Power and hierarchy

In my view power creates hierarchy and hierarchy creates power the two are very inter changeable and are negative ideas in my opinion on the workers movement. I don’t think creating power or hierarchy even if with the best intentions should be our aim. We don’t want to create a movement in the image of the e existing one we should be looking to replace it with non hierarchical structures if possible. Take the NUS the National Union of Students in the UK for example. The National Union of Students (NUS) is designed to filter, control, pacify and compromise the student movement. It is a way of disempowering students trying to fight together for radical social change and for defending and extending the right to knowledge and education for all. Within the union, energy has been directed at struggling against right-wing bureaucrats for control of the union, instead of organising as students to fight the battles we need to win. The union’s hierarchical structures divide and alienate us, thereby stopping us from being an effective force for change. What happens when you run for an election? Either you win, and are set apart from your comrades, have your time wasted in pointless meetings, and through your position of authority inevitably become an obstacle for students to overcome, or you lose and continue to have no voice. The union’s democratic centralist structure means that we spend more time trying to make something ‘policy’ than actually organising around our real experiences and needs. The recent governance review proposals, and their unwavering support from the NUS elite, are an unsurprising attack on the ‘democracy’ of NUS [see http://resource.nusonline.co.uk/media/resource/NUS_New_Governance.pdf for details]. These illustrate the extent to which the union is controlled by those who do not see its role as being to facilitate a militant collective student movement. However, the problem is deeper than just the control of the union by careerist right-wingers. These latest changes are not particularly significant in themselves, but they simply offer us an opportunity to draw attention to the inherent problems with the structures of the union. Indeed, if the union was controlled by the radical left it would still be a structure to organise the student struggle from outside of the actual experiences and struggles of us as students and, as in increasingly the case, simultaneously as workers. The very existence of the union is fundamentally in opposition to a real collective mass movement based on our real needs. Within NUS, left-wingers have attempted to push the union to fight for some of our needs as students/workers. For example, Education Not for Sale, a left-wing faction, has argued for NUS to resume its commitment to free education and grants for all funded by taxation of the rich. They have not been very successful due to the current stronghold of the right in NUS. However, even if they had been/will be successful on this issue, as long as the power and organisation continues to takes place in the hierarchies, conference halls and offices of the union it will not actually be based on our real needs and we will not have power in deciding our own course of action. Hierarchy is a systematic, organised division of people in a ranked way, so that they are divided into superiors and subordinates. These are INSTITUTIONAL ROLES, where it is the job of some to give orders, and of others to take they (whilst perhaps giving them to others further down the chain). There is a hierarchy between bosses and workers, because bosses give the orders, and workers take them. It’s just the same as the state, there is a hierarchy between the state and its subjects, because the government makes the laws, and the subjects obey them. If you want to stay within the area of the workplace, you have to take orders from above. If you want to stay within the area of the state, you have to do the same. Now, compare this to a democratic workplace assembly. Sure, sometimes a minority get outvoted on an issue, and have to decide between quitting, striking or going along with the majority. Other times it will be a different minority. But they all have an equal say. There is no institutional division between order givers and takers, managers and executants etc. Now, you are right in one sense of the word to say that there is always hierarchy, in that there is always some people who don't get there way, and may have to do something they don't like, or else face some sanction, even if just non-cooperation (which can be just as coercive in its effects). But when classical anarchists talk about hierarchy, they talk about an institutional structures which I think is spot on in my experience you see it in all political parties and trade unions today and reflected in society as a result. Now, it doesn't take a genius to tell the difference between hierarchical and horizontal social structures. HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURE: Organised in a pyramid. It is the institutional role and exclusive right of those at the top to give orders to those lower down Boss | V Upper Management | V Lower management | V Manual Workers (The | and V is supposed to look like an arrow) Those further down the chain take orders from those higher up, and have no institutional influence on the decisions of those further up. Now compare this to a workplace ran by a democratic assembly of all who work there (lets not get into side issues of feasibility or efficiency right now). Everyone has a say, everyone has a vote, no one has any more power, and there is no systematic division into those whose job it is to command and those whose job it is to obey. For me hierarchy and power are tied up within the capitalist system and its order of things to remove capitalism we must look to bring about the end of power and all forms f hierarchy in my opinion. They are both corrupting influences and not beneficial to anti capitalists who wish to change society. We do not lead to be lead all the time we can and should act and think for ourselves in conclusion.

Police and Trade Unions implicated in blacklisting scandal workers still need justice!

So new evidence has come to light in recent weeks on the disgraceful act of blacklisting workers in the construction industry mainly but no doubt it does and has gone on elsewhere too. In a Observer piece this morning “Police officers across the country supplied information on workers to a blacklist operation run by Britain's biggest construction companies, the police watchdog have told lawyers representing victims. The Independent Police Complaints Commission has informed those affected that a Scotland Yard inquiry into police collusion has identified that it is "likely that all special branches were involved in providing information" that kept certain individuals out of work. The IPCC's disclosure confirms suspicions voiced by the information commissioner's office last year that the police had been involved in providing some of the information held on the files, as revealed by this newspaper. The admission has been welcomed by campaigners for the 3,200 workers whose names were on the blacklist that was run for construction companies as "absolute evidence" of a conspiracy between the state and industry that lasted for decades. Dave Smith, an engineer who had a 36-page file under his name and was repeatedly victimised for highlighting safety hazards on sites, including the presence of asbestos, said he was delighted that the IPCC had revealed "the truth". He added: "For the past five years, when we have been saying the police were involved, we were told we were talking nonsense and it was a conspiracy theory. They wanted it to go away. Now we have the absolute evidence and this is no longer about industrial relations but is a major human rights scandal involving a conspiracy between the police and the industry." The blacklist, run by a company called the Consulting Association, funded by 40 major firms in the construction industry including Balfour Beatty and Sir Robert McAlpine, was discovered in 2009 after a raid by the information commissioner's office. Since then, the victims have fought to find out who was providing information against them. The IPCC's correspondence is regarded as a major breakthrough. However, the watchdog's disclosure has been disputed by a subsequent letter to the victims' solicitors. This was sent by a recently appointed senior investigating officer for the inquiry into the activities of undercover police officers, known as Operation Herne. In a letter, seen by the Observer, detective inspector Steve Craddock insists that the IPCC's statement is incorrect and that he has seen "no conclusive evidence" that Scotland Yard shared information with the blacklisters. The IPCC is standing by its correspondence, which it says was informed by discussions with the Metropolitan Police and that "developments since that ... are a matter for the Metropolitan Police". In response, a spokesman for Craddock said Operation Herne's investigating officer was "aware of the apparent contradiction and is looking into how that may have arisen". She added: "Operation Herne will report on the 'blacklisting' matter to the Metropolitan Police commissioner in due course." The developments come as the group fighting for justice for the blacklisted workers has received confirmation of a meeting between undercover police officers and those running the blacklist in November 2008. The information commissioner's officers have confirmed in a freedom of information response that they hold notes from a meeting between the Consulting Association and officers from the police national extremism tactical co-ordination unit, which runs undercover officers. The notes of the 2008 meeting are part of a haul of documents seized by the information commissioner's office when it discovered the existence of the secret blacklist during a raid on an office in Droitwich, Worcestershire. Sir Robert McAlpine, which was allegedly a major player in the establishment and funding of the blacklist, is currently being sued in the high court over an unlawful conspiracy to amass a database of information against thousands of people. Last week, in a dramatic twist, eight major construction companies, including Sir Robert McAlpine, announced that they would compensate some of the 3,213 workers whose names had been on a blacklist. A statement said: "The companies – Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Kier, Laing O'Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska UK and Vinci – all apologise for their involvement with the Consulting Association and the impact that its database may have had on any individual construction worker." Sean Curran, a solicitor representing 69 victims in the high court, said he cautiously welcomed the announcement but raised concerns over the involvement of the unions, which are also suspected of providing information to the blacklist operation in some cases. He said: "We note that there has been reference to the consultation of Ucatt and Unite in the formulation of the proposed compensation scheme. We express serious concern about the involvement of those organisations. "We have seen evidence that implicates Amicus (which evolved into Unite) and Ucatt officials in the supply of negative commentary about the suitability of their members for employment. That commentary frequently made its way onto the Consulting Association database and was no doubt one of the factors that led to denials of employment. "It is also worthy of note that those unions refused to support their members in bringing a High Court claim so that they could seek redress for the hardship that they suffered. Many of those that we represent are firm that they object to Unite or Ucatt playing any part in negotiations with the relevant companies for these reasons." Claire Windsor, solicitor for the victims in regard to the complaint over police collusion, said her clients had lost any faith in the ability of the police to investigate themselves and that the blacklist support group was now calling for a judge-led independent inquiry into blacklisting. “ Article in Observer is here http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/12/police-blacklist-construction-workers-watchdog?guni=Keyword:news-grid%20main-1%20Main%20trailblock:Editable%20trailblock%20-%20news:Position2

Capitalism is corruption

Capitalism wasn’t always like this it did play a progressive role for a time. Yet today it is hard to imagine a progressive era for this parasitical system which is more and more becoming a drag on society and our development as a human race. Corruption is everywhere we look in society now. Any falsehood of democracy is quickly fading away as bourgeois democracy crashes from crisis to crisis. In the last decade we had the expenses scandal which rocked trust in MP’s to their very foundation. The lies and deceit publically displayed by all politicians be them Labour, Tory Lib dem and now Greens who tried to pose as anti cuts and radical only to push through the cuts in Brighton City Council this year shamefully. From all parts of the establishment there is distrust and often contempt from the media to the police to our parliament and undemocratic House’s of Parliament including the unelected lords. It is no wonder society is divided with an establishment which is tearing itself apart too. With a ruling class split as explained in a previous blog post is causing a huge discourse in society where many are dies interested in politics and have good reason to be. Many think politics is not for them and it’s something that those in suits do. This is not true politics is everything and for everyone. A new workers party will have huge challenges to deal with most notably apathy and dies trust of all parties telling them they can help them. I think the point is to agree with people who tell us they hate all politicians. We do too and we are on their side one of you ordinary workers wanting to change society. Capitalism while in one of its biggest downturns possibly ever is finding it difficult to remain true to democracy. Democracy is a means to a end not a end in itself and for the ruling class is something they can do away with if need be but it is the cheapest form of control on the mass’s as the illusions of democracy hold some back from drawing the conclusions for a time. Capitalism is rooted in corruption from the labour theory of value onwards its the suction of surplus value from wage labourers that starts it all off. Corruption has grown to huge huge levels from that stage. Its time it all ends. Everywhere we look the dangers of a breakup in society is clear corruption whilst built in to the capitalist system can seep through into the labour movement and certainly this has been true in parts of the tops of the trade unions. Change needs to happen from the bottom up. Starting with the fight for the highest form of democracy at all levels starting at the bottom sweeping aside the rotten paracitical capitalist system as we go.

Italy could reignite Euro crisis

For many the Euro crisis never went away but for the markets there was a period of stability from Christmas till about now when we’ve seen the Italian elections deliver a stalemate and this as a result has thrown the markets into turmoil and panic. The “Tsunami tour” was the name comedian Beppe Grillo gave to his election meetings which filled piazzas throughout the country with tens of thousands of ‘spectators’. Now an electoral tsunami has well and truly rocked the Italian political system with Grillo’s 5 Star Movement, which did not exist at the last election, becoming the biggest single party in the lower house with more than 25% of the vote. Another 25% of the electorate stayed at home, the highest ever post-war abstention rate. The outcome of the election on 24 and 25 February is political gridlock. No party or list having an overall majority and the possibility of fresh elections quite soon. The opinion polls had predicted a victory for the Democratic Party (PD) in the lower house and most commentators expected an alliance of the PD in the senate with the electoral coalition of the outgoing (unelected) Prime Minister, Mario Monti. However, the polls vastly underestimated support for the 5 Star Movements and also for Berlusconi’s PDL, which, on the basis of populist programmes, tapped into deep and widespread anti-austerity and anti-political establishment feelings. Just 120,000 votes separated the PD camp from that of the PDL in the lower house (Camera). The Centre-Left got 29.5% to the Centre-Right 29.2% but the PD lost nearly 4 million votes compared with the last election and the PDL 6 million! Even though the PD as the ‘winning’ party will receive bonus seats to give it a majority in the Camera, it cannot reach a majority in both houses of parliament, even in alliance with Monti. Grillo has ruled out any alliances and a ‘grand coalition’ - embracing Bersani (PD leader) and Berlusconi - although not impossible, could be politically suicidal for the PD. The ‘technocratic government’ card has already been played with the Monti government, so the most likely perspective now seems to be a period of political crisis leading eventually to another election, possibly after a change in the electoral law, in which the support for the ‘Grillinis’ could grow even further. The “worst result possible” was how the Wall St Journal described the election outcome. The repercussions will reverberate far beyond Italy. The day after the election, falls on the Milan stock exchange were so great that trading was temporarily suspended. At the same time the spread (difference between interest rates on Italian and German bonds) began to increase, raising once again the prospect of market turmoil in Europe. The fate of the Euro could eventually be decided not in Greece but in Italy. ‘NO’ to austerity The election results were an overwhelming rejection of Monti’s austerity policies of public spending cuts, tax increases and attacks on workers’ rights. Monti had been dubbed the ‘saviour of Italy’ when he replaced Berlusconi in November 2011 and the markets began to stabilise after months of instability and crisis. In these elections he was the candidate of Brussels, of Merkel and of a section of the Italian capitalist class. They were fearful that a PD government with an overall majority would come under pressure from workers and unions to ditch or water down the austerity policies they had supported under Monti. A PD/Monti coalition was considered the safest option for continuing the ‘Monti agenda’. This strategy failed dismally with Monti’s alliance receiving just 10.5% in the Camera. Before the elections Monti’s personal ratings had been higher than all the party leaders but this was precisely because he was a ‘technocrat’ and not part of the despised political class. Once he became “one of them”, his days were numbered. Grillo and the 5 Star Movement were the real winners. His slogan “tutti a casa” (send them all packing) summed up the absolute disgust and contempt which ordinary Italians have for politicians, establishment parties and an entire rotten political system mired in corruption, scandals and self-enrichment while working people are called on to make more and more sacrifices. Scandals Reports of the huge cover up and fraud at Italy’s third biggest bank, Monti dei Paschi, exploded during the election campaign, tainting the PD, who have been historically closely linked with the management of the bank. It reinforced the deep-rooted feeling that the whole system stinks. Every day pages of the press were devoted to stories of politicians receiving kick backs for economic favours, of public funds being creamed off to fund lavish lifestyles and of company directors (including the director of one of Italy’s biggest and most prestigious companies, Finmeccanica) being arrested for fraud and corruption. The Grillo votes came from across the political spectrum – from the right, from the left and from those with no political affiliation. “I want to give them all a kick up the arse!” was how one voter explained her choice, summing up the mood of many of those who voted for the 5 Star Movement. In the piazzas, Grillo shouted populist slogans and sound-bites about curbing the power and privileges of the political ‘cast’, about a ‘citizen’s income’, a referendum on the Euro, a shorter working week, nationalising the banks, and about improving the environment, all of which struck a chord with those who have had enough of cuts and corruption. There are enormous illusions in the ability of the Grillinis to shake the system up. In reality, the Movement (Grillo refuses to call it a party) has no worked-out programme capable of solving the day-to-day problems of unemployment, low wages, and declining public services which most ordinary Italians are concerned with. It has no real roots in the workplaces or communities, organising principally via the Internet and social media. Grillo himself decides policies and tactics in an ad hoc, off-the-cuff way with no explanation or understanding of how those policies could actually be implemented in practice. His ‘rants’ are confused and inconsistent. Grillo has an ambiguous position with regards to the far-right and immigration. During the campaign he spoke of “eliminating” trade unions although he has also made a distinction between CGIL, CISL and UIL on the one hand and the more combatative FIOM and unions of the base. At a certain stage the limitations and contradictions of the Movement will become clear, ripping it apart. It is likely to disappear as quickly as it has arisen; but for the moment, in the absence of a left-wing, anti-capitalist alternative, it has become the main vehicle for expressing the anger, frustration and disaffection of millions of Italians and its support could grow even more. Economic crisis These elections took place against the background of the longest recession in Italy in the post war period. GDP has declined 7% since the economic crisis began. Unemployment has doubled and more than 37% of young people are now without work. Devastated by rising taxes and declining wages, the average family’s real income is at the same level as it was 27 years ago. Yet with working and middle class people desperate for an end to austerity, the PD was offering a continuation of the Monti agenda with just a few ‘modifications’. They pledged to respect the fiscal compact and balance the budget even though this would entail cuts of 45 billion euros every year. This is behind the massive fall of 11% in their ratings towards the end of the campaign. Berlusconi, on the other hand, was astute enough to understand how supporting Monti’s tax increases and cuts agenda was undermining his electoral base and so he pulled the plug on the Monti government, waging a populist anti-austerity, anti- Europe, pro-tax-cutting election campaign. This included sending a mock-up tax demand to every home pledging to reimburse every penny that people had paid out when Monti reintroduced the IMU household tax. On the basis of this campaign the ‘mummy’, as one French newspaper dubbed Berlusconi, rose like Lazarus from the dead; his PDL alliance clawed back 15 points in support and ended up neck and neck with the PD. What little remains of the Left was electorally crushed. Nichi Vendola’s SEL (Left Ecology Freedom) party, which was allied with the PD, got just 3.2%. Had the party stood alone it would have failed to cross the 4% threshold and would have had no seats in parliament. This was ultimately the fate of Rivoluzione Civile, the heterogeneous electoral list headed by the former magistrate, Antonio Ingroia. New force needed Instead of standing on a clear anti-capitalist/workers’ list, Rifondazione Comunista (PRC), once a semi-mass workers’ party, dissolved itself into Rivoluzione Civile on a vaguely reformist/liberal platform. This was an opportunist move, undemocratically imposed from above in a desperate attempt to get back into parliament. The PRC lost all of their MPs five years ago after entering into a coalition government with the pro-capitalist PD. After every electoral defeat, the PRC leadership, rather than looking to increase its support by involving itself in struggles in the workplaces and in local communities, has sought a new unprincipled electoral alliance, and every time its vote has plummeted. Rivoluzione Civile won just 2.2% of the vote meaning no seats at all.. The unprecedented support for Beppe Grillo can only be understood in the tragic context of the collapse of the Italian Left. But now an entirely new political landscape is emerging. The anger of working class people has exploded in the ballot box rather than on the streets and in the workplaces, but continuing crisis and instability will see the development of new mass struggles. At a certain stage the inadequacy of the 5 Star Movement will be exposed leaving millions looking for another alternative and opening up huge possibilities for the building of a new mass political force based not on confused populism but on the movements of workers and young people, offering a real solution to the problems of working people by challenging not only the politicians but the economic roots of the whole rotten capitalist system. With extracts taken from http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/6180

Horse meat scandal, profit is the underlying motive

With the recent scandal of horse meat being found in our food mostly beef but also found in other meats I thought it’d be good to blog on this. For me it comes as no great surprise that big business tries and fobs us off with cheap meat and meat that isn’t even meat to make a profit. For me this is the underlying issue the quest for the blind drive of profit they will try and get away with whatever they can in order to profit from our ignorance. No doubt this has been going on for many years I even read somewhere Lenin raising concerns of contaminated meat back in the 20th century so its been going on for as long as we can remember. For as long as profit is the primary motivator to produce meat not for peoples needs or the betterment of their health then issues like this will happen time and time again . I did want to point out though which probably has not been mentioned so far is the fact that I feel and with probably good reason the regulatory bodies in this case the FSA the Food Safety Agency was not aware of traces of horse meant being found in our food well I was not surprised about this either I firmly believe that just like with other so called independent regulators they are firmly in the pockets of big business much like the independent press complaints commission and the Independent Police and Crime commission all a load of corrupt industry hacks no doubt. This for me realises many questions. Is any of our food to be trusted? I fear not I think we never really know what is in our foods that we eat on a daily basis. If we are in hospital or prison how do we have any idea what we are being fed day in day out. Fact is we don’t not eve the FSA did until this scandal broke. What gets me is that if this had not come out and the whistle had not been blown then this would still be going on today they have only reacted as they’ve been caught out otherwise we’d still be eating god knows what and probably still are. Ten companies dominate global food production and the drive for profit comes first. Big business politicians are generally obedient to the demands of the super-rich manufacturers. Profits soar while health problems mount up and industry employees suffer attacks on working conditions. Low pay denies millions from buying high-quality food. And unsustainable agribusiness production is wrecking the environment. According to the Food Standards Agency (FSA), horsemeat has been found in one in every 75 beef products available in the high street, as well as in cottage pies sent to 47 schools in Lancashire and ready meals sent to hospitals in Northern Ireland. The FSA was established in 2000 as a watchdog on food safety and nutrition, in the wake of the BSE scandal a few years earlier. Part of its remit is to monitor the three million cattle, 13 million pigs, 19 million sheep and lambs, 70 million fish and 800 million birds that are slaughtered every year in the UK for human consumption. Food writer, Joanna Blythman accused the FSA of having an "unduly cosy relationship with the food companies, bio-tech companies and large retailers". As if to demonstrate this the former CEO of the FSA, Tim Smith, is now Tesco's Global Technical Director. Staff numbers at the FSA have dropped by 42% from 2007-2010 reducing meat inspection costs by £13.5 million, and since then a further 13% of staff have been axed. Its budget has been cut by £44 million since 2010. On her blog Blythman comments further: "Now, providing a food-processing company has a paper trail that appears to demonstrate 'due diligence' and conforms to 'quality assurance' schemes, supermarkets take its products on trust. "So unless a whistleblower tips off the authorities or obvious casualties line up in the form of poisoned consumers, any funny business in the factory goes undetected." Moreover, council environmental health teams, which are responsible for inspections of food retailing, fast food and restaurants, have also been squeezed. According to Environmental Health News spending has been cut by "32% since 2009, outstripping cuts in most other service areas." Most workplaces can be expected to be inspected somewhere from every six months to every two years. Some commentators have suggested that horsemeat is being used as a replacement for Desinewed Meat (DSM), which itself was a replacement for Mechanically Recovered Meat (MRM), also known as 'pink slime'. This is produced by removing residual meat from animal bones by high pressure water. The difference between the two is that DSM is removed at lower pressure retaining some structure, but both are a far cheaper source of 'meat' than actual cuts. DSM was reclassified as a form of MRM around a year ago which means it can no longer be listed as meat. It's quite telling that a former FSA specialist, Dr Mark Woolfe, was quoted in the press saying that DSM "was a perfectly good ingredient for value products". In essence he is saying that low-quality food is adequate for those on low incomes who have to buy value products. He then goes on to justify companies using horsemeat as they searched for similarly priced 'meat' to protect their profit margins. Horses are also slaughtered in Britain, some of which are for domestic human consumption, but mainly for export. The UK government's system of passports for horses is meant to identify what drugs they have been treated with over their lifetime, including the anti-inflammatory drug phenylbutazone (Bute). In high enough concentrations Bute can have severe side effects in humans. However, the passport system is deeply flawed. 7,000 of these passports were issued by the Spotted Horse and Pony Organisation after it had its license to do so withdrawn in 2008 by Defra, a government department. This is just one of over 75 organisations which can issue such licenses. According to the Ulster Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals around 70,000 horses are untraceable in both the North and South of Ireland. With the suspected involvement of criminal gangs, horses worth as little as £10 (due to drug treatment) are being sold to slaughterhouses with false passports and identification microchips for up to £400. Although it is highly unlikely that sufficient levels of Bute are present in the horsemeat to seriously affect humans, a bigger potential danger is contamination by bacteria such as salmonella from 'back-street' abattoirs. As long as capitalist companies, driven by the profit motive, produce our food then that profit will always come first, before quality and our health and safety. A lax regulatory system and cutbacks in inspections, means that the horsemeat scandal and previous food scares clearly won't be the last. Only a nationalised food industry, under democratic workers' control, alongside taking other key sections in the economy into public control would allow resources to be devoted to making sure our food is safe and correctly labelled. Socialist Party news and analysis Toxic Tories - With extracts taken from http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/issue/753/16191/20-02-2013/food-adulteration-government-cutbacks-and-capitalist-profits

The crisis at the BBC- toxic level of cuts

Over the weekend and the last few days there has been a huge campaign by the government and others in the media to smear the BBC and its record. The corporation which is apparently is in deep crisis with several high ranking resignations and several more stepping aside has lead to all sorts of speculation of its future as a journalistic establishment. Now I have my criticisms of the BBC like everyone but for the most part it is a solid organisation. It doesn’t cover workers movements or strikes very fairly but I don’t expect it too it represents the interests of big business and always supports the government of the day notably a capitalist agenda. But we are in danger of missing the bigger picture here which may well be the intention to deflect the attention from child sex abuse allegations in north Wales. All the frenzy of the BBC we have rather forgotten that there have been some serious allegations made here which must be looked into. The whole fury over the Newsnight report on Lord Mcalpine and was he or wasn’t he involved in child sex abuse is really not the point in my e yes. Someone or many people were involved and Phillip Schofield and his list on this morning along with Tom Watson in the commons have something which surely they wouldn’t risk their reputations on airing in public. The police cannot be trusted in all this either and have come off quite well so far but they to need to take some blame for covering up this awful incident/s and a reopening of the original investigation is a matter of urgency. The NUJ the journalist union have released a statement which I publish below setting out where they feel things have got to and the toxic mixture of big cuts, bad management and gross incompetency. The NUJ has called for an end to cuts at the BBC, saying the Newsnight crisis is a wake-up call to an assault on frontline journalism that has cost 9,000 jobs since 2004. General secretary Michelle Stanistreet says cuts are threatening the quality of journalism not only at flagship programmes such as Newsnight, which has had its budget slashed by 50% in real terms over the past five years, but in local radio and television as well as the World Service. She said: “With fewer journalists, many employed on a casual basis, it means there is no time for that extra telephone all, no time to double-check the facts, no time to reflect properly before a programme goes out. “The current re-grading proposals could see a situation where someone can be paid the minimum of £15,000 and end up in charge of a sensitive political report, or even output a whole programme and then get blamed when it goes wrong. “It’s testament to the great journalists working at the BBC that they manage, often through sheer goodwill and professional commitment, to get the job done despite staff shortages and dwindling resources. But the pressure this puts on journalists and journalism is undeniable.” Calling on BBC chair Lord Patten to take a long hard look at what has happened, Michelle Stanistreet urged him to take on a director general who would fight for quality journalism and stop the cuts. She said: “There must be a moratorium on these cuts. This should be a wake-up call to the BBC – they need to take the opportunity to halt the assault on frontline journalism and put in place measures to shore up news and current affairs before it is too late.” The NUJ believes the backdrop to the Newsnight crisis is the remorseless cost-cutting across the BBC that started in 2004. Since then 9,000 jobs have gone, including 140 in BBC news this year alone – the eighth consecutive year of cuts. Michelle Stanistreet said: “Mark Thompson’s decision, behind closed doors, to agree to a licence fee freeze until 2017 and to take on an extra £340 million in spending commitments, including the funding of the World Service, local TV and the rollout of fast broadband, was a disaster for the BBC. “This has been compounded by the way BBC senior executives have implemented the cuts. They have chosen to cut staffing and budgets in frontline journalism; news has been particularly badly hit. Rather than hack away at the fleshy layers of management, they have chosen to cut at the sharp end and inevitably that will make it harder for quality, thorough journalism to flourish.” * NUJ members at Newsnight have asked the NUJ to make clear they are appalled at what happened, and that the overwhelming majority of those who work there had no involvement with the story, and were not consulted about it before broadcast. They are determined to go on doing their jobs and to support the BBC management in its effort to go on delivering the Corporation’s world class journalism.

For a full workers enquiry into the banks

With all the outrage on bankers, phone hacking and the deepening crisis in capitalism. We are still being told we are all in this together. Surely now this lie is being shown for what it is exactly that an attempt to mask the true face of the system the rich millionaires seek to defend. Whilst we pay our tax’s and are hounded if we do not for the smallest errors in our tax returns the very wealthiest in society cannot even pay the basic rate of tax let alone what they really should be a progressive high rate of tax.
An estimated 120 billion goes evaded every year. More than enough to cover the cuts.

Let’s also have no illusions in the labor party shall we. Labour including many who are still on their front bench Ed Balls for example was their City minister over seeing big city deals deregulation and being a “friend” to the city so Let’s not start thinking labour are genuine when they are calling for a public enquire. They are only asking for one as it would go on for months giving them time to prepare for the humiliation which would be sure to follow them too.

We as a result need our own party of workers not a capitalist labour party who pretend to stand for us but quite clearly do not hand have not for some time. We need our own party of ordinary working people socialists and trade unionists to fight for the alternative society we wish to see.

Workers should be able to see how much of the profit of the companies they work for, are being drained in similar expenses by their top bosses, and the various Board members of those companies too. And bourgeois democracy, is about more than just the people who are elected to Parliaments and Councils, it’s about the whole structure of the society we live in, including those who provide the information on which the politicians are judged. Its all well and good journalists shaming MP’s, but we should also have full disclosure of THEIR salaries and expenses too. Certainly, we should know how much these rags are being paid by the bosses in one form or another to run stories, and how much they are paying out to obtain stories.
If we are to have a truly independent Inquiry into the actions of the Banks, and all their dealings with Politicians, the Bank of England, Treasury Officials, the Media, the Judiciary and the Police, then we cannot leave it up to representatives of any of these organizations to conduct it impartially. We need a comprehensive Workers Inquiry into the Banks. It should be established by the TUC, and should utilize the resources of trusted Labour Movement lawyers to conduct the necessary forensic questioning. It should call on TU appointed specialists from Revenue & Customs, and from the Treasury, and wherever else to uncover and expose the actions of the Banks, and their dealings with other sections of the Establishment. The TUC should demand from Parliament that such an inquiry has all the force of law behind it, including the right to subpoena under oath witnesses.



It’s time for the British workers to clean out the stench of British Capitalism.

With extracts taken kindly from boffy over at boffy's blog
http://boffyblog.blogspot.co.uk/

Lord Ashcrofts millions, how a capitalist hides their dealings

Michael Ashcroft, the billionaire peer who for years bankrolled
the Conservative Party, has been accused of hiding his business
involvement in a Caribbean state whose government was brought down
by corruption scandals.

BBC's Panorama programme alleged last night that Lord Ashcroft was secretly controlling the biggest construction company on the Turks and Caicos Islands, though he claims to have severed his link with the company in 1999.

The islands, a British overseas territory, have been under direct rule by the Foreign Office since August 2009, when the then Prime Minister, Michael Misick, became embroiled in corruption allegations. Panorama reported that one of the allegations being investigated by the police is how Mr Misick could afford a luxury home, valued at $16m, which was built in 2006 by Johnston International.

The programme stated that Lord Ashcroft announced on the London Stock Exchange in 1999 that he had sold Johnston International, and has repeatedly asserted that he has had "no interest whatsoever" in the company since that date. But Panorama showed fax messages which it said were exchanged between Lord Ashcroft and the chief executive of Johnston International, Allan Forrest.

The faxes suggest that Mr Forrest repeatedly sought and got Lord Ashcroft's instructions or advice, despite the peer's denials that he was running the company. One fax said: "Dear Michael, a short note to thank you for the salary increase. Much appreciated."

In another, written after Mr Forrest had visited Belize, where Lord Ashcroft originally made his £1.1bn fortune, refers to Johnston International's parent company, Oxford Ventures. Mr Forrest wrote: "The perception in Belize is that you are still in full control of Oxford's assets (which you are of course)."

Panorama interviewed former employees of Johnston International, who lost their jobs when the firm went bust. When it collapsed, Lord Ashcroft's bank, the British Caribbean Bank, as a secured creditor, took priority over others who were owed money.

Panorama also interviewed Chris Johnson, the liquidator appointed to wind up the affairs of Oxford Ventures, which also went bust. He complained that Lord Ashcroft's bank was refusing to release the information he needed to complete the job, though the bank has said that it cannot give information to an overseas-appointed liquidator until recognised by the TCI courts, which recognition is under challenge.

The programme-makers said that "there is no suggestion that Lord Ashcroft is corrupt", but suggested that the alleged secrecy in which he has wrapped his business affairs is "hardly in keeping with the Government's demand for greater corporate transparency."

Lord Ashcroft's spokesman said yesterday: "No statement is being made because the BBC has not had the decency to tell Lord Ashcroft what is in the programme. They have been at this for two-and-a-half years and have made so many false starts on the way, who knows what they are going to do?"

Michael Ashcroft was made a life peer in 2000 on the recommendation of William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, who was then leader of the Conservative Party. The peer is believed to be one of the biggest political donors in British history, having given around £10m to the Conservatives. During William Hague's leadership, after the 1997 election defeat, he was virtually the only major funder of the Tory party.

Lord Ashcroft is suing The Independent over articles published on 19 and 20 November 2009, about the affairs of the Turks and Caicos Islands.


This programme for me last night highlighted the corrupt nature of the capitalist system where a capitalist invests his or her money in a offshore bank account and starts investing abroad and makes millions. When it doesnt suit in true capitalist style when no more profit is to be made they pull the plug on the funding and workers jobs go down the drain as a result.

The programme to me confirmed much of what i already knew that the tories are a capitalist party acting in the interests of the city and big business. They claims for democracy and transparancy were truely shattered last night with one of their most influencial lords being accused of such high level wrong doing.

For socialists we would say this backs up our idea that a future socialist society needs to be international more than ever as offshore bank accounts are rife with the capitalists and controlling and closing these havans will prevent capital being bunged away offshore where it is no use to the public purse.
The lengths the capitalists will go to cover their tracks is amazing. But when they control the media and the laws it is no wonder they can get away with so much. Having parent companies of parent companies on different offshore islands is designed so no one can find out who really is in control. But as we know there are a minoroty of very rich people out there who control more and more of the worlds wealth.

Much of what Lord Ashcroft had invested for himself has been evaded tax that he gets away with due to offshore accounts and tax fiddling. No doubt if he paid his tax the need for alot of these public spending cuts would not be nessesary!

The power and corruption in the beautiful game today

So as we sit and wait to see if the FIFA presidency elections will happen or not with just one candidate standing. The current president Sepp Blatter we are left wondering what has happened to our beautiful game many of us lovea round the world today.

The main reason for its corruption and downfall i place firmly at the feet of big rich greedy businessman. The game is not run by real football people or fans anymore, instead rich hungry and greedy business people.

The fact that rich billionaires like Roman Abramovich at Chelsea can play with a football club like chelsea and pull his money out whenever he likes is a fine example of how unstable and badly run football is in this country.

I follow my local side Stevenage FC who have just gained promotion to League 1 in England. We dont spend much and gate prices are very reasonable to be honest. But for premiership fans paying £40 + a game is all too much for many working class fans.

The fact that football is prodomenatly a working class game for the workers to enjoy at the weekends has faded considerably. The game is now far too expensive for workers to enjoy going to games with their mates at weekends.

Our solution as socialists would be to introduce workers run football clubs. Alittle like AFC Wimbledon where there is no big businessman running them rather the fans all own a part of the club and help fund this.

I do think fan ownership is the way to go with football clubs with many clubs facing tough times and this would prevent many going to the wall.

The fact that football clubs can get away with big debts and just reforming under new owners is wrong. They if they want to run like a business should be treated like one not given special treatment. All this would not have to happen if workers and fans ran the clubs in a democratic fashion making no profit from the ownership only reinvesting in the everyday running of the clubs.

This way all fans who wished to attend games could do without being priced out of attending. The prices would be fixed at a affordable rate for all fans and workers to enjoy their own beautiful game.

As far as FIFA goes i see little hope for them. Unless it is inspected and a proper inquirey is held ridding it of its corrupt nature i cannot see the organisation changing anytime soon.

Again with FIFA if it was brought under international fan ownership and run for the benifit of the fans and workers in a turely democratic fashion i am sure much of the corruption could be rooted out with a transparent looking at the books and how money changes hands.

Is football not living in the real world ?

Taking this blog on a different direction now. As some of you may or may not know i'm a big football fan but i think this recent story of Darren Bent a average premiership striker at best is set to move to Aston villa from Sunderland for 18 million pounds.

Outrageous sums of money this is. When will football join the real world while people aer struggling to get by with paying their bills these super rich sports stars are getting paid silly amounts of money.

Take Manchester City for e xample Carlos tevez gets paid roughly 200,000 pounds a week and if any new player joins the club on a higher salary his wages will match that. I just think it sets a really bad example to the rest of the country in times of hardship.

I know alot of this money coming into the game has been though various sources like Sky Television money and selling the rights to show live games around the planet. But also foreign ownership with rich benifactors buying up english clubs pumping huge sums of money into the top teams. That money rarely trickles down to the lower league teams forcing many to go out of business.

Football is a cruel game which must look at its actions if it wants to continue to be a well respected sport on the national and world stage. As was shown with FIFA over their decision for the world cup in 2018 and 2022 there is a hell of a lot of corruptin involved in the game still.

Speaking of corruption it hasnt erally been touched on but is sure to attract attention from groups like UKuncut in next few months and years is the fact alot of rich footballers avoid paying large sums of their tax. Wayne Rooney, one of Englands best players and best paid players earns an estimated 250 thousand pounds but dodges paying tax on a large amount of that. What UKuncut ask is that money better spent on the NHS rather than being in your back pocket.

more and more questions will be asked like this if fotball continues to live in this rich fantasy world turning into a game no longer for the working class who already find it hard to afford to attend games turning into a game and a play thing for the very rich.

The corruption of FIFA

So as we have just learned that fifa have gone with russia and qatar for the 2018 and 2022 world cups. I just think these decisions alone demand a investigation as to the corruption of FIFA.

I personally feel it is a disgrace clearly the people who get to vote on these things can be influenced so much.
We must set up a big campaign to rid fifia of its corruption. FOr the good of the game.
The bbc panarama documentary really did highlight the corruption involved in fifa. Still so many questions to be answered out there. The debate still rolls on whether the documentary helped or hindered our bid. i rather think it didnt as the timing of the show really made us out to be trouble makers. Even if true the timing wasnt great when we were trying to bid for the thing. Maybe we should have waited till after ?

Just disapointed we didnt get it as it would have brought lots of money and revenue into the country which we could have needed.