Wednesday, November 20, 2024

First Power Achieved from South Korea’s First Commercial Offshore Wind Farm

South Korea offshore wind farm — South Korea's first commercial scale offshore wind farm acheived first power as it enters texting (SK Innovation E&S)

South Korea marked a milestone in its efforts to join the growing list of countries around the world generating power from offshore wind farm installation. First power was generated from the country’s first commercial-scale wind farm, in a test phase, marked by a visit from the country’s Prime Minister Han Duck-soo to inspect the site and hail the industry’s achievement.

The project known as Jeonnam 1 is located off the southwest coast of Korea in a location northwest of Jaeun Island. It is a fixed-bottom offshore wind farm that when completed will generate 96MW and is viewed as a building block for South Korea’s large ambitions for offshore wind power.

Construction on Jeonnam 1 started in early 2023 and turbine installation started in September 2024. The project is being developed by Copenhagen Infrastructures and its Copenhagen Offshore Partners in partnership with South Korean conglomerate SK Innovation E&S. CIP highlights that it entered the South Korean market in 2018 due to its strong belief in the potential for the industry.

“First power from Jeonnam 1 is a landmark for CIP, our partners, and the offshore wind industry in South Korea,” said Thomas Wibe Poulsen, Partner in CIP.

SK highlights that the project is part of the larger regional plan for Korea with this district projected to ultimately have a capacity for 8.2 GW, which would make it the largest in the world. With the project moving into test operation, SK expects it will help to build support for private investment which will give further momentum to the development of the Jeonnam offshore wind farm complex.

Prime Minister Han stated during the visit to the site, “The activation of offshore wind power will solidify the foundation for energy security and serve as an opportunity for Jeonnam to emerge as a leading region in new and renewable energy.” The Prime Minister instructed the relevant ministries to continue providing close support.

South Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE) in September mapped the next steps toward accelerating the development of the offshore wind sector. They selected an area near Incheon as the location for a three-phase offshore wind farm complex that will have a total capacity of 2 GW. The project is due to be in development until December 2026 and will require approximately KRW 8.9 billion in investment ($6 million) in its next phase. It also reported that the MunmuBaram Floating Offshore Wind Project (based in Ulsan, South Korea) had completed an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

The government expects to auction 7 to 8 GW of capacity by 2026. Of that, 2.5 to 3 GW is projected for floating wind with the larger portion in fixed-bottom wind turbines. The country has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and to reach that goal Korea has ambitious plans calling for 14.3 GW of installed capacity by 2030.

SK highlights that it has approximately 5 GW in the pipeline for development. It plans to expand by approximately 1 GW per year to reach 7 GW by 2025. In addition to Jeonnam 1, CIP has plans for Jeonnam 2 and Jeonnam 3 with a total capacity of 800MW, and the 1.5 GW Haewoori floating offshore wind project.

The timeline for commercial operations at Jeonnam 1 is targeting March 2025 reports SK Innovation E&S.

Fishing Vessel Chartered by Offshore Wind Farm Grounds Off Rhode Island

Courtesy USCG Sector Southeastern New England

Early Monday, a fishing vessel reportedly contracted to work on the Revolution Wind project ran aground in a channel near Jamestown, Rhode Island, prompting a rescue and response operation.

In the early hours of Monday Morning, the Virginia Wave grounded near Beavertail State Park, between Narragansett and Jamestown, Rhode Island. The good Samaritan vessel Deep Cygnus rescued four crewmembers, and all made it safely off the boat without injury. Luckily, the vessel avoided flooding, even though it took on a severe list during its time aground.

The Virginia Wave refloated later in the day and the crew reboarded, then returned to the port of Quonset - but not before the boat spilled an undetermined amount of diesel fuel.

The Coast Guard is assessing the environmental impact of the small-scale spill, according to local media. Orsted, operator of Revolution Wind, has not yet commented.

Revolution Wind is a 700 MW, 65-turbine offshore wind farm located 15 miles south of the Rhode Island coast and 32 miles southeast of Connecticut, adjacent to South Fork Wind. It is built to supply power markets in both Rhode Island and Connecticut.

Work on the project began in 2023, and the first turbine was installed in September 2024. Delays in completing an onshore substation have pushed back the opening date for the project from 2025 to 2026, and Orsted booked an impairment charge on Revolution Wind in August due to construction delays.

A previous project partner, Eversource, sold its stake in Revolution Wind at a loss earlier this year.

Norway & Portugal New Collaboration Ahead of Iberia’s Offshore Wind Venture

[By: WavEC Offshore Renewables]

Heavyweights from Norwegian industry are descending on Portugal to drive collaboration as Iberia’s offshore wind plan takes flight

‘Portugal and Norway: Fostering Offshore Wind Supply Chain Development’ takes place at the Museu do Oriente, Lisbon, on December 3.

The open event is being hosted by WavEC Offshore Renewables in collaboration with the Embassy of Norway in Portugal, Innovation Norway and Norwegian Offshore Wind. For full programme details and registration, click here.

Keynote speakers include Hanne Brusletto, Norwegian Ambassador to Portugal and Lidia Bulcão, Portugal’s Secretary of State for the Sea. Other participants include DGEG, DNV, Source Galileo, Qair, TechnipFMC, Odfjell Ocean Wind, Vestervind Contractors, Global Maritime, ETERMAR, Principle Power, X1Wind, Gazelle, Wergeland Group, Reach Subsea, SINTEF, APDL (Ports of Douro, Leixões and Viana do Castelo), Port of Aveiro, Port of Setúbal, the Norwegian Marine Energy Test Centre (METCentre), plus Portuguese Test Site Companhia de Energia Oceânica. The event will be closed by Portugal’s Secretary of State for Energy.

The conference comes just months after the Portuguese Government unveiled an updated version of the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) for 2021-2030, containing ambitious targets for offshore wind energy as part of a broader strategy to accelerate the country's energy transition.

Previously, Portugal set a target of 300 MW for offshore wind capacity by 2025. Recognising the critical role of renewable energy in combating climate change and enhancing energy security, the government set a new goal of 2 GW of offshore wind by 2030.

WavEC CEO Marco Alves said Portugal is now actively engaging international partners to accelerate progress and encourages all parties interested in Iberia’s offshore wind expansion to join the “must attend” event.

“We are delighted to be welcoming partners from Norway which is playing a leading role in the burgeoning offshore wind industry, especially floating wind,” he said. “With this year’s focus on supply chain development, it will be especially instructive to hear the views from our expert panellists as Portugal prepares to kickstart a new era in offshore wind. Supply chains are an essential pillar driving success across entire project lifecycles — from design and construction to installation and operation, and decommissioning — ensuring efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and scalability in offshore wind development.”

Portugal phased out coal-fired power generation in 2021 and currently generates around 60% of its electricity from renewable sources, including hydropower, wind, and solar. The NECP has set a target to increase this share to 80% by 2030, contributing significantly to the European Union's broader climate and energy goals.

The national Offshore Renewable Energy Allocation Plan (PAER) has designated a 10 GW reserve capacity for offshore wind, aligning with the draft National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP). Public consultation for new policies began in Q3 2024, with the first site auctions expected in mid-2025. Around 50 companies expressed initial interest in December 2023 auctions.

In Norway, around 98% of electricity is produced from renewables. In addition to wind power, the Scandinavian nation has more than 1,500 hydropower plants, boasting half of Europe’s reservoir storage capacity.

Deputy to the Commercial, Innovation, and Tourism Counselor of Norway – Innovation Norway Rodrigo Ballesteros Cruz said: “the great offshore expertise built along the last decades has derived in the adaptation and creation of new technologies applied to the offshore wind industries. Being both maritime nations, Norway and Portugal have the possibility to collaborate in order to lead the further development of sustainable solutions applicable to the offshore wind industry.”

Einar Tollaksvik, leader of the Portugal Working Group of Norwegian Offshore Wind said: “Norway has important assets in offshore wind. Decades of offshore experience, a complete supply chain, and world-class technology and digital solutions. Norwegian innovations have paved the way for floating offshore wind. Due to projects at the METCentre and the pioneering floating offshore wind farm Hywind Tampen, our supply chain already has hands-on experience with floating offshore wind.”

WavEC is a world-renowned “centre of excellence” focusing on the development of marine renewable energy through R&D, knowledge transfer and innovation. The non-profit organisation heavily supports the EU’s Horizon Europe Programme and has delivered more than 70 R&D projects in the marine renewables sector and corresponding support technologies. It has worked in collaboration with more than 350 partners in 32 countries. A co-founder of the OceanACT consortium, WavEC also co-manages the Aguçadoura test site in north Portugal, promoting offshore testing infrastructures to support blue economy technologies.

Click here to register to attend the event - “Portugal and Norway: Fostering Offshore Wind Supply Chain Development.”

The products and services herein described in this press release are not endorsed by The Maritime Executive.

ECOCIDE

Ammonium Nitrate-Laden Bulker Dumps Contaminated Cargo off UK

bulker offshore — Bulker Ruby continues to draw complaints due to its cargo of ammonium nitrate fertilizer (file photo)

The Malta-flagged cargo ship Ruby with its cargo of 20,000 tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer is again being drawn into a controversy weeks after the vessel found a safe refuge at Great Yarmouth in the UK. Local elected officials complained after the ship left port briefly over the weekend and returned on Monday, November 18, to continue offloading and transshipping the cargo.

The political leaders called for the government not to permit the ship to return to port citing the danger from the cargo which is seven times as much as the ammonium nitrate that caused the explosion in Beirut in August 2020. They blamed the Secretary of State while saying the ship should never have been permitted into Great Yarmouth in the first place.

Media reports surfaced that a portion of the cargo had been found to be contaminated making it less stable and potentially more dangerous. A spokesperson for Peel Ports which operates the facility would only say the ship briefly went to sea for “operational reasons.”

The media reports cited the fact the Ruby went approximately 11 or 12 nautical miles offshore and according to the AIS signal, was circling. The reports said the ship which departed Saturday, November 16, and returned Monday, November 18, dumped a portion of its cargo at sea.

The Maritime Coastguard Agency confirmed in a statement to the British press that “a small quantity of contaminated cargo was found,” and without providing details said, “This has now been successfully removed.” They said that inspectors from the government agency Health & Safety Executive would continue to monitor the vessel and the offloading process.

Environmentalists were quick to highlight the toxic nature of ammonium nitrate when it is exposed to seawater. They said it could accelerate algae growth and is detrimental to fish.

The Department for Transport responded to the criticisms saying that the operation was carried out with advice from the Maritime Coastguard Agency and HSE and that they had been assured that the vessel continues to meet safety standards. They called the decision to dock the bulker a “commercial decision” while highlighting there was no legal basis to refuse entry.

The plan agreed to in late October called for the Ruby to be berthed in the outer harbor at Great Yarmouth. She is to offload the cargo which is being transferred to another bulker also managed by Serenity Shipping of the UAE. The Barbados-registered bulker Zimrida (37,296 dwt) arrived in Great Yarmouth on October 29.

Some reports indicate a portion of the cargo has already been transferred between the ships but there is no indication how long the operation will require. There was speculation that the contaminated cargo had slowed the process.

The story began attracting international attention when Norwegian authorities at the beginning of September ordered the ship to leave Tromsø due to the explosive potential of the cargo. The managers ultimately complained that the media attention and misrepresentations of the cargo were complicating what should have been an ordinary transfer of the cargo. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Lithuania placed restrictions on the ship and rejected its entry into port. Its class society DNV and port state Malta agreed that the ship due to damage to the hull, rudder, and propeller, had restrictions and required a tug escort until repairs were completed.

US Navy Officials Missed Multiple Chances to Avoid Red Hill Disaster

Navy salvage divers inspect the Red Hill water well, November 2021 (USN)

The Pentagon's inspector general has concluded that the U.S. Navy didn't understand the spill risks involved in operating its Red Hill fuel tank site at Pearl Harbor, and it repeatedly failed to respond when a major spill finally occurred, exposing thousands of military family members to fuel-tainted drinking water.

The spill was a slow-rolling disaster, with multiple missed opportunities to intervene along the way. In May 2021, about 19,000 gallons of fuel were inadvertently pumped into a PVC drain line on the ceiling of an access tunnel. That overhead drain line sagged under the weight until it drooped low enough to get hit by a passing maintenance cart. The impact broke off a drain valve and spilled all the contents of the line onto the floor. The spill went on for 34 hours, and an unknown amount flowed into a water well located inside the access tunnel. That well fed the freshwater supply system for Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. About 4,000 military families were displaced from their homes because of contaminated water, and military doctors treated about 6,000 people for symptoms of fuel exposure and related illnesses. The cleanup and the planned closure of Red Hill will cost more than $2 billion.

During the course of the investigation, the IG determined that the Navy managers on site had limited knowledge of the facility and did little to ensure safe operation. They didn't even have an accurate map of their site: When inspectors visited the base library to look for up-to-date site plans, they found "documents overflowing into the hallway, a lack of labeling, and piles of engineering drawings scattered on various tables," and there was no librarian. After asking around and getting no answers, the IG team concluded that "Navy officials did not have accurate and up to date as?built drawings of [Red Hill's] tanks, pipelines, and supporting infrastructure."

The spill response plan for the Red Hill system didn't contemplate the possibility of a pipeline leak, even though the pipelines were kept filled with about 200,000 gallons of fuel each at all times. It also did not acknowledge the presence of a drinking water well inside Red Hill's access tunnel. "The bad assumption we made was that the tunnel system would be containment," one Navy official told the team. "There was no emphasis put on other potential impacts to the drinking water well, because we believed it would be contained in the tunnel."

In addition to a deficient response plan, the command conducted "no comprehensive fuel spill response drills" before the large-scale spill occurred, according to the Pentagon.

The IG also found evidence of deteriorating infrastructure, including corroding piping, and it learned that the facility's maintenance team was deferring up to 100 percent of new corrective tasks per month in order to address a backlog - despite "high levels of overtime." A shortage of technicians, lack of maintenance instructions and a lack of a work order system exacerbated the problem.

The team also found a lack of consistent lockout/tagout procedures, resulting in at least one prior spill and at least one serious safety hazard. The entire facility's fire suppression system was left locked out and disabled for more than a year, including a period when hot work was going on in the tanks and tunnels - and no notice was given to contractors that the site had no working firefighting system.

Additionally, the IG faulted the Navy for allowing a contractor to install the PVC drain line, instead of the stronger steel line originally specified in requirements - which would have been less likely to sag and might have prevented the spill.

On November 20, 2021, when the spill finally happened and it came time to mount a response, the Navy's site managers ignored their own spill response plan. They did not appoint one leader to manage the response as spill incident commander, and the designated incident manager for Pearl Harbor - the Navy On-Scene Coordinator Representative (NOSC-R) - did not even visit the site to look at it, either in May or November 2021.

As the spill unfolded on November 20-21, officials missed multiple opportunities to prevent exposing servicemembers and their families to contaminated water, because they did not activate the base-wide emergency response plan. Red Hill's managers assumed that the spill was contained in a sump on the 20th, and even after examining the scene in more detail on the 24th, they failed to identify clues that the well had been contaminated. They didn't immediately check or sample the well to see if there was fuel in it - even after instructed to do so by the Hawaii Department of Health.

On the 27th, Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam got the first complaint of a chemical odor in drinking water on base. No action was taken.

The number of complaints rose on November 28, and officials began to suspect water contamination, but even then they did not activate the base-wide drinking water emergency response plan. "In sum, Navy officials missed four opportunities to activate the [water system response plan]," the IG concluded.

The Hawaii Department of Health took over and issued an advisory not to drink or use the base's tap water on November 29, and on December 6, it ordered a full shutdown of the Red Hill tank farm and a cleanup treatment of the drinking water system. Lab testing of the tapwater revealed elevated concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons in the benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) group of chemicals, which were potentially consumed by thousands of base personnel.

To prevent future tragedies, the IG called for better spill detection and response planning. "The DoD must take this action, and others, to ensure that tragedies like the one in November of 2021 are not allowed to repeat," Inspector General Robert P. Storch said in a statement, noting that the Navy still operates a large fuel transfer hub at Pearl Harbor. "Our recommendations include that the DoD assess leak detection systems at other Navy fuel support points."

Hawaii's congressional delegation called the findings "outrageous and unacceptable."

"The Navy must take full responsibility for its failures and immediately implement the recommendations from the Inspector General in order to address the ongoing impacts to public health and the environment," said Senators Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono and Representatives Ed Case and Jill Tokuda [D-HI].

A story of the migrants who built Britain

Artist and author Miriam Gold talks to Judy Cox about her new graphic memoir, Elena–A Hand Made Life, and how such histories can be used to defend refugees and migrants today

Miriam’s great grandparents, Sonia and Moshe Matskevich, who died in Auschwitz

By Judy Cox

Tuesday 19 November 2024

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

My grandmother was a refugee twice when she was still a teenager. She gave 40 years’ service to the NHS. She said the day the NHS was founded was the best day of her life, even better than giving birth to her own children.

That story has to be part of how we oppose the racist violence that happened over the summer. Refugees have made such a positive difference.

My grandfather was a Jewish refugee from Germany who fled to Britain. During the war he was classed as an “enemy alien” and the British government sent him to an internment camp in Canada then to the Isle of Wight.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for INTERNMENT

Imagine a government thinking it was a priority to send German Jews miles over the sea to Canada—what an incredible misuse of resources. We still dehumanise refugees by putting them on barges or sending them to Rwanda today.

When I started writing seriously, I stopped taking my family stories for granted. Part of growing up is starting to interrogate our family histories.

Our family histories are connected to where we find ourselves now, to how we talk about refugees and public services.

Since the book came out, it has been lovely to meet people who don’t have the same experience of seeking refuge still relating my book to their own grannies and their own memories. We know our families through their homes, their furniture, their curtains.

People recognise their grandparents’ homes in the book. The visual elements of the book help retrieve those memories. We all live our lives within our domestic concerns and wider social and political concerns.

There is often a shocking disconnect between the people I knew and the history they carried. I knew my grandparents as old people. It was difficult to think of some of the horrible things they went through when they were young.

My grandparents got married in 1941. My grandfather had been stripped of his German citizenship because he was Jewish.

But when my grandmother married him she became a German citizen and an “enemy alien”. It was labyrinthine.

My great grandparents could not escape from Germany because they had to settle debts. They fled to France and enjoyed a brief period of peace.

But they were living under the Vichy regime and a neighbour denounced them to the authorities. Early in 1944 they were sent to the Drancy internment camp then deported to the Auschwitz concentration camp.

Both sides of my family have stories of internment, of dehumanisation. I have always felt aware that my existence is down to the wheels of fate.

My father was a Hungarian Jew. He was saved by Raoul Wallenberg, a man from a wealthy Swedish family who saved tens of thousands of Jews from Hungary.

People’s lives hung by the tiniest of threads. An administrative error could save your life.

I have always rejected a narrative that migrants come here and then move to the right, become self-made business owners and oppose other migrants being allowed in. I was brought up in an anti-racist family.

My grandmother lived in a working class area in Sheffield and then in Leigh, a coal and cotton town in Lancashire. She hated snobbery. She was a doctor who was absolutely committed to her patients. This was back when the system allowed you to get to know your patients.

Those relationships gave her a real sense of belonging. My grandparents lived in Sheffield, but they were not urban sophisticates. They loved walking in the Peak District.

This was the time of mass trespasses like the Kinder Scout Trespass. So you had two stateless, penniless young people, building a new life together, walking land whose ownership was being contested.

My grandmother’s Jewish identity was important to her, but she wore it lightly in terms of observance. Sometimes she went to the synagogue but not always. Towards the end, she was involved in a reform synagogue in Manchester.

Being Jewish was at the core of who she was. The importance of community is the thread that runs through the book. The Jewish community in Sheffield. The community of Leigh, which was a mining town and was so brutally attacked during the Miners’ Strike. And the community at her medical centre and, of course, her large family.

Now we have language around things like trauma, PTSD and survivors’ guilt. My grandmother had an abhorrence of sitting still and being quiet.

This helped her keep unhelpful reflections at bay. Keeping busy, knitting, crocheting, making everything by hand, it was her trauma response.

I have always been drawn to novels and graphic novels. The images do the storytelling. I came of age in a political area—in inner London, a multicultural area with Irish and South Asian communities.

It is exciting when people find new ways to tell their stories in music, in literature or film.

I think it so important to tell positive stories about refugees. We need a very different conversation about refugees and asylum seekers.

We need people to come and work, we need people. Today, people are recycling old arguments about refugees, which were not fit for purpose in the first place.

I am a teacher. I work in an area with huge levels of transient communities, from all over the world.

The language we are using now is like the language we were using about Jews then. Conversations about refugees and migrants are spiralling.

My memories of my grandmother remind of that phrase about the banality of evil.

My family story is a Jewish story, a Holocaust story. But it is also a story of one of the many migrants who built post-war Britain, the Windrush Generation, the people from Uganda, who all came and built our public services.

WALES

Interview: Jo Stevens on assisted dying, 2026 Senedd elections and Port Talbot

Daniel Green 20th November, 2024

Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.

Jo Stevens has said that she will back the assisted dying bill when it comes to a vote in Parliament next week.

In an exclusive interview with LabourList at the Welsh Labour Conference in Llandudno, the Secretary of State for Wales confirmed she will support Kim Leadbeater’s private members’ bill to grant those with less than six months to live the option of assisted dying in England and Wales.

She said: “The government remains neutral on this bill. It is a private members’ bill and it’s a vote of conscience. It’s a free vote for everybody, and within the Cabinet and within the Parliamentary Labour Party, there are different people with different views. My view is a matter of public record. I voted for Rob Marris’ bill (former MP for Wolverhampton South West) in 2015, and I will be voting for this bill.”

‘Welsh Labour has to show it is making a difference to people’s lives’

Her appearance at the conference came amid growing preparation by Welsh Labour for the Senedd elections taking place in 2026, with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage claiming his party will be Labour’s main challenger when voters next go to the polls.

Stevens said she was not convinced Reform UK had any interest in Wales. “The leader of Reform is far more interested in what’s going on across the Atlantic, never mind his own constituents in Clacton.”

She stressed that Labour takes every election seriously and takes no votes for granted. “Between now and in 2026, the Welsh Labour government has to show what it’s delivering that makes a difference to people’s lives, so that they can see it and they can feel it.

“I do think that the advent of the UK Labour government and the Welsh Labour government working together has already shown the benefits that two Labour governments bring for Wales. People will and are feeling the difference already.”

‘Very proud’ of funding boost for Wales

One of those benefits has been a boost in funding for Wales, announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in the Budget last month.

Stevens said she was “very proud” that the UK Labour government was able to deliver the largest real-terms settlement for the nation in the history of devolution, granting First Minister Eluned Morgan an extra £1.7bn to spend on public services.

She said: “Eluned has spent the first few months of her premiership listening to people across Wales. What are their priorities? We know that getting waiting lists down is a top priority. We know that improvements in education is a top priority, so I’ve no doubt that the Welsh government budget will focus on making sure that those improvements can be made.”

‘It’s a challenging time, but a huge opportunity for Port Talbot’

The government has also sought to support those affected by the green transition of the steel sector in Port Talbot. Stevens said that workers should “absolutely” feel reassured by the actions the government is taking to ensure a just transition for the industry.

She said: “I want every steel worker in Wales, their families and businesses that rely on our steel industry to know that this government has their back.

“We’ve done that by confirming the £80m for the transition board – an unfunded spending commitment from the previous government. I wondered why, when we won the election in July, that not a single penny of that £80m had gone out the door to help anybody, and now we know why – it didn’t exist. Rachel Reeves confirmed that in the Budget. I’ve announced £13m for a new fund, on top of the previous £13.5m I announced in the summer.

“In addition to that, we secured a better deal with Tata that gives better protections for the workforce – all the workforce will gain under that deal, no immediate compulsory redundancies, the best voluntary redundancy terms that Tata have ever offered to their staff in the UK, skills and training commitments, and of course the contract for the electric arc furnace has been signed. We’ve also got the freeport in Port Talbot.

“This is a huge opportunity. It’s a very challenging time at the moment, but this is a huge opportunity for Port Talbot and for our other steel communities across south Wales, because there is going to be a huge investment in the area.

“We are going to create good jobs, we’re going to put money in people’s pockets and regenerate that area and I want it to be an exemplar of what a government does when a really severe economic shock hits a town or a region or a part of the country.”

Scottish Labour vows to reverse winter fuel cuts in break with Westminster line

James Moules

19th November, 2024

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar has promised to restore universal winter fuel payments in Scotland, in a sharp break with Keir Starmer’s government policy.

Sarwar pledged to reverse Labour’s decision nationally to means-test the benefit, as Scottish Labour aims for a return to power in 2026 at the next Holyrood election.

But The Daily Record has reported that insiders are concerned the backlash to the controversial winter fuel cut could hinder Labour’s chances of dethroning the SNP, which initially accepted the cuts but is reportedly also considering reversing them.

The Scottish Labour leader told the paper: “A UK Labour government is clearing up the mess left by a chaotic Tory government – here in Scotland, people are demanding a new direction and in 2026 we have the opportunity to deliver it with a Scottish Labour government.”

Starmer and Rachel Reeves have repeatedly defended the winter fuel payment reforms as a necessary measure to bring public finances back under control. But critics have voiced fears about its potential impact on ineligible pensioners during the colder months.

The policy has led to disquiet in the Labour ranks, with more than 50 of the party’s MPs not voting on the government’s motion to cut the allowance.

While Labour scored a resounding victory over the SNP in Scottish seats at July’s general election, opinion polls suggest the party could be in for a tougher battle at the 2026 Holyrood election.

A recent Norstat poll for The Times suggested Labour’s popularity had fallen in Scotland following last month’s Budget, with the SNP 10 points ahead of Labour in the constituency vote.

Bank of England governor says Brexit has damaged UK economy

Basit Mahmood

18 November, 2024

Left Foot Forward

Governor Andrew Bailey said he took no position on Brexit “per se”, but added: “I do have to point out consequences.”

The Governor of the Bank of England has confirmed what many of us already knew, that Brexit has been bad for the UK economy.

Speaking at the Mansion House dinner in the City of London last week, Governor Andrew Bailey said he took no position on Brexit “per se”, but added: “I do have to point out consequences.”

He said: “The changing trading relationship with the EU has weighed on the level of potential supply.

“The impact on trade seems to be more in goods than services, that is not particularly surprising to my mind.

“But it underlines why we must be alert to and welcome opportunities to rebuild relations while respecting the decision of the British people.”

“The picture is now clouded by the impact of geopolitical shocks and the broader fragmentation of the world economy,” he added.

According to Aston University Business School, the value of UK goods exported to the EU was 27% lower and imported goods 32% lower, compared to what the economy may have looked like if Brexit had not happened.

A report produced by Cambridge Econometrics commissioned by City Hall at the beginning of the year, found that the average Briton was nearly £2,000 worse off in 2023, while the average Londoner was nearly £3,400 worse off last year as a result of Brexit.

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward

60% of Tory party members would have voted for Trump and think his election is good for Britain

Basit Mahmood

18 November, 2024

Left Foot Forward

Tory party members give their verdict...

A clear majority of Tory party members would have voted for Trump, with a majority also saying that they think his election is good for Britain, a survey of party members has found.

The survey, carried out by Tory grassroots website Conservative Home, asked party members how they would have voted in the U.S. election. A clear majority said they would have voted for Trump, with 60.5% backing the 45th President. Only 24.1% opted for Kamala Harris.

15.4% did not know or would have chosen someone else.

That such a clear majority opted for Trump, despite him becoming the first convicted criminal to be elected US President, and who held campaign rallies filled with vitriol, after he also tried overturn the 2020 election result, speaks volumes about the Tory party, which so often likes to portray itself as the party of law and order.

Tory party members were also asked if they thought the election of Trump was good or bad for Britain, to which 60% said they thought his election was positive for Britain.

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward

What Trump’s win means for US capital

While Donald Trump is offering tax cuts and deregulation, some of his other policies are not as straightforwardly in the ruling class' interest

Elon Musk has been a large funder of Trump’s campaign

(Photo: flickr/Trump White House Archived)

By Alex Callinicos
Monday 18 November 2024

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

Now the immediate shock of Donald Trump’s victory has worn off, there’s much anxious speculation about what he will actually do. A lot of attention has naturally focused on the appointments he’s announcing.

In his first administration Trump sought to reassure the core ruling class—the big transnational corporations and banks and the national security apparatus that keeps the world safe for them. He filled his cabinet largely from their ranks. This time no more Rinos—“Republicans in Name Only”. Trump is determined to appoint only those who are personally and politically loyal to him. Hence the parade of anti-vaxxers, dodgy Congresspeople, ultra-Zionists and frackers. Their records and views are pretty scary.

But the situation is more complex and contradictory than it seems. Last time, Trump had to reassure the core ruling class because his social base lay elsewhere. It consisted of capitalists who had got rich tapping the domestic market and often the US state—for example by running care homes.

This time, however, the core ruling class was split. Tesla boss Elon Musk, previously a Democrat, led a big chunk of Silicon Valley money into the Trump camp. Stephen Schwarzman, CEO of the investment company Blackstone, fell out with Trump over the storming of the US Capitol on 6 January 2021. But he endorsed him this time. Meanwhile, Trump has maintained cordial relations with arguably the most powerful capitalist in the world, Larry Fink, boss of the even bigger investment company BlackRock.

Trump is offering these corporate titans more of the red meat he gave them last time—tax cuts and deregulation. But some of his other policies are not so straightforwardly in their interests. Big US capital operates globally, but Trump wants to raise more barriers with the rest of the world.

One of his headline promises is to expel “illegal” migrants. But Goldman Sachs estimates that immigration has boosted the US workforce by more than 4 million since 2023.

This “helped rebalance the labour market with little economic cost”. Investment bank Morgan Stanley warns that “a curtailment of immigration will force slower growth and higher inflation”.

The higher tariffs on imports that Trump is threatening would disrupt the transnational supply networks on which capitalist production depends today. Despite Musk’s embarrassing far right posturing he is the boss of a global electric vehicle company that has factories in China and Germany.

His tweet praising the ultra free market libertarian Argentinian president Javier Milei for cutting tariffs suggests he isn’t entirely comfortable with Trump’s trade policy.

Another complication concerns the workings of US politics. It’s true that the Republicans now control all branches of government—the presidency, both houses of Congress and the supreme court.

But the US state functions to achieve two results. First, to ensure that elected officials of both parties serve big capital and, second, to allow rival corporate interests to lobby and bargain their way to the best outcomes for them. This is why Fink said it “really doesn’t matter” who won the election.

Trump has to operate this system, which often works agonisingly slowly. He knows this, which is why he is looking for ways to bypass Congress. Ash Merton writes on the New Left Review website, “Trump’s second term looks set to replay a familiar pattern.” This is where “his grandest promises come up against the practical difficulties of mediating between rival interest groups and their political representatives, both inside and outside the administration”.

“During his first stint in office, this dynamic forced him into a series of retreats and compromises, which he attributed to ‘deep state’ sabotage, deflecting the blame onto this shadowy enemy. The next four years will be characterised by a similar attempt at displacement.”

Nevertheless, because he’s been through it before, Trump will try to show his base things will be different this time. Most likely, he’ll start with what he calls “the largest deportation operation in American history”. This could unleash untold suffering. The left in the US and the rest of the world need to prepare to resist.

Trade expert warns UK must choose between EU and Trump

Basit Mahmood

Yesterday

Left Foot Forward

Trump, who is a protectionist, has said that he plans on introducing a 20% levy on most imports to the US in order to help out domestic businesses, with 60% on imports from China

After President-elect Trump made clear his intentions to engage in a trade war and impose tariffs on all imports, which would harm the UK economy, a former world trade expert has warned that the UK must now choose between the EU and the U.S. if it is to grow its economy.

Trump, who is a protectionist, has said that he plans on introducing a 20% levy on most imports to the US in order to help out domestic businesses, with 60% on imports from China.

According to analysis from the Centre for Economics and Business Research, those plans will mean a hit of £20bn to the UK economy, amounting to a reduction in the UK’s economic output by 0.9 per cent by the end of his presidency.

With economic growth a priority for Keir Starmer’s government, some have been pushing him to adopt closer ties with the EU in order to counter balance any economic hit from Trump’s plans.

The former head of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Pascal Lamy, has said that it is clear that the UK’s interests lay in staying close to the EU on trade, rather than allying with Trump, not least because it does three times more trade with Europe than the US.

His comments came after an adviser to Trump warned that the UK should align itself with the American “free enterprise” economic model instead of the “more socialist” European system.

In an interview with the Observer, Lamy said: “It’s an old question with a new relevance given Brexit and given Trump. In my view the UK is a European country. Its socio- economic model is much closer to the EU social model and not the very hard, brutal version of capitalism of Trump and [Elon] Musk.

“We can expect that Trump plus Musk will go even more in this direction. If Trump departs from supporting Ukraine, I have absolutely no doubt that the UK will remain on the European side.

“In trade matters, you have to look at the numbers. The trade relationship between the UK and Europe is three times larger than between the UK and US.”

Basit Mahmood is editor of Left Foot Forward