Thursday, April 25, 2024

 

Silencing and cancelling –  art and truth for Palestinians

Sally Hobbs reports on how public opposition and the collective action of artists got an important solidarity event reinstated.

APRIL 24, 2024

On Monday 22nd April, Manchester’s central community arts venue, HOME, was host to a packed audience. They had gathered to listen to an evening of “Voices of Resilience” – readings from Palestinian poets and writers, with Palestinian music. Video links with readings from Maxine Peake and Jeremy Corbyn were broadcast alongside background video images of olives, skies and sea, as writers’ work was read out by a team of speakers. 

The event was presented by publishers Comma Press as “an evening of writing from Gaza, marking the launch of Don’t Look Left: a diary of genocide, by Atef Abu Saif, with additional readings of work by Refaat Alareer, Hiba Abu Nada and others who have lost their lives in the current conflict. With guest appearances from Kamila Shamsie, Maxine Peake, Ahmed Nehad and others.”

This event was the successful end result of a shameful episode in HOME’s previous history of open access to dissident and diverse communities within the arts, which started when HOME announced the cancellation of the event at the start of the month due to “safety considerations”. It emerged that a lobby group  – the Jewish Representative Council – had claimed that the Abu Saif was an “antisemite” and “holocaust denier” a claim repeated without evidence in an article by Manchester Evening News.

The letter sent by the JRC to HOME and published on their X account, referred to an article Abu Saif wrote on 22nd August 2022 in Al-Ayyam newspaper as evidence of this. Rather than denying the holocaust, he said the exact opposite: “Hitler’s crimes against humanity cannot be forgiven or tolerated. They may be unprecedented in history in terms of their ugliness… As Palestinians, this is a fact we have not denied and will never deny. We are a people who suffer injustice, massacres, killing and displacement. We cannot accept something similar that happened to others and say it is right.”

Comma press threatened legal action for defamation. HOME advised in a statement cancelling the event that it was due to “safety considerations” and that HOME was a “politically neutral space”.  An article in The Mill, an independent online vehicle for local journalism, covered the background, citing the influence of some specific lobbyists including  Ed Glinert, known locally for co-founding a local paper and as a tour guide, but whose influence appears at odds with his incendiary and entirely unfounded claims about the potential risks from pro-Palestine protesters rioting, and objections to the use of the word genocide. He was also apparently proud of his track record in claiming to have got the director of Whitworth Art Gallery sacked while lobbying for the cancellation of a previous prestigious art event in Manchester hosted there.

Atmospheric Memories,  which included verified evidence of the use of white phosphorus and footage of the shooting of unarmed Gazans during the 2018 Great March of Return protests at the border with Israel, along with others internationally, was the focus at that time. In the end, exhibition was not cancelled following strong objections. 

Meanwhile the opposition to  Council- and Arts Council-funded HOME’s decision snowballed. Letters to the recently appointed Director of Home, Karen O’Neill, protests outside HOME and prominent local and national voices in opposition to the decision put escalating pressure on HOME. Hundreds of artists, including actress Maxine Peake and director Kapadia, a patron of HOME, also signed an open letter stating that the venue has “contributed to the silencing of Palestinian voices at a time when they most need to be heard.”

Just what was happening behind this, in terms of the decision-making of the board, of funders  and sponsors? Manchester City Council has a very direct responsibility for the venue and will have also been influential. We continue to call for transparency and accountability for the decision-making process.

The final humiliation for HOME was when over 100 artists and their supporters took down around 70 of the 500 artworks in the biennial regional Open art exhibition, with more set to follow. In place of the absent artworks, copies of a statement signed by over 150 artists were put up, calling for an apology from HOME and the reinstatement of the “Voices of Resilience” event, alongside other demands such as facilitating a forum for “Palestinians and their allies” to air concerns. Photos of artists walking out with their work were reproduced in the local and national press.

The day after this, HOME published a carefully worded statement acknowledging “the upset and distress caused” and confirming the exhibition’s reinstatement.

So Monday night’s event felt particularly important in the face of the continuing battle for the right of Palestinians to be heard. The nerves of HOME were still evident: I have never attended anything there before where every ticket holder was contacted personally beforehand to be advised that they would have bag searches and ID checks and on no account must they call out, wear or carry flags, symbols or other indicators of Palestine solidarity.

But once through a largely friendly security check, there was a real sense of a shared experience.  It was a powerful evocation of the Palestinian experience of displacement, longing for home, being unheard. And at its centre was a series of extracts from a journal written daily of his first-hand experience of living in Gaza through the first three months of the Israeli invasion and bombing of Gaza after October 7th, by internationally acclaimed Palestinian writer, Atef Abu Saif. Inevitably, this was a hard listen, read perfectly by actor Kingsley Ben-Adir  although often needing a pause to enable him to continue.

The evening was introduced by Basma Ghalayani, from Comma Press, starting with her welcome of “Well, we made it here!” She introduced the evening as one that had originally been aimed at providing a space for the Palestinian community in the region and for their supporters, and to launch Abu Saif’s book, who she said “was luckier than most” – he got out – but that only goes to define how terrible others’ experiences of ordinary life in Gaza has been and continues to be. It certainly achieved its intention and cemented for me the critical importance of sharing this experience and telling others the truth about the genocide that is continuing.

Nationally and locally we continue to battle for the truth to be told and not to allow defamatory claims of antisemitism to derail genuine humanitarian stories of what is happening.   The murder of journalists and photo-journalists in Gaza, the news blackouts and lack of internet access, all tell to the scale of Israel’s need to control the narrative. 

HOME’s experience is also testimony to the support of artists. Art is never conducted in a political vacuum and it is indeed vacuous to say so.

Sally Hobbs is a Palestine supporter and activist in Manchester.

Image: Ceasefire protest in Colchester, April 20th, c/0 BH Griffiths.

 TSSA flag outside parliament

Further Strike Action on London Underground -give your solidarity!

“Because of London Underground’s refusal to get back round the negotiating table, we have been forced to take further strike action this week.”

From the TSSA Press Team

The TSSA rail union has announced a further day of strike action on Friday 26 April at London Underground by members working as Customer Service Managers.    

The walkouts will take place on Friday 26 April where members will not commence work on any shift starting between 00:01 to 23:59 on Friday, 26 April 2024. Accordingly, strike action will also take place on Saturday 27 April 2024 in respect of any members expected to commence shifts before 23:59 on Friday 26 April 2024 whose shifts run into Saturday 27 April 2024.

When TSSA Customer Service Managers took strike action on 10 April stations closed at short notice. Similarly, the strikes this week are likely to cause stations to close at the last minute, including late night and into Saturday morning (night tube on Friday night).

TSSA Customer Service Managers at London Underground will also take part in an overtime ban from 29 April to 5 May. This overtime ban will again lead to station closures at very short notice.

Commenting, TSSA General Secretary Maryam Eslamdoust said “It’s clear that our Customer Service Managers strike on 10 April made a real impact, many stations shut at short notice, and we had overwhelming support from the public. Because of London Underground’s refusal to get back round the negotiating table, we have been forced to take further strike action this week.

“London Underground must now come clean with the public – their refusal to negotiate seriously and fairly with our union will lead to stations closing at the last minute and other stations being understaffed.

“We have made it clear that our union will not accept the continued threats to our members’ roles, locations, terms, and conditions to stand unchallenged. We will continue to take sustained action until London Underground is prepared to negotiate with us in good faith.”


 

#MayDay4Palestine – Get organised in your workplace on May 1st!

“War & peace are very much a class issue – & Palestine is very much a trade union issue.”

By Jennie Walsh, Stop the War Coalition

War and peace are very much a class issue and Palestine is very much a trade union issue. Our power as organised working people has the potential to force the biggest change in our society. 

Since 7 October over 33,000 Palestinians have been killed, 70 per cent of them women and children. Millions are at imminent risk of starvation.

At the heart of the trade union movement lies international solidarity, which the Palestinians urgently require. marching on the streets is incredibly powerful, but when workers withdraw their labour, they can shut things down. 

We’ve seen some really inspiring actions by trade unionists around the world in demand for an end to the arming of Israel and for a free Palestine, such as transport workers in Belgium refusing to carry weapons bound for Israel and port workers in Barcelona refusing to allow them to leave their shores.

Let’s not forget the impact of the brave Rolls Royce workers in East Kilbride who refused to carry out repairs on General Pinochet’s war planes.

Every collective act, big or small, sends a message to those who are suffering in Gaza that we are with them and puts pressure on our government to stop arming Israel.

This is why Stop the War is calling on all those within the trade union movement to join and build for the May Day Workplace Day of Action for Palestine on Wednesday 1 May.

Our open letter to UK trade unionists also calls for labour movement unity in the face of attacks on the pro-Palestine campaign and our right to protest.

We are encouraging all those in work, college or university to mark International Workers’ Day by organising a walkout, a lunchtime or early morning protest, or another collective action, in demand of peace and justice for the Palestinians. 

Where those workplaces are arms or arms components manufacturers, we are clear that our enemies are not the workers making the weapons, but the government that is selling them. All actions challenging militarism and the arms industry must be workforce and union led.

And in some of those factories we are seeing groups of workers taking actions, with workplace meetings and walkouts.

There are any number of activities that union members can organise for 1 May, from collections for Medical Aid for Palestinians or other charities helping the people of Gaza, giving out leaflets around the workplace, to holding a lunchtime protest outside a workplace, or organising a meeting with a speaker from Gaza.

So get organised in your workplace on 1 May and make it a #MayDay4Palestine

 

The bloody history of US & UK interference in Iran & the Middle East – John Rees

“There is the most enormous swathe, of physical bloody destruction which marks out the US and UK relationship with the Iranian people.”

By John Rees

The West, we are told, has an ‘Iranian problem’. But if you’re an Iranian whose memory stretches back over a lifetime of around 70 years, you might think you have a problem with the West. 

And you would be right. Because, in living memory, Iranians will know that the first and only attempt at a democratically elected government, that of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, who nationalised the British oil holdings in the country and set out to weaken the power of the Shah, was ended by a coup in 1953 with the more or less open, and certainly now admitted, participation of the security services of this country and the US. 

What followed was a monarchical regime headed by the Shah, the King of Kings as he called himself. It was a Western client regime which would make the links the West has with the Saudi regime today pale into insignificance. The Shah was a massive purchaser of Western armaments, and he ran a brutal internal regime. 

His Savak secret military police was feared throughout the country. He used them to hunt down, capture and torture, or simply kill, his opponents around the world, including in universities here.

When the Shah’s regime was overthrown by the 1979 revolution, a revolution in which there was a significant Iranian working class component, but which eventually ended up in the theocratic regime of the Ayatollahs that runs the country today, it was a significant defeat for the West. It was an overthrow of a Western ally on a scale as if Israel had lost its influence and been transformed, or as if Saudi Arabia had been overthrown and transformed from a Western ally to an independent country. 

Because Iran was now seen as a threat the US and West backed Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war from 1980-1988. A destructive war on the scale of the first or second world war. Half a million military personnel alone were killed on each side.

It was the hubris of the Saddam Hussein regime, due to the unqualified backing it enjoyed from the West, that led Iraq to invade Kuwait with such impunity that it brought about the first, and arguably the second Gulf War, after the West’s sanctions failed to remove Saddam.

So, there is the most enormous swathe, of physical bloody destruction which marks out the US and UK relationship with the Iranian people. And it is precisely because of the West’s repeated and disastrous responses to that relationship that have caused things to become so dangerous in the Middle East now. 

The war on Iraq was another catastrophic failure in the West’s relationships in the region. It did not turn Iraq into the stable, pro-western state it was hoped it would. Instead, it destroyed the country and produced an Iraqi government which is pro-Iranian. 

Much like the interference of the US in the Arab revolutions after 2011 convinced the Houthi movement, which was ultimately a product of that revolutionary wave, that leaning towards Iran was its best option. 

Likewise, the repeated attempts by Israel, with full Western backing, to invade and subdue Lebanon has resulted in a resistance movement in Hezbollah, which orients towards the Iranians. And it was the disaster of the Oslo peace process, impressed on the Palestinian people by our government and the US, that convinced many Palestinians that the PLO was not a viable strategy and that helped sustain support for Hamas, which has pro-Iranian political leanings. 

Of course, none of these forces in the Middle East are puppets of Iran in the way they’re described in the Western media. They all have perfectly legitimate reasons for not being particularly well disposed towards the West. They all have their own constituencies and their own support bases which simply obscures the real political processes in the Middle East. 

However, the course of politics in the region has certainly led to numerous political forces looking to the Iranian regime rather than to any of the pro-Western ones, which have done everything they can to prove that their policies in the Middle East are wholly and completely destructive.

So, the result of Western policy to Iran itself and towards the struggles of the Palestinians and towards the broader struggle of the Arab masses against their own dictatorships has resulted in a strategic shift in our lifetime to make Iran the most powerful regional player. US and UK policy has achieved, by its failures and repeated hostilities to the popular will of the Middle Eastern people, exactly the opposite of what it intended. 

Instead of pro-Western, stable regimes, they have produced massive instability and the growth of the Iranian state as a regional power in the area.

Ultimately, this is what we’ve seen come to fruition in the past week. A regional war became a very real possibility, from which we only stepped back when it came to the very brink of a sustained military exchange. 

It could be said that the Iranian response to the bombing of its embassy in Damascus and the Israeli response to it have in a way been performative. And it’s true that the US and the Western powers didn’t want to see the entire region go up in flames. But I don’t think we should see this as the end of things. This is simply a more dangerous escalation. The red line of Iran and Israel firing directly on each other’s territories has been breached. Now we have a different, more unstable situation than since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the First World War.

The inability of the West to seriously restrain the Israeli state in Gaza has not been resolved and therefore the consequent conflicts and involvements of Hezbollah and the Houthis has not been removed. 

So, the peace movement must redouble its efforts and our explanatory capacity to link these events and dispel the lies and misconceptions that are so current in our media. This doesn’t of course mean, as it has not meant in any previous conflicts, that we are in favour of the Iranian regime, anymore that it meant we were in favour of the Taliban in Afghanistan or of Saddam Hussein. We simply believe that all this history proves, beyond any doubt, that the one group of people who are absolutely incapable of contributing towards a more democratic and just and stable Middle East are our governments.

Wherever they have said they are acting for democracy and peace, the exact opposite has resulted. Afghanistan was a 14-year war which led directly from Taliban rule to, yes, Taliban rule. It led to the destruction of Iraq and the turning of Libya, whatever the view of Muammar Ghadaffi, into an ungovernable territory with slave camps transiting desperate people into Europe. 

This underlies a very simple fact about international relations. The only people who can be trusted with regime change are the people of the country concerned.

Take South Africa. The masses changed the apartheid regime and ended up shaping the fate of their country. But if it is the 82nd Airborne Division that does the regime changing, then it is the 82nd Airborne that does the ruling afterwards. 

So, as ever, we must stand with the people, for peace and for democracy, against the rulers, both here and in the Middle East, who have led to such a disastrous post-war experience for the workers of the region.


  • John Rees is an Officer of the Stop the War Coalition. This piece is based on his speech at the recent Israel, Iran & The Threat of Wider War online briefing which you can watch in full here.

Revealed: Claims of bullying, misogyny and harassment in Young Fabians


Daniel Green, Cathleen Clarke & Tom Belger
23rd April, 2024, LABOUR LIST

The Fabian Society’s chair has said it is “deeply sorry” after its own report said a “culture of misogyny and marginalisation”, abuses of power and sexual harassment had developed within the Young Fabians, with some current and former members calling it “toxic”.

A leaked report seen by LabourList reveals the findings of an investigation for the Labour-affiliated think tank into claims of “unacceptable behaviours and troubling practices”, convened in November last year.

It highlights “troubling reports of unchecked misconduct: of bullying, of sexual harassment, of poorly understood safeguarding requirements, of marginalisation and abuses of power, occurring in a climate of clique-ism, sexism and opaqueness”.

The Fabian Society recently re-launched its youth branch, and has committed to implementing changes on the basis of the review panel’s findings “in full” and shared them internally, though the report has not been published.

‘Culture of misogyny’

The report, which saw several committee members and one independent contributor speak to current and former members of the Young Fabians, said that while many praised the organisation as “helpful” and “welcoming”, issues “repeatedly” raised included a “culture of misogyny and marginalisation” within the organisation and claims power is “regularly misused”.

Some said the Young Fabians had been dominated by white, male university graduates.  One said some men had shown “toxic and misogynistic behaviours”.

According to the report, the “culture of misogyny” within the organisation existed on a ‘spectrum’ from being overlooked to salaciousness and through to sexual harassment, though members noted misogyny was part of politics and society more widely.

The panel heard reports of incidents and behaviours of sexual harassment, which included physical contact and even sexual assault.

The authors said there were “profound safeguarding concerns” over having members as old as 30 socialising with children under the age of 18.

Current or former members also reported a lack of trust in and clarity around the complaints procedure, with some fearful about making a complaint about such behaviour.

One member is quoted in the report as saying: “I didn’t know that the person who abused me would know I made a complaint against them.”

‘Race and class-based inequality’

The panel also said there was a “poor” culture, described by some as “toxic”, and a lack of accountability throughout the organisation, “from not completing high quality work in a timely fashion, through to unchecked misconduct”.

Some members told the panel they had experienced and observed race and class-based inequality, with one member reporting that the idea of creating a Black and Minority Ethnic group within Young Fabians was met with “laughing dismissal”.

Other claims by current or former members included “many examples” of “self-aggrandising” behaviour, such as taking credit for others’ work, and a “climate of clique-ism”.

Recommendations for ‘cultural change’

The report listed six areas for action on “cultural change”, with a number of recommendations, calling on the Fabian Society to do more as the “parent organisation” to foster an environment that “nourishes rather than depletes or harms”.

The recommendations also called for a shake-up of the Young Fabians, with multiple co-chairs with at least one woman, a three-year maximum term limit for members of the group’s executive committee and restrictions on the age range for membership.

The executive committee will also require at least six of its 12 members to be women and “should be populated in significant part by those less rooted in experiences of power”, including disabled people, people from working class backgrounds, LGBTQ+ people and “racially minoritised” people.

The report’s authors say problems identified should be “understood as environmentally driven or enabled, not only a matter of policy or procedures and certainly not a matter of a few ‘bad apples’”.

The investigation came after the Fabian Society suspended in-person activities and elections of Young Fabians last autumn following a complaint about several of its members, including “allegations of behaviours that breach the society’s code of conduct”.

Praise from members too

The report did find many current or former members “wanted to share their good experiences” as well.

Some called it “really helpful” in their learning and political journey, while others said it was “very welcoming” to them, and there was apparently relief among some respondents that positives were being noted as well as problems.

One said: “I met some incredible friends for life. I fervently believe the Young Fabians can be a force for good and promote active free thinking to develop the future of the left.”

Fabians ‘deeply sorry’ as new youth committee planned

Sara Hyde, chairwoman of the Fabian Society, said the organisation takes “all complaints extremely seriously” and took “swift action” to suspend the Young Fabians in order to commission the review.

She said: “The Fabian Society executive committee is deeply sorry that this Young Fabian culture developed and apologise to members affected.

“The recommendations the review panel made are wide-ranging, timely and have been developed with the participation of members past and present – including those who made complaints. They have been accepted by the Fabian Society and are now being implemented in full.

“Every part of the Fabian Society should be a place where people can thrive. We now look forward to working with the Young Fabians in close partnership to foster an atmosphere of open debate and development, where all members can participate fully, equally and safely.

“We are delighted that more than 60 people have applied to serve on a new Young Fabian executive which will relaunch the organisation and set it on a new path.”

UK

WAIT, WHAT?!
Haigh: Labour won’t shut ticket offices or cut jobs – or nationalise water

Daniel Green
25th April, 2024
LABOUR LIST


Labour has pledged to protect ticket offices and staff if elected to power, as part of its planned radical overhaul of the rail network.


Shadow Transport Secretary Louise Haigh unveiled the party’s proposals to bring Britain’s railways back into public ownership on Thursday at an event at Trainline HQ in central London. She vowed to crack down on delays and make the service better value for money for passengers.

She said that the overhaul, the “biggest in a generation”, would work to address the root causes of the “deepening crisis” in the rail network, with Labour’s “fully-costed” plans ensuring services are reliable, affordable, efficient, safe and accessible.

Under Labour’s plans, private operators will be brought into public ownership as contracts expire, with Great British Railways (GBR) controlling the nation’s railways in the interest of passengers. Haigh said that those operations would be folded into GBR “well within the first term” of a Labour government.

While people will say “same old Labour”, neither passengers nor taxpayers can afford for the current arrangements to continue, she added.

Haigh explained she would serve as “passenger-in-chief”, setting the strategy and objectives for the new state-owned operator and holding it to account.

She also promised to deliver simplified fares and ticketing, with a “best fare guarantee” across the rail network, as well as resetting industrial relations following a series of strikes under the Conservative government.

“Labour will take a consciously different approach: we will see our workforce as an asset, rather than a liability. We will work with them – and where there are disagreements, we will get around the table and work them out.”

When asked to guarantee no ticket offices would close at a launch event at Trainline’s HQ in Holborn, Haigh said Labour had “absolutely no plans to close or change staffing levels”.

The shadow cabinet member played down the idea of public ownership of water too.

While Labour has committed to nationalise the nation’s rail network by taking contracts in-house when they expire, Haigh said that nationalising water would cost the taxpayer “billions” because there is a different settlement with firms.

She said: “In a constrained fiscal environment, we don’t think that’s immediately the right priority.”

She instead highlighted Labour’s plans for “tough” regulation, legislation and the threat of criminal sanctions, tackling sewage and ensuring firms pay for infrastructure upgrades.

Despite the plans to implement nationalisation over the course of the first term of a Labour government, Haigh said she believes that Labour could enact basic improvements to services “from day one” and said customers would start to see changes “very early on” in Labour’s time in power.

While Haigh said she could not set out plans to lower fares, she did say Labour would simplify tickets for passengers to make them “more accessible, more transparent and more trustworthy”.

“Passengers have to contend with a dizzying array of different types of tickets and fares, which means they simply don’t trust they are getting the best value for the journey,” she said.

“We will deliver a best fare guarantee so they can always trust they are getting the lowest fare for their journey, just as people currently experience with Transport for London when they tap in and tap out of the system.”

Read our coverage of the 2024 local elections here.


Lou Haigh to reveal ‘roadmap’ for public ownership of railways within first term



Katie Neame 
 24th April, 2024
LABOUR LIST
Kings Cross station. Photo: pio3 / Shutterstock.com

Labour’s Louise Haigh has pledged to deliver the “biggest overhaul to our railways in a generation” ahead of the launch of the party’s “thorough and detailed roadmap” to take Britain’s rail network into public ownership.

At a launch event in central London on Thursday as part of Labour’s local election campaign, the Shadow Transport Secretary is expected to say Labour would “expect” to complete nationalisation within the first term of a Labour government.

Ahead of the event, the party shared a series of endorsements its plans have received from industry experts and others, including the chair of a recent government review into the railways, who said he welcomed Labour’s intention to take forward the “substance” of his recommendations.

The plans were also welcomed by the leader of Labour-affiliated train drivers’ union ASLEF who said the “stunning Labour vision for rail” would deliver “for the economy, for the taxpayer, for passengers and for staff”.

Haigh: ‘Biggest overhaul to our railways in a generation’

Labour said in a press release it would deliver a Railways Act to establish Great British Railways and “enable the full benefits of a unified railway”. The party said its rail reforms would have six key objectives: delivering rail services that are “reliable, affordable, efficient, quality, accessible and safe”.

Speaking ahead of Thursday’s launch event, Haigh said: “Labour will deliver the biggest overhaul to our railways in a generation. Whilst the Conservatives are content to let Britain’s broken railways fail passengers, Labour will deliver root-and-branch reform.

“After years of dysfunction and waste, our broken railways are unfit to meet the needs of modern Britain. Passengers and taxpayers alike are being failed, and our economy is being held back. Doing nothing is simply not an option.

“With Labour’s bold reforms, a publicly-owned railway will be single-mindedly focused on delivering for passengers and will be held to account on delivering reliable, safe, efficient, accessible, affordable and quality services.

“Labour’s detailed plans will get our railways back on track; driving up standards for passengers, bringing down costs for taxpayers, driving growth and getting Britain moving.”

Haigh to set out roadmap to deliver Great British Railways

Haigh will set out details of Labour’s plan to establish Great British Railways, pledging that her party would “put the passenger first” by delivering a best-price ticket guarantee and rolling out automatic delay repay and digital season tickets across the network within its first term in office.

The Labour frontbencher is expected to commit to the creation of a “powerful” new passenger watchdog, the Passenger Standards Authority, “to hold Great British Railways to account for passengers”.

She will promise to deliver “significant savings” to the taxpayer by “eliminating fragmentation, waste, bureaucracy and by stopping profits leaking out to private operators”, announcing that Great British Railways would be “unified, publicly-owned, accountable and arm’s length” and “led by rail experts, not Whitehall”.

Photo: Labour

Haigh is expected to announce that a Labour government would give devolved leaders, including metro mayors, a statutory role in the rail network.

She will also confirm that a Labour government would support “successful” open access and freight operators to continue to deliver, setting clear objectives and targets for passenger services and freight growth.

The Shadow Transport Secretary is likely to tell attendees that Labour would “expect” to complete the transition to public ownership within its first term, by folding existing private passenger rail contracts into the new body as they expire, without the taxpayer paying compensation costs.

Labour’s plans for the freight sector and train manufacturing

Labour said it will also announce plans on Thursday to harness the “huge economic potential” of rail freight and deliver a long-term strategy for train manufacturing.

It said its proposals would deliver more certainty for investors and manufacturers to plan for the long-term in rail manufacturing, as well as crowd in private investment to stimulate innovation. The plans will include a statutory duty on Great British Railways to enable the growth of rail freight.

Rail freight would remain within the private sector under a Labour government, but targets for increasing the use of rail freight would be set by the Transport Secretary, in addition to the statutory duty on Great British Railways.

Plans welcomed by industry experts and union leaders

Businessman Keith Williams – who chaired a recent government review of Britain’s railway – said: “I welcome Labour’s intention, if they are elected, to take forward the substance of my recommendations to deliver a better railway for passengers and freight by creating a rail body with an integrated profit and loss account, at arm’s length from government.

“Running a better railway and driving revenue and reducing costs will deliver economic growth, jobs and housing by delivering better connectivity.”

Jurgen Maier – the former UK head of Siemens who was recently appointed by Labour as an adviser on rail infrastructure policy – said the proposed reforms were a “significant step in the right direction”.

He added: “It is clear that there is no plan and no ambition for our UK railway at the present time. Creating a long-term strategy is exactly what we need and will begin to restore confidence across the network – especially for passengers.”

ASLEF general secretary Mick Whelan said: “We have seen more positivity in this stunning Labour vision for rail than anything at any time from the Tories during all the years of the failed Tory privatisation of our industry and their subsequent, and incoherent, rail reform programme.

“The Labour commitment delivers for the economy, for the taxpayer, for passengers and for staff. We welcome the Labour Party reaffirming that it will bring our railways back into the public sector – which is where they belong – and we welcome Lou’s vision for freight.”

“Bringing our railways back into public ownership means we can invest properly in rail and build a greener, cleaner, more sustainable transport network which, in turn, will help the economy and build a brighter future for Britain,” he added.


UK

The public have had enough of Tory neoliberalism. The case for collectivism has never been greater

'Working class solidarity is the very opposite of the law-of-the-jungle values promoted by Conservative ideologues'


Jon Trickett 
23 April, 2024 
Columnists Left Foot Forward Opinion
Jon Trickett is Labour MP for Hemsworth


Given the explosive growth in our country of poverty and deprivation in recent years, how do Conservative politicians sleep at night with a clean conscience? What kind of reasoning has led the Prime Minister to believe that doctors ought not to decide whether their patient is well enough to work.

Simple. They blame the poor for their own poverty. Easy as that. Self-exculpatory thinking. Others are to blame, but not the Tory government.

Don’t believe me? Take a look at various statements made by senior Conservative politicians in the modern era.

On a visit to Glasgow, David Cameron told the poor in that impoverished city that their situation was – in part at least – the product of the decisions which they had made. He argued that: “Social problems are often the consequence of the choices that people make.” Ignoring the evidence that poverty causes obesity, he said that a significant factor was the individual’s personal choices.

Cameron’s comments were in 2008 but this is not the thinking of a bygone era. Just a few weeks ago the Deputy Chair of the Conservative party said of his own constituents: ‘Most of the kids who struggle in Bury are the products of crap parents.’

Of course, you might think these comments are just the ravings of a few individual Conservative outliers. In fact, they are reflective of a deeply held Tory philosophy. In government they have deliberately fostered an economy which has driven up poverty and then set about redistributing public funds to the more affluent areas. In seeking to be Prime Minister, Sunak told Tory party members that he had reversed the policy of funding deprived urban areas. He told a summer gathering of Conservative party members in Tunbridge Wells that as Chancellor he had instead ‘managed to start changing the funding formulas to make sure that areas like this are getting the funding they deserve’.

No doubt there is an element of poverty in Tunbridge Wells, but the constituency is one of the most prosperous areas in the whole country. The latest figures available show that residents have an average weekly income of £771. In my constituency in West Yorkshire the equivalent weekly figure is £608. Sunak wasn’t promising more funding for public services for reasons of need. He was saying there would be more funding for having returned a Tory MP.

Conservative governments have adopted economic and fiscal politics which sought to create a hard-faced selfish country based on division and greed. In this ‘neoliberal’ worldview, everyone is in competition with each other. If you can believe that the poor are responsible for their own poverty, then you can have a conscience-free life if you are wealthy.

Mrs Thatcher once remarked that “Economics is the method. The object is to change the soul.” 45 years on from her first election, we can say that our country has changed dramatically but has neoliberal economics really changed the souls of the British?

I do not believe the British soul has not been captured by Tory values. Indeed the reverse is the case and we can measure this by the growing tide of dissent in the country.

The right to protest is an ancient British liberty. Many millions of people in our country are making use of this right, whether its trade unionists, environmental campaigners or community activists.

The Government has reacted to public displays of opposition with alarm. Rather than retreating from their reactionary principles, they have embraced increasingly authoritarian solutions.

There are numerous examples of this process. Anti-trade union legislation, strengthening of police powers, limits on the right to demonstrate and so on. They are even seeking to undermine the principle of universal suffrage with voter ID requirements.

In the face of the most stringent attack on working class living standards in decades, workers turned to their trades unions and we have seen the renaissance of industrial action in the last 2 years. The strikes have been of long duration but the members remained solid and met with many notable victories.

This working class solidarity is the very opposite of the law-of-the-jungle values promoted by Conservative ideologues. There are other examples of solidarity in almost every community in Britain. When people come together to either donate food or to volunteer in one of the thousands of food banks, they are operating collectively to remedy the failure of the so-called ‘free market’ and the withdrawal of public services under the impact of austerity. The same applies to the clothes banks and furniture banks designed to assist families who can’t afford clothing and furniture.

Opinion polls, too, show huge concern about inequality in Britain, with 74% of voters expressing concern about inequality of wealth and income. ⁠Only 18% say it is a small or non-existent problem. By far the biggest concerns in the opinion polling is about the NHS whose very design embeds the principles of mutuality, reciprocity and collectivism.

Decades on from the inception of the neoliberal era we can see that not only has its economic promises failed. But the very foundational principles of its value system have failed to convince people. The values of the Left remain deeply embedded in the national psyche.

As we enter the long election period some Labour elders are advising the Opposition that we ought to reduce the scale of our offer. They say our offer to the electorate ought to be that we are simply more competent than the Tories. This would not be a difficult thing to achieve

But would it be enough? I don’t think so. Acting within the same value system won’t work any more. The electorate wants real change. They are ahead of us.

We should be confident that it is our values which remain the strongest in the battle for the hearts and minds of the electorate. Solidarity, mutuality, collectivism, liberty, justice and fairness. These are deeply rooted principles. And they are the values of the Left. It’s time to make our case in simple, straightforward, confident and indeed fearless language.