Skwawkbox exclusive: smeared ex-Lab member Siddiqi ‘planning to stand vs Streeting’

Spread the love

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-commercial use.

Victim of repeated smears and even a discredited prosecution is planning a bid at the next Ilford North parliamentary election, say locals

Syed Siddiqi, the former Labour member repeatedly abused, harassed and smeared by right-wing Labour figures in Ilford in north London, is planning to stand against right-winger Wes Streeting in the next Ilford North parliamentary election, according to local sources.

Siddiqi has faced constant harassment by the party right, including a failed attempt to prosecute him that ended in all charges being dropped – reminiscent of the disgraced hatchet job against neighbouring left-wing Muslim MP Apsana Begum.

The party’s hounding of Siddiqi even went as low as suspending him for more than three years after he was the victim of a foul, late-night Islamophobic tirade by a local right-winger, despite the whole incident being recorded. His abuser was quickly reinstated so that he could stand for Labour in local elections.

Siddiqi was revealed to have been targeted by Streeting’s office and others, by the leaked party report into abuse by the party right:

Labour has a long and appalling record of Islamophobia and of protecting abusive right-wingers. Local council leader Jas Athwal was selected as the party’s candidate in Ilford South, after complaints of ‘serious sexual assault’ were dismissed by a committee of Labour national executive members – against the advice of the party’s barrister. He won the selection vote when six hundred postal votes ‘turned up’ late in proceedings, while supporters of his opponent, incumbent MP Sam Tarry, were denied entry to the selection meeting. Labour general secretary David Evans dismissed the evidence as ‘irrelevant to the result.

The party has reason to fear the challenge. Last year, Lutfur Rahman ousted Labour to win the executive mayor’s position in nearby Tower Hamlets last year and voters there kicked out Labour at the last local elections in a landslide for Rahman’s new Aspire party. In neighbouring East End borough Newham, Newham Independents leader Mehmood Mirza hammered an imposed Labour candidate in May – and his colleague Sophia Naqvi then trounced Labour in November’s by-election in Newham Plaistow North.

With discontent spreading in the area and Black councillor Shanell Johnson quitting Labour in Redbridge, which covers both Ilford seats, in disgust at the local and national party’s conduct, few would be surprised to see similar developments threatening Labour’s complacency there too; particularly with an incumbent MP as dislikeable as Streeting, Starmer’s pro-privatisation health spokesman who has accepted donations from private health interests and who triggered protests outside his office – and a boycott by students – for his part in Starmer’s support for Israeli war crimes.

In 2018, Streeting also launched a ‘disgraceful’ and ‘disgusting’ tirade in the face of Diane Abbott, Britain’s first Black woman MP, leaving Abbott ‘shell-shocked’. If he stands, Syed Siddiqi can expect considerable support from outraged former Labour supporters around the country who would be delighted to see Streeting ejected.

Original article republished from the Skwawkbox for non-commercial use.

Continue ReadingSkwawkbox exclusive: smeared ex-Lab member Siddiqi ‘planning to stand vs Streeting’

Why it is essential that the UK’s shady think tanks reveal their funders

Spread the love

Original article by Tom Brake republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

We know think tanks can shape government policy. But we often have no idea who is paying them to do so

openDemocracy’s Who Funds You? report finds think tanks raking in millions ahead of general election  | Getty

You don’t have to follow UK politics too closely to have spotted the names of a handful of think tanks cropping up again and again in the news.

There is little doubt these organisations exert significant influence. Just last year, the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) was reported to have shaped then-prime minister Liz Truss’s disastrous budget.

And sometimes it seems like only hours have passed between the publication of a Policy Exchange research paper and the adoption and implementation of its content as government policy. This is perhaps unsurprising given even Policy Exchange says its “status as the UK’s most influential think tank is widely recognised”.

The influence of high-profile think tanks is also apparent in the revolving door between them and the government. The former CEO of Taxpayers’ Alliance (TA), for example, took up a job in Priti Patel’s office when she was home secretary.

So we know think tanks can shape public policy. What is often far less obvious, though, is who is paying them to do so.

openDemocracy’s annual Who Funds You? report, published today, assesses how transparent think tanks’ financial disclosures were in the past year, grading them on a scale from A to E based on how much they publish about their funders.

I should mention, at this point, that I am the CEO of Unlock Democracy, a think tank awarded an A rating (the most transparent possible) in the report.

The report has revealed that UK think tanks have raised more than £101m to influence public policy in the run-up to the next general election – £25m of which came from ‘dark money’-funded think tanks, which are opaque about funders.

Policy Exchange and the IEA were both awarded D ratings, the second lowest.

There is nothing in either think tank’s mission that indicates any requirement for high levels of secrecy surrounding their funders. So why are they so shy about revealing their backers?

Is it because the public and ministers might view any advocacy of slower action on climate change or accusations of ‘nanny-statism’ over limits on sugar, salt and fat in processed foods differently if their accounts revealed they were partly funded by oil or gas companies, large food manufacturers or private individuals with an interest in promoting deregulation or privatisation? Of course, they might not be. But that’s the point – we don’t know.

Or is it because much of the media might stop describing them, rather generously, as ‘independent’ if the truth were known about from where and whom they received financial support?

Or is it because pressure would build for Parliament to force these think tanks to register as consultant lobbyists?

Given the IEA, Policy Exchange, the Taxpayers’ Alliance and other think tanks have declined to take voluntary action to reveal their sponsors, it is time for the government to step in and require them to declare funders contributing over £5,000 a year.

The media could help by refraining from describing think tanks whose funding remains as murky as the waters in our polluted rivers as ‘independent’.

We would all then be better equipped to establish whether the exhortations of the most influential think tanks will help deliver ‘a stronger society’ or something far less attractive.

The full report is available at opendemocracy.net/who-funds-you/

Original article by Tom Brake republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.  

Continue ReadingWhy it is essential that the UK’s shady think tanks reveal their funders

China cancels line of credit, pulling the plug on Argentina’s ‘anarcho-capitalist’ president

Spread the love

Original article by JAMES MEADWAY republished from People’s World under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/.

Dollarization: Javier Milei holds up a giant cardboard sign depicting a U.S. $100 banknote emblazoned with an image of his face during a rally in La Plata, Sept. 12, 2023. Milei wants to replace the peso with the U.S. dollar as Argentina’s currency and says that the country’s Central Bank should be abolished. He’s got a new financial challenge, though: China just cut his line of credit. | Natacha Pisarenko / AP

The Chinese government may have pulled the plug on far-right “anarcho-capitalist” President of Argentina Javier Milei, just weeks after his shock election win.

In a spectacular demonstration of how the lines of geopolitical power are shifting, the People’s Bank of China has withdrawn its “swapline” to the Argentinian central bank, depriving it of a vital source of cheap funding.

This leaves debt-ridden Argentina without ready access to funding to meet its promises to pay creditors. These international creditors include the IMF, to whom Argentina owes a world-record $43 billion. China provided the Argentinian government with funds for its $2.7 billion IMF repayment over the summer, lending it ultra-cheap foreign currency through its swapline arrangement.

Milei, a fanatical free marketeer, was elected with 55% of the vote in November from a population desperate for a break with the failed political Establishment. Developing his public profile through TV appearances and his 1.4 million followers on TikTok, Milei was able to present his program of ferocious spending cuts and the abolition of the Argentinian currency, the peso, as the bitter medicine the country needed to end its economic crisis. Younger voters, in particular, flocked to him in droves.

This was a product of desperation. Two-fifths of Argentinians live below the poverty line, and close to 60% of children. Inflation was over 140% when the election campaign ended, meaning prices doubling roughly every six months.

Since the government defaulted—halted payments—on its debts at the end of 2001, the two decades since have seen governments both pro and anti-neoliberal attempts to negotiate agreements with Argentina’s creditors and break the cycle of crises.

The latest round of these was a colossal 2018 loan from the IMF, attached to conditions on cutting government spending over the following three years.

But what tipped the country over the edge into its latest round of crisis has been the catastrophic drought that began in 2019. This ongoing drought is the worst for over 60 years, hammering farmers and severely cutting harvests—soybean production fell to its lowest level for a century.

For a country dependent on agricultural exports for foreign exchange earnings, it has been a disaster. Its trade deficit ballooned, taxes fell and government spending mushroomed. Government borrowing swelled and the Argentina central bank resorted to issuing more money to cover spending costs. Climate change almost certainly worsened the drought.

Milei’s program offered nothing on this—he is a climate change denier, claiming that those who “blame the human race” for climate change are “fake…only looking to raise funds for socialist bums who write for fourth-rate newspapers.”

The colorful language is very much part of his appeal, along with waving a chainsaw at his public appearances, to symbolize what he planned for government spending, and smashing a piñata of the central bank on live TV.

But cartoonish posing shouldn’t kid us: Milei’s program is neoliberalism on steroids. He campaigned on a promise to cut government spending by 15% of Argentina’s GDP.

His plan to abolish the peso and “dollarize” the economy was arguably even more radical, claiming this would prevent Argentinian bureaucrats and politicians from printing money. Although two other Latin American countries, Ecuador and Panama, use the dollar as their official currency, neither is the size of Argentina, the continent’s second-largest economy.

And while many Argentinians already use the dollar, with $246 billion in dollar savings, the government has no dollars to hand, and would have to either buy them to replace pesos, or perhaps seize them from those mostly middle-class savings.

The plan is a non-starter. Confronted with the economic realities, Milei has rapidly defaulted to conservative type, appointing a former president of the central bank, Luis Caputo, as his economy minister, and appointing a close associate of Caputo as the new central bank head. So much for “burning it down.”

The ferocious spending cuts are still planned, along with a 54% devaluation of the peso as part of a program approved by the IMF.

Far from a radical break, Milei is a stooge for the maintenance of Argentina’s failed elite—including even the rehabilitation of the dictatorship, with his running mate for Vice President, Victoria Villaruel, claiming the figure of 30,000 “disappearances” under the regime is a “myth.”

This is a familiar pattern. Across the world, supposed populists from the radical right have taken power, often with the promise of taking on corrupt local elites. They don’t follow through.

Italy’s radical right government, for example, in August threatened a windfall tax on banks that were profiteering from interest rate rises. But they rapidly backed down after howls of protests from the banks themselves.

Milei has almost certainly bitten off more than he can chew. Expecting protests, harsh new guidelines for police and military, including the criminalization of the parents of younger protests have been rushed through—“prison or bullet,” as one pro-government MP described them. Inflation has accelerated, to 3,678% a year, which the government are now using to justify their “shock therapy.”

However, it is anti-China posturing that could prove his undoing. China is Argentina’s second-biggest market for exports, and loans from China make up over 42 per cent of Argentina’s foreign exchange reserves.

Yet Milei called China an “assassin” during his election campaign, promising to sever ties and instead reorienting Argentina towards full-throated support for Israel and the U.S. Argentina’s foreign minister has confirmed that the country would not be joining the China-led BRICS coalition, as pledged by the last government.

This was treated as a “slap in the face” by China: Cutting loan support to Argentina is the inevitable response. As Milei himself might put it: Fuck around and find out.

Morning Star

Original article by JAMES MEADWAY republished from People’s World under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/.

Continue ReadingChina cancels line of credit, pulling the plug on Argentina’s ‘anarcho-capitalist’ president

Milei Couples ‘Total Crackdown’ on Protest With Economic Shocks in Argentina

Spread the love

Original article by Julia Conley at Common Dreams shared under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Argentinian President Javier Milei looks on after the polls close in the presidential runoff election on November 19, 2023 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. (Photo: Tomas Cuesta/Getty Images)

“Protest is elemental to Argentine social and political life, so it’s not difficult to imagine how this ends,” said one journalist.

As the human impact of Argentinian President Javier Milei’s “shock treatment” to the South American country’s economy became increasingly clear with rising prices on Thursday, Security Minister Patricia Bullrich announced what one journalist said were doubtlessly “preemptive” new controls on protests to discourage a struggling population from speaking out.

Bullrich said four security forces—the Federal Police, the Gendarmerie, the Naval Prefecture, and the Airport Security Police—will work together to stop protests that block streets and suggested the protocol is aimed only at ensuring “that people can live in peace” without demonstrators blocking traffic.

But as Progressive International co-general coordinator David Adler and others noted, the measures also include calls for armed forces to break labor strikes, create a national registry of people who organize protests, and sanctions against parents who bring their children to demonstrations.

The new package amounts to “a total crackdown on Argentine civil society,” Adler said.

https://twitter.com/davidrkadler/status/1735666098127733129?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1735666098127733129%7Ctwgr%5Edc4c076d58c4fd3232ae472103691fce93a38f1a%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2Fmilei

Bullrich’s announcement came days after Milei, a far-right libertarian economist who has called the climate crisis “a socialist lie” and has been compared to former U.S. President Donald Trump, announced in the first weeks of his presidency an economic “shock treatment” package including a devaluation of the peso by 50%, from 400 pesos to the U.S. dollar to 820 pesos.

The administration also said it would cut public spending by closing some government ministries, increasing retirements ordered by decree, reducing energy and transportation subsidies, and freezing public works, with further “profound” measures expected in the future.

Milei claimed that with the spending cuts, government revenues will ultimately increase by 2.2 points, helping to confront an economic crisis in which annual inflation exceeds 160%, the country has a trade deficit of $43 billion, and $45 billion is owed to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

But as Milei’s “open heart surgery of the economy,” as El País called the package, took hold, prices of some goods and services rose by 100% and some commuters worried that they will no longer to be able to afford their daily commutes it transit agencies are forced to raise prices due to lost subsidies.

“If [the bus fare] goes up, my salary will be spent on transport,” Julia González, who takes three buses and a train to her job in downtown Buenos Aires, toldThe Associated Press.

About 40% of Argentinians live below the poverty line and more than 9% are destitute, reported El País, with incomes insufficient to buy food.

Economist Juan Manuel Telechea told the outlet that monthly inflation could reach 30-40% due to the devaluation and that social aid will be “highly insufficient.”

Presidential spokesperson Manuel Adorni said of the economy Wednesday that Milei “found a patient in intensive care about to die,” but one trade unionist told El País the president is “exaggerating the inherited crisis situation to justify inadmissible measures, which will increase poverty levels in Argentina above 50% in a matter of days.”

“The mega-devaluation that is being carried out is a matter of concern because it may devolve into hyperinflation,” Pato Laterra, an economist at the National University of La Plata, told the newspaper.

Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said last month that Argentina’s current economic crisis is the result of right-wing former President Mauricio Macri’s administration, which took out the largest loan ever from the IMF and pushed the economy into a recession, with poverty and inflation rising by 50% or more.

“But a crazed, economically suicidal approach would only make things worse—and as Argentina has experienced, things can get a lot worse,” said Weisbrot. “Milei displays a callous disregard for most people’s living standards, values, and well-being, as well as a commitment to widely discredited economic policies, that is unprecedented.”

Jacob Sugarman of the Buenos Aires Heraldsaid Wednesday that it remains to be seen “how long Argentine society is willing to tolerate this kind of pain” and suggested that Bullrich’s announcement of a crackdown on dissent is likely to further anger the public.

“Protest is elemental to Argentine social and political life, so it’s not difficult to imagine how this ends,” said Sugarman, “especially with Bullrich announcing that the government will use federal forces including the National Military Police to break picket lines.”

Original article by Julia Conley at Common Dreams shared under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingMilei Couples ‘Total Crackdown’ on Protest With Economic Shocks in Argentina

Wes Streeting says NHS uses winter crisis as excuse to ask for more money

Spread the love

This is the evil Neo-Liberal siht who will be in charge of the NHS if Labour come to power at the next General Election

Official portrait of Wes Streeting crop 1

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/dec/10/wes-streeting-nhs-uses-winter-crisis-excuse-more-money-labour

Shadow minister tells health service ‘money is tight’ and that it must provide better value for taxpayers

The shadow health secretary has accused the NHS of using every winter crisis and challenge it faces as an excuse to ask for more money.

Speaking on a visit to Singapore, Wes Streeting said the health service needs to accept “money is tight”, and that it must rethink how the care it provides could provide better value for money for the taxpayer.

“I think people working in the NHS and the patients using the NHS can see examples of waste and inefficiency,” he told the Sunday Times. “I don’t think it’s good enough that the NHS uses every winter crisis and every challenge it faces as an excuse to ask for more money.”

He added: “The NHS is going to have to get used to the fact that money is tight and it’s going to have to get used to switching spend, and rethinking where and how care is delivered to deliver better outcomes for patients and better value for taxpayers’ money. At the moment, I think we get the worst of all worlds, which is poor outcomes alongside poor value for taxpayers.

“I’m willing to give people more freedom to innovate and create as long as they deliver. That’s the tough love that people can look forward to if I become the health and social care secretary.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/dec/10/wes-streeting-nhs-uses-winter-crisis-excuse-more-money-labour

Hospitals ‘falling to bits’ as NHS in England faces record £12bn repair bill

Continue ReadingWes Streeting says NHS uses winter crisis as excuse to ask for more money