wing] NPF is blocked & big business is kept happy.”
By C.J. Atkins
After delaying for months, President Emmanuel Macron has finally told the French people directly that he is ignoring their votes. In July parliamentary elections, they put the left-wing New Popular Front (NPF) coalition in first place, but on Thursday Macron named right-wing figure Michel Barnier as the country’s next prime minister.
Macron cobbled together enough votes in the National Assembly for Barnier by securing the support of the fascist National Rally party of Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella—the very forces he previously pledged to fight.
The president presented his Ensemble/Renaissance party as the anti-fascist option in the elections this summer, but he allied with National Rally in late August as part of a scheme to keep the labor-backed NPF out of power.
Against all political common sense, Macron called the elections after National Rally emerged as the biggest single party in the EU parliamentary vote in June. Formerly known as the National Front, the party was founded in 1972 by anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Jean-Marie Le Pen to unite the extreme nationalist right.
Though it has tried to paper over its neo-Nazi roots, the party maintains its strong anti-immigrant positions, and members are frequently outed as racists in the press. Like fascist parties elsewhere in Europe, National Rally has also taken steps to make itself amenable to the neoliberal ideology of the capitalist ruling class. It has ditched its perennial anti-EU stance and accepted the euro currency, for instance.
Relying on its support is not a problem for the centrist Macron, it would seem, so long as the NPF is blocked and big business is kept happy.
It had the backing of organized labor, progressive social movements, women’s groups, and climate justice activists. The 150-point NPF program included major taxes on the country’s biggest fortunes, huge investments in public services and housing, the repeal of Macron’s unpopular “pension reform” that raised the retirement age, price freezes to combat inflation, a rejection of EU austerity rules, an increase in the minimum wage, and much more.
Together, the NPF parties beat the predictions of pundits and knocked the National Rally into third place. Macron’s group, Ensemble/Renaissance, came up the middle and secured second. Coming in first gave the NPF the legal right to nominate a PM and cabinet. Openly defying voters, however, Macron spent weeks peddling one excuse after another to delay appointing Lucie Castets, the NPF’s choice.
Macron didn’t openly admit at the time that he was working with the right wing, but the math provided by his own office shows he joined forces with Le Pen to install Barnier. The anti-immigrant stance that the new PM took while running for president in 2021, when he said immigration was “out of control,” no doubt helped convince National Rally to support him. Le Pen declared that her party is “waiting to see” what policies Barnier will put forward and what “compromises” he will make with them on the budget.
Predictably, the NPF coalition partners have all strongly rejected Macron’s coup from above.
PCF Senator Pierre Ouzoulias called Barnier “the minority candidate of a minority party, appointed by a defeated president, in the service of…anti-social policy.” He said the appointment is a “terrible blow to democracy and the French people.”
The party’s national secretary, Fabien Roussel, said that Barnier is “the antithesis of the message sent in the legislative elections.” For Macron to choose him and pass over the NPF’s nominee is nothing less than “a middle finger to the French people.”
“I am very angry, like millions of French voters who I think feel betrayed,” said Castets. “The president is placing himself in cohabitation with the National Rally,” she said, vowing to table a motion of no confidence against Barnier.
The Socialist Party pointed out that Barnier and his party did not join in the effort to save the Republic from fascism and that Macron’s undemocratic actions signal “a crisis of the regime.”
“Macron was looking for a clone capable of continuing the policy he has been pursuing for seven years,” said Marine Tondelier, leader of the Ecologists party. “He found him in Michel Barnier.”
The General Confederation of Labor—the CGT, France’s biggest trade union central—laid responsibility for Barnier’s appointment at the feet of the capitalist class. Rallying outside the headquarters of the country’s leading bosses’ organization—the Movement of the Enterprises of France, MEDEF—Friday morning, union members declared France has experienced a “democratic abduction.”
Pasting posters across the façade of MEDEF’s building proclaiming “Increase in salaries,” “Repeal the pension reform,” and other labor slogans, workers fought with staff who came outside to try to stop their protest. The workers prevailed, and the posters went up.
The demonstration at MEDEF, Caubère said, is only the beginning, a “symbolic action” of what will come soon. “What is important for workers is not the name of the Prime Minister, but the policies implemented…. We demand the implementation of the program of the New Popular Front.”
All eyes are now on the NPF leaders and the trade unions to see what their next move will be in the battle to save French democracy.
C.J. Atkins is the managing editor at People’s World. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from York University in Toronto and has a research and teaching background in political economy and the politics and ideas of the American left- you can follow him on Twitter/X.
Bar worker Josh has lived in the same house in east London for six years. But “now the landlord fancies upping the rent”—so he and his three flatmates are being evicted.
Josh is one of the thousands of victims of Section 21 “no fault” evictions, which a new Renters Reform Bill could ban.
“They didn’t give us a specific reason,” he told Socialist Worker. “Section 21 means they can just kick us out. When it’s an urgent situation, when you have two months to find a house, it’s a very difficult and stressful situation.
“People are working so they have barely any time where they can actually look for a house and go through the application process.”
Josh says an end to no-fault evictions would be a real step forward. Under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, landlords can evict tenants—without any reason—at a two month notice period.
Last year alone, some 26,000 households faced homelessness due to no-fault evictions.
The Renters’ Reform Bill, which Labour introduced into the House of Commons on Wednesday, would introduce some more protections for private renters.
A Section 21 ban—which would be implemented by next summer—would require landlords to give a sufficient reason for eviction and four months’ notice.
The Bill would set deadlines for landlords to tackle dangerous conditions in their rental properties and potentially fine them.
It’s also expected to allow tenants to end rental agreements with just two months’ notice from the first day they move in. And it would abolish blanket bans on renting to people with children or benefit claimants.
But housing campaigners say it needs to go much further. The proposed Bill does not give any support to those facing eviction.
Ben Twomey, chief executive of Generation Rent, said, “Renters risk being left with no financial support to find a new home in difficult circumstances. The government must take action to soften this blow.”
Josh described the “ridiculous” task of trying to find a new place to live in a short space of time. “The process of applying for housing is ridiculous—you don’t get any information from landlords or the letting agencies,” he said.
“There are just loads of forms and credit checks—and that’s before you even view the house and know it’s suitable for your needs. This makes it so hard to find a house before you actually get evicted.
“And that’s before it gets down to it being affordable and suitable.”
Labour’s bill fails to address the critical issue facing private renters—escalating prices. Twomey said, “The Bill will ban scheduled unaffordable rent increases being written into contracts, but we remain vulnerable to backdoor rent-hike evictions.
“If landlords are allowed to continue with unchecked and unaffordable rent rises, thousands more of us will still be forced into poverty and onto the streets.”
The Bill would only allow landlords to raise rents once a year—and only to the “market rate”. But landlords often set that “market rate” themselves and, with no further controls, the measure does nothing to address spiralling rent prices.
Josh said, “People can’t afford housing—that’s the long and the short of it. Families are getting priced out of London because they can’t afford to live there. Our landlord has upped the rent while we’ve been here—but even then, we’re nowhere near finding a new house for the same price.”
If Labour was serious about helping renters, it would impose rent controls and start a mass council house building programme. “Would rent controls be a start? Yes, but they wouldn’t be enough at all,” Josh said.
“We need a complete roll back of prices. Housing right now isn’t affordable, so a cap on something already unaffordable is just simply not enough.
“Housing needs to be taken out of the private sector—it shouldn’t be down to individuals. The fact that people can get evicted because the landlord wants to make more money from a property they don’t need is absolutely disgusting.
“Housing is a social need, so it should be treated as such—there must be a mass redistribution of homes.”
But Labour doesn’t want to do that. And it’s no wonder—when three of the five biggest landlords in the Commons are Labour MPs. It will take a fight under the Labour government to win homes for all.
Keir Starmer in Washington: Should the UK back Ukrainian strikes into Russia?
James Moules
13th September, 2024
Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to meet US President Joe Biden in Washington today amid mounting speculation Western allies could green-light Ukrainian use of their missiles to strike inside Russia.
Ukraine has long pushed for greater licence in its use of Western weapons – including Anglo-French Storm Shadow missiles – as the country fights back against the Russian invasion.
But many Western leaders have shown reluctance to allow this since the conflict began, over fears it could lead to wider escalation.
However, supporters of Ukraine argue the nation needs the ability to hit targets inside Russia to be able to stage an effective resistance – and point to Russia’s use of foreign-sourced munitions against cities in Ukraine.
Responding to remarks by Russian President Vladimir Putin – who suggested last night granting this permission would be treated as the “direct participation of Nato countries” in the war – Starmer said: “Russia started this conflict. Russia illegally invaded Ukraine. Russia can end this conflict straight away.”
MSPs called on to tackle Scotland’s public debt crisis
MEMBER OF SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT
SEPTEMBER 11, 2024
The acclaimed Aberlour Children’s Charity joined with Govan Law Centre yesterday to call upon MSPs to make transformational changes to the way public debt is collected in Scotland to help end child poverty.
Both Scottish charities hosted a Scottish Parliament event that pressed MSPs to support a transformational law reform bill, which would include radical initiatives to change the way public bodies in Scotland collect debt to ensure children are not trapped in, or pushed into, poverty.
Low-income families across Scotland are facing a growing debt crisis, with public debts such as council tax arrears, rent, and school meal debts trapping them in an unbreakable cycle of poverty. Aberlour’s research and frontline experience found that 75% of the total debt supported by their Tayside Hardship Fund was to pay off debts owed to public bodies.
Aberlour and Govan Law Centre are also calling on the Scottish Government to take immediate action to reform the current public debt recovery processes, which often punish, rather than support, struggling families.
Amongst other measures, the charities are advocating for permanent support to parents in school meal debt, as well as a unified, compassionate approach to debt management that prioritises the well-being of families and children over punitive collection practices.
The charities are saying clearly that the Scottish Government must change course from the current public debt collection approaches to ones that actively support families in overcoming financial hardship.
Positive government intervention is essential not only to alleviate the financial strain on families but also to improve mental health, strengthen family well-being, and prevent issues such as homelessness and the potential loss of children to care systems.
“I felt like I was stuck in a hole and couldn’t get out,” said one parent supported by Aberlour. “Debt is like a shadow you can’t escape,” agreed another.
SallyAnn Kelly OBE, Chief Executive of Aberlour said: “At Aberlour, we stand at the forefront of supporting Scotland’s most disadvantaged children and families. Scotland, and indeed the entire UK, are facing a debt crisis that demands urgent and radical action. Public debt is a key factor in entrenching and increasing child poverty, and those burdened by debt need support, not punishment.
“We are delighted to be working with the Govan Law Centre to urgently call for new legislation that reforms public debt recovery processes. Government intervention is essential to relieve the crushing debt burden on disadvantaged families, enabling them to thrive. The welfare state should be a safety net, not a financial trap.
“Public bodies, including governments, should help people escape debt rather than trapping them in unsustainable and unmanageable financial situations. Positive government interventions to reduce debts not only alleviate financial strain but also enhance physical and mental well-being, strengthen family bonds, and foster inclusivity for children with disabilities.
“Governments and political parties must urgently address the policies that lead to public debt and reform current debt recovery practices to be more humane, compassionate, and sustainable.
“This session was a critical opportunity for MSPs to engage with Aberlour and the Govan Law Centre and hear first-hand from us about our experiences supporting people affected by public debt.
“We were pleased that so many MSPs from all parties attended this important event and committed to supporting the necessary reforms to public debt recovery systems. These changes are vital to breaking the cycle of poverty and ensuring every child in Scotland has the opportunity to thrive.”
Mike Dailly, Solicitor Advocate at Govan Law Centre said: “Govan Law Centre believes that the public debt crisis campaign with the Aberlour Children’s Charity is a vital initiative to shift the dial on child poverty. Around 240,000 children live in relative poverty in Scotland and sadly this unacceptable number has remained fairly static since 2007.
“While the Scottish Child Payment has helped, it hasn’t lifted 100,000 children out of poverty as the Scottish Government claims. The evidence for this claim relies upon projected modelling based on a range of policy assumptions.
“We know that the uncoordinated and often aggressive collection of debt by public bodies can trap or push families into unnecessary poverty and misery. The obvious lever available to the Scottish Government and Parliament is to use Scottish law to create a coordinated, fairer and more intelligent system of public debt collection in Scotland.”
Key recommendations include:
Permanent School Meal Debt Relief: Extend the Scottish Government’s one-year school meal debt write-off permanently and ensure it is implemented across the UK.
Unified Debt Repayment System: Develop a centralised, affordable repayment method for managing multiple public sector debts to ensure deductions are manageable and fair.
Prohibition of Aggressive Debt Collection: Prohibit aggressive debt collection practices that push families deeper into poverty, promoting compassionate and supportive approaches instead.
Debt Amnesty Programme: Implement a comprehensive debt amnesty programme targeting low-income families, particularly for debts owed to public bodies.
“As trade unions, we still have a major fight on our hands”
SEPTEMBER 12, 2024
An edited version of the speech Sarah Woolley made to the Trade Union Coordinating Group fringe meeting at this week’s TUC Conference.
One of Keir Starmer’s five ‘missions’ for government is “to kickstart economic growth to secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 with good jobs and productivity growth in every part of the country making everyone, not just a few, better off.”
That’s a goal we could all share, on the condition that growth is delivered on a sustainable basis which is compatible with reaching our climate targets.
But what is much less clear is exactly how and when is this growth going to happen?
People can’t afford any more years of economic failure. After more than 14 years of Tory austerity, and a devastating cost of living crisis, working class living standards have been absolutely hammered.
The Trussell Trust gave out 3.1 million emergency food parcels over the last 12 months (over a million of which were for children), a 94% increase on the previous year. They also saw a rise of 27% in the number of pensioners presenting at their food banks.
Food banks are now being regularly used to support households with at least one member in paid employment, such is the rise in ‘in-work poverty’. The Foodworkers on the Breadline report published by our union shows that pay and conditions in the food sector itself means that the workers who keep Britain fed are worried about feeding themselves and their families. Nearly 70% of workers who responded to the survey worried that their wages were not enough to put good food on the table, while over half reported that they had experience of running out of food.
Austerity has had a devastating impact on people’s lives, and public services are at breaking point – the NHS is on its knees. But Keir Starmer’s promise that things will get worse is genuinely frightening. People voted for change, our members were clear in the manifesto document we put together after speaking to them that they demand change and we need to see that change, not more of the same – like taking winter fuel payments off all but the very poorest pensioners.
More austerity, more downward pressure on pay and further cuts to spending are exactly what we don’tneed if we’re going to get growth in the economy. Putting money in working class people’s pockets will result in more money being spent locally as they don’t typically have off-shore bank accounts and hedge funds to save it in. By locking the government into an even tighter fiscal straitjacket, Rachel Reeves will only heap on further pain but will do nothing to help achieve the ‘mission’ of restoring growth.
Instead, we need urgent and radical action to direct investment into building local economies, investing in renewable energy, saving the high street, restoring public services and ensuring that work is paid fairly for everyone.
In circumstances like these, it would be criminal to rule out tax rises on the wealthiest in society, who pay far less in marginal tax rates than the lowest earners. It’s no good saying, “We can’t have it if we can’t afford it” while you leave all the wealth in the hands of the billionaires.
Arguing for the redistribution of wealth used to be plain common sense, even for social democrats. The labour movement as a whole needs to put it back on the agenda.
Critical, here, will be implementing the New Deal for Working People in full – including strengthening trade union rights, extending sectoral collective bargaining, abolishing all zero-hours contracts, ending fire-and-rehire and guaranteeing a decent living wage for all regardless of age.
We can’t allow powerful employers’ groups to water down these plans to maintain the race-to-the-bottom on pay and conditions. Failure to offer hope to our communities will leave open a huge vacuum for the far right to fill. Reform UK have made strides in this election and are already looking at targets for the next round of local elections to further their reach in 5 years’ time.
“The World Bank defines corruption as the use of public office for private gain,” Simon Kuper tells us in this short book. “Sometimes this use is illegal, but often it’s perfectly legal. For instance, David Cameron’s lobbying for the Greensill Capital firm during the pandemic didn’t break any rules.”
This is part of the problem. In just six years, Britain has fallen from eighth to twentieth in Transparency Intenrational’s global anti-corruption index. At times, Kuper seems nostalgic for a supposed lost era when a deep-rooted public service ethos was shared across Britain’s upper class elite – strange considering his withering critique of that elite in his previous book Chums. However, it’s doubtful that public life was ever particularly sleaze-free.
Yet things have got worse, and more blatant. Cash for honours is now so routine, it rarely makes the news. And in a country where only 5% of offences reported to the police lead to a charge – let alone a conviction – corruption is quite likely to go unpunished. Breaches of campaign finance laws especially are largely ignored by the English police.
Corruption has many consequences but one of the most damaging is the erosion of public trust in politics. In 2023, public opinion on whether politicians were “out for themselves” hit 70%, the highest ever.
Political donations have long been a problem. They are growing both absolutely and in proportion to other sources of a party’s income. By 2000, the Conservatives were getting less than 5% of their money from membership fees.
State funding of political parties is one solution, although difficult to justify in a context of ongoing austerity. “Yet a donor-free political system could have saved the taxpayer a fortune,” suggests Kuper, citing the Covid VIP lane, where the government gave lucrative contracts to “useless companies run by Tory donors.” This, however, implies that donations automatically entail an expected payback. From the standpoint of trade union contributions to Labour, this is highly contestable: such donations are probably the cleanest in politics.
Evidence suggests that when a government becomes more nationalist it become more corrupt. The elevation of the morally deficient Boris Johnson to Prime Minister certainly created a permissive mentality. Kuper catalogues how cash for access mushroomed under his premiership. The situation was worsened by the poor calibre of many of Johnson’s ministers, who, not understanding the complex processes of their own departments, could be easily swayed by a persuasive donor to cut corners.
The author is rightly concerned about how easily the rules banning foreign donations can be circumvented. Russian money is a particular problem. Once UK citizenship is acquired, legal donations follow – as with Lubov Chernukhin, whose husband had been deputy finance minister under Putin and later chairman of Russia’s state development bank. By 2023, she had given the Conservatives more than £2.4 million. “Lubov Chernukhin’s money cannot be disentangled from the Russian regime,” says Kuper – and he cites other donors with links to post-Soviet regimes about whom the National Crime Agency has been alerted. Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee reported in 2020 that Russian influence in the UK is “the new normal”.
“Of all the Russian influencers in British politics until 2022, first prize must go a father-and-son operation: the former KGB agent Alexander Lebedev and his son Evgeny, the newspaper proprietor,” writes Kuper.
In 2008, the Lebedevs bought the loss-making Evening Standard newspaper. In the 2012 London mayoral election, the paper backed Boris Johnson. In the same year, Johnson attended one of the Lebedevs’ legendary parties at their Italian Palazzo in Umbria. The Italian authorities believed the building was being used for espionage purposes, which the Lebedevs strenuously denied.
In 2017, Johnson, now Foreign Secretary, flew directly from a NATO summit in Brussels to the Palazzo, where he later admitted to attending an undocumented meeting with a longtime KGB agent, without officials present – an event that would normally be unthinkable.
On becoming Prime Minister, Johnson nominated Evgeny Lebedev for a life peerage, against the advice of intelligence officials. When Covid hit and the Evening Standard’s circulation collapsed, due to the absence of commuters, Johnson allegedly “funnelled hundreds of millions of subsidies in the form of Government advertising with a select group of newspapers”, which included the Standard, according to an article in Byline Times, entitled “Why Did Boris Johnson Meet Evgeny Lebedev Twice in Days Before First Covid Lockdown – With No Civil Servants Present?”
Russia’s war on Ukraine saw the British establishment detach itself from the Lebedevs. Johnson’s government never sanctioned Alexander Lebedev – “perhaps worried about what he might reveal” – but Canada did. Yet the Tory party continued to accept donations from individuals linked to the Russian economy, notably Chernukhin.
For Labour, the big donors that had become a feature of the Blair years deserted the Party as it moved left in Opposition. The emergence of the anti-Corbyn faction Labour Together, and its capacity to mobilise donations for itself, laid the basis for a well-funded Keir Starmer leadership campaign in 2020. Only after former director Morgan McSweeney – now Starmer’s head of political strategy – stepped down as Labour Together’s administrator were the organisation’s donations fully registered. The Electoral Commission found that Labour Together had committed 20 separate breaches of the law and fined it £14,250 , equivalent to a mere 2% of the undeclared donations.
Legal restrictions and tougher enforcement in relation to the abuses itemised in this book might not do much more than create new loopholes, as corruption itself is really just a manifestation of a wider problem. For all his spotlighting of political sleaze, Kuper seems to shy away from a more fundamental, point. In any liberal democracy, there is a central contradiction between the basic equality implied in one-person-one vote and the stark inequality of a neoliberal economy, where the economically powerful can throw money into politics in a variety of ways – including donations, but also ownership of the media, contacts and networks with a range of state officials – to get the outcomes they want.
As Britain’s inequality has worsened, it’s not surprising that those distortions in our democracy have proliferated and been expressed more flagrantly. While not denying that corruption is an issue for all parties, it’s a particular problem for those in thrall to the rich, the Tories especially. Kuper ducked this structural problem in his previous book, but the question remains: is the system fixable – and if so, how?
Mike Phipps’ book Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow: The Labour Party after Jeremy Corbyn (OR Books, 2022) can be ordered here.