class war

Ed Miliband shifts Leftwards at conference but Rightwards in the PLP

Spread the love

Ed impressed me at his conference. Looks like he’s two-faced in the tradition of Labour party leaders: They tell you what you want to hear. Original with comments is at: http://www.leftfutures.org/2013/10/ed-miliband-shifts-leftwards-at-conference-but-rightwards-in-the-plp/.

What sort of party does Miliband really want? The signs are confused because his radical stance at conference in taking on corporate power has now just two weeks later been followed by a distinct turn to the right in the reshuffle. How a programme of transforming capitalism is to be carried through by a Labour front bench which is largely made up of people wholly opposed to any such project is hard to see.

The Opposition shadow cabinet plus attendees is now composed of 12 Blairites, 4 Brownites (who together make up a majority), plus 9 centrists, and 6 on the left or left-inclining. Ed Miliband has constantly asserted that he wants a united party which balances the various factions and interests. In no sense can this reshuffle be said to achieve this. Leaving aside the centrists whose politics cannot readily be identified, the right outnumbers the left by almost 3 to 1. That is contrary to Ed’s instincts proclaimed at conference, contrary to the balance within the Labour Party as a whole, and contrary to the spirit of a shared unity which Ed professes to believe in.

One wonders who actually made the selections. What role was played by Ed’s office which is almost unanimously Blairite or right-wing? Who decided to drop Diane Abbott, a candidate for the leadership in 2010 and one of the small minority on the left who remained in the shadow cabinet?

Who decided to remove Lisa Nandy, one of the very few on the left in the 2010 intake and perhaps the most prominent, from her shadow responsibility for child care policies at which she was performing so well?   Who decided to drop or move such prominent campaigners as Chris Williamson and Jack Dromey, and why?

Of course it is true that Miliband demoted three prominent Blairites, but they were replaced by persons of similar ilk. It is also true that the reshuffle in the junior ranks overwhelmingly favoured the Blairite faction whilst not one of the 2010 left intake was singled out for the front bench. This whole picture leaves a puzzling impression, that Ed Miliband’s political instincts are quite radical, yet in the PLP he errs towards placating the dominant faction, even though that makes it difficult if not impossible to achieve his political ambitions. It is hard to understand how he thinks he can achieve his vision when he suppresses or marginalises the very people who can create the political space for him and who would support him when times get tough, as in politics sooner or later they always do.

Labour will be tougher than Tories on benefits, promises new welfare chief

 

Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband’s frontbench reshuffle.

The 34-year-old Reeves, who is seen by many as a possible future party leader, said that under Labour the long-term unemployed would not be able to “linger on benefits” for long periods but would have to take up a guaranteed job offer or lose their state support.

Adopting a firm party line on welfare, the former Bank of England economist stressed that a key part of her task would be to explode the “myth” that Labour is soft on benefit costs, and to prove instead that it will be both tough and fair.

…

 

Continue ReadingEd Miliband shifts Leftwards at conference but Rightwards in the PLP

One home in every street at risk of repossession, warns charity

Spread the love

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/one-home-in-every-street-at-risk-of-repossession-warns-charity-8876317.html

Shelter says unemployment and high cost of living are leaving household on a ‘ knife-edge’

Image of terraced houses

One home in every street in some parts of England is at risk of being repossessed, according to a housing and homelessness charity.

Shelter said that unemployment and the high cost of living are leaving many households on a “knife-edge”, and applications made to courts by lenders and landlords to repossess homes in England have increased.

Between July last year and June 2013, Richmondshire, North Yorkshire, saw the biggest increase in possession as claims rocketed by 80.3 per cent.

Newham in East London has the highest number of homes at risk of being repossessed: one in every 35. This translates into one house on every street in the area where a family may be at risk of becoming homeless, Shelter said.

…

27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.

I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.

Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.

dizzy

Continue ReadingOne home in every street at risk of repossession, warns charity

The Royal Mail sale is grotesquely illogical

Spread the love

Guardian source

Image of post office van next to postbox…

“There’s no way we will sell Royal Mail ‘on the cheap,'” promised the government in its “myth-busters” factsheet. Yet this is precisely what it is doing; the valuation is believed by many experts to be on the embarrassingly low side. Experts from Panmure Gordon say that its lower value estimate of £2.6bn could be undervalued by up to £1.9bn pounds, or over 40%. Labour points out that the valuation does not seem to include up to £1bn of property assets – such as the Mount Pleasant or Nine Elms sites in London. Add to this that Royal Mail has an accumulated backlog of tax credits of about £2.8bn, which means that it is expected not to pay any tax for between five and 10 years. And here is the kicker – not only is this government selling the service significantly under any sensible valuation, it is retaining its biggest liability – pensions. Why wouldn’t there be frenzy for its undervalued, no-strings-attached shares?

“But anyone can buy shares,” point out the sale’s proponents. Indeed, provided that “anyone” has between £750 and £10,000 to spare and access to a broker or enough savvy to buy privately. Even then, one would be paying for a tiny amount of shares in something that we all jointly own already and end up not really owning it. The government itself forecasts that seven out of 10 shares will be bought “by big institutions in the City and overseas”. The apotheosis of the cockamamie logic surrounding the sale, is the idea that some of the City institutions set to make a killing may own our pensions. This, apparently, makes everything alright. The state is selling a valuable, profit-making asset, substantially below market value, in the vague hope that some of the corporate entities who buy it may happen to hold your pension.

“Look,” explained James Max on Sky News, “let’s get it off the balance sheet and reduce national debt,” echoing the sentiments of those in support. This is where the rationale of this fire sale really crumbles. Royal Mail is profitable. During the last financial year it showed an operating profit of over £400m. According to the government’s own literature, “the company is on the road to sustained profitability”. It is in a position to make a positive contribution to state coffers. Selling it does not decrease the budget deficit, it increases it.

…

Continue ReadingThe Royal Mail sale is grotesquely illogical

Daily Mail

Spread the love

The Daily Mail has been almost universally condemned for attacking Ed Miliband through attacking his long-dead father. Ralph Miliband was a Marxist academic and activist, a Jewish immigrant to evade the Nazis and served in the British Royal Navy during the Second World War. He was accused by the Daily Mail of hating Britain when he actually hated many aspects of bigoted right-wing ideology in Britain.

There are similarities between the Daily Mail and this blog. We both have a huge online readership and influence and we both attack politicians. The Daily Mail is traditionally more open to conspiracy theories which I find refreshing.

The differences are ideological and that I often attack people who have already attacked me e.g. Tony Blair, David Blunkett and all the has-been old New Labour Home Secretaries and of course Ian Blair. My attacks on family members have probably only extended to Cherry and she was very closely associated with Tonee. I could very easily hint at obvious, acknowledged issues about the Blair ‘family’ as I’m doing right now. I very occasionally get the wrong target but I do apologise for it.

A comment made it through the spam filter today. It was spam. Please feel free to comment – it’s likely to be published so long as it’s not spam.

Continue ReadingDaily Mail

Government forcing us to open NHS to competition, say commissioners

Spread the love

The government promised parliament that NHS competition would not be compulsory under their new laws. New evidence emerges today that these promises were false.

Local health bosses are saying they are legally obliged to put NHS services out to competition, despite repeated government promises to the contrary, it emerged today.

A survey in today’s Pulse magazine revealed that since April, Clinical Commissioning Groups have put 63% of contracts to provide NHS services out to tender, with a further 9% using the slightly different ‘Any Qualified Provider’ route. The contracts that have been opened up to private healthcare companies to take over include every aspect of NHS services and total billions of pounds.

And according to Pulse:

“When asked whether they had awarded contracts without putting it out to competition, many Clinical Commissioning Groups – including Cambridgeshire and Peterborough – answered: ‘This would be contrary to the section 75 regulations.’”

The revelation will re-open controversy about broken government promises on NHS privatisation.

The Section 75 regulations were made under the Health & Social Care Act in April this year. They appeared to force competition on the NHS in contravention of ministerial promises made during the stormy passage of the Act itself. At a critical juncture then health secretary Andrew Lansley wrote to the new local health bosses (Clinical Commissioning Groups) telling them that,

“I know many of you have read that you will be forced to fragment services, or put them out to tender. This is absolutely not the case. It is a fundamental principle of the Bill that you as commissioners, not the Secretary of State and not regulators – should decide when and how competition should be used to serve your patients interests.”

And he told the House of Commons,”There is absolutely nothing in the Bill that promotes or permits the transfer of NHS activities to the private sector”

Days later Tory health minister Earl Howe promised the Lords “Clinicians will be free to commission services in the way they consider best. We intend to make it clear that commissioners will have a full range of options and that they will be under no legal obligation to create new markets, particularly where competition would not be effective in driving high standards and value for patients. As I have already explained, this will be made absolutely clear through secondary legislation and supporting guidance as a result of the Bill.”

However when this secondary legislation emerged in February this year – the Section 75 regulations – it appeared to break these promises and give local health commissioners no choice but to put NHS services out to competition, as first highlighted on OurNHS openDemocracy and by Keep Our NHS Public.

A storm of protest errupted. Over 1000 health professionals wrote to the Telegraph urging for the regulations to be scrapped. Both the unions and the Royal Colleges – even those who had been muted in their opposition to the Act itself – and were up in arms at what the Association of Royal Colleges called ‘privatisation by stealth’. Over 300,000 38 Degrees members signed a petition for them to be dropped. Polly Toynbee called for the Lib Dems not to stand for any more lies on the NHS and many Lib Dem activists raised concerns.

Lib Dem health minister Norman Lamb told parliament “We are looking at this extremely seriously. Clear assurances were given in the other place during the passage of this legislation and it is important they are complied with in the regulations.”

continues

 

Continue ReadingGovernment forcing us to open NHS to competition, say commissioners