SOCIALIST UNITY

29 April, 2006

Dr John Reid - you dog!

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 11:59 pm


According to this from Reuters, Defence Secretary Dr John Reid has been caught with the evil, evil, evil cannabis in his Scottish home.

I am shocked and horrified… but he wont be charged as it only has a ’street value’ of 85 pence.

I was soooo excited for a moment… on the back of Prescott affair ‘exploited power’ (BBC), Nurses wish Hewitt the very best of luck . . . in her next job (Times) and Blair won’t guarantee Clarke’s job (Guardian) it would have been the icing on the cake.

It’s just a shame that these people can never be brought to book for the things they really should be.

28 April, 2006

Basque leader and peacemaker jailed for praising ETA leader

Filed under: basques, spain, terrorism — @ 11:00 pm

Anyone following debates about the criminalisation of political expression in the name of defending against terrorism should note this story in The Independent.

Basque leader is jailed for praising former head of Eta
Elizabeth Nash in Madrid
28 April 2006
Arnaldo Otegi, the radical Basque politician and a key figure in the incipient peace process, has been jailed for 15 months for glorifying terrorism.

Spain’s High Court also banned Otegi, one of the most prominent and outspoken leaders of Basque nationalism, from standing for political office or voting for seven years at yesterday’s hearing. Otegi, 47, the leader of the outlawed pro-separatist Batasuna party, is thought to have played a decisive role in persuading Eta armed separatists to declare a permanent ceasefire last month.

He had long been in discreet contact with members of the ruling Socialist party to prepare for the ceasefire, and is considered Spain’s nearest equivalent to Sinn Fein’s leader, Gerry Adams, in his importance to the Basque peace process.

While Basque Socialists consider him a key interlocutor, Otegi is one of the few non-combatant radical Basques with clout among Eta’s military hotheads - because of his record as a former Eta hitman. He is likely to be a vital participant in future peace talks.

“I think the bases for the abandonment of violence are firm and will not be affected by these kind of events,” the Socialist parliamentary spokesman, Ramon Jauregui, said.

Otegi was sentenced for praising the Eta leader Jose Miguel Benaran Ordenana, known as Argala, at a memorial service in 2003. He denied at his trial this month his homage amounted to the glorification of terrorism or Eta. “My message was only an act of remembrance for a person murdered 25 years ago for political reasons,” he had said.

Argala was suspected of masterminding the assassination in 1973 of Franco’s right-hand man, Admiral Luis Carrero Blanco, whose death in an explosion shook the dictatorship’s foundations. Argala was amnestied in 1977 and murdered a year later, supposedly by extremists seeking vengeance for Blanco’s death.

Otegi is on bail in connection with a trial to establish Batasuna’s links with Eta. He was sentenced to a year in jail in November for insulting the king, whom he accused of being “responsible for torturers”, but the term was waived as “a first offence”. He can appeal to the Supreme Court, which has the last word on whether he should go to jail for the latest offence.

Before the court ruling yesterday, Otegi sought permission to travel to Dublin to take part in Sinn Fein events, invited by Gerry Adams. Mr Adams is said to have advised him on how to orchestrate Eta’s transition from armed action to peace talks, and has praised him publicly.

For the record: I’m still celebrating the assassination of Carrero Blanco as an important blkow against a fascist regime.

local elections, what would be a good result?

Filed under: elections, Respect, Far Left — Andy Newman @ 3:58 pm

My article on what would be a good result for the left in the local elections has now been published. The whole article is here:

But is you want to skip the argument and leap to the conclusion, this is how the article ends:

Generally, in local elections left of labour candidates except where there are special circumstances, get votes of around 2% or 4%. Anything above that is good, and suggests that the campaign has some resonance, anything below that suggests that you are doing something wrong: perhaps your leaflets shouldn’t have mentioned the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Hegelian dialectic after all.But we also have to judge what the impact of our campaigns is on developing networks of relationships with other activists in the town, the degree to which it is having an impact on the local Labour party. How many activists are involved in the campaign, etc. Crudely these factors will be reflected in the size of the vote as well.

In local elections it doesn’t matter so much that the left are standing under different banners, and we can all play to our own local strengths. I am hoping that when we look at the elections outside East London that we will see an average vote of around 4%, with some isolated results above 10%. That would be progress on the Socialist Alliance. Except in areas where there may be large Moslem populations I am not expecting Respect to do any better than the rest of the left.So what about Tower Hamlets and Newham? Galloway has set the bar high by suggesting that they will win control of a council, more likely they will end up with small but significant opposition groups on both councils. This will both be a big step forward, and also a very significant challenge. Once they have a few councillors it will no longer be enough to talk about Iraq, they will have to deal with next year’s budget, and can they hold their coalition together to lead a militant mass campaign for better funding, which may include surcharges on councillors?

It is an exciting prospect that a group of Respect councillors in Tower Hamlets could lead a fight over the issue of the Council tax, which is an issue that transcends the exceptional nature of their predominantly Moslem vote. Galloway has said it his ambition to fly the Palestinian flag over the town hall, but remember when John Lawrence was leader of St Pancras council in the 1950s he flew the red flag over the town hall – are Respect ready to take up that example?

However it pans out, if Respect win a significant group on either council this could provides the platform for the left with a practical basis for collaboration in a struggle against the council tax, and local government underfunding. It is through such practical collaboration over specific concrete projects that a new left can be built, and which could pull the Greens behind us.

26 April, 2006

To secure for workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their labour

Filed under: GMB, Trade Unions, New Labour — Andy Newman @ 1:25 pm

There comes a point in life when you have to read your Union rule book. I have been in a number of unions over the year’s as I have changed employment: NUPE, the Halifax Staff Association, APEX, MSF and GMB, and it is important to understand how the structures work. Although I have been in the GMB for 4 years now, I had never felt the pressing need to study the constitution, but I recently decided to give it a go.

Imagine my surprise when under Rule 2.10, Objects of the Union, it says:

“To secure the return of members to parliament and public authorities who will support the policies of the union and further the interests of members through political means, provided the candidates are pledged to collective ownership, under democratic control, of the means of production, distribution and exchange” [My emphasis]

Now in fact the GMB stumps up hefty amounts of cash for the Labour Party in elections. The Labour Party, since the removal of Clause IV, no longer shares these aims, and the GMB’s money is spent by the Labour Party as it sees fit, and not only in furtherance of candidates who meet rule 2.10 of the GMB constitution.

The question is therefore, have all the GMB’s contributions to the Labour party since Clause IV was abolished been unconstitutional, and ultra vires?

25 April, 2006

The agency of NHS agency workers

Filed under: NHS — admin @ 3:01 pm

The NHS is the biggest political issue in the country today. Labour, the party traditionally associated with the creation of the national Health Service seems hell bent on taking it apart.

Hewitt seems additionally concerned that health workers are not angry enough yet and so has been stirring it with bizarre statements like this is the “best year ever for the NHS” in the midst of lay offs, the closure of services and wards, and a whole number of trusts around the country just simply bemused as to how they are going to cut the required millions from their budgets.

Personnel Today did a survey of 200 NHS Human Resource directors and whilst finding that many trusts have escaped without too much injury because the deficits are concentrated in a large minority of NHS trusts others “are freezing vacancies, redeploying staff to other roles or organisations, redesigning roles, and reducing the use of agency and temporary staff.” (1) to avoid redundancies.

7,000 jobs have already been lost in England alone, with a further 13,000 predicted, so it’s hardly surprising that Hewitt has had a hard ride with the RCN and Unison conferences this week. Some nurses have even been talking of strike action. Don’t worry though, laid off in England? Labour’s Andy Kerr says get on your bike to Scotland and fill their vacancies, lucky you. (2)

In some quarters the blame has been laid at the door of wage rises, but headline grabbing salaries of a handful of GPs have obscured the fact that the majority of NHS workers are on the lowest pay grades and are paid a pittance.

It’s the priorities of the government that is part of the problem. For instance, the number of managers in the NHS has doubled in the last ten years (3) frankly that’s twice as many people to bully, obstruct and irritate the workforce, not helpful. But the largest area of growth in government spening in the NHS has been in drugs and the private sector.

One pound in every eight that the NHS goes tot he drug companies. Let’s nationalise these drug cartels which would simultaneously cut the drugs bill and remove the privateers from decisions about what drugs, if any, a patient requires.

The money going to private companies to supply pay roll services, catering, maintenance et al is a disgrace when they are providing services that were all previously done in house at less cost with the erosion of working rights. Then add on the money for the PFI and other part privatisation projects up and down the country that seemed such a good idea to local authorities at the time to get a quick fix investment - but then the loan shark is on your back for decades.

This process is not abating but continuing. For instance the NHS Logistics Authority which organises supply of food, blankets and medical equipment was announced in early April (4) sold off to a US company, Novation, that is currently being investigated by ther Senate for dodgy practices.

One area of this crisis that has been largely ignored though is that it’s the most vulnerable workers who get given the elbow first. I am referring here to agency workers. When HR managers say they are going to reduce the “use” of agency and temporary staff it sounds innocuous we’re talking about lay offs that don’t appear on any balance sheets.

It may surprise some to learn that agency workers are not doing it for a hobby or to spite NHS workers. One billion pounds of NHS money goes towards the supply of agency staff - but the problem is not the staff but the fact that the government prefers to have a supply of easily discardable staff and pay the private sector a cut so they don’t need to give these workers rights or security of employment.

Thousands of these workers have simply lost regular work at a moments notice over the last months but, despite being essential staff, media and government alike continue to simply regard them as expenditure. In the last twenty years we’ve returned to the position where hands are hired each morning at the gates of the dock. But, no, I’m, being silly. It’s done by phone thse days.

The problem with being an agency worker is that you are continually aware of your lack of agency. If you annoy the manager of a unit they just don’t ask you back, no disciplinary, no legal protection, nothing, which simply encourages managers to make personal decisions rather than professional ones. Got a complaint about bullying? Seen the abuse of patients? Is raising it worth losing your job over?

We should return to the position where temporary staff are seen as peripetatic and employed by the NHS as ‘bank staff’. Kick these cow boy operators out of health care, not just because it would reduce cost but because it would raise the standard of care these workers can deliver and give them the kind of rights that every worker deserves.

The nurse on the left is discardable just cos she’s with the agency

23 April, 2006

Racism and Fascism in France

Filed under: France, anti-fascist — @ 3:12 pm

There’s a disturbing report of political opinion in France being carried by Doug Ireland’s excellent US-based blog Direland - even after the triumph of the student and worker struggles against the CPE - headlined as ‘FRANCE: ONE-THIRD IDENTIFY WITH NEO-FASCIST RIGHT IN NEW POLL’ based on an IFOP poll in the Metro newspaper.

Immigration and crime are the key issues and indicate a predictable ‘heightened climate of racism in France since last fall’s ghetto riots’ and ‘[t]he resurgence of that violence on the margins of the two successful nation-wide general strikes against a reactionary youth labor contract last month — even though that much-televised disorder was mostly generated by only a few hundred ghetto youths out of millions of peaceful demonstrators — also contributed to the increase in security hysteria and anti-immigrant sentiments this new poll’ .

21 April, 2006

Is the UK moving to the right?

Filed under: Uncategorized — admin @ 2:34 am

I’ve never been to Question Time before so it was quite a learning experience to go to my first one earlier today in Cambridge. I’d raced back from Colchester where I’d been helping out with leafletting for some socialists standing as independents in the local elections and was a bit tired, but none the less I’ll write a few notes on how it went.

The first thing I noticed is that the panel line up was unremittingly right wing. Charles Clarke, Shadow Chancellor and Cameron clone Osborne, Vince Cable - pro-privatisation co-author of the Orange Book and new Lib Dem deputy leader and some journalist who has just left the Telegraph cos it was too liberal (Janet Daley, I had to look it up again).

Usually there is at least one person who is bearable but there didn’t seem to be any ray of light here. Not a good sign, but then the programme began and I have to say I thought the audience leant to the right as well, which was really disappointing.

A precis of the views from the floor

The NHS - all those greedy workers sucking up wages are a real problem.
That bloody Chameleon advert - it’s a bit of a laugh isn’t it.
Law and Order - rehabilitation? We must lock up ‘criminals’ to be safe in our beds
The BNP - they’ve got a bit of a point haven’t they?
The Monarchy - a rousing chorus of God Save the Queen

I expected the panel to be bad but when 90% of the audience burst into applause over how great the Queen is… jeeez!

Counting those that I know there were about ten progressive activists in the audience all with their hands up - none of them called for their questions or comments during debate unfortunately (although I’m not suggesting conspiracy on the latter at least)

Incidently before it began that nice old chap Dimbleby told us they never cut anything from the show - well they did! There was a juicy bit of slander they chopped out… man I’m used to being lied to but it still hurts. It was over negative campaigning and a mad UKIP woman in the audience attacked the Tory for Cameron’s anti-UKIP rant the other day. Osbourne said, but you are closet racists and the UKIP founder, Alan Sked, agrees. She then replied something like “he’s a warped, twisted and bitter little man.” But that outburst did not make it onto the show, cut out, expunged, eradicated… shame - it’s nice to see these eccentric spittle flecked maniacs flap at each other.

But my main worry is that in a liberal town like Cambridge, where racism and homophobia are notably lower than many places, it was the right that dominated the floor. With a socialist political alternative never further away, with the mass public sector strikes a flop, with the anti-war movement running out of steam, ideas and utterly directionless is the UK moving to the right?

17 April, 2006

Athens ESF registration now open

Filed under: Social Forum — Andy Newman @ 9:35 pm

A message from the organisers:

We would like to inform you that registration for individuals and organizations is now fully functional.Please tell people who want to come to Athens to register as soon as possible.Please register using our website: http://athens.fse-esf.org. This is the only website which you should use to register.

Payments are done with a credit card or bank transfer. If you pay by bank/wire transfer, please warn us so that we can monitor the process.Contact persons for organisations do not need to register as individual participants.

The registration fee for individuals is 20 euros per person. The fee for organisations is 200 euros per organisation.

Organisations that need to register with a discount (100 euros) are kindly requested to send an email to the Organizing committee. If the request is granted, the organisations can pay via bank transfer.Registration for an organisation automatically allows you to apply for stalls. Each stall is constituted by a folding screen 2m20 long, with 3 partitions, and 1 table. Each organisation can have a maximum of 3 stalls. Each stall costs 150 euros.

14 April, 2006

Cashmere Communism

Filed under: Rifondazione, Italy — admin @ 6:12 pm

Reuters has this story by Robin Pomeroy

“With his dapper appearance and urbane manner, 66-year-old Fausto Bertinotti does not look like the harbinger of “misery, terror and death” that Silvio Berlusconi has accused Italy’s communist leader of being. The head of Italy’s biggest hard-left party, Communist Refoundation, often called a “cashmere communist” because of his taste for expensive clothes, Bertinotti is set to play a key role in Romano Prodi’s new government. Bertinotti has said he would not become a minister himself, but as his party secured third place in Prodi’s centre-left election victory, it will demand significant spoils after more than 2 million Italians gave him their vote.

“…Confounding the Prime Minister’s constant warnings of “baby-eating” communists, Bertinotti has taken a left-wing but hardly extreme stance, calling for lower tax on labour and higher taxes on capital gains - a policy broadly adopted by Prodi’s “Union” coalition. “There’s nothing wrong with being rich, as long as you pay taxes,” he has said.

“…It is not just Berlusconi voters who fear Italy’s communists. Many moderates in the centre-left are concerned Bertinotti could hold Prodi to ransom unless he gets his way. He was responsible for sinking Prodi’s first government when, in 1998, he turned against him in a confidence vote due to disagreements over labour policy.

“…New lawmakers who may enter parliament under Refoundation’s banner include Vladimir Luxuria, a transvestite who aims to be Europe’s first “trans-gender” lawmaker, Francesco Caruso, a leader of the anti-globalisation movement, and Haidi Giuliani, mother of a demonstrator shot dead by police at G8 protests in Genoa in 2001.”

I love the way commentators make out that the PRC are fair weather friends, as if leaving the government was just some sort of wrecking technique. The Prodi government was pursuing free market policies that the PRC totally opposed and so they could not continue to support the government. The PRC was absolutely consistent and principled - and it is a testiment to their willingness to work with others that they are giving it another go.

But that doesn’t mean the coalition is going to be easy sailing - if Prodi isn’t willing to give significant concessions to his coalition partners he wont deserve to stay… Italian election results in detail

12 April, 2006

Iran - sorry Seymour i’m still not convinced

Filed under: Iran, anti-war — Andy Newman @ 11:06 am

Following Seymour Hersch’s recent piece in the New Yorker I wondered whether my own scepticism about the likelihood of a US attack on Iran was becoming an increasingly lonely position to hold. Especially having marched through London with maybe 30000 peace activists many of whom carrying placards giving testimony to their fears of an imminent US or Israeli bombing campaign against Iran.

However, I am still far from convinced that the USA has the political ambition or military capability to take out Iran’s dispersed nuclear development programme, without incurring a backlash that even the most hawkish pentagon planner would be able to see coming.

It seems some others still agree with me, and they are people better qualified and informed than I am. In Pakistan recently Tariq Ali said that he thought an attack on Iran unlikely, although I haven’t been able to find anything from him in writing about this subject.
The very well informed, and shrewd commentator, Rahul Mahajan, who writes the Empire Notes blog, is also sceptical.

In a very well argued piece, Mahajan points out that the same predictions were made by Seymour Hersch a year ago, and “all that has changed since then is that Bush has recklessly spent down his political capital, at home and abroad. There is more cooperation with Europe, but Europe doesn’t want military action.

“Some would say that this is also an exact repeat of the leadup to the Iraq war, complete with statements that Iran has a chance to resolve this diplomatically, or the U.S. will go to war. The difference, of course, is that the Iraq war was undertaken in an era of expansive military triumphalism, when nearly all informed opinion thought the Vietnam syndrome had been kicked forever; a mere three years later, we live in an era of stark pessimism about the ability of the United States to transform the world by violence.

“So I think what we are seeing is what military analyst Fred Kaplan calls a game of “nuclear chicken.” The United States and Iran are locking themselves into a collision course, each saying that it will not back down under any circumstances. The threat of military strikes against Iran shows not the likelihood of military action but the desperation of the United States, which seems to have exhausted all its cards and can only hope to scare the Iranians into negotiating.

After all, you would hardly expect the US government to make an anouncement like: “We are worried about Iran getting Nukes, but we have bitten off more than we can chew in Iraq and Afghanistan, and used up all our good will with our allies, so we are just going to have to let them do what they want

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress