What is “One Nation Labour” for?

We will hear a lot in the coming months about “splitting the left vote”; how Labour are the “lesser evil” and so on. These arguments are from those who say that, even against our better judgement, we must vote Labour - to keep the Tories (or UKIP) out.

The “lesser evil” approach is the road to ruin for working people. The “lesser evil” school constantly urges workers to vote, not for the party they want, not for the party with the policies that will benefit them and their families; but for another party: a party they do not want, but a party which is, apparently, the “lesser evil”.

But that IS only apparent. “Labour” is better than the Tories only in the same sense that being hanged tomorrow, is better than being hanged today!

Of course it is! But to vote for the lesser evil simply brings the greater evil nearer!

That is why we are here today. Well over a decade of “Labour” government led us directly to the ConDems! And the “lesser evil” brigade want us to go through that all over again! No thank you!

Have a look at the Guardian article here. Labour’s shadow minister is almost shouting the message that if you vote for us you’ll get more of the same!

In the run up to Hitler’s seizure of power in the early 1930s, right wing leaders of the Labour movement in Germany urged that people should vote for Field Marshal von Hindenburg, as the “lesser evil” to that of Hitler. And he was elected. But then handed power to Hitler - he appointed him Chancellor!

CROYDON: COPY ENFIELD!

Here is a posting on the national TUSC website about Labour controlled Enfield council in North London where there is also an active local TUSC group.

Pressure of events and the hot breath of Enfield TUSC down their necks (and also the fact there may still be one or two fighting Labour councillors left!) has led Enfield to take some pro-worker measures to defend housing.

As TUSC has constantly emphasised, an article in the Guardian explains that councils do have powers they could use to intervene (if there is the will to find them and use them!).

Enfield, the report says, "has arranged a credit facility of £100m" to bulk-buy homes, in a programme that began in March this year. It is introducing a scheme to license private landlords and, "for the first time in 30 years, it is building council homes", with 180 starts this month as the first steps.

Austerity is NOT the only show in town! But Enfield will need to do more. It is still issuing redundancy notices to staff! See the full article.

Sutton Croydon TUSC Meeting, 10th September, 2014.

The main, and most exciting decision we made was that we should stand a TUSC candidate in Croydon North in the general election next year! 

All the mainstream parties (and UKIP!) offer nothing for working people. There’s is a bleak and uncertain future for the vast majority: of endless austerity, cuts in public services, unaffordable homes and low wage, zero-hour contracts!

TUSC is building a new workers’ party. It’s time we gave Croydon the opportunity to vote for someone armed with policies to shift the balance of power back towards working people and their families.

The next major decision for us will be selecting the candidate. We hope to agree this at our next meeting in a month’s time.

We also discussed whether to stand in Sutton/ Carshalton constituencies, but we felt at this stage we should concentrate our forces in one constituency.

The other key issues were -

We agreed a simple constitution - mainly required for opening a bank account. We agreed an annual membership fee - £10, or £2 (unwaged) - to help regularise income and support.

We agreed to write to all local union branches, trades councils, left organisations, community groups & campaign groups, to solicit their support for our candidate and for what we are seeking to do across the boroughs.

We agreed to hold street stall on Croydon High Street.

We agreed to prepare specific anti-UKIP material to contribute to the wider election campaign.

The date of the next meeting will be Wednesday, 8th October. Location to be decided - it may be North Croydon, where we shall be spending more time in the months to come! For more information, email us at - SuttonCroydonTUSC@gmail.com

One Nation Labour - Ambitious for Croydon?

Labour’s Manifesto for Croydon is called “Ambitious for Croydon”. They don’t call themselves “Labour”. They call themselves, “One Nation Labour”.

It is a document of double-speak. The overall message is that if you vote “Labour" they will try to make things a little better. However, “we will have to take tough decisions”. (No prizes for guessing who will be at the sharp end of that).

Whilst admitting there are, "stark contrasts in wealth and poverty” in Croydon, the document puts forward proposals of the meekest, milk-and-water variety. There are few proposals not ring-fenced with caveats and circumspection. The manifesto is as cautious as cat in a dog pen.

It reads as though the calamities affecting Croydon are to be tackled not by the Council itself, but by other people and organisations, businesses and voluntary groups. There is very little in the document suggesting that the council ITSELF can or should do very much!

The word “socialism”, needless to say, is not mentioned.

Unbelievably, one of its major proposals is for setting up a “Croydon Fairness Commission”.  It will "recommend steps on how to improve the quality of life across the borough...”.

This is an open admission that Croydon’s New Labour council does not know what to do! Instead, it will ask a committee of the great and the good, clever people you understand, who will come up with something. What an admission of total bankruptcy!

Here is a sample of some of New Labour's “ambitious" proposals.

On wages. Implement £10 an hour minimum wage? No. Implement the London Living Wage? No. Instead, they “will campaign to make Croydon a living wage borough”! Why are they still campaigning? They are in power!

On jobs. An ambitious direct works programme by the Council? No. An immediate halt to all cuts in council services and jobs? No. Instead, they "will work towards increasing employment…”.  Work towards!

On youth unemployment. They will "create an ambitious and vibrant ‘place to be’”.  They will "build upon our good working relationships with local businesses…”.

On housing. An ambitious building programme of affordable houses and flats? No. A rent freeze? No. Abolish the bedroom tax? No.  Set up a council Housing Costs and Standards Agency to set and control ALL rents and ENFORCE housing condition standards? No.

But they will set up another commission of clever folk who will "report back within six months on the scale of the homelessness crisis we will inherit and to provide possible solutions”.  There are various ideas for more “partnerships” and some “cracking down” on bad landlords. But the nearest they get to a proposal we could go along with is a "not-for-profit lettings agency”. But they will only “look to” establishing this (and it is point seven, of eight).

Even on libraries they are pathetically cautious. Will they halt library closures? No. Will they set up new libraries? No. Instead, they will “seek to” reverse the Tories’ policies.

Whatever else their manifesto is, it very definitely is NOT “Ambitious for Croydon”. It may be ambitious for councillors, who want to join the “New Labour” gravy train; but for Croydon people the “manifesto” is a waste of good paper.

They are no longer Labour. WE are Labour!

If you think this is an unfair review, you can see the manifesto for yourself at Croydon Labour's website. www.croydonlabour.org.uk

One Nation Labour - the Lesser Evil?

People will say to us, "We must keep out the Tories and UKIP. Therefore we must vote for the lesser evil - One Nation Labour!" Others will say, “If you stand, there is a danger of splitting the left vote".

These are the arguments of people with short term political memory loss! Have they forgotten what New Labour did?!  Wasn't it New Labour who got us to where we are today? 

This is what happened. New Labour was elected in a 1997 "landslide" - with fewer votes than John Major obtained in the previous election! Each subsequent election brought New Labour fewer and fewer votes until, in 2010, it lost the election, with 8.6 million votes - just 22% of the electorate and nearly the lowest vote since 1935. Is this the march of victory which One Nation Labour supporters anticipate? (The full results are at the bottom of this post).

As we reported in a recent post, at their completely powerless policy conference the party voted on a good motion which wanted to commit Labour to fighting against public expenditure cuts and for working class policies. It was rejected, overwhelmingly!

A vote for New Labour is NOT a vote for the left! They were war-mongers! They helped get us into the Iraq war on false pretences. They sold arms to the Indonesian government as it tried to suppress a local uprising. They supported Putin as he devastated Chechnya. In 2006 Labour offered unconditional support to Israel as it attacked Lebanon. (And what has Labour’s response been to the recent war on Gaza?)

It was New Labour who introduced “light touch” financial regulation. We know how that ended, in 2008! 

Britain used to be the “workshop of the world”. Under Thatcher the share of manufacturing in the economy fell from 26% to 22%. Under New Labour it fell further, to around 12%!

At the beginning of the 1990s the richest 1% owned 17% of total UK wealth. Under New Labour that share increased to 21%.

Under New Labour, Tory privatisation zeal continued. It was New Labour, for example, that sold off the London Tube network!

It was under New Labour that Tory NHS commercialisation and privatisation picked up more speed. According to Treasury figures, by 2009 over 900 PFI (privatisation) projects had been signed, worth around £72 billion. 

It was the 2000 NHS Act which set up an “internal market” within the NHS. By 2008 there were 13,000 fewer general and acute beds!

In 1998, Blunkett introduced tuition fees. New Labour introduced “faith schools” and "city academies”.

Do you remember the “cash for peerages” scandal of 2006-7?  Thatcher created on average 18 peers a year. John Major created 25 a year. Under Blair - it was 37. In relation to this, Blair became the first Prime Minister to be questioned by police in a criminal investigation.

As the New Left Review magazine said (which journal is responsible for much of the information above), “There is no reason why voters should be any more sentimental about the Labour Party than it has been about them”.

The Labour Party is decrepit and bankrupt; it is finished as a force in the interests of working people. It is not the lesser evil.

People may ask, “So what is the TUSC?” It would not be wrong for us to reply, “WE are Labour! We are what the best of Labour used to be!”.

Our next post will look at Croydon’s Labour Manifesto.

[The election figures mentioned above (in millions of votes) are - 1992, Tories 14.1: 1997, Labour 13.5: 2001, Labour 10.7: 2005, Labour 9.6: 2010, Labour loses with 8.6 million]

Immigration - TUSC Answers the Lies!

This is the opener for an ongoing effort to supply labour movement answers to the lies and misinformation of the pro-business political parties, their corporate media friends and the Lords, Ladies and lickspittles of UKIP.

This will be particularly crucial if we are able to stand a local Parliamentary candidate (or two!) in the May General Election! 

If you have any particular issues you want us to cover, or questions you want answering, let us know.

“Divide and Rule” has been a core policy of the governing classes for hundreds of years. Getting working people to fight amongst themselves, damaging their social solidarity, and having them blame each other for what is happening, is one of the most important political strategies of the ruling class.

Something heard quite often is - "They take our jobs!"
But how can anyone “take” a job? A worker does not have the power to do that.

It is the employer who chooses who works and who does not!

An employer will often select an immigrant worker for a job, because desperate people are a source of cheap and pliable labour. Labour to be super-exploited!

The only way to stop immigrant workers being used to undermine wages and conditions is to UNIONISE THEM and fight alongside them for a living wage and decent conditions.

The fight for £10 an hour minimum wage for ALL workers is one of the best ways of fighting racism and workers disunity. Ten pounds an hour across the board, no exceptions, no exclusions, would leave no room for employers to use immigrants to drive down wages!

To blame immigrants is to be on the same side as the worst employers. Workers’ disunity helps those employers exploit ALL workers.

Politically, the racist is the employers' little helper!

The people who are REALLY responsible for "taking jobs" are the employers!

It is employers (usually the largest of them) who are closing firms, reducing head counts, outsourcing work overseas!

Did immigration cause Nestlés to move out of Croydon and cut jobs?

Morrisons announced 2,600 job losses in June this year. Did immigrants cause that?

Some Facts (from reliable sources!)

You are nearly twice as likely to be claiming benefits if you are NOT an Immigrant, than if you are.

Immigrants comprise 9% of the UK population. In Germany 13%, in the US 13%.

The Financial Times in its editorial (11 Jan, 2014) said, “Claims that immigrants as a whole are a burden on the state are wrong: the young people who predominate contribute more as taxpayers than they absorb in welfare.”

Of all immigrants arriving from the EU since 2010, 2% have claimed unemployment benefit, even though 6% were eligible.

Working people will always seek a better life; seek to escape war, violence and poverty, corrupt political systems. This is true for British people also, five million of whom live abroad.

St Helier & Single Issue campaigns; worthwhile?

This is a personal view from Steve Appleton. If you have comments, please post them.

In Sutton, during the May local election, there was a good campaign waged in defence of St Helier Hospital, whose future remains uncertain. Several individuals stood as “Save Our St Helier” candidates; many windows had posters. 

I’m not sure, though, that single issue campaigns and candidates is the right way forward. Is a single issue campaign, even one as important as this, the best way to achieve results? 

The issues affecting St Helier are no different from those affecting all hospitals - things like privatisation, tick box “performance measurement”, outsourcing, low wages, etc. 

Some people told us they wanted to keep the campaign non-political. They said that politics will put people off.

But it is politics - mainstream, pro-business politics - that’s the main cause of the problem! The policy of all main parties (including UKIP) is aimed at “Americanising” the NHS and selling whole parts of it to profit-seeking corporations - allowing them to exploit the NHS for profit. 

During 2013, more than £5 billion NHS contracts were put out to tender, and around 70% went to the private sector. 

The ultimate aim is getting clearer by the day. Private care for the richest (already in place), insurance-based health care for those who can afford the monthly fees, and a free but inevitably poorest quality service for the rest of us. And even that may become means-tested!

Can any campaign to save St Helier really ignore these wider issues? Can it treat St Helier in splendid isolation, as though it wasn’t part of the government’s pro-rich, anti-public sector agenda? 

Single issue campaigns can help raise awareness. But they can also let politicians off the hook - the very politicians whose parties are wrecking the NHS! All the main parties in Sutton “support” the St Helier campaign. They are hypocrites, and we shouldn’t hide that from the people of Sutton! They are part of the problem, not the solution!