Labour
We could do things so very differently
There are rare moments when I think everything must change.
Sometimes, these have been personal.
Other times, I have realised that organisations I have been involved in need to change.
But this morning, I have a very real sense that the need for everything to change is very much bigger. I am increasingly thinking that society is becoming unsustainable. The political decisions of the past are coming home to roost. The current political narrative is not working and cannot ever work again. The risk of serious breakdown is very high.
The evidence is all around us, and I offer it in no particular order.
The COP28 has seen bizarre claims that we must burn carbon to save the planet. The scientific evidence is unequivocal that we must stop doing so. Our failure to do just that is very rapidly leading us to climate tipping points.
The war in Gaza is going to rewrite the politics of the Middle East, which have been so significant throughout my life. Israel's actions will change its standing in the world, whatever Hamas totally unjustifiably did.
Sellafield is leaking, and there is no answer to the questions about nuclear waste after a lifetime of it accumulating. The pretence that nuclear is the energy answer has to be over.
Fascism is on the rise. We have seen it in the Netherlands, but it is as apparent here. The Tories are discussing the suspension of human rights so that they can pursue a policy on extraditing immigrants to Rwanda that can do absolutely nothing to solve the migration issue because of the tiny numbers that will ever be involved.
In fairness to the Tories, it looks quite likely that they will split over this issue. The possibility that the supposed most effective electoral machine in democratic history might collapse under the weight of its own in-fighting looks to be very real. It could happen soon. The likelihood that the date of the next election is not Sunak's to choose is growing as he begins to lose his party's support in the Commons.
Labour has moved into Tory space to take on the centre-right role.
There is no leading left-of-centre political party in the UK in a two-party system now: the essential element of first-past-the-post, that it offers the electorate choice, even if it is only a limited one, has gone. As a result, we no longer have anything approaching a functioning democracy.
Nor, with Labour dedicated to austerity and cuts, will we have anything approaching acceptable public services left in the UK. The next round of doctors' strikes is evidence that this is unacceptable.
The migration issue is not going away: without inward migration, we cannot survive. Without it, there will be no provision for an ageing population in the UK that long ago ceased to replace itself. The self-destruct button is being pushed on this issue.
And the same is true of economics. The failure to recover from the 2008 crash is not by chance: it is because that crash was caused by the failure of neoliberalism and yet we are still trying to treat that failure with more neoliberalism, which clearly cannot work. But our politicians, civil service and the so-called economists who feed them the nonsense that informs what is supposedly called evidence-based policy cannot see this obvious fact, so blinded are they by ideology.
All of this, and more, suggests that the system we have cannot survive. It is literally, and very obviously, dying all around us.
We could do things so very differently.
We could care.
We could prioritise meeting the needs of all and not delivering the wants of a few.
We could plan for our children's and grandchildren's survival.
We could make financial services a servant and not a master.
We could fund strong public services.
We could take action to stop the massively destructive excess consumption of some that is destroying this planet for everyone else, which is also utterly distorting our economies.
We could have a functioning democracy.
If we did, we could stop fascism.
We could do all this.
But will we?
What Labour is proposing makes no sense at all – even electorally
I posted this poll on Twitter yesterday morning:
I do, of course, accept that my Twitter following is not representative. It is bound to have a left-of-centre bias. But that makes this more relevant. What that makes clear is that amongst those who are left of centre, what Starmer is doing is deeply unpopular.
We know that Starmer is chasing swing voters on the right. That, though, makes no sense either. There are none left to be had when latest polls look like this:
There is no margin left for Labour to take there.
In that case what is Labour playing at? As Aditya Chakrabortty said in a Guradian email this morning:
Two weeks ago, Jeremy Hunt came out with plans which everyone credible says are simply not going to happen. And Rachel Reeves says, I’m going to accept all of it anyway. This feels a bit like handing your worst enemy your wallet, and asking them to count your money.
That's how insane what Labour is doing is.
And Labour is leading in the polls.
Why shouldn’t MPs also have completely overt bank accounts?
This is 50 seconds of speech and incisiveness that is worth much more of your time, I suggest… For anyone unable to access the speech itself, this is the really devastating concluson: “Never in our history has the government intruded on the privacy of anyone’s bank account without any good reason. And now we’re treating... Read more
Starmer does need to learn about what entrepreneurialism really is
This Tweet from me was popular yesterday:
The point is really important, and suggests a real lack of economic understanding on Starmer's part.
Labour’s plan for Britain is austerity piled high
Keir Starmer has a deeply depressing article in The Telegraph this morning.
He began by talking about:
It is in this sense of public service that Labour has changed dramatically in the last three years. The course of shock therapy we gave our party had one purpose: to ensure that we were once again rooted in the priorities, the concerns and the dreams of ordinary British people.
To put those dreams in context he said:
Margaret Thatcher sought to drag Britain out of its stupor by setting loose our natural entrepreneurialism.
He mentioned Clem Atlee, but only to note:
A century ago, Clement Attlee wrote that Labour must be a party of duty and patriotism, not abstract theory.
Of his founding of the NHS or the creation of the welfare state there is not a mention. Instead we get:
The Tories have talked the talk on fiscal prudence while wasting untold billions…. They have squandered economic opportunities and failed to realise the possibilities of Brexit.
Amongst Labour supporters opinion polls show almost no one thinks there are any such benefits. At this juncture only a fool could be persuaded that there might be.
This, though, is where Starmer really reveals himself:
They will bequeath public finances more akin to a minefield than a solid foundation. Labour’s iron-clad fiscal rules will set this straight – but it will not be quick or easy.
The crass stupidity that is Labour’s fiscal rule - that will guarantee austerity and failing public services in the UK- is on display here. This is so much so that he notes :
There will be many on my own side who will feel frustrated by the difficult choices we will have to make. This is non-negotiable: every penny must be accounted for. The public finances must be fixed so we can get Britain growing and make people feel better off.
Starmer clearly thinks three things.
The first is that the government has no money of its own, which we all know is not true. QE proved it.
The second is that there can be no accounting for deficits, which is oxymoronic, because we can only know they exist if they are accounted for.
And third, that the illusionary goal of balancing the budget - which is thankfully very largely unknown in recent British history, because all economic progress depends on the existence of such deficits - is more important than the provision of public services. It is quite staggering to see him make that so clear, and deeply depressing.
A Labour government led by Keir Starmer will be a disaster for this country.
Galloway re-elected as Workers GB party leader, will stand for London mayor
Former MP has more than the required nominations to enter contest
Former Labour and Respect MP George Galloway has been re-elected as leader by members of the Workers GB party – and has confirmed he will be standing for election as mayor of London.
Galloway told the party’s national conference today that he has double the required nominations to be able to stand.
Andy Hudd
Chris Williamson
Peter Ford
Former Labour MP Chris Williamson, former UK ambassador Peter Ford and the Aslef union’s Andy Hudd were elected as deputy leaders.
A Workers’ Party GB member present at the conference told Skwawkbox:
The party has had fully democratic elections for the twenty positions of the “national members Council”, open to all members. The positions of leader and deputy leader were unopposed. Contrary to the smears of its critics, WPGB is not the Galloway show and there is a full and democratic structure.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
What do you want to leave your children?
I out this poll out on Twitter yesterday morning, and it closes soon:
The question is, I think, binary.
There is no way that we are going to save the planet for human habitation without greater government investment. That is, in turn, going to require the reorientation of savings away from private sector deposit takers and towards government based savings mechanisms that will provide the capital to make this process possible. Anyone can pretend otherwise, but I just don’t see how we can do it in any other way.
In that case, if we insist on calling government provided savings facilities ‘government debt’, then that debt is going to rise as a pre-condition of our survival.
It would seem that the respondents to this poll understand that.
What we know is that Rachel Reeves does not. And that makes her a threat to the survival of everyone’s children.
There’s no subtle way of stating that fact, for fact it is.
And that’s why a large Labour majority at the next election could be a catastrophe, unless someone can persuade the Party leadership to change its mind.
State investment would encourage business investment
News that Heathrow airport has changed ownership once more so that Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund will get a £1bn stake and Ardian Private Equity will take up to 15% of the whole, suggests that foreign investment in the UK is doing alright… But should we be chasing foreign private investment as Sunak did in... Read more
Graham to be called to testify in Ireland in Ogle’s discrimination claim against Unite
Irish union legend’s case against union for abuse and discrimination after his cancer treatment expected to last eight days but adjourned until February
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham is expected to be called to testify in Dublin in Irish union legend Brendan Ogle’s discrimination claim against the union.
Ogle, who is also suing Graham, her ally Tony Woodhouse and the union for defamation, has alleged that he was abused by the union after his return from treatment for serious cancer – and after he made ‘protected disclosures’ to the union about its failures to adhere to covid protocols during the pandemic. Graham and her representatives have been accused of ‘disgusting’ behaviour toward Ogle – and anger in Ireland at the situation became so great that an entire sector branch threatened to disaffiliate entirely from Unite, the well-known ‘Right2Water’ campaign said it will no longer work with Unite, Unite’s Community section in Ireland condemned the ‘injustice inflicted’ on him and members picketed general secretary Sharon Graham’s long-delayed visit to Dublin.
Graham is using one of the world’s most profitable law firms to defend the defamation suit – and also, Tuesday’s hearing revealed, in the tribunal case. Her tenure as Unite boss has been marked by a string of other allegations – which neither she nor the union has denied – including alleged destruction of evidence against her husband in misogyny and bullying complaints. She is currently being sued, along with an ally and the union, by Irish union legend Brendan Ogle for defamation.
She has been exposed using proxies to order the cancellation of showings of the film ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn/The Big Lie’, which exposes the political abuse of antisemitism accusations against left-wingers in the Labour party, and discussion of Asa Winstanley’s forensic book Weaponising Antisemitism: How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn. Proxies were similarly despatched to try, unsuccessfully, to cancel a Unite ‘fringe’ event at Labour’s conference earlier this month in support of Palestinians.
Ogle’s barrister told the Workplace Relations Commission adjudicator that she expected the union would be required to ‘produce’ Sharon Graham to testify, along with a string of current and former senior Unite officials and employees. The case was adjourned to allow both sides further time to prepare for what is expected to be an eight-day hearing and will recommence in February.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Reform is getting all it wants as both Labour and the Tories jump every time it moves
The Guardian has an article out this morning headlined:
I think this is a misreading of what Reform is doing.
Reform does not exist to win. It has no desire to do so.
Nor does it want to split the Tory vote. It is even questionable whether it is doing so. Some of its vote undoubtedly comes from Labour. Yet more will come from those who would not have voted at all without it being present, I suspect.
The Reform agenda is quite different. Those funding it simply want a populist far-right agenda that focuses on division in society by exploiting issues such as migration to dominate political debate.
By doing so, they force the issues that really matter, from climate change, to destitution, to real political reform, to tackling inequality, and so much more, to the sidelines, and force the so-called Overton Window that determines possible political outcomes ever further to the right.
Labour has fallen for that hook, line and sinker. If Tice merely moves Labour jumps in response.
The Tories are no better.
Reform does not need to win, and will not win. But it is getting what it wants anyway as all but right-wing options are removed from the Tory and Labour agendas.
And, apparently, nether of those parties can see that.
It's that fact that is most especially sickening.