Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Hysteria over the rapid roll-out of the vaccination programme neglects to mention the reality that those vaccinated so far have only received just the initial dose with a prolonged wait for their booster jab. This has allowed this corrupt Tory Government to tout the high numbers of people in the most vulnerable group it has managed to vaccinate in record time, now even beating their own deadline. It’s a similar trick as counting gloves separately rather than by the pair, it gives a false impression of their tremendous accomplishment to be hailed by the media at a critical time that masks the grim reality of our soaring death toll now exceeding the 100,000 mark. Ignoring the possibility of any delays in the supply chain, the extension of the gap between doses eliminates any potential leeway if problems arise, hence the aggressive policy of vaccine nationalism that sparked a row with the EU. Obscuring the impact of the unnecessary deaths is perverse, but other potential pitfalls in the Government’s strategy aren’t making headlines.

At the beginning of February few were questioning this over-egging of the vaccine roll out success story. In the London Economic Article entitled, “Britain’s reaction to the first sign of competence in government is scary,” Jack Peat reminds us that, “New Zealand has managed to keep their Covid death rate down to just 25 because their government acted with competence from the start.” He says, “The Conservatives enjoyed a vaccine boost in the polls this week, turning a four point deficit into a three point lead over the Labour Party. A year on from the outbreak of a pandemic that has wreaked havoc across the nation and all has been forgotten, with the government’s vaccination programme seemingly enough to make amends for all that has gone wrong. This weekend close to one in every 60 adults in the country were vaccinated against the deadly virus, a proud Matt Hancock trumpeted last night. They may even hit their target of vaccinating the most vulnerable by February 15th, ‘with a fair wind’, as Boris Johnson likes to say.” Or, in this old sea dog’s nautical terms, he could suffer a dangerous broach in the massive following seas!

Peat remarks that, “It is almost as if for the first time since the pandemic started we had a semi-competent government in charge, and it has caught many of us by surprise. That’s what they are supposed to do. The scary part about watching people’s reaction to the vaccination response is seeing how many have forgot that it is the job of the government to make this stuff happen. With the strength of our national health service, the vigour of our great scientific minds and the financial might of the British state they need only coordinate the vast resources at their disposal to make it work. The vaccination ‘success’ is, in reality, simply competence, and I hardly think we should laud a ruling party overly for that. Especially when you compare it to places where this has been happening all along.” Following the Covert 2019 Rigged Election that burdened us with this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship we have suffered the consequences of multiple incompetent decisions; a full Investigation of that result could oust this corrupt Tory cabal!

New Zealand is cautiously emerging from the Covid crisis relatively unscathed. In New Zealand, for example, Peat reports on how, “They closed the borders, went straight into lockdown and had a functioning test and trace system as soon as the first cases were recorded. Juxtaposed to the UK where border restrictions are still not fully in place and the test and trace system has been a laughing stock and you get a picture of what true competence really looks like. Fortunately for us we don’t even have to look that far any more for case studies in how it should be done. Yesterday our very own Isle of Man announced it was ‘back to normal’ as pubs, schools and businesses reopened. They too had enforced a strict lockdown and closed their borders and were led decisively throughout. One person said their mother had refused a vaccine because ‘there are people in the world who need it more’ than her. Pressed on who she was referring to she said those in the UK. ‘There is a much higher risk over there’.”

Few in the Mainstream Media are really putting the Government’s shambolic decisions under robust scrutiny. In the Byline Times Article entitled, “The UK’s World-Beating COVID Vaccination Rollout Behind the Flag Waving,” Martin Rodgers, “calls on journalists to scrutinise the Government’s vaccine programme to ensure defeat isn’t snatched from the jaws of victory.” He says, “The UK’s embattled Conservative Government is taking succour from a barnstorming roll-out of almost 10 million COVID-19 vaccine doses in January, powered from an aggressive purchasing and emergency licensing strategy. Indeed, in recent opinion polls, the Tories had moved back into a four-point lead over Labour, a mere week after Boris Johnson soberly announced the milestone of 100,000 COVID-19 deaths to the nation. However, as the vaccinations accolades pour in, including from Labour leader Keir Starmer and traditional press critics of the Government’s approach, the scrutiny of what lies beneath the headlines has started to wane.”

Rodgers says that, “In a nation bruised and battered by its 12-month COVID nightmare, slowly awakening to the reality of its divorce from the EU, and where political discourse is held in increasingly binary and aggressive terms, the tendency to seek solace in good news seems overwhelming. Looking under the lid of the UK’s vaccination programme, and beyond its shores to global equivalents, serious questions lurk, that if not addressed with urgency, could see vaccination becoming another catastrophic failure of this Government’s pandemic response, along with PPE procurement and outsourcing. The Vaccines the UK has aggressively pre-ordered vaccines, with a total seven candidates secured covering 357 million doses for its 60 million citizens. This strategy has been conducted on the basis that not all candidates will be successful or pass approval. Of those, two have been granted emergency approval and are being used.”

Rodgers reports that the, “Pfizer/BioNTech, Has trial efficacy of 90%, and a dosing interval of 21 days. The UK Government advises a three-to-12-week dosing interval. AstraZeneca/Oxford has trial efficacy of 60% and a dosing interval of three weeks. The UK Government advises a three-to-12-week dosing interval. The UK has ordered 100 million doses of the AstraZeneca (AZ) vaccine, and 40 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine. As of 1 February the UK announced that 9.7 million people had received a first vaccine dose, with just under half a million having received second doses and thus being vaccinated. UK-wide and region-specific data on which vaccines have been used on which age-groups, and on the dosing interval for second doses, are outside of the public domain. We have a perverse scenario whereby the more vulnerable are being issued with the weaker AZ vaccine on the basis of its ability to be easily distributed, as opposed to clinical best practice.”

Rodgers explains that, “Crucially, the UK Government does not break down its vaccine delivery statistics by manufacturer. Despite lower efficacy, AZ is still a vital tool in the fight against COVID-19, given its much lower price per dose, and the fact that, unlike the Pfizer vaccine, it does not need to be stored at -80 degrees. However, some controversy has surrounded the design of the AZ study, as data on subjects aged 65 and over is sketchy at best. Coupled with inconsistencies and gaps in the results from the Anglo-Swedish first-time vaccine producer, this has led to a tardiness in approval from other countries, most notably the USA, whose agency is running a much larger trial prior to granting approval.”

Rodgers reports that, “The EU, during last week’s vaccine furore, approved the vaccine across its member states, with a note on untested efficacy among those aged 65 and over. The German national regulator went further, advising against its use in seniors, and other member states, including France and Spain, have expressed similar reservations. With the bloc recently securing an enhanced 600 million dose order from Pfizer in 2021, it is questionable to what degree AZ will figure in its over 65 cohort. The UK has not made such a distinction between vaccine flavours, basing the bulk of its roll-out on getting the more plentiful AZ doses into arms the length and breadth of the country. Given the ease of storage and distribution of AZ, this has meant a bias towards GP surgeries, local health centres, and indeed care homes, with Pfizer doled out at volume in national vaccination centres.”

Rodgers says that, “Again, the national breakdown is not published, but Northern Ireland may be used as a reasonable barometer, and here the Health Minister, Robin Swan, has stated: ‘Those aged 70 and over are receiving the AstraZeneca jab from their GPs while those aged 65 and over are invited to book an appointment at one of seven regional vaccination centres for the Pfizer vaccination.’ Hence, we have a perverse scenario whereby the more vulnerable are being issued with the weaker AZ vaccine on the basis of its ability to be easily distributed, as opposed to clinical best practice.” Rodgers says that the, “AZ trial data, confused as it is, does appear to support a delay in dosage intervals. Hence the major concern is around the UK’s decision to override Pfizer’s instructions for a 21-day gap between doses and to opt for an interval of up to 12 weeks. In announcing this delay for Pfizer vaccine recipients, the UK took a dramatic public health decision, reversing its initial schedule after some had received first doses.”

According to Rodgers, “Ministers went even further, giving the NHS licence to further extend the delay if operational reasons dictated, and to reserve the right to deliver a second dose of a different vaccine if duplication of the first was not possible (although this is not recommended). The new schedule represents the longest dosing delay of any country in the world, and was met with consternation from the British Medical Association, which requested that it be halved to six weeks at the very most. Pfizer itself simply stated that departure from the tested regime is not recommended.” Other countries are cautiously watching and waiting as the UK population is turned into a giant petri dish under a nationwide randomized trial that the first vaccine recipients did not give their ‘informed concent’ to participate in due to the schedule change after they received their first dose. I believe a violation of this informed consent may well be illegal and Pfizer will claim it is an ‘off label’ administration of their two dose regimen.

Rodgers reports that, “Worryingly, recent field data from Israel, which is leading the world in roll-out with 75% of its population having received at least one dose, suggests that the UK Government’s figure is a hopeful projection.’ In response to the Israeli data, the UK’s chief scientific advisor Patrick Vallance, in an interview with Sky News, said, ‘We know that when you get into real world practice, things are seldom quite as good as clinical trials. I don’t know exactly what data Israel are looking at, but we need to look at this carefully.’ Vallance’s bland assessment could be seen as a typical English understatement, or simply evading a difficult question on live television, but it is not surprising that he did not engage further on the subject. For, as chief scientific advisor, he will have been a party to the Government’s decision.”

Rodgers raises the issue of our neglected, “Care Homes and a Disunited Kingdom.” He says that, “The UK Government does not publish which vaccines have been delivered in what setting and at what interval, and so it is impossible to obtain a national picture of the vaccination situation in care homes. What we can ascertain, again using Northern Ireland as a barometer where the approach has been published, is that there are substantial differences across the four regions, and in all likelihood also within the regions. Following the UK-wide decision on 30 December to delay second doses, the Northern Ireland chief medical officer stated the following: ‘Care home residents and staff in NI will get their second doses within the original three-week period.’ One month later, this objective has been met almost in full, with the vast majority of care home residents and staff receiving both doses of the Pfizer vaccine in and around 21-days.”

Rodgers reports that, “Tragically, England’s sprawling privately-run care home network, which bore the brunt of the disastrous first wave of the pandemic, appears to have suffered once again. Whereas the government touts that all care home resident have been offered vaccines, the fact is that this only covers outbreak-free homes. Furthermore, only 50% of staff have been vaccinated, and there appears to be no official figures on Pfizer versus AZ dosage, though anecdotal evidence suggests that both are deployed. Predictably, the death toll continues to rise even as England’s second wave appears to be finally plateauing. Despite this harrowing picture, central government has doubled down, issuing a statement on 1 February refusing to budge on the 12-week gap between care home doses in England. It seems that no group of people is too at risk or vulnerable, or has suffered enough death or loss so as to be exempt from the Government’s one-size-fits-all mantra.” The Tory Sovereign Dictatorship are playing a sick game of Russian Roulette with their expendable UK citizens!

Rodgers focuses on the danger of, “Mutations and ‘Leaky Vaccines’,” saying that, “In recent months, it is mutations of COVID-19 that have prompted most concern worldwide, with notable strains deriving from Brazil, England, and South Africa. As of right now, England has implemented a door-to-door Wuhan-style contact tracing response to the South African strain across eight regions, in a marked departure from the distant and largely ineffective outsourced Test and Trace infrastructure that has been synonymous with the country’s failure to manage the pandemic. Some scientists have expressed concerns that the UK’s delayed dosage schedule, when applied against this rapidly evolving disease, increases the chances of new and potentially more infectious strains evolving. Indeed, the less perfect a vaccine is, the greater the chance of the virus surviving and mutating.” This is without doubt the biggest unquantified risk this Tory Government is willing to take with its expendable population.

Rodgers points out that, “Research to date is far from conclusive, however one 2015 study on chickens seemed to suggest that this is the case. While all the chickens in the unvaccinated group died, the vaccinated chickens survived for 30 days or more, “
‘allowing the virus to be transmitted to other birds housed within the same confines. These vaccines also allow the virulent virus to continue evolving precisely because they allow the vaccinated individuals, and therefore themselves, to survive.’ Whether or not this effect is repeated in a human-hosted coronavirus remains to be seen, yet it is difficult to read the above without thinking of mutations to date. This is relevant in particular to the scenario in care homes in England, where groups of partially vaccinated residents mix with staff who may or may not have been vaccinated, or received different vaccines.” These risks aren’t worth taking!

Rodgers reports on, “Keeping Up with the Virus,” saying that, “A second concern, pertaining to mutations, is the ability of vaccine manufacturers to respond to virus mutations. In this respect, Pfizer has expressed confidence in the ability of its mRNA vaccine to work against the two causing most concern at present, the South African and UK strains, and has expressed as much on its website. The AstraZeneca/Oxford team has been much more circumspect, with John Bell, Head of Medicine at Oxford University. stressing on Times Radio that the South African strain has ‘really pretty substantial changes’. The AZ/Oxford team has further spoken of the need to modify its virus platform and potentially to develop new vaccines. With the UK in particular spooked by the South African variant, having majority-dosed with AZ, there is a question of whether a traditional, as opposed to mRNA-based vaccine, was appropriate for such a fast-moving coronavirus in the first place.”

Rodgers describes, “Flying the Vaccine Flag,” saying that, “Since the beginning of 2021, concerns over the UK’s vaccination strategy have largely been buried beneath an outpouring of national pride as the NHS, with military support, has put jabs in arms at the astonishing rate of 1.5 million per week. The Government-friendly broadcast news infrastructure has promoted the vaccine roll-out with gusto, Sky News has a live ticker of vaccines administered based on the daily figures, whereas the BBC has frequently led on the story, and has examined the case studies of various individuals. In the worst month by far of the pandemic, with more than 1,000 daily deaths expected to be logged on average, and a daily case rate hitting 50,000 at worst, it was the vaccine rollout and not the new level of carnage that made headlines.”

Rodgers reports on how, “Britain’s largely right-wing print media predictably led the charge on the good-news vaccine front, and was afforded an unmissable opportunity when the EU suggested it would have to restrict the supply of vaccines to the UK. When the EU ultimately sought compromise, the Daily Mail compared the UK’s victory to the Falklands War campaign. Amidst the jingoism, a change in tone could also be noted in the reporting of the traditionally pro-EU and left-leaning Guardian. Previously questioning of all aspects of the Government’s response, its sister paper the Observer ran a series of articles in defence of the regime and even questioning the BMA, the trade union representing frontline staff.” While we cannot trust our UK Media to tell us the truth and the Tory Government is only interested in positive PR spin to detract from their aggressive corrupt profiteering, we all remain vulnerable and the Covid crisis can continue being used as a tool to control, exploit and impoverish us.

“Herd Immunity II, On 13 January, it was reported by Byline Times that Dr Mary Ramsay, head of immunisation at Public Health England, said in front of the UK parliamentary committee that the country would need to ‘allow the disease to circulate in younger people where it’s not causing much harm’ while protecting ‘the people who are really vulnerable’, if the vaccine fails to sufficiently slow or prevent COVID-19 transmission. Whereas herd immunity is the goal of any immunisation programme, this apparent nod to the discredited Great Barrington Declaration approach, in essence allowing COVID-19 to spread while in theory protecting vulnerable population categories, was met with surprise from leading epidemiologists. Ramsay went further, alluding to another false doctrine, conflation of COVID-19 with the flu. ‘That may be the situation that we are going to, like we are with flu where we accept that a lot of people get flu but we protect those who are most vulnerable. That may be the outcome,’ she said.”

Rodgers warns us that, “As we know, however, COVID-19 is not flu. Rather, it is a fast-developing RNA virus, which has spawned numerous contagious and quite possibly more deadly variants. Government policy decisions from 30 December, the date of emergency AZ approval, appear to support this herd immunity at-all-costs narrative. At best the UK approach may not deliver the desired results as rapidly as intended, but at worst could reap a host of unintended consequences, both in immunological and political terms. But all is not lost. More people have received vaccines in the UK than anywhere else on earth, and the vaccines do afford some protection. This can only be good. But in order to ensure that the programme succeeds, the Fourth Estate needs to stop flag-waving, and instead redouble its efforts to scrutinise the Government.” As the British people wait patiently hoping that the deadly risks this corrupt Tory Government forced us to take will not cost more lives, the best answer is to remove them from office! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[SA]

Johnson’s regime is now trying to pretend that they know what they are doing. The most recent attempt at window dressing is of Johnson pretending to be a scientist and pipetting a pink solution into a tube in a filmed interview in Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies plant. This follows the announcement of a blueprint for another radical NHS reforms . Whether this is genuine repentance at the deliberate running down of the NHS by 10 years of Tory rule, aided by the Lib Dems, or whether it is another cynical attempt to ride on the massive appreciation of the NHS amongst the population, and use it to pretend that the Tories are the saviors of the NHS, is not really the point here because it obviously is. Already because of the success of the vaccination programme, the Tories appear to once again be ahead in the polls, despite the dismal performance. Of course that is also facilitated by the fact that Starmer with no clear policies other than to destroy all of the achievements of Corbyn, has shown no policies, no leadership and no sense of direction-no effective opposition.
The actual devil in the details of the announced NHS reforms will remain to be analyzed as it no doubt will be used to exert more political control on the NHS. Rachel Clarke, who has been an excellent and articulate critic of the government’s health policies, discusses some of these points in theis article in the Guardian, together with others.

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

SA – Thanks for this; I am waiting for the implications of this bombshell NHS shakup to perculate a little before I comment further. I am part way through reading the Book 99% by Mark E. Thomas to the point where I am painfully aware of the consequences of doing nothing to change the political trajectory that I fear will be held very firmly in place by the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship led by Boris Johnson. Thomas’s book elaborates on warnings spelled out on the 99%.org.uk Website that continued neoliberalism and further austerity policies will massively increase inequality thereby creating mass impoverishment in the UK just as it is doing in the US. There is no acceptable reason why in two of the richest countries on earth destitute people should be sleeping on the streets and relying on foodbanks to feed their families despite being in work. This was my Valentine’s Day wake-up call for us to demonstrate genuine love for our fellow citizens, especially the children. Beyond the horrific toll of misery and hardship that this grim political choice offers Thomas warns that this level of selfish exploitation is patently unsustainable for civilization to maintain beyond 2050!

Prior to the Covert 2019 Rigged Election I was filled with hope by the Labour Party’s categorical rejection of the austerity agenda and the exposure of these cruel policies as a sadistic political choice that had cost 120,000 lives during its implementation. There was genuine hope for a radical change of direction, shattered by the ‘borrowed votes’ lies that accomplished the corrupt result of a stolen Tory ‘landslide’ that still demands full Investigation to correct the injustice. We are being forced to accept further ongoing corruption with the reckless squandering of public funds to enrich the wealthy elite. In the Vox Political Article entitled, “The richest UK citizen doesn’t own any money; it all belongs to the government,” Mike Sivier explains and tries to answer the question, “Why do some people cheat with it? This is not a bombshell, it’s very simple economics. As Richard Murphy explains in this Video; money has no value in and of itself.” Other vital information from Richard J. Murphy at Tax Research.org about economics can be accessed Via this Link.

Sivier explains how at one time our currency used to be valued, “…when the United States applied the Gold Standard (meaning the Dollar was worth its value in gold), but when the States had trouble funding the Vietnam War, Richard Nixon put a stop to that.
The Pound was also tied to the Gold Standard, because it had a fixed exchange rate with the Dollar, but that all changed in 1971. The value of our currencies became fluid, attached only to the promise by the Governor of the Bank of England, a government employee, to pay the bearer, on demand, the sum printed on the front of our banknotes and coins. That promise, in turn, is only worth anything at all because the government refuses to take our taxes in any form other than the Pound. That’s why we do all our trade in the UK using the pound; because if we didn’t, we would have to put our cash through an exchange system, possibly with an adverse exchange rate, before paying our taxes.” He asserts that, “tax is important because it stops our money losing its value.”

Sivier reports what Mr Murphy explains so well in his Video clip, “Governments create money. They must also destroy it, otherwise the system fills with too much of it, meaning we have to pay more for the goods it buys, and we get inflation.” He then points out that, it occurs to him that this must mean that, “certain people are screwing up the system for the rest of us.” Sivier encourages us to view the video to better understand his assertions. He asks the question, “What about people who hoard up their money in tax havens and refuse to pay it back? I’m referring, of course, to the super-rich. They seem to think that the cash they have accrued is theirs; it isn’t. It belongs to the government, no matter whose bank account holds it.” He reminds us that our money, “was created for a purpose, and the government sets tax rates in order to recover it after that purpose is achieved. So it follows that anybody avoiding tax is deliberately sabotaging the government’s plans.” This is a very interesting perspective that alludes most people.

Sivier then asks, “What can a government do about it? Well, as we’ve seen with the Tories, the most common choice is to do nothing and let the greedy fatcats keep their ill-gotten gains. This, in turn, must have an inflationary effect as not as much cash comes back to the government as intended.” So he asks, “how would a government deal with that? It would tax the rest of us, those who have no choice but to pay more.” Sivier concludes that, “So it seems to This Writer that you pay taxes for the super-rich who avoid paying theirs.” He asks, “Do you think that’s fair?” We should then contemplate the worst consequences of the Tory agenda of protecting the wealthy as this rampant inequality has inflicted inhumane suffering on the poor which Sivier refers to in a recent report in an earlier Vox Political Article entitled, “The ‘shocking’ part of this report is that it was so easy for 1.3m children & babies to fall into poverty” He says, “Family poverty skyrocketed under Tory policies of benefit denial and wage depression.”

Despite the horrendous damage of Tory ideologically driven austerity, in a cruel twist of fate, Sivier claims that, “Now they can blame Covid-19 for it.” We should not allow them to escape accountability with this deception. Sivier reports that, “Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and baby bank charity Little Village has shown that 1.3 million babies and children aged less than five in the UK are now in poverty. The report found 34 per cent of families with one child under five live below the poverty line, meaning they survive on less than 60% of the median household income in the UK. 1.3 million of the 4.2 million children in poverty in the UK are babies and children under the age of 5. Two in five of the families of the children in poverty have seen a reduction in their earnings as a result of the ongoing Covid crisis.” Sivier cites the Mirror Online Article entitled: “1.3m babies and kids under 5 live in poverty in Britain, ‘shocking’ new report finds.”

Sivier claims that, “Undoubtedly the government will want to blame Covid-19. Measures to control the pandemic have meant lower-level incomes have suffered. But who imposed those measures? The Tories. And why were so many families already so close to poverty that it took only a 20 per cent reduction in their incomes (the difference between normal wages and furlough payments) to drop them into it? Because the Tories encouraged wage depression over the 10 years prior to the pandemic. Finally, let us all remember that the pandemic has been a windfall for the richest people in the country. They have increased their income hugely.” We must demand that those who have profited from the Covid crisis must be ‘windfall’ taxed appropriately to pay for it. That will require progressive Socialist leadership and vocal MPs to forcefully reject and call out any attempt to impose pay freezes or any aspect of austerity including strong repudiation of the Tory rebranding of austerity under the deceitful guise of the ‘Lev…up’ lie.

In the London Economic Article entitled, “Pandemic: eye-watering spending must not lead to austerity,” they claim that, “Rather than quantitative easing for the banks, there should be quantitative easing for the people. The vast sums of money governments are spending to sustain locked down economies are eye-watering, so far around $12 trillion globally. Estimates for the UK are at least £400 billion or around £6000 per person. This money is inevitably described as needing to be met by government borrowing. The assumption is that the state does not have any money of its own and relies on a jumble of various foreign and domestic financial investors to fund any deficit in tax income. This is patently untrue, modern states have central banks which have the ability to create new money out of fresh air, a privilege that flows through to the rest of the banking system. How far the central bank uses its money-creating powers to back bank lending rather than enabling state spending, reflects a political choice.”

London Economic say, “That choice determines whether or not countries are put into debt. Government borrowing places the burden of repayment onto the populace leading to calls for austerity. The current dominant ideology of neoliberalism demands that new money must only be issued through the commercial banking system. Governments are set arbitrary levels of debt and deficit such as the EU’s 3% of GDP as a maximum for deficit and 60% for debt. The UK deficit is currently around 20% and total debt over 100%, and the sky has not fallen in. There is concern that states ‘printing’ money will cause inflation. That is not the worry at present, the bigger danger is deflation and a collapsed economy. Money is the lubricant that enables the economy to flow. Like a water system or a blood circuit if there is a break, the water or blood drains away. The money system, like a leak or wound, needs to be constantly replenished until the break is mended. It is on life support. There is a place for debt and government borrowing, but that is not now.”

London Economic point out that, “The money to rescue the economy during the pandemic should be created and circulated by the state, free of debt, until the crisis is over. The UK is temporarily a public economy, total public spending is nearly 60% of GDP. A public economy should be funded by public money, this is not the time to provide financial institutions with a profitable investment. Nor is there any need for austerity. The current emphasis on state borrowing leads to the ridiculous situation where governments are selling government bonds to raise money, while the central bank is buying up the self-same bonds through ‘quantitative easing’ that is, creating new money. The result is that central banks end up holding a substantial amount of government ‘debt’. This means that in a democracy, one part of the state owes money to another part of the state. If we owe the money to anyone at all, we owe it to ourselves. Rather than quantitative easing for the banks, there should be quantitative easing for the people.”

In the London Economic Article entitled, “Watch what happens to the UK’s debt pile under the Conservatives,” Joe Mellor explodes the myth of Tory fiscal responsibility. He explains the consequences of Tory austerity policies on the UK economy and it is not a rosy picture of fiscal recovery after the banking crisis. He says that, “It means the UK’s overall debt is now around 99.5 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), which is a measure of the size of the economy, a level not seen since 1962. Despite claiming to be the party of fiscal responsibility, the UK’s debt pile under the Conservatives has increased exponentially over the past decade. Often weaponised against the Labour Party in the elections of 2010 and 2015 it has increased in every year since the Tories took charge, and has grown at an alarming rate this year. Government borrowing surged to a record £31.6 billion in November as efforts ramped up to support the economy through the second wave of the pandemic, official figures have shown.”

Mellor reports that, “The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said last month’s borrowing, excluding state-owned banks, soared by £26 billion year on year and marked the highest seen in November and the third highest in any month since records began in 1993. The latest estimate saw public sector net debt reach a new all-time high of £2.1 trillion at the end of last month. It means the UK’s overall debt is now around 99.5 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), which is a measure of the size of the economy, a level not seen since 1962.” Mellor has provided a few handy graphics to help illustrate how badly the Tory strategy of austerity introduced by Goorge Osborn managed to rapidly increase the national debt despite all the deceptive Tory claims of ‘fiscal responsibility’ and the constant repudiation of Labour’s appeals to protect the social safety net. This hoax of better management of public finances is trotted out at every election and the progressive Left need to robustly reject this lie and present the true picture to the UK public.

Mellor points out that, “Borrowing has hit £240.9 billion for the first eight months of the financial year, £188.6 billion more year on year and breaking yet more records. Recent official forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) predict borrowing could reach £393.5 billion by the end of the financial year in March, which would be the highest seen since the Second World War. It comes after the Government launched more than 40 schemes across the UK to help households and businesses through the coronavirus crisis. One of the most costly has been the furlough scheme for workers, which was last week extended again until April 2021. The most recent figures from HM Revenue & Customs showed another £3.4 billion worth of claims were made between November 15 and December 13, taking total claims to £46.4 billion and 9.9 million furloughed jobs.”

Mellor reports that, “The ONS said borrowing rose as tax and National Insurance receipts fell by £38.3 billion, or 8.6 per cent, year on year in the eight months to November. But government support for individuals and businesses during the pandemic contributed to a 30 per cent or £147.3 billion hike in central government spending. Howard Archer, chief economic adviser to the EY Item Club, cautioned the furlough extension and extra Government support could send borrowing ballooning to more than £400 billion this financial year. He said: ‘If the trend of the first eight months of fiscal year 2020/21 continued, the budget deficit would come in around £264 billion. ‘However, it looks likely to come in significantly higher than this with the furlough scheme now being extended until April and other supportive fiscal measures announced for the economy in the recent Spending Review. ‘Indeed, if introduced, more support for businesses affected by Tier 4 restrictions could potentially send the budget deficit above £400 billion’.”

In an even more depressing London Economics Article entitled, “Repressionomics: Get ready for the new permanent austerity,” T.J.Coles paints a grim picture of the road ahead. He predicts that, “Government and corporations will again balance the costs of a long-term stimulus on the backs of the poor. No prizes for stating that the economy is in crisis. By late-June, government debt was £1.9 trillion, more than the entire national GDP; a debt not seen since 1963, following six years of Tory mismanagement under Chancellor and later PM, Harold Macmillan. In the second quarter (April to June), GDP dropped by more than 20 percent. Another record was broken when government borrowing exceeded £127 billion. Economists predict that the deficit, ie., expenses exceeding revenue, could top £370bn. Analyst Nick Hubble calls the Tory solution a potentially ‘limitless stimulus’ (paraphrasing). Others say that this approach amounts to a type of management called financial repression. And guess who will pay the price… again?”

Coles describes, “austerity and covid” as “a match made in hell,” saying that, “Britain was the hardest hit of the G7 nations. The ex-hedge fund managing millionaire Chancellor, Rishi Sunak, claims that the UK tanked so badly because:‘Social activities, like eating out, going to the cinema, shopping… comprise a much larger part of our economy than they do for most of our European comparative countries.’ But is this true? By the end of July, France’s GDP had fallen less than 14 percent and Germany’s just over 10. France’s household consumption expenditure is between $1.3 and $1.5 trillion, Germany’s is $2 trillion. The UK’s is not radically different ($1.7 and $1.8 trillion.) Although Germany’s services sector comprises just over 60 percent of its GDP compared to the UK’s 70+ percent, the sector in France likewise constitutes over 70 percent of GDP. So, by these measures Sunak’s claim is false. The BBC parroted the assertion regardless.”

Coles claims that, “A more plausible explanation is that the deep cuts imposed by the Tory-Liberal regime (2010-15) after the Financial Crisis (2007-09) weakened the UK’s resilience. An article by the Oxford Research Group calls COVID off the back of austerity ‘a match made in hell’. After the Global Financial Crisis (2007-09), austerity was imposed across the European Union, but the UK’s measures were particularly harsh. The French government continued to fund its health system, introducing new taxes to pay for the budget. It ‘took steps to protect people with low incomes,’ says the World Health Organization, for instance by increasing the national insurance contributions of wealthy people. In Germany, according to the Centre for European Economic Research: ‘the increase in the debt ratio overstates the cost of banking sector stabilisation because the public sector also acquired significant assets,’ thereby preventing long-term austerity.”

Placing the blame fairly and squarely on greed obsessed Tory mismanagement Coles says, “In the UK, Chancellor Osborne (who was almost certainly a millionaire at the time) cut the top rate of income tax, reduced the National Health Service budget, and decimated social security. By the time COVID struck, two-thirds of the so-called job recovery market comprised of what the Resolution Foundation calls ‘atypical work’: precarious small business ownership or unstable gig economy-type jobs.” We cannot be duped by this ruinous and dangerous tactic again. That is the crux of the warning in the ‘must read’ book: “99% – Mass Impoverishment and How We Can End It.” We should understand that it was the hollowing out of our NHS and public services that left this country so uniquely ill equipped to combat the Covid 19 crisis in the first place with people already surviving on the brink of destitution.

Coles asks, “So, how will the government, which is comprised of millionaires and funded by billionaires, manage the unfolding COVID crisis? Barclays notes that policymakers ‘will have to choose from overt debt reduction policies, such as austerity and taxation, to covert ones, such as financial repression and inflation’. ‘Repressionomics’ sees funds borrowed from the private sector to reduce government debt. The acquisition of private funds facilitates the continuation of low-interest rates for government spending. The measures are ‘repressive’ in that savers earn less than at the rate of inflation. Ideologues are already pushing for this as the least-worst option. The Telegraph, for instance, finds reasons not to re-nationalise the Bank of England or spend on a massive, post-WWII-type infrastructure project, backed by government-secured jobs and housing. ‘That leaves the last option: financial repression’.” This is the dystopian nightmare option that Thomas’s 99% book warns will result in mass impoverishment!

Coles explains that, “Contrary to the impression given by Barclays, financial repression and austerity are not mutually exclusive. Ad van Riet of the European Central Bank (ECB) confirmed that European technocrats ‘applied the tools of financial repression to restore stability after the euro area crisis,’ following the Crisis of ‘07-09. But that didn’t stop the ECB from imposing austerity in the form of public spending cuts. Corporations are not in the business of having their profits repressed. They will likely continue to defer the cost of lost profits to lower-level employees and pension holders. With embedded public spending cutbacks resulting from policies undertaken during the last decade, social security will continue to be meagre for the recently-redundant and retired. Nearly nine in ten pension funds saw a drop of up to 15 percent in the first quarter. Harvard economist, Professor Lance Taylor, predicts that ‘profits from job losses will finance government borrowing for COVID-19 bailouts’.”

Coles reports that, “The former Chief Economist at Citi, Willem Buiter, says that even without protectionism, ‘the organisation of production and trade will emphasise planned redundancy.’ Buiter cites only ‘painful ways to restore fiscal sustainability.’ The rich and powerful have ways to offset the ‘pain’ of lower-than-expected returns. ‘That leaves the familiar tools of public spending cuts and higher taxes,’ says Buiter. However, corporations and wealthy individuals already create a ‘tax gap/ of £35 billion. In late-2019, the Institute for Fiscal Studies reported that ‘an awful lot’ of austerity was ‘baked in’ to the Tories’ supposedly generous manifesto. In April this year, millionaire Boris Johnson said: ‘I think this government will want to encourage that bounce back in all kinds of ways, but I’ve never particularly liked the term [austerity] and it’s certainly not part of our approach.’ Notice that Johnson said he didn’t like the ‘term,’ not the practice.” The reality is that the PM is using the ‘Lev…up’ lie to obscure his rebranding of austerity.

Despite the very real probability that the alt-right UK Media fully understand exactly what Boris Johnson is up to with this deceptive propaganda they are not letting on. But, according to Coles the, “Media read this as a pledge not to continue the trends set by millionaire PM David Cameron in 2010. But in reality, Chancellor Sunak has already confirmed that ‘tough times are here,’ though not for people like him and Tory donors. Talking to the Confederation of British Industry, former Chancellor and millionaire, Philip Hammond, says: ‘My personal view is that this government will be extremely reluctant to either increase taxes or reduce public spending.’ Hammond concludes that this will push austerity further down the road: ‘I expect that the great majority of the burden of this crisis is going to be absorbed through increased borrowing and left on the table for future generations’.” This is only a worrying prospect if you buy into the delusional fallacy of considering the national budget in the exact same light as a household budget.

It is the perpetuation of this myth that permits the Tories to sell the need for more austerity to the British people, but we have had an entire decade of seeing that the super wealthy are not only spared and share of this hardship, they are enriched by the selective Tory policies that protect them. Coles says, “The usual suspects are lobbying for belt-tightening. Matthew Lesh, head of research at the Adam Smith Institute, claims that government spending is too generous: ‘The Tories are caring less and less about fiscal responsibility. They are instead looking for a magic money forest.’ Sajid Javid, the millionaire ex-banker and former Chancellor, recently published a report for the Tory-backing Centre for Policy Studies, recommending VAT and national insurance relief for employers, and ‘[n]ew fiscal rules to gradually eliminate the current budget deficit after the economy recovers.’ Javid concludes: ‘When things have returned to some form of normality, fiscal conservatives may have to win the argument all over again’.”

That statement is code for ramping up the Tory propaganda to convince the public that they are now responsible for repaying the reckless squandering of public funds and rampant corporate profiteering throughout the past year. We have a very small window of opportunity to hold the Tories to account for their corruption using Judicial Review before this avenue of scrutiny is closed down by the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. Coles warns that, “To prevent another decade of austerity, the grassroots must ensure that the Labour Party remains committed to socialist policies, otherwise it will repeat the mistakes of the austerity-lite leader Ed Miliband in 2015 and fail to gain a significant number of seats whenever the next General Election comes.” The potential for another election and the possibility that it might be free and fair is miniscule and we cannot count on it happening at all. The exposure of the blatant ongoing corruption of this Tory cabal is more than sufficient to remove them from office right now: we must rescue our democracy! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The Jury is still out on the Tory Governments latest plans for a complete shake-up of our beleaguered NHS, but their timing couldn’t have been worse so does that have ominous implications. So far at there are a few naively optimistic commentaries, but from NHS professionals cautious warnings too. In the Politico Article entitled, “NHS shake-up finds Boris Johnson ready to ditch ideology,” Charlie Cooper comments on how the, “Second health service reorganization in a decade marks a direct break with pro-market Conservative predecessors. London — The coronavirus pandemic is far from over and England’s National Health Service is not yet out of the woods, but its next big reform has already been set in motion. The obvious question being asked by some of the exhausted health care staff on the frontline is: Why now? It’s the second time in a decade that the U.K. government has ordered a reorganization of the NHS and the latest plan gives a hint at how the Conservative party under Boris Johnson is changing.” I think not!

Politico reports that, “The last round of reforms, led by the-Health Secretary Andrew Lansley in 2012, proved deeply controversial. They had, at their heart, ideas firmly rooted in Thatcherite orthodoxy. Private-sector competition with state-run health services was an inherent good, and central government should be at one remove from public services on the ground. The fresh proposals, set out by current Health Secretary Matt Hancock in a government white paper, represent a major about-face. They do away with the legal requirement for competitive tendering of health services in the NHS, and place significantly more power in the lap of the health secretary himself.” Am I the only one to smell danger here? Matt Hancock has developed a special take on the ‘Friends and Family’ benefit program, so increasing his lock on unaccountable public money squandering is not a ‘healthy choice’ as the endemic Tory corruption will not stray far beyond his circle of ultra wealthy elitist chums at the expense of the British public.

Putting trust in this Tory Government’s shambolic control of the NHS is nieve, but according to Politico, “it’s a sign of how Johnson’s government is less driven by ideology than many of its Conservative predecessors, and far more opportunistic. Though founded by the Labour Party on principles contrary to Johnson’s espoused pro-market leanings, the prime minister has made the publicly-funded, free at the point of use NHS central to his political identity.’ Much of what is in the white paper has been proposed by NHS England’s leading officials and has been in the works for some time. The previous Lansley reforms saw the establishment of GP-led clinical commissioning groups, which were handed public money and tasked with buying health care services for a local area from either NHS or private providers. The reforms were ‘only ever really understood’ by Lansley himself, said Nigel Edwards, chief executive of the Nuffield Trust think tank. They were never warmly embraced by Lansley’s Conservative successors or the NHS.”

Politico quote Edwards saying, “‘Politicians and the NHS go in cycles of falling in and out of love of different types of mechanisms. There has been a disenchantment with quasi-market mechanisms as a really major lever for change.’ The new ‘integrated care systems’ that will now be responsible for the funding of health care are already up-and-running in some parts of the country.” This would all seem remarkably positive if it had not been proposed by a pathological liar whose attention to detail is so poor that policies he approves are ill-conceived and with a dictatorial absolute control of his cabinet there is zero challenge or scrutiny. But Politico’s optimism gathers pace as they enthusiastically describe how, “Johnson is willing to embrace changes drawn up by NHS leaders and casually sweep away pro-market thinking inherited from his Conservative predecessor David Cameron is characteristic of a prime minister who sees himself in the tradition of ‘Tory Democracy’.”

Politico describe Johnson in glowing terms, “He is pro-market, but relaxed about state intervention where it seems to work and (crucially) is popular.” They rightly say, “there are few areas of public life in which British government’s stand to gain, or lose, as much popularity as on their handling of the NHS.” But here they buy into that other Tory con to describe the PM’s priority as, “Eyes on 2024,” as if Johnson is not now in a perfect position to call or not cal an election whenever he chooses. The abolition of the Fixed Term Parliament Act was a Tory Manifesto pledge, but there was no hint as to the order of future elections and nothing to prevent Boris from proroguing Parliament for as long as he wants whenever he wants. There will be further disenfranchisement efforts in place and other restrictions to reduce turnout and simplify corrupt ballot stuffing. Due to our dire reluctance to question, challenge or fully Investigate the unfathomable result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election we remain unable to monitor the system.

Politico ask, “But why now, in the teeth of a pandemic? The answer, said Richard Sloggett, founder of the Future Health think tank and a former adviser to Hancock, lies in the coming challenges for the NHS and the Tories’ desire to address them in time for their public reckoning at the 2024 general election.” They return to the 2024 Election fantasy, they claim that, “The government wants to get this through now so it can be in place by April 2022. With the next election in 2024 that gives you a couple of years for these reforms to start delivering,’ said Sloggett. “‘The big thing they’re going to have to deliver is the reduction in waiting times. We’ve got hundreds of thousands of people now waiting over a year for treatment after the significant disruption caused by COVID.’ Precisely how, or whether, the new structures can deliver remains to be seen.” There are thousands of retired staff who were lured back to work to help the NHS through this crisis, but they will want out again soon and the NHS is already desperately short of staff.

Politico report that, “Sloggett said the key reform to watch would be the additional powers accrued by the health secretary; an aspect of the overhaul that was not based on pre-existing NHS plans and came as a surprise to many observers. While the management body NHS England will retain ‘clinical and day-to-day operational’ independence, Hancock has said reforms would empower him to ‘set direction for the NHS and intervene where necessary.’ In other words, Hancock wants to be able to pull a lever in Whitehall and for the NHS to respond on the ground. With a rapidly growing waiting list for treatment that could become a major election issue in three years’ time, you can see why he might want that.” Or if you are a tad more sceptical you might think twice about increasing the power of a thoroughly untrustworthy, unprincipled Tory only interested in profiteering for the benefit of himself, his family and wealthy Tory donor friends.

Although Politico described the timeline according to Edwards as “’optimistic’ to think the reforms could have any effect by the time of the 2024 election, and highlighted a chronic workforce shortage in the NHS as the real problem with the health service that needs fixing,” the real challenge will be rampant Tory corruption. Has no one noticed the obscene track record of this Government with their ability to squander public money with impunity on everything from inadequate PPE, to inappropriate equipment and dysfunctional systems? Why the sudden vote of trust in the PM and Matt ‘sleight of Hand’ cock? But Politico reports that, “What they will discover is that you can pull the levers all you like, if there’s no orthopaedic surgeons it doesn’t really matter,’ said Edwards. ‘There’s a flawed theory about what the issues are … that somehow performance is a management problem or a lack of will; when actually the real problem there aren’t enough staff’.”

According to Politico, “There is another risk for Hancock and Johnson contained within the reforms.” Really? Just one? “’If the government wants to take more control of the health service, there is an opportunity for Labour to take a greater focus on the performance of the health service and to try to tie that more closely to Conservative ministers,’ said Sloggett. At the 2019 election, despite a range of NHS performance problems to highlight, Labour placed more emphasis on the claims that the U.K.’s post-Brexit trade deal with the U.S. would see parts of the health service sold off to American private healthcare; the kind of political attack that was par for the course when the Lansley reforms were being introduced. ‘Now, they might now change tack a bit,’ said Sloggett.” As if we can now all breathe a huge sigh of relief in the delusional hope that our NHS will no longer be in danger of being sold off to powerful US Healthcare Corporations… This is still very much on the Tory agenda.

Politico finish on a note of caution saying, “So while more ministerial control might (in theory) help drive down those ballooning waiting lists, as Hancock hopes, the risk is that the reforms do not deliver the boost he’s hoping for. If the problems persist long after the pandemic has ended, the buck will now, indisputably, stop with him.” The Tory obsession with centralized, privately outsourced services assigned to inappropriate companies with no experience in healthcare will continue as they prioritize the elitist buddy system. This is compounded by poor leadership with Johnson trusting the important Track and Trace Service to Tory chum and serial failure, Dido ‘Tallyho’ Harding, refusing to remove her or decentralize and abandon the shambolic contract despite repeated criticism and strong evidence. A failed Track and trace App disappeared without a trace taking squandered money with it. Why should we trust Handcock not to milk the system for all its worth; I am surprised the PM hasn’t assigned it to failing Grayling!

In the Royal College of Nursing Article entitled, “Safe staffing and nursing leadership must take precedence in NHS shake-up, insists RCN,” they set out safety priorities with regard to the policy shift. RCN insist that, “Proposed changes to the NHS in England aim to tackle bureaucracy and encourage health and social care services to work more closely together. The UK government’s health and care white paper, which sets out its legislative plans for the NHS in England, has been published. It proposes reversing some of the reforms introduced by the Health and Social Care Act 2012, which saw the creation of NHS England to run the health service, and the scrapping of primary care trusts in favour of clinical commissioning groups to organise local services.”

The RCN report that, “The white paper sets out changes it says will help deliver the aims of the NHS long term plan. These include giving integrated care systems a statutory footing by removing barriers to collaboration and removing incentives to compete; reducing bureaucracy with reforms to tariffs to ensure the NHS and local authorities can work closer together; and introducing measures to officially merge NHS England and NHS Improvement. The RCN is clear that nursing leadership must be recognised more clearly in integrated health care systems, not just because nursing is the biggest workforce, but because of the skills and expertise nurses bring to meeting the holistic needs of patients.”

The most alarming things that the RCN report are that, “The paper also proposes powers for the secretary of state for health to abolish a regulator, remove a profession from regulation and regulate senior managers. The RCN is firm in its position that nursing should remain a regulated profession and will work with the Nursing and Midwifery Council on these proposals.” This is typical Tory deregulation to reduce scrutiny and abolish all accountability. In other areas of governance this is what led to the huge loss of life at Grenfell Tower, deregulation, reduction in ‘red tape,’ fewer inspections of work standards and the materials used: do we want such deadly mistakes made in healthcare? Former Mayor, Boris Johnson, bore zero responsibility for gutting the London Fire Service. There must be robust pushback from the RCN and all UK professional Medical bodies during the committee stage of the bill passing through our disempowered Parliament to prevent vital regulatory safeguards from being removed by reckless Tory Ministers.

The RCN highlight another problem, “In addition, there are plans for the health secretary to take more direct control over NHS England with ‘enhanced powers of direction for the government’ to ‘ensure that decision makers overseeing the health system at a national level are effectively held to account’.” Holding Tories to account just does not happen any more, ever; when they seriously screw up they stay in post to await their next efficiency bonus awarded for squeezing money out of an already depleted system that they consciously disabled. They don’t even have the courage to apologize, even when their policies cost thousands of lives. The NHS is targeted to be run down before it is pronounced unviable and sold off. Having a corrupt, self-serving Tory with zero Medical knowledge set the direction of the NHS is like handing the Captaincy of a 3000 passenger cruise ship over to a drunken cabin boy!

“The RCN has been campaigning to get accountability for safe staffing written into law in England as part of its Staffing for Safe and Effective Care campaign.” The reality is that, before new staff have been recruited and trained, there will be a depletion of staff as those returned to help out leave exhausted but all that this year has demanded of them. RCN “wants a legal framework that clarifies roles, responsibilities, and accountability for the supply, recruitment, retention and pay of nursing staff. It also wants guarantees for a fully funded workforce strategy. The white paper falls short of the RCN’s asks but the legislative process will provide opportunities to influence and lay amendments to the draft bill as it goes through the parliamentary stages. The RCN has produced a member briefing about the proposed changes and will be working with members to shape its response to them. It will also seek support from MPs and others to make amendments to the draft bill at each stage of its legislative journey.”

“RCN Chief Executive & General Secretary Dame Donna Kinnair said: ‘We are inching closer to getting ministers to take responsibility for ensuring safe and effective care with enough nursing staff. But these proposals are only worthwhile if the UK government makes this issue a priority and matches that with investment. ‘For years, nursing staff have been kept waiting with the promise of a workforce strategy from ministers and the NHS. The absence of one left health and care services tens of thousands of nurses short when facing a pandemic. This workforce strategy must be produced without delay, with legal teeth, to demonstrate a clear commitment to investing in the people who make patient care safe. ‘New NHS structures will need to include senior nurses bringing their expertise and leadership and our members will want that reassurance when the detail is published. Politicians have to be accountable for the NHS, but nobody wants that to mean political interference’.”

In the BBC News Article entitled, “NHS shake-up ‘risks diluting patient power’,” Health reporter Nick Triggle, warns that, “Patients risk having less of a say in the running of the NHS in England under the proposed shake-up, eight leading health charities say. GPs are being given control of much of the NHS budget under the changes laid before Parliament last month. Part of the reasoning was that it would help empower patients, but the groups, including the British Heart Foundation, said it could weaken their involvement. The government insisted the changes would give patients “real clout”. The intervention by the health charities – in a letter published in the Times, follows widespread criticism of the reforms by health unions and MPs last month when the bill paving the way for the changes was published.”

There are concerns over accountability BBC News report that, “Managers working for primary care trusts (PCTs) are currently responsible for planning and buying local services, but GPs working together in consortia would take on responsibility for this from 2013 under the reforms. Pilots are already starting and once the process is complete, two tiers of management, PCTs and the 10 regional health authorities, will be scrapped. The letter, which was also signed by the Alzheimer’s Society and mental health charity Rethink questioned the powers and resources being given to the local Health Watch bodies, which will be set up across the country to represent patient interests in the new NHS structure. It states: ‘If the new NHS is to properly serve patients and the public, this democratic deficit must be addressed and the voices of patients heard by those making crucial decisions affecting their lives’.”

The BBC note that, “The letter also said the proposed scrutiny arrangements, local authorities are being put in charge of monitoring GP consortia – meant the lines of accountability were ‘too weak’. Andrew Chidgey, of the Alzheimer’s Society, told the BBC the issues needed addressing now that the bill was working its way through Parliament. ‘If we don’t do this well and thoroughly we could end up with patient and public involvement weaker than it is and no-one really wants that.’ The eight signatories to the letter are the Alzheimer’s Society, Asthma UK, Breakthrough Breast Cancer, Diabetes UK, National Voices, Rethink, the British Hearth Foundation and the Stroke Association. Their criticisms represent a new area of concern about the changes.”

BBC News report that, “A Department of Health spokeswoman said the letter raised ‘constructive’ points, adding: ‘We will work together to ensure the bill, which is in its early stages, delivers the reality of improved patient involvement.’ However, she disputed the suggestion that patient power could be diluted, citing the ability of Health Watch to trigger official NHS inspections. Last month, the House of Commons’ health committee said the plans had taken the NHS by surprise and could threaten its ability to make savings. Meanwhile, in another letter, also published in the Times, six health unions, including the British Medical Association, warned of their ‘extreme concerns’ that greater commercial competition in the NHS would end up undermining care. The NHS Confederation, which represents managers, has also suggested hospitals may have to close.”

A decade on from the disruptive damage caused by Andrew Landsley’s unnecessary and ill-conceived reforms the Tories want to inflict more stress on the NHS in the middle of a pandemic. However positive these changes might be the timing is abysmal. Please forgive the powerful wiff of sceptacism, but this was the incompetent team that heralded eugenacist Dominic Cummings Advice to promote ‘Herd Immunity,’ discourage mask wearing and didn’t stop mass sporting events. They failed to procure enough PPE, but discharging infected patients to Care Homes caused a ‘Holacaust in Care.’ A very late lockdown and reckless easing of restrictions, insisting children returned to schools so parents could get back to work, that slaughtered a few more thousand sheeple and they are not done yet. We already have the highest Covid death rate in Europe and very close to that shame globally. Boris Johnson’s one shot vaccine triumphalism could cost more lives; the only way to end the carnage is to Get The Tories Out ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

I am deeply concerned by all of the Tory hype about nationalism and it is even more concerning now that Keir Starmer has jumped on the patriotism and flag-waving bandwagon it does not end well. It’s the vacuous populist rhetoric of idiot politicians like Donald Trump, with no solid policy agenda, just empty rabble-rousing to stir a moronic crowd. Trump’s speech stirred his followers to march on the Capitol in a violent insurrection that led to five deaths; we do not need a similar uprising here in the UK. In a well governed democracy Trump would have faced serious criminal charges, but in a truly phenomenal display of democratic deficit and appalling factionalist weakness there was no accountability for his shameful efforts to incite violence and he remains free to run for office once again in 2024! We must dial down the rhetoric and change the narrative. I’m a ‘Peaceful Patriot of the Planet,’ campaigning for the establishment of a collaborative, mutually beneficial, ethnically and culturally diverse and inclusive global identity.

In the Byline Times Article entitled, “Plastic Patriotism GB News’ Foreign Funders,” Sam Bright reports on, “Andrew Neil’s Union-Jack-branded platform is backed by a range of foreign and right-wing interests, reports. As though the country hasn’t suffered enough over the past 12 months, two well-funded right-wing broadcast operations are now set to launch in the coming months. News UK TV, funded by Australian-American media baron Rupert Murdoch, is vying with GB News to be the first to launch this spring, heralding an ominous new TV ecosystem in Britain. GB News is chaired by former BBC presenter Andrew Neil, who also previously worked for Murdoch as editor of The Sunday Times for 11 years. Yesterday, the Evening Standard carried more information about the imminent launch of the platform and its attempts to lure right-wing presenters from their present habitats, including Julia Hartley-Brewer of talkRADIO, and Nick Ferrari of LBC.”

Bright reports that, “GB News claims that it will challenge the current monopoly of Britain’s broadcasters, namely the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky, by creating a news service that is more representative of the wider population. Judging by the statements made by the company and its executives to date, it will attempt to be considerably more conservative in outlook than the established broadcasters, and less London-centric, though it remains to be seen how the latter will work in practice. There is also a deep hypocrisy embedded in the branding and ethos of the channel. For while it seeks to represent the British people, and wears their flag, it is actually funded and operated by a range of foreign groups and individuals. In terms of funding, GB News has successfully secured £60 million in initial start-up cash, which has come largely it seems from two foreign sources.”

The point is, do we really want US billionaires or any foreign entity warping UK politics in a way that is not in the best interests of our population, but instead fulfils an overseas agenda? So who is invested? Bright reveals that, “The first is Discovery Inc., the $11 billion mass media company that operates the Discovery and Science channels, based in New York City. The second is Legatum Limited, a private investment firm headquartered in Dubai. Legatum funds projects that promote ‘entrepreneurship and free enterprise’ and established a UK-based think tank under its name in 2007. Following the 2016 EU Referendum, the Legatum Institute had an influential role in promoting Brexit and the Vote Leave campaign’s CEO, Matthew Elliott, was a fellow at the institute for a year. Legatum and Discovery are the ‘lead’ investors in the media start-up, but they are joined by other parties.”

Indeed, Byline Times can reveal that GB News is also backed by a New York-based private investment firm called Kibble Holdings. Posting on LinkedIn, the firm’s managing partner Matthew Kibble said that the investment was ‘a little different’ to the firm’s typical approach, ‘but never more important for the world’. Kibble, who appears to have been an early investor in the controversial US big data platform Palantir via his family’s investment firm, also claims to have operations in Dallas and Hong Kong. GB News is also backed by pro-Brexit hedge fund manager Sir Paul Marshall. And as for the management of GB News, the story isn’t radically different. One of the co-founders of the platform is Andrew Cole, a director and board member at multinational telecommunications company Liberty Global. Cole’s LinkedIn profile states that he is currently based in Boston, Massachusetts. Cole has publicly called for the break-up of the BBC.” Palantir have also scored lucrative contracts that will facilitate gaining unfettered access to UK patient data!

Bright reports that, “Cole’s accomplice is fellow media mogul Mark Schneider. Though now apparently based in London, Schneider is American and was educated at the University of Denver. He is a member of Republicans Overseas, the support group for party supporters living abroad. The CEO of GB News, meanwhile, is Australian Angelos Frangopoulos, the former CEO of Sky News Australia. Frangopoulos’ LinkedIn profile indicates that he hadn’t held a role in the UK before joining Cole and Schneider on the board of All Perspectives Limited, the holding company for GB News, in November 2019. This management team is now deploying its bulging bank account to hire 120 journalists, all in the hope of fundamentally altering the make-up of British journalism.” They say, “If you are concerned about the infiltration of right-wing foreign money and influence through GB News, we would recommend subscribing instead to Byline Times and its sister platform Byline TV, a progressive rival to billionaire-backed corporate media machines.”

In the London Economic Article entitled, “#DontFundGBNews trends to persuade advertisers not to spend with any ‘Fox News style’ channel,” Joe Mellor says, “’Morals matter and I won’t fund hate’. Two news channels coming to UK screens are stoking the debate about the future direction of broadcast journalism. GB News is chaired by former newspaper editor and BBC presenter Andrew Neil, and funded by a range of investors including Discovery Inc. News UK TV is backed by Rupert Murdoch, whose Fox News channel has long been a partisan broadcaster in US politics. The channel plans to shake up the TV news landscape, currently dominated by Sky News and BBC News. Bosses of GB News have confirmed two new backers for its 24-hour TV and online service set to launch in the UK later this year.”

Mellor reports that, “In the latest funding round, Dubai-based investment group Legatum and one of the UK’s most prominent hedge fund managers, Sir Paul Marshall, have added their names alongside US broadcasting giant Discovery Inc. Don’t fund Now a group have started a social media campaign to try and get mobile phone companies not to spend on advertising with the new channels. Stop Funding Hate Tweeted: ‘If you want to help stop ‘Fox News style’ TV in Britain: *Tweet your mobile phone company using the hashtag #DontFundGBNews *Urge them not to advertise with GB News or any ‘Fox News style’ channel, & explain why this matters to you.’ They then Tweeted: ‘We’ll share info about GB News advertisers as soon as we have it. In the meantime we think it’s worth engaging now because ad contracts tend to be agreed a way in advance. The more brands are contacted now, the clearer it will be that Brits reject ‘Fox style’ media standards!”

In the Byline Times Article entitled, “Exclusive: GB News Founder in Business With Two Top Priti Patel Appointees,” Nafeez Ahmed, “reveals how Sir Robbie Gibb, who helped found the new ‘anti-woke’ media channel, is tied to the Government’s bid to attack Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion.” He says, “A key original founder and fundraiser for the new right-wing news channel GB News is in a business partnership with two Home Office political appointees who are conducting the Government’s strategic reviews into extremism and political violence. Sir Robbie Gibb, the former Downing Street spin doctor, reportedly led the fundraising drive for the so-called ‘anti-woke’ channel GB News in late 2020. The Mail on Sunday cited a GB News source confirming that Gibb was the driving force behind it, including ‘leading efforts to raise money’ for the group. In September 2020, Guido Fawkes corroborated the story, reporting that Gibb had ‘set up’ GB News.”

Ahmed reports that, “A GB News source told Byline Times that, since then, Gibb has left the venture and is no longer associated with it. However, at the time he founded GB News, Gibb was in a business partnership with John Zak Woodcock, who sits in the House of Lords as Lord Walney; and William Shawcross, the former Charity Commission chairman. In April 2020, both Woodcock and Shawcross were part of a successful bid by the JC Acquisition Ltd consortium led by Gibb to take over the Jewish Chronicle. Four months later, news surfaced that Gibb was setting up another media project, GB News. He had secured the involvement of Andrew Cole, who serves on the board of Liberty Global, which runs Virgin Media and owns 10% of ITV.” That is the same hate filled Jewish Chronicle who have weaponized fantisemitism slurs to discredit Jeremy Corbyn and the progressive Left of the Labour Party in defence of their Zionist agenda. They have also had to pay out on Libel cases as a result of their toxic defamatory fake news.

Ahmed says tha, “At the time, Gibb’s business partner in JC Acquisition Ltd, Woodcock, had already been appointed by Home Secretary Priti Patel as the Government’s Special Envoy on Countering Violent Extremism. He has held the role since November 2019, although it was paused due to the Coronavirus pandemic. It was revitalised in November 2020, when he was appointed as the Government’s Independent Advisor on Political Violence and Disruption. According to the GB News source, Gibb left GB News shortly after setting it up. Gibb did not respond directly to Byline Times. Instead, this newspaper received a statement from a lawyer representing GB News and one of its funders, the private investment firm Legatum, which said that Sir Robbie Gibb was no longer associated with the media group and had left the operation in September 2020. However, his involvement as a founder of GB News was not denied: ‘Robbie Gibb was only involved in the fundraising in the very early stages’.”

Ahmed reports that, “This month, the Telegraph revealed that John Woodcock would be conducting a new Government review into political extremism in Britain, reporting that it would look into how ‘far-left’ groups might ‘hijack’ anti-racist and environmental movements. His review is due to report its findings on the ‘extreme fringes’ of both the right and left to Boris Johnson and Priti Patel next May. A month earlier, William Shawcross was appointed by Priti Patel to the role of the Government’s Independent Reviewer of the controversial counter-terrorism ‘Prevent’ strategy, in a process which former regional chief crown prosecutor Nazir Afzal described as ‘rigged’. In this capacity, Shawcross will review the Government’s policy to prevent people becoming radicalised and supporting or carrying out terrorism. Critics claim that Prevent has had a disproportionate, and in some cases discriminatory, impact on Muslim communities.”

Ahmed reveals that, “Woodcock’s connection with Shawcross through their partnership with the founder of GB News raises its own potential conflict of interest questions. Shawcross was a director at the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), a lobby group with close ties to Steve Bannon and Mike Pompeo, from 2011 to 2012. The group has worked closely with the anti-black movement in the US. Through the last decade, HJS staff regularly attended the annual ‘alt-right’ gathering organised by the David Horowitz Freedom Centre, the founder of which was described by the Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC) as the ‘driving force’ of the ‘anti-black movement’. Despite this, Priti Patel has had close associations with the group. She sat on the HJS’ political council until 2016 and had a trip to Washington DC paid for by the group in 2013.”

Ahmed reports that, “The Government’s most pivotal appointments on reviewing its policies on political extremism have ties to the man who first set-up GB News, and both appointees will provide findings and recommendations that will feed into the Prime Minister’s policies on extremism, activism, free speech and protest for years to come. A Home Office spokesperson said: ‘The role is entirely independent of the Government and Lord Walney will be free to consider groups across the political spectrum and make recommendations accordingly’. John Woodcock, known as Lord Walney, did not respond to a request for comment. Sir Robbie Gibb did not respond to Byline Times when contacted for a second time for a request for comment after it received a reply from GB News.”

In the Canary Article entitled, “Head of the government’s politically-charged ‘extremism’ review met with antisemitic neo-fascists,” they uncover a remarkable example of Tory Government hypocrisy. They say that, “It’s claimed that the man the government has charged with the task of conducting a review into political ‘extremism’ in the UK met with members of an ‘extremist anti-Semitic’ party. This revelation exposes a ‘Government offensive against left. In November 2019, home secretary Priti Patel appointed lord Walney (former Labour MP John Woodcock) as the government’s envoy on countering violent extremism. According to the Telegraph, Woodcock will be looking at ‘progressive extremism’ in Britain. That includes how ‘far-left’ groups could infiltrate or hijack environmental movements and anti-racism campaigns. The obvious candidates, presumably, from the government’s perspective, would be Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion. Indeed, Patel has already described the latter as ‘criminals’.”

But according to the Canary, Woodcock himself can be credibly accused of being an extremist! The Canary explain why by pointing out thatt, “On 10 February 2021, the pro-Kurdish ANF News ran an article showing that during a visit to Turkey, Woodcock met with members of the ‘anti-Semitic’ and ‘neo-fascist’ Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). The article added that Woodcock was hosted by the Bosphorus Centre for Global Affairs (BCGA). The BCGA is a company run by Berat Albayrak, the son-in-law of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. ANF News regards the BCGA as a government propaganda organisation. Moreover, in 2016, WikiLeaks published thousands of Albayrak’s emails, which appeared to show that Powertrans, a company with which Albayrak is linked, was involved in the import of Daesh (ISIS/ISIL) controlled oil to Turkey.”

The Canary report that, “Kurdistan Solidarity Campaign spokesperson Rosa Gilbert commented: During a trip to Turkey funded by Bosphorus Global, an organisation with links to the President’s son-in-law who has been accused of profiteering from ISIS oil deals, Woodcock met with members of the far-right anti-semitic MHP party with proven links to the fascist paramilitary grouping the Grey Wolves. … Given Woodcock’s links to the Turkish regime which aids and abets extremists in Syria who kill Kurds, how can Kurds in Britain have any confidence in his ability to adjudicate fairly on the concept of ‘extremism’? Any study of ‘extremism’ worth its salt would surely include Woodcock himself in its research.”

The Canary claim that, “Anti-ISIS volunteers under threat. ANF News also reports that in 2017 Woodcock described the Kurdish-led anti-ISIS militia the YPG (Peoples Protection Units) as being linked to terrorism. One former YPG volunteer stated that Woodcock, whom the volunteer described as ‘Jihadi John’: ‘thinks we are all terrorists and I fully expect this review [by him] will lead to more of us being pulled in by intelligence services and more raids on those of us that fought against Isis’. Presumably Woodcock was unaware that the RAF launched attacks in support of the YPG-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Also, reportedly reportedly not just the UK but also US military provided support to Kurdish-led anti-terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq. In March 2017, another report suggested US special forces were working alongside the YPG.”

The Canary report that, “An Agence France Presse report even described how some US troops wore: ‘the patch of a Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG). Still others of a women’s unit within the YPG. An SDF commander tells us that the men are US special forces and are there to provide training. Later, a Pentagon spokesman said that American commandos often wear insignia of the units that they train. Embarrassing, being photographed with alleged antisemitic neo-fascists is not particularly good for Woodcock. Especially given his April 2020 co-purchase of the anti-socialist Jewish Chronicle. Woodcock’s partners in that venture included William Shawcross (who’s set to head a review into the government’s anti-terrorism Prevent strategy), John Ware (who fronted the controversial Panorama programme on antisemitism and the Labour Party), and Robbie Gibb (who helped set up the ‘right-leaning’ GB News).”

While the Jewish Chronicle has a notoriously poor track record for lack of journalistic integrity, having been forced to settle several defamation claims due to printing concocted fantisemitism lies, this disgraceful conduct is just fine with Woodcock who was one of the Labour MPs most eager to rant about Jeremy Corbyn in the same vein. It’s only a matter of time before John Ware’s hack job is discredited in court exposing defamation and the willingness to offer perjured testimony in Court. I am not a legal eagle ,but I would have thought Ware’s Court submissions, Pre-Action Protocol, would qualify as perjury, certainly extorting money from the Labour Party on the basis of false information is fraud. Shame on Keir Starmer for settling a corrupt SLAPP Lawsuit, that probably would not have gone to Court, but if it had done would have revealed the true scale of the deception. Most SLAPP suits cannot be won in Court, they rely on character assasination, intimidation and relentless harassment; they must be robustly contested.

The Forde Inquiry has the potential to expose the saboteurs within the Labour Party which is why Sir Keir is so eager to sweep it under the rug as he too might well be discredited, most specifically for his haste in making a unilateral decision to pay-off the SLAPP Suit con artists. Starmer has used the EHRC Report and fantisemitism as a crutch to facilitate gutting the progressive Socialist Left of the Labour Party, but his agenda is coming unravelled fast. The Canary are right to say that, “As for antisemitism, it is vile, as also is its weaponisation by people like lord John Mann to attack those of the progressive left who wish for more justice in the world.” The sad part is that what I now refer to as ‘fantisemitism’ not only ruins the careers and lives of those wrongly accused, it makes the Jewish community a far more vulnerable target of prejudice. This injustice is being perpetrated in oorder to protect the Apartide Zionist agenda and destroy the progressive Socialist politics of the Labour Left to enable the Tory Sovereign Dictatorsjip. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Newsnight last night presented a truly warped picture of Keir Starmer, tarting up his flagging reputation to make him sound like a massively popular savior of the Labour Party instead of a right wing, Trojan horse, wrecking ball! From an enthusiastic Kirsty Wark to a line up of mostly Labour centrists if you didn’t know the Labour Loser before last night you would have thought that Starmer had single-handedly transformed the party to rescue Labour from Electoral oblivion. In reality this sleazy Captain of Capitulation’s reputation is now on life-support, with party members leaving in droves, election canvasers on strike and multiple Trade Union disaffiliations. The BBC all but erected an iron scaffold around Starmer to keep him propped into position as their most reliable centrist sell-out, raving about his popularity and ‘forensic’ skills of non-opposition at PMQs. Corbyn was demonized as a disaster and only the Momentum rep questioned how Starmer might reinvent himself again in his next vacious speech. This was the ultimate BBC fake-news propaganda spin; it was absolutely vomit worthy!

With the BBC, ‘Auntie,’ already so heavily right leaning, why should we be seriously concerned about the establishment of not just one, but two ‘Fox News’ style TV channels with foreign influenced alt-right backing for competition? The total lack of political balance is extremely worrying especially with the toxic involvement of Australian billionaire media mogul Rupert Murdoch who already has far too much leverage in UK politics. In the Byline Times Article entitled, “Exclusive: Rupert Murdoch in Series of Meetings With Boris Johnson and High-Profile Ministers,” Sam Bright reports that, “The right-wing billionaire gained unprecedented access to ministers in August and September last year. Right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch repeatedly gained special access to the UK Government in recent months, Byline Times can reveal. Newly-released records show that News Corporation CEO Murdoch and his right-hand woman Rebekah Brooks held seven private meetings with five senior ministers over a seven-week period in August and September 2020.”

Reporting on the privileged access, Bright says that, “This included a meeting between Murdoch and Boris Johnson on 18 September, followed just a few days later on 21 September by a meeting between News UK CEO Brooks and the Prime Minister. Rishi Sunak was taken out to lunch by Murdoch on 26 August, perhaps benefitting from the Chancellor’s ‘Eat Out to Help Out’ scheme, followed by breakfast with Brooks on 17 September. Home Secretary Priti Patel held a meeting with Murdoch on 14 September, though perhaps thought it was politically prudent not to name him directly, instead saying she had a ‘private dinner’ with the ‘Executive Chairman of News Corp’. Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg was less bashful about his meeting with the billionaire however, listing his lunch with Murdoch on 25 September as an ‘informal lunch between friends’.”

Bright says, “All of these meetings preceded a dinner bash between Murdoch and Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove on 8 August. Gove, whose wife Sarah Vine is a columnist for the Daily Mail, was joined at the soiree by a guest (though their identity is not disclosed). Gove, who used to work at the Murdoch-owned Times, has maintained an ongoing friendship with his old boss during his political career, Murdoch joining Gove for an interview he conducted with President Donald Trump for the newspaper in 2017. Gove also had a tipple with Daily Mail owner Lord Rothermere, again with a guest, a week later on 15 August. No other media executives seem to have been afforded the same access to ministers as Murdoch and Brooks during this time period.” Bright lists, “Meetings between Murdoch, Brooks and senior ministers: 8 August, Michael Gove; 26 August, Rishi Sunak; 14 September, Priti Patel; 17 September, Rishi Sunak; 18 September, Boris Johnson; 21 September, Boris Johnson; 25 September, Jacob Rees-Mogg.”

Bright notes that, “Despite being logged as official meetings, the content of the discussions are entirely hidden from public view. When Byline Times reported in December that Sunak had been schmoozed by Brooks earlier in the year, we filed a Freedom of Information request to obtain the minutes from the meeting, only to be told by the Treasury that no record existed. A notorious right-wing media operator, Brooks runs News UK, which publishes the Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times newspapers. The publisher is owned by News Corp, which in turn is owned by Murdoch and his family. Murdoch also owns Fox News, the hard-right US broadcaster that acted as a mouthpiece for Donald Trump during his time in the White House – often fanning his half-baked conspiracy theories. Indeed, Murdoch’s stranglehold on the news business stretches across the globe and is perhaps most acutely experienced in his native Australia, where Murdoch-owned newspaper titles account for more than 60% of metropolitan circulation.”

“This influence has also been keenly felt in the UK, with the political fortunes of a particular party or leader seen to be reliant on the stance taken by Murdoch-owned titles. Indeed, after the surprise election victory of John Major’s Conservative Party in 1992, Murdoch’s red-top-title emblazoned a headline that stuck in the British media membrane: ‘It’s The Sun Wot Won It’.” Bright says that, “Consequently, when Tony Blair became leader of the Labour Party, a key facet of his ‘modernisation’ project was to curry favour with Murdoch and his newspapers, much to the chagrin of left-wing activists. For her part, Brooks is firmly embedded in the Murdoch machine. She was the editor of the now defunct News of the World from 2000 to 2003, editor of the Sun from 2003 to 2009, and CEO of News International from 2009 to 2011. Brooks was a prominent figure in the phone-hacking scandal, when it was revealed that a News of the World story published during her tenure allegedly involved illegal phone-hacking. She was cleared of charges in 2014.”

Bright reports that, “As mentioned, the content of the meetings between Murdoch and ministers is not for public consumption. However, one could reasonably speculate that the menu of conversation may well have included News UK TV, Murdoch’s latest media venture. As reported by the Guardian in December, the broadcasting regulator Ofcom has given approval for the platform to launch whenever it is ready, rumoured to be this Spring. It’s said that News UK TV will launch as an evening-only service, on air for around four or five hours a night. Although it reportedly will launch as a streaming-only service, News UK TV also applied for a full Ofcom broadcast licence, which means it could eventually be expanded into a traditional television channel.”

Bright reminds us that, “News UK TV will be launching in competition with GB News, a startup broadcast venture chaired by former BBC presenter Andrew Neil and backed by a range of foreign investors.” Despite that overwhelming saturation of right leaning news presentations, he says that, “Both are seeking to exploit a perceived deficit of conservative thought on British airwaves.” But he qualifies that by noting, “I say ‘perceived’, because the new director general of the BBC is a former Conservative councillor, its new chairman has donated £400,000 to the party in recent years, and opaquely-funded right-wing think-tanks have a regular spot on BBC political debate programmes. Nigel Farage, for example, has been one of the most regular guests on Question Time, despite never having been elected to Parliament, rejected by the electorate on seven separate occasions.”

Bright warns that, “Meanwhile, it looks like both these projects will be aided by the UK Government, with speculation mounting that Boris Johnson is set to appoint former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre as the head of Ofcom, a man who has been fervently opposed to media regulation in the past. Perhaps Murdoch was keen to make sure that ministers were still following his playbook, given his plans afoot. ‘Ministers have meetings with a range of individuals and organisations, this includes with the media,’ a Cabinet Office spokesperson told Byline Times. ‘The Government is open and transparent in publishing ministerial meetings with senior media executives’.” This is one of the obligatory core control levers that’s required by a fully functioning Dictatorship: absolute control of all public broadcasting and the Media in order to sedate the population into accepting authoritarian control through fear propaganda!

In another Byline Times Article entitled, “Exclusive: Cummings and Cain Held Private Meeting With New BBC Bosson Day of Internal Market Bill Vote,” Sam Bright again reports on a dubious meeting. He reports on, “how the Prime Minister’s former top advisors met with Tim Davie on the day of a Brexit vote that threatened to break international law. Two of the Prime Minister’s closest advisors held a private meeting with the new director general of the BBC on the day that MPs voted on controversial Brexit legislation, Byline Times can reveal. Newly-released records show that Boris Johnson’s now-former chief aide Dominic Cummings and director of communications Lee Cain met with the BBC’s Tim Davie on 14 September ‘to discuss the Prime Minister’s priorities’. On the same day, MPs were due to debate and vote on proposals, made by the Government, to breach international law in the event of a no-deal Brexit.”

Bright says that, “The Internal Market Bill, which was later neutered by the Government, was condemned by every living former Prime Minister. In the days following his promotion to the top job at the BBC, Davie used his new platform to warn his journalists from expressing their ‘personal agendas.’ The law was designed to give the Government power to override the Northern Ireland Protocol, an element of the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement signed by the UK on 24 January 2020, in order to maintain the same trading rules in Northern Ireland as the rest of the UK. The vote passed in the House of Commons, though not without much rancour from opposition MPs, accusing the Government of failing once again to respect the rule of law. Indeed, in the Summer of 2019, Johnson attempted to prorogue (shut down) Parliament in order to curtail scrutiny of the proposed Withdrawal Agreement he had negotiated with the EU, a move that was ruled to be unlawful by the Supreme Court.”

Bright explains, “So, in short, the Internal Market Bill proposed violating the Withdrawal Agreement, an international treaty that Johnson had attempted to push through Parliament by acting unlawfully. The minutes of the meeting between Cummings, Cain and Davie are not publicly available. When Byline Times pressed the Government to release minutes of a previous rendezvous between Chancellor Rishi Sunak and right-wing media supremo Rebekah Brooks, the Treasury said that no record existed. It’s understood that the Internal Market Bill was not discussed at the meeting, though neither the BBC nor the Government would go on the record to formally confirm or deny this point. Cain and Cummings, who have both subsequently been relieved of their Downing Street duties, are primarily Brexit operatives, both having graduated from senior positions in the Vote Leave campaign to become Johnson’s Government henchmen.”

According to Bright, “Cummings in particular was seen to be the source of many of the Government’s anti-democratic instincts, epitomised by his stubborn refusal to appear before a committee of MPs investigating the dissemination of fake news during the EU Referendum campaign. Cummings still remains in contempt of Parliament.” This should not have been legally permitted in a functioning democracy especially with Cummings still able to retain a powerful Chief Special Advisor role. The very public exit out of the front door of number 10 carrying what looked like a large seemingly empty cardboard box had all the classic signs of a ruse to fool the British public into thinking Cummings and co had gone. In reality, we have absolutely no way of knowing for sure that they are not still heavily involved in pulling strings behind the scenes in this corrupt Tory Government under the weak leadership of Johnson.

Bright informs us that, “For his part, Tim Davie formally assumed the director general role on 1 September, less than two weeks before his meeting with Cain and Cummings. Prior to his appointment, Davie had served in several management roles at the national broadcaster, despite not having any editorial experience. Davie also boasts past links to the Conservative Party, namely that he stood as a councillor for the party in 1993 and 1994, and was deputy chairman of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservatives in the 1990s.” This follows a well established pattern of appointing inexperienced and incompetent right-wing Tory connected individuals from the wealthy elite to insure compliance with the political agenda of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

Bright says that, “In the days following his promotion to the top job at the BBC, Davie used his new platform to warn his journalists from expressing their ‘personal agendas’. ‘If you want to be an opinionated columnist or a partisan campaigner on social media then that is a valid choice, but you should not be working at the BBC,’ he said. Managers subsequently informed BBC staff that they would not be allowed to participate in gay pride marches, under new rules implemented by Davie, only for this policy to be reversed after a social media backlash.” Bright says that, “Davie is not the only new BBC executive with ties to the Conservative Party. Former Goldman Sachs banker Richard Sharp is set to be appointed as the BBC’s chairman, following his nomination by the Government. Sharp has donated more than £400,000 to the Conservatives since 2001, and was Rishi Sunak’s mentor during his time at Goldman Sachs.” The chumocracy rumbles on securing power for the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

Bright points out that, “Davie has appealed to staff to be assiduously impartial in their work. This appeal would undoubtedly carry more validity if the BBC’s board of directors didn’t increasingly resemble a Conservative reunion party.” Once again the same bland statement, “The Prime Minister’s special advisers have regular meetings with a range of individuals including the media,’ a Government spokesperson told Byline Times. “The Government is open and transparent in publishing these meetings with senior media executives.” They might as well also say that they welcome independent scrutiny as long as they are able to very carefully select those providing the regulatory scrutiny! This is the alarming point: the Tories are not only locking down our broadcast as well as our print media, they are also appointing compliant ‘regulators’ to provide a vanier of impartiality while abolishing all accountability!

In the Canary Article entitled, “Newspaper editors raise concerns over whether the government is blacklisting journalists,” the expose this Tory Government’s aversion to scrutiny. They say that, “Downing Street has insisted it welcomes press scrutiny after newspaper editors signed an open letter calling for a review into the government’s use of freedom of information (FOI) requests. Former and current Fleet Street editors have raised concerns about a ‘clearing house’ within the Cabinet Office, which has been advising government departments on the handling of FOI requests. The existence of the unit was revealed by an openDemocracy investigatio which said the team collates lists of journalists with details about their work. Media organisations are calling for an investigation into the clearing house unit, whether journalists and others submitting FOI requests are being ‘blacklisted’ and whether this is illegal.”

The Canary report that, “The prime minister’s official spokesperson told a Westminster briefing on Tuesday there is no ‘blacklist’ of journalists and said the ‘sole purpose’ of the unit is to provide advice. They said: ‘I would point to the fact that the clearing house has been operating as part of the Government’s approach to FOI since 2005, so it is not a new body within the Cabinet Office. ‘It acts to ensure that the advice and information we provide is consistent and compliant across Government to ensure freedom of information requests are handled in the proper and sensitive way. I would point to the fact that we regularly, routinely, disclose information. Not just as part of the FOI process, but as part of the regular transparency documents that we publish on the Cabinet Office website and will continue to do so’.”

The Canary reveal that, “The joint open letter has been signed by editors of newspapers across the political spectrum, including the Guardian, the Times, the Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times. Addressed to the chairs of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee and the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee, it calls on MPs to raise the issue ‘as a matter of priority’. In response, Julian Knight, Conservative chairman of the Commons DCMS Committee, said press freedom was a ‘cornerstone of our democracy’ and that he would raise the matter with the government. ‘It is concerning that questions have been raised about the openness and transparency of Government in dealing with freedom of information requests made by members of the press,’ he said.”

National Union of Journalists Tweeted: “Journalists who have submitted #FOI requests should follow up with Subject Access Requests, we need to get to the bottom of how the government’s Clearing House is operating and find out if they are monitoring the media; #NUJ #saveourFOI ‘The actions of Government in enabling proper scrutiny of it must be beyond reproach and I shall be raising these matters with DCMS secretary of state Oliver Dowden.’ The letter has also received backing from Michelle Stanistreet, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ). ‘The media industry is united in backing a Campaign to Expand the right to information and secure greater transparency in public life,’ she said. ‘We want our Government to be less secretive, not more. ‘That is why the existence of a so-called clearing house, profiling requests, stonewalling requests and essentially thwarting and blocking journalistic scrutiny is so disturbing and outrageous.” This is all about achieving a toxic manipulation of the Media!

Why should we worry about the privileged access afforded to Media magnates like Rupert Murdoch and the like? They are all billionaires, dedicated to protecting and advancing the financial and strategic interests of the super wealthy elite to the punitive and sometimes deadly detriment of the working poor, deprived and the extremely vulnerable who the Covid crisis has demonstrated are considered ‘expendable’! To prevent the destitute from rioting in desperation requires absolute control of all areas of the Media: lie to people in propaganda broadcasts with supporting press articles, to convince them, ‘black is the new white;’ they are ‘privilaged’ to continue being exploited for a pittance well below survival pay! The Media message is key to successful authoritarian repression, subjugation and exploitation for profit that the Tories are determined to achieve. Massive public protests, legal challenges and robust Investigations can expose the corruption to derail this plan and remove this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship from office ASAP. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The BBC, once trusted with the endearing title ‘Auntie,’ has chosen to maximize their endless stream of worthless propaganda briefing today by focusing wall to wall attention on former royals who no longer even reside in the UK. In essence the story was remarkably simple and could have been reduced to a very brief statement of reality as they finalized the royal rift: “You cannot have your cake and eat it too!” Brits are familiar with this principal after trying to cherry-pick EU privileges and exiting with the extremely basic raw deal of the PM’s choosing, even the Erasmus students were thrown under the bus. The deluge of vacuous commentary on royal privileges lost and how our ultra wealthy monarch feels let down by her grandson is intended to distract us from paying any attention to far more important issues of the day that should dominate our thinking. Harry and Megan have merely swop one set of privileges, that came with strict obligations, for the ongoing wealth of being able to freely monetize their celebrity.

While we should all wish the Prince Consort a full and speedy recovery, at the ripe old age of 99, that his elitist privilege has so graciously assured, perhaps our Queen might spare a thought and show more sympathy for the increasing homeless population in her realm; destitute individuals who on average do not survive sleeping on our frigid streets beyond the age of 47! Despite the measures to get homeless people off the streets due to the Covid risk; I doubt any of this Socialist style generosity will persist beyond the crisis. This Tory Government will be keen to implement one of their most shockingly vile manifesto pledges, to target the gypsies, criminalize them and destroy their homes. Without hesitation our aging Queen gratefully accepted when her loyal Tory Government prioritized toping-up the income lost to the royal estate due to the economic stagnation of the pandemic. When it comes to money the royals know the difference between ‘the have’s and the have not’s’ and they fully intend to keep it that way.

This warped news coverage comes two days on from a heavily biased Newsnight presentation aimed at persuading the public that Sir Keir Starmer was that knight in shining armor riding in on his trusty steed to save the Labour Party from oblivion; rather than the pro-right Trojan horse who lied and misled party members in order to seize power! There were more centrist commentators ready to endorse Starmer’s ‘Fork in the road’ vision as Prime Minister in waiting as they encouraged the public to keep guzzling the neo-con Kool Aid of business as usual. Sir Keir is earning their accolades for his important work dismantling the Socialist movement in this country that threatened the ability of the ultra wealthy elite to endlessly exploit the vulnerable and the working poor. Although none of the Mainstream Media will acknowledge the reality of the growing push-back against Starmer, it will soon reach a point where it can no longer be ignored and this incredibly divisive and highly unpopular Captain of Capitulation will be forced out.

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Trickett blasts Starmer’s sickly speech – with a 10-point plan of actual policies,” they report that, “Starmer proposes ‘recovery bond’ that shores up Tory austerity lie and would make corporations even wealthier. Trickett lists ideas that would actually improve the country. Trickett’s platform puts Starmer’s drab conformism to shame. Backbench Labour MP Jon Trickett, who has been outspoken in his criticisms of Keir Starmer’s dire performance and conduct as Labour leader, has blasted Starmer’s dreary and unimaginative ‘policy’ speech today, with ten points of actual policies that would make life better for the vast majority of people in this country.” The Skwawkbox claim that, “The best Starmer could come up with, as he tried dully to climb up the rear end of big business, was a ‘recovery bond’ to ‘allow’ the country to afford a post-COVID recovery. This was a clear reinforcement of the austerity lie and patent nonsense in a country that has plenty of cash, just badly distributed.”

The Skwawkbox say that, “Trickett made his opinion of Starmer’s visionless speech and its failure to tackle the real issues this country faces very plain: But he didn’t stop there, tweeting his own ten-point plan for a real recovery:” Trickett Tweeted: “My *alternative* economic speech: Ÿ Invest for growth Ÿ A Wealth Tax Ÿ Proper workers rights Ÿ A proactive state Ÿ End NHS privatization Ÿ Cut power of Mega Corps Ÿ No bailouts for tax dodgers Ÿ Extend Furlough to Xmas Ÿ No fire and rehire Ÿ Ful, well paid, employment.” They say that, “Investment, growth, the restoration of a real National Health Service and concrete financial assistance for those hit hardest by the pandemic, combined with curbs on the power of huge corporations, taxes on those who can easily afford it and a ban on the tactics many are now using to enrich themselves further at the expense of workers.”

“It’s not rocket science, Keir Starmer has no excuse for failing to come up with a similar plan, but it is inspirational,” say Skwawkbox “and it does address the real problems of inequality, exploitation and cronyism that have blighted this country under Tory rule. Keir Starmer is not fit for the position he now occupies and his supposed ‘big’ speech today, of which many said the highlight was when Labour’s own live feed of it crashed, does nothing but confirm that.” However, Jon Trickett wasn’t the only person to point out the failings of Starmer’s pledge, the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Rothery’s manifesto for Liverpool shames Starmer’s pallid pitch,” features a Liverpool Mayoral candidate. They say that “On the day Keir Starmer was lambasted for his dreary ‘paint drying’ speech about the economy and for attempting to crawl up the nether regions of big business, Liverpool’s Anna Rothery published a manifesto for the city’s mayoral contest that showed the Labour leader what ambition and vision for real change look like.”

Skwawkbox contrast how,“While Starmer’s ‘plan’ essentially consisted of some buzzwords and a ‘recovery bond’ that would allow huge corporations and wealthy investors to enrich themselves even further at the expense of ordinary taxpayers. Rothery laid out a plan for transforming the city’s governance that includes: Ÿ genuine ‘levelling up’ Ÿ a rigorous clean-up of local politics Ÿ a plan to build decent, council homes Ÿ a local ‘green new deal’ Ÿ grassroots democracy to empower communities Ÿ bringing council services fully back ‘in house’ and Ÿ abolishing the executive mayor structure that was imposed on the city without its consent, to return to a more transparent and accountable leader/cabinet model.” They say that, “All this in a proudly bright red, eye-catching manifesto, none of Starmer’s ‘let’s hint at being Tory really’ purple.” Bold statements on her handout include the following sentiments, many that are shared by citizens right across the UK, but with special relevance to people living in the ‘forgotten North’ of England.

Skwawkbox say first up is,“Leave No One Behind: Liverpool has been hit hard by a decade of Tory cuts and now the impact of COVID-19. My first priority will be supporting local people, opposing austerity and leading a joint campaign with core cities to demand a fair funding settlement for local authorities. I support grassroots anti-poverty campaigns like the right to food. Clean Up Local Politics: We need to restore trust in local politics. I will root out conflicts of interest and urgently strengthen checks and balances to ensure transparency and scrutiny at every level. I will lead a culture-change based on the Nolan principles of public life: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. Deliver a Local Green New Deal: I will deliver a local Green New Deal to decarbonise Liverpool’s economy by 2030 and create well-paid, unionised jobs. I will promote green transport and municipally-owned energy infrastructure. Working with local Friends groups, I will protect and nurture our precious parks and green spaces.”

Skwawkbox continue with Rothery’s visionary list of pledges that include, “Extend Democracy: I will extend democracy at every level putting local communications at the heart of decision-making, ensuring democratic accountability of elected representatives, promoting working democracy by supporting and working in collaboration with trade unions, and standing up for member led democracy in the Labour Party: I have publicly called for the whip to be restored to Jeremy Corbyn and for wrongly suspended CLP officers to be reinstated. I believe that the current Mayoral model is unaccountable and concentrates too much power at the top. My preference is for a more collaborative Leader and Cabinet model, with the Leader elected by members. I will continue to listen and learn and implement whatever form of governance the people of our city decide in a democratic vote.”

Last, but not least, Skwawkbox report that Rotherly’s list of pledges culminates with, “Tackle the Housing Crisis: I will take a new approach to planning that puts the interests of local people and communities first. We need to build many more decent and genuinely affordable council homes. I will work for the reintroduction of a city-wide landlord licensing scheme, back a Healthy Homes Act and support organised tenants to improve conditions across our city. Bring Services in House: Working closely with trade unions. I will work to insource local services, including social care, and bring outsourced workers back into the public sector where they belong. #AnnaRothery4Mayor.” Skwawkbox say, “Small wonder Rothery’s supporters fear that the party’s decision to delay the issuing of ballots and re-interview all three shortlisted prospective candidates is cover for an attempt to scupper Rothery’s candidacy. She makes ‘Dear Leader’ look bad by showing what a Labour vision looks like.”

But Keir Starmer’s concerns go well beyond his palid presentation as he seeks to reinvent himself yet again in his endless quest for purpose and acceptance as he is basing his pitch for support on a false perception of what the general public really want in a PM. In the Morning Star Article entitled, “Corbyn’s successes, not his failures, haunt Keir Starmer,” they say that, “Three months since he removed the whip from his predecessor, the shine is coming off the ‘new leadership’. Three months have passed since Sir Keir Starmer withdrew the Labour whip from his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn. Two Jewish members of Corbyn’s own constituency party have marked the occasion by writing directly to Starmer demanding it be immediately restored,” but, “Corbyn is far from the only Labour member to be targeted by the new leadership. The growing Tory lead over Labour has provoked talk, probably unrealistic, of a leadership challenge, hints of an impending policy blitz and demands for a change of direction even from Starmer allies.”

The Morning Star report on what the describe as, “A withering assessment by Tom Kibasi, who worked on Starmer’s leadership campaign, savages a strategy of going easy on the Conservatives while provoking an ‘unnecessary war on the left’ that has alienated a party membership that overwhelmingly picked him to lead it. Kibasi’s logic is impeccable, but he takes too much for granted, firstly in taking Starmer’s election as proof that Labour members saw Corbynism as ‘a political project that had hit the buffers,’ and secondly in assuming the war on the Labour left is designed to win back voters. After Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton for the US presidency in 2016, left-wing Democrats quipped: ‘Don’t tell them Bernie would have won. They know. That’s why they stopped him.’ Similarly, it is not 2019, when Labour led by Corbyn crashed and burned, but 2017, when Labour led by Corbyn bagged its biggest vote share increase in seven decades, that haunts the Labour right.”

The Morning Star say that, “When 2017 is mentioned at all, it is treated as a strange anomaly. But understanding this anomalous election is of critical importance, because it explodes the ‘electability’ myth that has so often helped the right to dominate the Labour Party and demand ‘realism’ (lack of radicalism) from the trade unions. Starmer wasn’t elected to drop the Corbyn project, the leadership candidate who defined herself against Corbyn, Lisa Nandy, came last. Starmer made 10 now infamous pledges which appeared to commit him to most of the political content of a Corbyn project that retained the enthusiasm of Labour’s mass membership. That is why, in the Labour right’s eyes, the war on the membership is far from unnecessary, they are an affront to the cosy politics of the Westminster bubble.”

According to the Morning Star, “Starmer was picked because he was supposedly ‘electable.’ Finding the polls say he isn’t, he has summoned Blair-era strategist Peter Mandelson to fix the problem in the way a celebrity chef turns round the fortunes of a failing restaurant on reality TV. Unfortunately, ‘reality’ TV is a misnomer. Blair chased Tory voters on the premise that voters in Labour heartlands had nowhere else to go. It should be obvious following the collapse of the ‘red wall’ that the premise no longer applies.” That is of course if you believe the bogus ‘borrowed votes’ lie told by the Tories to explain their unfathomable ‘landslice victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. A Robust Investigation of the result of that stolen election would expose the high probability that industrial scale fraud involving the postal votes was more likely. The say that, “Less remarked is that winning over voters from other parties can be done by engagement, persuasion and mass politics, not by attempting to close the political gap between left and right.” But targeted PsyOps is even more persuasive!

The Morning Star point out that, “Labour’s vote in 2017 rose in many unexpected places: the shock victory in Canterbury was merely the most famous. Labour piled on votes by the thousand in Tory strongholds from the Cotswolds to Cornwall. At the same time, most of its northern and Midlands MPs saw their majorities increase, and its vote rose in Wales and Scotland. What this said about the common anxieties of millions of people all over the country around jobs, privatisation and living costs has been lost in the wreckage of the subsequent 2019 election. But electoral success and socialist policies are not an either/or. Voters’ cold reception of Labour’s non-opposition is a signal to the left to counterattack. The policies the country needs can become the focus of public campaigning with or without the Labour front bench.” The say that, “The trade union movement can use it to point out that trashing Corbyn isn’t doing the party any favours. Starmer should be warned that continuing to withhold the whip will have consequences.”

In the Morning Star Article entitled, “Jewish constituents of Corbyn demand restoration of Labour whip three months after its withdrawal, they say that, “Two Jewish constituents of Jeremy Corbyn have written to the Labour leadership to demand the party whip be restored to their MP three months after it was withdrawn. Tomorrow marks three months since Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer withdrew the whip from his predecessor. Islington North constituency Labour Party (CLP) members David Rosenberg and Julia Bard wrote to Sir Keir and deputy leader Angela Rayner to call for the ‘immediate restoration’ of the whip to their ‘exemplary’ MP. Mr Rosenberg and Ms Bard described themselves as ‘Jews who have been combating and educating people about anti-semitism over decades (including being educators on trips to Auschwitz).’ They said that they were ‘dismayed by the injustice’ of Mr Corbyn having the whip withdrawn on the same day his three-week suspension was lifted in November.”

The Morning Star report, “It was reported in November that the withdrawal of the whip would be in place for at least three months. Mr Corbyn is considering legal action against Labour that could see him seek an injunction to restore the whip immediately. He was suspended by party officials in October for claiming that the scale of anti-semitism in Labour was ‘dramatically overstated for political reasons’ after the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published its report on the allegations. Despite a panel of the party’s national executive committee deciding to readmit Mr Corbyn after he clarified his statement, Sir Keir refused to restore the whip, ignoring a warning by the EHRC against political interference in such cases.” Supposedly the Labour Party response to EHRC demands remains under scrutiny, so it’s hard to see how they could possibly condone the extraordinary level of interference in disciplinary matters being exercised by Keir Starmer and his acting General Secretary David Evans!

The Morning Star stated that, “Mr Rosenberg and Ms Bard wrote that they ‘sympathise strongly’ with Mr Corbyn’s criticism of the political and media commentary relating to the EHRC report. They also criticised the party HQ’s ‘absurd’ punishment of suspending CLP chairs and members for discussing and passing pro-Corbyn and pro-Palestine motions. It comes as a researcher who was suspended from Labour before he resigned from the party is set to reveal results of his survey into a ‘monstrous mass purge’ of members. Dr Neil Todd has been researching party members and CLP officers suspended and expelled since Sir Keir became leader. He said: ‘Whether it’s Jeremy Corbyn or ordinary members, the purge is sending out a message that Israel and anti-semitism are intertwined, and topics which are not for discussion.’ The Labour in Exile Network group will be hosting an online event at which Dr Todd will reveal his findings at 7pm on Saturday February 20.”

It is becoming increasingly obvious that Keir Starmer will not be able to throw his weight around with impunity for much longer. Even a predominantly right-leaning NEC cannot allow Starmer to reinvent the Labour rule book; if his heavy–handed inappropriate interventions were presented to EHRC while the party remains under scrutiny he would be exposed. The Forde inquiry has access to incriminating evidence that will be hard to whitewash over especially in light of various potential legal challenges revealing the truth. Starmer’s authoritarian dictates will be challenged in the Courts and he will lose, the most the Tories can do is manipulate the BBCto keep the situation under wraps for as long as possible. After the betrayal of Starmer we could see the pendulum swing back in the direction of the progressive Socialist left, finally granting the public access to robust opposition to call this corrupt Tory Sovereign Dictatorship to account. We must continue to protest, challenge and demand justice to derail this corrupt cabal before it is too late. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

There was a seismic Court ruling in the news on Friday despite valiant attempts by the BBC to sideline the issue by keeping the general public distracted with inconsequential royal rubbish over formalizing the rift between ‘the family’ and the hollywood breakaway couple. This type of vacuous coverage I now refer to as ‘handifloss!’ Why? Like Candyfloss: puffed-up, but lacking real substance, sticky and sickly. In the London Economic Article entitled, “Time for Uber to accept its responsibilities’ – Union hails ‘historic’ ruling that drivers are workers,” Joe Mellor says, “Uber must now stop wasting time and money pursuing lost legal causes and do what’s right by the drivers who prop up its empire.” A union has hailed a ‘historic’ Supreme Court ruling that Uber drivers are workers.” These days there are so few victories for ordinary workers and the progressive Sosialist movement, but this ruling will prove truly historic as it throws a monkey wrench into the exploitative practices of today’s gig economy; this will have a wide reaching impact.

Mellor reports that, “Supreme Court justices ruled on the latest round of a long-running fight between Uber operating companies and drivers on Friday. Lawyers say the ruling means Uber drivers will be entitled to workers’ rights such as holiday pay, and will have implications for the gig economy. Uber operating companies, who said drivers were contractors not workers, appealed to the Supreme Court after losing three earlier rounds of the fight. But justices unanimously dismissed Uber’s appeal. A law firm enlisted by the GMB union to represent Uber drivers says drivers will be entitled to compensation for lost pay. A GMB spokesman said officials would now consult with Uber driver members over forthcoming compensation claims.” Mick Rix, GMB National Officer, said: “This has been a gruelling four-year legal battle for our members, but it’s ended in a historic win.”

Mellor says that according to GMB, “The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of three previous courts, backing up what GMB has said all along; Uber drivers are workers and entitled to breaks, holiday pay and minimum wage. ‘Uber must now stop wasting time and money pursuing lost legal causes and do what’s right by the drivers who prop up its empire.’ An employment tribunal ruled in 2016 that Uber drivers were workers, and were entitled to workers’ rights. That ruling was upheld by an employment appeal tribunal, and by Court of Appeal judges. Lawyers representing Uber operating companies told Supreme Court justices that the employment tribunal ruling was wrong.” GBM Union Tweeted: “BREAKING: It’s the end of the road for Uber’s mistreatment of drivers. This landmark Supreme Court ruling puts all debates to bed. Time for Uber to accept its responsibilities, compensate drivers and discuss a way forward.”

Mellor reports that Uber had consistently claimed, “They said drivers did not ‘undertake to work’ for Uber but were ‘independent, third party contractors’. But lawyers representing drivers said the tribunal was entitled to conclude that drivers were working. Justices unanimously ruled against Uber. ‘It can be seen that the transportation service performed by drivers and offered to passengers through the Uber app is very tightly defined and controlled by Uber,’ said one Justice, Lord Leggatt, in Friday’s ruling. ‘The employment tribunal was, in my view, entitled to conclude that, by logging onto the Uber app in London, a claimant driver came within the definition of a ‘worker’ by entering into a contract. ‘I think it clear that the employment tribunal was entitled to find that the claimant drivers were ‘workers’.”

Mellor examines the, “UK gig economy and employment law,” saying that, “IPSE (the Association of Independent Professionals and the Self-Employed) has responded to the Supreme Court Ruling today against Uber, saying the judgement shows the ‘glaring need for clarity’ in the gig economy and UK employment law. IPSE has said the very fact this case has come to the Supreme Court shows ‘UK employment law is not working’ and that to clear the confusion of the gig economy, government should introduce a statutory definition of self-employment. The Association has also argued that in the financial strain of the pandemic, the need for clarity and for those who are truly workers to get their fair rights ‘is more urgent than ever’.”

Mellor reported that, “Andy Chamberlain, Director of Policy at IPSE” had claimed that: “The very fact this case has come to the UK’s Supreme Court shows the UK’s employment law is not working. There is a glaring need for clarity in this area, to clear the confusion in the gig economy. The gig economy is enormously complex, including many people who are legitimately self-employed and many others who really, based on their working circumstances, should be classed as workers. It is a patchwork of grey areas between employment and self-employment: the only way to resolve this tangle is to clarify employment status in UK law. With the pandemic still raging and its financial impact ever more visible, it is more urgent than ever that struggling people who should technically be classed as workers get the rights they deserve. To bring this about, and protect the freedom of legitimately self-employed people, we urge government to write a definition of self-employment into law.”

On a CrowdJustice Post entitled, “Uber attacks right of workers to organise a data trust,” they elaborate on another aspect of the ongoing battle for worker justice from Uber. They write that, “On December 16, we are in court at the Amsterdam district court against Uber and Ola. Both companies are fiercely resisting their legal obligations to data access and algorithmic transparency. Uber and Ola are tied together by the large investment in both by Softbank. Both firms have obfuscated the proper fulfillment of access requests and wrongly attacked the motives of the 13 claimants. They say any question of personal data being accessed for the purposes of a data trust to boost the collective power of workers is an abuse of GDPR rights. We say this is quite wrong and that Uber and Ola must obey the law without further delay. We are somewhat taken aback by the strong attack on the idea of worker and trade union controlled data trusts.”

On CrowdJustuce they state that, “As such, there is a lot riding on this. If Uber and Ola are successful, the right of workers to organise a data trust could be suppressed. Your help is now more urgent than ever.” They lay out their case starting with, “Who we are?” The answer is, “The App Drivers and Couriers Union (ADCU) is UK registered trade union serving the needs of private hire drivers and couriers whose work is digitally mediated. Our members often work for companies like Uber, Deliveroo, Ola, Addison Lee, Bolt and FreeNow. We are proud to be members of the International Alliance of App based Transport Workers (IAATW) who are working with us on this important campaign. The action is supported by Worker Info Exchange, a non profit organisation dedicated.”

CrowdJustice elaborate on their case by saying, “We are launching legal action in the district court in Amsterdam over Uber’s failure to to respect the digital rights of drivers and couriers under the GDPR. Uber has illegally:
• blocked workers from accessing all of their personal data at work.
• failed to provide workers transparency to algorithmic management and control of drivers when requested to do so
Uber pretends not to be the boss so it can avoid employer obligations such as the minimum wage, holiday pay, sick pay as well as health, safety & equalities protections. We all know Uber manages by algorithm but we don’t know exactly how even though workers have the legal right to know.”

CrowdJustice explain, “We have evidence that Uber maintains secret driver and courier profiles which it uses to rate worker their performance with categories such as ‘late arrival/missed ETA’, ‘negative attitude’ or ‘inappropriate behaviour’. For years, we have worked with hundreds of drivers to make data requests but Uber always blocks the process and refuses to accept any collective approach. Now we are going to ask the courts to order Uber to provide drivers and couriers access to their data and to make algorithmic management transparent.” They insist that, “Digital rights are worker rights! Members of the ADCU won a landmark 2016 worker rights claim against Uber which the firm will appeal once more against us at the UK Supreme Court this week. But this hard won victory could be lost over time if we continue to allow Uber to flout the law to hide more and more management control in secret algorithms.”

But CrowdJustice point out that, “How can drivers challenge discrimination or unfair algorithms if everything is hidden from us? How drivers and couriers ever level the playing field to bargain for a better deal if Uber blocks our data requests so we can never establish our own worker’s data trust? In today’s world, digital rights are the gateway to worker rights.The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) gives everyone to access the personal data any organisation holds on them and the right to an explanation of how this data is processed in algorithms used by firms such as Uber. In practice, this means that drivers have the right to access all personal data which includes every trip, every fare, all GPS data, telematics and so on. Crucially, we also have the right to know how Uber algorithms manage us and we can challenge automated decision making.”

CrowdJustice outline their “Call to Action,” saying that, “There are two things you can do to help
1. Please donate as little or as much as you can to help us raise £20,000 to bring this action, future similar actions and to cover any potential adverse cost awards.
2. If you are an Uber driver or courier living anywhere in the UK or in the European Economic Area (EEA) please follow the link to register to join our collective action campaign. ADCU.org Give us your permission to make a data request to Uber on your behalf as part of a very large group of drivers in a joint action. Your data will eventually be sent only to you and not us. Our lawyer will liaise with Uber and monitor the process to ensure everyone is treated fairly and receives all the data and information they are legally entitled. If you do not, we will take action on behalf of the group by making another complaint to the court. There is no cost to drivers and couriers for this and we ask as many local driver groups and unions to join us and get involved in this campaign.”

CrowdJustice elaborate on their legal representation saying, “We are represented in this case by Anton Ekker of Ekker Advocatuur. Mr. Ekker is a renowned lawyer specialising in the field of data protection and personal privacy. He most recently won an important landmark victory in the landmark SyRI case against the Netherlands government.” They ask, “ Who else is involved? The ADCU is proud to be a member of the International Alliance of App based Transport Workers (IAATW) who are working with us on this important campaign. The action is supported by Worker Info Exchange, a non profit organisation dedicated to helping gig workers protect their digital rights at work. We thank you for your kindness, solidarity and support. Now more than ever, we must support one another and work together to bring fairness, respect to our common digital workplace.”

Back in December 2016,on the SocialistRevolution.org, Warwick Marxists and Thomas Soud triumphantly announced that, “Britain: Uber Drivers’ Victory Strikes Blow Against Gig Economy.” Soud reported of a much earlier time when, “In front of big square boxes, blinded by flashing lights and slowly dialing up to a new network known as the World Wide Web, a group of young, wide-eyed entrepreneurs had an idea. With the two-ton machines that currently lay crushing their desks, they could create a new version of capitalism: an economic ecology freed from the robber barons and satanic mills of old, where free, rational individuals, guided by the digital hand of the market, could be united to create new riches for themselves and all of society in the process. This was the silicon dream.”

Soud lamented that, “Nearly 30 years on from this initial daydreaming and we find that this new reality, for many, has become more of a nightmare. Rather than calibrating and equalizing the desires, preferences, and rationales of free human beings, the apps, internet, and computers at society’s fingertips have simply become yet another tool for the exploitation of the working class. Airbnb, Deliveroo, and Uber are but three of the new household names in this latest tech wave known as the ‘gig economy’.” Soud killed, “The myth of the micro-entrepreneur,” saying that, “In essence, this new digital ‘paradise’ is no different from the old satanic mills. Their meteoric rise is a graphic display of capitalism’s need to grind down workers’ rights, increase the working day, and lower workers’ wages, all in the name of profit. The move to ‘gigs,’ with an army of precariously employed workers, forced to compete in a race to the bottom for small scraps of work and pay has allowed the bourgeois vultures to achieve this historic task in new forms.”

Soud exposed how, “Rather than give people decent wages and conditions fit for human beings, the capitalists now skirt around the gains won through struggle by previous generations, claiming that they are not required to provide such luxuries to these gig workers. Uber, Deliveroo, etc., so we are told by the bosses, are apparently not companies, but ‘platforms.’ The workers in the gig economy, therefore, are in fact the entrepreneurs, ‘micro-capitalists’ controlling their own minibusinesses via the generosity of corporate multinationals. Yet what capitalist earns $7.50 per hour? What entrepreneur lacks all but the most measly amount of capital, so that all they can offer is a single cab ride? What business owner has no employees and must routinely work long past the point that all regulations prohibit, and (to add insult to injury) has all this decided by those who control their income?! Such conditions are not that of the boss, but the worker.”

According to Soud, “This is not the hard work of the Protestant Ethic, but blatant, brutal, and illegal exploitation. We do not see progress in such a system, but simply a rehashing of the same crimes that have haunted humanity since the inception of capitalism.” In what he describes as, “A blow to the bosses, workers have never taken such attacks lying down, and will not start to today simply because their bosses sit at a keyboard rather than in industrial factories.” Referring to the very beginning of the 2016 push-back targeting Uber, Soud reported, “Recently, on October 28, two brave Uber drivers, backed by the GMB union, said enough is enough, taking the international corporate giant to court and securing a monumental victory. No longer would the pretense of a self-employed micro-entrepreneur be allowed to be maintained; instead, the courts decided that they were employees, members of the working class, entitled to the same rights as all other workers in the UK.”

Soud reported that was when the Courts decided, “It was deemed that Uber must provide the minimum wage, holiday pay, and pensions, and stop trampling over workers’ rights. This decision immediately sent convulsive fits around the headquarters of the leading companies of the gig economy, since what applies to Uber will undoubtedly apply throughout all similar organizations. The legal requirements this precedent sets now place the profits and futures of these corporate monstrosities under existential threat; they will not, therefore, accept this setback lightly. Uber has already appealed the decision and sent out a pack of lies to all of its ‘partners’ (a.k.a. ’employees’) that this will only affect the two drivers concerned. It frames the debate as one of flexibility vs. bureaucracy. In reality, it is exploitation vs. decency.” Uber certainly didn’t give up without a fight, their huge profit margins were at stake and so it was worth splashing the cash to fund the first of several appeals anll of which they have now lost.

Those courageous drivers took a stand and they have finally been rewarded showing that, “Militancy pays.” Soud explained the formidable odds against them by noting, “Uber’s strength can appear overbearing, and the fight will not be easy. If these two drivers and others like them are to succeed, then the first task must be to work on unionizing and organizing those in the gig economy, starting with other Uber drivers. This is no easy task. But the inspiring strikes and victory by Deliveroo drivers recently shows that it can be done, that organization and militancy do pay. At the same time, it must be stressed that such struggle is the only genuine defense that workers have in the face of the aggressive rat race of modern day capitalist competition. Only by exerting the power and pressure of the organized working class and not relying upon the benevolence of the courts of the capitalist state, can concessions be won, guaranteed, and maintained.”

Describing the deliberate pattern of disrupting worker solidarity, Soud said, “In replacing relations between worker and worker with username and username, we see how technology designed to bring the whole world closer together is in fact used to isolate and divide the working class even further. Many in the gig economy may never see a fellow colleague in the entire time of their employment; indeed, they are instead placed in direct competition with each other, with the only winner being the corporation and its profits. The extremity of these conditions demonstrates the need to get organized. Failing to do so will only result in continued exploitation, as more and more malevolent routes are devised in order to exploit workers. On the other hand, successes and victories could cause shock waves throughout the gig economy and the labor movement as a whole, showing that if unions can take hold in this most precarious of industries, it can and must, happen everywhere.”

Soud appealed to readers, “End exploitation! End capitalism!” He said that, “Ultimately, however, even such industrial struggles cannot secure a decent, long-term future for ordinary men and women. The ruling class will strike back with a vengeance and seek to strip away all the hard-won gains of the past for the sake of their profits. If we desire a world without exploitation, without long working hours, low pay, and vicious attacks on our basic rights, then the only solution is to abolish the inherently exploitative capitalist system, to instead plan production on a socialist basis, for use rather than exchange, with democratic workers’ control of the workplace and the whole economy. Solidarity with Uber drivers! You have nothing to lose but your chains! There is a world to win!”

In the Labour List Article entitled, “The Uber ruling is a huge achievement. We can build a more secure future,” MP Andy McDonald described Friday’s Supreme Court ruling in favour of Uber drivers as, “a massive achievement that will benefit gig economy workers across the country, and it is thanks to years of hard work by the trade unions. For too long, the likes of Uber and Amazon have been getting away with gaming the system. They have tried to pretend that people who work for them aren’t, in fact, workers who are entitled to basic rights, including a fair wage, holiday and sick pay, safety and job security. This was always morally wrong; now the court has ruled it is also legally wrong. For the last ten years under successive Conservative governments, this mistreatment of workers who deliver vast profits for these companies has been allowed to go unchecked. On their watch, there has been an explosion of exploitative zero hours and insecure contracts.”

McDonald explains how, “To deny them these rights not only has a devastating impact on their lives and wellbeing, it also has a disastrous impact on wider society and is plain economic illiteracy.” He says of the Tories, “They simply cannot be trusted to rebuild a fairer and stronger society as we recover from the pandemic. If you want to know where improving conditions for people at work ranks on the list of Tory priorities, take their long-promised employment bill. It has been postponed indefinitely.” He claims that, the Tory, “Contract with the British people, that their hard work would enable them to get on in life and give them the dignity of being able to provide for themselves and their families, has been broken.” This is why noone should be taken in by the new set of Tory lies hinting an end to austerity, ’40 new Hospitals,’ the ‘Lev…up’ lie and ‘borrowed voes’ that stole our democracy in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. We must Strike, Protest, Challenge, Investigate and take the Tories to Court to win: Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

I have never enjoyed sweets, so I’m scathing in my description of ‘Candyfloss’ as “Puffed-up sickly sweet, vile sticky goo, devoid of any real substance, clinging to a stick.” We are currently being overwhelmed with another sticky gloop of airy ‘floss,’ that can easily be ‘spun,’ to placate the masses with soothing junk disinformation I call ‘Handyfloss’! I would define Handyfloss as, “Grotesquely over-exaggerated sickly sweet vacuous rubbish and vile sensationalist compulsive reporting, totally devoid of any real substance, and frequently centered around an expansive empty pledge or a blatantly obvious fabrication. Handyfloss is the convenient, as in ‘handy,’ propaganda spin of devious, lying politicians trying desperately to hide corruption or a mendacious power grab agenda to facilitate their endless profiteering and privilege at the expense of the general public. Our greedy, narcissistic PM, Boris Johnson, is a ruthless, perpetual motion, Handyfloss generator, but we really must stop consuming his sweet compulsive lies like Kool Aid!

This is an insidious part of a Tory forced lurch to the right. In the Canary Article entitled, “The left is under the most extensive attack since the 1950s,” they caution that, “A former Labour MP has been tasked with examining left wing groups as part of a government review into UK ‘extremism’. But this move is just the thin end of the wedge. It is one part of a much wider assault on left-wing views and activity. Taken as a whole, we are witnessing perhaps the system’s greatest attack on us since the McCarthyism of the 1950s.” They describe John Woodcock as a,“witchfinder general” and “As The Canary‘s Tom Coburg recently wrote: In November 2019, home secretary Priti Patel appointed lord Walney (former Labour MP John Woodcock) as the government’s envoy on countering violent extremism. According to the Telegraph, Woodcock will be looking at ‘progressive extremism’ in Britain. That includes how ‘far-left’ groups could infiltrate or hijack environmental movements and anti-racism campaigns.”

The Canary insist that, “To be clear, ‘extremism’ is a nonsense term. As police monitoring group Netpol’s Kevin Blowe wrote for The Canary, it can mean a number of things: from being a member of a civil disobedience group to being part of a campaign that challenges corporate power. Moreover, the government hasn’t even defined the term extremism or extremist in law. So it allows the state, and its agents, to decide who gets labelled as one.” The Canary describe this as, “The thin end of the wedge,” saying that, “Already, the right wing in the UK is cheering Woodcock on. The Telegraph wrote with glee that he’d be looking at ‘anti-capitalist’ groups. Woodcock himself stated that: ‘I want to look at the way anti-democracy, anti-capitalist far-Left fringe groups in Britain like the Socialist Workers Party tend to have much more success hijacking important causes… than the far-Right, and the harm that may do. Woodcock’s review is the thin end of the wedge. Because it sums up what’s happening across society.”

The Canary point out that Woodcock is, “implying there is no alternative to corporatism (or ‘capitalism’ as he incorrectly refers to it). Anything ‘anti’ that is wrong and must be stopped.” They say that, “in the wider world, this is already happening. It can be broken down into several areas.” First up, “Un-social media: controlling the narrative: Facebook and Twitter have been actively silencing dissent. This has now been happening for a while. In 2017, Facebook changed its algorithm to intentionally remove smaller, left-wing news outlets from people’s feeds. The Intercept reported last year that as Facebook was banning far-right, QAnon-related groups, it was doing the same to antifacist ones, too. It consistently shuts down pro-Kurdish accounts. Also, UK Twitter has repeatedly banned left-wing voices.” They say that now, “Facebook will be ‘depoliticising’ its platform. In short, it’s looking to reduce the amount of news in people’s feeds. But campaigners say this will hit small, grassroots groups the hardest.”

The Canary say, “Now, you could argue ‘it’s the algorithms what did it’. But someone designed those algorithms and according to reports, CEO Mark Zuckerberg personally intervened to make sure left-wing sites were hardest hit. Why? It’s about control of the narrative and it’s also about protecting powerful people and companies’ interests. The internet nearly caused control of the narrative to be lost. In the early days, it was a fairly open platform. But then, the dot com crash of 2000 came. The demise of countless new, smaller tech start-ups was a disaster capitalist’s dream. It paved the way for the domination of the internet by a few companies.” They say that, “In turn, these companies have ended up being some of the biggest in the world. At first, this was about concentrating ownership. But after events like the Arab Spring, the system realised the power the internet could yield for the people. So, the shutting down began.”

The Canary report that, “Just recently, we’ve seen some tech giants openly go to war with governments. Most pointed in this is Australia. Its government is making companies like Facebook pay the media for its content. Facebook isn’t happy. In response, it has blocked all news content from its Australian site. Google, meanwhile, is so far going along with the Australian government’s plans. The situation in Australia sums up another problem. Namely the establishment corporate media. Because it too has massive control over the public narrative.” The Canary describes this as, “Manufacturing consent, 21st century-style.”

“The Canary‘s Tom Coburg recently summed up the problem with the establishment corporate media. He wrote that: Professor Noam Chomsky co-wrote Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, which famously argued that the mainstream media’s role was all about suppressing criticism of the powerful. Now recent moves by media in the UK are about to see that ‘manufactured consent’ taken to a whole new level. Coburg argued that UK media is already dominated by a few players. People like right-wing Rupert Murdoch control huge sections of it. But Coburg wrote about how it’s about to get worse. He said that: In February 2021, Ofcom was reported to have given its approval for Murdoch and Brooks to launch News UK TV, an outlet that will undoubtedly reflect the political leanings of its owner. Meanwhile, it’s understood that former editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, is rumoured to become the next chair of Ofcom [the broadcast media regulator].”

The Canary warn of the danger of allowing these powerful entities to dominate the narrative as, “In January, it was reported that Richard Sharp, a former Goldman Sachs banker who donated an estimated £416,189 to the Conservative Party, is to be chair of the BBC’s board of directors. In short, the corporate media was already run by a few, right-wing people. Now, it’s about to get worse. The new Australian rules are all the more concerning, too. Because with Google and Murdoch now in financial cahoots, power over the narrative is even more concentrated. Overall, the left wing is being shut down on social media. It’s actively deplatforming our news sites. The establishment corporate media is more and more dominant. So, we all better get back to protesting on the streets, yes? Well, we are facing a clampdown there as well.”

The Canary describe the, “Co-opting of climate chaos,” saying that, “Whatever you think of Extinction Rebellion (XR), it’s gotten a name for itself. Its protests in London and around the world have been high-profile. But the system is determined to shut the group down. UK home secretary Priti Patel called its members ‘criminals’. She said its methods were a: shameful attack on our way of life, our economy and the livelihoods of the hard-working majority. Billionaire tech mogul Bill Gates said XR was not ‘constructive’. And Woodcock will be including the group in his review. So, why are the establishment attacking XR? It’s about control of the climate change narrative. In short, we’re seeing corporations and those in power co-opting the green movement for their own benefit. Gates is one example. Elon Musk is another. Shell, one of the world’s largest oil companies, is another; rolling out low carbon fuels. The system and its proponents know that we’ve screwed the planet. They know it needs fixing.”

The Canary point out that, “n the process, these disaster capitalists also see a money-making opportunity. Plus, if the system fails, so do they. So, XR and its people-led approach needs stopping and the UK’s increasingly authoritarian police are central to this.” The describe the, “Increasing authoritarianism” noting that the, “Police monitoring group Netpol recently wrote that the UK government: ‘Is planning to introduce major changes to public order legislation to crack down on protests, under a new ‘Protection of the Police and Public Bill’ planned for 2021. It’s looking to increase police powers over protest. These include police being able to control where they happen and using stop and search powers on protesters. Netpol says it comes in the wake of not only XR but also Black Lives Matter (BLM). Patel accused the latter of ‘hooliganism and thuggery’. Little wonder, when its call for defunding of the police is, like XR, a threat to the system. BLM’s drive for equality and social justice is the same.”

But it doesn’t stop there as sadly the Canary report that, “Corporate capitalism needs inequality to function. Any true levelling of the playing field would be too damaging for it.” If the Spycops Bill isn’t seriously amended both the police and private investigators hired by Corporate entities, will have unaccountable expanded powers to infiltrate and spy on law abiding citizens who oppose Tory Government or Corporate exploitation of workers, minorities and the environment. They say, “So, what if the police do arrest and charge you over a demo? At least lawyers will be able to help you. Or so you’d think. The government is also attacking the legal profession. As former Green Party leader Natalie Bennett recently wrote for Bright Green: ‘It’s not just that the government has drained away the resources of legal aid: the annual legal aid budget is now £1.6bn a year, £950m less in real terms than it was in 2010, or removed all support for large areas of work under the 2013 Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO).”

The Canary report that, “It’s also that the government has actively attacked the role of lawyers in upholding the rule of law: Priti Patel attacked ‘do-gooders’ and ‘lefty lawyers’, her Home Office tweeted (although after an outcry deleted) an attack on ‘activist lawyers’ and even produced a video with the same theme (also eventually deleted). Marina Sergides, a barrister at Garden Court, testified to the APPG: ‘We are public servants but we are not treated as public servants… we are actively attacked by the government’. That attitude permeates throughout government action. Just this weekend, Paul Powlesland tweeted that while assisting, pro bono, anti-HS2 protesters at Euston, he was slapped with a £200 Covid regulation fine. He said he’s confident of being able to fight it in court, but what a pass we’ve come to when police are acting against legal protection.”

As the Canary highlight how, “the left is becoming increasingly squeezed. We’re unable to operate effectively online. Our media outlets are impaired. The corporate news is all the more dominant. Physical protest is becoming more and more restricted and our right to legal recourse is also under threat. So, we’d best hope that Generation Z is going to save us then?” They also report on “Indoctrinating the youth,” saying that, “In 2020, the UK government issued new education guidance. Vice reported that it: ‘told leaders and teachers involved in setting the RSE curriculum that anti-capitalism is categorised as an ‘extreme political stance’, comparable to the opposition to freedom of speech, antisemitism and the endorsement of illegal activity. Of course, this would mean students would not hear any opposing views on capitalism. But it could also mean erasing huge parts of history.”

The Canary report, “As George Monbiot said in a Twitter thread: ‘Behind these histories lies an even bigger and more sacrilegious truth. It’s that the system we call capitalism… is really a system of global theft… Let’s imagine there’d been no theft. No gold, silver and land stolen from Native Americans, no people stolen from Africa, no wealth stolen from India and the other colonies, no ransacking of our life support systems. How successful would this system we call capitalism have been? How rich and powerful would nations like ours have been? I would guess: not very. Capitalism is not what it claims to be. It is not the great success story its beneficiaries proclaim. It is the ideological structure we use to shield ourselves from brutal truths. So, the system has to erase valid criticism of it for it to continue to evolve. And it’s embedding this further, too.”

The Canary describe the, “Cancelling of cancel culture,” they say, “We’re also seeing a ‘twin’ attack on so-called ‘cancel culture’. The UK government has just said it’s ‘strengthening’ free speech at universities. Education secretary Gavin Williamson said: ‘I am deeply worried about the chilling effect on campuses of unacceptable silencing and censoring. That is why we must strengthen free speech in higher education, by bolstering the existing legal duties and ensuring strong, robust action is taken if these are breached. In short, the UK Tories are targeting students trying to shut down transphobes, racists, and misogynists. Also with this comes a government focus on ‘heritage’.”

The Canary describe the “war on woke.” They say, “The government is bringing together 25 of the UK’s biggest heritage bodies and charities in an attempt to whitewash British history. Third Sector said that the government has ‘summoned’ them: ‘to a summit where Oliver Dowden [the culture secretary] is expected to tell them ‘to defend our culture and history from the noisy minority of activists constantly trying to do Britain down’. It is being seen as an escalation of the government’s ‘war on woke’ against so-called ‘cancel culture’, amid concern at senior levels in the government over what it sees as attempts to rewrite Britain’s past. It’s an obvious attack on BLM and the removing of slave trader statues. But moreover, it’s an attempt to shore up the false nationalist history peddled by the establishment that has led the system to the point it’s at today. So, you’d be hard-pushed to find somewhere the system wasn’t attacking the left. These individual cases are nothing new. But what seems new this time is the sheer scale of it.”

According to the Canary, “A freelance journalist has compared this to another time in history: A new McCarthyism? Tim Fenton said that much of this is a new form of McCarthyism. Historically, it’s not far off in terms of the current system’s MO. Woodcock’s review is the same as a ‘Salem Witch Trial’. That is, in the context made famous by Arthur Miller in his play The Crucible. Miller’s Salem witch trials were a metaphor for the clamp-down on communists during the 1950s in the US. But Fenton’s point is also useful in seeing why this is going on. In the 1950s, two forces were pulling the world apart: communism and capitalism. Human society was at a crossroads of ideologies. It could have gone either way. Fast-forward to the 21st century, and we are in a similar position. Except this time, the forces are not communism and capitalism. They are corporatism on one side and humanity on the other.” We must Protest, Challenge and Investigate Corruption to make sure that humanity not rabid Tory Corporatism prevails.

The Canary insist that, “This isn’t just a UK phenomenon, either. It’s been the same in the US and it’s the same in France. It’s the same in Australia. Power is now highly concentrated and those with it want to make sure it stays that way. But in the UK, Woodcock’s review isn’t the end of the story.” The Canary say that, “The left wing: being dunked, Tory style,” noting that, “The government will soon be introducing the Online Safety Bill.” Steve Topple says as he “previously wrote for The Canary, this proposed legislation is peak Tory government. It’s dressing up an overarching attack on freedom and democracy as something that’s good and protective for us. Put this authoritarian piece of law in tandem with Woodcock’s review. Then, tie in all the other crackdowns mentioned above and what you have is perhaps the greatest attack on the left since McCarthyism in the 1950s. In fact, it may end up being even worse.”

The Canary report, “With the advances in technology have come more and more ways for activists to organise. But consequently, traditional methods have been lost. Our lives and our human interactions are now dominated by tech. This leaves us exposed to governments and corporations exerting more power than ever before over them. My late father was a prominent member of the communist party in the 1950s/60s. He used to have a favourite story to tell. When they held meetings, the chair would always end his opening speech by saying: ‘finally, a very special welcome to our friends at the back of the room.’ He was referring to undercover police. But the meeting would still go ahead. Now, we live in the age of virtual organising and our right to even discuss having a meeting may end up being curtailed. Our freedom to object to, and protest against, what the system is meting out has never been under such a threat. It’s up to all of us to push back, before it’s too late.”

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled, “In attack on academic freedom, Gavin Williamson puts ally in charge of uni speaker lists,” Joe Lo elaborates on a worrying trend.” He says, “In a new reform allegedly designed to protect freedom of speech, Education Secretary Gavin Williamson will hand control over who can speak at universities to his friend and Tory peer James Wharton. Using research from a discredited dossier, Williamson has claimed that freedom of speech is under threat because some controversial speakers have been uninvited from speaking at university events. Unions representing students and lecturers have both denied there is any such crisis. But to fix this phantom threat, Williamson plans to give the Office for Students the power to fine universities who ‘fail to promote free speech’. This gives a lot of power to an unelected public body and its new chair James Wharton, who ran Boris Johnson’s leadership campaign along with Gavin Williamson and was made a Tory lord in return.”

Lo warns that, “By deciding how to define freedom of speech and when and how to enforce it, Wharton and his staff will essentially decide who is allowed to speak at universities and who is not. This is a grave threat to academic freedom; the university staff union UCU have warned that it’s not the only such threat. In a complaint to UNESCO, they said: ‘The reality is that, in the overwhelming majority of instances, UK academics report statistically significantly higher levels of systematic abuse of their academic freedom, than their European counterparts”. One reason for this is the Conservative’s 1988 Education Act, which abolished the concept of academic tenure, removing job security from academics. That’s increasingly been replaced by short-term precarious contracts which leave staff very vulnerable to management’s whims and limits their power to choose their own research topics and voice their own opinions.”

Lo explains that, “Repeated ‘national research evaluation excercises’ means academics are under pressure to prove their research has ‘impact’, influencing what they look into. On top of this, academics don’t ultimately control what they teach and how they teach it or how students are examined as that power is reserved for management. The government’s ‘Prevent’ rules, designed to counter terrorism, are also limiting what materials students and academics can access. At the University of Reading, students have to ask university management for permission to access certain books, like the Brazilian revolutionary ‘Minimanual of the Urban Guerrilla’. With all this bureaucracy, many will decide certain issues are too much hassle to investigate. Yet instead of addressing these real academic freedom issues, or the numerous other problems education is facing right now, Gavin Williamson has chosen the headline-grabbing non-issue of ‘no platforming’.”

Lo insists that, “When combined with the appointment of James Wharton, it looks less like he’s simply misguided and more like a cynical Whitehall power grab over centres of learning.” In essence this is another ploy for the alt-right to not just shut down genuine free speech, but force their warped Tory perspective into the minds of our most progressive thinking young people. Combined with other toxic Government appointments aimed at attacking and shutting down progressive Socialist viewpoints this is very worrying. Especially so as the alt-right are getting set to drench the public in Tory inspired ‘Handyfloss’ and fake news via two newly created ‘Fox News’ style TV channels spewing hateful propaganda to help maintain fear and division within the population. We cannot afford to wait until new Tory laws make it impossible or seriously dangerous to protest and the Judicial process is permanently altered to protect those who exploit and oppress our freedoms. We must act now before it is too late to oust the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

We must be a lot more vocal in demanding answers from this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship because they are manipulating our national broadcaster, the BBC and will soon back up their alt-right messaging with more extreme right TV in addition to saturating our print media. The vile agenda of eugenics policies that led to the horror of Nazi Fascism cannot be repeated. The Canary Article entitled, “UK media is about to take Noam Chomsky’s ‘manufacturing consent’ to a whole new level” they examine his ground breaking book. “Professor Noam Chomsky co-wrote Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, which famously argued that the mainstream media’s role was all about suppressing criticism of the powerful. Now recent moves by media in the UK are about to see that ‘manufactured consent’ taken to a whole new level. These big media players won’t be content with greater dominance and they, along with the help of the government, will do everything they can to crush the opposition.”

“New kids on the block?” The Canary ask, noting that, “The national mainstream media in the UK has always been dominated by the Conservative right. The Times, the Sunday Times and the Sun are owned by Rupert Murdoch and family via News UK, in turn, owned by News Corp. The main shareholder of the Daily Mail (as well as the i newspaper) is viscount Rothermere. The Daily Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph are owned by billionaire Frederick Barclay. And the Daily Express is owned by Reach (which also owns the Daily Star and the Daily Mirror). Each newspaper offers similar political content but tweaked for different audiences. As for broadcast news, the main players are the BBC (funded by the license fee) ITV, Channel 4, and Sky News (each dependent on advertising). But there are now old players masquerading as new players waiting in the wings.” They refer to “News UK TV”

In earlier Canary articles they reported on how, “In August and September 2020, Murdoch and his sidekick Rebekah Brooks met regularly with UK government ministers, including prime minister Boris Johnson. Then in February 2021, Ofcom was reported to have given its approval for Murdoch and Brooks to launch News UK TV, an outlet that will undoubtedly reflect the political leanings of its owner. Meanwhile, it’s understood that former editor of the Daily Mail, Paul Dacre, is rumoured to become the next chair of Ofcom.” The Canary say this, “isn’t the only new upcoming media venture. The ‘right-leaning’ GB News, which is part-funded by Legatum, a Dubai investment firm that via its chair is linked to the Brexit-backing Legatum Institute. GB News is headed by Angelos Frangopoulos, a former Sky News Australia boss. In 2018, former Labor minister Craig Emerson quit Sky News Australia after it “broadcast an interview with far-right extremist Blair Cottrell“. No doubt GB News’ politics will be of a similar hue.”

The Canary note that, “According to Byline: GB News appears to be owned by a company called ‘All Perspectives Limited’, which is in turn equally owned by media moguls Mark Schneider and Andrew Cole. Cole is a director and board member at Liberty Global, a multinational telecommunications company with roughly 47,000 employees. According to the trading website Wallmine, Cole is also a shareholder at Liberty, reportedly owning stock worth more than $1 million. Liberty Global has an interest in mainstream broadcasting in the UK, owning 9.9% of ITV Plc, the company that effectively owns and operates the ITV network. There has even been speculation that Liberty could launch a full takeover of ITV, with this rumour circulating via City AM as recently as May. Byline adds that Virgin Media is also owned by Liberty.” The Canary ask if this constitutes, “Political cronyism or conflict of interest? But, “It doesn’t stop there.”

The Canary say that, “In January, it was reported that Richard Sharp, a former Goldman Sachs banker who donated an estimated £416,189 to the Conservative Party, is to be chair of the BBC’s board of directors.” They provide a listing: “Some of the donations he made to the Conservative Party.” They say that, “The Guardian also reported that: Sharp’s family foundation donates to the Institute for Policy Research, an obscure charitable organisation that funnels money to the CPS [Centre for Policy Studies], as well as to other organisations aligned with the right of the Conservative party, among them the Taxpayers Alliance, MigrationWatch UK and News-watch, an organisation that has produced a number of reports alleging anti-EU bias in BBC reporting. The Canary add that, “Sharp happens to be the former boss of UK chancellor Rishi Sunak. He was also an economic adviser to Boris Johnson when mayor of London. Sharp will join Conservative supporter Tim Davie, who took over as BBC director general last September.”

The Canary previously reported that, “Davie met with former Downing Street special advisers Dominic Cummings and Lee Cain some two weeks after he assumed the role, although no minutes of that meeting are available. Meanwhile, the Johnson-led government is accused of blacklisting journalists and doing its best to sabotage freedom of information requests.” They describe, “Manufacturing consent; The media landscape in the UK is undergoing a major shift. More right-wing players are stepping forward to work alongside media moguls, establishing control both in existing organisations and in creating new ones. It’s nothing less than a media coup, with the beneficiaries being the Conservative Party and their friends in business. Moreover, the right-wing media monopoly will no doubt want to destroy all effective opposition to its political dominance, including using any means it can to eliminate independent media. Or as Chomsky puts it better, a manufacturing of consent; they include his Youtube Video.”

Even more alarming, the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship’s ‘Manufactured Consent’ isn’t just aimed at staying in power, and eliminating scrutiny so that they remain unaccountable for plundering public funds with impunity, there is a far more ominous agenda. The dangerous pseudoscience of eugenics that inspired ‘Herd Immunity’ still remains a Tory strategy for selectively targeting and culling the elderly, the poor and ethnic minorities. In the Byline Times Article entitled, “Free speech’ Czar role linked to Toby Young’s Free Speech Union & US Right-Wing Funding Network,” they note, “Nafeez Ahmed’s investigation reveals that the Government’s new proposal is inspired by attempts to suppress free speech about racism. The Education Secretary’s proposal to regulate free speech at universities by appointing a national ‘free speech champion’ at the Office for Students (OfS) came from an academic defender of white identity politics who has argued that ethnic diversity in itself increases ‘white threat perceptions’.”

Ahmed reports that, “Professor Eric Kaufmann, of Birkbeck College, is an advisor to the Free Speech Union run by Toby Young, the disgraced former OfS appointee who resigned from the role after critics highlighted his history of bigoted tweets. Kaufmann first proposed the idea of a ‘national academic freedom champion’ at the OfS to investigate alleged breaches of free speech rights in a co-authored report published by the Policy Exchange think tank in November 2019. Kaufmann joined the advisory board of the Free Speech Union when it launched in February 2020, when Young publicly endorsed Kaufmann’s proposal. Young’s influence on the Government’s latest proposals raises questions, given his own role in defending scientific racism and biological theories of racial and gender inequalities.” It follows the typical ‘divide and rule’ Tory technique of racist, anti-immigrant, nationalist ‘othering!’

“Byline Times has previously exposed his defense of pseudoscience funded by the Pioneer Fund, a neo-Nazi eugenics foundation established in 1937. Among other things, the Fund’s affiliated authors, several of whom Young has openly supported, claim that black people have lower IQs than white people. Toby Young is also the man behind a free speech students network with the same name as the new OfS role, Free Speech Champions, launched in February. Although it claims to be ‘led by young people’, Byline Times can reveal that the project is, in reality, a Toby Young front trying to suppress free speech on equalities among university students.”

“Documents and email communications obtained by Byline Times, as well as interviews with students, confirm that Free Speech Champions’ network is actually controlled by its funders, the Free Speech Union and the Battle of Ideas, which is part of a network sponsored by the Charles Koch Foundation. Under the guise of promoting ‘free speech’, Toby Young’s Free Speech Champions promoted alt-right figures such as Jordan Peterson, defended the alleged speech rights of Nazis in universities, fed students an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, and discouraged students from using words such as ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’. That the Government’s new role was inspired by an academic advising Young suggests that, far from defending ‘free speech’, Gavin Williamson is attempting to shut it down to defend ‘alt-right’ speech. The Department for Education did not respond to a request for comment.”

In a move Ahmed describes as, “Promoting Free Speech for Nazis” he says, “In January, the Guardian exposed the role of the Free Speech Union in the Free Speech Champions project, interviewing a range of students who had been involved. The students eventually resigned over concerns they were ‘censured if they disagreed with the group’s right-of-centre orthodoxy’ and described Free Speech Champions as an ‘astroturfed’ front for Young’s Free Speech Union. However, the Guardian story only scratched the surface of what the Free Speech Champions project represents. The project was not conceived by any of the students described as ‘founding champions’. Instead, Inaya Folarin Iman, who sits on the board of directors of the Free Speech Union, sent unsolicited emails to students at different universities early in 2020 asking them if they wanted to join the project.”

Despite the innocuous-sounding invitation the racist agenda soon became clear. Ahmed reports that, “Students who agreed to get involved were then enrolled in a series of meetings and workshops to receive training on free speech and to help develop the project. On 9 November, Iman emailed the participants links to online videos on free speech, including one titled ‘Would Today’s ACLU Defend the Speech Rights of Nazis’, published by Reason magazine. The video calls for Nazis to be able to freely express their views. Other videos recommended by Iman included one by the controversial psychologist Jordan Peterson and another by Brendan O’Neill, the editor of Spiked magazine. Peterson, described by The Times as an ‘alt-right darling,’ has been widely criticised for claiming that gender and class hierarchies are a function of the natural order. According to the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, Peterson has a track record of promoting revisionist falsehoods about Hitler, the Holocaust and Nazism.”

According to Ahmed, “Iman’s interest in defending the free speech rights of Nazis was in contrast to the opposition to students talking freely about the idea of ‘punching a Nazi’. In an email to participant Harry Walker, president of the Bristol University Free Speech Society, Iman appeared to oppose the freedom of speech to advocate punching Nazis, while simultaneously defending the right of Nazis to advocate genocide: ‘One thing I hope for this project is to see whether it’s possible to engage with the most reprehensible ideas in a way that is in the spirit of intellectual ambition, bravery and curiosity’.” I wish the example given had not mentioned a physical attack, as that isn’t essentially ‘free speech;’ it plays into the hands of a group that advocates violence.

The objective: “Shutting Down Speech about ‘Sexism’ and ‘Racism’” says Ahmed, “The Free Speech Union’s education and events director Dr Jan Macvarish was involved in steering discussions with the students from the beginning. According to Harry Walker, Macvarish ‘inexplicably sat-in on all of the meetings’ despite the students being told that the project would function independently of the Free Speech Union. WhatsApp logs reveal that, early on, she actively discouraged students from challenging racist and homophobic attitudes, describing doing so as an affront to free speech. Macvarish told the students: ‘I don’t think racism is irrational, it’s not a phobia. Neither is an objection to homosexuality.’ Macvarish described words such as ‘racism’, ‘sexism’ and ‘transphobia’ as ‘phobia’ words which, if used, would undermine free speech. She also dismissed the idea of Islamophobia: ‘If you look at who gets accused of ‘Islamophobia’ it really isn’t people who are actually oppressing and abusing Muslims though is it?”

Ahmed reports that, “In several meetings, Walker said that Macvarish ‘was railing against the notion that ‘the personal is political’, suggesting this is the issue with the discourse around gender, race and so on. She also encouraged us not to use terms like sexism, racism, transphobia, arguing that doing so was making concessions to the anti-free speech camp’. In other words, in the name of free speech, the Free Speech Union was trying to convince the students that certain words around racial, sexual and gender equality should be expunged from discourse, while words opposing racial, sexual and gender equality should be protected. Macvarish, a visiting research fellow at the University of Kent, did not respond to Byline Times‘ request for comment.” We are now seeing this exact same ‘nothing to see here’ denial culture preached by Tory Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch in Parliament and she is well supported by other privileged ethnic minority Tory MPs and right-wing BAME commentators.

Ahmed describes the, “‘Cultural Marxism’ Conspiracy Theory,” saying that, “In WhatsApp conversations, the Free Speech Union’s Inaya Folarin Iman also went on to endorse fears of ‘cultural marxism’, which she incorrectly defined as ‘rooted in a critique of the Marxist critique of capitalism’, supposedly in which certain ‘post-modernist thinkers’ moved on from Marxism to focus on identity politics such as ‘white = oppressor, non-white = oppressed (again, simple explanation)’. Her reference point was a book by James Lindsay and Helen Pluckrose called Cynical Theories: How Universities Made Everything About Race, Gender and Identity. Apart from the book offering a systematically flawed analysis of ‘critical theory’, Lindsay is funded by the conservative Christian nationalist Michael O’Fallon, who co-created a statement branding ‘social justice’ a threat to the gospel. O’Fallon is founder of Sovereign Nations, the entire remit of which is based on an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory about George Soros.”

Ahmed warns that, “Iman’s attempt to promote fear of ‘cultural marxism’ to the students is of particular concern as the term actually designates a far-right anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, thoroughly debunked by historians and quantitative analysis of academic research. Last year, the Board of Deputies criticised Conservative MP Suella Braverman for using this ‘anti-Semitic trope’. She refused to apologise and was instead made the Government’s Attorney General. As Jason Wilson has observed in the Guardian, the theory is ‘blatantly anti-Semitic, drawing on the idea of Jews as a fifth column bringing down western civilisation from within, a racist trope that has a longer history than Marxism. Like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the theory was fabricated to order, for a special purpose: the institution and perpetuation of culture war’.”

Ahmed explains, “The theory of ‘cultural marxism’ is credited largely to white nationalist Kevin Macdonald and far-right ideologue William Lind of the Free Congress Foundation. But it originated from the Nazis, who first used the term ‘cultural Bolshevism’. It claims that a cohort of German Jewish Marxist academics behind the Frankfurt School orchestrated an academic and cultural effort to undermine the US through an ‘identity politics’-driven cultural war on US values, mobilised through the Trojan Horse of minority rights. The theory of ‘cultural Marxism’ has since become a staple of the alt-right, used by the likes of Steve Bannon, Breitbart and even neo-Nazi terrorist Anders Behring Breivik who killed 77 people in Norway in 2011.” Byline Times say, “Inaya Folarin Iman did not respond to request for comment.”

What’s in a Name? Ahmed asks, saying that, “Perhaps the most direct evidence that the Free Speech Champions project is not led by young people is the fact that, despite going through the motions of allowing the students to brainstorm together a name of their own choosing, Toby Young’s Free Speech Union forced the project to take on the title ‘Free Speech Champions’ despite it being universally rejected by all of the students. In a letter to the group on behalf of members Harry Walker, Ben Sewell, Charlotte Nuernberg and Maya Thomas, sent in December 2020, they noted: ‘It seems that many of the major decisions regarding the project (its name, and belligerent approach to the culture wars to name a few) were made executively despite the group’s advice, not as a result of it; we don’t recall ‘Free Speech Champions’ being raised as a naming suggestion.’ The letter noted that the same name had been prematurely announced by Toby Young ‘nearly a month ago on Darren Grimes ‘Reasoned’ podcast’.”

Ahmed reports that, “The students’ letter pointed out that, when participants voiced approaches different to that of the Free Speech Union, they were largely shut down: ‘Those criticising the predetermined FSU-esque direction of the project were dismissed as overly sensitive or caving to censorious factions.’ Ahmed is focused on, “The Koch Connection and the Battle of Ideas” saying that, “Young’s Free Speech Champions is plugged into an opaque network of lobby groups which are funded by the Charles Koch Foundation. Apart from the Free Speech Union, its other chief organisational sponsor is the Battle of Ideas, a charity which runs the annual flagship festival of the same name on behalf of the Academy of Ideas (formerly the Institute of Ideas), chaired by former Brexit MEP Baroness Claire Fox, who also sits on the Free Speech Union’s advisory board.”

Ahmed says, “According to a joint investigation by the Guardian and DeSmogUK, Fox and the Battle of Ideas are part of the Koch-backed Spiked network of organisations which emerged from the ashes of the Trotsksyist left Living Marxism (LM) magazine, itself a splinter of the Revolutionary Communist Party. In 2000, LM was shut down after it became bankrupt due to losing a libel trial in 2000, in which it claimed falsely that ITN had fabricated evidence of Serb atrocities against Bosnian Muslims. The same figures involved in LM, including Fox, Brendan O’Neill and Frank Furedi, resurfaced through the Spiked network in the early 2000s. It later emerged that, from 2016 to 2018, Spiked US Ltd, the network’s US fundraising vehicle, had received $300,000 from the Charles Koch Foundation to produce public debates in the US about free speech.”

Ahmed points out that, “The Spiked network’s interest in promoting ‘free speech’ is clear from what it publishes and promotes, namely opposition to bans on child pornography; regulations on tobacco; gun control; limiting hate speech; bans on Nazi free speech; Black Lives Matter; anti-racism; the Me Too movement; and so on. It also regularly promotes climate science denial. Battle of Ideas trustee Frank Furedi contributes to the Koch-funded climate denial lobby group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation. Another Battle of Ideas trustee is Luke Gittos, author of Why Rape Culture is a Dangerous Myth. Gittos is a lawyer with ‘extensive experience in defending allegations of rape and sexual violence’, according to the book blurb, and is also a legal editor for Spiked. The Battle of Ideas did not respond to request for comment.” In a truly nauseating Rolling Stone Article entitled, “Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire,” you can discover the origins of their wealth and malevolent influence they have bought with that wealth.

Ahmed insists that, “It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the Free Speech Champions is merely yet another astroturfed front group for the Koch-backed Spiked network. That its backer, Toby Young’s Free Speech Union, is linked to the Government’s new free speech czar proposal indicates that the biggest threat to free speech on campus is coming from an alt-right pincer movement with ties to the Government itself.” Rolling Stone say that, “Together, Charles and David Koch control one of the world’s largest fortunes, which they are using to buy up our political system.” They are described as, “each worth more than $40 billion” and these American “‘homegrown oligarchs’ have cornered the market on Republican politics and are nakedly attempting to buy Congress and the White House. Their political network helped finance the Tea Party and powers today’s GOP.”

In contrast to toxic racist messaging now being channeled via alt-right organizations targeting students, “The Office for Students told Byline Times: ‘Free speech and academic freedom are essential elements of higher education teaching and research. Our regulatory requirements are designed to uphold the widest possible definition of free speech permitted within the law. However, we all must be clear where the law restricts speech, for example prohibiting unlawful harassment and incitements to racial or religious hatred. ‘Free speech is never an excuse for illegality or violence. It is essential that higher education is free of all unlawful discrimination, harassment and violence, and all students should feel confident that that is the case. It is vital that any student who suffers this behavior is given the support they need, and that universities deal with complaints effectively and robustly.”

Although the Rolling Stone Article refers to US politics, vile foreign manipulators like the Koch brothers, Steve Bannon and Rupert Murdoch have warped our democracy in the UK. The powerful Zionist Lobby has maneuvered into a strong position of influence over both the Tory and opposition Parties to forward the agenda of Apartheid Israel. We must oust these malevolent influences from our Universities and all aspects of our Media as well as our Political Parties because they aren’t acting in the interest of our citizens. We can no longer ignore such unacceptable incursions, so destructive to our democracy; we must protest, organize massive general strikes, robustly challenge the increasing injustices, taking legal action including demanding a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, the horrendous Covid death toll and the relentless squandering of public funds since this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship took power. In Myanmar they risk death to defy dictatorship, why can’t we even muster a whimper? DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The BBC just featured a repeat of ‘Have I got News for You’ originally broadcast just the day after the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. While the show is aimed at political humour one message was abundantly clear from the two main panellists, the result had been well beyond astounding, it was simply not believable. While there were swipes from all sides, the ones pointing to the numerous very public gaffs of Boris Johnson were most noticeable. The fake claim of an ‘assault’ on one of his team, the disgrace of him refusing to look at a picture of a child improperly cared for in A&E, stealing the phone only to hand it back as if nothing in his vile conduct mattered because the votes were ‘sorted.’ The requests for him to present himself for questioning and his refusal to be interviewed, culminating in him running away to hide in a fridge! These were not the actions of a confident politician awaiting a really strong showing in the polls; it seemed everyone had expected a hung Parliament at best or even a narrow Labour victory.

This show went out during that brief period of stunned shock before the impact of what had just occurred had really sunk in. The speed of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election result announcement with what appeared like barely enough time to complete the counts, it was as if the BBC were well prepared ready to sell the scam quickly and decisively to a gob-smacked public. Despite being a truly unfathomable result that clearly no-one was expecting, due to the abysmal performance of Boris Johnson and the almost complete absence of any real campaign from the Tories, there were no interviewers eagerly questioning him, seeking to discover the secret of his astounding success: this was highly unusual and very suspicious. All of a sudden the BBC remembered that Labour MPs had fought the election; they were hurriedly called in for nauseating interviews, expected to explain how they lost so many traditional Labour seats! Many on the Labour right delighted in being able to denigrate and blame Jeremy Corbyn for losing the election.

It was a unique chance for the unfaithful Labour centrist MPs, who had been trying to sabotage Labour just to oust Corbyn, to spew their venom and they eagerly complied with our not-so-impartial broadcaster as they sought to solidify and bed-in the fake news. The BBC featured an extraordinary invitation by offering an extended period of days of collective hand-wringing, breast-beating and self-flagellation to the Labour Party to convince the public that their MPs fully supported the unbelievable result: that they really had lost the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. Dissent was not tolerated, but few dared to question the validity of the so-called Tory ‘landslide victory.’ No one wanted to be criticised as a ‘sore loser’ so talk of challenging the results was kept well under wraps. The illegal prior knowledge of the postal vote results was never really investigated and the swift result-call was passed off as ‘normal.’ Some members of the public were crying foul, but they were being drowned out by the alt-right press and the BBC.

Time and distance helped solidify the deception; so after a few short weeks of convincing the British public that black was white, that the man despised and jeered at right across the country had miraculously won by a ‘stonking majority,’ most settled into the true misery of what lay ahead. The only explanation concocted by the Tories was the bullshit about ‘borrowed votes’ and how ‘the people’ had wanted to ‘Get Brexit Done.’ After a decade of Tory austerity, the forgotten north had supposedly voted to have their own children starve and it certainly didn’t take long for ramped-up Tory deprivation to arrive. For a pathological liar like Johnson, it really wasn’t hard to come up with a catchy new theme for ‘Austerity Mark 2’ and so the ‘lev…up’ Lie was born. He needed another zero credibility massive fake pledge that he could pretend the plebs had fallen for; yes, 40 new Hospitals for their precious NHS while he got busy completing the full privatization. The Tories needed to act fast to get things done before their con trick came unravelled.

Threatening the BBC had paid off; the total absence of impartiality from the BBC and UK Media was key tp obscuring the truth and marginalizing the potential for challenge. His handler Dominic Cummings wanted more control at number 10 despite the fact that he was an unelected… geek, the PM had him to thank for that weapons-grade PsyOps selling his propaganda so effectively. But look where we are now 120,000 Covid deaths on in just over a year of his shambolic premiership. The Pandemic gifted Boris an almost God-like power very early on into his corruptly acquired Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. Those who felt the most intense pain of his jackboot on their neck now patiently await a decree to allow the privilege of being able to hold their mum’s hand in a care visit; that is the paltry relief from oppressive misery that we are now reduced to as a nation. Where is that plucky spirit ready to defy the injustice with loud protests, nationwide strikes, legal challenges, and a demand for a full Investigation into that very dodgy election result?

Johnson wasted no time in bullying his MPs into compliant submission to his dictatorial rule; the gravy-train perks of shovelling so much public money out the door in untendered contracts to placate their donors and buy future votes helped to persuade. A Court victory declaring Matt Hancock’s actions unlawful, like so many Tory transgressions, can be ignored. The public is expected to become accustomed to the new normal of zero accountability in office. It started back with Dominic Cummings refusing to appear before a Parliamentary Committee, then his violation of the lockdown rules, Priti Patel’s bullying of her staff, Robert Jenrick and fellow MPs cheating over allocation of the ‘Towns Fund,’ now it’s Matt Hancock’s inappropriate Government contracts. These minor distractions have become just a matter of refusing to resign or dismiss a miscreant then just bluffing things out for a while until we move on. Once again with compliant Press cover, a hobbled BBC, and a useful Labour stooge, all it takes is time and distance…

We cannot afford to keep moving on! In Craig Murray’s Post “The Utterly Useless Keir Starmer” he says, “Ministerial resignations should be the least of the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic procurement corruption scandal. Ministers, MPs and their corrupt mates who benefited from these contracts should be in the dock and looking at lengthy periods of imprisonment.” So too should the Tory Prime Minister who used public money to fund paying a fake charity, ‘Integrity Inititave’ to deliberately create and disseminate fake news propaganda to defame Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn in order to steal the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. In any properly functioning democracy Boris Johnson and many of his cronies would be in jail not in office: we must fight for this just outcome. The Labour Party membership must wake-up to the fact that knight in shining armour ‘Sir Keir’ is a lying, cheating Trojan horse ushered in via alt-right Media accolades of his ‘forensic opposition,’ but dedicated to destroying the progressive Labour Left!

In the Canary Article entitled, “Keir Starmer just rallied to protect snivelling Matt Hancock,” they criticize the total lack of opposition. They say that “Matt Hancock needn’t have worried about the Labour leader savaging him on Sunday 21 February’s political TV programmes. Because Keir Starmer completely let the embattled health secretary off the hook.” They describe, “Hancock: flouting his ‘legal obligations’ The Canary reported on Saturday 20 February about a High Court ruling. As it noted: The Government is required by law to publish a ‘contract award notice’ within 30 days of the award of any contracts for public goods or services worth more than £120,000. But the Good Law Project and a cross-party group of MPs said the Tories didn’t do this and a judge agreed with them. He said: There is now no dispute that, in a substantial number of cases… [Hancock] breached his legal obligation to publish contract award notices within 30 days of the award of contracts.”

The Canary report that “There is also no dispute that… [Hancock] failed to publish redacted contracts in accordance with the transparency policy. So, were the Sunday 21 February political TV shows awash with calls for Hancock to quit? Of course not.
Starmer: let me wring my hands…” First up was Labour leader Keir Starmer on Sophy Ridge on Sunday: “Moments before, the host asked Hancock if he should resign. ‘No’, was his predictable answer. So, Ridge posed the same question to the Labour leader. Again, ‘no’ was the predictable (but ridiculous) answer. Starmer said: I don’t want to call for him to resign. I do think he’s wrong about the contracts. There’s been a lot of problems with the contracts: on transparency, on who the contracts have gone to, and there’s been a lot of wasted money and I think that is a real cause for concern. But at the moment, at this stage of the pandemic, I want all government ministers working really hard to get us through this.”

Taking a leaf out of the Johnson playbook he assumed the mantle of public consent for his spineless decision as the Canary report “He also said: But I think at this stage, calling for people to resign is not what the public really wants to see.” We the people are really furious at getting stiffed once again and Starmer cannot even manage a strong objection to the wrongdoing: both Starmer and Handcock need to go, but please take the rest of that corrupt Tory cabal out with you! The Canary report that, “Starmer thinks there have been ‘problems’ with the PPE contracts. Feel free to shout “FFS” while you read this. Because there haven’t been ‘problems’. There’s been unlawful activity from a senior government minister.”

The Canary say that “Over on The Andrew Marr Show, and things weren’t much better. Lammy: missed Starmer’s ‘hand-wringing’ memo. First up, and shadow justice secretary David Lammy was at odds with Starmer. He said that Hancock: should publish the contracts because the court has found it unlawful. He should cancel the… temporary scheme that he’s been using without any accountability or any transparency. He should come to parliament on Monday and explain what he’s going to do. It is outrageous, frankly… This is the sort of behaviour, giving contracts to your pub landlord and your best mate, that you would expect in a banana republic. Ouch. Clearly, Starmer’s ‘hand-wringing on the fence’ briefing hadn’t got to Lammy.”

Then Matt Hancock was on to defend his and the government’s actions… “Pulling on heartstrings, disaster capitalist-style.” The Canary describe how “The health secretary tried to pull on the public’s heartstrings. He said his department, ‘in the height of the pandemic’, published contacts on average within 47 days. Hancock pleaded that: my team were working seven days a week, often 18 hours a day, to get hold of the equipment that was saving lives. Indeed: ‘getting hold of equipment’ from Hancock’s family friends; Tory Party-linked firms and donors, and a hotel carpet company. Yet the health secretary repeatedly used the ‘saving lives’ line to defend his and his government’s cronyism.”

The Canary report how “Marr asked Hancock to apologise for breaching the law. He predictably didn’t.” They point out how “Hancock even had the audacity to say the country should be ‘grateful’ for his department doing its job. But of course, Hancock whitewashing cronyism, exploiting a global crisis, and showing wilful negligence is all in a days work for our disaster capitalist-led government.” Caroline Lucas Tweeted: “Listening to this again from #Marr makes me so angry. How dare Hancock suggest he broke the law to prevent shortages of PPE on the frontline? Health workers died for lack of right PPE at right time because of incompetence, cronyism & waste – does he think our memories are so short?”

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Video: ‘Opposition’ leader Keir Starmer says deciding whether to oppose is a ‘difficult judgment call’,” he “claims he’s not a ‘tap-dancer’ for the Tories. Keir Starmer has appeared on LBC radio, where caller ‘Anna from Camden’ challenged him on being a ‘tap dancer’ for the Tories over his refusal to call for lawbreaker Matt Hancock to resign after the High Court ruled that Hancock’s awarding of contracts to Tory donors and mates has been unlawful. Starmer trended twice, at the same time, on social media yesterday after saying he didn’t want to call for Hancock’s resignation, despite the lawbreaking mate-enriching taking place while the Tories caused at least 150,000 needless coronavirus deaths. Starmer denied he was a tap dancer, but the ‘leader of the opposition’ went on to try to defend himself by claiming that deciding whether to oppose the Tories is a ‘difficult judgment call’: Clue’s in the job title, Keith.” Right now his fancy footwork is so good he’s looking like Fred Astair!

In the Canary Article entitled, “Centrists promised In the Forensic Keir, but delivered Flaccid Keith,” they say that, “When centrists foisted Keir Starmer on a demoralised and defeated Labour Party membership, they promised he would be ‘forensic‘. But the only word that captures the limp futility of his first year is ‘flaccid’. Forensic Keir?” They justifiably ask? “Originally, the Left rebranded Keir as ‘Keith’ to dissociate him from the Labour legend he’s named after. Keir Hardie, the Scottish trade unionist who founded the Labour Party, began working the mines at the ripe age of seven. Hardie channelled a life of classist exploitation int politics to end it, and that was the mission of the Labour Party.” Sir Keir certainly has all the sparkling personality of a glass of distilled water; no wonder he was the perfect candidate for the role of Tory Trojan horse charged with dismantling the progressive Labour Left.

The Canary elaborate, “So Starmer, a former director of public prosecutions prosecuted people he had previously defended. Not to mention the question marks over his role in covering up the undercover policing scandal. However, almost a year of impotence later, ‘Keith’ has come to epitomise Starmer’s beige banality.” The Canary doesn’t hold back in calling Starmer, “A man with all the charm of the pub bore, who’d find himself outperformed by a talking potato sack. His nasal delivery gives him the sound of a Poundland Ed Miliband, who was himself a Poundland Gordon Brown. Flaccid Keith has so far failed to land a single punch against the criminally incompetent, corrupt Johnson government. He’s had a honeymoon with the press, and the centrist Parliamentary Labour Party gave him their full backing. Yet he’s turned it into absolutely nothing. In fact, opposition has been led by unions and working people. Despite pleas for his support, Flaccid Keith either abstained or sided with government.”

How could he have known it would be this demanding to ferment the type of catastrophic political sabotage the Tories had asked of him? The Canary describe, “The middle of the road to nowhere,” saying that, “Centrism isn’t about finding an objective middle ground. It is based on the assumption that there is no alternative to capitalism. But more than that, it’s based on a belief that capitalism is good, in and of itself. There might be a few rotten apples to deal with, but no major systemic issues. All capitalism needs, centrists argue, is a better manager. They are technocrats, suspicious of democracy. If only they were in charge, all would be well. Or at least, as well as anyone deserves. Because that’s the other thing about centrists, they fully buy into basing a person’s value on their contribution to capitalism. They’re likely to say things like: ‘Socially, I’m a liberal. But economically, I’m conservative’. They believe this compromise makes them grown-ups.”

The Canary claim that, “This is a nonsense, because the two cannot be separated. Economic policy that privileges the already-wealthy over everyone else has social consequences. Those consequences are all around us. Homelessness, poor mental and physical health, addiction, suicide, all derive from this inequality.” They say that “The truth is, centrists aren’t even particularly socially liberal. If they were, they’d be confronting Apartheid in Israel rather than enabling it. They would be backing trans people in their civil rights struggle, not condemning them. They would have backed Corbyn, not assassinated him. Centrism is a vacuous ideology borne of privilege. It’s what happens when you spend too much time in the company of affluent sameness. A certain type of person starts to believe they’re better than those without, and that sense of superiority turns to contempt. So when the ‘contemptible’ working class found political expression through Jeremy Corbyn, centrists flipped their wigs.”

The Canary explain that, “There was no political vision or values behind the centrist coup. It was a tantrum thrown by bourgeois prefects for the capitalist class. Now they have the Labour party, they have literally no idea what to do with it other than nod and curtsy.” They call out Starmer as, “The empty vessel” saying that the “Centrists have spent the past year continuing the chicken coup. They’ve purged the party membership of socialists with mass suspensions. They even aimed to decapitate the movement by suspending Corbyn on bogus pretexts. They’ve buried the Forde Report and any hope of holding to account the centrist staffers responsible for racist abuse against BAME MPs and members. In short, they’ve made the party a hostile environment for anyone to the left of Margaret Thatcher.”

According to the Canary, “At the same time, Flaccid Keith couldn’t bend over fast enough for the Tories. Watching his earnest defence of the indefensible, you’d be forgiven for thinking he was a government minister. He’s meant to be the leader of the opposition. Keith has ordered his MPs to back (or abstain on) every mistake the Johnson government has made. When school staff and pupils fought the government for a safe learning environment during the pandemic, Keith sided with government. When Health Secretary Matt Hancock’s corruption was exposed in court, Keith refused to call for his resignation. Keith has done nothing but fight the left while assisting the right.” They point out that, “The result is complete irrelevance. Labour now trails in every poll and is losing ground in many. Flaccid Keith is a subject of derision and mockery. The empty vessel is sinking.” Flaccid Keith seems an appropriate condemnation of Starmer’s failure to rise to the occasion and make hard choices.

The Canary comment on how, “When Jeremy Corbyn was holding mass rallies across the country and eight points up in the polls, centrists told us he was underperforming. Tony Blair himself stated that Corbyn should have been 20 points ahead. This became the battle cry of centrists in and out of parliament. Any other leader would be 20 points ahead, they said. So how do they account for Flaccid Keith falling further behind Boris Johnson? In the 2017 election, Corbyn won the greatest swing to Labour since the post-war government of Clement Attlee. The swing to Labour was greater in 2017 than in 1997. Centrists repaid the achievement by destroying the party. Corbyn’s leadership breathed life into a dead party. Haemorrhaging votes throughout the Blair era, centrist Labour was a busted flush.”

According to the Canary, “Centrists are now trying to memory hole 2008-2017. In their world, Blair left, Corbyn took over, Labour lost, and now they’re back to win again. But this wasn’t what happened. Corbyn and socialism proved popular. So centrists joined forces with Conservatives in a five year assault on the Left to halt a popular movement,” but they point out, “Now the Left is gone, centrists are superfluous. They’re too left for the right and too far right for the left. No one wants what their selling except themselves and so they continue to stumble about, high on their own supply. Centrists have achieved nothing but civil war internally, and irrelevance externally.” They claim, “Flaccid Keith seems stuck in a groundhog day, constantly rebranding the party via mostly-ignored presentations against a purple backdrop. He’s not waving, he’s drowning.”

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Video: Jeremy Corbyn shows Starmer how it’s done – telling Johnson to sack Hancock and end scandal of NHS privatisation,” they say, “Corbyn shows how it’s done and shows more Labour principle and spine that Starmer and his front bench put together. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn gave his successor an object lesson in opposition today when he did what Keir Starmer had refused to do: demand the resignation of the law-breaking Matt Hancock, after the High Court ruled Hancock’s awards of huge NHS contracts to Tory donors and cronies during the pandemic were unlawful: View Video here. I don’t know how the centrist wimp who had done the most to promote a second vote on Brexit, supposedly key to Labour’s defeat in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, was voted in as Leader, but surely people are missing real leadership and Labour opposition?

The Skwawkbox note, “Corbyn seemed to gently rub Starmer’s nose in it, posting out the video of his parliamentary contribution on Facebook and commenting: ‘Today I asked Boris Johnson to end the scandal of privatisation and outsourcing in our NHS and to replace the Health Secretary after he was found to have broken the law by failing to reveal contracts worth billions of pounds. These are questions to which people deserve an answer. Corbyn is not even currently a Labour MP after Labour joined Hancock in acting unlawfully, by failing to end the already-unjust withdrawal of the Labour whip last week when the period mandated by the party’s rules expired. Yet in one minute’s intervention he showed more Labour principles and backbone than Starmer’s whole front bench.” Labour will remain floundering in the wilderness until they finally unite under honest, trustworthy, genuine progressive Left leadership after Jeremy Corbyn returns to provide robust Labour opposition. We will need to do a lot better to Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The spirit of collaborative cross-party support that Sir Keir Starmer uses as an excuse for his spineless lack of opposition to the shambolic policy decisions of this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship are a lop-sided fxxk-you to all elected MPs. I say all because Tory MPs have no real choice in Johnson’s ‘my way or the highway’ corrupt Tory cabal; we have almost reached the point where there is no real ability for Parliament to continue functioning at all. In an ongoing display of utter contempt, even Rishi Sunak failed to attend the debate on a Labour motion that was a targeted appeal to the Chancellor regarding the upcoming budget. In the Labour List Article entitled, “MPs pass motion calling on Sunak to cancel ‘triple-hammer blow’ to families,” Elliot Chappell reports on yet another disgraceful Tory no show. He says, “MPs have passed by 253 votes, with Tories abstaining, a Labour motion calling on Rishi Sunak to abandon the planned cut to Universal Credit, the upcoming council tax rises and the public sector pay freeze.”

Chappell reported on Tuesday that, “Opening the debate for Labour this afternoon, Anneliese Dodds described a ‘triple-hammer blow to family finances’ and warned that the Chancellor is pressing ahead with ‘economically illiterate’ plans that will stifle demand in the economy. The Shadow Chancellor told MPs today that Sunak ‘faces a choice’ next week as the March Budget is a ‘pivotal moment’ for the country and urged the government to learn from the mistakes of the pandemic and the past 11 years. She argued that Conservative austerity imposed since the financial crash in 2008, which saw wages ‘flatline’ for a decade and household costs rise, had left the country with a ‘worryingly low level of resilience’ ahead of the pandemic.” The problem is that any concession on this issue will mean admitting that the devastating decade of austerity wasn’t just a serious mistake, it was a deadly error that is estimated to have cost 120,000 lives even before the shambolic handling of Covid doubled that death toll.

There is zero likelihood that this corrupt Tory Government will admit that their warped austerity agenda that forced the working poor into destitution via austerity was wrong. This was a conscious ideological choice, not a financial necessity which raises the issue of culpability for the needless deaths. Chappell reported that “Dodds said the damage done to the economy and to public health over the past year ‘didn’t need to be as severe’ as it had, and criticised Sunak for failing to understand that ‘the health crisis and the economic crisis are not separable’. ‘If economic support does not go hand-in-hand with the imposition of necessary public health restrictions, then we cannot get a grip on the virus nor will economic activity return to normal,’ she told the government minister. ‘If infections are not reduced, not only will restrictions be in place for longer but people will lack the confidence needed to get out and start spending again. Yet, time and again, the Chancellor has sought to pull back economic support with the virus still raging’.”

Chappell noted that “The Shadow Chancellor highlighted the attempt from Sunak to roll back the furlough scheme last year, and the subsequent the ‘11th hour’ U-turn to extend the job support programme just hours before it was due to come to an end.” This was unbelievably cruel to leave so many truly desperate people in limbo right up to the last minute and they look like doing the same again in callous response to this motion. Yet the BBC continue talking up their ‘lev..up’ lie and it keeps appearing in the press in total denial of the reality of the ruthless Tory assault on the poor. This vomit-worthy lie is what Starmer should be ranting about at PMQ, not that the PM or any of his Tories mates believe in accountability as they adamantly refuse to apologise. Chappell quotes, “Coronavirus may have closed much of our economy, but this government’s approach is crashing it,” Dodds said. “Next Wednesday is a chance to change course. To learn from these mistakes, not just of these 11 months but of the last 11 years.”

Chappell said “Dodds today urged the Chancellor to “harness the spirit of unity and solidarity” in the crisis by allowing those who have saved to invest in ‘British recovery bonds’, a proposal unveiled in a recent speech by Labour leader Keir Starmer last week.
She reiterated Labour’s call for the government to allow businesses to pay back Covid loans once they are making money, and to expand the start-up loan scheme to support the creation of 100,000 new businesses over the next five years. She said: ‘We need a new approach. A government that is on people’s side, that understand the value of public services, that gives families and businesses the security they need in the tough times and offers them hope in the years to come’. Sunak will unveil the Budget on March 3rd. He has refused to make announcements ahead of the statement but is expected to defer plans for significant tax increases and extend support schemes including furlough and business interruption loans.”

Chappell reported that “Left Labour MP Nadia Whittome urged ‘courage’ from the Chancellor, likening the moment to the post-war period, and called for a national care service, a green new deal, a long-term ban on evictions and a pay rise for key workers. Zarah Sultana MP emphasised the need for ‘ambition’. She argued: ‘This isn’t a time for tinkering around the edges. It’s 40 years of neoliberalism that got us here in the first place and we can’t go back to that. So let this be our 1945 moment’. ‘We must make a different choice. We must choose not the smallest state but an active and empowering state. We must renew our public services, not starve them of resources’,” Mention of 1945 will have sounded a ‘Socialist’ alarm bell for the Tories. He said, “Labour’s Angela Rayner told the Commons. Echoing lines from Starmer’s recent speech on the economy, she added: ‘As we seek to recover from this crisis, the state must work in partnership with business to lay the foundations of our future success and prosperity’.”

Chappell noted that “Stressing low levels of statutory sick pay and zero-hours contracts, Labour MP Olivia Blake said: ‘Low pay and insecurity in our economy has created a perfect storm for transmitting the virus and the government has failed to learn the lessons. Throughout the pandemic, the government’s ‘whatever-it-takes’ rhetoric has rung hollow as for the past decade it has downgraded the public sector’s ability to respond to a crisis,’ the Labour MP for Luton South, Rachel Hopkins told MPs today. Housing, Communities and Local Government Secretary Robert Jenrick told local authorities in March last year that ‘the government will do whatever is necessary to support their efforts to combat the impact of the virus in their communities. But analysis released last year showed that nine out of ten major local authorities in England do not have enough money to cover their spending plans this year and that the pandemic could result in them going £1.7bn over budget.”

Funding that is vital to the survival of ordinary working families remains left up to a last-ditch reprieve from a millionaire Chancellor so removed from the reality of ordinary mortals that he feels justified in ‘playing-God’ with the less fortunate and totally destitute. According to Chappell, “Labour has repeatedly urged the government to provide more money to local councils instead of forcing the authorities to implement a near-mandatory increase in council tax this April to make up for lost funding. Sunak was not present for the debate this afternoon. Shadow apprenticeships minister Toby Perkins commented: ‘I don’t suspect that’s because he’s publicity shy… I suspect he doesn’t want to be associated with the Tory policies of the past.’ The government continued with Boris Johnson’s new policy today, adopted last month in the face of motions on free school meals and the Universal Credit cut, of ignoring opposition day motions and instructing Tory MPs to abstain.”

Despite all of the genuinely desperate need throughout the UK, the one consideration hinted at in the Media is an extension of the Stamp Duty relief in order to stimulate the house buying market, a nice perk for those who aren’t facing severe hardship, imminent eviction or struggling to feed their families; this costly tax give-away is hardly a dire necessity! Labour List has included a copy of the full text of the motion tabled by the opposition, in one long, breathless mega paragraph that starts with a strong admonishment of past policy mistakes and their negative impact so far. It begins, “That this House believes that the last decade of UK economic policy weakened the foundations of this country’s economy and society, leaving the UK particularly vulnerable when the coronavirus crisis hit; further believes that many government choices and actions during the coronavirus pandemic have exacerbated the problems that the pandemic has caused, leading to the UK suffering the worst economic crisis of any major economy;…”

The motion concludes with: “…Calls on the government, as the UK emerges out of the pandemic, to address the deep inequalities and injustices in this country and take the UK forward to a stronger, more prosperous future through a new partnership between an active state and enterprising business; further calls on the government to protect family finances by reversing the planned £20 cut in Universal Credit, reversing the key worker pay freeze and providing councils with the funding they need to prevent huge rises in council tax; and calls on the government to introduce a new British recovery bond to allow people who have accumulated savings during the pandemic to have a proper stake in Britain’s future and to back a new generation of British entrepreneurs by providing start-up loans for 100,000 new businesses.”

The advice of the former Labour Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell puts Sir Keir Starmer’s feeble input to shame as is readily apparent in the Independent Article entitled, “Impose windfall tax on pandemic profits to wipe the debt slate clean, says McDonnell.” They report his claim that “Many Britons facing ‘long trail of hardship’ after Covid is gone,” saying that, “McDonnell has called for a windfall tax on those who have profited from the coronavirus pandemic to pay to cancel households debts caused by the crisis. Writing in The Independent, Mr McDonnell said it was time to ‘wipe the slate clean’ on high-cost and unmanageable debt built up by millions of Britons, including many key workers who have fought on the Covid-19 frontline?”

The Independent highlight that, “In a swipe at Sir Keir Starmer’s high-profile economic speech on Thursday, which was criticised for containing only modest proposals for reform, he said: ‘There is a time for framing speeches and political positioning but there is also a time to get angry and a time to demand immediate action to help people survive’. Mr McDonnell cited Citizens Advice warnings that an estimated 6 million people, including more than 20 per cent of key workers, have fallen behind on bills because of Covid-19.” McDonnell said, “that number in severe problem debt is believed to have doubled to 1.2 million during the crisis. The former shadow chancellor called for a Debt Charter to deal with the causes and consequences of debt. Improved benefits and a £10-an-hour living wage, along with restored universal basic services, should be deployed to prevent people from getting into debt in the first place, he said.” Far from seeing wages go up it’s more likely they will fall due to ‘fire and rehire’ or zero-hours contracts.

The Independent report that “He called for a cap on interest rate charges and a ceiling on overdraft fees and interest payments to ‘rebalance power between lenders and the indebted’. He said bailiff visits should be suspended at least until the whole of the UK has been vaccinated against Covid-19. In his most radical proposal, Mr McDonnell said: ‘We need to wipe the slate clean. That means a comprehensive package of debt cancellation, beginning with the worst kinds of debt: including high-cost debt, old debt, unmanageable rent and student debt, backed by a windfall tax on those that have profited from the pandemic’. Writing ahead of Rishi Sunak’s Budget on 3 March, Mr McDonnell said the chancellor had “virtually ignored the debt burden many people have been forced to take on over the last 10 months as their incomes have either been cut or dried up totally”. I fear the Tory jackboot will not be taken off our necks any time soon; the only way to effect change is to remove Trojan horse Starmer and the Tories from office.

According to the Independent, “The Bank of England’s Andy Haldane has predicted a ‘coiled spring of demand’ from people wanting to spend savings built up during the pandemic.” This was a typical comment from a person so completely out of touch with the reality for the majority of Brits that it is beyond insulting. But Mr McDonnell told the Independent that, “other Britons were facing ‘a long trail of hardship, poverty and unmanageable personal debt unwinding’ because of financial problems caused by Covid. ‘Debt is an issue neglected by politicians for too long,’ wrote the former shadow chancellor. ‘The time for action has come’.” It is hard to imagine how abandoned our young people feel after being coaxed back to high-cost Halls accommodation where they were trapped during online tuition that they could just as easily complete at home. Students locked into accommodation contracts, despite moving away from campus, are saddled with this debt on top of over £9000 a year in tuition fees for a limited learning experience.

But the Tories do not care about young people at all, there is no financial support and their job prospects after investing in costly education are abysmal. Mike Sivier comments on the debt relief alternative for those hit hard by Covid in his Vox Political Article entitled, “Windfall tax on pandemic profits should wipe out Covid-19 related debt says McDonnell.” If we hadn’t been cheated out of a Labour victory in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election as Sivier says of McDonnell he, “would have revolutionised the UK’s economy. Instead, the Tories have saddled one-tenth of the population with debt so great that they cannot pay their regular bills.” He notes, “A former Shadow Chancellor has proposed a radical set of plans to clear the debt created by the Tory government’s cack-handed handling of the Covid-19 crisis. John McDonnell pointed out that the richest firms in the UK have profited hand-over-fist during the crisis, and should pay a windfall tax to help pay for the measures to end it, which would ultimately help them, of course.”

Siveir claims that “His proposals were not an attack on businesses, though – they were a criticism of a speech by current Labour leader Keir Starmer, whose best idea was to get members of the public to give all the money they have managed to save during the crisis to a new investment bank, meaning the nation’s poorest would foot the bill (again). What a socialist Starmer is!” He too emphasizes the point that, “In fact, according to Citizens Advice, more than six million people have fallen behind on their bills because of Covid-related hardship and the number in severe, problem debt has doubled to 1.2 million. They don’t have any spare cash for castle-in-the-air investment banks!” This was such an out-of-touch obvious ‘business as usual’ neocon proposal from Starmer, no wonder it has been heavily criticized by the progressive Left: at least those who have yet to be gagged or expelled for daring to speak their mind! We have zero opposition under Starmer and he needs to go ASAP s we can Get The Tories Out!

Siveir hails the constructive solution proposed by McDonnell, who said “a comprehensive package of debt cancellation was needed to get the UK back on its feet, including high-cost debt, old debt, unmanageable rent and student debt, all to be supported by a windfall tax on businesses that have raked in billions of pounds over the last year.” One of Starmer’s loyal centrist followers, James Murray Shadow Financial Secretary to the Treasury was eager to tell Politics Live that there should be no new taxes any time soon as he tried hard to marginalize McDonnell’s the progressive Socialist input of getting the excessively wealthy to stump up. While he managed to identify deficiencies in the Tory Government’s ‘Catch-Up’ scheme as he focused on the lack of support for children’s mental health. He attacked the Tory defunding of Councils that has forced them to keep hiking Council tax, he was under pressure easily cornered into ruled out any tax increase on top earners and the windfall tax even if the Tories put that forward.

Although there were questions re the continuation of the Furlough scheme and the vital extra £20 Universal Credit amount, the Tories are taking this to the wire, just to ramp-up the unnecessary anxiety across the nation while they delight in playing-God. James Murray tried to claim that McDonnall was in full support of the limp Labour Leadership under Starmer, but he simply is not. Siveir reports that McDonnell, “Called for the creation of a ‘Debt Charter’ to tackle the causes and consequences of debt in UK society. Improved benefits and a £10-an-hour living wage, along with restored universal basic services, should be deployed to prevent people from getting into debt in the first place, he said. He called for a cap on interest rate charges and a ceiling on overdraft fees and interest payments to ‘rebalance power between lenders and the indebted’.” McDonnell also identified that, “bailiff visits should be suspended at least until the whole of the UK has been vaccinated against Covid-19.”

Silver insists that “This is the kind of thinking, we need at this time. We could have had it, too, if only millions of people had not been hoodwinked by anti-Labour propaganda at the 2019 general election, including a Tory campaign that was found to be more than 80 per cent lies. So if you find yourself struggling with debt for years to come, while the Tories, their client media and their business-oriented donors tell you you’ve never had it so good, just remember that you could have had it better.” Siveir stresses that we must “remind everybody you know not to be fooled again.” Personally I still believe that not so many were tricked into ‘lending’ their votes; that in reality their votes were stolen in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election and this still needs to be fully Investigated. The public have been fooled into thinking this was a free and fair election, but it the Tories are allowed to get away with this injustice once it will become the norm just as the zero accountability precedent has been normalized by this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Labour MP Derek Twigg launched the first attack at PMQ’s, raising an issue that is crippling local authorities right across the UK as the Tory Government choke off repeatedly promised funds to cover the increased costs of dealing with the Pandemic. This callous move appears aimed at forcing Councils to raise Council Tax rates that will hit the poorest residents the hardest as Tories distance themselves from the impact. He asked, “Halton Borough Council ran out of funding for discretionary covid isolation payments despite the strict criteria for eligibility. Just 171 constituents have been helped. The council has applied for further funding, but what the Government have offered will not be enough. Other constituents failed to qualify for help due to the criteria set by the Prime Minister’s Government. Will he look again at this and bring forward a properly funded scheme so that no constituent is in a position where they cannot afford to isolate? We need this to happen if we are to continue to drive down covid-19 infections.”

The problem of people not having sufficient funds to isolate when told to do so is far too well recognized for the Government to claim ignorance and it therefore clearly indicates a conscious choice to leave this massive breach in the infection control effort wide open to enable the targeting of poorer communities. There is simply no excuse for inaction, but again the tactic of distancing is being used to offload responsibility onto cash-strapped Councils forcing them to axe public services in another covert Tory austerity drive. Boris Johnson responded by saying “I thank the hon. Gentleman and pay tribute to the work of everybody on Halton Council for everything that they have been doing throughout this pandemic. I know it has been very tough on council officials and, indeed, on everybody else. Central Government have put in another £4.3 billion to help councils throughout the pandemic. We will continue to support our local authorities and he will be hearing more from the Chancellor next week.”

Then Tory MP Duncan Baker asked, “If the UK is to become the Saudi Arabia of wind power, off my coast of North Norfolk is surely the capital. But the current piecemeal and environmentally damaging connection method to the national grid is holding us back, as was proven by the Vattenfall judicial review just last week. We need legal and regulatory reform now. Prime Minister, could this be a job for the new Taskforce on Innovation, Growth and Regulatory Reform to help us to implement the much-needed offshore transmission network and meet our net zero targets?” It was an invitation for the PM to brag replying, “Yes indeed. I congratulate my hon. Friend on his campaign to make his constituency the Riyadh, or possibly the Jeddah, of offshore wind. I can tell him that we are certainly looking at the issue of the transmission network review and we are developing the necessary regulatory changes.” Alignment with the murderous regime of beheadings, female repression and bombing Yemen into oblivion didn’t phase the PM.

It was Sir Keir Starmer turn to present his weekly charade as Labour opposition, he said, “The principles behind the Prime Minister’s recovery plan, of caution and it must be irreversible, are plainly right, but one of the biggest threats to that is misinformation about the risks of the deadly virus. For example, there have been people saying that covid statistics ‘appear to have been manipulated and that Monday’s road map is based on ‘dodgy assumptions’ and ‘false modelling’. Does the Prime Minister agree that these kinds of comments are irresponsible and undermine our national recovery?” A pathetic non-question dribbled out as the PM sought more praise, “The road map that we have set out will, I believe, set us on a cautious but irreversible journey to freedom. I am glad that the right hon. and learned Gentleman supports the four steps of 8 March for schools, 12 April for shops, 17 May for hospitality and 21 June for everything. The data supporting all of that has been available to the House since I announced it on Monday.”

Starmer failed to realize his own ineptitude saying, “I think the Prime Minister dodged that question, no doubt because all those comments came from his own MPs, some of the 60 or so members of the Covid Recovery Group. Perhaps the Prime Minister should have a word with them. Another big threat to the recovery plan is that around three in 10 people who should be self-isolating are not doing so. That is a huge gap in our defences, and the small changes on Monday will not fix it. That is why Labour has called for the £500 self-isolation payment to be made available to everybody who needs it. Will the Prime Minister just fix this?”

The PM was still fishing for complements, a bit more grovelling was expected from his faithful Trojan horse so he tried once again to coapt the Labour Leader in his own deadly shambolic decision making saying, “The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows very well that those who are asked to self-isolate already have the £500 test and trace support payment, and I think he also knows because he supported the road map on Monday, that the eligibility criteria are being extended to allow parents and guardians who are staying off work also to receive a payment, provided they meet the criteria. I think he is aware of that.”

The money wasn’t being supplied to Councils to cover the cost of paying people to isolate, but the opposition should be clearly pointing out that this is by design,’ a callous Tory strategy to target the poor in deprived areas, a ‘cull!’ Starmer said, “Three out of 10 people who should be self-isolating are not doing so. That matters to millions of people, and it matters if we are going to get the virus under control. The chair of Test and Trace said that people are ‘scared’ to come forward for a covid test because they cannot afford to isolate. The chair of Test and Trace says they cannot afford it. The Government’s Joint Biosecurity Centre concluded that ‘unmet financial need’ was why some lower-income areas are seeing ‘stubbornly high’ infection rates. Why, after all the billions the Government have thrown around, is it still people in low-paid jobs who are at the bottom of this Government’s priorities?”

The PM saw this as his opportunity to launch into PR bragging in the pretence that the public are appreciative of all the misdirected funding and the choked-off vital support. He said, “Actually, I think that most people looking at what we have done throughout the pandemic and looking at the £280 billion package of support can see that it is the poorest and neediest in society, those on the lowest incomes, who have been at the top of the Government’s priorities, and that is quite right. We will continue to act in that way and the right hon. and learned Gentleman will be hearing more about that next week from the Chancellor. That is in addition to the discretionary funding we have given councils to support those who need it most, including those who have to self-isolate.”

The public are not fooled by the Tory, ‘black is the new white campaign;’ the money simply isn’t there and cash strapped Councils have no choice while billions in public funds are being squandered on Tory mates. Starmer hit back, “Here is the difference. If you need £500 to isolate, you are out of luck. If you have got the Health Secretary’s WhatsApp, you get a £1 million contracts. Turning to next week’s Budget, I do not expect the Prime Minister to pre-empt what is in the Budget, if I want that, I can read it on the front page of The Times, but will he at least agree with me today that now is not the time for tax rises for families and for businesses?” The progressive Left felt the bear trap snap shut as the Captain of Capitulation ignored the need to tax the wealthy elite.

The PM seized the opportunity to force Starmer into abandoning tax hikes on the wealthy, he said, “I don’t know about you, Mr Speaker, but the Budget is happening next week, and it is not a date that is concealed from the right hon. and learned Gentleman. He knows when it is happening and he knows what to expect, but it is preposterous for him to talk about tax rises when he stood on a manifesto only a little over a year ago to put up taxes by the biggest amount in the history of this country. It is the Labour party, including his Labour council in Camden, that puts up taxes across the country. That is the way Labour behaves, and it is thanks to prudent fiscal management by this Government that we have been able to fight this pandemic in the way that we have.”

Starmer’s ‘forensic’ skill wasn’t clear – he said, “The Prime Minister wants to talk about tax rises, and he should because it matters. Councils up and down the country are being forced to decide now whether to put council tax up. That is a £2 billion rise on families. I am not blaming councils. They have been starved of funding for a decade, and Labour and Conservative councils are in the same position. For example, the Prime Minister might want to concentrate on his own constituency. His own council, Conservative-run Hillingdon, is voting to increase council tax by 4.8%. Does the Prime Minister think that the council is right to do that?”

The PM defended his record saying, “Hillingdon Council, in common with most Conservative councils has been running lower council taxes than Labour up and down the country. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is completely wrong, so I will correct him. The top 10 highest council taxing councils in this country are run by the Labour party, and they are all going to put their taxes up, except for one in the top 10, which is Burnley, which is currently in no overall control. He talks about London and my own record on taxes, but he should talk to the current Labour Mayor of London, who is putting up his council tax by 10%. I can tell him that the previous Conservative Mayor of London cut council tax by 20%. That is what Conservative councils do.” In reality, there is good reason why Councils in deprived areas need more support with fewer high-end business premises to boost revenues, but the PM was on shaky ground citing his London record after he gutted the Fire Department so it was ill-equipped to deal with Grenfell!

Starmer said, “The fact is that £15 billion has been taken out of council budgets over the last 10 years. The Prime Minister should stop blaming others for the damage he has done. He quotes the Mayor. This is the former Mayor who bought water cannon that could not be used, spent millions on a garden bridge that never got built and then more recently gave a pay rise to Dominic Cummings.” He noted, “This is yet another PMQs with no answers. The truth is this. The Government spent a decade weakening the foundations of our economy and our country. As a result, we have the highest death toll in Europe. We have the worst recession of any major economy. Families are facing council tax rises and millions cannot afford to self-isolate. And all the Prime Minister offers is a return to business as usual. Next week’s Budget is a chance to choose a different path, to build a stronger future, to protect families, to give our key workers the pay rise they deserve and to back British businesses by supporting 100,000 new start-ups. Will the Prime Minister do so?”

The pressure was on the PM to offer concessions; remaining stum he said, “If the right hon. and learned Gentleman will only wait until next week, I think he will find that we will do far more than that paltry agenda he has set out. It is quite mystifying to see the way that he weaves hither and yon like some sort of druidical rocking stone. One week he claims that he supports the vaccination roll-out. The next week, he attacks the vaccine taskforce, when it is spending money to try to reach hard-to-reach, vaccine-resistant groups, and says that that kind of spending cannot be justified. He calls for us to go faster with rolling out vaccines when he would have stayed in the European Medicines Agency, which would have made that roll-out impossible. He vacillates. We vaccinate. We are going to get on with our agenda, cautiously but irreversibly taking this country forward on a one-way road to freedom, and I very much hope that his support, which has been so evanescent in the past, will genuinely prove irreversible this time.”

Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns was ready and willing to stroke the PM’s ego, saying, “The Prime Minister’s road map will provide many of my constituents in Morley and Outwood with a vision of hope that life is set to return to a new normal before the end of June, allowing us to celebrate the great British summer. Can he inform the House of the pre-emptive actions that the Government are taking to spot, prevent and limit the damage of any future health emergencies, so that local economies in constituencies such as mine have certainty that this will be their last lockdown?” The PM responded, “My hon. Friend is right to raise the issue of local outbreaks and how to tackle them, particularly with the threat of new variants, which she rightly raises. That is why we have a very tough border regime but also a programme as we go forward for surge testing, door-to-door testing, to ensure that, when there is a local outbreak, we keep it local and keep it under control, as we are trying to do at the moment with the South African variant”

The SNP leader Ian Blackford asked, “Next week’s Budget gives the opportunity to tackle the financial costs of this pandemic. The UK has suffered its worst recession in 300 years. We now need a Government who understand the scale of this crisis, yet at the very moment that we need maximum investment to recover, the Tories are threatening austerity cuts that will leave lasting scars on all our communities. Families have already seen their incomes slashed under this Government, and now the Tories want to impose a public sector pay freeze and cuts to universal credit. Will the Prime Minister rule out a return to Tory austerity cuts and commit to a major fiscal stimulus of at least 5% of GDP, or will he threaten the recovery and leave millions of people worse off?”

The PM just needed to bluff this out in the normal way, bragging over exaggerated spending on the wrong priorities, “I am proud of the massive investments that the UK Treasury has made throughout the whole of the United Kingdom, with £13 billion and more going to Scotland and huge sums going throughout the country. I wish that the Scottish nationalist Government would spend that money better because it is very sad to see some of the failures in education policy in Scotland and the failures in their criminal justice policy and fighting crime. I think what the people of the whole UK and, I believe, the people of Scotland would like to see is less talk about a referendum, which is the right hon. Gentleman’s agenda, and more talk about the real issues facing our country.” Cloaking himself in the mantle of assumed public approval the ‘Emporor’s’ nakedness exposed all his most sordid ‘bits!’

Ignoring Johnson’s repeated childish insult of improperly recognizing the title of the SNP, Blackford hit back saying that “The Prime Minister is boasting, but the cold, hard reality is that the United Kingdom has suffered the worst slump of any major economy and 120,000 people have lost their lives. That is under your guidance, Prime Minister. Coronavirus has exposed the deep inequalities under this broken Westminster system. After a decade of Tory cuts, millions of families are in poverty and UK unemployment is soaring. In contrast, in the United States, President Biden understands what is needed. He has proposed a $1.9 trillion stimulus package to restart and renew the American economy. Prime Minister, will your Government follow the example of the US and boost the economy like Biden, or is the Tory plan to return to type and impose yet another decade of Tory austerity?”

Damn him ignoring the insult, still, no apology was necessary the PM was free to hurl abuse as he pleased, even in the Chamber, such is the power of Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. He bragged, “This Government are investing £640 billion in infrastructure alone throughout the UK, a massive programme to get our country rebuilt and restarted again. I think that is what people would like to focus on, rather than the right hon. Gentleman’s agenda. He has talked about our broken politics, our broken country. All they want to do is break up Britain with another referendum, and I think that is the last thing this country needs at the moment.”

Ed Davey briefly joined the Tory congratulatory chorus saying, “Can I start by thanking the Government for their change of policy, announced today, on the vaccination priority for people with learning disabilities, despite the Prime Minister’s rather more equivocal answer to me on this last Monday?” It was a victory for the Lib Dem Leader’s personal crusade. He then switched his attention to concern over China saying, “Today, millions of Uyghur people in China live in fear under a cruel regime. The BBC, international media and human rights non-governmental organisations are all reporting on forced labour camps, women being raped and sterilised, and families being separated. This is a genocide happening in front of our eyes. So does the Prime Minister agree with me that, unless China ends this genocide, Britain and Team GB should boycott the Winter Olympics in Beijing next year?”

The PM ignored Davey’s triumph to focus on China saying, “The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to highlight the appalling campaign against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang and that is why my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has set out the policies that he has the package of measures to ensure that no British companies are complicit in or profiting from violations. We are leading international action in the UN to hold China to account, and we will continue to work with the US, friends and partners around the world to do just that. The right hon. Gentleman raises a point about a sporting boycott. We are not normally in favour of sporting boycotts in this country, and that has been the long-standing position of this Government.” In reality, both the US and UK are very selective in targeting outrage over human rights abuse, atrocities and genocide: Israel, Turkey and the Saudis get a free pass!

Labour’s Dame Diana Johnson’s attack was short and razor-sharp as she demanded to know, “Is the 40% cut to Transport for the North’s budget part of the Prime Minister’s plans for levelling up the north?” Ouch! That other Johnson, our lying, cheating, shyster PM replied in defensive denial of the truth, claiming, “There has been no such cut, and we intend to invest massively in Northern Powerhouse Rail, and in railways in the north and across the entire country.” For over a decade Tories have maintained this con! Labour’s Wes Streeting poured shame on the PM citing how “We went into this pandemic with rising child poverty, a widening attainment gap, and school funding falling in real terms.” He asked the PM if he would be happy with just 43p per pupil per day spent on his own children? The PM “passionately disagreed” and tried to bluff the house with impressive totals that amounted to… just 43p a day! He went on to attack, “bankrupt policies of the Labour party;” presumably prioritizing feeding and educating kids!

Labour Alex Cunningham highlighted one of the PM’s photo-op visits to a vaccine complex in his constituency pointing out a local tour that might have bought him down to earth. He said “I could have taken him to nearby Billingham food bank, where he would have learned that over a third of the children in my constituency live in poverty, yet two in five of those same children are still not entitled to free school meals because the threshold is so low. Will he urgently address that scandal, take long-term action on universal credit and school meals, and help free our children from poverty?” In the cruelest of denial tactics the PM pretended he had received a compliment saying, “I certainly am proud of what universal credit is doing…”

Johnson then started ranting about the Labour agenda to replace Universal Credit with a functioning social safety net and banged on about “top-quality jobs” that simply do not exist. Jack Lapresti launched into another PR pitch for the pet Tory project of creating covert UK tax-haven Freeports with the false promise of creating, “50,000 jobs in the region” and linking this to building affordable homes throwing in the catch phrase “build back better.” It is vitally important that all opposition MPs consistently call out these lies and false promises by pointing to the stark reality of rapidly increasing deprivation and destitution throughout the UK while the Tory squandering of public funds on dodgy private contracts handed out to friends continue apace. In a functioning democracy, the perpetrators of this relentless corruption would be robustly Investigated for fraud including their manipulation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. They would be in jail not in office; it is time we demanded justice to remove this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

We must change the narrative to prevent the British public being subjugated by the Tory propaganda and exploited for another decade or longer under their Dictatorship. The ‘lev…up’ lie must be banished from the political lexicon because the mere mention of this term breathes life into this dangerous myth. At Prime Ministers Questions reality returned when SNP Stuart C. McDonald asked, “Before the budget is finalised, will the Prime Minister ensure that his Chancellor reads the Trussell Trust’s new report, ‘Dignity or Destitution? The case for keeping the Universal Credit lifeline’? His Government have been incredibly generous to pals with personal protective equipment contracts, so surely, instead of cutting employment-related benefits to the lowest real-terms level in 30 years, he must now afford some basic dignity to 6 million people on universal credit and make the uplift permanent.” We cannot wait patiently for Tory Sovereign Dictator Boris Johnson to consider bestowing dignity on our people: he must go ASAP. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The UK has just sunk to another level of extreme hypocrisy that screams massive injustice. Perhaps best expressed in a biblical passage that essentially says, “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” The Chinese persecute the Uighurs, the Russians are not giving Alexey Navalny a far trial, but the Brits are simply above reproach! Somehow the British people have become so blind to the reality of grotesque injustice perpetrated by this vile Tory regime that we are incapable of demonstrating genuine humanity. The danger is that this steady dehumanization of those targeted by our Government will warp the opinions of the general public with regard to cruelty and injustice; this is an integral part of moving the UK towards the full acceptance of an authoritarian Fascist dictatorship. The establishment of scapegoat sectors within our population is promoted by the far-right and our rabid Tory Party: gypsies, migrants, Muslims who will be next?

The public demonstrated genuine sympathy for a number of young teenage girls after discovering that had been groomed by a notorious paedophile gang in Rotherham. The child sexual exploitation scandal where widespread and prolonged sexual abuse was ignored for far too long, was eventually investigated and our legal system tried to put things right. It might be politically incorrect to point this out, but in light of our inappropriately disproportionate response to a more recent incident of grooming that few seem to care about, these victims predominantly white. The teenagers who were groomed and exploited were considered victims and treated with sympathy. But the UK Government is essentially claiming that the three teenage schoolgirls who were apparently ‘groomed’ by a former pupil at their school, after that fellow student moved to Syria, couldn’t possibly have been innocents led astray by their youth and naivety because… well because… well what? Because they were Muslim of Bangladeshi descent?

All three girls were minors and while some might claim that their plight was basically a family matter the same can be said of other young people who gall prey to the Siren call of predators or radical extremist groups. Often parents are blissfully unaware that their children have been targeted and in our workaholic society, supervision of minors has become greatly reduced. Within a community that already feels unfairly targeted in this country, demonized by the tabloid press, and regularly facing unfair prejudice, it becomes far easier for extremists to preach their message of hate. The three girls might not have been fully aware of what they were doing, but in this case an article in the Independent claims, “that they were aware enough; they could not, at that stage, be saved from themselves,” and “Anyway, once with Isis in Syria, they were ranged with the enemy and no longer the UK’s responsibility.” Really? If that was your child you would move heaven and earth to rescue them from their misguided decision, we all would.

The trio were brainwashed into believing that there was good reason to join the Califate, what drove that decision we do not know. After arriving in Raqqa the three schoolgirls were married to Isis fighters, but if at some point the enormity of their decision finally dawned on them there was no way back; they were not free to leave and return to England. Kadiza Sultana was reportedly killed in an airstrike at Amira Abase hasn’t been seen since; the third schoolgirl also reportedly died in Syria. When Shamima Begum was discovered in a refugee camp she was heavily pregnant with her third child after having lost two other children during the fighting. These were children she gave birth to while still a teenager in a war zone under heavy bombardment, but there is no compassion extended to her, despite the fact that by this time she would have had no alternative but to remain until she was captured. I cannot comprehend the complete lack of compassion for a young woman whose suffering has paid for her errors.

By the time she was interviewed by a film crew, her baby had been born and she desperately wanted to return to the UK to protect her third child from the ravages of the camp. But, the then Tory Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, blocked her return, showed no mercy towards her or her innocent baby who soon died. Javid was able to ramp-up the nationalist hysteria in this country to score political kudos. The hateful British tabloids dehumanized this traumatized, grieving mother signalling their approval of increased ‘othering’ towards Muslims in this country. At a time when the Media had created a massive fantisemitism storm to break apart the Labour Party, they were actively supporting prejudice and persecution of another sector of our population. This is the exact path followed by the Nazis in order to dehumanize Jews in Germany that eventually led to the Holocaust. I can imagine how vile and toxic the sick tabloid headlines will be after this latest Supreme Court ruling against Begum; it makes me deeply ashamed to be British.

In the Canary Article entitled, “Shamima Begum loses British citizenship in landmark test case,” they elaborate on the implications of this shocking decision. They say that “Shamima Begum has failed to restore her British citizenship after the Supreme Court ruling that she’d lost her case. 21-year-old Begum was infamously groomed as a 15-year-old child. She was a minor when she entered Syria and also when she married an ISIS fighter. All three of her children have since died. Begum was born in the UK. The government has cited her Bangladeshi heritage as proof of her claim to statehood in Bangladesh. However, Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has refused entry and citizenship for Begum. ‘Begum hasn’t been allowed to return to the UK over the course of the trial’.”

The Canary say, “According to the Guardian: Lord Pannick QC, representing Begum, said [he] was unable to put her side of the case properly from al-Roj detention camp where she is held. He told the court she would be at risk of physical harm if she spoke by mobile phone to her British lawyers. This latest ruling has sparked concerns of civil liberty and human rights.” Calling it a “Threat to democracy, The Canary reached out for comment to civil rights organization Liberty. Liberty lawyer Rosie Brighouse said: ‘The right to a fair trial is not something democratic Governments should take away on a whim, and nor is someone’s British citizenship. If a Government is allowed to wield extreme powers like banishment without the basic safeguards of a fair trial it sets an extremely dangerous precedent. The threat to democracy is apparent in this case, as Brighouse continued: The security services have safely managed the returns of hundreds of people from Syria, but the Government has chosen to target Shamima Begum.”

The Canary report, “This approach does not serve justice, it’s a cynical distraction from a failed counter-terror strategy and another example of this Government’s disregard for access to justice and the rule of law. The Canary also spoke to Muhammad Rabbani, managing director of advocacy organization CAGE, who said: The Home Office deliberately circumvents the right to a fair trial for those exiled and stripped of their citizenship by only doing so when they are not in the country. National security is used as a ruse to suspend long established legal norms. Rabbani pointed to politically motivated decisions as the reason for Begum’s treatment: The Supreme Court has not only upheld the Home Office’s politically motivated decision to deny a girl who was groomed as a child the right to return home but has provided cover for the deeply racist citizenship deprivation policy, and failed to address how the secret SIAC [Special Immigration Appeals Commission] fundamentally upend any semblance of a fair trial.”

The Canary voice, “Concerns for the future” after “Several commenters also considered the implications of the case: The implications of the Shamima Begum case for people, like myself, whose parents were born abroad and who are theoretically eligible for citizenship of those countries is so grim and disturbing. Are we lesser-class UK citizens because we are of immigrant descent? Apparently so!” Sirin Kale Tweeted: “POC in this country know that if Shamima Begum can have her citizenship stripped away, a contradictory statement, then it can happen to any one of us. This ruling has set an incredibly dangerous precedent for us and I hope people who are happy about the ruling realize this.”

Sade Tweeted: “Labour councilor Shaista Aziz asked who was responsible for Begum: A 15 year old school girl and her two friends from a high performing school in East London ended up running away to join a terrorist entity after being groomed online. How and why did this happen? How and why were these young girls failed by Britain? Begum is a British problem.” Shaista Aziz Tweeted: “Others drew comparisons to cases that didn’t see defendants stripped of citizenship. Even if you don’t care about the way a 15 year old girl was groomed and exploited, you should care about allowing a state to break international law as they see fit. Because once that precedent is set, you are naïve if you think that it won’t impact your life too.”

Ife Tweeted: “Precedent Stripping Begum’s citizenship is yet another sign that Britain won’t allow international condemnation to stop it from behaving callously. If some people, in this case UK-born citizens with dual citizenship, can have their citizenship revoked, ‘citizenship’ itself is under attack?” Conditional citizenship for some is conditional citizenship for all. We should all be gravely concerned. Under the Tories ‘Hostile Environment’ immigration policies the Home Secretary, now the ruthless bully, Priti Patel, has been scaling up deportations and a number were rushed through over Christmas. The Government claim to be only deporting serious criminals who pose a threat to our security and have no legal right to be here, but in reality, the Tories have created a system where even minor charges can strip citizenship away from people who have lived here since childhood, worked, contributed and paid taxes, but they are deported destitute and vulnerable in a place where they have no connections.

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled, “Immigration lawyers: Attempts to strip Shamima Begum of citizenship are likely to be illegal,” they say that, “Begum was born, bred and radicalised in the UK. Javid will not succeed in stripping away her citizenship, argue two immigration lawyers.” That was back in early 2019, but today her appeal has been placed in a permanent state of limbo as she remains trapped in a refugee camp. This isn’t just grossly unfair to Begum it places a massive unfair burden on the Kurdish liberation forces who are trying to manage, feed and shelter a huge number of foreign fighters and their dependents in camps in the north of Syria. The UK wants to be able to deport those with even the most tenuous claim to another national heritage who may have fallen foul of our laws, but we do not want to accept prisoners from overseas: typical British ‘cake and eat it’! Begum accepts that she will need to face trial for possible participation in atrocities overseas: she need rehabilitation not further torment.

Left Foot Forward reported that the Lawyers, “Danielle Blake and Ruth Mullen are experienced immigration lawyers for the Immigration Advice Service, and have represented various complex immigration and asylum cases, including British citizenship applications.” They say that “The legal basis for depriving Shamima Begum of her UK citizenship is found in the Immigration Act 2014. Firstly, the Secretary of State must determine that in his opinion the person has behaved in a way which justifies them being stripped of their British citizenship; secondly, he must be sure that they will not be rendered Stateless, that is, they must hold dual nationality. With regards to Shamima Begum, Sajid Javid argues that she is entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship. However, Bangladesh has responded robustly, asserting that they have no responsibility for Shamima and that they will not avail her of citizenship.”

Left Foot Forward reported in 2019 that, “Articles appearing in mainstream media seemed to imply that she will have an easy ride in achieving Bangladeshi citizenship, an opinion that the Bangladesh government clearly does not agree with. If the laws of Bangladesh are as strict as those in the UK, original documents, such as birth certificates and passports for both herself and her parents, could be asked for. They could even go as far as demanding a DNA test, a process all too familiar to those in the UK who have applied for British passports for their foreign-born children. If Bangladesh succeed in denying Shamima Begum a passport then Sajid Javid’s attempts to cancel her citizenship will automatically fail.”

Left Foot Forward reported, “There is also the very obvious issue of Shamima Begum’s current location. She is not living in a modern city, with easy access to public transport or consular buildings. She is living in a refugee camp, with the bare minimum essentials for survival, and her only communication with the outside world thus far has been via a handful of journalists.” At the time of writing, Begum had just given birth and they commented that “Shamima’s newborn son – a British citizen by descent and innocent of any crime, must also surely be considered. It is hard to see how Shamima’s son will be able to benefit from a UK future without having to give up any relationship with his mother. Once within UK jurisdiction, he would have access to lawyers who could invoke a whole array of laws which seek to protect the best interests of the child. However again, this will be hard to access from a refugee camp.” These points soon became irrelevant as the baby died soon after birth, another traumatic loss for Begum.

Left Foot Forward said that, “Whatever crimes she has committed, Shamima Begum is a British citizen, culturally and by birth. Sajid Javid may feel as though he has triumphantly fulfilled the wishes of the British public by denying her the right to return to the UK. But offloading offenders onto another country and deeming them to no longer be our problem is a practice the UK has not undertaken for around 100 years and would most likely tumble in front of a well organized legal challenge. The Bangladeshi Government played no part in educating Shamima Begum and the people of that country played no part in her upbringing or her development, so it would not make legal sense for them to take responsibility for her. Regardless, Shamima’s interview from within the refugee camp, dismantled by the press into juicy soundbites, has provided the backdrop to her trial by social media.” The vile tabloid press were not kind or forgiving towards her at that time right after losing a third child’ what does that say about us?

Left Foot Forward claim, “The laws regarding British nationality are hugely complex. This is an area of immigration that has gone through many changes over the years, mostly due to the high levels of discrimination that previously went unnoticed and unchallenged. Previously, a child had no claim to a British passport if only his mother was British: women were not allowed to pass on their citizenship.” They say, “A child born out of wedlock to a British father could previously only apply to register up until the age of 18, after which they would have just been considered unlucky. These are rules that have only been amended in the last five years. Shamima Begum’s situation is one that currently falls under a still existent discriminatory rule, as it is only people who have foreign-born parents who can have their citizenship taken away from them.”

Left Foot Forward report that, “If a white British Islamic convert with British parents were to commit the same crime and then decided to return, yes, they would face punishment, but their re-entry to the UK could not be denied, and it is unlikely it would be lobbied for or discussed at length in various news outlets. Shamima was born, bred and radicalized in the UK. She is surely a symptom of a home-grown problem. Her innocent baby must also be considered. The law, as it is, provides for two different types of citizenship, one which is immutable, and one which can be stripped away. The discriminatory effect of it is chilling.” Over the past couple of years, this Tory Government have been pushing the boundaries of who can be stripped of their citizenship and deported. But at the same time, we want to preach about the injustices perpetrated in other countries in our holier than thou rants.

In the Canary Article entitled, “Here’s how you can support the campaign to stop the deportation of Osime Brown” they highlight another desperate case of injustice. They say that “Osime Brown, a Black 21-year-old autistic man with learning disabilities, is facing deportation from his home in Britain to Jamaica. He was imprisoned in 2018 under the joint enterprise act for the theft of a mobile phone and lost his leave to remain. The Home Office now intends to deport Brown from his home in Britain to Jamaica, a country he left when he was four years old. Throughout his tumultuous life, Brown has been systematically failed by the services that were supposed to protect him – the education, health and social care, and criminal justice systems. Brown has a learning disability, has high support needs, and now suffers from anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of his distress.”

The Canary report that “Regarding the Home Office’s plan to deport her son to Jamaica, Brown’s mother said: He doesn’t have anybody there. He hasn’t been back to Jamaica, he doesn’t know Jamaica. When he found out the Home Office wanted to remove him he said: “Mum, is there a bus that I can come back on?” His removal would be a death sentence. She told the Independent: He wouldn’t cope. If he can’t even cope here, how is he going to cope in an environment and a culture he doesn’t know? He would be exploited because of his vulnerability. 34 MPs have signed a letter calling on home secretary Priti Patel to halt the planned deportation of Brown, saying: If Osime is deported, it is our and his mother’s belief that he will die. #StopTheDeportation”

The Canary say “Brown’s family have taken to social media to call for a twitterstorm at 7pm on 25 February to raise awareness about his case and stop the planned deportation: They have shared a useful thread on how people can get involved in the online campaign:
JUSTICE FOR OSIME BROWN (Official Account @FreeOsimeBrown Please don’t forget about the #TwitterStorm happening for #OsimeBrown this evening from 7pm onwards (UK time) Please read the thread below for all ways you can take action this evening. #StopTheDeportation #OsimeNeedsHisFamily #JusticeForOsimeBrown”

The British like to preach to others about their human rights abuses, only modifying such criticism when it stands in the way of lucrative arms sales as with their Contracts with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Israeli Governments. When it comes to assessment of our own human rights violations there is no tolerance for any reprimand or call to modify our conduct. The UK Government wanted to make an example of ruthless cruelty in the case of Shamima Begum, just as they have with the so-called serious criminals we are kicking out of the country. We have abandoned Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe after the PM’s gaff extended her sentence. The extradition hearings for Julian Assange are an extension of his torture by UK authorities called out by the UN. But the UN has also criticized this Tory Government for human rights abuse of the disabled in this country; all ignored. This is not a society I feel proud to be a part of; we must Protest, Challenge, Investigate and seek justice to remove this Tory Government. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

On Friday I was consumed by the saga of the Scotts. Alex Salmond delivered testimony and answered questions well and the Convener seemed fair, but it wasn’t about Scottish politics or the struggle for independence which doesn’t impact me personally. It was about the wider picture of justice and accountability throughout the UK as the remnants of our feeble democracy crumble and tumble into the seas that now isolate us from rescue by the EU. The breakdown in legal process and the maneuvers to deliberately manipulate the law for corrupt political ends were all exposed in a lengthy Scottish Parliamentary Committee hearing in a way that we can only hope that the rancid can of Tory maggots will very soon be torn open here in Westminster. Will it sound a warning to this corrupt Tory Sovereign Dictatorship that they might be able to cheat, plunder and exploit for a while, but in the end, justice will prevail? I doubt it; the focus south of the border was on how this disruptive battle might be used to derail Scottish Independence!

The SNP’s Maureen Watt MSP obsessed over the Me Too movement as if this seismic shift should herald the rewriting of all laws to prioritize sexual harassment, despite well-drafted, long considered, legislation already firmly in place. For her this inquiry wasn’t about examining and correcting deeply flawed legal procedures that had cost the Scottish taxpayer dearly; it was a chance to overturn the not-guilty verdict and force Alex Salmond to wallow in disgrace. Despite repeatedly framing her questions to meet this one objective, Salmond kept his cool, very patiently reminding her of the extensive Trade Union input during the eighteen months of formulating the ‘Fairness at Work’ Legislation. His message was ‘don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater;’ build on existing laws rather than focusing on the hastily concocted, poorly drafted, target law that had proved not fit for purpose in Court. She was fixated on retrospective judgment of former Ministers; his objective was to restore genuine access to justice universally.

Another persistently hostile non-contributor to the hearing was Lib Dem MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton who aggressively and repeatedly tried to suck the Committee into the warped vortex of his vindictive ‘admit your guilt’ rabbit hole. He defied the very patient and fair Deputy Convener, Margaret Mitchell, several times with his flagrant attempts to retry Alex Salmond for trumped-up crimes he had already been acquitted of in a Court of law. Heaping discredit on himself, he stubbornly tried to force words of apology for Media stunt value, but Salmond maintained his composure by reminding those present of the Criminal trial acquittal and his Judicial Review victory. With his relentless badgering Cole-Hamilton offered nothing substantive that was material to establishing the facts that formed the subject of the hearing. Of course, positively contributing to the hearing was not his objective; he just wanted to toss some red meat to the tabloid press in the hope of damaging SNP support in the coming elections: in this he succeeded in spades!

As anticipated the heavily biased BBC hosted an opportunistic Newsnight segment to mislead the public into believing that Salmon had deliberately set out to sabotage the cause of Scottish Independence to rescue his own ego. The botched attempt to criminalize him had devastated his reputation, caused untold distress, but thankfully it had failed to get him thrown in jail! Amol Rajan’s claim that clearing his name was just an ego trip or a personal vendetta against his protege was a really cheap shot, well off the mark. The Tories would like nothing more than to see this rift within the SNP as a golden opportunity to sabotage Scottish Independence, but the feeling in Scotland goes way beyond personalities to address the abject Tory betrayal of the Scottish people. Brexit was the last straw for the Scotts with the majority in favor of remaining in the EU and the catastrophic impact on their fishing industry all ignored by the Tories; it will take a lot more than this internal spat to derail the call for InfiRef 2! They could vote pro-EU Green!

In the Scotsman Article entitled, “Alex Salmond inquiry: MSPs must test the truth of his incendiary claims about a ‘malicious scheme’ against him” they commented on the proceedings. They highlighted a clever nuance Salmond had used to avoid the term ‘conspiracy’ saying, “In his evidence to the MSPs’ committee investigating the Scottish government’s mishandling of complaints made against him, Alex Salmond said he was not alleging there had been a conspiracy against him.” This savvy politician chose his words carefully saying, “Instead, he called it a ‘malicious scheme or plan or campaign over a prolonged period of time’, making a distinction that may be lost on many members of the public.” In reality I think it was a smart calculation for a man combatting an overwhelmingly hostile media: ‘conspiracy theory’ is an easily discrediting hackneyed phrase.

The Scotsman reported that “The former First Minister said he had evidence to support his claims, pointing to text messages sent by SNP figures, including one by Peter Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s chief executive, in which, the day after Salmond was charged, he said it was a ‘good time to be pressurizing’ the police.” That was one of the less damaging messages among a selection that are already in the public domain. Salmond was determined to rigidly stick to the solid evedence that was in his possession, some of which is being deliberately kept from the inquiry team via threats of prosecution. The do admit that “he also made clear that he believes there is evidence that the committee has not been allowed to see that would provide further backing for his allegations.” The most damaging component of the entire hearing was the knowledge that evidence was being obscured for no legitimate reason and Salmond wanted the committee to demand access to it.

The Scotsman took a slanderous personal swipe at Alex Salmond stating that “Given what we know about Salmond’s admitted behavior, his reputation will be forever tarnished and so he should not be regarded the most upstanding of citizens.” Determined to reclassify Salmond’s open and honest presentation they continued on the offensive saying, “However, his evidence will be fuel to the fire of conspiracy theorists who have not been quite so circumspect as him, and that poses a danger to the reputation of Scotland’s democratic and legal institutions. It is most unsatisfactory that this shadow of suspicion should be allowed to hang over them in this way.” Perhaps they should have acted with genuine honesty and integrity, but that is certainly not in vogue right now in UK politics in general. This is exactly what I mean in reference to the bigger picture,’ with our current Tory Sovereign Dictatorship rife with corruption and seeking to manipulate the Judiciary and regulatory bodies in their favor.

The Scotsman explains how “The committee is examining the Scottish government’s handling of the complaints against Salmond and MSPs have stressed that he is not on trial.” It seems that some on the committee did not receive that brief… They continue “However, the conflicting accounts of Salmond and Sturgeon must be properly tested and so both are on trial if only in the court of public opinion.” Which they will no doubt seek to influence by inserting damaging insinuations regarding Alex Salmond’s character and honesty while at the same time loyally pitching Sturgeon’s popularity. They say that “The credibility and integrity of the current First Minister and other senior figures in the SNP and government have been called into question. The people of Scotland need to know whether or not Salmond’s claims are true or not and have confidence in the process of establishing this.”

Although the Scotsman say that “All pertinent evidence, including the Scottish government’s legal advice about its position in the judicial review of the complaints process brought by Salmond, that can be made public, should be:” how will they react when the enemy Salmond is fully vindicated? They say that “The anonymity of the women who complained about Salmond’s actions must be preserved and if the Salmond inquiry committee must sit in private in order for this to be achieved, then so be it, but it does need to get to the bottom of whether there was a ‘malicious plan’ or a conspiracy, call it what you will, or not.” It is clear that the Scotsman is cheering for the ‘or not’ camp as it is not even thinly disguised in their cynical reporting of the matter. Salmond insists that the suppressed evidence that should have been made available to the committee holds no clues that would expose the claimants. If the evidence establishes a strong case that fraud was perpetrated then that anonymity should be stripped away in perjury charges!

In the Politico Article entitled, “5 takeaways from Alex Salmond’s explosive Scottish parliament appearance,” they say that “The former first minister made a series of incendiary claims against Nicola Sturgeon’s government. ‘This is much, much bigger than me.’ That was the message from former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond during a long-awaited appearance before a parliamentary inquiry Friday. Even for the famously forthright politician, his over 4 hours of evidence was explosive. Ministers will have been expecting a political hand grenade, they got a thermonuclear detonation. Not only was there a conspiracy at the highest levels to expunge Salmond from public life, he claimed, involving the suppression of evidence and hamstringing a probe into the government’s handling of sexual harassment complaints against him, the malfeasance was eating away at Scotland’s democratic foundations.” The BBC had tried to pass this off as an inconsequential whimper and a private vendetta.

The Politico reported that “The actions of senior ministers were ‘undermining the system of government in Scotland,’ Salmond said, even as erstwhile allies in the Scottish independence movement dubbed the performance a grandstanding distraction to salve his oversized ego.” I am sure the poor man had bottled his anger over the attempt to criminalize him for long enough; he was relishing the opportunity to put his case before the public in all its sordid detail and he did it with calm, calculating panache. The Politico highlighted him “Telling the committee he had turned down hundreds of media appearances in order to give his evidence direct to lawmakers, Salmond cast himself as the defender of truth in a murky affair that threatens to bring down First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, and with her the cause of independence itself.” I wouldn’t have drawn that final conclusion from observing the entire hearing. As Politico presented them, “Here are five key takeaways from Salmond’s committee appearance:”

1. “Top down,” Politico describes how, “The former first minister didn’t pull his punches. While Salmond rejected claims that the affair had rendered Scotland a ‘failed state,’ he said that the mishandling of his case stemmed from the very top. ‘Scotland hasn’t failed. Its leadership has failed,’ the 66-year-old said, laying blame squarely at Sturgeon’s feet. Salmond then went a step further, suggesting that Sturgeon’s administration, alongside elements of the civil service and prosecuting authority, was so incompetent that his dreams of independence were in jeopardy. ‘Our move to independence … must be accompanied by institutions whose leadership is strong and robust and capable of protecting each and every citizen from arbitrary authority,’ Salmond told lawmakers on the Holyrood committee. Sturgeon denies she has done anything wrong.”

2. According to Politico the “Scottish National Party rift widens. The Salmond vs. Sturgeon saga has torn a hole through SNP ranks, splitting the party in two. Today’s blistering session will have done little to soothe tempers or bridge the divide. As the committee got underway, a string of SNP politicians changed their profile pictures to grinning snaps with Sturgeon. One of them, Brendan O’Hara MP, added a little context: ‘Please be in no doubt as to where my loyalties lie. #IStandWithNicola.’James Dorman MSP, who represents a Glasgow constituency, upped the ante, accusing Salmond of ‘undoing everything he fought for to salve his ego.’ The former first minister’s supporters weren’t to be outdone, however. ‘How much further can [the] jaw drop [?],’ tweeted MP Angus MacNeil, responding to claims of Scottish government bungling in a court case against Salmond. For a party trying to instill trust in the independence cause, these fissures threaten to upend voter confidence.”

3. “Salmond the victim,” claim Politico on Salmond’s behalf, although not necessarily taking his side. They quote, “It has been a testing couple of years, Salmond told the committee: harassment claims, court cases, criminal prosecution, eventual acquittal. He described it as a ‘nightmare … among the most wounding that any person can face.’ But is he sorry for behavior towards multiple women that, though not criminal, he has admitted was sometimes inappropriate (he acknowledged that he could’ve been ‘a better man’ during the trial)? That’s what committee member Alex Cole-Hamilton wanted to know. ‘Laying aside the charges of which you’ve been acquitted and the allegations you deny, of the behaviors you have admitted to, some of which are appalling, are you sorry?” the Liberal Democrat MSP asked.

The Politico report that “The former first minister did not offer an apology, instead referring to the Scottish government’s botched handling of claims, and the consequences that had had for all involved.” Alex Cole-Hamilton conveniently forgot the actual purpose of the hearing in order to have a rant that implied that the Jury who acquitted Salmond had made some grievous error of judgment, but he could save the day by retrying him in committee. In all fairness, the Convener wasn’t having it and reminded him that such questioning was not part of their remit, but it didn’t prevent the obnoxious MSP from rephrasing the exact same request several times before he finally shut up having contributed nothing relevant to the proceeding. Salmond diplomatically avoided being drawn into the trap of offering an unwanted apology by calmly reiterating the outcome of Court verdicts in his favor. Cole-Hamilton came across as petty and vindictive, but his questions will be quoted and embellished in our biased Media.

4. Politico pointed out the “Election approaching” saying that “After Friday’s bombshell session, there’s little chance of the debacle blowing over before May’s Scottish Parliament election. For the SNP’s electoral rivals, desperate to counter the party’s seemingly ironclad popularity, that is good news. ‘I am no fan of Alex Salmond. He is not a man I respect,’ said Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross as the hearing commenced. ‘But he is right about at least one thing, truth, and honesty in government matters. And we’re not getting it from Nicola Sturgeon.’ Expect to hear this line over and over again. If the opposition can sow seeds of doubt in Sturgeon’s probity, the SNP, reliant on their leader’s public standing, will be in big trouble (a point borne out by recent polling).”

5. But the Politico claim that “This is far from over,” saying “Salmond professed his wish to move on from the ugly affair, but there’s plenty of play in it yet. The prospect of new police involvement looms large after the hearing, with Salmond demanding that the leak of harassment allegations against him be investigated.” One can hardly blame him for wanting this after all the torment he has suffered. Politico point out that “next week, Sturgeon will be in the hot seat herself. She’ll be facing questions on a range of topics: not least whether she breached the ministerial code by pursuing a court case despite her team having had prior contact with complainants, or whether a complainant’s name was passed illicitly to Salmond’s chief of staff, two things her predecessor seems certain of. Even more dangerous for Sturgeon is a separate probe being conducted by James Hamilton, an Irish barrister investigating her conduct. He is due to give his verdict just weeks out from election day.”

Someone should have reminded Sturgeon that when you’re in a really deep hole it is best to stop digging! There are already tentative grounds to charge her with breaching the ministerial code, but she arrogantly tried it on with another flagrant violation; does she really want to torpedo her political career? I have a funny feeling she knows it’s all over now baby blue… This latest gaff has prompted Justin to start a new Discussion Thread entitled, “Jim Sillars’ formal complaint re Nicola Sturgeon’s smears about Alex Salmond.” He reports that “Jim Sillars, former Depute Leader of the SNP, has lodged a formal complaint about Nicola Sturgeon’s rants during her televised official Covid briefing on Wednesday.” To read more visit Justin’s thread where he has posted a copy of Jim Sillars “letter of complaint” in full.

Throughout this hearing Alex Salmond remained calm and level headed at all times answering without faltering or being evasive, He did not call for the entrapment techniques of two members of the committee who asked inappropriate and irrelevant questions in an attempt to implicate guilt over charges already dismissed as bearing no criminal liability. He was razor sharp and right on the money in his exposure of the grossly unnecessary squandering of public funds in the futile attempt to justify their relentless persecution of a case against him. This should be sounding alarm bells with regard to Tory squandering of public funds and the bottomless pit of public cash spent repeatedly defending unfair laws, corruption and other Government wrongdoing. If the persecuted and exploited are too impoverished to go to Court only the powerful and the egregiously guilty can afford limitless representation we have zero access to justice in the UK. Crowdfunding offers us the opportunity to rebalance the scales of justice and hold Government to account.

On the rare occasion where Alex Salmond held back, he cited the evidence he was being forced to suppress, against his will, on pain of prosecution. He saved his greatest asset for a parting salvo when asked if he had any final remarks. He stated very clearly that this, or any other Parliamentary Committee, had an absolute right to access all relevant evidence without restriction and he suggested that they forcefully demand that access. Throwing down a confident ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ gauntlet, he made it crystal clear that if such evidence was demanded of his legal team they would be obligated to hand it over to the committee and it would be in their possession by Monday. Come in Nicola Sturgeon, your time is up… This was genuinely forensic;’ exactly what is needed to expose obscene levels of squandered public funds that continue to enrich the Tory elite and also reveal the truth in a really robust Investigation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. Salmond is blazing an accountability trail: we really must Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The revelations by Alex Salmond on Friday are set to rock the Scottish Government to its core, but the targeted persecution he suffered is not unique within UK politics, sadly it is rife. The exposure of the political dirty tricks to discredit and criminalize a man of integrity have become an acceptable norm and I can only hope that Salmond’s fight to clear his name should make us all pay far more attention to who is feeding us the news, and whose agenda they are promoting, to demand significantly greater scrutiny in future. It is a triumph that the trumped-up charges against Salmond were scrutinized sufficiently in Court to exonerate him and to support his Judicial Review of the unfair processes used to criminalize him. Truth is the best disinfectant so perhaps now those who targeted Salmond will be held accountable and the corruption that allowed them to do be so vindictive will be excised from the system. The Media are still trying to spin this to solidify the demonization of Alex Salmond and his personal battle is not over yet.

There are very important lessons that we should be paying close attention to right now south of the border so that we can route out Political corruption here in the UK. A good place to start would still be in Scotland while they are in the process of purging the cancer that warps our political system by churning out toxic propaganda to disrupt, demonize and destroy progressive political leaders dedicated to serving the needs of ordinary citizens. The Scottish Registered fake Charity, the ‘Institute of Statecraft’ and its so-called ‘Integrity Initiative,’ is already known to have interfered with both foreign and domestic elections by propagating and disseminating fake news on behalf of the far-right agenda. This clandestine organization was supported by UK taxpayer funding to generate defamatorily material targeting Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party well in advance of and throughout the Covert 2019 Rigged Election campaign; this has already been exposed: it needs to be more fully Investigated as it invalidates the shock result.

In a properly functioning democracy such a blatantly obvious and extreme level of incumbent Government corruption sponsored by public funds would bring down that Government, but the UK continues to stray further and further from the path of democracy and at this time can best be described as the authoritarian Fascist state of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. Alex Salmond’s testimony was an attempt to drag Scotland back from the brink of becoming a failed state, but it is impossible to consider the dangerous Tory cabal recklessly running the UK into the ground as even close to legitimate governance and we must demand change. Salmond was forced to rely on crowdfunding to raise money for his legal battle; we should take note and utilize this valuable tool in our cases to rescue the progressive left from SLAPP Lawsuits as well as Judicial Review battles while this avenue is still open to us. If Corbyn had fought back aggressively to clear his name as Salmond has we would not be sinking in this Tory quagmire right now.

“Question More” is the mantra at RT, that’s Russian Television to the uninitiated, a TV station that our Tory Sovereign Dictatorship would sorely like to shut down in their attempt to censor alternative voices. Alex Salmond presents regularly on RT and he is far from the only progressive voice to have turned to RT, among them Noam Chomsky, respected Investigative Journalist John Pilger and they have consistently supported Julian Assange. RT is criticized as just a Russian State propaganda station, but the news coverage is often more thoroughly investigated and well balanced than the BBC. It is truly shocking to admit how low our BBC has sunk in its sycophantic promotion of an increasingly radical Tory right-wing. The extreme extent of pro-Tory bias presented by the BBC during their coverage of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was far too glaringly obvious to be ignored. Salmond’s exposure of corruption in Scottish politics must be a wake-up call to us all: ‘no smoke without fire’ depends on who is creating the smoke!

So while RT remains under attack from the Tories who feel threatened by their content, we should resist being sucked into a stupor of belief in what used to be a credible national news reporting station that has been reduced to a Tory propaganda mouthpiece. RT has not shied away from presenting Russian protests regarding Alexey Navalny, but they do not endorse the faux outrage over his trial. Meanwhile Neocon Governments around the world rant over the Russian authority’s treatment of Navalny as if he is a saint and a national hero, as this suits their concerted political campaign against Putin and the Russian Government. In reality, the entire fiasco involving the Navalny case was seized on by the US in order to sabotage completion of the Nordstream 2 Gas Pipeline as it does not serve American financial interests. No matter how we might feel towards Putin, the Russian authorities do have a right to arrest one of their own citizens in their own country and bring him to trial and we have no right to intervene in their legal processes.

In a Tass Article entitled, “Diplomat slams foreign diplomats flooding Navalny trial,” a Tass correspondent reported earlier that about 20 foreign diplomats, including from the United States, Bulgaria, Poland, Latvia, Austria, and Switzerland, had been seen at the Moscow City Court hearing on possible replacement of Navalny’s suspended sentence under the Yves Rocher case with an actual prison term.” Without access to the charges leveled against him or any of the evidence for or against in his case, foreign supporters of Alexey Navalny’s political ambitions are demanding there should be no trial, it must be halted immediately to secure his unconditional release. But think about this rationally; would our UK Government or the Americans accept any similar external intervention or pressure in their Judicial system? I think not! Tass said “The presence of foreign diplomats at the court trial of Russian opposition blogger Alexey Navalny is not a general practice in diplomacy and can rather be interpreted as a political move.”

Reporting from Moscow on February 2 Tass noted that, “Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Tuesday. ‘It is not a normal practice. A normal practice is when foreign diplomats are present in court when case of their nationals or international terrorists, or people who committed crimes in third countries, are tried,’ she wrote on her Facebook account. ‘But when diplomats, the more so, collectively, are present when cases of not their citizens are tried it is rather a political move. She also recalled that Russian diplomats are not always allowed to attend court trials of Russian nationals in Western countries. Tass noted her commenting that ‘In many cases, the US side refuses to allow Russian diplomats to attend court trials of Russian nationals,’ she added. ‘So, instead of inventing any non-existing diplomatic norms and practices, it is better to admit: it is Western money, Western diplomats (ask Washington what Japan is doing at court), a Western political project,’ she stressed.”

The same level of scrutiny and criticism of our UK Legal system by overseas observers, diplomats, and even Amnesty International is simply not tolerated; take the Julian Assange extradition hearings as a case in point. On the Amnesty International Website, Stefan Simanowitz asks, “Why are Amnesty International monitors not able to observe the Assange hearing?” In late September of 2020, he wrote, “The street outside the Old Bailey criminal court in London, where Julian Assange’s extradition hearing has been taking place, was transformed into a carnival. Inside the Old Bailey, the courtroom has turned into a circus. There have been multiple technical difficulties, a COVID-19 scare which temporarily halted proceedings, and numerous procedural irregularities including the decision by the presiding judge to withdraw permission for Amnesty International’s fair trial observer to have access to the courtroom.” The situation of access had not improved a great deal for the hearing in early 2021.

Although the extradition was blocked due to a perceived risk of suicide the outrageous US political persecution of Julian Assange was upheld as valid which does not bode well for the safety of Journalists around the globe and our access to free speech. Meanwhile due to a number of credible complaints regarding Neocon darling Navalny’s history of vile hate speech Amnesty International no longer feel it can categorize him as a ‘Prisoner of Conscience.’ in reality Navalny is a ruthlessly ambitious bigoted nationalist: not a particularly nice guy, although you certainly couldn’t learn that from our biased Media: Craig Murray was a lot more criticalin evaluating his integrity. Medical experts who have analyzed early testresults on Navalny say they reveal symptoms of acute pancreatitis, diabetes,liver failure, severe dehydration, muscular rigidity, a slew of bacterialinfections, even a possible heart attack associated with his kidney problems:”not recognizable symptoms of a nerve agent attack! No one was kitted up forhazmat. 

Was the Navalny case another opportunistic false flag event weaponized to target Russia? But I digress… In reporting last years Assange trial Simanowitz described “Arriving at the court each morning was an assault to the senses with the noise of samba bands, sound systems and chanting crowds and the sight of banners, balloons, and billboards at every turn. The first day of the hearing, which started on Monday 7 September, drew more than two hundred people to gather outside the court. People in fancy dress mingled with camera crews, journalists, and a pack of hungry photographers who would disappear regularly to give chase to any white security van heading towards the court, pressing their long lenses against the darkened windows. One of the vans had come from Belmarsh high-security prison, Julian Assange’s home for the last 16 months. The Wikileaks founder was in court for the resumption of proceedings that will ultimately decide on the Trump administration’s request for his extradition to the US.”

Reporting on the charges Amnesty say, “The American prosecutors claim he conspired with whistleblowers (army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning) to obtain classified information. They want him to stand trial on espionage charges in the US where he would face a prison sentence of up to 175 years. Assange’s lawyers began with a request that the alleged evidence in a new indictment handed down in June be excluded from consideration given that it came so late. The Judge denied this. In the afternoon session, the lawyers requested an adjournment until next year to give his lawyers time to respond to the US prosecutor’s new indictment. They said they had been given insufficient time to examine the new allegations, especially since they had only ‘limited access’ to the imprisoned Assange. Indeed, this most recent hearing was the first time in more than six months that Julian Assange had been able to meet with his lawyers. The judge rejected this request.”

Simanowitz documents being denied access to the hearing as an observer for Amnesty International. “Reacting to the decision, Kristinn Hrafnsson the editor-in-chief of Wikileaks told me that: ‘the decision is an insult to the UK courts and to Julian Assange and to justice. For the court to deny the request to adjourn is denying Assange his rights.’ Amnesty International had requested access to the court for a trial monitor to observe the hearings, but the court denied us a designated seat in court. Our monitor initially did get permission to access the technology to monitor remotely, but the morning the hearing started he received an email informing us that the Judge had revoked Amnesty International’s remote access. We applied again for access to the proceedings on Tuesday 8 September, setting out the importance of monitoring and Amnesty International’s vast experience of observing trials in even some of the most repressive countries.”

Simanowitz documented the official response to their request saying that “The judge wrote back expressing her ‘regret’ at her decision and saying: ‘I fully recognize that justice should be administered in public,’ Despite her regret and her recognition that scrutiny is a vital component of open justice, the judge did not change her mind. If Amnesty International and other observers wanted to attend the hearing, they would have to queue for one of the four seats available in a public gallery. We submitted a third application to gain direct access to the overflow room at the court where some media view the live stream, but this has also been denied.” So where was the global outrage over this arrogant refusal to submit to scrutiny? There was none! The UK demand immediate unconditional release for Alexey Navalny, no trial necessary, but do not dare to pry into corrupt Courts over here!

Amnesty International claim that “The refusal of the judge to not to give any ‘special provision’ to expert fair trial, monitors is very disturbing. Through its refusal, the court has failed to recognize a key component of open justice: namely how international trial observers monitor a hearing for its compliance with domestic and international law. They are there to evaluate the fairness of a trial by providing an impartial record of what went on in the courtroom and to advance fair trial standards by putting all parties on notice that they are under scrutiny. Amnesty International has monitored trials from Guantanamo Bay to Bahrain, Ecuador to Turkey. For our observer to be denied access profoundly undermines open justice.”

Simanowitz described other impediments to monitoring the trial saying “In the court, the overflow room has experienced ongoing technical problems with sound and video quality. More than a week after the proceedings began, these basic technical difficulties have not been properly ironed out and large sections of witness evidence are inaudible. These technological difficulties were not restricted to the overflow room. In court, some witnesses trying to ‘call into’ the courtroom last week, were not able to get in. These basic technical difficulties have hampered the ability of those in the courtroom to follow the proceedings.” There is simply no excuse for such easily corrected technical glitches not to be fixed promptly given the critical importance of the venue.

Amnesty International said at the time, “We are still hopeful that a way can be found for our legal expert to monitor the hearing because the decision, in this case, is of huge importance. It goes to the heart of the fundamental tenets of media freedom that underpin the rights to freedom of expression and the public’s right to access information. The US government’s unrelenting pursuit of Julian Assange for having published disclosed documents is nothing short of a full-scale assault on the right to freedom of expression. The potential chilling effect on journalists and others who expose official wrongdoing by publishing information disclosed to them by credible sources could have a profound impact on the public’s right to know what their government is up to. If Julian Assange is silenced, others will also be gagged either directly or by the fear of persecution and prosecution which will hang over a global media community already under assault in the US and in many other countries worldwide.”

Amnesty International claim that “The US Justice Department is not only charging a publisher who has a non-disclosure obligation but a publisher who is not a US citizen and not in America. The US government is behaving as if they have jurisdiction all over the world to pursue any person who receives and publishes information of government wrongdoing. If the UK extradites Assange, he would face prosecution in the USA on espionage charges that could send him to prison for the rest of his life, possibly in a facility reserved for the highest security detainees and subjected to the strictest of daily regimes, including prolonged solitary confinement. All for doing something news editors do the world over, publishing information provided by sources that is in the interest of the wider public.” The US has regressed from thuggish global policeman to global mafia and the UK is facilitating this vile injustice.

Simanowitz reported that “Outside the court, I bumped into Eric Levy, aged 92. His interest in Assange’s case is personal. He was in Baghdad during the American ‘shock and awe’ bombardment in 2003 having traveled to Iraq as part of the Human Shield Movement aiming to stop the war, and failing that, to protect the Iraqi population. ‘I’m here today for the same reason I was in Iraq. Because I believe in justice and I believe in peace,’ he tells me. ‘Julian Assange is not really wanted for espionage. He is wanted for making America look like war criminals.’ Indeed, it is ironic that no one responsible for possible war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan has been prosecuted, let alone punished. And yet the publisher who exposed their crimes is the one in the dock facing a lifetime in jail.” I was pleasantly shocked when Peter Hitchens wrote an article in support of Julian Assange despite admitting to not liking him, but we should expect integrity from credible Journalists and Political Commentators: they need to grow a spine!

Instead they sop-up the garbage churned out by Integrity Initiative or endorse the fake news from discredited idiot Elliot Higgins at ‘Bellingcat.’ Craig was quick to call out fake sleuth, con-artist Higgins early on in his ‘espionage career in Murray’s Blog Post entitled, “Bellingcat’s attempts to gild the Chepiga lily are now becoming ludicrous. The photo they published today is a very obvious fake,” where he noted the glaringly obvious poor photo-shop that Higgins was claiming as evidence. He wrote, “Many people have noticed that the photo of Chepiga on this wall appears to be hanging in completely different lighting conditions from the others. That is indeed a good point.” He also documented the other major error made by this investigative retard when he put the replacement photo in a less than credible position. As Murray queried, “So why is Chepiga in a row of much earlier Heroes of the Soviet Union? Next in sequence in fact to Grigory Dobrunov who got his award in 1956!!!! The pictures are definitely otherwise all in date order.”

Since those early scams you might have expected Higgins to perfect the art of creating photoshop ‘evidence;’ or used some of the copious Government money chucked his way to pay an expert forger. I also expected him to perfect his ludicrous plotlines to make them at least sound superficially believable, but no. His last piece of fantasy fiction rivaled a slightly kinky version of Hans Christian Anderson with a return to a suppressed underwear fetish! This time the magic, oh so deadly, Novichok managed to find its way into Alexey Navalny’s smalls, Ouch! Who put it there, how was it applied and when did this dastardly deed take place? Bellingcat is not yet ready to share the raunchy intimate details of our public hero’s privates. There must have been a highly sophisticated time-release dosing mechanism to conveniently incapacitate Putin’s target enemy mid-flight and not a second before: do not apply logic! The Pilot wasn’t in on the plot as he hastily landed the plane in order to get Navalny to Hospital where they worked to save his life.

The Tories have learned from past successes that believability is superfluous when tossing hateful jingoistic nationalist red meat to the tabloid beasts. The more shocking the revelation the more readable by the gullible masses so any future exposure of the truth will pose no threat while key Media players have agreed to ignore all expert evidence to let their lies stand. The made-for-TV Skripal drama embellished the fake news from Government to hide their complicity in a false flag fraud: the public bought it ‘hook-line-and-sinker, despite glaring inconsistencies that grossly defied logic. The Duma false flag has been comprehensively debunked by credible experts who examined evidence on the ground, but Bellingcat’s lies still prevail because our corrupt Tory Government needs this fake news to be accepted as true by the public; that is disgusting and it really has to change. Will the Alex Salmond case serves as a shock awakening to the fact that we are being far too trusting and as RT promotes we should: “Question more!”

You would have thought that when the neocons went looking for a useful idiot they might have managed to score one with a tad more credibility than Elliot Higgins of the fake news factory ‘Bellingcat;’ Belling ‘dead’ cat as I would more appropriately name his disinformation outlet. He was just featured on Politics Live trying hard to sound intelligent and failing miserably despite being wholeheartedly endorsed by Joe Coburn and her guests. So why give ‘bellylaugh’ Bellingcat a platform right now? We should be worried that perhaps the Tories are helping to buff hack Higgins’s credentials in advance of another dead-cat operation. But, why does the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship need to pull such a stunt right now when it appears all is going reasonably well for them due to the popularity of their vaccine roll-out program? It could mean that they are about to make highly unpopular decisions to inflict more pain on our destitute population; a serious incident supported by propaganda to prevent public protests would be of use. Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

In the week just past a certain cruel dichotomy could not have been more stark. Newsnight featured pictures from Mars as the US landed a roving vehicle on its barren red surface. The thrill… what a tremendous achievement for mankind, plucky or just lucky the rover aptly named ‘Perseverance’ had arrived safely on the Martian terrain ready to collect samples to bring back to earth ten years on. Yet on our own lush ‘blue planet’ a far darker scenario unfolds as the US and UK back the Saudi efforts to bomb the people of Yemen into a barren wasteland that will rival Mars; do those broken bodies of emaciated children belong in the same time frame? Our scorched earth policy of destruction overseas is matched by a callous disregard for life here in Brittain, where our ruthless Tory Government is content to see school children falling through our gutted social safety net, driven into abject poverty and destitution. When forced back to class, they will battle pangs of hunger learning a harsh reality of the barbarity that passes for modern society!

How can such an impressive, technological advanced society that landed a rover on the surface of Mars, ignore the mayhem of the devastation of their high-tech weaponry or ignore the impact of sanctions and other ruthless fiscal policies they fully realize are perpetuating misery here on earth? There is no need for such destruction, such unconscionable manipulation of the global and local economy that deliberately created a chasm of disparity between the super-wealthy elite and the grinding poverty of the global majority. The innovative thinking that took us to another planet could so easily have eliminated the gross inequality of our world. The exploited and oppressed will need a good deal more than ‘perseverance’ to survive the billionaire Barron’s boot on their necks. There is a conscious choice to perpetuate the deprivation that leaves so many in dire survival poverty while our ruthless politicians brag about the triumphs of scientists with their victorious conquest of space; as a humane pragmatist I cannot share that pride!

As those scientists enthusiastically tell us of rocks that can be returned from Mars in ten years time perhaps we should imagine what we might so easily accomplish here on earth by then: ending our jingoistic interventions in endless futile proxy wars, stoping sanctions, and treating all people with basic humanity. The haunting image of a child’s skeletally frail body no longer shocks the public into outrage over the atrocities in Yemen, for which the US and UK are partially to blame. One such emaciated child’s picture tops the Morning Star Article headline entitled “16 million risk starvation in Yemen, says UN as Saudi war rages.” They report that “More than 16 million people in Yemen will go hungry this year, a United Nations agency warned today ahead of a conference to drum up humanitarian aid. The UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said that the risk of a major famine in the country, subjected to brutal bombardment and blockade by Saudi Arabia since 2015, ‘has never been more acute’.”

In a recent development the Morning Star report that “Though the new US government of President Joe Biden has blocked arms sales to the Saudis for use in the war, which has killed an estimated 130,000 people and given rise to what the UN deems the world’s worst humanitarian disaster, the Gulf kingdom has shown no sign of backing down in its bid to crush the Shi’ite Houthi movement, which took control of Yemen in 2014, overthrowing Saudi ally Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. Riyadh said on Saturday that it had intercepted a Houthi missile over its territory and shot down three bomb-laden drones in a southern province. A major new Houthi offensive in the province of Marib has prompted an escalated Saudi bombing campaign in response, killing hundreds of people. The OCHA said that the fighting there had displaced more than 8,000 people and 380,000 more may have to flee if fighting reaches the provincial capital, many of them already refugees from other theatres of the war.”

The Morning Star claims that “A spokesman for the Saudi-led coalition, Colonel Turki al-Maliki, said that the Houthis were targeting civilians ‘in a systemic and deliberate way.’ Yet Saudi Arabia has faced international condemnation for causing heavy civilian casualties by its own bombing of Yemen over successive years, including the targeting of residential areas and hospitals. An August 9 2018 attack on a school bus that killed 40 children and 11 adults sparked worldwide uproar, and the subsequent revelation that the bomb used had been supplied by the United States swung US public opinion against the war, leading Mr Biden to pledge an end to support for Saudi Arabia.” When will the British finally pay more attention to the carnage on earth and a little less attention to the recovery of rocks from the surface of Mars?

the Morning Star note that “Despite publishing a report by US intelligence agencies on Friday that concluded Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had personally approved the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Washington will not be taking any action against him, while its ban on arms sales has not been emulated by Britain, which continues to sell weaponry to Riyadh.”
For a few billionaire Brits the bottom line is essentially the bottom line, wars are massively profitable for those willing to supply the weaponry and so the global carnage continues unabated. In an earlier Canary Article entitled, “The UK has made billions from helping Saudi Arabia create a humanitarian crisis in Yemen,” they outline the solid financial motivation behind distressing UK foreign policy. They say that “In its latest report, Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) has revealed that the UK has exported £6.2bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia in the last four years.”

The Canary report how “The trade has fed Saudi Arabia’s ongoing war in Yemen and contributed to a growing humanitarian crisis. The Saudi-led war in Yemen has now created what the UN has described as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. On 15 August, NGOs Mwatana and Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) reported that Saudi Arabia had ‘whitewashed significant civilian harm’ and was guilty of violations of international humanitarian law. The Canary has previously reported on the extent of the UK’s complicity in the humanitarian crisis in Yemen. A briefing paper from the House of Commons states: ‘the UK was the second-largest exporter of arms to Saudi Arabia (after the US) between 2010 and 2018, and larger than all other countries combined. Between 2010 and 2018 Saudi Arabia was the largest importer of arms from the UK; the total volume of arms transfers was around 43% of the UK’s total arms export volume.”

The Canary reported that “On 20 June 2019, the Court of Appeal ruled that weapons exports to Saudi Arabia are ‘unlawful’. But according to CAAT: ‘[The] UK Government has invited Saudi Arabia and other coalition members to London next month for one of the world’s biggest arms fairs.’ Andrew Smith from CAAT stated: ‘Thousands of people have been killed in the Saudi-led bombardment of Yemen, but that has done nothing to deter the arms dealers. The bombing has created the worst humanitarian crisis in the world, and it wouldn’t have been possible without the complicity and support of Downing Street. These arms sales are immoral and illegal.’ CAAT has also reported on British arms trade to other Gulf countries that form part of the Saudi coalition, adding that: ‘In reality, the figures are likely to be a great deal higher, with most bombs and missiles used by Saudi forces being licensed via the opaque and secretive Open Licence system.” A revealing RT News Video presentation is included in the piece.

The Canary Quoted “Sarah Waldron of CAAT said: ‘These new figures are shocking and once again illustrate the UK government’s determination to keep supplying arms at any cost. UK-made weapons have played a devastating role in the Saudi-led attacks on Yemen, and the humanitarian crisis they have created, yet the UK government has done everything it can to keep the arms sales flowing.” But this is just one foreign arena of British-sponsored aggression for profit and the UK’s determination to monetize misery. The unconditional support of Apartheid Isreal in their systematic persecution of the Palestinians remains another of the most lucrative among profitable UK atrocities overseas. UK bulldozers are used to obliterate homes and encampments in occupied West Bank, sweeping the earth clear of human detritus to render the vacated ground as bare and lifeless as the Martian terrain. Is Keir Starmer now ready to hail this as another victory of modernity as Israel consolidates its theft of Palestinian land unabated?

In the Canary Article entitled, “Israeli army repeatedly destroys Palestinian Bedouin village,” they expose the relentless ongoing persecution of the Palestinians. Back in early February, they documented how “On Monday heavily armed Israeli soldiers arrived in the Palestinian Bedouin village of Humsa. They used a bulldozer, manufactured by British company JCB, to flatten people’s tents and possessions while the villagers looked on. This was the third time in just one week that soldiers had come to demolish homes in Humsa. The demolitions are part of a colonial policy, aimed at stealing Palestinian land. Aisha, one of the residents of Humsa told journalists from Middle East Eye: ‘The community has become rubble. The Israeli army came and destroyed all of our homes and tents. We are now in the open, between the grounds and the sky. …We have no alternative but to remain here on our land. They will continue to demolish and we will continue to build and remain steadfast here’.”

“The Canary also spoke to Palestinian activist Jamal Jumaa. He told us: The destruction of Humsa community in north of Jordan Valley by the Israeli occupation forces is part of an ethnic cleansing plan targeting Palestinian communities this is a crime against poor people, who [have been] living on their land hundreds of years, destroying their future, terrifying them.” He said in outrage, “for those companies [whose] bulldozers are used for the destruction of these communities, I’m telling them, ‘shame on you’. JCB is owned by the Bamfords, one of the wealthiest families in the UK. The company is currently facing an investigation over the use of JCB machines in home demolitions.” But we can take protest action here in the UK in solidarity with the oppressed. The efforts of ‘Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) are far-reaching and capable of exerting great pressure on the ruthless Israeli Government if we continue to escalate our involvement; remember it was pariah state isolation that brought South African apartheid to an end.

The Canary said that they, “Asked Jamal how we should respond to these demolitions and what action ordinary people could take against companies like JCB. Here’s what he said. We should gather our efforts to boycott them, to isolate them, and to tell them: ‘what you are doing is violating international law; what you are doing is horrible. It’s crimes against humanity used by this criminal state’. JCB has been told time and time again that their equipment is being used in Israel’s home demolitions. It’s time for JCB’s directors to distance themselves from state-sanctioned racism, and to prevent JCB equipment being used by the Israeli army.” We cannot allow the new rogue leadership of the Labour party under Trojan horse Starmer to force the thus far Palestinian supporting, Labour membership to condone of facilitating the expansionist Zionist cause. The Starmer lurch to the right, cheering for nationalism, patriotism, flag-waving and toxic foreign intervention is a return to Blairite warmongering; this must be rejected: Starmer has to go.

Starmer is working to destroy the progressive Left of the Labour Party, courting the Zionist Lobby, appeasing the Tories by offering zero opposition in total support of Boris Johnson, regressing Labour to a familiar Neocon stance of the past. Starmer will help with the continuing Tory revamp of austerity! In the Canary Article entitled, “Exposed: Devastating DWP cuts have led to more people dying during the pandemic,” they reveal the extent of damage this Tory Government has wrought here in the UK. “Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) welfare cuts have had a “direct” and “negative” impact on people’s mental and physical health. That’s the view of a new report into the UK’s social security system. Moreover, the research also highlights how DWP’s changes over the past five years led to a perfect storm of deprivation and ill health when the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic hit. Taken as a whole, the report’s findings suggest a greater number of people have died and suffered during the pandemic because of the cuts.”

The Canary outline how back to 2016, “The Conservative government put in place the Welfare Reform and Work Act. It made sweeping changes to the social security system. The then work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith said at the time it would form part of: the Government’s aim to move from a high tax, high welfare and low wage society to a low tax, lower welfare and higher wage society. This Bill lays the ground for that commitment and helps us to continue the job of reversing the Labour’s Government’s failure that led us into the difficulties we inherited. Now, five years on, the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Health in All Policies has looked at the Act. It has analyzed the effect it has had on social security claimants. And the APPG has also looked at how the 2016 changes have affected society overall. Its findings and conclusion are damning.”

The Canary describe the “Sweeping changes,” saying that “The act made numerous changes to social security. As the APPG’s report laid out, it: ‘Reduced the benefit cap (the total income from social security support)’; Put in place the ‘benefits freeze’; ‘Limited the amount of support provided by child tax credit for families who become responsible to a third or subsequent child born on or after 6 April 2017’; ‘Limited the child element of universal credit to a maximum of two children’; ‘Removed the Work-Related Activity [WRAG] component in Employment and Support Allowance [ESA] and the Limited Capability for Work element in Universal Credit’. In short, all these were effectively cuts or restrictions on the amount of money the DWP gave to claimants. Now, by combining lots of research, the APPG has reported on the vast impact the act has had.”

The Canary focused on the “Five key areas” as “The APPG looked at the act in the context of five areas. These were: Benefit cap: £1.62bn cut; Benefit freeze: £10.2bn cut; 30% of households saw a reduction in money; Two child limit: £5.35bn cut, affecting 3.8 million families – ‘Abolition of £30 a week support for disabled people who were unfit for work (ESA WRAG)’: £1.365bn cut, affecting half a million disabled and sick people – ‘Extension of sanctions to ‘responsible carers’ (parents of pre-nursery age children).’ Then, its report compiled lots of evidence. This showed that the 2016 act has not done what the Tories claimed it would do. In fact, when you look at what has happened, it has really done the opposite.”

With the impact well illustrated by graphs included in the article, the Canary reported on the “Overarching negative effects,” noting that “After the Tories put the 2016 Act, and one from 2013, in place, The APPG report notes the following effects. Child poverty went up: The number of homeless children in March 2019 was 51% higher than in 2014 – Trussell Trust foodbank use went up –
There was a rise in children on Free School Meals. But it was the APPG’s analysis on welfare reform’s effects on people’s physical and mental health which made for the starkest reading. DWP reforms: literally making people sick Its research noted that: Infant mortality rose from 3.6 per 1,000 live births in 2017 to 3.9. The report said this was ‘unprecedented in modern history’. The report also said that from 2016-18 there was a ‘16.4% increase in the number of women with 2 or more children terminating their pregnancies compared to increases of 7% and 10.3% for women with no children and one child, respectively’.”

“The Canary documented other negative health impacts: Disabled people’s anxiety increased; Disabled people’s loneliness increased. It also noted that: more than half of the 14 million people living in poverty have a disabled person in their household. Approximately 6.5 million disabled adults and children are living in poverty, with disabled working-age adults having the highest rate (40%). Although physical disability rates have stayed the same over the last 5 years, mental health conditions have increased. Since 2012, there are an additional 1.6 million people with a severe mental health condition or mental disability. Then, it cited 2017 research which said that negative health behaviors like smoking and not eating fresh fruit and vegetables were associated with increased poverty. More research showed that poor children: were more likely to have socioemotional behavioral problems, cognitive disability and to be overweight or obese.”

The Canary reported on another disquieting revelation potentially “Shortening claimant’s lives? The report also noted that: There was a 9% increase in claimants with ‘depressive-like symptoms’ due to the benefit cap. Another study found a ‘causal relationship between the psychological distress that claimants experienced and moving onto Universal Credit. Abrahams summed up by saying: The impacts of this social security-driven poverty on the health and wellbeing on the population is profound. The United Kingdom is one of a few advanced economies where our life expectancy has flatlined since 2018, with poor areas seeing a decline. But the impact of this poverty on our children on their life chances but also on their longevity is shocking for the 5th richest country in the world. The evidence that for every 1% increase in child poverty there’s an extra 5.8 infant deaths per 100 000 live births shame us. But then the pandemic hit. The report highlights, all of the problems the DWP created made this worse.”

The Canary described how these issues were becoming entrenched noting how, “In early 2020, professor Michael Marmot released a report. It looked at the 10 years after The Marmot Review and looked at the health of society. Marmot found that: People can expect to spend more of their lives in poor health; improvements to life expectancy have stalled, and declined for the poorest 10% of women; the health gap has grown between wealthy and deprived areas. In December last year, he added to his ‘call’ on the government. This was because coronavirus had hit the poorest communities the hardest. Marmot said that the causes of this were the: ‘governance and political culture which has damaged social cohesion and inclusivity; ‘widening inequalities in power, money, and resources’; ‘regressive austerity policies over the last decade’; ‘declining life expectancy and healthy life expectancy of the poorest, particularly women, which is amongst the worst of all comparable economies’.”
.
The Canary claimed, “In other words, things like the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 had directly led to people dying during the pandemic,” They described “The ‘dehumanization’ of claimants. Abrahams said in a statement that: There is a growing evidence base of the direct and negative impacts of different aspects of the social security system on the mental and physical health of claimants and their families, in addition to the indirect impacts mediated by poverty as a result of having inadequate income from work and/or social security support. In addition to quantitative evidence, we looked at qualitative studies which pointed to a process of ‘dehumanizing’ claimants that eroded their self-esteem and confidence, making them feel worthless. In some cases, the whole experience had proved too much for some claimants and they have taken their own lives. It’s important to note the knock-on impact that this ill health will have on health services and for social protection to be recognized as mitigating against socio-economic health risk factors.” The Canary asked “So, what can be done? Overarching changes needed.”

The Canary report that “The APPG said it wanted the government to make 16 changes. These included: ‘making permanent’ the £20 a week Universal Credit uplift; ‘Removing sanctions’; ‘Eradicating benefit caps and lifting the two-child limit’; ‘Ending the five-week wait for Universal Credit and providing cash grants for low-income households’. But will the DWP and the Tories listen? The Canary asked the DWP for comment. It said in response to the APPG report: This Government has always been committed to supporting the most vulnerable and targeting support to those in greatest need, including boosting welfare support by billions and investing at least £2.3 billion of extra funding a year in mental health services by 2023/24. The DWP also pointed The Canary to additional measures it has put in place. These included the £20 Universal Credit uplift which runs until the end of March, and additional investment in mental health services. Abrahams disagrees” claiming “Money-saving at the expense of people’s lives.”

She told the Canary “The 2016 act has literally done little else except save money. Although the Government achieved their aim of cutting welfare spending by introducing these measures, working-age spending on social security has shrunk by £34bn since 2010, there has been minimal impact on helping to get people into work who wouldn’t have got into work without these measures. In the short term, Abrahams said: This is a clear warning to the Chancellor that, as a bare minimum, he must maintain the £20 Universal Credit uplift in his Budget this week to help alleviate some of the devastating damage caused by this act, and the ongoing effects Covid, on low income families who are already struggling to survive. But it remains to be seen how UK social security will pan out in the long term. The number of Universal Credit claimants has doubled since the pandemic started.” The much-touted vaccines will allow the surviving working poor to return to a ‘new normal’ of ramped-up Tory exploitation with forced repayment of their debt!

Regarding the broken system of Universal Credit the Canary warn that “With around six million people now claiming, it’s likely the problems that the APPG highlighted will now affect even more people and given its track record, it’s unlikely the Tory government will act to stop this.” Both with their jingoistic foreign policy and their torturous continuation of austerity here in the UK the Tories have perfected the art of monetizing misery for the many to enable the enrichment of the few! This is no brave new world of hope and opportunity; the Brexit promise of ‘Global Brittain’ is merely an expansion of Tory exploitation while their ‘Freeports’ provide a Tax Haven closer to home. Their rape of the environment will bring the fantasy of ‘life on Mars’ into stark reality as we turn the blue planet into a desolate lifeless terrain surrounding bombed-out cities filled with starving refugees. The rampant corruption of this rabid Tory Sovereign Dictatorship demands Protest, Challenge and Investigation: they must be removed from office before it is too late. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[SA]

In GMB this morning Piers Morgan grilled Kwasi Kwarteng about the governents reaction regarding the MBS revelations and the Saudi led war on Yemen. Kwartengs answers were so unconvincing, it was embarassing to see him squirm:
Kwarteng replied: “I don’t think you’re right Piers. I think the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman cares deeply about his reputation across the world.

Kwarteng about MBS “I think he cares a great deal when Great Britain says to him that some of his behaviour is unacceptable. I think that has a huge impact on him.”
So Piers answered back
“Come on you don’t believe that. Sorry Mr Kwarteng with respect even you don’t believe what you’ve just said to me,” Morgan hit back.
It is interesting to watch the rest of this interview to see how decieptful Tory policy is..

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

SA – I’m not a fan of Pears Morgan, I never watch his show, but he is sure perfecting the art of going for the jugular and not even giving the Tories an easy ride. They are such hypocrites, preaching human rights over Russian treatment of Navalny, but hands-off MBS; those arms contracts to blast Yemen into oblivion are just too lucrative. The Tories hate Alex Salmond, but delight in his takedown of Sturgeon. They are incapable of recognizing their decade-plus foul treatment of the Scotts and foolishly think that the Scottish clamouring for Independence is just a personality cult that can be quashed with her demise. The French have tried and convict Nicolas Sarkozy when will we acquire similar accountability in the UK? Maybe never! But today the Tories have so much at stake it will be really tough working ou what to force the BBC to cram into their fake news propaganda broadcasts to placate the masses. There will be a few peachy gifts tucked discretely into Sunak’s budget to please wealthy elite Tory donor friends no doubt!

‘Borrowed Votes!’ ‘Borrowed £300Bn!’ ‘Borrowed reality!’ Blame Boris for all that ‘borrowed bullshit,’ but it’s just a true-to-form deliberately deceptive Tory agenda con-trick to prepare the British public for yet another devastating wave of austerity. The fancy made-for-TV trailer staring hero Rishi Sunak striding in to save us from the economic impact of Covid 19 was just a stunt for those who generally pay no attention to the budget beyond an extra penny on a pint! There was no logical reason that worried workers on furlough and those relying on Universal Credit needed to suffer weeks of stress so that there were a few scraps to toss to the paupers as he grandstands over perks for wealthy homebuyers in his budget. This extension of the torment was an unnecessary act of deliberate cruelty, but we can expect a lot more when the Tories really start to ‘Decimate Down’ hard on the working poor and unemployed. For now, the first service cuts and tax rises will be delivered by Councils who have had their funding chocked off.

The worst nightmare is that after we all thought that ‘austerity is necessary to pay down our massive debts’ myth had been very thoroughly debunked, it is being hastily resuscitated by the Tories for another round of persecuting the poor. In the Canary Article entitled “Marr just told one of the biggest lies of the pandemic, and it could impact all of us,” they say “Andrew Marr just repeated one of the biggest lies of the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. What’s worse, it’s one that could help the Tories put in place more austerity. On your marks… get set… LIE! Chancellor Rishi Sunak was on the Andrew Marr Show on Sunday 28 February. His slot was ahead of the budget on 3 March. But before Sunak even spoke, Marr was already spreading propaganda for him.” Marr works for the BBC, it’s his job to function as a Tory mouthpiece! How did he wade hip-deep into the Tory bullshit? They noted that “In his intro, he said: Now, my final guest is a man who’s borrowed almost £300bn: the chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak.”

Steve Topple Tweeted: “#Marr compounding one of the biggest lies of the pandemic: that the Tories have ‘borrowed’ £300bn. Clear paving of the way by the government and corporate media for increasing austerity.” The Canary claim “That’s the lie right there. Because Marr claiming the Tories have ‘borrowed almost £300bn’ is simply not true.” They resolve to ‘unpicked’ Marr’s lie, noting that “Tax expert Richard Murphy was straight on it. He tweeted that: ‘How many times this week will we hear the lie that the government has borrowed £300bn to pay for Covid? It hasn’t. It has issued debt, but then immediately repurchased it using new money created by the Bank of England. This debt has already been repaid in that case, for good.’ Murphy is so ‘irritated‘ by this lie that he did a video.” In the Richard Murphy Video, he says: “There is nothing owing to anyone. How do I know? Because the bills have been settled.” Some people might be confused by this concept, but Murphy explains this well in his must-watch video.

The Canary report that “He then says that the Tories have already paid the £300bn off: with money created by the Bank of England [BoE], which was used to buy government bonds, which bonds were issued by the Treasury simultaneously with their repurchase – in effect to fund the deficits that were required to ensure that government could continue to provide its services despite the collapse in tax revenues… How many bonds have been issued? Roughly £300bn… How many bonds have been repurchased by the Bank of England on behalf of the Treasury? Roughly £300bn… What is the consequence of that repurchase? That the Bank of England has injected roughly… £300bn worth of new money into the economy.”

The Canary ask, “£300bn: where’s it come from, and gone to?” To answer, “Where has this £300bn gone? Murphy says it’s gone: either into savings, and savings have risen by roughly £300bn this year; in such things as stocks, shares, and other things, or in cash. Now, that is the end of it. There is no further bill to pay. So Marr was either lying, or he doesn’t get basic economics. Let’s say it’s the latter. To be clear for Marr’s benefit: what Murphy is saying, simply put, is this. The Tories just got their mates at the BoE to print a load of money. End of.” The Canary ask, Why would Marr, much of the corporate media, and the Tories keep lying about borrowing?” Are there “More cuts coming? SNP MP Angus MacNeil took Marr’s lie to a possible conclusion. As he tweeted:
His #AusterityCausingTV hashtag is apt. Because this £300bn lie could well pave the way for more cuts to public spending and/or tax rises. That is, the Tories could bring in more austerity.”

Truth be told they have already started because by not reimbursing local Councils for their Covid overspend the Tories are forcing a hefty rise in Council Tax rates and deep cuts to local services provided. This is a direct breach of the Tory pledge to refund our Councils enabling them to do ‘whatever it takes’ in the fight to get the virus under control. Meanwhile, it has foisted an additional burden on Councils by telling those who cannot afford to self-isolate that they can receive a £500 payment from the Council while again central Government is not covering the rising cost of providing such relief. This allows Chancellor Rishi Sunak to offload the financial responsibility onto Councils and let them take the flack for cuts to services. The Canary also remind us “We’ve already seen a bit of it, because the Tories have made a real-terms cut to some public sector workers’ pay. This, and any future cuts, are based on a lie that we owe someone £300bn. We don’t. So, for Marr to say otherwise, is him being complicit in this sham.”

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Poll shows Starmer’s really got his finger on the pulse in opposing corporation and wealth tax rises,” they ask “Or is it somewhere a lot darker..? Keir Starmer and his front bench have outraged Labour supporters by saying that they will oppose Rishi Sunak’s plan to increase tax on companies and wealthy individuals that have made a fortune during the pandemic, and at the same time, the Labour hierarchy is threatening councillors with severe disciplinary action if they oppose Tory cuts to local government budgets. Starmer’s opposition to tax rises, almost the only time in his leadership that he’s actually opposed anything, puts him alongside the hard right of the Tory party. His supporters claim that’s because it’s not the time tax rises don’t fit the ‘public mood’ and because he needs to pursue Tory voters. Well, the public, including Tory voters, seems to drastically disagree with him about what its mood is, with more than two-thirds saying they agree with tax rises right the hell now:” They post a
Chart by @LeftieStats and say “Maybe it’s not just his finger he’s got somewhere dark.”

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled “Trickett, Beckett, Lavery unite against Labour HQ briefing against left MPs for saying they’ll vote for tax increases on wealthiest,” the progressive’s speak out. “Left Labour MPs and Unite general secretary candidate combine to denounce hostile briefing by Starmer’s crew, who are now further right than most Tories on tax. Labour MP Jon Trickett and Unite assistant general secretary Howard Beckett have united in solidarity with Ian Lavery and Richard Burgon, after both MPs were the target of hostile briefings to the press by ‘senior party sources,’ for the ‘crime’ of supporting an increase in taxes paid by the businesses and wealthy individuals who have made a fortune during the pandemic, while ordinary people struggle.”

The Skwawkbox reported that “Lavery tweeted his own response to the sly and slimy message farmed out to Paul Waugh, a favourite of the Labour right: ‘Am I right to be slightly irritated that ‘senior Labour sources’ are briefing the right-wing press against @RichardBurgon and myself for our view on increasing corporation tax in next weeks budget? One senior party source tells me: ‘The approach being advocated by Ian Lavery and Richard Burgon is an unintended argument for austerity because it suggests you can fiddle with taxes and spending to pay off debt accumulated in an economic downturn. It’s the mirror of the argument George Osborne made a decade ago’. Starmer and his front bench, disgracefully, are now well to the right of Tory chancellor Rishi Sunak and his boss on tax, despite an overwhelming preference among voters for immediate increases in corporation tax.”

The Skwawkbox claim that “Having blundered yet again and presumably feeling it’s too soon since Starmer’s last panicked u-turn on his dire ‘Recovery Bonds’ idea that was touted by his supporters as a game-changer, they are desperately trying to shore up the last vapours of their credibility by briefing against MPs who, rightly, oppose them. Jon Trickett, in his second blast at the party’s purple hierarchy in three days and his third in a week, stood by Lavery on the issue.” Trickett Tweeted, “Be clear this Labour Party source (anon) is distorting the Left’s view which has massive support in the Party as we shall prove on Monday Night. Join us @Nback20 on Monday to show which way Labour should take the country. We won’t be silenced by false briefings to the Torygraph.” These progressive MPs are deluded if they think they can rescue Labour without the immediate removal of Starmer

The Skwawkbox say “Unite’s Howard Beckett namechecked both men as he took aim at the ‘disgraceful’ right-wingers: Starmer’s idiot pursuit of Tory voters has blown up in his face yet again: more than two-thirds of voters want corporation tax to increase, including very nearly two-thirds of Tory voters. Yet again, leading figures from the left of the movement are right and yet again the dreary Labour right is desperately trying to distract from the egg on its collective faces.” Skwawkbox provide a graph to prove their point. With the BBC and the Mainstream Media all hyping–up the massive debt issue the British people are being duped into the same old Tory trick for accepting budget cuts, pay freezes and more austerity, just packaged under a different name because Boris doesn’t like the term ‘austerity.’ Could be because Johnson knows the entire argument for austerity is not at all credible and it has been publically debunked, but that certainly won’t stop the Tories monetizing the misery of the many for the enrichment of the few.

This Tory Government really must honestly level with us regarding the appalling state of our heavily lopsided economy. They have no intention of spreading any potential growth in the economy more evenly amongst our population as they claim with their latest ‘lev…up’ catchphrase. The ‘level’ of household debt has risen; the ‘level’ of DWP sanctions has risen; the ‘level’ of destitution has risen; the ‘level’ of homelessness has risen; the ‘level’ of child poverty has risen, the ‘level’ of infant mortality has risen, but the level of life expectancy has flatlined, and among some groups it has fallen. What else has fallen in real terms due to a decade of Tory austerity continuing now under another name? The ‘level’ of real-term wages not keeping pace with inflation; the ‘level’ of staffing in our NHS Hospitals; the ‘level’ of policing on our streets; the ‘level’ of public services provided by our cash strapped local Councils the ‘level’ of support provided to the disabled, the vulnerable and the unemployed have all diminished under the Tory cosh!

Despite the growing witch-hunt targeting those on the left of the Labour Party another bold progressive Socialist proves unafraid to speak his mind in the Morning Star Article entitled “Socialist policies are the way to avoid economic ‘long Covid’ – Labour mustn’t shy away from them.” Ian Lavery MP writes that “research done by his organisation and polls nationally show that the only thing that reversed the decline of Labour’s vote in constituencies like his were the bold progressive proposals of the Corbyn era.” Wednesday will see one of the most consequential budgets of our time proposed to Parliament by Rishi Sunak. The importance of this budget simply cannot be overstated. It will reflect how the government chooses to rebuild Britain out of the devastation of the pandemic and it will show the government’s priorities and ambitions for the people of the country. It will also show quite clearly how the leader of the opposition Keir Starmer prioritises tackling the inequality that plagued this land long before coronavirus hit.”

Lavery writes “2020 marked the year that, along with Jon Trickett MP and Cllr Laura Smith, former MP for Crewe and Nantwich, I co-founded the organisation No Holding Back. More than a year has passed since then, during which time we have undertaken a virtual tour of every corner of Britain, listening to the grassroots communities on which the politics we represent were founded. We published The Challenge for Labour, a report based upon the analysis of the conversations that we had. It is vital for politicians to listen but essentially it is even more important to then shape the policies and the solutions to provide answers to the problems raised. This must be an ongoing exercise. It is not good enough to just check in to tick a box. Building on that first initiative of the virtual tour, we have now set up a new Activists’ Assembly, the first iteration of which focuses on Wednesday’s Budget. We have been blown away by the response to our first consultation. Over 1100 have responded with their priorities for the Budget.”

Lavery reports that “There is a clear signal of what people would like to see and we will be releasing the findings on Monday evening. The responses that we have had have come from a wide cross-section of society and it is absolutely crucial that their views are heard before the Labour front bench responds to Rishi Sunak’s fiscal plans. It is obvious that currently the Labour Party machine is prioritising returning to the acceptance of the status quo of the Blair years over the politics of progressive transformation of the Corbyn period. A rewriting of history and ducking and diving of responsibility is underway and frankly no good will be achieved long term if this approach continues. Labour was steadily losing support from the Labour heartlands for decades because solutions were not being offered to improve the lives and opportunities of those living there. People and communities whose votes had long been taken for granted felt alienated from the politics of Westminster.”

Lavery rightly claims that “2017 was the only time that that changed when a real progressive agenda for change was put forward and people were excited about what that meant. For the Many, not the Few offered hope despite vicious internal attacks and, in my view, attempted sabotage from those who prioritise holding the gears of the internal machine as more important than getting the Tories out of power. By 2019 the hateful attacks on the party leadership by the media and organised sections of the Labour Party, plus the disastrous second referendum campaign and lack of discipline of the left on the matter had sealed the fate of socialist and transformational policies coming to the forefront of British politics.” Within this statement is an acceptance of the Labour loss in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election that I still cannot buy into. The defamation had an impact, but the prospect of a second referendum was far safer than ongoing austerity after a Tory controlled Brexit: we still need to fully Investigate this unfathomable election result.

Lavery is right to claim that those transformational policies were popular and vote-winning but misled in his acceptance that the positive inspirational policy agenda of 2019 was blown off course by a fixation on Brexit at all costs. I don’t find it credible to believe that after a gruelling decade of intense suffering under Tory austerity a large faction of former Labour supports among the exploited working poor voted to extend the torment and abuse of Tory rule. Survival is the single strongest human instinct so at a point where the public came to realize that the conscious cruelty of Tory austerity was not a necessity, but ideologically driven by excessive greed, I seriously doubt they voted for their children to starve. How long did it take before the new Tory Government was putting the squeeze on school meals and forcing even greater reliance on food banks? Less than nine months after they stole the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, but the public were not in the least bit surprised because for the Tory elite it was business as usual!

Lavery insists that “Those very policies are the blueprint to drive us out of the economic disaster that we face now. The answer to how we bridge inequality starts there. It is clear as day from our original tour with No Holding Back and this latest consultation that those popular policies are still popular. That has been proven in various polls nationally and it would be disastrous for Labour to ignore this and offer more or less the same as the Tories (and conceivably even less). The full economic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic are still being quantified and understood, but it is already clear that it is a major economic event, unprecedented during peacetime. Government action will be critical to ensuring the avoidance of an “economic Long Covid” that could reshape Britain’s economy for years to come, accelerating inequality, deepening poverty and further widening regional economic disparities, with all the associated social, economic and political costs.”

Lavery reminds us that “We must not forget however that not everyone has experienced economic losses because of the Covid-19 economy. At the very top of the income distribution, many amongst the very wealthy have been making a killing. The private contracts being dished out to friends and associates of the top leaders of the Conservative Party go to show how utterly divided and corrupt things have become. Given the social, political and ecological harm created by runaway inequality, Labour should call for a windfall tax on excess profits and/or a wealth tax, rather than increasing taxes on work or spending during an economic contraction. If the Labour leadership is to oppose any increase in corporation tax, they’d be out of step with the country at large, 67 per cent of voters, including 76 per cent of Labour supporters, say they’d favour an increase. Britain’s existing corporation tax rate, at 19 per cent, is the lowest in the G7.”

Ian Lavery, who is the MP for Wansbeck, warns that “Starmer needs to stop listening to the likes of Peter Mandelson, who is famous for taking the heartlands for granted with his ‘nowhere else to go’ comments and instead, listen to those who live and breathe the concerns of real communities crying out for new politics. Taking bolder action, more in line with the scale of the Biden economic stimulus proposals we have seen in the US can begin to radically transform the situation and instead put Britain on a different path. Lives can be saved and a more hopeful future achieved, mass unemployment can be prevented and we can halt and reverse the spiralling levels of poverty and wealth inequality in this country. We need a budget that will protect health, jobs and incomes. That is what the Labour Party should be about.”

Convincing arguments put forward by Robert J. Murphy refute the need to pay back a massive debt to avoid burdening future generations. ‘Quantitative Easing’ (QE) sees the Bank of England injecting newly created money into circulation to spur investment and public spending. The real key is in the word ‘circulation;’ taxation is necessary to prevent funds being syphoned off by the super wealthy to be unproductively hoarded in offshore Tax Havens! The whole fake promise of ‘lev…up’ is just a cover for more austerity as the Tories monetize the misery of the many for the enrichment of the few. We must banish this grossly deceptive phrase from our lexicon as it continues to trick progressives into regurgitating this cruel Tory lie. There will be subtle hints in this budget of exactly how and when the Tories will ‘Decimate Down’ in their continued exploitation of the working poor. The Tory boot will remain on our necks until we take to the streets on mass to protest and challenge their claim to power: Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

In the Labour List Article entitled, “How the labour movement reacted to Rishi Sunak’s 2021 Budget,” Elliot Chappell documents the critical response from the left and representatives of the left behind he notes after “Rishi Sunak delivered the long-awaited 2021 Budget this afternoon. He announced the extension of the £20-per-week Universal Credit uplift via a one-off payment and confirmed that the furlough scheme and support for the self-employed will continue until the end of September. The Chancellor told parliament that the government’s restart programme’ would help get over one million people into work with the incentive for hiring apprentices doubling to £3,000 and £126m to help people offer trainee shifts to apprentices. He revealed that corporation tax, paid on company profits, will increase to 25% from April 2023. He added that smaller businesses will be protected, as firms with profits of less than £50,000 will pay the current 19% rate.”

Chappell reported that “Sunak confirmed that business rates relief and the reduced VAT rate for leisure and hospitality businesses would continue and announced a £300m culture recovery fund, £300m for sports clubs and £19m to support victims of domestic abuse. The Chancellor said the basic allowance will continue to go up to £12,570 as planned but will then remain at that level until 2026, and that the higher rate threshold will also go up to £50,270 but then it will be frozen for the same period. He described the Budget as one that will ‘unite and level up” the country, but Keir Starmer declared that he “barely mentioned inequality let alone tried to address it’. Here’s what the rest of the labour movement had to say…”

Chappell first looked at the “Trade unions” where he noted that “The Chancellor was ‘strangely silent on public services’, UNISON general secretary Christina McAnea said, commenting that workers will be concerned by what the Chancellor did not announce today. ‘Economic recovery and rescuing beleaguered public services should go hand in hand,’ she said after the Budget statement this afternoon. ‘Both are essential in the kind of society in which we all want to live’. TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady warned that the Chancellor is ‘gambling with the recovery when he should have acted to create jobs’ and argued that the extension to the furlough scheme to September ‘ends too soon’. ‘After a year of key workers going above and beyond, it’s an insult that he announced no new support for our hard-pressed NHS or public services and no guarantee of a decent pay rise for all our public sector key workers,’ she added.”

Chappell reports that “GMB acting general secretary Warren Kenny told the Chancellor that ‘warm words don’t pay the bills’, criticising the absence of support for public service workers and a commitment to take action on the low level of statutory sick pay. ‘The Chancellor has presided over a wasted opportunity in his Budget, again ignoring the plight of the travel sector and others who have been so badly hit in the pandemic,’ TSSA general secretary Manual Cortes said today. ‘Where were the rewards for our key workers who have done so much for our country throughout the pandemic?’ he asked. He said Sunak offered nothing on sick pay, the minimum wage, climate change or workers ‘after a decade of Tory cuts’.”

Chappell heard that. “Extending furlough by six months, short-term business rates reductions and one-off grants do not allow retailers the opportunity to plan their recovery out of the pandemic and secure jobs,’ Usdaw’s Paddy Lillis declared. The general secretary added: ‘Huge issues like expensive rents and rates, along with unfair taxation continue not to be addressed by the government. Today’s Budget is yet another missed opportunity. Royal College of Nursing national officer Hannah Reed described a ‘failure to listen’ from Sunak in his refusal to give nurses a pay rise and warned that it ‘leaves even more contemplating their futures and only adds to the nurse staffing crisis’. ‘We hope the silence from the Chancellor on NHS pay in today’s Budget is not a sign of government inaction on a fair rise for all NHS workers,” Royal College of Midwives executive director of external relations Jon Skewes said’.”

Turning to members of the Labour Party Chappell reported the following unflattering comments. “This budget won’t rebuild Britain,’ newly elected leader of the Scottish Labour Party Anas Sarwar told his followers on social media shortly after the Budget statement was delivered to the UK parliament today. ‘The UK is in the worst economic crisis of any major economy and the Scottish people need a plan for jobs, inequality, social care and more. The priority of the UK, and Scottish, [governments] must be Covid recovery and uniting our country’. ‘Have I missed the bit where the Chancellor announced a pay rise for health and social care workers?’ Deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner tweeted. ‘I suppose last year’s clapping will have to pay this year’s bills’.Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds highlighted that Sunak failed to mention key workers, social care, high streets, sick pay or inequality and said, Tory mismanagement of the crisis meant the economy has been ‘hit harder’.”

Chappell reported that “Jonathan Reynolds thanked people who had campaigned alongside Labour against cutting the increased rate of Universal Credit, and said on social media that it should remain in place ‘until Universal Credit is replaced’.” The switch to a one-off payment was ominous as it signals the Tory determination to return to the pre-Covid level of grotesquely inadequate benefit payments that were the result of George Osborn’s prolonged benefit freeze that have dragged so many into destitution, reliance on food banks and unacceptable child poverty. While the Furlough scheme could potentially be extended if the situation changes there is a sharp cut-off for that vital £20 a week, rendered invisible by no longer being included in regular payments. This decision also slams the lid down on the possibility that those on legacy benefits will be awarded parity. Tories realised what a serious mistake it was to offer the uplift in the first place as it exposed the fact that the benefit’s real spending power had been declining for years.

According to Chappell “John McDonnell argued that Sunak ‘steals my rhetoric’ without the substance, condemning measures including the council tax rise, public sector pay freeze and lack of support for those excluded from the self-employed scheme. Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds declared that the economic statement ‘fails key workers who’ve done so much throughout the pandemic but are now rewarded with a pay freeze’ and added that this is ‘totally wrong’. Shadow minister Liz Kendall highlighted, as the Labour leader did, that social care was not mentioned by Sunak. ‘Elderly and disabled people need decent social care so they can live with dignity and respect,’ she said. Jess Phillips tweeted that ‘children were decidedly missing” from the Budget. She also said: ‘No social care, no child care, nothing about children. Nothing specifically targeting women’s jobs which have been damned’.”

Chappell reported how “Justin Madders remarked that it seems the controversial Towns’ Fund will be allocated on the same party political basis as before’. The Tories were accused of directing funding towards its target seats in the 2019 general election.” This is highly likely because the Tory Party are not robustly challenged when it comes to this type of corruption or any type of corruption for that matter. When issues like this are exposed, usually in the alternative Media, the BBC and Mainstream Media still give the Tory Party and all Tory Ministers a free ride. They are caught cheating, lying and squandering public funds with impunity and are never held to account: Ministers are never fired or expected to resign because in the Tory Party corruption is backed-in! It goes back to a point well before the totally unfathomable result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election when nobody challenged the voting anomalies or demanded an Investigation. They got away with industrial-scale fraud and decided it was a valid working model!

Sunak’s offer of funding to increase scrutiny over one area of fraudulent abuse was a pathetic token. Chappell noted that “Rosena Allin-Khan commented that the Chancellor’s £100m taskforce announced to tackle those abusing Covid schemes should; start with the list of donors to his party’, resharing an article on dodgy Tory contracting in the crisis.” The ‘taskforce’ is typical of the Tories ongoing commitment to go after those who have been forced through circumstances to avail themselves of Government help and may have made genuine mistakes. Sure there are some that will have gamed the system, but the amount will just like ‘benefit fraud’ be paltry in comparison to the excessive largesse available to companies who have had massive sums of money inappropriate awarded for shoddy goods and services not provided or the money syphoned out of our economy by the wealthy tax-dodging elite!

Chappell reported that “Backbencher Bell Ribeiro-Addy criticised the Chancellor for not mentioning the NHS in his statement, telling her followers that a ‘government that doesn’t value NHS workers doesn’t value the NHS’. ‘Disappointed this budget does not address reform of social care, a pay rise for our brilliant NHS and care staff, a permanent increase to Universal Credit, investing in education and a plan to eradicate child poverty,’ Diana Johnson tweeted. ‘Is this a joke?’ Rebecca Long-Bailey tweeted this afternoon, slamming the measures on the climate emergency in the Budget and describing the £12bn announced for the new national infrastructure bank as ‘paltry’. Karl Turner criticised Tory mismanagement of Covid: ‘I’m baffled Rishi Sunak boasts that we need to spend £407bn to deal with the pandemic. Most other countries haven’t needed to spend anything like that. Why? Because they dealt with it early’.” The bill in the UK is astronomically high not just because of shambolic Tory policy, but their prioritization of greed!

Chappell noted that “On spending announced to support sports clubs, Charlotte Nichols quipped: ‘Unsurprising the Chancellor is spending more money on supporting cricket because this Budget is a masterclass in spin’. The Labour MP for Warrington North added: ‘Statutory sick pay is not nearly enough to live on as is, but a real-terms cut is just unconscionable when it’s in the wider public health interest that everyone can afford to self-isolate!” Undoubted this issue has been deliberately systematically ignored because if the amount was raised now during the Covid crisis the Tories would have a really tough time pruning it back down again after the pandemic was under control. The UK‘s statutory sick pay was woefully inadequate before Covid hit and the crisis with the need for large numbers of people to self isolate just exposed this inadequacy. The Tories do not care that this has accelerated the spread of Covid 19 and put huge numbers of frontline workers at risk; they were considered expendable during the grand cull!

Chappell said “Apsana Begum remarked that ‘austerity 2.0 v likely’ with ‘even larger insecurity on the cards. with the extension of support to September, noting the absence of a social care plan or any commitment to address child poverty.” Chappell then turned to representatives from “Charities, think tanks, campaign groups.” He reported “Fabian Society general secretary Andrew Harrop described the Budget as ‘very bad news for low income families, vital public services and affordable housing and said the cuts to benefits and tax credits ‘robbed low-income families’. ‘Instead of new ideas, they’re stealing ours,’ Momentum co-chairs Andrew Scattergood and Gaya Sriskanthan argued, citing the creation of the national infrastructure investment bank and the increase to corporation tax. They criticised Labour for ‘wobbling’ over corporation tax rises, adding: ‘By allowing themselves to be outflanked on profit taxes, the leadership has ended up gifting the party of cronyism a new source of anti-establishment legitimacy’.”

Chappell noted that the “Institute for Public Policy Research North director Sarah Longlands said there was very little in today’s Budget to help bolster the creaking foundations of the North’s economy such as poor skills, health and child poverty.’ ‘Recovery in the North will take longer,’ she said. ‘What we needed today was long term, comprehensive investment plan for recovery. What we got doesn’t feel like a genuine attempt to ‘level up’ but a short-term package of measures to win votes’.” Chappell reported that the “Joseph Rowntree Foundation director Helen Barnard described as unacceptable the decision to cut the incomes of millions of families by £1040-a-year in six months’ and argued the Budget has created the ‘perfect storm for the end of this year’.”

Chappell noted that “Generation Rent said the Chancellor’s promised 95% mortgages are ‘completely out of touch when 60% of private renters had no savings at the start of the pandemic and another 18% have had to use savings to pay their rent in the past year’. ‘The government tried a mortgage guarantee scheme eight years ago and all it did was push up house prices, while another half a million households have got stuck renting over the same period,’ director Alicia Kennedy said.” This is so typical of the Tory Party who refuse to learn from their mistakes.” Instead of investing in the building of much needed affordable Council Homes, the Tories decide to focus on helping those in the least distress, the wealthier sector of young people can afford to buy property or get into the buy to rent market. There is no debt right-off scheme to bail-out in those in rental arrears due to Covid related redundancy.

Chappell said “The Chancellor’s Budget has fallen short when it comes to what councils up and down the country desperately need to help their communities out of this pandemic,’ Local Government Intelligence Unit chief executive Jonathan Carr-West declared. He described the state of local government finance as unsustainable and added: ‘Unless we are building prosperous, resilient, well-governed places then the Chancellor’s vision of a green, high-tech, high-skills economy will be built on sand.’ Locality chief executive Tony Armstrong welcomed the announcement of the community ownership fund in the Budget, which allows community groups to bid for up to £250,000 to buy or take over local assets at risk of being lost. But he warned that the £150m fund must provide a mix of capital and revenue funding to support assets to be sustainable in the long term and added that it is vital to ensure that communities with fewer resources are not disadvantaged.” I have to say this sounds like another selective Tory only perk!

Josiah Mortimer examines another aspect of Sunak’s Bidget in the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “Budget: Is Rishi Sunak about to launch a wave of legalised tax-dodging?” He says “A new report has poured cold water on the Chancellor’s plans for freeports. They’ll be announced with grandiose rhetoric about forming ‘safe harbours’ for world trade and ‘levelling up’ the UK. But new analysis of the government’s plans for freeports, tax-free zones often based at ports and airports, has debunked Conservative claims about the proposals. A report from the independent UK in a Changing Europe think tank ahead of Wednesday’s Budget finds that freeports, likely to form part of Rishi Sunak’s plans, will at best relocate, rather than create, economic activity and jobs.” He declares that “They are unlikely to lead to the sort of transformation the government hopes for.”

According to Mortimer “The Chancellor has long been wedded to the idea of freeports. When he was still a backbench MP, Rishi Sunak wrote a report for the Centre For Policy Studies extolling their virtues, with ideological zeal. He claimed they would ‘unleash the potential in our proud historic ports, boosting and regenerating communities across the UK’. The government’s consultation on the plans last year claimed they would ‘create national hubs for global trade and investment across the UK’, ‘promote regeneration and job creation,’ and ‘create hotbeds for innovation’. But there’s scant evidence to back up the tax-handouts, according to academics. The Government wants to launch up to 10 freeports across the UK, with one in each of the four nations. Freeport sites could be located inland as well as by ports, increasing the range of options for sites and potentially allowing existing manufacturing plants to be designated.”

Mortimer notes that “A new report, Freeports, finds that evidence about freeports create additional jobs is unclear, and at best mixed. It notes that there is a ‘public cost’ of maintaining freeports, which is exacerbated by the necessity of providing financial incentives for businesses to relocate to them. And the groups that will benefit from freeports are businesses that relocate there and high net-worth individuals. Freeports, a type of ‘Special Enterprise Zone, have been used by countries such as the United Arab Emirates to create areas with 0% corporation tax, no VAT, income tax, indeed no tax at all. Such a radical scheme in the UK would simply see a rush of UK companies moving from tax-paying areas to tax-free ones.”

Mortimer says “There are also fears over money laundering and international tax evasion: ‘Goods can enter a freeport, stay there indefinitely and trade an unlimited number of times without ever having been taxed…The Financial Action Task Force report[s] that this lack of scrutiny can ‘facilitate’ trade-based money laundering, through ‘relaxed oversight, lack of transparency, trade data and systems integration.’ The Geneva Freeport, for example, has reportedly been used to store stolen archaeological artefacts and artworks. The report notes one study by academics Larkin and Wilcox, concluded that ‘up to 41% of the 58,000 jobs created in the enterprise zones of the 1980s were relocated from elsewhere in the UK’ (and even the ‘new’ jobs might have been created elsewhere if enterprise zones had not existed)’. While they could help if focused on ailing sectors or move jobs from high-employment areas to low-employment ones, they are unlikely to offer real benefits.”

Mortimer warns that “Instead, they look a lot like a giveaway to multinational firms who will go from paying tariffs to avoiding them legally.” This would make sense of Sunak’s early warning of a Corporation tax hike scheduled for two years hence. I do not know the particular advantages offered to companies operating within the Freeports, but I question whether the sizable rate increase in 2023 is a logical wait for the economy to recover enough for big companies to get back on track financially or if it is just a two year window for them to up sticks and relocate to a Freeport to dodge the tax burden? Mortimer says “The report notes the UK had freeports until 2012 when the relevant legislation lapsed, amid suggestions that freeports were of limited use, made no difference to Government revenue or customs reliefs, and that they introduced unnecessary complexities regarding customs.” It is therefore untrue for the Brexiteer Tories to tout this as a new benefit of our freedom from the regulatory constraints of the EU.

Mortimer concludes by revealing that “Commenting on the findings, Professor Catherine Barnard, deputy director of UK in a Changing Europe and one of the authors of the report, said: ‘If the Government thinks freeports are a magic bullet that will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs, bring billions of additional pounds to the Exchequer and radically transform an area it is mistaken. ‘That is not to say they should not be created but the thought they’re going to transform the wealth and prosperity of this country is simply untrue. It will help the regions that get a freeport, but possibly to the detriment of those that don’t’.” Undoubtedly the locations will be carefully considered to advance Tory Party influence in deprived areas where workers well accustomed to serious exploitation will be grateful to accept low pay and the barest means of survival in a continuing age of austerity. This Budget will monetize misery for the masses to further enrich the elite hiding their wealth in Freeports; we must Get The Tories Out ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Boris Johnson started into Prime Ministers Questions by resuscitating his favorite ‘dead cat;’ the now infamous Skripal Novichok poisoning, False Flag stunt staged in Salisbury. No doubt the PM gets perverse pleasure out of knowing how easy it was to dupe the British public with that ludicrous fantasy tale as it bodes well for the multiple scandals and corrupt practices that will require a similar fake news maneuver. He said, “It will be three years tomorrow since a chemical weapon was deployed by Russian military intelligence on the streets of Salisbury. All our thoughts remain with those affected, their families and loved ones, and we will continue to seek justice for them. I am sure this House will want to pay tribute to the people of Salisbury and Amesbury, and wish them well for the future.” No new evidence has ever materialized, the Skripals have been conveniently ‘disappeared without need of any explanation, the Russians remain demonized and now new incredulous allegations: Noviock in Alexey Navalny’s undies…

Labour MP Kim Johnson replaced one type of rivalry with another by evoking the PM’s fond memories of Liverpool and whatever delightful mischief he was up to on an earlier visit. She said, “Liverpool is a welcoming city, with the oldest Chinese community in Europe, but in 1946 the British Government ordered the forced repatriation back to China of thousands of Chinese seamen who were living in Liverpool with their British families, causing lasting emotional trauma. Many of their descendants still live in my Liverpool, Riverside constituency. Will the Prime Minister take steps to acknowledge these events, and provide the descendants with a formal apology and the justice they deserve?” Johnson replied with a telling grin not lost on his fellow MPs, “I have happy memories of my own visits to Liverpool, and I can tell the hon. Member…” he paused, “I can tell her that we are certainly very grateful across the country to the Chinese community for their amazing contribution. Her message has been heard loud and clear.”

The first of several Tory MPs to stroke the PM’s ego with “does he agree with me” groveling was John Stevenson who said, “The Pirelli factory in Carlisle employs around 800 people, contributes hundreds of millions of pounds to the local economy and is an exporter. Its location is a consequence of regional economic policy from 50 years ago. Does the Prime Minister agree that, if we are to rebalance the economy and level up the country, we need a modern-day, proactive regional economic policy? If he does agree, will he come to Carlisle to see the old and new in action?” Sycophants had to keep reinforcing the PM’s lies, “Of course,I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for what he says. He will hear more in just half an hour or so, let us try to keep it to half an hour, Mr Speaker, from the Chancellor about how exactly we intend to make sure we build back better across the whole of this country and unleash the tremendous potential of the whole of the United Kingdom, including of course Carlisle, which he so well represents.”

His faithful Trojan Horse Sir Keir Starmer dutifully reinforced the Tory False Flag incident saying, “I join the Prime Minister in his comments about the Salisbury atrocity.” But he had to offer the team a nugget of opposition on behalf of the Labour Party, so he asked, “Does the Prime Minister agree with President Biden that the sale of arms which could be used in the war in Yemen should be suspended?” The PM’s response was entirely predictable, he said, “Ever since the tragic conflict in Yemen broke out, this country has scrupulously followed the consolidated guidance, of which the right hon. and learned Gentleman will be well aware.” Starmer rephrased his question saying, “The trouble is that, while President Biden has suspended arms sales that could be used in Yemen, the UK has not. In fact, we sold £1.4 billion-worth of arms to Saudi Arabia in three months last year, including bombs and missiles that could be used in Yemen.” Ouch! Starmer strayed out of bounds; you don’t question the Tory arms trade gravy train…

But Starmer kept going, “Given everything we know about the appalling humanitarian cost of this war, with innocent civilians caught between the Saudi coalition and the Houthi rebels, why does the Prime Minister think it is right to be selling these weapons?” The PM was quick to justify the horrific carnage of this futile foreign war by claiming international consensus, “The UK is part of an international coalition following the UN resolutions, which the right hon. and learned Gentleman will know well and which are very clear that the legitimate Government of Yemen were removed illegally. Those are the resolutions that we follow, and we continue scrupulously to follow the humanitarian guidance, among the toughest measures anywhere in the world, in respect of all arms sales. He talks about humanitarian relief, and actually I think the people of this country can be hugely proud of what we are doing to support the people of Yemen: almost £1 billion of aid contributed in the past five years.” Tories know how to monetize misery!

Starmer stuck with the same question yet again saying, “The Prime Minister says the system is very robust in relation to arms sales. It cannot be that robust: the Government lost a court case just two years ago in relation to arms sales. The truth is that the UK is increasingly isolated in selling arms to Saudi Arabia, despite what is happening in Yemen, despite Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, and despite the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a murder the US has concluded was approved by the Saudi Crown Prince. So I have to ask: what will it take for the Prime Minister to suspend arms sales to Saudi Arabia?” Of course, the logical answer to that question from any Tory PM would be ‘when hell freezing over!’ But the PM continued to trot out lame excuses claiming consensus saying, “We condemn the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. We continue to call for a full independent investigation into the causes of his death, and indeed we have already sanctioned 20 people in Saudi Arabia.” Not impressed.

Johnson then tried his favorite trick of coapting the Labour Party for their complicity in past jingoistic foreign interventions. He said “I repeat the point that I have made that the UK Government continue to follow the consolidated guidance, which, by the way, was set up by the Labour party.” Starmer ignored the baiting and stuck with the same criticism, but added an important point about the recent decimation of the UK’s Foreign Aid budget saying, “To make matters worse, the Government decided this week to halve international aid to Yemen, to halve it. The United Nations has said that Yemen faces the worst famine the world has seen for decades, and the Secretary-General said on Monday that cutting aid would be a ‘death sentence’ for the people of Yemen. How on earth can the Prime Minister justify selling arms to Saudi Arabia and cutting aid to people starving in Yemen?”

The PM started reinventing reality, black was the new white, he bragged about huge amounts of money spent; the UK is the most generous country on earth, he claimed. “It is under this Government that we have increased aid spending to the highest proportion in the history of our country, and, yes, it is true that current straitened circumstances, which I am sure the people of this country understand, mean that temporarily we must reduce aid spending, but that does not obscure the fact that when it comes to our duty to the people of Yemen we continue to step up to the plate: a contribution of £214 million for this financial year. There are very few other countries in the world that have such a record and that are setting such an example in spending and supporting the people of Yemen.” Sure, sell weapons to the Saudi regime to bomb Yemen into oblivion, then toss the innocent victims a bit odf aid money…

There was no point asking a question about the budget, there would be time to criticize that later so Starmer stayed on message, saying, “This week the Government halved our international aid to Yemen. If this is what the Prime Minister thinks global Britain should look like, he should think again, and if he does not believe me, if he does not like it from me or the UN Secretary-General, he should listen to his own MPs. Just this morning, the Conservative MP the right hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood) said: ‘Cutting support to starving children is not what Global Britain should be about. It undermines the very idea of the UK as a nation to be respected on a global stage.’ The right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell) said this was ‘unconscionable’. Will the Prime Minister now do the right thing and reconsider this urgently?” He knew descent in the Tory camp wasn’t tolerated!

The PM was not on the moral high ground, climbing up would induce vertigo so he regurgitated perverse defensive claims of billions spent, “I repeat: we have given £1 billion since the conflict began; we are in support of UN resolutions; this year we are contributing another £214 million to support the people of Yemen. There are very few other countries in the world that have that kind of record. In these tough, straitened circumstances, bearing in mind the immense cost of the covid epidemic that has affected our country, I think the people of this country should be very, very proud of what we are doing.” The lying Emporer’s nakedness demanded that he cloak himself in ‘the will of the people.” Starmer scolded, “Britain should be a moral force for good in the world, but just as the US is stepping up, the UK is stepping back. If the Prime Minister and Chancellor are so determined to press ahead with their manifesto-breaking cuts to international aid, cutting the budget to 0.5%, they should at least put that to a vote in this House. Will he have the courage to do so?”

Johnson began his spin pitch, “We are going to get on with our agenda of delivering for the people of this country and spending more than virtually any other country in the world, by the way, spending more, still, than virtually any other country in the G7on aid. It is a record of which this country can be proud. Given the difficulties that this country faces, I think that the people of this country will think that we have got our priorities right. The right hon. and learned Gentleman cannot work out what his priorities are. One minute he is backing us on the road map; the next week he is turning his back on us. He cannot even address a question on the issues of the hour. He could have asked anything about the coronavirus pandemic; instead, he has concentrated his questions entirely to the interests of the people of Yemen. We are doing everything we can to support the people of Yemen given the constraints that we face. We are getting on with a cautious but irreversible road map to freedom, which I hope that he will support.”

The PM remarked, “Very shortly, Mr Speaker, you will be hearing a Budget for recovery.” The Speaker sarcastically replied, “I think I already know most of it.” Tory Dr, Liam Fox put the boot in re turmoil in Scotland saying, “My right hon. Friend will be aware that when devolution was established in Scotland, there was no separate Scottish civil service created; we have a UK civil service, with UK ministerial oversight. Given the turmoil in Scottish politics, will he confirm that any civil servants who feel pressurized to behave inappropriately have a mechanism to seek redress beyond the Ministers to whom they are immediately answerable?” Johnson said, “I thank my right hon. Friend, and of course we will support all civil servants. By the way, I thank them for the work that they have done up and down the country throughout the pandemic. I think everybody in this House would agree that now is the time, really, for our civil service to focus on working together to build back better together, rather than on measures that might divide our country.”

Even SNP Leader Ian Blackford bought into the False Flag lie saying, “May I associate myself with the remarks of the Prime Minister on the terrible atrocity three years ago in the town of Salisbury? The situation in Yemen has been called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. One hundred thousand people have been killed, 16.2 million are at risk of starvation, and 2.3 million children, Prime Minister, are at death’s door, facing acute malnutrition. The UK Government’s response is not one of compassion; instead, it is to impose cuts. That is what you are doing, Prime Minister, a 50% cut to international aid to Yemen, a move that the UN chief, António Guterres, has described as ‘a death sentence’. Since the start of the war, the Tories have shamefully backed the Saudi regime through billions of pounds of arms sales and support, despite evidence of war crimes and of the targeting of civilians. Will the Prime Minister confirm that today’s Budget will force through the devastating cuts to international aid?”

This was like a one, two punch from the left; I can imagine Boris Johnson was caught off-guard by the consolidated attack targeting a sensitive issue that had escalated in importance following the US announcement regarding Khashoggi’s murder. The PM was on the defensive, but being steadily worn down by the opposition. He repeated, “I think anybody listening to this debate will have heard me say that this country, this Government, in the last five years has given £1 billion to support the people of Yemen. I can tell the right hon. Gentleman, in case he thinks there is any diminution of our efforts, that on Monday we are going to provide cash support to 1.5 million of the most vulnerable Yemeni households, support 400 health clinics and treat 75,000 cases of severe malnutrition. That is the continuing effort of the British people and the British Government to help the people of Yemen.” There was no way he was going to let the opposition bully him into relinquishing lucrative arms deals or forking out more aid money.

But Blackford persisted, “The reality is a 50% cut to Yemen aid at a time of a global pandemic. The coronavirus has hit poor and vulnerable countries the hardest, threatening decades of hard-won gains while exacerbating existing inequalities. During his leadership race, the Prime Minister made a commitment to stand by 0.7% for aid spending, a position he reaffirmed in June last year at that very Dispatch Box. What followed was yet another U-turn, another broken promise. Why is the Prime Minister breaking his own manifesto commitment, and why are his Government breaking the promises they made to the world’s poorest?”

Johnson enlisted unanimous approval again bragging, “I think most people in this country will know that the Government have given £280 billion to support the people, the economy, the livelihoods and the businesses up and down the whole of the United Kingdom. That has, as you will hear from the Chancellor, Mr Speaker, placed strains on our public finances. In the meantime, we continue to do everything we possibly can to support the people of Yemen, including, by the way, through a massive vaccination program, to which the people of this country have contributed £548 million, the second biggest contributor in the world.”

Boris Johnson’s disgraceful self-serving support for the Saudi war on Yemen, despite appalling human rights violations including the Embassy murder revelations now brutally exposed; he must have felt relieved when the coordinated attack was over. Tories are very selective in responding to atrocities: weapons contracts take precedence. But there was also the dramatic reduction in aid funding so Johnson needed to lean hard on his Media buddies to drown-out this concerted attack from the opposition benches, but the Budget announcements would help. Johnson’s Tory sycophants came to the rescue as an all too familiar pattern returned to PMQs: groveling non-questions to stroke his ego and prompt another advertising pitch in his funding pledge fantasy parade party political PR broadcast as delivered every week. Interspersed with tough opposition questions where scrutiny is easily rejected to ignore, not answer, ridicule or counter with more gushing boasts, the illusion of money spent or empty pledges for future funding.

Two MPS from the DUP, Sir Jeffrey Donaldson and Carla Lockhart both expressed concern over the impact of Brexit on Northern Ireland protocol saying “we are fast approaching the end of the three-month grace period.” They complained of the disruption the protocol was causing to trade between GB and NI; they warned of political instability and damage to the Belfast agreement. They were falsely promised “unfettered access to goods from Great Britain,” but the reality has blocked vital food supplies from reaching NI stores and swamped firms with gobs of onerous red tape paperwork. Lockhart pleaded with the PM to “make this aspiration a reality and ensure that they act in accordance with section 46 of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, which stresses the importance of facilitating the free flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland?” The PM said, “Yes, I certainly can do that.” The UK has now unilaterally violated the recently signed international agreement causing the EU to place ratification on hold!

SNP Patrick Grady presented a tricky Catch 22 for Johnson, “We know that the Prime Minister is the proud leader of a British nationalist party, and he says that his no to another independence referendum in Scotland is final, so why are his colleagues in Scotland distributing leaflets that say a vote for the Tories is a vote to stop an independence referendum? If a vote for the British nationalist Tories in Scotland must be accepted as a legitimate vote against a referendum, surely a vote for the Scottish National Party in May must be respected as a mandate for putting Scotland’s future in Scotland’s hands.” Johnson was bound to launch into his standard SNP insult over the Party name, despite Grady’s attempt to weaponize it against him. His retort was to say, “I was delighted to hear a sort of acceptance there that the hon. Gentleman is running a nationalist party.” The Tories are counting on the charges threatening Nicola Sturgeon will magically derail calls for Scottish Independence, but anger over Brexit is the last straw.

Labour MP Grahame Morris said, “I would like to ask about a very important domestic issue. The property tax system in England is broken. Council tax places an unfair burden on people living in the poorest communities without generating the revenues needed to fund local services. Does the Prime Minister agree that a proportional property tax, as proposed by the Fairer Share campaign, would create a transparent property taxation system, generate revenues that local government needs, and ease the tax burden on hard-pressed families across the country, including in my constituency of Easington?” The PM Started into a comparative attack rant trying to perpetuate the blatant lie that Tory-run Councils manage to deliver better services despite lower Council Tax than neglected Labour Councils the Government’s punitive cuts have hit the hardest. These are the truly deprived areas that should have been selected for grants from the ‘Towns Fund’ that has been plundered through corrupt Tory Minister gerrymandering.

Labour’s Amy Callaghan was welcomed back after an illness and asked the PM about his promise “that there was no threat to the Erasmus scheme as a result of Brexit.” She said “Charities such as STAND International in my constituency that participates in the program are set to lose 96% of their funding as a result of the UK Government’s decision to pull the plug on Erasmus+.” She reminded the PM of his “Guarantee that charities will receive match funding under the new Turing scheme,” Johnson claimed that his Turing scheme would do more for Students from disadvantaged backgrounds taking an opportunistic dig at the well respected Erasmus program favoring high-income households, but ditching Erasmus was the most appalling betrayal of our young people.

Labour MP Beth Winter questioned the ‘lev..up’ lie (LUL) saying “Eleven years of Tory austerity cuts have destroyed the capacity of our public services to withstand the pandemic…” The PM refuted her criticism, and fearing Wales would soon be clamoring for independence, he bragged that the Barnet formula alone was worth 2.4Bn. He teasingly dropped hints about Freeports and a new ‘LUL Fund’ that Sunak was about to announce in the Budget. But, there is every indication that the Tax Haven Freeports will help secure Tory seats while Labour strongholds will become abandoned ‘Freezeports’ and the new LUL Fund will be just as corruptly misappropriated by Tory Ministers as the ‘Towns Fund’ making it more of a ‘LULabye:’ a sweet tune to placate the easily fooled! We must fight back to end the escalating Tory corruption: protesting, challenging ‘chumocracy,’ taking the Government to Court and finally demanding a robust Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election that inflicted this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship on us. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Political commentators are still busy picking through Sunak’s latest budget. The Tories like to use the expression ‘in the round’ as a way of spreading the savage impacts of their negligent and vindictive decisions more broadly over a greater area, to diminish the stark reality of the damage done. We need to protest this conflation of fact and fiction that negates all scrutiny. No, it’s not ‘in the round,’ rather it creates a triangle of torment by perpetuating inadequate benefit payments; lack of affordable housing and rampant unemployment. What isn’t ‘in the round’ for the Tory Party? …Letting this massive financial stimulus of Quantitive Easing (QE) effectively ‘circulate’ within the economy to benefit the entire population. They allow the Tory elite to siphon off obscene amounts of public funding. When money that’s intended to stimulate public spending and Corporate investment in a productive rotation back through the economy, instead dissipates and disappears into hoarded wealth in offshore Tax Havens, it stunts economic recovery!

Tory policies and incentives fail to promote investment as they are based on short-term exploitation opportunities directed towards the desperate, totally disempowered workforce. Austerity is like trying to extract blood from a stone as the Tories inhumane policies of cutting pay and benefits essentially sabotage QE by circumventing the circulation of money within the economy where the majority of people have a lot less money to spend. Wherever money is spent it creates the need for employment: if you cannot afford to get a haircut, the barber’s shop has less custom and requires less staff… This is why immigration is considered a “shot in the arm” for a local economy because the influx of people don’t just take jobs, the requirements of their daily life will create additional jobs. This is the very antithesis of the tabloid scare tactics stirred up by Nigel Farage on his hateful Brexit crusade to con the gullible into voting to leave the EU. The exodus of people from an area due to a major workplace closure has a knock-on effect on the local economy.

The severe disruption of Brexit, supply chain problems and red tape, will force certain businesses to close if they become no longer profitable. This would not have been so traumatic if we had remained in the European Single Market, but the devastating impact of the self-harm Boris Johnson and his corrupt Tory cabal foisted on the people of this country is less obvious due to the jolt caused by their shambolic handling of the Coronavirus pandemic. Covid will also force businesses to close and the Tories will be quick to blame the damage of Brexit on the equally preventable catastrophic damage to our economy caused by Covid. While all countries have suffered economic harm during this pandemic, few other nations have mismanaged Covid so badly, experienced such a massive death toll, or will face such a correspondingly huge hit to their finances as the UK. But the grand Tory Budget announcement concerning Freeports will create even further disruption as many companies will relocate to take advantage of new tax incentives.

The PM is grossly manipulating our national broadcaster, the BBC, to pump out propaganda supporting a defunct ‘£300Bn dept’ myth in preparation for yet more foul Tory medicine with an impending austerity agenda. Once again they are forcing local Councils to inflict the first cuts. By convincing local authorities that they must do ‘whatever it takes’ to stop the spread of the virus promising this would all be funded by the Government: not! So debt has accumulated requiring Councils to cut services in forced compliance with the Tory agenda for smaller Government. Encouraging the people who need to self-isolate to seek access to a Council fund that the Tories have deliberately underfunded once again shifts the ‘bad guy’ burden onto local authorities as does the inevitable need to increase Council Tax. Meanwhile, after offloading this mayhem of indebtedness away from central Government the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship who created this perfect fiscal storm will ignore their responsibility with innocent cries of ‘not me Gov!’

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “This budget shows ‘leveling up’ is just a slogan,” Prof Prem Sikka “shares his analysis of Sunak’s ‘salvation’ for our strickem nation, but, as with most Tory offerings, it wasn’t drafted for the many, but to protect the few. Prem Sikka, who is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting and a Labour member of the House of Lords, claims “The budget will plunge more people into poverty and foodbank queues. He warns that “The post-Covid economic recovery needs to be built upon an equitable distribution of income and wealth and new jobs, accompanied by a boost to the purchasing power of the masses to enable them to buy goods and services produced by businesses. This is the practical translation of the UK government’s slogan of ‘leveling-up’, but that is not what budget statement has delivered.” We urgently need to banish that phrase that I call the ‘lev..up’ lie or just ‘LUL’ from all public debate because giving it oxygen gives people the false impression it refers to reality.

Sikka highlighted a rare piece of “Good news is that the staff furlough scheme under which the government paid some of the wages of staff laid off during the pandemic will run until September 2021, but thereafter employers would need to pay more.” After months of wrangling over complaints of unfairness he reports that “Self-employed people will also get some help and the chancellor has said that 600,000 people previously excluded will get some financial support. However, there is no universal basic income or minimum base for support. The chancellor’s announcement does not take account of the specifics of industries. For example, the aviation industry is likely to struggle for some time but its employees have not been offered long-term assurances.”

Sikka explained how “The government is to create an Infrastructure Bank with an initial £12bn capital to investment in the country’s infrastructure. Well, the UK had a state bank to address infrastructure issues. It was called the Green Investment Bank and was sold-off by the government in 2017. Now it is being reinvented with a puny budget. It is worth recalling that Labour had promised a £500bn national investment bank to regenerate cities and town, renew infrastructure and invest in green jobs over the duration of a parliamentary term.” This follows a Tory pattern of destroying projects that work well and then being forced to rebuild them!

Sikka explains how “Since April 2021, stamp duty of house purchase of up to £500,000 has been suspended. This concession will continue until June after which the value of property qualifying for the concession would be reduced. The government has also announced a new mortgage guarantee scheme to enable homebuyers to secure a mortgage up to £600,000 with a 5% deposit. 95% mortgages are likely to overheat the housing market and when interest rates increase many trapped in higher mortgages will face negative consequences. Notably, there is no equivalent taxpayer-funded support for people living in rented accommodation. Redistribution is missing from the budget. The government did not end wage freeze for public sector workers. There is no increase in statutory sick-pay of £95.85 per week. The £20 per week top-up of Universal Credit, which was introduced at the start of the pandemic, will be temporarily retained. This will help some 6.5 million families, but only until September.”

Sikka reports that “The main rate of corporation tax will increase from the present 19% to 25%, but not until 2023. This measure is expected to raise £17bn per year by 2025–26. The higher rate of corporation tax is sweetened by 130% allowance for amounts spent on selected investment. This and other sweeteners are expected to be worth £27bn over the next three years. There are tax rises by stealth on the way for households and these will hit the poor hardest. The tax-free annual personal allowance will increase by £70 to £12,570 from April 2021, and will then remain unchanged until April 2026. The current threshold for paying the 40% marginal rate of income tax is £50,001. It will rise to £50,270 from April and will then remain unchanged until 2026. The net effect is that 1 in 10 adults will pay higher-rate income tax and the poorest will end up paying a higher proportion of their income in tax. This measure alone will remove around £19bn over the next four years from household budgets.”

More worrying, Sikka says “Many households will also face a council tax rise of around 5% as the government has refused to fund social care from general tax. In addition, household budgets will be further depleted by an increase in the cost of gas, electricity, food and other essential. VAT was cut to 5% for tourism, hospitality and accommodation businesses. This concession will come to an end in September, followed by a 12.5% rate until March 2022 and a return to 20% from the following April. Altogether, there is little relief for household budgets and the planned increase of 19p per hour in the rate of minimum wage will do little to help the less well-off. The small print of the budget shows that there will be cuts in public services. The budget for NHS England will be slashed from £147.7m for 2020-21 to £139.1m in 2021-22 even though there is a huge backlog of operations and urgent treatments.”

What is deeply concerning is that, as Sikka points out “The Institute of Fiscal studies says that the government is planning to spend £14bn to £17bn less on public services each year after 2021 than planned pre-Covid. Each cut will be paid for by loss of jobs, wages and degradation of public services. No doubt, in due course the mantra of ‘we can’t afford it’ will be followed by more privatizations of public services. The government’s economic strategy assumes that people will borrow and spend their savings to boost the economic recovery. Levelling-up is just a slogan and the budget will plunge more people into poverty and foodbank queues. Finally, while the shadow of Brexit looms large on the UK economy, the chancellor said nothing about it.”

In the Morning Star Article entitled, “Economists blast Sunak’s spending plans, warning proposals ‘do not look deliverable” they reveal how “Economists lambasted Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s spending plans today, warning that proposals to address Britain’s battered public finances ‘do not look deliverable’.” They say, “The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said the biggest tax-raising Budget for 28 years has made the Chancellor look less like ‘Santa Sunak’ and ‘more like Scrooge Sunak.’ Mr Sunak is largely funding a mammoth £50 billion squeezes by freezing income tax allowances and hiking corporation tax in ‘screeching U-turns on Conservative policy,’ the economic think tank said in it’s damning analysis of Wednesday’s Budget. It said the corporation tax increase from 19 percent to 25 percent by 2023 was a ‘gamble’ but would not have a bad effect on much-needed business investment.”

The Morning Star reported that “The IFS said Mr Sunak had been ‘silent’ on long-term recovery plans to address the future consequences of the pandemic. IFS director Paul Johnson said: ‘This was, of course, a tale of two Budgets’. ‘By the end of the forecast period we are looking at a fiscal tightening of over £30bn relative to previous plans. ‘Take account of the cuts to planned spending announced in the autumn and Santa Sunak, purveyor of billions, today looks more like Scrooge Sunak, cutting spending and raising taxes to the tune of nearly £50bn relative to his pre-pandemic plans of March 2020.’ He said the Chancellor’s spending plans look ‘implausibly low’ and questioned whether it was realistic to assume spending on the NHS from next year will not be more than before the crisis. He warned that Mr Sunak was unlikely to meet his goals, ‘at least not without considerable pain.’ ‘How he is actually going to fix the public finances remains to be seen,’ Mr Johnson said.”

Even if one seriously believed the false promises of pathological liar Boris Johnson when he boasted of building 40 new Hospitals, that then magically became 48 as announced in Parliament, where is the funding coming from? Due to the devotion of our BBC and compliantly unquestioning Media the PM has never been quizzed on this point. But even if Boris had a secret benefactor lined up to cover the cost of the build and equip the facilities where would he find the staff when the NHS is desperately short of staff? The Morning Star note that “The IFS said freezing the income tax threshold would raise around £9bn, while the corporation tax changes could see revenues rise by more than £17bn by 2025. If spending plans and tax hikes go as planned, the government will be able to balance the books by 2025, according to the IFS. ‘The sad truth is that that would be a balance built on the highest sustained tax burden in British history and yet further cuts in unprotected public service spending,’ Mr Johnson added.”

It is distressing that while John McDonnell meticulously costed every proposal in both the 2017 and the 2019 progressive Labour manifestos and was grilled on the spend; there was zero scrutiny regarding Boris Johnson’s most ambitious pledges, or any of his pledges for that matter. I fear the 40/48 new Hospitals are a projection of inward investment from giant US Healthcare Corporations once they have the opportunity to fully privitize our NHS; the Tories will use the ‘Scavenge, Exploit, Deport’ model to staff them. I’m astounded so few respected political commentators are prepared to publically debunk the £300Bn debt lie. I was encouraged to see economist and Chief Executive at the New Economics Foundation, Miatta Fahnbulleh, as a guest on Question Time trying to explain where the money is being ‘borrowed’ from, basically, the Bank of England borrowing money fro itself. She was supported by entrepreneur TV ‘Dragon’ Theo Paphitis who assured us that these ‘bonds’ aren’t vulnerable to an interest rate hike.

Unless we stop people drinking the ‘KoolAid’ deception of a huge debt that inhibits all spending and the rediculous analogies with household budgets we are in danger of returning to public acceptance of austerity as a crisis necessity and we return to another cycle of intense impoverishment. I honestly think that the key to understanding both the source and the function of QE is by driving home the statement that the Bank of England has printed £300Bn of QE stimulus funding to inject into circulation in our economy for pay and investment. Reducing rates of pay, cutting benefit entitlements and eliminating services under austerity measures with the claim of saving money to repay the debt, seriously inhibits the intended circulation of money within the economy and will cripple our recovery. The model that conclusively proves the viability of this reality is the huge state investment in infrastructure, building of council homes and forming our NHS after WWII when we were massively in debt: we must build our way out of this recession too.

Councils cannot create money so they must balance the local budget; this will force cuts to services and severe hardship on local populations all over the country. This damage can be manipulated by the Government to increase or decrease the burden in ways that serve their political agenda by channeling funding to Tory-run Councils or Tory constituencies just as they are doing right now with the ‘Towns Fund.’ Sunak announced a new pot of cash to be awarded for the regeneration of local high streets and we can fully expect that Tory Ministers will redirect that funding through the exact same corrupt means. There will be no scrutiny unless we demand it with our loud protestations and robust legal challenges. The Covert 2019 Rigged Election set a precedent in terms of the level of industrial-scale fraud the Tories could get away with without generating suspicion or demands for a full Investigation of the obscenely unfathomable fake ‘landslide Tory victory,’ but it is still not too late to insist on full accountability and get the Tories out!

Pathological liar Boris Johnson could never have sold his hapless campaign as the winning ticket without the relentless propaganda extensively promoted by the BBC in direct violation of their impartiality mandate. Yes, people complained loudly about the BBC bias, but with Boris’s chum at the top just ignoring any obligation to the public to serve his Tory master all was sorted. The equally relentless defamation of Jeremy Corbyn was also bought and paid for by the Tories using public funds allocated to a fake Charity, the Institute for Statecraft’s inappropriately named ‘Integrity Initiative.’ This clear-cut scandal case of Tory Government corruption has been fully exposed with the evidence verified and no legitimate reason that very serious charges of corruption could see them removed from office. In a properly functioning democracy this would be more than enough damning evidence to end the political careers of a number of key members of the Tory Party including Boris Johnson.

In Iceland some years ago charges of corruption took down a Government, now Nicolas Sarkozy has been tried and convicted in France although the sentence he received was ridiculously lenient. Benjamin Netanyahu clings to power in Israel to stave off facing justice on the corruption charges he is facing. Donald Trump might have evaded impeachment in the US, but he will be hounded by multiple corruption charges for years to come. It seems that if corruption is your crime of choice the profession for you is politics! When political criminals keep getting away with blatant corruption unchallenged they are emboldened by their success and they become complacent about risk thinking that they are invincible and beyond the law. The Tories are busy installing their compliant stooges in commanding positions that will allow them to perpetually evade scrutiny, but at the same time they are making significant mistakes and our efforts to crowdfund justice has permitted opportunities to challenge them in Court.

The sanction offered by Judicial Review was identified for targeting in the Tory manifesto and it will soon come under attack. If the Tories are able to change the law might enable them to appoint compliant right-wing Judges to further support their pursuit of corrupt practices. There is nothing to stop the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship from accomplishing this goal as brief window of legal opportunity is about to slam shut. There is no time to waste if we want to derail this juggernaut of oppressive authoritarian disaster and ongoing corruption. This lawless and fraudulent standard of corrupt governance seriously needs to change both here and in a number of fascist regimes overseas. We have a growing body of evidence to support a strong case against Tory rule with a perfect opportunity here in the UK to set a groundbreaking example of scrutiny, accountability and justice by forcing the changes that remove our Tory Sovereign Dictatorship to install a fully functioning democracy that other countries will want to emulate. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

They say that “When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping;” well Boris Johnson really knows how to take that to extreme levels. Who can forget the scandal as a young football hero’s desperate pleas to rescue our poorest children from hunger during at-home learning; only for this Tory Government to enlist a profiteering private company to provide grossly inadequate ‘free school meal’ starvation ‘hampers’ for the most vulnerable kids in the UK. Then there was the ‘oh so unnecessary’ pay freeze for all public sector workers, aside from a select few categories within our NHS. Now there is a massive smack in the face for those ‘select few’ spared the wage reduction of a pay freeze; they will get just a paltry 1%, still a below projected inflation pay rise, after a decade of pay cuts! Give the Tories a round of applause for their audacity in daring to describe this exploitation as ‘levelling up!’ While the 99% are now Flat Broke the PM and his current floosie are ‘going for broke’ on a £100,000 refurb of their posh Downing Street pad.

In the BBC News Article entitled “Boris Johnson’s No 10 flat: Top level talks about cost of makeover,” the most glaringly obvious point is that, considering the extreme circumstances of a pandemic, if Jeremy Corbyn was PM, tarting up the flat would have been the very last thing on his mind. But, Boris is the ultimate ‘me-first guy.’ So “Top-level discussions have taken place within Downing Street about the cost of renovating Boris Johnson’s official flat, the BBC understands. Sources said setting up a charity to allow members of the public to donate towards the revamp has been considered to cover the cost.” Now that really is an extremely sick joke! Does the PM assume that in April, when benefits increase by 37p a week, those relying on foodbanks for their basic survival will have enough spare cash to splurge on donating to the worthy cause of redecorating the PM’s luxury, rent-free, accommodation in central London? What planet does this warped individual live on? This is a Marie Antoinette “Let them eat cake” moment!

According to the BBC “Work on the flat, where the PM lives with his fiancee Carrie Symonds, is understood to be largely complete. The PM’s spokesman declined to comment on press reports about the cost. When asked whether a charity had been set up, as first reported by the Daily Mail, he said they ‘wouldn’t comment on speculation’. A source has told the BBC the interior designer Lulu Lytle has been involved in the upgrade. Like several of his recent predecessors, Mr Johnson is living in the flat above No 11 Downing Street, the chancellor’s official residence. Mr Johnson and Ms Symonds moved into No 11 in July 2019. Their son Wilfred was born in April 2020. The four-bedroom flat, which is much larger than the one above No 10, was extensively refurbished by David and Samantha Cameron in 2011. The Camerons spent £30,000 on their revamp, the maximum annual public grant available to prime ministers for the upkeep of their accommodation.”

The BBC say that “According to the Daily Mail, Mr Johnson and his fiancee are considering options for how any expenditure over this annual limit could be covered. Sources have suggested the matter has been of some considerable concern in Downing Street, with high-level meetings taking place.” The BBC show “Designer Lulu Lytle (L), pictured here with Prince Charles on a visit to her firm’s workshop, is involved in the upgrade Interior designer Ms Lytle is a co-founder of Soane Britain, an upmarket London-based interior design firm which specialises in traditional craft methods. According to the company’s website, its furniture can be found in ‘fine hotels and restaurants,’ private members’ clubs, yachts and private houses. London’s Connaught and Claridges hotels, the Somerset Georgian manor Babington House and Shoreditch House private members’ club are listed as clients.”

Despite Boris Johnson’s millionaire status, there’s little doubt the PM will be seeking ways to offload the rest of the exorbitant cost of this refurb onto the taxpayer. Citing “Calls for transparency” the BBC say, Downing Street has said details of any work carried out on the Downing Street property would be published in the normal way later this year. On Friday, the PM’s spokesman said the Downing Street complex was a ‘working building’ where refurbishments were made periodically. Opposition parties have questioned the cost of the refurbishment, and whether conflicts of interest could arise if Conservative donors are approached to contribute. Labour MP Sarah Owen has written to the PM asking him for details of taxpayers’ contribution. She has said the British public ‘rightly expect probity, integrity and transparency when it comes to spending public money’. The SNP has said the move would be ‘grossly inappropriate’, suggesting the PM, who is paid £150,000 a year, should fund the works out of his own pocket.”

Sunak’s Budget does not include a bailout fund for those who, due to Covid, are now in rent arrears. With looming unemployment leaving many more that are now on furlough facing redundancy, spiralling debt and eviction the priority for the PM and his girlfriend is to get a designer makeover in the spacious property they live in at our expense! Well you really can’t expect the ruling elite to live in hovels like paupers; so spare no expense even in a time of crisis when money is so tight that feeding our poorest school children is unaffordable and a real term pay rise for Nurses, public sector employees and other key workers is out of the question! Where is your outrage? Why are the British people not tacking to the streets in massive protest demonstrations over such blatant corruption. Why is there so little scrutiny over the money squandered by the Tories on private contracts handed to their donors? Why did no one seriously challenge and demand a Robust Investigation into the unfathomable result or the Covert 2019 Rigged Election?

But the Tory money squandering doesn’t stop there, because this consummate narcissist PM, Boris Johnson, has hired a new Press Secretary to give regular PR spin Press Briefings from a specially revamped press briefing room at number 9 Downing Street for which the refurb will cost a truly staggering amount! According to another BBC News Article entitled, “Downing Street: Millions spent on new media briefing room,” they say “Downing Street has spent more than £2.6m on fitting out a new media briefing room, it has emerged. No 10 plans to start televised daily press conferences, like those held at the White House, to be fronted by spokeswoman Allegra Stratton.”

The BBC report that “The Cabinet Office said the spending ‘is in the public interest’ as it will increase public accountability and transparency.” Not from lying toad Boris or any the Tories! I must stress that making sure British kids survive their childhood and are not starved to death due to an ideologically driven, cruel and totally unnecessary form of rebranded Tory austerity is a far greater priority in the public interest’ of the 99%! The BBC report that “Labour said it reflected ‘Boris Johnson’s warped priorities. It comes as further details emerged about plans to renovate Mr Johnson’s Number 10 flat, including possibly asking the public to donate to it. The Cabinet Office issued a breakdown of spending on the briefing room, which totalled £2,607,767.67. The release was a response to a Freedom of Information request made by the Press Association news agency.” It took a FOI request because there was no way the Government would have let the public know about this obscene expenditure during a time of national crisis.

The BBC say that “The money had been spent to allow various news organisations to broadcast from No 9 Downing Street, the Cabinet Office said. ‘This will necessarily require one-off capital works, including audio-visual equipment, internet infrastructure, electrical works and lighting,’ a spokesperson said. They added that ‘spending on maintenance and technical facilities reflects that 9 Downing Street is a Grade I listed building.’ Labour’s Angela Rayner contrasted the spending to the government’s proposed 1% pay rise for NHS nurses. The party’s deputy leader said: ‘It would take around 100 years for a newly qualified nurse to get paid this kind of money. ‘It sums up Boris Johnson’s warped priorities that he can find millions for vanity projects, while picking the pockets of NHS workers. ‘Our NHS heroes deserve a fair pay rise after all they have done for us’.” Perhaps we should designate all of our NHS staff ‘Grade A Listed Treasures’ to protect them from being exploited and trashed by this Tory Government?

The BBC report that “The FOI release detailed spending of over £1.8m for the ‘main works’, nearly £200,000 for ‘long lead items’, and more than £33,000 for broadband equipment. The new briefings were expected to begin in the autumn, but have been delayed because of the pandemic. They will be held by the prime minister’s press secretary, Allegra Stratton. An advert for her taxpayer-funded role said the salary would be based on experience, but reports suggested pay would be around £100,000 a year. At the moment, political reporters based in Parliament, known as lobby correspondents, have daily briefings with the prime minister’s official spokesperson, but they are not televised.” This is the latest abuse of Party Political broadcasting to buff the profile of our hapless PM, with a Press Secretary to distance Johnson from any embarrassing questions during tightly controlled press scrutiny.

But wait there’s more Tory money squandering in the continued pandering to Boris Johnson’s fragile ego. In the June 2020 the Guardian Article entitled, “Paint job on Boris Johnson’s plane will cost taxpayer £900,000,” they detailed the “Cost of union jack makeover” which was touted as representing value for money according to the PM’s spokesman. They say “Boris Johnson’s red, white and blue paint job on the prime ministerial plane is costing the UK taxpayer £900,000, his official spokesman has said. The spokesman confirmed that the RAF Voyager, previously coloured grey, is in Cambridgeshire for a makeover. ‘The RAF Voyager used by the royal family and the PM is currently in Cambridgeshire for pre-planned repainting. This will mean that the plane can better represent the UK around the world with national branding, which will be in line with many other leaders’ planes,’ he said. He added that it would continue to perform its other job, refuelling military jets.”

Another shock expenditure headline that hit the news during the dark days of 2020 was detailed in the Independent Article entitled, “Queen to receive government ‘bailout’ to top up income after Crown Estate hit by economic slump.” The warned that “This royal bailout will be tough to stomach for people who love the Queen but have lost their jobs,’ says Tax Justice UK. Boris Johnson’s government has confirmed it will top up the Queen’s income following a significant slump in the Crown Estate’s revenue during the coronavirus crisis. The royal family takes in rental receipts from shops in London’s Regent Street, alongside malls and retail parks around the country, but the value of its portfolio has fallen by more than £500m since the pandemic hit.”

According to the Independent “The Treasury said it would provide the estate with extra money to meet any shortfall in profits and make sure the Queen’s sovereign grant remains at its current level. ‘In the event of a reduction in the Crown Estate’s profits, the sovereign grant is set at the same level as the previous year,’ a spokesperson said told The Independent. ‘The revenue from the Crown Estate helps pay for our vital public services, over the last 10 years it has returned a total of £2.8bn to the Exchequer. The sovereign grant funds the official business of the monarchy, and does not provide a private income to any member of the royal family.’ More details on the next sovereign grant are expected to be set out on Friday, but legislation governing the formula prevents the overall amount given to the Queen from ever being allowed to fall.” So austerity doesn’t touch the Monarchy!

The Independent report that “Graham Smith, of the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic, described it as a “golden ratchet”, adding: “Once the grant goes up it can never come down, and the taxpayer loses out.” Nurses, other hardworking public servants and our key workers just get plain ‘rat shit!’ It would be greatly appreciated in this time of crisis, if the royal ‘we’ could manage to get by on a little less profit so that the NHS staff, on whom we all rely, could earn the decent pay rise they deserve and funding free school meals for poor hungry children didn’t take the herculean intervention of a football player now a national hero. The televised speeches to boost morale are as much an empty gesture as the ‘Clap for Careers’ when the elite 1% cannot make any sacrifice at all. While I hope that Prince Philip makes a speedy recovery from his heart surgery, the Queen should remember who cared for him in Hospital and perhaps also spare a thought for the homeless whose life expectancy is less than half that of her husband!

But perhaps the most galling obscenity in Tory money squandering was detailed in the December BBC News Article entitled “Dominic Cummings: PM’s former aide got £45,000 pay rise.” They noted that “Boris Johnson’s former chief aide Dominic Cummings, who left No 10 last month after an internal power struggle, enjoyed a bumper pay rise earlier this year, new figures have revealed. His basic salary rose by about £45,000 to between £140,000 and £144,999. The PM stood by Mr Cummings this summer when he was embroiled in controversy over a trip to Durham during lockdown. Labour said the rise was an ‘insult’ to millions of workers whose pay is being frozen due to the Covid crisis.” The BBC reported that “Keir Starmer says Dominic Cummings lockdown breach journey was the ‘tipping point’ for a loss of trust over Covid.” Cumming should never have been in post after refusing to appear and give testimony before a Parliamentary Committee; just part of the Tories zero accountability culture.

The BBC claim “Separately, it has emerged that Boris Johnson ignored the advice of the chief of the civil service in relation to a legal case brought by a special adviser sacked by Mr Cummings. Sir John Manzoni urged the PM to reach a negotiated settlement with Sonia Khan, who was led out of No 10 by police in August 2019 following a reported row with Mr Cummings. No reason was given for her sacking as an adviser to Chancellor Sajid Javid and before that Philip Hammond. In a letter to the PM in March 2020, Sir John raised concerns about the cost to the taxpayer of fighting the case. He sought a written instruction known as a ‘ministerial direction,’ a specific order sought by civil servants in instances where they have reservations over a particular course of action.” It is interesting to note that a massive overspend of public money on an unwinnable case just landed the SNP in hot water in Scotland. Sadly, Governments have a bottomless pit of public cash to throw at legal defence, but victims must crowdfund to seek justice!

The BBC say “In response, the PM said he fully understood concerns over the use of public money but he believed ‘wider considerations’ took precedence in the case.’ He said he wanted to ‘test in litigation’ his belief that individuals should not receive more compensation than they are entitled to under their contract. ‘The legal position is clear that the prime minister can withdraw consent for the appointment of any special adviser,’ he wrote. ‘That is the reason for the termination of employment.’ Ms Khan settled her case last month, shortly before it was due to go before an employment tribunal.” Sajid Javid was not even consulted before Khan was fired without cause, but she was also publically humiliated with what I call ‘the walk of shame’ She was marched out by armed police officers, an extreme scare tactic common in the US where it is used to ostracize an employee so that former colleagues treat them like a criminal. I experienced the ‘walk of shame’ as a Whistleblower; it is a deeply traumatizing event.

I am convinced that the ‘Herd Nerd’ is still pulling Johnson’s strings; the BBC report that “Mr Cummings is still on the government payroll but is working his notice at home, having left Downing Street in November following a bitter row over the running of Mr Johnson’s office. Figures released by the Cabinet Office show his salary rose during 2020 from between £95,000-£99,999 to £140,000-£144,999, making him among the highest-earning special advisers in government. It is not clear when the increase, revealed in an annual report on the pay of special advisers, came into effect. While Mr Cummings was in the highest salary band when he was first taken on by Boris Johnson in July 2019, his pay was considerably lower at the time than other senior political advisers in Downing Street. The pay rise brought Mr Cummings, whose Brexit strategy was credited with helping Mr Johnson win a thumping victory in the 2019 election, into line with other key figures such as Sir Eddie Lister, Lee Cain and Munira Mirza.”

Although his menacing presence is no longer disrupting Number 10 I’m convinced that the ‘Herd Nerd’ still maintains a powerful hold over Boris Johnson as his ‘weapons-grade PsyOps’ warper minds in favour of Brexit plus I think he masterminded the fraud needed to take the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. The BBC note that “Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner said the pay increase was a slap in the face to the public. ‘Dominic Cummings’ bumper bonus is an insult to key workers denied the pay rise they deserve,’ she said. ‘It’s another example of how under this government it is one rule for the Tory Party and their friends and another for the rest of us.’ The figures show that while the overall pay bill for special advisers remained the same at £9.6m, having risen sharply the year before, the number of advisers earning more than £100,000 doubled on the year before. Those earning six-figure salaries included Allegra Stratton, the PM’s new press secretary and Dan Rosenfield, the newly appointed No 10 chief of staff.”

In the August 2020 London Economic Article entitled “MPs get 8 pay rises in 10 years while nurses salaries are slashed,” Henry Goodwin points out that the “Average pay for all nurses, regardless of which salary category they fall into, has fallen by 7.4 per cent since 2010. Members of Parliament have been handed eight pay rises in the last ten years, while nurses have seen their average salary slashed by more than 7 per cent across the decade. Since the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) took control of MPs’ pay in 2010, salaries have been linked to average changes in public sector pay. In 2010, an MP’s annual salary was £65,738. It stayed at the same level until 2013, when it rose to £66,396.”

Goodwin says that “It has climbed steadily since then and, in April this year, was hiked by an inflation-busting 3.1 per cent, meaning MPs now earn £81,932 per year.” Take a look at this MP Pay Chart that was included in this article to see the increases. He says that “The likes of Yvette Cooper or Jeremy Hunt, who chair select committees, earn an additional £16,422 each year on top of their standard salary. Announcing the changes earlier this year, Richard Lloyd, the interim chair of IPSA said that the salary spike would pay for; staff training and welfare, security and changes to the salary bands and job descriptions for MPs’ staff to bring them into line with the jobs they actually do’.”

Goodwin claims that “Nurses and teachers suffer” saying “While there have been real-terms increases in nurses’ pay in recent years but, according to fact-checking charity FullFact, they haven’t balanced out the real-terms decreases that took place in the early and mid-2010s. Average pay for all nurses, regardless of which salary category they fall into, has fallen by 7.4 per cent since the year ending August 2010, when the NHS started publishing such statistics. All newly-qualified nurses start at Band 5, which pays £24,907 per year. The Band 5 starting salary has increased by 6.7 per cent since 2017/18 but, since 2010/11, has fallen by a total of 3.2 per cent, FullFact said.”

Goodwin reports on the fate of Teachers salaries too noting that “A survey by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2017 found that teachers’ salaries in England had plummeted by more than a tenth in the last decades, despite earnings rising in comparable countries. Last month the Department for Education announced that salaries for new teachers are set to rise to £26,000 this autumn, as the government tries to stem the tide leaving the profession. It has pledged to raise teaching starting salaries to £30,000 by 2022-23. The latest report by the OECD found that statutory salaries for teachers in England and Scotland are yet to recover to ‘pre-Great Recession highs’. Salaries in England in 2018 were 10 per cent lower than in 2005, and 3 per cent lower in Scotland, despite the UK being one of the few countries seeing class sizes rise at the same time.”

When the Bank of England decides to essentially print more money for Quantitative Easing (QE) to infuse into circulation in order to stimulate growth, the strategy will fail if funds are squandered on overpriced vanity projects that do not provide worthwhile long-term investment, training or properly paid jobs. Money syphoned off by the wealthy elite to be hoarded in offshore Tax Havens will deliberately sabotage QE; these are the unscrupulous low wage paying, exploitive zero-hours contract employers, the slum lords who charge exorbitant rent for run-down flats, and other greedy, opportunistic scroungers who rake in huge profits and bonuses, but manage to pay less tax than the staff who clean their fancy office! Funding of both paid work and even benefits, from Furlough to Universal Credit to Pensions, unilaterally expands the virtuous circulation created by QE for ongoing spending that will stimulate growth and eventually return to the treasury in taxes. This circulation of funds is vital to our economic recovery and trust the Canary and Richard Murphy, there’s no £300Bn debt to pay! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

There is a long-held tradition at sea, that in an emergency women and children should be the first to be placed in the liferafts. In this age of so-called equality you might say that women should not receive preferential treatment, but they deserve equal treatment and surely we should protect the most vulnerable: our children. It seems in the Tories neocon ‘new normal’ they believe women and children should come dead last. This harsh reality has never been more stark than during the Coronavirus crisis, where, due to Tory Government incompetence and dithering, frontline mostly female carers were denied proper PPE while caring for vulnerable elderly who were forced to return to Care Homes without a negative Covid test. The predominantly female NHS Nursing staff have been offered a 1% pay increase after putting their lives on the line, but paid Carers and those on Carers allowance don’t even get a mention. Shamefully, it took the determination of a football hero to force this Government to accept responsibility for making sure the poorest children didn’t starve!

In the run-up to the latest Budget there were appeals to offer more help to the unpaid Carers identified in the Independent Article entitled “Call to help carers after shocking figures show 64 per cent have had no break since pandemic began.” They reported that “Lib Dems’ Ed Davey demands immediate emergency funding from Rishi Sunak” and highlighted that “The Liberal Democrats are today launching a campaign for unpaid carers to be given a break, after the release of shocking figures showing that 64 per cent have had no opportunity to take time off from their responsibilities during the coronavirus pandemic. In an open letter to Rishi Sunak, published in The Independent, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey called on the chancellor to provide immediate additional funding of £1.2bn for support services to allow a weekly break for every carer looking after a loved one at home.”

The Independent say “He cited a survey by Carers UK which found that 81 per cent of carers are spending more time on their caring responsibilities during the pandemic, either because of increased needs or the closure or reduction of support services because of lockdown restrictions. The survey found that 64 per cent of carers have not been able to take any breaks from their caring role during the pandemic, 74 per cent said they feel exhausted and worn out as a result and 44 per cent said they are reaching breaking point. In his letter, Sir Ed said: ‘During this pandemic, millions of people have stepped up heroically to look after elderly, disabled and vulnerable people. They are doing a remarkable and important job in very difficult circumstances’.”

According to what Davie told the Independent “A recent survey by Carers UK found that 81 per cent of carers are spending more time on their caring responsibilities during the pandemic, mainly because the needs of the person they are caring for have increased or because the local care services they rely on have been reduced or closed. ‘The brutal combination of lockdowns, shielding requirements and reduced support services have made the pandemic especially tough. But now most carers are simply exhausted. Most haven’t had a single break since the pandemic started.” He urged Mr Sunak to provide emergency funding now, or if that was not possible then in his 3 March Budget, for local authorities to provide more support. “It is essential that services such as day centres can reopen Covid-safe now, so that carers can finally take a break while the people they care for get the support they need,” he said.

The Independent report that Davie had said “With local authority budgets so badly overstretched, the government must provide immediate funding to make this possible, as part of a bigger emergency package to fill the funding gap in adult and children’s social care.’ Across the UK, some 6.5 million people, one in eight of the adult population, are carers, supporting a loved one who is older, disabled or seriously ill.” But did Sunak spare a second thought for our embattled Carers paid or unpaid? Absolutely not! Those working through agencies funded by local Councils will remain on minimum wage, zero-hours contracts where their frenetic care visits as brief as half an hour, interspersed with unpaid travel time. For those looking after a loved one at home there was no respite and because the meagre Carers Allowance is a legacy benefit there has been no uplift just a bleak future of minimal support. This is the demanding role that almost always falls to women, who the Tories put dead last!

It seems that the Tory austerity drive was aimed directly at women in particular and this is still very much the case. In the Labour List Article entitled “92% of net savings to Treasury since 2010 shouldered by women, says Whittome” Sienna Rodgers highlights the obscene disparity. She emphasised the injustice that “92% of net savings to the Treasury via tax and social security changes since 2010 have been shouldered by women, Labour MP Nadia Whittome has highlighted on the basis of analysis released on International Women’s Day. Research by the House of Commons Library commissioned by Whittome, the Nottingham East MP who is the UK’s youngest, shows that just 8% of savings through welfare, state pensions and direct taxation have come from men. The 92% versus 8% figures include measures announced in Rishi Sunak’s new Budget. They do not include indirect taxation, business/corporation tax or pension tax relief, nor the Covid furlough or self-employment support schemes.”

Rodgers points out that “The latest data suggests the disproportionate impact on women is intensifying, as the same analysis conducted in 2017, based on a methodology created by backbench Labour MP Yvette Cooper in 2010, revealed a split of 86% to 14%. Whittome has pointed out that despite exceptional measures being taken during the pandemic, such as the £20-a-week uplift to Universal Credit, the net savings generated from women since 2010 stood at £100.5bn compared to £8.2bn from men. ‘Women have overwhelmingly paid the price for a decade of austerity, with money taken directly from their pockets. Measures announced in Wednesday’s Budget failed to rectify this deeply unfair burden and may have actually made things worse. ‘We need a government that takes gender economic inequality seriously and is not oblivious to the impact its policies have on different groups,’ Nadia Whittome, MP for Nottingham East, said.”

Rodgers reported her demand that “The Chancellor must now urgently publish the government’s equalities impact analysis of the Budget and explain what steps will be taken to rectify the massive disproportionate impact of government policy on the lives of women.’ Sunak unveiled an extra £19m over the next two years for domestic abuse schemes in England and Wales in the Budget on Wednesday. Leaders and organisations in the sector welcomed the move, but said a £200m ‘shortfall’ remained. The Chancellor’s lack of attention to the social care sector and decision to freeze public sector pay, particularly affecting women, were also criticised. Keir Starmer said Sunak ‘barely mentioned inequality let alone tried to address it’.” However, we need a much stronger voice offering robust opposition to this Tory Government’s toxic policies; the Labour Party has been severely weakened by the targeting of the progressive Left under the wrecking ball of Trojan horse Keir Starmer who really needs to go ASAP.

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “The government needs to protect domestic abuse shelters for women,” Sophia Dourou says that “Campaigners are calling for the government to protect lifesaving women’s domestic abuse services.” She highlights the “Launching on International Women’s Day, a petition by domestic abuse charity Women’s Aid,” they are asking for the government to require local authorities to fund women’s refuges. The domestic abuse bill, which reaches report stage at the House of Lords today, requires councils to fund accommodation for survivors but does not specify women-only shelters. The charity is asking for specific funding for women’s’ shelters because abuse is a gendered crime and the vast majority of victims who get seriously injured or killed are women. This petition follows a number of Women’s Aid member services losing local authority funding.”

Dourou reports that “The charity’s recent Fragile Funding Landscape shows that one in five domestic refuge services are running without local authority funding, with spaces for Black and minority women far more likely to be unfunded. Women’s Aid chief executive Farah Nazeer said that the women-led domestic abuse services losing funding could lead to more women and children dying.” She said: “The decision by some local authorities to commission ‘gender-neutral’ services disregards the evidence that women experience the most severe domestic abuse; are more likely to be killed by their abuser; and that women experiencing domestic abuse need access to women-only support. ‘Women need to trust a service and feel safe to be able to access support, especially if they are leaving their home to move into a refuge with their children. Many will be living with long-term trauma, and will need specialist support to rebuild their lives’.”

Dourou noted that “Nazeer said that 91% of domestic violence crimes that lead to injuries are against women and three women are killed every fortnight by a current or former partner in the UK. ‘Coupled with the current government plan to separate domestic abuse from the Violence Against Women and Girls strategy, this will only serve to encourage more ‘gender neutral’ responses to domestic abuse,’ she added. ‘Women-led domestic abuse services are under threat, and there will be severe consequences for women and children if we do not stop this now’.” Left Foot Forward encourages you to Sign the Petition.

Posted on International Women’s day, in the Byline Times Article entitled “IWD 2021Internet Now ‘Most Dangerous Place’ to be a Woman Journalist,” Sian Norris exposes another danger facing outspoken women. She says that “A new study by Reporters Without Borders exposes the dangers faced by women journalists online and off. The internet has become ‘the most dangerous place for women journalists’, according to a new report from Reporters Without Borders – with 73% of those surveyed saying that they had experienced gender-based violence online. Published on International Women’s Day 2021, Reporters Without Borders gathered 112 responses from across the world, including from journalists who write about gender issues. It found that the “internet has become more hazardous for journalists than the street”.

Norris reports that “In response to the question “do you feel that impunity prevails, that the violence could be repeated, and that another woman journalist could fall victim to the same perpetrator?”, 85% of respondents said “yes”. This question applied to violence offline as well as online. The report recommends that journalists are provided with training to help them ‘develop good reflexes and responses to cyber-harassment and to create an ‘emergency internal mechanism to respond to threats and sexist attacks online’. It also suggests to women journalists that ‘while you are being attacked, ask a trusted person to manage your social media accounts for you, sifting through what you are receiving, deleting insults, blocking accounts that are the source of insults, and reporting those accounts’. Online violence against women journalists can take many forms, from trolling and targeted abuse on social media to the hacking of email accounts and the posting of personal information.”

Norris documents responses: “I get rape and death threats every day, aimed at me and my family,’ Syrian journalist Merna Alhasan told Reporters Without Borders. Indian investigative journalist Rana Ayyub said that she received ‘daily threats of rape and death’ and a wave of hatred on social media. Ayyub was targeted by abusers who used ‘deep fake’ technology to insert her image onto pornographic material. She said: ‘I felt like I was naked for the world. I was throwing up, I was in the hospital, I had palpitations for two days and my blood pressure shot up. I just couldn’t stop crying.’ India was found to be the most dangerous place to be a woman journalist. Women journalists who call out gender-based violence online also find themselves becoming a target. For instance, French journalist Nadia Daam, who accused the Blabla forum on gaming site jeuxvideos.com of fostering a culture of online bullying, received threats from men claiming they would ‘rape her dead body’.”

Norris describes a situation where “Women’s Rights in the Firing Line,” as “Reporters Without Borders found that women reporting on gender issues were at a greater risk of violence, both online and offline. According to Juana Gallego, head of Spain’s Gender Equality Observatory and a lecturer in journalism, writing about women’s rights ‘can prove dangerous in some countries where it means undermining traditions and arousing awareness in minds that have been subjected to a machista society’. Over the past decade, 942 journalists have been killed, of which 43 were women. Four of these women were killed for their work on gender rights, Mexico’s Miroslava Breach, India’s Gauri Lankesh, Iraq’s Nawras al-Nuaimi, and Malalai Maiwand who was killed by the so-called Islamic State.”

Norris says that “According to data collected in December 2020, two of the 42 women journalists currently in prison have ended up there as a result of reporting on women’s rights. They are Saudi journalists Nouf Abdulaziz al-Jerawi and Nassima al-Sada. A third Saudi journalist working on women’s issues, Eman al-Nafjan, was released on bail in 2019. One survey respondent in Spain told Reporters Without Borders: ‘The fact that women often write about women and feminism, as well as sensitive subjects such as human rights and minorities, exposes them to a two-fold danger, of being bullied which almost always includes sexist insults.’ Women who work in traditionally male-dominated fields, such as sport, are also routinely targeted with violence and harassment.” As the authoritarian rule of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship intensifies its grip here in the UK, the situation will get more threatening for all outspoken journalists in this country and our Media is already leaning well towards the extreme right.

Norris points out that “Journalists were routinely targeted by former US President Donald Trump’s administration, with women journalists and women of colour singled out for sexism and exclusion. He repeatedly made comments designed to demean and belittle women journalists, telling PBS’s Yamiche Alcindor that she asked a ‘racist question# when she queried his statements on nationalism, and ordering CBS’ Weijia Jiang to ‘just relax’, telling her to ‘keep your voice down’ and saying she had a ‘nasty tone’. Trump told Cecilia Vega of ABC News ‘I know you’re not thinking, you never do’ and called CBS’s Paula Reid ‘disgraceful’ and ‘a fake’. Members of Trump’s administration actively excluded women by refusing to take meetings with women journ Sexist harassment, online and offline, has a chilling effect on journalism and women’s rights to freedom of expression. At its most extreme, it kills women journalists.” Boris Johnson is eager to follow the Trumpian model, ready to sling insults at women.

Norris claims that “Online violence in particular causes women to self-censor and discourages them from covering subjects which they fear will lead to harassment and abuse. Considering that women journalists are more likely to be the victims of this abuse if they report on women’s issues, this violence creates a vicious circle and silences writing and reporting on the issue of gender-based violence itself. According to the survey, violence against women journalists caused 48% of respondents to self-censor, while 22% closed their social media accounts and/or left professional networks. Another impact is on pluralism. If women are harassed out of journalism, issues that impact specifically on women are not heard and therefore not taken into account by decision-makers in politics, the economy and industry. It also allows everyday sexism in the media to flourish.”

According to Norris “In defiance of a male-dominated media landscape, women are coming together to fight back. In the UK, the Second Source was set up in 2017 following the #MeToo revelations against male journalists. The scheme runs events and a mentoring programme to support women in the industry. Meanwhile, in Brazil, Agência Pública co-founder Natalia Viana, who is often the target of online attacks from persons close to President Jair Bolsonaro, has said that women journalists had taken steps to protect themselves and are trying to build a stronger form of mutual aid.” She says that “In France, Prenons La Une has built a support network for women journalists.” We have progressive Socialist news outlets here in the UK like Byline Times, the Canary, Skwawkbox, Left Foot Forward, The Morning Star, Labour List, London Economic, Vox Political and so many more. We must support them and above all make sure that this rabid Tory Government does not shut them down.

The Government are using Covid as an excuse to shut down our valid right to protest; one Nurse in Manchester just received a hefty fine for organizing a protest against the 1% pay rise. But both Skwawkbox and the Canary are producing regular broadcasts available online so we don’t need to be drowned out by the Tory mouthpiece at the BBC. “#TheCanaryLive – International Women’s Day – Choose to challenge. The Canary is all about challenging the status quo and it runs through our blood as individuals. Join us to be a fly-on-the-wall while Canary women discuss the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day: ‘Choose to Challenge’. What does it mean to challenge gender bias and inequity? What can any individual really do to bring about social change? And with the trend of ‘cancel culture’ are the people who find themselves cancelled actually being given an opportunity to change and evolve? Are they really being held to account in a meaningful way? We’ll discuss this and more between 7 and 8 this evening.”

The Tories want to shut down Russia Today (RT) claiming they are spreading Fake News, while in reality the real political hype, lies and propaganda is being churned out via the BBC under Tory control. The reality of renewed austerity, rebranded to hide the truth, is starting to dawn on people across the UK. The battle over school meals, freezing public sector pay and now the insulting offer to the Nurses who have put their lives on the line during the pandemic; is anyone still buying their ‘lev…up’ lie? People will need to start taking to the streets on mass in protest because in huge numbers it will become impossible to shut down without enlisting the arm to turn guns on us. The obscene squandering of public funds while they wine about a well-deserved pay rise and try to convince us there is a £300Bn debt to pay back. We need to demand a full Investigation ofthe Covert 2019 Rigged Election that foisted this corrupt cabal on us. We need to challenge their corruption in Court and get them removed from office ASAP. DO NOT MOVE ON! 

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

I read Margaret Atwood’s book ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ while delivering a sailing yacht across the north Atlantic. Between watches I shared the book with one of my crew, too gripped by the horrific content to wait until she had finished reading it. The really sick thing is that a national emergency created the perfect timing for a ruthless authoritarian coup to strip women of their rights and that component remains a distinct possibility right now due to the Covid Pandemic. We have already seen far-right Governments within Europe legislate to remove women’s rights. The single most powerful political weapon is to strip away the rights of half the entire population of a country and embolden the other half to express their grievances with failed Government policies by persecuting strong outspoken women; it is the ultimate divide and conquer’ tactic and shockingly, it is going global! Now that we have a Tory Sovereign Dictatorship in the UK, how long will it take them to weaponize Covid even further to emulate other despotic regimes?

The evidence that this powerful assault on Women’s rights is growing is featured in a Byeline Times Article entitled “IWD 2021The Global Anti-Rights Networks Behind Madrid’s Anti-Feminist Rally.” Sian Norris warns us of “A virtual protest organized by Spain’s Women Of The World Platform is part of a global assault on women’s and LGBTIQ rights.” Featured “On International Women’s Day, the Women of the World Platform will hold its annual anti-feminist rally. The event will take place virtually due to Coronavirus restrictions. Attendees are rallying under the banner ‘Wo + Men: With the Other Half of the World’ and are encouraged to ‘stop for a moment to remember what is the feminine identity, so different from the masculine one, and that both are complementary’.” She says that “Complementarity is a concept on the religious-right that essentializes men and women into ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’.”

Norris explains that this “Is linked to the concept of ‘gender ideology,’ a term invented by the Vatican in the 1990s to attack and undermine women’s and LGBTIQ rights. It portrays gender as an invented concept that is dangerous and destructive for children, families and society at large. Women of the World Platform (not to be confused with the feminist WOW festival) claims that feminism has been ‘derailed’ and is ‘hatred of men, it is victimhood, it is supremacy, it’s a struggle of the sexes, a rejection of motherhood’. It promotes a ‘reverse sexism’ narrative which states that quotas and anti-sexual harassment campaigns mean that men are the real victims of sexism. The strategy of ‘modern sexism,’ sexism against men, has also been adopted by Spain’s far-right Vox party which campaigns against abortion and LGBTIQ rights, and laws protecting women from gender-based violence. Vox and its allies claim that gender-based violence does not exist and that it should just be referred to as ‘violence’.”

Norris elaborated on “The Women of the World Platform was founded in the early 1990s by Profesionales por la Ética. It is a coalition of anti-choice, ‘family rights’ groups from around the world, including Real Women of Canada, Pro Vita in Romania, and Pro Vita & Famiglia in Italy, In The Name Of The Family in Croatia, Peru’s Pro Mujer, Moms For America, Kenya Christian Professionals Forum, and more. The Platform has attended the anti-rights World Congress of Families, (WCF) where it met the Real Women of Canada before becoming partners. The WCF is an event that brings together anti-abortion, anti-LGBTIQ organizations to swap strategies and has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre. All of the organizations a campaign against women’s rights to safe and legal abortion, including in countries where abortion remains illegal, such as Fundacion Vida SV in El Salvador.”

Norris reported that “The Women of the World Platform also partners with CitizenGO, a global anti-rights campaign with links to Spain’s far-right parliamentary party, Vox. CitizenGO presents itself as a community of active citizens working together to defend and promote life, family and liberty. It is famous for its online petitions against same-sex marriage, sex-education and abortion, while promoting a conservative Christian agenda. The WCF’s founder Brian Brown is on its board, along with Russian Orthodox oligarch Alexey Komov. The campaign group works across three different continents and has more than nine million followers, making it a major global force in the anti-rights movement. Its connections to far-right political parties go beyond Vox to include Germany’s AfD, Lega in Italy and Fidesz in Hungary. In 2019, it was accused of being a US-style ‘super pac‘, driving voters towards far-right parties in the European Parliament elections.”

According to Norris “CitizenGO’s campaigns cover a range of issues. In 2019, for instance, a petition was launched to protest against LGBTIQ characters in Disney films. In the UK, it is currently campaigning to prevent the extension of telemedical abortion in early pregnancy. Disney films aside, CitizenGO focuses most of its energy on opposing so-called ‘gender ideology’, in concert with its founding group HazetOir and Agenda Europe. It campaigned to prevent the European Parliament from adopting the Estrela Report, which would have obliged EU member states to teach comprehensive sex and relationships education in schools. The report was replaced with a more conservative approach. It was also involved in promoting the European citizens’ initiative One Of Us, aimed at undermining women’s rights to abortion.”

Norris reported that “In collaboration with Vox, HazteOir and CitizenGO have campaigned to implement a ‘parental pin‘, which requires parents to expressly authorize their children to attend sex and relationships education which they claim equates to ‘indoctrination of gender ideology’. A spokeswoman for the women’s rights organization Women’s Link Worldwide told Byline Times that CitizenGO uses legal avenues to try and roll-back abortion rights. ‘It has been very active against service providers on abortion rights,’ she said, citing examples such as when CitizenGO campaigned to defund the International Planned Parenthood Federation. It currently has a petition supporting attempts to get Spain’s Constitutional Court to rule on an appeal by the right-wing Popular Party against a 2010 legal change that allowed abortion on demand.”

Noris reports “What we see here is similar to what is happening in other countries and similar to what happened in Poland,’ the spokeswoman added, referencing the recent ruling in Poland’s Constitutional Court that extended the country’s abortion ban.” She describes “A Global Anti-Rights Campaign” saying “These groups are very well-connected and they are replicating their strategies all around the world,’ the Women’s Link Worldwide spokeswoman told Byline Times. ‘We have seen CitizenGO replicate its strategies from Spain in other countries, particularly around sex education.’ This includes transplanting its campaigning and legal strategies to countries in East Africa and Latin America. In 2018, in Kenya, CitizenGo launched a petition that helped to close 23 Marie Stopes International abortion clinics in the country. Abortion is illegal in Kenya except when there is a threat to the mother’s life. It also launched a petition against comprehensive sex education in the country.”

Norris warns that “The tactics employed by CitizenGO echoed its actions in Spain and the EU. In Argentina, where abortion was finally legalized in December 2020, CitizenGO via HazetOir is linked to the anti-abortion Catholic association Centro Nacional de Oración. The organizations are also connected to the highly-secretive, ultra-Catholic Mexican sect El Yunque. Back to Spain, the spokeswoman from Women’s Link Worldwide expresses her concern about what could happen if these anti-rights organizations and their far-right allies in Vox succeed. ‘We have already seen this roll-back in the winning of Vox,’ she told Byline Times. ‘We have seen what happens in other countries, in America, in Poland. They are examples of what can happen if we don’t stop this’.”

The assault on women’s rights is not as extreme here, yet! But in the Canary Article entitled “The pandemic must not be used to force women’s rights back to the 1970s,” Jasmine Norden presents a few positive achievements before warning of the potential for retrograde steps. She said “On International Women’s Day, there’s lots to celebrate in terms of the movements for gender equality around the world. There’s been great progress in some places during the pandemic: Argentina’s abortion legalization signified a huge victory for reproductive rights; Donald Trump was voted out of office; a transgender woman achieved a landmark victory for transgender rights in the US. However, there has been a more sinister effect of coronavirus (Covid-19) for women.”

The Canary say that “Increasingly, reports are finding that women are taking on the majority of childcare and home schooling, and have also been more likely to lose their jobs during the pandemic. This has led to fears that the pandemic has hampered progress in gender equality. As a result, we must take extra care to ensure coronavirus recovery includes planning for recovering equality. Reporting on ‘Childcare and home schooling,” they point out that “In July, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) released figures showing that women spent significantly more time on childcare in a day. A third of women subsequently said their mental health had suffered because of home schooling. A further study by University College London (UCL) found that women were more likely to have given up working to look after and educate children during lockdowns.”

The Canary quoted “Emla Fitzsimons, a research author and professor at UCL’s Institute of Education, said: Many mothers who have put their careers on hold to provide educational support for their children will need to adjust again once schools reopen and the furlough scheme tapers off. These figures show that women who have reduced work hours to help their children will need support to get back to the workplace. While reports show men are taking on more housework than they did decades ago, we cannot settle for women being the default for childcare responsibilities. Children are returning to school, but the future remains uncertain as to whether they will stay there; men must step up to take on an equal share of childcare.”

According to the Canary “In addition, women have also been more likely to lose their jobs or be furloughed during coronavirus. Women are more likely to work in sectors such as hospitality, arts, and retail, which have been more likely to have to lay off workers over the course of the pandemic. For example, Debenhams and Arcadia, both recently bought by online companies, are likely to shed most of their store employees. At those stores alone, 77% and 84.5% of staff respectively were women. In the arts and entertainment sector, there was a two-fifths drop in the number of Black women working. This leaves many women in a precarious position.” The Canary warns that this “Further risks decades of progress in increasing women’s representation in the workforce. In this case, the government has the power to tackle this by maintaining furlough as long as it takes industries like hospitality to get back on their feet. This would protect industries from having to shed jobs that are likely to be held by women.”

The Canary report that “Most terrifyingly, coronavirus has led to an increase in domestic abuse across the world. The UK saw a 49% rise in domestic abuse calls made to the police in just the first month after restrictions began. The United Nations (UN) has called the increase in domestic violence a ‘shadow pandemic’, urging global action to address the increase as countries map out recovery. While the government has announced £19m in funding to tackle domestic abuse, domestic violence charity Women’s Aid has called for more funding from the UK government to help women effectively. Women’s Aid chief executive Farah Nazeer said: Specialist women’s domestic abuse services continue to face a funding crisis, with funding cuts and poor commissioning decisions failing to keep them secure.”

The Canary says that “Women’s Aid estimates that £393m is required for lifesaving refuges and community-based services in England, alongside ring-fenced funding for specialist services led ‘by and for’ Black and minoritized women, disabled women and LGBT+ survivors. However next year only £165 million will be delivered, with an additional £19 million announced today for work with perpetrators and ‘respite rooms’ for homeless women. We urge the government to provide further details of this funding, as it’s unclear what ‘respite rooms’ are. This shortfall of over £200 million will mean that women and children will be turned away from the lifesaving support they need. Without action, women are increasingly suffering violence in their own homes. We cannot allow this pandemic to mean less support for them.”

The Canary asks “What does this mean for equality? In a recent survey by Mumsnet, more than half of the respondents said they believed gender equality was ‘in danger of going back to the 1970s,’ a horrifying thought. If we look to previous health emergencies, the outlook is bleak: one year removed from Sierra Leone’s Ebola outbreak, 17% of women have returned to work compared to 63% of men. An outbreak of Zika in Brazil five years ago still sees 90% of women who have a child with Congenital Zika Syndrome out of work. With that possibility in front of us, we must take this as a call to lobby for women’s rights globally, in the home and in the workplace. The fight for gender equality is a fight parallel to and inseparable from the justice called for by the Black Lives Matter movement, by campaigns for economic equality, we cannot allow it to go backward.”

In the Canary Article entitled “On International Women’s Day, let’s take a look at one of the strongest women’s movements in the world,” they examined one of the world’s greatest female success stories. She noted that “Perhaps the strongest women’s movement in the world right now is the Kurdish Women’s Movement. On International Women’s Day, The Canary takes a look at these revolutionary women. Kurdish women came to world attention in 2014, gaining global media headlines in their fight against Daesh (ISIS/Isil) in Rojava, Syria. Yet, as is typical in a patriarchal society, western media outlets usually depicted the Kurdish Women’s Movement as young, beautiful twenty-somethings with guns, even appearing in women’s magazine Marie Claire. But Kurdish women, from the young to the very old, were struggling against patriarchy and fascism for decades before Daesh existed.”

The Canary report that “Kurdish people are the largest stateless group on Earth. Most live in the geographic region of Kurdistan, which lies within Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. The Kurdish people have experienced generations of oppression in all four countries, from Saddam Hussein’s Anfal genocide in Iraq, to the torture and disappearance of hundreds of thousands of people and the burning of villages in Turkey. Sakine Cansız. Yet this oppression contributed to the creation of one of the largest women’s struggles in the world in the Kurdish regions within Turkey and Syria. One of the biggest icons of this struggle is Sakine Cansız. She was a co-founder of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in 1978 with Abdullah Öcalan. The PKK began an armed struggle against the Turkish state in 1984. Kommun Academi writes: Sakine Cansız was tasked by the leadership to build the women’s movement, a duty that she took very close to her heart.”

The Canary says of Cansiz that “She single-handedly managed to gather large groups of young women, often students, for discussion and educations. On November, 27th 1978 only at the age of 20, Sakine Cansız became one of the two female co-founders of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, when she participated in the party’s founding congress. Cansız was imprisoned and tortured in Diyarbakır prison from 1979-1991. Kommun Academi continues: The resistance of Sakine Cansız in Diyarbakir prison led to a new approach towards women in Kurdish society. It encouraged women to join revolutionary structures in the cities and moved women towards politicization in the villages. Starting with her prison resistance, Kurdish women’s activism gained increasing respect and support among the popular masses. After her release from prison, Cansız continued in the PKK, and later as an educator of the Kurdish Freedom Movement in Europe.”

The Canary report that Cansiz “Was murdered in Paris in 2013, along with Leyla Şaylemez and Fidan Doğan, both central women in Kurdish organizing.” They say that after “Decades of organizing” and “Long before the 2012 Rojava revolution in northern Syria, the Kurdish movement was developing structures for radically changing how society was organized. If you speak to any women in Kurdistan, they will tell you that this struggle didn’t start during the Arab Spring, or in the fight against Daesh. It began more than 40 years ago, though women such as Cansız, who organized tirelessly from prison. Democratic confederalism, an anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal and anti-state ideology, was created by Öcalan from his prison cell. Democratic confederalism ensures that power that would usually be held by governments is given to people at the grassroots level. Local communes were set up within the Kurdish part of Turkey in 2007, empowering people to make decisions over areas of their lives.”

The Canary say that “In Syria, people began putting the ideas of democratic confederalism into practice in 2005. Within the Kurdish Freedom Movement, women’s councils, academies, and cooperatives have been created, while positions of power are always held by co-chairs, at least one of whom identifies as a woman. A crucial ideology within the Kurdish Freedom Movement is jineoljî, or women’s science. A role of jineoljî is to transform the patriarchal mindset: The patriarchy of the government, which has constructed itself on the basis of women’s bodies, feelings, ideas, beliefs and labour, intervenes constantly in our daily lives. It invades our space with violence, exploitation denial, murder and creating illusions. As important as tearing off these masks and organizing a strong self-defense against these patriarchal attacks is the construction of a mindset. Jineoloji, which we have reached by setting out from a paradigm based on freedom, will succeed in achieving this.”

The Canary reported that “Cansız and the many other women who have died in their struggle for women’s liberation, continue to be a source of inspiration not just in Kurdistan, but around the world. Within Turkey, thousands of Kurdish women continue to be imprisoned, including Leyla Güven (to the right of the photo at the top of the page), who survived a 200-day hunger strike in 2019. The women currently imprisoned gain their strength from those who have struggled before them. In the UK, Kurdistan Solidarity Network Jin (‘Jin’ means ‘women’ in Kurdish) released a statement for International Women’s Day. They said: As feminists, we know that struggle involves work and it involves love. It is militant just as much as it is joyful. Whether we look to you, our sisters and comrades who have been imprisoned by the Turkish state, to the women fighting in the mountains of Kurdistan, or the women building new ways of life across society in all four parts of Kurdistan, we see this same love and dedication in their actions.”

The Canary Continued with the bold statement: “We join your call to continue the struggle, to stand side by side as free women and raise our voices, to oppose all forms of injustice and fascism, to strive for building a society where justice and equality prevail and where the rights and dignity of women are respected. We call for unity and solidarity, against femicide and in defense of a free life and free society everywhere. United we will overcome. We salute you and wish you peace and strength. ‘Women, Life, Freedom’ is an important slogan of the Kurdish Women’s Movement. On this International Women’s Day, we must stand in solidarity with all women like Güven, locked up as political prisoners, and we must remember all those who have died in their fight against misogyny and patriarchy.”

The achievements of these brave Kurdish women set a powerful example to the world of a stable genuine democracy built inclusively, from the bottom up, around the principles of progressive Socialist equality for the mutual benefit of the entire population. The Covid Pandemic has exposed grotesque inequalities that the Tories have capitalized on in the determined race to the bottom. I expect the pitting of one set of workers against another to ramp-up industrial strife, plus the rivalry between privileged and abandoned communities and the racial ‘othering’ will also increase, but the most powerful political oppression would be to strip away women’s rights disempowering half the population to ‘divide and conquer.’ Strong evidence of corruption and demanding a full Investigation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election could derail this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. We must protest on mass, challenge in Court and take such action immediately before the UK joins far-right Hungary, Poland and Turkey to inflict decades of oppression on us. NOT MOVE ON!

[Author]

Posts