London rental prices sky high, Could rent strikes be the answer ??

With the housing crisis in teh UK no more accute than in the Xcapital city of London seeing rent prices soar in recent years. Could we start to see the idea of rent strikes between occupants making a much needed return ?? House rental prices in London have risen by 7.7pc in the past year to £1,560 a month, making rental costs in the capital more than double the UK average. Excluding the capital, rents across the UK average £749 a month, having risen 3.5pc year-on-year, according to the latest quarterly rental index from Homelet. The gap between London and the rest of the UK is now the highest on record, the insurer said. However, rents have risen fastest in Scotland, where new tenancies over the three months to October were priced 9pc higher than the same time a year ago. Prices surged to £665 last month, compared to £610 a year ago. Renting is cheapest in the North East, where average prices are £536 a month. The most expensive area outside London is the South East, where new rental properties coming to the market last month averaged £944 in monthly rent. Average price for new rental properties across the UK, October 2015 Region Average price Annual change Greater London £1,560 7.5% South East £944 4.3% South West £872 4% East Anglia £809 -1.2% West Midlands £669 2% Scotland £665 9% North West £635 -4.9% East Midlands £628 5.9% Yorkshire & Humberside £621 2.0% Wales £614 1.8% Northern Ireland £588 -2.1% North East £536 3.9% Across the UK, rent increases are far outpacing wage growth, with average tenant incomes up just 1.7pc over the year. A separate survey last month suggested many renters are paying more than they can actually afford. Affordable rents are defined as making up less than 35pc of net household income. Homelet, which also questioned almost 15,000 tenants about their views on the rental market, said that while 71pc of tenants are keen to buy their homes, 64pc have no expectations of being able to do so any time soon. An overwhelming number cited high deposits as the biggest barrier preventing them from buying. Yet the report suggested more than half weren't taking any steps to save for a deposit. In total, 20-somethings in the UK can expect to pay £66,800 in rent to landlords by the time they are 30. The authors also found price is the most important factor for tenants choosing a home, ranking higher than other factors such as location, a low crime rate and distance to work. Some 71pc of respondents said they rent through a letting agent, with just 29pc renting directly through a landlord. Those who dealt directly with landlords were more likely to be happier than those renting through letting agents. From the daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/property/11984097/London-rents-now-a-record-108pc-higher-than-rest-of-UK.html

Occupy for the right to social housing

An interesting new wave of activism around housing has been springing up of late with the latest being on the Guinness Trust estate in South London. This follows closey on the heels of the occupation on the Aylesbury estate the other week. Occupations and direct action are becoming tactics with a target once again. Once again direct action can get the good's. Yesterday, an empty flat in Elveden House on the Guinness Trust estate in Brixton was occupied by local residents and supporters protesting at the threatened eviction of dozens of Guinness tenants from the estate. More people have joined the action today and they plan to keep the occupation running until Guinness agree to halt all evictions and rehouse all the tenants in local social housing. A protest is planned outside the Guinness estate office tomorrow morning Monday 16 January at 9am. The first eviction is due to take place on Thursday 19 February and protesters have vowed to resist any attempt by bailiffs to remove the family from their home. The tenants facing eviction are ‘shorthold’ tenants – but many have been there for ten years and longer. The evictions will make way for Guinness to demolish the blocks and build luxury apartments which will go on sale at full market rate. Of course none of the tenants being evicted can afford to buy the new flats and are facing leaving London, jobs, schools, friends and their community to find somewhere affordable to live. But many residents are saying no and refusing to go. The occupation is part of the campaign to support those residents who are demanding from Guinness Trust: NO EVICTIONS REHOUSE ALL ‘SHORTHOLD’ TENANTS IN SECURE LOCAL SOCIAL HOUSING For more information or to speak to one of the tenants facing eviction, email lambethhousingactivists [at] gmail [dot] com or call 07538 316548 http://en.squat.net/2015/02/15/london-guiness-estate-occupation/ Over at Johnny Void he perfectly sums up the growing mood of anger rising from below which has so far not been fully co opted by the left sects who will use it for their own ends if they could to recruit and steer any campaign down a dead end much like the Socialsit party are trying to do with the Focus E15 mums who are being invited to every event put on by TUSC and the SP they can do. Our strength is with ourselves not a party of self appointed revolutionaries. "As glass and concrete spindles made of luxury flats climb into the clouds above London below them lives a generation of children who will never be able to afford to live here when they are grown up. Across the capital families and communities are being fractured as rents soar beyond poverty wages and benefit caps mean eviction and forced relocation for those who fall on hard times. In central London at night huddled bodies in sleeping bags fill the shop doorways whilst camps of homeless migrants hide beneath bridges and in tunnels after finding out the city’s streets were actually paved with shit. Social housing estates are being slowly run down, decanted and demolished to make way for the rich and a handful of so-called affordable properties that nobody local can afford. Gentrification forces up rents and closes down well loved local pubs and markets to be replaced by hipster twats selling over-priced cupcakes or bowls of fucking Coco Pops to each other. The rich should not just be unwelcome in this environmnent, they should be despised. None of this has happened by accident. As property prices rocket out of reach every last fucking brick has become an investment opportunity. London does not have a housing problem, some of the most expensive properties in the city are empty and unused. London has a rich people problem. Yet as the social and cultural heart of the capital is ripped apart, a spectre is haunting London. A spectre of toff-hating fucking rage. Recently up to four thousand people marched on City Hall demanding homes, whilst a breakaway groups took to the roads and occupied empty flats on the Aylesbury Estate. Abandoned properties have been occupied throughout the capital from Stratford to Mayfair. Shadowy American property developers Westbrook Partners were chased out of their ownership of the New Era Estate after threatening to hike rents. Local groups who face losing their homes have brought construction sites to a standstill with blockades. Last week bailiffs, the attack dogs of the rich, were pelted with paint bombs at their glitzy annual award ceremony. And the boisterous Poor Doors demonstrations are back after pampered property developer Taylor McWilliams declared there was nothing he could be arsed to do to end social segregation in the building his company owns. It is little wonder that the rich want us out of their playground. Property developers now boast in adverts that there will be no social housing tenants in their luxury new flats. Poor doors force low income tenants to use a different entrance to their homes than the rich who live in the same buildings. Even gardens that were promised to low income residents are now to be fenced off and made available for posh cunts only. David Cameron has threatened a policy which will socially cleanse the poor from the entire South East of England within a week of any Tory election victory. But we are not fucking going anywhere. At the recent housing march it was declared that the growing movement for homes is the beginning of the end of London’s housing crisis. Escalation is now vital on every front. It’s time to make the rich feel unwelcome. To let them know that if they leave their luxury buildings empty they will be occupied. If they force us to use poor doors we will mob their buildings and spoil their dinners. That from the trust fund Tarquins destroying local communities to the plutocrats, bankers and global super-rich buying houses to keep empty as investments, we will hunt them down and make their lives as uncomfortable as they want to make ours. There are fucking loads more of us than them. The rich are here by our consent. It’s time to tell them to fuck off. Next Thursday (19th February) the Poor Doors demo will start at 6pm sharp, 1 Commercial Street, E1 and march to the site of the stolen garden at Tower Bridge SE1. Then on Monday 23rd February Boris Johnson will be the target as housing campaigners flock to City Hall to block his budget. If you have kids growing up in this city or plan to grow old here then you should be there, at both if you can. This is our London, not theirs and we need to take it back." Please help spread the word about both events, for more info on the Poor Doors protest visit Class War’s website and join/share the facebook event page for Block the Budget. https://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2015/02/16/this-is-our-city-not-theirs-its-time-to-tell-the-rich-to-fuck-off/

Statement from Aylesbury Estate Occupation

February 2, 2015 news From “Fight for the Aylesbury” occupation website. Since the “March for Homes” demo on 31st January, we have re-opened and occupied a part of the Aylesbury Estate in Southwark, South London. We are tenants, squatters, and other people who care about how our city is being grabbed by the rich, by developers and corrupt politicians, socially cleansed and sold off for profit. The Aylesbury Estate is where Tony Blair made his first speech as Prime Minister in 1997, making empty promises about social housing. Since then, for the past 18 years, Southwark Council and their developer friends have come up with one scheme after another. All with the same aim: to dispossess the residents, demolish their homes, and sell the land. In 2002 Aylesbury tenants fought and won a campaign against demolition and voted down the original scheme in a ballot. But now big areas of the estate are emptied and sealed up awaiting the bulldozers, while residents are “decanted” away from the area. The same bullshit that we have seen on the nearby Heygate estate, and all across London. No demolition of the Aylesbury. No yuppy flats. Homes for all. We are here to fight for the Aylesbury. We are here to fight for our city. We are here to liberate this space and bring it back to life. Come and join us. PS: Thank you to everyone who has come down to show support, to all our neighbours and to those who have even come from as far away as Hackney bringing tea!

Spikes to keep the homeless out, where is society going ?

A worrying report over the weekend in the papers confirmed that many expensive propeties in and around the capital are installing spikes to keep out the homeless. "A new development in London has installed metal spikes in an alcove – such 'defensive architecture' helps us to pretend real poverty doesn't exist For more than a decade "defensive architecture" has increasingly been creeping into urban life. From narrow, slanted bus shelter seats – not even suitable for sitting on, let alone sleeping on – to park benches with peculiar armrests designed to make it impossible to recline; from angular metal studs on central London ledges to surreal forests of pyramid bollards under bridges and flyovers. Hard property jutting out against soft homeless bodies, saying: how dare you be poor in plain sight? Step by selfish step we have arrived at the latest item causing outrage: a bed of metal spikes inside an alcove of a fancy new development on Southwark Bridge Road in London. "I think it's a good idea," one resident said. Speaking of "beggars and homeless people sleeping there", she added: "It completely affects the way the building seems, the appearance, and it's just not very nice." An Englishman's home is his castle, and that castle now includes a moat to keep the peasants out. These "anti-homeless" measures are designed to move the destitute on to somewhere else. This for me stems directly from Margret Thatchers idea of there is no such thing as society and to turn us all into selfish poor hating individuals with only a care for ourselves. At the root of this cruelty, which treats the dispossessed like a pigeon infestation – fed crumbs by the kindly misguided, shooed away by the thoughtlessly indifferent and spiked by the inhumanly practical – are wilful misconceptions about homelessness: that it is a lifestyle choice, which oddly becomes more popular during periods of nationwide economic ruin; that poverty is down to personal failure; that kindness perpetuates it; and, more than any misconception, that good shelter is readily available. And this damaging dissociation of the destitute from the rest of the world, this dehumanising effect, is precisely the aspect that such offensive "defensive architecture" feeds. It makes the city hostile to those who exist in this parallel reality. It breaks their psyche down further, making recovery less likely. It consigns them further out of sight so that the rest may continue to pretend that real poverty doesn't exist. It doesn't just deny someone who has absolutely nothing, a place to rest; it is a sign which reads, "Not even this bit of earth. Not even for the night." This turns my stomach that we are going down this route. The medias demonisatin of the poor one of the few remaining acceptable catagories of people to bash repeatably for simply being poor has lead to this selfish mentality. The lack of affordable housing and decent levels of support is hugely lacking with benifit cuts and tightening of the welfare budget year on year it is no wonder homelessness is shooting up in and outside of London for that matter. To pretend povety doesnt exist in our own country which is stll one of the wealthiest on the planet is woeful and hugely embarrassing toa country who likes to make out it is a civil society to the rest of the world whilst turning a blind eye to its own povety at home. with quotes and extracts from comment is free http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/09/spikes-homeless-london-metal-alcove-defensive-architecture-poverty

Is britain becoming more racist ?

I certainly think so and new evidence out today would back this up. I myself have noticed a sharp spike in the racist comments i'm hearing about the place with casual comments on other nationalities and races especially eastern europeans at the moment is getting worse and worse. The proportion of Britons who admit to being racially prejudiced has risen since the start of the millennium, raising concerns that growing hostility to immigrants and widespread Islamophobia are setting community relations back 20 years. New data from NatCen’s authoritative British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey, obtained by the Guardian, shows that after years of increasing tolerance, the percentage of people who describe themselves as prejudiced against those of other races has risen overall since 2001. The findings come as political leaders struggle to deal with the rise of the UK Independence party, which campaigned on an anti-immigrant, anti-EU platform and has sent shockwaves through the political establishment and put pressure on mainstream parties All we have seen so far is the major political parties reacting with further lurch's to the right with even the labour party conceeding it was wrong on imigration and we let too many in. This does nothing to curtail the UKIP rise and in fact boosts their arguement that we are over crowded and there is not enough jobs or houses to go around which is partially true. In an echo of the voting patterns of Ukip supporters in last week’s European elections, the figures paint a pattern of a nation geographically divided – with London reporting the lowest levels of racial prejudice. Older men in economically deprived areas are most likely to admit to racial prejudice. The data is in stark contrast to other indicators of social change such as attitudes to same-sex relationships and sex before marriage. By those measures, the UK has become a more accepting, liberal country. The shadow justice minister, Sadiq Khan, said the findings should come as a wake-up call. “This is clear evidence that we cannot be complacent about racial prejudice. Where it manifests itself, it blights our society. Those in positions of authority must take their responsibilities seriously. It also falls to us to address the underlying causes.” causes ?? sounds all a bit sinister. The data was taken from the BSA survey carried out by NatCen Social Research and includes exclusive figures from the 2013 survey due to be published next month. It shows a broad decline in the proportion of people who said they were either “very or a little prejudiced” against people of other races – from a high of 38% in 1987 to an all-time low of 25% in 2001. However, in 2002, following the 9/11 attacks in New York and the invasion of Afghanistan, there was a sharp rise in self-reported racial prejudice. Over the next 12 years that upward trend continued to a high of 38% in 2011. The following year it fell to 26% – which experts say could be due to the positive impact of the London Olympics. a little simplistic perhaps but certainly worrying that even official evidence is backing up the idea that we are becoming a more racist, divided country and in fact going backwards in many ways. Omar Khan, acting director of the Runnymede Trust – Britain’s leading independent race equality thinktank – said the data should be noted by all the main parties. “This nails the lie that the problem of racism has been overcome in Britain or that somehow when Jeremy Clarkson said the things he did it is some sort of anomaly that does not tap into a wider problem. “Politicians became too relaxed and thought that all they had to do was let things continue unhindered and that generational change would take over. But this should act as a warning shot to politicians and the public about how we see ourselves.” The BSA survey data shows different levels of prejudice stemming from age, class and gender, with older men in manual jobs most ready to admit to racial prejudice. Dr Grace Lordan, from the London School of Economics, said her own research based on BSA data going back to 1983 showed a clear correlation between recession and the numbers who self-described as prejudiced. Her research found that the group that recorded the biggest rise was white, professional men between the ages of 35 and 64, highly educated and earning a lot of money. Their attitudes may directly affect others as many will have managerial responsibilities. All age groups experienced a spike in their racial prejudice after 2002, but those born since 1980 – generation Y – and the baby boomers born between 1940 and 1959 have seen prejudice levels fall since then. By contrast, people born between 1960 and 79 – generation X – and those born before 1939 increasingly identify as prejudiced. A fascinating picture also emerges in the self-evaluation of men and women. As with almost all indicators of prejudice, this data finds that men are more likely to describe themselves as racially prejudiced than women. However, that gap has closed significantly over the past decade with the number of men admitting prejudice falling from 37% in 2002 to 32% in 2013. Over the same period, the figure for women has risen from 25% to 29%. "We do know that the factors that predict the likelihood of a man or a woman admitting prejudice differ so we should not expect trends over time to be similar,” said Lordan. “For men, the usual socio-economic variables matter more – income, education and being full-time employed. For females the factors that can predict their attitudes are less obvious. We know that females who are in part-time employment are more likely to admit to being prejudiced – perhaps because part-time jobs in the UK have pretty poor conditions.” Party allegiance also appears to have a bearing on racial prejudice. Conservative supporters have consistently been the most likely to describe themselves as prejudiced against people of other races. However, since 2002, when 42% of Tory supporters said they were very or a little prejudiced (compared with 27% for Labour and 24% for Lib Dems), they have been overtaken by the category classified as “other”. This appears to coincide with the rise of the far-right British National party and then Ukip. So what has driven the apparent growth in prejudice? Prof Tariq Modood, from Bristol University, said the findings suggested many people were conflating anti-Muslim sentiment and racial animus. “I don’t think there is any doubt that hostility to Muslims and suspicion of Muslims has increased since 9/11, and that is having a knock-on effect on race and levels of racial prejudice.” Prof Bhikhu Parekh, the Labour peer who in 1998 chaired the groundbreaking Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, said the data revealed a country increasingly ill at ease with itself. “The last few years have been marked by fear of loss of identity,” he said. “There have been new people coming in and new mores. People feel uncomfortable. They lose their bearings. What should they say or do to not be classed as racist? “People have a feeling that we are losing control of our own society in terms of the EU and the liberal establishment and that they are not in charge of their destiny. They feel they can’t do anything about it.” But he also argues that the language around race has changed. “The term racism has undergone a change of meaning. It has lost its moral force. We use it today too freely. After the war if you said someone was racist, you had images of Hitler. A racist was someone who hated people. Now it is applied to someone who might say: ‘I love my people and want to keep others at a distance.'” The BSA survey data shows wide variance in levels of prejudice throughout the UK. In combined figures for 2012-13, 16% of people questioned in inner London admitted to racial prejudice. Outer London and Scotland emerged as the next most tolerant areas, at 26% and 25% respectively. Other regions – including Wales – hovered around the 30% mark. The West Midlands emerged as the place with the highest level of self-reported prejudice at 35% – a difference deemed statistically significant. It echoes the geographical split demonstrated in last week’s elections, when fewer voters in London supported Ukip. In London, one obvious explanation would be the churning population. Those with shallow roots are least likely to mourn change. Tony Travers of the London School of Economics said: “There is a self-defining image of London as a place that celebrates difference. It wasn’t created by Ken Livingstone but he did build upon it – in the same way as New York self-defined itself – and that approach has been carried on by his successor, Boris Johnson.” Travers identifies two migratory tribes in the capital – those who come from abroad and those from other parts of the country. Both choose to live in London and thus buy into the narrative. Strong roots are unnecessary. “The word Londoner is an entirely inclusive concept.” http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/27/-sp-racism-on-rise-in-britain

The young who just cant move out

New findings out today suggest more of us young people are living at home with parents for a long time now. I would place myself in this bracket. I simply cant afford to move out the prices even just to rent in my area are ridiculous and buying is way out of the question as i simply dont earn enough. "British society is undergoing a significant shift as 1 in 4 young adults now live with their parents according to national statistics released on Tuesday. Those aged 20 to 34 are now more likely to be sharing a home with their parents than any time since 1996. That's 3.3 million UK adults who are either unwilling or unable to live in a separate home from their parents. A closer look at the data from the Office for National Statistics reveals who is most likely to be in that 1 in 4. A sharp and significant rise Almost two decades ago, 21% adults aged 20-34 were living with their parents - 2.7 million people in the UK. Now, as 670,000 more individuals in that age bracket are in the same situation, that figure has risen to 26% of young adults. For every 10 women, there are 17 men aged 20 to 34 living with their parents. There are a few possible explanations for this wide gender gap: On average, young women are more likely to form relationships with men that are older than them and are therefore more likely to be living as part of a couple in their own household. (600,000 more women than men in this age group are cohabiting) Young women are also more likely to be lone parents in their own households (590,000 more women than men in this age group) Finally, young women are more likely than men to be studying in higher education - and move away from home to do so In the capital, the number of young adults living with their parents drops considerably to 1 in 5 while in Northern Ireland it is more than 1 in 3, well above the national average. Those regional differences have existed since records began, despite the fact that they've grown more noticeable. In 1996, just 17% of 20-34 year olds in London lived with their parents while in Northern Ireland it was 33% - though the figures were lower back then, they still represented the country's high and low spots. As adults get older, they're less likely to be living at home, though the figures for older age groups may come as a surprise. 14% of male 30 year-olds still live with their parents, a year later that percentage has fallen to 12%, then 9% before finally dropping to 8% for males aged 34. The reasons for younger adults living with their parents may seem self evident but the statistics released still offer some explanations. The first of these is that average earnings of adults rise steadily through their 20s and don't begin to level off until they are in their mid 30s, giving them additional means to leave the parental home. What's more, as age increases, so too does the likelihood young adults will be living with a partner - just 8% of people in the UK do at the age of 20, but by the time they're 31 years old, that rises to 70% of Britons. Finally, the house price paid by first time buyers is now higher compared to their incomes. In 1996, the ratio of first home price to income was 2.7 to 1 - by 2013 it had risen to 4.4. That house price problem is made all the more insurmountable by rising rates of short- and long-term unemployment. The percentage of young adults living with their parents who are unemployed is almost twice the unemployment levels found amongst those in the same group who don't live with their parents (13% compared to 6%). Comparable figures for other countries are based on a slightly different age group - those aged 25 to 34. On that basis, the UK has the 7th lowest percentage of young adults living withe their parents out of 28 EU countries. The lowest rates were in Denmark where it was just 2%, compared to 68% in Croatia. Aside from differing attitudes towards marriage and cohabitation, similar factors are put forward to explain the trends - from university attendance to incomes, unemployment and house prices. You can add your thoughts about the reasons for the British trends below the line. " with extracts from http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/jan/21/record-numbers-young-adults-living-with-parents?CMP=twt_gu

The poor poor rich folk, so oppressed

Yes my heart weeps for them it really does. My sarcasm meter is boiling over. In today’s papers today Boris Johnson champion of the rich and the ruling class's has come out with an astonishing piece today. "The super-rich are a "put-upon minority" like homeless people and Irish travellers and should be protected from any further "bullying" from the public, Boris Johnson claimed today. Johnson called for an end to "bashing" the richest people in Britain and suggested they should instead receive "automatic knighthoods" for their contribution to the UK exchequer. "It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city – from the homeless to Irish travellers to ex-gang members to disgraced former MPs," wrote the Conservative mayor of London in the Daily Telegraph. "But there is one minority that I still behold with a benign bewilderment, and that is the very, very rich." He said the public should instead extend their "humble and hearty thanks" to the super-rich who "now pay 29.8 per cent of all the income tax and national insurance received by the Treasury." "We should stop any bashing or moaning or preaching or bitching and simply give thanks for the prodigious sums of money that they are contributing to the tax revenues of this country, and that enable us to look after our sick and our elderly and to build roads, railways and schools," he claimed. Johnson believes the super-rich have been "brow-beaten and bullied and threatened with new taxes, by everyone from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Nick Clegg". He suggested that taxes on the super rich could instead be cut and that the richest people in the country should be automatically awarded honours by the Queen. "Indeed, it is possible, as the American economist Art Laffer pointed out, that they might contribute even more if we cut their rates of tax; but it is time we recognised the heroic contribution they already make. "In fact, we should stop publishing rich lists in favour of an annual list of the top 100 tax heroes, with automatic knighthoods for the top 10." Johnson's comparison between the super-rich and homeless people will enrage campaigners against homelessness. The London Mayor had promised to end rough sleeping in London by the end of 2012. However, research released this year found that the number of rough sleepers had doubled in the capital over the past five years. Johnson has been a long-term advocate of reducing taxes for Britain's wealthiest people. Earlier this year he called for a new "flat tax" which would have reduced the top rate of tax to just 30%. He has sometimes been accused of being too close to the City of London. His first mayoral election campaign was heavily financed by City donors. Donations to his second mayoral election campaign were routed through Conservative central office, meaning that names of individual donors did not have to be revealed. " The poor mites bless them... With extracts and quotes from http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/11/18/boris-johnson-super-rich-an-oppressed-minority-like-homeless

The gentrification of our towns and cities

Yesterday on the ever excellent Novara FM Aaron and James discussed gentrification and how it is changing the face of the Britain we know. You can listen back to yesterdays show on Novara at http://novaramedia.com/2013/10/regeneration-gentrification-and-social-cleansing/ The definition from Wikipedia on gentrification is as follows “Gentrification is a shift in an urban community toward wealthier residents and/or businesses and increasing property values, sometimes at the expense of the poorer residents of the community.[1] Gentrification is typically the result of investment in a community by local government, community activists, or business groups, and can often spur economic development, attract business, deter crime, and have other benefits to a community. However, despite these potential benefits, urban gentrification often, intentionally or unintentionally, is generally believed to result in population migration as poor residents of a neighborhood are displaced by wealthier newcomers, though studies have shown this not necessarily to be the case.[2] In a community undergoing gentrification, the average income increases and average family size decreases. Poorer, pre-gentrification residents, who are unable to pay increased rents, and property taxes, or afford real estate, may be driven out. Often old industrial buildings are converted to residences and shops. New businesses, which can afford increased commercial rent, cater to a more affluent base of consumers—further increasing the appeal to higher income migrants and decreasing the accessibility to the poor. Often, resident owners unable to pay the taxes are forced to sell their residences and move to a cheaper community.[3][4] Political action, either to promote or oppose the gentrification, is often the community's response against unintended economic eviction.[5] However, local governments may favor gentrification because of the increased tax base associated with the new high-income residents, as well as other perceived benefits of moving poor people and rehabilitating deteriorated areas.[citation needed]” A fantastic piece carried out by The New economics Foundation who are a little hit and miss me find but often come up with some cracking investigations and works have unearthed some startling statistics in Islington and how this is going to affect people long term. “Poverty is deepening and inequality is widening in Islington. After five years of economic uncertainty, public sector cuts, and now welfare reform, lower-income residents are under more pressure than ever. The gap between the wealthiest and the rest is growing as house prices and wage polarisation squeeze middle-income families. By 2020, Islington will be a starkly polarised and unequal borough. Despite these challenges this report shows that local actors can make a difference in the face of change. It identifies key areas in which action can make a positive difference to the lives of Islington residents, now and in the long run. This report is about poverty and inequality in Islington. Through interviews with low and high earners in the borough, as well as statistical analysis of key trends, Distant neighbours explores: • how life has changed for Islington’s lower-income residents during a period of economic uncertainty, public sector cuts, and welfare reform. • what inequality looks like in Islington, how people experience it, and what the consequences are for all of us. • how current trends will continue into the future and what Islington might look like in 2020. • what can be done locally to address poverty and inequality. In contrast to its image of boutique shops, top-end restaurants, and a thriving night life, Islington has long been a borough of entrenched poverty and wide inequalities. In 2008, Cripplegate Foundation’s report Invisible Islington painted a rich picture of the lives of the borough’s lower-income residents. It showed how people were struggling with worklessness, debt, social isolation, and poor physical and mental health. Our research suggests that over the last five years poverty has deepened and inequality has widened. • Poverty is intensifying in Islington. There have always been lower-income residents living in Islington, struggling with poverty. Today, life is much harder due to five years of economic uncertainty, public sector cuts, and now welfare reform. People on low incomes feel insecure. They feel they have no control over their lives. They fear destitution. Social isolation and mental ill health are worsening. Child poverty is particularly high, and likely to grow. Finding work is not always the answer to poverty in Islington. Our research shows that the London Living Wage (LLW) is not enough for the majority of household types in Islington. • Middle-income families have been squeezed out of Islington. Islington is fast becoming a place where middle-income families can no longer afford to live. The middle market in homes is disappearing as house prices soar. Wages are also stagnating, especially for middle- and lower-income earners. This means that middle-income families have been squeezed out of the borough and only certain groups on middle incomes – single people and couples without children living in flat shares – will be able to stay. • By 2020, only the wealthiest will be able to afford to live in Islington. We predict that by 2020 a family will need to earn more than £90,000 a year to afford market rents in Islington. House buying will be out of reach for almost all but the very top earners. This will leave Islington polarised, with very wealthy families at the top, a youthful, transient and childless sector in the middle, and those on low incomes at the bottom, living in social housing. The social consequences of living in an economically polarised borough which are revealed by the research – residents leading separate lives, lack of understanding between groups, and social alienation – are likely to grow. The issues raised in this report are both wide ranging and complex. However, action to address poverty and inequality in Islington is possible. Cripplegate Foundation, keen to learn about residents’ experiences of poverty and inequality and thus inform its future work, commissioned this report. Based on our findings we identify three broad areas for action. These range from opportunities for immediate local action, to longer-term preventative measures, to advocating for wider change beyond the borough. • Make a difference today. The most direct and immediate way in which organisations such as Cripplegate Foundation can address the issues raised in this report is through local action. Building on the success of the initiatives developed after Invisible Islington, Cripplegate Foundation could make a difference today by investing in mental health and well-being initiatives, supporting initiatives to reduce social isolation the borough, enabling lower income families to access alternative forms of credit, and supporting young people to develop their capabilities. • Invest upstream to prevent poverty and inequality. Cripplegate Foundation could play a role in ensuring that valuable preventative work continues in Islington. This could best be achieved by partnering more closely with universal service providers, such as General Practitioners (GPs) and Registered Social Landlords (RSLs), and by working more collaboratively with local residents. • Advocate for change beyond Islington. Cripplegate Foundation can use its position as a respected local foundation to advocate for change within and beyond the borough. This could be approached on an issue-by-issue basis, including: affordable and decent quality housing; secure and well-paid jobs and apprenticeships; and access to credit, building on the successful work of the Islington Debt Coalition.” http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/distant-neighbours Clearly I am going to agree with James and Aaron from Novara FM who suggest communism being the route out of this mess but in the right here and now we need resistance to all this. Big parts of London for example are coming no go zones for the working class. A lot of people are moving south from the north in London and further east too the old docklands areas are now full of high rise posh flats and offices where before it was good solid working class communities. We can see the changing face of London under our very eyes we must organise to stop this happening in any way we can. There are a lot of difficulties in organising any sort of resistance to this but to spread solidarity and draw people into the struggles must be a start for me. The answer oh just build more homes isn’t necessarily helpful here as there is good housing all be it in need of upgrading here but poorer communities are not being allowed to stay and are having to be forced out. A culture of resistance in communities is clearly needed to combat this kind of attack. This is not going to go away and whilst capitalism is here and the transient inter capitalist class who are always on the move exist we will always have this issue.

Last call out for the NSSN conference this sat in London; join the fightback against the cuts !

This Saturday following hot on the heels of the so called people’s assembly last Saturday militant anti cuts and trade unionists converge on London again to call for an end of talking and a demand for a start of action. Whilst we heard big speech after big speech on Saturday at the people’s assembly workers will be wondering waht happens next. The National Shops Stewards Network conference the 7th annual event to be held since its formation meets at a crucial time for workers facing attack after attack on their pay and conditions. It can be an excellent chance to hear from rank-and-file workers and anti cuts candidates fighting back in their workplaces and their communities too. Sharing stories and tactics of how we can fight back can boost other workers confidence to know that we are not just fighting alone and we can win. Why we're going to the NSSN conference: Coventry communications workers With thanks to Lenny Shail Seven delegates will be heading down to the National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN) conference from the two CWU branches in Coventry. Workers in Royal Mail, the post office, BT and other companies in the communications industry are facing unprecedented battles: against privatisation, bullying, sell-offs, sackings, union busting and performance management. At a Coventry CWU branch meeting of around 50 members there was unanimous anger at the union's telecommunications executive's recommendation of accepting BT's below-inflation pay offer and refusal to immediately take action against performance management. At car park meetings at the local postal depots, postal workers are demanding industrial action now to defeat privatisation of Royal Mail. Local NSSN supporters in these workplaces and branches have been key to organising such meetings, putting forward a correct programme and strategy and linking the need for action with the need for a 24-hour general strike against austerity. The continuing strikes in the Crown post offices has shown that action can force the employer to back down and that the public supports them. Workers in O2 were balloted for strike action to stop outsourcing to Capita, while workers in Virgin Media, Sky, Vodaphone and others continue to defy the union-busting tactics of management. The NSSN, particularly its conference on the 29 June, is key to building support for these day-to-day battles. ________________________________________ The 7th annual conference of the NSSN will take place on 29 June, 11am - 5pm in the Camden Centre, Judd Street, London WC1H 9JE The NSSN was initiated by the RMT transport union in 2006. Seven national unions - RMT, PCS, CWU, NUM, POA, NUJ, and BFAWU - are either affiliated to the NSSN or officially support it as well as many union branches, shop stewards' committees and trades councils. The conference will include main sessions on resisting the cuts and fighting the bedroom tax but also workshops on defending the NHS, organising in the workplace, housing, organising the unorganised, fighting blacklisting, Turkey, etc. It's open to everyone in the trade unions and community campaigners. Speakers include union general secretaries: Mark Serwotka, PCS, Billy Hayes, CWU and Steve Gillan, POA and Tommy Sheridan, Scottish Anti-Bedroom Tax Federation chair For more information contact: info@shopstewards.net www.shopstewards.net

Support the London wide save our NHS demonstration

This weekend see’s nother step towards saving the NHS. A London wide demonstration, this must be just the start. The chair of the National Health Service (NHS) regulator has warned that pressure on Accident and Emergency (A&E) units is "out of control... [and] totally unsustainable". David Prior, head of the Care Quality Commission, was reported as saying it meant he could not guarantee against any future scandals similar to the highly publicised tragedy of Mid Staffordshire NHS. This increasing pressure has led to a number of A&Es struggling to hit targets for waiting times. Bizarrely, Mr Prior's response to this appears to be to call for fewer, not more, resources. He told the King's Fund health think tank that "if we don't start closing acute beds, the system is going to fall over". He believes that the increased pressure is due to people "misusing" A&E services for less serious health problems, which they would apparently be less likely to do if they knew there were less resources! Anyone who thinks about this, even briefly, will see the lie in it. Clearly, those who do not actually need the services will never be sent on to acute beds; however if beds are cut it will be the patients who do need these services that will be left waiting for longer. The BBC's health correspondent Nick Triggle, reporting on the story, mentioned some more believable reasons for the increased demand on A&Es, including: "A rise in the number of people with chronic conditions, such as heart disease, that end up having emergencies; the ageing population; and problems accessing out-of-hours GP care." This shows the need for more staff and resources, not less. Triggle also made a fleeting but telling reference to "staffing problems". 6,000 nursing jobs across the NHS have been cut since the Con-Dems came to power, with that number expected to double by 2015. Closures This story also raises further concerns over plans to close four A&Es across north-west London. Communities covered by Ealing, Central Middlesex, Charring Cross, and Hammersmith hospitals have been campaigning against the closure of their A&E services, which would mean in an emergency they would have to travel to one of the remaining A&Es at five other hospitals covering the wider area. How five A&Es are expected to take on the previous workload of nine while maintaining waiting list targets is not clear, although perhaps a hidden agenda is revealed later in Mr Prior's speech when he blamed the NHS's apparent problems on the lack of a health market. Aside from the fact that an internal market has existed, and has been undermining the NHS, for over 20 years now, this also hints at the future of healthcare in north-west London, and nationally. When the remaining hospitals struggle with the additional demand and become "failing" hospitals, the bloodsuckers of the market will step in. This is so much easier now under the Health and Social Care Act. No one who works for the NHS would claim it is perfect, but we must fight to defend and improve it, as opposed to running it into the ground to be replaced with a system that puts profits over patients, which is the true aim of scare stories like this. The London demonstration (see box) can help pull together health workers and campaigners as we have seen in many other local demos. However, these must be followed by a national demonstration to focus the defence of the NHS. The trade unions must take the lead in this campaign, including building for coordinated industrial action and a 24-hour general strike, to stop the government's destructive agenda. Defend London's NHS All-London demo organised by trade unions and health campaigners. Saturday 18 May. Assemble 12 noon, Jubilee Gardens, Waterloo. National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN) Defend the NHS - new bulletin Downloadable resource - available at: http://shopstewards.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NSSN-NHS-Bulletin3-1.pdf article taken from www.socialistparty.org.uk

Benefit cap, will it help people back into work as tories say it will ?

The Tories new benefit cap comes into affect today in several London Boroughs as a test before it’s rolled out across the whole of the country. e cap, being introduced in four London boroughs – Croydon, Bromley, Haringey and Enfield – will see couples and single parents receive no more than £500 a week in benefits. The limit for single people is £350, although there are some exemptions. National implementation of the cap will begin in July, and the policy is scheduled to come fully into force by the end of September. The cap is being brought in to cut spending and to bring benefits payments into line with average income. The aim is to get people back into work but I highly doubt it will do. If anything it will exasperate the housing crisis and harm those it’s meant to help. There is something that many in the media still do not understand there are just not the jobs out there for people to take. If there was don’t you think they’d take them given the amount of benefits they can get which is as we know now £53 a week which Iain Duncan Smith was challenged to try and live on? He has since shut up on that point. The benefit cap has been hailed as the answer to our so called benefits crisis and both labour and Tories support a benefit cap labour only differ by which cap it is and unsurprisingly they won’t give details on what they’d do. We suspect it’d be very similar to the Tories. In fact it’s not meant to help people at all its designed to set employed against the unemployed and so on. Its set to deepen divisions in communities as the suspicion of who is getting what heightens further due to this cap. The stigma around benefits increases and the government are being aided by their friends in the capitalist press who are playing the strivers and shirkers card hugely to ram home the minority of people frauding the system is lots of people. In fact benefit fraud in the UK is less than 1%. The government says those who rely on benefits should not have incomes above the national median. But things are rarely as simple as suggested by the coalition. Government is making £18bn of social security cuts on the back of a handful of high-profile cases splashed across the tabloids – typically showing large families living in opulent surroundings at taxpayers' expense. These exceptional cases will be dwarfed by the million families losing out. Families will be severely disadvantaged, some almost £400 a week worse off. People desperate to stay in their local area will have to downsize, making households overcrowded, or move into poorer quality accommodation. There will undoubtedly be a knock-on effect on other services, and children will be forced to move schools. Quite clearly we are in the midst of a huge housing crisis with over 5 million now on the housing waiting list with most forced into over crowded private rental accomadation. This is often sub standard and ridiculously expensive. A socialist government would instantly look to unroll a programme of a mass affordable homes building project while looking to cap private rents at an affordable level. We used to have rent capping at a fair rate why is this noteven gettinga echo today in 2013 ? It is due to the fact that all major political partiesnow see no alternative to the market system and have fell back on the market for so long they cannot see further than their nose. The socialist party and formally Militant has always called for rent caps not benefit caps. Buildign new affordable homes is just one part of a solution it is not everything though providing good well paid work for peopl is another. There is no shortage of things we need but for as long as we put up with a system based on profit first and whether something can make profit is the measure of whether something gets done or not we will not get the things we so badly need.

march 26 2011 a look back, TUC vacated struggle for now

2 years ago today we were on the embankment in London lining up to march against the cuts the first major demonstration since the con-dems came to power. There was great noise and expectation that this could be the start of a mass fight back by the unions and the working class as a result. Yet today looking back 2 years on we’re left wondering what was it all for? Hearing big grand speeches from union leader after union leader we need to go further one march is not enough one day strike action is not enough yet barring November the 30th 2011 was a big march up a hill and back again. The TUC disgracefully has still not responded to the consultation on the consideration of a general strike agreed at last year’s TUC congress in September which the NSSN lobbied. I hear today unison one of the biggest public sector unions has the lowest days lost to strike action in its history at this present time one strike and one strike ballot live at present apparently. That for me sums up the trade union leadership absolute capitulation to the cuts a willingness to rush into negotiations before fighting. November the 30th sell out by right wing trade union leaders set our movement back a huge way from a point we were at a weak point anyway before. Thinking back to march 26th 2011 I was full of optimism I’d just joined the socialist party and felt the working class was awakening again to take on this vicious undemocratic government yet we’re in this big lull at the moment waiting and intervening where we can waiting to see which way the class turns . But I can’t help feeling March 26 and the following year was a big disappointment and an opportunity lost. The following year in October of 2012 there was far less on the demonstration a “future that works” was the title not march for the alternative this time and from a demonstration of 500 k plus in 2011 was probably less than half of that who c amen on October the 20th. No doubt disillusioned and disheartened by the continued sell outs of union leaders and a failure to take the struggle on. While labour politicians used both platforms to spout their too far and too fast line rightly miliband got booed on the last demo. No pro cuts MP should be invited from now on in my view it disarms us. We will again be lobbying the TUC with the NSSN this April on the 24th when the general council meets again. We cannot let these bureaucrats off the hook. If it has to be we will go it alone PCS has already shown it is prepared to fight even if no other unions are alongside them. This is far from ideal and PCS must be supported with solidarity and other unions joining the action next time. The Tories are out for unions like the PCS so they need our solidarity and what better way than to get other unions to join the action. Unity is strength in this case. March 26th will live long in the memory for me one of my first big demonstrations and inspirational in some ways yet it could have been so much more. We must remember that going forward learn from our setbacks so we do not make the same mistakes again.

London to loose 12 fire stations with over 500 jobs going, fight all cuts!

Its been reported today that London is due to loose 12 Fire stations and over 500 workers as a result of these huge cuts recommended by the London Fire Commissioner. This will have a devastating impact on London and the Fire services ability to deal with large scale fires and disasters if and when they occur. This wills not only put people at risk it will also risk many people’s homes and business’s which need protecting too. Boris Johnson who is slowly ripping into London’s public sector jobs and services in his second term of office cannot hide from these eye watering cuts these are his cuts and his cuts alone. It will be interesting to hear the Labour party and what they have to say on this no doubt they will oppose these cuts in words but in actions what will they do? A petition her and there will not keep a fire station open I’m afraid. The Fire Brigades Union lead by Matt Wrack a good fighting socialist need to lead this battle bringing on board anti cuts campaigners, local community members and the local residents who will loose these Fire stations. Other stations not affected need to link up with those under threat saying to Boris Johnson and his Tory chums no to all closures we wont accept closure of one for keeping another open that’s divide and rule and something the Labour party are very good at we should campaign for no to all cuts in the Fire service and for a investment in the Fire service keeping all services and jobs in the public sector with good levels of pay. This is a service we cannot do without if god forbids there was a major fire in London again loosing this many fire stations would be crippling to the city. We cannot allow these cuts to happen and every possible tactic and strategy must be considered including the threat of mass strike action over these cuts. As I’ve blogged before unions have many reasons of which to call national strike action on this is just another one to add to this list. Save our fire stations, no to divide and rule and for a fully funded publically accountable fire service that benefits the many.

17 Fire stations at risk with 600 jobs on line too, fight all cuts!

In London plans have been revealed to close 17 fire stations across inner and central London with the loss of about 600 jobs. Some of these stations only have one fire engine others have two. Boris Johnson the London Mayor who I think behind his stupid bafoonary is a very dangerous anti workers Tory. Boris thinks these cuts will not have any impact on the fire service and will not put lives at risk. I beg to differ and I’m glad to say the FBU do too. The Fire Brigades union who are a strong left militant union especially in London have gone to war before over cuts and I have no doubt will lead their members in yet another battle this time of a bigger degree. In the FBU’s press release today it sounds very clear its view and that it will be opposing these dangerous cuts which are wrong but not even necessary, are we seriously saying that too many fires were put out which lead to the global economic crisis? No way Jose! The plans, which were revealed in a leaked document, look set to be put before a meeting of the London fire authority on 22 November. The brigade was told by the mayor of London, Boris Johnson, to save £65m over two years, and senior managers have been working on proposals to meet that demand. The FBU’s regional secretary for London, Paul Embery, said: “These proposals present the biggest threat to the London Fire Brigade since the days of the Luftwaffe and would lead to the decimation of fire cover in London. The stations under threat of closure have stood proudly for generations, protecting local residents from bombs, fire and terrorism, yet Boris Johnson is about to hammer a ‘For Sale’ sign on to their front doors. “Such a huge cut cannot be made without there being an impact on public safety, and we call on Londoners to join with us in defending our fire service. “All around the country, chief fire officers are beginning to warn publicly of the danger of catastrophic cuts. So far, the commissioner of the London Fire Brigade, Ron Dobson, has remained silent, but surely now it is time for him speak up. “The London Fire Brigade is a proud organization with a fine history. But it is now facing possibly its greatest challenge. Its leaders must do the right thing and tell the politicians these cuts are wrong and dangerous. If they don’t do it, the FBU will.”

Austerity Games get involved with Youth Fight for jobs

This summer London will play host to the costly Olympic Games. While many look forward to a 'summer of sport', in its shadow, workers and young people in London and around the country face, not just months of disruption and misery that go with the £24 billion games, but poverty and homelessness as the cuts bite.

Housing in London stands on the brink of a crisis. With more cuts to housing benefit due to come in next April, a new government-commissioned study has shown that 40% of London landlords plan to stop renting to housing benefit tenants in the next year, dwarfing the already high 33% nationally.


Tens of thousands of working and poor families face being forced out of their homes as a result of the changes. The increasing lack of affordable properties only promises to exacerbate the problem and force people onto the streets or into insecure, temporary accommodation.

The government argues that the changes will stop families from claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds for large properties in expensive areas at the expense of the taxpayer and that landlords will be forced to lower rents.

The reality is that greedy rip-off landlords, who are the real beneficiaries of housing benefit, will not lower rents. In fact, 37% of landlords in London have said they are more likely to evict tenants or not renew tenancy agreements, three times higher than the 11% that said they would consider lowering rents.

The reality is that over the last year there has been a 61% rise in the number of households with children living in bed-and-breakfast accommodation and homelessness has seen increases of 14% nationally and 36% in London, with children increasingly at risk.

We refuse to accept the government's scaremongering attacks on so-called benefit scroungers to justify the return of Dickensian poverty stricken conditions.

While the real scroungers - the tax-avoiding super-rich - splash out on the luxury services on offer around the Olympic games (for between £295 and £4,500 per person you can get a champagne reception and four course dinner with your Olympic ticket) Youth Fight for Jobs will be organising to show workers and young people that, in the seventh richest country in the world, we can, and should, be afforded the right to a decent home and a decent future.

That is why young people and trade unionists from across the country will be sending teams to Hackney Marshes to compete in the Austerity Games on Monday 23 July - the week before the Olympics. We will be launching the Youth Fight for Jobs Manifesto: A Future for the 99%, which lays out the problems faced by young people in Britain today and a strategy of how to get organised and fight for a decent future.

We will be putting competitors through their paces with ten athletics events from the Race to the Bottom to the Deficit Discus and Property High Jump to highlight the plight of workers and young people, lost underneath these expensive and corporate Olympic Games.

To get involved in Youth Fight for Jobs or the Austerity Games email youthfightforjobs@gmail.com


Post originally written by Suzanne Beishon, London Youth Fight for Jobs

Solidarity with London bus workers taking strike action today

From 3.00 BST today many of London’s bus workers on many of the major routes in and around London will be taking industrial action for the first tiem in many years. This is all over the failure of TFL and the bus companies to agree a Olympic bonus for the bus workers. Unite the union who is the major union in the London bus workers will be supporting its members across the capital today. I will be lending my supporta and solidarity with the workers who deserve a decent bonus for being made to work harder and longer hours during the Olympic games.
Bus workers from 17 companies will go-ahead with a 24-hour strike in London despite an injunction, a union said.
The Arriva, Metroline and Go Ahead firms applied for the court injunction, which was granted, and their workers have been told not to strike on Friday.
But union members at the other firms plan to walk out in a row over a £500 bonus for working during the Olympics.

Unite had called for the bonus to be paid to its20,000 members, in line with extra pay deals agreed with train companies.


The failure by the bus companies to negotiate seriously and their desire to run to the courts will only heighten tensions”
End Quote Peter Kavanagh Unite
The three companies who went to court account for 15-20% of London's bus routes, providing services in north-west and south London.

Unite's regional secretary for London, Peter Kavanagh, said: "Bus workers across the vast majority of London's bus network will be on strike tomorrow.
"This comes despite an injunction which was given without any proper explanation.
"Granting an injunction in the face of a massive vote for strike action is an affront to democracy. We will appeal [against] this anti-democratic decision."

BUS FIRMS AFFECTED
• London United
• London Sovereign
• Stagecoach East
• Stagecoach Rainham
• Stagecoach Selkent
• Arriva North
• Arriva South
• First Capital
• First Centre West
• London Central
• Abellio West
• Abellio South
• Metrobus
• Docklands
• Blue Triangle
• CT Plus
• Arriva Southern Counties

Talks between the bus operators and the union aimed at halting Friday's planned strike action broke down at the conciliation service Acas earlier.
On Wednesday the mayor announced that the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) had offered £8.3m in a bid to avert action.
Unite said it "cautiously welcomed" the offer. It blamed the failure of the talks at Acas on TfL's and bus operators' refusal to negotiate a meaningful settlement.
The £8.3m is in addition to £91m the ODA gave to TfL to cover the additional costs of running extra services during the Olympics, including bonus pay deals agreed with rail workers.
Deals have been announced giving workers at Heathrow Express £700, Network Rail £500, Docklands Light Railway £900, London Overground £600 and London Underground at least £850, Unite said.
Unite estimates it would cost £14m to provide a £500 bonus for every bus driver.

TUSC calls for support of anti cuts candidates in GLA elections next year

This excellent letter which has been drawn up by comrades in the RMT and the FBU in a personal capacity is to help move the process on more towards TUSC or under another name as a union candidate standing against all cuts in next years GLA london elections. You can read it below and find out more about TUSC the trade union and socialist coalition at
www.tusc.org.uk

Dear Sister/Brother,

We believe that in next year’s Greater London Assembly elections there must be trade union and socialist candidates who oppose all the cuts being forced through by the Con-Dem government. We cannot support Labour’s policy that some cuts are necessary but should be implemented more slowly. We deplore Ed Miliband’s criticism of millions of trade union members who are ready to strike over pensions.

The recession is causing untold misery. Already four in ten children (650,000) in London live in poverty, a higher proportion than anywhere else in the UK. Unemployment in the city has passed 400,000 for the first time in 15 years. These cuts, whether implemented more quickly or more slowly, will have a devastating impact on the lives of the vast majority of people who live or work in London.

The most vulnerable will suffer terribly – older people, the disabled, the sick and young people. But almost everyone will be affected. Even those with relatively better-paid jobs now face a future of insecurity, with the attacks on pensions.

One in ten workers in London earns less than the poverty threshold. One in six is paid less than the £8.30 living wage. Last year, city bonuses totalled £14 billion.

A handful of millionaires and billionaires can afford their penthouses and palaces but housing for the vast majority of Londoners is an endless nightmare. House prices and rents continue to rise, forcing more and more young people to stay at home. Transport fares are due to rise by 7%.

Privatisation has put millions into the pockets of the company bosses whilst jobs, pay and conditions are attacked. Workers facing a pay freeze in the face of rising prices are forced further into debt or difficult decisions.

We cannot afford these cuts. Everything that makes life tolerable is being destroyed. We need an alternative policy - one that puts ordinary people before bankers’ bonuses and big business profits.

Following discussions involving the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition and representatives of our unions in London, we have decided to appeal for your help to ensure that there will be candidates we can support in next year’s GLA elections.

With the expenses scandal and attacks on working-class living standards, is it any wonder that only 26% of voters trust MPs. We want candidates people can trust; who will fight against all cuts and defend the interests of ordinary Londoners.

We ask for your support. Please print and sign this statement (opens as a pdf). We will be calling further meetings to plan our campaign and want you to get involved. We are stronger when we stand together. Together we can make an impact next May.

Yours in solidarity,

Steve Hedley - RMT London organiser

Ian Leahair - FBU executive member for London

John Reid - RMT Assistant regional secretary, London Transport

Ben Sprung - FBU regional organiser for London

(All in a personal capacity)

Poplar 1921: 'Better to break the law than break the poor'

This excellent article in this weeks socialist highlights just how far real working class socialists will go to defend and stand up for the working class. To defy the law which is deeply unfair to working class people. Deliberatly so some would say designed by the ruling class to oppress us even more. Good working class fighters have had to break unjust laws at times to defend the working class this week's edition of the socialist looks back at the Poplar struggles in the 1920's and what a inspiration their struggles are to us today.

This year marks the 90th anniversary of the struggle of councillors in Poplar, east London, against government cuts. This culminated in their going to prison with the slogan 'better to break the law than to break the poor'.

Their ultimately successful battle was a major inspiration for Liverpool council to take on the Tories in the 1980s and shows the way forward today in fighting against the Con-Dem government's attacks. Linking all three periods are profound crises of the capitalist system.

Poplar council's main struggle was to gain a reduction of the rates, the forerunner of the council tax, but they also battled for adequate relief for the poor and a decent minimum wage for council workers.

Poplar has always been a poor area. In the 1920s over a quarter of the borough's men worked in transport, mostly casual dockworkers, yet the docks were vulnerable to trade depressions. Unemployment and poverty rose enormously in the economic bust that followed shortly after World War One.

In 1919, socialists won 39 of the 42 seats on Poplar council and consolidated their hold on the 'Board of Guardians' that administered poor relief. The new councillors were not middle class armchair socialists. They included seven dock workers, seven railwaymen and four labourers.

The capitalist press had a fine time sneering at them as 'unfit to govern', but their first year in office saw impressive achievements. Council housebuilding was inaugurated, the electricity supply developed, the library service expanded. Free milk was provided for expectant mothers and babies and measures were taken to reduce the threat of TB. Poplar paid a minimum wage to council workers well above that elsewhere and introduced equal pay for women.

Poplar levied rates on behalf of London County Council (LCC), the Metropolitan Police and other all-London bodies. It also levied its own rates, including part for the Poplar Board of Guardians. Since the Board of Guardians paid all poor relief in the borough, it was paying out far more, due to the rapid rise in unemployment.

Yet wealthy boroughs like Westminster with few unemployed did not face this problem. In effect, the poorest boroughs were having to pay far more than their share in looking after London's poor.

Campaigns for "equalisation of the rates" in London, to make rich boroughs pay their share, had been going on for decades with no effect on government policy. Poplar faced a choice - to stay within the law and show Labour in power could be "responsible" as Herbert Morrison, Labour mayor of Hackney advocated, or defy the law in order to change it.

Obeying the law would have meant cutting services, pushing rates above what most of the population could pay, or reducing poor relief to a level which would not stop the unemployed and their families starving.

The Poplar councillors wanted to make a protest which 'would force the central authorities to pay attention'. George Lansbury, the Labour group leader, proposed that they should just levy the rate for their own purposes and the Board of Guardians, not for the all-London bodies.

Mass support
This strategy was discussed and agreed at mass meetings of the council trade unions, and in every local area. Backed by this mass support, councillors voted to break the law and did so.

The LCC took a writ out to try to force them to change course. Poplar council then used every avenue to delay the writ, even though they had no chance of a court victory. They were playing for time to build the movement and get other councils to support them.

Finally the LCC took proceedings against them for contempt of court. On 29 July 1921, the councillors and 2,000 supporters marched from the town hall to the High Court, under the now famous slogan, 'better to break the law than to break the poor'.

In prison, the councillors soon made their voices heard. On arrival, Lansbury asked to see the warder's union card. The food was terrible initially, but a campaign led to a big improvement in their conditions.

They also won the right to hold council meetings in Brixton prison, and the women councillors were brought over from Holloway prison specially. Every evening there were demonstrations outside the prison in support of the class-war prisoners.

The government hoped the councillors would compromise. However, Stepney and Bethnal Green councils made moves to follow Poplar. The pressure was such that even Clement Attlee (future Labour prime minister and no radical) then a Stepney councillor, moved the resolution to go down the Poplar road. Poplar also won the TUC's backing.

A formula was eventually accepted that the councillors would apologise for contempt of court, but without agreeing to levy the disputed rates - in other words a crushing victory for the 'law breakers'. A subsequent conference to discuss the issue, organised by the government, accepted nearly all of Poplar's demands.

The rebel Poplar councillors were under no illusions that what they were fighting for was a simple reform. They all saw the ultimate solution for the ending of unemployment in a socialist society.

Today, the present mayor of Tower Hamlets, that includes the Poplar area, invoked the spirit of 'Poplarism' and Lansbury in his election campaign. He then implemented a savage programme of Tory and Liberal cuts (without any resistance) making a mockery of his earlier pronouncements.

If Tower Hamlets followed the Poplar road today, as well as the successful example of the 1980s Liverpool city council struggle, then a campaign could be built that would draw other councils behind it and force the government to retreat.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

London Socialist Party public meeting:
"How do we fight for a better future? Better to break the law than break the poor."
Thursday 29 September 7.30pm.
Room 2.40, Francis Bancroft Building, Queen Mary's university, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS.
Nearest tubes. Mile End, Stepney Green.

Speakers include Tony Mulhearn, Liverpool 47 group of councillors, Peter Taaffe, Socialist Party general secretary.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this issue


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Building for 30 November strike

We won't pay for

Tottenham riots, time for a working class candidate in 2012 London elections

After the violence and the discontent in North London and other parts of London last night. With seemingly all polititians being completely out of touch. Including Labour who have not put up any resistance to cuts. Cuts that have lead to youth centres and youth funding being cut. Disgracefully there is a lot of handringing from them but we cannot let them off the hook. Due to their lack of opposition and just passing on the cuts local communities like Tottenham have felt very hard doen by by these cuts. Lets not forget this is only the first year of 5 certain years of cuts. There could be even more after that too depends what happens in 2015.

But i really do think now despite our differences on the left we should withouta doubt field a candidate under the name of Trade union and socialist coalition against cuts. A true left candidate with working class backing would give people in the pareas like Tottenham a voice and a banner to unite under. A sense of belonging and a understanding can develop as local trade unions can link up with youth projects and youth groups to bring young disenfranchised people back into something constructive.

We do understand their frustration. we really do. But rioting is not the answer unfortunatly. The anger and frustration is totally understandable and will only spread under this system of capitalism .

So as TUSC we would not just stand to divide a labour vote of Ken Livingstone we would stand to try and win. Not to just remove the tories from office as Labour wish to do but to be a beacon to workers to unite around a new workers party fighting for socialism and a change of society.

Of course not in one city can this change the whole face of Britian much like in Liverpool in the 80's the militant influenced councillors could not put through real change as they were isolated to just one city. So the call must be to spread this out right across the whole country.

Just imagine what affect this could have on the whole labour movement if a socialist fighting for trade unions and working people won in London. Under the governments nose the confidence that would create would be huge.

We all know next years election will be posed as Ken vs Boris but Ken Livingstone has a record not fit to be proud of either. He is known to be pro privatisation and almost had his way with the London Underground. He is not a true representitive of the working class and a true left candidate would be great if we can get one i feel.

As this last weekend has shown people will take things into their own hands if a clear alternative and a way out is not shown. The inaction of a labour party who see it fit to pass on cuts and say they have no choice will not stick for much longer. people are getting angry, really angry and if they will not fight they will have to be removed for people who do i'm afraid.

TUSC conference 2012, London mayoral elections and the future

Today i attended the TUSC conference. For anyone who didnt know we are TUSC- trade union and socialist coalition set up 18 months ago to give working class people a voice and a alternative to the main 3 capitalist parties.

You can view our website and learn moer about TUSC here.
. Find out more about TUSC at http://www​.tusc.org.​uk/


TUSC is made up of the SWP and teh Socialist party as it stands with other independants affiliating too to use it as a banner to stand in elections against the cuts. All cuts. One of our unique selling points is the fact that we are different and do offer an alternative. A working class alternative which has not been seen on ballot papers for sometime.

The conference today was to discuss the past year of this con-dem government and what is next for TUSC.

There weer some brilliant speakers from the Socialist party and the Socialist workers party aswell as leading figures in the trade unions such as PCS and the RMT.

a very engaging discussin was had by all comrades and lots of tactics and ideas were shared. Some trying to offer a way forward others looking back.

But all in all it was a very positive conference with plenty to look forward to. Much of which i have previously talked about on this blog. SO do please look back over those posts if you can on TUSC and the formation of a new workers party, which we in the socialist party are firmly behind.

This is due to the fact we do not believe the labour party offers a solution for workers today. Not one Labour party run council voted against cuts this year and didnt even come close to discussing voting against the cuts.

So now as we learn nearly 43% of people now do oppose the cuts there is clearly the base there to tap into to build support within the working class which have no political voice at all today.

We do need a socialist being able to reply to the arguements being put by the main 3 capitalist parties and offering a alternative.

I myself am very much behind the idea of a new workers party as a point to base our struggles around and to lead the way.

In Greece right now the lack of a working class party to lead the struggles is one of the main reasons the working class resistance has not brought about a change as yet it is still the cuts coming through. The lack of such a party is very evident across alot of the Europe if not the world today.

The question is often put to us that the lesser evil is the labour party and we should back them. We disagree even when the Labour party was first formed back in the 1900's there were many who condemned it and said it'll never work and many stuck with the liberals at that time.

What rings true to me is that things can move very quickly indeed. I mean who can imagine just two years ago the Rupert Murdoch owned News of the World was Britains best selling paper now it is gone. Gone from our high streets and our homes. So things can change extremely quickly in times like this we need to be rady for any eventuallity .

We dont know for certain but this con-dem government could fall this year or next if pressure if put upon them so great splits appear. We need to be there ready with a alternative. As as we speak it would be the Labour party under Ed Miliband who would become our Prime Minister.

Much was said about the Labour party today. Not sectarian but truthful hard facts of all Labour councils pushing through cuts.

Workers will still vote for labour but only to keep the tories out. This is contiousness we are having to deal with. But if you dont explain to people labour are offering much the same as the tories and there is a alternative, a real socialist alternative then people will never break the habbit.

There is millions of people who dont even vote. Many ex labour supporters millions since 1997 which Labour still trumpet as their proudest year in recent times who simply do not vote for anyone.

They havent gone to vote for the tories or teh Lib Dems. They ahve stayed at home. Its these workers we can win overa nd draw in to the struggles as the situation intensifies .

OOne ofthe biggest debates to come out of todays meeting and differences are there between comrades on whetehr to stand for the Mayoral election next year where it is being billed as ken Livingstone vs Boris Johnson.


People will see this as a left v right fight but it is not as simple as that. Ken although we are being told to back him by the SWP as we want Boris out will do well to remember Red Ken's last time in office. There was privatisation on Thameslink and lots of jobs cut on the tube to name a few of his red credentials being blown apart.

So the question was asked do we as the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition or under a different name if Unions were to come on board with support, be that the RMT or PCS who are thinking of standing their own candidates possibly too.

My position is yes we definatly should. In London if you stand for Mayor your automatically mailed out in a booklet to all London residents who are on the voters list. This i a massive chance for us to gain publicity and get our message out there. There is an alternative and we can be that beecon for workers.

I certainly think although alst Mays election results were possibly not fantastic and we didnt win any seats we have laid down a marker for future push's on the electoral front. As at the time the cuts were just on paper now people are starting to see jobs going and services closing i do feel we would see a different result now and next year forward.
So lots of positive discussion today and lots of room to improve and move into a broader platform for workers to stand up and be counted.

The ruling class is on the offensive lets join them by taking them on and winning i say.